Stealth Fundamentals

This is for directed discussions on immediate questions of game design. Only moderators can create new threads.
Message
Author
User avatar
Grummel7
Space Dragon
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#31 Post by Grummel7 »

Oberlus wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:07 pmThe main problem with gradual detection strength is not micromanagement as LienRag pointed out, but GUI. How do you represent in the galaxy map in which areas of your vision you have this or that detection strength? When detection strength is uniform over all your space, you can just use your color empire to represent the areas under detection range. If detection strength also varies, what do you do? A gradient? Give the player a mouse tool to probe detection strength at a certain point in the map? It becomes cumbersome, confusing or both, for not much gain in gameplay.
Well, most of the time the exact value should not be that important. The GUI shows you what you can see and you make your decisions based on that, which is not so much different from now.

Sometimes you may want to know: Can there be an enemy fleet in a specific system? Provided that you know what kinds of ships they use, a tool to tell you the exact value of your detection strength in that system may be helpful.

Regarding the display, how about using equi-strength lines (like height lines on terrain map), possibly combined with a gradient.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#32 Post by Oberlus »

Anvil wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 8:34 pm Regarding the display, how about using equi-strength lines (like height lines on terrain map), possibly combined with a gradient.
I don't know. Maybe try opening a feature request at github to see what devs think about it. But better if you first search a bit in the years-old threads where this could have been already discussed and dismissed.

Bobit
Space Floater
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2015 2:52 am

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#33 Post by Bobit »

I think either of these ways could work (but not both):
  1. Detection strength is DOUBLED and ONLY DOUBLED where you have ship sensors (which are now more expensive and base detection range is higher) or stealth/detection-focused planets or expensive detection-focused buildings. Represented on UI somewhat easily compared to gradient strength, low micro. Credits to anvil I think?
  2. Detection strength is now entirely based on detection range. 200 detection range gives 200 strength at 0uu, 150 at 50uu, etc. No urgent need to represent on UI, just use the ruler, maybe a bit higher micro tho. Credits to alleryn I think? Also Geoff suggested this 5 years ago
Either way every sort of thing should be stealthable. Troop ships / bombardment (at a malus to attacking under shields as said earlier in this thread), planets, mobile defense/bioterror/stargate planets, colony ships, carriers. An empire can stealth everything, but only if they're willing to kill scouts. Or they can invest into stealthing just tall planets very well and never kill scouts. Or they can stealth only their scouts and use them to warp in the whole army.

As for stealthing supply, I don't see the point compared to just using global stockpiles and stargates. Also I see no reason that stockpiles shouldn't ignore supply.

I must confess I'm not really sure how stealthed carriers in combat work.
Last edited by Bobit on Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#34 Post by Oberlus »

Bobit wrote: Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:56 pm Detection strength is DOUBLED and ONLY DOUBLED where you have ship sensors (which are now more expensive and base detection range is higher) or stealth/detection-focused planets or expensive detection-focused buildings. Represented on UI somewhat easily compared to gradient strength, low micro.
Dunno. Could work. Need to think about it.

Bobit wrote: Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:56 pm Detection strength is now entirely based on detection range. 200 detection range gives 200 strength at 0uu, 150 at 50uu, etc. No urgent need to represent on UI, just use the ruler, maybe a bit higher micro tho.
So, in order to find out what spots within your space can have a hidden enemy you need to:
- Check out possible stealth values of your enemy ships (e.g. they could have 45 or 65 stealth)
- Check out the detection distance from each of your systems with planets or ships (this have a 150 detection planet, this a 130, this 75 from the scout...)
- Calculate for each previous system de minimum distance from it at which a ships could stay hidden (here, with 150, could be 105 or 85, there could be 85 or 65...)
- Cross all previous information to find out the systems that are outside your detection.

I'll pass :lol:

Bobit wrote: Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:56 pm I must confess I'm not really sure how stealthed carriers in combat work.
Same as other combatants: firing a weapon or launching fighters makes them visible on next combat round (they always launch fighters on round 1, so they are always targettable on round 2).

Bobit
Space Floater
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2015 2:52 am

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#35 Post by Bobit »

Hm. You're right, #2 would need UI representation and not just a ruler. Though the UI representation wouldn't be that complicated. Just press "+" and "-" to adjust your "displayed detection strength". E.g. if you have "displayed detection strength" set to 50, it will render all of your detection ranges as 50 less. Still, it might be more tedious than the alternatives.

ooooo I like those combat stealth mechanics

I don't really like the idea of just removing stealth and replacing it with imaginary stealth ships, because it removes all the different kinds of stealth ships you can naturally make with the current ship designer. I don't know how population ships would be very different from migrating planets, it seems potentially redundant and less intuitive.

