Transporting fighters and bombers

[Heavyarms]

Shouldn't the rebels be able to do this too? I'm not saying auto spawn the ships, I like the system as it is right now. But I'd like the ability to conceal your fighters inside your capital ships, and if you lose them they are dead. They still count towards your unit capacity on the battlefield, but this way they are protected. I hate it when I'm moving to take a planet's space and I hyper in next to several corvettes that instantly maul my fighters and bombers. Therefore, I'd like to just garrison them inside of those ships' hangars. To counter the ability, the hangar should become a hardpoint on those ships and if it explodes, you lose all the fighters on board. Sound good? Maybe expansion or something...

[GhOsT-Jedi]

Hangers are too easy to take out, But what I think is if it was somthing like this, you could press a button that would be like the deathstar switch, and it would be like a "red alert" making all fighters swarm out.

[My Names Dan]

I would love to be able to garrison my fighters, keep them nice and safe when they are not needed. I would also like to choose exactly what I bring into a space battle in a conquest game. As in I could bring an entire force, but only have one or two ships drop out of hyperspace with the rest sitting in reinforcements. Yeh, good times.

[Cheech Marin]

That would make the game "too complicated" for the 8-year-olds. Sound ridiculous? Yeah, that's what I thought.

[Mandarax]

Agreed, I really *really* wish there was a way you could choose what you start a battle with.

[ScorLibran]

It would be nice to be able to hangar the Alliance's small ships in its bigger ships.

 

But I understand why you can't, story-wise. Alliance fighters and bombers are hyperspace-capable, while Tie fighter/bombers are not. Plus, the unit value of each Rebellion fighter/bomber is slightly higher than those of the Empire, so they're treated as more important units and, in turn, brought into battle individually. One-for-one, the X-Wing > the Tie Fighter, the Y-Wing > the Tie Bomber, etc.

 

The game's well balanced as it is. Could you imagine if Mon Cals could hangar, say, 6 X-Wing squadrons and 4-Y-Wing squadrons, for maybe one more population cost? Even if the hangar is a targetable hardpoint, it'd still be way out of balance.

 

Being able to hangar Alliance fighters and bombers would just be wrong.

 

[Orao]

We asked the question to dev team right after the demo release and what Cheech Marin siad is the awnser from the dev team. In paraphrasing them we got this awnser : "Our beta team and QA team found that it was too confusing to have such feature implemented".

 

Now I'm sorry but I cant see what is so much confusing about havin order to launch fighters/bombers only when we need them.

 

As for choosing which units will start the battle we got this awnser in paraphrasing of course : "We wanted to have stright foward entering into battle in MP games"

 

Ok so instead giving us the limited time to choose which units will start the game they spent they time programing the engine to chose which units will enter the battle first.

 

It may sound like I'm bashing the game but what I would actualy like to have is more freeedom and not having imposed solutions in the game itself. That is all.

 

But I understand why you can't, story-wise. Alliance fighters and bombers are hyperspace-capable, while Tie fighter/bombers are not. Plus, the unit value of each Rebellion fighter/bomber is slightly higher than those of the Empire, so they're treated as more important units and, in turn, brought into battle individually. One-for-one, the X-Wing > the Tie Fighter, the Y-Wing > the Tie Bomber, etc.[/Quote]

 

It seems that you don't understand whta ppl areasking. They don't ask to have X-Wing and Y-wings for free.

 

They want to build them but they want to be able to hangar those fighters and bombers. They want ability to launch them in the battle only when they think that is safe for them and that they can do some dammage.

 

Frankly isn't that frustrating when you see tartan cruiser or corelian corvette heading directly for you fighters and wiping the out whereas all you can do is to watch them destroying a valuable anti-capt bombers ?

[ScorLibran]

You do have some control over what's brought into a space battle. First, the game will try to bring in at least one of each unit type you've moved onto an enemy planet. Then it will fill the rest of the population slots accordingly to try to reach the max (20). This is why I focus on three unit types, plus my heroes, to try to get the particular mix I want. If you come in with 6 different unit types, you'll start the battle with only one of each (if one of each is within the pop cap), and maybe two of a few of them. A thin and unfocused mix, in my opinion.

 

The mix I like at tech 3, for instance, is 2 Nebulon-Bs (pop cost 3 each), the Sundered Heart (pop cost 2), 4 Corellian Corvettes (pop cost 2 each) and 4 Y-Wing squadrons (pop cost 1 each).

