The future: DW Fighters?

[lordxorn]

Could this be the future of DW as far as fighters are concerned?

Youtube Video Distant Worlds Fighters

Forgot to mention , 2guncohen has helped me develop the upcoming improvements to my Star Wars mod including the new fighter models. V 1.1 coming soon, including the Death Star debuting as the planet destroyer.

[Erik Rutins]

Nice video!

Yes, I think representing squadrons of fighters would be the most likely way to implement them in DW, though that is not in any way the final word.

[2guncohen]

The trailer is kick ass !!!

[Bartje]

Does that movie look like it stutters occasionally to anyone else?

Is that because of FRAPS?

I like starfighters!!

Space carrier warfare would be a nice added dynamic, perhaps we could model naval military history. The early and middle periods focus on guns while later on fighters and bombers become more dominant (but do not replace a traditional navy completely)

Perhaps some races can even have a unique early focus on carrier based warfare ?

[2guncohen]

[:D] Bartje I notice you have allot of questions.
The force is strong in this one.

For the stutter its best to check the support page.
Its something that happens regulary i saw some posts about this subject.
Dont recall the exact where...

[lordxorn]

ORIGINAL: Bartje

Does that movie look like it stutters occasionally to anyone else?

Is that because of FRAPS?

I like starfighters!!

Space carrier warfare would be a nice added dynamic, perhaps we could model naval military history. The early and middle periods focus on guns while later on fighters and bombers become more dominant (but do not replace a traditional navy completely)

Perhaps some races can even have a unique early focus on carrier based warfare ?

You bring up great points, once fighters are implemented fully we can really start working on what your proposing. I actually am trying to get my Wings3d skills up and thought about what would a US Navy battleship really look like. Plus if you think about it in space, once you fire a projectile it doesn't ever stop until it hits something. So Battleships with huge railguns would be something I think is coming.

[lordxorn]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Nice video!

Yes, I think representing squadrons of fighters would be the most likely way to implement them in DW, though that is not in any way the final word.

Elliot thanks for the somewhat hint of the future, can we make some suggestions as a community.

A couple of Star Wars strategy games implemented fighters very well, like Empire at War and the oft underrated Rebellion.

In Rebellion the ships of the line had two values basically where one was their main guns (turbo lasers), and the second value was anti-fighter cannon (laser turrets) which had faster tracking but were weaker. So a Capital ship had a high Main Gun value and little to no anti fighter coverage.

This type of system can be applied to WW2 era ships, and hence a more realistic feel to fleet warfare. Which if DW is able to capture would become an even better game. Also if we can get some formation support for our fleets.

[Bartje]

Yes your completely right!

Starwars modelled these things pretty well, based on actual naval warfare.

If we can combine fighters with some sort of intelligent ship formations (if there are fighters try staying in groups, near ships with anti-fighter armament)
then the game would advance leaps.

I'd love to see the individual fighters scurrying about the battle!

[ASHBERY76]

Yes more suicide darts would be good.Not.

[Aurelian]

If you're going to talk realistic, than a fighter couldn't do anything more than be annoying.
 
Not big enough to carry what would be necessary to generate enough power to do more than scratch the paint of a capital ship.
 
LACs from Weber's Harrington series would make more sense.

[lordxorn]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

If you're going to talk realistic, than a fighter couldn't do anything more than be annoying.

Not big enough to carry what would be necessary to generate enough power to do more than scratch the paint of a capital ship.

LACs from Weber's Harrington series would make more sense.

The opposite was true in WW2 whose bombs could hit the weakest part of a battleship, it's deck. Plus a battleships main cannon could no way hit a fighter. This is why I am requesting a overhaul of the combat system otherwise just a smaller version of an escort would not be fun like Ashberry says.

However I feel this type of feature I either a separate add on or sequel.

[Wade1000]

Your implementation of fighters seems to just be another form of a ship with a fighter group icon. I think fighters should be more of a weapon component.

ORIGINAL:  Wade1000
Yes, I agree to have carriers and fighters represented in some form.

-Maybe fighter bays as another ship component and the fighters that come with(or are added to) it as another generalized/abstarcted weapon system. That would be great.

-Maybe each fighter bay could launch a group of fighters(5 maybe) that seeks to target like the missile weapon. The graphic, instead of hitting and exploding, would stay/"stick" to the target and fly around close to it shooting it and slowly damaging it.
THUS, a fighter bay "shot" would act as a "damage over time"(DOT) effect.

-These "fighter bays" might also be added to stations and planets.

-There would need to be a point defense component for ships and bases.

-There would need to be a way to have or portray fighters intercepting each other.
Perhaps, if each fighter bay "shot"(group of fighters) pass close by each other then they would stay/"stick" to each other and slowly damage over time(DOT) each other.
These "shot" interceptions, perhaps, could be unlimited in their battles and thus a concentrated mass of fighters could be slowly destroying each other.

