Update on incendiary Shells...

Changed the line allowFirstSpawnerToStack from FALSE to TRUE...allows the ability to stack now, even from just one Marza...

The Marza has 3 weapons, and with a 15s duration on this ability the weapon cooldowns allow for an accumulation of about 6-8 instances of this buff on the target...with the current stats, this is about 21/31.5/42 extra DPS from just one Marza...multiple Marzas, and that number gets insane....also keep in mind that weapon cooldown decreases with each capital ship level (3% per level for the Marza), so this ability scales with the Marza's level...

For being a passive ability, I think those numbers are too high...I personally don't think a stacking limit is the way to go, but I'm open to arguments for that...I think a better approach is to either reduce the duration of incendiary shells or reduce the DPS values (currently 3/4.5/6)...

the reason advent is the weakest is becuase not just one ship was weakened, but several ships were weakened, plus vasari got buffed, resulting in big op of vasari...TEC is in the middle as always

Superfleet you are correct...the illum/scout nerf was devastating to the Advent, and only the Vasari got a decent amount of buffs (poor TEC, they always get shafted)...

Here's the thing with balancing...

Now, a few tweaks here and there could balance the factions, as in no faction would be overall better than any other...however, this doesn't necessarily make the game the best it can be....

I'm hoping to balance the game so the factions are equal, but likewise balance the game so that individual elements are balanced...capital ships, frigates, defenses, etc...

The problem with this is, how do you get people to agree?  You can't...no matter how good any mod is, the odds of it being universally accepted are slim because once you try to "balance" the game, everyone has their own idea of what the game should actually be like....

Though right now the focus is on capital ship abilities, there have been many posts regarding other changes...the consensus falls apart as you move farther and farther away from military tactics, to the point where a community mod may be impossible...

I'm hoping that by balancing the capital ships, it will be a start in the right direction...I'll of course work on balancing beyond that, but it will likely be with less consensus, to the point where it may have to become a separate mod....

This is why it doesn't stack; I've punched those numbers before, it's quite clear that IC never intended for the Marza to have that kind of power.  We need a secondary function on this ability.

We're opening a can of worms here, no matter how you want to go about this.  Be prepared for discussion.

I'm with you here all the way; we don't need perfect balance, just a state that encourages variety. 

Magnetize....

There is some concern that an infinite target count for this ability could be a problem...however, HerrPinguin noticed something I had not, and that is the finish condition on this ability...apparently, killing a certain number of SC (currently 8/12/16) also ends this ability...

Here's a proposition for magnetize...let the ability have an infinite target count but change the finish condition so there is a reasonable limit on how many SC can be destroyed...a late game situation could allow for 50 squadrons of SC (if not more)...if those were Vasari bombers, that would be 150 individual SC...advent fighters, and that could be 450 individual SC (could even be more)...

Since this ability got a reduced antimatter cost and has a very fast cooldown, I think the finish condition should be changed to 25/50/75...best case scenario (late game, lvl 3 magnetize), you eliminate half of the 50 Vasari bomber squadrons...worse case scenario (early game, lvl 1 magnetize) you wipe out about 3 Advent fighter squadrons...

Right now the damage upon impact of each SC is 25...that is 625/1250/1875 damage (potentially) in a period of about 15 or less seconds (max of 125 DPS)...given how powerful SC are and how bad of a loss 75 SC could be to the enemy, I'm thinking that damage should be toned down a bit...

I propose changing the finish conditions on magnetize from 8/12/16 SC destroyed to 25/50/75 SC destroyed...in addition, I suggest changing the damage done to the targeted ship from 25 damage/SC to 15...suggestions are welcome....

The problem with magnetize is that I don't see any way to make it scale effectively.  Part of the issue is that anything that's an all-or-nothing instant kill is extremely difficult to balance.  This is only made more difficult by the vast difference between a Vasari bomber squad (3 members) and an Advent fighter squad (9 members).  Your 25 number is a mere three Advent fighter squads, while it's a whopping eight Vasari bomber squads that get knocked out. 

Simply tinkering around with this number doesn't change the fact that knocking out squads wholesale is a big deal in the early-game but isn't going to make a dent late game.

Does it not have a time limit on the pull buff?

Add one if there isn't already one, and shorten it. The pull isn't quite instant, it pulls the strikecraft towards the target and then when they 'collide' they are destroyed. Try to see if the destroy/pull stops working if it times out before they reach the magnetized ship.

