Topic: Question about 4.0 Fighters...

[Magnum357]

I'm working on a personal mode of mine which is very similar to 4.0 and SFB.  Right now, my fighters in my mod have weapons loadouts similar to SFB and there speeds vary from 6 to 15 (depending on generation).  I've notice that 4.0 fighter Squadron numbers have usually less fighters then what SFB has for there Fighter Squadrons.  For example, an SFB Carrier will usually have a standard number of Fighters per squadron at about 12, while 4.0 Fighter Squadrons will usually have about 2/3 of that number (in this case, about 8 ). 

I was wonder if the reason why the numbers in 4.0 are 2/3 of that in SFB is because you are limited to only 2/3 numbers for Interceptors/PF's aswell.  OP will only allow 4 PF's Maximum per PFT, while SFB has usually 6 PF's per PFT.  Is this part of the reason why Fighters are reduced in numbers in 4.0?  I have Fighters at the same levels at SFB squadrons and wondering if reducing them by 2/3 (much like Interceptors/PF's are reduced to 2/2) as a better way to get balace out of your mode.

[762_XC]

The 2/3 was Paramount's decision. They wanted the game less fightery.

[Magnum357]

Really?  Ok, I can understand that with the initial release of EAW and OP, but they could have bumped the number of fighters in 4.0 shiplist.  Any reason why Firesoul didn't do this? 

Could it also be that a little less fighters help in multiplayer games (ie. less lag)?

[762_XC]

Ask Firesoul. I would imagine the PF limitation is a big part of it.

SFC fighter mechanics are also vastly different from those of SFB, so it's something difficult to balance.

[RogueJedi]

Fighters are the ultimate cheese. Fun cheese, but cheese none the less. Consider an I-CVAZ with 16 Caveat III fighters. Each fighter has 3 PhG's and 1 Ph2, can maintain a constant speed 26, even while charging, and has a built in 1-shift. That's 96 PhGs. 96!! If you can manage to get those fighters to hold fire until inside range 5 (without taking enough damage to kill the group) there's a major hurtin' in store for your enemy.


2/3rds is still too much. 


But, if you are cutting down their speed and maybe their weapons a bit, then maybe they will be more balanced and full complements of 24 will be feasible.

[762_XC]

Case in point, there's no such thing as a Caveat III in SFB.

[Bonk]

Really?  Ok, I can understand that with the initial release of EAW and OP, but they could have bumped the number of fighters in 4.0 shiplist.  Any reason why Firesoul didn't do this? 

Could it also be that a little less fighters help in multiplayer games (ie. less lag)?

"Let's add what's missing from SFB. .. but let's do it as if we were Taldren so that we can preserve the good feel of the game. Its style must match Taldren's, as if it was an extension and continuation of their work."

From: http://klingon.stasis.ca/OP_plusrefit/introduction.html




SFB-OP does not place this restriction on itself however...

[RogueJedi]

Case in point, there's no such thing as a Caveat III in SFB.

I wouldn't know about SFB unless I read about it here, as I don't play that game. So, I don't make my comments based on what's in SFB or not, but on my experience (however rusty) with this game.
IMO, toning down fighters would be a good thing.

[762_XC]

That's cuz you play ISC. 

[Magnum357]

I must admit, ISC Fighters in 4.0 are deadly SOB's.  Well, you guys have convinced me, I have decided to go against SFB Doctrine here and reduce the Fighters Squadrons to 2/3 of what they are now much like 4.0 ship list. 

Since Interceptors/PF's can't have more then 4 per Flotila, it seems only fair that Fighters should be restricted to 2/3 as many compared to there SFB Counterparts.

[Riskyllama]

i believe also, that while 6 fighters can be put into a squad, that only the first 4 fire weapons at any one time, but I could be wrong about that...