I just gave up on a game that demonstrated all too painfully the costs of plodding, trudging Arcean ships. In a no-tech-trade game, the Arcean speed penalty and lack of access to engine techs is a pretty huge disadvantage.
Lack of speed is obviously a big problem at a tactical scale when you can't intercept fast transports or even sometimes invasion fleets. What I didn't appreciate until now was the strategic implications. Low speed means it takes you longer to gather forces for an invasion, and longer to prosecute an invasion. I completely conqured the Drath, but it was a conquest in very, very slow motion.
With low speed, it takes longer to reach the front lines, and the lag between your building decisions and conditions on the front lines can be fatal. Several times I directed transports toward a sector where I had strong space-superiority, only to have them arrive in a situation that was rapidly falling apart due to the slow pace of reinforcements. You pay maintenance for ships all the way to the front lines, and when you get there they may no longer be what you need.
Given this, I'm not seeing any counter-balancing Arcean advantages. Yes, you can add 2 squares to your planets at the cost of upkeep and build time. If you don't want your ships to be complete plodders, you will have to use one of those squares for navigation buildings.
Overall, I think giving the super-warrior race the slowest possible ships isn't a good idea. A race's special abilities should work synergistically with each other.
