Fighters and Drones

[RTGPete]

I'm a little confused. 

 

So to be absolutely clear in my understanding of how Fighters & Drones work in the Warp Point assault scenario, if I deploy all of my Carriers, Drone and CnC ships in the "back" - Deployment Location 12 - and have a few heavily armored "junkers" (i.e. 10kTon ships that are nothing but armor, engines and  jump drives) in the "front" - Deployment Location 1 - all of my Fighters and Drones will go through the Warp Point with my first "junker"?

 

If so, why can't I "tow" Orbitals through Warp Points?  Effectively, I am "towing" Fighters & Drones through the Warp Point without the benefit of having Magnetic Grapples or Tractor Beams, or an upper limit of Fighter & Drone tonnage that can be brought through. 

 

Brain hurting 

Need Beer ... 

 

-SK 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fighters and Drones come through en masse. This can be good for the attacker - it can be very bad.

 

There are several fundamental differences between fighters/drones and starships. One major difference is that fighters cannot be armored like capital ships. They can realize advantage from specialized pulse engines, making them harder to shoot down, but this is not equivalent to the massive armoring that can be attached to a ship-of-the-line.

 

Another is that fighters/drones are not the same as conventional weapons. They can be destroyed piecemeal. A laser turret or torpedo launcher cannot be destroyed independently of its ship. This has huge effects when serious point defense umbrella coverage is brought into play. Very serious effects.

 

Assuming that orbitals cannot ever be towed through warp points is not entirely correct

 

Finally, there is an upper limit on the number of fighters and drones that can be brought through. You must build fighter bays or drone racks. This is just like building tractor beams to "tow" the fighters though, except that the bays have a horrible efficiency-per-ton when compared to tractor beams.

[Paradigm]

I think what is upsetting people is that all the fighters/drones go through on impulse 1 which was not what they expected based on the available documentation. An attacker can use this by feeding through hundreds of 1,000 ton swarm ships (probably built of otherwise outdated components) to keep his carriers and perhaps capital ships out of battle until the end. So the attacker's drones/fighters get to chew on the defender's ships while the attacker's real ships remain invulnerable until the end when they transit. Assuming the defender isn't mostly point defense, it seems that for most of the battle, nearly all of the defender's firepower is wasted while the attacker's fighters/drones fire at full effect as long as they live. By the time the carriers transit, it may be over or they may only have to clean up. In this situation, assaulting a "smaller" WP may actually be in the attackers favor. It'll keep his carriers out of the battle much longer giving his fighters more time to run their course.

 

Whenever there is a situation where most of one side's firepower is wasted, be it due to overkilling junk swarm ships or because the targets are on the other side of the WP, it puts that side at a huge disadvantage.

 

I understand the reasoning for not wanting combat to just come down to which fleet has more tonnage, but it can be taken too far. I hate to see totally lopsided battle results because one player knew how to take advantage of a very non intuitive quirk of the combat system. If it's a major battle, it could decide the fate of their empire. Until now, has there been any clues that all fighters/drones launched before transiting a WP and transited with the first ships through? I think most would logically assume that carriers individually launched fighters after transiting. Heck, I couldn't have faulted someone for guessing that carriers were extra vulnerable on the impulse they transited so there might even be a chance to catch the fighters "on the deck". People basing their strategy on these assumptions would be screwed. You can't say you want to reward people for coming up with clever tactics, then not provide a logical framework.

 

From a tactical level perspective, is there any down side whatsoever to an attacker with fighters/drones clogging the WP with swarm ships first? The cost of the swarm ships is minimal. Even if the defender shoots down all of the fighters/drones after a few rounds, that was going to happen anyway. Whatever damage the fighters/drones do before the rest of the fleet shows up is unanswered. It's not like the fighters/drones would be otherwise soaking up damage.

 

I don't know how much damage fighters/drones do compared to other weapons. This could be a relatively minor issue, or it could be a massive advantage to those that have invested research in fighters/drones. What annoys me is that this wasn't documented so the players couldn't decide how to handle it.

[hobknob]

For those that have not built a serious fighter force it is very expensive both in terms of resources and tech. That makes fighters cost about double the resources of any other weapon system so sending them in when you know and expect them to be destroyed is not what most fighter fanatics are likely to do.

 

 

Pete mentioned in a thread along time ago that with current technology it was not possible to tow orbitals through WP's. He never said it was impossible, just that it wasn't possible with the low level tech we all had. That was almost 18 months ago or more I think and now we have much more tech available to us with new stuff opening up all of the time.

 

There are a ton of things that seem to be fixed within the system that will not be once a particular tech is researched.

 

If you want to see what is coming down the road you really need to do a lot of explorations and find advanced neutrals. That is where you find out about the upcoming tech wheter it is Nutralite battle armor or a Tri-Cobolt Fusion Device. And things really strat to get exciting when you get hits on a 3rd Generation planetary gate. Who needs fleets if you can gate your stuff in instantaniously?

