I spent all night trying make the Gravity Accelerators work as a percentage, not a flat bonus. I couldn't figure out how.
But I did move them up in the tech tree- they're under Extended Life Support, they give a +2 bonus, and the cost a little less. I'll play tonight to see if it's balanced.

The Advanced and Ultimate Miniaturization techs: Somewhat useful, but not as useful as they should be since for some reason most components increase in size at these two techs, which is kind of the opposite of miniaturization, don't you think?

Miniaturization should be called Expansion as it increases the size of the ship hulls; the size of components increase in size as the hull size increases. Since floating point values always are rounded down and most components have relatively small size, the miniaturation would often be lost if they applied to components. Yet another reason to round off floating point values to the nearest!

Gravity Accelerators and Hyperion Shipyard: Woohoo! A WHOPPING +1 to speed for each! <~~ Dripping with sarcasm.

+1 to speed matters a lot early in the game when your ships are slow but not much in the game. It should be a +25% speed boost so it matters a lot in each stage of the game.

In the Dec. 2005 Beta of GalCiv2 there was an Omega Shipyard which provided a precentage boost (I forget how much 25-50%?) to the weapons and defenses of all ships built on that planet; I would build this on my Manufacturing Capital! I miss the Omega Shipyard! I think it became available when you reached Medium Hulls; why not make it available when you reach the next level of the hull branch which currently provides nothing (just a gateway to "Large Scale Building" which provides Large Hull)?

I'm a bit confused, some of the posts contradict each other. What does Mind Control actually does? What about other wonders that are ill described, what do they do? What about goverments? Anyone who has checked this can make it clear please?

Well, the mind control center, by description, is supposed to make planets that are revolting defect almost immediaty. Instead, it gives you an Empire wide 100% to economy.

The governments do not do what they say they do in their descriptions. (i.e. +25/50/75% to production and research.) I am guessing that they actually make the bonus and economic bonus instead since the only thing I seem to get from a better government is more money, not that that is a bad thing, I'd just like the prouction and research bonus later in the game when money doesn't matter.

Miniaturization should be called Expansion as it increases the size of the ship hulls; the size of components increase in size as the hull size increases. Since floating point values always are rounded down and most components have relatively small size, the miniaturation would often be lost if they applied to components. Yet another reason to round off floating point values to the nearest!

I would agree with you if it weren't for enhanced miniaturization actually causing some hulls to decrease in size. My initial understanding was that to avoid dramatic rounding that they were going to just increase available hull space so that their would be a benefit with each tech.

Besides, the descriptions of the miniaturization techs all say , in a nut shell, they make everything smaller. So why call it expansion when you aren't expanding? I do think to some extent it is expansion since components are getting bigger with each tech, but only changing once it clears each whole number. This is especially noticeable on the massive hulls! An Impulse Drive MkIII goes from a size 9 up to a 13 with no miniaturization when it's 9, and full miniaturization when it's 13.

Lastly, opinion only, and I've probably said it earlier. They should stop making components get larger as miniaturization gets better. Isn't the purpose of miniaturization to make components smaller without losing their effectiveness?

REALLY lastly, I may have said this earlier as well, but why should, for example, a Phasor VII takes up about twice as much space between a medium hull and a massive hull. So shouldn't a weapon that is twice as large do at least twice the damage?

The stat window for it says it grants a +100% economic bonus, which it also doesn't do...

Actualyl i build that mind control thing yesterday and it works. Its basically a 2nd economic capital.

Space consumed by one Impulse-III engine, on each hull, at each level of miniaturization:

Impulse.3	Normal	Basic	Enhanced	Advanced	Expert	Ultimate	Supreme
Tiny	4	5	5	5	5	5	5
Small	5	5	5	6	6	6	7
Medium	6	6	6	7	7	7	8
Large/Cargo	7	7	8	8	9	9	10
Huge	8	9	10	10	11	12	13

Componant size increase with hull size increase is a game feature.

But to have componant sizes increase as the level of miniaturization goes up is counter-intuitive and thwarts the use of larger hulls and miniaturization. Both of those techs are valued by the A.I., so it is also counter-productive with respect to breeding competetive enemies.

Or maybe there's a positive that should be a negative somewhere? This table would make more sense if the columns were reversed. Like if the row for Huge went from 8 down to around 5 instead of from 8 up to 13.

