Space Superiority Fighter

[AndrewW]

Now this is something that I've had arguments on myself, but I've been told (possibly incorrectly) that the 1 dTon internal space for a turret was the fire control - i.e. you're doing yourself out of 0.6 dTons. Only matters for the block A.

Yup, the one ton for a turret is for the fire control. I mentioned that above...

 

[Nerhesi]

I'd always consider the survivability for the amount of money invested. Look at the 85 Mil MCR fighter below that survive significantly more punishment and dole out a lot more for nearly half the cost of the OP.

40-ton Fighter Cost Effective
Type Value Cost (MCR) Weight
Hull Size S4 – Streamlined, Stealth 40 5.54 40
Armour Bonded Superdense TL15 15 8.31 5
Drive Gravitic-M sT TL 14 9 32.5 11.7
Power Plant Fusion sT 9 20 8.7
Power Plant Fuel Fusion Fuel sT (3 Days) 3 0 0.75
Cockpit Standard - 0.2 1.5
Basic Military Radar, Lidar, Jammers, +0 1 2
Reinforced Hull +3 hull 3 0.4 4
Fire control 0 0.5 1
Particle Barbette (TL-11, 3 upgrades) Accurate and Very Long Range 4d6+crew hit 16 5 Armor 15
Computer Model 4 20 Rating Max 5
Fire Control/2 10 4
Evade/1 10 1

84.45 MCR Cost 0.35 Tons Remaining
Summary: 4 Hull, 2 Structure, Plasma Barbette, Thrust 9, Armor 15

So you're basically immune to anything that is not a barbette or better, and even then you need to be hit by a 5d6 or better weapon to take damage on average, meanwhile you can attack from Very Long range due to the Accurate, Very Long Range Barbette, which doing 4d6, has a chance of damaging even equally armored craft. At 9 thrust, you're controlling the range of any engagement unless its other small craft.

For 150ish MCR, you can make the 11 thrust, Computer whatever,etc etc variants - but they will still die to a 2:1 ratio of the cost effective ones.

 

[F33D]

So you're basically immune to anything that is not a barbette or better, and even then you need to be hit by a 5d6 or better weapon to take damage on average, meanwhile you can attack from Very Long range due to the Accurate, Very Long Range Barbette, which doing 4d6, has a chance of damaging even equally armored craft. At 9 thrust, you're controlling the range of any engagement unless its other small craft.

For 150ish MCR, you can make the 11 thrust, Computer whatever,etc etc variants - but they will still die to a 2:1 ratio of the cost effective ones.

As one Barbette hit can ruin your whole day (note your hull & structure points) you don't want this thing taking on ay real military ships. Just a white elephant.

 

[SSWarlock]

As one Barbette hit can ruin your whole day (note your hull & structure points) you don't want this thing taking on ay real military ships. Just a white elephant.

Well, yes and no. The Barbette can definitely trash it but then one can trash almost any fighter. My design went for speed and evasion as its primary method while Nerhesi's goes for armor and punch. Both have their place in combat.

Any fighter can be considered a white elephant if their stated mission is to destroy large enemy warships. If the powers in command make that the mission then something has gone very wrong. A fighter simply doesn't have a one-shot, one-kill capability against a large warship. Put enough of them into coordinated attacks then maybe. But expect heavy casualties because the real combat mission of a fighter in Traveller (IMO of course) is to distract enemy warships and degrade their combat capabilities by forcing them to shoot at hard-to-hit fighters rather than the fighter's friendly warships that should be the enemy's real target.

It would be interesting to put the two fighter designs through the same combat scenarios to see how they perform. I'm not sure which would be more survivable but I'm leaning a bit toward the 30-ton design because it can put so much of its acceleration into evasion. The 40-ton design is limited to 9Gs while my 30-tonner can reach 16 Gs. After all, you can't damage what you can't hit but my 16Gs may prove to expensive overkill. Yes, it can chase down the fastest missiles but how often is that necessary?

