Hi, I am new to this mailing list and apologise if I may be suggesting
somthing that has already been discussed and thrown in the bin.
I have always been interested in the way fighters work in Full Thrust and have
implemented various 'House' rules in our gaming group to reflect this.
One of the primary roles of the fighter is to protect a ship from other
fighters. This usually is accomplished by the fighters keeping close to the
ship they are defending, ie TIEs in Star War protecting the Death Star or Star
Furys in B5 protecting the station and the Omega Destroyers in 'Severed
Dreams'.
So in our games when a fighter group is launched it can be designated
as flying protective escort (CAP/Screen). The fighter is moved with
the ship it is escorting and is placed anywhere within 2" of the model.
If a fighter group ends the turn within 2" of a friendly ship it may perform
CAP as above for that ship in the following turn.
A fighter group may only perform CAP for ONE ship per turn even if another
ship ends its move within 2" of the CAP fighter group.
If a fighter group wishes to attack the escorted ship it can be fired on by
the CAP fighters before the attackers can fire at the ship, rather like an
extra Point defence system. A single CAP group can only engage ONE enemy
attacking fighter group per turn. If any attackers in the group the CAP
engages survive give them immunity against PDAF fire as we can assume the
defending ship will not try to avoid hitting its own CAP
The facing of the CAP group does not matter, they are assumed to be in a
special defensive formation. (Look at the Star Furys protecting the EAS
Alexander at the start of Severed Dreams)
An attacking player may use a fighter group to Dogfight the CAP group this
results in std fighter to fighter combat and prevents the CAP engaging
fighters attacking the ship it is protecting.
These rules make 'interceptor' fighters very effective as CAP
Additional Comments:
Specifically Babylon 5 games. Having watched battle scenes in B5 many times, I
think that fighters are helping screen ships against PPG fire from other
vessels, this seems to be happening in Voice in the Wilderness and Severed
Dreams. In our games a CAP group may be used in this role as follows: The CAP
group must not be in a Dogfight or be used to fire against enemy fighters.
Roll 1d6, if the roll is less than or equal to the group strength
the CAP group acts as one shield. This may be combined with PDF/
interceptor screening but still only a maximum of 3 shielding per ship.
I look forward to you comments...
> One of the primary roles of the fighter is to protect a ship from
Agreed. One of the big problems with FT is that because it is assumed that
space is huge and 3D, there is no such thing as LOS, and so it is very
difficult to screen an important ship with any others. We recently played a
game which involved a small fleet assisting a passnger vessel 'run a blockade'
set down by another fleet. The problem was that the military vessels were
simply ignored whilst the civilian got nuked, and there was very little they
could do about it... In reality they could have made an effort to put there
own vessel in the way.
> So in our games when a fighter group is launched it can be
Cool scene aint it...
> An attacking player may use a fighter group to Dogfight the CAP
Love the look of the rules as a whole. I am afraid that not being alergic to
thousands of rules makes me suseptable to ideas like this... I am currently
working on a very much expanded fighter combat system, in order to increase
the action that they see and flesh them out a bit, and will definately try
these out.....
-Michael
> Hi, I am new to this mailing list and apologise if I may be suggesting
Hey, being new nada problem. Throw out the ideas and stuff. If it's been
covered before you'll get some kind of response indicating so.
If it hasn't, then you started a new discussion. :-)
> Additional Comments:
In my B5 rules (which need a little upgrading; or total dismissal when
Jon T's B5 starship combat system comes out with the r-p game) use *DAFs
in pairs to simulate screening. I've found that doing to level 3 in this kind
of screening to be hideously effective in reducing enemy fire to almost
nothing. Doesn't give the *bang* effects that we see. So I'm advocating only a
limit of 2 levels of screening.
As for fighters also screening, I'm not sure about this. In VitW they don't
screen or block shots that I recall; they go after the alien dudes. In SD they
aren't *blocking* any shots there, either (okay, that we
see).
Yeah, they are referred to as a 'fighter screen', but I don't think it means
the same as you are tryign to emmulate here. The Clarkestown fired some pulse
cannons (okay, they went wide, anyway) and a heavy laser (which hit; by
coincidence took a fighter with it). I think the 'screening' the fighters were
doing here was keeping the Clarkestown at a distance, preventing it from
closing too closely. Also, they would be tying up some of the Clarkestown's
guns to defend itself against the Aggie fighters. If the fighters were 'reeled
in' then the Clarkestown would be able to concentrate it's full assortment of
weaponry on the Aggie.
Also, the Aggie fighters would also deter Clarkestown fighters from coming in.
So with this in mind I'd say fighters wouldn't be able to go into an
'intercept' mode; only *DAFs (I used pairs of them to keep them from being
*too* effective). *May*be other batteries, depending on how you view what they
represent.