Then big ships with miniaturization would be deadly, and become an important race.

Miniaturization seems to be something that started out as one thing in the game and then changed towards release and was never renamed. Brad has said many times that they wanted all ship sizes to be viable throughout the game. Also he did not want the end game to become a race to the *monster ship*. I think the way the system works now is that balancing act in well action .

Whether you agree with their reasoning or not there is a optimal point for you to stop researching miniaturization for the hull size(s) you prefer. Also higher level components are not affected as much by hull size as their earlier counter parts. Again I think this is done on purpose to give you a reason to bother continuing to research a particular branch of ship components rather then just jamming more inferior components into a larger hull.

For certain components, mainly engines or defenses, it does make sense for them to be larger for larger ships. If for no other reason then there is more ship to push or cover . However I do agree that weapons increasing in size just because you have more space to put them in does seem a bit off. But I think it's that balancing issue I mentioned at work again. There was probably a magic number the devs wanted in terms of total components on a given hull size. Finding that sweet spot is part of figuring out how to optimize your empire. Course once you know then it's no big mystery .

anyone take a look at the planetary improvments file? Tons of buildings that never made it acctually in the tech tree.

For anyone interested, here is a list of componants that have a SizeMod.

SizeMods Query

Componant	Size	SizeMod
Adv Troops Module	12	70
Constructor Module	35	50
Troops Module	20	30
Trade Module	40	25
Colony Module	25	25
Armor Plating	10	20
HyperDrive	6	15
Plasma II	7	10
Plasma III	6	10
Mini-Balls II	8	10
Smart Chaff	10	10
Mini-Balls	10	10
Mass Driver IV	7	10
Mass Driver III	9	10
Mass Driver II	10	10
Mass Driver	12	10
HyperDrive Plus	6	10
Space Cannon	16	10
Impulse Drive Mark II	5	10
Particle Beam	14	10
Impulse Drive Mark III	4	10
Ion Drive	5	10
Laser	10	10
Laser Mark II	8	10
Laser Mark III	7	10
Laser Mark IV	6	10
Impulse Drive	7	10
Particle Beam II	12	10
Laser Mark V	5	10
Plasma	9	10
Chaff	12	10
Duranthium Armor III	5	10
Duranthium Armor II	6	10
Duranthium Armor	7	10
Tri-Strontium Armor	6	10
Titanium Armor	6	10
Titanium Armor III	4	10
Titanium Armor II	5	10
Warp Drive	6	10
Black Hole Generator	8	10
Enhanced Deflectors	8	9
Deflectors	10	9
Shields II	7	9
Superior Deflectors	4	9
Advanced Deflectors	6	9
Shields	8	9
Phasors III	7	7
Neutrino Bullets	7	7
Phasors	10	7
Graviton Disruptor III	7	7
Phasors II	8	7
HD Spike Driver IV	6	7
HD Spike Driver III	7	7
HD Spike Driver II	8	7
Phasors IV	9	7
Graviton Disruptor IV	8	7
Graviton Disruptor II	8	7
Graviton Disruptor	9	7
ECM III	8	7
ECM II	8	7
ECM	10	7
Duralthene Armor	7	7
Disruptors III	6	7
Disruptors II	6	7
Disruptors	7	7
HD Spike Driver	9	7
Singularity Driver	10	7
Tri-Strontium Armor III	5	7
Tri-Strontium Armor II	6	7
Subspace Blaster	6	7
Sinularity Driver IV	7	7
Singularity Driver III	8	7
Nano Ripper	9	7
Singularity Driver II	9	7
Phasors V	7	7
Shields III	6	7
Quantum Driver III	9	7
Quantum Driver	8	7
Qauntum Driver II	8	7
Psyonic Shredder	9	7
Phasors VII	6	7
Phasors VI	8	7
Kanvium	6	6
Warp Drive Mk. II	6	6
Sensors Mk. VI	2	5
Ultimate Adamantium	4	5
Barriers	6	5
PD Combo	7	5
PD Combo II	6	5
PD Combo III	5	5
Barriers II	5	5
Warp Drive Mk. III	5	5
Force Field	5	5
Sensors Mk. V	2	5
Point Defense II	7	5
Barriers III	4	5
Basic Support	3	5
Survey Module	8	5
Dynamic Shielding	5	5
Subspace Rebounder	6	5
Superior Duranthium	5	5
Doom Ray	10	5
General Life Support	3	5
Kanvium III	4	5
Point Defense III	6	5
Admantium Armor II	5	5
Warp Drive Mk. V	3	5
Warp Drive Mk. IV	4	5
Point Defense	8	5
Admantium Armor	6	5
Extended Support	3	5
Advanced Force Fields	5	5
Sensors Mk. IV	2	5
Kanvium II	5	5
Hyper Warp Drive Mk. III	5	5
Hyper Warp Drive	5	5
Sensors	2	5
Sensors Mk. II	2	5
Sensors Mk. III	2	5
Hyper Warp Drive Mk. II	5	5
Advanced Support	3	4
Zero-Point Armor	3	4
Droid Sentries	5	3
Droid Sentries II	4	3
Droid Sentries III	4	3
Superior Force Fields	4	3
Ultra Support	3	3
Invulnerability Field	4	3
Invulnerability Field II	3	3
Aereon Missile Defense	4	2
Ultimate Invulnerability	3	2
BlackholeEruptor	12	0
Anti-Matter Torpedo II	12	0
Anti-Matter Torpedo	12	0
Anti-Matter Torpedo III	12	0
Harpoon II	12	0
Positronic Torpedo	11	0
Positronic Torpedo II	11	0
Psyconic Missile	10	0
Photonic Torpedo II	10	0
Quantum Torpedo	12	0
Quantum Torpedo II	12	0
Quantum Torpedo III	10	0
Stinger	18	0
Harpoon III	16	0
Photon Torpedo	12	0
Photon Torpedo III	11	0
Photon Torpedo II	9	0
Sparrow	18	0
Harpoon	16	0
Stinger II	16	0
Stinger III	14	0
Stinger IV	12	0
Photonic Torpedo	14	0

