I really hate the way that starbases are built and defended in this game

I have not yet made the switch to TA but I do not imagine the starbase dynamics have changed too drastically from DA that my comments would be without some small merit.

I make extensive use of all three types of starbase when playing and find that, used correctly, they are incredibly powerful. So I do not think the benefit is underrated.

However I am not making a 'you're doing it wrong' statement. I bashed my head up against the wall of starbases for a long time before I started figuring things out. I'm amazingly stubborn that way - and without such a disposition I wonder how players are meant to figure these things out. Without an intimate understanding of how to get the most of starbases the benefit to the player is limited, construction is clumsy and defence is difficult.

I can see why you are making the argument for simplification of construction, but the current implementation does have its benefits. I thought I would run through several of the things I do in case some find it helpful, some may be obvious but its possible to miss the obvious and i'd like to be thorough.

* 2 levels of miniturization provides the tiny hull enough space (20) to mount a construction module. This is the cheapest way to build as the outlay for a cargo hull is larger and only provides access to a great deal of space you wont be using. Generally speaking I will add nothing else (indeed it will be a long time before you even have the option of adding to a tiny hull design - I use cargo for specialist builds) unless its important eg: engines to grab that galatic resource faster.

As a result of this, and the fact the early game is unsuited to anything but the most rudimentary starbase construction, I do not invest much into starbases before this ship is available.

* Even though the tiny hull is a 'military' grade hull you will pay no upkeep (as per cargo designs). This is an incredibly beneficial aspect to the current starbase construction model as it allows you to amass an armarda of construction ships and dispatch them to where they need to be or upgrade a starbase with just the right module when you need it.

Even if you have no current plans for positioning a starbase it never hurts to have some spares rattling around in your pocket. Theres nothing quite like sneaking 20+ builders into the centre of another races territory and creating a 'fully armed and operational battle station' on the eve of hostilities. Sometimes the AI reactions are quite amusing too.

* Planets with a starport and one or two factories are perfect for producing a steady stream of builder units. You do not need to make every production planet a wasteland of factories - adding a starport and a factory to an econ or research world can work wonders at freeing up production planets to larger projects.

* The biggest source of stress for me when I was wrestling with starbases was the feeling of waste when I did not micro manage every single last building unit. Refer back to my earlier point on upkeep - you pay nothing for idle units. Then reflect on what is in fact being wasted. If you hold back constructing a starbase until you need it you save any starbase maintenence costs.

When you eliminate the feeling of waste a lot of the stress deflates out of starbases - it also allows you to feel a lot more comfortable using rally points. A few missed turns while a group of builders form is not such a big deal anymore. In addition moving builders around in groups by hand tends to avoid constant popup windows of starbase upgrades while you try to remember where is and what prorities starbase 3245 had and indeed if you even own a starbase 3245 - maybe you got some other galatic emperors mail by mistake.

Need should be at all times your guiding star on where you proritize building (this is also in my mind the driving force behind the entire concept of the game).

* Defence. This is a big one. My biggest misconception early on was that starbases are great impregnable fortresses. Its a mistake to think that and many have pointed out how vulnerable starbases become as the game progresses.

So my next mistake, in thinking that since starbases are not fortresses was thinking that they were non combatants that needed to be protected at all times by ships. Since the ships are there we don't need to bother with modules right? Well thats only half right - they do need to be protected at all times. But they have all those guns and missiles and bombs and ballistic cow launchers for a reason.

Its better to think of arming starbases as a last line of defence. Theres nothing more frustrating to see a 20+ module starbase explode because a very determined teenage Dregin fired a hand disruptor out of the window of his space charger while doing laps around the starbase.

This brings up another point of stress on starbases. Because you now have vulnerable fixed position targets in your empire you now find yourself scrolling out to tactical view each turn and squinting at all the little icons, sacrificing chickens and performing auguaries to determine if your starbases are under threat. Because the only thing more frustrating that a teenage Drengin blowing up your starbase is the 63rd Battlefleet, Terra Invictus, Scourge of Thalan, Bane of the Dark Yor, protectors of the sector watching from guard mode with buckets of popcorn.

Do something! you scream. Then you open up your save games, scream again then quit to desktop muttering angrily about starbases. It doesnt have to be that way. Arm your starbases to a capacity that they can deal with 'leaks' to borrow terminology from Tower Defence type games - but that connection is natural.

Your fleets should be intercepting concentrated enemy forces prior to engagement with starbases. You should be thankful the AI was gracious enough to dash the brains out of the wounded survivors on the rock that is your starbase. It should look something a little like a Tower Defence.

* More Defence. Yes I have not finished making points on this. How do we go about defending starbases in a stress free but effective manner? I tend to group my starbases together. If a cluster of planets is juicy enough to benefit from a factory laden economy starbase its juicy enough for two factory laden economy starbases. This is most likely why theres a cap on starbases per sector (though it can be incredibly benefitial when a sector boundary intersects a sweet spot).

