Starbase Balance » Forum Post by Maccilia

Best laugh of the day!

Successfully updated karma reason!

It should be enough if the starbase have enough range that they can cover one phase lane completely. Phase jumping starbase is stupid imo.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Concerning Starbase build times..

In my last game the AI decided to build a Starbase in the middle of a big fight. I thought it was a bad idea and immediately targeted the "construction site" with a Cleansing Brilliance and some 5-6 Destra Crusaders. And 10 seconds later there is a damaged but fully functional Starbase with Shield mitigation firing back at my ships. Seriously now.

Can we have the Heavy Construction Frigate not disappear after it starts building so that we can destroy it instead and halt the construction? Why shouldn't Starbases be built just like every other structure?

And the Starbase build time seriously needs to be about 10 times longer. And 20 times longer in an uncontrolled gravity well. Actually you shouldn't be able to build at all with hostile ships around.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

I find the idea itself of using Starbases as an offensive tactic to be rediculous. And the ability of the Advent Starbase to use asteroids to attack enemy planets ... either it's going to be in a friendly grav well (in which case the ability is useless), or you're going to have the capital ship / seige frigate support to reduce a planet without the added help.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Can we have the Heavy Construction Frigate not disappear after it starts building so that we can destroy it instead and halt the construction? Why shouldn't Starbases be built just like every other structure?

And the Starbase build time seriously needs to be about 10 times longer. And 20 times longer in an uncontrolled gravity well.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

I have to agree with everyone increase range,

I have a suggestion Maybe make the upgrades cheaper for the first initial 2 on the starbase, and have it get more expensive the more upgrade's you add on. Oh and how about being able to use all the upgrade's for the starbabes instead of only getting 7. I mean whats the use of having them when they can't even fend off a fleet of ships.

Example

1. Fisrt two upgrades you use on the starbase maybe costs 800/100/100

2. Third upgrade jumps to 1000/150/150

3. Fourth upgrade goes too 2500/200/200 and so fourth until your starbase has used all of its upgrades that you researched.

Also I know this maybe impossible to do now but maybe show the growth of the starbases as you upgrade them, you know have it get bigger the more health you add to it. Hanger bays be shown when added, the construction yard actually be construted around the base. Show the different types of weapons that you upgrade. Oh heres and idea to make them more usefull have them be able to be built in the phase lanes so when an enemy fleet jumps and runs into the base they are pulled out of the jump and are forced to have to engage the base rather than just fly around it. But make it so if you do build one in a phase lane you can't built one in the connecting planets gravety well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Also maybe give the player an option on the starbase either offensive,defensive,or economic. Whatever option you choose you can't choose another one. Maybe also make a limit as to how many starbases a player can have. Force the player to think caefully as to where he will place the base.

Some suggestions if you choose one of the starbase options.

Defensive option:

More hull points, shields, large hanger for a max of 10 squadrons of either fighters or bombers or a mix than the other two options after all it need's to defend your empire, and the ability to create all ships once fully upgraded. Player can build up to 6 of these.

Offensive option:

less hull points, shields than the defensive option but more weapons and a small hanger for 4 squadrons, and the ability to construct only capital ships at a 20% faster build rate than capital factories, and have the ability to jump to other systems. Heres the catch though it can't bombard planets, and the player can only build 2 of them and no other ones can be built once you choose this research tree.

Economic Option:

Well if you choose this tree it turns the stare base into a huge money generating base for trade mineral gathering and even supports up to 500 civilians to add tax's to it. It of course has shields and hull points but at a lesser value than the other two options. It also has some weapons to allow it to defend itself from small fleets of about 1-5 ships, a max of one capital ship. Player can only build 3 of these and after fully researching the tree be able to construct 2 defensive Starbase's at a higher than normal cost.

Wow brainstorming away right now, I'll think of others don't worry.

Successfully updated karma reason!

yeah wack up the range, nerf the build/upgrade speed, i could afford one in the first 10 minutes of a game. also with the advent one the bombers appeared in the left hand ship bar rather than the bottom one where the hanger ships go? as for damage i would say its about right altho it could do with mulitple targeting, after all it is a starbase with shite loads of guns

Successfully updated karma reason!