 

Right now, at mission 5 in the Rebel campaign, my "standard" total attack fleet is 10-12 frigates (most often Nebulons, occasionally Assault Frigates, but NEVER both types at the same time), 16-20 Corellian Corvettes, 8-10 Y-Wing squadrons and the Sundered Heart. And I get the opening mix described in the previous paragraph consistently every time.

 

Now, something I don't know is if the game will "favor" a unit in your initial spread if you have a lot more of it in your attack fleet. For instance, if I bring 24 Corellian Corvettes and only 4 Nebulon-Bs, will it give me the same starting mix as it would if I bring 10 corvettes and 12 Nebulons?

[Heavyarms]

Orao is correct, that is what I am asking for. In general I'd like the ability of when to deploy ships. I don't mind paying for my fighter and bomber squadrons, but especially in galactic conquest and in AI skirmishes fighters and bombers are just chewed up instantly by corvettes and tartan cruisers. I don't want to send in my units only to have them hide in the corner of the map until I take down their anti-fighter craft. I'd be much happier keeping them safe in the bowels of a big ship.

[ScorLibran]

It seems that you don't understand whta ppl areasking. They don't ask to have X-Wing and Y-wings for free.

 

They want to build them but they want to be able to hangar those fighters and bombers. They want ability to launch them in the battle only when they think that is safe for them and that they can do some dammage.

I know no one's asking for them for free. I'm just saying why, in the story, Rebel ships do not have hangars in the first place. They're not needed if all their ships can traverse hyperspace unattended.

 

Even paying to produce all the Rebel fighters, bringing them into combat hangared and then spawning them - up to the number of squadrons in the hangar - would give the Alliance an unfair advantage, if it doesn't already have one. Making you work harder to protect your fighters/bombers and manually reinforce them alongside your big ships is part of the game balance. That's my point.

 

Frankly isn't that frustrating when you see tartan cruiser or corelian corvette heading directly for you fighters and wiping the out whereas all you can do is to watch them destroying a valuable anti-capt bombers ?

Indeed.

 

This is why (playing the Rebellion) I hang back with my Y-Wings - and leave out X-Wings altogether - and let my corvettes and frigates take the lead. If the first thing I run into is a group of enemy fighters and/or bombers, my corvettes are already there to clean up. If it's an enemy corvette, then my frigates are there to deal with it. If it's an enemy frigate, then I occupy them with my frigates for a moment while my Y-Wings move up. While my Y-Wings are working over an enemy capital ship, I never let my corvettes get too far away...just out of the capital ship's "area of attention", but close enough to sweep in and clear out enemy fighters that may appear.

 

The exception is when there are Broadsides on the map edges that require my corvettes to boost power and go engage them, and then I try to have enough corvettes to split the group - a couple for the main battle, and 2 or 3 to go hunt down the long-range missile cruisers.

 

And of course reverse this for playing the Empire...Tartans vs. X-Wings/Y-Wings and Marauders, except the Tartans aren't as fast, so aren't as good at tracking down the enemy missile cruisers.

[Orao]

I know no one's asking for them for free. I'm just saying why, in the story, Rebel ships do not have hangars in the first place. They're not needed if all their ships can traverse hyperspace unattended.

 

Even paying to produce all the Rebel fighters, bringing them into combat hangared and then spawning them - up to the number of squadrons in the hangar - would give the Alliance an unfair advantage, if it doesn't already have one. Making you work harder to protect your fighters/bombers and manually reinforce them alongside your big ships is part of the game balance. That's my point.

[/Quote]

 

Sorry but I fail to see how this can advantage the empire ? If the empire have same ability as alliance to launche fighters and bombers only when needed then it evens things.

[Jmaster3265]

Maybe this thread or the first post should be merged with the expansion thread? I mean he is talking about an idea for the expansion possibly.

[ScorLibran]

Sorry but I fail to see how this can advantage the empire ? If the empire have same ability as alliance to launche fighters and bombers only when needed then it evens things.

It wouldn't be an advantage for the Empire, but for the Rebel Alliance. The Alliance can hold their own just fine when facing Imperial frigates carrying fighters and bombers in their hangars. I don't want another advantage for the Rebels, personally. If you put hangars on their capital ships, then you'd have to make them a little slower, reduce their armor/shielding or take away a weapon or two...or some combination of these.

 

In this story/game - and in real life - having a hangar on a ship means having less engine, fewer weapons and/or weaker defenses. To make space for something, you have to take away something else. It's only logical.

