And you just proofed that even with including my original post that you are incapable of comprehensive reading.

So you just proofed that at least with you I was right. See the second bold part. You didn't read or used your brain before posting.

And the rest of your post is really fitting with your own remark: seem like you do not!

If you just wanted to proof that a post without silly smiles can be just plain silly, you just won the this useless prize.

If you wanted to proof that my question was right, the one which you did hang yourself up, you just proved this question do be true.

So at least you proved by yourself, that your silly statement:
is not true for yourself.

And if you do not know the difference of OP and my original post I advice the use of translators or schools. They even might teach you a wee bit of comprehensive reading.

I see a contradiction there. So i did include link for your original post yet i dont know the difference between it and OP or what?
But as looks like you dont want to get the stuff about some old boring game slightly better and have some other goals instead not sure ill be able to help you much then.

And again you are are just clearly pointing out your inability for comprehensive reading, despite me making it crystal clear by making the relevant parts BOLD.
I, unlike you, DID NOT refer to the OP! DID YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND IT?

as I clearly said, MY ORIGINAL POST, which has nothing to do with OP, ORIGINAL POSTER. That are two separate and independent things.

And YOU did NOT include a link to MY original post were the discussion about THIS started.

What DreamTeam and me were arguing about was related to THIS:

https://www.gog.com/forum/master_of_orion_series/moo_2_help_building_ships/post23

So again you just proofed your inability of comprehensive reading. Just throwing yourself into the middle of a discussion without checking your facts, is making you look silly.

And trying to turn it onto my side, just makes you look like a fool again. Nothing else.

So to reuse one of your phrases:
If this post did not help, I'll be not able to help you much then.

And this is why the use of, as YOU called them, silly smileys can make a huge difference.

If you want to discuss about MY original post with meaningful comments fine, but please abstain from making further meaningless remarks, ok? ;)

And I have to retract part of my comment, looks like your editing happened while I was posting my reply and afterwards went off my page view:

So you did think, but the slow GOG forum prevented me from seeing your editing, hence you did think before posting, except it did not reach me in a timely manner, sorry for this misunderstanding and my appologies ;)

That might explain what I have seen, no it does explain.

Would it not mean that a newer version shall incorporate this change to align description and/or game?

Plus it would really make fighters far more controllable by the AI. But what is the priority of the AI trying to get shields in general?

And looking at the RP, 250 and conflicting with Mass Driver.

So a long time the human can exploit fighters anyway. And one point I forgotten, even if they would apply shields non-PDs can not targets on the same field, right? (unless 360)

So even then fighters are still more than a hassle, even a slow chipping away doomsday weapons stays a doomsday weapon, right? ;)

And looking at Class III shields, same tech level as neutron blasters with a max 10 damage would render the shields again useless, right?

IF fighters are always using the best non-PD version. (which seems to be true as you can not have a PD-laser early in the game anyway)

So is this a bug, exploit or a feature?

Ok, now its a little more clear , you prefer to call your post #5 in a given trhead as "your original post". Its definitely confusing, but as you finally pointed into it i can work with that slightly weird numeration. "that even with including my original post" part didnt provided much hints aswell (as far i got it somehow meant waht i did included your "original post" while at the same time i didnt). Also i didnt provided a link for OP (ok, i will do now, so you can see how it would look if i somewhy did it https://www.gog.com/forum/master_of_orion_series/moo_2_help_building_ships/post1).

Now about discussing your post #5 aka original one. Usually i just skip posts with brilliant lines like "ok, in the meantime as I haven't enabled it yet, my 2 cents and line of thinking: " followed by some inherently wrong calculations, unless author clearly will show intent to get a better understanding on a subject he's posting about. But as another user correctly tried to do it for you, explaining some little certain part of it, i just confirmed what he's totally right in his post, and there is absolutely no need to insult him in response, as he did a good stuff for you. Now if you clearly have intent for, and as we're both are finally able to use your post numeration properly - i can explain (or discuss, not sure you meant there) errors from your post #5 here (post #23 from start), i still have some time left.

No, that is what I said the whole time!

MY original post were THIS discussion began! Pure simply English. and real clear all the way! ;)

Again not bashing you, just IF you see how many times this happens it seems to be a problem of attention span or just the inability to really comprehend, hence it REALLY pisses me off!

