Changes in Fleet Tactics

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
I've been analyzing the changes current and expected with 3.14 on into the future, and especially the changes with weapons capabilities and the fact that both guns and missiles will no longer be accessible simultaneously; and thought I should share some of my findings. Fleet tactics of the UEE are pretty set in stone. A single Idris should be able to launch 3-4 Gladius, and this provides them with scouts and/or a fighter screen. These fighters are of limited use against cap ships, and are best used against an opponent's fighters. Additionally, they may grant an Idris the ability to shoot down incoming torps. Though the Idris is not a dedicated carrier, it carries enough fighters to do this job. Trouble is, now none of these fighters can use their significant missile loadout unless they disengage guns.

So I've been looking at this and running scenarios. What are the consequences for standard tactics like draw plays, where an opponent's fighters are drawn away from proper function? How does stealth ambush apply? How does one bring optimal firepower to the fight? What do the missile changes tell us about fleet engagements? Looking at the numbers and expected changes, that S1-4 weapons are best used against fighters and not especially effective against cap ships. How do we generate a "doctrine" concerning when a fighter pilot should and should not engage missiles? It's a mess.

Note that I heavily weight stealth capability, since I'm looking forward to killing Vanduul who have no such ability; so the strength of that asset may mean more to me than it would to someone else looking at fleet engagements.

So what I'm finding in a nutshell: as opposed to flying 4 Gladius or Arrows (depending upon your individual tastes) I think it may be more effective to fly 3-4 Khartu-al and a Shrike. So just observing:

---The Khartu-al is faster, nimbler and stealthier than either the Gladius or the Arrow. Trouble is it has no missiles. The Khartu-al has such fantastically improved stealth that it can fly with hot Attrition-4 lasers and a pair of industrial coolers that allow it to regain stealth over and over, and still runs cooler and quieter than the Gladius and Arrow in full stealth regalia. Consider this key.
---A single Shrike carries twice as many missiles as 3 Gladius. Yes, it's missile loadout is equivalent to 6 Gladius and these are all missiles with 10 km range.
---Placing the missiles slightly off the battlefield makes them safer, and more ready to engage at each moment.
---The slender profile of both the Khartu-al and the Shrike when parked seems to suggest more of them could be placed inside an Idris than would be Gladius or Arrow.
---Moving all the missiles off the fighters that are engaging means they can fly their guns 100% of the time, making combat simpler, easier and more efficient.

I think it remains to be seen which is better against 4 Gladius or 4 Blades, but right now my money would be on the Khartu-al, especially if backed up by a Shrike. I think it's certainly worth deeper investigation if you plan to try any fleet engagements.

Note both the Arrow and Gladius have more gun firepower than the Khartu-al, but there is a sense in which they don't need guns, if they work together with a Shrike.

I'm interested to hear pilot's thoughts. Keep in mind this is for fleet engagements only, so solo pilots who don't coordinate with others really don't apply.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Patrick Spaceman

Patrick Spaceman

Commander
Oct 4, 2020
272
917
100
RSI Handle
Patrick_Spaceman
I would be interested if they implemented some kind of fire control system with the fighters. Except not override their weapons just link in and have the fighters used as extended radar coverage to give the ability to target at greater distances, or give the ability to passively target objectives for fighters.
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
All friended sensors are supposed to share info in the future. So they will share radar coverage as well as EM and IR. This doesn't change the fact you can't use your missiles while you're using guns, unless you have a REO. IMHO, two seaters do not provide adequate bang for the buck. I still like the Vanguard, but they nerfed them big time when they turned all S5 weapons into large and cap ship use only, and that is one too many nerfs, IMHO. Vanguard will still fit an unique niche with their extended range, but not much else beyond this. At close range why would you choose them over a pair of Sabres, etc.?
 