The same engine taking up more space on a larger ship makes perfect sense. Larger ships have more mass to move, so they need larger engines. Weapons taking up more space is completely illogical. A bigger weapon that does the same damage as the little one?

The thing I don't understand about miniaturization is that the name implies that something is getting smaller. What is getting smaller? Hulls and weapons get bigger, but nothing really miniaturizes!

Miniaturization seems to be something that started out as one thing in the game and then changed towards release and was never renamed. Brad has said many times that they wanted all ship sizes to be viable throughout the game. Also he did not want the end game to become a race to the *monster ship*. I think the way the system works now is that balancing act in well action

Well, read the description of the massive hull. It says it is approxmatly 3000 meters long. Of course it doesn't really appear that way since next to a medium it appears to be about only 3 or 4 times longer. 3000 meters, 3km, or 1.8miles.

That makes the massive hull 1400 meters, 1.4km, or .8 miles longer than an Imperial-class Star Destroy (For all you Star Wars geeks, I'm guilty here! ) The Imperial-class Star Destroyer has over 100 weapon emplacements, of course that isn't just Turbolasers, it's 60 Ion Cannons, and 60 Turbolasers. For some reason they didn't carry any proton or concussion missles/torpedos, but with that many Ion Cannons and Turbolasers, I can sorta see why that might be overkill. Although, you could easily say that a Super Star Destroyer is overkill being 8km long. Even more overkill, would be the Eclipse-class Star Destroyer, which is approximately 16km long. It was made 6 years after the battle of Endor to be a replica of the Emperor's old flagship.

So wouldn't it make sense that a massive hull would be a "monster" ship?

For anyone interested, here is a list of componants that have a SizeMod

Ummm... your size mods are off somewhat... at least last time I checked, which is literally 20 seconds ago...

For example, the size/sizemod of Titanium Armor is size 6/ size mod 4, not size mod 10

Also, the Colony Module, Troop Modules (Normal and Advanced), Construction Module, and Trade Module do not have a size mod, they are the same size on every hull no matter how much miniaturization.

The same engine taking up more space on a larger ship makes perfect sense. Larger ships have more mass to move, so they need larger engines. Weapons taking up more space is completely illogical. A bigger weapon that does the same damage as the little one?

Heh, I've said that three times now...

Now I hope I am not alone on this, but I am somewhat Ok with weapons and sensors getting larger as hulls get larger. I can definately understand engines, defenses, and life support modules getting larger though.

