Re: balancing Fighters and different SM loads

jeremy claridge wrote:
> 
> I like fighters and don't see them as a problem.
> 

I tend to agree.  While fighters are powerful, they can be stopped.
If anything, maybe we need new systems, or tweak old ones (I like the
idea of expanding the range of PDS, or perhaps re-creating the ADS 
e.g. MASS 3, POINTS 10, can engage any fighter group within 12", 
regardless of whether or not it's attacking any ship in the area.)

Something else I've been playing with which would help are differing
SML loads.  Right now, we have two anti-ship loads - SM, and SM-ER.
We'd add two more - SM-AF, SM-B

SM-AF is an anti-fighter loadout.  Range 24", detonation radius 6".
Every fighter group within the detonation radius is attacked by d6 
missiles; each missile attacks like a fighter.	If the fighter group
burns a CE to escape the detonation radius, the number of missiles
per fighter group is halved, and each fighter group is treated as having
level 1 screens (level 2 for heavy fighters.)  No-rerolls. MASS: 2

SM-B is a bombardment loadout; instead of carrying missiles, it carries
a large anti-matter bomb.  (This was tossed around in playtest, and a
version of it exists in EFSB.)	Range 24", detonation radius 6".  Every
object within the detonation radius takes a d6 worth of damage, -1 per 
inch of range outside of 3" radius.  Fighter craft lose that many
fighters;
heavy fighters lose the number halved.	No re-rolls.  MASS: 2

-- 
/ Jerry Han -  CANOE Canada - jhan@canoe.ca -
http://people.canoe.ca/jhan \
  ** Visit the Canadian Online Explorer! => http://www.canoe.ca **
TBFTGOGGI
 The opinions expressed are mine, and not necessarily those of CANOE
Canada.
	 "...And if I should try, Would you catch me If I Fall?"