Re: [GZG] [FT] fighter mix

This depends on your house rules.  Until the Fleet Books came out my
group 
used combined types freely, although we eventually decided to house rule
ban 
heavy interceptors because they were a little too good at annihilating 
everything else.  The fact that the fleet books list the fighter types
as 
seperate, apparently atomic types convinced us to just stop combining
the 
types altogether.  However, there's nothing saying you can't just keep
using 
that as part of your house rules.

Fast AND heavy AND torpedo seems exorbitantly expensive to me, even so. 
Nevertheless, I suppose if you can afford it, there's no reason not to. 
I 
could certainly visualize a starfaring empire that considers fighter 
strength a high enough priority being willing to make sure that their 
bombing arm of the carrier forces is as effective as possible, if
they've 
got the technology and resources to achieve it on any real scale. 
That's 
the other part of it.  The PSB for it definitely would have to
acknowledge 
that combined super-fighters are definitely a much higher tech item than
a 
regular one with just one area of specialization, so... whatever. :P

E

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "john tailby" <John_Tailby@xtra.co.nz>
To: <gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: [GZG] [FT] fighter mix

> Within the requirements of 6 squadrons of fighters for 120 points
there 
> isn't much room for upgrades beyond the effective mix that has already

> been suggested.
>
> If you are playing the ships from the rulebook then they tend to have
a 
> pretty small PDS suite so there isn't much to be gained from being
heavy.
>
> I have seen it done with a light cruiser mounted one squadron of heavy

> fast torpedo bombers. They would reach out 48 inches and make their
attack 
> run against the enemy ship then whip back to the carrier for the
refuel 
> rearm.
>
> I built a carrier with 4 similar squadrons and they killed a 150 mass 
> battleship in one pass.
>
> If playing against KraVak or SV opponents with access to scatter pack
type 
> weapons then the heavy upgrade is well worthwhile.
>
> If you are worried about salvo missiles then you might do better
having 
> 2-3 squadrons of interceptors and the rest torpedo bombers. 4
squadrons of 
> torpedo bombers will ruin an enemy capital ships day while the 
> interceptors in escort will supplement your point defence while your
beams 
> do the damage.
>
> John
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gregory Wong" <sax@soundingrocket.com>
> To: <gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 8:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [GZG] [FT] fighter mix
>
>
>>I find it interesting that no one has suggested purchasing
>> heavy fighters, fast fighters, or long-range fighters.
>> Are they not worth the extra cost?  I guess fighters
>> tend to go pop before they exhaust their endurance.
>> And being a fast fighter doesn't help you in a dog fight.
>> And heavies are just too expensive?
>>
>> --Greg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gzg-l mailing list
>> Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
>> http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> 

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l