Anywho, as I've said before, my original theory is that they gave hulls greater capacity as miniaturization techs got better so as to avoid decimal rounding on components, which would negate some percentages of miniaturization altogether. Sohaving it round a much larger number will make a smaller percentage of error when the decimal is rounded on the hull capacity.

If the miniaturization worked logically (decreases space of components, doesn't increase hull space [ship size could still increase the size of some components]), there would be one major problem:

100% miniaturization. You can suddenly place an infinit amount of components on a ship. Every component has size 0.

But this could be fixed with a miniaturization cap somewhere between 50 and 100% and having the miniaturization-techs etc. give a much smaller benefit.

Also, rounding will much more often than now negate small miniaturization-bonuses if it was changed to this.

Ummm... your size mods are off somewhat... at least last time I checked, which is literally 20 seconds ago... For example, the size/sizemod of Titanium Armor is size 6/ size mod 4, not size mod 10

Maybe we have different versions of GC2Types.xml?
Here is a cut and paste from my "...\TotalGaming\GalCiv2\Data" folder (brackets edited):

< Defense >
        < Name >Titanium< /Name >
        < Class >A< /Class >
        < Size >6< /Size >
        < SizeMod >10< /SizeMod >
        < Cost >20< /Cost >
        < Absorption >1< /Absorption >
        < DisplayName >Titanium Armor< /DisplayName >
        < Description >This is armor< /Description >
        < Model >armor0< /Model >
        < Thumbnail >armor< /Thumbnail >
        < Category >Armor< /Category >
        < Tech_Requirement >Titanitum Armor< /Tech_Requirement >
        < Animation >Defense.x< /Animation >
< /Defense >

At least in my copy of the file, the SizeMod for Titanium Armor is 10. Anyone else have a different number? Perhaps we have inadvertently discovered how Microsoft came up with the phrase "Slipstream Upgrade"?

EDIT: After uninstalling, and then re-downloading through Stardock, my new version of GC2Types.xml does indeed say SizeMod for Titanium Armor is 4. So some changes have taken place. I'll post an update when I get it assembled.

If the miniaturization worked logically (decreases space of components, doesn't increase hull space [ship size could still increase the size of some components]), there would be one major problem: 100% miniaturization. You can suddenly place an infinit amount of components on a ship. Every component has size 0. But this could be fixed with a miniaturization cap somewhere between 50 and 100% and having the miniaturization-techs etc. give a much smaller benefit. Also, rounding will much more often than now negate small miniaturization-bonuses if it was changed to this.

That's why I was saying don't even bother with changing the size of the compenents, just keep miniaturization as it is where it adds to the hull size, thus making miniaturization techs have the value of it function as a multiple of rather than a percent difference. Thus you wouldn't have to bother changing any of the techs or variables really.

So a Massive hull with size 80 (At least I think it's 80 initially) with a 50% miniaturization bonus would make it a size 120, and a miniaturization of 100% would make it a size 160. So hull capacity would be figured as a formula:

Initial Hull size x (1 + Miniaturization bonus% / 100%*) = final hull size

*- or if you understand percentages as a value and not a percentage only, 100% would translate to 1.00, and 75% would translate to 0.75. This would change the * part to just the value of the percentage miniaturization.

As I said, this makes miniaturization function as a multiple rather than an actual percentage. I believe they do this because you could essentially conquer everyone's Hyperion Shrinker and then make components that would take up virtually no space, if any. Heh, and if you get above 100%, then it would make the hull get bigger as you stuffed more components in it.

I think it already functions like that to calculate hull space, but it just makes the components bigger, which makes no sense at all.

Well, read the description of the massive hull. It says it is approxmatly 3000 meters long. Of course it doesn't really appear that way since next to a medium it appears to be about only 3 or 4 times longer. 3000 meters, 3km, or 1.8miles. That makes the massive hull 1400 meters, 1.4km, or .8 miles longer than an Imperial-class Star Destroy (For all you Star Wars geeks, I'm guilty here! ) The Imperial-class Star Destroyer has over 100 weapon emplacements, of course that isn't just Turbolasers, it's 60 Ion Cannons, and 60 Turbolasers. For some reason they didn't carry any proton or concussion missles/torpedos, but with that many Ion Cannons and Turbolasers, I can sorta see why that might be overkill. Although, you could easily say that a Super Star Destroyer is overkill being 8km long. Even more overkill, would be the Eclipse-class Star Destroyer, which is approximately 16km long. It was made 6 years after the battle of Endor to be a replica of the Emperor's old flagship.

