Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Well if were going to wish...how about shield arcs to go with the weapon arcs...

Kana

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

i know in starfury the shields have 4 arcs, and the ships (according to screenshots) look like they are set up the same way in se5. are there arcs i thought that was just a given?

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Hmm I seem to have missed this, but then so has the zombie mouse...

Hello OrionsBane and welcome to these forums. Here be dragons, temporal penguins and a visceral dislike of US alleged beer. Consider yourself warned. And welcomed of course. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Hi, welcome to the forums. I will now eat your brains with root beer and chedder.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

A small request:

Make all lists remember the last viewing position (like the log list in SE IV).

And please don't forget the AI!
In the last time I heard very little about the AI in SE V.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I know it's been said at least a couple of other times in this thread already, but, as small as this is, it would be a great improvement. I also find re-scrolling down lists over and over to be quite aggrevating.

Another great thing would be a hotkey that did this:

"Go to location of next Event Log entry and display what happened there."

Even with the Event Log remembering your spot, you keep having to go back to it many times per turn. This would speed up turn processing tremendously. With a hotkey for this, you could quickly go to all the important places for that turn, take any actions required, then move on to issuing new orders or new business.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I want the "combat replay" feature to be an external program, freely distributable separate from the main game, so that we can save replays of our most glorious battles and share them with other players - and also with people who haven't played SE5 yet! FRESH BLOOD! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

My biggest wish for SE:V is if your playing a TCP/IP game and there is player to player combat you can play it in real time (with pausing of corse) that would be nice.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I've probably mentioned this before, but how about the ability to mod different sets of music tracks for each race? They could be the same in stock just to avoid the extra work, but if modders want to take the initiative, maybe borrowing some free MIDI's or something, or if players just want different music to come up when they play a different race... This could be worked into SE4 Deluxe as well, don't you think? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Something like this:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
*** MUSIC.TXT - specifies music for the Anubian Necropolis empire ***

*BEGIN*

Num Strategic Tracks := 2
Strategic Track 1 := moo2-antaran.mp3
Strategic Track 2 := mountain-king.mid
Num Combat Tracks := 1
Combat Track 1 := mm4-pharaohman.mid
Combat Track 2 := mm4-skullman.mid

*END*
</pre><hr />

And maybe even more types, such as "diplomatic contact with this race", "strategic screen while at war", "strategic screen while at peace", etc. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Rules for encounters with races with no treaty or declaration of war - i.e. "attack at first sight", "don't fire on unless fired on first", etc. Would make roleplaying in MP games a bit less cliched - "Oh no, it appears our captain was reckless AGAIN, we propose a treaty of non-aggression" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Better AI modding.

I've noted that one of the advantages that a player can use over the AI is single use planets. The AI tends to build multiple facility types on a single planet, including R&amp;D on high resource value planets. Players on the other hand, tend to put one main facility type on a planet (say Minerals) and then load up on the bonus facilities (Robotic Factories, Mineral Scanners, etc.). This gives a much larger total production overall when you examine this on an empire wide scale. A poor resource planet, then is loaded with many R&amp;D facilities.
Another AI problem is that the AI considers a tiny domed planet to be equivalent of a Huge non-domed planet. Thus, Default_AI_Planet_Types: "Percent of Colonies:" becomes fairly worthless as a method of tracking overall production balance to the empire.
If the AI could take a broader look at its facility building abilities, it would be better (Empire Wide: running low on minerals, where is the best place to build more -- but restricted by minimum mineral value). I think the AI could be made considerably stronger. Another thing that I often look at is "Am I plus or minus on the resources I'm taking in vs using?". This tells me whether I need to focus on resource production or R&amp;D point production.
The key is that SpaceEmpires is first an economic game, and secondly a military game. Thus, if the economic abilities of the AI are inefficient, then the overall AI will be seen as weak as it just doesn't have enough ships to compete.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Redesigned component repair:

1.) Two different repair abilities: One as in SE IV that repairs all ships in the same sector and one that only repairs the own ship but not any other ship.
2.) Repair done in kT with the possibility to do partial repairs of a component per turn that can be continued next turn. That would imply a memory for each ship of partial repair/damage (as it is done in SE IV during combat turns).
3.) Repair ability during combat as it is in SE IV for organic armor but (at least possible) for all component as it is in Starfury.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

#2 I fully support. I mean, it makes no sense if you can repair 3 200kT Stellar Manip devices in as much time as it takes to repair 3 10kT Armors?

