Will asteroid belts be feasible?

Moving huge moons just seems wrong to me, but it seems that an asteroid belt would just destroy any fps at all...
Thoughts?
(I think moons would be better just as bases, not weapons)

Astroid belts won't behave the same way as moons. Something different will be done so it doesn't tank fps.

Its surface area that matter, not the amount of bodies.

Also they don't need to be generated at the start of the game. It could be that there a few asteroids to start with and when one is claimed another is generated.

Apparently asteroid belts will only have about 4-5 usable asteroids, the rest will be decals.

Source?

Because I remember Uber talking about how astroid belts will have a bunch of useable astroids.

I think it was said in one of the livestreams.
Maybe I'm mistaken.

I bloody hope they become feasible.

Uber is working on it and claims they'll become feasible.

Eventually.

But when they do get added, we'll desperately need proportional smashing.

I'm excited about proportional smashing for many reasons.

Firstly, we'll be able to smash a base without wiping our own stuff off the planet.

Secondly, big enough smashes will wreck the whole planet, and leave it completely unusable/gone.

also, asteroids with cheaper and less overkilling smashability will allow smashes to happen more often.

It'll make orbital a lot more balanced too.

Really looking forward to it.

I'm going to second this. I have no clue when it was said, but unless we're both insane, somebody mentioned it.

Edit:
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/the-vanguard-newsletter-issue-4.58804/

Found it, 5th paragraph. Not confirmed however.

I remember them saying this as well!

That says 10 or 12 asteroids, which is fine in my opinion. 5 is too few, a dozen could definitely look reasonable.

Shh, I didn't feel like pointing that out You guys should be happy I wasn't too lazy to not search for it

Edit: Wow, is that some scary Grammar or what? It's so bad I'm leaving it.

Actually, I remembered the 10-12 figure, and would have referenced it anyway.

Well, far as I can tell a smash actually DOES destroy metal extraction points on a planet.

There should be very small (asteroid) celestial body cannons that destroy them that way players would be able to defend against 1 or so at the same time if prepared.

It's been suggested a bunch of times that nukes should be able to intercept them to mitigate some of the damage, however I doubt you'll be able to fully defend against them without pro-actively going after a player building Halleys. Pretty sure I saw a comment from a dev that the bit with the missiles firing at an incoming KEW in the Kickstarter trailer was to show that there wasn't any effective way to defend against it.

Really I think that if you've managed to throw an asteroid you should be garuanteed some destruction.

Well, yes, unless you intercept it so far away that it loses any hope of smashing anything to begin with.

Or if we are able to hijack it via commander capture, and dirt it's course to another target....