Weapon/Defence Archive: Miscellaneous: Fighters

[Agile Fighter] -[Bomber] -[Breakoff/Feint] -[Customisable Fighters] -[Drone/A.I.] -[Fighter Missiles] -[Fighter Speed] -[Genre Fighters] -[Kra’Vak Fighters] -[Light Fighter] -[Multimode Fighter] -[Needle Fighter] -[Phalon Fighters] -[Parasite Fighter Rack] -[Planet-Based Fighter Group] -[Pulse Cannon Fighter] -[Scout Fighters] -[Spotter Fighters] -[Starburst Attack] -[Stealth Fighter] -[Strike Bomber]


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Ghostworks)

Agile fighters are fighters that have vastly improved survivability in combat, but at a cost in firepower. They are better over the full 6 turns of endurance and against fleets with large PDS arrays. They are worse over the short term and against small PDS arrays.

Agile fighters have the same movement and endurance as multirole fighters, but have reduced weaponry and increased defences (more manoeuvrability, increased armour, etc.). Agile fighters only hit and kill opposing fighters with rolls of 6 (which destroy one fighter only per successful roll) and do not get re-rolls. They can force a target fighter group to dogfight them rather than attacking another target. When engaging ships, they will inflict 1 Damage Point on a roll of 6, if the ship is not protected by screens or vapour shrouds, they may re-roll any dice that rolled 6.

If Agile fighters are used to intercept missiles, they will hit and destroy 1 missile on a roll of 6, and may re-roll any of the dice that rolled 6. Agile fighters can attack Plasma Bolts just like any other fighters (see Fleet Book 2, page 36).

When Agile fighters are attacked by beam-type (eg: Human, Phalon, or Sa'Vasku) point-defence weapons or other fighters, they are only killed on a roll of 6, which kills one Agile fighter, and the attacking fighters do not get a re-roll. The exception to this is Interceptor fighters, which kill one Agile fighter on each roll of 5+, and can re-roll any dice that rolled 6.

A group of 6 Agile fighters costs 18 points (3 points each).

ICON:    Agile Fighter


[Charles] What is the effect of Scatterguns and Interceptor pods on Agile fighters, as well as similar weapons in this archive, such as AFHAWKS etc.? Do Agile fighters suffer a chance of collateral damage when attacking missiles?


[Paul Wellman] (Sam Penn's website)

Bombers are larger than fighters, and slower, and are primarily used to attack ships, having attack capabilities similar to those of both Attack and Torpedo fighters. Only specially designated carriers may carry Bomber squadrons.

A Bomber Squadron consists of 4 bombers which have a combat duration of five turns (i.e. they have 5 CEF). Bombers have very little ability to engage fighters. When attacking or dogfighting an enemy fighter group, bombers only hit and kill opposing fighters with rolls of 6 (which destroy one fighter). Enemy fighters which attack Bombers add one to their attack die rolls, so a standard fighter would destroy one Bomber on a roll of 3 or 4, and two bombers on a roll of 5 or 6, an Interceptor would destroy one Bomber on a roll of 2 or 3, and two on a roll of 4, 5 or 6).

However, when engaging other ships bombers add one to their die rolls, like Attack fighters. Bombers also carry four one- shot rocket assisted laser guided bombs each. Each of these bombs requires a 3+ on a d6 to hit, and does 1–2 Damage Points (roll 1D6, on a roll of 1–3 the bomb inflicts 1 DP, on a roll of 4–6 it inflicts 2 DP. Alternatively, resolve this attack with a single D6; roll of 1 or 2 indicates a miss, a roll of 3 or 4 inflicts 1 DP, and a roll of 5 or 6 inflicts 2 DP).

The Bomber squadron may drop 1 to 4 bombs per Bomber, though each must drop the same number of bombs per run. When Bombers are attacked by beam-type point-defence weapons, rolls of "4" have no effect (c.f. Heavy fighters, see Fleet Book 2, page 4).

Bombers are moved in Phase 3) MOVE FIGHTER GROUPS, and may make secondary moves in Phase 6) ALLOCATE ORDNANCE AND FIGHTER ATTACKS. However, their movement allowance is 16mu per turn, and they have a limit of 8mu for secondary moves.

A Bomber Squadron costs 40 points (10 per bomber). A Bomber hanger requires 12 MASS, and has a points cost of 36.

ICON:    Bomber


[Oerjan] This is effectively a Long-Range Heavy Torpedo Attack fighter with some extra complexity added.
[Charles] Actually, with the movements and CEF listed, this is a SHORT-Range Heavy Torpedo Attack fighter (almost). We should probably combine these with the Strike bombers.


