Suggestion about StarBases....

I agree completely. The number of starbases any one race can build per sector should be limited.

The only potential problem I see as what would you do about TerrorStars that are moved into a sector already at it's maximum?

Good idea! Maybe by voting about it at the UP it could be possible to increase that number (like with traderoutes). However, it should be possible to put as much terror stars in a sector as you want. (or can afford, that is ).

"The only potential problem I see as what would you do about TerrorStars that are moved into a sector already at it's maximum?"

I think if you make it an exeption then it might work.. :notsure: .

PS: But not more than 1 TS and 1 normal SB per sector.

I don't agree with 1 base limit. I have had sectors with 3 resources in them, and I'm not letting some other civ get 2 of them. Maybe 2 in an empty sector, and possibly all on resources.

You must be playing at the lower difficulty levels.

Well, I don't think anyone will have fleets of Terror Stars anyway (5000 bc. sounds quite a sum to me), so I'm not sure if a limit on TS would be nescessary.

I'd ask the players in higher AI intelligence games what they think. I would imagine on higher AI levels you'd, potentialy be shooting yourself in the foot. All those constructors require production facilities, money and time. How well is your defensive fleet production going when building these SB's? Not very well I'd say, and on a higher level game I'd bet the AI would smack you around a bit.

All pure speculation on my part, I'm still playing on beginner and dont use SB's too much.

idle

~SDC~

Sorry I didnt mention the difficulty level. I am playing on Intelligent level on huge map and I have constructors winning a war for me. Most of my star systems produce 1 constructor per turn or two and the amount of star bases just gets bigger ans bigger. My frigates 2 frigates are dstroying AI's army of battleships without being damaged too much thanks to the huge amount of star bases I have in some sectors.

As far as resources are concerned then that should be an expention too (what I am writing....exeption..and now another exeption... ).

PS: This isnt the first game where this Star Base issue helps me to defend my self against any AI invasion force with relatively few inferior ships .

I have so many Star Bases now that I am thinking of blocking my planets with them by building SB along the border of the sector...which means...AI will never be able to take me down.

Just got an idea from reading another post...What about imposing a huge maintenace tax (cost) if you have more than one (or what ever the optimal number is) SB in a sector... :notsure:

...unless its already the case (which will explain the economic situation I am in now LOL )

many some kind of "diminishing returns" thing should kick in when you have more than x starbases in a sector? and/or starbases could have some kind of maintenance cost. that way it would make sense to only build a few SBs with heavy improvements, lest costs spiral out of control.

i think this issue would be less significant if the AI tried using the same tactics. i've had the drengins build a lot of SBs, but it was very "unfocused", with some SBs being improved and others just sitting there doing nothing.

of course, wars would quickly become pointless since neither side would be able to mount an effective invasion.

cheers

h

I have posted this before about AI being unable to build SB in strategic locations and upgrade them optimally. I might be totally wrong here but in 5-6 games i played on Intelligent level, AI never went beyond placing SB on resource locations, which is a bit of a disappointment.

I think what needs to be done is:

a) AI needs to be taught how to use star bases effectively;

There should be a limit (or a maintenance cost) on building more than 1 SB in a sector.

Another totally unrelated thing: I have noticed that in times of war AI units that spot, say, your scout will follow that scout forever. I once had around 20 ships following my survey ship. Since my survey ship was fatser I managed to keep them all busy for a very long time until I managed to take em all out one by one. This obvously adds to the strategic thinking on unit movements, but, honestly having 3 battleships chase my scout for ever is just stupid.

Disclaimer: Everything mentioned above is from my experience only.

It takes a lot of resources and time to fully upgrade one starbase let along several. I dont think it is much of a problem.

"It takes a lot of resources and time to fully upgrade one starbase let along several. I dont think it is much of a problem. "

But the point is that you can boost your, say military, by an infinite amount simply by building more star bases. I agree it takes ages to fully upgrade one, but you dont have to do that to get huge benfits.



~SDC~

I agree... If I want to build a 10 star bases in a sector then I want to be able too. Especially when more then one resource can be found in a sector as I have found more then 2 in a given sector. Also by only having 1 or 2 starbases it ruins any trade bonus's u may receive when a trade ship visits each starbase along its route. Then add in bonus ship that comes with bonus pack that can rip thru a starbase with ease. But if someone is worried about too many starbases then an option should be included at setup time to have limited or unlimited starbases though I feel this is totally unnecessary.

oops I meant I do not agree with initial post of thread sorry... long day looking at UNIX script... ugh!!

As for the >1 resources problem- a simple algy to spread them out more would be easy. But I'm not sure about limiting SB's in sectors anymore (Ionce started a thread on this). As long as the AI can handle doing it.

~SDC~

I think if you are able to build 10 starbases in one sector and not have to sacrifice anything else, then you already have the game won.

~SDC~

The problem I see with 10 SB in a given sector: that you don't need to reasearch modules anymore. Instead of pumping up one SB with 10 moduls, which would only work if you have a technological lead, simply build ten new SB's and you have the same (if not an even bigger) impact on the sector.

Of course the cost for constructor ships is the same in both ways, but you don't need a technological lead in one of them.

technolocical lead should be read as technological advanced.

Why not just alter the AI so it can use the strategy of taking a few constructors along with it's invasion force to drop a starbase right inside your sector, thus giving it it's own boost to ships?
I used this to great effect against the Altarians in a recent game. They'd holed up in their last planet and kept spitting out defenders, but due to my +2 to attack from my starbase, I was able to keep knocking them down.

~SDC~

My question is: Is it intended (by the game mechanics) that you have to do science, for being able to support your sectors - or is high productivity all you need to support them?

Maybe we should make a poll...

~SDC~

"The problem I see with 10 SB in a given sector: that you don't need to reasearch modules anymore. Instead of pumping up one SB with 10 moduls, which would only work if you have a technological lead, simply build ten new SB's and you have the same (if not an even bigger) impact on the sector.

Of course the cost for constructor ships is the same in both ways, but you don't need a technological lead in one of them. "

Absolutely!!!

Some people disagree with the idea of limiting the amount of StarBases or implementing a maintenance cost if you go beyond 1 per sector (I personally prefer the latter). So what about including it as an option before the game starts. Because IMHO it would make the game much harder and placing SB will require much more of strategic thinking... .

Even though, I thought about that one once again, and while you won't need the appropriate Tech for "higher" modules, you need at least TWO Constructors for each SB to get *anything* out of it. Then you have to send them to the sector, etc. - Maybe an upper limit of 3 Space Bases would be sufficent.

~SDC~