Actually the Build penalty has been great , and I still use carriers as a means of making my oppoenent overbuild flaks which i can just overcome with superior lrfs.

I think the balance is fine..

Maybe 50% for bombers tho. THAT WOULD BE ACE

first:

when did this happen? are you talking about 1.17? did it JUST come out...?

If so, your complaining before the official change log thread... wowzies...

perhaps it makes carriers more stratigic... perhaps it will make it a better startigy to dock your strike craft untill you can either distract the enemy flacks, or you move in some units (preety much anything) to keel the flacks.  Bombers can kill flacks too.

Since flack can kill squads of fighters easily, and carriers were--and i am just guessing here so don't rail me for this--used mainly for fighters.  Now about the only point for carriers is for bombers--whcich is what i use light carriers for already. It would be nice to reduce the nerf because then it would be more reasonable to build carriers again to help counter lrfs

you people whine too much. first everyone wanted a nerf on the carriers now you want a boost. jesus christ make up your mind.btw flaks worked if you used them right before anyway.

actually, as far as I could determine, the penalty IS only 25%. if you look at those carriers with enemy forces in the grav well, it will say 'strike craft build rate 75%'. that means it is AT 75%, not reduced BY 75%. this is evidenced by the fact that a light carrier under attack displays 38% which is exactly those 75% times the 50% you get when under attack (which was there right from the start and affects pretty much everything that can house squads). if you guys say even those 25% are too much, maybe because of a similar buff to flak, ok. I'm not a balance expert, but at least let's get the facts right. and I am pretty damn sure that I understood this correctly.

also, where do you get the info that 1.02 (talking about entrenchment versions here) changed anything? I checked the 1.02 log and it says nothing about changes either to flak or light carriers. big changes came with 1.01, while 1.02 was mostly fixing some issues like the emergency government upgrade and ai surrender. if somethat was in fact changed and it was not listed in the change log, then let me say, this makes me unhappy. then, either you publish rough changelogs without going too much into details or you publish everything and every balance change. but then, the past logs documented changes pretty well, so I'd be surprised if a flak buff got overlooked in the log.

now, if I am mistaken, please go ahead and correct me.

Wrong people called for a buff of the flak frigates by a large majoraty. Only a tiny minoraty wanted a nerf on carriers.

Would not. Remember advent alos have LFs. They also ahve 3 SC wing per carriers. It would demand advent players to amke choises like Vasari and TEC players thou.

But part of the Advent's strength is that its fleet benefits synergistically from being in close proximity to the capital ships and guardians having various range-limited abilities that buff up and peserve the fleet.

you cant counter LRF / FLAK combo with scouts,flak eat mass scouts for breakfast.....only answer to this is kodiaks with their own suppor.but then we have the fagvent repulsing them away...

OH btw.AI in this is game not just bad,or horrible bad.IT SUCKS.CAPITAL SHIPS WHEN REPULSED FROM THE DIRECTION THEY TRY TO MOVE TO - START TO ACT IDIOTIC AND KEEP CRASHING INTO THE REPULSE BARRIER WHICH IS DEATH.AI AND PATHFINDING SUCKS ASS.

Jix is right, it'd screw up the Advent pretty bad (the fleet dispersal thing).

If you did something like that, you'd also have to introduce an option to change the formation of your fleet (ie: position of what genre of ship goes where) - just one pre-set formation wouldn't cut it anymore. While this would make for some nice/interesting variety, it would also unfortunately fudge the balance of the game right out the window (not to mention drastically increase the need for micromanagement skills, and thus make the game less accessible to some customers), and be way too much of a p.i.t.a. to solve.

So to that effect: I veto your motion, Darvin3.

-Itharus

The thing is GoaFan77 since fighters are so easily destroyed, you don't need to worry about killing the carriers. you can kill his first wave of fighters off pretty wuick then every few minutes you get a wave of squadrins with 1 fighter. What is the point of trying to kill the carrier if it cant hurt your fleet? By using flack in your fleet carriers just become wastes of fleet points, nothing else.

Really i would much rather have flack suporrting my fleet because it over counters the 1 most used counter to lrms. If they waste their money on carriers I laugh at them. just because they just wasted money on a ship that wont help them one bit.

That would be fine with me. If the ship is actually under fire then yeah slap on a build rate penalty. The crew is trying to keep the ship alive with repairs and not building fighters. Sounds good!!

I would be okay with this too, if we really need to do anything with the carriers. Derek's idea would be harder to implement (and what do you mean by engaged, getting shot at or just near enemy ships).

And top Vasari, so what if all your fighters get shot? You just retreat them where you have a star base waiting and they are free to regenerate their fighters and then they just come back. Every time they do this they will probably destroy some of your ships but they can easily escape without losing a carrier (unless you build several phase jump inhibitors, but even then they can probably blow them up before you can destroy very many of them).