[OT] SFB Fighter comment

5 posts ยท Jun 6 2001 to Jun 9 2001

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 02:47:22 -0400

Subject: [OT] SFB Fighter comment

I hear a few people piping up about how few fighters were out there or how
they were only nuisance value. Holy smokes, but I must
disagree. Federation F-14s from the CVA or a
full carrier strike wing could majorly wreck
things, especially if the flight included A-10 or A-
20 attack shuttles and had good drone loadouts. Not at all to be trifled with.
I saw them wreck large fleets of capships.

Of course, we often played in 20 cap ship survivor style melees or in fleet
battles with
2000-4000 points per side, sometimes with 3,
4, 5 or even 6 sides. One turn has been known to take three hours:)

I myself (an inveterate klingon player) preferred my larger fleets to have
D6Ds, D7Ds (heavy missile armed cruisers) with very extensive and
sophisticated drone mixes, a wrack of pseudo-
fighters (like Noam's stingboats) with warp packs and good drones, D7B and Cs
with DERFACS for long range fire, and the occaisional cloakes hip or mauler. A
nasty combination.

But our Feds almost always took CVAs with CC and CAs as escorts and maybe a BC
which had IIRC 8 photon launchers.

And of course, we had Lyran players who loved to turn on ESGs and plow through
the Kzinti fighter and drone waves....

To draw this vaguely back OT, any way to do warp packs for FT fighters or
stingboats? I guess fast fighters cover that for the fighter side. For the
stingboat, I'd go so far as to suggest an external mounting of a warp pack (ie
doesn't eat internal space) which adds (say, to be arbitrary) 50% to your
thrust value. The downside is your engines make threshold tests
at -1 (more likely to fail) and ONE engine hit
destroys the entire main drive. I don't know how I'd point this.... maybe some
FT player
might have suggestions/alternatives/criticisms?

From: Robert W. Hofrichter <RobHofrich@p...>

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 19:29:35 -0400

Subject: Re: [OT] SFB Fighter comment

In my experience in SFB, fighters were pretty good, though only if the "right"
kind or backed up by some ships. Hordes of fighters (especially
phas-G equipped ones) were VERY dangerous (but that was about 15 years
ago--the rules have certainly had numerous "addenda" since then, I'm
sure).

Long live the LDR!

Rob

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 23:30:20 -0400 (EDT)

Subject: Re: [OT] SFB Fighter comment

On  8-Jun-01 at 19:41, Robert W. Hofrichter (RobHofrich@peoplepc.com)
wrote:
> In my experience in SFB, fighters were pretty good, though only if the

So has anyone tried to do an ESG for FT?:)

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 23:56:28 +0100

Subject: Re: [OT] SFB Fighter comment

In message <001e01c0f072$e425e2c0$458a153f@d5s9p7>
> "Robert W. Hofrichter" <RobHofrich@peoplepc.com> wrote:

> In my experience in SFB, fighters were pretty good, though only if the
[snip]

IIRC (very much so) there is (or was) a rule in SFB that if one player
didn't believe in fighters in that setting - they didn't exist!

Very big :-)

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 23:57:58 +0100

Subject: Re: [OT] SFB Fighter comment

In message <ML-3.4.992057420.9383.books@jumpgate.jumpspace.net>
> Roger Books <books@jumpspace.net> wrote:

[snip]
> So has anyone tried to do an ESG for FT? :)

...Must....Resist.....temptation....to....design....new....system....