Oerjan Ohlson wrote-in either case assuming that the "fighter missile"
above refers to AFHAWK (not sure, it could refer to a torpedo
fighter-style
weapon as well).
This has given me a idea. How about for torpedo fighters, giving them a
selection of missiles to chose from. We have the standard heavy missile, with
a range of only 6 MU, requiring the fighter to enter the PDS envelope of the
target, but with 4 to 6 dammage. We could also have a light missile,
same range as above, but only 1 to 3 points of dammage (1D6 -3, positive
number is a hit and the dammage done), but 2 missiles per fighter. Their is
also the posibility of a long range missile. The above 2 are fired from within
the targets PDS envelope, at short range, giving the target no chance to
intercept. The target only has a chance to shoot the fighters down before they
fire. The long range missile would be fired from outside the PDS envelope,
giving the PDS a chance to intercept the fighter missiles while they are
comming into range. The fighter would not have to enter the PDS range of the
target. The long range fighter missiles would have a range of 9 MU, and a
dammage same as a light missile (1 to 3). You would roll a 1D6
-3,
and any missiles that hit would have a chance to be intercepted by PDS before
hitting. Now, I know the chance of hitting would be low, esspecially with the
PDS shooting down the missiles on the way in, but since the fighters don`t
have to enter PDS range to launch, more fighters would suvive to try again. If
you are going to say about differentiating between different loadouts on the
torpedo fighters, you can always use the sistem we do, and have 1 model per
fighter, with a number on said fighter, and a
record sheet to tally the number of losses/missiles fired/missile
loadout etc.
Just a rough idea from playing against my generic bad guys, the "bugs".
> How about for torpedo fighters, giving them a
I like the idea so far.
> We have the standard heavy missile,
This is the standard Torpedo Fighter mechanic (1-3 = miss, 4-6 =
number of damage points)
> We could also have a light missile,
It looks like it would balance fine (1-3 = miss, 4-6 = 1-3 damage
respectively). Gives them more options for employment. Trades damage for
flexibility.
> The long range fighter missiles would have a range of 9
(1-3 = miss, 4-6 = 1-3 "hits" respectively; "hits" may be countered
by PDS) At first glance, this might seem like a low chance to hit, however:
Take a typical squadron of 6 fighters attacking a CH, which typically have
about 2 PDS. Each missile does an average of 1 "hit," making 6 hits for the
squadron. The PDS will stop 1.6 hits. This means that an average fighter
squadron will do 4.4 points on the CH without any chance of it damaging the
fighters in return. Why would anyone NOT take this option!
> If you are going to say about differentiating between
I like the idea of different torpedo types. Just need to work out balance.
[quoted original message omitted]
> We could also have a light missile,
Why not use the dice as rolled 1,2 & 3 count - ignore 4,5 & 6 results.
No figuring
> [quoted text omitted]
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 02:04:33 +0100
From: "NeoMatrix" <neomatrix@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: FT-Torpedo fighters
> You may be reading the fighter torpedo rules wrong from your
FB2(p4) has roll 1d6 4= 4hits, 5=5 hits, 6 = 6 Hits
:D
<<<<<<<<<<
that being the case, the average damage is 2.5.
Dave
> BIF wrote:
> This has given me a idea. How about for torpedo fighters, giving them a
Standard FT "Torpedo fighter" load.
> We could also have a light missile, same range as above, but only 1 to
OK. Lower total average damage than the standard load (2x1 = 2 pts instead of
the 2.5 for the standard "torpedo"), but increased flexibility.
> Their is also the posibility of a long range missile. [...] The long
> The long range fighter missiles would have a range of 9 MU, and a
Not only will more fighters (ie., *all* fighters) survive to try again, but
more importantly they don't have to take any morale check which means that the
attack will always get in.
Schoon's example:
> Take a typical squadron of 6 fighters attacking a CH, which typically
> the squadron. The PDS will stop 1.6 hits. This means that an average
Usually not quite *this* bad though, unless the cruiser has already been
damaged. Typical (undamaged) heavy cruisers have 2-3 PDSs + 1-2 B1-6s,
so could expect to intercept 2-3.2 missiles on its own allowing the
fighters to inflict "only" 2.8-3.2 pts. Still, considering that the
fighters don't take *any* damage to themselves that's too much already -
a lone torpedo squadron attacking the same lone cruiser (and taking the
morale roll) would inflict on average 3.3-6.7 pts, an attack squadron
would
inflict 1.6-3.2 pts (or less if the cruiser is screened) - and in both
cases 2-3 of the attacking fighters are destroyed.
What about making the long-range fighter missiles inflict 1D6-4 points
per fighter instead? Average damage per fighter is 0.5 pts, so an average
undamaged cruiser would take very little damage from a lone fighter squadron;
a solid ADFC phalanx would be very difficult to crack even for
massed missile fighters. (Which, BTW, is exactly what happens in Starfire
:-) ) If the fighters have unlimited time at their disposal they'll
still
be able to take out any fighter-less non-SV enemy without taking any
losses themselves, but it'd be a slow death of a thousand cuts rather than a
single massive blow - and the enemy would have plenty of time to
withdraw if he can't break through to the carriers while the fighters are
reloading.
BIF again:
> If you are going to say about differentiating between
Allowing different fighters in a single squadron to have different weapon
loads is a *pain*. I wouldn't allow that, no.
Schoon replied to BIF:
> Came from remembering the WDA/WotW discusion, where someone said "50%
Schoon got it in one here. A longer *ship-borne* weapon range doesn't
guarantee that you're outside enemy weapons range; longer fighter weapons
ranges does guarantee that you won't get any counter-fire (except from
other fighters, and from Sa'Vasku).
Later,
[quoted original message omitted]