On Fighters
 

Here is something that I fing a bit disturbing...

When hit by point defense weapons, a group of missiles die one at a time. On the other hand, when hit by a big weapon, fighters and sat Groups seem to die by the dozen instead of one by one.

This makes fighters a relatively poor choice on the cost effectiveness side, not to mention that you can find yourself doing a lot of transporting to keep up operational loses. Also, I found myself at least once in the unenviable situation of having to stop an offensive and run because of loses inflicted on my fighter strike forces by the Cue Kappa main ship batteries (Add a stream of colorfully irreverent words at the end of that sentence, please). So far I've read some Posts where a bunch of you guys seem to dislike relying on fighters, Is that your reason?

I like fighters. They are an offensive tool. But it spoils my "suspension of disbelief" to see the way they handle damage. So, should I stick with fighters or switch to something else? Are there any successfull fighter commanders out there who can advise me?

Re: On Fighters
 

Several modders (including myself) have suggested to Aaron that he include a line item in the "Settings.txt" file (TRUE/FALSE) flag on whether main weapons are limited to "one hit/one kill" against units. If you feel the same way, go ahead and e-mail him.

[This message has been edited by Tampa_Gamer (edited 25 January 2001).]

Re: On Fighters
 

I've actually always thought fighters were a bit overpowered. I use fighters to protect every planet. I have used a single carrier loaded with 200+ fighters to take out fleets of dreadnoughts. I find them to be low cost and very disposable. I usually stick 7-9 engines, 1 rocket pod and fill the rest with 2-3 cannons. How are you configuring your fighters?

IBD

Re: On Fighters
 

Personally, I love fighters (ahem, who would have thought that, eh?).
I don't like the way damage is applied to them but they are quite effective anyway. Make sure to install 2 shields in a large fighter and they are deadly.
When you bring some capital ships with you the enemy is faced with a though decision: Fight the capital ships and be mauled by the fighters or shoot the fighters (quite hard) and get toasted by the capital ships.
No one said it would be an easy decision. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Firemane:
Here is something that I fing a bit disturbing...

When hit by point defense weapons, a group of missiles die one at a time. On the other hand, when hit by a big weapon, fighters and sat Groups seem to die by the dozen instead of one by one.

This makes fighters a relatively poor choice on the cost effectiveness side, not to mention that you can find yourself doing a lot of transporting to keep up operational loses. Also, I found myself at least once in the unenviable situation of having to stop an offensive and run because of loses inflicted on my fighter strike forces by the Cue Kappa main ship batteries (Add a stream of colorfully irreverent words at the end of that sentence, please). So far I've read some Posts where a bunch of you guys seem to dislike relying on fighters, Is that your reason?

I like fighters. They are an offensive tool. But it spoils my "suspension of disbelief" to see the way they handle damage. So, should I stick with fighters or switch to something else? Are there any successfull fighter commanders out there who can advise me?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Re: On Fighters
 

Hasn't anyone heard of Escorts?! I build DD hulls with Shield and PDC only. they do wonders for Missile and Fighter hordes

------------------
Seawolf on the prowl

Re: On Fighters
 

So far I've engaged only with medium fighters, which can only fit a relatively modest load. I have the heavies researched and I'll try them ASAP.

On the other hand, I feel a bit uncomfortable with their Kamikaze nature when compared to the bigger ships. I hate to send my troops to die. :P

I also discovered that it is a good tactic to send fast fighters tailing a missile barrage. It improves the odds a bit, though not for the fighters.

The point defense escorts sound like a great idea too. I assume that you place less PD in your "other" designs then? If so, how many? Isn't that approach more 'expensive' that building 'self-defending' ships?

