I know that the beta just came out and everyone is still finding bugs, but thats not all beta tests are for
about star bases this is just if you think that any balance issues need to be mentioned I for one think that the range at least for the advent starbase (i haven't played any other race yet) is way too small anyone can just go around the base without taking any damage sure i can defend all my buildings in that grav well but it isnt a fleet stopper you just go around and kill his other planets.
I don't mind Vasari Starbases phase jumping as long as they cost 150 fleet supply and 3 capital ship slots and move at the speed of 200.
Perhaps it would be simpler to give the Ruiner an anti structure weapon.
Explain to me again how setting a new one up again in the new well is even an issue with the current mechanics. And you can even build it completely out of the way of the enemy forces since the Vasari starbase is the only one that can move.
and one of the big ideas that has come up that will solve this problem is just give the Vasari a torpedo cruiser
The only way building it out of range of the enemy works is if all of their defences are stationary. If they have a fleet, building far away doesn't work. And if you are playing against another Vasari, then their starbase (that will probably be fully uprgaded) can come attack yours while it is under construction, and if yours is finished, it still needs to be upgraded to have a hope against the enemy one.
or if you planned and brought a few torpedo cruisers with you you win hahahahahahaha
But it should be extremely difficult to build a SB in an enemy well, especially if that well is heavily defended. The point of Entrenchment is to add a more DEF style to the game. If you can jump into a well and build and upgrade a SB real quick...then what good would it be to have a strong DEF set up.
It should be hard, or next to impossible to set up a forward base like this (in a heavily ENTRENCHED well).
Hence the name Entrenchment. Get it.
It's really not that hard to understand and comprehend this concept people.
Again, it should not be easy. Entrenchment means DEFENSE...not Offense.
You guys just don't seem to be getting the whole point behind what this micro-expansion was supposed to emcompass. It was supposed to add DEFENSIVE strats to the overall game to help balance out all of the OFF and spamming issues.
I mean it's great that they added some possibilities to make the SB be OFF, or set it to be culturally efficient or trade efficient...but the whole gist of the SB was meant to be more DEF to start with...not OFF.
Like I said...it's not that hard to understand.
What about inside?
If an enemy is shooting an M16 on the inside of either an F16 or M1A2, then you've got a problem.
1) Starbases need more range 2) Starbases should move3) Starbases should have built-in flak4) Starbases should have more squads5) Vas starbases should be able to be deconstructed and reconstructed OR Vas should get a torpedo cruiser.6) Players need a reason to fight starbases. They need to provide some sort of heavy obstacle for enemies.
1) Starbases definitely need more range. The TEC and Advent starbases are just really strong turrets right now.
2) Starbases should not move. I'm going to allow the Vasari one to scoot around because one of them doing that is kinda cool. However, the whole concept of a starbase is that it's a freakin' stationary base of defensive operations. STATIONARY FREAKIN' BASE.
3) Starbases do need some kind of built-in anti-fighter equipment, otherwise carriers become cheap "torpedo cruisers". I like the idea of tying the number of flak cannons with the number of defensive upgrades, but maybe only one or two per upgrade.
4) Starbases definitely need more squadrons. Two to start off with, four for Advent and adding three squadrons per upgrade sounds about right. Gives you a stronger fighter presence without being game-breaking.
5) Starbases do not leave their gravity well. STARBASES DO NOT LEAVE THEIR GRAVITY WELL. I think this is the single most nonsensical idea I have heard so far. There aren't freakin' Death Stars, they're starbases. Defensive Starbases. But a Vasari torpedo cruiser (or torpedo mode for their mine cruiser) would even the playing field.
6) Starbases should absolutely have a compelling reason for the enemy to attack them. Long-range harassment missiles, planet-protecting powers, or my favorite ... the tractor beam ... are all good things that would influence an invader to engage the starbase.
HAHAHAH
STATIONARY FREAKIN' BASE
This so going to be one of the "OVER 9000" 's. I will make it so.
IT'S A STATIONARY FREAKIN' BASE people!
On topic,
I agree with everything posted. I don't mind the idea of packing up a bases and moving it though. Investing 18k into a starbase midgame then having it in a useless position late game makes them highly less economical compared to a medium sized fleet (aka 6 capital ships.)
Maybe if you got a special one of a kind bonus/when you kill a Starbase it would be interesting. Say every cap in your fleet regardless of position would level up. And maybe instead of destroy only options/ how about a boarding/assualting/taking a Starbase over? That's what I love about this game the possibilities are endless.
