Re: [FT] Yet Another Fighters Suggestion

Oerjan Olson wrote:

>The main game problem with this proposal, as with Alan's suggestion
which
>has already been playtested and rejected even more times than yours, is
>that 6+ fighter groups is enough to take out just about any FB1 ship
>smaller than a dreadnought - so if you use FB or FB-like ships, you get
yet
>another incentive to use dreadnoughts and larger ships only. Nice if
you
>want to play WW1-in-space rather than WW2-in-space, but it doesn't make
the
>game any more balanced...

 6+ fighter groups is a superdreadnaught sized fleet carrier
 against a smaller ship: what other outcome would you expect?
 (Plus, from my experience testing, the 6 fighter groups will
 still get rough treatment if the battleship in question has
 an escort cruiser friend.)

 4 fighter groups, your typical light carrier, is much more
 of an even fight against a battleship, but enough to over
 power a cruiser. Again, that's about right for the points.

>(If you use custom designs, your proposal is completely ineffective
since
>the players can design any size of carrier they like anyway.)

 The problem seems to be most extreme with large battles
 using Fleet Book designs, so if it works for that, I
 think it's worth using. I believe that people with custom
 designs should be allowed more freedom.

 The rule does not become totally ineffective for custom
 designs. Yes the players can design any carrier they like.
 But with this rule it has to be a really big carrier, not
 just several smaller ones acting in concert.

>This and and several similar numerical limitations (including Alan's
>proposal and variants thereof) have already been tested. They all run
into
>the above problem with making dreadnoughts and larger even more
desirable
>than they already are; some of them have additional problems as well.

 Evidently those people who have tested and rejected numerical
 limitations never bothered to actually inform the rest of the
 list that they'd done so. I read through the entire archive
 from 1998 looking for evaluations of numerical limits and
 didn't find *ANY*

	Cheers,
	Hugh