The Starbase needs little research while the nova needs more and higher tech researches. Given the Loyalists get it a tad too cheap research-wise. But that is a problem with it's current research order.

Besides that your estimation fails to take into account that starbases might already be present on the planets where you need the auxiliary government, seeing how they are an important defensive structure and how they give additional boni to you (like boosted trade income, better allegiances or colony pods). I for one almost always have starbases on most of my planets before being shelled with Novas, in which case it's just an 1800/275/150 investment.

Advent starbase: Tradeport that is about as effective as two normal tradeports, 30% extra allegiance (equals 30% stronger resource and planet income), extremely strong temple of communion. Takes up 6 starbase slots, frees up 20 logistic slots (if all abilities were maxed out) on backwards planets. Leaves open two slots (1 can be used for aux gov if needed).

TEC starbase: Tradeport as effective as 3.5 to 4 normal tradeports (on step 2), frigate factory that builds 2 times/3.5 times as fast as a normal one. Takes up 4 starbase slots, frees up 28 logistic slots. Leaves 4 slots on the SB.

Vasari Starbase: Phase stabilizer, tradeport roughly as effective as 2 normal ones, colony pods are immune to planetary bombardment. Takes up 4 starbase slots, frees up... 8 logistic and 8 tactical slots I think. The weakest economic effect of all starbases, but the freed up tacticals can be very useful.

The Vasari starbase is the least useful to use on backwards planets right now, but the immunity of their colony pods from all sorts of eco debuffs can be valuable in certain situations.

 

Edit: I don't have the exact numbers in my head right now, but I think that is bout the gist of it.

 

Right now I play versus AI a lot more, but in diplomacy the rate is about... 50/50 I guess. I'm more of a defensive player so I'm more prone to have starbases out early than someone who tries to steamroll players early on with fleet, but I always try to balance increasing my fleet size and securing my lines.

The argument I was trying to make was, although already having starbases for defense/economics weakens said argument, is that a counter which can cost 10x+ as much as the problem (the Novalith) for full coverage is a poor counter. Add in the fact it only prevents the planet from going neutral, and does nothing to address the population loss or the trade reduction/population growth debuff, and you're left with what is, all and all, a mediocre plan. All it really does is saves you the downtime from having to send a new colony ship. You still take the punch right in the teeth.

EDIT: Since I'm talking so much about it, I might as well be clear on my stance on the Novalith. I do not think it's OP. I think against unprepared enemies it's devastating, and versus prepared ones it borders on a waste of resources. It's almost like a nuke in the sense that the mere threat of it is arguably more effective than the weapon itself. It would be nice if they could make it less of a oneshot planet killer, while allowing it to never become useless. Hopefully Mr. Haze won't kill me in my sleep for suggesting it needs a buff, but it really is... odd. It just doesn't seem to fit in with the other two, and suffers for it.

XubXub, what mcintire was saying regarding the presence of starbases is my same philosophy.  It's not uncommon at all for me to use Orkies for their economic benefits.  If I'm going to turtle, I'm going to spam starbases and make stupid amounts of trade ports and will put an orky on every neutral that increase my length.

The closest thing the Vasari have to Hardened Cities or Planetary Shields is their tier 1 civilian tech that lets them build planet shelters for something like 20% of their default cost and at an accelerated rate.

why do all these people think they get to whine about something a say it needs to be changed? Super weapons weren't really a problem... ever unless i missed something

if the nova was tied back into the missile tech then the tec loyalist lose their early advantage/bonus and their would be no point in playing them since they r a turtle race cant get their twin starbases till tier 8 and after some rly expensive and long research while the other races can get some of their bonus early like the tec tebel with truce among rogue and the advent loyalist global unity and w/e the advent rebels do i havent played as them much and atm the tec loyalist have their early novas if they r tied back into the missile tech it will fuck them up just like they will be when the super weapons r limited

You don't get it.

SOASE Engine has about as much chance of getting options asked for back in 2008 as Forest Gump has of being Obama's father.

What you see is what you get. 

They made the Iron Engine which SOASE uses.  I'm not sure if the new medieval game they're making also uses it or something else (though I think it does), though I'd assume that they're updating it for the new game.  Sins II would probably use a newer redesigned version.