Love this idea, but here's my thoughts. Fighters should be 0fp but you need hanger space to use the , except maybe for some ships that seem really good. Yes this could eliminate small lone fighters but instead just hav alone fighters with a lousy carrier.
Btw Question: why is fighters fp if we have hanger space?
Because to me there is no reason to have it.
I can see this working except for one problem. At the start of combat you would be forced to deploy your carrier rather than individual fighter wings and frigates. Most worth-while carriers are at least cruiser class and the vast majority of them are capital ships. This would use up almost your entire starting FP allotment. Rather than making fighters more versatile it forces an almost all or nothing choice on a player. Does he want to deploy his carrier and have fighters available immediately or does he want to be able to utilize frigates or destroyers?
At the moment, fighters, as useful as they are in certain situations, are woefully under-powered in general combat and without heavier backup can very quickly get picked apart. Particularly cheap/early game ones like the talon or piranha class. If you've only got fighters and a carrier on the field but your opponent fields a series of fast/powerful frigates he may be able to intercept you before you capture the points you need to bring on backup and at that point you are well and truly screwed because fighters vs frigates is only going to end one way.
I don't follow this argument. Carriers, all 5 of them, aren't particularly expensive in FP, especially the ever so popular and versatile Venture (12 FP for a cruiser what?). And for the really confusing part, there are plenty of non-carrier ships with hanger space... so what the hell?
To top that off, if fighters/bombers were to cost zero flight points with enough hanger space, you can bring in those fancy regular ships and fighters would be included in your fleet in addition for FREE, so what are you talking about needing to bring in more reinforcements?