What cykur said.

I think the problem lies in fact that OP is Cap spammer and likes to build his SBs. So a lot of resources become tied up which leaves him vulnerable to hit and run tactic. since his fleet cannot be split because it consists out of 3-4 carrier caps and a few assailants with multiple unupgraded star bases.

Carrier caps got nerfed so hes not as successful of forcing enemy to sink all in defense so enemy can afford to haras him.

Yes ogrovs give a punch but getting 10+ of them together to haras takes a lot of resources. I would say hit and run tactic is exactly what counters his style of play. Therefore he has problems with it.

If you don't see PJs 10 siege will do th same thing. Kill planet and run. I would say though that siege are much easier to counter and therein lies the problem.

well, durp, thats what i mean by ship movement.

but the actual dps, from the infocards and entity files are unchanged...

fighter and bomber dps might actually be REDUCED because they will end up traveling farther away from thier target...  this is something that should be tested... hmmm...

I had a nice-sized fleet in this particular game.  The problem wasn't that I couldn't send ships after the Orgovs, but that they were hopping around from well to well and seemed to move at a fast pace.  That's what bothers me.  I'm fine with keeping their power the way it is now if their speed is reduced.

Regarding Skinatra spam, I like to make two of them as a standard build.   They are great for clearing large militias off of terrans and deserts.  Alternatively, one Egg and one Skin is a nice combo if you're in an eco spot.  A lot of players if not most of the pros seem to start out with two caps now-a-days.  I'll make more caps or start spamming out flaks and LRMs depending on the situation and what I need the ships for.  Skinatras are a particularly good value because they are combination carriers + fortified siege frigates, so making more than two isn't necessarily foolish depending on your needs and what's going on in the game.  If a Level 3 Skinatra has 4 strikecraft and can average fielding 4 more with Level 2 Scramble Bombers, that's like having 4 carrier cruisers (56 fleet supply) plus two siege frigates plus Level 1 Repair Cloud).  Making more than 1 or 2 Skinatras isn't necessarily as retarded as it may sound.

I tend to build no more than 2 starbases unless I have a lot of money or a compelling reason to do so (opponent is not TEC, I have lots of money and phasic trap, etc.).  Starbases are useful early in the game when fleets are small.  They serve a purpose and have benefited me and won games for me numerous times.  Sometimes it makes sense to go on the defensive.  As a general rule, if my opponent is a TEC I try not to invest too much in starbases if I can avoid it.

Chasing those suckers around and having to constantly focus on where they are running off to is tedious.  In my view, they shouldn't be able to run away from pursuers with impunity that easily.  If you lose your focus for just 20 seconds (perhaps because you are managing a battle elsewhere) then they have the chance to jump away from your pursuers to another well where they can do some serious damage.

I wish you guys would drop this silly stereotype you've formed about my style of play and actually read my damned posts.

Siege don't do nearly as much damage to planets as Orgovs do to structures.  Also, siege seem to move slower and siege frigates have to go to the center of the gravity well to get anything done, which allows pursuers to catch up to them and take them down.  They cannot bomb a planet safely from the edge of a gravity well and run away like Orgovs can.

If Ogrovs are supposed to be a space equivalent to a siege engine, why not simply making them have a warm-up and cool-down time from firing before they can engage their engines and move again? And before someone goes all high and mighty, I am not talking about the cool down between shots, I'm talking something analogous to the initial setup and take down of siege engines and old WW2 Artillery prior to their ability to fire. Perhaps it takes a few seconds to divert power from engines to firing. This would keep them powerful but would lower their ability to be used as raiding units which I don't think was the intent. Granted, they could still be part of a small raiding fleet to great effect but you wouldn't have Ogrov wolfpacks able to jump from system to system with impunity destroying economic assets before any sort of effective resistance could be mounted.

All that being said, I offer this only as an objective possible solution to the originally presented alleged balance issue. Personally, I don't find them to be that big of a problem. 2 Hangars at important worlds with a half dozen scouts are usually enough for me to keep them from being little more than a slight annoyance.

I don't think they are over powered. It was more of a rhetoric question.

Just because I lost to them 1x doesn't mean that. I wasn't scouting and i wasn't ready for such an attack.

For next time I will be more prepared as my knowledge so far told me that in order to be successful you need minimum 3 of them. I do think that cobalt spam or disciples would work better against them.

This is a sub-problem of a larger general problem I forever encountered when I was active playing this game.  You are winning against some a-hole who attacked you.  You had to sacrifice a lot to get to this position, and you lost a lot while the a-hole was raiding your planet before your fleet could make it back.  So you are making him pay.  But then he takes that high-level high-value cap that you are targeting and jumps out of the grav well.  So naturally you follow.  But when you arrive at the next well, you find that he's jumped right back where he came from.  So you follow, only to find that he's jumped right back again.  Rinse.  Repeat.