That said, the ability of the 40-ton to really reach out and touch someone far, far away is pretty sweet. Personally though, I would have gone with a plasma gun barbette rather than a particle beam just to get the higher armor-piercing effect the plasma gun provides. I'd also have gone with Accuracy and High Yield in order to make the weapon a bit more accurate at closer ranges and a smidgen more punchy but that's a personal preference and I admit may be a mistake. I really, really wish I could put a barbette on my 30-tonner since the rules limit small craft of that size to one and only one anti-ship weapon. Can't even add the Missile Packs suggested by locarno24 because of this rule. *pout*

I've got to admit, Nerhesi, you've got me pondering just what I could accomplish with a 40-ton design.

 

[F33D]

But expect heavy casualties because the real combat mission of a fighter in Traveller (IMO of course) is to distract enemy warships and degrade their combat capabilities by forcing them to shoot at hard-to-hit fighters rather than the fighter's friendly warships that should be the enemy's real target.

On an equal Cr basis, the fleet with only heavy's will overcome one that dilutes its spending with expensive fighters. They just plain lack the punch per Cr.

Fighters work in our current naval paradigm but not in the Trav big ship, big armor, outer-space scene.

 

[phavoc]

In regards to your 30ton vs. 40 ton argument, one thing to keep in mind is that if you have a heavier fighter mounting ordnance, once you drop/fire it, your acceleration profile should change. Of course you'd need to design that into it from the beginning, but there's no reason a 40ton fighter that carried 10 tons of ordnance wouldn't have the maneuverability of a 30ton one.

Has anyone tried that?

 

[SSWarlock]

In regards to your 30ton vs. 40 ton argument, one thing to keep in mind is that if you have a heavier fighter mounting ordnance, once you drop/fire it, your acceleration profile should change. Of course you'd need to design that into it from the beginning, but there's no reason a 40ton fighter that carried 10 tons of ordnance wouldn't have the maneuverability of a 30ton one.

Has anyone tried that?

Not yet. That was my plan for my version of the 40 ton though. The kicker is whether or not the rules limit the 40 ton to just one anti-ship weapon like they do the 30 ton. Hope not.

Update: Hah! A 40 ton small craft is limited to two anti-ship weapons. That's the good news. The bad news is I made a mistake in removing the fire control from the Block B/C designs. High Guard explicitly states "One ton of fire control equipment must be installed for each turret or fixed mount (see p111 core rulebook)..." and I just missed it. Apologies for that.

Update 2: I've confirmed my original Block C design does indeed include the fire control tonnage cost in its subtotal and total number; I'd just forgotten to add the detail line. That has been corrected.

 

[Nerhesi]

As one Barbette hit can ruin your whole day (note your hull & structure points) you don't want this thing taking on ay real military ships. Just a white elephant.

Ok - so no, and not really I dont think you've noted the hull and structure points (4 hull and 1 structure)

A barbette, will at most do 2 single hits and the only way it is doing 2 single hits is if you roll 20+ on 4d6. So on average, you are not penetrating. Then if you do penetrate, you're probably doing a single hit - and so even if you score Hull.

Even with a double hit - you will notice - 4 Hull? That means there is no way you will be destroyed - in-fact you have to beat the armor rating (of 15) by 33+ damage and roll well to immediately destroy the fighter. So basically, you're hitting the thing with a spinal to guarantee a one shot kill, lol. On average, even a Heavy Meson Bay will not do enough to kill this fighter in one shot.

No where near the white elephant you say it is.

On an equal Cr basis, the fleet with only heavy's will overcome one that dilutes its spending with expensive fighters. They just plain lack the punch per Cr.

Fighters work in our current naval paradigm but not in the Trav big ship, big armor, outer-space scene.

Not at all - see the races that concentrate on fighter use (Zhodani for sure and I believe Droyne too?).