Re: On Fighters
 

You can build situational ships like point defence ships as needed then either refit them or mothball them after the threat is gone so its really not more expensive. I usually make point defence ships out of my latest and greatest ship size because after you kill all those fighters or destroy a lot of missles you get a big boost in your ships experience. Then just refit that ship to use your best beam weapon and it will rarely miss. So bring on your fighters and missle ships. It just helps me control the galaxy http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

Re: On Fighters
 

One hit/one kill - my god, if you hate being swarmed by 200+ fighters now imagine if that 1/1 ratio were in effect. small planets and small fleets would have NO chance vs. 1 carrier. To me it would be a little unbalancing but that is the beauty of SE4, if you don't like it, change it... in that spirit I wouldn't mind seeing Tampa's ratio option in the game (just be able to let me change it - I hate fighters.)

Mephisto gave me an idea - his 2 shields on large fighters.... add shield piercing PDs to the components. Maybe make the 1st be available when you get PD lvl 3 & the corresponding tech lvl for phased energy weapons? Don't know how hard that would be to Mod but it might be interesting (at least for multiplayer, cause I have'nt seen a AI fighter w/2 shields yet.)

------------------
Character is best defined as that which you do when you believe nobody is watching.

[This message has been edited by WhiteHojo (edited 25 January 2001).]

Re: On Fighters
 

This is the same problem that came up on the SE IV Center forum BBs long ago, before the game was released. It's the old problem of which "style" of warfare is or should be better: carrier or capital ship? If you make fighters as powerful as they are today then a single fighter could carry a weapon that will destroy a ship with one hit. If you then get a carrier with 100+ fighters it's going to be invincible against almost any fleet without fighters to counter it. So, of course, people who prefer capital ships will complain that fighters are too powerful. If you try to balance fighters by giving PDC cannons a good chance to hit them and not giving them weapons that can destroy a ship with a single hit then fighter-oriented people complain that fighters are too wimpy. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif You can't win! I have to admit that I cannot think of a way to make it exciting and interesting for BOTH sides myself. Either you're a carrier partisan, and think fighters ought to take out even capital ships with ease, or you're a capital ship partisan and you think fighters should be swept away by powerful ships. &lt;shrug&gt;...

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 25 January 2001).]

Re: On Fighters
 

Baron, you have captured the essence of the debate in nutshell. I, obviously, am a Captital Ship kinda guy. Fighters to me should be relgated to shuttle duties between BattleCruisers and larger Ships of the Line.

In this spirit, I have a little question I need answered by the Mighty Modders out there. I have a new component (text of the 1st level component to be included later) which will aid me in the destruction of the Godless Hordes of Cowardly Fighters I seem to be incountering w/the new Sergetti and EA races. I haven't really seen a large need for this new component but why should that stop us. Anyway, my question is this: Is there anything or specifically any other file I should modify to allow my new toy to be available in game? The new component is a Shield Piercing Point-Defense Cannon (affectionately known as an SPPD) and requires 2 tech areas to build - PD weapons & Energy Stream Weapons. Do I have to modify any of the research or vehicle construction files to allow this new SPPD to be used by me or the AI?

So far I have just tweaked w/existing components and files and have not made any new component(my dreamed of MiniMineSweeper never panned out) so I am unfamiliar w/the proceedure.

And as always, any help would be appreciated.

Name := Shield Piercing Point - Defense Cannons I
Description := Small mobile Multi-Phasic energy beams on turrets which can penetrate normal shields and are used to target and destroy incoming fighters and seekers.
Pic Num := 66
Tonnage Space Taken := 20
Tonnage Structure := 20
Cost Minerals := 100
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 0
Vehicle Type := Ship\Base\Sat\WeapPlat
Supply Amount Used := 0
Restrictions := None
General Group := Weapons
Family := 2005
Roman Numeral := 1
Custom Group := 0
Number of Tech Req := 2
Tech Area Req 1 := Point-Defense Weapons
Tech Level Req 1 := 1
Tech Area Req 2 := Energy Stream Weapons
Tech Level Req 2 := 1
Number of Abilities := 1
Ability 1 Type := Point-Defense
Ability 1 Descr :=
Ability 1 Val 1 := 0
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0
Weapon Type := Point-Defense
Weapon Target := Ftr\Sat\Seekers
Weapon Damage At Rng := 25 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage Type := Skips Normal Shields
Weapon Reload Rate := 1
Weapon Display Type := Torp
Weapon Display := 21
Weapon Modifier := 50
Weapon Sound := pointdef.wav
Weapon Family := 6




------------------
Character is best defined as that which you do when you believe nobody is watching.