 

Or you can keep all the weapons/engine power/defenses and just make the ship bigger, at which point it's now a higher class of ship - more expensive to produce, takes longer to produce, takes more resources (population slots) to deploy, etc.

 

Maybe for a future expansion there could be something like a "Fleet Carrier" for the Alliance. It could hangar several squadrons of fighters and bombers (which you'd still pay for individually), and to counter the advantage of extra fighter/bomber protection going into battle and not having to manually reinforce the small ships, the carrier would have a specific vulnerability that would require a constant escort. That'd be interesting, in my opinion.

 

Maybe this thread or the first post should be merged with the expansion thread? I mean he is talking about an idea for the expansion possibly.

Hehehe, it did go that way, didn't it.

 

It started off just as a game balance discussion, from my perspective. It's funny that I was writing the "expansion idea" into this post just as you wrote what I quoted above.

[Orao]

Sorry I misstyped. I wanted to say dissadvantage the empire.

 

There is no dissadvantage for the Empire at all. If the Empire can launch the fighters on demand they they will stand same chance as the rebels. The main difference between imperials and rebels is the cost. Tie fightrs are free as well as Tie bombers. On the other hand you have to pay for X-wings and Y-wings.

 

After all it is up to player to decide when he/she wants to bring in fighters don't you agree with that ?

[ScorLibran]

Yes, except that the Empire having hangared fighters/bombers in their capital ships while the Rebels have to reinforce them manually, and only into open population slots, results in the game being balanced, in my opinion.

 

If you gave the Rebellion hangars and didn't change anything else, the Rebellion would have an advantage and game balance would be negatively affected. If you want to maintain current game balance, then in order to give something, you have to take something away. That's my point.

 

And no one should say that the Rebellion is not as strong in space as the Empire, and hence needs another feature to give them more power or control. I just finished a battle with 6 Nebulon-Bs, 6 Corellian Corvettes and 4 squadrons of Y-Wing bombers, plus reinforcing 2 more Nebulons, to defeat 2 Star Destroyers, 2 Victory cruisers, 5 Acclamators, 7 Broadside cruisers and 1 Tartan. I lost all my Y-Wings, two Corvettes and one Nebulon. Not a bad trade. And I'm no exceptional player...4 days experience playing on normal. If anything, I think the Rebellion is already stronger in space and therefore doesn't need hangared fighters, or anything else different about their game. I never kicked the Rebellion's butt like this when I played the Empire campaign, even with hangared fighters.

 

The advantages I see with hangared fighters and bombers is (1) the ability to protect them when initially going into combat, or when needing to "garrison" them for some reason (i.e., 4 Tartan Cruisers start heading your way), and (2) foregoing the need to manually reinforce fighters and bombers; you could just have a hotkey for the ship to "launch fighters" and one for "launch bombers", enabling deployment with the press of one button instead of pressing "R", selecting a squadron from the list and dragging it to a clear spot in space (and as you know, finding a "green" area is not always easy).

 

And by the way, as I'm sure everyone knows, this is different than the way it works with the Empire. Their frigates and ISD automatically run a fixed number of squadrons all the time, until their total inventory is destroyed.

 

So we're not only talking about giving an Empire feature to the Rebels, but if we're talking about the ability to control deployment and garrisoning of the fighters/bombers in a ship's hangar during combat, then that would be a totally new ability in the game.

[Heavyarms]

But it would be a good ability to control the squadrons, wouldn't it? And I think the fighters stored should keep the pop cap up, or reduce it and force it up when they exit. The former is the better choice. I just don't like the fact that the fighters and bombers are really fragile and that you usually must replenish them after every battle. Therefore, it would be nice to keep them safe if trouble shows up. There's no real advantage besides surprise or protection.

[ScorLibran]

But it would be a good ability to control the squadrons, wouldn't it? And I think the fighters stored should keep the pop cap up, or reduce it and force it up when they exit. The former is the better choice. I just don't like the fact that the fighters and bombers are really fragile and that you usually must replenish them after every battle. Therefore, it would be nice to keep them safe if trouble shows up. There's no real advantage besides surprise or protection.

I agree. To the point that I'm considering not even using Y-Wings anymore, at least on normal difficulty. They do always get wiped out, and quickly too. (One of the reasons I gave up on X-Wings as well.) I end up doing over 90% of the killing with my corvettes and frigates. I know this may be different when I start facing more ISDs more often, but send a flock of Victories/Acclamators/Tartans/Broadsides/Tie Bombers at me, and I'll take them apart with two unit types: the Corellian Corvette and the Nebulon-B Frigate. And several reinforcements of each, of course. Whenever I lose my Y-Wings in battle, I never reinforce them...I always go with a corvette if I've got bomber problems or have to chase down Broadsides, or with a frigate to face down other frigates or corvettes.