Deroth

Grand Admiral
Donor
Sep 28, 2017
1,533
5,099
1,350
RSI Handle
Deroth1
All friended sensors are supposed to share info in the future. So they will share radar coverage as well as EM and IR. This doesn't change the fact you can't use your missiles while you're using guns, unless you have a REO. IMHO, two seaters do not provide adequate bang for the buck. I still like the Vanguard, but they nerfed them big time when they turned all S5 weapons into large and cap ship use only, and that is one too many nerfs, IMHO. Vanguard will still fit an unique niche with their extended range, but not much else beyond this. At close range why would you choose them over a pair of Sabres, etc.?
Ummm...because of survivability and the turret?
Vanguards have around five times the shields of a Sabre and nearly four times the health, and this is before ship armor is implemented.
Then there's the turret, granted it is only 2xS2s, but they have good coverage and with Badgers I believe they have over 300 rounds per gun (only been in one once for 3.14) and recharge very quickly. They don't do a lot of DPS, but with the sustained harassing fire, they do an excellent job of shooting down missiles and stripping shields off incoming fighters to keep them at bay until the pilot is ready to finish them off.
Vanguards are no longer meta solo ships, but with a gunner they're still highly effective (ran some Group HRTs in one as the turret gunner the other day, while the Hurricane kills things MUCH faster, the survivability of the Vanguard with someone running the turret made even eight NPCs on us at once not feel like a threat.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow Reaper

Bambooza

Grand Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
4,726
14,856
1,250
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
All friended sensors are supposed to share info in the future. So they will share radar coverage as well as EM and IR. This doesn't change the fact you can't use your missiles while you're using guns, unless you have a REO. IMHO, two seaters do not provide adequate bang for the buck. I still like the Vanguard, but they nerfed them big time when they turned all S5 weapons into large and cap ship use only, and that is one too many nerfs, IMHO. Vanguard will still fit an unique niche with their extended range, but not much else beyond this. At close range why would you choose them over a pair of Sabres, etc.?
While having to toggle between missiles and guns currently exists in this build I have a feeling it's just a temporary outcome of them introducing the missile role for the co-pilot and not a long-term solution and that the next release will bring it back to the pilot to not have to toggle between the two roles. In the meantime, it's a pain but at the same time fleet engagements within the current PU is limited.

So either we are trying to theory craft within the current or near-future builds (less than a year) or we are theory-crafting towards beta release where there will be far more systems in place that will impact fleet tactics.

One point with missiles is they do want to be able to shoot them down as well as the possibility of some fighters to outmaneuver missiles especially the heavier slower ones vs lighter fighters as well as the impact of missile types and countermeasures.

As for light fighters in fleet tactics they really will have three different distinct roles.

  • Interception of both launched torpedoes as well as incoming bombers. This group needs to hang back with the capital ships and jump on identified launched torpedoes and incoming bombers and their support wings. Here stealth will only be beneficial in giving the fighter an advantage in being missile locked on but most of these engagements are going to be guns on target so faster and maneuverable or hitting hard will be a higher priority.
  • Bomber escort. Fighters even heavy fighters are going to find it hard to do any sort of measurable damage against capital ships while it is possible they can target vulnerable modules once the shields come down I have a feeling that armor is going to easily protect against any sort of damage the fighters can dish out. Which is why having bombers and protecting said bombers is going to be critical in large fleet battles. With some bombers stealth will be beneficial but others stealth will not as important. More than anything hitting hard is going to be more advantageous as you don't want to give the enemy enough time to blow up your bomber even if they die shortly after.
  • Finding and destroying support ships. Ships that are rearming, refueling, repairing, medical ships, and scanning ships will be targets of opportunity. While not directly involved with destroying or preventing the destruction of capital ships they do play a role and if take out can provide a tactical advantage. Here more than the other two groups stealth fighters will have the biggest advantage as it will allow them to sneak around the battlefield snip a support ship and then disappear again. But at the same time, this might end up having the smallest impact on the battle as it's unknown how long these battles will last. Short intense battles will not give much time to rearm, refuel and recover ejected pilots. (more than anything else beyond the first year the limiting factor typically always ends up being the number of player pilots in a given area as the economy becomes trivial, so fleets will not be balanced so much on economics but on optimal makeup vs the expected target fleet composition and thus the meta will be born)
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
I agree with all that but I'm not sure how many other roles we may find for light fighters in fleet engagements. Given current stats, the big torps have a speed of just 500m/s, so it may well be the best way to clear a path for them, is to actually escort the torps to their target, and defend against attacking fighters as they appear. That introduces the questions of how best to do this. Lessons learned after the introduction of the P-51 in Europe suggest fighters flying escort to big torps might be most effective by flying in front of the torps and attacking any defenders. Regardless of how that will settle itself, I doubt the big bombers can expect much success without some sort of protection to the torps. In fact, I think what we may often see with the big bombers is the first torp wasted to draw defenders out, and spotting ships attacking defenders to clear a path for later torps. Whatever the details though, these functions all need blinding speed and the space between opponents 50 km apart will be managed in part by raw speed. I don't think medium fighters like the Sabre are going to prove the best choice. In fact I'm back to wondering whether "ultralight" fighters like the Razor EX can do what's required.

