Jessica, I think you have missed the big F-18 weakness compared to the Z-Y, drone launch rates.

(J4.24) DRONE FIRING RATES: A fighter can always launch one drone per turn (assuming it has at least one drone), but cannot launch two drones on consecutive turns within 1/4 turn (eight impulses) of each other.

(J4.241) Unless otherwise stated in the rules, any fighter can launch two drones per turn (or within 1/4 turn) if:

A-both are launched at the same target; and

B-one (or both) of them is a dogfight (type-VI) drone.

Some exemptions to the A and B restrictions are listed in (J4.242) below. No fighter can exceed the per-turn rate within a 1/4-turn period (of two consecutive turns).

(J4.242) Exceptions include the F-14 (which can ignore restriction B; type-IIIs also have their own special rules), the F-15 and TAAS (which can violate A if the drones are not launched on he same impulse, and which can violate B in any case), the Z-Y (which can violate both), heavy fighters (J10.4), bombers (J14.233) and others noted in the rulebook. The A-10 is covered under (J10.43). Fighters which replace light rails with standard rails actually have a lower launch rate. Special rails do not give a fighter the F-14 launch rate.

Note that an F-18C with Type-IIIs could still launch both in one turn but an F-18C that had expended its Type-IIIs (or never had them at all) and only had Type-Is, could only launch one drone per turn. A similarly situated Z-YC with only Type-Is on board could launch two per turn.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 - 05:21 pm: Edit

Eh, you only get one F14, sorry.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 - 09:16 pm: Edit

The F-18 has 2 control channels (2xI).
The F-15 has 4 control channels (4xI).
The F-14 has 2 control channels (2xI).

The total number of drones on the board controlled by a squadron of single-seat non-EW non-megafighters would be 24 for the F-14 and F-18s and 48 for the F-15s. As a megafighter or two-seat fighter can control 12 drones that would change the value to 144 drones.

Per (J4.25) DRONE CONTROL: Any fighter can control a number of drones equal to the number of non-DFDs (non-dogfight drones, i.e., drones other than type-VI) in its nominal load exclusive of variants, if any (or two drones, whichever is greater). Note that type-VI drones must be guided until they achieve their own lock on (FD5.12). EXAMPLE: An F-15 nominally carries four type-I and four type-VI drones, so it can control four drones, even if some type-I are replaced by type-VI and even if it is an F-15C (R1.F8) with six type-I drones.

Unit	Control Channels
Federation F-15 (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-15C (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-15D (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-15p (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-15Cp (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-15Dp (R2.F10)	4
Federation F-111 (R2.F11)	4
Federation F-111p (R2.F11)	4
Federation A-6D (R2.F12)	4
Federation A-6 (R2.F12)	4
Federation A-6F (R2.F12)	4
Federation FB-111p (R2.F16)	4
Federation FB-111 (R2.F16)	4
Federation F-101A (R2.FA14)	4
Federation F-101B (R2.FA14)	4
Federation F-101C (R2.FA14)	4
Klingon Z-H (R3.F7)	4
Lyran Z-H (R3.F7-R11)	6
LDR Z-H (R3.F7-R14)	6
Seltorian Z-H (R3.F7-R15)	6
Klingon Z-HB (R3.F8)	4
Klingon Z-K (R3.FA26)	4
Lyran Z-K (R3.FA26-R11)	6
Klingon Z-KB (R3.FA27)	4
Orion G-F (R4.F4-R8)	4
Romulan Trib-F (R4.F8)	4
Romulan Glad-D (R4.F9)	4
Romulan Glad-DM (R4.F9)	4
Romulan Trib-D (R4.F15)	6
Romulan Trib-K (R4.F16)	8
WYN TADS (R5.F6-R12)	4
WYN TADSC (R5.F6-R12)	4
Kzinti LKS (R5.FA1)	4
WYN LKS (R5.FA1-R12)	4
Kzinti LKF (R5.FA2)	6
WYN LKF (R5.FA2-R12)	6
Gorn G-40 (R6.F12)	6
Gorn G-42 (R6.F13)	8
Gorn G-101A (R6.F14A)	4
Gorn G-101B (R6.F14B)	4
Gorn G-101C (R6.F14C)	4
Orion AF (R13.F4-R8)	4
ISC FDF (R13.F11)	4
Frax Demon-4 (R51.F4)	4
Frax Demon-4C (R51.F4)	4
Frax Demon-H (R51.F5)	6
Frax Demon-HF (R51.F10)	6
Frax Demon-HI (R51.F11)	6
Frax Demon-HIF (R51.F12)	6
Qari MiG-29 (R52.F3)	4
Peladine P-H (JR1.F4)	4
Peladine P-HF (JR1.F4A)	4
Peladine P-HD (JR1.F4B)	4
Peladine P-HFD (JR1.F4C)	4
Peladine Mi-P (JR1.F8C)	4

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 - 09:22 pm: Edit

"Eh, you only get one F14, sorry."