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Ghostworks)

Breakoff/FeintFighters that are attacking ships or dogfighting may breakoff their attack. This occurs during Phase 7) POINT DEFENCE FIRE, after point-defence and other anti-fighter weapons fire (such as other fighters) has been declared, but before it has been resolved. Fighters that break off expend a Combat Endurance factor as if they had made their attack, but do not actually fire their weapons.

Point Defence Systems, Class 1 Beam Batteries or K–Guns in point defence mode, and opposing fighters attacking the Feinting fighters modify their attack die rolls by -1, and do not re-roll any natural rolls of 6. Interceptors attacking Feinting fighters roll to attack as normal fighters (i.e.) the Interceptor +1 bonus is counteracted by the Feinting - 1 penalty, however, rolls of 6 are not re-rolled. Scatterguns and Interceptor Pods roll 1D6-2 for the number of Feinting fighters killed (half that if the Feinting fighters are Heavy).


[Lots of people] (various)

These are fighters that combine two or more of the features of the Advanced and Specialised fighter types (see Fleet Book 2, page 4), for instance, a Fast Interceptor, or a Heavy Attack fighter. The first would move like a Fast fighter, and would attack as an Interceptor, while the second would attack as an Attack fighter, but would be attacked as if it were a Heavy fighter.

The simplest, and most common way of doing this to use one of the fighter capabilities as a base, and add additional points for the additional abilities, thus:

Fighter Ability Additional Points Cost per group (per fighter)
Move as Fast fighter (36mu per turn) +6 (+1)
Defend as Heavy fighter +12 (+2)
Attack as Interceptor * +0
Attack as Attack fighter * +6 (+1)
Long-Range (+3 CEF) +6 (+1)
Attack as Torpedo fighter * +18 (+3)
Attack as Needle fighter * +24 (+4)
*The three attack options cannot be combined within a single fighter type.

Under this system, a Fast Interceptor would cost the same as a Fast Multirole fighter, while a Heavy Attack fighter group would cost 36 points (30, +6 for Attack capability).

One problem with the system above is that it may not take into account the cumulative effect of multiple capabilities. For a system that does this, instead of ADDING extra points for additional abilities, give each capability a multiplier, and multiply the base cost of the fighter by all of the relevant multipliers. The result is calculated per fighter group, and rounded to the nearest whole number. The cost per fighter is one- sixth of the cost per group.

Fighter Ability Cost Multiplier
Move as Fast fighter (36mu per turn) ×1 1/3
Defend as Heavy fighter ×1 2/3
Attack as Interceptor * ×1
Attack as Attack fighter * ×1 1/3
Long-Range (+3 CEF) ×1 1/3
Attack as Torpedo fighter * ×2
Attack as Needle fighter * ×2 1/3
*The three attack options cannot be combined within a single fighter type.

Under this system, a Fast Interceptor would cost the same as a Fast Multirole fighter, while a Heavy Attack fighter group would cost 40 points (30, ×1 1/3 for Attack capability).

For a MUCH more flexible system, see (Jared Noble’s WebPage which contains a highly detailed fighter design system.


[Frits Kuijlman] (GZG-L 5 April, 2001)

Not so long ago I read Hamilton's "The Naked God". He uses lots of different drones in space combat. It's all very deadly. If a drone comes through the defensive drones, the target is toast most of the time.

These drones have a reasonable lifespan (more than 1 turn), so either MT–Missile's or fighters would do to simulate them. I like the idea of modelling these drones as pilot–less fighters: the drones are intelligent and they can go anywhere they want. It should be possible to have several types of drones, similar to current fighter types.

A question about normal fighters though. I put in that the drones can't be recovered during battle. Do people actually recover fighters during battles? What I read about fighters seems to give the impression that they are of the "forgive and forget" type. They forgive their captain for sending them into battle, and then he forgets about them. If this is the case then I doubt that the decreased endurance alone compensates for the removal of morale problems.

There is a mass advantage, so launching facilities are cheaper. On the other hand, their endurance is less, and the existence of EMP counter drones will probably compensate any advantages that remain.

With the exceptions noted below, Drone/A.I. fighters function exactly like normal fighters. However, unlike full–size fighters, Drone fighters normally only have three Combat Endurance Factors, rather than the usual six. Drone fighters are NOT subject to Fighter Morale checks (like Sa'Vasku Drones). Drone fighters are launched just like normal fighters, in groups of six, however, they CANNOT be recovered during battle, they are, however, recoverable after the battle is over, should their launching ship survive and remain in the area.

