Once Off Starbase Upgrade

posted on August 27th, 2011, 3:43 pm

I don't know if this has been suggested, but here I go

Well here's a thought I had, we always have to buy single upgrades to get the starbase to its strongest level. I know we have these single upgrades to progressively upgrade the starbase, due to costs. I was wondering what if you build a second starbase at a forward expansion and you want to upgrade it to its maximum level. This is where my idea comes to play. How about one single extra button at the starbase that upgrades it to its finally level, which costs the total cost of the single upgrades together with a 10 percent reduction in cost. Maybe even a 20 percent reduction. This would give you a insentive to upgrade the starbase to its maximum level.

Sorry about the grammer, kind of having a hard day at work.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 3:53 pm

interesting idea, dont see the harm, a fully upgraded starbase -10% cost is still a huge investment. probably wouldnt see it often in mp.

welcome as well.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 3:56 pm

Three torpedo-turrets cost less than a fully upgraded starbase, have far more firepower and artillery-range. A second starbase actually makes sense only if you plan to expand somewhere you need ages to take miners to; otherwise you won't need it.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:00 pm

Three torpedo-turrets cost less than a fully upgraded starbase, have far more firepower and artillery-range. A second starbase actually makes sense only if you plan to expand somewhere you need ages to take miners to; otherwise you won't need it.

or maybe if you're not fed. the klink starbase is a good strong giant turret.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:03 pm

or maybe if you're not fed. the klink starbase is a good strong giant turret.

I agree. Works best in AI-games

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:05 pm

I agree. Works best in AI-games

definitely. ive never had more than 1 starbase in a mp game. they arent really sensible builds. maybe, just maybe, in a big team game you could justify the cost. but in those sorts of games you see starbase killing fleets rather often. and the huge pile of money for a starbase could go into your own fleet.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:15 pm

I agree the investment is a lot. But I'm not just thinking of mp, but also when the FO campaign comes out.

When me and a couple of my mates play FO's, especially 3v3, we use a starbase strategy at a forward expansion. We find its easier to defend a single starbase than multiple turrents. Especially if you use the fed newtons to repair the starbase. We we do play with a cease fire. Make the game a little longer .

Well that's my reasons.e game a little longer .

Well that's my reasons.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:23 pm

Alright, just wondering...

Starbase 2000 /1000
Upgrade Off x2 1200 / 100
= 3200 / 1100

With this idea, 10% less on the upgrades if you buy them at once, it would be 120/10 less, or an overall difference of around 3,5%, with def as well you would save 130/130 from an overall cost of 3300 / 2300 - if i'm not mistaken here.

If you can afford to build a starbase and get all upgrades at once, i just doubt those 3,5% would make any difference at all.

20% would be a reduction of 260/260 from an overall cost of 3300/2300 - wouldn't make such a difference, and would only work in some AI games where you really spam starbases.


So overall i just don't get the point  :D

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:41 pm

Hey Lost Brain! Welcome in the FO community and thanks for your input.

The insentive to upgrade your starbase is given when your starbase is directly attacked during an invasion. Player usually never upgrade as long as there base not in danger. So from that perspective your idea is quite logic. Why not expand the idea to change the way of upgrading starbases. actually I find the current upgrade system for starbases stupid... it's senseless. Despite of economically recovering of an upgrade there is no (in my eyes) justified reason for the current system.

If I had the skills to do it I'd make the starbase role in FO much stronger and central. The starbase is the essential core of your base and as such is should play a major role in defensive action. In practice this would look like:

1. Let the starbase gain experience for each kill instead of manually upgrade it - even transfer a certain share of each ship's XP to the starbase (can also be done globally for each starbase that belongs to you)

2. With each XP level gained the starbase stats get a boost increasing damage, shield strength, hull strength and most importantly range to cover more area of your base such as primary moons. The full program - even new weapons in the context of MixTech could play a role. Imagine when you play in a team with another dude that plays Borg your starbase automatically gains a Borg MixTech upgrade at Admiral level.


That way defense would interact with offence action. The more your fleet gains XP your base will be fortified and harder to overwhelm. I'd love to play around with that and it definately would bring more spice into the game. But as I know Optec and Doca they won't like that idea because they have their own sense of fun. Optec most probably will say "We already have some similar ideas about the current upgrade system and already work on them". the funny thing then is that in the next patch the upgrade system is completly gone...hahaha ... and I just sit in front of my PC thinking back to this very moment here and start laughing.  Just kidding. But honestly, the dev team prefers the very simple way. They don't want to make the game having that insane feel of super weapon and rediculous upgrade gameplay where all actions you do serve to increase weapon output. I for my part would love if they would change that and try out more encouraged feature implementations. At least I can make my point here and they have to read it.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:44 pm

Well every little counts in this game .