In fact, the Imperial (or Imperator, as it is technically called) is 1.6 km long, while the Executor is 17.2 km long. Eclipse is 16 km, but has greater mass than the Executor. /Pedantry

As for all this strange business with miniaturisation and balancing, surely the best thing to do would be to radically rejig the logistics system. Having two (small) fighters being equivalent to a (huge) battleship is ludicrous, and by the time you have hulls on that scale, anyone sensible will have lots of logistics. So make use of them! That way, lots of little fighters will still match up against one massive battleship, without worrying about scaling up weapons. Defences, engines and life support would still scale, but nothing else.

Has this already been suggested?

In fact, the Imperial (or Imperator, as it is technically called) is 1.6 km long, while the Executor is 17.2 km long. Eclipse is 16 km, but has greater mass than the Executor. /Pedantry

Heh, Star Wars n00b... The Imperator was not the technical name of the Imperial Class Star Destroyer. It was the actual name of one of the Imperial Star Destroyers (Wether it was an Imperial 1 or 2, I can't remember). Although I might be mistaken and it may have been the name for one of the predecesors to the Imperial Class (The Victory Class) Star Destroyers.

The Executor was the first Super-class Star Destroyer. It was the same as all the other Super Class at about 8km in length. The only significant difference being it was the first and was given to Darth Vader as his personal flagship shortly after the Battle of Yavin. Admiral Ozzel was the original commander of it. He was the one that Darth Vadar killed in The Empire Strikes back near the beginning when the Imperial fleet jumped too close to Hoth, making them visible to Rebel sensors. Ozzel thought element of surprise would be best, obviously Vader disagreed... Command was then given to Admiral Piett. The Executor was destroyed at the Battle of Endor when Rebel fighters destroyed it's two shield generators, followed by a Rebel A-Wing intentionally smashed into the bridge thus going out of control and smashing into the second Death Star. (Although it didn't look like it was intentional, but that's their story and they're sticking to it! ) Of course, for a dramatic affect, it happened to just hit the right spot that would cause an enormous explosion. Aren't movie effects great?

As for all this strange business with miniaturisation and balancing, surely the best thing to do would be to radically rejig the logistics system. Having two (small) fighters being equivalent to a (huge) battleship is ludicrous, and by the time you have hulls on that scale, anyone sensible will have lots of logistics. So make use of them! That way, lots of little fighters will still match up against one massive battleship, without worrying about scaling up weapons. Defences, engines and life support would still scale, but nothing else. Has this already been suggested?

Yes, it probably has been suggested many times, but we have yet to see any sort of reply...

What I find funny was that I started this thread talking mostly about buildings and Super Projects that seem to have no functionality, or at least the functionality they say they have.

If you're going to get picky about language, and call someone a noob, you should know that the Executor was not a "Super-class Star Destroyer", it was a "Super Star Destroyer class" ship.

If you're going to get picky about language, and call someone a noob, you should know that the Executor was not a "Super-class Star Destroyer", it was a "Super Star Destroyer class" ship.

I am not being picky about language, I was pointing out an error the guy made, just like I am correcting yours... The Star Destroyer is a type of ship, if it be a Victory, Imperial, Imperial II, Super, or even Eclipse, those are the classes of Star Destroyers. So by me saying "Imperial class Star Destroyer", I was using a more extended term rather than the simpler term, which I probably should have used since it's more common.

However, they are all Star Destroyers. The Imperial class became the standard after replacing the Victory class, since the Victory class is better used for orbital bombardments than ship-to-ship combat. Only one Eclipse class was ever made, which isn't surprising since it's 16km long, or approximately 10 miles long. Although I can't remember what happened to it, I mean, come on, how do you lose track of a ship that is 10 miles long?!? Although, I guess that is possible since the Empire also lost track of a giant battle moon (The Eye of Palpatine) shortly after it was built I think about 18 years before the battle of Yavin. Luke met one of his many loves on it, Callista. However, I am getting off track... again...

The Star Destroyer was originally designed by Lira Wessex. She is the daughter of a supposedly famed Old Republic engineer and designer, Wallex Blissex. Once again another tid bit that isn't really important but interesting none the less...

Anymore questions? I think I need to make it look like I have a life at least and not get into in-depth detail about Star Wars. And no... I have never been to a Star Wars convention, never even knew they existed, but not interested either way.