On the one hand, the way the game is programmed each "entity" has four "sides" and each side is equipped with certain weapons. This means that a starbase can only bring 25% of it's weapons to bear on a single target, and in order to get the full damage output of a starbase, the enemy has to be idiotic enough to fully surround it.

Instead, I want to see starbases have the ability to bring more (but not all) of their firepower to bear on a single target. Say ... half instead of a quarter. Do more damage, bring the invaders down quicker, but not overpower. Just double the weapons on the "front" of the starbase, and drop the damage on the other sides by half.

This does not negage my desire to see a starbase have more range, a tractor beam to force engagements, and the need for it to be a STATIONARY FREAKIN' BASE. That is all.

Successfully updated karma reason!

from what i've seen the range should be increased to half the grav well and u should be aloud to build 2 or 3 bases to cover a planet and the price should be dropped a bit to compensate for the additional bases. i agree with the time it takes to build them though in the sense that if ur building them in controlled or nuetral grav wells its half the time it would take to build one in enemy grav well

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting shfir,

reply 9

On the one hand, the way the game is programmed each "entity" has four "sides" and each side is equipped with certain weapons. This means that a starbase can only bring 25% of it's weapons to bear on a single target, and in order to get the full damage output of a starbase, the enemy has to be idiotic enough to fully surround it.

Instead, I want to see starbases have the ability to bring more (but not all) of their firepower to bear on a single target. Say ... half instead of a quarter. Do more damage, bring the invaders down quicker, but not overpower. Just double the weapons on the "front" of the starbase, and drop the damage on the other sides by half.

The Argonev is able to fire 3/4 of its laser beams at a single target after it positions itself right. So presumably 3/4 of its other weapons are firing as well. In my last game the Argonev seemed to be able to take down an 8th level Radiance rather mercilessly which was impressive.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Combining a well placed starbase, at their current weapon range, with only a few concentrations of mines (and phase inhibitors if you're feeling particularly cruel) at a suitable choke point is already quite effective a holding enemy fleets from bypassing your system in my experience. A starbase alone cannot stop all enemy traffic and it should not in my opinion, as that would be a rather lazy option and would dramatically reduce the tactical decision making required from the player.

I agree with some observations people have already made regarding other balance issues; the build time of a starbase in an opponent’s gravity well could be increased to a level that would give the option of jumping in ships from a neighbouring system before the starbase could be completed, or significantly reduce the firepower of the first level of your starbase to give a greater window of opportunity for your opponent to counter this strategy.

The wrong thread I know but a related and often mentioned issue, I believe the mines are far too cost effective (so naturally everyone spams them). For all factions the cost/antimatter to build them could be multiplied substantially, to the point where players can fill their systems with mines only to the detriment of their fleet or empire building rather than at present, as a mere afterthought. There is also a huge disparity between the amount of micro it takes to lay the mines vs. avoiding/clearing them. One option is that once a scout reveals a mine they could stay permanently visible and vulnerable.

I think that starbases and mines are a great addition to the game overall and the beta is great fun.

ps. do the developers read these forums or are you supposed to leave any balance suggestions on another page?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Since the Vasari starbase is designed to take down enemy starbases, this means that the Vasari starbase is offensive by design as well as defensive.

Therefore the Vasari need a quick-building starbase to attack enemy defenses.

Vasari starbase build time should not be increased.

Some people seem to be forgetting this.

Instead, it may be possible to give the Ruiner an anti-starbase attack when upgraded.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting StarFallArmada,

reply 20

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...

perhaps they are very busy working on implementing some of our suggestions

in my opinion, the whole point of the beta was to add DEFENSIVE strategies, not offensive ones. starbases should not be able to phase jump. moving around a gravity well slowly via tugs is ok, and is probably optimal. i like the tractor beam idea, but there is the problem of only being able to target one ship at a time. better would be to upgrade pji abilities, and make it almost impossilbe to bypass

oh, and vasari should get a starbase-killer cruiser to balance the game. easy, and makes sense storywise. while the vasari had been on the run for 10000 years, they would necessarily have changed their strats during a full scale war that turned into a stalemate.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting kyogre12,

reply 23

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?

