Shadow Fighters - Just why

[katadder]

they still have alot better dogfight than the pak, drazi and brakiri super heavies

 

[Sulfurdown]

I guess what Im trying to say is that shadow fighters DO suck, but that in my eyes thats just fine, its a weakness of the fleet, live with it

I just don't want this to become a rock-paper-scissors game. I'm all for fleets being weaker at levels but when the first really effective ships you have start at Raid* or more likely War (depending on perspective) then why bother with the Fleets as anything more then Special Fleets like the Techno mage Pinnace or the Ancients? From what I can tell the Shadow Ships are spot on and the rules changes for 2E have really done a brilliant job of balancing the Shadows vs the Vorlon. All except that niggling fighter situation that does effect both (though the Vorlon fighter seems to be pretty unique and valuable ship - it still can be used as a good point defence and even though I still disagree that the Vorlon Capital ships have the anti-fighter, the fighter having it makes perfect sense to me).

 

[Ripple]

That bluestar positioning is a largely silly argument, as the best you can manage there is a stalemate. You can't move and he never has to engage you. Bluestar is a nice ship, but not as fighter defense.

Kotha is bad. Frankly too bad. It literally has no role in a fleet, given it's speed, range, armament, dogfight rating it can do no job. Eight of them simply get picked off around the edges in all fighter battles due to poor initiative of the race. They could have give Kotha speed 12 and non-weak weapons and due to initiative it still would have been a bad enough fighter to warrant its reputation. For a race that reveres life the Abbai apparently care so little for their own that they put pilots to death just by fielding them.

BUT, even bringing it up as a justification for the Shadow fighter not being an unbalanced ship (too weak in this case) is ridiculous. It does illustrate that not all races have a fighter worth noting, but the shadow fighter is costed as if it was a VERY good fighter, and it is not the equal of its peers.

Ripple

 

[Sulfurdown]

they still have alot better dogfight than the pak, drazi and brakiri super heavies

The pak have 3/wing at 1/2 campaign cost and the other two have their screening fighters that can run in escort in addition to having the same 3/wing at 1/2 campaign cost.

Even the 3/wing means that they don't have 'alot better' they have the same.

3 @ -1 = +1 dogfight
2 @ +0 = +1 dogfight

 

[katadder]

BUT, even bringing it up as a justification for the Shadow fighter not being an unbalanced ship (too weak in this case) is ridiculous. It does illustrate that not all races have a fighter worth noting, but the shadow fighter is costed as if it was a VERY good fighter, and it is not the equal of its peers.

Ripple

its costed by its firepower which is the top end of fighter firepower, the same as the WS fighter carries minus acc but as far as a ship is concerned its top end fighter firepower.

 

[Da Boss]

BUT, even bringing it up as a justification for the Shadow fighter not being an unbalanced ship (too weak in this case) is ridiculous. It does illustrate that not all races have a fighter worth noting, but the shadow fighter is costed as if it was a VERY good fighter, and it is not the equal of its peers.

Ripple

its costed by its firepower which is the top end of fighter firepower, the same as the WS fighter carries minus acc but as far as a ship is concerned its top end fighter firepower.

Really so we are back to comparing the WS fighter again with the Shadow fighter -

The WS has better firepower as it can take out low level ships - like the Blue stars - cos it ignores their dodge - if theat was the only difference - ok cos the Shadow has shield. but is not:

WS ALSO gets +3 dogfight and extra speed - which you keep ignoring making it wonderful at dogfighting and good at anti ship combat (as it still ahs to avoid AF) but it CAN DO BOTH!

then there is the possible fleet carrier / carrier bonus / recovery situation -which again you ignore - thats taking it as a part of a fleet list rather than on its own.

The Super heavies you mention can have escorts and usually have hull 6 AND are cheaper!

 

[katadder]

and is in a differant fleet entirely. I am not comparing it to the WS fighter, i am saying its firepower is top end for a fighter which it is.
thats the fighter you get for your fleet. you have help if shot at at range. but otherwise have to brave AF fire like a WS fighter would have to, that is the only comparison. the 2 fighters with best fighter weapons in the game have to close within 2".

 

[Da Boss]

and is in a differant fleet entirely. I am not comparing it to the WS fighter, i am saying its firepower is top end for a fighter which it is.
thats the fighter you get for your fleet. you have help if shot at at range. but otherwise have to brave AF fire like a WS fighter would have to, that is the only comparison. the 2 fighters with best fighter weapons in the game have to close within 2".

So you are now saying the cost of the fighters is based on firepower alone - your kidding right - Dogfight, hull and dodge score are irrelvant!?