 

[Ixitixl]

Pete mentioned in a thread along time ago that with current technology it was not possible to tow orbitals through WP's.  He never said it was impossible, just that it wasn't possible with the low level tech we all had.  That was almost 18 months ago or more I think and now we have much more tech available to us with new stuff opening up all of the time. 

 

There are a ton of things that seem to be fixed within the system that will not be once a particular tech is researched. 

 

If you want to see what is coming down the road you really need to do a lot of explorations and find advanced neutrals.  That is where you find out about the upcoming tech wheter it is Nutralite battle armor or a Tri-Cobolt Fusion Device.  And things really strat to get exciting when you get hits on a 3rd Generation planetary gate.  Who needs fleets if you can gate your stuff in instantaniously?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Reminds me when no one had heard of Nuclear Transwarp Drives...

[RTGRuss]

I think what is upsetting people is that all the fighters/drones go through on impulse 1 which was not what they expected based on the available documentation. An attacker can use this by feeding through hundreds of 1,000 ton swarm ships (probably built of otherwise outdated components) to keep his carriers and perhaps capital ships out of battle until the end. So the attacker's drones/fighters get to chew on the defender's ships while the attacker's real ships remain invulnerable until the end when they transit. Assuming the defender isn't mostly point defense, it seems that for most of the battle, nearly all of the defender's firepower is wasted while the attacker's fighters/drones fire at full effect as long as they live. By the time the carriers transit, it may be over or they may only have to clean up. In this situation, assaulting a "smaller" WP may actually be in the attackers favor. It'll keep his carriers out of the battle much longer giving his fighters more time to run their course.

 

Whenever there is a situation where most of one side's firepower is wasted, be it due to overkilling junk swarm ships or because the targets are on the other side of the WP, it puts that side at a huge disadvantage.

 

The use of screening units can indeed keep carrier/drone units from being targeted early on, much as they can in a normal battle, while fighters/drones are out in the forefront. If your force depends solely on fighters/drones then your tactics will always be to keep your main force alive long enough for your fighters/drones to do their job. Fighters/drones have great firepower/tonnage ratios but depend on fire control like other weapons and in most cases the defending force will have screening units as well (and/or units that can withstand a lot of damage) so, like most combat scenarios it becomes a question of tonnage allocation. Balancing firepower vs fire control vs survivability.

 

WP Assaults give the tactical advantage to the defender (although he must design/build to use those advantages). The smaller the WP the easier it is to defend. Fighters/drones will come on all at once as they would in a normal battle so you would need point/umbrella defense to handle them in either situation. The smaller the WP is the easier the fire control situation for the defender - once he has sufficient fire control to blanket every unit that 'transits', the rest of his tonnage can go into weapons, defensive systems, armor, etc. If the screening units being used by the attacker are easily destroyed then offensive firepower can be reduced as well in favor of defensives systems and/or armor.

 

A smaller WP, granted, can be advantageous if your force is designed to take advantage of it while the defender is not but the smaller WP makes the job of the defender a lot easier if he designs/builds for it. Intelligence will always be the key. If the defender 'knows' that your strategy will be to inject a mass of fighters/drones followed by a single screening unit each pulse (composed of obsolete components) with your carrier/drone units (designed for maximum fighter/drone capacity - minimum survivability) bringing up the rear then he can craft a defense that will defeat that and probably do so in spectacular fashion. Technology can make your job easier or harder but the easier the defensive scenario the easier it is to take advantage of your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

 

From a tactical level perspective, is there any down side whatsoever to an attacker with fighters/drones clogging the WP with swarm ships first? The cost of the swarm ships is minimal. Even if the defender shoots down all of the fighters/drones after a few rounds, that was going to happen anyway. Whatever damage the fighters/drones do before the rest of the fleet shows up is unanswered. It's not like the fighters/drones would be otherwise soaking up damage.

 

If the force depends exclusively on fighters/drones for offensive firepower then it will probably depend on expendable screening units to give it more survivability in battle (whether in a WP assault or not). Every ton devoted to conventional weapons, armor, etc. reduces the number of fighters/drones that can be deployed and the fewer the numbers the easier to counter with umbrella defenses. Fire control will probably be an issue as well depending on what the defender does (the tonnage of the screening units will be a complicating factor in that) and since fire control reduces the number of fighters/drones you will face - it is a good idea to avoid giving the attacker the optimum scenario for his attack (i.e. a single large target and/or little to no point/umbrella defense ability). Extreme strategies, on either the offensive or defensive side, can lead to spectacular victories or defeats. Balanced strategies make spectacular victories and defeats less likely.

 

My .02

 

Russ

[Damiano]

I think what is upsetting people is that all the fighters/drones go through on impulse 1 which was not what they expected based on the available documentation.

 

This first part is the crux of the matter, most people have taken what was said and interpreted it the same way, this means that now that we understand how Fighters & Drones work we can defend against them, however those who have invested heavily into F&D will have a massive advantage while defences are reorganised using the new information, this was more by luck than judgement and were not actually that happy about it.

