Prev: Re: [FT] Yet Another Fighters Suggestion Next: real-life FT playing (was: Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS

Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS

From: drowmage@g...
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:00:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS


Its been ages since I've been able to play FT with anybody (I've got to
find some players here in the Boston, MA area.. any takers?), but I
thought I'd throw out some suggestions on how fighters could possibly be
improved. Odds are the old hands on the list have kicked them around
before, but I've been way out of the loop and lurking for a while now,
so I probably missed it. So here they are in no particular order. 

Firstly, its not just the fighter points cost that we should be looking
at. Its also the ships that carry them. Dedicated carrier craft should
be more expensive than something that just has a fighter bay tucked in
here and there like most of the FB style DNs have. For this expense, you
get the ability to launch and recover faster (fighter control systems in
place of or in addition to fire control systems to simulate fighter
command systems, or
somesuch, maybe?). CVs could also have armament restrictions based on
their mass, since for the most part, their main guns would BE their
strikegroups. However, you would still want the option for arming and
armoring some designs heavy for the assault CV role if you want to spend
the money/pay the points for them. You could also seperate the
launch/recovery system and make it a seperate system for each squadron
to be carried. That gives you another system that can be lost on
threshold roles, and also allows you to design less than optimum fighter
platforms (merchant hulled conversions and such) that have some flavor
to them. It would add more time and more recordkeeping, which could
definately have an adverse effect on gameplay. But it might force
players to keep their strike groups to something resembling sane just to
avoid being lynched by the other players for taking to long, so that
might work out okay. =)

I think the points cost for the fightergroups is possibly skewed,
espeically once you start tacking on points to make them multirole (Fast
Heavy Interceptors, anybody?). One way around this would be to limit the
number of roles you can have in a given fighter squadron, or to have
some sort of points system in place for a modular or omni-fighter. 

Point defense systems could also stand to be updated a bit, but I'm
honestly not sure how best to do this. They could possibly have some
sort of a bonus (or penalty) that takes into account the sensor suite
and ECM/ECCM systems of the ship that mount them. 

Most of the stuff I listed has the potential to really gum up gameplay,
so I'm conflicted implementing it. If I ever get a chance to game
sometime soonish, I'll have to test a few of the ideas out. 

Anyway, thats all I have for now. 

--Theron Hatfield

Prev: Re: [FT] Yet Another Fighters Suggestion Next: real-life FT playing (was: Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS