We are proud to bring you the stories, opinions and musings of a long time pilot who has dabbled in everything New Eden has to offer, he writes and podcasts about his opinions and adventures at

Currently there is a threadnaught on the Eve forums because the CSM Summit meeting minutes came out and CCP pretty much said that they were not going to revamp Player Owned Starbases (aka POSes) as previously discussed due to them only impacting a small portion of the community while requiring a lot of effort to develop. There is lots of places where people discuss this malarkey (including episode 82 of the longest continuously running active podcast, Broadcasts from the Ninveah!
) so I won’t rip into CCP’s shortsighted stand here.
Instead, CCP, I’m going to give you an out.

My proposal is to leave POSes alone as they are for now and instead develop something new for the sandbox:

Player Owned Platforms

What the hell, you say?

Look, the reason that POSes are used by only a small number of people is because of cost and practicality and not desire. So let’s give the playerbase something that fulfills the need for players to establish their own bases in hostile territory without incurring the massive ISK, Time, and Effort cost that even small towers do now.

I propose three sizes of platforms (large, medium, small) and they would cost 50/35/20 milllion ISK or thereabouts to produce. They would have fuel costs of about 15/10/5 million ISK work of fuel blocks (and charters on top of that for high sec) to run and must be anchored like towers, but can be anchored anywhere in system, not just moons. However, to balance that flexibility they can be scanned down like a ship.

They would sport some CPU and Powergrid to be able to host a handful of small tower guns but lack a force field. They would have a built in corporate hanger and ship assembly hanger and maintenance array; storage for ships would be 500,000m3 for large, 350,000m3 for medium, 200,000m3 for small and corporate hangers would be 50,000m3/35,000m3/20,000m3 respectively.

Defensively, I would have the hitpoints for the large being just under that for a small tower, with medium platforms and smaller platforms scaling down from there. The goal is not to create a fortress but a resupply point, a home away from home. No reinforcing either, because of the next paragraph.

In order to prevent enemy fleets from simply roaming around and sweeping the platforms from everywhere they are found, I propose that platforms have a built in cloaking device that operates as long as the platform has fuel. It deactivates when a ship comes within 2000 meters and has a 30 second cooldown before it can activate again. The cloak does not cover any sentry guns setup at the platform.I think this along with requiring fuel is a nice balance to its vulnerability otherwise.

These platforms would allow players to setup bases away from stations in potentially hostile territory without the massive overhead that even a small POS incurs. They would be far more accessible to newer players (and we know that perks your ears right up, eh CCP?) while giving new content to old players to try out.

Thoughts, comments, rude gestures?

– Kirith Kodachi

Send us Intel/Corrections via dropbox or shoot us an e-mail


  1. All seeing eye


    January 18, 2013 at 12:26 pm Reply
  2. Kirith is spot on with this idea!

    January 18, 2013 at 12:29 pm Reply
    1. Hey!

      Why does mirth think this would be less work for Ccp than pos's?

      January 18, 2013 at 12:42 pm Reply
      1. kkodachi

        Mainly because they would not have to touch the majority of the archaic POS code and assets which I hear is a minefield of terror.

        January 18, 2013 at 2:30 pm Reply
    2. Sukhdeep

      but I thought Riverinme was Kirth,But it makes poerfect sense to amke some new for all players, instead of fixing something old only a few people bother to use…A little bit of plaster and paint only goes so far but a new dishwasher gets everyones attention right….We all know CCP is thinking Dishwasher Dishwasher Dishwasher…

      January 18, 2013 at 11:13 pm Reply
  3. Gumpin

    I was fine till you wanted them in hostile territory. I'd be cool with them in NPC null or low sec. Not sov null though. More than just the obvious gtfo cloaky camper with a million billion bombers stashed away in a cloaky camper dream house.

    Lets say they DID anchor on a moon. Every Moon. and cloaked.

    Whats that you say? Can't hang your tower to much cloaky? Whats that can't hang your TCU? Your Ihub? Your Station?

    Its an interesting Idea, but I just discovered two easy ways people will hate you forever for it in the time it takes to bad post on en24.

    January 18, 2013 at 12:49 pm Reply
    1. Hmm

      I don't agree. You can speculate forever, and your fear of the unknown will hinder potential progress.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:59 pm Reply
      1. M1k3y

        Its a POS that cloaks, and costs ~50m

        If you think cloaky campers WONT have a field day, your nuts. Especially given anchoring them in safe spots.

