I really like the idea we have now of a few races really not getting into fighters. Why mess up a perfectly good piece of ratial flavor?

The Lyrans buy fighters from the Klingons. If you want to make them a little something special, then just say they can carry a higher number of special pods for their fighters, in place of drones, since said drones play havoc with ESG usage.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 03:24 am: Edit

Placing a reusable Ph-3 on a standard rail feels OK to me (not that I've tested the idea). The current fighter Ph-3 pod is pretty ordinary - a fighter carrying one could mount a swordfish drone on the same rail and get the same phaser to fire without needing to get dangerously close to the target.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 09:44 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Actually...if the Lyrans were to use as their main fighter, a Klingon Z-D with RaLADDs mounted on the Type VI drone rails, that would be where their fighter designs would go considing that their main Enemy ( the Kzintis ) used drones and thus RaLADDs would be an important fighter weapon that the Lyran scientists would have created even if no other race in the galaxcy invented them ( because Kzinti drones need to be defended against ) AND the disruptor doesn't interfere with the opperations of Lyran ESGs.

---

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 12:10 pm: Edit

Limit of two added phasers, so whether standard pods or long pods, two is the max. Probably needs carrier power to arm. May limit it to four or five shots?

MJC: I don't even remember your AC130 proposal, so bring it up again and we'll vote on it.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 12:26 pm: Edit

Jessica,

That's true, but it's a problem for Hydrans and Feds, too. You only have so many things you can plant on a fighter, and since Lyrans don't use drones, and you can't put an ESG on a fighter, Disruptors would seem the only option. Phaser pods are a choice, but the carrier has to power those, as well. To combat the power supply issue, my guess is that Lyran carriers would carry less disruptors and ESG's of their own, so that they can spare the power to arm fighters, be they disruptor or phaser armed.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 01:17 pm: Edit

But that would mean changing existing SSDs, which can't be done.

Besides, giving them squadrons of Disruptor fighters shows that they didn't like fighters how?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 01:25 pm: Edit

No, it would mean making new SSD's, for theoretical Lyran carriers carrying theoretical Lyran fighters. As for why they wouldn't like them, try taking a squadron of disruptor/phaser armed fighters up against a squadron of drone-armed fighters, and watch the show. The disruptor guys are at a hell of a disadvantage.

For what it's worth, Chris, I don't really think Lyrans need fighters, either. To my mind, as a long-time enemy of the Kzin, Lyrans went down the road they wanted to combat fighters and drones by developing the ESG. THAT'S where they put their emphasis, and it works for them. But, as long as we're talking about it, and SVC is open to ideas, I'll chip in my thoughts with the hopes that, if nothing else, it will spark a good idea from someone else.

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 02:57 pm: Edit

I think some alternative Lyran fighters and carriers might make for a good SSJ article, but we face a serious problem if we try to shoe-horn a Lyran fighter into the history. If it is too good, why would they have opted for drone armed fighters. If it stinks, who would want to use them?

By Trent Telenko (Ttelenko) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 03:19 pm: Edit

>Federation A10B speed 15 proposed by Mike West.

How about a speed 13 A10A for Y175 deployment?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Sunday, August 11, 2002 - 10:51 pm: Edit

Mike Raper:

Statements like the following indicate that your data is untrustworthy as you are clearly NOT researching the item.

Mike Raper said at 2142 hrs on 9 Aug 02: "Gorn ships carry plasma D's in their fighters; again, the carrier doesn't use them."

Gorn Carriers with Plasma-D racks: CV, HDV, BCV, BCS, CVS, BDV, SDS.

Gorn Carrers without Plasma-D racks: SCS, CVA, HRV, BBV.

Mike, you are allowed to state your opinions and thoughts and allowed to use the game background and history to justify what you think should be. But when you issue clearly erroneous blanket statements, it devalues virtually everything else you say on a given subject. The above demonstrates that the MAJORITY of the Gorn carriers DO use plasma-Ds, and an even larger percentage of the actual HISTORICAL as opposed to CONJECTURAL Gorn carriers did.

Further (this is a general comment NOT directed solely at Mike Raper), one of the considerations to reducing Lyran fighters to a handful of direct-fire weapons equivalent to Hydran fusions beams is that they become useless. A Hydran fleet, even a Hydran battle squadron, is going to put out a lot more fighters than a comparable Lyran force. Reduce the Lyran fighters to mere parity, and in direct weapons firepower, and you make them totally useless in any effort to counter Hydran fighters. Drones make the small number of Lyran fighters viable in an action with Hydran stingers. Delete the drones, and you may as well delete the fighters in toto a the have no significant effect against the Hydran fighters.

