Re: [FT] Fighter thoughts

> 
> Grant A. Ladue wrote:
> 
> >Eh, perhaps it's just me.  I'm just having a problem coming up with
any
> >explanation for *how* any number of fighters could stay with a small
ship
> >indefinitely.
> 
> How do you explain that a Banzai Jammer - which isn't much larger than
a 
> fighter itself - can outrun fighters during short sprints?
>
   An interesting question.  Let's see, fighters have limited combat
endurance,
 but aren't dead in space when that is expended.  Ships have no limit to
their
 combat endurance.  Presumably ships have some kind of drive that has no
fuel
 considerations, or such small fuel usage as to be practically nil. 
Fighters
 apparently have smaller versions of these (for their primary move) that
allows
 for cruising only.  Perhaps the limited cef represents higher output
fuel
 based engines that can run out.  These are used for the extra bursts of
speed
 used in attack runs, evasive maneuvers, etc.  The reason ships can
outrun 
 fighters over a distance is because they cross the threshold point when
large
 full thrust engines can be installed (either for size or cost reasons).
 Ships
 have no concerns about just opening the engines wide and leaving. 
Fighters
 have to think about running out of fuel.
   Hmm, under that explanation, then the solution might be to require
the 
 fighters to spend a CEF whenever they are screening any ship that is
moving 
 faster than the fighter's primary move.  Then the fighter's could
choose to
 use precious fuel to stay with the ship, or conserve fuel and move on
their
 own.  You could "surf" fighters to the battle faster with a ship, but
only at
 the cost of less endurance when they got there.  Similiarly, no enemy
ship 
 could outrun the fighters over a short distance, but would be
guaranteed of
 doing so eventually (presuming it survived).
   What do you think?
 
> >Hmm, now that I think about it, how does a fighter group compare
versus a
> >PDS for mass and effectiveness against missiles?  Would you be better
off with
> >a few fighter groups screening you (and providing their own fire
control)
> >rather than using PDS's with fire controls?

> Depends on many things - eg. on how fast your defending fighters get
shot 
> down by the enemy ships (or fighters!), on whether or not the enemy 
> fighters get close enough to the PDS-equipped ship to be shot at by
them, 
> etc. Fighters are more flexible than PDS, but they can also be more
vulnerable.

   Let's simplify to just having heavy or salvo missiles attacking.  Is
there a
 point where fighters would be better (or more cost effective), than
some 
 number of PDS?  I would ignore the fighter's anti-ship capacity for
now.

  grant