 

[katadder]

no, but its top end firepower. so it has a major effect on it of course. i am not saying how costs are worked out but it will have an influence.

the shadow fighter is a good fighter. you wont agree and you will try to twist anything i say so go for it, but personally I ma happy for it to stay as is. maybe not cost double in campaigns but i think its fine as an anti-shipping fighter.

 

[Sulfurdown]

I don't think I'd want the range increased necessarily, Anti-Fighter at 2" only get's to defend against about half the fighters out there as it is.

Edit: (As is stats)
Shadows
S12", 20AD* Std average needed to kill a wing, DF0-1, 2" 6 AP, DD
Drazi
S8", 18AD Std average needed to kill a wing, DF-1-1, 4" 12 TL + 12 AP
ISA
S16", 18AD Std average needed to kill a wing, DF3-4, 2" 6 Ac, AP, DD
Abbai
S8", 48AD Std average needed to kill a wing, DF0-7, 2" 16 Wk

Edit: Strike range
Abbai - 10"
Drazi - 12"
Shadow - 14"
ISA - 18"

AF resistance
AF 6 (AAF 4) to kill a Shadow wing
AF 6 (AAF 4) to kill an ISA wing
AF 16 (AAF 12) to kill an Abbai wing
Drazi can ignore AF/AAF

*Corrected (I forgot the Shields initially)

 

[Da Boss]

its costed by its firepower which is the top end of fighter firepower, the same as the WS fighter carries minus acc but as far as a ship is concerned its top end fighter firepower.

I am not trying to twist things - thats what you said above

As I said on the very first page - the Shadow Fighter has got good guns but is costed as if everything else about it is good - Like every other 2 flight per patrol point fighter - thats what I think is wrong.

IMHO its too expensive............but hey

 

[katadder]

but its too good to come in at 3 per wing really when you consdier the other 3 per wing stuff like the brakiri super heavys etc.
its one of those stuck in the middle i guess, not good enough for its cost but too good to get more.

 

[Sulfurdown]

Brakiri
S7", 27AD Std average needed to kill a wing, DF-1-1,
2" 12 AP + 4" 6 P, SAP

Strike range
Brakiri - 11"

AF resistance
Brakiri can avoid AF/AAF (AF 18 (AAF 9) to kill a Brakiri wing)

I think the Riva is a little bit better fighter.

 

[katadder]

but they have a 5+ dodge so you can always shoot mainline weapons at them. shadow fighters can either dogfight them or go for shooting them, which is what i would do.

 

[Sulfurdown]

but they have a 5+ dodge so you can always shoot mainline weapons at them. shadow fighters can either dogfight them or go for shooting them, which is what i would do.

Aye, and disregarding traits (Because things like Accurate level the field and the right placement for AP/SAP also do) it still takes 20 AD on average to take down a Shadow wing and 27 AD to take down a Riva wing. You are correct that the Shadows could Dogfight the Riva however it's a 2 to 3 fight and that's assuming the Brakiri didn't bother with that Falkosi fighter.

 

[Da Boss]

I don't know - As I understand the PL system you have to assess it as part of the fleet as well as an individual and the Super heavy flights get additonal benefits from the rest of the fleet - be it escorting fighters or other factors. Thats how I understand you answers reagarding the Shadow fighter suffering from being part of the Sahdow fleets advantages / disadvantages.

Surely the ability (or not) to fire outside effective AF range has got to be a "strong" (or weak if not) ability - given a base line of ships that can be attacked. So slightly less damaging but repeated attacks due to safeness or strong attacks but riskier?

eg:
Riva - 2 AD AP at range 4 or an extra 2AD Precise and SAP when within AF range. (althought they do have Hull 6)
Porfatis - 1 AD AP DD, SL at range 8, or extra 4 AAD AP at AF range (again hull 6)

 

[katadder]

yes it is a strong ability, but so is being able to launch fighters 30" behind enemy lines and probably behind any acc weapons.

 

[Sulfurdown]

Yep the FDT makes the Shadow ships some of the best carriers without the Carrier trait. By the way, with Fighter launch at end of turn, that's when the FDT is used right?

 

[Da Boss]

OK so that ability may counter the Fleet carrier ability / escorting fighters ability - hmm maybe not convinced but maybe .............

but the other Riva / Profatis Stats balance (or prob better) the other Shadow fighter stats ?

Also would you say the Vorlon fighter is weaker or stronger - with both a precise 3" beam and it own antifighter protection - surely its better / and about right for 3 flights?

 

[Da Boss]

Yep the FDT makes the Shadow ships some of the best carriers without the Carrier trait. By the way, with Fighter launch at end of turn, that's when the FDT is used right?

no its instead of firing your gun