I agree, but the ability is what it is...and it is also an ability interrupt so it still has its uses....

I've tested this and as soon as the ability stops, the SC can't die...in fact, if the finish condition number of SC do die, the ability stops instantly even if it hasn't reached its duration...

I understand that...

How about buff it obnoxiously at lv.3, because you cannot make lv.3 until a lv.5 Dunov at least. It might do something for you late game.

I know you all probably dont care, but I brainstormed a few ideas for magnetize.

Idea #1 Make it apply an overtime buff to nearby strike craft with DPS at like 10/15/35 DPS to all strikecraft within range of magnetized ship.

Idea #2 Have a 'telekinetic pull' type ability, pulls strikecraft in while doing instant damage instead of overtime. The pulled strikecraft have a slowdown buff, probably slowed to 0 speed, acceleration, etc. Not really destroying them, but sticking them to the ship like a magnet. For good measure, it might be a good idea to add a weapons disabled buff so they cant attack whilst stuck.

Idea #3 Make magnetize a GRG type ability disabler, and make Flak burst stronger to compensate for the loss of a strikecraft killing ability.

Idea #4 Make magnetize an overtime damager to the targeted vessel, and cancel abilities, like antimatter detonate. Also buff flak burst like I said before.

Idea #5 Make magnetize generate a 'no-ability zone' that sticks to the targeted ship and cancels all abilities within range. Quite an interesting idea. Not too long though, or it would be even more unbalanced than it already sounds.

I just looked over the 0.20 list of changes.  I don't have time to give much specific feedback tonight, and a lot of it will depend on how the testing goes this weekend..

But I want to suggest a note of caution on changing too many things at once, especially as the changes seem to be picking up speed.   I'm not saying that any of these new changes will be unbalanced per se, but I think simpler changes will help.. well.. simplify the testing.  I'm sure you've spent more time thinking about each of the abilities than I have, but it's hard for me to predict the interactions between so many new variables all at once.  Similarly, I think more people may try (and hopefully adopt) the mod if they can immediately understand what you've done in terms of 'small buff', 'big buff', 'small nerf', or 'big nerf' for each ship/ability.  If you do a lot of combined nerfing/buffing to the different components of a single ability, it gets harder to see the net change. 

I like the concept of your regen-from hits on Animosity, but I don't think we've even see how potent the original animosity can be after you've 'fixed' its biggest flaw.  It's already somewhat unique in its ability to extend a defensive bubble around a large number of surrounding units (by way of drawing fire).  Your regen bonus seems like an extraordinary tanking ability (it's a bit like armor or mitigation since it scales proportionally as the number of attackers increase), but this is the only Bship that can tank *and* literally force the enemy to focus on it.

Part of me thinks that the Radiance should at least need to combine two separate abilites (e.g., Animosity+Energy Absorbing armor) to produce this ultimate tanking combo that no other fleet can match.  That's also why I was advocating for a range increase on Animosity instead of this attacks-to-regen boost.  A range increase would just make the ability better at what it's supposed to do without adding this new unknown into the mix.

And I think the Radiance still has an AM-spending bottleneck, especially now that you've upped the cooldown on Animosity and increased energy absorption's effects.  I previously advocated for a simple hull/shield regen on animosity because it seemed like the ship needed more outlets for its AM, and a weak regen buff would still encourage some use when it was out of battle and be balanced to be inefficient and of minimal impact when the ship was drawing heavy fire.  It's not as interesting as the change you made, but I think a basic +5/10/15 hull/s boost might work.

I'm also unsure about some of the AM scaling and range changes on other ships.. (e.g., on the Dunov, especially with that sniper EMP).

That said, I'm still excited about the prospect of some of my own pet ideas that change the way abilities work.. (I'd still like to set up a turn speed buff for Cleansing Brilliance, probably in combination with a longer firing period so it can activate and then drag the beam across swathes of the enemy fleet)..

So I can't criticize you for exploring your more interesting ideas.

PS: I like the changes to magnetize.  The dmg + max SC change is the perfect way to buff its anti-SC functionality without overbuffing it into a major source of DPS.

Now both of these ideas are actually very interesting...I'll be honest, I kind of like them...

