Battles, battles and MORE battles ! Turn based vs real time.

[discord]

impaler: the systems would not fuse well at all, but i suggested tos as a new view on 'turn based' and how it could be handled for more varied troops....

and how can you fuse turn based and realtime? unless you create some sort of turnbased(using time as turn, as in tos.) engine, and just apply it using script/macro control on a RT visual engine......could work.

//discord

[utilae]

and how can you fuse turn based and realtime?

The system that I propose is called phased real time, basically it's a combination of turn based and real time.

Within combat:
There are turns, in each turn their are two phases (give orders, watch orders play out, the real time part). In the first phase of a turn all players give move and attack orders at the same time. When they are all done, then the real time part begins (second phase). Players pretty much see their orders unfold in real time for 30sec, a set time. They will see ships move where they told there ships to move, while firing at enemies that players said to. When 30sec is over, then back to first phase (give orders), by now it would be the second turn.

It can be done, it's just hard to explain.

[discord]

utilae: i can understand you quite well, but i think the way i proposed would be better....since i dislike the 'planning' part, that should be done using scripting and macro planning long before any battle starts.

//discord

[utilae]

Maybe you could give a detailed description of your idea.

[discord]

utilae: okey...i'll give it a shot.

#1 using a 'behind the scenes' engine similar to ToS, to get a wide variety of results out of the ship design, pilots, etc.

#2 the ToS engine is a staggered turnbased system, but based much closer to the term 'time' then the abstraction of time, wich is common in turnbased, so it's easier to convert it to a variable real time system.

#3 'variable real time' you ask? well, basicly, if something takes time, and since this IS a simulation, you can make 'time' go faster, thereof the variable part, makes for faster battles, if so is wished for.

#4 and how could the player handle such high speeds? well, in any normal game play type, he could not, it would be physicly impossible....unless he was some crazy asian high ranking tetris player, those guys CANT be human, but how do i intend to handle it? well basicly using something called 'scripting', or pre battle planning might be a better word, now this is where things get a little complicated.

#5 okey, how does it work? ships get assigned to a fleet, wich then infact is a group of units being controlled at the same time, thereof giving a macro control over many units.(if you have done your scripting well, you should be able to point your fleet in the right direction, and just see the battle unfold.) each unit belongs to
A) a empire,
B) a fleet(or reserves if such will be in, personaly i think it would be kinda cool, combined with a few other ideas i have.)
C) a wing(or detachment, or whatever you want to call it.)
D) a classification(basicly what it's function is.)
E) a unit identifier unique for that ship.

using a macro(script controling other scripts) system, one can create very big changes with very limited input(ergo pushing a button), to change the whole fleet composition, layout of the battle plans, and all that, wich the fleet(fleets could also be 'macro' controlled together, for even more powerful single push bottons.) then tries to do during real time....ahwell, i think this covers most of my idea....

all in all, it's a theoretical improvement over the moo3 system(wich did not work at all.).....and you should check out ToS to get a hang for that system, cause it is rather interesting.

//discord

[utilae]

Would it work, you may get the same problems as with the planetary viceroy ai and development plans. Also scripting sounds predetermined, ie you can't do much to control your ships in the present, and you can't always have a script for every possible scenario.

[discord]

ütilea: that's when the always useful 'tactical retreat' comes in handy, so you can conjure up some new plan.

and the planetary viceroys did everything, BUT you did not have the ability to control everything, and the moo3 viceroys worked pretty well aslong as you told'em to stay off the military stuff.

//discord

[utilae]

#3 'variable real time' you ask? well, basicly, if something takes time, and since this IS a simulation, you can make 'time' go faster, thereof the variable part, makes for faster battles, if so is wished for.

#4 and how could the player handle such high speeds? well, in any normal game play type, he could not, it would be physicly impossible....unless he was some crazy asian high ranking tetris player, those guys CANT be human, but how do i intend to handle it? well basicly using something called 'scripting', or pre battle planning might be a better word, now this is where things get a little complicated.

How would it work going so fast? Not much time to do things. Would you select scripts before the battle? Would it come down to the best scripter/programmer? And scripts running other scripts, this could get messy, it may become too complex to setup, even if it were as simple as pushing a button do things.

[Thumper]

#3 'variable real time' you ask? well, basicly, if something takes time, and since this IS a simulation, you can make 'time' go faster, thereof the variable part, makes for faster battles, if so is wished for.

#4 and how could the player handle such high speeds? well, in any normal game play type, he could not, it would be physicly impossible....unless he was some crazy asian high ranking tetris player, those guys CANT be human, but how do i intend to handle it? well basicly using something called 'scripting', or pre battle planning might be a better word, now this is where things get a little complicated.

How would it work going so fast? Not much time to do things. Would you select scripts before the battle? Would it come down to the best scripter/programmer? And scripts running other scripts, this could get messy, it may become too complex to setup, even if it were as simple as pushing a button do things.

I would like to be able to issue Battle Plans just prior to my Ship/Fleet/Armada entering a hostile system (any system that contails another race/empire's ships and or planets).


