AntonyLee wrote:
bomber feel more like torpedo boats.

Torpedo bombers!

I'm somehow reminded of Team Gamma out of Starlancer, now...

Wtb mech/fighter/bombers ala macross/gundam style . They can be the all around vehicle.

And I started thinking of Strike Suit Zero somehow - adaptable too

Ok correct me if i'm wrong but fighters/bombers are individual units that can be stacked right? this would mean we have X amount of units costing Y amount of Tonnes. Why not simplify this and have them as Squadrons. When you think about dogfights you think about teams of fighters working with teams of bombers etc so hence it makes more sense to have a squadron as these units don't work individually. More of a story aspect than anything else.



Secondly will the new cards include fleet formations as more distributed fleets make it easier to protect against long range fire but its easier for bombers to get in without getting shot up and vice versa.



For Example:

Close formation +10% against fighter/bomber formation but -10% evasion from other ships

as ships are closer together they would have less manoeuvring room to avoid enemy ships but they could use saturating fire to take out enemy squadrons



Saturation fire +10% damage dealt to fighters from frigate class ships

this way we highlight the importance of support ships in fleets e.g frigates are more maneuverable than Cruiser's and Battleships and hence can make a mess of enemy fighters.



I apologise if this is confusing or if I missed something

Phoenix946 wrote:
Ok correct me if i'm wrong but fighters/bombers are individual units that can be stacked right? this would mean we have X amount of units costing Y amount of Tonnes. Why not simplify this and have them as Squadrons. When you think about dogfights you think about teams of fighters working with teams of bombers etc so hence it makes more sense to have a squadron as these units don't work individually. More of a story aspect than anything else.



Secondly will the new cards include fleet formations as more distributed fleets make it easier to protect against long range fire but its easier for bombers to get in without getting shot up and vice versa.



For Example:

Close formation +10% against fighter/bomber formation but -10% evasion from other ships

as ships are closer together they would have less manoeuvring room to avoid enemy ships but they could use saturating fire to take out enemy squadrons



Saturation fire +10% damage dealt to fighters from frigate class ships

this way we highlight the importance of support ships in fleets e.g frigates are more maneuverable than Cruiser's and Battleships and hence can make a mess of enemy fighters.



I apologise if this is confusing or if I missed something

There's this post by meedoc, that has at the end some multipliers for the amount of fighters per module. /#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13125-exp-fighters-bombers

Just 1 question: Will there be barrel rolls?lol

Delta21 wrote:
Just 1 question: Will there be barrel rolls?lol

Ooooh! And split S's too?

Fighter only fleets, babylon 5 style

Nomas wrote:
Wtb mech/fighter/bombers ala macross/gundam style . They can be the all around vehicle.

Gangnam style? O__O

Who you calling gangnam?

Igncom1 wrote:
Who you calling gangnam?

I can't see what you're trying to show me so...





Weird, I can see it in my reply but not your message O_O

For those objecting to the term bombers for anti-ship weapons:



It is a tradition in space warfare to call very small one man (or 2) ships bombers when they are made to attack larger ships. Homeworld 2 for eg, and I'm sure many more.



My 2c on this topic: You can get a lot of tactical flexibility if fighters & bombers can have a single slot to customise. Speed and range can also be a factor. Speedy bombers for eg striking earlier and faring better vs enemy fighters, or longer ranged fighters able to briefly engage enemy bombers before getting entangled in a hairball with enemy fighters.



Lots of options on the other hand means harder to balance. So as per G2G votes I believe some customisation should be allowed for, but nothing major.

quick question, will there be dedicated hulls for carring large amounts of fighters ala Carriers/super carriers? with bonuses?

Tiggy wrote:
quick question, will there be dedicated hulls for carring large amounts of fighters ala Carriers/super carriers? with bonuses?

Would be nice...*cough* G2G Vote? *cough*

I would say I`m sceptical about the overall concept of fighter/bomber in space.



Space is empty. Whatever the missle you fire from bomber you can just fire straight from the carrier, and the result would be the same, due to no friction.

Bomber is a bigger target, easier to intercept at long range.

The missles they fire are as succeptable to flack as missles fired from the ship.



Why bother with bombers at all?



Also, considering the existance of mele phase, where ships assumingly close in to the point where they can reliably hit eachother with projectiles, the point of bombers is, again doubtfull.



"Bombers" need some good deal of difference from anti-ship missle that is fired from rocket launcher.



Fighters again, need some sort of explaination. What is preventing ship to fire anti-bomber missles, that would be way faster and more manuverable than bomber, due to much shorter oprational range and smaller payload required?

Logic


There have been many discussions on that topic, and this thread is about the game play standpoint.

I would love to see the Cravers, the ones swarming around their ships, be the actual fighters/bombers for their race. They could literally eat the opposing faction's fighter/bombers and possibility be healed off them.

1alexey wrote:
I would say I`m sceptical about the overall concept of fighter/bomber in space.



Space is empty. Whatever the missle you fire from bomber you can just fire straight from the carrier, and the result would be the same, due to no friction.

Bomber is a bigger target, easier to intercept at long range.

The missles they fire are as succeptable to flack as missles fired from the ship.



Why bother with bombers at all?



Also, considering the existance of mele phase, where ships assumingly close in to the point where they can reliably hit eachother with projectiles, the point of bombers is, again doubtfull.



"Bombers" need some good deal of difference from anti-ship missle that is fired from rocket launcher.



Fighters again, need some sort of explaination. What is preventing ship to fire anti-bomber missles, that would be way faster and more manuverable than bomber, due to much shorter oprational range and smaller payload required?

Well, think of it this way, bombers are able to get pretty close in and target vulnerable locations in the enemy ship that would be impossible to pinpoint from afar with a guided missile. (If guided missiles are feasible at all in space combat that is, which is another issue altogether :P)

Read a couple of pages, looks like I lot of my initial thoughts have already been voiced in one way or another.



As a side note though, an alternative unit to consider: Boarding shuttles. Fighters would have to escort them, and they could either be for A) Boarding a ship in order to do damage or B.) Boarding a ship in order to commandeer it. (My personal favorite)



This could perhaps be specific to one or two factions. In other words, maybe only one of the factions has this, in place of bombers. I am not sure who though. Perhaps the federation? (I'm thinking space marines, I guess)



Anyway, I wanted to put forward that suggestion as "Alternate bomber type", so to speak.

It seems like it'll be another weapon/defence module on the ships, but with two types of defence modules: ones that also interfere with your enemies defence (fighters) and ones that outright target the enemy attack (turrets).



Not being able to customize is a little disapointing, but on the other hand, what could you customize?



Most of what I could say has already been said. Except one thing: How about making it so that bombers and fighters that have their carrier destroyed are used to greatly reduce the industry cost of the fighter/bomber units for one ship?



Sort of reassigning them to a new carrier, I guess. But I would like to know how to fill up a ship that lost all its fighters.