Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

Sure would like to know how to tweak the demo and not get a load error..
10kt is definately unreasonaly small. The only way I have found them useful is to build them with only one engine and an ECM, a combat sensor, a shield depleter and an electric discharge weapon. Then I build a carrier with minimum launch bays because that allows me to get the 3rd level shield depleter on it and the 2nd level ionic weapon that destroys engines and a standard plasma cannon. Add in 3 shields and a replinisher and fill it out with the best armor. Tactics;; put the carrier at point blank range and blow out the enemy shields with the big depleter then slam their engines. Launch 14 fighters and they will always end up less than 3 spaces from the enemy so I bLast the shields again and follow with the electric discharge. This will normally leave an enemy cruiser with no shields , no armor , half its engines and at least some weapon damage.
The enemy takes a shot and I usually lose half the fighters and 2-3 armor on the carrier. Carrier fires again if there is a replenisher on the enemy otherwise I take out another ships shields and engines. Launch the second fighter group and have the small group fire first then the second group. This usually leaves a nearly imobile hulk with one weapon that can be dispached with the plasma cannon or the electric discharge on the next turn..

------------------
Wingte

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

Another thing we might try is to change the damage over range of the larger weapons and make them "zero" at range of 1, perhaps 2, etc. That way, when the fighters get really close - the target cannot use BIG weapons to fire at the fighters.. but only smaller ones designed to close effects (like the PD batteries). What do you think?

------------------
"nothing happens in a vaccum." - me

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

Hmnn,, That would also make it impossible for capital ships to do point blank range. Besides,, as the game is right now the only thing that can be used on fighters is the point defense cannons..

------------------
Wingte

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

No, I'm sure some of the organic weapons can target fighters. It was quite a nasty surprise when my carrier-based fleet (I'll never try this in the demo again) lost a quater of its fighters before they even got within range.

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

The PD cannons have a long range,, that is why I keep them in the carrier until I am at point blank range.

------------------
Wingte

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
In my custom set, I have changed small fighters to be 15kt, medium fighters to be 20kt, and large fighters to be 30kt. Additionally, I have given fighters a 50 percent defensive bonus. Finally, I have given them a +2 movement bonus.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like those mods very much, with the exception of the movement bonus. I have the same trepidations about them you mentioned in your post - being able to carry 9 engines is enough of an advantage, once it becomes possible to actually install that many!

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

Once you are able to edit the txt files, you could even go further down this line of thought. For example, I think I am going to folow the proposition to give fighters a +60 or so defence bonus. However, given that PD weapons are made especially to shoot down fast moving, small targets, they will get a +50 offensive bonus. As they can also target seekers and sats, this must be (partially) offset by giving defensive bonis to these units, too. I guess I would also give seekers +60 while the imobile sats would only get +30.
Sounds complicated but I guess you can do the changes within 30 minutes.
Under this system, it is harder to decide how much space shall be attributed to PD weapons and how much to the "big guns". Now, a fleet of 3 heavy firepower battleships may actually be in trouble when it meets a single medium carrier(at least if the fighters can move a bit faster than those in the demo). With an escort of "AA" destroyers (mobile ships with mainly PD weapons), the threat to the BBs could be significantly reduced, what again is realistic if we look at the composition of today's fleets (on our oceans)

Re: Beef #2: Fighters
 

[PD-laden] Aegis cruisers, eh? Another reason to have 'em is that a large/huge planet can have a LOT of missile-launchin' WPs...

Fighters with nine small quantum engines, afterburners and advanced propulsion should have, what, a combat movement of ((9 engines + 3 (quantum) + 1 (AP))/2 + 1 (aft)) = 8 squares, methinks, which combined with hefty defense bonuses should make 'em pretty nasty to a fleet using only non-PD weapons.


------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night