RE: [FTFB] "Needle" fighters?

>Jared E Noble wrote:
>> >On Fri, 8 Jan 1999, Robertson, Brendan wrote:
>> >> How about an entirely new type of fighter, instead of rehashing
old
>> >> ones?
>> Possibly, but I like Thoomas' idea better
>
>who is this Thoomas character? if i catch him round here i'll batter
him,
>having a funny name like that :-).

You never what weirdos will show up on the net ;)

>if we can develop a good mechanism for fighter needle attacks, people
can
>patch it in as a fighter type or an attack mode as they wish. reduce,
>reuse, recycle. as an attack mode it should be called the trench run,
>obviously.

Certainly - Though I prefer it a tactic, not a fighter type - so you
have 3
attack types with fighters - Dogfight, Anti-ship, and Trench run.

>> >- nominate primary and secondary target systems
>> >- roll a die. if you score under the current strength of the
squadron:
>> >-- roll a beam die:
>> >--- 2 pts - primary and secondary targets destroyed
>
>thinking about this some more, this may be excessive. maybe we should
just
>say pick one target; 1 point of damage destroys it, 2 pts destroys it
and
>the player is allowed to shout "KABOOM!" louder than he usually would.
or
>score a point of hull damage too, although i dislike this on aesthetic
>grounds.

I think 2 systems detroyed is indeed excessive, but read on

>define terms: if a system is KOd so it can be repaired (eg threshold)
it
>is damaged, if it is KOd so it cannot (eg shipboard needle beams) it is
>destroyed.

Yes

>if we use the 'needle fighters damage systems' rule, then maybe getting
2
>points means the damage was extra heavy, and is treated as system
>destroyed (ie, cannot be repaired). this i like. this would apply to
>multiple successes for each-fighter-rolls mode.

This best, IMO.  Which ever die mechanic you use, 1 pt damages system, 2
pts destroys it.

>note that needle fighters should be able to target systems which have
been
>damaged in an attempt to destroy them (the Horizon is drifting
helplessly,
>but nonetheless the Equinox launches needle fighters to see the job is
>properly finished ...).

Agreed

>> >count turkeys as one fighter less
>
>squadrons with aces make an attack at one less strength (the ace is not
>involved) but get the ace's attack as well. or just get +1 on the roll,
or
>count as 1 stronger (the opposite of turkeys).

I would word it 'Squadrons with Aces count as 1 stronger'  This way you
benefit even if you use a reversed die roll like I proposed (where you
want
to roll low).  I don't think I would split the Ace off - He may be the
hot
shot, but the squadron still stays together on the trench run.	You
could
make his needle attack separately, but this would seem to imply a split
squadron.  If you do want to make his attack separately, I would say he
must attack a system adjacent to the main squadron's target (adjacent
system on the SSD) or better yet, declare his separate attack and allow
PDS
to specifically be used in targetting him.  If the PDS targetted at him
scores a hit, the Ace is toast.

>> How about collapsing that to a single die roll to resolve the attack?
>
>faster is better.

An interesting idea, at least - I like fast - I've modified my proposal
(see below)

The squadron gives up it's normal attack and instead:
- Declare the intended trench run (but not it's target)
- Resolve PDS
- Nominate the target system
- Roll a die and compare it to squadron strength
  (Turkey groups count as 1 less, Groups with ace as 1 more)
  -- If above squadron strength, nothing happens.
  -- If equal to squadron strength target system damaged.
  -- If below to squadron strength target system destroyed.

>the nice thing about rolling a normal beam attack die is that it allows
>fighter types to differ: needling ordinary fighters roll a straight
beam
>die; needling attack fighters do the attack fighter thing and add one.

That is true, but would those factors alter the Trench run abilities
very
much? And if they do, could attack fighter groups simply add +1 to the
squadron strength? (just like having an ace, but it is cumulative)
Personally I don't think fighter type should significantly alter the
trench
run, buy YMMV

>ok, so can torpedo fighters do the trench run?

hmmm...I've mixed emotions on this one.  I sort of think that the same
abilities (maneuverability, agility, etc.) that make a good dogfighter
also
go a long way in making a good trench fighter - at the same time you
want
anti-shipping guns to take out the larger targets...

