Wall of text incoming! Evasive maneuvers!
First off, I agree with the idea that for a military commander to send soldiers to do a task during a war KNOWING they will likely die is not in any way "murder." Weather or not it's RIGHT comes back to a more fundamental question of weather or not war in general is "right" under certain circumstances. I will not go into that issue in much depth here, except to say that I think DS9 effectively portrayed what was a "necessary war" for the Feds and their allies.
That said, the attrition rate of these fighters is really being inflated quite a bit here. Consider that the number of fighters we actually see get taken out is
three. Now, I'm not saying that only three were lost throughout the entire battle; that'd be silly. But the visuals show fighters weaving in and out of the enemy formation, firing relentlessly, and out of a
minimum of 9 in the first wave (at 4:52 in the video
Cyke101 linked to, we see 5 initially, one gets pasted, then a different group of 4 more can be seen, and this is all
before Sisko tells Nog to send in the second wave), only three are
known to be lost. So, if a wave is 10-15 fighters, and they are losing 2-4 per wave while attacking a vastly more numerous force, that's actually pretty good.
We see e.g. a long pass where the fighter formation swoops on a Galor and then gets pummeled by a Dominion battle cruiser when trying to pull out.
Right... except that never
happened. Again, not saying that there weren't some fighter kills off screen, but only one of the ON-screen kills was from a Dominion ship (right at 5:05) and not once did we see an entire FORMATION getting "pummeled"
. And also at 5:05, one is taken out by a
Galor, and it took two strikes from said
Galor to take the fighter out. Those two plus the one I mentioned above at 4:52 are IT for fighter attrition as far as what we actually see. The logical conclusion is that the off-screen fighter deaths wouldn't be randomly WAY higher than the on-screen ones, leading to (as I speculated) 2-4 fighters lost per wave. Which holds up well against how fighters perform in most space opera type sci-fi I can think of. Having said that:
Let's just keep from making the fighters a truly effective antiship weapon, in WWII style, because they don't behave like that previously or later on.
I agree with your general sentiment here. I think fighters are effective in Trek under the right conditions; Starfleet certainly felt these were the right conditions, and I think they performed well enough to support that. And speaking of support, though this unfortunately wasn't
shown on screen in any meaningful way, Sisko's dialog at one point (not included in
Cyke's vid) mentions moving several destroyer groups in closer, because the fighters need "more cover fire." So, it could be that fighters can be effective against a significantly less mobile enemy as long as they have proper support from some of the starships behind them. But I do think they would be VERY situational, and their effectiveness would be quite limited outside of those situations, unlike in say, Star Wars, or (especially) Babylon 5.
In the scene just before the Cardassians break formation, a squadron of fighters attack and take out a Galor from above before it could even respond.
And there were only 4 of them. (Looked cool by the way!)
Well, all we see is that the
Galor begins to move down on the z axis. Perhaps she's doing evasive maneuvers as the
Hidekis start to move offensively?
Those were some
serious explosions going off when that thing started to "list." And, more importantly, some of them looked like
internal explosions. IMO, that
Galor was definitely toast.
Yes, that's remarkable. Galors seem to have very poor aim here - even Evek's much-hurt ship in TNG "Preemptive Strike" was scoring perfect hits, albeit at a rather low rate of fire. Perhaps Starfleet pilots are better than Maquis ones, or have better maneuvering computers, or better jammers?
Having better equipment seems like the best explanation, actually. What the Maquis could scrounge together shouldn't hold up well when compared to what Starfleet outfits its fighters with for a major offensive during a war, not to mention that "Sacrifice of Angels" is about 4 years after "Preemptive Strike".
As far as what you said earlier,
Timo, about the lack of clear depictions of Dominion forces really biting it... I kinda see what you're saying (I remember it struck me at the time how little we saw that during this battle, too), but I don't think it reaches the degree you describe. Besides the previously referenced ship that was taken out by fighters, we have:
-a
Galor being taken out by those two
Galaxy-class ships that suddenly just APPEARED and started drilling holes in it (that was an
awesome sight) at 6:15
-the
Defiant definitely taking out at least a couple of ships (6:23 and 7:26)
-a
Galaxy blows something away at 7:23 (on the right side of the screen, just next to the
Defiant... it's hard to see precisely what's going on there, but you can clearly see the
Galaxy firing its phasers, then right where they terminate, there's a huge explosion... do the math.

)
-quite a few ships blow up spectacularly when the Klingons show up at 7:52
-and finally, right at the end, at 8:35, the
Defiant and the BoPs take out one of those big Dominion battleships.
I know I'm reaching a little bit on a couple of those, and I think what you say about perhaps the VFX money getting a little overextended makes a lot of sense. Maybe that's WHY there weren't more "sure" Dominion/Cardassian losses, but I do think it's pretty easy to assume everything in my little list up there counts, even if the visual presentation was muddier than we would like.