Space fightercraft in RPGs.

[amanojaku]

I know this thread has a lot of potential flammability, but I hope people here can discuss the idea without it becoming a flame war.

 

What do you think of fightercraft in space?

 

I know some people, thinking stuff like star wars, dismiss the idea, but what about some form of small, relatively heavily armed assault vessel designed to serve as, say, a "gunship" type vessel?

 

I think it depends mostly on the technology you decide to use. If you have FTL drives that are huge and can only be mounted on large vessels, the idea of "fighter carriers" may work if you have small, effective STL drives. If you have some sort of inertialless drive, maybe fighters work even better.

 

In one SFRPG I like, fightercraft were made plausible because most capital ships carrier fairly weak weapons mounted in turrets meant to engage targets tens of thousands of miles range, and as such the gear needed to keep the beam focused at such ranges took up as much or more space than the weapon, and the 3d factor of space combat made turret weapons often necessary as the enemy can come from anywhere.

 

So most spacecraft carrier weapons not much more, if any, more powerful than mall vehicle weapons in terms of damage. but could engage targets at thousands of kilometers instead of tens of kilometers.

 

Now some vehicles could and did carry heavier weapons, usually mounted in fixed mounts that could only fire in a limited arc. (Small spinal mounts.)

 

The justification for fighters was that they had no FTL drive, limited duration and life support, and could carry a fairly potent weapon in a fixed mount that could threaten a larger ship in addition to mounting enough armor to defend themselves from some turret weapon hits.

 

Again, some think space combat will be all huge ships with massive defenses and such, and small ships would be vaped on sight. Some think small fighters would work in a serious SF game. I'm curious what people here might think.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

I'm not sure exactly what your definition of 'fightercraft' is, here. In my campaign setting, there aren't any single- or two-man fighters, but there are small vessels which fill the same role as PT boats, with similar crew and armaments. (About 16 crew, and a rack of AWESOMEs.*)

 

*Atomic Warhead-Equipped Spacecraft Ordinance MissilE

[amanojaku]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Well, yes, those would do. Sounds like the 'fghters" haldeman had in "the forever war". I suppose any small manned craft that were carried/serviced by a larger unit and were mostly weapons and tactical systems would count as fightercraft.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

The general consensus seems to be "fighters are unrealistic in space combat." In fact, it seems the consensus is Drone Ships, Relativistic Kinetic-Kill missiles, and a variety of other arguably unfun concepts.

 

So do what makes you happy, what seems fun, which we all know is "Space Fighters are IN." Unless you are going for "hard sci-fi" which can be painfully unfun ("OK you get shot, your life support fails, you die.")

 

On a side note... what ever happened to Nyrath?

[phookz]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Nyrath gave up on these forums almost a year ago. This was his last post: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/77648-Solar-Systems-Like-Ours-in-the-Minority?p=1972811#post1972811.

 

It's a shame, he had a lot of good stuff to offer.

[Tasha]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Nyrath gave up on these forums almost a year ago. This was his last post: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/77648-Solar-Systems-Like-Ours-in-the-Minority?p=1972811#post1972811.

 

It's a shame, he had a lot of good stuff to offer.

 

Sometimes people need a break from these boards. Either that or they explode in some spectacular way that makes Dan Ban them forever. Hopefully Nyrath will be back, I really enjoy his projectRho site.

[Silverhawk]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

In my campaign setting, there aren't any single- or two-man fighters, but there are small vessels which fill the same role as PT boats, with similar crew and armaments. (About 16 crew, and a rack of AWESOMEs.*)

 

*Atomic Warhead-Equipped Spacecraft Ordinance MissilE

 

These sound like the LAC's (Light Attack Craft) from David Weber's Honor Harrington novels. Small craft that pack a punch that you can't ignore.

 

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

These sound like the LAC's (Light Attack Craft) from David Weber's Honor Harrington novels. Small craft that pack a punch that you can't ignore.

 

 

They're kinda like that, but not as specialized: they have larger crews and their own FTL drives. I'm using a variation on the 'hyper limit' concept. Weber uses this, as do most settings with FTL spacecraft, to prevent a battlefleet from materializing out of hyperspace right on top of their primary objective; they have to fight their way across at least part of the target's system in normal space, and the enemy can see them coming. The 'twist' I put on it is that smaller spacecraft have a much closer limit.