Zerogman: Let me introduce you to some REAL SW fanatics. If they saw your comments, they would not be happy. Here: Link

This page is devoted to the common mile-long destroyer known to the forces of the Galactic Empire as the Imperator-class star destroyer, and colloquially known as Imperial star destroyer to rebel operatives.

And the Executor: Link

Executor-class Star Dreadnoughts (“Super Star Destroyers”)

And finally, Executor length: Link

And no, I've never been to a SW convention either. I just write stories, and one of them went into the SW realm... getting hit by half a dozen pedantic reviews hurts, trust me...

Zerogman: Let me introduce you to some REAL SW fanatics. If they saw your comments, they would not be happy. Here: Link This page is devoted to the common mile-long destroyer known to the forces of the Galactic Empire as the Imperator-class star destroyer, and colloquially known as Imperial star destroyer to rebel operatives.

Eh, this arguement again... Wether to call it an Imperial-Class, or Imperator-class, can both have arguements... I chose to side with the Imperial-class because that seems to be referenced as a class, and the Imperator is always referred to as the name of a ship. The only reference, at least that I've noticed, to it being an Imperator-class was from some blueprints created in real life, not in the Star Wars Universe. I am sure the site used those blueprints as a reference... Looking at the bottom of the site too, I noticed it was a single guy with a good amount of references.

And the Executor: Link Executor-class Star Dreadnoughts (“Super Star Destroyers”) And finally, Executor length: Link

Yeah, heard that, the Executor is 8 times the size of a normal star destroyer... Here's another arguement. I am prone to believe the "over 8km in length" side... What makes sense to me, is the over 8m in length since it can conincide with the 10 - 12 times the size of an Imperial Star Destroyer. (Which doesn't mean 10-12 times in length, but in volume as a whole)

Taken from part of that guys website:
"At one stage, Kenner considered including an item based on the Executor in their toy line. The developers considered the ship's true name too scary for children, so they invented the “super star destroyer” label. This term is insensitive to realistic naval terminology,..."

It's a toy, they can call it whatever they want so long as they pay the royalty to, and probably even get approval from, LucasFilm Ltd.. So what he said is also an opinion based upon fact, not an actual fact in itself. Last part mentions it being insensitive to realistic naval terminology. Unfortunately, he's assuming that the space military forces use our real life form of naval terminology, which it obviously doesn't since the movies (Which are the Star Wars equivalent to the Bible) never give any ships the prefix abbreviation like we give our navy. (Like the U.S.S. Enterprise for the U.S. navy).

Also, the Star Destroyer/Dreadnaught arguement is a no contest win in my opinion for all of them being Star Destroyers. This guy's site says they used the term "Destroyer" to specify size. However, this would be basing it upon our own system for size. I believe they are all Star Destroyers since the Empire ruled through fear, and Star Destroyer would literally mean a destroyer of stars and seems like a more fitting logic for the Imperials. A Star Dreadnaught can also be turned into a Star battleship, or Star Patrol Ship, if you assume the title after Star refers to it's size, but that makes it sound like the base design of the ships was "Star", which I HIGHLY doubt would be the case.

This can also agree with making the Victory, Imperial, Imperial II, Super, and Eclipse classes for Star Destroyers. Just because the Executor was the name of the very first Super Star Destroyer doesn't mean they are all going to be called Executor class Star Destroyers. The Executor was the name of the ship, just like Han owns the Millenium Falcon. Speaking of which, the system the guy uses above (Calling them Executor class since the Executor was the name of the first one) would mean that the very first YT-1300 light freighter was named YT-1300. Now who names a ship YT-1300? Finally this same arguement I use for the "Imperator-class" Star Destroyers... So the very first Imperator Star Destroyer was named the Imperator? (Kinda redundant if you think about it) So the newer, and more commonly used term, Imperial, and Super, Star Destroyers seems to make a lot more sense to me.

Also, just because two Super star destroyers aren't the exact same (i.e. The Lusankya and The Executor) doesn't neccesarily make them different classes of Star Destroyers. For example, every Mon Calamari Cruiser is unique, since they are constructed by hand I think, but no matter what differences they have, they are all called Mon-Calamari Cruisers.