This is a very good point, I just don't know if I'm completely sold on the SB being able to jump. Maybe with some sort of negative effects or something.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting mja5000,

reply 17

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.

This is an interesting idea...but then you run into this...well if the SB can be moved by a "Tug" then any placed structure should be able to be moved by a "Tug."

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting TheSpydyr,

reply 16

if the SB can be moved by a "Tug" then any placed structure should be able to be moved by a "Tug."

im not sure why you would feel it necessary to move a frigate factory, or any other structure, but it would certainly be possible

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting shfir,

reply 4

I find the idea itself of using Starbases as an offensive tactic to be rediculous. And the ability of the Advent Starbase to use asteroids to attack enemy planets ...

The reason the Advent starbases use this ability is a basic extention of their psionic and PsiTech abilities. If you remove that ability from the Advent Starbase, the game will be even more unbalanced as the Vasari and TEC will have a better starbase if it is removed. Let me explain, the Vasari Starbase can move. That has been established I need not say more. The TEC Starbase can construct frigates and carriers and is the only one that can do so. If you remove Advent's Asteroid manipulation ability, the Advent Starbase would just be an oversized Temple of Communion

Removing Advent's Asteroid Manipulation= Bad Idea

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Jrla21,

reply 18

The reason the Advent starbases use this ability is a basic extention of their psionic and PsiTech abilities. If you remove that ability from the Advent Starbase, the game will be even more unbalanced as the Vasari and TEC will have a better starbase if it is removed. Let me explain, the Vasari Starbase can move. That has been established I need not say more. The TEC Starbase can construct frigates and carriers and is the only one that can do so. If you remove Advent's Asteroid manipulation ability, the Advent Starbase would just be an oversized Temple of Communion

Removing Advent's Asteroid Manipulation= Bad Idea

See, the solution isn't to give the Advent an ability to slowly decimate planets that have probably already been sanitized by friendly forces. The solution is to give the Advent an ability that would slowly cause an enemy planet in the same gravity well to come under your control, giving you a fully developed planet. Because in a normal game, by the time you construct a starbase and install the upgrades that let you throw rocks at planets, you've already killed the planet. And it takes a long time to do the job with 'roids, anyways.

I know why you like it, it's a cool idea and all. But ultimately it's a gimmick that doesn't match promise with functionality.

Successfully updated karma reason!

But removing it also removes balance. What is the base going to have after removing that? A culture Center and trade port. I might as well not build an SB if that is removed and Instead just build Temples of Communion, and Trading Stations. I am not looking at this from the concept POV. I am looking at it in relation to the other races' SBs. From what I have read in the Game manual this is the Way things work in-game

Vasari>Advent>TEC

If you are going to remove an ability from the Advent SB that makes logical sense to have, I want the TEC to lose it's Ship construction ability and Vasari to lose it's mobility and colony support. And if you remove those abilities, you might as well remove starbases from the game because each race has an ability on the SB, that relates to their form and level of technology. For the TEC the SB emphasizes on their ability to spam ships. For the Advent, it reinforces their psionic and PsiTech. For the Vasari, it reinforces their technological superiority over the three races.

What I am speaking of works as a ripple effect. If you remove one factions ability, you have to remove from the other 2 factions in order to keep things balanced. But some things are dependent on one key concept. If you remove that key concept, the larger concept falls apart, and you have to remove other things to balance the scale.

