open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked T2 POS idea
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Alexia page
Posted - 2011.07.15 20:45:00 - [1]
 

I read in another thread where someone suggested having a cargo rig type structure that could be anchored anywhere, frieghters could dock here to load/unload cargo. He also suggested having it so you could add modules and such. Although I like the idea it seems a little far fetched.

I have also read some players suggesting making POSes so they could be anchored in dead space. So I think that this might be a cool idea for T2 POSes. Let them anchor anywhere, no moon required. give them more EHP, less power grid/CPU, and maybe a built in hanger. This way by sacrificing a little power grid/cpu you can anchor them anywhere, filling this niech sugested by the Cargo rig/platform idea. A T2 POS would be perfect for this.

There would of course have to be restrictions, like can not anchor within say 1 AU of a cosmic signature or asteroid belt, or whatever. You could anchor a T2 POS at a safe spot or in deep space where the only way it will be found is through scanning. maybe even add a defensive module that makes it harder for probes to detect. These POSes could be used as deep space depots, or to make jump gates harder for the enemies to find. I would think the power grid?CPU penalties would be high enough so you can not run Capital ship manufacturing there, but then again why not. Freighters can load cargo at a POS so these could be used as safe spot docking stations for freighters.

Just a thought, but what do you think about the idea?

DeMichael Crimson
Minmatar
Republic University

Posted - 2011.07.17 10:17:00 - [2]
 


Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
draketrain
Posted - 2011.07.17 10:21:00 - [3]
 

yep we definetly need pos's with more hp than old ones which can be anchored in missions or stargates. i think it would be cool to do mission inside forcefield

Iella Tesla
Posted - 2011.07.18 03:57:00 - [4]
 

While there would need to be restrictions on it, having a deep space outpost would be a great idea. It would remove the need for so many safe spots and create the safe haven/home for more corps to move into lowsec. It would of course still be able to anchor around a moon, perhaps giving it more cpu and powergrid to work with, being in a locked orbit or some such. While in deep space it will need to sacrifice a portion of cpu and powergrid to monitor and defend against cosmic rays or micro meteors.

I support this idea.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.18 04:50:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Ranka Mei on 18/07/2011 04:50:00

I see nothing wrong with this idea.

+1

Trinkets friend
Posted - 2011.07.18 07:34:00 - [6]
 

There is a deep space POS already: its called an orca with a cloak.

Elina Tan
Posted - 2011.07.18 07:37:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Trinkets friend
There is a deep space POS already: its called an orca with a cloak.

Good luck doing BPO research in an Orca.

Trinkets friend
Posted - 2011.07.18 07:46:00 - [8]
 

You really want a lab you can anchor off of a celestial, cloaked or nearly impossible to probe down (aka unscannable T3's what just got nerfed yay), which is as tough as a POS, defendable, blah blah blah? What's the point, it will take someone all of 10 minutes, at worst, to find your cloaky deep space carebear creche and ruin it.

In which case, here's an idea: form a corp with your research alt, pay someone to be a faction fluffer, get faction standings to +8 for your corp, anchor POS in hisec. Bingo! You're just like everyone else!

Alexia page
Posted - 2011.07.18 14:12:00 - [9]
 

The reason I suggested the limit of being anchored at least 1 AU from any cosmic signature was so that it could not be anchored in an asteroid belt, or inside a plex,effectively keeping it from despawning. That can not be allowed.

I know scanning down a POS in deep space is not a hard thing to do. But it would provide a little more security from hostiles just passing through. And if someone does stop to scan the system there probes will show up on directional scan and the defending force can possibly scan them down and kill them before they find the POS. With additional stats slightly better than the faction towers only a reduction in CPU/power grid as a sacrifice for the ability to anchor in deep space. It would give an option to have a more secure POS but would support less modules for that extra security to maintain a balance.

Whether or not these could be anchored in high sec is another issue. Trying to find an available moon in a decent high sec system is no easy task. But allowing these to be anchored in high sec could result in far to many POSes in a system. Perhaps just adding a restriction to the number of POSes per 10 AU system width. Then systems 100 AU wide could have far more than systems only 20 AU wide, but there would still be a maximum number. T2 POSes would also be much more expensive creating a good isk sink for larger alliances with far to much extra resources.

Alexia page
Posted - 2011.07.18 14:28:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Trinkets friend
There is a deep space POS already: its called an orca with a cloak.


If Orca's had enough cargo space to hold a full freighter load, 25+ million EHP for protection, and could protect the freighter within its shields while loading an Orca would work well. But an Orca provides none of the defensive benefits a POS does.


Alexia page
Posted - 2011.07.18 14:34:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Alexia page on 18/07/2011 14:38:23
Originally by: Iella Tesla
While there would need to be restrictions on it, having a deep space outpost would be a great idea. It would remove the need for so many safe spots and create the safe haven/home for more corps to move into lowsec. It would of course still be able to anchor around a moon, perhaps giving it more cpu and powergrid to work with, being in a locked orbit or some such. While in deep space it will need to sacrifice a portion of cpu and powergrid to monitor and defend against cosmic rays or micro meteors.

I support this idea.


That would work, just code it so if anchored in deep space it has CPU/power grid penalty to maintain the anchoring. And if anchored at a moon there would be no penalty. In keeping with T2 stuff being generally better than faction T1, give the POS even more CPU/power grid than faction towers, but make the deep space penalty high enough that you have less CPU/power grid that a normal T1 POS if anchored in deep space.

Caveman Dreadstalker
Posted - 2011.07.19 12:40:00 - [12]
 

I really like this idea.
free bump

Xearal
Minmatar
SOL Industries
Black Thorne Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.19 13:06:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Alexia page
Edited by: Alexia page on 18/07/2011 14:38:23
Originally by: Iella Tesla
While there would need to be restrictions on it, having a deep space outpost would be a great idea. It would remove the need for so many safe spots and create the safe haven/home for more corps to move into lowsec. It would of course still be able to anchor around a moon, perhaps giving it more cpu and powergrid to work with, being in a locked orbit or some such. While in deep space it will need to sacrifice a portion of cpu and powergrid to monitor and defend against cosmic rays or micro meteors.

I support this idea.


That would work, just code it so if anchored in deep space it has CPU/power grid penalty to maintain the anchoring. And if anchored at a moon there would be no penalty. In keeping with T2 stuff being generally better than faction T1, give the POS even more CPU/power grid than faction towers, but make the deep space penalty high enough that you have less CPU/power grid that a normal T1 POS if anchored in deep space.


This sounds like a good idea, this way, the T2 POS would be usefull around a moon as well, for when you want to put up a REALLY big deathstar.
As an added penalty for anchoring in deep space, if the POS ever runs out of fuel, it doesn't just deactivate, it and it's modules also unanchor and if left adrift like this for too long, despawn ( say, 2-3 days? )


Now what would be REAAAALLLY cool.. is the ability to set up our own deadspace pockets, complete with rooms, accel gate(s) etc.

Alexia page
Posted - 2011.07.20 14:32:00 - [14]
 

sure why not.
After all many dead space mission sights have abandoned or derelict stations in them. If outposts and POSes can only be anchored near planets and moons respectively how did those deep space stations get there. Even in the EVE lore there is hidden deep space stations and stargates nobody knows about. Why not be able to anchor POSes and even outposts in deep space for say a 20% power grid/CPU penalty.

It would be awesome for large null sec alliances to be able to build an outpost in deep space that does not show up on overview because it is in deep space. You could have to get a book mark from someone who knows where it is before you can warp to it. It would fit well with the lore. according to lore there are pirate, Jove, and Sansha deep space stations, and stargates that are not on star charts(don't show on overview) that you can only find by stumbling across them or getting coordinates from someone who knows where they are. Not even scanable. Currently these are only in game in mission dead space pockets, why not allow players to build them as well, at of course a significant penalty/increase in cost over the standard planet/moon anchored ones. calling the deep space ones T2 versions will make it easy to bring into game without breaking anything. Just start with T2 POSes that can be anchored in deep space(but not in belts or anomalies) and see how it goes. I really like the idea of player owned complexes with acceleration gates to access them. T2 outposts could be added later if it works out well.

Trinkets friend
Posted - 2011.07.21 05:52:00 - [15]
 

Jeez, just listen to yourself.

"I want a POS I can anchor at a deep safe, which acts like a deadspace pocket, and which I can put a stealth emitter array (or similar) on, making it nigh on impossible to get a lock on, with more EHP."

That won't unbalance the game and make the current crop of warp-to-safe-and-cloak bots even safer, nor will it unbalance the risk/reward structure of Sov space because its now impossible to blow up people's candy or even begin a siege because you can anchor this somewhere that they can't detect except perhaps mid-warp with a lucky stab of the d-scan.