-Replenishing the fighter numbers at bases would be good. Also, though, maybe a very advanced component to place on very large ships could produce fighters to replenish them away from bases.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2418281 (Master Wishlist Thread)

Other fighter/carrier threads:
tm.asp?m=2417796&mpage=1&key=fighters%2 ... s&#2417796 (Carrier and fighter ideas.)
tm.asp?m=2428757&mpage=1&key=fighters%2 ... s&#2428832 (Carriers)

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: lordxorn

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

If you're going to talk realistic, than a fighter couldn't do anything more than be annoying.

Not big enough to carry what would be necessary to generate enough power to do more than scratch the paint of a capital ship.

LACs from Weber's Harrington series would make more sense.

The opposite was true in WW2 whose bombs could hit the weakest part of a battleship, it's deck. Plus a battleships main cannon could no way hit a fighter. This is why I am requesting a overhaul of the combat system otherwise just a smaller version of an escort would not be fun like Ashberry says.

However I feel this type of feature I either a separate add on or sequel.

There's the deck, and then there's the armored deck below that. While a main gun could't hit a fighter, no fighter ever sank a battleship either. Then we have the armored flight deck of the Brit CVs that pretty much brushed off kamikaze hits.

But this isn't WW2.

Hey, I'm a TIE Fighter fan myself. I took out a Star Destroyer with lasers alone while listening to Vader yell in my ear to get back to the ship. Fun? Yes. Realistic? Hardly.

What I'm saying is that, realisticly, since that word was mentioned, a fighter isn't big enough to carry a capital ship size weapon, let alone what's needed to charge it over and over. And, unlike WW2, your target very likely will have shields as well as armor.

With that said, do I think fighters ala Star Wars is a bad idea? Yes. Do I think something like LACs would make more sense realism wise? Yes. Would I play the game if the the former was put in and not the latter? Yes indeed.

BTW, I use your mod[:)] Is the Imperial March in the music? I haven't heard it yet.

[lordxorn]

I like Wade's idea of possibly having them act like components, where they are a function of a carrier. I didn't really mean for this to be a wishlist thread either, lol.

Just wanted to give DW fans an immediate look at fighters which is very limited at the moment, and 2guncohen was the brilliant mind to present them in a way shown in my youtube video.

Sorry Aurelian Imperial March is not, which is funny I would of thought it was included. Maybe I can add it in the next update. =-)

This weekend I will work on the Rebel Alliance. =-)

[Fishman]

Space fighters really don't make a lot of sense. Airplanes work because they travel in an entirely different medium from the ships they attack. As you can see in the video, the fighters offered no real advantages to the fighting. They didn't extend your range, they didn't attack any vulnerabilities that you couldn't hit, and they blew up easily and cost you the effort and resources of replacing them. Also, they looked entirely ineffectual. In most other space games, fighters are either capable of exploiting some weakness (such as bypassing shields in GSB/LEI), doing completely disproportionate damage relative to their size and cost, or outranging other weapons, and must be significantly more difficult to shoot down than regular ships. Being freely-spawned by carrier craft helps a lot, especially if they tend to get shot down. If the player has to manually intervene to replace them, this gets old and annoying fast. However, if they don't satisfy the points above, their usage becomes a lot more bizarre and esoteric: In Armada 2526, for example, fighters are no more difficult to shoot down than regular ships and do not inflict significantly disproportionate damage, so their main use is to exploit their total lack of replacement cost as disposable antimissile chaff. Not really the fighters you expected. In other cases they are simply fancier, slower-acting missiles that can occasionally double as point-defense against similar "missiles".

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: Fishman

In other cases they are simply fancier, slower-acting missiles that can occasionally double as point-defense against similar "missiles".

And, they are missiles that shoot other targets. I like that description you give. That theme with the fighter/carrier module idea I mention is my desire.

[Fishman]

Plus, fighters are simply not as GOOD as missiles: They carry 4x the delta-V needed to perform the same mission, and do less damage because they refrain from employing their most effective weapon: Themselves. What's more, they're not really all that much more reusable because as you saw in the video, they are easily killed: A single FRIED wave will incinerate the entire lot of them, making them just as dead as the missiles would have been. Fighters just don't have a lot of survivability in DW.

[lostsm]

ships are all big guns is there really a need to have fighters? i understand for the mod it's very cool, although i mean in a space fight scenario where ships are mainly classed by firepower where do fighters fit in. i suppose a good analogy would be DW space fights are akin to what WWI naval battles was envisioned to be

now if weapon systems were very expensive and limited to deploy, space carrier warfare might make sense

[Fishman]

The flaw in space carrier warfare is that with NAVAL carriers, planes FLY while ships DON'T. In SPACE, there is nothing that makes fighters intrinsically better off than ships, so a more accurate analogy would be motor gunboats.

Of course, in modern naval warfare, carriers are actually obsolete and small boats with antiship missiles dominate the field, so...

[lostsm]

so maybe the need for big ships, for this theoretical space warfare, would be for planet invasions? big ships to transport the troops, mount big guns for massive bombardment?