Combat Mechanics

[Xrati]

Ideas for combat/movement system. At a time when Off Topic, became Topic!!!

[pydna]

Well since the ball is rolling.

I think some sort of ship orders system would be nice.

Attack Close - Vessel(s) will close to shortest range.

Attack Standoff - Vessel(s) will stay at long range from target.

Attack Vessel Type - This type of order means your ships will attack a certainly type of enemy ship and ignore others (e.g. go for the carriers)

Screen - Vessel(s) will always place themselves between the enemy and the fleet they are screening

Disengage - Vessel(s) will try and avoid combat and withdraw at the earliest opportunity.


I'm sure there are heaps of possible orders these are just some off the top of my head. I'm guessing that since the game is play by email battles would be resolved using some formula where player designs,battle orders and tactics would influence the outcome.

[Q]

One more ship/fleet order:
Stay close to ... (e.g. warp point)

What I strongly suggest is the possibility to define an initial placement of your ships and units: around colony/warp point/base.
And that the fleet/task force formation is always observed in a new combat and not just the last placement of your ships is used.

[pydna]

I see what you mean Q. Perhaps there could also be a general order such as Defend Starbase and/or Screen Starbase?

It all depends on the importance of Orbital facilities.

Say for instance planetary invasion cannot commence until the Starbase is taken out would make them very important :-)

Also do we know what time scale is going to be used for turns? Does each turn represent a month or a year of real time?

Another thing I've been thinking about is multiple targetting. Say for instance my vessel has three weapons pods I have two of them set with attack standoff orders and one set with defend orders. This means two are blasting away at the enemy and one is trying to shoot incoming missiles. I don't know if will work but something to think throw into the mix.

[Q]

Yes Pydna, that is a good idea: strategies not only for the entire unit/vehicle but also target priorities for individual weapons.

What is the use of shield depleting weapons against a ship without remaining shields? And perhaps I would like to wait with the use of my armor (but not shield) skipping weapons until the shields are gone.

[Gregstrom]

Originally Posted by pydna

Another thing I've been thinking about is multiple targetting. Say for instance my vessel has three weapons pods I have two of them set with attack standoff orders and one set with defend orders. This means two are blasting away at the enemy and one is trying to shoot incoming missiles. I don't know if will work but something to think throw into the mix.

It's an interesting idea, but if fleets get sufficiently large I could see it turning into a MM hell of epic proportions.

[jars_u]

I agree with Gregstrom that sounds like MM Hell - I think SE resolved this nicely by having point defense weapons whose only function/ability was to fire on incoming missiles etc. - this affords the strategy without the Hell I think and also I believe to more realistic - you wouldn't fire on a cruise missile with a 16 inch gun etc.

[pydna]

Very true Jars_u, but you could also have a short range interceptor missile.

It would have a longer range than point defence but much shorter range than an Anti Ship Missile (ASM). This would would allow Ships with screening orders to shoot down inbounds that weren't necessarily targeting them.

Already there are several design strategies players could employ.

Do I build a large ship which has a mixture of point defence and interceptor missiles + ASMs and Beam Weapons??

Or do I build two classes of ship. One large ship with limited point defence, ECM and Targetting systems lots of ASMs plus a second lighter vessel which is fitted mainly with Interceptor missiles and given screening orders. Essentially you're building a Battleship and Escort class vessel.

[jars_u]

Originally Posted by pydna

...you could also have a short range interceptor missile..."

I think this can still be resolved with the weapon characteristics themselves without the need for independent orders for individual platforms. The greater the range of the defensive weapon the slower the rate of fire along with the corresponding size and resource consumption. This would still allow players to design role specific ships.

One of the things I wasn't crazy about in SE 4/5 was that while an abundance of weapons choices existed the differences between them were often not significant enough to justify researching one over the other. For example the point defense beam weapons and point defense cannons were fairly interchangeable.

[pydna]

I think one thing the designers may want to consider is look at the effects they want to achieve.

For defence you could have the following I'm borrowing from Real Life navies.

Point Defence (short range missile interception)
Missile Interceptors (medium range missile interception)

Electronic Countmeasures (affect missiles tohit chance)
Chaff/Flares (affect missiles tohit chance)

I would suggest that given the "function" of the last three (ECM,Chaff and Flares) is the same you would just lump them as one piece of equipment (Counter Measure Systems). Now obviously you could have better grades (Grade 1, Grade 2 etc) but you get the idea.

Same goes for point defence and interceptor missiles. Again, you would have multiple grades (Point Defence 1, 2...n)

The main point is you don't get cluttered with lots of gizmos that do the same thing.