Cheese? Who said Cheese?

Something to keep in mind: GalCiv2 isn't about accurate depiction of fleet battles.

You know what it also is not about?????? Reality.
It is a game and molded for max enjoyment from the max of the population playing.
Hence.... that is why there is no multiplayer.

They gave people the ability to mod the game to play as they want and or see fit. They are not going to give everyone, everything they want.

Stardock will do what they feel is best for the game. Not what I think is best or whoever, what they feel is best. That is why they have the forums here. So they can get an idea of what people do and do not want. What is and is not feasible. Are Carriers feasible? No freakin clue but..... I think the game is great without them.
Just my 2 cents.

To those of you who say never, I say never say never. And to those who don't even like the idea, pooey on you. There seems to be more people for the idea than against although you wouldn't know that to read it here

hmmm next Stardock poll?

I don't care too much about the subject of carriers myself, either. The game does seem fine without them, but it would be something else to mess with. I'd just like size of weapons and hulls to be taken into consideration for combat purposes in future instances of this game (not at all expecting such to ever be patched into the current iteration).

Though maybe I'm just too used to Master of Orion with respect to this particular genre of game, and just expect weapons to be variable in size to deal with varying types of targets just as in that game series. It's likely been too long since I've played anything but a Master of Orion. I barely remember playing Spaceward Ho! or Stars! or Reach for the Stars...

Well, no matter what "universe" you are talking about, the smaller ships are always more difficult to hit, and add another strategic ability to the game. It doesn't make sense for them to be obsolete later on when you have huge hulls. Even if it was just the Tiny and Small Hulls that have a significant bonus, I would be thrilled!

It doesn't make sense for them to be obsolete later on when you have huge hulls. Even if it was just the Tiny and Small Hulls that have a significant bonus, I would be thrilled!

Tiny and small hulls aren't obsolete at all in the late game: Just pack two of the best engines and weapons on a tiny hull, build a fleet as large as possible of them (21+), and go on a rampage! Granted, you'll lose a lot of them, but they're very cost effective ship killers against the most expensive ships of the enemy. If you haven't, you should try it.

I remember one time late-game where I decided to take a Small (I think? It had 55 hull space after full Miniaturization research) hull and load on 5 Black Hole Eruptors, then just pump out a bunch of them for suicidal attack fleets. I called them Ballistas - it helped that the hulls themselves looked kinda like arrowheads.

Stormbringer: It's not happening. Just so you know.

Cheese was, by the way, me returning the collected insanity of a few on these forums, and pouring it back. I still haven't annoyed those few enough for them to repent yet, so COMING SOON: HAM.

Ham & eggs, mhmmm...

estab, I use Huge ships with a strong defense,and I rarely lose a ship, even against larger fleets... might be time to up the difficulty level, but at this point, it's more cost effective for me to build large ships and not have to rebuild.

Marcathonas, I'd imagine that you are including me in that "insane" category.

Whether carriers will ever be in game or not, it is still an interesting discussion for some, and there is NO reason whatsoever for someone to click the link on a Carrier's thread just to point out that carrier threads bore them and they are tired of seeing them. It's the most pointless thing!

IMO, those people are insane.

BTW, throw some onions in with those eggs, would ya

People who think that carriers would ruin game balance by bypassing logistics restrictions should be intellectually honest and also petition for the removal of Miniaturization, which does the same thing in a different way.

And while they're at it, they can tell the creators of Battlestar Galactica that they're wrong, too.

I realize that we'll never get them, that they would probably be unbalanced and that the mechanics of introducing them into the game would be difficult at best.

With that said I still would like carriers and think they would be cool.

Until they make the 'tatical' battle part of the game actuly a tatical battle, where attack speed, size etc play a role in the battle, until you can control those battles then adding carriers just seems like a huge waste of time to me.

Using thread titles like "I WANT MY AIRCRAFT CARRIER NOW!!!11!!1!ONE!" (slight exaggeration from my side) draws a certain attention, you know. Shouting around and demanding things usually doesn't make things better, quite the contrary.

Using thread titles like "I WANT MY AIRCRAFT CARRIER NOW!!!11!!1!ONE!" (slight exaggeration from my side) draws a certain attention, you know. Shouting around and demanding things usually doesn't make things better, quite the contrary.

If you are referring to my post title, sorry e-stab. It was a "joke" of a title per say, but then I forget that some people take everything literally, which can be cool considering that it is the written word conveying alot of emotion. I always thought actual conversation would do that. But now that I know just typing something with a few extra caps or exclamation points bothers some, well, you know. Time to start tweaking!! And for the last time, I don't see the big logistical and statistical problems with having a carrier class vessel. You can put colonists onto a colony ship,,, so put a few fighters onto a carrier. Where is the difference? Make the carrier a useless whale, unarmed and even unarmored. Then it has to rely on support ships. It's main purpose is to introduce fighters into an area that they would otherwise be off limits to, either because of range or engines or whatever. It is adding something in the way of strategy, as well as "realism" (can't believe I said that!)to the game. It seems like those who don't want a carrier are really trying to make it sound like an impossible thing to program. I am no wiz but I can't see what would be so hard. If a colony ship can move people, a carrier could move fighters! Oh, and btw, I never ever ever even thought that the devs would entertain my idea.

