Howdidudothat:
Your points are fine, and I have no quarrel with you putting your two cents out there at all. However, I have a few retorts:
1. I don't want to be forced to build an anti-strikecraft capital right off the bat to counter strikecraft guaranteed to come my way early game. Why? Because I like to open with a colonizer capital, that's why. Opening with another cap will handicap me, and force me down a particular path I might not want to go. You might say "well get one capital of each." No - I don't have the resources for that early game. You might say "well open with the colonizer, and when resources become available build the other capital." No, the carriers appear too early before legitimate funds are available for me to build a second capital (something I am loathe to do anyway - see my thread on "do capships suck or what?").
Now, I understand that my contention that I should not have to be "forced down a particular path I might not want to go" can be called into serious question. You can retort "My rushing you can force you down a particular path you might not want to go, too! You can't go eco in that circumstance! Should we get rid of rushing just so you have the covenience of not being forced down a path you don't want to go?" That is a fine counter-argument. So what it comes down to is what the devs had in mind when the game was designed. If the devs said "yes, we intended that to counter carriers, you would be forced into either building carriers of your own, or getting the anti-strikecraft cap" then my point is moot, and your point (that I just made for you, heh) is correct. Now, if the devs stated this, there wouldn't be anything wrong with it at all. But I'm simply guessing that the devs wouldn't say this.
2. I usually play as vasari, and have found jam weapons on the kortul to be rather anemic. Given the ability's effectiveness (especially with a non-leveled cap) vs. the cost to deploy this beast, I have serious doubts as to whether it is worth building and fielding one of these critters to counter your strikecraft spam.
3. I think no one builds PJIs (except maybe pros) because of the disaster with them when the game first came out. As such, people were "trained" not to use them (this was certainly the case with me, anyway). I understand that their effectiveness is much better now (its not GOOD, but its better than it was) but old habits die hard - I still don't build them, and nobody else does either because I have never seen one built in any game I've played. I hopefully will build them in Entrenchment, where defense should hopefully actually mean something in the game, but in vanilla Sins, static "D" is a joke, LOL. At any rate, a PJI is totally useless unless there is a fleet sitting right on top of it to defend it.
4. Your answer to the question of "can carriers be countered?" is an overwhelming YES. However, like any great philosopher, I'm wondering if we are asking the right question in the first place. Should the question be "can carriers be countered?" or should the question be "AT WHAT COST can carriers be countered?" In other words, is it just plain easier for you to spam carriers than it is for me to counter them? I will quote you on the case you cited with the vasari:
For the Vasari, you have a more difficult time. You need 1 Kortul with Jam weapons and flak and fighters all grouped together. This combo is especially deadly with a Cap Carrier with Repair cloud.
This to me sounds like a lot more trouble and micro (and perhaps, at the end of the day, cost) than simply spamming carriers.
I will close with saying that I have been very careful to NEVER say "nerf carriers." In fact, I've never said it. The strongest tone I ever used was with the "lame-o-test" you spoke of, where I said something to the effect of "unless the devs state such and such, I'm willing to say there's a balance problem," and in retrospect I actually regretted using language THAT strong. If CreditSuisse is a 10 on the "nerf carriers" scale, I'm a 1, which means 1) I'm not convinced either way that there's a problem, but I'm open to at least asking the question, and 2) I'm a little fearful of considering the option, as overnerfs are the history of games, plus it is guaranteed that another "OP" spam will replace the currect one, and the next "OP" spam will probably be worse than what we have now. I have never said "nerf carriers." If anything, I have always leaned towards some other option, i.e. buffing flaks, etc. That is, assuming anything needs to be done anyway (I've always been open to doing "nothing" as well).
In short, I'm for asking the questions, but I am careful about pronouncing any answers.