There is also the minor point that fighters do not just show up in battles in deep space. A Lyran starbase, BATS, or other base is better served by being able to put drones on its fighters than diverting power to arm weapon systems on the fighters. A Lyran colony planet is better served by drone-armed fighters operating in its defense than fighters that must watch their numbers dwindle as they must charge into the teeth of an attacker to fire direct-fire weapons.

So far, most of the argument still seems to hinge on the concept of "I do not care if the result is that Lyran fighters become useless, so long as I can get a warm feeling that they are using what I consider to be appropriate technology. Therefore, we will limit the discussion to just the appropriate technology, and ignore the consequences in the larger picture."

I know that the above is NOT what you are really thinking, but it is the effect of it. Lyran fighters do not exist in enough numbers to operate in the "assault" role with direct-fire wepaons against the Hydrans. And reduction to the short-range of direct-fire weapons will limit their effectiveness in protecting Lyran ships from Kzinti drone swarms. And they will be pretty useless in defending Lyran colony planets. Please do not limit the concept to "I have an idea", but consider the effect implementing your idea has on the over all picture of operations.

And, yes, I still do not consider it all that hard to integrate drone fighters with my Lyran forces (maybe my Lyran alter-ego was a carrier group commander?).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 03:42 am: Edit

What is terribly wrong with having an R1 or R0 Maximum radius, and 1 or 2 points of power, miniturised, fighter version of an ESG for the Lyran fighters!?!


So long as it can't do everything that the real BIG HAMMER can do, there shouldn't be a problem...other than needing to keep fighter spread out from each other.

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 06:47 am: Edit

MJC. Picture this: A Lyran fleet advancing on a Hydran one, with a squadron of these in the van. The Hydrans fire their hellebores ... and kill a squadron of fighters. The ships then overrun and destroy the Hydran fleet.

The HB/ESG interaction is not one that should be unbalanced in this manner.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 06:52 am: Edit

Steve Petrick,

If my statement was erroneous, it was because it was unclear in meaning. My comment about carriers not using plasma-D's was to be taken from the context of how they use them; not that they don't use them at all. Fighters that carry plasma D's generally use them for attack. Ships that carry them use them for defense. THAT's what I meant by that statemtent.

As for the general statement of reducing Lyran fighters to direct fire weapons, and thus making them relatively innefective, I was under the impression that that was what was needed:

quote{There is, presumably, a need for a new something for Lyran fighters, since drones and ESG's don't mix. It cannot be very good or we'd wonder why Lyrans invented PFs.}

Fighters with only disruptors are not very good, IMHO. If I misinterpreted SVC's meaning of "cannot be very good", then I withdraw the suggestion.

By Jonathan Dean (Nightshade) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 09:14 am: Edit

Michael,

If they can make a version of the ESG which can be put on a fighter, then by extension that weapon could also be put on a PF. Arguably, it would be alot more effective on a PF, not to mention that on a PF it probably wouldn't have a use-one/return to carrier restriction.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 09:26 am: Edit

Jonathan> It would actually be pretty easy to have a PF ESG that needs to be recharged by the tender. *handwaves* After all, the reason an ESG is a two-space weapon is not for the size of the geenrator, but of the power conversion equipment. A PF just carriers the generator mount, but not the power conversion gear, which is part of its mechlink, so it can produce an ESG field, but not charge it itself.

But yeah, if you're getting ESGs on fighters you're gonna be hard-presed to not get them on PFs in some form.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 10:40 am: Edit

Mike Raper:

I apologize if you thought I was taking your statement in re plasma-Ds on Gorn carriers out of context. Such was not my intent, and going back and reading your missive again, I do not see how it would be possible to infer the context you intended. Your missive simply noted (to begin with) that Federation Carriers (and this is actually limited to CVAs, SCSs, Starbases, and NVHs) can arm fighters with range-12 photons, but cannot fire those photons themselves, and goes on from that point. The only context I could see from that was, as I noted, that Gorn Carriers arm their fighters with plasma-Ds, but cannot use the plasma-Ds themselves.

