lastbesthope
Mongoose
I suspect Burger may have at least thought in slightly harsher language :lol:
LBH
LBH
Batrep(ish) and preliminary thoughts on carrier force
- Thread starter Fireymonkeyboy
- Start date
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Well, you would, wouldn't you?
Surely, though, no one could have mis-read the beam rules that badly...? :?
Surely, though, no one could have mis-read the beam rules that badly...? :?
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Speaking from bitter experience, there is no way in which someone hasn't misread the rules.
LBH
LBH
Lord David the Denied said:
No its true!
Burger was in the Q-Con Tourney, and Digger convinced him that Mini-Beam were interceptable. Thus negating the attack, and costing him the battle.
A dejected Burger came over to us, and told Hash and I what happened. Where we then pointed out the error, of Diggers claim :lol:
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Harsh. Poor sod...
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
I should hope not...
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Well V you must never have gotten a dhip withDodge within 4" of the Minbari, my poor WS!
LBH
LBH
MustEatBrains
Mongoose
Voronesh said:
I have, against a Centauri - it was one of our first games, and he managed to park all his fighters 8everysingle one; quite a lot) around my Sharlin, so I was able to use every single Mini-Beam the ship had - afterwards, there was a lot of empty space around my Sharlin, and a lot of disbelieve in my opponent´s face... :roll:
Slightly Norse John
Mongoose
I've had to- it was against an overwhelming cosmic shedload of EA, 6 Battle of Minbari (me), 16 Battle of EA (four players); by fluke and miscommunication, ech EA player thought one of the others was supposed to be bringing the scouts, they managed to leave themselves with a grand total of one Delphi. I was so short of Nials that there was no advantage in it taking them on fighter to fighter, so I sent my own five flights up the flank after the Delphi and trusted to the fusions to ride out about fifteen flights of Furies and twenty- five of Thunderbolts.
Both fighter strikes failed abysmally- I lost three achieving a single hit, took out about half the Terran Collective's fighter force for a similar return.
It's not just the anti- fighter aspect; even that isn't dependable against hard nuts like the T- bolt. It's the AP minibeam that makes fusion cannon so useful. That's actually what I'd like to see for a Minbari skirmisher- about 8AD of turreted fusion cannon. It'd be feasible at the level, and it would make a tactical difference.
Both fighter strikes failed abysmally- I lost three achieving a single hit, took out about half the Terran Collective's fighter force for a similar return.
It's not just the anti- fighter aspect; even that isn't dependable against hard nuts like the T- bolt. It's the AP minibeam that makes fusion cannon so useful. That's actually what I'd like to see for a Minbari skirmisher- about 8AD of turreted fusion cannon. It'd be feasible at the level, and it would make a tactical difference.
Fireymonkeyboy
Mongoose
Hi,
This is the part I dont' get about thse who are wialing and gnashing their teeth over the changes to fighters. While fighters can now do more damage than before, it generally seems as if they won't do as much as will be done to them in return (bear in mind, this is with a grand total of 2 games under my belt). Fighters still perform the roles they had before - screening, stealth hunting, dogfighting, fire division, intercepter draining, and finishing of crippled or smaller ships; the only difference is that they become better at the latter two roles. Capital ships seem not much affected by the changes.
FMB
This is the part I dont' get about thse who are wialing and gnashing their teeth over the changes to fighters. While fighters can now do more damage than before, it generally seems as if they won't do as much as will be done to them in return (bear in mind, this is with a grand total of 2 games under my belt). Fighters still perform the roles they had before - screening, stealth hunting, dogfighting, fire division, intercepter draining, and finishing of crippled or smaller ships; the only difference is that they become better at the latter two roles. Capital ships seem not much affected by the changes.
FMB
Uhrm 2 things, rather minor. Yer cant go screaming at a noobie can i now ^^. (Noobie meant literally, as anyone whos new)
Interceptor draining is a whole new job for fighters. Hasnt been here in SFOS, or rather existed back in pre-SFOS and is back with a vengeance.
Capship killing has gotten alot better. But only if you heavily invest in them (Kinda like the Sag fleet, fleet becomes a bit funny, but some people dont care about that) and since AF weapons cant fire at you before fighters do their 'thing' it means some ships will be very hurt by them.