I do care   I like your idea #5...of course, the ability would have to be toned down in some other area if that change was made....certainly something worth considering...

You are right, there are many changes and without having been the one who suggested them it might be hard to understand why they were made...however, when testing each player is going to go into the game with the mindset of building a capital ship or two that's been buffed...

For example, instead of a double Skirantra start, I built a space egg (tried the new colonize) and a vulkoras (tried phase missile swarm) when I tested a previous version with Darvin, waxworks, and cykur...even though two abilitie were changed, I was still able to get a good sense of how the changes affected the game...

Instead of building two skirantras or two halcyons or two sovas, hopefully players will try unique combinations (rush with a marauder with subversion like you would with a sova) so that these caps can really be tested...

For many abilities, if say, the antimatter cost is 70, then I changed it to 60/70/80...part of this is balance, but part of this is also for the purpose of testing...a lower antimatter cost at low levels allows them to be used more often...I'd rather have an ability spammed and found to be too powerful than an ability spammed and the player has a hard time telling if it did anything...some of these antimatter costs will likely be raised after the testing phase...usually its easier to nerf a powerful ability by increasing its antimatter cost (it can be used less often) than by nerfing its affects...

Some of the range changes were done for similar reasons, it will allow testers to use the ability a lot easier without risking their cap...again, I'd rather have someone say "EMP is pretty powerful, but I think just reducing the range will make it easier to counter" than say "I never really got to use EMP and test it because I didn't want to lose my Dunov"...again, some of those ranges will be reduced after the testing...

Players are going to be testing out of their comfort zone since they won't be using the typical carrier/colonizer start...I don't want testers holding back those caps because they are too afraid to lose them, so giving abilities more range/less antimatter is part of the testing....I'm not saying I super buffed abilities just so they could be tested, but I'd rather tweak a range/antimatter cost than try to tweak the buff/debuff/effects...

Of all the changes, animosity is probably my biggest concern...you're probably right, it will never run out of antimatter because of cooldowns...but, this hull regen idea is interesting and I'd like to try it....it may be changed, but at least we'll know if hull regen is a good idea or not...

Very true...definitely something worth keeping in mind....

Have clairvoyance reveal mines at the location, and increase bombing damage.

Make the 'no-ability zone' Magnetize the Dunov's ultimate ability, and make Flux field a multilevel ability.

Now that is an interesting idea, Clairvoyance revealing all mines...in MP you don't see mines very often...but, if this mod continues, mines are likely going to get buffed and, well, that could be really useful...

What do you all think?

Magentize having any AoE ability interrupt instead of just interrupting the target ship?  Might have to tone down the number of SC destroyed then, but, it might make this ability more useful and more balanced...think about it, right now destroying x number of SC hurts the Vasari a lot more than the advent...but an AoE ability interrupt would hurt advent more because both iconus guardian and both domina subjugator abilities can be interrupted...TEC would be somewhere in the middle because they have less SC per squadron than Advent but more than Vasari...likewise, one of the cielo's abilities (Embolden) is interruptable...Vasari abilities are all instant actions except Distortion field on the Subverter...the file indicates this is interruptable as well, though I've never noticed this....this might balance this ability so it is equally potent against all 3 factions...hell, it could even be the perfect counter to repulsion or subverters...

Also, what if Clairvoyance revealed all mines?  I know it would still need another effect (something probably related to planetary bombardment) but this ability needs every small bonus it can get...and this one actually makes sense too...

I was thinking more along the lines of SOME of the mines, not all.

I was also thinking that you should get rid of the SC magnetize effect if making it an AoE ability interrupt.

Yup, got a Radiance to level 10 last night against the AI, and in none of the battles did it run out of antimatter (I should point out that its early battles were in a star, but once I got energy absorption at level two I doubt it would matter much), and I was spamming detonate, animosity and even cleansing brilliance. Indeed I kind of liked how it turned out as I felt I could actual afford to use both animosity and detonate antimatter, which I think was the intention with energy absorption IMO. Brilliance still feels a bit underwhelming if the target already has shield mitigation up (and even without it, it can only reduce an intact destra to about 200-300 hull points, or about 1800 total damage).

I actually really like this idea. Even if human players don't use mines, the AI most certainly does, and homing mines are the biggest pain to get rid of in the game I think. It also fits with the ability quite well.