Trust me on this. I have played hours on SINS as all 3 races. And the simple fact is, all of them have something that the others dont have. It's those key differences, that let SOASE be as fun as it is.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Jrla21,

reply 20

But removing it also removes balance. What is the base going to have after removing that? A culture Center and trade port. I might as well not build an SB if that is removed and Instead just build Temples of Communion, and Trading Stations. I am not looking at this from the concept POV. I am looking at it in relation to the other races' SBs. From what I have read in the Game manual this is the Way things work in-game

Vasari>Advent>TEC

If you are going to remove an ability from the Advent SB that makes logical sense to have, I want the TEC to lose it's Ship construction ability and Vasari to lose it's mobility and colony support. And if you remove those abilities, you might as well remove starbases from the game because each race has an ability on the SB, that relates to their form and level of technology. For the TEC the SB emphasizes on their ability to spam ships. For the Advent, it reinforces their psionic and PsiTech. For the Vasari, it reinforces their technological superiority over the three races.

What I am speaking of works as a ripple effect. If you remove one factions ability, you have to remove from the other 2 factions in order to keep things balanced. But some things are dependent on one key concept. If you remove that key concept, the larger concept falls apart, and you have to remove other things to balance the scale.

Trust me on this. I have played hours on SINS as all 3 races. And the simple fact is, all of them have something that the others dont have. It's those key differences, that let SOASE be as fun as it is.

Umm, Man I think what he's saying isn't to remove their ability. He's saying replace it with something else that makes sense. Vasari can move, TEC can build ships, Advent gets to bomb a planet that is more than likely already destroyed by the time you get to upgrade to the planet bombing ability. What good is an ability to bomb a planet when the planet has already been destroyed? it's not a very good ability. They should REPLACE it with something else that makes sense. What that is? I don't know, but the planet bombardment doesn't work. and you're wasting an upgrade to bombard a planet that takes like a minute to do with backup while Vasari and TEC's abilities are useful always.

Successfully updated karma reason!

From what I understand, the Advent starbase is HUGELY underpowered from the other starbases. I saw that the Advent's starbase capabilities, ended up less powerful than originally promised. Also, I read in another post about StarBases that the actual ability in the Advent SB that throws asteroids is buggy and doesn't work properly. Hopefully thia is corrected in the next update.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Jrla21,

reply 22

From what I understand, the Advent starbase is HUGELY underpowered from the other starbases. I saw that the Advent's starbase capabilities, ended up less powerful than originally promised. Also, I read in another post about StarBases that the actual ability in the Advent SB that throws asteroids is buggy and doesn't work properly. Hopefully thia is corrected in the next update.

TBH, all the starbases are underpowered, but that'll change. As for the asteroid ability It really needs to be replaced with something else. I feel like using a starbase as an offensive tactic by any of the races goes against the whole Idea of what a starbase is anyway. If you want Offense you have Caps/frigates. A starbase's purpose is to defend its gravity well and for the cost they should definately be doing it alot better. But like I said, Replace the asteroid ability with something more useful against an incoming fleet.

Successfully updated karma reason!

How about we list possibilities for replacing the Asteroid ability instead of leaving it up to the developers. That way, when we testers agree on something, the Devs can implement it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Jrla21,

reply 24

How about we list possibilities for replacing the Asteroid ability instead of leaving it up to the developers. That way, when we testers agree on something, the Devs can implement it.

Yeah ... you really don't know how this works, do you? They (the developers) produce ideas, then we (the players/testers) play with the ideas and give feedback, and then they (the developers again) decide whether our ideas have merit, our ideas are crap, or they have some newer, cooler idea to implement instead.

What I'm saying is that ultimately if we "testers" agree on something ... the devs can just ignore us. It's like being the crowd at a football game. If the refs call a bad game and the crowd boos, the refs might start calling it better. Or they might just decide they don't like the visiting team and the fans can go whine. In short, don't tell the developers what to do. Comment, yes. Suggest, yes. Be very vocal and emphatic about your suggestions, even. But that's just what they are. Suggestions. Don't pretend otherwise. We do this for fun, they do this for a living.

----

And yes, I was suggesting removing the ineffectual rock-throwing ability with a more effective ability of another class. Did you notice how you'd heard that the ability was buggy but didn't know from personal experience because you've never used it, despite the fact that you've spent "hours on SINS as all 3 races"?

Successfully updated karma reason!