Archive through August 13, 2002
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: New Product Development:
Module J3: Back in the Cockpit:
Archive through August 13, 2002
Just out of curiosity.
Why does the Lyran fighter need PARITY with the Stinger-II?
What if Lyran fighters didn't have parity and were a lot cheaper to buy!?!
Then the Lyran Player could feild bigger and better armed carriers and cruisers than his Hydran opponent for the same BPV.
Marc Baluda:
Let me see if I can grasp this. Your theory is that if the Lyrans use phaser-drones, the tremendous firepower of the phaser-3 will more than make up for the difference between a drone strike (dead Hydran fighter, dead Kzinti drone whether a type-VI or type-IV Slug, dead Kzinti fighter, and possibly 12 points of damage on an enemy ship) and the only phasers "only three points of damage because I rolled a 6 at zero hexes range, so I do not know if that drone I was trying to kill was a type-I or a type-IV with armor, but by God I know it is not a type-VI or it would be dead!"
I am sorry, but phaser-3 drones are just not that effective. Not effective enough in any case that they are worth employing in the manner you suggest. And given their very short effective range, how does this fix the problem with launching drones in near conjunction with ESG fields?
And, no, we are not going to redesign Klingon fighters in Lyran service to carrying type-IV phaser drones (not that a phaser-2 is that much more effective than a phaser-3 to be worth the extra time to load it on the fighter).
(HUMOR ALERT)
Are you sure you are not a Kzinti or Hydran agent?
(END HUMOR ALERT)
Well, I didn't suggest swordfish drones but I did mention increasing the availablity of MW drones. This would increase their anti-fighter/drone ability while NOT removing their STRIKE ability. (Just load the apropriate drone.)
Okay, I'm going to ask a really basic question here. Before a fighter can be outfitted or designed, you have to decide what you want it to do. Is it for interceptor duty, strike duty, CAP duty, or what? In short, what kind of roll should Lyran fighters fill? Are they used to attack capital ships, defend their carriers and fleets from other fighters, or as a way to shoot up incoming drones? I know this is probably a sort of stupid point, but wouldn't you need to know this before you can decide what kind of weapons to put on their fighters?
The way I see it, you've basically got four options:
1: Disruptors as heavy fighter weapons, similar to the Hydran's Stinger/Fusion template.
2: Carry drones.
3: Carry phaser pods.
4: Something totally different.
Option one requires lots of power, and isn't that usefull by itself. Option two, while easy enough to implement, doesn't always mix well with ESG ops. Plus, Lyrans aren't a drone using race. Option three has some promise, if the right balance can be struck. Option four is still up in the air...nothing's yet been put forward that can work.
So, before one of these choices can be made, what would the primary purpose of Lyran fighters be? Note that I say primary...they may do a little of everything, but they probably have a driving need that their fighter design concept is meant to fill.
Michael John Campbell:
I think I have noted repeatedly that reducing Klingon fighters (whether in Lyran service or not) to mere parity is the same as making them useless. The thing that makes the viable against the Hydrans is their drones. They cannot survive close in because typically there are only going to be about a dozen Klingon or Lyran fighters in a given battle. CVAs are pretty rare, and times when two carrier groups are present are also pretty rare. So your dozen fighters are trying to stave off attacks from (lets assume three Hunters, three Lancers, Three Mongols, and a Lord Admiral) upwards of 36 Hydran fighters. If the year is Y175, you have dozen Z-Vs. They cost you about 98 BPV (assuming one was an EW fighter), plus about another 11 BPV to upgrade all their drones to medium speed (plus, about another 4 points to upgrade the reload drones on the escorts). This assumes nothing fancy in the warheads. In total (not counting the carrier and its escorts) you paid 113 BPV for the fighter squadron, about the same as the Hydrans paid for 11 Stinger-2s (actually, three BPV points more). Now, go mix it up with the Hydrans. Care to guess who will win in a fight between your 12 Z-Vs and his 11 Stingers? I will tell you now that I will bet on the Stingers. Between chaff and phaser-G fire they are going to deal with your drones. And that is the best you can hope for because your Z-Vs cannot use MW drones, and they cannot out run the Hydrans. But if you time the drones right, you can pull some of his firepower, lessening the shock effect of those stingers on your ships. And that is your job.