 

This separates the fleet into heavy warships which can only operate their FTL drives in deep space, and lighter craft which can penetrate much deeper into the system while still in hyper. Of course, the local defenses don't need to go into hyper, and can build as large as they like, which makes raids using these smaller spacecraft very risky. In peacetime, they're similar to PT Boats, patrolling 'shallows' where larger vessels can't function. In wartime they're more like U-boats, undertaking extremely dangerous surprise-attack missions from which some of them don't return. Service on these Intruder class spacecraft is a hazardous but prestigious assignment.

[Grymour]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

I am of two minds on this subject... on the one hand I love the idea of small fighter craft (ala Star Wars), however I know that realistically they are unfeasible. I used to include them in my games only because my players seemed to expect them. Had one player that always played an ace pilot type and would have a cow if there were no small craft for him to fly around in.

 

I usually modeled my fighter craft after the vessels used on Babylon 5.. no aerodynamic turns or anything like that. I felt and still feel that it had the feel that I was looking for from space battles. However, this did not sit well with said player... so I scrapped the game and moved onto a fantasy game.

 

Second mind, it always seems that in any space game, you only have one or maybe two people that want to play fighter jocks and the rest... well they seem to have to sit on the sidelines every time you give face time to the fighter aces. I eventually concluded that it was just not in the best interest to have craft that small in the game. Especially since a craft that small realistically can't take that much damage and not explode.

 

So, when I revamped my space hero game a few years back, I went with a concept similar to both Xavier's and David Webber's.. the LAC. The players that want to be ace pilots, still can be, and the rest of the players can fill other roles on board the attack craft. Now I must mention, unlike Xavier, my small attack craft are not FTL capable. They must be brought in on a larger ship and launched in system. This I stole directly from the Honor Harrington books

 

All in all I do like the concept of fighter craft that are not huge ships of war, I just don't see really small ones being feasible weapons platforms with any kind of realistic survival rate, to do any good in protracted engagement.

[Escafarc]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

The only time I've used "fighters'" was a Alien Wars campaign that was modelled after Space Above and Beyond with a little Black Sheep Squadron. If I was to do another Star Hero game I would go with the larger LACS myself.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

One important thing about giving the LAC its own FTL capability: if you're using it for the PC's ship, then they've got a degree of autonomy they wouldn't have if they were dependent on a 'mother ship' to travel from star to star. This can be either good or bad, depending on how you want to structure the campaign.

[Grymour]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Never actually thought about that.. hmmm, may have to go back and look things over a bit. However, if my crew has there way we will be rebooting an older campaign called "Indigo One". So it may not even come up. Although knowing my group they will eventually end up having some sort of attack craft anyway LOL.

[Spence]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Space fighters and whether they are effective depend on the setting you choose to use.

 

For my belief for the real world as I imagine it will be I do not think a small space fighter such as we see in BSG, SW or like shows will ever happen.

 

But for an RPG? Certainly, yes. I have used all versions up to and including space dragons with riders launching from immense sailing ships that ply the ether.

[amanojaku]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Space fighters and whether they are effective depend on the setting you choose to use.

 

For my belief for the real world as I imagine it will be I do not think a small space fighter such as we see in BSG, SW or like shows will ever happen.

 

But for an RPG? Certainly, yes. I have used all versions up to and including space dragons with riders launching from immense sailing ships that ply the ether.

 

 

Well, maybe fighterplane type fightercraft are not plausible, but how about small craft more like a PT boat from WW2? I suppose in an era of huge ships something like a PT boat could be believed as it could have effective weapons, armor, defenses, etc, without having to have space for a large crew, long term resources, spare parts, etc.

 

In terms of short term combat effectiveness per ton of mass/megacredit of cost they might be very cost effective in a world of huge battlestar/star destroyer sized vessels.

 

In short, don't think viper, think raptor. Instead of xwings maybe something more like the millennium falcon in size terms.

[austenandrews]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

I can see small, crewed ships for operations too distant for effective remote control and too complex for AI control. Patrols that cover large volumes of remote space, for instance. Though I'm inclined to think the manned ship would be more of a local command center for remote-controlled drones.

[Spence]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Well, maybe fighterplane type fightercraft are not plausible, but how about small craft more like a PT boat from WW2? I suppose in an era of huge ships something like a PT boat could be believed as it could have effective weapons, armor, defenses, etc, without having to have space for a large crew, long term resources, spare parts, etc.

