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