My own prejudice is that draw plays that eliminate enemy fighters are going to become common, prior to the actual fleet engagement. That is where stealth is most important. Secondarily is that tiny ships flying in a 50 km battlespace are going to be invisible to enemy fleets past 7-8 km, and refusing your enemy to know where your fighters are is very powerful. 3-4 Khartu-al or Razor EX running interference with a single Shrike in support seems to me an able torp shield, especially if the enemy can't see them most of the time.

Just to add a final note to all this: to the best of my knowledge, still no one has cut the wings off a Razor and flown it in vacuum to see how it handles. If you can do this and if it still handles like a race machine, then a single Polaris can carry an entire wing of escort fighters. This is a huge big deal. Even the tiny Razor EX can be mighty if backed up by 8 Thunderbolt III missiles.
 
Last edited:

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
They don't do a lot of DPS, but with the sustained harassing fire, they do an excellent job of shooting down missiles. . .(ran some Group HRTs in one as the turret gunner the other day, while the Hurricane kills things MUCH faster, the survivability of the Vanguard with someone running the turret made even eight NPCs on us at once not feel like a threat.)
Wow. So you were actually able to shoot down incoming missiles from the Vanguard turret?
 
  • o7
Reactions: Deroth

Bambooza

Grand Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
4,726
14,856
1,250
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
Interesting ideas.

At this point with so many loops still not implemented or talked about it's one of those things, we will need to wait and see. Past games of Chris flagged fired torpedoes so they were easy to identify and they did not have a lot of hitpoints and if that is carried over it would be better to escort the bomber which would attempt to launch it as late as it could while still surviving the run vs launching the torpedo early and hoping it would not be identified and shot at. As it would be targeted over the escort ships attempting to protect it with their shields/armor.

View: https://youtu.be/zjhFQR7w0F0?t=884


As for the Razor EX, I do not see it having enough firepower to do anything productive beyond torpedo interceptor once shields and armor come online. And here any of the racers could be very effective at making the bomber effective gap so small that they do not make it in range to launch their payload thus taking their damage potential out of play.

It's really in the protecting bombers and destroying bombers that ships all of the fighters come into their own as each has their own advantages as seen in arena commander. Some might have high ttk with ballistics but then will need to fall back to rearm while others with energy weapons might take a bit longer to kill their target but they don't have to fall back and can continuously engage targets. It's also where Hammerheads come into their own as they provide a sphere of protection for fighters and bombers to fall back and regroup or hook up with resupply ships.

Once again I am not sure how effective stealth is going to be for bomber escorts or bomber interceptors as combat is going to be close and personal and most of it is going to be within visual range. CIG has continuously pushed fighter balance in this direction and so outside of sneaking around the battlefield to snipe support ships your going to be in close-quarter combat with other fighters and the only real advantage stealth will have is on how long it takes them to acquire a lock on you if they are using missiles at all which most fighters don't carry many.

