Right, but we've over been over why 5 ordo fleets are NOT considered for balancing.
If those playstyles weren't strong, there would be no videos of pushing them to the extreme. A very strong strategy that when pushed to its limits is probably also a stronger strategy when playing casually. We are all seasoned Starsector players here, so just because we can, say, defeat a Remnant ordo without using any skills, it doesn't mean it's a viable strategy for a casual player. In fact, I need to go back to a different post.
For those that think Combat skills are not worthy, give them an actual shot and pilot your ship, even someone that sucks at the game mechanically can at least do a much better job of clicking the left mouse button to fire the missiles at a more appropriate time than AI would do.
Piloting ships doesn't have to be merely theoretically possible, it has to be good enough to be worth a try. Casual players are unlikely to attempt challenges or try everything in the game out. They will try to solve problems efficiently. And if, in the short term, it's better not to learn to pilot, then they will not pilot.
As if that wasn't enough, last time I checked both capn hector and vanshilar are in agreement that getting combat skills and manually piloting a flagship is in fact, very strong.
And I disagree that manually piloting a flagship is strong enough to be called "very strong" (unless no flagship playstyle would be called "extremely strong").
This is overall a terrible argument. Should I just spam videos of me using a flagship odyssey to beat 5 ordos and start using that as "proof" that combat skills are overpowered?
If you can, yes, please do this. It's disappointing how the strongest piloting options right now are either phase ships or Radiant and I would love to see an alternative.
The reason they make these videos is probably the same reason I like them... because a player showing off their piloting skills is less impressive/interesting to me than showing off a well designed fleet with good loadouts.
One is harder than the other, though. I also think it's fine to like loadout building and ordering the fleet more than piloting, but what you like and what is good aren't necessarily the same things.
Those are in the Leadership tree, not Combat, which sort of makes Brain's point.
It was my reaction to him not picking WT as the obvious "early game non-flagship skill impactful for your flagship" skill.
One thing I'd been thinking about for a *while* is finding items that, when right-clicked, grant the player a unique combat or two. Something very limited - you wouldn't get amazing at combat off those alone - but it could be a fun way to approach this sort of thing.
Gameplay and design wise, this isn't that different from the pre-chosen character builds but limited to one path. 
It just makes doing certain actions or quests feel mandatory on repeat playthroughs, which is not a bad thing as long as its entertaining to do. On the plus side, unique skills to the player are really handy balancing levers, since they don't impact anything else.
What if combat skills were items you can find in the game world and put them in slots to make them active, and combat skills would be replaced with simply increasing the number of slots you get? You could also move Cyber Aug to combat. But let's better not run into another skill overhaul...
Right now an Alpha Core Radiant is an Alpha Core Radiant, because you haven't left yourself the option of customizing, simply applying the same 90% of all elite skills - which mirrors player flagship power.
That's how it works for the majority of ships in the game, innit?
And if no flagship playstyles are truly true strong, this is a sensible way to go - weaken a few fleetwides.
I focused on officers, because I consider officers in their base, unupgraded power, to be strong enough to make every other playstyle niche. As if you started with 2 skills spent in Leadership already.
(I got tired of editing quotes)
Re: officer elites:
I wasn't sure how people felt about it, so I didn't touch upon it. I would go for a slightly different approach, of taking away base elites, instead of those from skills. It isn't unprecedented for skills to unlock new mechanics or improve existing ones to make them play differently.
Re: hypercognition but no elites for the AI:
It doesn't sound bad per se, but I cannot think of an appropriate effect to make up for the loss of elite skills.
