Is Fighters firing first so bad?

[CodeofArms]

Out of general interest are fighters such a problem firing first? I've played multiple fleets (Centauri, EA, Minbari and Dilgar) against fighter heavy fleets (once against 4 Avengers!) and never had too much of a problem.

And now with Armageddon theirs no reason for anyone to go whingeing about not having enough fighters; with points splits you can spend one point; generally get one or two initiative sink ships and then two wings of fighters; whats to complain about?You killed two birds with one stone(okay Drakh players i know you don't have any fighters!)

Comments?

 

[Destroid]

I've played a game or two with the Armageddon rules for fighters and they're fine, it gives em a chance to do something before they get e-mined or Fusion-Cannoned, etc. Makes em rather handy for depleting interceptors too.

 

[H]

It's a kick in the teeth for the vree, it's a pain for Drakh, it's a hinderance for Minbari, and it makes little to no sense at all. the fastst most reactive ships... move last?!?! but then immediatly get a chance to fire, while all the vree antifighter gunners are having a nice soothing cup of green tea.

 

[Reborn]

You've just contradicted yourself. The fastest, most reactive ship - move last? Thereby being able to react to everything else. It makes absolute sense.

 

[E Nicely]

Fighters firing first is a good rule change, they're not worthless like they were under SFOS rules. Anti-ship fighters get to be anti-ship fighters.

 

[H]

You've just contradicted yourself. The fastest, most reactive ship - move last? Thereby being able to react to everything else. It makes absolute sense.

if you take my words at face value yes, but if you had read the hidden code. . . .

The thing is, Antifighter guns are supposed to stop fighters, now the fighter gets a free attack, it's plain stupid.

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

But when anti-fighter guns fired first they destroyed the bulk of the attacking fighters before they'd get a chance to fire. One thing it's important to remember as well is that fighters in B5 are pretty powerful compared to other SF universes and they should be a threat to capital ships. I think allowing fighters to fire first helps simulate that without them being overpowerd (remember when most of their guns had precise?)

 

[H]

But when anti-fighter guns fired first they destroyed the bulk of the attacking fighters before they'd get a chance to fire. One thing it's important to remember as well is that fighters in B5 are pretty powerful compared to other SF universes and they should be a threat to capital ships. I think allowing fighters to fire first helps simulate that without them being overpowerd (remember when most of their guns had precise?)

but a good fleet commander shouldn't suffer anyway. under the old rules, i regularly had frazis in weak arcs of centauri ships, take down the fighter screen, then go swamp some weak arcs, it wasn't rocket science, and gave good antifighter fleets a chance to do their job.
I'm assuming none of the people who say it's a great Idea play Vree then?

 

[Locutus9956]

antifighter guns dont stop fighters compltely but they can stop them attacking more than once....

What was plain stupid was the old version where fighters pretty much always died before they ever got a shot off

 

[Alexb83]

Does noone else think that allowing antifighter weapons and fighters to fire simultaneously is a good comprimise?

If fighters last and fighters first is too much either way, then have them fire at the same time! The fighters and the ship get a fair cop at hurting each other, then, without one or the other getting wiped out with no attrition!

 

[H]

i can see i will be fighting a lone battle. Fighters don't even affect me that much being Narn, but still. It was a quick and dirty fix.
Hey Matt, we have a set of ships that are weak and die easily. Really, hmm, just let them fire first then. Now get the drinks in would you...

 

[Locutus9956]

personally I think it would be best to go back to the original rules for fighter movement and firing, you simply nominated 'auxilliary craft' (all of them at once) as a ship in the initiative sequence:

ie you move a Gquan, I move an Omega, you move a Katoc, I move my fighters, you move a Thentus, I move a Nova, you move your fighters etc etc.

You CAN choose to fire fighters first and move them last but this is not always the best way to do things. I will never understand why they changed that rule in SFoS/revised.

 

[H]

people whinged about the all fighter fleets. Personally, they should have said you need X support ships per Y wings of fighters, preventing the OTT fighter fleets, but keeping a mechanic that worked in terms of moving and firing

 

[Alexb83]

I guess I'm the only person on the forum who likes the idea of simultaneous fire...

Moving last makes sense. They have super initiative, and so can watch the battle unfold and move quickly to where they need to be. Firing first... makes no sense. Firing last... makes no sense (and in Full thrust it seriously hurts fighters and makes them somewhat pointless).

What's in the middle? Simultaneous fire The best of both worlds...

 

[tneva82]

One thing it's important to remember as well is that fighters in B5 are pretty powerful compared to other SF universes

Precisely. Primus in final episode of S2 was destroyed precisely because it didn't launch it's fighters and was swarmed by thunderbolts(which allowed them to take out weapon systems etc which left it vulnerable for station to take it out).

 

[Alexb83]

They weren't thunderbolts We didn't see the first Thunderbolt until S3, when there was an attack run on the Mars Dome?

Starfuries are shown as very effective at shooting down Centauri ships on a few occasions...

 

[Reaverman]

I think the new fighter rules work perfectly fine, I've got no problems with them.

 

[Locutus9956]

people whinged about the all fighter fleets. Personally, they should have said you need X support ships per Y wings of fighters, preventing the OTT fighter fleets, but keeping a mechanic that worked in terms of moving and firing

yes but the problem with the original fighters wasnt the order they could fire in, it was that they were all precise!

Mongoose have a nasty habit of overreacting to rules problems, I mean just look at the Whitestar in SFoS, the Tourney Saggitarius, the tourney Shadow hunter etc.

In the first case the Whitestar was felt to be a tad weak so mongoose went toally nuts and made them rediculously good. Same with the Sag and hunter.

Rather than fine adjustment they seem to tend towards huge sings to the oposite extreme every time they fix a problem ship.

They ARE getting better though, as evidenced by the new fix to the Sag, the tourney warlock (though they went and ruined my faith in them on that front with the Arageddon warlock farce...)

 

[emperorpenguin]

Primus in final episode of S2 was destroyed precisely because it didn't launch it's fighters and was swarmed by thunderbolts(which allowed them to take out weapon systems etc which left it vulnerable for station to take it out).

It was a Secundus, so didn't have fighters! :wink:

and they weren't Thunderbolts!

 

[Locutus9956]

Good point it WAS a secundus too, though it was only a secundus AFTERWARDS cos AoG invented the ship to match what was seen on the show

They were just regular Furies though as has been pointed out many times. The first time we see T-Bolts is in 'Severed Dreams' I think (we see them bombing Mars and also in the battle later on)

Incidentally do we ever see them actually CALLED thunderbolts on the show? try as I might I can only ever recall them refered to as 'new starfuries'