unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 4, 2010 9:56:18 GMT -5
No, Flak still fires BEFORE the Fighters attack and that is a key ability and keeps them a useful Equipment choice IMO.
So, Flak/PD fire before the attack and ACs/GLs can try and mop up afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by warchariot on Jul 4, 2010 10:01:22 GMT -5
No, Flak still fires BEFORE the Fighters attack and that is a key ability and keeps them a useful Equipment choice IMO. So, Flak/PD fire before the attack and ACs/GLs can try and mop up afterwards. That's assuming fighters get to attack first. If the rule doesn't change, this makes auto cannons a better anti-fighter weapon than Flak whose only purpose is to shoot at fighters.
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 4, 2010 10:27:43 GMT -5
Possibly, but you are still paying a Battery slot for the ACs and they have an arc restriction. Also, the Flak batteries can hit quite a few hexes on medium to larger ships. Unless you've packed the Gatlings in to make an 'AA ship', I cant imagine them being more effective than Flak for a size 3 or larger ship. And on smaller ships, the Flak really doesnt take up too much tonnage (certainly less than the Gatlings).
Gatling ACs are 3 tons + turret mounting (which scales with armor). Flak is 5% of the ship. So on a size 200 ship, Flak is 10 tons. For that you could maybe get 2 Gatling ACs in a turret. The Flak batteries will hit 2 hexes and potentially up to 12 Fighters (12 dice, hitting on 7+). The same amount of space allocated to Gatlings would top out it hitting only 2 Fighters (on 7+ but with FC added on AND only a d6, albeit with one re-roll).
Now on really large ships, the Flak batteries take up considerably more space. On the other hand, the turrets for the ACs on large armored ships scales up a lot too. If you dont turret mount them, they have limited arcs and trying to put them in multiple arcs will eat up all of the battery slots on your large ship for the AA role.
Personally I think it looks fine, and it's even more in the Flak's favor if the Fighter do shoot first (since they can pre-empt the attack, unlike ACs).
|
|
|
Post by Jester on Jul 4, 2010 12:12:32 GMT -5
1) Your Carrier fleet even has the Torps and they still felt pretty ineffective? Wow. I would have figured that they would have really made the difference. Still, I guess against heavily shielded ships, the torpedoes are actually LESS effective firing before cap ships (since at best the target will only be down 12 points of shields when the torps hit). 2) How fragile did the Fighters feel? Did TFB have Gatlings to use? 1) Yeah, the Torps were often still striping shields on the big ships so my BCB or CA could fire down the same sheild facing. Their main advantage is the ability to fire from several hexes away. I would place a strik fighter on the ship then line up as many Torp fighters as i could on that facing. The resulting shots would "usually" stip the shields (depending on class of course), and a few times actaully hit the ship with the last reamining fighter or two. 2) The fighters didnt really take much damage in either game. Both TFB fleets only no Flak, Gattlings, Screens, Grapeshot, etc). The only Anti-fighter they boasted was 1-2 PD each. Ironicly, the best anti-fighter TFB came with was getting two of their ships blown up with the reactor explosion crits . I will say that in the other games, Grapeshot, other fighters and flak did a good job on the fighters but that felt about right.
|
|
|
Post by Jester on Jul 4, 2010 12:13:55 GMT -5
What would you guys think of kicking strike fighter damage up to 3? Sounds interesting. I would love to hear from anyone testing this out. I wont be able to play again till Tuesday probably.
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 4, 2010 12:19:30 GMT -5
I'm going to give it a go tomorrow with 3 damage and I am introducing the game to a new player at some point tomorrow afternoon/evening so soon I'll have more data to play with...
|
|
|
Post by warchariot on Jul 4, 2010 18:01:25 GMT -5
We have used some 3s and it is that little bit more that helps. It upped a 10 hit fighter swam to a 12 hit against a size 2 ship-33 hull.
|
|
|
Post by Jester on Jul 5, 2010 7:25:45 GMT -5
Hi all! For the suggested fighter sequencing change, we are talking about moving the entire fighter phase (Dogfights, then anti ship strikes) before the cap ship firing, yes?
Thanks
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 5, 2010 9:15:52 GMT -5
That is how I'm testing it, yes. If anyone wants one, I have also re-organized the Turn Tracking Sheet as a Word doc to reflect the change.
|
|
|
Post by warchariot on Jul 5, 2010 12:44:33 GMT -5
Yep, that's what we did also.
