I signed this thread because of all the carrier thread spamming (one thread would be ok, but jeez), but I don't hate them. I do care if they are implemented properly though, and I'm not convinced this is possible.

Currently, I haven't seen a good reason for including them, except for 'flavour'.

Aircraft carriers on Earth carry aircraft to give them air support, and spread a country's air power across stretches of water. It adds a new dimension to combat that would otherwise leave the fleet at a disadvantage.

How would spacecraft carrying spacecraft be good for the game?

In Battlestar Galactica, the Vipers are useful because the Battlestar is harder to maneouver, and you're not putting all your eggs in one basket by keeping your guns on one ship. In GalCiv2, ships are equally maneouverable, and it's already possible to use multiple smaller ships instead of larger ones.

There is also too much disagreement between players on what they would actually do in the game!

I think we should forget Carriers in GC2, but reconsider them for GC3. From what I've gathered, GC3 will have tactical battles, so there may be a niche there that carriers can fill. (Perhaps larger ships have to spend more time turning to change direction).

As it is right now, carriers would be too much work to implement, without adding any serious benefits to the game. Therefore, I would rather forget about them this time.

Maybe next time!   

Wow, such hostility over a simple topic. I had the impression that this forum was for anyone interested in the game and for sharing ideas across a broad spectrum of players. Obviously there is a division amongst the ranks. I haven't noticed any absurd or idiotic comments in any carrier thread where those of us who support having carriers bad mouth others for wanting things that they want. I guess that goes to show the intelligence level of some people in here. Always interesting reading what a hostile and biased crowd will say to belittle others. Nice post.

Agreed. Can't they take no for an answer?

They don't break any rules, so hopeless as they may be, they can stay.

The topic itself may not break any rules, but it's starting to become apparent, to me at least, that the intent of these posts and multiple threads is just to annoy people.

As earlier suggested some form of combining or sticky where folks who want can rant to their hearts content without cluttering up the forums with these posts would be a good idea.

I personally like the idea of carriers in the game but that horse died long ago. Give it up already.

personally like the idea of carriers in the game but that horse died long ago. Give it up already.

So then all of you are going to give up asking for anything you want in the game as well? Will you quit asking for a green turn button? Or a nerfed morale/economy building? Or rewritten alliance code? Or altered ship dynamics? Or a million and one other things that the devs made updates for? Updates which caused many of us to have problems running our games because some people abused the AI? Updates which amount to meaningless online time wasted on downloading and searching to see if there is an update to fix the issue you got when you downloaded the last update that was supposed to fix the economy thingy? Please. If the devs can selectively add whatever they want to, then they have to listen to all ideas, from all players. But to tell us to give up asking for something, then quit asking for things yourself. Maybe what you want added is trivial to me. Who knows. Who really cares. If you don't like the music playing you change the station. Same in here. Don't read the thread. And if you read it and have nothing positive to say (as I was told once in here by some little elfin character) then don't say anything at all!

Face it folks, the battles are the space equivalent of "Wooden ships & Iron fighters" (see - nice species/gender neutral transform of the original saying   ). Until we get tactical battles where range of the various weapon systems become part of the mix, the discussions are for intellectual exploration only but effectively moot.

One vote for a sticky for discussion purposes and to keep the redundant thread numbers down.

So then all of you are going to give up asking for anything you want in the game as well?

I can only speak for myself, but once the rational arguments have been made and rejected, Yes. Once the conversation devolves into:

LALALALALA BUILD CARRIERS LALALALALA MUAHAHA!

LALALALALA BURN CARRIERS LALALALALAL HAM.

it's pretty clear rational argument is over.

People often disagree with ideas posted here. But generally, they make their argument against the idea in the thread itself and that's the extent of it. When was the last time you saw a thread whose sole purpose is to complain about a topic that they're sick of hearing about? This is the only one I've ever seen.

To continue posting about such a subject seems like you're more interested in trolling for a flame war than in rational discourse.

Ah Mumblefratz, even though I am a staunch advocate of carriers I do have to agree with reply #32. Yes, it is sad that it has degenerated to such and to think, I started this by dredging up an apparently sore subject which I honestly had never bothered proving the forums for. As my original post was, I want an aircraft carrier!!!!, I was only throwing one out there since everyone was saying what to put in the expansion or even GC3. If ever I'd known what kind of response, I don't think I would have posted it, so sorry to all of you who hate seeing this topic. It is apparent that Stardock hates them (for whatever reason) so we will never see them, short of a mod, if it is possible. Till then, there's nothing wrong with dreaming, so long as you don't tell the people in here what you're dreaming about! LOL. Sometimes you guys,,,,,, sheesh!

