[6.1] Balance Discussion - Starbases

from GalCiv3 Forums

So other than bugs, I'm going to try and review balance areas that can be tweaked before going live. This thread is dedicated to starbases.

Note: This is mainly a balance discussion. This is not meant to brainstorm wholesale changes to the starbase system, as that is not practical so close to relase.

 

Base Starbase Defenses

I feel that the current defenses, while strong, are appropriate. However, I think the fact that you can instantly build a starbase that can fully defend itself right off the bat is the problem. It makes me less wary of pirates early game, and makes starbase hopping strategies into enemy territories too easy.

So the most radical of the changes I am proposing: Have the starbase build a "default defense suite" module and have it take 1 (preferably 2) turns to build. This means starbases start at helpless for a few turns, and then gain their defenses.

This makes starbases a bit more vulnerable to early pirates, and if people plop down starbases in enemy territory with no support, it gives that enemy a few turns to shut it down.

 

Economic Starbases

I agree with many on the forums that the economic yields (aka manu, research, and wealth) of these starbases are on the weak side. Specialization is the normal in Gal Civ 3 as it stands, so even the most basic buildings are getting me about a 35% bump (25 + 10 for adjacency). So a 10%, followed by a few 5% bumps, feel pretty weak, even if I get a few planets in the ring.

I don't mind the 10% off the bat, I don't want starbases to start too strong. But I think the next tiers should also bump by 10%.

On the other side is the approval bonuses. I feel that these are actually pretty good, and right now is the main way I use economic bases.

 

Mining Starbases

Mining Bases serve their purpose well, and are probably the most common starbase in the early game.

I think they are fine as is, no change.

 

Archaeology Base

The bonuses of these are good and strong, I always want the relics (as I should). The fact that I can get these and another ring is a nice touch...but does ask the question of why the other types need to be exclusive.

I wouldn't change anything here.

 

Influence Base

I think the influence bases are actually on the strong side right now...but that may be a factor in the whole influence system. Because influence buildings are static bonuses, a lot of influence buildings + the percentage bonuses of influences bases gives me a dramatic increase in influence. And unlike economic bonuses that require growth time to accumulate, influence can be acquired through manufacturing and purchasing...which I can do much faster.

The counterargument is that influence is a much more specialized resource, and unless you are flipping planets or trying for an influence win they are fairly worthless. That is a valid point, but its so easy to specialize in influence right now on just one or two planets and get dramatic bang for your buck.

So I would give influence bases a 5% nerf across tiers. Or...at least at the initial tier if you want to go less radical.

 

Military Starbases

These are currently the weakest starbases imo. The problem with military bases is that they are the base you never "want" to build. You are giving up on the bonuses of the other bases (unless you have constructed all of the other bases and upgrades that you possibly can), and the return is okay, but not amazing. Overall I think the base needs to be more generally useful to be competitive.

My first recommendation, increase the range the bonus provides. Keep the normal 5 hex distance limit, but let the military bonus extend by default to 8 hexes. This makes them more flexible, gives them something "special", but allows for some "kill zone" overlaps that create neat chokepoints in space. Also, if it doesn't already (I haven't checked), make sure their bonus applies to their own defenses and defenses of starbases they overlap with.

Second, consider allowing them to overlap with other rings like the Archeology ring does. This is more radical, but immediately makes them more useful. If you go this route I wouldn't recommend my other ideas.

Third, give them a big bump to sensor range. Recreate the "listening post" concept using military bases.

Fourth, provide a repair range bonus in the military bases influence (default or a module).

Fifth: Consider a military manufacturing bonus to either a planet OR starport in their influence. So you can get some economic benefit out of them.

Sixth: Provide some default resistance bonuses. Helps counter influence starbases a bit, as well as making planets harder to crack.

 

Starbase Sensors

As we have debated long on the forums, right now the "SONAR SHIP" puts all starbase sensors to shame. This makes starbase sensors a "newbie trap". New players will build those sensor modules, feeling very cool about their "listening post". Until they find out on the boards that they could have parked one cheap sonar ship in that starbase and gotten more bang for the buck than all the starbase sensors everywhere provided.

I recommend:

1) Dramatically increasing the sensor range of the sensor bonuses (honestly 15 hexes a pop would not be outrageous the way it works now). If this is "too good", make it a perk of the military base as I mentioned above.

