Re: (fwd) Re: [FT] F***ters [was: Operational game]

On 5 Feb 2003 at 21:30, Hugh Fisher wrote:

>  Is increasing the cost of each fighter not an option?

The problem is that the effectiveness of fighters do not scale 
linearly. 20 fighters groups are more than 20 times more effective 
than 1 fighter group.

So either, the cost needs to be some sort of function of the number 
of fighter groups (which could be an option for tournaments, but has 
too many knock on effects for casual or campaign play).
Or, the rules need to be tweaked to make the effect of fighters more 
directly proportional to the numbers.  

There's also the "realism" question - why can't ships fire at 
fighters that are just loitering within range? Any modifications in 
this area also have to be checked to see whether they impact on the 
points cost issues.

>  Is it really that painful to exchange 2 mass of other gear
>  for an ADFC on capital ships instead of relying on specialised
>  escort vessels?

That's how many custom fleets work. But if you're using standard FB 
fleets then dedicated escort ships are the only ones that carry ADFC.
 
>  (I'm just bitter because my fighter-heavy NACs just got thumped
>  at a convention, so don't want them made less effective :-) )

How fighter heavy? Just FB fighter heavy or really fighter heavy?

None of the FB fleets have enough fighters to really demonstrate what 
they can do in large numbers. The NAC carriers could easily trade 
B2s, shields, armour and maybe thrust for more fighter groups. Keep 
the carriers well away from the fire fight and they don't need any of 
that stuff.

	Steve
-- 
The Ground Zero Games Meta-FAQ is available at
http://steve.pugh.net/gzg/meta-faq.txt

Steve Pugh   <steve@pugh.net>	<http://steve.pugh.net/>