The main thing that I find slightly inconsistent with the mechanics is that a superheavy ground units of 300 ton that you add armor to stays the same tonnage, but a fighter of 300 ton does not ( regardless of what definitions used I would expect the behavior to be similar ).
The thing is that the MAJORITY of the weight is NOT that fighting equipment itself it is the logistics surrounding it.
A standard Infantry unit displaces 5 Aurora tons which is equal to around 70 cubic meters of volume. The man and his combat gear must be a tiny fraction of that, the rest is all the stuff needed to support that infantry man over time... the vast majority of items is probably none combat items as well.
Why are you responding with an example of an infantryman when the inconsistency I pointed out is focused on a 300 ton superheavy vehicle in the other end of the scale?
A 300 ton superheavy vehicle is operating in exactly the same environment as a 300 ton fighter, and both can potentially be designed to fire on eachother ( if ground unit is equipped with AA ) so they can interact. Ground units can also be engaged effectively by the same weapons that engages fighters ( and their armor impacts damage taken ), so it's for me quite logical that similar armoring approaches would be needed.
The size of units is from a strategic and NOT a tactical perspective... so any images of tactical use of said equipment is basically of no consequence in this equation.
My feeling is that the ground combat system could benefit from having a more severe strategic considerations of when to armor a unit and when not to then simply impacting it's cost ( by also using size and materials needed ). Don't you agree that this would add richness and depth to the game for very little added complexity in the same way we all appreciate how this works for spaceship design?
It could also be argued that in my example brought up it is very much a tactical consideration or at very least operational. For example how many fighters can fit in a Carrier Hangar vs how many Superheavy vehicles can fit in a troop transport bay impacts how many you can bring.
I'm mostly fine with the majority of materials for infantry being what it is and size not being impacted by armoring them. But when you put the same kind of weapon and fight in the same environment vs another same size vehicle, then I do expect there to be a more consistent distribution of materials and it breaks my immersion when putting very heavy armor on a fighter has a very different impact than doing it on a ground vehicle of same size, both in terms of tonnage and in terms of materials needed for building it.
There is such a thing as game balance.
Indeed there is, and as you can see in my post game balance is one of the main concerns. Most areas of aurora that have had time to refine their balance strike a beautiful point between game balance and immersion. Ground units that were very recently added are not quite there yet, but I think the same level of balance and immersion is possible to be reached in this area too once there is time to polish this new system more. Don't you?