Fighters #2 - whittling things down a little

[Morpheus1975]

NOTE
When fighters attack (before, with, or after ships) is NOT an issue in this thread. This is purely focused on their usefullness in relation to firepower and survivability.


Option 1
No Changes

Option 2 - more damage + harder to kill
Fighters get +1 AD
AF gives -2 to dodge
Fighters in contact with ships ignore stealth.

Option 3 - more but weak crits + harder to kill
Fighters W/o Precise get precise those w/ precise get AP those w/ precise and AP get SAP
AF gives -2 to dodge rolls
Fighters in contact with ships ignore stealth.
Fighters get -2 on all the critical rolls or special fighter crit chart

Option 4 -
As 4 but give precise or +1 AD or AP on a fighter type basis.

Option 5 - Other - (Explain) BUT NOT if fighter combat itself such as when they attack should be altered. IN this case vote 1

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I vote 5 now, put fighters back into the normal firing sequence, activated by Wing or ship's complement. Movement of all fighters at the end of the Movement Phase as now. No other changes required.

Wulf

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

I agree with Wulf. giving fighters back a standard place in the firing sequence, but not firing all at once is a good compromise.

 

[Morgoth]

yeah Wulfs idea seems a good one, I voted for that too

 

[Balance]

Wulf's idea has the advantage fo simplicity to it...

 

[Wulf Corbett]

Further ideas...

All fighters move at once after all ships, at the end of the movement phase, as current rules.

Activation of fighters for firing should be by Wing or Ship's complement <option - ship's fighters activate along with the ship, so they do not create another initiative sink - problem with Carriers here>.
EDIT: Idea nicked from philogara - Independant Wings always activate last, unless a Fleet Carrier is present.

Squadrons of fighters can only be created from Independant Wings, or fighters deployed from a single Ship/Carrier, EXCEPT if a Fleet Carrier is present. A Fleet carrier can combine fighters from any ship, even before they are deployed (they can join the squdron when deployed, but the deploying ships must start out within the usual squadron radius. Squadrons are activated as a single unit.

Wulf

 

[Morpheus1975]

Interesting since in an earlier vote it seemed a large majority wanted changes to be made.

I tried but IF you voted 5 because you think the time in which fighters attack should have been changed you misread or I was unclear.

DO NOT VOTE 5 if you just think the time when fighters attack should be changed. VOTE 1 because you think fighters are good but should just attack at another time and another way.

 

[Achiles]

I actually think Wulf's idea isn't so bad but I'm not sure it is nearly enough. Even if they activate by wing or compliment they are still very fragile and I don't see how changing the firing order will fix that other than giving them an increased chance of getting to shoot before they die. In fact I think I like the firing order. I imagine the fighters zooming in through the defensive fire from the enemies secondary weapons, dodging and weaving in order to close with their short ranged weapons. Ofcourse even if you change the firing order fighters are still singularly ineffective against cap ships of almost all categories. Only carrier fleets would have an incentive to move their fighters first. Once Wulf started talking about all these rules with fleet carriers and squadrons it became completely unnecessarily complex.

I had to vote 5 because none of the options offer what I am looking for. I want to see increased survivability more than anything else. Option 4 comes close to something I would be willing to accept but the special crit chart I don't like. It's one more step of complexity and I think the fix should be as absolutely simple as possible while still taking care of the problem. I have seen and heard about people trying to fix a system with rules that don't seem all that complex but in practice that one additional layer slows down the game alot and/or creates all sorts of rules headaches.

I have proposed a couple of different ways to give fighters more survivability. At present I favor giving them +1AD, their damage chart that their enemies roll on when they hit the fighters becomes 1-2 nothing 3-6 kill, and AF is -2 to dodge rolls.

As for stealth I favor +1 to your stealth roll if you are in base-to-base.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

Interesting since in an earlier vote it seemed a large majority wanted changes to be made.

I think the study on firepower & survivability changed my mind in one go. I think others were looking more about changes to the stats without thinking overly about changes to the SYSTEM.

DO NOT VOTE 5 if you just think the time when fighters attack should be changed. VOTE 1 because you think fighters are good but should just attack at another time and another way.

Hmm... how do I do a -1 vote?

Wulf

 

[Morpheus1975]

HAHAHAHAHA

WULF .. that is what you get for not reading CAREFULLY


MUUUWAAHAHAHAHAH

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I actually think Wulf's idea isn't so bad but I'm not sure it is nearly enough. Even if they activate by wing or compliment they are still very fragile and I don't see how changing the firing order will fix that other than giving them an increased chance of getting to shoot before they die.

have you looked at the figures on this thread:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=13308&start=15&sid=acca1ffba042a7368317a4bb86263473

The figures there do not in any way support this statement. Individual fighter stats are perfectly survivable compared to other Patrol level picks (although I would like to see Wings go back to the higher number of flights they had before SFoS, if this ideas was adopted).

Once Wulf started talking about all these rules with fleet carriers and squadrons it became completely unnecessarily complex.

Quite the opposite. Squadron rules already exist, ignoring them without interpretation would just cause confusion and problems later.

