The Star Trek universe doesn't typically have to deal with fighters to begin with, if you're just playing a pure Star Trek game.  If you do deal with fighters, ala SFB, then there are SFB ships available to most races known as Maulers that have basically anime spinal mounts.  The ships have specially designed warp drives which can be overloaded, and the energy focused in a giant area effect beam which has a very tight fire arc (1 hex wide straight forward, or can be slightly aimed to one side). 

Fred

I see these effects going on as the result of reading this thread and the experiences of my gaming group.

1. Fighters, once they "pounce" can only be dealt with after they've dealt their damage, lots of fighters on the board means lots of damage that "feels" like it's coming in with impunity.

2. #1 means that ships must survive past the first pounce.  Either the victim of the pounce must survive or the fleet must be able to absorb the loss of the victim, be able to deal with the fighters and still remain combat-capable vs. the remainder of the enemy's fleet.

3. #2 tends to apply upward pressure on the hull size to increase the chance of surviving that first pounce.

Now, I'm relatively new to playing Starmada, and my gaming group isn't to the point that we can conclusively say that this or that part of the rules is "broken".  For example, fighters have yet to be completely decisive in my group's games, but two out of 5 players this past friday really hated the harm caused by some effectively deployed/used expendable weapons.  There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth as the two (new) players bewailed their existance.  So... I suggest this only as a "maybe we'll discuss house-rule it this way, if we think there's a need" measure, after my group has matured as Starmada players:

I think fighters can be toned down significantly without Nerf-ing them by just putting them into some sort of firing sequence vs. the ships.  They still get to move after ships do, and without orders.  Their damage still takes place immediately, but so would damage TO them. 

One way I'd suggest would be for each side would roll initiative for each combat phase, then select a fighter group or starship to fire.  Players alternate in this way until all ships/groups have fired.  The player with more ships/fighters can choose to fire more than one per "firing turn" until the units that have yet to fire on both sides evens out (Or a ratio can be calculated at the beginning of the firing phase the would persist through-out the rest of the turn - If I had three times the number of elements on to table I would resolve/fire three to every firing activation to my opponent's one.)

Another way to mix up the initiative would be by using initiative cards for fighters AND ships as described in the appendices of the SX:B book.  I kinda prefer the initiative cards idea.

Attacks from fighters take effect immediately, just like they do now.  Likewise attacks ON fighters take effect immediately, giving starships the opportunity to thin the wave before the fighters pounce.  Ship-ship attacks would still be considered simultaneous though.  So if you equip a ship with fighter-slaughtering weapons it MAY get to fire before the fighters do AND eliminate them, but if you fire that same weapon against other ships it'll still get it's shots if it hasn't taken them already.

In all the discussions about fighters, I hadn't seen this one suggested.  Maybe you guys like it, maybe not.  I kinda do or I wouln't have shared it.

Any opinions on whether this would require a re-costing of fighters?

I think it addresses the "first-strike with impunity" (I know, not accurate but I'm tired of typing!) part of the fighter-pounce without taking away their "immediate damage" advantage or negating their other bennies.

--Flak Magnet

Ah, yes, you are both right.  Its been a few (10+) years since I've played SFB.  I thought my memory was better.  doh!  I apologize.

Fred

Ah, yeah.  Just after high school my buddy and I had pizza delivery / fast food type jobs, so we didn't have to be up in the morning... so it was SFB every night all night.  Went a few good years.  I very rarely was able to crack his Klingon or Hydran tactics.  I've actually been working on SFB type conversions for Starmada to get him interested in the game, but I only have SSDs for the captain's edition... he was the owner of "The Tome" (all of the standard rules compiled in one overfilled 4 inch binder) and the second only slightly smaller binder of all of the SSDs.

Anyway, this brings up something I've been wanting to ask about... are there any rules in the works for having smaller ships docked inside larger ships (ie: Andromedans and their satellite ships)? 

Sorry so off-topic.

Fred

..and I know that 'Mother Ships' was discussed, but I don't recall what was decided....

Also, instead of running your hull sizes up, try fielding some fast escorts.
Yes they are going to die against capital ships (more importantly though it means those capital ships aren't shooting at YOUR capital ships) but they are generaly very fast (speed 7-8+) coupled with some fast firing light homing missiles (Rng 9, 3-4+ to hit, ROF 3, D1, P1, inverted range mods, expendable or not as you see fit) and you've got a very nice, very lethal fighter killer on your hands.
  Lets assume you have a speed 8 escort, and you give him rng 9 guns. He has an effective engagement envelope of 17 hexes. Sure the fighters will move after he moves but it won't save them. You'll be shooting at long range where they can't get you and that coupled with inverted range mods means you'll be hitting on 2+ at long range (3+ when you factor in the fighters small target ability). You are gonna massacre the little buggers.
  PS. The best thing about expendable ordnance on a small ship: A. You've already shot your wad so if you croak it's no big deal and B: You've already shot your wad so you're no longer a priority target either, so you might get to live to run away, reload and fight another day!
  PPS: We generaly frown on disposable ordnance in one off games. But for campaigns its not a problem (as long as the fleet has colliers and time available to reload).

Question: If the scaling of AFBs is sjupposed to represent the extra coverage required for the whole ship, how come it only takes one hit to completely destroy, no matter what the size of the vessel?