Allow bases without dropship hangars to build and transfer dropships?

[Schilcote]

My base-building strategy is to specialize the first two; the starting base gets lots of labs, and the second is my factory. All my science and manufacturing are done at those two, and the rest are completely devoted to housing soldiers and intercepting UFOs.

The problem with this is that my manufacturing base (which will, of course, inevitably have those annoying un-buildable sqares- what game-design purpose do those serve?) has no room for dropship hangars. I fit one interceptor hangar in, and just transfer the interceptors to one of the dedicated combat bases as I build them.

It'd be great if instead of just refusing to build dropships without hangars to put them in, it'd just show you the "you have no room for this" dialouge box like it does when you already have an aircraft in all your hangars.

[Duke]

annoying un-buildable sqares- what game-design purpose do those serve?)

I think they are there to keep players from using a standard layout for their bases.

Btw what is the main reason for you to prefer centralizing research ? It's less efficient at least for living quarters...

[Schilcote]

Is it?

I do it mainly just 'cos I want to get as much research as I can done in the beginning, so the first base ends up being entirely labs, and then I really just don't need to build labs in any other bases afterwards.

[Duke]

It is. Look at the unused living quarters in your 'fighting bases'.

Also, most players want to build as many bases and as fast as they can afford. It is said to be better for nation happiness.

[Sarin]

I tend to centralize research too, although I might try building additional labs in my last base next time instead of more workshops.

My usual: Main base has 4 labs, 3 living quarters, houses 40 scientists, 16 soldiers (main team and replacements for injured ones) and 3 pilots (dropship and two interceptors), second is manufacturing base right next to it with 5 workshops, 3 quarters, 50 engineers and team of soldiers for defense, along with some base defenses. This provides AAA for main base and does all the disassembly. One dropship and one interceptor hangar are there just for manufacturing purposes. Second and third base are identical, 2x living quarters, 2x workshop for keeping ammo supply up (I spam EP ammo at late game), 2x interceptor, 1x dropship and usual complement of troops and pilots. There's enough space left for AAA. Workshop is the only base without radar. Using this and three radar sites, I can get good coverage of most populated landmass.

[geever]

Back to the point:

The problem with this is that my manufacturing base (which will, of course, inevitably have those annoying un-buildable sqares- what game-design purpose do those serve?) has no room for dropship hangars. I fit one interceptor hangar in, and just transfer the interceptors to one of the dedicated combat bases as I build them.

It'd be great if instead of just refusing to build dropships without hangars to put them in, it'd just show you the "you have no room for this" dialouge box like it does when you already have an aircraft in all your hangars.

Actually I think it should work the other way. The game should not allow to build an aircraft if there are hangars but there is no room in the hangars and should not allow to move or buy any aircraft into a hangar that is used for producing one.

The point is that an aircraft is too big to be assembled in the workshop (as it has all the machines and so) and you need a free hangar to make them.

-geever

[Schilcote]

Well, fair enough then.

But in that case, maybe we should have a way to clear out those unbuildable sections?

[geever]

But in that case, maybe we should have a way to clear out those unbuildable sections?

Nope.

-geever

[TallTroll]

The whole point of unbuildable squares is to make extra bases generally less efficient. There has been talk of a 2 level base system, where bases have upper and lower layers (and hence more total spaces) to allow for greater base building gameplay

[Flying Steel]

Yeah, I think unbuildable tiles is a feature deserving of removal or at least made optional if it isn't already.

They annoy more than they challenge.

[Noordung]

save before you build new base. if you have too much rock load and build base again... reload and reply until you are happy with result.

[Flying Steel]

save before you build new base. if you have too much rock load and build base again... reload and reply until you are happy with result.

If abusing the save system is the way to deal with a feature, then there may be something wrong with said feature.

[geever]

If abusing the save system is the way to deal with a feature, then there may be something wrong with said feature.

Abusing the save system is not the way to deal with a feature, it's just what cheaters do.

Noordung, thanks for the bugreport, I'm thinking about how to fix that exploit...

-geever

[Noordung]

i play the game the way i want. so im a chearter. no problem with that.

[cevaralien]

Abusing the save system is not the way to deal with a feature, it's just what cheaters do.

Noordung, thanks for the bugreport, I'm thinking about how to fix that exploit...

-geever

But is true, that feature don´t makes the game more difficult. If you can dig all the base, why leave a "rock" there? Another thing, why don´t choose the initial entrance?

Maybe the answer is that the locations are old bases taken from UN?