Change the year to Y183. Your dozen Z-Vs are now a dozen Z-YCs. They cost you 146 BPV (assuming an EWF). Drones cost 67 BPV for a total of 213 BPV, and that is not counting any special warheads. And you have a 22 rails that might carry multi-warhead or starfish drones. You are balanced by a Hydran force of roughly 21 Stingers in BPV. Through in one or two more (total 22 or 23) to account for any tricks you play with your drone warheads. Here you have a real battle. Sure, the Hydrans have numbers, but you can play a lot of tricks with your drones now, and it is not quite as one sided as it might appear. The Hydrans may get some of their fighters through to hit the ships, but they are going to expend a lot of ordance to do it, and that will make it easier for the ships to fend off the strike.
Parity is not what the Lyrans want, or need, with the Hydrans. Given the relatively small number of fighters, they need superiority, and now they have to wait until after Y180 to get it. Prior to that point, they are outmatched, but can at least take some of the heat off of the Lyran ships if they are handled right.
SPP:
I don't have a problem with ESG intereactions. I would fly them like you do.
I would like a unique dohickey for flavor, which I can't have, and good explanations why have been offered. So, I'm essentially disinterested in whatever other change to fighters is made. I just thought I would pitch-out an idea to sate others.
Also, I can't for the life of me figure out why Lyrans built carriers. I would simply have embraced the escort without the carrier, and had at the Hydrans and Kzins with that. A nice FFE or police-sized ship with ESGs and P-1s, no disruptors.
How about taking away the escort-only-with-carrier rule for the Lyrans? I realize this will create some problems. This would, however, be consistent with PF development.
"The Lyrans had problems supplying the few carriers they deployed, but they found the escorts originally developed for carriers to be useful in the role the fighters had been intended to fulfill. The Lyrans deployed more escorts as a percentage of fleet elements than any other race to combat the drone and fighter swarms they faced in combat. However, as escorts got shredded more quickly than they could be produced the economic realities of needing a weapon system to fill that role at a cheaper cost became apparent."
Hence, the PF. I don't know - perhaps this supplement to the existing history surrounding the development of PFs is weak, but escorts are what the Lyrans need, not fighters.
MJC: Problems is, let's say the cheapo Lyran fighter is 5 BPV, half of a Stinger. So a squadron saves the Lyrans 60 points as compared to the Hydrans. Assumign a full one carrier force with 3 squadrons, that's 180. So ya get a CA and change over the Hydrans...who'll likely still have more fighters that you, and will regard any kind of 5 BPV fighter as a speed bump on their way.
Mike Raper:
With drones, you have both. Why would you limit it to one? Racial purity I guess (I am not being sarcastic, it is just that it is the only thing I can think of that makes sense).
I am (and this is NOT directed at Mike) having a hard time grasping the desire to impose rigid lock step thought processes on the Lyrans (and by extension all races). If a solution shows up that is viable, I will probably back it as much as anyone. But I litterally cannot conceive of why I would want to do something other than an obvious solution. I realize it has happened in the real world (the Union, for example, had the ability to equip its troops with repeaters, but delayed in doing so because of a hidebound administrator who was supported in his view that repeating weapons would just encourage the troops to waste ammunition . . . which was true, but the volume of fire is very effective). Drones are the best solution to the problem I have seen so far.
Would you expect me to refuse to use Submarine Warfare against Japan just because the Germans were using it against Great Britain?
I do not know what, but the use of drones seems to have been most readily available solution that best met all the needs of the Lyrans at the time, and I have so far seen nothing that is better than a drone-armed fighter that is also reasonable and consistent with Lyran background. I have seen a lot of things that would effectively put the Lyrans out of the fighter business except for "historical scenarios" where they are forced to use an otherwise useless fighter that the players would never select on their own.
Michael John Campbell:
Two phaser-2s on a size one fighter? If we agree to that, then we would obviously have to agree to the Hydran (and Federation) two Phaser-G Stinger. Phaser-2s are very restricted on fighters. Large fighters have one in addition to other weapons. Size one fighters have one in some cases, but pay a heavy price (small size, slow speed, or huge size and EXTREMELY slow speed, i.e., the Z-1). Fighters that slow even if armed with phaser-2s would be tactically worthless in a fluid battle, but of some possible value in defending a planet or other fixed installation. And we have them. They are called "BOMBERS".