 

The little ships are just too much trouble, even though I do acknowledge the importance of bombers against capital ships. I'd rather try to tough it out without them, though. I'll see how it goes.

 

So what you're saying about being able to better control/protect them in battle is something I'd be all for, and would bring me back to trying them again. As long as game balance was maintained, of course.

[Orao]

Ok I understand it now. But there is a flaw in your reasoning . Tie fighter and Tie bombers cost you 0 in population cap.

 

Actually the problem which you encounter (Rebels => to Empire) is because of the gameplay it self. They decided to dumb it to the most simplistic thing which was ever been done. In some ways I would swear that this is Command and Conquer first of its kind but just with much better GFX and in SW univers.

 

Two sides have their exact counterparts which is stupid. Therefor the ISD has his equal in MC, Tartan has Corvette, VSD has Frigate Mk2, Venator has Nebulon B-2.

 

In my opinion it is pretty stupid but it couldn't have been otherwise or with this gameplay you will have some heavy unbalance.

 

I only regret that they didn't keep their initial system for gameplay which was simplified Rebelion system. We can still find remaining parts of the code in the XML files.

 

As for my part I'm allready bored with this game. I'm playing it since it day 1. I ended up doing same thing over and over.

 

And BTW before the game release we were talking about doom fleet. I would just notify you all that doom fleet is possible in early stages of the game. It is how I've beaten the AI on hard. The shortest GC ever played.

 

 

P.S.

 

For those who are looking for more depth in games try Galactic Civilizations 2

[ScorLibran]

Ok I understand it now. But there is a flaw in your reasoning . Tie fighter and Tie bombers cost you 0 in population cap.

I know, and I figured this into my reasoning of game balance. And you're right, it does give the Empire an advantage in fighter and bomber management during combat, but what I'm saying is that it's balanced by other advantages the Rebellion has.

 

Actually the problem which you encounter (Rebels => to Empire) is because of the gameplay it self. They decided to dumb it to the most simplistic thing which was ever been done. In some ways I would swear that this is Command and Conquer first of its kind but just with much better GFX and in SW univers.

Good point. You'd think that a galactic empire able to conquer almost the entire galaxy, as they are portrayed, would be considerably stronger face-to-face than any resistance like the Alliance, and therefore the Alliance would have to resort almost fully to "sneak" tactics for any mission. They wouldn't be so able to face off with the Empire in open space and win.

 

Two sides have their exact counterparts which is stupid. Therefor the ISD has his equal in MC, Tartan has Corvette, VSD has Frigate Mk2, Venator has Nebulon B-2.

 

In my opinion it is pretty stupid but it couldn't have been otherwise or with this gameplay you will have some heavy unbalance.

I'm torn on this one. I've never played a game before with such clear cut "counters" for each unit. As I do in real life, though, I like "breaking from the norm" and trying things differently than expected. Not that I'm going to attack an ISD with only X-Wing fighters ( ), but I have landed ground assault forces with only Vader and as many stormtroopers as possible - no vehicles of any kind - just to see how far I'd get. (Not bad until I ran into artillery, at which point I'd run the sole-surviving Vader by himself back to a reinforcement point to replace all my dead stormtroopers.)

 

As for my part I'm allready bored with this game. I'm playing it since it day 1. I ended up doing same thing over and over.

Then do something different! When I get bored with a game I love, I start inventing...thinking of new ideas to make it fun again. Granted, 90% of the time they suck and I get killed, but it's fun trying them, and fulfilling when I find that occasional idea that works and makes the game fun again.

 

For instance, with Diablo II, when I had beaten the game with every character type, I started playing naked characters...no items, no armor, no weapons...relying entirely on their skills, and on a bit more running away to stay alive. But I was able to finish the game with two of them, and it was very fulfilling.

 

Not sure what could be done in EaW like that, though. I guess you can't tell your soldiers to lay down their weapons and slug it out mano-a-mano, huh? Maybe limiting yourself to only one type of space unit, perhaps? It might be possible to take over the galaxy with only Corellian Corvettes. If you're a good enough player. (I know I'm not. Yet...)