Better point defense systems. Right now, PD also acts as a normal weapon and weapons with the PD ability only fire on small stuff. I want to configure PD that, for instance, only (and only) fires during the "opportunity fire" phase, that is, you have no manual control over firing. Or, a PD weapon that also shoots any ships and other large stuff that the ship that carries it happens to pass. This would, in my eyes, improve the "independent turret" idea you tend to get with PD and other "turreted" weapons. Sure, you can set targets for the large, heavy, non-turreted weapons, but the smaller ones have their own gunners and crew, and tend to pick their own targets.

Also, a "priority target system" for PD would be nice. Now, it fires only at whatever target is closest; however, if it wastes all its shots on a small, relatively harmless clutch of missiles headed for another ship, and thereby negates the possibility of taking out a squadron of heavy bombers just 1 square further away, that can get on your nerves.

A PD "strategy" would be nice, too. You set your target priorities and target types (i.e. "Seekers - Only On Us", "Seekers - Only On Others", "Seekers - All", etc.) and you can select a PD strategy as well as a "normal" strategy for your ships. For instance, you might give a certain class of ships, which carry crap-loads of armor and entire batteries of PD, the order to fire only on seekers that target allied ships, while a small, maneuverable ship with no armor and only a few PD might get the order to fire only on seekers and fighters that approach itself.

An example list of PD strategy variables;
-Seekers - Only On Us, Only On Others, All
-[any target type] - Maximum Range, Medium Range, Point Blank Only
-Fighters - Approaching, Retreating, Firing On Us, Firing On Others, All
-Fighters - Light, Heavy, Fast, Slow, Small, Large, Anti-Ship, Kamikaze, Anti-Planet
-Drones - With Normal Weapons, With Many Warheads, Fast, Slow, Anti-Ship, Anti-Planet, Recon (i.e. equipped with scanners, supply tanks), Support (i.e. equipped with repair comps, supply reactors, etc.)
-Sat - Missile, Armored, Shielded, Short Ranged, Med Ranged, Long Ranged, Anti-Planet

So you could have a PD strategy priority list as such;
-Seekers - Only On Others, Medium Range
-Sats - Armored, Long Ranged, Maximum Range
-Fighters - Heavy, Approaching, Medium Range
-Drones - Many Warheads, Point Blank Only
You can have up to three target type priorities on anything except Seekers, though one or two would suffice for most situations. You would create these strategies in a screen similar to the current "create custom strategy" screen, and you could assing one to a class you design, or to an individual ship. Large warships (&gt;1000kT or so) with mostly PD and lots of armor could have "personalized" strategies per ship, while tiny, off-the-shelf PD escorts would just have a general strategy for the entire class, and if you want to change the strategy you just duplicate the design.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Q said:
...Repair done in kT with the possibility to do partial repairs of a component per turn that can be continued next turn. That would imply a memory for each ship of partial repair/damage (as it is done in SE IV during combat turns)...

Have you been peeking?

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I love it when Captain Kwok posts in these threads... he always lets something slip! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I am Q! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Just wondering if anyone has voiced the idea of giving planets gravity wells.
If you have it in combat mode, then ships that have their engines destroyed and are close to a planet (say 2-4 grids or will it be hexes now??) will fall towards the planet. Therefore the ship could cause damage to inhabitants on planet, or the planet and any other ships can destroy the ship thus preventing planetary damage, or a salvage ship(a ship with a component that can tug the damage ship to a safe distance) can save it.
If you have it in normal game play, I guess if a ship loses its engines due to battle, or sabotage or some unexplained phenomena, and is around a planet or sun (hmm, probably should have added idea of sun to previous paragraph), then it would also gradually get pulled in towards said stellar body unless something intervened.