It is apparent that Stardock hates them (for whatever reason) so we will never see them, short of a mod, if it is possible.

They don't hate them. They simply judge that there are other things worth investing time more than carriers.

I'm not against carriers, but the devs have made clear that they won't be added and this should be the final point of any discussion. Every posting about carriers after Brad's statement was just a nuisance, even more when done in a new thread. And the collection of "signatures" for carriers is just as childish as ours here.

Did you finally buy the game Zubaz?
) check your recent posts. Every time you make a post about carriers, I drown a bag of kittens. Please, think of the kittens.
LMAO! Just read that one from a couple of days ago. Awesome reply. I love it.

Why do you guys hate carriers so much? Give me a firm reason. And don't say that its because its not gonna happen.

I'm absolutely astounded.

Read this very carefully. It's not the IDEA of carriers that anyone here is interested about. Brad has confirmed these will never happen, and I really wasn't that interested either way. I don't hate carriers.

I do hate logging into the forums in the morning and seeing seven threads about carriers. Seven. Some were dragged up from April just to prove a point. The point has been made, and the counter point has been made. This should now be dead, or at least in one post, rationally arguing the pros and cons.

This obviously will not happen on the forums, because people like have absolutely no comprehension whatsoever of the problem. It's the damn threads.

Now, you can shut up, because THAT'S the reason so many people are pissed off at this topic.

I personally like the idea of carriers in the game but that horse died long ago. Give it up already.

Amen

I think we should forget Carriers in GC2, but reconsider them for GC3

Actually, there is going to be an expansion after Dark Avatar(if dark avatar makes enough money). We want stardock to put carriers in that.

Agreed. Can't they take no for an answer?

No.

If you don't like the music playing you change the station. Same in here. Don't read the thread. And if you read it and have nothing positive to say (as I was told once in here by some little elfin character) then don't say anything at all!

Thats what I said!(reply 14)

When was the last time you saw a thread whose sole purpose is to complain about a topic that they're sick of hearing about? This is the only one I've ever seen. To continue posting about such a subject seems like you're more interested in trolling for a flame war than in rational discourse.

Seriosly, you guys are so childish!!!!

Every time you make a post about carriers, I drown a bag of kittens. Please, think of the kittens.

Take it easy, dude!
Do whatever, just don't drown the kittens!!
LOL

I'm absolutely astounded

Why?

Why?

Oh bloody hell, are you THAT ignorant?
Learn when sarcasm is being used. And learn to stop going on. Carriers will never happen in gc2, expansion or no. I'm astounded because, from my perspective, and in my opinion, you're one of the most idiotic people I've seen on the forums. You will not shut up about something that wont happen. Now please, for the love of god, stop trolling.

[edited: When I said take it in private, I meant it.]

We want stardock to put carriers in that.

Its not happening in GC2, period. So sayeth the Frog.

Stormbringer and Marc:
If you want to keep arguing, do it elsewhere. It's not going to happen here.

Fine, carriers for GC3 then.
You may have won this battle but the war continues!(we still have more votes)
MUHAHAHAHAHA!!!

are you THAT ignorant?

Why, yes, yes I am!

BTW, You guys (i.e. marcathonas)wouldn't know a good idea if it bit 'cha on the backside.

Would make a nice april fools joke to release a phony update with carriers..

I don't want carriers in this game, they're useless and so are the posts about them.

/signed

I am just about sick of you, marcathonas.

If you guys hate carriers so much then why do you just "HAPPEN" to be reading every single post there ever was about carriers and "HAPPEN" to "ACCIDENTALLY" leave a reply on how much you hate carriers and the(now very familiar to us)" it's not gonna happen speech" AND THEN WHY ARE WE THE SPAMMERS??!!(angry tone)  

Do we go around leaving replies about how stupid your ideas are?!
I know I never did!!

WE OUTNUMBER THE CARRIER-HATERS 10 TO 1. MAJORITY RULES. The devs(as the creaters of the game)have every right to say what they say.

Okey, even if it is hopeless for carriers to be in GC2, GC3, GC4, GC5 and as far GC is gonna go. We are talking among ourselves!! WHY DOES IT BOTHER YOU?!!

WHY????

Yeah, Brad has refused carriers for GC2. WE ALREADY HEARD!!! I'm not going around begging him to change his mind. I'm absolutly fine with his decision.