So not to delve into the argument about using multiple thrust to dodge (1 per -2, as per core - no clarification on how many times), but if you consider even high-guard, Fighter craft have several advantages:

a) Closing distance quickly while dodging
b) Being damn near impossible to hit at close range due to squadron orders and strafing orders
c) Barrage damage vs squadrons coupled with the above when compared to barrage damage vs a single large ship.
d) If not use high-guard and barrage damage, the massed fire power of many single mounts has the capability of completely disabling a big ship before any damage control can be done - meanwhile return fire will destroy or cripple only some fighters obviously.

So while you are right about diluting firepower of a squadron, your squadron is probably actually putting out more hard-points and more damage than the one warship, enough to probably and insta-gib it. Especially if you start looking at using barrage rule and fighters armed with 2 x plasma guns in a single triple turret or something optimized like that.

Fighters, in the traveller paradigm are still best dealt with by other fighters. Even if just to hold them up - and thankfully, like everything else in ship design, they take some thought and are not just a matter of "build the most expensive fighter ever".

 

[Nerhesi]

I've been enjoying heavily experimenting with ship design, I think 40 tons is the best bang if considering pilot cost and load out (1 pilot, smallest thing to put a plasma barbette on) and gives you amazing speed and armor and room for those minor things like extra hull.

The point that I am hurting my head over is whether a partcile barbette that is accurate and very long range is better than a plasma barbette that is accurate and long range (very long vs long vs 4d6 vs 3d6 + 5)

Another headache is the range increase vs the upgrade that allows you to ignore the first hit.

Finally - I've been fooling around with 2-seater 60+ ton designs that allows Particle barbette AND sand caster - this would only be considering at TL 16 though if sand-casters can affect other weaponry beyond lasers, you'd effectively have another 1d6 of "armor", or something much more effective in barrage games when you consider squadrons with this.

 

[SSWarlock]

I've been enjoying heavily experimenting with ship design, I think 40 tons is the best bang if considering pilot cost and load out (1 pilot, smallest thing to put a plasma barbette on) and gives you amazing speed and armor and room for those minor things like extra hull.

Heh. Thanks to everyone's feedback and your design, this thread has moved from "interesting" for me to "fascinating". I haven't really dug into a 40 ton design yet but I'm starting to think you're right about it giving the best bang for the bu..er..credit. I hadn't added extra hull to my 30 ton design because I just couldn't figure out how to shoe-horn it in with everything else it needed to be really effective while providing the 16G minimum requirement. Yes, my design is blazingly fast and decently armored but its Hull and Structure ratings make it horrifyingly brittle.

Fortunately, I have tomorrow off and will be spending some time hammering out my 40 ton design. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be extremely close to what you've put together.

 

[SSWarlock]

The point that I am hurting my head over is whether a partcile barbette that is accurate and very long range is better than a plasma barbette that is accurate and long range (very long vs long vs 4d6 vs 3d6 + 5)

Another headache is the range increase vs the upgrade that allows you to ignore the first hit.

Finally - I've been fooling around with 2-seater 60+ ton designs that allows Particle barbette AND sand caster - this would only be considering at TL 16 though if sand-casters can affect other weaponry beyond lasers, you'd effectively have another 1d6 of "armor", or something much more effective in barrage games when you consider squadrons with this.

Regarding your first headache, my thought is to get that very long range, you're having to make Medium- and Close-ranged attacks more difficult. Other fighters will close the distance as quickly as they can to get you into their optimum range. For me, I'd rather be more effective than they are in both my optimum range and theirs than be able to hit them at extreme range but have the chance to miss.

Also, my personal experience with Traveller combat is the plasma gun is a bit more effective than a particle beam because its reduced number of dice rolls also reduces the chance of low damage rolls and the +5 does a good job of guaranteeing you're getting through quite a bit of armor. Don't forget that Effect is added to the damage roll. Low damage rolls can dilute this and there's simply a lesser chance of low rolls with the plasma gun. One other point I want to make is a particle beam does tend to make a target glow in the dark and I'd rather any prize I capture to be as little a threat as possible to the prize crew I put on it.

