Idea for Carrier

Kinda hard to impliment in a balanced way.

However, I would love to be able to add the "StarFighter Base" to a military starbase. You could station tiny hulls there, and the ships would automaticly assist fleets in the vicinity...

which would allow to exceed the logistic max of a fleet... (you got a fleet who has 16/17 logistic point used. You send it in battle who is nearby a starbase with 2 Assistance Fighters. You got +4 logistic points to your fleet for THAT battle...)

It would make a hell of a defence to break... think of 4 stacked starbase, with full fighter assistance..

I find that I am not using tiny hulls very often. I'm also wanting to see some sort of carrier type vessel. So why not make some kind of military star base module to be put on ships? Have them benefit only the tiny hulls. This makes it more worthwhile to build the tiny ships by increasing their power and range.

this has already been brought up in many other threads, and it wouldnt work. It would un-balance the game or the computor wouldnt be able ot use it.

Tiny hulls are great with military starbases, expecialy since there super cheap. Just attach some laser wammo bammo, you have a tiny ship that can be built in 2-3 turns that can kill any other ship (will die in the process) but you can replace your ships faster

I fail to see why it's unbalancing. A carrier could carry fighters that are either beam, missile, or gun, and they could be deployed like a weapon in battle, like the Carrier in starcraft, automatically launching and attacking when a battle begins, and returning to a bay for refit when damaged.

OR you could have a carrier module that when attached will give small + tiny hulls the speed and lifesupport of the ship with the carrier module if grouped into a fleet with them. I like the first idea better though.

OR you could take the first idea, and add fighters with no specific attack, and a defense system to target them. (IE, Beam, Missile, Gun, and Fighter.) In future expansions I'd like to see more then just the three types of weapons there are now, and some additional ship roles for combat, the carrier is the most prominent that I can think of.

As it stands, the only warships are battleships, bigger battleships, and huge battleships, whereas I'd like to see some variety, and a role for fighters. A carrier could kill two birds with one stone.

the carrier idea makes fleets of small fighters useless. if you could put together a fleet of carriers armed with their own weapons plus the small fighters that come out a fleet of small ships would be overwhelmed and lose every time!
there should be a carrier class ship thats like 10-12 logistics that cant be armed with weapons, and could only carrier at the most (a tech should be needed) 5-6 small hull ships or should be able to carry ships whos logistics add up to more or less of the carriers.

I would be in favor of a carrier module to be placed on ship hulls or a starbase. For balance purposes, I'd be more in favor of some effect that "carries" tiny or small - hulled spacecraft along, negating their speed and life support range as far as transit goes. This could be balanced by cranking the module cost up and making a limit on how many logistics points worth of fighters can be carried. How would this sound - 20 size points for every 2 logistics points (the standard Tiny logistics cost). This makes it so that, at the most, Medium ships could make effective carriers, and then at risk of being weak themselves because all the points were put into the carrier module. This would make putting carrier modules on Large or Huge hulls far more optimum, hulls that are already juggernauts in their own right.


Personally what I'd use them for is equip ultra-miniaturized Cargo hulls with engines, a Trade module, and a carrier module so we can have a little Combat Air (or Space, I guess) Patrol for my freighters, who keep getting squished by either pirates or hostile Civs.

Carriers are a staple of space-themed military science fiction - even hyperdrive-equipped X-Wings in Star Wars travelled with several support ships. The points brought up about it being ubalanced are, I think, well thought but not totally right. Think about it - a Large carrier with 3 carrier modules on it and lots of engines and life support so it can take those fighters in deep, but is mostly unarmed, against a Large battleship with lots of weaponry and defenses. I think the balance factor can be equalized simply by finding the right size cost/logistics carried ratio.

The question is how effectively the AI can use the carrier concept. If the CPU time won't allow a way to use it it gives the human player a real advantage. If the AI can't figure it out it becomes unbalancing.

Wwe just got the AI right on building structures on planets and creating normal fleets in the latest beta.........

Yeah, carriermodules would be great, allways wanted to create my own "tigerclaw" or battlestar galactica

hmm....sounds good. how about you can only carry....5 tiny ships, or 2 smalls?