Comments?

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I just had this thought: Wouldn't it be cool to have a PBW option where the number of other players (real and AI) was hidden?

Right now you know EXACTLY how many other players are in the game, and can tell who are the human opponents. This gives you an advantage in knowing approximately how large or small the playing field will be, and you can tool your tactics accordingly.

I think it would be interesting to have ways to mask who are real &amp; AI opponents so you don't know who they are, and possibly some way to hide the total number of players in the game. This would make the process of scouting / discovery more interesting.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

How about if SE5 were to run all political messages through the altavista translator; from english to french to german and then back.

A system would simulate the such disorder in the communications under foreign races is enough although corresponding, me to believe.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

More in-depth and, more importantly, moddable diplomacy.

Say, you just encountered another race. You can only send General Messages until you've established some sort of consulate there, at which point you can propose the more basic exchanges and such, such as gifts, trades, trade treaties and such. Then, if you were to establish an embassy, you could start working on the more complex agreements, such as Military Alliances, joint war efforts, Surrender and so on. This wouldn't just be a Nothing-Consulate-Embassy system; this would work with numerical levels, so that Consulate is lvl2 and Embassy is lvl3. This way, you can mod in more diplomacy options, so that a basic Consulate would allow you to make gifts and non-aggression pacts, whereas a Trade Consulate would allow trades and trade treaties, Embassies would have even more complex treaties and Joint War Coordination Centers would allow military alliances and joint war efforts.

Also, I would like to see moddable treaties. This would allow for a more complex, in-depth diplomacy system, keyed to the specifics of a mod. And, mod specifics aside, it would give you a potentially vast amount of diplomatic agreements. I for one would like to add at least these following treaties;
Loan, Mutual War Effort, Vassalization, Forced Annexation, Merger of Empires, Trade Boycott, Mercenaries, Multilateral Alliance, several types of more in-depth Trade Agreements, Mutual Intelligence Coordination, Research Alliance, a bare-bones Military Alliance und so weiter.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Out of curiosity, since all the models for vehicles will now have actual proportional size, how will planets be fit into tactical combat?

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I don't know if I've posted this, but I look for this in every single strategy game I buy: The ability to turn all players into computer players and just sit back and observe.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

narf poit chez BOOM said:
I don't know if I've posted this, but I look for this in every single strategy game I buy: The ability to turn all players into computer players and just sit back and observe.

SE3 and SE4 have this. It seems reasonable to assume that SE5 will probably have it too.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Not exactly. You can turn on all ministers, but they don't perform exactly as the computer (I don't think).

I meant literally an observer - Like watching an FPS game played by bots in observer mod.

Your view wouldn't be limited to one empire; you could look at all empires, without having to password your way through empires.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

The 'Complete AI ON' button turns all the ministers on and the player will act exactly like the AI. Do this for each player and you can just go player to player watching.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I covered that.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Narf is right for turn based games there is a difference: even with all ministers active the computer will still ask you if you want to attack and which colony type you want for a new colonized planet. You don't know exactely what the AI would do in this situation when the empire were under computer control.
For simultaneous games however there is no difference AFAIK except the AI bonus and if chosen the team mod.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

How about system grav shields that have a on and off button. If you build them, you should have the option to have some control over them. (other than demolishing them)

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I would like to be able to adjust the brightness of my screen in the game. I am finding that I have to adjust my screen brightness every time I go to play. It just seems to be too dark otherwise. Another thing that might make the game simulator a bit more user friendly is if you could save your simulation. If I am testing a new ship design against a fleet of an enemies ships I find it difficult because if I want to change my design I have to re-select all the ships to re-start the simulation again. I have found a way around it but it is still a hassle.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

This would make turtling 100 billion times worse.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

