Re: Full Thrust vs Starmada

> 
> Tom McCarthy wrote:
> 
> >There have been suggestions that limit the number of fighters that
can
> >attack a ship in a turn.  Number crunching suggest they ameliorate
the
> >problem (even greatly), but some people don't feel they solve it.
> 
> Show me the number crunching that suggest they ameliorate the problem 
> "greatly", or even at all. The only number crunching of this concept
I've 
> seen very strongly suggested that limiting the number of fighters
attacking 
> a particular ship in a single turn has virtually *no* effect if the
target 
> ship is a FB-style (ie., limited-PDS) BB or smaller...
> 
    Really?  I find this a bit suprising, but it depends a lot on how
much
  you limited the fighters, whether you use morale, etc.  
    For instance, I would think that if you limited a cruiser sized hull
to
  only 4 attacking fighter groups (say out of a 6 group swarm), that
could 
  extend it's lifetime considerably.  The average cruiser has 3 or 4 pds

  doesn't it?  Dedicate one pds per attacking group and you should get a
couple
  of fighter kills.  With the morale rules, you've got at least one
fighter 
  group who has to roll before it attacks.  If you can get one or two
fighter 
  groups to break off before their attack, you've probably kept the
cruiser 
  from going through a second threshold on that turn.  That's much
*much* 
  better than what would happen if 6 fighter groups attacked it under
the 
  current system.  It ain't perfect, but it's better.  If you also
allowed the
  ship to fire it's other weapons at the fighters, then the fighters
could have
  a fairly hard time of it.  It's just off the top of my head, but it
seems ok 
  to me.  For settings where non-targetable fighters are appropriate
have that
  be another way to run fighters, with the proviso that fighters would
be 
  *very* common in these universes, and forces not equipped with
fighters are 
  going to be at a real disadvantage.

    Just one man's thoughts.

  grant