The bottom line is, LRF are king overall in this game with bombers just below them.  LRF are slow, but they have long range.  LRF are not hard counters to anything aside from LF, but they have exceptionally high damage to begin with.

The point is, they are very difficult to bring down when used properly, and Darvin is right.  Good players will end up playing rock v rock.

Due to these issues, in my mod I'm actually creating an entirely new unit with the sole purpose of taking out LF.  Its called the Defense Cruiser, and it lives up to its name as most of its abilities actually reduce the damage taken by nearby forces.  In my mod, I also increase the percent of damage of LRF against HC to amplify the effect to create a triangle of LRF>HC>DC>LRF so as to limit every one of them to some extent.

The point is, they are really freaking powerful in the hands of someone who knows how to use them...

Assuming the LRF's made it to their target undetected. PSIDAR, anyone?

Okay. Fine. You retreat. And guess what, the defenders simply pursue you. You can't retreat from something that's faster than you. Now, I know your reply to that: the LRF's simply hide behind a starbase or a friendly fleet. The point is, the LRF's need something BESIDES AN LRF to cover them. At which point it's not LRF spam any more--it's a mixed fleet.

You and Volt are both leaving a lot of stuff out--assuming ideal circumstances for the LRF and non-ideal circumstances for the opponent. The reality is that the opponent will likely see you coming and MIGHT already have countermeasures in place. The reality is that your LRF's may not have anywhere to run to when they have to run--if they have to phase-jump five times to find a starbase to hide behind, they are going to die.

Though I find the concept of friendliness levels with dead factions contributing to victory more than slightly bizarre- especially the concept of proximity to their former territory- for this post lets assume that the relationship points victory will stay the same and the question is how to adjust it using the existing system.

The problem is that it is all too easy to fulfil missions by simply playing an ordinary game and building a strong fleet.  At least up to Unfair level the other factions are just too friendly at the start.  Having looked at one game I was playing, I had occupied a planet next to one of the factions and was heavily engaged with their forces in the next gravwell, owned by them.  Yet my relations score on 'Adjacent' was still 0.00?  The concept of factions being adjacent is either bugged or broken, so it either needs a fix or a better worked mechanic, so that it keeps track of positions.  That might help keep the game competitive in the middle stages.

The mechanic for strong fleet is just wrong, it should be altered so that a weaker fleet inspires better relations.  Then you could have two paths, fleet or relations, with a mission specialist flleet.

Faction inclination is also underemphasised at present.  Even one mission can wipe out centuries of hate.  How about missions +2 with a further bonus of +1 when the ability to give missions is researched.  Also a base of -4, weak at -8 and strong hate at -12?  I'd also want to up the value of the inclination research to perhaps +4, a real incentive to get this tech.

Then we could add in my favourite element,  a general relationship bonus for each artefact possessed.  This should be significant to give a real incentive for exploration another underused aspect of the game, how about +4 per artifact?  After all, if you have relics of times past, everyone would want to pact with you!  The bonus could go into the 'Diplomatic Inclination' points, perhaps.

If we absolutely have to have a quick fix 'relations bonus' for the AI so that it will offer pacts to the player without needing extensive work on the AI, then surely the AI should also enjoy this bonus among themselves?  As it is the AI relations bonus does not cure the problem that only the player is actively trying to increase relations, it instead exacerbates it.   If the AI never stop fighting each other, the player will win if he survives the early game. 

The relations system was introduced late in the beta and like the pirates really needs more work.  Entrenchment has had five patches and mines still haven't been solved... and mines are far simpler than AI relations.

This depends on how the front-line is shaped and what kind of approaches you have.  This could range from trivial to quite challenging, regardless of what units you're throwing at him.  The most intense harass battles I've had in the past have been where I share a large border with my opponent that gives us both innumerable approaches, which usually means getting harassers in is just a matter of making a single jump.  More difficult situations might be using a pirate-base back door, but even that's just a matter of planning.

In any case, if getting in and out is a significant issue, you should be using bombers.  LRF are used for their high damage, and in most cases that damage output will completely outweigh their low-end mobility.  If the mobility is a significant handicap, you should be using bombers.  Light frigates are simply not the right unit type, because even though they have the mobility they lack the damage to get the job done.