The only way to effectively counter Turtling aside from turning off the tech that allows it, would be to allow players to send ships to those systems locked off by allowing them to traverse the space between them. In steps light speed, faster than light, and so on.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Alternative 1. Interstellar FTL travel is possible, and it's none too slow to prevent turtle-breaker fleets from having to spend decades in interstellar space.
Result: Everyone's going to have fleets scooting around in interstellar space to avoid WP defenses.
End result: WPs reduced to civilian transport networks only, system defense becomes a b**ch, borders change faster than you can keep track of, fleets start popping up and disappearing everywhere etc.

Alternative 2. Interstellar FTL travel is possible, and it's not too fast to avoid the mess of the End Result of Alternative 1.
Result: People still use WPs.
End result: When you dispatch a turtlebreaker fleet, it'll be rather severely outdated by the time it reaches the turtler, and he'll sweep it aside even though he's outnumbered 3 to 1. To build a fleet capable of breaking a turtle, you'd have to devote your entire production over several years to this goal, and you'll end up dead as the other empires'll take advantage of this to invade.

Alternative 3. Interstellar FTL travel is impossible. System grav shields have an on/off button.
Result: SE as we know it.
End result: Turtlers gain vast amounts of power as they can now strike out from a turtled system without fear of retribution.

Alternative 4. Interstellar FTL travel is impossible. System grav shields have no on/off button.
Result: SE as we know it.
End result: People will still resort to turtling.

Alternative 5. Interstellar FTL travel is impossible. System grav shields use up vast quantities of resources each turn.
Result: SE as we know it.
End result: Turtlers will not be able to sustain a turtle if they don't have a nice resource base spread out across several systems. Turtles will become a lot harder, but not impossible.

Alternative 6. Interstellar FTL travel is impossible. System grav shields only last for a set amount of turns after which they fizzle. The structure can be scrapped.
Result: SE as we know it.
End result: Turtlers will have to deal with a vulnerable period every so often, unless they synchronize queues on multiple planets.

Alternative 7. Interstellar FTL travel is impossible. System grav shields only last for a set amount of turns after which they fizzle. The structure cannot be scrapped.
Result: Non-turtlers using a system grav to prevent a solar nuke from going off will have to deal with the fact that the slot they use to build the grav is lost.
End result: Turtlers will have to deal with the fact that eventually, they'll run out of space in their system, at which point the entire system becomes utterly useless, unless he's got a few planet-killers, planet-creators and colonizers tucked away somewhere. Nuke all planets, create new ones and rebuild your empire. Vulnerable period lasts longer and turtlers are more vulnerable, however as stated above non-turtlers will be more vulnerable to solar nukes and planet-killers.

Take your pick.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I've yet to get to a point in a game where turtlers are a problem, but if this is the case, why not counter with another facility that can pierce the grav shield. In order to be fair to the Turtler, they should get some warning that their grav shield is being assaulted. Maybe something like it takes several turns (years?)to burn through during which the turtle-ee is given warnings.

Maybe another tactic would be to give an intel project the ability to target Grav Shield Facilities.

Again, I've never experienced a "turtler", but a on/off switch is not mutch different from building a separate grav shield facility and then halting the construction one turn from completion. This is pretty much the same effect as an on/off switch.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Quest for Ship And captain. To increase Exp. and Found Technology and misterius things. (fully moddable) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Possibility you can assign a specific captain or crew to a ship to boost his capacity.

Naturally Full stat to captain and crew...

This add open the door to new rpg (stng mod will benefit)
Tank you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

disclaimer: post made under some frustration.

What would be interesting is some way to tell ships to attack the rear column support vessels in an enemy fleet. They'd have to get through the warships first, but they could make a suicide run against the minesweepers and supply ships. I just spent an hour or so trying to figure out how in SE4 to no luck.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I would really like to see in SEV the ships go where the little lines showing their path says they are going. I've noticed on many occasions that ships go by different routes over long distances, usually due to some warp point that has a tagged minefield or something similar in their displayed route.

