[FT] Fighter thoughts

  Don't worry, this isn't the typical balance complaint.  As I'm
relatively new
to FT, please excuse me if this has been asked/answered before.

  While I'm reading through FT and the new beta rules for fighters, I'm
seeing
what I think is a potentially dangerous omission.  As I read the rules
right
now, there is no limit to the number of fighters that can "screen" a
ship.  I
think this lends itself to the following tactic:  A force with a large
carrier
could include a small vessel with large drives and negligible armament. 
At the
start of scenario, the carrier can launch all of it's fighters, have
them all
"screen" the small vessel and then have it drag all of the fighters
ahead of 
rest of fleet to the enemy.  This would allow the fighters to attack the
enemy
while the main fleet was still closing.  This means that fighters are an
almost
infinite range weapon for no more than the cost of a tiny.  It seems
ridiculous
to allow say 36 fighters to "screen" around a courier.	I think there is
a 
simple fix:

Proposal:  The mass of a vessel determines how many fighters can
"screen" it.
	 For each 4 mass that a vessel has, one fighter may accompany it
as a
	 screening fighter.  A ship must be at least mass 24 for an
entire
	 fighter squadron to screen it.
	   If it's not mentioned elsewhere:  Any fighters screening a
ship
	 when it goes to ftl are automatically destroyed.

Result:    Frigates will be the first ships able to have full fighter
escorts.
	 Light cruisers can often have 2 squadrons screening them. 
Heavy 
	 cruisers 3, BC's 4, etc.  Important courier vessels might often
have
	 2 fighters screening them until it reaches the FTL point.

Explanation: Fighters use a ship's drive field to extend their own range
while
	   screening (pilot's call this "Ride the drive").  Very small
ships
	   do not generate a large enough drive field to permit many
fighters
	   to accompany them, while very large ships can accomodate
numerous
	   fighter groups.

Tactics:  Capital ships that have one or more fighter groups embarked
usually
	 use them in the screening role to increase the ship's missile
and 
	 fighter defenses.  UNSC SDN-x's in particular often carry
interceptors
	 when they are in areas where the likely opponents use large
numbers
	 of missiles or fighters.
	  Navies that employ carriers with large numbers of fighters and
weaker
	 anti-ship weapon suites frequently launch the fighters well
away from
	 the enemy and allow them to procede into battle while screening
other
	 fleet elements.  The carrier and it's escorts remain well back,

	 preferably never entering combat at all.
	  Navies that employ battleline carriers would launch fighters
out of 
	 battle and have them screen the carrier until a proper range
was 
	 reached for the fighters to break off an attack the enemy.

Scenario thoughts:  Allow fleets with carriers to send their fighters on
board
		  while screening other ships, while the carrier remains
off
		  map.	You should require that the carrier have escorts
that 
		  remain with it (at least a destroyer and light cruiser
for a 
		  fleet carrier) and that the owner pay the costs of
these 
		  ships even if they never go on map.  This probably
makes more
		  sense as a campaign tactic, but in one-off scenarios,
you 
		  could have the carrier and escorts come on map on a
later 
		  turn.  Actually I think this better reflects the
tactics of
		  fleets who build carriers that aren't supposed to
stand in
		  the main battleline (like the NAC or apparently the
UNSC).


   what do you think?

  Grant