Re: On Fighters
 

You shouldn't have to modify the tech files. (However, I am at work and my brain is a little fried from reading documents all day). You will have to modify the design and research files of the AI if you want them to use it. Now that I think about it, another way to get the AI to use them without heavily modifying their files would be to make these PDC levels 6-10 and then you would only have to change the AI research files to max-out at PDW TL10 instead of TL5. Hmmm....

[This message has been edited by Tampa_Gamer (edited 25 January 2001).]

Re: On Fighters
 

A great use for cruddy small fighters: use swarms of them to suck up enemy PD fire, so your wave of seekers (or large fighters) coming behind them can waltz right in and destroy the enemy's capital ships. Especially satisfying to take out dedicated PD ships this way, early in a battle.

Re: On Fighters
 

Phased-energy PD?

Fine, I'll start on that small phased-shield components for fighters in the shield tech area. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Hmm... throwing all those small fighters in to distract enemy fire sounds like building chaff ships in Stars! (Or the Wild Weasel planes the US Air Force uses to thwart SAM sites.)

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough
to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a
pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors
come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless
eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your
associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"

[This message has been edited by Sinapus (edited 26 January 2001).]

Re: On Fighters
 

I like the idea of changing most weapons to inflict one hit. Then the ability to 'stream' damage (stolen from MOO), so that multiple casualties can be inflicted with a single weapon firing, could be attached to some of the presently more useless weapons (meson bLasters spring to to mind).

As to the question which should be more powerful, a fleet of fighters or a cap ship... well my personal take is they should be balanced. A fully loaded light carrier should be equivalent to a warship, a heavy carrier to a dreadnought. With Heavy fighters that should be upped a little in the carriers favour. A baseship should always be stronger than a carrier filled with ships, provided they're at the same tech level. And the Death Star I'm tinkering on can take on a fleet of either. (No, it's not vulnerable to a single fighter torpedo. I'm not the Emperor. I don't make mistakes like that, after all, I've read the 'How to be an Evil-Overlord').

-Aegis

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sinapus:
Phased-energy PD?
Hmm... throwing all those small fighters in to distract enemy fire sounds like building chaff ships in Stars!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The chaffers will not be so effective in the new Stars!. I believe they are adding maintenance costs to ships. Fighters in SEIV should have a maintainace cost as many have argued before. Otherwise, they may well become the dominant decoy in SEIV that cheap Frigates are in Stars!

Re: On Fighters
 

How about this ??
Add a new mount type(say shotgun mount, same stats as large mount, up from 400 kt etc.)
you can either build a large caliber
gun (large etc.) doing more damage on cap
ships but only one hit on fighters, missiles
etc.
the shotgun mount is kind of D(ouble) P(ourpose) Gun, making normal damage to
cap ships but has the ability to say split
its beam etc. into tiny beams to increase hit
prop. on small targets. (between dedicated PD-guns and large guns)
In my opinion this type of gun can defend against smaller numbers of fighters without
sacrificing to much specialization.
PD guns/ships. are stll needed for large battles.
(current equivalent should be the 76 to 130mm
navy gun range)

Re: On Fighters
 

Isn't all this posting about "super-anti fighter weapons" and "how much do we despise fighters" sort of a show of envy? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

IMHO, fighters are quite well portrayed in SE IV. They are fast and hit hard. No, I don't think that thet should have a "one hit capital ship obliterating" weapon, but neither should capital ships have a "one shot fighter group obliterating" weapon. I see it as kinda shooting at fighters with a thousand pound shell.

On the side of balance, a capital ship with 4 main guns and 4 PD's can take "technically" 8 fighters per turn. It would also force _us_, the mighty space admirals, to broaden our horizons instead of solving the thing with the conventional "mega-weapon" approach... satisfying as it might be.

