House Rules Suggestion For Fighter Squadrons

[ArchonAstaroth]

Generally i always found it a bit counter-intuitive how fighters work - they remove enemy attack craft on a 1:1 basis. Normally, if e.g. 5 fighters are in combat against 10 enemy ones of the same quality, then they wouldn't get wiped out and cause five casualties to the enemy at the same time, but only about two or three.
When one fights with 2:1 superiority one can expect to lose only about 1/4 of the own strength, if one fights 3:1, then one usually loses only about 1/9 and so on.


In BFG however casualties of fighters are always 1:1. That's explained with the victorious fighters having to refuel and re-arm, but that kinda seems like an excuse to me.
As a consequence, there is absolutely no reason to field fighters in waves. One can achieve the same effect when one brings two times one fighter against the enemy as if one brings two fighters once against the enemy. I think the game is foregoing a but of depth there, by completely neglecting any advantage to fighter waves bigger than one.

Enough with the motivation, that's my suggestion:

Normally, if a wave of fighters attacks enemy attack craft, then you'd normally remove as many squadrons from both your own and the enemy wave as there were fighters.
A wave of 5 fighters against a wave of 3 enemy squadrons would result in both sides losing 3 squadrons.
I'd suggest to modify this procedure so that the player with the superior wave (the wave with more fighters) gets to roll as many dice as he has squadrons of fighters more than the opponent's wave has squadrons (perhaps both fighters and others, perhaps only fighters count, that's yet to be determined)
For each 4+ he can keep one of the squadrons which normally would get removed in the game.

So if a wave of 5 fighters attacks a wave of 3 fighters, then the player with the 5 strong wave gets to roll 2d6. For each 4+ one of his squadrons which otherwise would get removed can stay.

It's simple and effective:
E.g. if one fights with 2:1 superiority, then one has as many more fighters as the opponent has, and with that one gets to roll 4+ for each own normal casualty. This reduces the own casualties to exactly the 1/4 of the own total number which would be expected in a "real" 2:1 combat:
8 fighters against 4 fighters would result in 4 chances to roll 4+ to keep a squadron in the game, 2 casualties in average. One roll for each squadron which otherwise would get removed.


Of course, how other attack craft than fighters would work in this would yet to have be determined, as well as torpedoes. But i think it's a good way to make fighter waves have an actual purpose.
Other attack craft e.g. could count as half their number in fighters for determining the number of rolls. A wave of four fighters against a wave of four bombers would count as fighting two fighters, so they get two rolls. That'd mean that in average one fighter survives, as bombers remove fighters on a 1:1 basis just like other fighters do, they just count "halved" for the number of rolls the fighters get.
Or bombers and so on don't count at all for the number of rolls one gets. A wave of four fighters against four bombers would get a full four rolls of 4+ to keep fighters in the game. This would create an imminent benefit in including fighters in bomber waves, by significantly increasing the number of casualties the opponent has to expect if he attacks the wave with fighters.

Simularly, torpedo volley which count as a single fighter for the purpose of casualties, can count as their strength divided by two, three, four or even five for determining how many rolls the fighters get.
So a wave of four attacking a torpedo volley would have a good chance to wipe it out without any casualties, whereas a single fighter would get removed along with it.


Generally, in regards to the effect on the game balance, this would mean that the player with attack craft superiority has to dedicate some fighters to cleaning away the enemy fighter screen instead of just swamping him in bombers which so far fight just like fighters when they encounter these. If he doesn't do that, then even an opponent who is inferior in terms of carriers can put up a good defense against bomber rushes by taking advantage of this bonus against bomber squadrons.
I think it'd add a significant portion of depth to carrier battles without making the game much more complicated.

[Archetype-]

Well, I have to say this makes a lot of sense. I just might try to convince my group to incorporate it into their own rules. I do have one question. The fighter removal method you propose when numerical superiority is in effect only applies to fighters of equal quality (e.g. Imperial vs. Chaos). What if the outnumbered fighters were of superior make, like 5 Imperial Furies against 3 Eldar Darkstars? Darkstars have a 4+ save to remain in play already, as do Space Marine Thunderhawks. On another interesting note, if 5 Dark Eldar fighters and 3 Eldar Fighters (both having a 4+ save to remain in play) came into contact, what would happen? Yes, they are both of equal make, but they both have a save to avoid being removed. How would one deal with the situations described above with your proposed house rules?

Victorus aut mortis,
-Archetype

[ArchonAstaroth]

I'm glad you like it

In case of fighters with the "resilient" ability such as eldar ones the outnumbering dice would work on top of the resilience rolls.