As a full fleet example: Vree can never match EA for fighters. They have great AF weapons but low hull. Fighters swoop in shoot down low hull ship and leave. AF weapons cant fire. Overlapping fire with suppoerting fleet doesnt really work, because that would put other low hulled ships into the potential explosion radius, which hurts Vree saucers more than fighters.
Thats the reason for fighter whinage.
Interceptor draining is a whole new job for fighters. Hasnt been here in SFOS, or rather existed back in pre-SFOS and is back with a vengeance.
Capship killing has gotten alot better. But only if you heavily invest in them (Kinda like the Sag fleet, fleet becomes a bit funny, but some people dont care about that) and since AF weapons cant fire at you before fighters do their 'thing' it means some ships will be very hurt by them.
As a full fleet example: Vree can never match EA for fighters. They have great AF weapons but low hull. Fighters swoop in shoot down low hull ship and leave. AF weapons cant fire. Overlapping fire with suppoerting fleet doesnt really work, because that would put other low hulled ships into the potential explosion radius, which hurts Vree saucers more than fighters.
Thats the reason for fighter whinage.
Fireymonkeyboy
Mongoose
Voronesh said:
Oh, go ahead, I've got thick skin.
Voronesh said:
So . . . not actually new, then
Voronesh said:
It's the "leave" part I find suspect. While fighters can certainly withdraw from the ship they just targetted, it is unlikely that they will withdraw far enough that they'll not be subject to return fire of some kind - fast fighters only move 12-15". IIRC. You are also assuming sufficient damage from one round of firing to take out the targetted ship, something that's only likely against a ship that is already heavily damaged or otherwise weak (such as a patrol vessel, or, I suppose, the Vree). This doesn't strike me as the end of the world. Small or weak-hulled ships should be vulnerable to massed fighter attack; if they aren't, one has to wonder whay so many races have fighters.
What this rule change seems to have done is up the threat of fighters to the point that fighters are worth taking; as escorts in larger games, and as a direct threat to low priority ships in smaller ones. While I understand that this is different than the case in SFoS, and that this difference will require some adjustment, I'm not convinced it is "bad".
Put it this way. The last game I plaed I had a poseidon and two rail hyperions against six Cenurion ships, and got my butt kicked form here to next tuesday. With the new rules, I suspect I still would have lost, but hopefully I would have been able to do a credible amount of damage beforehand, and, more importantly, the game would have been more interesting. Fighter stike forces will still be tought to play, I suspect, since even with the new fire rules, most fighters simply don't have the firepower to take out a large vessel, even if they swarm, while large vessels have more than enough firepower to take out carriers and fighters. But a fighter wing adds much more to a gunline than it used to.
Speaking as someone who associates space combat with swarms of fighters (pick your inspriation - Star WArs, BSG, Space above and beyond, or, you know, B5), it's nice to know that there is actually a reason to take them in game.
FMB
Ahh yes.
Mistake on my part.
They dont leave per se.
They weather a potential explosion and target the next ship next round.
If you have masses of fighters, there will be no Vree saucer to retirn fire on you. You just start nibbling at the edge and make your way trough the fleet.
Yes this wont be a problem in most games. It is just the Vree who got the shaft from, as fighter proof as you can get without fighter support to "what AF are we packing anyway".
Mistake on my part.
They dont leave per se.
They weather a potential explosion and target the next ship next round.
If you have masses of fighters, there will be no Vree saucer to retirn fire on you. You just start nibbling at the edge and make your way trough the fleet.
Yes this wont be a problem in most games. It is just the Vree who got the shaft from, as fighter proof as you can get without fighter support to "what AF are we packing anyway".
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
Yeah, the Vree do get the erm.. 'dirty' end of the stick. But the problem before the rules change was that EVERY ship with decent AF weapons was virtually fighter-proof.
MustEatBrains
Mongoose
Fireymonkeyboy said:
That sums it up pretty well - fighter just got better at what they´ve been supposed to do all along; they will be able to do some damage (even a Nial or a T-Bolt is not guaranteed to score any significant damage against your average ship), but will most likely not survive their first or second attack run (AF-weapons, masive firepower or even exploding ships can spell doom for them).
Fighters alone won´t win you your game, but when used well in combination with the rest of your fleet, they do give you new tactical options which might win you your games in ways not possible before.
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Me too...