I would kill for Carriers. Its one of the biggest things that I feel is missing. Stardock seems like they have alot a smart people working for them. I am sure they can figure out a way to do it without jacking up the game balence too much. Makes me wish we could start polls ourselves.

Carriers are the greatest idea I've heard for the game. I don't think they would be too unbalancing, since if you are not allowed to give the carriers weapons, their strength would entirely depend on the strength of the tiny ships inside. And if you do the math, 5 or 6 properly constructed tiny ships are roughly equal to a basic large or massive hull, so having a fleet of carriers wouldn't be any better than having a fleet of juggernauts, it would just give small/tiny ships late game usefullness.

its compleatly unbalnced... and the AI would never would be able ot use it effectivly.
Just cause you dont know how to use tiny hulls doesnt make them useless. Thats like me bitching the large hulls are useles and wanting a super carrier to cary them around the map.

If its a module that carrys 2-5 ships
Then your really not doing anything there, you could just use a larger ship size and have 2-5 of them together doing the same thing

If its a ship
same thing basicly since your taking so many logistic points up

Balancing
Outfitting a carrier with 20 engines and life support would be insane. Its not hard to build a small ship with over 50 attack and 20 defence later in the game (since most of you state that this tech would be far up the tech line) now you have super fleet that goes 1/2 across the map and can kill everything

Yes its a cool idea but its either going to be to strong or to weak there is no happy medium and the computor will never be able to use it right.

Carriers are the greatest idea I've heard for the game. I don't think they would be too unbalancing, since if you are not allowed to give the carriers weapons, their strength would entirely depend on the strength of the tiny ships inside. And if you do the math, 5 or 6 properly constructed tiny ships are roughly equal to a basic large or massive hull, so having a fleet of carriers wouldn't be any better than having a fleet of juggernauts, it would just give small/tiny ships late game usefullness.

As a math major i am hurt that you would state "if you do the math"
Obviosly you didnt do the math.
Ship components are scalled to there size. Something on a tiny might be only 7 spaces but on a large it can be 15. So what "math" are you talking about.

A fleet of smalls with more movement spaces, more support, and almost = attack/defence as a larger ship (luckly you people arent stating the carrier shouldnt give more life too) is somehow =?

I am completely in favour of Carriers and all the associated tech that woud need to be added to make it happen. The idea for having a fighter complement at military starbases is also pretty cool. Both these features would complement GC2 really well.

@ heroine4life I do not think I have ever seen you being positive about any idea or suggestion posted ever. Maybe you should change your nick to negative4life or Ihateeveryone. Chill out for christs sake. The whole unbalancing issue that you cling to with barely suppressed desperation is as flawed an argument as everything that you state. Everytime a race gets ahead in the tech race and builds a few quick fleets the game becomes unbalanced. If a race has more planets than anyone else, the game becomes unbalanced. A race with a high diplomacy will unbalance the game....Are you following this? Everything, every change, every tech, every tactic, every strategy has the potential to unbalance the game.

As to whether the AI has the ability to use this, well it will get there eventually, right Kosty? Meanwhile the rest of us will get to have some fun playing with our micromardas.

Also this isnt the first time this idea have been talked about
Link

Link

Link

Link

Link

Thats not even half of the posts that talk about carriers in the OP

Don't forget that if you have a fleet of tinies with the same attack and defense rating as a fleet of Huge ships, the Huge will win. Why? Because the defense and of the Huge ships are concentrated on single vessels, meaning that it is easy for them to score high damage over the individual weakly defended tiny ships, while the tiny ships with their low individual attack power will have trouble against the large ship's defenses. That's before you start considering that the attack power of the tiny ships will dwindle over time as they are destroyed.

The only time that tiny ships would be useful is if your opponent is not using much defense, or for nearby to military starbases.

Well obviously, it seems, using the small ships like this would be unbalanced.

What you do is have carrier modules work like on Master of Orion 2. Each module has a set number of ships assigned to it. However you design that ship, so you can choose how it looks or whatever, and that is what goes into the modules. If its destroyed it will be replenished automatically after the battle. However it will only be able to have enough spaces for a couple of weapons.