In closing, nobody is 100% correct unless it comes from Lucas himself, is mentioned in the movies, or is a publication directly from LucasFilm Ltd.. It's all up to you as to what to think, just back up any statements you make so you can have an arguement, thus sometimes spinning off new ideas and theories. The "Star Wars Encyclopedia" from Del Rey, in my opinion, is the best single source for referencing anything Star Wars. I say this since Del Rey published most, if not all, Star Wars Essentials books, used about 100+ sources for it, and the main author has the largest private collection of Star Wars memorabilia in the world (Last I heard at least), so you know this guy is definately a nerd!

EDIT: After uninstalling, and then re-downloading through Stardock, my new version of GC2Types.xml does indeed say SizeMod for Titanium Armor is 4. So some changes have taken place. I'll post an update when I get it assembled.

Wow, I hope you have some automated way to do this, but still it's an effort and I appreciate your contribution.

I agree with the Gravity Accelerators, which is why I changed the initial value of 1 to 5. Tried 10 but it doesn't balance with the rest of the elements. By the time I get around to building it I am starting to dominate the map.

Thats the beauty of the game and editing the xml files. Don't like something, change it. Comparing loading the game and changing the xml file, about the same time.

Yes, I have an automated way; MS Access can extract tables from xml, and then I can do a query on the tables, and convert it to html, and voila:

DisplayName	Size	SizeMod	DisplayName	Size	SizeMod	DisplayName	Size	SizeMod
Armor Plating	10	20	Droid Sentries	3	2	HD Spike Driver II	4	4
Titanium Armor	6	4	Droid Sentries II	4	2	HD Spike Driver III	3	4
Titanium Armor II	5	4	Droid Sentries III	4	2	HD Spike Driver IV	4	4
Titanium Armor III	4	4	Aereon Missile Defense	4	2	Neutrino Bullets	6	4
Duranthium Armor	7	3	HyperDrive	6	10	Black Hole Generator	6	4
Duranthium Armor II	6	3	HyperDrive Plus	5	10	Psyonic Beam	8	4
Duranthium Armor III	5	3	Ion Drive	4	9	Particle Beam	14	10
Superior Duranthium	5	3	Impulse Drive	7	8	Particle Beam II	12	10
Tri-Strontium Armor	6	3	Impulse Drive Mark II	5	7	Laser	10	5
Arnorian Battle Armor	4	4	Impulse Drive Mark III	4	6	Laser Mark II	8	5
Tri-Strontium Armor II	6	3	Warp Drive	6	6	Laser Mark III	6	5
Tri-Strontium Armor III	5	3	Warp Drive Mk. II	5	6	Laser Mark IV	5	5
Kanvium	6	3	Warp Drive Mk. III	4	6	Laser Mark V	4	5
Kanvium II	5	3	Warp Drive Mk. IV	3	6	Plasma	8	5
Kanvium III	4	3	Warp Drive Mk. V	4	6	Plasma II	6	5
Duralthene Armor	6	2	Hyper Warp Drive	3	5	Plasma III	5	5
Admantium Armor	6	2	Hyper Warp Drive Mk. II	4	5	Phasors	7	4
Admantium Armor II	5	2	Hyper Warp Drive Mk. III	5	5	Phasors II	6	4
Ultimate Adamantium	4	2	Basic Support	2	5	Phasors III	5	4
Zero-Point Armor	3	2	General Life Support	2	4	Phasors IV	7	4
Deflectors	9	4	Extended Support	2	3	Phasors V	6	4
Enhanced Deflectors	8	4	Advanced Support	2	2	Phasors VI	7	4
Advanced Deflectors	6	4	Ultra Support	2	2	Phasors VII	6	4
Superior Deflectors	4	4	Survey Module	8	5	Subspace Blaster	6	4
Shields	6	3	Sensors	3	8	Disruptors	6	4
Shields II	5	3	Sensors Mk. II	2	8	Disruptors II	5	4
Shields III	4	3	Sensors Mk. III	2	5	Disruptors III	5	4
Subspace Rebounder	6	4	Sensors Mk. IV	3	5	Doom Ray	10	4
Barriers	3	3	Sensors Mk. V	3	5	Sparrow	15	3
Barriers II	4	3	Sensors Mk. VI	2	5	Stinger	18	3
Barriers III	3	3	Space Cannon	16	5	Stinger II	16	3
Dynamic Shielding	5	3	Railgun	12	5	Stinger III	14	3
Dynamic Shields	4	6	Railgun MK II	10	5	Stinger IV	12	3
Force Field	4	2	Railgun MK III	8	5	Harpoon	11	3
Advanced Force Fields	5	2	Railgun MK IV	7	5	Harpoon II	10	3
Superior Force Fields	4	2	Railgun MK V	6	5	Harpoon III	9	3
Invulnerability Field	4	2	Railgun MK VI	5	5	Psyonic Missile	10	3
Invulnerability Field II	3	2	Singularity Driver	8	4	Photonic Torpedo	10	2
Ultimate Invulnerability	3	2	Singularity Driver II	7	4	Photonic Torpedo II	9	2
Chaff	10	5	Singularity Driver III	6	4	Photon Torpedo	9	2
Smart Chaff	8	5	Sinularity Driver IV	5	4	Photon Torpedo II	8	2
ECM	6	3	Nano Ripper	9	4	Photon Torpedo III	9	2
ECM II	5	3	Graviton Driver	8	4	Anti-Matter Torpedo	9	2
ECM III	4	3	Graviton Driver II	7	4	Anti-Matter Torpedo II	9	2
Telepathic Defense	4	3	Graviton Driver III	6	4	Anti-Matter Torpedo III	8	2
Point Defense	5	3	Graviton Driver IV	4	4	Quantum Torpedo	9	2
Point Defense II	4	3	Psyonic Shredder	9	4	Quantum Torpedo II	9	2
Point Defense III	3	3	Quantum Driver	8	4	Quantum Torpedo III	8	2
PD Combo	4	3	Qauntum Driver II	7	4	Positronic Torpedo	9	2
PD Combo II	3	3	Quantum Driver III	6	4	Positronic Torpedo II	11	2
PD Combo III	3	3	HD Spike Driver	5	4	BlackholeEruptor	11	2

