Another thing I noticed: starbases that boost the yields of nearby planets are way too weak. Even after 3 upgrades, an economic starbase was only giving +15% (it was not stacking with previous upgrades), and that's not to the total yield, because that might be worth it -- that's just a tiny +15% that gets added to the other percents the planet has, so it's eclipsed by half of a single tier one bank.

Given I had to send like five constructors to that one starbase just to get that 15%, I think I should get more than that for my troubles. First, the previous upgrades should stack, making it +30%. Second, it should boost the total gross output, rather than just modifying the base output. That way, yield-boosting starbases would be well worth the time and money.

I'm pretty sure you can't build starbases that close to each other, and if that's the entire reason they're so weak in the first place, then get rid of stacking starbase yields so we won't have to. Honestly, though, with that many constructors, which is well over 60, you probably deserve to be overpowered. If this has become the norm, then no wonder I've been hearing a lot of complaints about starbase micro.

They should just make it if any ship enters you borders (without an open borders treaty) the AI must declare war similar to how the Civilization games are.

This was on a huge map! If this really was a design decision, it's a terrible one. It's annoying and counter-intuitive. Laying claim to the neutral resources, sure, that I can understand. Going to war over that is fun, and means something. Definitely one of the parts I enjoy most about conquering a new system. Laying claim to resources already in another person's territory? That's an offense that deserves a declaration of war on its own, and the AI treats it like it's no big deal, regardless of who does it.

This is a problem even into the late game. This isn't about rushing, this is about me being in the middle of a war and need to be producing transports, and I shouldn't need to have a constructor waiting in the wings every time I destroy a Starbase just to make sure my allies don't claim my own resources 3 turns later.

Yeah, but you have a hard limit to how many modules you can build via technology. Maybe 70+ modules on a single starbase is good for modders, or maybe if you wanted to make a starbase impossible to destroy, but it doesn't help me boost a system's income enough to pay for the starbase's maintenance to begin with.

Also funny in this respect is the diplomacy screen..

If I send in a constructor to mine a resource in alien space I get a message that the other guy is annoyed with it and demands I pull back my base.

But MY diplomacy options, I don't have the means to object or demand withdrawal??

Besides that, I totally agree with Vidszhite : I also noticed constructors waiting to take over if I destroy an enemy miningbase as if they have them stacked up for this purpose. But building economic bases to improve their worlds? No (seems to me if the AI Does stack up constructors they should be using them for that as well)

I was just playing on a Large map and had this issue with literally every resource I sighted bar 1 being taken by the AI's I had a race for a couple but was unable to get my constructor there falling short by a turn each time, its almost as if the AI see you launch and works out which faction can send one to beat you to the punch and there was of course some cheeky sod set up a duel Anti-Matter mining base literally with 15 hexes of my home world, while there home world is only accessible to me via a Wormhole because its that far away, I mean seriously what the hell! 

I also found literally zero habitable planets that were not owned by minor factions within 50 hexes of my home world and sadly those that where further out were far closer to the AI races and thus colonised so I've not been able to get resources and I'm stuck with a paltry two planets and two AI's have just gone to War with me for no reason as so much as I can tell, though that was about 20 turns previous and I've not seen a single aggressive fleet though I'm now going all in to maximise my production of ships myself. I've set up trades with the more wealth minor races for the simple reason that the AI's I'm on best terms with are on the other side of those I'm at war with on neutral with and there's no chance in hell I'm going to risk sending a trade ship though so much enemy territory with the amount of production they cost me.

Anyway what I'm saying as A) I agree with the original poster in terms that a treaty should be required to set up a star base within your borders though B)that should not be the case regarding moving though territory with civilian vessels at least because otherwise you get penned in with no route past them which would suck. C) Where was the memo that Pirates guarding locations are now easily able to destroy your survey ships within a few seconds of an encounter because that was a nasty thing to discover...

I don't agree that influential "borders" should stop anyone from using resources inside them. I do however think that colonies and star bases should exert a five radius "border" in which no one cold create a colony or use any resources without declaring war on that faction first.

The "borders" of the map are only the areas where you have cultural influence, there are no real borders in space no more than you can patrol and enforce. There should be diplomatic tension when another faction establish bases inside another factions influential area which can lead to war. All this would be an interesting addition to the diplomatic side of the game if developed in that direction.

When it comes to economical star bases I currently only deploy them in areas where they can cover more than one colony.

Buying is a good option but sometimes early on they want a lot for the trade. If it is too much I just buy all the output of that base (assuming it is a mining base, which nearly all of them are)

This is a problem even into the late game. This isn't about rushing, this is about me being in the middle of a war and need to be producing transports, and I shouldn't need to have a constructor waiting in the wings every time I destroy a Starbase just to make sure my allies don't claim my own resources 3 turns later.

Actually, I often criticized GC2 for not doing this. Glad to see the AI is smarter this time around *applause*

The problem with forcing Open Bordere or Declare War is you are taking a prime strategy away from players who pursue Influence Victories.  Culture Flipping planets via Influence Starbases is a tried and true method to victory.  Now, yes, the AI should take the fact that you are trying to McDonalds them to death into account on how it views you.  But, well, it wasn't an instant DoW in GC II, and I see no reason why it should be in GC III.

And why don't you have a constructor ready when you blow up the enemy one? 

This is a strategy game afterall. Securing and fighting for resources is a major part of the gameplay. If there are fixed borders that prevent players from building starbases or even go into foreign space, than you take away a major part of the game.

And remember: If they can do it, so can you. If the AI can't build starbases in your zone of influence, you are not allowed to build any starbases outside of your zone of influence. Do you want that?

I don't have issue with the AI securing resources around the map, its just a difference resources strategy.

I do agree with the idea that a colonized planet should exert some kind of "get off my lawn border" for starbases, as then those enemy bases don't just take resources, they prevent economic/cultural bases of my own.

I realize it is a different universe literally and figuratively, but think about Star Trek. What would happen if the Romulans started building starbases within Federation space? As well as mining resources? Particularly for both starbase types, deep in Federation space. Or switch the 'aggressor.' The Feds and the Roms would react different, but still along the lines of taking over those bases, blowing them up, war, etc. Or the real world friction between Russia and the US and the missle defense system the US is trying to fully set up. Its not currently leading to war, but there is a proxy of a sort going on in the Ukraine. If the Russian government were mining precious resources in the US, well it wouldn't even happen. I realize Russia and US are land based, but the point still remains. It would not be tolerated.