Fighters verse Type S scout ships

[Blue Ghost]

So, which is more effective in fleet action; a squadron of fighters, or a squadron of scout ships?

Keep in mind that I've rarely done High-Guard (the last time I did I wasn't running the adventure, and really wasn't sure what was going on. I was used to the basic space combat rules).

 

[veltyen]

So, which is more effective in fleet action; a squadron of fighters, or a squadron of scout ships?

The fighters if it is in this system. The scout ships if it is in the next.

 

[mike wightman]

Heavy fighters? TL?

Scout ships are a lot cheaper than heavy fighters in Supp 9.

 

[atpollard]

I get the most bang for the buck by opening the cargo doors from a Type S, exposing the cargo hold to space. This allows me to purchase the cheaper Type S, but still get the rules benefits for being under 100 tons (97 dTons without the cargo hold).

 

[tim_manley]

Which rule system?

If your'e doing straight LBB2 then fighters are better. You can buy a hell of a lot more of them for the same price as the scout ship.

 

[mike wightman]

He does mention High Guard, and a purpose built fighter will beat a scout every time - except breaking off by jumping

The fighters cost a lot more though - under High Guard that is.

 

[tim_manley]

He does mention High Guard, and a purpose built fighter will beat a scout every time - except breaking off by jumping

The fighters cost a lot more though - under High Guard that is.

Ah yeah, B5.

I've been refreshing myself in B2 so have that on the brain lately....

 

[Blue Ghost]

I guess fighters have a better agility rating than Scout ships, but the Scout has a turret. Doesn't the turret offset the fighters ability to maneuvre?

Anyway, I'm curious for some Traveller projects I've been working on.

 

[mike wightman]

Under High Guard rules, no, having a turret gives the scout no advantage.

The fighter will have armour, agility, a better computer and a higher weapon factor (if I've designed it ) than the scout.

A scout ship's main use to a fleet would be just that - scouting. Visiting systems the fleet will jump to, acting as a courier for info and orders that sort of thing.

It is no use in the line of battle or in a screen since it would die far too easily.

 

[sabredog]

Since almost any hit under Book 2 will hurt a fighter more than a scout, the scout has the edge in damage capacity.

The scout has the computer capacity to enhance it's defensive and offensive capabilities, and the fighter doesn't - as long as the strictest interpretation of Book 2 rules is used.

The scout can carry more weapons that will have a chance of hitting and neutralizing the fighter. in fact, if the scout only carries missiles, it can maximize the chance of getting the fighter.

On the other hand, the scout only has the edge as long as it has a turret, but then of course, provided the J-Drive is still working (and fuel is present) the scout can leave at it's choosing.

 

[sabredog]

You can also get 1.5 fighters for every scout...so beyond the one-on-one I described above, the fighter has the edge over the scout. In my opinion and experience. Especially in High Guard.

 

[mike wightman]

You can't get a fighter equipped with a good computer - needed in High Guard combat - for anywhere near the same price as a scout if you use High Guard to design it And by the time you pay for the power plant to power said computer, agility 6 and weapons your fighter adds up to significantly more than a humble scout ship

 

[far-trader]

EDIT II: Apparently I goofed on the type S prices, and it comes out almost the same as the Fighter, so it gets even worse being pretty much a one for one fight based on cost...

So, which is more effective in fleet action; a squadron of fighters, or a squadron of scout ships?

My first suspicion was fighters, all else being equal. So for fun I decided to do it in HG.

First to the "all else being equal" bit...

Start with a base model TL9 100ton type S Scout/Courier with the double turret loaded with a pair of beam lasers for F2. Outfit the model/1bis with the required software (nothing special) and a typical crew (more on that below) of Pilot and Gunner. Engineer and Navigator optional. Cost about MCr31.

Then (I purpose built) a TL9 50ton Heavy Fighter with a triple turret loaded with 3 pulse lasers. The fighter is 6G with 3EP and a model/2 computer with the required software (nothing special) and a typical crew (more on that below) of Pilot and Gunner. The fighter has armor factor 6 (didn't need it as it turned out) and a small stateroom for the crew to stay on patrol. There's even a half ton of cargo space left over. Cost about MCr49.

So, for the same money we can get 3 Scouts to 2 Fighters so that decided my squadron sizes for the engagement. The Scouts would be jumping in from 1 parsec leaving them 25tons of fuel (with a bingo break off by jumping of 15tons for J1 and 1 week). In other words one fuel hit and they should break off, two fuel hits and they can't (mission kill).

EDIT: Ack, now I see the confusion I caused and was operating under. While I did recreate the type S in HG I forgot to follow through with the math on the fuel calcs for bingo jump out. I had the fuel right for the Scout in the workup, but not in the example. A moot point as it turned out, but the source of the confusion perhaps.

Let's get back to that crew thing again. In fairness I decided that gunners are just skill-1 (no software to matter anyway) and the pilots are 6 levels for each side giving each Scout a Pilot-2 (and no tactical agility advantage) and each Fighter a Ship's Boat-3 (for a tactical agility advantage of 1 each).

The Scouts jump in and the Fighters spot them, time to rumble...