OR you just design its looks, and its damage and such is automatically calculated based on your technology. Their would be 3 types of ships, one with beam, one with missile, and one with guns, that come in 3 different modules.

To expand on it further they could try this idea off the top of my head. Each module would come with some small ships and some larger ships. The larger ones will do more damage and the smaller ones will "escort" the larger taking damage first when attacked. Or the smaller ones attack the larger "bomber" fighters of the enemy and the bomber ships attack the large fleet ships.

I personally think, after reading some posts, that this would work better. Then its working more like a ship weapon and not some seemingly easily exploitable combat bonus.

Well obviously, it seems, using the small ships like this would be unbalanced

How is that obvious? You sacrifice space on your large ships for space on your small ships. In some situations, this would be better. In others, it would not.

What you do is have carrier modules work like on Master of Orion 2. Each module has a set number of ships assigned to it. However you design that ship, so you can choose how it looks or whatever, and that is what goes into the modules. If its destroyed it will be replenished automatically after the battle. However it will only be able to have enough spaces for a couple of weapons.

That idea just sucks, it is even more unbalanced. Freely replaced ships? MOO may have had some good ideas, but this is not one of them.

The only time that tiny ships would be useful is if your opponent is not using much defense, or for nearby to military starbases.

Not true if you dont need to put engines and lifesupport.
Its not hard to build a cheap ship that has as much attack as a large ship and abit less defence.
Mind you defence is what costs money.
1 high tech defence costs 100-200
1 high tech weapon on a small costs like 50-100
and the weapon does more damage then the shield sheilds.

[/carriers]

You aren't making a lick of sense, and you aren't really reading anybody elses ideas, just making statements based on ideas that weren't really presented here. I have no idea why you're so against carriers, but if you're going to attack them, try to please at least make logical statements.

its compleatly unbalnced... and the AI would never would be able ot use it effectivly. Just cause you dont know how to use tiny hulls doesnt make them useless. Thats like me bitching the large hulls are useles and wanting a super carrier to cary them around the map.

Of course the AI can't use it effectively. The AI couldn't use beam weapons or research effectively unless it was told how to. I fail to see how this is an issue, as all you have to do is write a few lines of code, which, if this is in the expansion pack, would be done

Your second statement is completely pointless. I'm not even sure how to approach it, because it doesn't make any sense. Besides, "Using" small hulls effectively isn't really the point here, of course if I build a billion small hulls I can take down huge ships, but it's time consuming and annoying, in addition to being hard to keep track of. Carriers in addition to adding another layer of strategy to the game without it being too coding intensive, add a convenient way to organize small+tiny hulls and keep them useful into the late game. I personally was surprised to find this game did not have some sort of carrier when I bought it.

Ship components are scalled to there size. Something on a tiny might be only 7 spaces but on a large it can be 15. So what "math" are you talking about

What are YOU talking about? Sounds like you need to take a closer look at the ship editor.

Not true if you dont need to put engines and lifesupport

When do you ever not need engines? If you're building a defensive ship, there are much better choices the small + tiny hulls. The ONLY situation I find them useful in is in an interceptor role, with lots of engines and few weapons and no defenses.

Its not hard to build a cheap ship that has as much attack as a large ship and abit less defence. Mind you defence is what costs money

Maybe that's your playing style, but it's not mine, or many other peoples. If the larger ship gets the jump on the smaller one and it has no defense, it's going to get taken out in one shot.

If its a module that carrys 2-5 ships Then your really not doing anything there, you could just use a larger ship size and have 2-5 of them together doing the same thing

Again, you're missing the point. Adding extra layers of strategy, and hence adding to the replayability.

Balancing Outfitting a carrier with 20 engines and life support would be insane. Its not hard to build a small ship with over 50 attack and 20 defence later in the game (since most of you state that this tech would be far up the tech line) now you have super fleet that goes 1/2 across the map and can kill everything.

