SE V: Unique Abilities And Ideas

[Suicide Junkie]

I firmly believe in letting the player's design and strategy determine whether a fighter is a dogfighter, an interceptor or a bomber.

Carrier Battles mod being the prime example of that...
I simply provide Basic fighter hulls, QNP propulsion, and a variety of guns.

If you design the fighter with a small engine, light defenses and a very big gun (or missile launcher), then it is good for anti-ship bombing, but weak vs fighters and useless vs missiles.
If you design the fighter with good speed, light defenses and a large variety of small weapons, then it is great for intercepting missiles, but mediocre at anti-fighter action and completely useless for anti-ship.
If you design the fighter with medium speed, heavy defenses and efficient weapons (as opposed to high damage-per-shot or many small shots) then it becomes great at anti-fighter action, weak vs missiles and weak vs ships.

The player is, of course, free to make a design with compromises between these main types, but since each type has conflicting requirements, the dual-role fighters will be less effective tactically.
(Which isn't to say they can't be effective strategically, due to the fact that having a combo interceptor/dogfighter design means that supply lines are simplified.)

[President_Elect_Shang]

If I wanted to create dedicated bombers I would adjust the hull size to be slightly different than the other fighters and create a mount with use for certain weapons; the bombs. I would create a range of bombs for different tasks too. Also you can use the Get_Design_Ability_Component_Count("Movement Standard") with an equals as I did so the fighters must have a certain speed and thus number of engines. This is how I managed to make one fighter size yet give it different weapon and component capacity from over 7 generations. I would make the dedicated interceptors small (i.e. 8kt) the duel role medium (i.e. 9kt) and dedicated bombers large (i.e. 10kt). Now if you really must have them all one size than create three vehicle types and then it is as simple as saying this component can work on all three, or just the bomber, etc.

I’m really starting to get hooked on this idea.

[Suicide Junkie]

May I inquire as to why you two guys seem to like the idea of iron-fist control over fighter designs?

You could give the player the freedom to do whatever they want, and let the separate fighter roles emerge naturally from the pressures of combat.

[President_Elect_Shang]

I wouldn’t call it iron fist; that seems rather harsh. I see it as a way to provide guidelines, not as a matter of micromanagement. The player would have the freedom to design an interceptor with the components for an interceptor. When you have one vehicle size which can use any set of weapons you tend to get a “middle-of-the-road” vehicle. To put another way in RL I can’t build a Harrier, strap twenty 1,000lb blockbusters on it, use vertical take off, and fly as fast as an F-15.

[Atrocities]

I see what your saying SJ and that is a good way of doing it. But as PES suggested, using mounts to scale some components for use with only one sized hull is an excellent idea as well.

[President_Elect_Shang]

And how about unique “run ways”? Bombers need this type, interceptors need that one? Maybe by using an AI Tag but without any real problem solving I couldn’t say if it would be possible or not.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Besides SJ isn’t that how everyone is modding fighters now? “Here is your hull selection pick one. Here is your engine selection pick one. Here is your component selection pick one. Now what do you want to call it?” With AT’s idea the player would need to make a series of choices based on what they wanted and those choices would in turn regulate the selections offered for the next choice. For example I want to make a fighter:

1) I have to pick the type of fighter so I choose Interceptor.

2) Next I load the base equipment which has been designed to give the Interceptor limited endurance but bonuses in other areas.

3) I pick the engines I want next. All Interceptor engines are fast but some are faster than others. Still even the slowest provide more movement than the best engines in the next class, the Duel Role Fighter. Point is Interceptors should be the fastest in my opinion.

4) Now I pick the weapons and any other extra components I want such as chaff shells, ECM, etc. Because I picked Interceptor I only have X number of slots. Less than had I picked Dule Role and far fewer than if I had picked Bomber. However, none of my weapons can target ships, bases, or planets; only fighters, mines, and satellites. Or maybe a few of them can target ships and so forth but they are weak compared to the choices for Duel Role which are still weaker than those for the bomber.

I think this has potential.