FreeOrion

In relation to the supply design thread this thread is to dicuss ship fuel.

Fuel is still up for debate, so let's debate it here.

I had this idea, that all ships systems (weapons, engines, shields) use fuel. Sure, firing those lasers is actually using power, but the ships power generator burns fuel to create power (eg antimatter->power). And even things like missiles could use fuel in their warheads.

Now, what would the gameplay be like if it were like this. Firing your weapons uses your fuel. Travelling between star systems uses fuel. Would you be out of fuel after firing a few shots? Would your weapons be inactive after a long trip? Of course, If your supply is maintained running out of fuel won't be an issue.

And then we could incorperate other technologies such as fuel scoops and regenerating fuel systems. You may run low on fuel during a battle, but a fly by at the local Gas Giant replenishes your fuel reserves.

Using technology in your ship that uses less fuel will also be more beneficial and adds to the options when choosing components along with stealth, space, cost and effectiveness (eg damage/defense/accuracy).

All in all, supply and a ships fuel could provide strategic value to the game.

And why do you think this is a good idea?
While i'm all for simplifying things, there's a point where simplification causes the player more trouble.

Fundamentally this idea penalizes the player for using his weapons, which really puts a damper on those battles. If you shoot too many times, then next turn your ship can't move. If you shoot your lasers too many times, you won't be able to fire your missiles.

Basically this forces the player to micromanage his ammo usage, which will be more of a un-fun burden on the players attention than noticing both a fuel and ammo gauge.

_________________
—• Read this First before posting Game Design Ideas!
—• Design Philosophy
—•— My Ideas, Organized —•— Get an Avatar —•— Acronyms —•—

I defiantly think there should be finite ammo, if you do manage to cut off a ships supply lines then it should eventually be unable to fight.

Furthermore it won't require in battle micro at all, just order a long/short range attack, the only thing the player needs to take care off is how much ammo the ship has left in total.

If you think that alone is too much micro then make it so that every weapon added to a ship increases the ship's ammo storage by enough to keep that weapon active for several battles, if you do this a lack of ammo becomes a punishment for letting you're supply lines get cut rather than a routine part of the game.

I never said it was a good idea, but thought more that at the right balance, this is how I could imagine supply affecting ships in battle.

If your ship is in supply, while it is waging war with another empire, then fuel does not deplete, therefore the ship can travel freely or use all weapons and systems without limitation as long as the ship remains supplied.

If the ship is not in supply, then fuel depletes, and weapons start to suffer limitations. This is the intended result of a lack of supply. The ideal balance here is that a ships fuel will allow them to travel maybe 2 starlane jumps to an enemy world. Take part in two battles. Then be able to make 2 more starlane jumps. If the ship goes for 3 or 4 starlane jumps, then the first battle may be ok, but the next ones will have weapons not functioning as a result of lack of fuel. Something like that, where a ship can operate over short range without supply, but over medium to long range, the ship won't return or participate in battles effectivley.


When a ship is not in supply, we want some penalty to the ship. In battles, with missiles, this is no ammo. With lasers, a similar thing. With the proper balance, you may be able to go through three to five battles before your ship suffers the effects of having no supply.


Possibly, I am aware of these problems, but the point is to develop this somewhere. I always prefered battles as they were in Moo2, no ammo to worry about. But with supply, it really requires an ill effect on your ships in battle if your ships are not in supply.


Yes, this is what we need. Some system where a lack of supply makes a ship ineffective at combat and long/medium range wars.


Well that is true. With this idea, all weapons whether lasers or missiles rely on a single pool of fuel.

Another issue, is whether having the fleet share fuel reduce micromanagement. That way the player only has to keep track of the fleet wide fuel supply. We could prevent the fuel ferry exploit Geoff has talked about by only allowing fuel sharing in battles.


I think a better system is that in ship design the player decides the ships fuel capacity independently of how many weapons are added. Want heaps of fuel in your ship, add heaps of fuel tanks. A ship with enough fuel capacity will be able to travel further into enemy territory and unleash more weapons fire over a greater number of battles.

I think that they should have to use ammo like everyone else, but thanks to getting fresh resupplies outside the battle they'll probably start with more than enough to not worry. This means that if you make an exceptionally bizzare design (100 death rays, one ammo/fuel store) they can't fire repeatedly thanks to a swarm of invisible supply ships. Defendeders will still be able to have less fuel tanks since they're not jumping but you can take it too far

For this argument I'm assuming the death rays don't add anything towards the ammo store.



We definitely want a penalty, but I think the player should never have to chose between getting home and fighting. If you say 5 battles with enough fuel to make it home, on the 5th battle he'd probably have to micromanage to ensure that there is enough fuel left at the end. The battle will be more fun if he can focus on fighting and worry about getting home later.

Just make running out of ammo the penalty, its enough without adding fuel to the mix



Well I think this is one of those rare occasions where realism matters, if the player cannot share fuel between his fleet outside a battle but increase it inside, it will double the frustration of being unable to share fuel outside a battle at a critical moment.

Not to mention the harder to use exploit where you find a planet defended by a base, attack it but spend the first few minuets of the battle calmly sharing fuel between ships outside the enemy's attack range.