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 5, 2010 22:22:14 GMT -5
OK, so as I said in another thread, we got to play a few games tonight and we got to work out the new Fighters. I designed a few CAs that carried some squadrons of Strike Fighters to employ as fleet support and they worked out very nicely.
The goal of the fleet is to primarily use a few CVs and their Fighter wings to rip the shields off of enemy ships and then using heavy hull damage weapons to wreak havoc. Most of the ships carry very little in the way of shield destroying weapons, relying on the Fighters for that purpose. The CA's carry 2 squadrons of Strikes each so that even if a CV isnt present in the battle, there are still a few Fighters around to perform that crucial role. They do not carry any Fusion torps though.
Ok, so in our game, the Fighters performed their role very well. They would move to the shield side that was under threat from the main fleet and they would weaken or remove that shield to allow the heavy weapons to make a mess. The defending player was whittling them down though, so it was clearly a finite capability. Also, once he grocked the situation, he started positioning RDF DDs in hexes adjacent to the larger ships that he didnt want to lose their shields on a specific arc. THAT was definitely a neat effect.
Overall, we were very happy with the changes to fighters (both the sequence of play change which gave them a fleet support role and the increased damage which made them seem worth their tonnage, tech, and role costs). They are fragile though, so unless you DO mass them, you'll be running low on them pretty quickly.
|
|
kashre
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 110
|
Post by kashre on Jul 5, 2010 22:33:17 GMT -5
We played a game today, a 1700/2550 Ambush scenario, with the defender fleet based around an 884 ton heavy carrier with 14 strike fighter squadrons, using the fighters-first and Strike fighters get 3 damage rules. (and the +3 init for flagships).
It was a serious nail-biter, and the fighters did play a pretty pivotal role... stripping shields off of heavy ships so the CARs could take them out with torp hits straight to the hull, and taking out hardpoints from lighter ships to get rid of missiles, which were the biggest threat to the game. I'll post a little AAR about it in a minute, just because it was such an awesome game.
so my 2 cents: these changes are just about perfect for balancing fighters. They still only do 1 point on non-pen hits so against high armor targets they're pretty useless except for shield stripping, but 3 point hits is a credible threat to DDs and CLs, especially if you can get to weaker ships.
It encourages the use of casual interceptor carriers on "regular" ships that will be facing carrier fleets too, which we found to make pretty fascinating games when you have a bunch of fighters trying to take each other out.
|
|
|
Post by lordhawkins on Jul 8, 2010 13:54:06 GMT -5
I think making all these changes to fighters makes them way too powerful. In the initial playtesting we did (with Dreadnought), Strike fighters did 3 damage and had no crit limitations...they devastated smaller ships and did a number on the bigger ones as well. They needed to be brought down.
As far as shooting first, I don't see how that can't be seen as a huge boost. What's the point of taking AA if a ship can deploy/move/attack with fighters without the chance to use the AA you bought?
Without taking Flak into account...with fighters shooting first, I imagine you'd be less inclined to take actual shield stripping weapons when fighters can do the job better, both from a damage sence and you can't miss with fighters.
Even 1 strike fighter for 16 tonnage (if 3 damage) is going to do 18 shield damage. Compare that to the Heavy Disrupter for 16 tonnage. The fighter can't miss, does double damage to shields, and if shields happen to be down...up to 5X the hull damage and possible 6 crits? Ouch.
Fighters are already very good at taking down smaller ships with little support. Dreadnought has already mentioned that he made it so cap ships with the big guns are needed to crack other cap ships. Making fighters better at taking down cap ships undermines this IMHO.
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Jul 8, 2010 14:11:26 GMT -5
Fighters degrade quickly over time. PD eats into them and incidental weapons fire from very cheap weapons kills them too. That doesnt even include dedicated things like Flak, Cluster missiles, and Grape all of which wipe Fighters out in job lots if used properly. Finally, even a few squadrons of Ints of your own prevent critical enemy strikes by engaging them in dogfights.
Fighters also dont 'stack up' well since they all have to attack different shields. If they are firing first, then that means that they are likely firing at full shield. This does indeed put them in the role of shield strippers and more of a support roles for the larger ships rather than as a follow-up to them. I think it's a good thing that a fleet has to be bring less anti-shield weapons if they field lots of Fighters since it encourages design interactions. Fighters doing 2 points each AFTER everything else fires are simply not worth the expense (at all). There are PLENTY of other ways to spend your tonnage and roles that will generate better results.