So at this point in time, it comes across to me that fighter combat is going to be very much like arena commander and that being able to hit hard, and either take a few hits or outmaneuver the enemy is going to be the meta and the divergence of gameplay styles. As for stealth I really do not see its place in fleet engagements outside specific flanking tactics. Stealth will play a huge part in bounties, and pirates and many other small group activities but when it comes to fleet engagements the element of surprise is limited.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
I've been analyzing the changes current and expected with 3.14 on into the future, and especially the changes with weapons capabilities and the fact that both guns and missiles will no longer be accessible simultaneously; and thought I should share some of my findings. Fleet tactics of the UEE are pretty set in stone. A single Idris should be able to launch 3-4 Gladius, and this provides them with scouts and/or a fighter screen. These fighters are of limited use against cap ships, and are best used against an opponent's fighters. Additionally, they may grant an Idris the ability to shoot down incoming torps. Though the Idris is not a dedicated carrier, it carries enough fighters to do this job. Trouble is, now none of these fighters can use their significant missile loadout unless they disengage guns.

So I've been looking at this and running scenarios. What are the consequences for standard tactics like draw plays, where an opponent's fighters are drawn away from proper function? How does stealth ambush apply? How does one bring optimal firepower to the fight? What do the missile changes tell us about fleet engagements? Looking at the numbers and expected changes, that S1-4 weapons are best used against fighters and not especially effective against cap ships. How do we generate a "doctrine" concerning when a fighter pilot should and should not engage missiles? It's a mess.

Note that I heavily weight stealth capability, since I'm looking forward to killing Vanduul who have no such ability; so the strength of that asset may mean more to me than it would to someone else looking at fleet engagements.

So what I'm finding in a nutshell: as opposed to flying 4 Gladius or Arrows (depending upon your individual tastes) I think it may be more effective to fly 3-4 Khartu-al and a Shrike. So just observing:

---The Khartu-al is faster, nimbler and stealthier than either the Gladius or the Arrow. Trouble is it has no missiles. The Khartu-al has such fantastically improved stealth that it can fly with hot Attrition-4 lasers and a pair of industrial coolers that allow it to regain stealth over and over, and still runs cooler and quieter than the Gladius and Arrow in full stealth regalia. Consider this key.
---A single Shrike carries twice as many missiles as 3 Gladius. Yes, it's missile loadout is equivalent to 6 Gladius and these are all missiles with 10 km range.
---Placing the missiles slightly off the battlefield makes them safer, and more ready to engage at each moment.
---The slender profile of both the Khartu-al and the Shrike when parked seems to suggest more of them could be placed inside an Idris than would be Gladius or Arrow.
---Moving all the missiles off the fighters that are engaging means they can fly their guns 100% of the time, making combat simpler, easier and more efficient.

I think it remains to be seen which is better against 4 Gladius or 4 Blades, but right now my money would be on the Khartu-al, especially if backed up by a Shrike. I think it's certainly worth deeper investigation if you plan to try any fleet engagements.

Note both the Arrow and Gladius have more gun firepower than the Khartu-al, but there is a sense in which they don't need guns, if they work together with a Shrike.