We have the old saying: If you don't understand, fucking ask. Which seems to be a concept getting lost nowadays as well.

Errors? Did you see the post 34?
And you are ripping part of my posts out of content again, to which part did the quote you posted belong?

I still don't really see that you read/understood what I posted.

Sorry, quoting is a real pain in GOG forums engine, so i hope you will not ask for directly pointing what the whole time prior you was busy "proving" i did a link to OP instead of your, while i didnt. Ill copy just one example in non-direct way tho "And if you do not know the difference of OP and my original post I advice the use of translators or schools. They even might teach you a wee bit of comprehensive reading.", as thats the place where redundancy of later posts of your starts after you did throw that "OP link" in and kept kicking it.

I did asked. "What you do refer as "original"? This: https://www.gog.com/forum/master_of_orion_series/moo_2_help_building_ships/post2 [i dont know what to suggest, so ill write it twice, and will also add what all is about techs to make it a good useful answer] one. Or some else?" Symbol "?" meant "question". Look: 1. What do you refer as [question]. 2. This [there i mistyped and missed actual question sign, my bad]. 3. Or some else [question]. So two from three questions, and you just needed to answer at least one of them. Now it turned into "If you don't understand, fucking ask". I did, you decided to went into some "proofs" about OP you throwed in, intead of provide a simple answer.

I did seen post 34. Now you want to talk about errors of post 34? Its possible. We can start with the fact what you seems to start to realize how fighters beams do work there, while i wrote about it in post 20 already (hint: it predate it. you really worried about me not reading your posts properly all that time, but i was sure at least you did it right way for my posts on your own. and now - bah, you didnt, out of sudden).

I agree quoting is mess, but you could always do like:

post 37: quoting is a real pain in GOG forums engine

And for the rest of your post, do we want to start again? Fine with me! ONLY up to you!

now back to topic? ;)

As I stated over and over again: fighters are overpowered. And if it is a fact that fighters use even NON-PDs they are even more overpowered.

And no, (unlike you ) I admit I didn't see your post. I would have ssen it, if you would have replied to me, how shall I have guessed that it was pointed to me?
But even if so, even with PDs they are still overpowered as I showed with math in my original post about this subject, right? (and as Dreamteam pointed out the ingame description says different)

And again nowhere did you show me anything HOW the AI will counter it.

HENCE (again): Looking for solution/discussion!

Do we agree that fighter are overpowered?

EDIT:
Disadvantage of the method above, references can get lost! (just using postXX, instead of [ post _ XX ]

About such quoting - i just was slightly worried it could went into "you did edit a line from my post during "quoting" it that way [running to edit own post above to not match a quote in process], bastard, and now trying to put a words i didnt wrote into my mouth!". Sadly i encountered it prior, and you did provide a small hint it could arrive again here. But small one.

Fighters are overpowered in vanilla moo2. How come the fact what i clarified what AI can use non-pd beams to target them confront it? That was the only thing i pointed at.

" I admit I didn't see your post. I would have ssen it, if you would have replied to me, how shall I have guessed that it was pointed to me? " - Ok, how should i operate then? Assume by default you just write in topic and not read a posts there from somebody else? Maybe they have the stuff you want to write in your post already written etc? And it wasnt pointed to you, what difference it make? You read only direct posts? Ok ill try to write them that way.

"And again nowhere did you show me anything HOW the AI will counter it. " - most likely because i didnt wrote anything about it at all. I just clarified about AI shooting fighters using Normal beams. Then we tried to find about "original post". Now i ll write - AI wouldnt counter it, aswell as all other stuff AI wouldnt counter. Tactical combat AI is very poor in moo2, it cannot do complicated stuff, and human player will always be able to use a special anti-AI tricks. There is nothing special about fighters, beside they yield enormous overpowered research:cost:size:damage ratio compared to other weapons in game, so no other weapon can do better VS AI than they do, as all other weapon are obsolete with them. It doesnt mean you need fighters to win AI. You can win AI using basing unmodded nukes only and not researching any tech playing from Average, or using only spies and self-destructs and not firing a one shot during a whole game, or using any other weapon. Just the most easy way is to use fighters. Point of AI in that game is not to win a human player, but to provide some company, thats all. To make AI be able to counter stuff - we will need a new AI. There are some techniques to make AI stronger, by fixing some blatant holes, say awful AI ships designs, or making fighters, affected by buggy coding or weird balance decisions by Simtex fit the in-game help text etc. But AI still offer no competition to human player, unless human player dont intentionally handicape (play intentionally weak race, play battles on Auto, so AI will do same silly things using his ships, as it does with own ones, use AI-designed ships instead of designing own good ones (1.50 option) etc). So no, i will not show it to you, and i never said i will. I can point to some calculation errors in your post if you want it, thats all. Also i did wrote some stuff on a subject on that and some other forums in past, you can try to read them, some of them about fighters.

