Had a nice large game last night and was quite fun, went for two hours I believe.
Not that the size restrictions won't work, probably are a great idea and being able to choose in the game options the size limits for teams would be a great feature; however, some of it may be our ability to adjust.
Larger games are different and you can't use the same mentality. A Single bomber supported by 15 nans isn't always the smartest method possible. Instead multiple bombers might be a better option. 2 bombers with nans might get the job done so much better.
Larger games means the enemy has more guns floating about, so capital ships might be a better option, they tend to last a bit longer and against exp, which 99% of the time is what the oposition is, they perform a bit better.
Something that I and others may see or notice is the evolution of allegiance. Back in the day miner's were generally ignored, compared to today, so in effect you saw more tech evolve, multiple tech trees, and caps, on both sides instead of just the dominant team. Allegiance has finally evolved to the point where it is all about the economy, most games aren't won by tech on tech warfare, but instead by killing their economy and waiting till your game winning tech, which is basically out teching the other side, is up and they either notice it and resign, or you use it. Believe it or not there was a time in allegiance history where it was rude to resign. If a team was winning the other team would let them finish the game normally, because in some way they earned that right by working hard together to accomplish that goal.
Maybe the solution isn't to limit game size either, but instead to make larger games more viable by some means. After playing lots of small games, sometimes its really fun to have some large epic scale battles. Would really love to some some cap on cap battles with support from nans and figs about.
