Fighters killing turrets

It is fine that fighters are able to kill turrets, it give them another purpose especially vs no carrier fleets but at the moment they stay ages, soak up turrets damage and if enough just kill all turrets on a ship.
I think they should be changed by dealing a fixed amount of turret damage for each squadron (like bombers are working) like 1 or 2 turret/squadron.
Also they shoould not stick to a ship and give them perma vision on it

last edited by Beernchips

Ah...you know that Brace for Impact order increases your turrets accuracy? Usually using the order and getting your ships a bit closer to each other should be enough to take down most fighter waves...well, save for extreme carrier fleets of course, but that's their tactic, so what else would you expect? That's why you should always bring at least one or two light carriers with you.

I am not discussing the strategy against carriers, I am discussing the fighters itself

I'm still thinking that this is particularly against the lore.

Bombers destroying turrets fine, but Fighters usually don't have the firepower for it in lore. Not at all.

It would be like a squad of guardsmen with lasguns being able to take out the guns of a Baneblade.

I don't think it is against the lore, the defence turrets are not the same as the giant macro cannon gun turrets. They are "small" autocannon and multilaser turrets as far as I remember (small like as big as a tank or a superheavy tank), and the Fury fighter of the Imperial Navy is armed with multiple lascanons, so a group of them should be able to take one down after a few strafing runs. They are probably a bit too effective atm, I grant you that.

last edited by Hjalfnar_HGV

@imperator if you go by lore you run into way to many numerical issues to even have this be an issue and also defense turrets come in all shapes and sizes but from what i can recall off the top of my head is that fighters are around the size of a 747 so it would stand to reason you could pack enough fire power on it. that said according to the numbers a macro cannon salvo from a light cruiser would probably crack a world so i think we can safely discard trivialities at this point lol.

being able to use interceptors as scouting is essential so i am heavily against them not hanging around the target
giving vision is a great way to use interceptors and it makes sense

i would like to see interceptor dodge chance reduced and the time they stay on a target reduced too so that they can still survive the return trip considering the lowered dodge

Fighter already identify the ships when they come into their range, if they stick they avoid the possibility to go in nebula or run silent to break the identification, its like a scan but you don t have to commit an escort in range and fighters can travel all map

@Hjalfnar_HGV do some math with turret damage (one attack in 3s with 35% hit chance), effective fighter hp (2hp with 70-80% dodge) and add different amounts of defensive fighters in the mix. you will soon be able to realize, that you have to use at least half of your points for carriers to have something against dedicated carrier builds and that fleet turrets are useless against more than a token fighter strike

spoiler: one braced turret does fractional more than 3hp damage to non-eldar fighters in 60 seconds. non-nid fighters have 12hp per hangar. you would need 4 braced turrets per hangar to kill them in 60 seconds, which is the hangar CD without reload and which ignores that the fighters attack the turrets back. I don't know the turret attack formula, or I could give you an exact function how many fighters you need to neutralize x amount of turrets and y amount of defensive fighters. but from what I know about game calculations and in-game experience, the game favors massing hangars massively.

last edited by Fosil