Then you only get half a Z-H. That's how it goes with heavy fighters; half as many in a squadron, and half as many in the bay. Sorry.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Nope, you said an F14 could wipe the floor with anything coming out of a shuttle bay. You don't get to change the goal posts to need two.

:p

By Jamey Johnston (Totino) on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 - 11:26 pm: Edit

And a Z-H can't come out of a shuttle bay, it could only come out of 2.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 08:36 am: Edit

OK, if you want to be that way, Richard, hold still while I chuck this F-111 at you....

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 11:36 am: Edit

Ken Kazinski:

---

Quote:

As a megafighter or two-seat fighter can control 12 drones that would change the value to 144 drones.

---

---

Quote:

In the case of fighters armed only with drones and phasers (or only with drones), add rails for two standard type-I drones, but this
does not increase the rate at which the fighter can launch seeking weapons or the number of seeking weapons it can control.

---

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 11:45 am: Edit

A shuttle bay is the whole contiguous group of boxes, not (necessarily) a single box. Also note that the contention was about an F14 or F15. I do not and did not contend that a ZH could or could not take an F111.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 01:03 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

3 EW fighters, 198 is consistent with the 33 non-EW fighters each launching 6 drones and the EW fighter launching none.

---

---

Quote:

Away from books, does the F-18 based EW fighter have rails?

---

---

Quote:

Which can all be blown up, theoretically, by a single well-placed T-bomb.

---

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 01:36 pm: Edit

I somehow thought there was a rule that Remote Control fighters had no seeking weapon control ability.

But maybe that's just my delusion.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 21, 2022 - 03:33 pm: Edit

Daniel,

I don't recall any such rule and a brief check of my rule book didn't find it either. Possibly I just didn't check carefully enough... but I suspect you may be thinking of the requirement in (J15.221) that the carrier must control three of its fighters with each seeking weapon control channel. So a Fed CVS launches its F-18 squadron on remote control. A Fed CVS can normally control 12 drones (assuming it has not taken sensor damage) but four of those channels would be required to control the F-18 squadron, laving it with a control capability of 8 drones. But unless I am mistaken, the F-18 squadron itself also retains its drone control capability (34 drones unlss augmented with Seeking Weapon Control Pods). Note that (J15.226) states

---

Quote:

The fighter’s own fire control functions normally for all purposes.

---

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, April 22, 2022 - 08:48 am: Edit

Vs a F111, the ZH would have to hit with both Disruptors at range to have a chance.

Then turn off, dump your chaff to clean out half the darn drones, wait 8+ impulses for a turn break, turn back in, fire the disruptors...

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Friday, April 22, 2022 - 01:28 pm: Edit

Deleted

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Friday, April 22, 2022 - 01:36 pm: Edit

Alan,

Thanks for the reference to (J16.241) I have been using 12 for megafighters, which is incorrect.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, May 09, 2022 - 10:05 am: Edit

Well, this topic seems to be dying down. But before I forget (again), I did want to make a last post about some of the reasons I prefer PFs and would (personally) choose Fed PFs in preference to Third Way + F-111s.

1. Electronic Warfare - Fighters are limited to 6 ECM plus 6 ECM. This doesn't count "natural ECM" but it does include fighter pods, the EW fighter, or points lent by the carrier. PFs are limited to 12 points of EW. But it could bt 6 + 6 (like fighters), 12 ECM + 0 ECCM, 0 ECM + 12 ECCM, or any other combination that adds to 12. This gives a PF flotilla an enormous advantage in flexibility compared to a fighter squadron. If the tactical situation is such that hitting the enemy is of paramount importance, a PF flotilla can go to 12 ECCM, whereas the fighters max out at 6. An A-20 squadron will be able to launch more photon torpedoes in a single volley than a Thunderbolt flotilla can. But often those A-20s will be shooting against a ECM penalty of +1 or even +2 while the Thunderbolts are shooting at standard odds. Conversely, if the situation dictates minimizing the damage your own forces take, the Thunderbolts can have 12 ECM (and can also reinforce the shields). This superior EW flexibility is in my opinion a BIG PF advantage compared to fighters and one that doesn't always get as much emphasis as it deserves.

