Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[goduranus]

Maybe replacing fighters should cost a dozen or so units of supplies, cuz it makes sense that fighters would require spare parts to build.
Also re- launching fighters, maybe would require a few units of fuel, as fighters need to be energized with a power source.

This would be consistent with lore that the Hegemony doesn’t use massed carriers because of the increased logistical requirements.

[Serenitis]

The game moved away from this when fighters were changed from discrete entities into weapons.
This is now abstracted through the costs of running a carrier. Why does it need to be made more complex by separating it back out and rebalancing literally everything related to fighters/carriers again?

[goduranus]

Fighters are not entirely abstracted into carriers, losing fighters already results in losses of crew.

[Igncom1]

Why fuel? Isn't the point of carriers that they carry?

[bobucles]

Why fuel? Isn't the point of carriers that they carry?

Indeed.  Fuel is used strictly for hyperspace travel and has no effect on combat. It's reasonably safe to assume whatever combat energy, materials, ammo and fighter squadrons that go into battle is coming out of their supplies.

Each fighter on the field represents a source of damage and HP. Every carrier bay represents a source of regenerating HP. Carrier bays wear down during battle, starting out at high power and becoming fatigued as the battle drags on. However, more carrier bays solve the problem in a multiplicative fashion. Not only do you get more fighter replenishment in the form of direct production power, but you also gain less carrier fatigue because the stresses of lost fighters gets spread out more. It's much faster to replenish a fighter when the ship is at full strength, and a trickle of losses will maintain that strength to continue replacing fighters at max speed. The math can be seen in direct battle, where the best addition to a fighter heavy fleet is to stack on more fighters. I don't really understand the exact formula for how carrier fatigue works, though.

Once you start swarming the field with fighters, AoE weapons become vastly more powerful. Perhaps players should look into using more flak weapons? Weapons that hit multiple targets, weapons that chain across nearby targets and similar skills all punish swarm play. If they aren't up to the task of clearing out a swarm of fighters, then nothing really is.

[Igncom1]

I mean, if anything the player is just fine against mass fighters, it's the AI that isn't prepared.

[goduranus]

Current mechanics doesn't tie fighter losses with losses of supplies. You could do well and suffer no fighter losses or do poorly and lost tons of fighters and supply consumption wouldn't be any different. But crew casualties would reflect fighter losses though.

[SCC]

Perhaps carriers could lose more CR after the battle, based on their lowest fighter replacement per cent.

[Plantissue]

I can sort of see an argument for the usage of supplies everytime you have to replace a fighter. However, supplies are never actually ever subtracted directly in battle. Supply cost mechanic doesn't take away supplies from entering battle. It has always been been replenishing lost CR which causes loss of supply in the campaign map. There has never been an instant loss of supplies from doing anything battle related. So perhaps repairing fighters causes a loss of CR instead would make more sense.

[Megas]

I can sort of see an argument for the usage of supplies everytime you have to replace a fighter. However, supplies are never actually ever subtracted directly in battle. Supply cost mechanic doesn't take away supplies from entering battle. It has always been been replenishing lost CR which causes loss of supply in the campaign map. There has never been an instant loss of supplies from doing anything battle related. So perhaps repairing fighters causes a loss of CR instead would make more sense.

This actually happened during the 0.5.x Starfarer days.  It was possible for fighters to drain hundreds of supplies (and have warning messages of running out of supplies) in mid-battle as they rebuild.

Fighters main feature during 0.5.x was regenerating in combat if a single fighter returns to carrier, and it did consume supplies during battle to regenerate the wing.  If you ran out of supplies, wing could not regenerate.  Also, wings that lost all fighters were permanently destroyed.

[Midnight Kitsune]

All this would do is punish the player as the AI DGAF about supplies and logistics so no thank you. I to remember the fighters draining your supplies in .54.1a 
Also, this would require not only rebalancing and reworking of the current fighters, it would also need much MUCH more fine control over them or else it would relegate carriers to player only in order to not bankrupt the player