 

In terms of short term combat effectiveness per ton of mass/megacredit of cost they might be very cost effective in a world of huge battlestar/star destroyer sized vessels.

 

In short, don't think viper, think raptor. Instead of xwings maybe something more like the millennium falcon in size terms.

 

I don’t believe small hulled ships can be effective. You would be amazed at the amount of equipment and stowage goes just to support the crew in a sea going vessel. Not just supplies, but making fresh water and sewage containment and disposal. And our ships don’t need to supply atmosphere and can just scoop up seawater. Even a submarine pulls components from seawater. But a space vessel must provide everything.

 

No I don’t think a small vessel will have any real value. Here is a more detailed list of my reasons.

 

1) Battles in space will be over contested locations, not the chance meeting in deep space.

 

2) The attacking ship/fleet will need to bring itself and be self sustaining. They can’t just pull in and resupply.

 

3) A warship will be a very large tender transport with a very small crew for the tonnage. It will be extremely automated to reduce the crew to bare minimum.

 

4) Attacks will not be conducted by ship board weapons. It will have a well developed point defense, but its purpose in battle is command and control, not engagement.

 

5) Offense will be conducted by unmanned Drones delivering sub-munitions (missles/torpedoes/mines/etc).

 

6) Small manned vessels for in system defense are also no go’s. A defensive pickets endurance is just a vital as a long endurance ship. A picket isn’t any use unless it is on station. Being 12 months underway is 12 month underway regardless if cutting a patrol loop or traveling star to star.

Space is BIG. If you detect the incoming enemy attack drones, it is too late to launch manned vessel to intercept. Instead you use unmanned Drones that remain in defensive cordons in space. By the time a human realizes the enemy is attacking the automated defense Drones should already be engaging.

 

So in a nutshell. No fighters, no large crews. Both sides bring unmanned Drones to the battle with a small group of humans that initiate the attack orders and stand back to see what happens.

 

The Home team has the decided advantage with superior resources on hand. Battle will tend to be all or nothing.

[Sundog]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

There are some things I'd like to address here: a point of definition, and an assumption. Virtually every discussion on this issue I've encountered has had the anti-fighter argument make the claim that weapons will be delivered by "unmanned drones". The fact is, these ARE space fighters, albeit unmanned ones. Okay, they arent the dogfighting WWII-in-space fighters of Star Wars or BSG, but if you're talkng a parasite vessel designed to deliver munitions to a target while keeping the mother vessel out of the direct fight - then you're talking about a fighter.

The other thing is that unmanned drones are great - no need for g-limits imposed by a squishy crew, more space per tonne devoted to armament, far more expendable - provided the computer on board is capable of near human level decision making in all possible situations. Because if your opponent can, with manned attack craft, provide your drone swarm with a situation they can't handle, you lose.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

My SF universe is pretty much pulp space opera so fighters are IN. I've actually excluded a lot of probable future tech because it would hinder not help heroic adventuring. In the ral world there may never be space fighters but in an RPG a vehcle that one or two players can control and does dramaitc stuff is golden to me.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

I have neither "space fighters" nor "huge space battleships" in my setting, though it has not seen much actual play so far.

 

Most ships in my setting are something akin to the ships of the Aliens game - big interstellar mobile bases with lots of long range munitions, drones, drop ships, etc. As AI in my setting has serious limits (to avoid Skynet, basically), actual human beings are required for all missions - plus, no FTL comms and slow FTL travel (weeks to months for a ship - and, thus, a message - to travel from system to system), so all missions to other systems are likely to encounter situations they have to come up with their own solution to as an answer from HQ will not come quickly. So you have what I call a Cruiser, which itself might have a crew of 30 to 50 not including transported troops, can support about 500 ground troops, has about 25 drop ships, 25 "fighters", and a host of drones and missiles. A single cruiser can, as a general rule, handle most common situations - putting down rebellions in the colonies, responding to emergency beacons or chasing off raiders, etc. Actual war would be handled with as many ships are available.

 

The "fighters" are (usually) non-FTL ships something akin to a PT Boat or Coast Guard Cutter - 5-15 crew, 50 troop capacity, and designed for both orbital combat (taking out satellites and drones / munitions, generally, and EWAR platforms) and troop insertion and support (artillery and air-to-ground munitions.) Their biggest weapons are generally ECM and ECCM, EWAR, smart munitions, and railguns.