Regarding your second headache, I've learned the hard way to always go for anything that will negate incoming hits. A fighter can always close range faster than a non-fighter can open it but not if the fighter suddenly becomes crippled because the non-fighter got in a single lucky hit.

 

[SSWarlock]

Well, I couldn't wait until tomorrow to work on my 40 ton design; my Block A version is listed below. And yes, it's quite similar to Nerhesi's design. I did add a few things like a High Burn Thruster and a much larger computer to allow Fire Control 5 to be used all the time. Using that level of FC software to get the To Hit bonus allows the plasma gun to be able to hit any size target at all ranges, from Adjacent to Distant, while using all the Advanced Tech slots for miniaturizing the barbette to free up tonnage for other uses. For me, that is well worth the price of the top end TL 15 computer.

The High Burn Thruster allows the fighter to engage smaller, faster fighters (like my 30 ton design) while still having the advantage in armor and firepower and to chase down and destroy (or run away from) missiles.

FF-143 "Slugger" Space Superiority Fighter, Block A

Item (TL 15 standard)...........................Rating.............Tonnage........Cost (MCr).......Notes

Hull..........................................................................40..................1.3.............Built at TL12 to reduce cost. Hull 0/Structure 1
Hull Reinforcement.............................+3 Hull..................4...................0.4
Streamlining....................................................................................0.14
Armor.......................................Bonded Superdense........4.98..............1.743..........Hull Armor Factor = 15
Self-Sealing.....................................................................................0.4
Stealth..........................................................................................4
Radiation Shielding.........................................................................10
Maneuver Drive sT..................................9 Gs.................9.75.............52...............Advanced construction (75% std. tonnage)
Power Plant sT.............................................................6.525...........40..............Advanced construction (75% std. tonnage)
Fuel (1 week duration)...................................................1.75.............0.00875
High Burn Thruster sM.............................6 Gs.................1.05.............5.6............Advanced construction (75% std. tonnage)
HBT Fuel....................................................................2.1...............0.021.............Duration = Six one-hours burns and one 42-minute burn
Barbette for Single Plasma Gun............3D6+5 Damage..........3.................10..............Advanced construction (60% std. tonnage)
Fire Control for Barbette................................................1..................0
Cockpit.....................................................................1.5................0.015
- Specialised Navigation Computer..........Computer/5..............................0.1551........Intelligent Interface, Intellect/2, Expert Navigation/3
- Main Computer..................................Model 7.................................30...............Program Rating: 35
- Holographic Controls.......................................................................0.00375.......Cockpit counts as "optimized".
- Basic Military Sensor Suite............................................2..................1
- Enhanced Signal Processing..........................................2...................8...............+4 DM all Sensor rolls; +2 to Full & Limited range bands
Luxuries....................................................................0.1................0.01...........Consists of easy-to-use zero-g sanitary facilities and Smart Kitchen (see Scouts book)
SubTotal:....................................................................................165.1303

Software
Maneuver/0....................................................................................0
Evade 1/10.....................................................................................1
Fire Control 5/25.............................................................................10
Library/0........................................................................................0

Total..........................................................................................176.1303

Thoughts? Comments? What did I miss?

 

[Nerhesi]

Re-ignited my interest in this. I wanted to mention a couple of things that I did notice immediately!

First and most importantly:

Just wanted to correct you on a point if I may, effect is not added to damage in space combat. Compare page 65 to 150 and you will notice that unlike in person combat, effect is not added to damage in space combat.

I've noticed some people on these boards house-rule it otherwise, but me and my group personally don't - which preserves the RAW, immunity feeling that certain military/high-tech ships have vs some weapons. This is also explained/touched up in trillion credit squadron where by pulse-lasers/beam weapons are mentioned as being useless except for point defence in military engagements.

--------

Ok so now to compare:

Very Long range vs Medium (or long) is much better for Very Long in all circumstances (high guard range chart). Same negative modifier at close/adjacent (-1 only) and much better distance modifiers at very long/distant/very distant.

