bump sounds interesting cant help with the mod though

@Pnakotus what du you want to say ? (im not shure about you '???')
if you dont want read annythng about carrier then do it and dont read it!


its ok when someone says he want a carrier in the game (i want it too)

man, auto-naming of ships? absolutely ! I'm so freaking tired of trying to figure out which ship is which and then spending a few hours naming them all. i'm not terribly creative and frankly run out of things to use as names. so yeah, that is great idea.

It would be cool to have ships auto named, but in terms of carriers....

What I would love is if the various Jewelry and graphics were only minimally connected to the actual function of the weapons. Why cant I have a phaser VII that looks like a phaser II? Why can't I pick the graphical representation of the engines?

As for carriers. Why not have the ability to have generic "fighter" Jewelry that escorts your carrier, basically within the battle widow they fly around, but in effect they are only an extension of the ships weaponry, you could have all the beam missle and mass driver weapons represented by little ships flying around your "carrier"

The only reason I could think that you wouldn't do this is so human opponents in multiplayer could spot and identify your systems. Multiplayer seems to be off the books *sniff sniff* so why not?

The point of carriers is to extend the range of fighters, I guess you could make them like slowly mobile military bases. with bonuses, but that would be difficult as hell to balance.

While I believe that carriers would be a load and a half of fun, I don't believe that they're really very feasible for GalCiv II, given the gameplay mechanics. It's probably best to have them in GalCiv III, so that a new combat engine can be built that's capable of giving them a viable strategic and/or tactical significance.

...Oh yeah, as for auto-naming ships: heck yes! The current naming method does literally nothing to differenciate one ship from another, and it's annoying to have to go and rename the AI's ships so that you can find them in the diplomatic trade screen.

It'd be easy enough to implement, and would be easily moddable; all you need is a bunch of ship names in text files (one file for each race--we don't want to see Drengin cruising around in the TAS Napoleon, now do we?). Perhaps you could even put starbase names in separate files, or have lists for different ship types (so a survey ship could be named the TAS Columbus, while a battleship would be named the TAS Alexander, and a freighter would end up as the TAS Hudson... or whatever).

I would like to see carriers as well, but with the way the current combat system and logistics work, I really don't see the benefit.

Fighters are extremely small and maneuverable, and that is supposed to be their biggest advantage over capital ships. However, there is no maneuverability stat for ships. Also, there's litlte chance to miss in the current combat system. Damage is mostly decided by defense value, which fighters wouldn't (or shouldn't) have. You would need a rather sizeable force of fighters to really threaten just a single cap-ship as it is. Cap ships don't have any true "anti-fighter defense" or AAA either.

Another advantage fighters have is the fact that since they can be an incredible threat to enemy ships (in RL) they became the biggest weapon in carrier task forces. They would do most of the work of damaging & disabling the enemy ships before the friendly ships would move into gun range for the kill.

If a tactical combat system was ever implemented, then this idea would work great, because when combat commences, the fighters launch and race towards the enemy fleet and does it's damage well before the cap-ships even get within range of each other (if they even choose to, it's normally prudent to stay out of range while the fighters do their work.) If both classes have carriers, since the other ships guns wouldn't normally be effective against the smaller fighters, you could also house interceptor type fighters which would be even faster and more maneuverable than the heavier fighter/bombers which are heaver due to the increased payload of space torpedoes or heavier blasters or whatever they would be equipped with. Or even other small ships which serve as point defense and are basically small ships just bristling with AAA.

*Sigh* not including any form of planetary bombardment was a active and intelligent decision by the designers. This includes carriers.

You want to trash an economy with little losses? Send in a transport with only 500 people and use orbital bombardment, you probably wont take the planet but you will kill billions and leave it undamaged, for when you drop your transport with traditional attack and take it.

I like the idea of carriers, but as its said before, at the moment there is no point in introducing them, simply because the way that the combatsystem work. You would need to introduce som new variables like maneuverability/mobility, speed, range to target, and accuracy of weapons. You would also need another way of picking targets, maybe make it a player choice instead of it being a simple what is the biggest threat and the easiest kill. So a thing that could be in Galciv III and not in Galciv II expansion.

I like the idea of carriers, but as its said before, at the moment there is no point in introducing them, simply because the way that the combatsystem work.

The way things are currently, tiny hull ships are too slow to keep up with larger vessels. By the end of most of my games, my fleet speed is typically two or three engines per ship.

Ahzi Dahaka
like your idea about having auto-name the ship according to race. I think the point that byram is missing is that you can still name the class of this ship but its the specific name of the ship that can be automated. This would be especially helpful in diplomacy...just try to find ship Ass Kicker MK III 2034 on the galaxy map...especially late in the game when you play huge maps with gigantic fleets pitted up against each other. This would be an awesome addition to any of the major conversion mods out there in use...any takers???

yo sherlock, its for when you give them to allies. way to be on it though...you're a sharp one. and a word of advice, next time if i want to know what you do when you play the game, i'll ask...

its kind of hard to give them Sensors II when YOU DISABLE TECH TRADING...WOW...last time i deal with your ignorance, play the game some more before you make a fool of yourself again, paz...

SERIOUSLY Bro, you're missing sumthing...if you need me to explain this, you definitely have NEVER played the game... and next time when you get on the board say something worth saying other than 5 word phrases about nothing, no need to hate...i'm done wasting my time, i'm out...