I have proposed a couple of different ways to give fighters more survivability. At present I favor giving them +1AD, their damage chart that their enemies roll on when they hit the fighters becomes 1-2 nothing 3-6 kill, and AF is -2 to dodge rolls.

Now, adding awhole extra table, THAT is unnecessarily complex.

I deleted the comment about giving +1 to overcome Stealth while in base contact, but that I agree with.

wulf

 

[Wulf Corbett]

HAHAHAHAHA

WULF .. that is what you get for not reading CAREFULLY


MUUUWAAHAHAHAHAH

It still got the majority vote...

Wulf

 

[Achiles]

It's an interesting study. Although how he did it does harm the credibility. Also he didn't explain exactly what a survivability rating or 36 means. Is it the amount of shots it takes to kill them; how many times they survive the scenario; or just his own rating points system?

I know personal experience does not make a pattern but in the games we have played at my LGS fighters plink away at ships and then they die. Often they die without the ship having to use its full secondary firepower from one arc. Even if you did change the firing order they would shoot, not do much and then die anyway. A regular ship may take damage from each weapon and a fighter none but all it takes is that 1 slightly unlucky roll and the flight is dead. I have yet to see how changing the firing order solves this survivability problem.

I know there are squadron rules already but that is not what I was refering to. You were adding all sorts of special additons for fleet carriers and other things that stacked on rules that weren't necessary for wings of fighters to work within the squadron rules. If flights fire with their mothership no need for any new rules. If they fire seperately from their mothership let people fire them all as one or they fire them as wings of a certain size. Wings bought at patrol level count the whole wing as one ship for initiative order and up to three wings may be combined to form a squadron just like cap ships.

Fianlly I wasn't adding another chart. It is the same as having Precise or the Emine special. You are just modifing the original chart by 1. It isn't that hard to remember and doesn't require you to note anything extra down. It just represents the difficulty of killing all of a disperesed wing of 6 fighters with one attack.

 

[Morpheus1975]

I guess I'm just a little confused.

Previous polls said that a majority wanted fighters given more firepower.
Maybe because of the posts that seems to have changed.

Then it seems that the majority wanted fighters with more survivability and then that seems to be changing.

Maybe we should talk strictly about how to increase a fighters survivability.

 

[E-Mines Hurt]

It's an interesting study although how he did it does harm the credibility. Also he didn't explain exactly what a survivability rating or 36 means. Wether that is the amount of shots it akes to kill them, how many times they survive the scenario, or just his own rating points system.

Survivability is the number of Vanilla AD needed, on average, to kill the complete flight. I belive I explain that in the post.

I know personal experience does not make a pattern but in the games we have played at my LGS fighters plink away at ships and then they die. Often wothout the ship haviong to use it's full secondary firepower from one arc. even if you did change the firing order they would shoot, not do much and then die anyway. A regular ship may take damage from each weapon and fighter none but all it takes is that 1 slightly unluky roll and the flight is dead. I have yet to see how changing the firing order solves this survivability problem.

I don't account for "luck". If you have hull 5 one in three hits is going to breach it, if you have 2+ dodge 1 in 6 hits is not going to be dodged and if you have 3 flights you are going to need three hits.

3 hits per filght to breach hull * 6 breached hulls to avoid dodge * 3 flights = 3*6*3 = 36 survivability.

I know their are squadron rules already but that is not what I was refering to. You were adding all sorts of special additons for fleet carriers and other things that stacked on rules that weren't necessary for wings of fighters to work within the squadron rules. If flights fire with their mothership no need for any new rules. if they fire seperately from their mothership let people fire them all as one or seperate they fire them as wings of a certain size. Wings bought at patrol level count the whole wing as one ship for initiative order and up to three wings may be combined to form a squadron just like cap ships.

P.S. I wasn't adding another chart. it is the same as have precise or emine special. You are just modifing the original chart by one. It isn't that hard to remember and doesn't require you to note anything extra down. It just represents the difficulty of killing all of a disperesed wing of 6 fighters with one attack.

I don't account for maneuver or firing arcs or wing dispersion or anything like that. It is just simple front to front firepower.

 

[Achiles]

Ok I'm a little confused here. The order we have been using in our group is hit, dodge, damage.

Now the damage stage is just like with a cap ship. A 1 is a bulkhead, 2-6 is a damage and a crew, and a 6 is also a crit. We don't do crits obviusly since you can't crit a fighter nor would you need to as it only has 1 damage point. It seems like this final stage is not supposed to be there from what people are saying. Have we been playing it wrong this whole time?

 

[Morpheus1975]

From what I understand you do not roll for crits ie 1 is bulkhead and 6 is crit AGAINST fighters. If they are hit and do not dodge they die, period.
:twisted:

 

[Achiles]

Ok well that makes part of my suggestion pointless. Although I think it further reinforces my opinion that what fighters need is more survivability.

 

[philogara]

Have we been playing it wrong this whole time?

Think of the time you could have saved in die rolls!

 

[Chernobyl]

I don't believe you roll on the damage table for fighters, I think they either dodge or die.