Plasma Barbette (range upgrade) vs Particle Barbette (range upgrade) comparison:

Range:
At very long range, the plasma barbette suffers a -2 to hit, while the Particle suffers no penalty.
At Distant, it is a -2 vs -4.

Automatic Radiation Hit: Particle Barbette

So, on average, you're trading the radiation hit and the +2 bonus to hit for +1.5 average damage on the damage roll (14 average roll vs 16 or 15 average) - now the 16 is great because it actually penetrates... but again, you'd need to figure out the math based on how many MORE shots the particle fighter would land.

Finally, keep in mind, that assuming both fighters with the same Gs - the particle fighter may elect to remain in stand-off mode at distant range (based engagement range for engagements that are not "planetary"), so you wouldn't close really.

EDIT: Whoah - I just realised you kept your plasma with only weight-reduction as an upgrade, not range. This would be a killer (I assume upgraded range in my comparisson). Your fighter with medium-only range base plasma would not even be able to return fire (or close distance) with a similar fire - so thats an area I'd definitely recommend changing.

 

[locarno24]

Just wanted to correct you on a point if I may, effect is not added to damage in space combat. Compare page 65 to 150 and you will notice that unlike in person combat, effect is not added to damage in space combat.

Yes and no. The Barrage combat rules - used for big fleet engagements and capital ships - do have damage highly dependent on effect, to the extent that upgrading your fire control can actually be better than upgrading your guns.

Especially with the innate fighter advantages mentioned above - barrage combat has a DM-4 to target fighter waves rather than other ships, and Fast Strafing Run (if you can get close enough) makes it even worse.

 

[Chas]

I definitely want to pinch a good heavy fighter high thrust design here so please keep up the good work :lol:

Locarno, care to return to the missile pack high thrust drone in light of this thread? :wink:

Had few distractions but have now completed my pursuit frigate chassis (7,500ktons seems to have done the job) and need to finalize the add-ons. I have a couple of concepts I'd like to include in a suitable high thrust drone (as well as throwing in a couple of fast fighters, this thread came along at exactly the right time) so hopefully will be up to speed myself shortly with small craft design.

 

[SSWarlock]

EDIT: Whoah - I just realised you kept your plasma with only weight-reduction as an upgrade, not range. This would be a killer (I assume upgraded range in my comparisson). Your fighter with medium-only range base plasma would not even be able to return fire (or close distance) with a similar fire - so thats an area I'd definitely recommend changing.

Hmm. You may be right.

However, keep in mind the consequences of using Fire Control 5 to provide a +5 bonus modifier to the To Hit roll. Any dedicated combat pilot will likely have Gunner 1, if not more, so that's a +6 bonus which goes a long way to offset negative modifiers accrued from range to target.

The real question is: will such a bonus really be enough to level the playing field or will an opponent who has used the Advanced Tech upgrades to boost his weapons at-range accuracy still gain a meaningful advantage? Or is that advantage diluted enough by my design's combination of the Fire Control To Hit bonus, High Burn Thruster-provided acceleration bonus to Evade, and the damage absorption by its extreme level of Armor? After all, there's only so much bonus that can be added. Once there's enough bonus that you can only miss by rolling snake-eyes, adding more bonus is a waste.

It's time, I think, to stop my messing around in thought exercises and really test this design in combat.

Speaking of which, good point about the addition of Effect. I had house-ruled its addition so long ago I'd forgotten it was a house rule but it's definitely penciled in under my Core Book's space combat rules..and we all know Mongoose doesn't use pencil in their books. :wink:

While it is added in the barrage rules (which I've never deeply explored), I had been thinking all along of space combat in the Core Book RAW sense so that's what I'm trying to optimize my designs for. Which, now that I really think about it, is a very bad idea. IMO, designs using High Guard and Trillion Credit Squadron had better be able to perform adequately under the combat rules for those publications as well, which suddenly makes this effort much more challenging.

By the way, thank you all for keeping this thread polite and respectful. I truly, truly appreciate it.

Keep the ideas and comments coming, people! I love this forum!

