Fighters are broken. Can we fix them?

[TheDeadlyShoe]

It's hard to say they're inbalanced, though, given several game mechanics in their favor.

[Iron Giant]

TheDeadlyShoe said:
It's hard to say they're inbalanced, though, given several game mechanics in their favor.

Such as?

Getting 1000 Fighters together in one place is a logistical nightmare. It is far less work (and research) to put together a handful of capital ships with Point Defence V. Am I missing something? Can (at least) those 2 settings be made fair?

[Starhawk]

Fighters are not a logistical nightmare if you use them properly read my above post.

As far as their advantages:

Fighters= Cheaper, faster, harder to hit, more economical for planetary defense in force and properly supported.

Capital ships: Heavy firepower, expensive, slower, can't be everywhere at once, not good to use in groups smaller then 3 (in my experience). Can be easily seen at range (you can't ambush an enemy fleet in orbit of a planet).

[Iron Giant]

Starhawk said:
Fighters are not a logistical nightmare if you use them properly read my above post.

Posted while you were typing...

Ok, but when I'm putting fighters together over a planet, they mostly group together in a large force. How can I stop this? If I have a group of battleships, I set the formation and the tactics and have reasonable success. Again, its not fair to fighters that it is required to micromanage them to get them to work as designed, imho.

I have alleviated this somewhat by trying to use my fighters with their carriers so the carriers will launch them in smaller groups. But again, not fair. if I want to launch 1000 fighters from a carrier group and have them rampage through a system, I should not be forced to micromanage them.

Also, I hear what you are saying about "late game weapons should be able to destroy multiple fighters because of weapons advances, etc" and I disagree. The size of a weapon beam will never come close to the distances between objects in space. See "The Universe" in the Hitchhikers Guide to the galaxy.

I still don't think damage should flow. you said that fighters cannot shoot more than one object (unfair) and that can't be fixed, can damage flow be fixed?

Thanks for the tactical help, I'll try to include more bombers than fighters. My next gripe though is how much they can carry... But I would be content to fix these 2 issues...

[Starhawk]

Ok, but when I'm putting fighters together over a planet, they mostly group together in a large force. How can I stop this? If I have a group of battleships, I set the formation and the tactics and have reasonable success. Again, its not fair to fighters that it is required to micromanage them to get them to work as designed, imho.

Dock them at planet then order the planet to launch fighters ONLY IN COMBAT and launch them in groups of 20.
It's not quite "Micromanagement" anymore then controling that many capital ships would be it's just that instead of 1 capship you get 1 fightersquad of 20 fighters. If you want booste it up to 50 but that's uber overkill with rocket packs.

I have alleviated this somewhat by trying to use my fighters with their carriers so the carriers will launch them in smaller groups. But again, not fair. if I want to launch 1000 fighters from a carrier group and have them rampage through a system, I should not be forced to micromanage them.

Yeah that's your problem buddy Fighters are NOT system conquering tools they are FLEET engagement tools, if you want to send them against a planet keep them IN the carrier until that carrier is attacking said planet. Don't launch the fighters beforehand as it also uses up supplies in shedloads and can get you fragged.

A fighter squad won't even be able to take on late game planetary defenses, yeah a thousand MIGHT be able to do it but you'd lose so many that sending in a capital ship fleet would be more effective, less time and resource consuming and cheaper.

Also, I hear what you are saying about "late game weapons should be able to destroy multiple fighters because of weapons advances, etc" and I disagree. The size of a weapon beam will never come close to the distances between objects in space. See "The Universe" in the Hitchhikers Guide to the galaxy.

Fighters would still need to be "tightly packed" to effect a capital ship so a REAL warship firing a beam weapon into a squadron type formation SHOULD be able to do a "sweep" against the fighters thus destroying more then one at any time.

I still don't think damage should flow. you said that fighters cannot shoot more than one object (unfair) and that can't be fixed, can damage flow be fixed?

Not unfair, balanced if you had 1,000 fighters and it took 1,000 guns to beat them jack squat could stop you. Think of capital ships firing their guns at you as a "wash" effect over a squadron, ships would go BOOM in great numbers.
Also if you want to look at it this way think "AAA" in the form of pulsing the energy cannon against multiple fighters.

However you want to view it a cap ship killing only 1 fighter with EVERY shot is pathetic and unbalanced for that matter fighters in space is a stupid idea that will likely never happen for so many reasons it ain't funny Odds are they'd be more like large torpedo boats from WWII.

Thanks for the tactical help, I'll try to include more bombers than fighters. My next gripe though is how much they can carry... But I would be content to fix these 2 issues...

Can't fix what ain't broken You still need to realize that unless you play carrier battles mod FIGHTERS are not system conquest tools and nor should they be. Would you surrender to a fighter squadron? Uh no, for that matter most planets would have so much AAA fire a fighter FLEET would and should be toasted easily.

You don't like how much they carry lol the largest ones in Devnull carry FRIGATE level firepower if you put rocket pods on them

Heck design your own fighter if you want. But you still should realise that a capital ship should NEVER be beaten by less then a SWARM of fighters. And by swarm I mean several squadrons or a full carrier load.

[Fyron]

Fighters are NOT system conquering tools they are FLEET engagement tools, if you want to send them

Your preconceptions should not force me to be unable to manage fighter stacks in space. Further, I would be inclined to say that you are wrong simply because fighters can move through space within a system of their own power. They can definitely be "system conquering tools." Fighter management was simply coded poorly in SE4.

[Iron Giant]

Imperator Fyron said:
Your preconceptions should not force me to be unable to manage fighter stacks in space. Further, I would be inclined to say that you are wrong simply because fighters can move through space within a system of their own power. They can definitely be "system conquering tools." Fighter management was simply coded poorly in SE4.

I really have to agree with Fyron. While I do appreciate the discussion about how to use fighters better, in the mid to late game they are useless. After all the work building, collecting and getting them together in a fleet, the enemy wipes out 1000 fighters with a small handful of capital ships like they are not even there. Total waste.

In a game like SEIV, I should be allowed to come up with my own tactics and carry them through the whole game. Something as big as fighters in the SciFi world should not be relagated to a minor role so quickly. I wouldn't want them to be the ONLY viable tactic, not by far, but now at best they play a minor role, and only that if you heavily micromanage them.

So, can those 2 things not be fixed in the current game?

The fact that fighters in a stack only can fire on one ship and damage flowing to multiple fighters in a stack? Can I get hard confirmation that those 2 things can not be fixed? I'll take the advice from others with a smile on my face, but after 5 years of playing this game, I doubt that I'll get any revelation that will lead me to believe that fighters are not broken with these 2 issues.

I really hope fighters are worth something in SEV....