So e.g. three eldar fighters which are fighting an imperial wave of three bombers and one fighter would get three rolls because they are eldar fighters (as normal), and two more for outnumbering the enemy fighters by having two more own fighters. So they'd roll five dice.


In case of 5 DE vs 3 eldar fighters, the DE ones would get five rolls (three for the normal three casualties as normal, two for outnumbering), and the eldar ones would get their normal three rolls and none for outnumbering.

Generally with my suggestion bombers and assault boats become a bit weaker, at least if one doesn't support them with own fighters.
If your opponents don't like that, then you could start with having bombers and assault boats count towards the number of fighters when determinging the outnumbering dice. Then they'd still fight just as effective as before and wouldn't get weaker at all, but there would still be a realistic effect of outnumbering the enemy in a dogfight.

[Archetype-]

I'm glad you like it

In case of fighters with the "resilient" ability such as eldar ones the outnumbering dice would work on top of the resilience rolls.

So e.g. three eldar fighters which are fighting an imperial wave of three bombers and one fighter would get three rolls because they are eldar fighters (as normal), and two more for outnumbering the enemy fighters by having two more own fighters. So they'd roll five dice.


In case of 5 DE vs 3 eldar fighters, the DE ones would get five rolls (three for the normal three casualties as normal, two for outnumbering), and the eldar ones would get their normal three rolls and none for outnumbering.

Generally with my suggestion bombers and assault boats become a bit weaker, at least if one doesn't support them with own fighters.
If your opponents don't like that, then you could start with having bombers and assault boats count towards the number of fighters when determinging the outnumbering dice. Then they'd still fight just as effective as before and wouldn't get weaker at all, but there would still be a realistic effect of outnumbering the enemy in a dogfight.

Thanks for the answer. That actually reminded me of the numerous runs American B-17s made in WWII unescorted in broad daylight. They were particularly vulnerable to German fighter attack, and casualties among them were high.

These rules really make more sense than the current BFG rules. Kudos to the effort put out.

Victorus aut mortis,
-Archetype

[Lordofchange]

That is a very good set of rules, it makes a lot more sense than GWs current fighter rules. Still, i think what they were trying to achieve with the over-simplified rules is stopping BFG becoming like 40k used to be - the turns taking ages because you had so many complex rules. But still, in my next game of gothic, i may see if the other player likes these rules - it does make a lot more sense, and represents better the larger amount of fighters being able to "support each other" in a dogfight rather than just removing them. I have thought for a while that fighters shouldn't have to go back and refuel if they're simply on a turkey shoot against bombers, taking into account the fact that bombers are so lumbering the fighters shouldn't even have to change course and go into wild, fuel-wasting manoeuvres. Well done, the rules are really imaginative and you've just earnt yourself some rep!

[ArchonAstaroth]

Thanks!

Currently there is a bit of disagreement on the specialist games forums about he combat ability of bombers. I consider them to be pretty much chanceless against fighters - after all, bombers cannot attack other bombers on their own either. So they seem to be rather helpless against other attack craft and all they can do is try to evade. That'd be reflected by the bombers counting as 0 fighters for outnumbering purposes.

If your opponents think of bombers as being able to put up a fight, then they still could count as their full number or half that number or something like that.

Of course only fighters would be able to stay in the game that way, a squadron of 4 bombers would not get any "effective" outnumbering dice against two fighters - it'd get two dice, but it has no squadrons which can be kept in the game with these dice.

A squadron of 3 bombers and one fighter could get two outnumbering dice against two fighters, but no more than the single fighter squadron could stay in the game then even if both pass.
So one bomber would go down in all cases, and the fighters would have a 75% chance (4+ with two chances) to stay in the game. This represents the attacking fighters not really putting up a fight against the escort, as their main objective is taking out the bombers and they are also somewhat distracted by the bombers own defensive gun turrets.

This way bombers would not be sitting ducks, but there would still be a point in including fighter escort in bomber squadrons. I think it'd be a good compromise if your opponents fear for the effectiveness of bombers.

PS: If you try them out, then please let me know how the rules performed.

PPS: In regards to eldar fighters, they could simply count as two fighters for the purpose of outnumbering, but lose their default 4+ roll in return.
A single eldar fighter against a single enemy one would still get a 4+ roll, as it always used to be.
in case of the enemy outnumbering the eldar 2:1 (before counting the eldar bonus) neither side would get any dice. In this case the eldar fighters would get a little bit weaker.

However, if two eldar fighters attack one enemy one, then they'd get an enormous three dice, where there used to be only one. In this case they get a better.

That'd be a simple alternative to the way i suggested above on how to incorporate way eldar fighters or resilient fighters in general, and the effects on game balance would be small.