I really enjoy lingering near space stations to admire the views of stars or planets.
However, stations in the EVE universe are always situated in very high orbits, which makes the view feel somewhat unreal.
Could the stations be placed in lower planetary orbits so that the background planet appears larger and more realistic? Perhaps even add animations of shuttles constantly ferrying back and forth between the planetary surface and the station?
Upwell structures can be anchored anywhere outside 1000km of planets, for example in a spot like this which is a little over 1000km away:
However people often don’t do that as they prefer to place the structures not in cinematic spots but in efficient spots such as next to jump gates for easier travel or defense.
For structures in lower orbits of planets with shuttles ferrying back and forth between the planetary surface and the structure you should take a look at Skyhooks, which literally have shuttles ferrying back and forth to the planet as you can see one in the picture below:
One arrives and departs at the Skyhook every few minutes.
Other stations than Skyhooks usually aren’t placed this close to planets, I assume because the the reduced gravity in higher orbits is useful for our spaceships.
I always figured NPC stations were anchored at Lagrange points. Not that I gave it a lot of thought, honestly.
And also that time a titan wracked a habitable moon with tsunamis by emerging from warp too close to it.
Since the stations don’t actually appear to orbit the planet they are around, that sounds logical.
That said, gravity in eve is weird, since the planets also don’t appear to be orbiting their suns…
It’s more that it’s a game than any lore reasons. Bookmarks don’t work well with a solar system in motion, especially considering it was late 90s, early 00s coding.
Yes. I too was so disappointed by not being able to sun dive my ship or burn up in the entry of a planet’s atmosphere. This makes the planets seem more artificial. Those vids of people farming on planets and walking in stations, are all bunk, as you should know by now.
Just be aware that when you buy the station, you need a power core, at least 1 module, and some fuel blocks to power it. They might only cost you a few billion ISK to set one up, but they also cost a few billion ISK per year to operate. Players will be out to blow it up because the power core ( worth 800 million ) will always drop out in space.
There is no “low planetary orbit” in EVE. If you fly towards a planet eventually your ship will not get any closer.
Structure, as you cannot buy a station
I set up my stations of any type as far away from scanning as I could. Carefully aligned as I could for their location. A lower orbit would defeat my playstyle but not affect it as it would not matter to me, I guess.
That could be solved by binding their position in relation to a celestial on grid. It could just be an option when saving a bookmark:
Technically it would be possible to have such boomarks and let the planets, moons and structures rotate around their hostbodies in a pretty much natural way. The question is if the additional resources to do these calculations would be worth spending them compared to their benefit for the games enjoyability due to an increased layer of realism. I personally would only do that, if it can be done in a ways that put no noticable strain on the server.
The last time I checked the Astrahua, Fortizar, and Keepstar all seem to hold ships in a hangar, they don’t go anywhere, they house people in offices, they all have repair facilities, and optional modules from clone bays to mini malls. I would call that by definition a space station.
Space Station - noun. 1. A large satellite equipped to support a human crew and designed to remain in orbit around Earth for an extended period and serve as a base for launching exploratory expeditions, conducting research, repairing satellites, and performing other space-related activities. 2. A manned artificial satellite orbiting the earth designed for extended occupation and use by multiple crews in succession. 3. A manned artificial satellite designed for long-term habitation, research, located in a stationary or fixed position in space.
Yea, that is what I thought I meant.
It is well known in eve language, anything player made or player anchored etc is called a STRUCTURE. NPC’s are in STATIONS.
It is a good idea but since D-Scan has a 14.3 AU range you would still be detected. Don’t they still hold to the 10 AU limit rule or is that out dated information?
It is considered an exploit to begin deployment of any new Upwell Structures at a location in space further than 10AU outside the furthest celestial from the sun in the system.
but you should use the same words as most eve players use. For the majority of eve players, a station is a NPC station.
I mean you are free to call a scimitar a healer, but we call it a logi.
And if you call a capsule a “cap”, everybody will think that you are talking about a capital, not a capsule
The calculations are quite trivial compared to what’s needed for combat, even say a 1v1 without drones.
However, it’s not more realistic – it ignores the theory of relativity which states there is no such thing as an absolute frame of reference 
Also most bookmarks are not only placed relative to only one object, you might have a BM 100km behind gate A as seen from the direction of gate B (common null sec bubble tactic). Gates tend to be near planets, and if the planets move around, this concept of “behind” will rotate.
Yeah absolutely, maneuvering would be more complex. However even without relativity counted in, somewhat rotating systems would be at least more realistic than those static systems we have right now. Not achieving a 100% realism but thats not achievable anyway and probably not the goal. Somewhat “believable” would be more than enough.
Bookmarks in line with celestials would become very impractical, no more drag or stop bubbles or mid-warp smartbombs, chasing a player who made an in-line bookmark won’t be in-line anymore by the time people warped after them, safe bookmarks away from any celestials or gates suddenly could have gates in range a while later and my bookmarks strategically placed such that I have a gate in dscan range could just as well be out of range when I wish to use it, and any sense of direction I have now in systems would be gone.
I’m not against moving celestials, but it would be a huge change to the game.
If the goal is somewhat reality, I’d rather prioritize realistic spaceship physics than realistic celestial mechanics. Like, for starters, inertia and acceleration. In 17 years of playing this game, I don’t think I’ve ever been bothered by the planets, moons, etc., not moving. But I have definitely asked the question—many a time—why the heck my ship has a speed limit, and why it slows down when I cut off the afterburner.
Yes, but the distance is for ship safety. Gives me a chance to warp away, not for the protection of the sta.
