only reason my marza died is because my fighters were trapped by vasari phasic traps, and  i didnt want to armistice at that point. You notice i killed his level 9 cap and routed the entire planet for the cost one of marza? If you noticed how fast my caps were leveling, easily replaced.

As for replacing my fleet, i never lost my fleet, my orgovs needed replacement, but that was about it.

kinda the point? You consider losing a single capitol ship on the offensive, as the game was ending, a weakness? You failed to point out they spent the last hour focusing on the marza and never killed it.

I posted that replay to back up the points I made in this thread. That high level TEC caps have game changing abilities, that TEC survivability(notice how long the marza took to die even without fighter support) is the best in the game, and TEC star base killing ability and star base add something the other races cant. (You gotta go all bombers to kill TEC star base, you cant build a assault fleet or you will lose it. You saw how well those mass bombers worked for my opponents)

By fleet replacement, I mean Ogrovs as you pointed out (personally, in such a scenario where mines were preventing a fleet from moving without taking considerable loses; I would have held position, waited for Arcovas instead of wasting Ogrovs to get through the mines, so as to not have to replace so many), and you also built a lot of Kodiaks too, both to maintain a critical mass.

I agree with what Darvin and Seleuceia have been saying, that it takes an early game advantage carried into the late game for TEC to compete with Advent and Vasari late game, as you demonstrated. A TEC early game advantage allows for the survival of TEC capital ships to powerful levels, due to the support of a critical mass TEC fleet, which in turn gives TEC survivability a boost; on the other hand, the TEC Argonev is no better than the Advent Transcencia or the Vasari Orkulus.

Oh, if we're talking a starbase without anything else on it, then five destra will do it no problem.  The basic starbase weapons won't be able to keep up with your regeneration.

That's a lot more effort than an Advent with a few shots of TK push or a Vasari with phasic traps or jam weapons needs to invest.  Again, TEC can be quite potent, but you have to put a lot more effort to countering things than Advent or Vasari at the later stages of the game, leaning on a larger fleet with better capital ships to prevail. 

I think everyone here is sold on the Sova as an early-game powerhouse.  Late-game, I'd take a Halcyon over it any day, though the Sova remains a combat powerhouse.

This is my point; TEC has a great early-game that allows them to flow into an overpowering steamroll in the mid-late game.  However, one to one their units just don't shine in the late-game anymore.  If you're up against an Advent or Vasari with comparable fleet size, tech level, and capital ship levels... well, I wouldn't put my money on TEC.

I never said they can't deal with these things.  What I'm saying is that Advent and Vasari have better support abilities to allow them to deal with strike craft en mass with considerably less effort.  TEC needs to put more resources into flaks and fighters, and needs more levels invested in their Kol to make it competitive.  If you want to claim that a combination of fighters, flaks, and mid-high level Kols is equitable with putting up three hangers for phasic traps, you're basically assuming you have a substantial economic lead that lets you far out-pace the Vasari's expenditures. 

My whole point is that TEC's late game is dependent on that presumption.  If you have that superior economy that lets you out-invest the opponent, you can perform a smack-down easy.  If you don't, you're going to have to cut corners and really outplay the enemy to pull out a win.

The difficulty Advent and Vasari have is primarily getting to the high-end techs and sufficiently large fleets for their uncapped abilities to start scaling well.  Once Advent has a battleball on the field and that tech is in place, keeping it online is relatively easy.  Same goes for Vasari lockdown.  As well, Advent and Vasari capital ships are much more competitive at level 1 than their TEC equivalents.

This is very much a TEC advantage - in the early and mid game.  Towards the late-game, Advent and Vasari in the hands of a skilled player should beat TEC handily if they're equally-sized command-wise.  While TEC's units remain very cost-effective (both in resource and command) they don't compete nearly as well in the presence of the other faction's support cruisers and mature capital ship combos.  A skilled Advent with an equally-sized fleet should steamroll TEC with a battleball.  TEC is great, but they need larger forces to give them the leeway to steamroll an enemy in spite of those late-game combos.  If you have the economic advantage to do it, then TEC is great.  My underlying point is that TEC is spread too thin if they don't have a significant economic edge.

The problem here is that you are winning because you are a good player, not because you are using TEC...given an equal amount of playing experience with all three factions, I would bet you'd do better with late game fleet tactics as Advent or Vasari because those factions have better late game fleets...

Obviously your experience and intuition with each faction as well as your style may prevent that from happening...but as a whole, seriously skilled players will do better with properly composed Advent/Vasari fleets in the late game...

The point here is not to claim that TEC sucks...it is merely to argue that TEC's late game fleet is overall inferior to Advent and Vasari...even if that inferiority is marginally so, given the geometric nature of combat mechanics it doesn't take a big advantage to seal up victory...that TEC may have advantages over Advent and Vasari does nothing to show that overall TEC is better or worse...upon weighing all aspects of each faction's fleet, Advent and Vasari are stronger than TEC...

This is not just "how things are"...this was an intentional part of the game design...TEC's inferior late game fleet per fleet supply is a serious weakness, but TEC also has a stronger economy to replenish losses and field larger fleets sooner (larger as in more fleet supply being used)...now, TEC may or may not be stronger overall in the late game, but specifically when it comes to fleet, TEC late game fleets are generally inferior for several reasons...

Answering OP about how to watch replays.

Change player name while watching to see player u want to watch. With this done you can see when and what kind of research hes doing. And If you are holding alt while battle is going on you can see orders hes issuing to his ships (Eg hold position, which ship is attacking what, movement orders.....) 

Not only the economy to replenish the losses but the infrastructure to do so HYPER quickly if you have the proper setup. With fully maxed Industrial Juggernaut and a Starbase with Max Construction bay and Sova with Rapid manufacturing you can literally rebuild a respectable fleet in a 2-3 minute time span. By my rough calc for example, you are building a Kodiak in 11.5 Seconds and a Percheron in 12.2 seconds. This is the strength of TEC, the money and infrastructure to pound you like a pressure cooker.

Never actually done this particular combo that I have described but I think it will work. I know that I have used Rapid Manufacturing to rapidly complete an Argonev Starbase in an enemy grav well. Sort of a pseudo-TEC Assault Deployment. Building a SB in enemy territory with 250% speed increase is REALLY nice.