[FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

5 posts ยท Mar 7 1999 to Mar 9 1999

From: Denny Graver <den_den_den@t...>

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 08:35:56 -0000

Subject: [FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

According to the Miniatures list in the back of the fleet book, we have NAC:
Firestorm II Phantom Heavy Fighters

ESU: Kilo Class Fighters Katya Class Fighters Kisha Class Heavy Fighters

NSL: Adler Class Fighter Wulf Class Interceptors Wespe Class Heavy Fighters

FSE: Mirage IX Class Fighters Camerone Class Heavy Fighters

Do the major powers have preferences for fighter types?

Are interceptors better at attacking SML's/Missiles ?

What sensor range can fighters be detected at, and would they have similar
sensor ranges to ships, or one step lower? I.e. fighters sensor range is
36" rather than 54" due to smaller sensor packages - still military,
though.

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 09:20:37 +0000

Subject: Re: [FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

> According to the Miniatures list in the back of the fleet book, we have

No, they're just the ones we've done models of (so far....)   :-)
> Are interceptors better at attacking SML's/Missiles ?

Good question. I guess maybe they should be. Something for us to address in
FB2/FT3.....
> What sensor range can fighters be detected at, and would they have

Again, this is probably something for FT3 - we want to look at and
rework all the sensor rules. Any good ideas in the meantime would be useful!

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 09:17:47 -0800

Subject: Re: [FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

> Denny Graver wrote:

> What sensor range can fighters be detected at, and would they have

1) Half range detection for fighters sounds like fun.

2) I have always considered the fighters to be directed to the
intercept.   A range equal to the 'burn an endurance to intercept'
value would be fair.

Bye for now,

From: Thomas Anderson <thomas.anderson@u...>

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 13:36:42 +0000 (GMT)

Subject: Re: [FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

> On Sun, 7 Mar 1999, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> >What sensor range can fighters be detected at, and would they have

i'd say that fighter sensors should be far, far less effective than those
on ships. assuming you're using some sort of EM waves, then smaller ->
less area -> lower photon-gathering capacity, smaller -> smaller
aperture
-> worse resolution. plus, smaller -> less computers. otoh, a squadron
might be able to gang up and set up some sort of synthetic aperture, where
several fighters pool their signals, like similar telescopes. or maybe not.
maybe this costs extra.

Tom

From: Andrew Martin <Al.Bri@x...>

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:40:57 +1300

Subject: Re: [FT] NAC, NSL, FSE, ESU Fighters

> Thomas Anderson <thomas.anderson@university-college.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:
A task force and its scout ships should be able to do a similar job, if they
all pointed in the same direction and cooperated.