that might be a glitcht that the other starbases cannot target more than one opponent

My current thought is for TEC to get a range boost (currently missle frigates out range it) Advent to get free strike craft and fore all 3 to have flack plus flack upgrades.

I also think building a STARBASE in enemy system is rediculouis. These are massive structures that in reality no planet would just sit back and let you build. Build times longer. Greater damage. More strike craft. Long range weapons(50% grav well or like pji). But this should be an upgrade and should only be missiles. Planet defense linked to starbase so that they MUST engage it. Fighter defense. While im on the subjesct of fighter defense carriers should be slower and no structure should build fighters while in battle. its rediculouis. They jump in and fly around and even if you destroy all the fighters your ships cant catch them and they constantly build new fighters.Repair and resupply would not happen in combat. Its annoying when you take out a squad then all your fighters chase the new squad that built a few seconds later. Fighters need better management. Like if you outnumber enemy squads only 2 squads should attack 1 enemy so the rest can be useful else where. One of the main purpose of sb is to seriously dampen pillaging and just ransacking ur entire empire. So we need some seriously annoying pji towards friendly planets or phase lane mines or something that will make bypassing a sb extremely annoying but not impossible. You should be under some fire if you choose a go around. Im sorry but I see no use in building an expensive defense structure that can effectively defend nothing. The vasari can keep there movement and get a close range weapons buff which is one of the points of being mobile.On a side note most of the time in my experience when someone attacks you and they have carriers(in multi) they have at least 10-20 minimum unless they are rushing most of the time more. so thats like 40 squads. Hangers need a serious buff cause a measely 2 or 3 per hanger dont cut it for nothing. They are basically worthless unless you fill every tactical slot with them and they still worthless lol. Then you cant build cannon defense or repair bays or pji all the cool stuff. The vanilla sins was so close to being balanced I really wish we could see these finished up here.

I'm in agreement with most of you on this one--I'm thinking Starbases definitely need to take mor time and resources to build, and they need to be faster...stronger...and longer-ranged.  Ironclad can do it; they have the technology

To put it a bit more seriously, the current state of Starbases is somewhat ridiculous.  Carriers destroy them, and even a fairly small fleet can take one down without too much trouble, particularly when you're Vasari and get Phase Missiles.  Plus they don't have nearly the range they'd need to effectively defend a gravity well--as it stands, they're basically just glorified Gauss Turrets.

I know this is beta...but the devs dropped the ball on this one. Starbases were supposed to make our jaws drop, but this supposed behmoth is a wuss.

Plus whats with the clipping? cap ships flying thru my starbase?

I don't think the majority of people would design the best game. Developers need to take into account all the feedback and decide which would make the most pleasant game. A democratic vote on it will not necessarily produce the best game for everyone.'

example.

Option A goes well with B but not C or D

Option D goes well with option C but not A or B

Most people like options A and D but together they just end up being a weak product.

From my view, the gamers are the researches that profide info. They can definitely provide feedback, but it's ultimately up to the professional developers to look at the info and solve the real problems present. I do not think a vote will bring about that kind of action. The majority of people do not view games critically and will most likely not think critically when offereing their suggestions. They will give more biased assumptions that are influenced by play style and play preference.

My suggestion would be to create a list that describes the problems present and the issues that need solving. A vote on what issues need solving first would definitely help bring up the most important issues affecting gameplay and prioritize those issues for the dev. team.

well tkins that why it would be called wish list.

My suggestion would be to create a list that describes the problems present and the issues that need solving. A vote on what issues need solving first would definitely help bring up the most important issues affecting gameplay and prioritize those issues for the dev. team.

thats basically what i was sayin

Aboslutely right, I didn't mean for it to come off as "they always know best". The phrasing should denote "it is their job to know best"

I also strongly disagree with moving starbases and really strongly disagree with phase jumping bases. The vasari moving base is neat, if they can make it work i'll be down with it, but keep it unique to that faction.

A phase jumping base would be a super capital ship or titan ship.

Also, I'm going to suggest that starbases don't need to be limited to one per gravity well. Make it possible to stack a couple of them, but they have to be a certain distance apart. Nobody wants to see a starbase spam at the end of a phase line, but if you could have three or four spaced out far enough to let an attacker fight them one at a time, it'd be a way to better defend a gravity well without being a game-breaker.

I think you misunderstood somebody's phase-locking idea, but I didn't really see a way to incorporate it into the game in a sense-making way, so I just ignored the original idea.

And I'm going to second the idea of technologies that let you add an extra squadron or two to hangars. Those things are kind underpowered, and I'd appreciate them being a little more useful.

Of course, this is a thread for Starbase ideas, so it's not really germane to the conversation.

That's a terrible idea.  Already you have to fight one in just about every enemy planet.  Multiple starbases coupled with mines, plus various upgraded defenses?  A turtler's wetdream maybe, but an awful game breaker.

Now, i am not playing the beta game, but after reading the posts. I came up with several idea's and see 

what you guys think.

First off I like all your ideas, but how about also limiting the number of starbases that you can build to

around 5. This would help prevent players from dropping a base at every planet and since these things

are supposed to be so powerful, you should only have a limited supply of them (i am aware that there is already a limit, i just think it should be more restrictive).

Secondly, about the starbase movement and phasing problem. How about we take another approach to it. Instead of allowing the starbase to move and phase to different planets. Let's let the starbase pack itself up. In other words, when you order it to pack itself up, it breaks down the structure and loads it onto a ship that can move or phases to another gravity well, and then can be reconstructed in 2/3 of the time that is takes to construct a starbase, and not wasting any resources or levels that you achieved. (ps, that transport ship is unable to attack)

This will allow players to move their starbases when they get more territory, and at the same time allows the 5 starbase limit to be not so much of a hindrence. 

After giving the matter some though, my assessment is fairly simple.  In terms of damage output and tanking ability, the SB's feel about right, except the Transcencia which is... buggy and curiously underpowered considering it's listed damage output.  I suspect it's weapons, particularly it's default Plasma Cannons, miss a hell of a lot.

Range, for all starbases, seems to be a rather major issue - people have, thus far, proposed some rather ludicrous buffs to starbase attack ranges, oftentimes suggesting that they should cover a significant majority of a given gravity well.

I, however have a different idea, consisting of pretty much two parts.  The first would indeed be a range increase, though not as extreme as most are proposing -- something along the lines of a 60 - 80% range increase for short and mid ranged weapons systems, and a ~50% increase to long range weaponry.

The second would be the ability for starbases and all other facilities (excluding, naturally, the Vasari Orkulus) to move in an orbital path around the world to which they're attached.  This would render circumventing defenses a far more difficult task.

Finally, Starbases are either vulnerable to the point of uselessness or completely bypassable while defending an unihabitable node.  Given the early information available, this does not seem to have been intended.  My suggestion for this problem is quite simple; over an inhabitable node, Starbases have options available to help increase the resilience and prevent colonization of said node (or are at least supposed to - they currently seem to be bugged.)  For a Starbase in an uninhabitable node, I suggest that this ability, which in such a place is useless anyway, be replaced by researched option that would allow the base to acquire a constructor and a number of tactical slots, which would allow for the creation of adequate defenses, locking the route down with phase inhibitors, etc.