The whole game should be less micro intensive in my opnion.

I must not have realized that only one constructor module can only be placed on any size hull. This is ridiculous! If I want to take a huge hull and load it with construction modules, let me ! Remove this restriction please. Then maybe others would not mind the constructor dilemma so much.  Don't make me mod this game please! Or I will lose my social life once I start.😨

As Franco fx says you can put multiple constructor modules on a ship if you have the space however even with 4 on a large hull and the pragmatic 2 for 1 it still takes multiple large constructors to build an economic starbase to completion.  This is why I still have a problem with the current system, I'm getting 8 modules at a time but still need 2 to finish a single starbase at the point where I get that 8 module ship and there are still upgrades to be unlocked and some need 2 modules per.  This isn't fun, its annoying.

The more I think about it, the less I understand why one constructor should bring a starbase up to full upgrade.  It really shouldn't work that way, or what's the investment value besides a few credits one way or another?  I can see where you would want it, but I don't see why it should be so easy it's near automatic, even on insane maps.  It has to be a subjective and meaningful difference between setting up a basic starbase and outfitting one for maximum benefit.  Your suggestions seem to want to take out that differentiation to where it is near meaningless.  There becomes no reason not to maximize each and every starbase if you have the economy.  For me, that's losing trade off decisions.

I think you may have to make a personal trade-off decision between your annoyance level and your need to maximize as much as you want on impractical map conditions.  I can't see how to meet those contradictory needs without seriously impacting those who use constructors to selectively develop their economies for different maps and situations.  The complexity needed to meet the multiple uses of starbases means some compromises have to made.

Still hoping for better tools, though.  At least enough to alleviate the annoyance factor somewhat.  That and intoxicants should help.

And taking on an Insane map with abundant stuff is just that, insane.  We have to accept some of the responsibility for our own insanities, you know.  At least, that's what my family keeps telling me.

I'm well aware of my insanity in playing on insane map sizes although I don't put everything on abundant, that is a bit much even for me.  

I'm not asking for one and done starbase construction but I don't want to have to produce ridiculous numbers of constructors to build each and every base.  I want either the starbase to have some manufacturing capacity itself that it uses to build modules and when its not building itself up it planets inside its area of effect gain that capacity or sponsor the starbase to build it up.  This still prompts the trade off of what to produce just in less management intensive way.

If we can build 4 module ships (which becomes 8 with the pragmatic bonus), would it just about solve the issue if we could specify which constructor model is sent on demand.

I am looking for some kind of compromise because it is not going to change dramatically in the short run. Maybe in some expansion of the game a year or so down the road, if ever.

I could be wrong. Strong opinion can sometimes move mountains, and believe we are talking about a mountain.

1-3 looks great and seems easy enough. Like you said 4 might not make the cut.

HANDLE IT! HANDLE IT!  

I'm not sure where I stand on the mechanics of building Starbases.  I don't really mind the micro personally, but I can see where it could get cumbersome if building lots of Starbases was actually an efficient thing to do.

But my thoughts on Starbases as they stand currently:

-A very inefficient use of resources(Maintenance reduction coming patch 5.3 will help, maybe)

-Prototype weapons aren't really in yet, so there's not even a mining rush(No early game need, hopefully this will change soon as well)

-The % bonuses(Manufacturing, Science, Income), Morale, Sensor Range, Effective Range, Attack, Defense all don't stack with the previous module of same type. So if you think of what you could have done with all that production to get to more advanced modules(not to mention the research cost to even be able to build these modules), then the break-even equation starts to get pretty lopsided in favor of ignoring starbases altogether.

-Ships are currently broken as pure sensor ships can reach obscene ranges, so you don't need starbases for that either.

So what are Starbases good at in current form?

-Extending ship range

-Getting resources for support ships

That's the only reason to have them currently.  You could argue the Approval bonus isn't too bad, but it's still not worth the current maintenance.

-----

Trust me, I want a reason to perfectly place 5 Starbases around a single planet(8 is possible) and reap the bonuses, but right now its not worth the minimal gains for having diverted all those resources from other projects(aka - An unstoppable army that takes over the universe!).

So I'd really like a good balance pass(BUFF!!!) before I start debating the mechanics of building them.

I NEED a reason to build them first!

PS-You can build as many Constructor modules on a ship as you want. They do work, just not with the Request mechanic. But if you build a Shipyard instead of a Starbase, it'll delete any extra Constructor modules.  So use to build Starbases only.

This thread has way too much micro, someone fix this!

Reminds me of X3 (a game I like) where when there was a problem and the community fixed it, it solved the problem but they failed to see it was not a fun solution and failed to see the other repetitive micromanagement it created.

I don't like the idea of setting all this this up per Starbase, and setting priority orders, and queues and everything that was mentioned, as its all realistic but not fun or friendly to new users or alot of people like me. I don't really like constructors but I don't won't to trade a thumb for a finger.

Starbases are intended to support planets and mine resources. That should be the core principle to the system and it needs to be simple.

DARCA

Though I would strongly prefer a change to the system, I will note a few improvement to the current one.

1) I hate the various offense / defense / sensor modules. For 90% of my starbases, I never need them. Only my fringe starbases do I worry about their personal protection. Ideally, I would rather starbases just auto update with newer weapons / defense tech.

Another option, let me add a "weapons module", and it has the best strength reflecting by my strongest weapons.

Finally, give me the option to checkbox a starbase as "not seeing weapon/defense/sensor" modules. I hate when I accidentally send constructors to a starbase, and my only option is giving it one of these modules that I do not want.

2) In the automation scripting area (the place were I can send bulk upgrade commands and the like), give me the option to find all starbases missing the next "lab" module and then do a bulk request constructor command.

Example: I just researched a new lab tech, and now all 20 of my econ starbases are ready to get that latest module. I would like to do a bulk request module to all 20 starbases.

MicroManagement: Yes, I do agree to have it changed/altered. At the current it takes too much of the overall attention and ongoing it is somehow boring to do all steps over and over again. 

Defenses: How would sound 'star gates' as defense upgrade? Of course you have to research them and they should be quite expensive in monthly energy cost interest charge so you do not want to build them everywhere. It'll enhance defense options toward fleet system and helps defend your most needed systems.