 

Some "fighters" (read, what the players get) are FTL capable and just a little bit more souped up than the non-autonomous cruiser-supported Cutters - I like to call these "Corvettes" in my setting. These are generally used for scouting missions (where they don't want to devote the resources of a full cruiser or more) and house more firepower and EWAR stuff, but less troops (24 troops plus 15 crew.) They are also only used in conjunction with elite units. They are also the only known human craft which are both FTL capable while also being capable of orbital entry and launch - they are the only FTL craft that can land on a planet's surface.

 

Even the smallest of craft in my setting are still quite large; the player's craft is about 100m x 50m x 30m (approx. a size 17 vehicle.) Anything smaller would either be a transit shuttle - completely unarmed and just meant for ship-to-ship or ground-to-orbit travel - or some sort of unmanned craft.

[austenandrews]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

The other thing is that unmanned drones are great - no need for g-limits imposed by a squishy crew' date=' more space per tonne devoted to armament, far more expendable - provided the computer on board is capable of near human level decision making in all possible situations. Because if your opponent can, with [i']manned [/i]attack craft, provide your drone swarm with a situation they can't handle, you lose.

Depends on how far from the mothership the drones go. If they're close enough to make remote control viable, you augment it with AI and it's effectively the same as manned craft.

 

It's an interesting thought, though. Let's assume an engagement too distant for effective remote control. What might a manned craft do, that an AI-controlled drone couldn't, to gain the advantage over enemy drones? Bearing in mind the diminished capabilities of a craft with life support.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Define "effective" I guess.

 

I mean, anything out to about a light-second should be more than manageable, and with proper planning you could have "remote operator + AI programming" anywhere in the solar system, but the longer of a delay you have between operator and drone, the less able you will be to respond to changing situations. "Fly here and nuke this city" wouldn't suffer much from comm delays, but identifying and attacking enemy soldiers using human shields who are on the lookout for drones might require quicker responses to things.

[Sundog]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Depends on how far from the mothership the drones go. If they're close enough to make remote control viable, you augment it with AI and it's effectively the same as manned craft.

 

It's an interesting thought, though. Let's assume an engagement too distant for effective remote control. What might a manned craft do, that an AI-controlled drone couldn't, to gain the advantage over enemy drones? Bearing in mind the diminished capabilities of a craft with life support.

 

The most obvious things I can think of would be taking advantage of local environmental conditions (such as engagement from within a ring system or a tight cluster of asteroids) or some type of ruse de guerre - a deceptive formation perhaps, or time-on-target strikes from a force otherwise considered too far away to be a threat.

THat's not to say that drones couldn't be programmed to do such a thing on a case-by-case basis, but unless we're talking true AI, humans would have advantages both in setting them up on the fly, and reacting to unforeseen circumstances.

[amanojaku]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

I have neither "space fighters" nor "huge space battleships" in my setting, though it has not seen much actual play so far.

 

Most ships in my setting are something akin to the ships of the Aliens game - big interstellar mobile bases with lots of long range munitions, drones, drop ships, etc.

 

Could you please tell me what game you're referring to? Is it a reff to a game based on the sequel to "Alien"? Is it a wargame, RPG or computer game?

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

Could you please tell me what game you're referring to? Is it a reff to a game based on the sequel to "Alien"? Is it a wargame' date=' RPG or computer game?[/quote']

 

"My Setting." My own Star HERO Campaign Setting. Somewhat of a mix between the Miles universe of Lois McMaster Bujold, Aliens, and Mass Effect. Humans the new kids on the sector, exploring their chunk of space, etc. Was meant for a somewhat military campaign, so a lot of thought (well, what I like to call a lot of thought) was put into how ships work and are designated, standard issue military equipment, rank structure, relations with our neighbors, "how we got there from here," etc.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Space fightercraft in RPGs.

 

One gimmick to make starfighters slightly more plausible is to say that inertial compensators, the really good ones, get way expensive at larger levels, so the ones that give the most g-force-negation for the buck happen to be fighter-sized. That allows fighters to be much more maneuverable than big ships, particularly if you then posit some kind of reactionless drive for sub-light travel("anti-gravitic" drive or somesuch). Maybe those are also more efficient and cheaper on smaller ships, so you have starfighters that can accelerate in sub-light faster and maneuver much more tightly. Give them some useful carried weapons(like disposable missiles and at least one beam or projectile weapon with some punch to it), and you can have combat resembling WWII in the Pacific. Or something.