Or do you?  Perhaps at these close ranges, small anti-fighter guns are
as
effective as larger anti-shipping weaponry. Could it be that the Trench
Run
is closely akin to dogfighting a ship?	The maneuvers to approach a
target
so closely as to guarantee that your attacks will not only penetrate the
shields, but also be focused only on that system?  That would almost
suggest that Torpedo fighters couldn't do it, and that even attack
fighters
may not be very good at it.  What do you think?  Might interceptors be
the
best trench fighters?

If this is the case (which it may not be) then perhaps we should change
how
we handle the PDS during a trench run.	Fighters that get a bonus to
dogfight (interceptors) are attacked by PDS as normal.	Fighters without
bonus (multi-role,F,H,LR) are attacked with a +1, fighters penalized in
close combat (attack, Torp) are attacked at +2.

>also, my rule is totally unlike the rule for ordinary needle beams.

That's OK - we'll call it a trench run, and say fighters don't have the
targetting system to accomodate the normal needle system (so say nothing
of
the size), and so must make up for the precision with proximity.  Poof -
non-standard needle argument solved!

>Jared's rule is unlike beam or needle rules. this may not be a problem.

Now as to my new mechanic...umm...it's a new mode of operation - is a
new
mechanic all that bad?	Even your mechanic takes liberties with the
fighter/beam system (rather than 1 die per fighter you _might_ roll 1
die -
depending on the number of fighters in your group)

>> I would still
>> allow PDS to take place before the needle attacks
>
>fair enough. with a bonus, as has been suggested.

Agreed - is +1 enough?

>> >strong - replace anti-ship attacks with needle attacks; thus
fighters
>are
>> >no longer able to actually sink a ship, just batter its systems. i
>never
>> >liked the idea that my lumbering city-sized battleships were so
>vulnerable
>> >to those little swarming pests ...
>>
>> Possibly...I'd need to think on that one some more.
>
>so do i! this was one of the parts that fell victim to the 0200 effect;
>i was going to go into more depth, but basically it consists of
removing
>the normal attack mode altogether.

I've other thoughts on this (If I remember them I'll address them later)

>i think that screens can be ignored: if you're using needle fighters,
the
>weapon punches through them; if you're using the trench run, the
fighters
>duck in below the screen. do we have a consensus?

Well, the 2 of us do on this point...does 2 on a list of 180+ make a
consensus? ;)

>i have analysed the statistical characteristics of the proposed
systems.
>to recap, we have damage mode (each rolls a beam die for damage),
needle
>mode (each rolls a needle die for knockouts, max of 1 total), mark
>(shurtleff) mode (each half rolls a needle die, max of 1 total), tom
mode
>(morale check and beam die for knockouts, max of 1 total), jared mode
>(roll under strength to get a knockout). iirc, needle die score 1 on
the
>roll of a 6.
>
>thus, i give you formulae. where N is the number of fighters in the
>squadron and R is the result (damage or knockouts):
>
>Damage: R = N/2
>Needle: R = 1 - (5/6)^N
>Mark: R = 1 - (5/6)^floor(N/3)
>Tom: R = N/12
>Jared: R = (N-1)/6

I'm not sure about this - with my system, even having 1 fighter you can
score 'damaged', if not a 'destroyed' (of course this is my new system -
previously it was only 1 DP - so that may be what you meant)

>this is all normal squadrons. these versions are a bit simplified and
rule
>out secondary targets, attack fighters, etc.
>
>a table:
>
>N   6	  5    4    3	 2    1
>
>D   3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50
>N   0.67 0.60 0.52 0.42 0.31 0.17
>M   0.31 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00
>T   0.50 0.42 0.33 0.25 0.17 0.08
>J   0.83 0.67 0.50 0.33 0.17 0.00
>
>The Needle mode is probably the most powerful in combat situations (ie
>strengths of 4 or 5 are typical); Jared's is a close second. mine is
less
>so and falls of linearly, like Jared's; Mark's is the least powerful.
we
>just have to decide how we want this.

However, will 4-5 remain typical if PDS gets a bonus vs trench runs?

>hope this helps (and is correct),
>Tom

Looks good to me...nice job

Jared