I still sort of like my "Twin Mustang" proposal, if only as a curiosity or stopgap measure. Basically, you build a heavy fighter out of two modified Z-P fighters (they share a common wing, like the U.S. P-82 Twin Mustang did).
ZT-P: Speed 10, 2xP2-FA, 2xP3-FA, 1xI (carried under the "common" wing), 2xVI (under the "outboard" wings, as on the standard Z-P), Damage 19, BPV 15, YIS 173, DFR 0, Chaff 2.
Benefits: No extra energy drain from the carrier. Carries a total phaser capacity that's a bit better than a gatling (and half of which has better range). Still has a couple of dogfight drones for anti-fighter/drone work, and picks up a nominal anti-shipping drone capability over that of a standard Z-P. Beefy enough to survive an assault run (or all but the strongest ESG).
Problems: Still darned light in the drone department, and drones (for both defense and offense) are one of the few reasons for Lyrans to field fighters. Heavy fighter, which means only six on a CV (and the Lyrans don't have a CVA...though it would be kind of interesting to have an "early SCS" with 12 Z-V and 6 ZT-P in, say, Y175). Would require a Lyran assembly line; they just aren't going to buy that many Z-Ps from the Klingons, and the thing would be better built as a unit for the production models than converted from a pair of fighters each time. Slow (like all assault fighters). In short, its far from a perfect solution...which might be what drove the Lyrans to develop the Interceptor and PF.
SPP,
I don't really mean to limit it to one; it's just that one may outweigh the others. I can see the Lyrans, for example, using fighters as a way to knock out enemy drones, since their primary enemy is the Kzinti; and we all know what kind of drone throw weight they can have. And, you are right, as far as I can tell...drones are the best way to go. It's just that ESG's and drones don't mix very well, so it would seem hard to integrate the two.
You could potentially resolve this whole argument, if desired, by not necessarily creating anything new, but simply making an R section "note" that the Lyrans traditionally used the Z-D and Z-P fighters more frequently than the Klingons (perhaps the Lyrans didn't actually buy the already-produced fighters, but purchased the blueprints and produced them themselves under contract with the Klingons), and had a preference for phaser pods over type-I drones, and RALADs over type-VI drones.
If you HAD to create something new, you could choose to resolve the fighter speed issue by saying the Lyrans, in their experiments with hot warp, found a way to improve the speed of the Z-D/P fighters to 15 (13?), but than no one else could use because [insert handwavium here].
You could also say that the Disruptor on the fighter can be charged from extra charges carried on the type-I drone rails. Call it a "charge pod" or whatever, and use the same handwavium to prevent the Kzintis and Klingons from using it. Or maybe you DO let them use it...
Anyway, with the R section note alone, players have the official "option" of using no-drone Lyran fighters, and those who want to continue to use drones, can. Players can do it now, they just have to break the rules a little to do it...
Honestly, I've never been crazy about the Lyrans using fighters OR drones at all (it is the single issue that can drive the inventor of the Lyrans nuts, and make him start jammering to himself...
), but, given how far the game has come, is this really that big of an issue anymore?
Alright, let's try this.
New Weapon.
The Super Anti-Drone.
The super anti-drone was a one space anti-drone that could fit on a type I drone rail or in a G-rack. If launched from a G-rack, the rack can only launch one Super-ADD per turn.
It has to hit capabilities as follows.
| Range | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5-6 | 7-10 |
| To Hit | Na | 1 | 1-2 | 1-3 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 1-2 |
It inflicts damage exactly as an ADD against fighters & shuttles and automatically destroys drones when it strikes.
The Lyrans developed the Super-ADD because they needed to protect their fighters from the long range reach of Stinger-IIs and from Kzinti drone swarms.
Other races could have developed the Super-ADD but never did because their Admiralties and purchasing departments felt that the replacing of an entire 1.0 spaces of drone in their racks with a weapon that could not damage ships or PFs was a foolish idea, espeacially since the super-ADD is less effective than a regular ADD round at close ranges ( R1 through 3).
A couple of comments on the Lyran fighter discussion.
1) ADD (and even the "super-ADD") seems to be a bad idea. See (G23.82) that says they cannot fire through ESGs. They have all the problems of drones and none of the advantages.
