a translation question

[inadequatepen]

Up until now I have been sort of trying to teach myself, which is slow going and not guaranteed great results. So with that in mind, I have a question that may be silly. Is it necessary to include 'I' in a sentence. I've seen a couple translations that make me suspect that sometimes I is just sort of implied depending on how the verb is conjugated. For example, if someone said "I love you dad" does it come out ego diligo vos dad? Or is adding 'ego' unnecessary for a fluent speaker?

Assuming I've even got "I love you dad" translated correctly to begin with. I appreciate any help someone can give me on this. Thanks.

[ptolemyauletes]

This is more of a composition question than a translation question, not that that makes any difference.
Your instinct here is exactly correct. ego is often left out in Latin, as are the other nominative pronouns. As a heavily inflected language, Latin has no need to include nominative pronouns. The subject is built in to the verb ending.
This is also true of Italian. Rather than saying 'Io sono Fred' an Italian will simply say 'Sono Fred.' (don't know too many Italians named Fred...)

Latin usually only uses first person pronouns for emphasis or some similar reason.

As for your sentence regarding your father, unless you have several fathers I would suggest using 'te' instead of 'vos'. Otherwise it seems fine.
te patrem diligo.

[adrianus]

"I love you, dad" = "Te diligo, mi pater." or/vel "Te diligo, pater." or "Pater, te diligo".
"Te patrem diligo." is more/ magìs est "I love you as a/my father." or "I love your being a/my father" or "I love you, the father."

"Te diligo, mi pater, at non matrem." = "I love you, dad, but [I do] not [love] mum."
"Ego, pater, te diligo at non mater" ["I" emphasis] = "I love you, dad, but mum doesn't."

I think "pappa" or "papa" for "dad" is fine in Latin, 'though it can mean others things, too.
Licet latinè "papa" seu "pappa" pro "pater", ut opinor, etsi id et alia significare potest.