can it carry fighters??
    

Well, I did stick it in a fleet with almost two dozen tiny fighters

they were in the fleet or on board?? And does it have any bonuses on range or logistics??    
besides that the ship is AWESOME!!!    
The graphics could have been better though. BUT HOW???????  
Is it made with the help of cheats or did a bug in the game make it more powerful then actually should have been??
TELL THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!   
WHAT WAS YOUR TECH LEVEL????

And what does

Zomfging

mean??

Zomfging is a... well... Wiki zomfg
And no, I did not cheat. As I said before, Minimization had odd bugs that would sometimes under circumstances still unknown to me increase the size of the hull and decrease the size of the components. I had researched everything except for Technological Victory, and my Research Funding was set to 0% so I could play with the Paragon around the galaxy a bit. After loading it up in 1.2, I saw that the ship was using 336/186 room. My earlier flagship, known as the TCCS Executor class, was demoted from a Flagship to a Heavy Battle Ship. I had sold a fleet of six of them to the Drengin, and proceeded to attack it with the Paragon alone. The frikkin beast took down two, and almost cracked the third before finally going blooie.
And the fighters were in the fleet, not on board. BUT! There was a wierd bug that I almost ended up using. To each side of the carrier, a single hardpoint appeared in the middle of nowhere. I was tempted to make two small fighers at those places And the great thing is, his ship really worked! Replacable fighters were being lost by the hundreds, but this ship's fighter squadron successfully cleared the whole Drengin space. And the Drengin were powerful.

what does tccs stand for and give me a screenshot of those executors(with stats).
that ship is great.you know there are two other ships like that that were made(without bugs):The sentinal,it was almost the same size as yours and not as fast but with really big guns.it was in a gameplay example.i don't remember but i think it was in the databanks,gameplay examples or you could use this link.

a list of gameplay examples

the second ship was the dominator:it was (maybe)the same size as your impressive paragon but whole lot more effective with other ships.it took on a whole lot more then your incredible(i mean the "incredible") paragon and its armour was its superstrength(weapons were average super-heavy battleship stuff.nowhere near yours.you should check 'em out. Oh yeah, I saw another great ship and I think it could outclass yours its called the "blue whale" cuz it was built by some altarian loving guy.(not me,sorry to say)there was another but it was just a heavy battleship. BUT MAN, IT LOOKED SOOOOO COOL!!!it was the Night Hawk.I forgot where i saw it but i named my profile after it(see my name)(sorry again but I didn't build that either)my ships are standard heavy battle cruisers or just eye-candy (fast) frigates. My largest and baddest ship was the Greyhound-class heavy Battleship
and my most beautiful (yet formiddable) creation: Black shark-class Man'o'War. All beams,guns,armour and sheilds for this good lookin' bad boy.It was almost as powerful as the Greyhound but smaller and slower. I built the Black shark after the night hawk. they looked similar but mine was better and armed to the teeth(get it shark,teeth).

This was before I made Tranquility Corpus into a playable race, while I still played them as a Custom Race. TCCS means Tranquility Corpus Capital Ship, and TCFC means Tranquility Corpus Fighter Carrier. A ship of the TCCS Paragon class is renamed into TCFS Paragon for Tranquility Corpus Flagship. I'll get you those Executor shots and stats later.
EDIT:
Behold!

I think the executor is better(though ugly)

Yeah lolzz    Maybe when the enemy sees it, they run away with fear of its ugglyness

j/k


Monc34

Hey,
If you look carefully at the first screenshot after the stats it looks like a giant hamster laying on its stomach with a smiley face and its hands on its chin like a kid watching tv.      

If you look carefully at the first screenshot after the stats it looks like a giant hamster laying on its stomach with a smiley face and its hands on its chin like a kid watching tv.

Hamster???

Hey, If you look carefully at the first screenshot after the stats it looks like a giant hamster laying on its stomach with a smiley face and its hands on its chin like a kid watching tv.

I lold.

  Thats a great imagination man   


LoLL


CAT VERSION       

Monc34

While it makes sense to sometimes place multiple types of defenses on your ships, it is best to stick with only one weapon type. Different defenses will combine in defending against an attack. Only weapons of the same type are combined into an attack; each weapon type is a separate attack against the target's combined defenses.

Yes, but the AI focuses, and rarely ever uses multiple defense types. By using multiple different weapons, I have made the vessels effective against several races. I never have only a single-weapon armed vessel(unless in the very early game in special circumstances), and only arm my flagships with three different systems.