 

And in a galactic conquest game playing the Empire, on the ground Vader and the Emperor are about all you need...no soldiers or vehicles. So you could try a "Master and Apprentice" game, using only those two for all ground combat.

 

Just some ideas, but I'm getting off-topic.

[jedi3112]

I agree with heavyarms and orao here. The gameplay is way too simple. Lets just take a look at points you stated here.

 

Hangered fighters, combined with the release on demand. I think this should have been in. I find it very frustrating that my initial fighters never make it out of the battle alive. Now for the Empire this doesn't mean that much to me as it does for the Alliance as I haven't paid for them, but I still could have used them better later on. Still with the Empire I rarely lose a ship I paid for. The Rebels should also be able to hangar fighters. To compensate the Rebel Pop Cap in space battles should also be 20 and not 25. Making a button on the ship is not that hard, making the AI use it also isn't hard. Furthermore I think it should have been done the way it is normally done in games, where you click the garrisoned unit you want to get out (Age of Empires 2 and further, SWGB etc.). Maybe an AI setting for emergency launch should also be good, say 'if shield are lower then [this] launch all fighters'

 

The units you get when initating combat. Just take a look at what Rome did, you had a preparation fase first. I don't believe there was a timer for it, but you could just place the units where you want them (inside a certain area). If EAW was done this way, we could not only select our first wave, but we could also have our anti-fighter stuff up front.

 

Now the next thing I find frustrating is the fact that I can't use aggresiveness on my units. I've had units that did nothing when attacked when I wanted them to attack. As well as units that decided to go chase enemy units halfway across the map when I wanted them to protect something (mostly an area). There should have been settings like [stand ground] [chase] [scout but don't attack] [chase in a limited raduis].

 

I would also like my units to pick their targets with more care. Given the extreme modifiers for using the right units, the units should make use of this and fire at what they're countering first, and at what is countering them last. However if I select a unit to be attacked this should override the AI attack.

 

I've finished both campaigns and did the GC and skirmish, but now I don't play the game anymore (untill I can set my mind to modding).

 

Like I said many times, things could have been better and they should have been better.

[Admiral Raven]

How about giving the hangar ability to just Home One or something? In the films we clearly see it is carrying fighters and it is meant to be more of a carrier than a battleship.

[ScorLibran]

A lot of people want hangars on Alliance ships, but has anyone thought about what to take away from the Alliance to maintain balance? And don't say 'nothing'...the Rebellion already whoops up nicely on the Empire in space, especially at tech 4 and 5. Do we really want it easier for the Rebellion?

 

My Empire campaign was much tougher in space than my Alliance campaign was. I already want to cripple the Rebellion to make things more even. If they had hangars, they'd have to be crippled twice. Perhaps no Mon Cals and a pop cap of 18?

 

Don't get me wrong...I like the idea of better fighter/bomber control. But the Rebellion is already plenty strong in space. If you make things much easier for them, fighting the Empire wouldn't be fun anymore.

 

More reasonable would be perhaps removing a couple of weapons from a Rebel ship that gets a hangar, and making it slower. That I'd go for. After all - using a real-life example - aircraft carriers are slower and more lightly armed (not counting their aircraft) than ships half their size, right?

 

Also, I agree completely with the need for fleet prep before space battles. It would be a very logical addition. Although I have found a method for controlling how many of each of my types gets into the initial group, so it's really a matter of convenience rather than necessity to be able to create a "starting roster".

[Heavyarms]

Whoever "whoops up" on the other is pretty much determined by who's the better player. I've beaten the rebels as the empire head on at tech 5 before in space skirmishes. I think the empire has an advantage in space with stronger higher-level capital ships. Sure, the frigates and cruisers of the rebels have the shield power thingy, but it's pretty useless if you know how to counter it. I don't think it is a major balance upset, as we've already established that the fighters and bombers are really weak and that they are pretty much throw-aways when you are invading/in skirmish? Isn't that in itself an upset of balance that needs corrected?

[Orao]

More reasonable would be perhaps removing a couple of weapons from a Rebel ship that gets a hangar, and making it slower. That I'd go for. After all - using a real-life example - aircraft carriers are slower and more lightly armed (not counting their aircraft) than ships half their size, right?

[/Quote]

 

If you look at US Navy and French Navy carriers then it is true bu if you looka at Soviet carrier now Russina such as Kuznetsov you are completly wrong.

 

Nimitz class carrier

 

Builder Newport News Shipbuilding Co., Newport News, Va.