As this was easy to do ;)

Hence ME i always put the edit below with a clear indication, just out of politeness and avoiding this.

Quote: not reading from somebody else

You can blame me, or GOG, I just used the un-replied button/functionality which by default brings this post to the top.

IMHO, you address (here replying) the person who you want to reach, as this also makes it a bit easier the way how the forum works.

Quote: use non-pd beams

And I posted that AFAIK you can NOT target with NON-PDs on the same field, right?

I do not dispute that the human can always cheats. But as you said yourself "by fixing some blatant holes"is this not a blatant hole?

If the fighters are overpowered as you admit, shall we then not discuss if they can be fixed or how?

And part of the fun of this game is this ship editor, right?

Just suggesting: use AI-designed ships is not really a constructive way to comment or discuss, or?

And this I will let stand on its own silliness: So no, i will not show it to you

Maybe I didn't made myself clear enough: I did not see post 20 until you pointed it out. (reason as described) I am not saying that this post was meaningless, far from it.

Your intent was joining the discussion as it seems and the easiest and best way IS to reply to somebody whom you don't agree with. Otherwise it will be ignored (unfortunate/normal.....) as also how else shall I know you joined?

Yes, field=square. And I extra said 360 which is more or less normal for PD, but not for attack weapons. You might use extended to get another shield in, but not 360.

overpowered/post above: Is it a as you said a blatant hole, yes or no?

And using AI-ships is not really addressing this problem, which IMHO can be addressed without giving up the ship-editor.

The last part is out of the reason for discussion: exchanging ideas and opinions, throwing a statement is not participating in a discussion, that is a monologue, hence silliness.
If only your opinion counts, no need to discuss, right?
If you want to engage in a discussion you NEED to exchange words, otherwise it is plain silly.

So with the statement: "I will not show to you", you
a.) either expressed you don't want any discussion
b.) you expressed only your opinion counts
c.) you don't care at all.

Which in all ways is silly if you assume you want to discuss a subject, right?

If you just wanted to express your opinion you could have just posted a post and leave it like that, but YOU decided to join (by using the reply button) hence you have put onto yourself the obligation to participate in a discussion, otherwise it would be just trolling ;)

Its way more simple, actually. Just read posts just from this certain topic only (and i dont mean my posts only), and you will see what most of them are answered already, some of them more than one time (about holes, exploits, etc). As it turned to be what you skipped some of them, best way will be just read from post 1 till the last one first, it could save a need to write answers for 3-rd time etc.

The only useful ideas to exchange about your posts are correcting an errors in them, but its needed only if you want it too. Half of time you seems as confiriming it, half of time you derail yourself with some loonacy. The only initial "subject to discuss" from me was "at least dont question intilligence of a user, who correct your initially wrong data for you in his free time". Then you wasted many words trying to explain to me what i should discuss with you instead under your rules, including "showing" to you something what was only in your own head all the time.

"Yes, field=square. And I extra said 360 which is more or less normal for PD, but not for attack weapons. You might use extended to get another shield in, but not 360. " That totally depends. Say, you can use FX PD vs AI, as one of anti-AI exploits, as it wouldnt be able to expose weaknesses of it, while it wouldnt work well with human player. Same way attack weapons could be of various arcs in game. And if you planning to designate Normal beams as a defence measure - not a crime to use 360 for them too.

The first part of your post is an insult to any intelligent person per definition as YOU do not understand anything at all. So I suggest you finish school or attend another form of education which might turn you into a person able to comprehend common rules and aspects of live on which you obviously missed out. I know quite a few Russians but I have not met anyone being so impolite, ignorant and blatantly stupid. And as I have proven before with your posts, the only NON-intelligent person around is you.