As I just said, people don't fortify every planet, they simply leave infrastructure nearby so they can assemble forces on the spot to repel an incursion force.  To some extent this relies on scouting, but another extent (as I said) it's simply the admission that a certain amount of losses are acceptable.  Having your "pants down" implies that some critical assets are exposed, not that you're somewhat overstretched and you've left some minor to moderate assets unguarded. 

I've said this time and time again: your goal is to get in there and deal as much damage as possible within your window of opportunity.  Good players will keep that window relatively small, which is why high damage output is the key.

They're not that much slower.  Unless you've got a massive harass force, most of your time is going to spent pounding the structures (if you want to actually kill them) not moving around.  If you're actually hitting hard enough that you can vapourize structures without pounding on them for a while, you'd get a lot more performance out of bombers than either of these two options.

If you stop to attack anything, the LRF will catch up.  Even a very large force of LF will take over a minute to knock out a structure, so this is completely a non-option if you're being pursued.  This is why bombers rock for harass.  The carrier can attack while it's on the run, whereas the LF and LRF cannot.

The defender has two options.  He can use a small force (probably 40-60% cost-value) of LRF to keep you occupied, and he won't need to worry about losing anything.  If you stop to attack, he will catch up and deal some casualties, so it will be an endless chase.  This is perfectly acceptable from the defender's standpoint, because a smaller force units is keeping a larger force of units in check, which is all he really needs to do to counter your harass.  The other option is to hit it with a force of 80-100% cost-value, then use a pincer to catch it.  Because your units cant turn on a dime, he will force you to withdraw if you don't want to take casualties.

Exploiting their slow speed is easier said than done, but that's essentially all we have.  Teching up to heavies takes too long (LRF will beat heavies if you don't have them in sufficient quantities), and LRF come out too early for you to prevent them from being produced (in a front-line scenario, a player is likely producing them before you've even scouted him).  Back in 1.181 the scout could be used to really hammer the LRF early, but it took a 20% damage nerf last patch and this really sank it as a unit.

My problem with the LRF isn't so much that it's a ubiquitous unit type, but rather that its dominance is really sidelining the light frigate, and that its high propensity for focus fire (bombers have the same issue, with mobility rather than range as the culprit) suppressing the utility of capital ships and reducing our options. 

All of these tests were stacked against the Javelis, from a little to a lot....

Javelis are 4 supply cost and the smallest and cheapest of LRF -- the comparable ship for LF is an Advent Disciple.  Cobalts are a bit bigger (5 supply), and Skirmishers are very tough for LF's at 7 supply.

Micro does make a very large difference in the outcome of a fight, but you don't have the luxury to individually micro a few LF past the first stage of the game. 

Since they got buffed, LF are a lot more useful than they used to be.  The main problem is that in Entrenchment and Diplomacy, LF's become completely marginalized by Battlestation tactics.  You just don't want to invest too much in a ship class that is completely useless in mid-late game.  Both LRF and Carriers are much more versatile in what kind of targets they can take out.

In Vanilla, I think LF's still have their place to chase down and punish people who go carrier cruiser crazy.

At least, that is how the balance worked when Carrier Cruisers got their first major buff over a year ago.  I think that was the most balanced the game has ever been, personally.  It was hard to protect your LRF from carriers, but by virtue of this, LF's became critical to chase down carriers.  Caps with anti strikecraft abilities were more useful and strategies that had a heavy investment in Flak even worked (a few flak wouldn't cut it).  But everyone screamed bloody murder that carriers were too tough, so we moved back to the LRF as being the MORE useful ship, but at least now it needs some flak support. 

I think the Carrier Caps getting overbuffed is a bigger problem than LRF's right now.  I always thought the Carrier Caps had useful roles and didn't need too much -- maybe the Sova needed a small boost to be useful outside of Embargo rushing.  The last couple patches have been dominated by LRF & Carrier du jour.  Last major patch it was all about Halcyons and OP Illums, now it seems to be all about Skirantras, though I haven't played much this patch.

I'd say you jumped to my side of the fence. You said it yourself: reduce the speed of LRF's so they are ineffective at pursuing. They are already (fairly) ineffective at pursuing.

An alternative I've seen in other wargames: make LRF's more flimsy. One of my favorite wargames (we're talking cardboard counters and dice here) had a missile boat in it. It was basically a bunch of rocket launchers attached to a hull made of tinfoil. Cheap, strong attack, long hitting range--and ONE hit point. These little buzzbombs were still incredibly effective if you could catch your opponent (here comes that old worn-out line) with his pants down.