This infuriated me when I encountered it.  The tactic should have been removed from the game from day 1.  There is no reason to allow such an asinine tactic in the game.  I had a lot of people propose different "remedies" (cough) to the situation, but these remedies were all ill-advised.  For instance, people would say "split up your fleet, leave half in the home grav well, chase with the other half."  So then his full fleet in the home grav well gets to sit there and pound on my half fleet?

"The problem is vasari r too strong. Nerfing the other races isn't feasible."  

Not quite the case anymore, although I agree with putting away the nerf bat. With the Novalith/Hoshi buff as well as the nerfs that the Vasari have received of late I'd put those two almost on par. The problem is that the Advent is too weak, particularly against Vas.

Illum buff plus a fix for the Domina would do wonders however.  

Easy fixes but probably not priorities.

To fix Domina, simply increase range of Perseverance and make it not have to face target to be used. I would also lower AM cost, duration & cool down so that it can be more reactive. This would make it at least as useful as reactive nanite armor with a disable immunity instead of armor boost. Suppression aint bad as is, not my favorite ability, but it has uses as is.

To fix Starfish, it just needs a general buff and it would be useful. Approx. 10% increase in shields, hull and damage would probably be enough to make it viable. So instead of 980,560,15 of Hull, Shields & Damage respectively; a boost to 1080, 620,18 respectively would be enough for me to start re-integrating into my fleets again. Or at least give it a 2nd look. This would be the simplest fix.

The much cooler but  I think infinitely more complex fix for the Starfish would change the mechanics of how it attacks. IMO you could buff its attack 2 ways and make it much cooler. When starfish is attacking multiple targets, its orientation would remain stable, when attacking a single target it would spin at a fast speed allowing all plasma plasma launchers to fire in rapid succession at a single target effectively increasing the rate of fire as a whole somewhere around 150-200%. This would greatly increase its damage output and utility while it still not being OP due to being balanced with high cost and low hp/shield.

Or you could change its attack completely to a beam type and the damage output per beam would be a direct function of how many beams were firing at once. Single beam would mean all energy is directed at a single target greatly increasing damage. Conversely when you attack 5 targets at once, you are back to the low damage per target figure with utility coming from the fact that you are attacking 5 things at once. The single beam would not have to be exactly 5x more powerful than the 5 seperate beams for it to be useful, perhaps a sliding scale with 5 beams doing 75% of normal damage, 4 @ 100%, 3 @ 125%, 2 @ 150%, 1 @ 200%. Its a sliding scale with a slight exponential component but I think it effectively conveys what I am getting at.

people here are scared of seekers  .  Must be tec players. Vasari don't complain 

That is still a problem, whether you like it or not.

The goal is to have Vasari = Advent = TEC, while still having all of their individual specialties.

I don't know if anyone said it already, but it's Ogrov, not Orgov

The problem is fighters are so weak against anti-strike craft defenses, even more so than bombers, and there just isn't enough strike craft and antimatter regeneration in the hangar defenses. Hangar defenses need a buff, I would go so far as to double the number of supported squadrons and greatly enhance the antimatter reactors.

Increasing the amount of strikecraft is generally bad for one reason: They're CPU intensive. Adding to their number only increases lag.

I've been running my fighter-bomber mod and it is seeming to work very well.  The new strike craft ONLY go into starbases and hangars--carriers remain untouched.

I introduced:

• Assault Fighters--which are simply a slightly faster and more heavily armed and armored fighter allowing permanent facilities a slight edge in intercepts. 
• Heavy Bombers--crawls toward the target and has point blank, slow  weapons--plus No fighter defense but exceptional hull and armor.  Good for loitering over  stationary siegers and doing good damage while being too slow to chase down fast ships.
• Interceptors--consider it an SR-71 fighter-bomber.  Is very fast and does tremendous damage on very light armor and scouts in a single pass but only has 15 hull and takes 2 minutes to rebuild plus has a 10 second cooldown.  Is designed to intercept lone scouts in friendly territory and can argument fighters in a pinch.

I'm still playing with support craft but for the issue brought up here I'd say they aren't needed.  I did increase the loiter time of based strike craft so they don't evaporate as quickly when their host base is destroyed.  It makes it much harder to simply camp fighters, bombers and siege/bombardment assets over an enemy planet and slowly blow up everything he has completely unopposed.

All these types I added are SINGLE craft squadrons (less cpu need) and stop a player casually touring and shelling you rear areas without a fleet garrison.

I'm not trying to pitch my mod here but I personally found it annoying as heck that you can stroll through enemy territory with throw away units and the only real counter was they had to peel off valuable fleet assets needed at their front to stop you.

None of the ships I added "dominate" anything other than lone,  unescorted scouts and to a lesser extent lone siege craft and they don't ever move out of their gravity well.  They can easily not be added to starbases if  you want to make sure they aren't capable of being used offensively.