[Beta] Feedback on Starbases

Crossposted from the Impulse forums

from Sins Forums

 

I'm quoting the previous poster from (http://forums.impulsedriven.com/334537) because my post requires it:
Quoting Mercury Joe,
reply 19
I agree, starbases should be a powerhouse if built up that way. I liked that the game lets you make it a trading post, a shipyard, a defensive base, or a multi-purpose base.

If you build it as a multipurpose base, the weapons range are about right. BUT, when you build it to be a strong defensive structure, you should have RANGE. If you are going to sacrifice the shipbuilding, the trade port, etc for armor and weapons, you are meaning to make it a strong defensive structure. The starbase then should be able to range the whole gravity well with its weapons. It should be FEARED.

Along those lines, starbases should be able to be re-dedicated. When you build them on the frontier, you want to make them a defensive stronghold. Later in game, you should have the option to de-weaponize it and make it a tradeport as it is no longer a 'front line' item but now a structure existing in your empire.. These are HUGE structures that are supposed to be MASSIVE. To build them up should be a money and time intensive proposition. You do not destroy and rebuild, you tear out and remodel.

 

I agree with this.  It irked me to no end to discover that I would have to build a new base if I wanted a trade/government base and a Warbase.  I would love to see a 'Restructure base' option that resets half or all of the base slots.  Would a percentage of the total base cost be appropriate to pay for this?  AKA, if you only have 3 upgrades, then you only have to pay for 15% of those combined upgrades to restructure.  I do believe that people need to pay to redesign their bases, and I also think that leaving them locked in to the original configuration is untenable.

23,594 views 27 replies
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top





 



I'm quoting the previous poster from (http://forums.impulsedriven.com/334537) because my post requires it:


Quoting Mercury Joe,
reply 19
I agree, starbases should be a powerhouse if built up that way. I liked that the game lets you make it a trading post, a shipyard, a defensive base, or a multi-purpose base.

If you build it as a multipurpose base, the weapons range are about right. BUT, when you build it to be a strong defensive structure, you should have RANGE. If you are going to sacrifice the shipbuilding, the trade port, etc for armor and weapons, you are meaning to make it a strong defensive structure. The starbase then should be able to range the whole gravity well with its weapons. It should be FEARED.

Along those lines, starbases should be able to be re-dedicated. When you build them on the frontier, you want to make them a defensive stronghold. Later in game, you should have the option to de-weaponize it and make it a tradeport as it is no longer a 'front line' item but now a structure existing in your empire.. These are HUGE structures that are supposed to be MASSIVE. To build them up should be a money and time intensive proposition. You do not destroy and rebuild, you tear out and remodel.



 

I agree with this.  It irked me to no end to discover that I would have to build a new base if I wanted a trade/government base and a Warbase.  I would love to see a 'Restructure base' option that resets half or all of the base slots.  Would a percentage of the total base cost be appropriate to pay for this?  AKA, if you only have 3 upgrades, then you only have to pay for 15% of those combined upgrades to restructure.  I do believe that people need to pay to redesign their bases, and I also think that leaving them locked in to the original configuration is untenable.



   Bases should be so powerful, so expensive, such upkeep, that each side should only have like three. And they should be able to be decontructed to move into your NEW defensive positions. It would take a great deal of time and be very dangerous because the contructor ship is and should be very vunerable in transit.

   I'm not sure how I feel about being able to create bases in enemy wells though. I think you should have to control the planet before you are able to build a base.

WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

^^^Agreed. Otherwise you can build a base and just slowly wipe out enemy forces

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

The size, power, defence strgenth, number of fighter bays that comes as standard, the ammount of weapon ports - basically everything about the starbases should be increased.

Starbases should be very diffucult to deal with and as pointed out should cost allot more to build. I think starbases should be an extra line in Fleet logistics where you can increase the max number (5 or 6) and they should be deadly and able to take a huge amount of damage, also construction time should be greatly increased.

Also you should be able to build more than 1 in a system. Its called entrenchment

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

From what I can tell, The Empires in this game rely a lot on behind the scenes civilian and black market to help their war effort. All of your fleet and tactical structures cost you money to operate and maintain them. You directly pay to build and staff that capital ship.  Starbases are different, The Empire helps initialize the project by producing the constructor ship, but its up to the civilians to build and maintain the Starbase. Star base build time should scale by, the local gravity well's allegience, culture rate, amount of population on the planet(if applicable).Your bases build fastest if inside your own culture, next to a fully populated Terran world that happens to be your homeworld. And build so slow that you'd measure build time with a calendar if it is in an enemy culture,  enemy planet(low allegience.)

I like the big red button. I can see this as being the counter against those freaking huge ass AI fleets that are impossible to destroy. I blew up my base and took out almost the entire enemy fleet. It was Massive. Its just too bad I lost LOS to the Gravity well and couldn't see the fireworks. DEVs, please allow us LOS to the Gravity well for a few more seconds so we can see the destruction unfold.

