Re: [FT] Yet Another Fighters Suggestion

----- Original Message -----
From: <agoodall@att.net>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: [FT] Yet Another Fighters Suggestion

> It's at this point that Eric points out that you can easily defend
against
> fighters with large numbers of scatterguns. Scatterguns are also
overpowered
> for their price.

Well, I realize that most people don't like to push the envelope on the
rules system
with mixed tech and what not as far as I do, but here's what I've found
in
my experience.

A fleet that uses huge amounts of fighters as their primary and sole
weapon
(e.g. soap
bubble carriers) against a fleet that is equipped with enough
scatterguns to
stop them\
is going to be shredded in short order.  At that stage, any amount of
fighters, used as a
sole weapon without any real backup, is a serious waste of points.
Combining them
with almost any form of direct-fire weaponry is also a serious waste of
points; an enemy
fleet that brings more direct-fire weapons and enough scatterguns to
stop
the fighters
is simply going to outgun them.

Against scatterguns, about the only answer for a carrier fleet is to
back
the fighters up
with plasma bolts.  Scatterguns are limited-munitions weapons.	Plasma
bolts
aren't.

Then, of course, there's also the simple thought of flying at extreme
range
with really
long ranged weapons and tons of PDS and ADFC, as has already been
suggested.

Ultimately, that's sort of where the balance winds up lying once you
push
the system
to its limits.	Plasma bolt/fighter/scattergun combinations,
direct-fire/scatterguns, and
speed-and-firepower.  Any one of them, if well designed, can tackle the
other two, and
any of them can handle the soap bubbles without much trouble.

Eric (aka Stilt Man)