This is seriously the most idiotic proposal I have seen.

You say finding an available moon in hisec is not an easy thing. Well, neither is finding an empty tech moon either. Tough cookies; EVE isn't set up such that everyone gets an equal opportunity at getting everything. Without resource allocation inequalities we would not have conflict, and this includes highsec moon jousting. If you want a moon in a system, just dec the guys with the offline one and hire mercs.

The last thing we need is bigger, tougher POSs. Take wormhole space, notably the low-end systems which cannot get cap ship transits. Fumigating systems of their human rats and POSs is hard enough as it is. This type of POS would result in people being able to camp unrestricted in basically invulnerable unscannable deathstar POSs without even the clue of showing up in Local to tip someone off that players may inhabit the system. Yeah, fantastic idea.

David Fightmaster
Gallente
The Black Legionnares
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.07.27 18:13:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Trinkets friend
Jeez, just listen to yourself.

"I want a POS I can anchor at a deep safe, which acts like a deadspace pocket, and which I can put a stealth emitter array (or similar) on, making it nigh on impossible to get a lock on, with more EHP."

That won't unbalance the game and make the current crop of warp-to-safe-and-cloak bots even safer, nor will it unbalance the risk/reward structure of Sov space because its now impossible to blow up people's candy or even begin a siege because you can anchor this somewhere that they can't detect except perhaps mid-warp with a lucky stab of the d-scan.

This is seriously the most idiotic proposal I have seen.

You say finding an available moon in hisec is not an easy thing. Well, neither is finding an empty tech moon either. Tough cookies; EVE isn't set up such that everyone gets an equal opportunity at getting everything. Without resource allocation inequalities we would not have conflict, and this includes highsec moon jousting. If you want a moon in a system, just dec the guys with the offline one and hire mercs.

The last thing we need is bigger, tougher POSs. Take wormhole space, notably the low-end systems which cannot get cap ship transits. Fumigating systems of their human rats and POSs is hard enough as it is. This type of POS would result in people being able to camp unrestricted in basically invulnerable unscannable deathstar POSs without even the clue of showing up in Local to tip someone off that players may inhabit the system. Yeah, fantastic idea.


Use a orca with a cloak. Thats what I do. Anywho, a cloaky POS does sound cool though Trinkets. Makes it all Stargate Atlantis lol. I like a cloaky POS, but I don't want them really in the game.Very Happy

Marcus Gideon
Gallente
Federal Defense Operations
Posted - 2011.07.27 22:17:00 - [17]
 

Personally Owned Structures have been requested for quite some time. Since the POS of today are more of a Corporate Owned Structure, with far greater upkeep and maintenance than the average player should be required to spend.

We can anchor a Secure Container in deep space, with nothing required to maintain it, other than poking it with a stick once a month.

So why not allow much smaller and far more manageable "POS".

Outposts, and no not the big ones...

- Amarr Refining Outpost
- Amarr Repair Outpost
- Amarr Tactical Outpost

- Caldari Refining Outpost
- Caldari Repair Outpost
- Caldari Tactical Outpost

- Gallente Outpost

- Minmatar Refining Outpost
- Minmatar Repair Outpost
- Minmatar Tactical Outpost


The models are already in game, all CCP needs to do is put 2 and 2 together and give people small structures for their own use.

Whose to say these small outposts could even support external defenses like a POS? Or even a force field bubble bigger than a single ship?

Jaruselka Thorne
Posted - 2011.07.27 22:43:00 - [18]
 

anything that helps pos's be better than their current boring, soul destroyingly boring, and even more boring not to mention ugly and uninspiring selves...

Jonas Xiamon
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.27 22:53:00 - [19]
 

I think it's worth looking into.

Eperor
Posted - 2011.08.08 10:32:00 - [20]
 

i to support this

Flynn Fetladral
Royal Order of Security Specialists
Posted - 2011.08.08 22:23:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Flynn Fetladral on 08/08/2011 22:23:56
No. This is not a good idea at all. More EHP on a POS! No thanks. Why dose a freighter need to dock at a POS? It's not a 'Station', and you can transfer cargo from a hanger array anyway. Only thing the POS needs is to be modular, to get rid of the current fuel system and introduce fuel pellets, and to make a module allowing you to anchor your Supercarrier or Titan with a password so your toon does not have to be forever trapped inside one ship.

Naga Tokiba
Posted - 2011.08.12 22:01:00 - [22]
 

Not a bad idea, not bad at all.
Supported.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only