I never have only a single-weapon armed vessel(unless in the very early game in special circumstances), and only arm my flagships with three different systems.

Interesting. That's what I'd like to do, but it rarely turns out to be the most effective option for me (I think). Is it worth giving up the extra damage you get by specializing in something the AI doesn't have as much defense for?

Yes. See, sometimes the AI gets funky, and while you're on your way to invade and wtfpwn the Drengin, the Torians get paranoid and attack you. Between the Drengin missles and armor, and the Torian beams and shields, it really pays to have a backup. And the AI loves to declare war on every little bit on Bright and above.
Normally, the missiles are the most powerful, but lately I've kinda remodeled the weapons and techs a bit so they're more balanced. For example, I made the Black Hole Gun half as powerful as a Black Hole Eruptor, but also half as big and half as expensive. So far I am pleased with the outcome, but am worried about something that I have to run further tests on. Do 10 guns of the same type that deal 1 damage do the same damage as 1 gun that deals 10 damage? I want to know if the game rolls damage per weapons group(1-10 for the 10 guns, 1-10 for the 1 gun), or for each gun individually(1-1 for the 10 guns, 1-10 for the one gun).

Black holes fired in missiles seems really stupid. I mean how in the universe can you fire a stinkin' black hole in a missile. And wouldn't the ship that fired the black hole be sucked up, As well as creating a black hole that poses danger to any ships coming close to it. The logical ultimate weapon would be anti-matter.

Its out of phase, it says so in the weapon description, it only comes to this dimension when it is very close to the target to do maximun damage.

Anyway, its a fraking game!, you think there are gnomes, dragons,fairies and that sort of sh-it out there??

Monc34    

Whatever

The most likely implementation of carriers in any version of GalCiv II would probably be to allow a number of "boarded" fighters to travel farther without life support, and maybe engines; a logistics bonus would likely prove too advantageous, since the advantage fighters have lies in their sheer numbers. What's tricky about that, though, is the fact that you risk rendering frigates, battleships, and dreadnoughts useless--they're already at a disadvantage against swarms of fighters, after all.

Well, for wealthy nations in the real world, the balance did indeed tip in favor of strategic carriers. If you still need to lob an elephant at a stationary target, there's always battleships, though. And for less wealthy nations, all those lesser conventional forces are still useful, because that's what they can afford.

What is the tech prequisite for Mini-fighters??

Do 10 guns of the same type that deal 1 damage do the same damage as 1 gun that deals 10 damage? I want to know if the game rolls damage per weapons group(1-10 for the 10 guns, 1-10 for the 1 gun), or for each gun individually(1-1 for the 10 guns, 1-10 for the one gun).

I think someone said that they roll per each weapon type... so 10x 1 damage beam is the same as 1x 10 damage beam... but of course those 1 damage beams take up a crap-ton more space so its pretty balanced.

I still don't believe that multiple weapon types are the way to go. Example:

0/18/0 attack vs 0/4/0 defense (assuming max rolls) = 14 damage done
6/6/6 attack vs 0/4/0 defense (again assuming max) = 4+2+4 = 10 damage done
9/9/0 attack vs 0/4/0 defense = 7+5 = 12 damage done

So yes, with multiple attack types you get a couple more shots vs armor "weakness" but you also get rolled against 3x resulting in reduced overall damage.

For defense though, if you have multiple opponents and can't specialize, then it IS better to spread out your defenses instead of just picking one.. but only marginally.

0/24/0 attack vs 4/4/4 defense = (4+2+2 defense) = 18 damage
0/24/0 attack vs 0/12/0 defense = 12 damage
0/24/0 attack vs 12/0/0 defense = 20 damage

Fully agree with fuzzy, 1 weapon specialization is better, just make 3 ships with the 3 diferent weapons, and spread out the defenses to the 3 armor, PD, and shields. best way to do it. unless you dont want to spend the additional 3-5 minutes putting the 3 diferent weapons, in that case its your personal opinion...


Monc34

Well, for wealthy nations in the real world, the balance did indeed tip in favor of strategic carriers. If you still need to lob an elephant at a stationary target, there's always battleships, though. And for less wealthy nations, all those lesser conventional forces are still useful, because that's what they can afford.

Exactly: in WWII, for instance, your typical naval fleet consisted of the aircraft carrier(s) in the middle, surrounded by two rings of vessels for protection. The inner ring would be made up of battleships--for deterring enemy ships and aircraft--while the outer ring would be composed of destroyers for deterring attacks from submarines.

It's not hard to see something like that happening in fleets of spacecraft, either; it's just that instead of rings of defense, you have spheres.