Wouldn't that be a hard hit to user's cpu?

Maybe the structures aren't actually orbiting said planet?  Maybe they are in a solar orbit on the same path as the planet and therefore appear "fixed" around the planet because they aren't actually orbiting it?

Although, what flaws?  Turrets being useless?  Orbiting turrets would be even more useless.  THe thing would be pounding away at a seige frig and the suddenly it drifts out of range and you have to wait forever for it to come back.

Meh.  I haven't studied space and space travel as much as I'd like to.  Yes, I guess the objects would still be affected by the gravity of the planet itself, but I really can't think of a good explaination for anything that happens in Sins.  I mean, how can the space ships move every which-way in the grav well without smacking into the planet when their orbital speed drops below the critcal point (especially when they do a complete 180 and fly back to where they came from)at which outward force balances graviational attraction?  Solar orbit is really the best explaination I can think of - although it's hardly correct.

Geosynchronous orbit seems like a good idea for floating giant space structures to me. Given the International Space Station is truckin' along up there, would you want 30 HUGE structures going at different speeds? And Ritifo is right, that's a lot of mass to make change a different direction without comming to your feet. All a star would do is make the objects orbits oblong, they have to overcome said planet's gravity first.

If the developers were to go that far then someone would ask "why don't these objects have the ability to travel through space lanes" but that is what ships are for.  I guess the logic they use is that these structures have enough power to maintain the orbit we are building them in.  However the ability to have the fabricators move these structures, say not at combat speeds but for fine tuning would be good.  You could simulate that by scrapping one unit and building it in the new space.

I care more about gameplay than lore or complexities of orbitial math.  It would simply be useful in the sense of enhancing gameplay and tactical choice if turrets could be given an on/off toggle ability called Orbit, only available when the turret is built within a rather small ring/distance from the planet, to allow them to slowly move within that small ringed area to address threats to said planet.

If you want to place a turret in deeper space around the well, great, but then it's stationary.  If you want to nestle the turret at the planet, then it can move about the planet to fend off threats, avoiding the silly issue where a planet with 4-5-6 turrets has a gap somewhere where seige/cap gravitates, effectively negating all the turrets.

This avoids, I think, the issues of complexity with weird arbitrary orbits within the grav well, and issues of turrets exiting combat as they're dragged out of range by their orbit.  It also avoids turrets having full mobility to roam the well at large - they're not starbase or hanger bay after all.

Imho, if turrets defended planets better, a beneficial natural result is that then seige could also be buffed a little bit to not be countered by a stiff breeze.   I wish seige were either a bit more help for anti-SB, or that they damaged extractors production rate (not neccessarily the extractors themselves) in a way that could make it worthwild to sacrifice seige against unprotected extractors.  i.e. That seige had more use case.

In essense, we so rarely find a use or need to make any seige, or turrets, we find it regrettable that otherwise fine graphics/coding/opportunity goes by the wayside many games.  The lore discussion is fun, and has merit.  My first desire is for more enhancement of gameplay and choice though.

-evoke