Re: IF Fleet

Laserlight wrote:
> 
> >> I would base them off an attrition model for fighters.
> Every one of their
> >> ships carry at least one group of fighters. They have no
> true carriers -
> >> instead every ship is expected to fight in the line and
> carry some fighters
> >> as well. Think Hydran from SFB in that they are all
> partial carriers - a
> >> full fleet would have less direct firepower than most
> fleets, but able to
> >> fields a good deal of fighters. Plus the loss of any one
> unit means that
> >> enough other units can spread the surviving fighters so
> that none are lost
> >> for want of space.
> 
> This makes for very inefficient ships, though.  My IF
> designs (which I posted a day or two ago) assume the
> following:
> a) FTL drives are less available to the IFN than to the
> major powers.  Therefore many warships have no FTL drives,
> and are hauled from system to system by tugs or tenders.
> Ships with FTL drives tend to belong to the Sultanate rather
> than the amirs (who can be somewhat independent-minded).

This breaks the fleet book.  Non-FTL ships are much more powerful
on a BPV cost than FTL ships.  I would guess this is why ALL the
national fleets are FTL in the fleet book.

Roger