RE: Fighter Rules

In message <C6B11301984B7B4482835995B486A53626083A@molly.tas.csiro.au>
	  Beth.Fulton@marine.csiro.au wrote:

> G'day,
> 
> >With the morale rules now a standard 
> >(I think), are they still really powerful.
> 
> Personally I think you have to use the morale rules to make them
balanced.
> As for moving after shipping you'd be taking all the guesswork out of
it,
> not a good idea I'd say. Some guesswork is necessary so they don't
become
> too over the top.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Beth

I've been (vaguely) considering a 'simplified' set of fighter rules, as
follows:

Fighters move _after_ ships
Fighters only move their primary movement (no secondary - don't need
it).
Fighters can only make ONE attack before needing to return to their
carrier for re-arming.
After the attack, treat the fighters as having exhausted their CEF
(FB1).
The are no morale checks.

Now I'm kind of hoping the 'only one attack per sortie bit will cancel
out the 'doesn't need to make morale checks' if it doesn't, then I think
the points cost should be adjusted.

Special Fighters.

Mostly as written, consider long-range fighters to be the same as fast
fighters (move 36).

Torpedo fighters should have a higher cost, as they only make 1 real
attack anyway.

Refinements (Optional).

Allow re-arming.

Some system for having some of the 'killed' fighters in a sortie simply
being driven off or damaged. For example, group of 6 attacks a ship,
loses 4 to PDS, instead of the survivors being 2, they are actually say
4,
with 2 that could not get through the PDS fire (2 were actually killed).
All 4 are treated as having expended their combat endurance.

The idea of all this is to simplify fighter mechanics for larger
battles.
Now, do you all think it'd work?

Charles