Fighters are broken. Can we fix them?

narf poit chez BOOM · #1 October 18th, 2005, 06:06 PM

I think it would help, Al. 135% = 99%, 99%, 99%, 99%, 95%, 85%.

Iron Giant · #2 October 18th, 2005, 06:16 PM

While I hope for a fix to the first issue, lets talk about cost.

Small fighter - 100 minerals - 15 tons
Escort - 150 minerals - 100 tons
Large fighter - 300 minerals - 25 tons
Destroyer - 300 minerals - 300 tons

Whats up with that? Small fighters start out in the ball park, concidering they don't cost maintenance, but 300 minerals for a Large Fighter? After adding engines, life support, etc, the Large Fighter has barely enough space for a weapon, and only if you don't put a whole lot of anything else in it.

What would you rather have for 300 minerals, a DD or a Large Fighter? I'd call it DD any day.

Sure, I could change that to anything I want, but if I set it too low, it would be out and out cheating against the AI and where is the fun in that?

Does anyone else think this is a very steep cost?

Alneyan · #3 October 18th, 2005, 06:18 PM

I've just noticed something... what I am arguing exactly? I think I pretty much went astray here. Still, I was only discussing point-blank attacks, where the PDC accuracy bonus is pretty much wasted against most fighter designs: at longer ranges, the +70 starts paying off. Even then though, those fighters are lacking in combat modifiers (no armour, no ship training, ECM/CS that are a lot more limited).

Perhaps you thought I compared these +70 to the CS +65, implying they were separate, instead of working together? Now that I am giving it a closer look, it looks like that was your point.

narf poit chez BOOM · #4 October 18th, 2005, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Alneyan said:
I've just noticed something... what I am arguing exactly? I think I pretty much went astray here. Still, I was only discussing point-blank attacks, where the PDC accuracy bonus is pretty much wasted against most fighter designs: at longer ranges, the +70 starts paying off. Even then though, those fighters are lacking in combat modifiers (no armour, no ship training, ECM/CS that are a lot more limited).

Perhaps you thought I compared these +70 to the CS +65, implying they were separate, instead of working together? Now that I am giving it a closer look, it looks like that was your point.

I think I was asleep or something. That +70% would stack with the 60% ECM.