        January 18, 2013 at 5:02 pm Reply
        1. I like dis

          restrict the cloaking module to systems your alliance owns sov in

          January 18, 2013 at 9:39 pm Reply
    2. Limit the size of the fuel bay to a few hours maybe? There goes your cloaking ability before long.

      January 18, 2013 at 2:42 pm Reply
    3. I just do not know

      I thought all of 0.0 was hostile…

      January 18, 2013 at 5:54 pm Reply
    4. Deifirtep

      I think the main problem is proposing they can be cloaked.
      Otherwise, the idea is a good one.

      January 18, 2013 at 8:52 pm Reply
  4. THINK!

    This idea is beyond terrible. You are essentially saying, "let's fill space with hundreds, even thousands of new structures that must be cleared in order to make our space secure." Why even bother with stations? Oh, and they're cloaky so good luck finding them! Not a good idea.

    January 18, 2013 at 1:08 pm Reply
    1. I like dis

      if you make cloaking contingent on holding sov then once you take sov all those POPs would be easily scanned down and destroyed by a small number of people. Free killmails!

      January 18, 2013 at 1:18 pm Reply
    2. Gazmin

      I htink the cloaky idea, and the any where idea is bad. as you said would be thousands everywhere, for that cheep i could aford to put 5 in each ssytem so would would care if someone found 1. I think they should have a reinforcment timer but you couldnt remove anything from the hangers, make it kinda like PoCo battles, but more liekly they will come and defend.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:18 pm Reply
  5. I like dis

    I actually like this idea a lot, I think it would be better with a small force field. Maybe just big enough for 5 BS without bumping each other out. Only give the force field enough strength to withstand a five or so BS of dps for 10-15 minutes.

    Skipping the reinforced mode is a good idea too. Something that can deter solo people from just tearing it down, but small gangs should still be able to A) easily bubble it and B) be able to get into it with a bit of concentrated effort.

    You could either make it a modular assemble (in other words a badger or cloaky hauler could move it in pieces) or able to fit into a carrier hanger depending on how accessible you want this idea to be to players.

    January 18, 2013 at 1:11 pm Reply
    1. I like dis

      Requiring multiple runs by hauler ships or a single jump by carrier would deter afk campers from abusing it by requiring a much heavier time investment or exposing a carrier to attack. I also agree with Gumpin that afk cloakers with cloaky POPs would be a bad idea, I think you should have to hold sov in the system in order to equip the POP with a cloaking module.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:16 pm Reply
  6. Omen Nihilo

    There are some issues that would need to be dealt with, but in general I quite like this idea!

    January 18, 2013 at 1:14 pm Reply
  7. 0.o Grunt

    i think it should still have a force field with the base EHP as a large POS, but it doesn't have a reinforce timer. This would give people the oppurtunity to try to defend these "homes away from homes" The cloak could lead to bad things such as what was posted above, though a covert ops platform could have some uses.

    January 18, 2013 at 1:18 pm Reply
  8. tyollo

    I liked the idea.
    Putting some of these traditional POS anchored next to greatly facilitate the life and organization of a corporation in POS. And they would be protected by the POS

    January 18, 2013 at 1:22 pm Reply
  9. Rhombus

    I like it! Great to see someone thinking for us!

    January 18, 2013 at 1:29 pm Reply
  10. kevin___

    I like the general idea of it, but make them MUCH more expensive. Proliferation of cloaked structures does not seem the proper thing to do. Otherwise, a really great idea.

    January 18, 2013 at 1:47 pm Reply
  11. Haters gonna hate

    Someone did a forum post on this idea many years ago with full scale drawings, i cant friggin find it on eve forums anymore i had it bm on my old pc. i still prefer the old forum post but its similar idea to this if someone finds it please linky and i will love you long time <3

    January 18, 2013 at 1:52 pm Reply
    1. No, you are thinking in the "Flogging the dead horse" post from the old forums, that was a proposal for modular POSes, this is a bit different.

      January 18, 2013 at 2:12 pm Reply
  12. Barberian

    I like the idea, but….