User avatar
nox
Space Krill
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2021 5:25 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#36 Post by nox »

I think another way to improve the stealth mechanics is to add the ability to track stealth ships. Right now if a ship has low stealth it is always seen, and if a ship has high stealth it is only seen in later rounds of combat. I think that if a ship has a medium level of stealth, then opposing empires should not be find it, but they can follow it if they know exactly where it is.

With this, a ship or fleet could get one, but only one, surprise attack. When it attacks, then the opposing empire will be able to follow it with it's sensors. The ship will then have to regain stealth by either 1) leaving the enemy's detection range 2) flying to an ion storm to temporarily boost the fleet's stealth or 3) destroying ships / capturing planets to remove the enemy's detection ability

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#37 Post by Oberlus »

nox wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 5:51 pm I think another way to improve the stealth mechanics is to add the ability to track stealth ships. Right now if a ship has low stealth it is always seen, and if a ship has high stealth it is only seen in later rounds of combat. I think that if a ship has a medium level of stealth, then opposing empires should not be find it, but they can follow it if they know exactly where it is.

With this, a ship or fleet could get one, but only one, surprise attack. When it attacks, then the opposing empire will be able to follow it with it's sensors. The ship will then have to regain stealth by either 1) leaving the enemy's detection range 2) flying to an ion storm to temporarily boost the fleet's stealth or 3) destroying ships / capturing planets to remove the enemy's detection ability
I really like this idea, to help get rid of the all or nothing stealth.
Something similar could be implemented by giving a malus to stealth to ships after combat, which gets removed after a few turns. High-enough stealth ships will still be hidden after combat.
For the scanning tracking, I don't know if it can be done with current engine.

User avatar
blacksheepghost
Space Krill
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2022 12:55 am

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#38 Post by blacksheepghost »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 7:47 pm I really like this idea, to help get rid of the all or nothing stealth.
Something similar could be implemented by giving a malus to stealth to ships after combat, which gets removed after a few turns. High-enough stealth ships will still be hidden after combat.
For the scanning tracking, I don't know if it can be done with current engine.
How about a combination of this plus the earlier idea of better detection in systems with ships in it?

After a stealthed ship attacks, it receives a malus to its stealth strength in systems with an enemy ship. After being attacked, the defender could not see the stealthed ship move through the starlanes, but they could set up a perimeter and search the systems within it. If they land in the system where the stealthed ship is hiding (or if the stealthed ship tries to move through the perimeter), the stealthed ship is revealed and further combat would extend the malus. This adds a hide-and-seek element after any stealth combat to try to "get away with it", per se.
Last edited by blacksheepghost on Tue Apr 26, 2022 1:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#39 Post by LienRag »

An idea I had recently (that, as usual, feeds on previous discussions - we all are space dwarves standing on the shoulders of alien giants) is to have three specific Stealths : let's say Gravitic, Radiative and Void.

Gravitic Stealth would come from number and size of planets in the system; something like sum(size of planets).

Radiative would come from stars (Red then Orange then Yellow then White then Blue then Neutron then Black Hole).

Void would come from number of connected empty systems (with a huge bonus when the ship is itself in an empty systems).

These different Stealths would be Species and Hull characteristics, enhanced by specific Stealth techs (with different paths, like Gravitic Stealth would be in the Gravitonic research path).
What is important is that the Techs would be multiplicand, not additional : i.e with Gravitic as S= Sum (size of planets in system), level 1 Gravitic tech multiplies this Stealth by 2, level 2 by 3 (or maybe by four ? Needs balancing, and I'm not the best with that), and so on.

What is also extremely important and makes the core of my proposal, is that these Stealth boni would require for each Stealth path a corresponding Military Policy - without the Policy one does not benefit from the specific bonus at all.

Detection would also be specific (we probably would want to keep a generic Stealth and Detection value, and add the specific Stealth and Detection for each Path), with techs adding (not multiplying) Detection to the Empire specific detection capacity, but also only if the specific Military Policy is used.

That would mean six new Military Policies, so that an Empire would have to choose which path to choose.
I believe that the Stealth policy and the Detection policy for a specific Path should be mutually exclusive, a bit like Continuous Scanning removes ship stealth.
The only way to detect all would be to rise the generic Detection capacity, which should be really expensive - making winning the Stealth race in a specific path a viable strategy, at least till endgame (since we need to have all-seing empires in the endgame, lest we allow eternal draws).