And by the way, the internet can also be used to enhance your knowledge rather then slinging slurs and accusations around. I suggest as a starting point wikipedia, certain dictionaries and thesauruses.

As I am not willing as you say: "spending my free time correcting" your stupid view of certain errors in your post:

I am done with you.

Have a nice day

Ai'ght seems a few exchanges happened here and it actually caused me to re-read the thread from the start.

First of all Goodallgamer, surely there are not many (or none at all?) people in this world that do not understand anything at all, wouldn't you agree? Also, the fact that gog thinks its informative to display our countries here, doesn't mean that it's relevant to make it part of the discussion about the discussion, no? :) just saying...

Second Darza, smiley's are never silly :o

Having said that, and making a modest attempt to go back to the OP's question, which was request for some decent ship design suggestions for a player that has some Telepathic/Repulsive race:

imo such a race, if it also has some production capability, is made for an aggresive strategy which means you'll be attacking quickly and continuously as soon as you are capable to construct a fleet. Note that Repulsive dramatically decreases your chance to get a decent ship leader in early game.

So what is a fleet? Since you need to Mind Control, you need 1 Cruiser (CA) that is accompanied by some support ships, ie Frigates (FF) and Destroyers (DD).

If you start attacking with no other tech than the starting stuff (on average) it means that the CA will be a missile boat:
- 9 nukes 2 shot, spread equally over multiple slots, so you can have finer control during combat.
- extended fuel tanks
And at the very early beginning you support ships will be your scouts. (small galaxy, avg.)
9 nukes can do max 9*2*8=144 dmg that should be sufficient to take down a Star Base with 120hp (60+60), but you need to manoevre smart to make sure enough nukes make it to the base.

Once you are able to produce more ships, the fleet can be strengthened with
- 1 ammo 2x nuke FF that has Tanks, or
- empty FF that acts as a Runner
- 4 ammo 2x nuke DD that has Tanks

As soon as your 1st fleet is complete, start working on your 2nd fleet that again needs 1 CA for Mind Control.

If you go this route than Deuterium Fuel Cells, as Darza pointed out earlier is the tech to get.
Check distances between systems with F9 before you start out what routes to follow, Huge Gal can have some 7 parsec distances that makes Deuterium an absolute necessity.

It means that all your ships will be going around with the humple Paper Armor, and if you find yourself stalling for some reason, you might get into trouble, in which case make a run for Zortium (but its a long road)

Always 'report' your opponents coz if one has R.Hull, you need to increase your fleet size by two basically.

If you go the interceptors route than a CA can fit 3 fighters with tanks, while a DD fits only 1 & tanks.
When i go this route, i have some FF accompany the fleet that are either runners or 1 nuke's, or a mix.
Interceptors can be a problem when opponents have Class I Shield and Radiation Shield, or CIII Shield, as suddenly you cannot take down planetary defenses anymore, and you need alternatives.

Another way to win the game is less efficient in turns, but fun with Lasers only.
tech route in Physics is Fusion Rifle (for raids) > Battle Scanner
at that time you can construct a CA that has 1 Hv AP CO NR AF and 1 AP CO NR AF
One such ship can take out a starting SB with ease, with FF's acting as decoy's for the SB's missiles, but because you will be slighly later to the scene due to teching, so you might need slighly larger fleet to counter R.Hulls and the story for this ship changes dramatically with the appearance of H. Armor on Star Bases (AP will be useless & waste of space then)

Bomb ships in early game (<t100 Average) are next to useless as they are too slow and easy targets for the star base/ planet defenses. AI will see the threat there are makes targeting them a priority. bombs ships with Augs & Ion Drive can work.

In general, focussed ships work best, so beam ships with a good computer & battle scanner, missile boats & carriers with no computers to save on cost. (computers can come into play on these ships, if you want to make sure that you have the initiative but that's genarraly not needed in early game against AI.

EDIT
- The next good beam ship is a CA/BB with Hv Mass Drivers (with mods if avail, AP usage depends on opponent having Heavy Armor or not), capable of 9dmg this design should last a long time. Make sure to fit sufficient Pd - missile defense, coz once you're able to construct such ships, the AI will have decent missiles that needs counters.
- King of missile ships, the BB with x2 shot modded Merculites. Capable of 4x14dmg per missile (mirved), that ship is nearly unstoppable for an AI and will last you a very, very long time.