Re: [FTFB] "Needle" fighters?

Jared E Noble wrote:
> Tom Anderson wrote:
> >Jared E Noble wrote:

> I would word it 'Squadrons with Aces count as 1 stronger'.

agreed. this is clearest.

> I've modified my proposal
> 
> 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

good thinking - keeps the defending player guessing about what goes
where. otoh, it means that you can commit three squadrons, and after pds
fire you can assign the strongest to what you want destroyed most, etc.
this may not be realistic - squadrons would have their runs lined up in
advance.

in fact, i think a ship's crew would be able to figure out the target
from the attack trajectory, fighter fire-control emissions, etc.
"they're targeting our weapons systems!" is a classic space opera
phrase.

> - 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.

i see where you're coming from - this is the DS2 penetration rule!
however, the chance of destroying a system is far too high. how about
reversing the results, so you have a constant 1/6 chance of destroying
and a varying chance of damaging. with only one fighter left, it's
either destroy or fail, a suitably tense and operatic situation!

> >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

i can see your point - the trench run is about precision, not power.

> 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?

no. for theoretical reasons - ship systems will have their own armour
(like Harpoon's Critical Hit Protection), and so you need big guns, not
rapid-fire light-weight stuff like an interceptor's. for game reasons -
interceptors are for fighting fighters, atack fighters are for fighting
ships.

> >> 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?

yes.

> >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? ;)

yes, if i'm one of them :-). does anyone else out there have any
feelings on this?

> >thus, i give you formulae. where N is the number of fighters in the
> >squadron and R is the result (damage or knockouts):
> >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)

well, given that you had not posted your new system, and possibly had
not even thought of it, when i did this analysis, yes, that is what i
meant! next time i'll engage my clairvoyancy mode :-).

> >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?

and if it takes place first. if a full-strength squadron attacks a ship
and gets fired at by 1 pds, it can expect to take 1 casualty (FT pds
here); i don't know how it works in FB.

Tom