I'm interested to hear pilot's thoughts. Keep in mind this is for fleet engagements only, so solo pilots who don't coordinate with others really don't apply.
My thoughts.
  • Fighters just became more important since Hammerheads just got nerfed to the point they are not likely to be capable of defending themselves, much less act as a fleet escort, so Combat Air Patrol (CAP) just got important. I am thinking Hornets over Gladiuses for this role now, since it is more likely to be able to intercept incoming ordinance.
  • The Idris is likely limited to 3 carrier combat craft (call xs pad size) and a Snub, utility craft. (Whether that is bespoke to an Argo Snub or not is an open question.)
  • The Ideal complement is likely 2 Fighters (Gladius, Hornet, Sabre, or Arrow as CAP) then an AWACS type craft (Terrapin, 315P or R variant of the Hornet), a Strike craft (Gladius or Eclipse) or a stealth scout (Eclipse or Sabre performs double duty in this role).
  • The Khartu-Al seems rather large to be in an Idris or Polaris Hangar, isn't it size 3?
  • I think the equivalent to the Idris is not, properly, US Navy, but more Soviet Leningrad or Kiev Class.
In general I think you are on the right track.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deroth

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
  • Bomber escort. Fighters even heavy fighters are going to find it hard to do any sort of measurable damage against capital ships while it is possible they can target vulnerable modules once the shields come down I have a feeling that armor is going to easily protect against any sort of damage the fighters can dish out. Which is why having bombers and protecting said bombers is going to be critical in large fleet battles. With some bombers stealth will be beneficial but others stealth will not as important. More than anything hitting hard is going to be more advantageous as you don't want to give the enemy enough time to blow up your bomber even if they die shortly after.
A Size 9 torpedo crosses the engagement envelope of defensive guns in less than 3 seconds. A Retaliator can launch a 4 torp spread again, so even against a Hammerhead, at least one will get through.

If fighters can't damage large ships, then nobody will bother building Carriers or fighters (Star Trek, The Expanse, The Honor Harrington series). But this is Chris Roberts and this game is influenced by Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5 and, of course, Wing Commander so fighters will be able to seriously damage, if not destroy Cap ships.
 
  • o7
Reactions: maynard and Deroth

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
I haven't ever liked the HH in part because making its center hollow seems stupid past understanding, and in part because even with 6X4S4 guns, those 6 players will do more damage in fighters and they can be in six different locations and moving at much higher speeds.

I don't know if the Khartu-al needs an S3 landing pad. It is very long and narrow, so could be. Can't solve the Idris question without specific Idris airstrip numbers. I think though, the best option may yet be 6-8 Razors and a Shrike or two.

 
  • Drunk
Reactions: Deroth

Deroth

Grand Admiral
Donor
Sep 28, 2017
1,533
5,099
1,350
RSI Handle
Deroth1
Wow. So you were actually able to shoot down incoming missiles from the Vanguard turret?
YES!!!
Since I was messing around with the keybinds on my new VKBs anyways to figure out what should be where, I'd messed with the different target cycling options and one of them let me cycle to missiles, at which point I saw there was an aiming pip on the missile I'd just targeted...so I did what any reasonable TESTie would do when in a turret with a ton of ammo, I unleashed as much ammo as I could at the aiming pip for the missile to see what would happen, and it went POOF, cycled to the second one, tried again, but it was so close and going so fast I couldn't get it but at least it zoomed right past us.)

I haven't ever liked the HH in part because making its center hollow seems stupid past understanding, and in part because even with 6X4S4 guns, those 6 players will do more damage in fighters and they can be in six different locations and moving at much higher speeds.

I don't know if the Khartu-al needs an S3 landing pad. It is very long and narrow, so could be. Can't solve the Idris question without specific Idris airstrip numbers. I think though, the best option may yet be 6-8 Razors and a Shrike or two.
Considering those turrets will have around 10x as many shots per gun as ships with similar weapon loadouts and recharge quickly, those turrets are quite effective now. That is pretty much the point of the capacitor gameplay changes, to make turrets be a viable position to have someone in over taking another ship.
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
. . .it would be better to escort the bomber which would attempt to launch it as late as it could. . .
I think that depends upon target and other circumstances, but bear in mind a few salient issues.

Big torps have a range of 50km while S10 spinal mounts have a range of only 30km. This may change but this is the current plan. Torps have a speed of 500 m/s, while spinal mounts are 2,000 m/s. Ships like the Retaliator and Polaris will be shattered by spinal mount hits, and generally won't want to allow themselves into their range. So these kinds of conflicts I think are most likely to be started at close to 50 km, and ended with the large ships significantly closer as the target tries to rush the shooter.

