Taqwus:
No, I didnt mean to imply that they were 'super-weapons'.
BUT they ARE the most COST EFFECTIVE weapons (over time) I've seen so far. Building and maintaining 8 DNs with all the trimmings you mentioned will be FAR more expensive than the Fighter Task Force in your example.
And even at that, you only managed those results when you played the battle tactically, yes? Or was it the other way around? I dont remember.
Another thing to consider is that 224 Fighters could easily be 2240 Fighters if the game goes on long enough. I doubt any realistic game would be able to field 80 DNs to compete. Obviously, the 'unit limit' will prevent 2240 fighters, but that feels extremely artificial to me as a way to keep them in check.
Overall, I think the balance between Ships and Fighters is OK for the cost. But over time, it quickly becomes obvious that using Fighters to defend is FAR more efficient than using Ships. And I for one, prefer the Ship to play the deciding role in games with Fighters being a support arm. Dont get me wrong, I LIKE Fighters in my game, but not in the obscene quantities that having no upkeep will allow.
Talenn