Well the 10 percent is just a suggestion it could maybe be anything from 10 to 30 percent. Well basically any percent that wouldn't interfer with the balance of the game and at the same time giving ppl a new strategy to play with.

I kind of noticed that the starbase isn't really used as a strategy on online games. But for me and my mates we tried something new. It worked great for us.

Well in the end its an idea and I'm really greatful for the feedback.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:51 pm

I kind of noticed that the starbase isn't really used as a strategy on online games.

The FO-developers do their best to prevent players from turtling with platforms or other armed structures.

Starbases are not considered a "strategy". They're immobile, which makes them no part of the literal "Fleet Operations". They can hold off attacks for a while, give your main fleet the time to come back and defend or whatever you might wanna do and they build your civil ships, which is the primary purpose of starbases in the first place.

Sure you could try to block choke-points with a base, but honestly: Place a platform if you think you need to and have ships ready for defense.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 4:55 pm

Although it would be interesting to make the upgrades faction specific, I do not favor the idea of making a starbase such a focal point.

In team games and free for all, not everyone is aggressive and many new players prefer to build starbases and turrets to guard themselves in case of attack - this type of change would simply reward those strategies, to the consternation of one's allies and generally most players that do not like sim-ops  :sweatdrop: .

Already there are several maps, where if the players are not aggressive enough, it is possible to put down a starbase near critical locations. Currently a player is discouraged from doing so, because it is easier to move around that starbase while taking less damage, but if that were to be changed, you can imagine such 'starbase-walking' strategies might become quite more popular. In some interesting 1v1's there are also some examples of players losing most of their fleet to a single upgraded starbase, and thus forcing their opponents hand. The easier it is to make a super-defensive unit, the easier it is to capitalize on the mistakes of players who think that attacking the starbase is the best possible idea, while the rest of the base lives.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 5:11 pm

The FO-developers do their best to prevent players from turtling with platforms or other armed structures.

Starbases are not considered a "strategy". They're immobile, which makes them no part of the literal "Fleet Operations". They can hold off attacks for a while, give your main fleet the time to come back and defend or whatever you might wanna do and they build your civil ships, which is the primary purpose of starbases in the first place.

Sure you could try to block choke-points with a base, but honestly: Place a platform if you think you need to and have ships ready for defense.

I beg to differ. Fleet Ops still is a traditional Real Time Strategy game. It is NOT a fleet operations strategy game. Fleet Ops should not neglect the possibility to choose between offensive and defensive strategies. Armada II Fleet Operations is not a Ground Control II where the pure fact of unit action counts. Defensive strategies such as turtling have the same right to exist as offensive and semi-offensive strategies have. In this case ones personal preferences do not play a role. Using starbases as a strategy element is also a fleet operation. It just uses a different organ of the whole concept to reach a strategic goal.

posted on August 27th, 2011, 5:18 pm

Well I agree 100 percent with both of you; dominus and red eye. When we play don't use a starbase as a turtling post or a choke point blocker. Our idea was to use this as a massive defence point for our forward expansion. The idea of this strategy is to build the starbase at a expansion, usually close to a enemy base. Me and my allies would each build a shipyard around this starbase. This we felt would be a big push away from raiding your units while they limp back to the shipyards to repair. This might be seen as a turtling strategy. We see it as relocating the base to a more forward line to increase pressure on the enemy, negating the enemy from expanding out. How do they say. Break one link in the chain.... Well I'm sure u get what I'm talking about :p.

Like a say we just want to try something new because me and my friends played all the possible strategies on the guide. After a while doing the same thing over and over get a bit boring after a while. Well any feed back is greatly appreciatedd line to increase pressure on the enemy, negating the enemy from expanding out. How do they say. Break one link in the chain.... Well I'm sure u get what I'm talking about :p.

Like a say we just want to try something new because me and my friends played all the possible strategies on the guide. After a while doing the same thing over and over get a bit boring after a while. Well any feed back is greatly appreciated

posted on August 27th, 2011, 5:26 pm

Off the subject, but you could always come online Tunngle too if you are looking for exciting new gameplay