Recently in a game my assault fleet was on my side of a warp point, the order was given to jump into the enemy system and take a planet, and the next turn I find they had gone the OPPOSITE direction back into my own sector. The opposite side of the warp point has a minefield, so the fleet I'm sure was taking a path around it. The problem is that the course I thought they were taking was displayed as going through the warp point when in fact the computer was taking them around another route. In fact, when I clicked on the battlegroup, their laid out course still showed them going back to the warp point and going through even though all the ships were moving directly away from that particular warp point.

Anyhow, this display of the intended track but going another route when the turn is processed is annoying and counter-intuitive. I'd REALLY like to see this fixed in SEV.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Not so. An on/off switch would allow the turtler to switch the grav shield off at any given moment without having to wait until the other grav shield's finished, also an on/off switch doesn't (necessarily) cost resources.

I personally prefer Alternative 5. You can't support a turtle without a resource base spanning multiple systems, unless you're in a trinary system with three fully populated, fully exploited sphereworlds. Also, it allows people to still use the shield to prevent an enemy solar nuke from hitting the system, keeping it just long enough to allow a fleet to take out the solar-nuke after which you scrap the shield.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

im sure aaron does not check this list any more (its grown far to long, and there are too many tangents and repetitions)

but maybe some beta testers will catch this and pass it along:

There are two things currently on my wishlist. Fisrt - the ability to blockade wormholes. This would require the game to perform pathfinding to determine if there was another way to get resources back to the homeworld(s), but that sort of thing is already done to check if empires are able to communicate with each other. so it shouldnt be very hard. It could also create a real use for "palace" type facilities, that could act as additional homeworlds for the purposes of pathing systems to supply centers.

As an extension of the above, I would like to see blocades of a system's starport cut off all resource production in the system.

Second - I would be very happy if "can warp" was a component ability. I understand that it is currently a hull ability, (so you can determine wither fighters or certain ship types can warp, or can be carried in cargo), but it would be nice if it was a component ability. so you could add a large component to a ship that was its "warp engine"

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

You can uncheck the standard "Ships should not enter minefields" &lt;paraphrased&gt; and "Ships should not avoid restricted systems" radio buttons in the Empire Options screen. I also keep all the "Ships should clear orders **" crap turned off too. Micromanagement is my reason to wake up in the morning

[img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Dagger.gif[/img][img]/threads/images/Graemlins/icon42.gif[/img]

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Or just have the system grav shield not affect WPs being opened or closed. Possibly a toggleable option during game setup.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Or a quick mod that removes the WP blocking abilities.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Yes, I have now done that, which is what we term a "workaround" in my business (a user procedure that solves a software problem). But I was recommending that the problem be fixed so a workaround not be necessary.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

It's not a workaround!?!?! It's a game option! What.. to you Minister Control is a "workaround for people who can't manage detail"? Don't be silly.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

"Avoid when out of fuel" - an alternative setting to "avoid this system"; a ship coming across a system set to this will avoid the system only if it is out of fuel. Useful for systems with random movement or systems with movement toward center!

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Let us pick our own starting date.... the date 2400 is to limiting.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

That would be a shame, but you might be right.

Yes, this has been suggested before, several times. I might even have emailed Aaaron with it, and I am very hopeful that it has made its way into se5.

The other side effect of this, of course, is that the neutral no-warp ability can be defined by their failure or inability to research the necessary component tech, allowing players to gift them the tech and 'uplift' neutrals to full star-faring empires. You could also mod warpable fighters or non-warp drones if you wanted.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Which would be great IMO.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Technological degradation

...The idea being that an empire has to spend a certain amount on research just to keep still. Below this amount and it will lose build, then repair capability.

I'm thinking of any number of SF worlds e.g. Asimov's Foundataion where an empire is fallen from its great days.

So an empire may have ships and technologies lying around from the old days which it can no longer build, or even repair.