As with fighters, there are several separate types of Drone fighter; Multi-role, Fast, Heavy, Interceptor, Attack, and Torpedo Drones function like their normal counterparts, except where noted above. Long-Range drones have only six Combat Endurance Factors, rather than nine. Optionally, there may be Drone counterparts for several of the fighters described in this section, i.e. Needle or Scout Drones.

Additionally, there are Counter Drones, aka Anti–Drone Drones, that are specifically designed to attack other Drones (but not Sa'Vasku Drones). Counter Drones have an attack range of 9 mu (outside normal fighter or Drone attack range), and inflict 1 beam dice of kills per attacking Counter Drone. As an option, Counter Drones may also attack missiles, using the rules for missile interception by fighters (see Fleet Book 1, page 6), but with no risk to the Counter Drones.

A Drone/A.I. fighter hanger requires 6 MASS, and has a points cost of 18. A Drone/A.I. fighter group that has the same abilities as a listed fighter type costs the same number of points. A Counter Drone group costs 24 points (4 per Drone).

ICONS (example): Drone/A.I. Fighter Fast Drone Heavy Drone Interceptor Drone Attack Drone Long-Range Drone Torpedo Drone Counter Drone
(Multirole) (Fast) (Heavy) (Interceptor) (Attack) (Long-Range) (Torpedo) (Counter)


[Noam] Possible anti-missile role for Counter Drones? Most fighters are not effective past 3 endurance, so they are perhaps still a bit under-costed.
[Charles] (I've added notes on Counter Drones vs. missiles.) Well, considering that removing the Fighter Morale check roughly doubles the effectiveness of fighters, OTOH, I feel the reduction in Combat Endurance is significant (at least the way I play fighters – which isn't that much), but not sufficiently to counter–act this advantage. I suggest that as the morale check represents a self-preservation instinct, Drone fighters (and Sa'Vasku Drones) are easier to kill, say all attacks gain a +1 bonus (like Interceptors). Another option would be to increase the points cost.


[Jaime Tiempo] (GZG-L 2 February, 2002)

As well as dedicated Torpedo fighters, other fighters may be fitted with racks of small missiles. These missiles give a one–use +1 bonus to the fighters attack die roll, thus, a multirole fighter using a missile rack would kill one enemy fighter on a roll of 3 or 4, and two on a roll of 5 or 6 (with a re–roll on 6). All fighters in a group of fighters so equiped must fire their missiles simultainiously.

Fighter Missile Racks increase the cost of a fighter group by +6 (+1 per fighter).

While on the topic of the IJN, and anime, and variabletype fighters, I got thinking about those wonderfully cinematic missile swarms that fighters invariably launch in anime. I was thinking that as suplimentary weapon on fighters would be a 1 shot missile salvo.

ICON:    Fighter Missile Racks


[Brendan Robertson] Best match = 1-shot submunition. Points should be +2 to +3 per figher depending on final config.
[Charles] Does the +1 bonus apply to attacks against both fighters and ships? Would an Interceptor armed with a missile rack be able to inflict 1 damage point on a ship on a roll of 6 if it attacked the ship with its missile rack?


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Homebrew Rules)

For fighters, I lean towards "fixing" them by giving them vector movement at all times.

The Attack Velocity (AV) is determined in a similar manner to that of Salvo Missiles:

  1. Move fighter with vector, then move target ship with whatever movement, then apply fighter reaction move as desired. Determine total start-endpoint distance travelled for the fighters. The target of a reaction move MUST be announced. A fighter group may not attack a non-targeted ship with a reaction move even if it is base to base, though it may engage other fighters.
  2. Add, ignore, or subtract target speed as with SMLs.
  3. Close fighters to base-to-base contact. Actual fighter distance moved is from startpoint to ship being attacked.
  4. Total up Attack Velocity with 2) + 3).

To engage any target - including other fighter groups, the attacking fighter AV has to be less than 42 (+12 for fast fighters) (OPTIONAL: +12 for interceptors vs other fighters, +12 for torpedo fighters vs. ships). this is taken from the Normal 24 mu move of fighters +6 mu attack range +12 mu range for reaction move.

At the start of each turn (before movement orders are written) a fighter group that attacked a ship last turn can declare that they are "pressing the attack". That means that the fighter groups move with their target (as in screening). This gives the advantage that once attacking a ship, they can stick with it, but the disadvantage that the target ship can peel out of formation and drag the fighters with them away from the action. The fighters can choose to break their attack AFTER movement by spending a CEF to move 12 mu in any direction (adding it to the target's ships ENDING velocity for the purpose of next turn). Fighters breaking off a pressed attack can't attack another ship this turn, but can engage in dogfights.

