More options Star Base

posted on January 5th, 2010, 11:46 pm

The idea of them moving in that way is indead interesting Pappy, it makes me think of the time they moved DS9 right next to the wormhole. I think it would be ok to have them move shields and weapons down if there was a chance of a catrosrophic system failure or distruction (if posible the chances being related to how far your moving, for example moving from bajor to the wormhole 10% chance of failure, but say bajor to gamma quadrent 50% chance of failure and bajor to earth 100% chance of failue). it would probably also be a good idea to limit how often this can be done.

of course, ultimatly it would come down to can it be programed, I think that with the replace weapon you could change the starbase into one with pathetic engines and no shields or weapons. But, I don't know about the failure/destruction part

posted on January 5th, 2010, 11:47 pm

Moving? 

  But but but but but but but .... It's FLEET Operations ... not BASE Ops ... 

posted on January 5th, 2010, 11:50 pm

Spacestations aren't meant to move, only use Thrusters for orbital stability.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:00 am

Yeah....let's allow starbases to move in FO.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP_Pfth503U&feature=related

Tyler's already posted this, but it fits so well here.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:03 am

Yeah lets put thrusters on dilithium moons so you can just 'collect' them in your base.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:42 am

Yes I agree  Warping Starbases make no sense . But that was Armada 2 clip, However  in Fleet Ops there is no warp.  However moveing Assets makes tactical sense. If one was to limit the moving ability  to a value where it is almost  nil . I t weould require planing and fore though as where thwe battle was going to take place .  Just my .02cnts  on the matter.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:45 am

Using DS9 as an example of starbases being mobile isn't really a good one.

O'Brien basically jury-rigged propulsion for her, and took a huge risk of killing her.  Starbases weren't really designed to ever be moved.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:50 am

Indeed, Silent.  I'm pretty sure there's a reason why they call them "stations".

The noxter might have its mother be capable of movement, like in beta 2, so if you want moving bases, that might be the race to try.  Of course, everyone just built guardians/mothers instead of ships if they chose noxter since they had powerful weapons and could move.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 12:59 am

Anyone besides me feel that the Noxter are basically the Zerg?

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:05 am

Anyone besides me feel that the Noxter are basically the Zerg?

Hell.... It's about time! 

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:11 am

Well, they've said somewhere that the noxter are going to be very different from beta 2, where they really were zerg.  I hope they make them more like the aliens from the TNG episode "Galaxy's Child", they lived in space, and they had attacks that could threaten starships.  Maybe something similar to them would be neat.

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:29 am

O'Brien basically jury-rigged propulsion for her, and took a huge risk of killing her.  Starbases weren't really designed to ever be moved.

that is why the starbase would have a high chance of being destroyed and why it would move very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very slowly 

it probably woulden't be somthing you would use very often(because it would blow up most of the time!), but in some cases it might be usefull as a last ditch effort of some sort...

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:46 am

that is why the starbase would have a high chance of being destroyed and why it would move very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very slowly 

it probably woulden't be somthing you would use very often(because it would blow up most of the time!), but in some cases it might be usefull as a last ditch effort of some sort...

  Lol.  What possible reason could there be to move a starbase at a snail's pace if there's even a REMOTE chance of losing the whole thing?

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:50 am

  Lol.  What possible reason could there be to move a starbase at a snail's pace if there's even a REMOTE chance of losing the whole thing?

hence "last ditch effort" (AKA. we are all going to die anyway so...... lets do somthing realy stuped )

P.S. I have no idea 

posted on January 6th, 2010, 1:52 am

True there is no cannon evidence in the startrek  cannon( other than DS9 ) for moveing starbases that way. However in other cannon Battlestar Galatica I cite the Cylon Base stars . Base stars  which were basically  moving base stations. and the Babalon 5  cannon I think there was a book that moved B5  away from a planet. and the Star wars  Death Star, so the Idea is not  too far out there , just one of matter of  taste and  the developers willing nesss or lack of to do this .  Hey it be nice , however  won't loose sleeep over it, nor will I whine like a little girl child to get it . No offense implied or infered  to the few female  members  here .