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

From what I can tell, The Empires in this game rely a lot on behind the scenes civilian and black market to help their war effort. All of your fleet and tactical structures cost you money to operate and maintain them. You directly pay to build and staff that capital ship. Starbases are different, The Empire helps initialize the project by producing the constructor ship, but its up to the civilians to build and maintain the Starbase. Star base build time should scale by, the local gravity well's allegience, culture rate, amount of population on the planet(if applicable).Your bases build fastest if inside your own culture, next to a fully populated Terran world that happens to be your homeworld. And build so slow that you'd measure build time with a calendar if it is in an enemy culture, enemy planet(low allegience.)

I fully agree with you on this one for TEC. and Advent, but I personaly don't think this should apply to Vassari. They operate differently culture wise, relying on enslaving other cultures for their work forces. Plus they have a technological edge on the other to races.

Also, aside from culture the Vassari starbace is designed to be a seige weapon as well as a deffencive structure and would'nt work as a seige weapon if it took too long to build in an enemies  gravity well.

I really think that the vassari starbase is good the way it is. Thats my view anyway.

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

^^^Agreed. Being the oldest race, they should have the most advanced base

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top

I disagree with the OP.  You need to make hard strategic choices regarding starbases, their employment, and their abilities.  If you don't like a starbase's configuration, you need to spend time and credits rebuilding one and re-upgrading one.

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Being able to remodel star bases would be awesome.

I am 95% into finishing my first beta game as the Vasari.

Now having palyed at least one game of each race i have to admit the ability of the Vasari base to move in the gav well is a huge benefit and all races's star bases should be able to move within the gav well like that.

Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Matthew, reply 10
Being able to remodel star bases would be awesome.

I am 95% into finishing my first beta game as the Vasari.

Now having palyed at least one game of each race i have to admit the ability of the Vasari base to move in the gav well is a huge benefit and all races's star bases should be able to move within the gav well like that.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!XO   Startbase should NOT move!!!!! Since a few of you pointed out that the Vasari are the more advanced race, this is the benifit a moving starbase. TEC and Advent sorry you dont deserve this and or want to have it. Why, cuz they dont need to move. They need rebalanced to compensate for the lack of mobility. The mirco is called Entrenchment. NOT 'BUILD FLYING FORTESSES EVERYWHERE:puke: '!!!! There is so much more to the mirco than just the starbases. While a major key to the mirco they are once again part of a large picture in defense. Just like one ship type is part of a fleet. There have better suggestions than to make the starbases move. Lets once again think outside the box. Not 'OMFG!, his starbase moves I want mine to move too!!!!!!XO X( '

 

Gahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>:(

Ok, I feel better now. Sorry for that outburst but I need to vent. #:(

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

I totally agree with Carbon.  Also i dont understand why some ppl want to let the starbases to have the ability to phase jump, that totally defeates the puprose of this being a game of defence when the biggest defensive structure you have can be used as an offensive weapon.  NO MOVING STARBASES!

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

To be true to the lore, only the Vasari Starbases will be able to move.

+1 Loading…
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top

Good.

 

:fox:

Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Craig, reply 13
To be true to the lore, only the Vasari Starbases will be able to move.

 

THANK GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:w00t:  :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :D :D :D :D :D k6 k6 k6 k6 k6 k6 k6 \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/

 

Now we can move past the moving starbases! Ah its a glorious day!!!

Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Craig, reply 13
To be true to the lore, only the Vasari Starbases will be able to move.

I have no problem with this, I just have a question out of curiousity.  What lore?

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top

Top of the page, click the link that says 'Lore'.

 

:fox:

Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top

Ok, so Ive given this some thought and maybe the best way to deal with the starbases lack of range it reduce the phase jump lanes. Arent they are 40 degrees now? Why not reduce them to 25 degrees. That way you can park a starbase right in the way and they can not jump around it with out it shooting.

And back on the OP topic, I do agree a neat idea is to have your starbases adapt. Cuz the front line can change, and also gives you options if your losing ground to revert your statbase to a defesive post. Also liked GoldenShadow's post. And I personaly would love a longer building time and higher cost if I could depend on it to hold its ground against a large fleet.

Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top

Its kind of silly that the TEC starbae missiles have shorter range than Javelis missiles.  I was playing against AI and was able to park my LRM and blast away at an Argonev that had missile upgrade without any retaliation

Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top

also another idea is give the ability for starbases to launch missles out of the tubes using like  a mass driver, but not have it light off it's drive for another few seconds, thus increasing the range or adjust the drive of the missle to be able to run longer at a lower speed

Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top

I agree with the original poster, especially about the idea that starbases should be able to fire anywhere in the whole gravity well.  This is CRUCIAL.  In their current state, they aren't worth the trouble.

Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top

I agree, the only starbase that is at all semi useful is the vasari.  It you could put a starbase in the back of your well, and it could fire missles anywhere in the gravity well, that would be cool.  Make it the cap ship killer.  Right now, they are too little bang for the buck.

Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top

the upgrades you can do to the starbaes need to be more moticalbe

Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Kitkun, reply 17
Top of the page, click the link that says 'Lore'.

I did.  I saw nothing referencing starbases, or which ones could move and which ones couldn't.