Turn 1 - The Fighters got initiative and the game starts at long range. The Scouts shoot first deciding to concentrate on the lead Fighter, they need 12+ to hit total, and miss completely. The Fighters return fire concentrating on the lead Scout, they need 8+ to hit and one does, for a fuel hit. S1 is bingo fuel for break off by jumping. The Scouts assess the situation and consider doing that but hold off (because 1 it would be boring for me so soon, and 2 they won't have had time to do anything yet, not even plot a jump out).

Turn 2 - The Fighters again get the initiative and move to Close range. The Scouts again concentrate fire, need only an 11+, and all miss again. The Fighters return fire, this time on S2, needing only 7+ and score one hit, on the turret, dropping it's usp to 1.

Turn 3 - The Fighters retain initiative and stay Close. The Scouts gamely plug away trying to hit the lead Fighter, needing 11+, 12+ and 11+ and all miss again. The Fighters return fire on S3 still at 7+ and score one hit, also on the turret, dropping it's usp to 1 also.

Turn 4 - The Fighters still have initiative and stick Close. The Scouts flail away again at the lead Fighter, needing 11+, 12+ and 12+, and not surprisingly they miss again. The Fighters zero in on S1 deeming S2 and S3 mostly harmless, needing only the 7+ again they both hit this time, for 3 hits ( a W-2 and a W-1) on the turret, pretty much destroying it. The Scouts wisely decide to break off by jumping out the next turn.

Turn 5 - The Scouts finally get initiative and move to Long range. The Fighters have one last shot at them and decide to each take one Scout, S2 and S3, needing 8+... they both miss. The Scouts can't effectively return fire, needing 13+ for the two functional weapon platforms, but they are happy to just get away with their ship's and lives relatively intact and jump out...

And the winner is...

Fighters. Unless all the Scouts needed was a few turns in system to collect data and jump out to return it to the Navy Fleet waiting a parsec away...

:devil:

 

[far-trader]

Of course at a different TL the outcome could be a bit more one sided, probably for the Fighters

I might run it again with missiles instead. And maybe one each of missiles vs lasers. If I don't do some other stuff I should be doing instead...

 

[Blue Ghost]

Interesting. I guess maybe I better reread through High Guard (yet again).

 

[Ganidirsii O'Flynn]

The problem with High Guard is that it doesn't bring the electronic detection battle into play, really.

Theoretically, according to the canon text, the aft-port 'lounge' area should be taken up with 'sensor equipment', which is pulled when the IISS places a given Type S on Detatched Duty. None of these 'sensors' are given much description in Book 5 at all, and therefore it isn't in Supp 9. Now I happily grant that a Type S will have a different sensor suite (or electronics suite) for different missions. A courier would have electronics optimized for carrying messages, for example, and an Exploration Office scout would have survey equipment. But given the relative tonnages (that is, room for electronics) shouldn't the scouts have a detection advantage over the fighters?

My arguement here is 'different missions, different spacecraft'. The fighter is optimized for combat and the scout is optimized to be an IISS jack-of-all-trades. Hardly a fair comparison. That's like comparing an LCVP (a Higgins boat) to a PT Boat. Same rough tonnage, WAY different missions. That's like asking 'who would win a dogfight, a PBY Catalina or a Corsair? They both have the same number of guns, after all...'.

 

[mike wightman]

Nice combat example Dan, but shouldn't the fighters score 1 auto critical hit every time they hit?
USP #2 pulse lasers (use beam in future #3 that way) vs USP #1 size = 1 auto crit

(beam lasers would give 2 ).

 

[far-trader]

Nice combat example Dan, but shouldn't the fighters score 1 auto critical hit every time they hit?
USP #2 pulse lasers (use beam in future #3 that way) vs USP #1 size = 1 auto crit

(beam lasers would give 2 ).

Dang! I forgots all about auto crits! You're right. OK, those Scouts are probably toast then. Good thing the Scouts never hit too

EDIT: Ah, armor, that's the other thing it's good for Absorbing auto crits. It's a good thing.

I went with pulse for the better damage being the same to hit at usp 2 or 3, and the small cost savings trying to make the match equal MCr wise. The auto crits would make me rethink that choice.

 

[far-trader]

...My arguement here is 'different missions, different spacecraft'. The fighter is optimized for combat and the scout is optimized to be an IISS jack-of-all-trades. Hardly a fair comparison.

True enough but it was the one proposed by Blue Ghost so that's what I went with.

I've often thought the IISS might (should) have a more combat capable type S. One perhaps sporting a small torpedo bay and in that mission space (10dtons in my design). That'd be a fairer fight, maybe, more a PT boat than a spotter craft.

 

[far-trader]

I just had to roll the crits before heading for bed

Turn 1 - S1 Critical hit to the computer, it explodes and burns from an overload and is destroyed, mission kill.

Turn 2 - S2 Critical to fire control renders it unable to shoot and this ship is hightailing it for jump space.

Turn 3 - S3 Critical to the jump drive destroying it for another mission kill and preventing it from following S2 out by jumping, but they can still fight.

Turn 4 - Seeing as S1 is a mission kill and S2 isn't around instead of those 2 hits to S1's turret it'll be S3 getting nailed so now it's also toothless, and with a critical hit on the power plant it's not going anywhere (the second crit was Screens)

Turn 5 - the fight is all but over, S2 has escaped by jumping in Turn 3 and S1 and S3 can surrender or die.

Or something like that. Still a possible mission success for the IISS if all they needed was a quick scan of the system. A pricey success though.