My votes:
1) Starbases shouldn't be mobile - certainly not between planets. If you've built a monster one in a backwater too bad - demolish it and build it elsewhere.
2) "Starbases should outrange everything but the super-missile launchers (and each other)" and should be able to cover most of the grav well so you can get past them and can maybe bombard the planet they're near but only if they are badly sited.
3) They should take a long time to build
4) They should be expensive but not as expensive as cap ships (initially at least)
5) They should gain experience from battle which unlocks good things.
6) There should be a (raisable) limit to the number of starbases globally but not per system.
Another thing.. a planet bombardment ability on a Starbase is utterly useless.
The current "insta-building a massive starbase before your enemy knows what's going on in his system" aside, if you are able to construct a Starbase in an enemy grav well it means you already have military supremacy there. Which means your caps and siege frigates can bombard the planet at will.
I hope the planetary bombardment ability of the Transcencia gets turned into something more useful such as the suggested anti-repulsion ability to pull ships into firing range of the base.
1. Sbs do need more range, especially TEC and Advent, so they can actually stop something from running by them, or atleast haress them.
2.Never should their be a phase capable star base, or a star base that can be broken down and moved. I still stick with you should be able to build tugs from capital ship factories that have no shields, low health, and no weapons that can move a sb with them.
3. sbs need flak, and many more fighter squadrons.
5. The Vasari need a torpedo boat, or allow the Ruiner to carry torpedos.
Off topic idea for mine clearing, not only get a dedicated mine layer, but also get external ordinance racks for capital ships that carry anti-mine weapons.
They do have a hold position command if you go into tactic managment. All ships and def structurs do. Its on the engagment range options. First thing i looked for when my vasari starbase had to be sheperded back to a usefull spot....damn wave throwing sheep. I think they should not move because the whole point of the neat new defencive upgarde we got to the other def structures (the one part of the expansion im pleased with. see my rant...i mean topic on mines *shudder*). They do need a range increase badly though. not half the grav well but certainly they need to far out range the other static deffences. I also make the old argument that phase blockers need to make it impossible to pass through to another system you own untill they are destroyed. Put your SB on top of them and they will come up to say hi to it. SB are not doing their intednded dammage. Its just a fact. If you want proof play any mod out there where they increase the damage on cap ships into the hundreds. the dammage it quite visible. I sat and watched the sp and hp on two vas cap ships taking on my advent ( i tested the TEC sb too) sb and they were not taking more than 30 or so damage per hit. they need to strenthen starbases and nerf mines. Im disturbed by the aparent silence of star/clad on the forums. Used to be they had people patroling the forums and making an apearence on just about every game relevent post to correct information and dish it out when needed. Since the entrenchment beta i havnt seen any sign of a mod posting ANY kind of response...
HHAHAHAH
PURE GOLD
It's a STATIONARY FREAKIN' BASE!
This is'nt that bad of an idea you know but it needs to be more limited such as
1. jumping from one plant to another should take as long as jumping ships between stars and jumping between stars super freakin slow like even an hour at the fastest move speed
2. Starbases that go through a jump come out partley damaged always, possibly haveing lost upgrades or they need to be repaired for a cost and time before comeing back online, they can comeout completly disabled and sometimes with out sheilds (philidalphia experiment anyone?), or they dont end up at the planet you tryed to jump it to and comes out elsewhere (lost in space lol), can be completly lost from jumping
3.basicly these things are freaken huge and pulling them through what ever phase space is should be extremly dangerous and difficult to do, think of it as the phase engine was never ment for such a large mass or something at least not without several hundred years worth of research cause i mean if you could safely jump a whole base why couldnt that tech be scaled up for a plant or moon to me its just not logical
We get that it is about defense. I for one, love defense, as I turtle in all of my RTS's, and that is finally a viable strategy in Sins. But the TEC and the Advent both got ships to somewhat counter all of the new defensive stuff. What does the Vasari have? Their starbase. Which means you have to use it offensively. But the only way for it to be a viable counter is if it is upgraded before it goes into the enemy gravity well. Which requires a phase jumping starbase, or the Vasari need their own, dedicated defense counter.
I would prefer that their SB can jump. It keeps the Vasari unique, assuming that the other races get mobile SBs, and even if they don't, the only other option is to give them a torpedo frigate, which would make them lose some of their uniqueness. Plus, it fits the Vasari. If their entire race is on the run, would they really build a giant space station that can hold a tremendous part of their population, and then just leave it behind everytime they moved?
YES!
In space, no one can move your STATIONARY FREAKING BASE!
gold
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