Passing attack: If the AV is higher than the max required for engagement. Reduce the number of dice in the attack by 1 for each 6 mu or part thereof above the max AV. So two fighter groups closing head-on at 24 mu each (AV 48) could each make passing attack at 2 dice less. No furball ensues.

Breaking to Engage: If a fighter group reaches a target with its normal move, but the AV is still too high, it could apply it's reaction move to "break to engage" This would result in the fighter group not moving on the board, but reducing the AV (and the group's speed) by up to 12. In the head-on fighter example above if Group A spends a CEF to break to speed 12, the AV for both groups is now 36, and they can both engage full attacks. Next turn the furball drifts 12 mu in B's direction of travel (Direction determined by A+B's vector, speed determined by the slowest of A or B.).

(Extra Detail) Fighter furballs drift. Add the incoming velocity vectors of all fighter groups in the furball to determine the direction of drift. Speed of drift is the speed component of the slowest fighter group that that joined the furball.

Other thoughts from the list:

So I take it you're not going to see any dogfights first turn after launch unless the ships are less than about class 2 range apart, either that or your fighters spend ages chugging into battle – I guess people who play at higher speed could up the dogfight AFV though.

Yes.This is one of those things that would need to be tweaked by playtest. Fighters would also likely have a harder time engaging in cinematic than in vector – maybe adding CEF would balance that.


[John Leary] (GZG-L 6 May 2001)

A set of Genre Specific fighters (many untested) for Crossover type Full Thrust games, including Babylon 5, Star Wars and other settings.


[Charles Stanley Taylor] (gzg-list 06-Feb- 2002)

These fighters are found in the Aliens: Kra'Vak section.


[Dean Gundberg] (Star Ranger's Web Page)

Light fighters are smaller than normal fighters, however they have similar characteristics. Each group of Light Fighters consists of 8 fighters instead of the normal 6. Light Fighters move and attack just like normal fighters, so a full strength group of Light Fighters can roll 8 attack dice. A group of 8 Light Fighters costs the same as a group of 6 regular fighters.

The disadvantage of Light Fighters is that they are easy to kill and they only have 4 turns of endurance. Any attack at a group of Light Fighters gets a +1 bonus so normal fighters attack Light Fighters like Interceptors attack normal fighters (1-2, no kills; 3-4, 1 kill; 5, 2 kills; 6, 2 kills and a re-roll). Interceptors are very deadly against Light Fighters. Point-defence systems, Spicules, Class–1 Beam Batteries, Class–1 Kinetic Guns, and Pulsers in point defence mode, all get the +1 modifier. Scatterguns and Interceptor Pods kill 1D6+1 Light Fighters.

The are Fast, Interceptor, or Attack variants of Light Fighters. There are no Heavy, Torpedo, and Long Range variants of them.

A Light Multi-role fighter group or a Light Interceptor group costs 18 points (2¼ per fighter), a Light Fast fighter group or Light Attack fighter group costs 24 points (3 per fighter).

ICONS (example): Light Fighter Fast Light Fighter Light Interceptor Light Attack Fighter
(Multirole) (Fast) (Interceptor) (Attack)


[Oerjan] The Light Fighters die fast, but if they get to fire first their extra dice means that they'll take out an entire squadron of Standard Fighters in a single shot – whereas the Standard squadron won't be able to kill all the Lights if IT gets to fire first. Light Interceptors are EXTREMELY valuable when fighting Phalons, thanks to their improved ability to shoot down PBLs. Unless you modify the Fighter Morale rules they also get an impressive bonus when attacking ships.
[Noam] Have them morale check at -2 (i.e. as normal fighter squadrons. Light groups down to 2 fighters will always break and run.
[Oerjan] Something like that, yes. Or rephrase the fighter morale rules to read "roll over the number of fighters lost" instead of "roll under or equal to the number of fighters remaining", which would have the same effect but without the special modifier.
[Charles] I'd increase them to NINE per fighter hanger, then re-distribute them into groups of SIX when launched, with a 'short' group of THREE if there is an odd number of hangers. Then treat them just like normal fighters of the same type, except that they are easier to kill. Maybe reduce their Combat Endurance factor as well.
Alternativly, just use normal figher statistics, and have the increased number of weaker fighters as a special effect.


