It would be impossible to actually defend any assets.

Especially if you don't have full TZ coverage.

Why would you think that only the biggest groups should even be able to put up a POS?

As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid... neither side is making significant progress until the fight is resolved.

The restrictions and penalties on the Entosis Link should be as simple and understandable as possible.

no major alliances would just get bigger since you would be forced to join them or be unable to hold anything




as far as micro gameplay goes timers cause fights as it gives both sides a time to show up



your idea just makes it so bashes are nothing more than that since the defenders are not going to be able to get a defense up in the 45 min it takes to grind out a tower

Let's not

"I woke up Saturday morning and... I have no more things."

I understand. Consider this:

About a year ago I was moving all my things in an Orca. I decided to make a pit stop in Jita. "Burn Jita"? Whatever, I said.


I learned a lot that day. Needless to say, nothing is impossible for the players who put their minds to it.

And how are you going to win the fight to keep your stuff if you're an EU based alliance and some Australians come kill everything you own at 5 AM?

Recruit Australians.


Whenever I think about what can and can't be accomplished in EvE, I ask myself "What would GoonSwarm do?"

They would make a plan, and follow through.

Well, we wouldn't propose a mechanic that made it impossible for anyone other than us to hold space for one thing. This would hurt us, yes, but it'd also completely cripple anyone smaller.

Why is that good for the game?

Well, we wouldn't propose a mechanic that made it impossible for anyone other than us to hold space for one thing. This would hurt us, yes, but it'd also completely cripple anyone smaller.

Why is that good for the game?

Hurt, cripple, large, and small are relative terms. By today's standards, things would be drastically different. Owning three systems and ten POSes might be considered "large" without reinforcement.

I argue reinforcement hurts the little guys, because it limits their options for warfare. A fixed time limit does not scale proportionately, and gives the advantage to the larger force who is more capable of organizing a quick response.

Admittedly, my experience is severely limited; I do not know what a small force can really accomplish under the current system.

[

Admittedly, my experience is severely limited; I do not know what a small force can really accomplish under the current system.

your idea just makes it so bashes are nothing more than that since the defenders are not going to be able to get a defense up in the 45 min it takes to grind out a tower

If you are a small group, then you time your stuff to exit reinforcement at a time you are actually going to be online to defend it. How, exactly, does that hurt you when compared with just flat out losing it with no chance at all of fighting back?

If you have no experience with timers, why are you proposing their removal?

Because the theme is the same throughout. I did not receive a 40 hour warning when I flew my Orca into the gank fest that was Jita (well I technically did when I read the forum post days earlier, but that's besides the point). I knew the risks, I made a decision, and I faced the consequences.

It should be (I think) the same with POSes and Sovereignty.

Because the theme is the same throughout. I did not receive a 40 hour warning when I flew my Orca into the gank fest that was Jita (well I technically did when I read the forum post days earlier, but that's besides the point). I knew the risks, I made a decision, and I faced the consequences.

It should be (I think) the same with POSes and Sovereignty.

Because being the smaller inherently means that you are not able to successfully defend your assets [against a superior force]. Yes, there are things that can be done, of course. But these same things can be accomplished with or without reinforcement. The better force will win, the lesser force will lose.

I've been on the losing end before. The better force came, defeated us, and had to wait for the timer. All I could do was watch.



Because the theme is the same throughout. I did not receive a 40 hour warning when I flew my Orca into the gank fest that was Jita (well I technically did when I read the forum post days earlier, but that's besides the point). I knew the risks, I made a decision, and I faced the consequences.

It should be (I think) the same with POSes and Sovereignty.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

I will take the information I learned here today and use it to find a way to make reinforce timers work best for the game.

I think we should remove it, but that's because I don't own jack squat anyway. The implications are obvious, but I have a few questions on the matter:


Was there ever a time that structures existed without reinforcement?

Do you think it would be virtually impossible to hold sovereignty or own structures without it?

How would it impact capital construction?

Would major alliances simply shrink, or disappear entirely?


I'm a nobody in EvE, but I feel like reinforcement plays a bigger role in discouraging a POS attack than the POS defenses do.

What place does a 41 hour immunity have in a game where scamming, espionage, awox, and suicide ganks are legitimate?

What right do I have to own something in EvE if I do not have the manpower and TZ coverage needed to protect it?

Reinforced mode is actually a conflict driver. It forces parties to show up at the same spot at the same time. Removing it will result in more PVP avoidance.

One rf timer for system would be more than enough.

On the other hand maybe eve just reached end game and we full reset would be most exciting option

~Snip~

I really have no words to describe how bad of an idea that is.

Bashing POS's is already a **** job to do in EVE. Multiplying the manhour need by 100x would be making them basically invincible.

Not invincible at all. Just makes the battles for them last days/weeks.

Right now, you go shoot at a POS, and it becomes *literally* invincible for a set time, and then you leave. Everyone can see when invincibility will end (dumb), leading to people planning to go back and shoot it or come to defend it at that time.

Without RF timers, attackers would need to go and sit at that POS for hours a day, grinding it down. Sounds boring sure... BUT, sitting there for hours a day means hours a day that someone might come fight you.

Now, there's a TON of holes in this idea, that I just can't come up with solutions for yet. It would definitely be ridiculous to implement without some other major changes. I'm just trying to think of SOME way to have EVE without "invincibility" timers. I'd like a sandbox where anyone can shoot anything at any time.

You do realise that every single system would have hundreds of POS, right?

And that it'd be literally impossible to destroy them all?

*looks at Reina's idea*
*stares at it with a deadpan expression*

You can't be serious. Let me get home and do my evening jog. Your idea is so bad is deserves to be ripped apart piecemeal.

Why? Seriously, please make an argument against it. The hours of grind? Is that what makes it horrible in your mind?

I edited my post. Have fun.

Pro-tip: don't suggest changes to things you don't understand. The bit that I underlined above pretty much shows that you have no experience or knowledge regarding POSs.

Also, "no" to not being able to probe down a POS. It is similar in concept to an old idea where a ship, mod, structure creates an AoE cloaking field to hide fleets in.
It was rejected by the community as being "too overpowered."

Recruit Australians.


Whenever I think about what can and can't be accomplished in EvE, I ask myself "What would GoonSwarm do?"

They would make a plan, and follow through.

I didn't say you could put up infinite POSs at each moon did I? Still only one POS per moon, just doesn't have to be at single grid that everyone warps to.

In fact, on a totally unrelated note, I say get rid of the single "warp to" grid for each planet/moon/celestial. If you warp to Planet V from one side of the solar system, you land within X km of the planet on that side of the planet. Warp from the other side, you land on the other side.

Given our current style of play, you are correct. Player tactics would have to change, yes.