Prev: List Topics Next: Re: Please be more careful with Replies

Re: Stealth Fighters

From: Thomas@s... (Thomas Payne)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 02:04:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Stealth Fighters

In message <> writes:
> Great guys, exactly the sort of feedback I wanted.
> So the general opinion is that these buggers are a little too
>  Maybe they should have endurance -1 to reflect the smaller payload of
> stealth fighters.  Also, how about making the fighters -1 in all
> fighter-fighter attacks (ranged or dogfight).  My thinking on these is
> they are not impossible to see and attack, just much harder, so that
by the
> time an enemy has achieved a firing solution, the fighters will have
> their attacks.  There would be less defense against them, but isn't
that the
> whole point of a stealth design?  Fighters and dedicated Aegis ships
> ahead of the primary targets are the best choices.  An Aegis (ADAF
> ship which was not the target of the fighters would be able to fire on
> fighters on its turn exactly as normal.  However, if the stealth
> were targeting the same ship, the fighters would get to fire first,
> of taking the defensive fire before their attack.  ANy surviving point
> defenses could then attack the fighters, presumably made more visible
by the
> emmisions of their attack.

Perhaps change the dogfight rules slighty; make it so that the stealth
get to	fire _before_ the other fighter squadron, but give any fighters 
attacking them a +1 to their dice rolls (i.e. hits on a 3+) due to weak

> Any other ideas?
> Later
> Brian

 Tom Payne

 "Air Columbia; why fly, when you can float?"

Prev: List Topics Next: Re: Please be more careful with Replies