As to the usefulness of Lyran fighters. I think SVC is simply pointing out that there is a delicate balance here. If a Lyran fighter is created that is too good, why would the Lyrans invent PFs? If, on the other hand, a Lyran fighter is created that is absolutely worthless, what is the point? Are you, the players, going to be happy to run your Lyran carriers in campaigns where you will automatically lose because your fighters are worthless? How happy will the general player population (and the Lyran player population in particular) be if we present them with a new product with their big thing being a worthless fighter? Would we be serving our customer base or just those players who are:

A.) Unhappy that the Lyrans are not using an indigenous fighter.

B.) Do not care that the Lyran fighter is not indigenous, but find it too hard to use them due to the drone-ESG interaction problem.

There are a lot of people on this board, and in this topic, who are a lot more imaginative than I am. Maybe one of you, or SVC, will come up with a solution for an indigenous Lyran fighter that is actually worth bringing to a battle, but is not overpowering versus other race's fighters. Particularly in synergy with their PFs on their Space Control Ships.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 10:51 am: Edit

A few comments.....

1. Lyrans do not need and will not get indigenous fighters. Best you can ask for is something like a phaser pod to hang on Klingon-built fighters. Feel free to discuss what this might be if you don't like my phaser pod idea.

2. Lyrans have all the carriers they need.

3. The rules for ESGs say that they cannot fit on PFs or fighters. Doesn't matter why; it cannot be done. Please waste no more bandwidth arguing for this; I'll delete any mention of it from now on.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 11:24 am: Edit

Steven Petrick,

No apology is necessary. As I mentioned, I can see that my first post was somewhat unclear. It was actually part of an extended conversation with David Kass. And I agree with you about the balance needed for Lyran fighters; hopefully, someone will be able to find a way to get that balance.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 12:22 pm: Edit

I sort of thought the Lyran problem with fighters was one that could not really be expressed in game terms but more in their philosophy as a race. They seem to be team players. Sure their broak up into duchys but those duchys come together as a team.(And hence why the LDR is such a strange thing to them)
Anyway, my point is that fighters have an individual as a crew, which may not site right with the Lyran psyche. PFs have a crew. A team that, as individuals, they are much more comfortable with. Perhaps one of the troubles they had with fighters was finding pilots that were willing to die alone.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 12:54 pm: Edit

Loren Knight:

I cannot see it. In real terms an effective fighter squadron is a team, the sum greater than the parts.

Also, if Lyrans were incapable of acting alone, they would not be able to produce spies, much less create Prime Teams.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 01:47 pm: Edit

Hmm. OK. Good point. Though, I wasn't sugesting that they were incapable of acting alone. Just more uncomfortable and less willing. I also suggested that Lyrans were not voluteering in droves. Ya they have enough individuals to do some work but not in droves.

Anyway, I see your point.

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 03:26 pm: Edit

Count me among those who are unhappy that Lyrans don't have an indigenous fighter. What bothers me the most is the prospect of Lyrans fielding units that use drones. Why would they use a fighter armed with a weapon that goes completely counter to the doctrine of their ship weapons? You can probably wave your hands and come up with a logical explanation, but to me it just feels WRONG. I would rather have the Lyrans be a non-fighter race than seen them fielding drone fighters.

It seems to me there are workable options for indigenous fighters for the Lyrans. Direct fire fighters are not unworkable; the Lyrans would just have to do more with pods and capacitor systems (which can be charged before the battle to avoid power shortages on the carrier) - it makes sense the Lyrans would be good at this. Phaser-2 fighters, which charge their own weapons, could be quite effective and not cause power problems. Would a fighter with 2xp2 (and no other weapons) be unbalancing?

At the very least, have the Lyrans replace more drones with RALADs. ADDs on Lyans don't offend my sensibilities as much as drones do, since they are direct-fire, and it makes sense that Lyrans would use them on fighters but not ships. Maybe let them replace type-1 rails with a pair of RALADs, or replace all rails with a 6-shot ADD.

Another cool option is the Short Range Cannon (from Omega). Maybe the Lyrans, not wanting ADD-equipped fighters to be useless against ships, developed something along the same lines as the Federal Republic. This weapon did not live up to expectations (insert reason here), and so was not implemented on PFs.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, August 12, 2002 - 03:37 pm: Edit

It's years too late for the Lyrans to get an indigenous fighter. You might have won that argument before doomsday, but it's not going to change at this point. You can discuss weapons for the Klingon-built fighters, but indigenous is rejected with extreme prejudice and a totally dead horse.

Lyrans have access to the Klingon Z-D and Z-P so they already have those kinds of fighters, and can already hang ralads on their rails.

Omega weapons cannot be used in Alpha, so that's dead horse before it starts.