Yes it would be, and no one would do it. It's also why you make the carrier module so large that you're not able to have it, and still make the ship into a juggernaut. I want to see your small or tiny hull with 50 attack and 20 defence.
This is impossible, and it completely negates your superfleet statement. (Not to mention, how hard is it to build a superfleet that goes halfway across the map and kills everything as the game stands?)

I don't understand why you're so down on this, but unless you're going to make logical arguments and have some real reason for being opposed to it, all you're doing is ruining it for those of us, the majority it would seem, who want to see it in the game.

---------------

I'll reiterate my idea that fighters should attack like a weapon in battle. You can select the carrier, then choose from a list of ships you have made and choose the one you want it to carry, and when the carrier enters battle, the fighters launch and attack on their own. It could be like a starport inside the carrier, you choose what you want it to build, and the it builds them, at the ship's cost to you. Make the carrier module large enough to where the carrier can't be turned into a super battleship, just room for some defences and an engine. (or lifesupport if you choose.)

Maybe an option to replenish fighters that are destroyed automatically, and bill you for it. I don't think getting them for free is a good idea.

I'd pay good money for this option alone in an expansion, and I'd be happy to see it in just about any form. I'm all for anything that expands on the battles and adds more depth to the strategy than just paper-rock-scissors.

If one is to come up with a way that works, the best thing to do would be to first look just at what we're aiming for here, exactly. Just saying carriers is not enough; we need to know exactly what effect on the overall gameplay we want as a result.

Considering carriers are typically used as a sort of mobile aircraft base in the real world, it's a given that their function would be to mimic that in the game--in other words, they'd be used to transport small fighter vessels to remote areas that said fighters would otherwise be unable to reach.

Thing is, what effect is that going to have? Or rather, is that effect going to be the one that we're looking for? If not, then it's evident that before we can change things by just adding carriers, we must first change things by changing how the smaller ships work.

I believe that if we continue down this path, we're ultimately going to find that the core of the issue lies with the basic mechanics of the game's combat. It also seems to me that we've all been feeling as though there is something important missing from this game's combat, and we just can't figure out what it is... If such is the case, then I say we hope this path takes us to our little holy grail of CalCiv II combat.

What are YOU talking about? Sounds like you need to take a closer look at the ship editor.

Guess I'm the one who needs to clarify now, as this statement bugged me. What I meant by this was, it's not going to be the vastly unbalancing factor that you seem to think it is.

The main idea behind a "carrier" vessel is to be able to make some lightning-strikes here and there in a vicinity. Or bombing runs, or etc..

So, at first, we could simply say that a "carrier" would be a cargo module, and when tiny/small ships are put in the same fleet, the small/tiny ships don't use any movement points. Until, off course, you disband the said-fleet and launch an attack.

Or even cooler: You first launch an attack, get your fighters back into the cargo hull, and then it retreats like hell toward your lines.


That would be ONE implimentation of Carrier Vessel. Now, I had proposed an idea about Carrier Vessel when the game was under development. Rather than a mere "other ship", it would add a whole new tactical dimension to the game: Fighter missions.

You never actually see the fighters on the main map. However, when you select the carrier ship (or home-starbase), you would have the option of "giving a mission" to some fighters. These missions could range from "hit and run on target vessel" (a single attack, to drain its hit point), "assist target vessel" (more firepower), "assist fleets in range", "harass trade route", etc...

Now, the (and I do say THE) problem would be to impliment some AI capability in that aspect of the game, if we ever add this kind of tactical options (because we all know AI suck at tactical. That's why the game doesn't focus on tactical battles)

The AI couldn't use beam weapons or research effectively unless it was told how to. I fail to see how this is an issue, as all you have to do is write a few lines of code, which, if this is in the expansion pack, would be done

It wouldnt be a "few lines of code". Or if it was, you would end up having carriers with no ships swarming around your homeplanet. You know like they already do with freightors. If your going to attack someone else talking about coding, you should do alittle first. AI development is extremely hard when your trying to get it to do something "right".
How would it use the carriers?
When would it build them?
Would they be in fleets of them selves or with other ships?
Would you just try to make 1 bigger carrier with more of these "transport modules"?

