homefleet

So in the end, under your ideal Tumbler, how much less damage will the bombers and fighters do then that of a HC. Because if they do more, then what is the point of bring HC along. The carriers(i.e.artiller) are normaly near the grav. well, and so can have an easy time to run away(one of the old problems with this game). The reason that tanks worked well in other RTS, is that the artiller that they closed to attack, where slow, low hitpoint machines that where easy to destory at close range. So

The main problem with that ideal is that there is no sense in puttiing resources into culture, as any military victory would remove any culture victroy. If I put resources into culture and win a culture victroy, it would be use less under you ideal, as one military victory would lead to a military and culture victory. All I'm saying is that the culture, should give more of and edge to your side if you put more resoures into it, instead of the military side. This means that if you lose a military

After seeing a lot of post about carriers vs close combat ships, I have come up with the ideal of combing LRM with carriers, and making them one ship. I know this is a major game change, but this is the ideal. Carriers are long range warship, and LRM are middile range warships. By putting them together, you would have a long and middile range warship. In other words just give the carriers the long range weapons of the LRM. This would mean that in a comb. arms fleet battle, that the c

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the question or the point that you are trying to make.

The super unit is already in the game(captial ships), but the problem is that it take so much to increase there powers and assault power.

So we have different ways of fixing the same problem. You way is increae damage so the you have high damage output and less protection close up, and my is that you have lower damage output, but are able to buff the protection, when the enemy close the gap. Two answers to the same problem. But this would mean that if the enemy is close up and your fighters still hit like "a tone of bricks", what is there form keeping you form make it a high damage output at close range, which would result in high

Yes it would count, as well as the repair cloud, but I think he look for more of how to improve the long/close range combat fleet mix.

I think you still don't understand what I said tumbler. What you said is right and from the other post I have readed, you are also right there. The problem I trying to point out, is that there seems to me that there are three type of fleets. Long range fleets: Make up of carriers that launch there fighter and withdraw when in close combat. Close combat: any fleet fleet with no carriers, that run up to there enemy to get into close combat. long/close range fleets: Ships

This is a good ideal, but need to be tied in more with game, then an add on. I'm with Williamnight on the ideal of adding Culture as part of the ground battles. Instead of making you take ground forces or orbital bombardment, you should make it so ground forces are supported by orbital bombardment. Other wise it nothing more then a Galactic Civilizations 2 clone. But most of all it needs to be tied into the culture system. Right now as it stands, Sins(no offense) is a RTS with 4X elements in it,

This website "https://www.sinsofasolarempire.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page" has info on all most of the ships. If you go to each capital ships, there is a link to what each of there abilities do, as well as to some level what they do at each level.

So is it just me or is what I said in my last post wrong, because I think that the true problem is that you can't use long range and close range combat together.

You have a good ideal there, and it one of the problems with the carriers in this game. That why there are about 4 post out there about using long range carriers and close combat ships. If you what, I can post what I think the "incentives" should be. But the main problem, is that the long range carriers and the close combat ships, can't seem to support each other at any ranges. Which forces you to build a carrier spam fleet. or a balanced close combat fleet.

I think that the main problem with carriers, that no one is focuing on in any of the post, is what is there function of a carrier in a combined fleet. If you look at it, the support and heavy cruisers work best at close range combat, making them the perfect comb. arms fleet. But the carriers are a different story. The carriers fight at long range, which is out of range of the support abilities of support cruisers, and out of range of fire support form the heavy cruisers. If you do close

Thanks for answering me back, SmackSim. Do you think that the reason "the game is in the bag" when you vs AI, is because it does not us it cruisers class well. Also I would like the 4X side in sins to be a little stonger too. One of the problems of the Defense Platforms, is there limit range(and they can't move), It would be nice and increase diversity, to have one faction only with hangers, another with mobile defense platforms, and one with attack troops that are powered by y

Also keep in your first capital ship is free, and the one you take, can effect your fleet. Just as a note, it the type of ships in your fleet, that effect the outcome of any battle. So when you do spend on your militay, make sure you understand how to spend.

SmackSim Which cruisers do you find "not necessary", thougth there are abilities on some, like the Serevun Overseer's Mobile phase Dection which I find uesless after some tech upgrades. Also do you have any ideals to fix these fillers?

So now that everone has found a way to have planet defense counter pirate attacks, does any one find the raider xenophobia to be useful to the Vasari? Also do you guy think that there are any other useless techs that need to be fixed?

So does any one have a mixed fleet of heavy combat and offensive support Cruisers in there well balanced fleet, or am I the only one.

So it is most a mix of spam and balance fleet? So where the line in which a fleet is a spam/balance fleet and balance fleet? From what you said it more of a mix of 3 to 5 different ships in the spam, right? Thanks for you answer

Which do you guy find to be the best way to build your fleet? Do you build a balanced(comb arms) fleet or do you just make a fleet of spam(like the TEC Javelis Frigate) ships? Thank you for your answers (This could help with the next patch, in fixing the AI and fleet balance)

That is something I would like to see too.

So the Vasari get damage, the TEc get antimatter, and Advent get shield mitigation, right?

The TEC has the most hitpoints and armor of any of the two factions. The Strongest economy of any other faction, make it easy for the TEC to win thougth the use of pirates. More then any other faction, the capital ships of the TEC seem to me, more able to support each other. The Advent has the most shields points of any of the faction. On top of that, they also have a tech called Raised Shield Harmonics, that increases the maximum pssoble damag mitigation provided by shields. On top of

I find that the Kortul Devastor and Skirantra Carrier are the best, just because they work so well together. but form the past post,it seems to me, that a lot of people like the Jarrasul Evacuator, and Akkan BattleCruiser and liked or disliked the Antorak Marauder

I'm with PeskyFly on this one. Some of the Vasari Empire tech is very questionable(and some are very useful). To me the Phasic Cloaking is use less and a waste of resources. If it just clocked the scout and just removed the shield, while allowing the ship to move, it could be useful. But as it stands right now, it is a useful as Raider Xenophobia. They should fix it in 1.04.