On Thursday, November 13, 1997 8:27 PM, Dean Gundberg
> [SMTP:dean.gundberg@bcbsnd.com] wrote:
<Snip>
Initial reaction - there are enough variants (heavy etc.) already do we
want to add another multiplier? But read on.
8 in a bay the old D6 on the fighter stand is now a D8.
A LW fighter might be more nimble or a smaller target so harder to hit, but
once hit they fold easily. I think for balance you have to make then easier to
take out, so the to hit tables look OK.
> All fighter modifications are available for LW fighters including the
I don't see the point of a Heavy Light Fighter - its just a Normal
Fighter surely. Somehow you can fit 8 in the bay, what is the rationale behind
this? What are the Mass and Points costs?
I like light torpedo fighters and have a vision of the Fairey Swordfish
attacking the Bismark in 'Sink the Bismark' (great film).
> This type of modification might work well to give some races a
I agree that it can give a different tech or racial feel, but at the cost of
adding complication. They remind be of Fairey Swordfish.
> Subject: Re: Lightweight Fighters
taking into account the thrust to weight ratio and the speeds attainable
by 'light fighter/fast fighters', couldn't it be surmised that one of
these 'light fighters is more specifically designed for dog-fighting. I
know the rules are already in place for that, but could they possibly get a
better manueverability bonus? Also, being 'light', wouldn't they also act more
as fast 'interceptors' rather fighters and have restrictions on carryable
payloads?
just my thoughts.
Gil The guy with no tag line
> Lightweight Fighters
> All fighter modifications are available for LW fighters including
> I don't see the point of a Heavy Light Fighter - its just a Normal
That was my first thought but then I realized that Heavy normal fighters are
still the same size as regular normal fighters and a bay still holds 6 of them
so why should a Heavy LW fighter be equal to a normal fighter. Heavy fighters
are the same 'size' as the base fighter type, just harder to kill. Maybe
armored (or armoured:) is a better term than Heavy. Thus 8 Heavy LW fighters
would still fit in a LW bay.
> What are the Mass and Points costs?
To keep things as simple as possible, a LW fighter bay of 8 fighters costs and
masses the same as a normal fighter bay of 6 fighters. All modifications are
applied the same way. To balance the extra 2 fighters in a group, they are
easier to take out of action.
> I like light torpedo fighters and have a vision of the Fairey
Exactly the feel I wanted for LW fighters.
> I agree that it can give a different tech or racial feel, but at the
Yes it will add some complication, but then almost any addition to FT will add
some complication since the basic mechanics of FT are so simple. Any FT player
who also plays DSII, SGII or an rpg should have some d8s to use on fighter
bases, and other than that, you use a modified results table
when you shoot at the fighters with that funny d8 on the base.
Thanks for the feedback Tim. I have not played with LW fighters yet so
they could be totally off base. Numbers wise, they should be balanced.
A
PDAF on average can take out.75 normal fighters per shot, so it will take 8
shots to wipeout a fighter group of 6. With the modified hit results, LW
fighters are lost at a rate of 1 per shot on average, so it will take the same
8 shots to wipeout a LW fighter group of 8.
> Haun, Gilles, SSG wrote:
I
> know the rules are already in place for that, but could they possibly
Gil, You really cannot say you don't have a tag line, if you state that you
don't have a tag line, you cannot have a tag line to state
that you don't have a tag line on. Got that, I didn't.
Change subject: The problem that will develop is simple: soon the fighter will
be all things to all people. How about a Heavy fast interceptor
torpedo bomber. (I am just looking forward to fighting one of those!) In the
real world, the more functions an aircraft is called upon to perform, the less
ability it will show in the performace of any one function. Phil Pournelle did
a thing on combined fighter abilities which included FTL fighters, I would
suggest asking him for a retransmit of his thoughts.
Bye for now,
'cause Dean sez:
> Yes it will add some complication, but then almost any addition to FT
Any
> FT player who also plays DSII, SGII or an rpg should have some d8s to
Gene sez:
Cool idea.
It'll complicate thingsd slightly, but it'll also allow more leeway in
modeling 'fighter-rich' universes like RenLeg or Silent but Deadly.
> Gene
> Haun, Gilles, SSG wrote:
...Snip...(JTL)
> >Good thought, but I think your covered.
I
> know the rules are already in place for that, but could they possibly
Gil, the light fighter concept could have evolved into multiple fighter types:
1) Fast fighter; All thrust used for speed generation (18), standard weapons.
2) Interceptor; 66% of thrust for speed (12), 33% used in a dedicated form for
vectored thrust (I.E. REALLY BIG maneuvering thrusters).
The problem I have with changing the number of fighters in a group is simple;
1) The additional fighters need support equipment on the carrier. This is what
you buy with the 6 mass of the fighter bay. 2) The Light fighters are simply
not 33 percent smaller than the regular fighters with the same size engine,
33% less fuel, 33% less ammo, these losses in capability would render them
almost useless in combat. The Light fighters profile would be: Range; normal
combat: one attack turn, one defend turn.
(The reason for 1+1 combat is that the fuel will be used up more
quickly due to the oversized engine vs fuel supply)
By for now,
> ----------
Actually John, my whole point to this was that the description the gentleman
gave of the fighters seemed more along the lines of currently
existing fighters - ie: interceptors. Couldn't see changing the rules
for something already existing. on the otherhand, if they were extended
duration interceptors it might be plausible.
As far as the tagline goes - don't have one so don't use one.
Gil
Gil, Perhaps a change of concept is due at this point.
The lightweight fighter concept seemed to be a way to stuff
a few extra fighters in the same space/mass, so lets try this:
The rule: A fighter carrier can carry up to twice as many fighters
as it has hanger bays by paying the full cost of the non-existent
bays with no mass involved. (Waiting for a However yet.)
However! The carrier may only have half of the fighter compliment
armed at the start of the game/scenario and will only be able to
arm additional fighters as space becomes available due to launches.
This is a spur of the moment thought, and has not been playtested
in any way or form. I would suggest if you try this you have some
sort of improved ship defense. ( I have already done some thinking in this
direction, but I would like to see how the increased number of fighters
comcept is greeted.)
Bye for now,