I do like your CAP idea, though, for dealing with enemy fighters. A rule like
that would have been useful in my last B5 PBeM game (and yes, gang,
one of these days I *will* put together that summary/write-up of the
scenario)
Mk
> In message <856521548.99090.0@basil.acs.bolton.ac.uk> you wrote:
> Hi, I am new to this mailing list and apologise if I may be suggesting
Welcome!
> One of the primary roles of the fighter is to protect a ship from
It's something I tend to use my fighters for (since I field NSL (which look
vaguely B5ish), and I have some Starfury^H^H^H^Htiger fighter models, can you
blame me?:)), though we don't use any special rules. Most fighters are heavy
interceptors, which are kept close to my own ships until enemy fighters come
onto the board, at which point I engage.
You don't really need special rules for this (since it's very easy to force
the enemy to dogfight in the rules as they stand).
> Specifically Babylon 5 games. Having watched battle scenes in B5
Problem with this is, a single group of fighters is equally effective against
an attack from a single beam weapon, as they are against a dozen or so beam
weapons.
Something I'm considering using for sandcasters (ie Traveller style), which
could be used for fighters, is rolling dice as for damage, with each point of
damage being 1d less of damage taken. For fighters, you might want to say 1d
in defence for every two fighters.
eg: A group of six fighters is protecting a ship from an attacking ship which
is firing two A batteries at medium range. Normally, the attacker does 4d
damage. However, before damage is rolled, the fighters get their defence, and
roll for 2 pts of defence, stopping two dice of damage, before it's rolled (so
the attacker only rolls 2d for the attack).
Fighter types suffer/gain the same modifiers to their defence
as they would when attacking other fighters. Use this way uses up a turn of
endurance.
> Hi, I am new to this mailing list and apologise if I may be suggesting
I don't think the guys doing the Babylon Project RPG will mind me letting on
the fighter "screening" is going to be used in the ship combat rules
-
that bit was written long ago. We'll probably put the rule into FTIII as well.
> At 02:41 PM 2/21/97 +0000, you wrote:
Sounds like you need a scenario specfic house rule. Perhaps you could
implement a system where a ship within so many inches of another target can
"take the bullet" (i.e. jump in the way). I don't recommend this rule for
every game, and I think it could be easily misused, but it might make your
scenario work.
In response to another gent who stated that a "house rule" might be
needed, and only used for that scenario - cuz it might be abused...
Shame, shame, shame!
Whenever possible, rules should reflect an underlying "reality" if possible.
When the rule isn't realistic, it is usually because the "truely realistic"
rule isn't easy to implement for the game. This is the
"realism" vesus "playability" debate/tradeoff that many game designers
have to face that are "wargames". Of course, some games give up any pretense
of being realistic, so those games can be whatever the designer (and players
for that matter) want.
To address the issue, I too believe that there should be some form of "weak"
shielding rules. Maybe the concept of formation flying (mentioned as squadron
flying in one of the rules books) could be required in order to get the
benefit of shielding. For example:
Shielding ships are required to be within 2 inches of the shielded ship. Ships
may not break formation, nor speed up faster than the shielded ship other than
to interpose their ship between the shielded ship, and the aggressor. Clear
line of sight between aggressor ships and the shielded ship negate any
"shielding bonus" (whatever that might be).
Bear in mind - the shielding bonus should not be "absolute". The
shielding ship should not be able to entirely cover the shielded ship. At
best, maybe shielding will allow for the shielded ship to have one level of
screens, but any damage that is reduced as a result of the shielding, goes
against the ship doing the screening...
Just a response to someone else's complaint...
You all have stumbled upon the tactical issues that the United States Navy and
others have had to deal with for years. As the range of enemy missiles
increaced the need for expanded screens of ships became greater. Battle Groups
now maitain a surveilance range of over 200 nautical miles for this very
problem. Battle groups are specially placed to prevent an enemy unit from
closing the high value unit without being engaged. If you want to do this
right, don't change the rules... Instead ensure you send an action group to
intercept the enemy before they get too close. Use a larger playing field if
neccessary to make it work. As for fighters playing a CAP role. Just declare
that a squadron is playing CAP etc. and it moves with the unit its guarding,
assuming the escorted ship is not faster than the fighter. If a fighter
squadron is escorting some torpedo bombers, then put them base to base and
move them as one group. If another squadron wants to dogfight them, then they
have to get through the fighter squadron first. Of course the best way is to
place a fighter squadron out front and engage aproaching fighters in a
dogfight before they can engage the bombers etc.
Phil
> Roger Gerrish wrote:
> One of the primary roles of the fighter is to protect a ship from
> <SNIPPED>
OK. A thought occurs. If fighters can act to protect ships then they should
also be allowed to protect other groups of fighters. Thus we could have
interceptors giving cover and protecting torpedo or attack fighters.
Dave