2) I think the problem of drone/ESG (and fighter/ESG) interactions are being overblown. If a fighter squadron does an ill-timed drone launch, the ship(s) can immediately drop their ESGs to avoid the interactions. I think many players forget the exact sequence of play. ESG deactivation (another forgotten option) comes after drone launch (and before the ESGs can possibly destroy the drones). In much the same way (although it takes a bit more planning), the carrier can drop ESGs to avoid hitting the fighters. While I have limited experience with Lyran fighters, I didn't find them any harder to use with ESG than the standard fleet ESG problems.
3) My recollection is that the Lyrans have their own fighter production lines (and presumably drone production lines). These are presumably under an agreement with the Klingons. But in the event of a "disagreement" with the Klingons, there is nothing preventing the Lyrans from continuing their own production.
4) Based on sheer numbers, I suspect the primary role of Lyran fighters is to defend planets and bases (I'd guess they outnumber the carrier fighters by a factor of 5 to 1). Planets can't have ESG, so there is no problem there. In this role, the fighters need anti-ship firepower (the most likely opponent is going to be a raider, probably an Orion). If they have a system with defensive options, that's a bonus for carrier operations.
5) Lyran carriers already have the generous D% special drone allocation (with the odd exception of the DWV). Interestingly, this makes them the only race that can match Kzinti drone availability...
For those looking for P-2 fighters. I'd suggest looking at my heavy phaser pod (a single shot, two rail ph-2). It would need to be charged by the carrier, but a ph-2 only costs 1 point of power (compared to the 2 points for a disruptor).
As I had originally designed it, the Z-Y (and Z-H) would be the only fighters able to use it, but I suppose a different carriage definition could make the earlier fighters able to use it (allow one of the rails to be one of the pod rails instead of just the drone rails).
By giving the Lyrans an exception to (J11.331), the Z-Y could even carry 2, giving them the ability to have 2xph-2 (at the cost of most of their drones).
While a ph-2 doesn't do as much damage as a disruptor beyond range 3, it does have the advantage of being able to fire out to range 15. And it takes less power to fire. And 2 ph-2 are about equal to one disruptor at longer ranges (and much better at range 3 and less).
Finally, by using pods, the fighter can intially launch with the phasers (that may have started charged depending on the weapon status). If the carrier finds itself short on power (due to other needs), the pods can always be dumped and drones loaded (reducing the power drain of the fighter squadron).
Note that this would obviously be available to all other races. But Hydrans and Tholians don't have the drone rails to use them. Klingons, Kzinti and Feds would only use them is special situations (they have the drone throw weight to generally make the drone fighters a better way to go). Romulans, Gorn and ISC might use them occasionally, but their fighters can use the options.
Still sounds like the Lyran thing is more of a challange than a problem. Can some one tell me where the problem is?
Super anti-drone: well, gotta admit it's novel.
Or you could develop a weapon to counter hydran fussions.
New Weapon.
The Disruption generator.
The Lyrans wanted to develop a weapon that would allow their fighters to strike at longer ranges but without the absobitant power requirements of the Disruptor.
By combining some of the research of the ESG with the research of the disruptor, they managed to develop a weapon that unlike a disruptor which sends a super-luminal package of micro-waves at the target, would instead send a super-luminal package of sub-quanta particals.
The weapon was restricted in it's ability to fire and may only fire through the mauler firing arc ( It hardly gets used so I thought I'ld apply it. )
The Weapon can be charged in three modes but will fire once in that mode before requiring to be recharged. The modes are; Light, Standard and Heavy.
Light requires 0.5 points of power to charge, Standard requires 1 point of power to charge and Heavy requires 2 points of power to charge. The power may come from any source.
The weapon shall use the following "to hit" table and inflict damage to the target based on the base damage listed in the table and the type of target attacked.
Size class 6 targets or smaller shall take double the base damage.
Size class 5 shall take the base damage.
Size class 4 or larger targets shall take half the base damage.
| Range | 0-1 | 2 | 3-4 | 5-8 | 9-10 |
| To Hit | 1-5 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 1 |
| Light Base Damage | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Standard Base Damage | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Heavy Base Damage | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 0 |
Since the original core technolgy was based on the ESG, this Lyran indiginous fighter was never copied by other races.
David Kass:
A: Effective immediately you are to assume command of the CWE escorting my Carrier. Hail the Empire. (Since we seem in agreement about Lyran Carrier/Drone operations).
