I think my brain started to melt.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
...And you think that's better than the alternative?

Having larger fleets would cut down on the amount of time needed to go through the stack of doom. A single large stack of doom would mean the war will end sooner.

And that solves the problem HOW? Small fleets, and not may fleets is what the solution is, not a massive fleet you can't destroy!

No, changes to fleet upkeep will inflate the problem, as it will allow players with more Dust to maintain stacks of doom while the other players, with smaller fleets, have to somehow manage. Try getting a Sophon player to break through a 286-fleet Craver wall of death.

How in the love of god does that inflate the problem? Ships that cost more cause more problems for players who field more ships not less! The Sophons would have the advantage.

If your fleet loses on the first battle, there's no issue to begin with, so you can assume his fleet was more powerful than the others.

What? What does that even mean? You lose so there is not a problem because you lose the game?

In each battle just go Nano-Repair -> Nano-Repair -> Nano-Repair.

And the opposing player will consecutively use the offensive type cards to counter.....so how is that even a problem?

Not really.

Yes because promoting warfare somehow doesn't make it easier for the warmongering races right?

This is, first and foremost, completely irrelevant, since the example he gave was that of Star Wars, where ships can be several kilometers long.

And you know ships in ES are the exact same right?

This is already an issue present with a single ship. Trying to navigate a single ship to another system is already a disaster, according to you, and adding more ships doesn't worsen the problem exponentially, but marginally.

How the hell so? If 2 ships collide when exiting FTL speed that is some how makes it as easy as a single ship that won't collide with anything?

Again, these are issues present for every single ship. Even a single ship alone has a chance of ending up inside a star. Adding multiple ships does not make it as difficult as you believe. Yes, it becomes harder, but not to such a mighty extent that it's completely impossible to maneuver 25 ships together.

Yes it does! 25 Ships moving along at FTL speeds can easily collide where as a single ship wont collide with itself.



Quite frankly you seem to be arguing for unlimited sized fleets of death, a scenario where the Cravers and Hissho can never be beaten.



What you suggest makes the game impossible to play, over the current system that is easy to use and play is only a little time consuming.

Igncom1 wrote:
That has nothing to do with the amount of ships, that's more of a problem with how the games modules work.



In the end both are Stacks of doom, only that the current version prevents it being in a silge fleet.

...And you think that's better than the alternative?

Having larger fleets would cut down on the amount of time needed to go through the stack of doom. A single large stack of doom would mean the war will end sooner.

Igncom1 wrote:
Changes to fleet upkeep will prevent a massing of ships, as well will multi battles per fleet from moment speed prevent useless fleets.

No, changes to fleet upkeep will inflate the problem, as it will allow players with more Dust to maintain stacks of doom while the other players, with smaller fleets, have to somehow manage. Try getting a Sophon player to break through a 286-fleet Craver wall of death.

Igncom1 wrote:
Or you know just lose, because you don't have 236 ships and such stacking of fire power on few ships would negate any defenses you are capable of mounting.

If your fleet loses on the first battle, there's no issue to begin with, so you can assume his fleet was more powerful than the others.

Igncom1 wrote:
The only conceivable situation where you can win is if the enemy fleet is made of wood, or you have a larger fleet they they do.

In each battle just go Nano-Repair -> Nano-Repair -> Nano-Repair.

Igncom1 wrote:
This would further promote the eXterminate part of the game to the point where doing anything else is pointless!

Not really.

Igncom1 wrote:
Seeing as even smaller ships are 250M long, and space fleets are not comparable to seaborne fleets.

This is, first and foremost, completely irrelevant, since the example he gave was that of Star Wars, where ships can be several kilometers long.

Igncom1 wrote:
Imagine the complex calculations needed to keep a fleet together in FTL travel, 1 degree of difference can mean a ship ends up on the other side of the galaxy by the end of the journey, not to mention the possibility of 2 ships exiting FTL speeds at the same point.

This is already an issue present with a single ship. Trying to navigate a single ship to another system is already a disaster, according to you, and adding more ships doesn't worsen the problem exponentially, but marginally.

Igncom1 wrote:
Fleets need to be small because of the processing power of the ships computers networking all available data together, thus ensuring you get there in one peace, and not inside of a star.

Again, these are issues present for every single ship. Even a single ship alone has a chance of ending up inside a star. Adding multiple ships does not make it as difficult as you believe. Yes, it becomes harder, but not to such a mighty extent that it's completely impossible to maneuver 25 ships together.

ørret wrote:
There is a screenshot in a related thread with 236 Fleets stacked at one system..now tell me how the funny fleet cap prevents "massive stacks of doom"

First of all such a game is unplayable due to the pure time consumption of resolving all of those battles.

Moreover it is idiotic in every sense of gameplay. A player (even an AI) having such a vast advantage of numbers has to win (MUST win). Instead you can just punch through with your all migthy undefeatable 5 ship fleet and win a game anyone with a meager sense of mind would accept as lost

That has nothing to do with the amount of ships, that's more of a problem with how the games modules work.



In the end both are Stacks of doom, only that the current version prevents it being in a silge fleet.



Changes to fleet upkeep will prevent a massing of ships, as well will multi battles per fleet from moment speed prevent useless fleets.