What are YOU talking about? Sounds like you need to take a closer look at the ship editor.

And actualy its exactly as bad as i sad it was. Open the ship editor. Create a huge ship, place a lazer on it. Notice its huge its around 10-14. On a tiny that same weapon is 5-8.
Obviosly you havent noticed this yet
Lazers best for small/tiny
Missle best for large/huge (the scaler size change is tiny its practicly the same size for all ship sizes and the cost is almost always 55, until the final set of weapons).

Maybe that's your playing style, but it's not mine, or many other peoples. If the larger ship gets the jump on the smaller one and it has no defense, it's going to get taken out in one shot.

i agree, its going to die super easy. But you also forgot that now the tiny fires back. Also if you have alot of tinys the bigger ships cant kill them all fast enough. The cost of the tiny is 1/3 or less. Meaning if i lose 3 tinys to 1 or more of your huges i win. I can replace my ships faster then you.

Also its not very hard to build a small with 50/20 with no lifesupport or engines. Both of these components are very very big for the small hulls practicly 1/5-1/4 the entire space when you put a few on.

What difficulty are you playing on that you can create a fleet that can fly over the entire map and still dominate? I mean thats like 50-100 moves atleast. I usualy dont go far above 20 and even that makes my ships abit weaker.

A personaly want carrier i really do even though right now i am fighting them.
Why? Cause i personly think it wont work as most people are saying wiht out crippling the other ships or the AI.

Ask your self these questions:

1)If carriers exsist as your saying would you use them to the point where your hardly building other ships?
If so, your just replacing one aspect of the game with another, no more depth to it was added.

2)Will the AI be able to reasonable be able to use it? Obviosly it cant use it perfectly, but just enough to piss you off.
If not, you just gained another edge up on the computor, do you really need it?

My idea of carriers.
More of a mobile "support" planet.

All it does would extend your reach of your ships. Well right now its not really hard to be able to cross the entire map it only takes 2-3 support modules. So nerf those abit and the base range your planets give.
That would mean the carriers would need to be close to the front line or else your ships go "dead in the water/space" kinda like when you run into a wormhole. Giving a whole new stragegy to trying to find the enemy support ship. Defeding your support ship while you attack.

But even this is kidna lame and changes the mechanics alot.
People say the want the carrier to be able to do "lightning" strikes, and that they want it to be realistic to our present RL carriers.
Well then it would be slow...it count build ships... and if somehow there was a "stealth" bomber or a sub, its fucked, and all the planes and the carrier dies.

A personaly want carrier i really do even though right now i am fighting them.

You know, you are actually quite clever. To get your point accross you are sympathising with the opposition, to show that you have their best interests at heart...

Bottom line: carriers or ship enhancing mobile flagships would add some much needed diversity to the very plain vanilla flavoured combat setup. far too gimmicky for what I expected prior to purchase. Both the combat viewer and the planetary invasion visuals are pretty weak. The AI, which has been developed to give the AI a fighting chance fleetwise is now being deepened to allow for decent armadas to invade the enemy according to the dev journals. If carriers are included, and they should be, there will definitely be some further dev. to make the Ai use them better. v1.1 gave them better ships v1.2 negates first strike and will potentially give the Ai the time to redesign more often.

I honestly don't know what would be the best way to implement carriers, but using them to house tiny ships is not what I would envisage. tiny hulls are usefull in their own way and I would not like to take anything usefull away just to add another concept. I would prefer little tie fighter analogues buzzing accross the screen for the evil races and viper and x wing analogues for the good races and i'm sure a happy medium can be found for the neutrals. The only way to effectively kill these types of ships would be Point defence style missile and laser weapons, I'm seeing two new complementary branches that will have to be added to the weapon branches. Later carrier techs could give them better sheilding better weapons the ability to shoot down missiles and so on and so forth.

There are now people already finding things a little boring (heroine4life, you actually gave some good advice there), but they won't be the only ones to go if there aren't going to be some serious new additions to the game fairly soon. The whole carrier concept is cool and would open up new tactical choices for the player. In a world where everyone wants more, you want less? Bigger, better, faster, harder, louder!