I notice that size scaling with hulls has gone down quite a bit, and that missile tech also now scales with size, but just a little. This should result in bigger hulls actually being bigger. Maybe able to squeeze more componants on bigger hulls...Off to the labs! -- Er, what's that 'hon? No, I'm not 'just' playing games again; this is scientific research

I had put a little work into finding the absolute best combination of weapon size and miniaturization, but if they're going to tweak things like that without telling us I better not continue. (For example, the best and cheapest Beam ship with 2 power is a small hull with Laser II and Impulse II. For three power research to Advanced Miniaturization (cheaper than Laser III) and Impulse III.)

Zerogman: fine by me. You've clearly thought through it and made your own decisions. We'll just agree to disagree...

I had put a little work into finding the absolute best combination of weapon size and miniaturization, but if they're going to tweak things like that without telling us I better not continue. (For example, the best and cheapest Beam ship with 2 power is a small hull with Laser II and Impulse II. For three power research to Advanced Miniaturization (cheaper than Laser III) and Impulse III.)

From what I've experienced, it seems that +100% miniaturization is the best legit level of miniaturization. That's just researching every miniaturization tech and not building a Hyperion Shrinker.

I've stolen 3 other Hyperion Shrinkers from enemy A.I.'s, and the last one, the one that put me at +160% actually hurt more than helped, the only hull size it improved was the Medium, and all of my previous Massive hull designs were now over-sized so I won't be able to upgrade them unless I drop a component or two.

Zerogman: fine by me. You've clearly thought through it and made your own decisions. We'll just agree to disagree...

Heh, good, so does that mean you are a follower of a side, or are you just waiting to see what comes of the squabbling? Given a strong enough arguement, I might be able to waiver a bit on some of those things I mentioned, but the one that I am 100% not moving on was the "Star Destroyer" part. "Star Destroyer" is the name of the base model (well, not really 100% a model, but for explanation sake, it's still easier to understand.) of the ship. It sounds destructive, especially when one considers the power needed to destroy a star! Heh, Luke Skywalker's name was originally going to be Luke Starkiller, that just seemed to harsh (or evil) for his character.

Lastly, thank you guys for getting back on track of the topic! I do enjoy talking/debating/arguing Star Wars, but I didn't intend to start this thread about it, someone just got me started and I forgot to stop... again...

Also, I think I am going to try and see what happens in a non-Metaverse game if I give myself a negative miniaturization value... might be interesting... might do nothing... or it might crash the game. (Most likely outcome)