[wnkrshm]

There are some in-universe laws or facts that fictional genres cannot give up (Edit:typo) easily - one in scifi is the small crewed spaceship or even space fighter.

Even if guns exist, there is an arguable thrill to reading about a character infiltrating a castle with a saber and two pistols that cannot be reloaded easily. Long ago, those were pirate or naval pulp fiction.

Imo any setting can produce great stories, it's in how they're told not in how the world works. Established genres of fantasy are just attractive to some people, since analogues of the laws and structure of the world are already partially known - and it's possible to subvert expectations while not alienating people.

[AstralStorm]

Surprisingly the "fighter" may be much more powerful than expected, since space is wast and weapons delivered up close and personal have a good chance to land, as opposed to being dodged or intercepted like missiles.

Though I'd expect one of those to be more like a tank, with 4 people inside. Bigger though.

It's the same reason carriers tend to be more effective than battleships, even ones loaded with cruise missiles.

Even light takes a bunch of time to reach places at astronomical distances. It would look nothing like dogfighting, much closer to modern airborne missile exchanges.

Any non-moving object would be extremely vulnerable, if even to a thrown rock at orbital speeds.

[wnkrshm]

It entirely depends on where you see the role of a "fighter" but I think we both already agree that it won't be anything like naval battle on Earth.

Maybe you're familiar with Atomic Rockets, the collection of engineering and science discussions about hard scifi? If not, I may have got a rabbit hole for you that will eat an entire week, easily: [0]

(Edit: while the page starts off dismissing fighters for many reasons, there are discussions of many concepts with their merits and possible defenses of the concept)

[0] https://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fighter.php