Well that battlestations mk 1 isnt going to hold off more than one teenage Drengin at a time - you need a fleet. Defensive fleets in my mind don't need no stinkin engines - the best way to make sure somebody stays around to protect the flag in a capture the flag game is to cut off their legs.

The extra benefit of this is they now have more room for everything else. They need weapons to make the bad guys go kaboom and defences to make sure they are still around to make the next wave of bad guys go kaboom - because having to constantly resupply defensive fleets will have a significant impact on your ability to project force into enemy territory.

Worried about mobility? Well thats why you also throw down a military starbase to secure the sector. -enemy ship speed and +ship speed compensate handily for the lack of engines, as do passive advances in propulsion technology - with the added benefit of speeding up those old tiny hulled builders.

Extra extra benefit? The AI will respect your impressive attack+defence total and think twice before declaring war (which allows you the luxary of subverting his populations with influence starbases). Hand in hand with this is the benefit ship assist bonuses from military starbases count towards your military rating - try it to see for yourself.

This leads me in to my favourite defensive ship size - the tiny hull. A lot of people write this hull size off as obselete by the mid game due to low hp and insufficient space to overcome this vulnerability. The benefit from the military starbase is greatest with the tiny hull. The benefit of a +1 ship attack becomes +15 ship attack when you have 15 fighters in the fleet to benefit.

I have personally experienced some incredible defensive victories with fleets of fighters taking down fleets of battleships/dreadnoughts without taking a scratch - but that comes from my emphasis on playing the good alignment and maxmising defence. I am certain that evil players could find the firepower amplification useful.

------------

Well im starting to ramble now so I'll end this post here (and I did not intend to write this much 0.o) I do have more thoughts on the subject but what I really wanted to get across is that the current implementation of starbases is quite good - just really really inaccessable unless you bash your head against the wall figuring it out - it also may or may not blend well with differing playstyles - obviously it works okay with mine.

Hope that helped

Totally support most of the OP's comments. Upgrading a starbase should just be something you do with a planets military production, with a line of mini constructors like the mini freighters for trade (speed reduces with distance but increases with technology)

As far as defense is concerned: in the early game you have other problems and don't have the techs, in the later game it's more practical to just garrison a fleet there. IMHO fleets and starbases should fight together if they're on the same square (or surrounding 9 squares?), regardless of logistics. Not only does this make more sense, it would also make for some awesome looking battles.

I also think that weapons/defense technology should be tied to what weapons you are good at. It just makes more sense. For example, if you have mastered Stinger missiles, the starbases you are working on are slowly upgraded to have Stinger batteries, equivalent, to having 5 stinger launchers (or more in the case of military starbases). I just found it weird and unimmersive that starbases should have weapons and defence types I knew nothing about.

Thats exactly what the current implementation is except with the added features of customisation of the 'constructor' as well as the flexibility of any planet can provide the production. If you want automation just set rally points - after the first builder lays down the foundation of the starbase every successive unit will automatically pop up the upgrade window.



The military starbase is a force multiplier of the fleet garrisoned in the sector. Non military starbases (and the military starbase in anything other than ship assist) are not designed (at least in my interpretation of the game design) to be in battles unless given no other option.

In essence the fleet and the military starbase do fight together within a radius. Again you are arguing for something thats already implemented, you just disagree with the manner of the implementation. The reasoning behind the implementation is game balance.

The key word you brought up was logistics. Logistics is a balatant balance mechanic preventing a problem thats emerged in these types of games for decades. That is the super stack. 1000 crappy ships will defeat 4 or 5 highly advanced ones, subverting other balance points.

In essence I think you are arguing that the starbase should be able to join the fleet stack. The problem here is the logistics of the situation, and more accurately the balance issues.

Without a logistical value, by merely tacking the starbase onto the fleet a situation could arise that a starbase is unassailable due to the power of the fleet + starbase. In this case the logistics system is incredibly unfair for the attacker. Games would bog down and be drawn out.

If you wish to give a starbase a logistical number - what number do you give it? They can be very powerful or quite weak. Somebody is going to lose out here. The starbase will be either too weak to the extent of hamstringing the defenders or too powerful making any attack folly. What recourse does the aggressor have in that situation?

Also of interest is that fact that the battle is out of the players hands. I don't want to dig up the tactical combat issue again, but its worth pointing out the fact that the attacker will have little control over what his fleet attacks first.

If the starbase is the target unit whats to stop the defender feeding the starbase repair kits between battles and if the fleet attacks the defending ships around the starbase whats to stop the defender just replacing the losses quickly with no impact on the starbase.

Given that starbases can have dramatic effects for a sector the unassailability this would render would have, in my mind, a deterimental effect on gameplay. Imagine how you would feel playing against an AI that made use of these tactics.