Not really. They were tests demonstrating scenarios that are actually going to happen in reality. Nobody who's played this game more than twice is going to be dumb enough to allow his light frigates to go up against LRF's in anything worse than even numbers unless they fell asleep at the keyboard (or unless they're trying to distract you from something going on someplace else......) When outnumbered, the light frigates can simply walk away because they're faster.

The threshold is around twelve Javelises. When that many are focusing fire on one Cobalt, the Cobalt is gonna die before it can get out of firing range. Any fewer and micromanagement will win the fight for the Cobalts. Any more, and a commander who knows what he's doing is never going to allow the Cobalts to engage to begin with.

So now you know. Next time somebody attacks you with a sixpack of Javelises, send six Cobalts up against him, kill all his Javelises without taking any losses, and watch him accuse you of cheating.

Edit: The fact that Darvin and I are arguing the point means that the balance is just about right.

They're good enough at pursuing, which is why I think they need another speed reduction.  Certainly they won't catch up to a target that's already a fair distance away, but if they're already in range when you turn around, it's going to take you a good 10-20 seconds to break out of their attack range, which for a sufficiently large amount of LRF is fatal to capital ships. 

Light frigates, as Cykur says, can run until the game is over.  If I can keep them on the run by using only a fraction of their value in LRF, what do I care?

If this game were all about harass, then maybe, but in a straight fight the light frigate is a joke. 

Illuminators were made into Anti-Medium for a good reason.  You used to be able to able to overwhelm Advent with pure Light Frigate spam.  Not everyone, mind you, but against the average competent player, I could just make nothing but LF's and over-run them.  Advent players cried, "We don't have Anti-Medium!!  Illuminators suck!"   And the patch came, and the rest was history...Illuminator was the meanest LRM on the block until this current patch when its bugged damage output got fixed.

Just curious, what is the problem?  Are you concerned they don't kill Capitals fast enough?  It is true the initial punch isn't the same as Assailants or LRM, but the big advantage of Illuminators is they can follow along right next to a fleeing capital while chewing it to pieces and then jump with it to the next system.  Assailants and LRM's hit hard but they stop moving to fire, and if a Capital jumps and runs, it has a good chance of escaping.

The problem is with the LF and with Repulse rather than with the Illuminators themselves.. with only 2 types of dedicated anti-medium LRF the LF stood more of a chance.  I'd be more worried about Advent being overwhelmed early than with the extra damage versus capitals.  Even with the extra damage Illuminators wouldn't take take down capitals as quickly Assailants, and they cost as much supply and are 2 tiers up, and their damage upgrades are higher up the tree too.   

Also, it fits with Repulse that Advent wouldn't have a dedicated anti-medium ship.  With the enhanced defences it might be more difficult to attempt an early LF overrun, plus it helps capitals if there are lots of LF.. and LF are still even worse at firing on the run than any LRF.  With more quickstart used LF spam overruns might be more tricky, as two cap starts hurt LF spam and disciples build so quickly?  I'd combine it with a part-revert of the scout nerf to prevent LRF spam.

But as I said, the aim wouldn't be to improve Advent or Illuminators themselves, rather to improve overall variation in play.

Perhaps if the Kol and Radiance are allowed the same boost to shield regeneration as the Kortul has gained, and the Kol gets a more effective phase missile block, their area of effect abilities will help to reduce the threat from slow, fragile LRF.  I'm looking forward to having a go with the Kortul once the current 'Vasari scare' is over.  It would be good to have the battleships back on a par with the carriers.

After experiments I've also become less convinced that the current LF-LRF balance should be disturbed.  Scouts are still somewhat effective against LRF, and perhaps Cykur is right about the dangers of early LF spam.  It was pointed out to me that with LF as part of a fleet at least it means less of a threat to capitals, and if capitals are expensive to lose then so are carriers and support cruisers.

Mainly though, I'd like to see the effect of revived battleships on LRF before they are altered any further.  Too many changes at once could be counterproductive, and the LRF threat to capitals might been enhanced because of the stress on carrier capitals.  I wouldn't want the LRF-Halcyon balance changed in favour of the Halcyon, for instance.