[Brendan Robertson, and others] (GZG-L Jan-Feb 2002)

Multimode Configurable fighters (MMCF) can "transform" into different combat modes in combat, enabling them to perform a wide variety of actions. The mode that a Multimode Fighter will be in for a combat turn is declared at the start of Phase 3) MOVE FIGHTER GROUPS. If this declaration is not made, the Multimode Fighters are assumed to be in F–mode (interceptor).

The three available modes are:

F–mode: Acts as an Interceptor.
G–mode: Acts as a Multirole (standard) fighter with a movement allowance of 18 mu.
B–mode: Acts as an Attack Fighter with a movement allowance of 12 mu, and see below.

All of the modes can make a standard 12 mu secondary movement by expending 1 Combat Endurance Factor. Point defence fire against Multimode fighters is resolved as normal.

When in B–mode, the squadron can forego their normal attacks to act as DCPs (De–Construction Parties). After surviving PDS, each fighter is allocated to a non–core system and rolls using DCP rules (1 fighter = 6, 2 fighters = 5+, 3 fighters = 4+). If the DCP roll is successful, that system is disabled as if it had failed a threshold check (note this damage can be repaired, unlike that inflicted by needle beams). A system cannot be targeted more than once per turn regardless of the number of attacking B-mode fighters.

A group of 6 Multimode fighters costs 42 points (7 points each).

ICON:    Multimode Fighter


[Jaime Tiempo] Leave the damage unrepairable, like needles.


[Roger Burton West, and many others, organized by Tom Anderson] (Roger's web page)(Needle Fighter Page)

The GZG-L Needle Debate Summary:


With the introduction of diverse fighter types in More Thrust, including Torpedo fighters, it seemed logical to introduce a Needle fighter type, which was able to attack in much the same way as a needle beam. It has also been proposed that all fighters capable of attacking ships should be able to attack in a needle– like way, and that this represented a special tactic (inspired by the trench run in Star Wars) rather than a special weapon system.

Common Features

All the proposals have some common features. Needle attacks ignore screens (either the needle beam punches through the screen or the trench run is beneath the screen). Needle attacks come after anti- fighter fire, and PDS systems firing at needling fighters get a +1 bonus to the roll, as the Needle fighters have to hold a very steady course and fly close to the target.

Systems damaged by Needle fighter attacks can be repaired just like damage due to threshold checks, and unlike shipboard needle beam attacks. In some cases, a highly successful attack can destroy a system outright, so that it cannot be repaired. Damaged systems, if damaged again, become destroyed. The whole squadron must attack one target system, and can damage a maximum of one system per turn. If more than one success is scored, the target system is destroyed outright. Needle fighters dogfight as attack fighters.

Roger Burton West’s Proposal

Needle fighters are a specialized form of Attack fighter, which are intended to do specific systems damage to enemy ships, rather than general destruction. They sacrifice their anti–fighter capabilities to this end, like normal Attack fighters, killing enemy fighters only on a 6. When attacking ships, however, they attack specified target systems, which must be declared before any of the needle attacks are resolved. and all the fighters within a group must attack the same target system. Any attack die that rolls a 6 destroys the target system (Core systems CANNOT be so attacked). Needle fighters have the same attack range as normal fighters.

A Needle fighter group costs 42 points (7 per fighter).

ICON:    Needle Fighter


[Oerjan] Possibly underpriced. 6 needle dice with a high probability of being in range is quite lethal - IME the main drawback of the standard needle beam is its short range and narrow arc, not its low to-hit roll.
[Charles] Do Needle fighter attacks inflict damage like a ship–mounted Needle Beam?

The Shurtleff Proposal [Mark Shurtleff]

A fighter squadron may make a number of attacks equal to the number of fighters in the squadron divided by 3 and rounded down. Each attack has range 6 but is otherwise like a normal needle attack.

The Izenberg Proposal [Noam Izenberg]

Each fighter in the squadron makes a needle attack, which has range 6 but is otherwise like a normal needle attack. Needle fighters cost the same as Attack fighters. For systems in which a double hit usually results in the total destruction of the system, a triple hit be required by Needle Fighters.

The Anderson Proposal [Tom Anderson]

To make a needle attack, the squadron must first pass a morale test, rolling under the current squadron strength. The squadron then rolls one normal attack die, and if a single hit is scored the target system is damaged. If a double hit is scored, the system is destroyed.

The Noble Proposal [Jared Noble]

To make a needle attack, the squadron must take a morale test at -1. If they succeed, the target system is damaged.