No! you would figth one epic battle..either you win..or you loose. Compared to the boring nightmare of fighting 236 battles per round i would consider this as an improvement.

Or you know just lose, because you don't have 236 ships and such stacking of fire power on few ships would negate any defenses you are capable of mounting.



The only conceivable situation where you can win is if the enemy fleet is made of wood, or you have a larger fleet they they do.



This would further promote the eXterminate part of the game to the point where doing anything else is pointless!

No really not! But every game worth playing should give you the illusion of a consitent world. Imagine epic space battles in a movie (Like attacking the doom star in star wars) and then compare them to what would be left if it was limited to 5 ships at each side.....

Seeing as even smaller ships are 250M long, and space fleets are not comparable to seaborne fleets.



Imagine the complex calculations needed to keep a fleet together in FTL travel, 1 degree of difference can mean a ship ends up on the other side of the galaxy by the end of the journey, not to mention the possibility of 2 ships exiting FTL speeds at the same point.



Fleets need to be small because of the processing power of the ships computers networking all available data together, thus ensuring you get there in one peace, and not inside of a star.



Races like the Cravers are more loose when it comes to safety.

Igncom1 wrote:
It has been attempted, all it does is allow warlike races to build massive fleets that cannot be stopped, that why there is a limit in the first place, to prevent massive stacks of doom.

There is a screenshot in a related thread with 236 Fleets stacked at one system..now tell me how the funny fleet cap prevents "massive stacks of doom"

First of all such a game is unplayable due to the pure time consumption of resolving all of those battles.

Moreover it is idiotic in every sense of gameplay. A player (even an AI) having such a vast advantage of numbers has to win (MUST win). Instead you can just punch through with your all migthy undefeatable 5 ship fleet and win a game anyone with a meager sense of mind would accept as lost

Igncom1 wrote:


A stacked fleet would end up being worse the many smaller fleets, as there would be no way to effectively kill it once the ball is rolling.

No! you would figth one epic battle..either you win..or you loose. Compared to the boring nightmare of fighting 236 battles per round i would consider this as an improvement.

Igncom1 wrote:


You really want to discuss the implications and command structure for alien species, their space fleets and the reasoning behind the limits for such fleets because of the problems caused by FTL travel, Gravity and other such physics based phenomena?

No really not! But every game worth playing should give you the illusion of a consitent world. Imagine epic space battles in a movie (Like attacking the doom star in star wars) and then compare them to what would be left if it was limited to 5 ships at each side.....

Fenrakk101 wrote:
Not entirely. And while increasing the limit does create problems, like A,rett said, that doesn't mean it should not be attempted.

It has been attempted, all it does is allow warlike races to build massive fleets that cannot be stopped, that why there is a limit in the first place, to prevent massive stacks of doom.



A stacked fleet would end up being worse the many smaller fleets, as there would be no way to effectively kill it once the ball is rolling.



Being able to attack multiple times per turn with the same fleet would prevent the idea of many cannon fodder fleets protecting an actual one as the single fleet could engage all in a single turn and would in the end only end up with the multi-fleets player being weaker for sacrificing ships for no reason.

Theoretically, science is founded upon theoretical discussions.

You really want to discuss the implications and command structure for alien species, their space fleets and the reasoning behind the limits for such fleets because of the problems caused by FTL travel, Gravity and other such physics based phenomena?



That doesn't sound like a waste of time to you?

Igncom1 wrote:
Tweaking the amount of battles a fleet can do in 1 turn to the amount of movement points it has would solve the problem.

Not entirely. And while increasing the limit does create problems, like A,rett said, that doesn't mean it should not be attempted.

Igncom1 wrote:
And don't discuss theoretical circumstances of a theoretical universe, it is an exercise in futility.

Theoretically, science is founded upon theoretical discussions.

Tweaking the amount of battles a fleet can do in 1 turn to the amount of movement points it has would solve the problem.



And don't discuss theoretical circumstances of a theoretical universe, it is an exercise in futility.

Igncom1 wrote:
The games balancing factors still revolve around the sizes of fleets, I do not support this suggestion.

Yes the game is balanced around fleet cp limits. But that does neither mean it is a good decision to do so nor does it mean you cannot achieve better overall balancing by other mechanisms.

The fact that "something is done like that" should not mean (in especially not considering the g2g principle) that it has to stay like that.

This cap invokes much more gamebreaking problems than you can ever solve by further tweaking weapons and armors. Not to forget the athmopheric killing idiocy of having a galactic empire capable of harvesting material out of a sun beeing to stupid to form a fleet of more than 5 ships.

The games balancing factors still revolve around the sizes of fleets, I do not support this suggestion.

ørret wrote:
And maybe an additional checkbox/slider for an empire wide CP cap (if only to prevent the AI from summoning endless ships due to silly FIDS/Byout bonuses.)

You mean, cumulatively over all fleets? That sounds like a challenge, and it also sounds like a good idea for a checkbox/toggle/slider.

My support on this Suggestion. And maybe an additional checkbox/slider for an empire wide CP cap (if only to prevent the AI from summoning endless ships due to silly FIDS/Byout bonuses.)