 

[Nerhesi]

Just wanted to correct you on a point if I may, effect is not added to damage in space combat. Compare page 65 to 150 and you will notice that unlike in person combat, effect is not added to damage in space combat.

Yes and no. The Barrage combat rules - used for big fleet engagements and capital ships - do have damage highly dependent on effect, to the extent that upgrading your fire control can actually be better than upgrading your guns.

Especially with the innate fighter advantages mentioned above - barrage combat has a DM-4 to target fighter waves rather than other ships, and Fast Strafing Run (if you can get close enough) makes it even worse.

Thanks Locarno - yeah barrage combat is a whole other beast But yes, as you pointed out, if you start combining DM-4, then adjacent penalty for non-small craft (-3 or so), then fast strafing run, you start seeing some unhittable or barely touched fighter squadrons.

 

[Nerhesi]

Hmm. You may be right.

However, keep in mind the consequences of using Fire Control 5 to provide a +5 bonus modifier to the To Hit roll. Any dedicated combat pilot will likely have Gunner 1, if not more, so that's a +6 bonus which goes a long way to offset negative modifiers accrued from range to target.

I always go by what the books show in terms of skill. Assume a total +3, +1 from the link stat (which always seems to be dex, or int sometimes according to the profile) and a skill of 2. Pretty much standard as per flight officer/pilot/blah sample npcs in the books.

So to answer your question about is it worth it or not, we need a bit of a comparisson:

First assumption - you MUST have increased range for your Plasma gun, or else you can't fire back period.

Second assumption - fire control 5, evade 1 minimum, accurate weapon upgrade as well.

Third assupmtion - assumed weapon lock on and and jamming is a wash.

Lets max out some bonuses:
Fire control +5
Skill and Characteristic +3
Line up the shot +1
Accurate weapon +1
Total = +10

Defensive Bonuses/Penalties
Evade Software -1
Dodge (once - not getting into more dodges) -2
Range (-4 for plasma weapon at distant, -2 for particle weapon)
Doing more than one action? Would you take this into account? The pilot is piloting/dodging and shooting? -2?
Total = -9 for plasma, -7 for particle

Distant range: Is the Plasma fighter hitting on a 7+ and doing 3d6+5 damage comparable, better, or worse than the Particle fighter hitting on 5+, and doing 4d6 + crew hit damage

Plasma Fighter: 58.3% chance to hit, 50% chance to damage = 29.2% chance for a damaging hit
Particle Fighter: 83.3% chance to hit, 33.6% chance to damage = = 28% chance for a damaging hit

So far, it is a bare bare minor advantage to the Plasma Fighter - almost enough to consider it a wash. Now lets consider some things that can mess with this.

a) As range closes, the plasma fighter wins out - especially at long or better when no penalties apply to plasma range

b) Youre actually checking to "damage" twice per hit for the particle, because you are comparing 4d6 against armor a second time to check for a crew hit. While a rad hit of 4 or less (4d6 scoring 19 or less) won't do anything, 1 in 20 rad hits guarantee that the pilot gets a -1 to all actions due to nausea.

c) I think me and you both play RAW as allowing multiple dodges vs one attack, this would throw the hole thing off of course as it introduces interesting tactics. The Particle Fighter would not be closing range but dodging the entire time with maybe 1 thrust to line up the shot. This would cause the Plasma fighter a dilema: At very long/Distant ranges, the partcile fighter would be pretty much impossible to hit, but the plasma may not be, so it'd have to weather a massive amount of fire coming in to a range where it could get a favourable chance to hit.