2) Dropping this module. It has no use right now except to suck in constructors that more seasoned players know better to put elsewhere. If they can't be upgraded strongly enough, just drop them.

 

Starbase Defenses

Personally, I hate upgrading starbase defenses over time, but I am not the most warlike player and so that may be a personal preference.

I would recommending provide a hitpoint bonus for each of these "defense modules". I think right now that fleet offense scales much more strongly than starbase offense does, so a hitpoint adjustment would help it scale better with time.

 

 

So those are my general thoughts. Lets see what everyone else thinks.

3,664 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

bumping this thread. Would love to hear more from others to see if my thoughts are shared or I'm in the minority here.

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I agree on the boosting of the sensor range for bases (or dramatically reducing the sensor stack effect on ships).  It's logically and thematically appropriate for Starbases to be your fixed 'eyes in the sky', above and beyond the capacity of any ship to accomplish.  Presently you can load a stack of sensors on a ship to create a sensor barge that returns many, many time the amount of information that a sensor ring on a starbase does, and for a tiny, tiny fraction of the cost - not to mention it being mobile. 

There are a few things that are logically backwards in GC3 but this sensor stacking thing is one of the more egregious examples that makes Starbase sensor rings hilariously wasteful. 

Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Generally agree with three comments:

My first recommendation, increase the range the bonus provides. Keep the normal 5 hex distance limit, but let the military bonus extend by default to 8 hexes.
End of quote

There are Engineering techs that expand starebase range up to +4 hexes. My opinion is that this is well balanced as is.

Not sure I agree with the economy starbases being under powered. For very productive star systems (3-4 planets or my home system), I will put 3-5 economy starbases (depending on presence of mining resources/enemies) to pump up their production. Given that players can do that and they stack, I think they are balanced about right. Now, an argument could be made that we shouldn't be able to put so many starbases so close together. Then the economy perks would need to be better.

Sensor range is an interesting one. Because of the trade resource that extends sensor range +5%, if you get enough of those you can get some amazing range out of any sensors. I agree that a small ship should not give better sensor range than a starbase.

Reply #4 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I preferred it when starbases had no default defenses, especially now that there are pirates and you get a free module, I think this should be reverted. I think I am outnumbered on that though.

The biggest reason for economy starbases is the 10% production bonus. After that, I do agree that manufacturing, research, and economy bonuses could use a boost. I think they should be equivalent to their on-planet counter-part without adjacency bonuses.

Military starbases have always been a part of a very specialized strategy. I think that's okay. The main problem is that if you are using them offensively they become useless eventually and if an enemy is building their own starbases it will be very difficult to get them into useful areas. I would propose 2 changes to improve their usefulness:

1) Allow them to ignore presence of other factions' starbases for the purposes of minimum range from other starbases.

2) Give them a "deconstruct" command that allows you to destroy the starbase and get constructors equal to 1/2 the construction points spent on that starbase.

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I like all of your suggestions except the influence star base nerf. I play a lot of influence and I am politically opposed to any more influence nerfing. Enough, I say. :)

Seriously, any future changes in influence should have map size in the conversation.

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I disagree on the bonus amounts being too small.  It's perfectly viable to get 9-12 starbases boosting a planet, which will give it between +315% and +420% to manufacturing, research and/or wealth.  And anything above +300% is enough to, by itself, make running 100% manufacturing with a research or wealth project more viable than running any research or wealth directly.  When those starbase multipliers are stacked on top of planetary multipliers, they can increase the project yields on even well-developed planets by about 50%.

However, I do thing the order in which the bonuses come is too heavily stacked toward the end.  Right now, it goes +5% -> +10% -> +15% -> +35% (due to the final +20% upgrade being separate, while the others replace the previous upgrade).  So it would be nice if some of the bonuses from the final upgrade tier got moved to the earlier upgrades, to make it less all-or-nothing.

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting Tohron, reply 6

I disagree on the bonus amounts being too small.  It's perfectly viable to get 9-12 starbases boosting a planet,
End of Tohron's quote

In my personal experience, I have found the reality to be less than the theory.

Theoretically, you can stack starbases as you mentioned. But in reality between:

 

1) Foreign starbases blocking spots

2) Mining starbases needing a bit of planet real estate.

