Re: [GZG] Hugh's New Fighter/Point Defence rules

>
>The main issue I have with this is that torpedo bombers are not 
>going to get very many chances to strike in a battle compared to 
>regular attack fighters.  They need to be able to make the most of 
>it when they get them.

Torpedo fighters could roll to hit as if they were heavy
missiles (one band lower if possible, like attack fighters)
and use the to-hit roll as the damage as well. They'll do
slightly better again undefended targets because a 2 is
becomes a hit, and against well defended targets hits will
be rare but dangerous. And this would remove an extra die
roll.

>Well, given that 20+ scatterguns and/or 25-30 PDS have been 
>considered a balanced quantity for capital ship and/or escort ship 
>equipment in my campaigns, I think it becomes pretty academic as to 
>what would happen.  Inpenetrable PD levels would be a matter of 
>rote, and both plasma and heavy missiles would be completely 
>useless.  I'd suggest at the very least that they should hit on a 6 
>regardless of what defense was up, and I'm not sure whether or not 
>even that level shouldn't be pretty high up.

5-10% of capital mass and 20%+ for escort cruisers being
spent on PDS  isn't balanced to me, but then I did
say I wanted to find out what other people do :-) Your
campaign is evidently one of those where the optional
rules for fighter suppression/assistance should be used.

As for heavy missiles and plasma bolts, how about at
the 11-15 band they need a 6 to hit AND do one die less
damage, at 16+ 6 to hit and two dice less damage. So
heavy missiles always have a chance of doing some damage,
and while you can bounce off class 1 or 2 plasma bolts,
class 3 and up (Phalon heavy cruiser or better) still
hurt.

Oh, and anyone else want to jump in? Or has the Comic
Sans font seared the eyes of most readers? :-)

	cheers,
	Hugh
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l