    1. No cloak. Require a highly skilled scanning pilot in a well fit probing ship (sisters combat scanner probe, sisters launcher, T2 ship with scanning bonus) to be able to scan it down to 100%. Others can scan for it, see it is there, guess it's aprox location, but not down to 100% lock.
    2. Agree with no reinforce timer. This would encourage the "temporary" nature of the platforms. If you leave it, bad guys will come and pop it just to see what you left in it. Even in the "show info" text for the item, stress it is a TEMPORARY structure.
    3. Allow an add on module to the platform to allow a small shield. Something a medium PVP fleet could take out in 5-10-15 min. depending on POP size. This would allow the owner of the POP to sit in shields long enough to bio (in RL) in low and null space without worrying about his/her ship going "POP". This mod would double the fuel requirements.
    3. Agree with anchor anywhere. It would be a requirement to not conflict with POS locations.
    4. There are already structures in game that could be re-purposed as a POP with some coding from CCP. I see them in missions all the time.

    January 18, 2013 at 2:13 pm Reply
  13. anon

    No cloak. If it can cloak and be anchored anywhere, it would be almost impossible to find without massive amounts of effort on the part of the hunters, and only if the owner royally screws up.

    Lack of reinforce timer means that it should have sufficient EHP and guns to hold off a decent-sized fleet. Remember that if a piece of infrastructure is too easy to take out, folk won't use it, and then we're back to listening to wanna-be wulfpack pilots cry about lack of targets.

    Otherwise, this is a rather nice pilot idea, to see what the demand is for non-POS.

    That said, in my experience it doesn't take much time, ISK, or effort to maintain a small or even a medium POS for personal use. The primary limitation on POS use is security, in my experience. Unless you're in a solo corp, or know all members in real life, it's almost impossible to keep assets in a POS secure.

    January 18, 2013 at 3:27 pm Reply
  14. Kiyohime Ronuken

    Guns? Sweet. I want 300 of these around our stations ASAP…

    January 18, 2013 at 4:18 pm Reply
  15. alx Warlord

    This does not solve the POS problem at all, and will probably create much more problems… what we need is a modular POS, ( If you want tou build it like a gun platform, or in any other shape you should )

    January 18, 2013 at 4:39 pm Reply
  16. M1k3y

    No cloak, and not in replacement of current POS system. Especially without a RF timer.

    January 18, 2013 at 4:55 pm Reply
  17. I just do not know

    I really like this idea, because this is what I was hoping the new POS system would do, it would open up people to operate in all of 0.0. so all those systems held by big powers and never used will get a vibrant group of people attempting to farm them. And there has to be a cloak, because they will just get removed so easily without them. In terms of cloaky AFK types, well they tell me that they are not a threat if they are afk. CCP this makes sense, please do it…

    January 18, 2013 at 5:27 pm Reply
  18. afklocalcamp

    U know how you kill the cloak camper? U man the fuck up and get CCP to change local from your sole Information provider.
    Because EVERYONE in eve knows the correct action in null is to watch local like a hawk because u know the moment that guy shows up what type of reaction to make.

    I mean come on u cant care about that guy that's afk if u don't even know he is there.

    Just so u know afk cloaking is the only way around the magic local Intel box we all use.

    January 18, 2013 at 7:45 pm Reply
  19. Random Miner

    i love the idea of having a smaller base you can put ANYWHERE in system. the anywhere has always been something we should be able to do, it makes no sense to say a person in space with this much technology couldn't drop a base in any orbit of the sun they wanted to.

    the cloak seems dangerous tho, makes too many issues. Perhaps have a device that lowers sig radius to an incredibly small amount for extra fuel? or maybe give it a shield, but no timer. If you're not there to protect it, it's goner then and there, no fuckin' waiting

    This does seem like something that would help drive conflict, and people could make their own little "Cabins" all over new eden

    January 18, 2013 at 8:34 pm Reply
  20. Since 03

    And if these were to take POS places were do you suggest titans ans supers go when they need to refit/refuel etc etc safely…

    January 18, 2013 at 11:27 pm Reply
  21. someone is holding the idiot ball today…don't excuse CCP's laziness

    January 19, 2013 at 1:42 am Reply
  22. Dash ing

    This is simply brilliant, but as everyone said, you lost me with the ability to cloak. Otherwise this would be grand, and that's based on the contingency CCP could sort out enough "rules and regulations" as to not have this new "station-on-the-go" abused by null sov holders to increase their range of influence.

    January 19, 2013 at 2:23 am Reply

Leave a Reply