It is possible to make a simple analysis of the performance of each of these systems. If we ignore destroying rather than damaging systems and leave out aces, turkeys, and attack fighters, and so consider the probability of damaging a system as a function of the number of fighters in the group, we can arrive at a set of functions.

Formula for Probability of Causing Damage with Squadron Strength (N)
Proposal Probability of Damage
Izenberg 1 - (5/6)^N
Shurtleff 1 - (5/6)^floor(N/3)
Anderson N/12
Noble (N-1)/6
This can be expanded to a table of probabilities.
Probability of Causing Damage with Squadron Strength (N)
N 6 5 4 3 2 1
Izenberg 0.67 0.60 0.52 0.42 0.31 0.17
Shurtleff 0.31 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00
Anderson 0.50 0.42 0.33 0.25 0.17 0.08
Noble 0.83 0.67 0.50 0.33 0.17 0.00

The Izenberg proposal is probably the most powerful in combat situations (ie strengths of 4 or 5 are typical); the Noble proposal is a close second. The Anderson proposal is less so and falls off linearly, like the Noble proposal; the Shurtleff proposal is the least powerful.

This table relates the probable number of fighters left in a squadron after a given time attacking a ship with a given number of PDS. With the +1 bonus, PDS eliminates an average of 1 fighter per turn without rerolls, or about 1.2 with rerolls. So, each turn, the average number of fighters in an attacking group (assuming all morale checks are passed) would be (No rerolls/rerolls):

Number of PDS Turn 1 Turn 2 Turn 3 Turn 4 Turn 5
1 5/5 4/4 3/2 2/1 1/0
2 4 2/1 0 0 0
3 3/2 0 0 0 0
4 2/1 0 0 0 0
5 1/0 0 0 0 0


[Mike Wikan] (kontos web page)

A ship may mount 1 squadron of Parasite Racked fighters per 30 Mass of Carrier ship. Since this squadron is carried externally, any damage caused to the Carrier vessel will destroy the Parasite Racks ( each damage point to hull or armour damages one parasite rack). If the Racks are hit with fighters still embarked, roll 1D6-1 and that many fighters manage to disengage from the racks and launch.

Parasite racks MAY be used on civilian transports. This was what they were developed for in order to provide escorts for merchants in high risk areas(This distinction made irrelevant by the Fleet Books).

A parasite rack may launch at any time IN ADDITION to any normal fighter bay launches (This distinction made irrelevant by Fleet Book 2, page 4). They must be recovered within the normal constraints of fighter recovery. Only Standard, Interceptor or Heavy fighters may be Parasite Racked as the racks do not provide support for specialized weapon systems.

Parasite racks can be repaired by damage control.

A Parasite Fighter Rack requires 1 MASS, and has a points cost of 30, in addition to the points cost of the fighters on it.

ICON:    Parasite Rack


[Oerjan] Balance-wise, I dunno... Put it like this: I can put an entire fighter squadron on a single TMF 4 scout. Yes, it is expensive - but it is considerably LESS expensive (about 75% the cost) of a normally bay-carried fighter squadron. The proposal says nothing about rearming and reorganizing fighters (Fleet Book 2, page 4), but IMO the rack shouldn't be able to do either during combat (or else it should take very much longer than for bays).
[Noam] The FTL (at least) of the ship with the racks has to be sized for 4 mass more per group (Assumes that some of the mass of a standard fighter bay is for equipment, and that fighters themselves are a bit over .5 mass each). Best if both FTL and MD are sized that way, or some restriction to MD usage should be applied to a ship before fighters are launched. That could also reduce the cost of the rack. I agree that racks mean no (or very long) repairs to fighters, and no replacement b/t scenarios.
[Charles] I'd up the MASS requirement to 6, to automatically factor in the additional FTL and main drive requirements, but reduce the cost to 12 or 18 points per rack. Keep the rule on damage to racks and the restriction on fighter types. Fighters DEFINATELY cannot be recovered or re-armed during a scenario. Possibly include a -1 penalty to morale checks to reflect this.


[Charles Stanley Taylor] (gzg-list 06-May- 2002)

These fighters are found in the Aliens: Phalon section.


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Ghostworks)

Planet-based Fighter Group A Planet- Based fighter group is launched from a base on a planet’s surface, rather than a space ship or station. A Planet-Based fighter group can consist of any type of fighter. The fighters in the Planet-Based fighter group require additional ground-based infrastructure and booster packs to escape the planetary gravity, this replaces the infrastructure of a hanger bay.

