Hmm, I can see what you mean there, but at the other extreme it's better to not have everything be a game of rocks, paper, scissors, shoot right?

And the general purpose capital ship would still share the weaknesses of other capital ships; namely bombers, anti-capital ship ships, long ranged artillery weapons and over all low acceleration and maneuverability.

Versus Bombers / Versus Frigates / Versus Capital Ships / Versus Artillery
Capital Ship: Weak Strong Strong Weak
General Ship:Weak-Medium Medium-Strong Medium Weak

(I tried to set up a little table but couldn't figure out how to indent the text, went with color instead.)

Ok, perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "General" without defining what I meant by it. A capital ship with less of a vulnerability to bombers. Which really isn't a "General purpose ship" so I'll drop that now.

A ship that is both carrier and capital ship combined. Albeit one that operates less efficiently in either role than a dedicated carrier or a dedicated capital ship.

Alternatively, just a capital ship with enough anti-bomber weaponry that it isn't hung out to dry if its fighter escort is stripped away.

Again, I'd much rather see the concept of a player flagship investigated than this capital/carrier ship.

^What he said is spot on for what I meant.

Well since it's still a capital ship it's vulnerable to other capital ships and of course, bombers.

Either just sidle your capital ship up to it one-on-one and pound it to bits (taking damage yourself, but winning since it's one-on-one and its not a specialized capital ship) or strip its fighters away with your fighters (or a flak-frigate) and use bombers to neutralize it. Really they aren't that hard to take down individually.

The value of these ships is twofold:
1. They are effective when used en-mass

2. They ease the logistics night mare and micro-managing of forming and maintaining a number of fleets. Instead of building a fleet of anti-fighter, frigate and capital ship units in the most effective ratio, you can take whatever specialized units you have on hand and back them up with these. Hence the term "backbone" of the fleet.

Of course by being "decent" at most fleet functions they are obviously not as powerful as the specialized units. In my opinion this is balanced by the aforementioned logistics problem it solves.

And I do feel it fits in well with the TEC doctrine of strength through numbers. Though not so much the cobbled-together-out-of-merchant-ships theme. Though it does say they are building capital ships specifically for battle so maybe it does fit in.

Having nebula that cancel out shields in the occasional rare star system would be a great addition to the game. It would force players to mix it up with fleet composition and upgrading paths in order to deal with battles that occur inside those systems.

Other possible effects that Nebula could have on ships might include; continuously drain AM, halt AM recharge, limit sight range on the tactical map, reduce weapon accuracy and damage, and so on)

*I know the orbiting planets are out, but it would have been cool if there were shield canceling nebula clouds in a few systems that planetary orbits would cross occasionally. Shields would be disabled during those periods of time when orbiting planets moved through the nebula. Attacks could be planned for when planets enter these clouds.

I still am unsure how battles are going to work out without sensors. Us military fanatics might have difficulty accepting tactical maps and battles using the 'Everything is seen' concept . By doing away with sensors on the tactical level, there will be a lot of maneuvering potential taken out of this game

The only other thing that worries me from the screen shots is that the tactical maps might be too small. I really, really hope the tactical maps don't force head on battles because of size constraint (I love tactical maneuvering). Small maps would also limit the usefulness of carriers and strike craft.

I can think of a few games that have outright sucked because of small maps. Please let this one be different.

Nebulas can be BIG emp.

Sounds interesting except, in the case of shields, this would create an imbalance. Losing shields would be disastrous for the Advent since their ships have much weaker hulls and rely heavily on shields for protection. Meanwhile the TEC wouldn't be at much of a disadvantage without their relatively weak shields.

to be truthful, nebula aren't that thick... they really would only create issues if you're trying to take pictures of your enemy's planet

psshaw

they could also make giant penguins randomly swallow your planet, but I'm quite sure thats not exactly game worthy.

That would be pretty cool! Maybe an Advent power? They can summon the Penguins: Destroyers of Worlds

(if you didn't catch it, not entirely serious there)

Even if nebula and various effects could be included in the editor, that would rock.

because nobody agrees with a knowitall?

It would be a lot of fun! And probably quite impressive to watch