This could lead to a number of interesting scenarios -- you might have Uber war vessels more advanced than anyone else -- but you daren't commit them to a battle where they could get damaged.

The research points required to stand still could be a simple function applied to the empire population (on the basis that large societies tend to become decadent and collapse), and age (on the basis that old societies tend to become decadent and collapse). These could be tuned to disable the effect entirely if desired. (Personally, I'm in favour of anything which acts as a brake on the ridiculous tech escalation in the game :-))

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I don't think Technological degradation really happens.
Do you think in the future we are going to forget how to make computers?
Unlikely, unless something catastrophic happens. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I have a few...they've probably all been proposed a dozen times, if only for the gargantuan size of the thread vrs. probability.

System blockades: You know how you can blockade a planet? Well...commerce can't really flow if an enemy power is blockading the warp points. Ships and space installations would have to rely on locally industry and space ports, or a variation on the concept. This could also allow for certain fleet units to remain in local logistics, which would make finding out about them harder for intelligence.

Speaking of intel...privateering and anti-piracy. For privateers, you devote resources as well as intel points to disrupt commerce, and a simple probability "dice roll" can decide if tonnage is destroyed or claimed as assets to the empire.

Anti-piracy would require devoting light units, up to maybe heavy or standard cruisers, to the task, along with intel points. This is arguably more cost effective, because you could take ancient mothballed escorts and frigates from your empire's infancy to this sort of thing. A branching on this would be devoting light units for system customs or escort duty. You could also opt to construct Q-ships for piracy deterrant.

Data-links are a tactical sort of hybrid like the US Navy's Aegis, allowing the captain of one ship to see an engagement from the point of view from any other. If you have a flagship sporting a datalink component, then the ships in your fleet unit acquire the experience of the most experienced crew in the unit. Also, datalink-tied point defense would offer much hightened reflex, accuracy, and, through combined sensor nets, possibly even range bonuses vrs. less sophisticated seekers.

Fleet formations. Making formations based on divisions within established fleets would be very useful. Also, to be able to detach these...detachments and retain their detachment experience would be quite useful. This would allow another aspect of experience bonuses. Instead of direct bonuses, fleet xp is a bonus multiplier for detachments. If you have two detachments operating together fromt he same, seasoned fleet, you could maybe get a multiplier of 5-10% for fleet xp (that's an additional 1-2% as far as bonuses are concerned), and it doubles with every fleet detachment combined with the others. A detachment would be the size of a squadron, meaning at least 2 and at most 6. Since the bonuses are pretty small for infantile navies, combining two undersizerd squadrons into a 4-5 ship squadron would provide better bonuses than to attempt to abuse the thing with 3 undersized squadrons working in concert.

Divisions or detachments or squadrons, however you wnat to look at it, allows you to work with multiple pre-formed formations in one fleet unit, able to work together and provide mutual bonuses and point defense. It also allows you to contol screening squadrons independent of the capital ships, and allows you to use cruiser squadrons to act as heralds and cavalry for the heavy players.

EDIT: Also, it would be neat to provide an emperor the option of constructing warp point-side installations to provide commerce control. This would directly effect commerce for neighbors who are enemies, and the opponent has taken and regulated a system in the shortest distance route to the biggest commercial ally. Also, this would allow for monumental warp point raids, like I try to emulate by building starbases on warp points. Of course, making these things customisable to a degree would be good. Have it as a financial option for a system under total control to be funded by either (as an option) local control or from a specific system, or from the pooled Imperial resources. You give it an option of installations, fighter bases, commerce centers and light/heavy garrisons which can be either custom jobs like what you can do in the ship design windows, or standard units, depending on how interested you are in it. Customs stations around planets and warp points would serve as bases for piracy and anti-piracy operations, as well as a way to institute tarrifs for foreign merchantmen passing through the system to a destination beyond the system. In the actual window you would order one of these warp point defense/commerse installations would provide a choice of how much to put into the project every tenth of a year, and what part of the warp point installation to build first.