The Planet-Based fighters will require 1 turn to exit the planet’s atmosphere (if present) and gravity, then they can manoeuvre freely. To return to the planet will cost 1 Combat Endurance factor, or no Combat Endurance factors for a dead–stick re– entry. If the latter occurs, the Planet-Based fighters cannot return to combat during the scenario.

A Planet-Based fighter group costs an extra +39 points over the normal cost of the fighter group (+6½ per fighter). This is the cost of an orbital platform with a bay and no engines. A minimal, sublight, thrust 2, soapbubble carrier would cost +42 points per group, but the planetary base can't move, and takes extra time and CEF's to launch and recover fighters. [combined from Charles and Oerjan comments]



[Charles Stanley Taylor] (via e-mail - revised)

This is a lighter version of the Pulse Cannon designed for use on fighters. Fighters equipped with Pulse Cannon have the same cost as beam-equipped fighters, but their damage profile is slightly different. On a roll of 1-3 they do no damage, on a 4 or 5 they do 1 DP, while on a 6 they do 2 DP, 1 DP to armour, and 1 DP to hull, they ignore the effect of screens. They do not get re-rolls against ships, but do against fighters (this is the same profile as Kra'Vak fighters, but with a slightly different PSB).

Pulse Cannon fighters cost the same as their beam equipped counterparts.

ICON (example):    Pulse Cannon Fighter


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Homebrew Rules)

Scout Squadron - Non-combat fighters. Standard cost. Dogfight as Torpedo Fighters, anti-ship as Interceptors. Full group senses as std. starship with 6 Firecons (expending one CEF/turn for scanning SRB 3 and long range scan). Effective Firecons decrease as fighters are lost

ICON:    Scout Fighter


[Sam Penn's Star Wars Conversion] (Sam's website)

The Spotter Squadron is designed for target acquisition duties against larger vessels. It is not particularly good at either dogfighting or attacking larger vessels itself – halve (rounding down) all damage down by a spotter squadron against any target. If the group is within 6mu of a large ship though (i.e. non-fighters), it can designate targets for any other ship in the allied fleet. Each fighter rolls 1D6, and on a roll of 5+, a shot from a single weapon (announced before that weapon fires) may ignore all shields and armour on the target vessel. Spotters cannot attack or be involved in a dogfight while designating targets.

ICON:    Spotter Fighter


[Oerjan] Exactly how does a fighter help a far-away ship ignore enemy screens, when the ships themselves can't do that in spite of vastly better sensor resolution and computing power?
[Noam] Possible PSB alternative (requiring alternative names): "Probability Fighters" or "Reality Wedge Fighters". Instead of firing beams or other conventional weapons, Fighter "weapons" distort spacetime in the vicinity of the target ship creating temporarily weaker "holes" that allied weapons can fire through.


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Ghostworks)

Starburst Attack (Inspired by The Last Starfighter) The Fighter group expends all its remaining Combat Endurance factors (with a minimum of THREE) on an attack to double its firepower this turn. Roll an extra PDS die after the attack to see how many fighters are "burned out" by the attack. After the attack, the group's movement allowance is reduced to 12 mu. The Starburst Attack must be declared before Point-Defence is allocated. Starbursting fighter groups can Feint, but still expend three Combat Endurance factors.


[Charles] Rather too much like the Kra'Vak fighter Ro'Kah effect (Fleet Book 2, page 10), but under more control, and with potentially less of a penalty. I think this should be limited to a specialised fighter type, with an increased cost. The "Death Blossom" in The Last Starfighter appeared to be a highly effective anti-fighter weapon system, but we don't see it used against larger ships.


[Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Ghostworks)

Stealth fighters use a fighter–scale version of Stealth technology. For simplicity Stealth fighters are treated in the same way as Heavy fighters (see Fleet Book 2, page 4). There are also Super–Stealth fighters that have the equivalent of Level-2 Stealth. When Super–Stealth fighters are attacked by beam–type point–defence weapons or other fighters, not only do rolls of "4" have no effect, but rolls of "6" only kill one fighter, rather than two. When fired on by Kra'Vak scatterguns (or equivalent), the number of kills scored is divided by three.

The Long Range Defence Fire Control (LRDFC) cannot target Stealth fighters or Super–Stealth fighters.

A group of 6 Stealth fighters costs 12 points more than a normal fighter of the same type (+2 per fighter). A group of 6 Super–Stealth fighters cost +36 points more (+6 per fighter). If the Long Range Defence Fire Control is an allowed system, then increase the cost of Stealth fighter groups to +14 points (+21/3 per fighter), and the cost of Super– Stealth fighter groups to +38 points (+61/3 per fighter).

