Make Bases Great Again

Feedback
1

Ignition is awesome.

The massive amount of industry that is required to assemble our ships really makes them feel… Epic. I actually feel like I am assembling a starship of the future. It takes great concerted effort and has revitalized high tier industries by creating a strong demand for techs, engineers, and scientists.

All of this, however, really shines a light on the bases that lay forgotten in the corner, available at a dime a dozen.

Problem: How to make bases feel like a monumental achievement and an actual assemblage of parts that requires purposeful planning and resources without screwing up the entire early game during a reset?

Solution: Offer multiple versions of Core Modules

Players start with a core module mk0 - which is a base exactly as it is today but this module does not trade on CX and is not tradable via LM. The only way to acquire this module is to start a new corp to get one in the starting package. This base upgrades to a mk3.

Core modules can be upgraded to the next tier via a button where “repair” would normally be (since repair makes no sense for CMs) - cost would be displayed where repair costs would normally be.

Starting a new base can be accomplished with any core module - IE you don’t have to start with the basic one and upgrade it. You can just build a better one and take it to the site.

A word on balance - I barely attempted to find it here. Suggestion needs improvement - I tried mostly to just use existing materials I could think of and find with a few minutes of searching

Core module mk1 - “Frontier Base”
Built in: PP2
Cost: 4 LSE, 4 LDE, 4 LTA, 8 TRU, 12 PSL (today’s base cost)
Base Area: 400
Base Storage: 1500 m^3/t
Colonizing Population: 200 PIO
Efficiency: -5%

This module is what will allow early game expansion in a new universe. It has costs like bases today, but the reduced area and efficiency make it desirable to upgrade ASAP for more area and to remove the efficiency penalty.

Core module mk2 - “Colony”
Built in: UPF
Cost: Approximately 2-5M worth of: R-fabs, HAB, SP, POW, MFK, UTS, NCS, TRA, RAD, TRU, DEC, FC, FLP, GC, MHL, PSL, DCL, PSM, DCM
Base Area: 500
Base Storage: 3500 m^3/t
Colonizing Population: 300 PIO, 100 SET
Efficiency: +/-0%

Core module mk3 - “Automated AI Colony”
Built in: UPF
Cost: Approximately 12-20M worth of: A-fabs, CC, COM, AAR, LIS, WR, LOG, FIR, HAB, SU, TCU, DOU, FUN, WAI, HCC, DEC, TRU, LIT, SRD, SUD, NR and a new set of base structural components that use the ASM materials
Base Area: 600
Base Storage: 7500 m^3/t
Colonizing Population: 400 PIO, 200 SET, 100 TECH
Efficiency: +/-5%
Special effect: Building degradation rate reduced by 33% (takes 25% longer to degrade to the same point as normal - gives 30 extra days before hitting that magical 90 day mark where repair starts to become necessary)

What this all hopes to accomplish:
Keep bases attainable as a realistic goal in the first 3-6 months of gameplay for any player regardless of playstyle.
Make the starter base good enough, but also with a daily reminder that it isn’t perfect to encourage growth to bigger bases (that -5% efficiency WILL drive people crazy in their search for maximum efficiency… but it really isn’t that big of a hit. 375 base area after core module still creates a good sized base)
Make the average base we see today an actual investment of resources (2-5M)
Offer a super-base that takes ship-like levels of investment and planning to accomplish

3 Likes
2

why not repair a CM?

Degradation penalty should apply to CM and habitation as well.

I think there was energy on the list.
A degraded CM could provide less Energy.
It could also reduce the available area that you can use.
But what if you already use all area? Well then maybe a production line stops working… or one building of a production line.

About habitation… degrading habitation could result in higher consumable usage…

3

Actually, since I added an efficiency modifier to the CM, it could degrade that.

I just realized that the top tier base should totally have repair drones that decrease the rate of building degradation. Adding it now to main post

What I don’t want to just jump to is for it to become customizable like blueprints - to me, a base is a big modular place and your customization is the modules (buildings) you plug into it. Maybe that is the best way but theres design space to explore still, I think

Perhaps this leads to a 2nd idea where base “bells and whistles” take the form of buildings - since nicer bases have more area that fits well

4

I really like the idea of upgradable CMs. I think it could be nice that they enable higher level pops. Can’t house Techs if you don’t have level 2, Engineers level 3, Scientists level 4. Maybe the level of CMs could unlock higher ‘level’ habitiation units which are more efficient but more expensive (as mooted elsewhere). This would to be really add to the idea of developing bases over time.

5

I would really like to see tiered bases as well, although I don’t necessarily agree with the balancing as suggested. Starter bases should be much smaller (200-300 area) and buildable with a suitable number of BFABs, and getting progressively more expensive and much larger with each tier (4-5 tiers total). At the max tier a base would have 1000 area when upgraded using AFABs, DOU, HAB and other critical infrastructure items that would be quite expensive but worth it if you want to invest heavily into building a tall base on a particular world.

I like the idea of base and base upgrade kits being produced by the UPF or a similar building. Ideally I would like to see new players start out with the ability to plant a second tier base kit on their primary world, but also have another basic tier kit available to expand to a second world of their choice immediately. This would get newer players more engaged in the game and accelerate the first week or two significantly. There would also need to be a safety guard in place to prevent players from selling starter items on the CX or local market and immediately COLIQ to prevent abuse.

1 Like
6

All changing the starter bases will do is dramatically increase the amount of time that new players are irrelevant. As it stands all I can do really is shipping contracts and its been almost 2 weeks. I make a bit of STL which is only sustainable because of shipping contracts. The prospect that I can actually over the long term work on my base without having to dump all the money into a single module just to upgrade it to the point where I’m not completely irrelevant isn’t that attractive.

However, the idea of upgradable bases definitely is appealing and makes sense to me. But that at the expensive of the new player joining is as bad an idea as moving to a subscription model before the game is done. Seems great to veterans but to new players it would be more of reason not to get fully involved and look elsewhere for digital entertainment.

1 Like
7

I specifically proposed NO changes to the base you start with in the original suggestion

8

I agree with you completely that the new player starting ramp up is too slow. That’s why I would really like to see new players start off with a medium tier base, enough resources and prefabs/buildings to get started, and a second starter base kit to expand to a planet of their choice.

2 Likes
9

Thats an interesting idea. give them a small ability to create a basic useful production line. I’d be on board with that.

10

Sounds like the player curve needs to be more logarithmic (fast at the start, slowing down over time). I suppose having a high quality starter base, but additional bases have to be upgraded, could contribute to that.