B: If the Lyrans had an exception to (J11.331), it would by definition apply to the Klingons. You are stuck with the Fed and Emp situation that Klingon fighters can transfer to Lyran carriers and vice versa. Since existing non-drone pod rails can operate phaser-3 pods, by definition the paired pod rails would be able to operate the heavy phaser pod if it existed. And the Tholians WOULD find some use for it on fighters fighting behind the second layer of a "wedding cake/three ring circus" while shooting at targets stuck in the outer web layer. And I would (personally, as a Lyran Carrier Group Commander, still consider the system fatally flawed versus drones because it lacks the ability to knock out Kzinti drones at long range (a counter drone will kill an enemy drone if you properly calculate the interception trajectory, a Phaser-2 will not kill a type-IV, and will not kill a type-I outside three hexes range and has only a 50% chance of doing so), effectively halves the overall ability to counter drones (since it is taking up two drone rails). It has only one advantage, and that is that it cannot be countered by Hydran chaff packs.
Transporter drones.
This would be a one-space version of a type-VI drone with a specialized onboard transporter. When it reaches an ESG, uses its onboard transporter to move itself to the other side. In all other respects it conforms to the type-VI rules.
(For whatever technical reasons, the transporter can only be used in conjunction with warp-seeking guidance systems, increases the space taken by a drone by a half-space, and can only affect 1-space or smaller drones. This prevents the technology from being adapted to non-type-VI drones.)
It's a useful Lyran fighter armament against both Hydran fighters and Kzinti drones and it solves the problem of ESG interaction. It's marginal for the Kzintis to bother copying it, since it would do little damage to a real warship; the only real use for them would be to hit fighters hiding behind a ship's ESG.
Steven: This still has the problem of copying - why wouldn't the Kzintis and Feds get this, pursuant to SPP's and SVC's posts above?
Steven E. Ehrbar:
First, self-displacement (in essence, self-transportation) is Andromedan technology. Not replicable by Galactics.
Second, transporter launch or displacement launch results in disrupted fire control. Under (G18.425) seeking weapons in these conditions go inert (plasmas go ballistic and just keep moving in a straight line) unless they were displaced by the specific unit they were targeted on (G18.425). There is no exception for type-VI drones.
Third, (FD5.14) specifically states that the seeker of a type-VI can only be used on the half space type-VI drone. If it was possible to mount it on a type-I sized frame, then it would already have been so mounted. There is some limitation which prevents it from being used on any larger drone.
Disruptor pods.
This pod takes two adjacent rails. Requires the carrier to arm, but once armed it holds for free. Max range is 10.
Lyrans normally carry two sets for each fighter. This would solve the "Shooting through an ESG" question, give the Lyrans a system to enguage Hydrans fighters at R4, and still give them flexability on the Kzinti boarder. With a proper BVP cost it would give the Lyrans a useful punch where they need it without forcing them to give up drones entirely.
Yes, the Tholians would also love these, but since web does affect disruptors its not quite as good as phasers would be. Kzinti and Klingons could take these but would tend to stick to drones as they use them heavily anyway.
Mark Kuyper:
And why would the Lyrans use these? You are back to the phaser-pod solution in effect. You can inflict a whopping three points of damage at ten hexes range versue the 12 points of a type-I drone or eight points (if fired at a fighter) of a type-VI drone. The fighter is still SLOW compared to a ship, so it cannot operate within the ship's ESG field without slowing the ship down, meaning it is firing this weapon at long range (from behind the ships). The weapon requires the expenditure of ECCM (two additional points beyond the two built-in points) to be fired at drones (which it cannot kill outside of range four which otherwise have four points of ECM when fired at by a disruptor. And again, you only get (assuming a Z-YC) three shots, whereas if you had drones you would have (assuming no MW drones) six weapons.
Why in the Emperor's name would I use these things in my carrier group? At least prior to Y180 when I will have packed Z-YBs able to maneuver inside my ESG fields without slowing my carrier or my escorts.
SPP.
You would use them against Hydrans. they wouldn't be used on the Kzinti boarder much (if at all) but would be useful for crippling stingers before they get into gatling range. The idea is to reduce the Hydrans ability to trade fighters for ships.
NOTE: I've not tested this idea. I'm stating the concept. If it means making them single rail weapons to turn this into a usable concept I'm fine with that. Likewise if having them single rail pods makes this too good of an option I'm fine with dropping it.