LRM swarms with flak are hard to counter. LRMs counter (fighter) gets pwned by the flaks while the flaks counter (LFs) get pwned by the LRMs. But LRMs supported by flak is a BALANCED fleet. not spam. Spam would be if he only sent LRMs, which would then get mauled by fighters
i agree, thats a mixed fleet, except no one builds LF anymore, they just build up their LRF and Carriers and fire away at each other.
also, you said that Flak > SC, but the LF > than the carrier and flak, however for some reason LF never seems to be able to counter the flak frigs and carriers
i agree its a balanced and mixed fleet... but it seems unbalanced in that the counter does not seem very effective.
look, aside from all the artificial scissors paper rock crap, lets look at this logically
the LF is a light ship, but nonetheless an early game front line unit. its fast and has close range weapons.
the LRF is an even lighter ship, and serves a role out the back of your fleet out of harms way firing in for massive damage.
a carrier is a medium style ship, but has no weapons, means he has to be out of harms way as well. however he hosts fighters and bombers, which are his contribution to combat.
Fighters have (and ive said it in the past) weapons that are at most (for TEC lets say) 20 or even 50MM cannons. lets be crazy, and give it 100mm cannons. with armament that small i cant see it taking out large shielded, armored targets
Bombers have heavier weapons, missiles etc, designed for taking out larger ships. i mean, honestly, a missile will be better than a cannon and a beam will be better than a laser etc etc
a Flak Frigate has 4 banks that cant focus on the same target, and fires, again, lets say at the most 100mm rounds, because anything bigger would be a waste/ineffecient against SC, and, lets be honest, its pretty useless against larger ships
so, looking at it logically: a fighter should not be more effecient vs a LRF, simply because of the size of the LRF and the weapons of the fighter. i could imagine a bomber being more effective yes, due to the larger payload and the lighter armor of the LRF.
A LF should be, at close range, more effecient vs an LRF simply because the LRF has lighter armor. however the strength of the LRF is its long range and high damamge.
Flak should take a support role and counter SC, as they do now, but honestly, i think carriers can take up the role of flak frigate, since in the game they already mix in with the fleet anyway.
so, long story short, realistically, at least in my opinion, LF and LRF should counter each other pretty effectively. a fighter should be realistic and be effective vs bombers and other fighters only, and maybe unshielded, lightly armored targets. bombers should be effective vs structures, ships, caps, etc, but susceptible to flak, fighters, and should be unable to engage fighters. flak can remain where it is, though i think adding flak to carriers is viable... on second thoughts... it might contradict with lore, since what is stopping friendly fire... but then what is stopping friendly fire right now so...
this makes it much more realistic and gets rid of the currently very annoying system. i dont see why things have to be so artificial anyway. i mean, a cielo, for instance, very niche market, very high tech, why does it only have a medium power laser? there is no reason it cant have a much higher power laser and give enemy ships a hard time. to balance lets say it has a slow refire rate. then you could say its effective vs other utility cruisers, light frigates and good for generaly fleet support (offensive)
anyway, thats the end of the rant
i do have to agree if there were economic penalties ala Tkins suggestion i would not like it at all and would not upgrade