Also about the testing, is it carried out like a regular multiplayer games or do we just kind of expand to our nearby planets and then start sending fleets at each other to see who wins, but don't try to take each other out.

Well, when I played with Darvin, Cykur, and Waxworks, we played more or less like a regular multiplayer game...but, we tried new capital ships....

For example, in one of the games, me and Darvin were allies...he built a Kol and I built a Jarrasul/Vulkoras...the other team had a Kol (maybe some other ships, can't remember)...so even though we played a normal game, we used capital ships that had been changed....the idea is to see how these ships would perform in SP and MP (obviously in this case, MP), not in perfect setup conditions...since carriers and colonizers are so instrumental to expansion and early rushing, its important to see how the other caps work out in these same things...

Of course, just throwing fleets at each other also is not out of the question...but some things (like a Maurader with subversion/distort gravity) are part of rushing/overall strategy and cannot be tested in a "control" environment...

I disagree on both points.  I think vision of all mines is fine, You still have to have a fleet there to take them out.

The point of Magnetize is to get rid of strikecraft.  If it doesn't destroy strikecraft, then there is no point to the ability period.

I think magnatize needs to have a very large range, but not a very high amount of strikecraft destroyed.  It would pair up with a Kol with flak burst to take the rest out.  I don't think a Cap should be able to take out 200+ supply of strikecraft.

Cykur pulled a Sova first, brought in a Marza during one of the middle battles, and the Kol came towards the end (it was over by that point anyways).  The Kol worked well once I had it to level 6, but the Sova was definitely outperforming it before that point.

The problem with using Clairvoyance to reveal mines is that it'd do this job so well as to make mines worthless while still being no better at its regular role.  This is the worst of both worlds, driving an already sub-par choice to a useless state, and in effect leaving clairvoyance no better off.

Beyond that, I'd agree that animosity, clairvoyance and magnetize are probably our top priorities right now.

Just to vote:

I like the increased duration on Clairvoyance.  I'll state the obvious and say that vision on a planet for 240 seconds is much better than vision for 10 or 30 seconds..

That doesn't mean that another buff isn't needed, but I think the simple increase in view time makes it a great way to first check and then continually watch a (few) planet(s).  That makes it a lot easier to locate enemy fleets and observe their movements.  If it could be paired with a siege damage buff (something the Advent seem to need) then it would be even better.

A lot of people have complained about this and asked for it, so I think its the way to go...

Revealing mines still is not a bad idea, but Darvin makes a good point

So it's something to definitely think about...but, another buff is going to be needed whether revealing mines is implemented or not....

Clairvoyance definitely needs a secondary effect.  I have no doubts about this.

The problem is that duration isn't worth very much.  Usually for scouting purposes you only really need a single snapshot anyways.  If anything, I'd be more inclined for a shorter cooldown and antimatter cost so it can be used more often rather than just buffing its duration.  In any case, I don't think any such tinkering will "solve" the problem, and we need a secondary effect.

Yes, a lower AM and cooldown would probably be better.  I guess the value of these two approaches may depend, in part, on the size of the galaxy being used for the game.  Part of me likes the longer cooldown because it forces you to be a bit choosier about where you use the ability, and I always like designs that force players to make tougher decisions.  I like the idea of only being able to observe a few of the enemy's rear worlds and thus being forced to guess about what's going on elsewhere..  But I agree, that's less useful than quick snapshots of many worlds..

Anyway, it needs to be buffed so people really want to use it before we worry about restricting its use for gameplay.

I've been thinking about the issue of ability ranges.  I certainly like some abilities being 'sniper' shots from beyond weapon's range, but I also like the idea of forcing people to close in with their cap ships.  Among other things, I'm afraid that long ranged abilities just feed into the LRF-spam/strike craft swarm routine.  Of course, you made a very good point: It's just too hard for people to use these abilities when they have to charge into a swarm of enemy LRF fire.

So I think now might be a good time to start testing some of the previously discussed nerfs to anti-medium vs capital dmg (and/or to LRF speed, as I think Darvin suggested).  If LRFs aren't quite so deadly then LRF spam should decline a bit, and that might make it easier to use the newly buffed cap abilities.

I don't know if you were still planning on making those changes, but I think a small adjustment to LRFs could have a very positive effect..  I was also thinking of testing a nerf to anti-medium vs very heavy, and a buff to anti-heavy vs very heavy and capital armor (to boost light frigate use in the later game, as UE Carbon mentioned in the other thread). 