Thumper

[discord]

utilae: who said it would go 'fast', it's variable after all, anything from paused(prolly not available mp.) to super mega duper fast, 1year/sec speed.(i suggested a client side 'alarm' at oncoming enemy forces to slow down.), the system worked pretty well in imperium galactica.

thumper: battle plans are rather complex things, atleast as i want them, and you would NOT be able to make them in 15 secs.
most likely you spend time fidgeting with your plans while not gaming at all.
since i want to be able to control micro movement using macro commands, that means quite a substantial amount of work going into it, to get a 'working' battle plan.....although there will ofcourse be pre made macro's for groups, wich in turn is cotrolled by the fleet macro(wich i think would have to be user defined.), although they would be pretty simple, since they are defined like this.

#1 these groups are part of this fleet.
#2 group1 will do this macro, group2 will do this, group3 will do this, etc.
#3 and a direction in a 3d environment(usualy a enemy vessel) from wich the scripts can derive the course to plot.

wich is done by #1 choosing the target #2 clicking the command. and can involve VERY complex manuvers, like a 'covered retreat' where some of the battle ships lays down covering fire to let the rest get away safely(could be useful for the escorts of support vessels....ohyeah, you guys dont want support vessels to be in the game...or to let the expensive carriers, fighter or missile, to get away.), encircling attack(if your fleet consists mainly of smaller fast escort type ships.) could be rather lethal if used correctly and against less then well defended PD wise ships.(or in other words, focusing your firepower in the 'forward' arc could be a fatal mistake, even if it gets you LOTS of alpha strike), etc. since i can control each little unit using the scripts....well i think you get the idea.

and yes, you CAN create new scripts, but only the really crazy ones would do that(read me) since it takes quite alot of work to get such complex things to actualy work.

//discord

[Thumper]

@discord: Please read my ideas on Battle Plans and how they are created.


Thumper

[discord]

thumper: link to where you posted it?

//discord

[Pembroke]

battle plans are rather complex things, atleast as i want them, and you would NOT be able to make them in 15 secs. most likely you spend time fidgeting with your plans while not gaming at all.

I remember this very very old Unix game where two player pitted their robots against each other. It worked so, that there was a C-function interface that provided you fucntions to control your robot and functions that returned sensor input data. You then wrote a C-program using that interface and compiled it. When started the two competing robot programs would connect to a server process that fed them sensor data and responded to control calls thus playing out the battle. As the robot "AI" was written in a true programming language you could make it as complex as you wished. The graphics were crude but the game was actually quite fun.

While we could simply publish the ship battle interface for FreeOrion I don't think very many ordinary gamers would like to actually use it. OTOH it would provide a way for those interested in such things to improve on the game AI.

I myself would prefer a somewhat simpler solution, though.

Using the dreaded real world (*gasp*) as an example I'm now going to step on the toes of all the control freaks here:

FreeOrion will have computer opponents. That much is clear. However, from this it follows that the computer AI will be adequate to competently control a fleet of ships against the player. If it were not so then there would not be much point in the game. The computer opponent must be good enough or people will not play the game. But if the AI can fight reasonably well against the human player then it also by the same logic could fight reasonably well _for_ the human player as well.

In the real world an admiral does not directly control every single ship in his fleet. He plans mission objectives, prioritizes tasks for different ships, and gives general commands usually even appending the clause "as the opportunity arises", and then relies on the ship captains to be reasonably competent to act on their own. In fact it is a generally accepted military doctrine that the commanding general should not interfere with how his field commanders do the job as long as they do it, because usually the field commander knows the actual _local_ situation the best. The job of the general is to manage the battle as a whole and if he directly overrides his field commander then he better be darned sure he knows what he's doing.

Couldn't we do something similar in FreeOrion, too?

You would decide on a mission objective for the fleet engagement, like "Attack that planet", "Defend this planet", "Destroy enemy fleet", etc. You'd also set how hard you want the mission accomplished by setting triggers as to when to retreat like "50% of fleet destroyed" or "Less than 10 mission critical ships left", etc.

Then you would assign priorities for your individual ships or ship groups like giving some the command "protect mission ships at all costs" creating your point defense force. Some ships would "actively seek out enemy positions" so others can target them and some would "engage enemy at will" perhaps with extra target priority lists designed for your capital ships so your missile volleys go after the enemy capital ships first. Or however you want them.

You could also set the initiative level of ships, i.e. what to do when "opportunity arises". Like would your point defense ship hold its missiles and guns ready for a possible future incoming volley (= low initiative) or would it shoot at a enemy ship if it comes inside the range (= high initiative)?

Of course, the priority and target lists for the individual ships and ship groups could be made well in advance as a form of "standing orders".

After the commands are issued you hit "Go" and the die is cast. The actual battle will then be in the able hands of your ship captains except you could give some general battle directives, e.g. "retreat".

I would definitely not want to control each and every ship in a 100+ fleet even if it were in the MOO2 turn based style with unlimited time. However I would very much like to _see_ that 100+ ship fleet in action fighting that epic battle against the 100+ ship Klackon mother fleet. With multiplayer even more so. If the battle is mostly automated it could even be played "behind the screens" in situations where real world time is an issue (like in multiplayer) or you could play it out in double or triple speed.

IOW to quote the famous words: "Trust the computer. The computer is your friend."

[Thumper]

thumper: link to where you posted it?

//discord

Some of my theories and worries:
http://www.artclusta.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2751#2751
http://www.artclusta.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2818#2818
http://www.artclusta.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2827#2827

An example of 'A Scripted Battle Plan' as I see it.
http://www.artclusta.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2898#2898


Thumper

[discord]

thumper: basicly we are proposing the same thing, although i do think i pointed out how to actualy make it a tad bit more implementable....

//discord