[EternusIV]

Maybe I'm missing something here.....

 

If the defender can't handle the fighters on pulse one.....would they be able to handle them on pulse 2 onward?

 

In other words - what advantage does the defender have by getting fragged by F&D on pulse 2 instead of pulse 1? The only advantage I see is that the F&D can eat up screen ships a little faster (ONE round faster in most instances)....and...the defender has a chance to kill those F&D on the very first go around! (CIDS are fleetwide) Yup: F&Ds DIE FASTER under this ruleset (IF you have CIDS)

 

Heck - if anything F&D users should be the ones complaining....I'd prefer to send the F&D in after I've eaten up a few defending screens first!

 

The way I view it -- if you think your neighbor is coming in with F&D, you better prepare. We've always known this. I don't think this late tidbit of news from RTG has padded the fortunes of F&D users in the least.

 

Again, coming through on impulse one is a minor advantage in my view. Heck, I can't even SEE pulses on combat reports as it is...so its hard to tell what jumps when and if it gets fragged before the bad boys show up anyway.

[Nyarlathotep]

Maybe I'm missing something here.....

 

If the defender can't handle the fighters on pulse one.....would they be able to handle them on pulse 2 onward?

 

In other words - what advantage does the defender have by getting fragged by F&D on pulse 2 instead of pulse 1?    The only advantage I see is that the F&D can eat up screen ships a little faster (ONE round faster in most instances)....and...the defender has a chance to kill those F&D on the very first go around!  (CIDS are fleetwide)  Yup:  F&Ds DIE FASTER under this ruleset (IF you have CIDS)

 

Heck - if anything F&D users should be the ones complaining....I'd prefer to send the F&D in after I've eaten up a few defending screens first! 

 

The way I view it -- if you think your neighbor is coming in with F&D, you better prepare.  We've always known this.  I don't think this late tidbit of news from RTG has padded the fortunes of F&D users in the least.

 

Again, coming through on impulse one is a minor advantage in my view.  Heck, I can't even SEE pulses on combat reports as it is...so its hard to tell what jumps when and if it gets fragged before the bad boys show up anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If I am reading Pete and Russ' reply correctly, the answer is yes, you are missing something.

 

F'r'instance, let us say that the fighters from your carriers launched and attacked someone defense platform. The platform may not have sufficient CIDS to defeat the fighter attack on the first "pass," but, unless you lose the platform on that first pass, *ALL* of your CIDS will be available to fight the second pass, while, chances are that not all of his fighters survived the first pass.

 

Assuming nothing of yours actually gets destroyed, the fighters and drones get whittled away. Throw in your own fighters and it can get downright messy for the attacking forces.

 

The above assumes *I* am reading Pete and Russ' commentary correctly.

[EternusIV]

Arent we saying the same thing?

 

It comes down to whether the Defender has decent CIDS, right?

 

I usually only speak in terms of math. If you can break ti down with math, I might see what I'm missing?

[Krelnett_of_Kraan]

it is a good idea to avoid giving the attacker the optimum scenario for his attack (i.e. a single large target and/or little to no point/umbrella defense ability)

What happened to "The combat system is built to encourage one large ship rather than many small ones"?

[WKE235]

it is a good idea to avoid giving the attacker the optimum scenario for his attack (i.e. a single large target and/or little to no point/umbrella defense ability)

What happened to "The combat system is built to encourage one large ship rather than many small ones"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You actually believed what was written in the documentation? Wow...

[Krelnett_of_Kraan]

it is a good idea to avoid giving the attacker the optimum scenario for his attack (i.e. a single large target and/or little to no point/umbrella defense ability)

What happened to "The combat system is built to encourage one large ship rather than many small ones"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You actually believed what was written in the documentation? Wow...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Enh. As a species, we're quite gullible. After all, some of us have even fallen for this "war" joke everyone keeps talking about.

[Hughestrog]

War?

 

What war?

 

There's a war on and nobody told me

[ShadowKitsune]

Arent we saying the same thing?

 

It comes down to whether the Defender has decent CIDS, right?

 

I usually only speak in terms of math.  If you can break ti down with math, I might see what I'm missing?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, it comes down to whether or not the opposing side has enough CIDS (quantity or quality) to destroy all of the incoming Fighters/Drones before the Fighters/Drones destroy of their Ships/Orbitals/Fortresses.

 

-SK

[President Guztov]

And if your attacker comes in with a cloud of 4th or 5th or even 6th generation fighters with a

few improvments in pulse engine technology as a F&D researcher would have done. ...

then your CIDS umbrella better be up to par or else. And what if fighters arent the ONLY

weapon being used???? The attacking fleet could have a squadron of ships armed with long range

weapons such as those long range long lance torpedos or standoff missles or worse!

 

Those weapons being fired from the back deployment areas will have to be dealt with as well with CIDS at the same time the fighters are swooping in! Add in some extemely heavy armor

and decent FC on those rear deployed units and you have a force that can hit ya close and

sting ya from afar all at the same time.