RE: Re: Fighters

In message <Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1020507193756.14957F-100000@vtn1>
	  Brian Burger <yh728@victoria.tc.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, 7 May 2002, Ryan M Gill wrote:
> 
[snip]
> 
> > What it really sounds like is that the Ship construction rules for 
> > Carriers needs to be revised.
> > 
> > No instant launches of all fighters. Carriers must have at least 
> > average hulls for the cats to function with a corresponding decrease

> > of strength given a higher Delta V from the engines. Break out 
> > separate launching and recovery facilities for carriers from the 1.5

> > mass of the fighter bay and points cost.
> 
> But these also render obsolete the whole of FB1 (and chunks of FB2)
and
> all the fighter-using designs based on those rules.
> 
> Tweaking the fighter and/or PDS rules - without changing mass or
> adding/subtracting systems - seems better. (Don't forget that the FB
> carriers DON'T have fighter costs written in - so you could, say,
double
> fighter costs to balance them without wrecking the existing SSDs)
> 
> Brian - yh728@victoria.tc.ca -
> - http://wind.prohosting.com/~warbard/games.html -
> 
Well, maybe not _all_ of Ryan's suggestions - but you could have a base
rule "fighters begin the scenario in their hanger", and have to have
written orders (LF - launch fighters) to launch. You could even copy B5
Wars that (IIRC) has no manoeuvres on the turn that fighters are
launched.

Add refinements (fleet readiness, sensor superiority giving advanced
warning, etc.) to taste.

Charles