3) Wanting to get 2-3 planets with a single starbase, which breaks the "perfect ring"

4) Having to get other techs instead of the starbase range boosters.

 

I find that I rarely if ever get that many starbases around a planet. I find 4-5 to be a more realistic number, and I'm very curious to see what others think on this one.

Reply #8 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting peregrine23, reply 4


1) Allow them to ignore presence of other factions' starbases for the purposes of minimum range from other starbases.

2) Give them a "deconstruct" command that allows you to destroy the starbase and get constructors equal to 1/2 the construction points spent on that starbase.
End of peregrine23's quote

Perhaps another idea would be to let military starbases move like starports so you can push them outward as you conquer.

Reply #9 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting Stalker0, reply 8


Quoting peregrine23,
reply 4


1) Allow them to ignore presence of other factions' starbases for the purposes of minimum range from other starbases.

2) Give them a "deconstruct" command that allows you to destroy the starbase and get constructors equal to 1/2 the construction points spent on that starbase.



Perhaps another idea would be to let military starbases move like starports so you can push them outward as you conquer.

End of Stalker0's quote

I think that deconstruction is a good idea. It should give you all of the construction points but should take some time, perhaps one turn for every 2 modules constructed. Moreover, it shouldn't solely apply to military starbases.

On other issues:

  1. I had heard that Stardock was going to give starbases population of their own, which would imply a level of production, influence, approval, and resistance. I hope that this idea comes in a patch or expansion post-release.
  2. Shipyards should have their own modules which do things like reducing upgrade costs, increasing repair rate, raising military production, improving defense, etc. These modules should only apply to the hex occupied by the shipyard itself
Reply #10 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I've not had the chance to try all of the starbase varieties as yet (game crashes!) but agree there are a number of opportunities to enhance the utility of each.

Starbase defence: It's reasonable that a newly built starbase would have the defences to defend itself against 3-5 early game pirate vessels but I get the argument for a period of vulnerability - perhaps a 2 or 3 turn build period for a starbase, seems strange that a constructor can 'pop up' a starbase in a fraction of the time it takes a shipyard to construct even a small hull ship.

Economic: Haven't tried 'stacking' starbases but this seems rather unreal (but given we're in space...), had thought the exclusion area of a stabase applied equally to all types - if not perhaps it should but with the flexibility to build up to one of each type of starbase within the exclusion zone of another starbase.  Agree a boost to manufacturing, research etc seems a bit underwhelming at the stage (altho the ability to influence several planets may balance this).

Mining: Agree these are fine.

Archaeology Ring: Again works OK

Influence bases: Haven't tried these as yet but accept the comment that these are OK as is.  My thought is that perhaps this could be more of a ring approach as with archaeology.

Military starbase and Sensors: Fully agree that these are currently underdone and need work, altho I don't agree that they should be capable of being constructed within an opposition's starbase zone.  These should be capable of better supporting fleets by boosting firepower (not too bad at this stage), providing intel (agree with sensor discussions, should be at least as good as a purpose built sensor ship - but not automatically, should require upgrades as with other aspects - could also be a purpose built ring as for archaeology), and ship repair (something that is badly done overall to date).

 

Shipyards: Without hijacking this thread, I agree with Wer900 that there should also be more done with shipyards with modular upgrades which might delay other production whilst being constructed.

 

Reply #11 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Just to put the Sensor discussion in context.

Turn 1, you can build a sensor ship with a 24 hex sensor range.

With interstellar sensors (the tech that also gives you the second starbase sensor) you can extend to 32.

And of course, as hull capacity is increased, so do these ranges.

 

So when I suggested 15 hexes for each sensor upgrade, its actually still on the low side!

Reply #12 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Just a note, that in 6.2 influence starbases have received a nerf (or possibly a bug).

Now that consulates do not provide a base influence bonus, the percentage bonus of influence bases is not as strong.

 

The tooltip says that the base influence starbase provides 10% and a +1 influence. Its not providing a +1, so this may be a bug. I can say that a +1 influence would make influence starbases very very powerful.

Reply #13 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

In beta 5 starbases could get defenses this strong, early in the game, it just took 4 or so extra constructors. That was a good buildup time.