ICONS:    Stealth Fighter   (Stealth Fighter)     Super Stealth Fighter   (Super Stealth Fighter)


[Charles] Can Stealth capability be added to advanced or specialised fighter types at the additional cost (i.e. have a Fast Stealth Fighter, or a Stealth Interceptor)?


[Ryan Gill and the GZG-List] (30 May-5 June 2001)

Strike Bombers are about twice as large as fighters, and carry stand–off missiles that have a longer range than fighter weapons, enabling the Strike Bombers to attack ships from beyond the range of the ship’s anti–fighter defences. Each group of Strike Bombers contains THREE bombers, rather than six.

The Strike Bombers move like fighters, but have a movement allowance of 30 mu per turn, however their secondary movement is still 12 mu. They have FOUR Combat Endurance Factors, rather than six. Each Strike Bomber can carry either a pair of short–range missiles similar to Salvo Missiles, or a single MT Missile, thus each group either carries ONE salvo of Salvo Missiles, or three MT Missiles (all Bombers in a group must have the same load–out).

The missiles are launched during Phase 6) ALLOCATE ORDNANCE AND FIGHTER ATTACKS, the Salvo–type missiles are treated as Salvo Missiles, the target ship allocates point–defence fire during Phase 7), and during Phase 8) roll 1D6 to determine how many missiles are on target, if the Bomber group has suffered losses, ignore (and re–roll) rolls of 5+ if two Bombers survive, or 3+ if only one Bomber survives. The effects are then resolved just like normal Salvo Missile fire (see Fleet Book 1, page 9). Note that the Strike Bombers themselves will be out of range for Point Defence weapons.

If a Strike Bomber is carrying MT Missiles, then each is treated as an individual MT Missiles , except that each has one less Endurance Factor than normal, i.e. "Standard" MT Missiles would only have TWO, while "Long–Lance" Missiles would only have FOUR, "Misericordé" and "EMP" Missiles are not available to Strike Bombers.

A Strike Bomber only has limited armament apart from its missile load, when engaging fighters, or ships after it has launched its missiles, a Strike Bomber will only hit on a roll of 5+, which will kill one fighter or inflict one Damage Point. Rolls of 6 allow a re–roll. When the Strike Bomber is attacked by fighters or point defence fire, it is considered a Heavy fighter.

The Strike Bomber must expend one Combat Endurance Factor whenever it attacks, launches its missiles, or makes a secondary movement. It is possible for a Strike Bomber group to launch missiles (1 CEF), make a secondary movement to close the range (1 CEF), and attack a ship with their secondary weapons (1 CEF), all in one turn.

A Strike Bomber group costs 36 points (12 per bomber), or 54 points if planet–based (18 per bomber).

ICON:    Strike Bomber

10 Pts each (60 pts for a squadron)
Size 2 craft (double that of Fighters)
Mv 30"/turn (occurs during fighter movement)
12" Secondary Move (occurs during normal Secondary Move phase)
Dog-fight on 6's (tail guns)
Carry 1 of 2 strike packages (Fired During Ordinance Phase)
Either 1 ER Salvo Missile package or 2 MT Missiles

First Counterproposal:
Mass: 2 each (Count each bomber as 2 for fighter morale purposes).
Movement: 30" / 12"
CEF: 4 (cost: 1 per attack, 1 for missile launch, 1 for extra move)
Dogfight / Antiship: 5-6 = 1 point (reroll on 6).
"Heavy" fighter
Carries 2 SML missiles, 12" range or 1 MT capship missile.
Cost: 12 each = 3 (std) +2 (heavy) +1 (limited fast) +6 (1/3 SMR cost or capship MT missile) +0 (Dogfight/antiship cancel each other). Add +6 per fighter for planetary based (covers part of the cost of the carrier for play balance)


[GZG-list] Long follow-up thread on GZG List with uncertain conclusion.
[Noam] Planet based standard fighters require +~39 points for balance. Strike bombers would require at least that much, possibly more given heavier weaponry. 12mu Missile range is added complexity and possibly broken.
[Charles] As these are larger than standard fighters, might anti–ship weapons have a better chance of hitting them, say; Class–1 Beam Batteries and K–Gins can hit them out to a range of 12 mu, and kill them on a roll of 5 or 6 (B–1s get re–rolls, K–1s do not), possibly allow Class–2 weapons to hit them as well?

Small WDA Title - Weapon/Defence Archive main page
NIFT - NIFT Home Page
New Israel FlagNew Israel Homepage

Last Update May 31, 2002, NRI