2. Independent Strikes - This is dependent on the campaign rules. In some campaigns, long range independent strikes (the carrier / tender not present in the battle) by attrition units may be important. In other campaigns, with different rules, they may never occur. But we do know that such strikes did occur in SFU history, both by fighters and PFs. Furthermore, the "free replacement" of fighters was one of the points cited in favor of fighters, even though this is an F&E rule and may or may not be reflected in an SFB campaign. So I think it is entirely fair to likewise cite the great superiority of PFs for long range strikes. If the long range strike leads to a battle that drags on for multiple turns, the fighters will eventually run out of drones and photons, forcing them to rely on phasers only (or else to disengage without having killed their target). And since fighters can never have more than 6 ECCM, the enemy can often neutralize even gatling phasers except at very close range. But Thunderbolts with phaser-1s and photon torpedoes (and 12 ECCM) can do substantial damage even after they have exhausted their drones. And the Thunderbolt shields (plus the ability to go to 12 ECM if the situation warrants) make the PFs far more survivable than heavy fighters (or twice as many standard-size fighters). In any campaign in which long range independent strikes are a viable tactic, PFs have a big advantage.

3. Augmenting "Standard" Warships - In most cases, there is no way for a "standard" Fed to augment its strength by adding fighters. But any Fed warship could put mech-links on its tractors and carry a casual PF (or several). These casual PFs are inferior to a formal flotilla, but they do provide an easy and effective way for the Fed to "plus-up" his forces even if specialized carriers/tenders are not available. This can be very useful in a strategic campaign when something unexpected occurs.

By Ginger McMurray (Gingermcmurray) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 04:40 pm: Edit

What is the Fed answer to PFs? Are their fighters really that good? I'm in a campaign against Hydrans and well be in Y180 in a few turns. I'm trying to plan ahead. I don't have a lot of experience with fighters outside of flying Hydrans myself.

So far my best thought for facing their fighters is to load up on starfish drones on all of my special rails. That's not very useful once Howler enter the arena. Drones aren't going to be much use at all then. Is it time to switch to A-20s and their photons?

Unless the fed late fighters really are that good and I'm just not seeing it. Which is highly likely. Like I said, not experienced. :D

By Burt Quaid (Burt) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 05:25 pm: Edit

Well an A-20F is half as much as a Gunboat. You could match each of their 6 with 12 of yours.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 06:38 pm: Edit

The answer is either A-20Fs or F-111s. In the in-game history, it was mostly the F-111.

So, yeah. You get to try and match his six Harriers with your six F-111s. That's the plan, anyway.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 07:24 pm: Edit

Drones vs Harriers - the Hydrans have a gatling and 3 ph-2s so seven drones to have a chance or 40+ for a flotilla *and one still has to watch which targets have which drones on them) ... now A20s have photons but have to get close to effectively use them (almost forgot that Harriers also have two fusion beams to aid in drone defense or anti-fighter offense) ... still some combination of the two weapons can give you a chance to deal damage, just not as good as you'd like ...

By Ginger McMurray (Gingermcmurray) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 08:31 pm: Edit

Bowlers have 3 gatlings and no fusions.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Monday, October 24, 2022 - 11:44 pm: Edit

F-111s on a strict unit-to-unit comparison.

Operationally, via the "Third Way" in which the Federation developed the carrier battle group, allowing them to field two carrier groups together and bring a fourth squadron of fighters into a battle.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Tuesday, October 25, 2022 - 09:25 am: Edit

Basically you want to use MW drones vs the PFs. IIRC they do more damage than vs a regular starship and will present too many targets to gatling them all.

vs 6 Hydran PFs you probably can bring 6A20 and 12 F14. Which whould do the deal

By Ginger McMurray (Gingermcmurray) on Tuesday, October 25, 2022 - 10:07 am: Edit

What's the third way?

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, October 25, 2022 - 10:13 am: Edit

On a side note: one of the alternate timelines offered in SFB Module R4J is for the "Reflection Universe" - in which the UFP's more militaristic counterpart, the Federal Imperium, is permitted to take INTs and PFs (but not F-111s).

So, if your opponent wanted to consider this, you could jump universes and then match their gunboats with some Thunderbolts of your own...