Where/why/how many bases do you build?

[Triaxx2]

So far? I mostly lose before I can get the second base operational.

[kamor]

How do you lose?

Aliens wiping out your bases or funding nations discontinuing support of PHALANX project?

[Triaxx2]

I spend more cash trying to keep interceptors up in the air than I gain selling tech. If I let them land, the bottom drops out of my funding. Frankly it's easiest when the aliens come knocking.

I think there should be at least some cash value even for a crashed Alien ship. A fraction of the pittance it sells for already would be fine, but even crashed there's alloys and such of value.

[Starbug]

Huh, I've always been able to sell crashed UFOs, don't know if that changed at all in 2.5?

Do the interceptors cost lots because you are losing them, or is it just the missiles that are too costly? Once you get the ariel laser you should swap out all/most of the weapons with it, since it doesn't use ammo.

And don't try shooting down harvesters either, they are worth much more to you intact anyway, if you keep them in your UFO yard.

[Duque Atreides]

Headquarters I build in eastern Europe. Next I build a base really near as a pure workshop base. My Headquarters base has all my labs and workshops churn out goods (I leave the workshop at head quater to churn out ammo). After that I build five more in order, China, USA, Africa (South), South America and then Australia. I never use air defence (I even sell the first interceptor at the start) I have a squad at each base and when attacked, kill them and sell their ship. Better than a somali pirate operation.

I used this too. I build the HQ at Slovakia, my workshops at Poland, an airbase at Kamchatka (Russia) or Korea, another airbase at Venezuela and the final airbase at India. Australia is the home of one of my radar bases (no garrison, only radar, CC and energy), a radar base at Canada (west coast) and another radar base at Namibia or Angola.

Antartica is covered by a radar post, and the Patagonia (Argentina´s southern land) is covered by a radar post too. All radar post or bases are covered by 3 SAMs and my HQ/Workshop base is covered by another 3 SAMs too. The Air bases relay on their missile/laser defense (2 missile/1 laser) and the fighter wing.

[Triaxx2]

I'm in 2.4 and frankly it's not the missile cost, but the fact that I'll send the interceptor after one target and get ambushed by a second and lose it because they're universally faster. Or the drop ship is on it's way to a target and get's wiped out.

And I don't know why, but I never get the option to sell crashes, only landings.

[solbu]

it's not the missile cost, but the fact that I'll send the interceptor after one target and get ambushed by a second and lose it because they're universally faster.

One of the first things I always do is to build two extra small hangars, so that I have 3 interceptors at a base. So when a ufo is detected, I send all 3 interceptors from the same base at it. Then the chance of shooting it down increases considerably.

[Triaxx2]

I'll give that a shot.

[homunculus]

tried to get full and continuous land coverage with 7 bases and failed.
the gap over greenland was not intended.
should have built the north american base a bit more to the east.

edit: looked at it again, and it seems my eyes were playing tricks on me previously, and the continous radar coverage in this screenshot was ok (the thing that looked like a gap over greenland is the outer radar range circles).

the point of continuous radar coverage was not loosing sight of an ufo that has been spotted (except over pacific).

[Sarin]

Well, such small gap could be filled by radar tower.

As I wrote before, 3 bases+3 radars are enough to cover around 90% of populated areas, good enough.

[homunculus]

discovered i had a save from before building the last two bases, so maybe i will do an improved version of the same thing.

does anyone know if multiple radars in the same base will improve the detection rate?

@ Sarin:
a screenshot of the result, maybe?
otherwise i would need to play the game to see what it really looks like.

while at it, is there a way to remove the hud from the screenshot, so that the whole map could be displayed?
i vaguely remember there might have been such thing, but couldn't find it.

maybe i am wrong, but i feel like the installations have other uses than being radar towers.
1) i want most bases to have an ufo yard.
because i find it reasonable to dismantle ufo-s in bases with antimatter consuming crafts, for convenience (using saracens with particle beam for most ufo-s, and a dragon being the third interceptor for tougher fights).
maybe that is partly because i don't know if and how fast spinners work in 2.5.
2) i want ufo dumps on small islands, meaning about 4 sam sites at one spot, dropping ufo-s into the sea.

[Sarin]

I'll post screenie later, I have yet to rebuild that setup in my game.

Also, I've intentionally compromised areas with low population density, so there are significant gaps. east Siberia, northern part of Canada, Antarctic, Arctic and Greenland are not covered because of that. Also, New Zealand got out of coverage somehow...

But as I said, over 90% of population should be covered.

[krilain]

But wouldn't you agree that good positions for the bases depend also on the campain events? I mean, theorically it seems not so useful to cover Oceania when North US is very more populated. But the North US proved for me to keep more stable on happiness, and not so much targeted by aliens.

Maybe, but it is only a supposition I make, it is important to cover the lands depending on 3 factors :

• the knowledge you have of the campain events
• the fact that aliens seem to begin by invading some areas not depending on the population amount but on their ability to defend themselves or not - Oceania rather than USA obviously
• the maneer you decide to play regarding to air coverage or missile coverage; bases dedicated to researsh or crafting have not the same role than airports for your ships

[homunculus]

thought of making a second attempt at the radar coverage from a bit earlier save than the last, but noticed the previous radar coverage didn't really have a gap over greenland, so the base placement is all solid.

@krilain: you might want to take a look at the real financing in the statistics, and you will certainly notice what you might want to cover first, and it will probably not be north america.
can't go wrong with covering your greatest credits source first.

[krilain]

@krilain: you might want to take a look at the real financing in the statistics, and you will certainly notice what you might want to cover first, and it will probably not be north america.
can't go wrong with covering your greatest credits source first.

I didn't say that I would cover North Am. first, actually I cover South Am. before, with base, radar, and a missile rack.
But allow me to introduce a funny remark about the role of North America in funding through the happiness counter. As explained (below from a remark due to Kurja on an other topic), some nations seem to have more influence than the others according to the happiness criterion.