Then you have to figure out the chance that pilot actually succeeds on their piloting check to dodge the massive amount of times they need to do so (on both sides).

d) Crack pilots throw this crap completely off. In fact - for a crack pilot, I think Plasma becomes a clear winner because the -4 vs -2 or -2 vs -0 at distant/long wont matter with their amazing gunnery skills (4 skill, 2 characteristic, skill enhancement implant, etc etc). Thats basically a bonus +4 or more on the roll above. It's like stacking a friggin second +5 fire-control. Advantage = Plasma.

e) There is no anti-heat armor that would shut down plasma right? Under the vehicle rules for battle-dress construction, there is an armor treatment that increases Battle Dress armor by it's TL vs Plasma, Fusion, and HEAP weapons - I hope that is not the case and I've missed something like Reflec/Rad armor enhancements that apply to Plasma for space-craft, or this convo would be moot

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm going to post up a couple of designs from work in a bit. I think I've learned something from this thread too - in that Long Range, Accurate Plasma barbettes (Tl 14 barbettes) are my new favourite.

Wraith - 40 ton space superiority fighter - mass production version
Type.....................................................Cost (MCR)..........Weight
Hull Size: 40 tons S4–Streamlined, Stealth.........5.54..................-40
Armour Bonded Superdense (15) TL15................2.77...................5
Drive Gravitic-M sT (TL 10)......9Gs...................28.6.................12.35
Power Plant Fusion sT 9 Rating..........................20....................8.7
Power Plant Fuel Fusion Fuel sT (1 Day)......................................0.3
Cockpit - Holographic Controls..........................0.25.................1.5
Basic Military Sensors (Radar, Lidar, Jammers, +0 DM)...1.................2
Reinforced Hull.........+3 hull.............................0.4...................4
Fire control ...................................................1.....................1
Plasma Barbette (TL-14)Accurate and Long Range.....10.....................5
Computer Model 5....25 Rating Max...................10.......................0
Fire Control/3...............................................6........................0
Evade/1......................................................1.........................0

Totals........................................................86.56...................0.15
Stats: 9g, 4 Hull, 1 Struct, 15 Armor, Long Range & Accurate Plasma Barbette


Spectre - 40 ton space superiority fighter - Aces-only-because-im-expensive version
Type.....................................................Cost (MCR)..........Weight
Hull Size: 40 tons S4–Streamlined, Stealth.........5.54..................-40
Armour Bonded Superdense (15) TL15................2.77...................5
Drive Gravitic-M sV (TL 12)......10Gs....................60.................11.25
Power Plant Fusion sV (TL 15) 10 Rating..................48.................7.425
Power Plant Fuel Fusion Fuel sV (1 Day)......................................0.3
Cockpit - Holographic Controls..........................0.25.................1.5
Basic Military Sensors (Radar, Lidar, Jammers, +0 DM)...1.................2
Reinforced Hull.........+3 hull.............................0.4...................4
Reinforced Structure...+1 struct........................0.4....................2
Fire control ...................................................1.....................1
Plasma Barbette (TL-14)Accurate and Long Range.....10.....................5
Armoured Bulkhead-Barbette?...........................0.1.......................0.5
Computer Model 7....35 Rating Max...................30.......................0
Fire Control/5...............................................10.......................0
Evade/1......................................................1.......................0

Totals......................................................170.46...................0.025
Stats: 10g, 4 Hull, 2 Struct, 15 Armor, Long Range & Accurate Plasma Barbette with armored bulkhead

As you can see, literally double the price for 1 more G, 1 more Structure, and a bonus of +2 to hit. Thats what you're trading for a whole second fighter of the same type

First fighter only has TL 15 for armor. Second fighter has TL 15 for armor and for light-weight Fusion Power Plant.

Original Designed these fighters (Wraith and Spectre) as Zhodani fighters (due to their fighter heavy doctrine) and the availability of TL 15 to Zhodani Military units. But they obviously can be used for any star-empire.

 

[Nerhesi]

I should mention I have only barely explored the 100 ton 2-seater fighter style of superiority fighter - one of the limiting factors is the barbette issue.

However, I am very interested in further exploring since I've discovered the following:

a) Early attempts have yielded a Plasma Barbette and Particle Beam armed 100 tonner with 6G speed, 15 armor, and a ludicrous 17 hull 5 structure

b) Black globe generator armed fighters? This is worth exploring a bit...

c) Screens have been down graded to 20/30 ton weight according to high-guard so this poses interesting options as well!