Force concentration, and dedicating platforms for anti-missile, anti-fighter defense strikes me as a reasonable solution that would take care of the one-shot-one-kill, or any other fighter related business.

For those of you who still live in the 'battleship' age, remember WWII on the pacific. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

As far as my experiments went, I have the Cue Kappa on the run with my new 2-shield heavy fighters, my Rommel class light carriers, and my PD Escorts. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Firemane:
IMHO, fighters are quite well portrayed in SE IV. They are fast and hit hard. No, I don't think that thet should have a "one hit capital ship obliterating" weapon, but neither should capital ships have a "one shot fighter group obliterating" weapon<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I agree with Firemane entirely. Late game, I usually load dreads with 6PD, BCs with 4PD, and have at least two deadicated PD cruisers in each fleet. fighters and missiles dont touch me, even from the mighty EA. of course, I give up alot of weapon space that way. want to balance fighters? design better capital ships.

Re: On Fighters
 

Do repulser beams work against fighters? I'd love to see a group of fighters pushed to the opposite end of the battle map http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: On Fighters
 

I believe that fighters and ships are well balanced.
Hey, I heard that Wild Weasel comment. Don't get me started about napalm and bombs and stuff.

Re: On Fighters
 

I think that fighters are a balanced asset to a good game of SE IV. I only wish that I could get the AI players to use them more effectively.

------------------
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats! They invade our space and we fall back -- they assimilate entire worlds and we fall back! Not again! The line must be drawn here -- this far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" -- Patric Stewart as Captain Picard
UCP/TCO Ship Yards
http://www.angelfire.com/zine/cnchome/SE4/domBC_min.jpg

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Instar:
I believe that fighters and ships are well balanced.
Hey, I heard that Wild Weasel comment. Don't get me started about napalm and bombs and stuff.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

now THATS what fighters need. heck with the rocket pods, how about some one-shot planetary napalm?

and as for your Wild-Weasels, how about a weapon that targets weapon-plats only? they have the SP and SY seeking torps, how about one that seeks WPs? I will have to see if that can be modded in. that way it would hit the defense bases but not the population.

Re: On Fighters
 

Personally I use fighters for my warp defense, as the limit of units in space doesn't work...I forgot to change it to 2000, so it defaults to 100? (200?) and yet I have approx 1600 units in space, with close to another 1000 in storage.

I use small fighers, with 2 lv2 uranium cannons on them...these Last for a majority of the game, doesn't matter if the AI has PD or not when he comes through a warp point, because it usually doesn't Last longer then a turn, and my fighers don't move http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Puke:
now THATS what fighters need. heck with the rocket pods, how about some one-shot planetary napalm?

and as for your Wild-Weasels, how about a weapon that targets weapon-plats only? they have the SP and SY seeking torps, how about one that seeks WPs? I will have to see if that can be modded in. that way it would hit the defense bases but not the population.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They already have napalm for fighters. It's called "small cluster bomb".

I don't know about WP seeking weapons. Regular seekers for fighters to use on ships or other fighters might be neat. How about a wave of missiles that the enemy doesn't have enough point defense to stop? Muahahha.

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SirDarwin:
Personally I use fighters for my warp defense, as the limit of units in space doesn't work...I forgot to change it to 2000, so it defaults to 100? (200?) and yet I have approx 1600 units in space, with close to another 1000 in storage.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The limit may be working because grouped units count as 1 so if you only have 200 or less Groups at one time that is under the limit. I do know however that the limit does not work for bases. I don't know if that is intended or not because the limits don't mention bases. I haven't tried it lately but I know that the limit was working in earlier Versions but it may be not working now.

Re: On Fighters
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tomgs:
The limit may be working because grouped units count as 1 so if you only have 200 or less Groups at one time that is under the limit. I do know however that the limit does not work for bases. I don't know if that is intended or not because the limits don't mention bases. I haven't tried it lately but I know that the limit was working in earlier Versions but it may be not working now.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahh, that would make sense then http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif As I have only about 16 Groups of fighers...ranging from about 30-144 each.