I honestly dont care how much sense in real life you think this makes it screws up gl players who build smaller ships and so even if it is true, which it isn't, it should not be implemented.

AS i suggested Just change tactical officers to cannons and helmsmen to thrusters or imact reducers in your mind.

You are merely eliquently phrasing that crew heavy, low deck ships should be nerfed in pvp so people with larger ships are made stronger in pvp. I dont care if they didn't plan ahead and now are regretting the number of decks added either reset or take it. Why should those who did plan get their ships ruined so they dont have to face facts.


Neither should large ships not be able to use their cannons. They shouldn't have their cannons lose invasion attack.

This game is good because it allows people to use different styles instead of the linear progression in most gamesl. You have ssbs, msbs and lsbs. Each has its bonuses and drawbacts and each should have the same oppitunity to grow in pvp and invasions. Games shouldn't have their vital core mechanics changed like you propose

I don't know about changing the crew structure of Galaxy Legion but I certainly understand the OP's point.

you should read my OP again and maybe once again.
SSB will not get harm, as many of them have plenty of ship-bots in cargo, so can very quickly raise their decks. Also the suggestion is more for MSB, which are few in game. So again LSB would not get any significant benefit. You also excluded from your view the new CTlab item and GP modules I suggested. You should either take full picture or do not look.

For invasion, read OP again, it would have 2 phases, where first the cannons destroy the defense and attack structures, then the crew fights with soldier protecting the planet. Therefore it would have reason, to count defense/attack structures in ship vs planet battle (damage to population would be collateral), and ship crew vs soldiers (invasion defense) for invasion itself.
Sabs would remain needed, as not each ship has weapon attack strong enough to destroy all defense, I think Sabs would be again more required/played.

And for the end, deflectors thru hull.. hand guns shooting to another ship thru hull. Really surrealistic view, which I can not adopt.

You didn't really read my post then, your suggested CT lab item "Autolock chip" would be impossible to anyone over rank 200, as that's when the Vortul, Crimson Annihilator (The NPC that drops the Crimson Auto-Phaser) stops appearing.



I think here you forget that one rank point gives 2 tactical officers, each providing one extra attack, meaning in that example Mojo's logic was correct. And trust me, I've just gone through all my ship modules that give attack and then added in the number of tactical officers i have, and the end result matches my current attack. (attack from my modules = 3198, 1852 Tactical officers = my attack of 5050)

Also how do we know that each tactical officer doesn't just have their own shuttle during combat?

You should read mine again. You are forcing every ship to become msb or larger when ssbs have spent months or even years of sacrificing scanpower and adaptability to build a realy tough ship. Do you think the fact that they can 'Quickly add decks' will make them stay in the game after they just lost their whole planning and work.
There is no need to adress the ct and gp suggestions because they wouldn't happen Unless the new combat system you suggested is introduced
That is a realy surrealistic view that I cant adopt. Using the same logic you are saying is the root of why you think it should be changed You are suggesting that having a ship able to blast through the planets defences cant kill the defending solgiers and provide yours cover. In that case how come when planes bomb solgiers are killed. Its the same priciple. Im pretty sure that if I had air supremacy then I would just bomb and blast all the enemy solgiers untill victory via my army was assured


They could either be in domes on the outside like on some older large bombers that were used to shoot down enemy planets trying to intercept you or you could controll guns mounted on the outside remotely from the inside. As I repeat handguns are NOT used in ship to ship fights the crew controll bigger weapons remotely and carry handguns only for raid scenarios to fight other crews. That would be like saying you should carry round your quasi chaos blaster controlled by your crew to raid. They use seperate weapons for ship to ship compared to raids. The ship deck modules are Larger versions of these and therefore take up a Massive lot of extra space as they aren't as efficent.

man let's talk finally seriously:
1) GL is a changing game, expecting that Dan will never touch the conditions for SB is not practical
2) Last time I did check, each invasion has a must requirement of deploying military to the country. Thus why you are so sure, based on real life situations, that is "logical" to kill defending soliders "during planetary bombing." That is working maybe in movies, where defending soldiers are waiting what is going to fall on them and dont move away from the target location.
3) Domes outside of the ship or older large bombers - questions remain valid: Why we can not update these and see, what is the limit for these? SSB with 20K+ domes - where are these build in? Here the SSB make no logical connection at all. Same for bombers... where they have they place.. on hull, in special cargo, why these are not visible? Etc. Less fantasy, more logic please.
4) Once the CTlab item is clarified, it is suddenly not important to take it in consideration. Why so?
5) Could you finally suggest something constructive or not really? I think, you are only scared from change.