Re: Fighter/Seeker Query
That's not entirely true. The level of knowledge of physics, kinetic motion, action - reaction type effects, the environment of space...are all much farther along than the days of early sci-fi 1950's era making it fairly easy to make assumptions on fighter design based on logic, common sense, and projected advances in science.
The postulation comes more in the form of power plant (energy supply), radiation shielding, heat dissipation, control "surfaces" (I use this term lightly and simply for recognition effect), and weaponry. For the most part, rad shielding and heat dissipation are irrelevant for the abstraction level of the rules. Control is also less of an issue since simplicity requires the use of the same movement engine (rules). That leaves us with power plant and weapons...likely the easiest of things to model when utilizing a single/dual pilot type short range strike craft.
You will not have the cockpit canopy so popular in current sci-fi. More likely, pilots will be in the core of the hull behind inches of rad shielding, insulation, and armor plating capable of withstanding frequent impacts with dust particles or small rocks. This core area will have the life support area behind it with additional rad shielding between that and the power plant and fuel supply. Each end will likely have reaction thrusters (unless we develop a gravitic type drive system with a least a modicum of efficiency) in addition to the main drive behind. Hence, the fighter will likely be spindle or lozenge shaped. (Not very sexy, but the most space efficient and operationally feasible from an engineering perspective.)
Very short wings...or pylons housing heat dissipators among other things will likely have missiles/torpedoes at their tips...similar to how Sidewiders are mounted on current warplanes...and provide the primary anti-ship punch of the fighter. Again, this is the most cost efficient and damaging weapon system (likely tipped with nuclear warheads of some sort since Green Peace is still sucking atmosphere elsehwere 
) available for this scale of craft. Energy weapons at the end points and/or bow are possible, but are more effective against enemy fighters than warships, due to (current) physics...and will be shorter ranged than the missiles due to simple dispersion of the energy "beam". Beam weapons will always be limited in power to how much energy there is to supply them, refinement of the beam focus, and rate of dispersion/degradation of the beam itself once fired. Simply put...a fighter at this scale with a comparable power plant commeasurate to its size...simply cannot put out the same fire power as a single battery from a proper warship, even one as light as a "corvette" class vessel.
Also...since the fighter is going to have limited reaction mass, beam weapons are going to have to be mounted in turrets of some sort, further limiting the focus factor of their lensing, shortening potential range. Kinetic weapons are possible, but will affect the mass factor of the ship for ammo and potentially create a thrust reaction depending on what is used and rate of fire (making them unlikely prospects)...and since their speed and trajectory can be affected by gravity and are easily avoided at all but point blank ranges (comparatively speaking in space)...not the best of options.
That's the basis of my arguements. :ugeek:
