Tracking Fighter Squadrons

phavoc

Emperor Mongoose
To follow-up on something I said elsewhere, and to track it better in it's own thread:

For FLEET combats only:
Fighter squadrons are 'built' by a player, and deployed to a carrier/launching entity. Each squadron consists of a pre-set number of craft. Squadrons track their overa ll missile/torpedo count individually. Squadrons make an attack as a single entity against other squadrons, or starships. An attack against fighters is also made against the entire squadron.

Squadrons must be built upon the same class ship. If the squadron is mixed, then it's speed and values are based upon the LOWEST values of the mixed flight. This is done so that the squadron fights and fly's as a single entity.

Damage values are determined at the time of creation. If all ships have a damage value of 10pts, then multiply that number by the number of ships in the squadron and you get the total number of points the squadron can take. Each time damage is applied, if the end result is greater than the individual ship value, then 1 ship is destroyed.

Squadrons can receive a positive or negative DM based upon experience (recruit = -2, green = -1, average = 0, veteran = 1, elite = 2, legendary = 3)

Example: Omega Flight consists of 10 space-superiority fighters. They are equipped with a pulse laser and 2 missiles each. Each fighter has a damage value of 10. They are an average flight squadron (DM+0). Their ATTVAL is 10 x pulse lasers. Their DEFVAL = (need to determine this). Their damage value is 100 (10x10pts ea). Their ammo load is 20 missiles (2 x 10 craft).

The ATT/DEF value need more work, as to how to shoe-horn them in. Would need to figure out the other DM's as well, collectively, to be applied.

Adding in experience may be a bit too much for Traveller, as it doesn't have any. But I like the idea, and it could be set for an alternate tech/rule, assuming we go with some sort of carrier ops supplement. And, for squadrons, that experience would translate into +/- rolls when attacking and defending. So it would behoove a player to NOT field green squadrons if they could avoid it. And maybe it's more a issue of when you build the squadron, cause if you track experience you'd have to have a mechanism to go up/down as you take damage or complete combat. However if you are just building your squadrons and using some sort of credit/point system, it would be fine for NPC's to have. Being out in the boonies and you as the PC's have a fight against a backwater fighter post, most likely you'll be facing green troops. But tangling with a blooded unit in a hot area, you might get smacked on the nose by an elite squadron. Just some food for thought.
 
Two sections still outstanding in High Guard.

Fighter section (non-fleet non-squadron combat)
And the Fleet section - which will have squadron rules.

I think we should wait to see what the indication for the base combat system from Matt on this. There are several ways to approach it (average values with absolutes being turned into %ages, a whole new system ala battleforce-battletech, etc). I know crew values, fighter squadrons and so on have been discussed internally so I'm interested in what is up so far.

Im really curious too to see what Matt and crew proposes but I feel like if history is any indication, we need to lock down other areas first. This forces us to provide feedback on the newer areas knowing the previous stuff CANNOT change... key to avoiding analysis paralysis.
 
Nerhesi said:
Two sections still outstanding in High Guard.

Fighter section (non-fleet non-squadron combat)
And the Fleet section - which will have squadron rules.

I think we should wait to see what the indication for the base combat system from Matt on this. There are several ways to approach it (average values with absolutes being turned into %ages, a whole new system ala battleforce-battletech, etc)

Im really curious too to see what Matt and crew proposes but I feel like if history is any indication, we need to lock down other areas first. This forces us to provide feedback on the newer areas knowing the previous stuff CANNOT change... key to avoiding analysis paralysis.

If previous history is an indicator, NONE of this was in a previous edition of Traveller. I understand the analysis paralysis, but I'd rather be proactive than reactive for this (and a few other things). I don't want to see something come out, and then a deadline, and then it gets missed because there was no time. That's how we get rules misses in the first place.
 
I meant previous history of this playtest.

I understand the need to be proactive but the key here is alignment. We can come up with systems till the sun goes down but we should have some idea of what is the greater fleet-combat system, rather than trying to create the squadron combat system (which is a subset of the aforementioned), in a silo.
 
Back
Top