Ah, this is where the Shadow fighter comes out on top as well! It is definitely the most survivable when facing e-mines. Almost every other fighter is guaranteed to die except maybe Porfatis (hull 6)... but the shadow requires 2 hits even from a triple damage e-mine, so a 4AD emine only has a 40% chance to kill it. Go shadows!Da Boss said:
Are Shadow Fighter Abilities Reasonable
- Thread starter Dashadauknoz
- Start date
That won't help much against an 8D pulsar mine. 
The way I see it, though, Shadow fighters still aren't all that wonderful. But they've always been rubbish, they're now just less rubbish. Shadows just aren't good with fighters, and anyone who can't live with that really ought not to be playing Shadows. Personally, I bought the Shadows boxed set as my first fleet when I started playing ACTA, and quickly realised that the Shadows' only defence against fighters was a pair of Scouts facing each other about 4"-6" apart - any fighter which comes near either Scout is dead. The ability of fighters' shields to work in dogfights and against anti-fighter is not as good as having a +2 dogfight modifier to give you a good chance to actually win a dogfight, or 4" range weapons to let you stand outside anti-fighter range entirely, but it helps. So does the ability of beams to switch to all-round fighter sweeping mode. They don't completely negate the built-in weakness of the Shadow fleet, but they do mean the fleet isn't as helpless against fighters. Bottom line: in answer to the question posed by the subject of this thread, I'd say "yes".
Watch "The Long Twilight Struggle" again. About six or seven G'Quans versus five or six Shadow ships, at least two of them Ancient because they used jump point disruptors. So fighter numbers are more or less even, probably slightly more Shadow fighters. We later see Frazis attacking Shadow ships, we don't see Shadow fighters attacking G'Quans, which implies the Frazis won the dogfight. This tells you all you need to know about Shadows' ability to dogfight. (Unless it's me rolling their dogfights. Frazis can beat Sentris if I'm rolling for the Sentris, and have done so regularly.
)
The way I see it, though, Shadow fighters still aren't all that wonderful. But they've always been rubbish, they're now just less rubbish. Shadows just aren't good with fighters, and anyone who can't live with that really ought not to be playing Shadows.
Personally, I bought the Shadows boxed set as my first fleet when I started playing ACTA, and quickly realised that the Shadows' only defence against fighters was a pair of Scouts facing each other about 4"-6" apart - any fighter which comes near either Scout is dead. The ability of fighters' shields to work in dogfights and against anti-fighter is not as good as having a +2 dogfight modifier to give you a good chance to actually win a dogfight, or 4" range weapons to let you stand outside anti-fighter range entirely, but it helps. So does the ability of beams to switch to all-round fighter sweeping mode. They don't completely negate the built-in weakness of the Shadow fleet, but they do mean the fleet isn't as helpless against fighters. Bottom line: in answer to the question posed by the subject of this thread, I'd say "yes".Watch "The Long Twilight Struggle" again. About six or seven G'Quans versus five or six Shadow ships, at least two of them Ancient because they used jump point disruptors. So fighter numbers are more or less even, probably slightly more Shadow fighters. We later see Frazis attacking Shadow ships, we don't see Shadow fighters attacking G'Quans, which implies the Frazis won the dogfight. This tells you all you need to know about Shadows' ability to dogfight. (Unless it's me rolling their dogfights. Frazis can beat Sentris if I'm rolling for the Sentris, and have done so regularly.
)sidewinder
Mongoose
EA emine? You mean that stupid nuke? Its one shot, so which ever launcher you put it on is done for the game once you fire it. I thought a better version would be that it costs you a patrol point or something to buy one, but it does like 8 AD SAP, Triple Damage with a 4 inch radius all the time. But the ship can then swtich over to its regular missles after you fire it. I dont see why a nuclear missile should have its AD determined by the ship you put it on. Its not like they are really big missiles.
Yes but it gives you 2 chances to get a "lucky" roll and win. So overall you're more likely to beat even a better dogfighter. It won't make the shadow fighter king of dogfights or anything, but it will win 50% of dogfights against a +2 dogfighter, and usually win against a +1... a +3 will still beat it 70% of the time.KennyBoy said:
E-Mines Hurt
Mongoose
Burger said:
Lucky shots are not the basis of strategy. So the shadowfighter in dogfights is better than a +1 against other +1s but less good than a +1 against Nials. When fighting against +1 (or poorer) fighters it is sufficient.
Probability of victory for a Shadowfighter
+0 = 65.97%
+1 = 47,83%
+2 = 30,55%
+3 = 15,97%
The same for a +0 fighter
+0 = 41,66%
+1 = 27,77%
+2 = 16,66%
+3 = 8,33%
+1 fighter
+0 = 58,33%
+1 = 41,66%
+2 = 27,77%
+3 = 16,66%
+2 fighter
+0 = 72,00%
+1 = 58,33%
+2 = 41,66%
+3 = 27,77%
+3 fighter
+0 = 83,33%
+1 = 72,00%
+2 = 58,33%
+3 = 41,66%
EMH, there's a problem with your stats. 41.66% victory for a +0 fighter vs another +0 fighter? I make it (by common sense)... 50%!
I think you're not discounting draws from your figures? It makes sense to only count wins and losses, because any draws will be re-fought anyway until a win or a loss is rolled.
So, against a +0 fighter, a Shadow fighter is almost as good as a +2; about +1.8. It will wipe the floor.
Against a +1, it is about +1.4, and will win more than it loses.
Against +2, it is about +1.2. It will probably lose, but not as often as a +1 fighter would.
Against +3, it is the same as +1.
Against +4, it is about +0.5. Pretty doomed, but then most fighters are.
Lucky shots are a basis of strategy if you have enough chances to get that lucky shot that it is not considered "lucky" any more. Try fielding 10 Sagittarius in a 5pt Raid game... see how long it takes until you get a "lucky" crit!
I think you're not discounting draws from your figures? It makes sense to only count wins and losses, because any draws will be re-fought anyway until a win or a loss is rolled.
Code:
vs +0 vs +1 vs +2 vs +3 vs +4
Shadow Fighter 79% 58% 37% 19% 6%
+0 fighter 50% 32% 19% 9% 3%
+1 fighter 68% 50% 32% 19% 9%
+2 fighter 81% 68% 50% 32% 19%
+3 fighter 91% 81% 68% 50% 32%
+4 fighter 97% 91% 81% 68% 50%Against a +1, it is about +1.4, and will win more than it loses.
Against +2, it is about +1.2. It will probably lose, but not as often as a +1 fighter would.
Against +3, it is the same as +1.
Against +4, it is about +0.5. Pretty doomed, but then most fighters are.
Lucky shots are a basis of strategy if you have enough chances to get that lucky shot that it is not considered "lucky" any more. Try fielding 10 Sagittarius in a 5pt Raid game... see how long it takes until you get a "lucky" crit!
On the whole, it looks to be about equivalent to a +1 dogfighter. Add in weapons powerful enough to hurt a capital ship and a limited ability to resist anti-fighter, and it's comparable to other races' heavy fighters. These usually have poor dogfight ability, dodge 3+ at best, and the ability to ignore anti-fighter by using weapons with more than 2" range. You usually get more than 2 for a Patrol point, though.
