I don't think you would have to increase the range of lrfs if you increase the range of the defense platforms.  The Advent have the Ajudicator, the TEC have the Ogrov Torpedo Cruiser, and the Vasari have that whole mobile SB thing that makes them immune to the problems initially brought up in this thread in the first place.  On this note, I haven't really seen much use online of either the Ajudicator or the Ogrov, so maybe increasing turret range a little so they outrange lrfs and not those cruisers makes them actually useful.

I will agree, however, that there are most likely a lot of changes that would need to be done if the Z-axis is to be fully incorporated into the game, many of which probably haven't even occured to us yet because they would have to be demonstrated in order to be discovered.

How to get around the problem without changing code? lol, it's an ancient japanese secret! But I'll give you a hint, do starbases HAVE to be limited to the same plane as mines and other structures? I'm sorry if I'm being a smart-ass; I just feel as though the best lessons are usually the ones you learn yourself.

No, the answer is that starbases AREN'T limited to a two-dimensional plane of exsistance. You can, for example, place one directly over a planet... if this is a small planet (say a dead asteroid,) then you're plretty much proteced from planet bombardment. Placing starbases a little "higher" or "lower" also has the added benefit of making your SB.... well, I think you all get it. Yes, the z-axis is flawed, but using your brain power can help turn the tide of many battles! Be creative!

And watch as the enemies fleet flies safely under/over your SB (assuming TEC or Advent), where they can't be fired at.  Saves the enemy the trouble of having to use the Z-axis.

Just place your starbase over the defensive structures.  Give the starbase whatever bombardment protection it has and thats the best you can do to get around the whole obvious flaw in the system; shitty solution but the only one that comes to mind...

The whole point of this was to make you figure it out for yourselves though... why would I want to totally give it away? God forbid you just try it; trust me, it works. You really limit yourself to a small defesive area when you do this however...

Yes, the SB still suffers.  Move the SB up, the enemy fleet could still go under it, and have an easier time of it at that.  The same applies for a "lowered" SB.  Defensive structures above/below the SB might help though.

Yes, I've put a SB on a different plane, however I haven't faced an opponent that micros the fleet directly above/below it since the game in my posted recording, so I still don't know if putting the SB on a different plane magically makes it immune from attacks directly above/below it.  My guess is no, simply because the SB would have to tilt around 70 degrees.  If you have proof that it does so, please, post the replay.

sounds more like an exploit then skill.

just 'cause your head is too far up your ass to learn and experiment doesn't mean that they're abusing it. Really, I'm having to really wonder and scratch my head at all of you americans; you do realize there's a reason pride is such a bad thing?

Fail for so many reasons... For instance, im Australian, i know nowadays there isnt much difference between the two... but there is nothing wrong with pride. without pride, there would only be debasement and indignity, leading to am eventual breakdown of morals and ethics.

And btw... utilising a tactical flaw within a game that cannot be effectively (or at all) countered exclusively to the detriment and disregard for all other strategies, in order to win a game is abuse, in every sense of the word. Pride has nothing to do with it, though having some sense of honour and fair play is certainly involved...

pull your head from your ass and grow up

I have known about this for a long time now and learned it the hard way.Still I have never used it on anyone.Luckily not many use it and I hardly ever use sb in a game anyway.Ill never use this tactic simply because its basicaly cheating and to win by cheat is no fun.Neither is micromanaging placements so I dont get cheated.They should just fix it along with other problems.I would like to see sins 2 fully 3d without phase lanes and games that are made up of different solar systems instead of one big one that are still playable in a resonable amount of time.

Just to tell you guys a fun trick:

If you move a ship towards the center of a grav well, and then have it move up or down in a manner which causes the angle of ascent to skim the edge of the planet in question...

...the ship will move up (accelerate) VERY quickly to the top/bottom of the planet, you can have it do the same towards the opposite pole immeadiately after it reaches the zenith... which will basically make your ship move over and under the planet and exit the opposite side really quickly... w/ proper waypoint set up you can typically do this faster than anyone can respond- and it will give you a good head start on an escape to a repair bay on the other side of the planet or what have you.

This doesn't seem to work going around the planet horizontally.

Why? It's a nifty side effect of how SOASE works... your ships move faster towards the center of a gravity well and slower when moving away from the center of a gravity well... which is something a lot of people forget about! That and I think that the Z-Axis acceleration is also likely a bit quirky.

Also, I made a post about how to use the Z-Axis a long time ago, which you can find here, in reply 5.

Yeah... the TEC/Advent starbases need to be able to rotate along all directions so that it can bring it's full firepower to bear on a target above/below them. As for range issues... that's just something the game is quirky with on the Z axis, everything seems to have a longer range than it should (except apparently, starbases and structures judging by this thread). I'm sure they could synch the distances up properly by tweaking a few variables somewhere.

I've never really tried it, but when placing structures, can you adjust their Z-Axis placement?

-Itharus

PS: I totally agree that using the Z-Axis to invalidate mine fields or abuse the firing arcs of TEC/Advent Starbases is 100% complete and total bullshit. IMO, mines should have Z-Axis movment, and spring up or down really fast to catch ships going above or below them (just measure proximity via the XY distance)... it seems like the simplest solution for mines.