At the end of the day Stardock have sacrificed realism for balance, but also for the flow of the game. It may appear simplistic and non sensical in places but good game designers make those choices when limitations arise. I think thats the biggest thing players should keep in mind - its a game not a simulation.

I'm not sure it would actually be that much of a problem.

First, in order to have a hope of getting a base that strong you'll have to invest several thousand BC in constructors and upgrades and spend more researching the (expensive) starbase techs which currently you may as well ignore.

Second, there's no way they'd be truly unassailable anyway under the current combat system. They'd potentially be very costly to take down, though. This seems fair enough considering the investment made in them to get them to that level of power, and also considering this power is totally immobile and so cannot be used for offensive purposes.

Third, you *can* simply go around starbases. It's no good having a large number of impregnable starbases if you have no planets left!

At the moment, starbase weaponry and defence is a redundant part of the tech tree - the same goals can be achieved much more efficiently with ships. Not a big deal, but a bit of a shame.

Silphius where did you learn all that stuff?? nice , Im actual trying to get a response from someone knowlegable in my DL Apocalypse thread but no joy yet.

The reason I am here though is just to say Im going to copy all that text you have written! I have only read some of it but to my understanding I can create heaps of small hulled ships with no upkeep penalty at all? Also is it possible to make constructors on small hulls? its just thats what I may aim for in the campaign Im on (apoca) so that I can have heaps of constructors in case the DL take out a starbase which means I dont have the range to reach the dl planet

Yes, if you research miniaturization twice. (He stated that, look again)

-----------

I actually agree with the op about starbases, but I think that they play a huge role in the game if used correctly, they're just not my ideal way of building and implementing them.

I think the idea of having the starbases and ships situated in them helping out fleets in close proximity when attacked is a good idea, but I think it loses some perspective on the size of the game. How far away is the next parsec, you know?

In a way, your argument reminds me of people who complain that defensive structures in Sins are useless. Defensive structures (Sins) and Starbases (GalCiv) are not meant to be the be all and end all. They are a tool. In Sins, defenses are meant to slow down enemies until your fleet arrives, not completely destroy everything thrown at them. The same is true of starbases. While starbases can be incredibly powerful, they are really just a tool to aid you planets and fleets. Their sphere of influence is absolutely integral to your success in GalCiv. Fleets near military bases get boosted, which is in a way like a Starbase sending out its own ships to help the nearby fleet.

Anyway, interesting topic with some good replies so far. I've only played TA once so I'm interested to jump in and see how Silphius's methods work with diffent races now.

hang on... it was always my understanding that that is precisely their function... are you saying the att/def DON'T stack on any ships within said bases influence radius?

Ship assist values stack. Starbase attack and defence values are not ship assist values - only modules that state ship assist will actually assist ships (and this is function only provided by military starbases)

To illustrate my point since it seems people don't like the wall 'o' text I'll use a composite screenshot as the evidence and provide the text as backup for those requiring an explanation of what the screenshot means. I used a screenshot from my current game and unfortunately im experimenting with a big fat cruiser as a punching bag for the fighters. This will make the calculations a little harder to follow but bear with me.



There are 5 tiny hulled fighters (Nova Hawks) and one medium hulled cruiser (Barbican Class Cruiser "Knight") They all lack engines and are filled with phasors and armour.

The Nova Hawk has 3 phasors for a base beam attack of 9 while the Knight has 9 phasors for a base beam attack of 27.

Through simple addition 5 fighters and the cruiser should have a combined base beam attack of (5*9=45+27) 72. Yet the calculated total shown at the bottom of the screen (Marked "A" on the screenshot) shows the combined beam attack value of the fleet as 93 not 72. Also of note is the missile attack value of 6 when none of the ships are equipped with missile weapons.

This is because of the Ship Assist values given by the nearby military starbase, the values shown on the top right hand side of the screenshot (Marked "B"). It is worth noting that the military starbase is also equipped with level 3 battlestations and this combat value is not being transferred. The dialog window clearly states that the starbase provides ship attack +3.

There are three ship assist attack modules. Fighter Drones (+1 beam), Laser Equilizer (+1 beam), and Missile Launchpads (+1 missile).

As there are 6 ships in the fleet this translates to +6 beam, +6 beam, +6 missile.

So 72 base beam attack, + the 12 beam from the military starbase = 84. The extra attack value comes from the racial ability bonus - in this case the value is +16%. Those of you who bother to calculate this percentage bonus will note that its a little off from the final value, but I believe there is some rounding off or break pointing going on somewhere that would account for this.

This benefit may seem trivial within this example but it is one that grows exponentially as the size of the fleet and number of ship assist modules add up. Eventually this can provide very large values and render a group of tiny hulled ships extremely deadly.