That said I like the idea of sharing ammo within battles (and outside) especially if you can see little attackable fuel drones travelling from ammo ships to the fighting ships. Note: even though I don't think you should get supply from the usual routes, I'm quite happy for planets to give supplies in this manner since it's significantly weaker.



I'm not saying either system is better, I was just pointing out that with a system where you get more ammo storage per weapon, and presumably fuel per engine, if the extra storage is generous menas that you can ignore ammo entirely until you get to you're 3rd or 5th battle without fresh supplies.

In you're system a ship with lots of guns and few ammo stores will run out on its first battle, possibly the first battle in supply if you don't get invisible resupplies during battle. Not necacarraly a bad thing though, bad ship design should equal a bad ship

Yeah, thats probably how it would work. Ammo/fuel would still be used, even if they are in supply, but amm/fuel is resupplied fully and instantly at each new turn.


I think this is acceptable that the player should have to suffer the decision. After all, if the players ship is in supply, then there are no penalities. The player will just try and be in supply more.


Well then the player will have to track them seperately, which will be a pain. I would rather deal with one value for 'fuel/ammo' then two for fuel and ammo.


This woudn't happen. As no time would be spent fuel sharing. It would be automatic. All ships fuel meters summed up into one. All fuel usage from this one meter. When the battles, ends, fuel would be reallocated evenly (or some other pattern, eg to where it was).


That would be cool.

By new turn, do you mean every turn within the battle?



Its not the decision that's the problem, its the micromanagement of implementing it. Although since my last post I have thought of an easy to manage everything so my opposition has gone down. All you do is give an order to all ships, retreat through warp point X when you have enough fuel for Y jumps and no more. Possibly with the option of using themselves as a target to protect the ships still firing for a while first.



Actually tracking them seprately won't be that hard, in battle they only have to track ammo since fuel isn't used at all. Outside a battle tracking both will be quite easy



If there is any kind of fuel shareing at all then it leads to an "exploit", you bring in a dozen fuel tankers and they share during the battle, that counts as the "exploit" even if the post battle reallocation is perfect.

Outside of battle.

Oh good, we agree then

Or, how about this: You have two meters to watch on your fleet: Fuel and Energy.

Fuel is used for the engines. While using starlanes you use up a lot more fuel. In battle, you use up a lot less due to less movement involved. I don't think it's a burden, I think it adds realism. I know, most people hate realism in games. But still, it does limit your actions. I've always hated getting owned by more experienced players because they know how to play and have nothing limiting them. But when their fuel runs low, they can't take my last planet, can they? No, they have to go back and refuel, letting me prepare a defensive.

Energy could be used in weaponry and shielding. If your shields take a good hit, some energy is depleted to restore them to full functionality. Not enough to really set you back, just a sliver. Same with weapons. Every time you fire your weapons, you lose a barely noticeable percentage of the energy. You wont notice it much, but after a few battles you'll find yourself in need of a recharge.

Your argument that fuel = energy could be possible, but if you look at a vehicle of today, that's not how it works. The fumes from the fuel help the engine run, while the battery in the vehicle allows the lights, radio, and all that other good stuff work.

Also, another thing I thought of. Smaller ships like fighters shouldn't have enough fuel to make more than one starlane jump, right? Well, what if whenever they're in a fleet with a larger ship, it's assumed that the larger ship is carrying them. Thus they save their fuel for battle. And, while the larger ships carry smaller ships they repair them as well.

I actually like this idea you have with fuel. It limits the player, making them return to a friendly planet for a fill up before they can cause more havoc. Thus, if another player is getting owned and needs some time, they'll be able to plan on that one period of refueling as their chance to prepare a counterattack. Also, maybe a refuel should take longer depending on the size of the ships. Small ships take only a turn, larger ships might take two or three. I'm not sure how long a turn is supposed to represent though...

Not so.

You're assuming that it's a LARGE drain. If you have, say, 1000 fuel and use 200 to get to a star system, there's still 800, you'll probably want at least 200 for when you go home, thus leaving 600 for shooting holes in things. At a reasonable rate of 10-5 energy consumed per shot, that gives you between 60 and 120 shots before you won't have enough to go home.

In a real battle you're likely to get blown up before you have time to fire that much.

_________________
Computer programming is fun.

Exactly what I was thinking.

The player should have enough energy to get through a battle or two, having each shot drain 1/100th of the energy of something like that. If you think about it, 100 shots is an unnecessary amount in a game like this. If a battle lasts long enough for you to use 100% of your energy in it, then it's either not a very good game because the battles drag on way too long, or you've got one crappy ship.

If you wish to add something useful to this project please see the links and ideas in this post.
And especially this poston realism.

_________________
—• Read this First before posting Game Design Ideas!
—• Design Philosophy
—•— My Ideas, Organized —•— Get an Avatar —•— Acronyms —•—

Thank you for pointing these out. I apologize for misstepping and not being able to find everything.

NP
Unfortunately this project has a rather steep learning curve. It's hard for a newcomer to find out what's going on.

_________________
—• Read this First before posting Game Design Ideas!
—• Design Philosophy
—•— My Ideas, Organized —•— Get an Avatar —•— Acronyms —•—