Ok, this tread is moving in the same line as the other fighter treads - the old idea's come back to the table. Before jumping to repair-mode, let's make some conclusions:
1) Most votes were for option three, fighting with carriers agains the big guns ships should be possible with ACTA, on equal footing as fighting with the big guns. Fighters should have more than just supporting duties.
2) The number 2 and 4 are allmost equal, giving more or les dominance to fighters.
3) Nobody wants fighters and carriers to be abolished.
Although most people take option 3, people are very divided on how to achieve this. This is also the most difficult option to achieve.
This said, it was not the intention that normal vessels with a small number of flights (Sharlin, Nova, etc, ships that are 'big guns' and get some fighters for free) should suddenly be able to use the firepower of their flights to seriously kill ships. I still see them as limited offense and more defensive flighters, which could go nasty on you if you ignore them.
Just like old battleships had planes for scouting and gunnery directing. (And that is very close to the role fighters have now)
For carriers it should be different, they were designed to kill ships, just as we all seem to agree on. I don't see them doing this with their limited fighter ability that they have now, without significantly boosting the flights that are on common ships as well. We could have (again) a poll for the solution, of which two I want to post haven't been mentioned before:
1) Carriers should have far more fighters than they have now, and fighters should be less vulnerable, but not more effective in dealing out damage. In the end, also in WWII (the only war that showed real carrier to carrier combat) it is allways that you need to overwhelm your opponents defenses to ensure victory. That's why the Ise and Hyuga were complete failures. Half a battleship and hopeless as a carrier.
Or
2) We should have a bomber class type of fighter, exclusively mounted on carriers and not for sale as a patrol PL level choice. bombers are very inferior in dogfighting, but as good as fighters in dodging AF, and excellent in killing ships (if not, fighters could shield them , detailed solutions can allways be found in case). The thunderbolt could be re-rated as a bomber. In fact, we only see them in this role in the show.
Other options, increasing fighter strength, giving precise to fighters, giving twin-linked to fighters, reducing the strength of the AF-trait, it can all be considered as well. But if alone, the carrier will also be stronger, but not a specialty ship, and suddenly a sharlin gets offensive fighter capability, giving is more to moan when playing EA against minbari
.
I do have the great concern that some fleets will be very vulnerable to these types of tweaks (isa?), and if we also need to tweak ships, we are in for a SFOS+, because of creating more unbalance than we solve.
For those wanting to make fighters stronger, remember the 120 (?) thunderbolt flights that could be chosen to kill the enemy fleet. (At least I read about it when SFOS was released) I guess we don't want to go back to those days.
So what are your thoughts?