Carriers have been done in other games, "Cough RiseOfNations Cough"

Carriers have been done in other games, "Cough RiseOfNations Cough"

And they're incredibly overpowered there too. If you control the seas (or at least the entire body of water in question), and have access to carriers, it's game over for any enemy cities on that quarter of the map.

Kryo, you do have a point, and in all honesty, there is a reason why Carriers are the dominant ship in naval forces today all around the world. They do unbalance things. They have more range, the ship itself is rarely actually in danger, etc. But if a module is created, it can be balanced so that the fact that it can carry smaller craft with logistics of 1 and 2 take the place of the weaponry that would normally be on it. The module could also reduce HP by a certain percentage, etc. Things can be done . I do understand the challenges involved, and as I am not designing the game or any of the updates, it's not my place to say it's stupid they are not there. At this point, I do believe they will never be in GCII, but it is still an interesting conversation, and it could be done correctly with a LOT of work and testing . It's just not worth it at this point.

It would be an interesting poll though.

Hell, any aircraft tend to dominate. Stealth Bomber in that game is a pain to be on the receiving end. One session I played, it went on for so long that eventually Wonders ceased to exist, because the AI opponents would just destroy them with bombing runs and repairs could not be effected swiftly enough.

I started to setup AA guns around them, but it just didn't do enough and once they had stealth bombers, the ground defences couldn't do anything. I had to get my own fighters up into the air to patrol, and it just ended up being too much to manage. Eventually, I was able to deal with each of the civilizations in turn (primarily relying on mixed forces - Air Superiority and Bombings can do only so much before ground forces have to be mobilized - with naval support if possible) and stop the bombings, but the bombings still dealt their blow. Imagine a war causing the Great Pyramids of Giza to be pulverized, or the Taj Mahal to be crushed... Utterly appalling.

I for one vote for Carriers! They add an entirely new level of "STRATEGIC" and "TACTICAL" nuances. Our own real life leaders, when there have been crisises in the past always asked "Where are the Carriers?". Having a task force based around a Carrier opens up the range of influence one has. They are highly mobile, hard hitting forces. They do have disadvantages though, namely the expense of building and maintaining a Carrier Task Force, and the vulnerability of the Carrier itself without the escorts. Imagine the psychological effect of a Space Carrier Task Force appearing above your Homeworld? If you want to see the effects of space carriers, read David Webers "THE SHIVA OPTION".

A wing of 5 Tiny hull fighters each with a Blackhole Eruptor will theoretically do 5-125 damage against an unarmored target. If the target has 3 Droid Sentries 3, however, that damage will be 0. A Large ship with those 5 BHEs will do 1-125 minus the 1-30 from the enemy defense, meaning it will do a whole lot of damage and kill the ship in one shot.

You said if the target have 3 Droid Centries.
You forget about the fact that offencive technology
1) Take Less Space (in v1.3, false in v 1.3.1)
2) Cost much less
3) He must have the defenses of a good type. considering how cheap a fighter is, getting a fighter with another set of weapons is a a matter of several turns.

Also by the time i have Black Whole Eruptors I can put at least 2 of them in my tiny fighter. (i am not even talking about small). Thus you will need 6 Droid Sentries 3 to stop me.

If you have the defenses of the wrong type you would need like 30 Droid centries. (Ie unattainable).

Finally you are not playing against a supergeniuos AI. From my gaming experience, the small ships are 90% times better then the big ones.

Final note:
Did not finish playing with the last patch. Maybe the stats arecompletly different. However till they balance the whole offence/defense issue, i would nto advise any carriers.

for one vote for Carriers! They add an entirely new level of "STRATEGIC" and "TACTICAL" nuances.

So really, what is the "entirely new level of startegic and tactical nuances"? It's pretty much the same as putting a bunch of fighters in a fleet, except they have more room for weapons, obviously it unbalances the game, fighters are already practicly an exploit.

You said if the target have 3 Droid Centries. You forget about the fact that offencive technology 1) Take Less Space (in v1.3, false in v 1.3.1) 2) Cost much less 3) He must have the defenses of a good type. considering how cheap a fighter is, getting a fighter with another set of weapons is a a matter of several turns. Also by the time i have Black Whole Eruptors I can put at least 2 of them in my tiny fighter. (i am not even talking about small). Thus you will need 6 Droid Sentries 3 to stop me. If you have the defenses of the wrong type you would need like 30 Droid centries. (Ie unattainable). Finally you are not playing against a supergeniuos AI. From my gaming experience, the small ships are 90% times better then the big ones. Final note: Did not finish playing with the last patch. Maybe the stats arecompletly different. However till they balance the whole offence/defense issue, i would nto advise any carriers.

BHEs cost 160, and are size 11, sizemod 2, with 25 damage. DS3 cost 90, size 3 and sizemod 2, with 10 defense.
And you do miss the point. Much less damage is inflicted if you spread the weapons around multiple ships, I was just using an example to make it clear.
So go and make a test. Build a full-sized fleet of Tiny ships and a full-sized fleet of Huge ships, sell one of the fleets to the enemy AI, and attack. For fairness sake, make sure the two fleets have an equal total of attack and defense, and that defense is not 0.

DIE THREAD DIE!
*stabs thread*

Eats sammich.

MMM. jakku's ham sammiches. Nothing better.

I am casting Healing Breeze on I want an aircraft carrier!!!!!

*Uses Shock Paddles*

*Defibralator Buzzes*
PZZZZt

"Your Good to Go, Now Get Back to the Fight, Soldier!!!"


    

Monc34