I was just throwing ideas out, you don't have to use them.

If you want alternate ideas, I have them.

Make clairvoyance have a very quick flash of vision, like 5 secs or something like that, and have it able to cast upon the gravwell that the Revelation is in to make it balance with a secondary buff.

If you want a cool idea, have it apply a slight culture increase to that planet.

If you want a useful idea, go with the bombing damage increase.

If you want a different idea, have it reveal a limited number of mines in the selected gravwell. The reason I liked this idea was because scouts are horrid against homing mines. If your scout accidentally gets too close to one mine, POOF, he is gone.

If you want a reasonable idea, make clairvoyance a 'designate target' type ability. None of this "planet peeking" nonsense.

Magnetize:

Which aspect of Magnetize do you wish to preserve? Both the canceler and the strikecraft killer? Or just one?

Make it a damage over time type ability if you love the strikecraft killing ability so much.

Make it a 'no-ability' field if you like that.

How about my other idea? I could code the magnetize to stick strikecraft to the targeted ship, disabling them and slightly damaging them, like phase-out fighters on the Vasari hangar defense. I could also make a buff that if the SC die, they do damage to the magnetized ship.

I think that these ideas are much better than the AUTOMATIC SC KILL THAT IT IS CURRENTLY, and are easier to balance.

I dont really care if my ideas are shot down, but you really should consider changing a few abilities from their current state, if the ability is COMPLETELY different from the original ability, but is balanced, that is good.

Try breaking away from making the original sins' abilities balanced, and change them to something more manageable.

If this sounds like I am angry, I just want anyone to know that I am not.

HerrPinguin, I could quote parts of your last post, but everything you said is pretty much dead on

We are running into the stage where the capital ships can't be balanced much more because abilities aren't the only things that need to be addressed...and this, unfortunately, is where we are going to start running into major problems...

Pretty much everyone agrees that Scramble Bombers is OP...but even with that majority opinion, exactly how to change that ability was not easy...

We can all recognize that Gauss Rail Gun needs to be fixed, but there are so many different thoughts on this ability...and in the grand scheme of things GRG is a pretty straight forward ability since we're mostly just tweaking the numbers...

Now take something like Animosity...or Clairvoyance...or Subversion...and suddenly it becomes pretty much near to impossible to reach any sort of consensus...two or three people might agree on an idea, and everyone else might say "Well, it's not the best but I can live with it"...that is likely a best case scenario...

Now, extend this to things beyond capital ship abilities...how do we make capital ships more resilient?  Some people don't think they even need to be buffed at all...some want to focus on LRFs or bombers...some want to buff the damage, or HP, or shield mitigation of all the caps...there are ideas on boosting their speeds, number of weapon banks, and the list goes on...

If we were to try and fix LRFs and bombers, how would we do it?  For LRFs you have armor type, speed, DPS...with bombers you have HP, damage, armor type, hull regeneration, DPS of fighters and flak, damage types of fighters and flak...and both of these issues also involve phase missiles...should they be nerfed?  Should they be left the same?  Should they bypass less shields but do more raw damage?  The list goes on...

We are coming to the point where people may have very different philosophical views on what direction the game should be taken...and this is going to make consensus very difficult...in addition, it will pretty much eliminate any chance of this mod being widely adapted...game balance is one thing, but going through every element of the game to encourage diversity of strategy while maintaining (or improving) balance is very different...it isn't just balancing the game, its evolving it...this isn't inherently a bad thing, but it's important we don't kid ourselves in what we're doing...

This is going to be a long post, so bear with me....

First, lets categorize the capital ship abilities into priority levels:

Level 1 - These abilities need to be reworked and undergo major changes at the conceptual level

• Animosity
• Guidance
• Clairvoyance
• Colonize (Jarrasul)

Level 2 - These abilities need some significant balancing, but conceptually are fine

• Gauss Rail Gun
• Shield Restore
• Magnetize
• Incendiary Shells
• Scramble Bombers
• Subversion
• Phase Missile Swarm

Level 3 - These abilities may need some small tweaking but are more or less fine

• Flak Burst
• Adaptive Forcefield
• Finest Hour
• Missile Batteries
• Heavy Strikecraft
• EMP
• Missile Barrage
• Energy Absorption
• Cleansing Brilliance
• Vertigo
• Vengeance
• Domination
• Provoke Hysteria
• Distort Gravity
• Phase Out Hull
• Assault Specialization

