Ideas for More goodies

nerfman · #1 August 23rd, 2000, 03:06 AM

Until about a week ago, I have never heard of SE3, much less SE4. Anyway, I have had a very enjoyable week although I think my wife might be getting a little peeved. Here are a few ideas for some goodies to add:

1) Missile Pods/External Ordnance Racks: Just like out of Honor Harrington or Imperial Starfire. These seekers would be coded as armor, so they would take damage first (they are outside the hull after all). Set the fire rate to 30 and you have a one shot missile attack. This opens up a lot interesting possibilities from a tactical point of view.

2) Anti-Fighter/Anti-Missile Missiles: (Say that fast three times) Use these birds for wide area defense of your fleet. They would be bulky and fire slow, but could mean the difference in a long range missile duel.

3) Strategic Missiles - By having a weapon system that can be deployed on the strategic map, you open up some avenues. Like in starfire, where you can send a barrage of SBMHAWKs through a warp point and take out any enemy ships/mines that might be laying in wait on the other side.

4) ECCM - This would be like cloaking, but of a more limited nature. One way to do it would be that if a player turned it on, then other players in the system would see a different hull size for the ship. This could be useful of luring in an enemy to a trap or bluffing off a large enemy invasion force.

5) Towing Rig - Use this to pick up stranded or damaged ships, or even better, use it to tow a few battle stations to your opponent's favorite entry warp point.

Anyway these are just a few ideas. Later.

jars_u · #2 August 23rd, 2000, 06:00 AM

"2) Anti-Fighter/Anti-Missile Missiles: (Say that fast three times) Use these birds for wide area defense of your fleet. They would be bulky and fire slow, but could mean the difference in a long range missile duel."

Point Defense Cannons already fullfull a similar role in the game. Even 1 PDC on a ship is very effective aganist stopping incoming fighters and missiles.

"4) ECCM - This would be like cloaking, but of a more limited nature. One way to do it would be that if a player turned it on, then other players in the system would see a different hull size for the ship. This could be useful of luring in an enemy to a trap or bluffing off a large enemy invasion force."

There are ECM's in the game but they only give a defensive bonus, without researching sensors it is not even possible to "see" an enemy ship outside of combat - as far as I have seen at any rate, I understand in the full game cloaking/stealth devices are available for research however.

"5) Towing Rig - Use this to pick up stranded or damaged ships, or even better, use it to tow a few battle stations to your opponent's favorite entry warp point."

It is possible to build ship that is capable of repairing other ships so you would not have to tow it to say a planet with a space port on it. Although I have not tried it there is also a tech area that gives a ship unlimited supplies - it may be possible to supply other ships without this feature with a full load of supplies.

Jim

Paladin · #3 August 23rd, 2000, 05:16 PM

Point defense really is the only thing you need in a fighter fight...

On the other hand, I think missiles should have a bit more range and firepower. After all, a nuclear bLast does pack quite a punch. I really like the idea of strategiv missiles, tough. Perhaps if they could not be refueled or something...

Towing should be an option if you do not have a repair ship nearby, particularly since it takes less room, and a bigger ship cshould be able to bring a smaller one without problems...
Towing a battlestation would seem problematic at best, it is hard enough to keep one of those in orbit anyway... On the other hand, you can always BUILD a space station at a warp point using a space yard ship... It's only 400 kT, so a Light cruiser can have one of those...

[This message has been edited by Paladin (edited 23 August 2000).]

Taqwus · #4 August 23rd, 2000, 05:37 PM

How 'bout --

* A unit factory component specialized for building mines or fighters (possibly only one of the two. Troops are units too, but I can't see them being assembled unless they're actually 'droids...), for use in a long-range mine layer or carrier (i.e. replenish numbers without a return to base or a ship chain, and without the need for a full 400kt mobile shipyard).

* Cheap unmanned probes? Unless satellites can already move on their own...

* Short-range transporter (for boarding/bombing ala MOO2) ?

* 'Combination' devices, like a combined shield generator/armor device like in Stars!, that has neither the combined bulk nor damage resistance of the two... this might actually be possible with simply text-file editing, as the code for multiple functions must already be there.

* Custom missiles? That'd be either a fair bit of extra code, methinks (because now a missile launcher would need a variable telling it what type to use), or a paradigm shift (to finite missiles which actually take space, and the missile components are replaced by launchers ala fighter bays; missiles then become units that are AI-controlled upon launch).

* Constructing facilities on asteroids. Specifically, engines, supply storage/q. reactor, and a master computer for guidance (maintaining course).

OK, so maybe flinging asteroids at enemy homeworlds is a BIT too evil... ;-)

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Baron Munchausen · #5 August 23rd, 2000, 06:50 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Taqwus:
How 'bout --

* A unit factory component specialized for building mines or fighters (possibly only one of the two. Troops are units too, but I can't see them being assembled unless they're actually 'droids...), for use in a long-range mine layer or carrier (i.e. replenish numbers without a return to base or a ship chain, and without the need for a full 400kt mobile shipyard).

* Cheap unmanned probes? Unless satellites can already move on their own...

* Short-range transporter (for boarding/bombing ala MOO2) ?

* 'Combination' devices, like a combined shield generator/armor device like in Stars!, that has neither the combined bulk nor damage resistance of the two... this might actually be possible with simply text-file editing, as the code for multiple functions must already be there.

