Another hint to its fakeness; read the ticker tape at the bottom

All you really need to do is come up with a ratio such as  "if your total power is this than 2/3 your total power= capital class ship" or something like that

I think you should have to designate size for set Corvette and Capital Ships etc. in some sort of table on a fleets page because as the round goes on 606060 space is only 10mil and that isn't much for Capital Class.  Or a program could be made to base the Ship Classes off your total power... either way fixes it but 10mil isnt going to stay capital forever.

I like these ideas you've been having.  They're very unique and ambitious, especially that alliance base one.

Same thing happened to me... 'bout a month ago 9 of my reserve ships just disapeared, nothing in the logs about it.  Luckily they were semi-cheap ships

oops  i didn't check the forums before I posted

I believe qe2eqe's planet to be in Menkalinan quadrant Orion

Ah yes... Chronos is correct... using weight 9 frees up 1.5 space while 12 frees up 1.  Therefore it is more efficient.  Welll thankyou for this arguement; it has made the forum users of this game more efficient when designing computers.

Increasing the weight of these computers from 8 to 12 takes off 2033 energy needed while decreasing the enrgy the ship is able to produce by 1600 making 433 extra power which is 1 space in correlation  .  So therefore increasing the weight of a system from 8 to 12 provides more overall space because the system no longer needs as much power.

only 1,600 less energy... thats nothing

no infact...  more power generation on a power core doesn't make it more exspensive.  I've designed a power core that generates 1bil power that cost only 2credits.

Ya... well they work... That would be very nice if 12 was the actually the optimum weight.

Oh... I see what you mean now... I've made another chart...  All of them have +10%

Weight    Power   ACU   Relative  Price
40          167499 +10%    78663
30          170833 .......     78498
20          174166 .......     78168
18          174833 .......     76848
15          175833 .......     78003
12          176833 .......     78003
8            178866 .......     78168

I think this is surprising... there is an optimum price range, it does NOT include 8 as a lot of people thought... It runs from 12 to 16.  In fact a weight of 8 is just as efficient as a weight of 20.   I think we've found the real optimum weight range for computers 

Alright Chronos to prove my point I've made this table:

Weight     Energy     ACU     Price   Relative Price
40           43687499  +18%   3        18030666
40           10919499  +16%   3        93768
40           167499     +10%   3        78666
26           342833     +11%   1        148124
15           2735833   +14%   1        1135654
12           91499      +9%     3        42694
8             87389499 +19%   3        36052461

As you can see there is no real optimum weight... I chose these wieght and ACU values at complete random.

if you use the distributive property on that you get Spacex400-5200-79=Energy.  If you simplify that you end up with Spacex400-5279= Energy which is what I posted