Power Plant Two Nuclear Power Plant (A4W Pressurized Water Reactor)

Four shafts, Four propellers, with five blades each

Length, overall 1,092 feet (332.85 meters)

Flight Deck Width 252 feet (76.8 meters)

Beam 134 feet (40.84 meters)

Displacement Approx. 97,000 tons (87,300 metric tons) full load

Speed 30+ knots (34.5+ miles per hour)

Aircraft 85

Aircraft elevators Four

Catapults Four

Armament 4 Sea Sparrow launchers

3 Phalanx CIWS 20mm mounts [Nimitz & Ike]

4 Phalanx CIWS 20mm mounts [Vinson and later]

Combat Systems SPS-48E 3-D air search radar

SPS-49(V)5 2-D air search radar

3 Mk91 Fire Control

 

Multi-Function Radar (MFR) [CVN-77]

Volume Search Radar (VSR) [CVN-77]

 

AN/SLQ-32(V)4 active jamming/deception

AN/WLR-1H ESM

Service Life 50 years

Crew Ship's Company: 3,200

Air Wing: 2,480

 

More details here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cvn-68-specs.htm

 

 

Now watch for KUZNETSOV

 

Crew 1,960

Aircrew 626

flagship staff 40

Dimensions

Length 302.3 m

length at waterline 270 m

Beam 72.3 m

beam at waterline 35.4 m

Draft 9.14 m

Displacement

standard displacement 43,000 tons

full load displacement 55,000 tons

maximum displacement 58,600 tons

Propulsion

steam turbine quantity 2 x 50,000 horsepower

Boilers 8

Propellers 4 fixed pitch propellers

generating capacity turbogenerators 9 x 1,500 kW

generating capacity diesel generators quantity 2 x 50,000 horsepower 6 x 1,500 kW

Performance

full speed 29 knots

range at maximum speed 3,850 miles at 29 knots

maximum range speed 18 knots

maximum range 8,500 miles at 18 knots

Endurance 45 days

Aviation

fixed wing 16 x yakovlev Yak-41M, (Yak-141)

12 x sukhoi Su-27K, (Mikoyan-gurevich MiG-29K)

rotary wing 4 x Ka-27-LD, 18 x Ka-27

PLO, 2 x Ka-27-S

Weapons

Missiles

granit antiship missile system 12 launchers 12 antiship missiles

air defence gun-missile adgm systems

klinok adam system 24 launchers

192 vertical launch missiles

kashtan adgm system, 4 command and 8 combat modules 256 ad missiles and 48,000 cartridges

30 mm AK-630 ad gun mount 8 x 6 with 24,000 cartridges

Anti-submarine weapons

Udav-1 integrated A/s and A/t system 60 rockets

Systems

electronic systems combat information Centre

aviation combat information centre

fighter aircraft guidance system

navigation complex

radio communications system

space communications system

electronic countermeasures system

active search sonar system capable of detecting torpedoes

Radars air and surface target acquisition radar

Low-flying target acquisition radar

flight control radar

navigation radar

4 gun-missile fire control radars

 

More info here http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/kuznetsov/specs.html

[jedi3112]

The fighters are just too weak to not be hangared. Considering the Imperial fighters are free they don't really feel that, but for the Rebels it's different. So something must be done about this. Useless units aren't fun and should be left out don't they? So they have to be made usefull. That means they must be kept save untill they can be deployed safely. The answer is hangars. Still the Rebels are a bit too powerfull already, even in space, though not much of a problem for me it still means it's unbalanced, and considering the Empire should have the edge on both ground and space IMO that makes it worse. This means that that is also something that needs to be fixed. So I think there should be some editing and experimenting to see what works well and what doesn't. Using EVERY unit should make sence if you ask me. So that way there shouldn't be useless units.

 

I have even come to the point where I don't buy the fighters anymore. I keep replacing Y-Wings if I did so I replaced them with the Corellian Gunship. That ship may do less damage to hardpoints, but it can be pulled out in time and it is also effective against enemy fighters and bombers. So by using this unit I don't need X-Wings, A-Wings, Y-Wings and Corellian Corvettes (though the Corvette is a bit more effective against fighters). The gunship is even effective against the ISD. Though I must admit the unit itself also needs tweaking, but it's in the game the way it is. The only reason I ever buy Y-Wings is to use to the bombing runs. I even assigned them to my ground forces instead of space forces (and I always do the space battle first and sent in the ground forces after I've won the space battle, I wonder if anybody doesn't do this?).