* Custom missiles? That'd be either a fair bit of extra code, methinks (because now a missile launcher would need a variable telling it what type to use), or a paradigm shift (to finite missiles which actually take space, and the missile components are replaced by launchers ala fighter bays; missiles then become units that are AI-controlled upon launch).

* Constructing facilities on asteroids. Specifically, engines, supply storage/q. reactor, and a master computer for guidance (maintaining course).

OK, so maybe flinging asteroids at enemy homeworlds is a BIT too evil... ;-)

A "unit-only" shipyard would be nice. You could change the data files in the full Version to make a smaller shipyard, but it would have all the abilities of the large Version. This could alter game balance in bad ways.

Unmanned probes and lots of other cool functions are covered by drones. I hope they get implemented soon. Read the proposed features in vehiclesize.txt if you're curious.

Just say NO to transporters. This technology implies a ridiculously high level of control over matter-energy. Practically all the other techs in the game are obsolete toys to someone who can do what transporters do. Convert soemthing to pure energy, then reassamble it AT A DISTANCE with no loss? Think about what this really implies. It's nothing short of magic.

Combination components/facilites are easy once you get the full Version and can edit the data files.

Custom missiles - good idea, but as you say messy to code. Being able to choose what type of warhead to use in a given combat would be cool, tough.

nerfman · #6 August 23rd, 2000, 06:58 PM

You're right in that PD is a very effective way to deal with fighters and/or missiles. I guess my big beef is just that as far as modern weapon systems go, point defense and area defense are two totally different things and require different types of delivery. Missiles and fighters, I would expect, should be very manueverable and thus harder to hit, especially by a directed weapon system such as a gun. Today, most PD systems don't engage until about the Last mile or so of a missiles flight. This is not due to range restrictions on the gun itself, but really just because its hard to actually accurately point a recoiling gun at anything further out, the angular finesse of the mount so to speak. I would envisage a system where PD was much more range limited and area defense would be based on counter missiles. Then again, if you want to take the Star Trek appraoch and say technology can "miracle" anything you want, then just leave it the way it is.

I realize that there is ECM (a term derived from old US Navy Doctrine). Believe it or not, ECCM is a real term as well (Electronic Counter-Counter Measures). I guess if the US Navy would have stuck to the old terminology long enough we would have had ECCCCCM and so on, but I digress. Still, an electronic device that allows you to decieve the enemy at the operational level would add depth to the game. The way I look at it, since most will PBEM where tactical resolution will be off, adding more scope in the strategic/operational aspects is the prime way to increase enjoyment.

Building custom missiles would be cool. You could get different components based on technology: body (how much it can carry), seeker (determines hit prob. and/or effects of ECM), warhead (damage of course), and engine (speed/endurance). The only problem I can see as this would be tedious to track it in the game (who wants to factor missile upgrades/production/stocks into this already complicated game) and actually writing the AI for the computer to do the same.

Anyway, that's all for now - Later

Baron Munchausen · #7 August 24th, 2000, 12:51 AM

As with everything else, you can edit the data files in the full Version.

Yes, I think the range of point-defense weapons is a bit extreme. It ought to be comparable to the range of fighter-based weapons (3 or so) and not much more.

An anti-missile is an interesting idea. It's true that an interceptor missile could be smaller and faster firing than a ship-damaging missile, so maybe this is something you could add and test out. If it moved pretty fast (speed 5 or 6) and had a range of at least 10 it could be a good substitute for "area defense" as it is currently handled by PD cannons. But the delay between firing and hitting the target could make quite a difference in it's performance compare to PD cannons.

Taqwus · #8 August 24th, 2000, 08:52 PM

A tougher addition -- more adaptive unit strategies.

A problem right now is that a ship can only have one strategy, chosen before battle, such as "Optimum Firing Range". Depending on circumstances, this strategy may be completely futile -- perhaps the ship's weapons are too short-ranged or too weak to hurt another ship, in which case it is better to either a) ram, or b) run.

For instance, a small fleet of 3 high-tech, well-armed cruisers may be best off using OFR against a large number of low-tech beamers, especially with regen-shields and a mobility advantage. But, the same cruisers may be vulnerable to a large number of missile ships -- getting close to a pack of 25 CSM-V cruisers may be a lot deadlier than to 100 Anti-Proton cruisers.

Implementation, of course, might be devilishly difficult. One might perhaps define an ordered list of conditionals (e.g. "Fails to damage enemy vessel in first ## of turns", "Enemy vessels fail to damage me in first ## of turns", "Ship has sustained ##% damage") which, if triggered, lead to alternate strategies (e.g. in the first case, switch to a Don't Get Hurt strategy, or perhaps Kamikaze; in the second case, perhaps an 'Aggressive' strategy striving for Point-Blank; the third may lead to a Maximum Firing Range strategy).

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Fionn · #9 August 25th, 2000, 04:50 AM

I'd love to see fleet strategy scripting. It'd be a tricky feature to add but being able to constuct a library of self-scripted strategies to use alongside the standards like "Optimum Firing Range" would be a marvelous way to really get inside and personalize the way the fleets act even when using one of the auto-resolved combat options.

It'd also be a first, unless you count Origin's Omega from the '80s . . . and I think I'm the only one who actually played that one.