Level 4 - These abilities are already fine and probably don't require any work

• Embargo
• Rapid Manufacturing
• Colonize (Akkan)
• Ion Bolt
• Targeting Uplink
• Armistice
• Flux Field
• Radiation Bomb
• Raze Planet
• Detonate Antimatter
• Telekinetic Push
• Adept Drone Anima
• Energy Aura
• Anima Tempest
• Colonize (Progenitor)
• Malice
• Shield Regeneration
• Resurrection
• Concentration Aura
• Reverie
• Power Surge
• Jam Weapons
• Disruptive Strikes
• Volatile Nanites
• Repair Cloud
• Microphasing Aura
• Replicate Forces
• Gravity Warhead
• Nano-Disassembler
• Drain Planet
• Stabilize Phase Space
• Deploy Siege Platform
• Disintegration

As you can see, a very good portion of the abilities need little or no work...but some of them need a lot of work...

Here is another list of things that may need to be addressed...these are thing just off the top of my head, and I'm sure everyone has things I haven't thought of to add to this list...I have tried to include things I don't necessarily think are an issue but others do...keep in mind that not all these things need to be changed, but all may need to be considered in order to get the desired effect:

• Capital Ships - DPS, # of weapon banks, HP, shield mitigation, speed
• LRFs - DPS, spead, stats of anti-medium weaponry
• Bombers - DPS, stats of anti-very heavy weaponry, hull regeneration, HP, DPS of fighters and flak, stats of anti-light weaponry (for fighters vs bombers), construction rate
• Phase Missiles - shield bypass, weapon types of ships like sentinels and Vasari fighters, power against Capital ships
• Phasic Trap - Duration, cooldown, antimatter cost, range
• Distortion Field - Cooldown, antimatter cost, duration, range of debuff
• Scouts - DPS, particularly against LRFs
• Cielo Command Cruiser - Designate Target, Embolden
• Illuminator - DPS, ratio of frontal to side DPS
• Skirmishers - DPS, may need a buff depending on how/if LRFs are weakened
• Deliverance engine - Duration, more secondary buffs, cooldown
• Kostura - Duration, damage to structures, damage to ships
• TEC late game power - God knows what, but TEC needs it
• Advent early game power - Depends on how Vasari/TEC are affected, may or may not need to be addressed
• PIRATES - Definitely needs some work (DesConnor I promise I'll look at your mod sometime)
• Refineries - Increased productivity of refinery ships, reduce cost
• Resource Focus - higher bonus, maybe needs a conceptual change
• Colony Pods - needs to be more economical (at least to the point where it's worth considering)...
• Induced Reverence - needs to be more economical
• Repair Maw - I've hear mixed things on this, may or may not need to be looked at
• Rarely used technology - Communal labor and several others
• Pacts and Envoy bonuses - may need some balancing, Vasari/TEC packs are very strong while Advent packs are somewhat weaker

Oh my...I'm sure I forgot some things, but the point is, there's a lot to be addressed...

Since we are at the point where philosophy on how the game should be is likely to disrupt any chance of consensus from here on out, how to proceed needs to be addressed...

There are A LOT of areas that need to be looked at and improved...a lot of people are very interested in being involved in such changes, but unfortunately the focus has been on capital ships for a long time and I think some people have been turned off by this...I know there are lots of ideas out there for other things...therefore, I encourage others to start discussions on the changes they want to see...

Some things are entirely independent of other items on the list...refineries, pirates, useless technologies, super weapons...all those things could be worked on and be entirely independent of how the capital ships are changed...I'm going to see this through to the end, and if I'm the only person making changes or using this mod, then so be it...yet, there's no reason for others to not start their own discussions if they don't feel like waiting for this thread to move on...

If this is going to be a community effort, I think several areas need to start being addressed now instead of just one area...people who aren't interested in capital ships yet interesting in changing other areas should start those discussions...this can be a community effort, this can be the work of a few individuals, or this can be several works by several individuals or groups...but it depends on what everyone else is willing to do...

Right now there is about 5-6 people (that I know of) that have been focusing and testing the capital ship changes...I want to thank all of you for your ideas and willingness to test...