So, say you're a Polaris Captain. You have had your scouts scan the area and know there is a Void Bomber (3 spinal mounts) and 3 Blade Escorts in your area. Two of your Razors fly spotter and stay within 25 km of the Void Bomber but out of sight in order to keep it lit for the torps. You launch 4 S10 torps at max range (100 second travel time), and 4 more Razor EX fly escort about 4 km in front of the torps, while your Shrike flies support of them about 1 km behind the torps. How are the Blades going to stop your torps from reaching their targets?
 

Bambooza

Grand Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
4,726
14,856
1,250
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
There are some assumptions made here that the All About Alpha 3.14 puts into question.
missiles and torpedoes will have a multiple speeds based upon size and type as well as they will not fly at constant speed. They now use a IFCS2 system which works very similary to ship thrust with their own fuel as well as three stages of flight. Boost to top speed, to intercept phase to track target to final phase of full tracking to trying and hit the target.
That missiles and torpedoes will have beter tracking the longer you lock onto the target this will also allow for dumb firing which doesn't require any sort of lock prior to firing.

View: https://youtu.be/olnPAFQ314g?t=1354


View: https://youtu.be/flMqoID2QR8?t=380


I know the old data showed missiles and torpedoes having a set speed of 500 m/s but I would not hold that as immutable and would fully expect that missiles will retain their higher speed while torpedoes will get progressively slower as their size increases.

So yes a Polaris captain might just try and launch all four torpedoes at max range and hope for the best or they might risk a lot more and get danger close to the Vanduul ship and increase their chances that most of the torpedoes will hit the target. Still not sure what sort of protection Razors are capable of providing as if I was an interceptor I'd target the torpedo first and then the escorts and it's not like the flight path of the torpedo is not easily tracked in a straight line nor will the Razers be able to intercept and protect the torpedo from any incoming fire. While they might be able to engage the enemy fighter they would still have failed at their primary task and it's not like the Polaris has an infinite supply of torpedoes nor does staying around not increase its chances of being targeted by an enemy capital ship/bomber and blown up.

A Size 9 torpedo crosses the engagement envelope of defensive guns in less than 3 seconds. A Retaliator can launch a 4 torp spread again, so even against a Hammerhead, at least one will get through.

If fighters can't damage large ships, then nobody will bother building Carriers or fighters (Star Trek, The Expanse, The Honor Harrington series). But this is Chris Roberts and this game is influenced by Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5 and, of course, Wing Commander so fighters will be able to seriously damage, if not destroy Cap ships.
Fighters will have a chance to damage large ships like the Constellation, retaliator, and Perseus it's just doesn't seem like they will have much if any chance to damage capital ships. As you get into the large ships and Capital ships they will be most likely targeted by other capital ships, bombers like Eclipse and Retaliator as well as special ships like the Ares and Perseus.

And yes the Hammerheads nemesis will be ships like the Retaliator and Polaris and their success against it will be very much on the speed of their torpedoes and how easy it is to track and shot them down.

I had thought about using the Hammerhead to provide anti-fighter cover for bomber wings but I worry that the Hammerheads speed would make it an easy target for the enemy's capital ships like the Idris leaving the bombers unescorted where they would be better protected by fast fighters and take advantage of capital ship gun-tracking speed limitations and blind spots in turret cover arcs.

