i agree the hanger bays too have too much tact slots. I believe it should be hanger bays that hold 3 strike craft for Tec and vasari for 4 tacticals and advent get one that gets 5 for 6 tacticals. That wasy it would be 9 for 12 and 10 for 12. In my mind that's pretty even but i think it should be way more expensive than a carrier. The thing is that having 3 for 5 isn't practical expecially if advent are to have more they would need one taht would get 6 for 10 or something. Either you need to double tactical slots to make everything more percise. (Like teh support for ships) Make a turret 2 slots and a hanger bay 7 and hold 3. There needs to be a finer ballance. It may be confusing for a while but it would work. That way instead of 35 tacticals hoolding 8 4 tactical hanger bays it could hold 10 7 tactical hanger bays. Much more practical and much more balanced.

P.S. Sorry for being unorganized.

Its good to see someone else feels like I do. You guys keep saying static defenses are made to only stop small raiding parties but why not use them to defend. I would like my defenses to stop a medium fleet. Raids can happen on undefended worlds. Its strategy all about where and how much you spend. It takes alot of resources to build up all your tac slots I think you should have something worthwhile in return. BTW my opinions are geared for mp games. Yeah when you play against the ai it is dumb and you can clump all defenses in one spot but if you play a person they go to the other side where there is no defense. Saying spreading out your turrets is a bad strategy makes no sense. The last game I played I had 25 hosts in my fleet along with 30 somethin illums ,3 caps,guardians, disciples,and thier other support. Now 3 hanger bays are totally worthless here. Yes I know thats a big fleet but 5 hosts could defeat 3 hanger bays.

Does anyone else see this as a problem? The differences between factions seem very superficial and designed mainly to look initially different without having much of an actual distinction in gameplay. In the end it barely matters if you play with Vasari or Advent carriers or hangars as the result is the same for the same amount of money and space.

You'll probably love Entrenchment then

Strikecraft tend to be better in mass....I tend not to build any, or I want at least a couple.  And I also put fighters in them as well, because they can pick off scouts trying to cross my systems, or they can destroy light siege raiders.  You need a heck of a lot of defenses to stand up to a concentrated fleet.

Turrets are definately better than supporting each other when concentrated, but I almost never build them like this...I spread them out a bit, because I intend for them to beef up my fleet in defense.  I can't tell you how many times I have flown around a turret cluster, burned the world from the other side, even colonizing it occasionally, and left the turret/repair bay cluster intact.

I think all of the strikecraft are pretty comparable and effective.  One of the main things I find handy with Advent is that the carriers are easier to retreat before they are killed because they can take such a beating.

Well...5 drone hosts are practically a raiding fleet in themselves...but if they were using bombers to destroy structures, 3 hanger bays fight fighters, backed by a couple of repair, would go a long way towards neutralizing them.  If the drone hosts bring fighters, they can certainly neutralize your fighters, but it is going to take them a very long time to destroy structures.

Either way, this should give you time to react and get some reinforcements in system.  Drone Hosts / Carriers ARE more expensive than their races equivalent hangar bays, and while the Hangars can't move, they have a lot more structure to kill...so I think the balance is very reasonable considering the cost outlay.

Eh, not really.  Structures don't have shield mitigation, so you can't do a  HP to HP comparison.  The real benefit to static defense is that you don't need to further cripple your economy by increasing your fleet supply.  Static defenses are strictly one time outlay's.  Fleet supply is a continual pain in the butt.

well i just noticed one advantage advent has in strikecraft. The rapture Battlecruiser gives all strikecraft a 30% increase in damage.So if you had 30 squads it would really be like almost havin 40 damage wise. Thier lack of hp and armor is still weak.Db0 that is exactly how I feel. I wanted to see some difference to play on.

True, shield mitigation effectively triples a ships survivability, but the hangar bays have almost three times as much armor and the corresponding structure to take advantage of it.  You make a good point about the supply cap, all I was trying to say was they were reasonably priced for the units they field and the abuse they can take.  If defensive structures got significantly more powerful, everyone would be forced to turtle and games would take forever.

Completely agree, for their cost, they are worth it.  If it weren't for the fact that you have to upgrade your planets to get more tactical slots, I think a lot more people would be playing defensively though.  But true, they get more armor and more HP, but not so much for the hangers (the turrets are pure armor though).  Anyway, I think it's balanced.