And you can't compare 1 HDisruptor to 6 Fighters easily. For one thing, I can mass multiple Disruptors on a single shield...impossible for Fighters regardless of the investment made. Also, a HDisruptor will do 9 points of Hull damage while a full squadron of Strikes will do 18..that's 2x, not 5x. And the Disruptor can do a normal crit with the potential of killing the ship or rendering it combat ineffective. The Fighters have a 50/50 or killing a hardpoint on their one crit (remember they can only do one as as squadron, not one per Fighter).
As far as AA weaponry, yes, it can't preempt the initial attack, but it can certainly reduce the follow-on attacks. And Flak/PD function as normal for preempting (as do defending Fighters).
Now all that said, I could easily see the 3 damage as being a TL4 item (Heavy Strike Fighter Weaponry or something). That way for setting where Fighters shouldnt be very effective they could still be used at TL3.
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Jul 8, 2010 14:23:51 GMT -5
Hmmm. . . I like the heavy strike fighter weaponry idea. . .
Hawkins - When we originally tested the fighters at 3 damage, it was still while they got to ignore shields.
Yes, fighters will chew things up into itsy bitsy pieces with 3 damage against an unshielded ship. But against shields - especially when making them the first ones to have to take a crack at the shields - 3 damage should be ok. Turns them into shield strippers really - clearing the path for the battleline.
It increases the value of the defender role (with it's double shield regen) as well as the advantages of high PD and Flak batteries (which still get to fire first) over just tons of gatling lasers.
|
|
|
Post by lordhawkins on Jul 8, 2010 14:35:42 GMT -5
Fighter do degrade over time, but how much time do you have? In playtesting...once the ships started shooting at each other, the game tended to end in just a few turns. That's not a lot of time to wear down fighters.
Fighters doing 2 damage might not be much to a Battleship, but with d10 pen, it is more than enough to take out smaller ships. Using fighters to clear out the small stuff leaves all your big guns for the big ships. Yes, big guns make short work of small ships, but then your not shooting at the big threats either.
You are correct in that you can mount multiple guns in a hardpoint and target one shield facing...you can also loose all those guns to one crit and might not ever get it back. (I mixed up the S vs. H damage 5X to the Shields/2X to the Hull) You also have to put your ship in harms way to fire those weapons. A carrier can be up to 24 hexes away. In our playtesting, we never lost fighters due to a carrier being destroyed...or at least not having a Flagship close by.
Also, the playtesting I did was all at the highest tech levels. With lower shields and armor, those strike fighters become even more dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Jul 8, 2010 14:41:02 GMT -5
Well we'll make it a level 5 fighter tech to spice up the top of that tree a little.
|
|
|
Post by lordhawkins on Jul 8, 2010 14:50:11 GMT -5
Hawkins - When we originally tested the fighters at 3 damage, it was still while they got to ignore shields. Yes, but I tend to think of fighters for the smaller craft. I think they already were doing a good job against them...3 damage would make them crazy good. Size 1 ships can only have a max of 10 shields. 2 damage, the first 5 attacks get stopped, the last does damage. 3 damage, the first 3 get stopped the next 3 all do damage. That's a possible 9 Hull damage + crits. Bring in more fighters and that difference gets much bigger fast. Staying on the conservative side, I'd not want to see fighters be that much stronger than equally tonnaged weapons.
|
|
|
Post by warchariot on Jul 8, 2010 14:54:42 GMT -5
As we said, we have no problem with the fighter phase where it is or moving it. The fighters take falk and P Def either way, and may draw other fire as the sequence sits now. If they fire first, they do have an advantage in knocking out weapons, FC and finishing off a damaged ship as we have had, but still, were okay either way. my only worry is that it will affect something were not seeing yet.
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Jul 8, 2010 14:56:12 GMT -5
Well if it's a Level 5 tech I think it would be ok. Right now the 'Recon' ability is pretty nice. . . but strike fighters never get much cooler and having played quite a bit since the end of the playtest, they're pretty ineffective against the capital ships.
I agree that they are highly effective against the DD's, but I don't think that's going to break the game at all.
|
|