RE: Fighters options please

It basically has the effect of making all fighters "Light" Torpedo
Fighters.

Currently torpedo fighters cost 36 per squadron, but each fighter has a
mini-torp that does as much damage as the die roll (no-re-roll on 6) but
misses on 1-3 (so a 4 would do 4 damage).  They have a slight
disadvantage dogfighting, hitting only on 6's. They are single shot
against ships.

By making standard fighters single-shot with normal dogfighting
capability, they effectively become light torpedo fighters doing less
damage to ships but able to intercept other fighters on a normal basis.

Perhaps one way to deal with huge swarms of fighters is to have the
"Escort Interceptor".  Bought in the standard groups of 6, each
interceptor must remain within 24" of the launching ship, but each
fighter can engage an enemy squadron.  One kill on 3-4, two kills on 5,
two kills and a re-roll on a 6.  The PSB reasoning for the 24" range is
that the command and control functions are based on the launching ship
and the fighters need to maintain close contact to maintain optimal
coverage. So 2 squadrons of Escort Interceptors would allow you to
engage up to 12 opposing squadrons.  This would allow you to burn up
opposing fighter endurance and inflict some casualties, for relatively
low cost.

The down-sides are that escort carriers can be picked off like the
dedicated PDS platforms, Escort Interceptors provide no anti-ship
offensive capability.  The mass issue of having a hangar keeps it from
being used in some of the smaller ships.

The upside is that if you play with morale and endurance rules, the
attacking fighters will burn off some endurance, may take casualties
which could cause a morale check which in turn would reduce the
effectiveness of the anti-ship attack.

--Binhan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Bilderback [mailto:bbilderback@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 1:40 PM
> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: Fighters options please
> 
> 
> Charles Taylor wrote:
> 
> >No, keep posting, this has been interesting!
> 
> I'll do just that.  I made a suggestion earlier today, I'm 
> wondering what 
> people think of it.  I can articulate it in a little more 
> detail, and even 
> PSB it, I was hoping the group could exlpore how it would 
> change things for 
> the better or worse.
> 
> Here's the suggestion.  With or without changing any other 
> rules concerning 
> PDS/Fighters, put the following restriction on fighters:
> 
> When engaging missiles or other fighters, fighters may engage 
> in as many 
> dogfights as their endurance allows.	However, once a fighter 
> squadron makes 
> an attack on a ship, it may not make another attack on a ship 
> until it has 
> returned to it's own ship, landed, and re-launched.  If the 
> attack misses, 
> the fighter does not expend it's attack, unless the roll was 
> a 1, in which 
> case no damage is done AND the fighters must still return to reload.
> 
> PSB:
> Fighters are much smaller than ships - in fact, according to 
> what I've been 
> told On-list that they're less than 1 mass each.  This means 
> they must be 
> carrying some special ordnance to allow them to hurt a ship.	
> It might be 
> nukes, it might be chem-charged lasers, whatever suits your 
> flavor.  But 
> this ordnance must be expended to in order to hurt a ship.  
> The fighter will 
> probably still have enough remaining minor ordnance/weapons 
> to engage other 
> fighters, but rearming will be necessary in order to make 
> another run on a 
> ship.
> 
> As I see it, this has some potential for the situation as it's been 
> expressed by both sides.  Fighters do NOT lose any power for 
> any given run, 
> but it does stretch out how long it takes them to kill a 
> ship, and it makes 
> protection of their carriers paramount.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 3B^2
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
> http://www.hotmail.com
>