So while capital ships can't be damaged by fighters there will be a huge need for Carrier ships to bring along the fighters needed for the engagement. While it would be possible for battles to simply be capital ships shooting capital ships it's going to be bombers who will have a field day with unprotected capital ships as they can shoot with impunity at capital ships and just hang out in the blind spots. It's fighters that will protect this from happening and it's going to be fighters that protect bombers on their target runs. It's also going to be carriers that bring not only the fighters but dropships as well. As ships blowing up like we currently see when their HP reaches zero will become stories of lore outside small ships or large ships being targeted by rail guns.
That we can have these battles
View: https://youtu.be/CqE4VSnT5sc?t=38
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow Reaper

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Still not sure what sort of protection Razors are capable of providing as if I was an interceptor I'd target the torpedo first and then the escorts and it's not like the flight path of the torpedo is not easily tracked in a straight line nor will the Razers be able to intercept and protect the torpedo from any incoming fire.
So just for context, at the beginning of American and British bombing of Germany in WWII, the Brits chose to night bomb only, and the Americans got their asses handed to them by bombing during the day. They had something like 40% loss rates until the P51D was fielded, which had a range long enough that it could escort the bombers through their entire run. Still, the escorts were ineffective until they learned how to use them, which was to fly them in advance of the bombers and attack incoming fighters.

If a fighter is flying in to attack a torp, and it has to face fighters incoming first, as well as S3 missiles, I think it has to veer away from its target or be destroyed. Stock Razors do 1,800 dps at close range and a pair of Thunderbolts does something like 9,400.

It seems possible one could shepherd in a bunch of torps with just a MIS following, if it can track and lock 3-4 targets at once. However, if AI can destroy a torp with a turret, I don't see how torps would ever be of any use. This all seems would require much deeper nerfs to AI than anticipated.
 
Last edited:

Bambooza

Grand Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
4,726
14,856
1,250
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
So just for context, at the beginning of American and British bombing of Germany in WWII, the Brits chose to night bomb only, and the Americans got their asses handed to them by bombing during the day. They had something like 40% loss rates until the P51D was fielded, which had a range long enough that it could escort the bombers through their entire run. Still, the escorts were ineffective until they learned how to use them, which was to fly them in advance of the bombers and attack incoming fighters.
While this is true I do not agree with your projecting fighter protection of the bombers to be the same as fighter protection of the torpedoes themselves. I have been a large advocate for fighters as I feel that they will have the biggest impact on the outcome of most fleet engagements. Outside of a fleet of Javelins (6 or more), any capital ship only fleet is going to be easily outmatched by a bomber fleet. As I mentioned previously it's fighters that will counter bombers and it is fighters that will protect bombers and its fighter pilots who will be having the most fun.


If a fighter is flying in to attack a torp, and it has to face fighters incoming first, as well as S3 missiles, I think it has to veer away from its target or be destroyed. Stock Razors do 1,800 dps at close range and a pair of Thunderbolts does something like 9,400.

It seems possible one could shepherd in a bunch of torps with just a MIS following, if it can track and lock 3-4 targets at once. However, if AI can destroy a torp with a turret, I don't see how torps would ever be of any use. This all seems would require much deeper nerfs to AI than anticipated.
Being able to destroy torpedoes has been a part of all Chris's previous games and given the AI updates on targeting specifically calling out Torpedoes it looks like this trend is holding true. I am sure they will continue to balance pass on the survivability of torpedoes their speed and damage dealt. CIG has also been very vocal on risk/reward and so in that I can easily see that the risk/reward balance would be geared towards how much of a lock you acquired prior to launching the torpedoes and how long their flight time was before hitting the target. The other factors would be how many torpedoes were launched and at what vector to the ship would also play a part in the success. Most of the large ships have large areas where turrets have limited to no coverage and so it would be up to the bomber pilot to take advantage of that.

My only reserve has been to the regional concept of the effectiveness of stealth craft in a fleet engagement. And would their sacrifice in other systems be beneficial? While we do not know how much target information can be shared between the fleet it's still questionable how impactful stealth will be outside of playing on the flank and picking off support ships. And if target information is shared then the capital ships are going to be radar pinging like crazy as it's no longer about keeping their signatures low but about lighting up every ship like a Christmas tree.
 
  • o7
Reactions: Deroth
Forgot your password?