this isn't a bug; it's Z-axis movement. There's a separate thread in the MP forum about this.

The Vasari Orkulus can move, so it's not vulnerable to attacks from above (it'll just rotate and shoot); the TEC Argonev is vulnerable, but the weakest of the three to this movement is the Advent Transcencia SB.

Banks are grouped by FRONT/LEFT/RIGHT/BACK. A ship must turn to engage outside the X/Y axes.

Ah, I note that you said 'STATIC' Starbase. Nullifies my statement on the Orky (it MOVES, hehehe).

Overall though, it likely amounts to rotational movement. Because this is the Z-axis at work, and Sins is in SPACE, it likely won't be fixed by removal of the Z-axis (it's in SPACE, DUH).

not necessarily.

Strikecraft move in the Z-axis ALL THE TIME. Turrets can swivel to engage targets above/below them. Removing the Z-axis completely wouldn't really fix the problem, and would bring a whole slew of new ones. I suggest you check the thread 'Attacks from Above'. It has an interesting debate concerning the Z-axis.

I think that Sins obviously WAS designed with the Z-axis capable. The Orkulus can already move around the Z-axis. The Argonev and Transcencia, being static, cannot. However, increasing the rates at which they can turn (swivel) would likely help with this.

Additionally, ships, and especially strikecraft, NEED THE Z-AXIS for movement. Why? Quite simply, if there was no Z-axis, then there wouldn't be Sins of a Solar Empire. It would be 'Fly around 2D Plane and kill Planets of a Solar Empire'. Think about it. No Z-axis, no SC. While ships aren't as limited in that factor, you still need Z-axis. Otherwise, how will you have your fleets of ships operate properly. If you look through screens of the gameplay, then you'll note Z-axis variations are quite common, whether it's in the position of orbital defenses, Starbases, asteroids, logistics structures & ship factories, and in ship formations.

However, the employment of the Z-axis is actually not well known. Also, ComradeYakov, please do not say that Sins obviously was or was not designed to allow something that you probably don't know for a fact. It is my OPINION that Sins was designed for accomodation of the Z-axis. I do think that it is rather obvious that it was designed for Z-axis operations; however I'm not going to try and force this upon someone as a fact.

I am not saying you are attempting to force this upon everyone. Also, there is the fact that the OP asked that this be fixed, as if it was a bug. Z-axis movement is not a bug. It is quite possibly a feature. Also, while I agree that static emplacements would need to have some tweaking, I highly doubt that the changes that would be implemented would require a complete redesign.

To the OP- You should elaborate on what you mean. Was it that anti-structure cruisers were above/below an SB and were firing on it? If this is the case, than the SB wouldn't have been able to engage anyway; Ogrov/Solanus cruisers outrange SBs.

Then I apologize for assuming you to be completely against the Z-axis.

Ships using Z-axis is employable with Entrenchment however, as ships can employ Fighter Movement.

I don't know JJ. From everything I've seen so far it appears that the Advent SB is the most vulnerable to this attack. I've seen my Argonev rotate around to be on it's side before.

Really? Well, that's nifty. But it'd still be nice to see the SBs be able to handle Z axis movement. Or is there something everybody's missing in that regard as well?