Starbases and Satellites useless

[Jason2]

Using Space Bases (stations, battlestations, starbases) seems pointless. They cannot move and (unlike MOO2) are easily avoided. If they could even move 1 or 2 spaces in orbit around the planet they would be better... As it stands they are not worth making.

This seems to be the case with satellites as well - for much the same reason. They are stationary and easily avoided.

Has someone already brought this up with MM?

What are other people's thoughts??

Jason2

[Talenn]

I've found Satellites to be extremely useful as they cost little and require no upkeep. In fact, I've removed them as a 'starting tech' because it was just so easy to mass them up and prevent any forms of early aggression. Note that this is from a multiplayer POV as judging against the AI is not really worth it.

Starbases etc, I tend to agree on. We've upped the 'range bonus' of the Base Mounts a bit to help give them some power and have also reduced the maintenance cost down to 30% instead of 50%. This has helped somewhat, but we still usually only see orbital shipyards and not too many defensive bases.

I'm not sure what the solution is at this point. Maybe limited mobility would solve the problem but it would seem sort of odd at best.

Talenn

[Blue Lord]

¨Satellites are good for many things, I'm dropping sensor satellites in EVERY system in the galaxy that I don't control (yet). The are cloaked of courseand are excellent scout Posts since the give information on every single enemy ship move.

Bases, I don't use them to much anymore except for shipyards. My frOnline is always moving and It's better to have defensive battle fleet. But I still like them, they are very good to have.

[Taqwus]

A Talisman-equipped Starbase w/ massive-mount weapons is something to be feared, since it'll hit every time before most ship-borne weapons get a chance to fire. And if the SB has engine-destroying weapons, repulser beams (which will fling you back up to 30 squares or so...), and so forth, and is backed by missile-toting WPs, the attacking ships will need to number quite a few to have much of a chance.

Plasma V-carrying satellites could be a nasty surprise at a warp point. They've a combat speed of 6, meaning they'll outrun most ships, and they'll be in firing range first turn.

It's probably possible to add a component for either which grants a small amount of bonus combat movement (only), using the same ability as given to afterburners. This seems more reasonable for satellites than bases, but even a base perhaps should be able to (expensively) get a combat speed of 1, at basically no supply cost.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

[Noble713]

Sats: These are excellent quickie warp point defenses. Send a transport or two loaded with 'em and they can make a mess. I never use them for planetary defense though, as they tend be positioned poorly and the AI smashes the planet without taking them out.

Bases: Defense bases are only useful if you are on the defense and need to keep the comp out of your territory. I've only had one game where this was the case, and 4 space stations with DUCs proved to be a formidable early/mid-game warp point defense. With the AI in its current state, however, it is rare to not be on the offensive smashing through its systems, which of course makes fixed defenses unnecessary.

[Puke]

maybe im a prick for doing this, but i like to send a construction ship to a warp point (or stack thereof) and have it build a starbase or two, which will in turn sit there and build fighters or mines or sats or whatever. i tend to prefer fighters and mines though, unless against the AI (where the whole concept just becomes far too rude).