In fact, I have proof that I restarted the carrier thing after it was left in its quiet grave for 5 months in a thread that marcathonas knows very well.
Before I made my thread there were 27 carrier threads(which were very old)!
71 people replied spread the idea through their own threads.
Kryo can delete it but the influence has already spread. There are already 200 carrier threads and counting. AND PLEASE 200 IS A VERY LOW NUMBER COMPARED WITH 131924!!!

Marcathonas, I'm sick of you.

This is for Marcathonas(In fact the entire message is mostly aimed at him):

Do I go around to insult every post about an idea that I think is stupid?!
Okey, I only did that once with stormbringer's joke. Why all the "Brad said this" and "Brad said that". Don't you think I heard him?!

We all heard him. But I'm not complaining about that to him(sometimes I did complain but that was due to your constant unneeded sarcasm and most of the time it was aimed at you). He has every right to reject ideas(as the create of the gamer).
But who made you stardock's CEO?!(whatever that means. I just know it means boss or something)

Since when is it your job to visit every post and be all Mr.I'm in a bad mood?????

So let's hear what Mr. My word is law has to say.

Shouting won't get you anywhere. And you should have taken CariElf's advice more serious.

Since when is it your job to visit every post and be all Mr.I'm in a bad mood????? So let's hear what Mr. My word is law has to say.

I thought Cari demoted him to visitor status like two hours ago?

Just to clarify, the main reason that I made the night hawk a visitor is because he said in other posts that he is only 12.  Because of the COPPA (www.coppa.org) you have to be 13 to be able to post on Stardock forums. 

He wasn't behaving all that badly before people started flaming him, and he has been sorely provoked over the last few days. Yes, it is annoying when people resurrect old threads, but flaming him is not the correct way to handle the situation. 

 

I noticed it when he posted in another thread, and one of the web dev guys said that it was because demoting him only did it for the galciv2 forums, not the other ones that the posts syndicate to like tgn.net.  The web dev told me that he would make the night hawk a visitor on all the forums.  this last one though is after that discussion as well, so it's being investigated.

Erm, she did.

The night hawk, you know you aren't legally allowed on these forums? No under thirteens. Hence your demotion.

If you guys hate carriers so much then why do you just "HAPPEN" to be reading every single post there ever was about carriers and "HAPPEN" to "ACCIDENTALLY" leave a reply on how much you hate carriers and the(now very familiar to us)" it's not gonna happen speech" AND THEN WHY ARE WE THE SPAMMERS??!!(angry tone)

I don't hate carriers. I hate spam. You ARE spamming. Get over it.

Also, I read every post on these forums. So when I see seven on the front page, that's spam. You're a spamming troll. Get off the forums.

WE OUTNUMBER THE CARRIER-HATERS 10 TO 1. MAJORITY RULES. The devs(as the creaters of the game)have every right to say what they say.

No you don't. Learn to do basic statistics. Because you know what? Not everyone who purchased the game goes on the forums. And not everyone on the forums has an opinion on carriers. I know I don't, just the threads.

Okey, even if it is hopeless for carriers to be in GC2, GC3, GC4, GC5 and as far GC is gonna go. We are talking among ourselves!! WHY DOES IT BOTHER YOU?!!

Stick to one thread. Stop spamming. It's very, very simple.

In fact, I have proof that I restarted the carrier thing after it was left in its quiet grave for 5 months in a thread that marcathonas knows very well.

So you admit to thread necromancy. Which is DESPISED on these forums. THAT IS SPAM.

Do I go around to insult every post about an idea that I think is stupid?! Okey, I only did that once with stormbringer's joke

Once a hypocrite, always a hypocrite.

sometimes I did complain but that was due to your constant unneeded sarcasm and most of the time it was aimed at you

Again, since you've admitted to sarcasm, you're a hypocrite. I doubt you actually know what sarcasm means, since I don't recall being sarcastic recently. Scathing perhaps.

But who made you stardock's CEO?!(whatever that means. I just know it means boss or something)

Chief executive officer. Don't use words which you don't understand. It's not clever, and makes you look a fool. BTW, Brad is CEO.

Since when is it your job to visit every post and be all Mr.I'm in a bad mood?????

Well, we know you've been searching my name, and it doesn't appear to show posts I've made. You'd know there have been ideas I've been fond of. Carriers/Multiplayer/Orbital Bombardment are the only things I'm generally against. Other than that, if it's a good idea, I'll comment as such.

Now please kindly tell us how you posted after being banned, so the ban may be put into effect. I'm sick of you too, but I have a valid reason to be here. You're here illegally.

Actually, for a 12 year old night hawk can make a surprisingly cogent argument. Though it's clear he can be childish at times, it's unclear that it's any more frequently than some of us supposedly more mature posters.