Re: Fighters are now unbalanced
I think fighters are just fine being the way they are, my reason:
Manuverability.... Engines on fighters are exposed to more "surface area" than the capital ships, this means they have more finite control over the direction of their thrust, allowing them to adjust their direction more profoundly in short periods of time.
Of course size plays an important part, I can't see fighters as a single 25KT fighter... that's ludicrous! A 50 MILLION pound fighter, come on... instead they probally refering to fighter squadrons (I changed the description in my game to just this)... you're talking about dozens of fighters, thus their actual size is MUCH smaller.
Finally their speed although similar, is probally generated diffrently between fighters and capital ships.... Capital Ships have slower Engines/Drives that can continuosly operate due to efficient use of fuel.... fighters are more likely to use rockets, very fast accelerating engines that burn large amounts of fuel, thus they accelerate and coast. I know the SE4 system dosen't represent this, but the SE4 system dosen't represent any realistic form of space movement (unless all the ships were equipped with an inertialess drive).
Personally, I would love to see that "combat movement" could STACK in a future patch... (give Afterburners the "one per ship" restriction), and make all fighter need 3 engines per move, but give all fighter engines 1 combat speed. Thus if you've got 9 Contra-terrene engines on a fighter + afterburners III, you'd have a combat speed of 14! but a normal move of only 4. Much better in my opinion. (Maxes would be 15 & 6 w/ quantum engines & AB3)
|