I also believe that the strategic value of these choices (do I protect against Gravitic or Void ? My left neighbour is going for Gravitic Stealth, but my top one is going for Void... Hard decisions incoming !) depend on a progressive rather than sudden progression in Detection value and Stealth multiplicand, the way Continuous Scanning works now.
Without this progressive progression, it's too easy to adopt a Gravitic Detection policy when preparing for war against an enemy going for Gravitic Stealth, and then shifting to Radiative Detection once a Radiative-path empire declares war.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#40 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 9:07 pm An idea I had recently (that, as usual, feeds on previous discussions - we all are space dwarves standing on the shoulders of alien giants) is to have three specific Stealths : let's say Gravitic, Radiative and Void.
i agree that there may be some value in a paper-rock-scissors mechanism in the stealth/detection race. first hunch is your suggestion is too complex for its value. the ideas of having a way to switch between paper-rock-scissors is new and interesting to me. Anybody knows a game which uses such a dynamic? Food for thought, thanks.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#41 Post by wobbly »

Ophiuchus wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:08 am
LienRag wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 9:07 pm An idea I had recently (that, as usual, feeds on previous discussions - we all are space dwarves standing on the shoulders of alien giants) is to have three specific Stealths : let's say Gravitic, Radiative and Void.
i agree that there may be some value in a paper-rock-scissors mechanism in the stealth/detection race. first hunch is your suggestion is too complex for its value. the ideas of having a way to switch between paper-rock-scissors is new and interesting to me. Anybody knows a game which uses such a dynamic? Food for thought, thanks.
I'm not sure if it's exactly what you are asking but aurora has 3 different sensors. Passive thermal which detects heat signals, Passive EM detecting electric/magnetic signals and active scanners which detect mass but also send out EM signals. It's quite a complicated system.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#42 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 9:07 pm An idea I had recently (that, as usual, feeds on previous discussions - we all are space dwarves standing on the shoulders of alien giants) is to have three specific Stealths : let's say Gravitic, Radiative and Void.
(i guess the previous discussion was my "three shades of stealth", which was more 2.5 different types; active emission (current kind of stealth, less stealthy when you combat/are in flight, passive sensors, situational, easy to apply stealth tech, organic hulls have low active emission, while solar hulls shine), a passive part on top (so active scanning can detect this, maybe a penalty when not hiding and source of radiation/bright sun in the system (one can detect the reflection or shadow), small hulls could have an advantage), and an orthogonal gravitic component (hard to detect, hard to stealth, connected mostly with basic info, depends mostly on "hull size" and number of vessels).
wobbly wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:35 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:08 am i agree that there may be some value in a paper-rock-scissors mechanism in the stealth/detection race. first hunch is your suggestion is too complex for its value. the ideas of having a way to switch between paper-rock-scissors is new and interesting to me. Anybody knows a game which uses such a dynamic? Food for thought, thanks.
I'm not sure if it's exactly what you are asking but aurora has 3 different sensors. Passive thermal which detects heat signals, Passive EM detecting electric/magnetic signals and active scanners which detect mass but also send out EM signals. It's quite a complicated system.
the question was what happens if you do not have a "static" race only (e.g. improving a certain kind of sensor by tech) but also some dynamic aspect (LienRag suggested switching policies).
is that possible in Aurora?
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#43 Post by wobbly »

I'm not an expert, I don't play it much due to the micromanagement hell. It has a different kind of dynamic as you can do things a different way to the tech.

So for instance you can research thermal sensors tech or use a big sensor.

You could research more efficent engines, or use a smaller engine, or cut power to the engines cutting the thermal signal.

Cloaking mostly works by making the ship look smaller. Small ships are stealthy without it.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#44 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 10:32 am So for instance you can research thermal sensors tech or use a big sensor.

You could research more efficent engines, or use a smaller engine, or cut power to the engines cutting the thermal signal.

Cloaking mostly works by making the ship look smaller. Small ships are stealthy without it.
all of these sound reasonable. thanks for the insight. similar in freeorion: "big" sensor could be an expensive and/or core slot part (or an additonal internal(?) part). different engine types are easy to implement.
"cutting power" sounds like a connection to fleet stance.
Small ships having usually better stealth is done via hull stealth value. Making ships look smaller with better stealth tech is fluff.

But none of these are a empire-wide switchable focus/commitment. (there is non-switchable commitment via tech, part, and slot costs).
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stealth Fundamentals

#45 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 12:21 pm But none of these are a empire-wide switchable focus/commitment. (there is non-switchable commitment via tech, part, and slot costs).
Policy Active Scanning could reduce everyone's EM stealth.
I'm sure we can find fluff for policies to increase or reduce gravitational stealth. E.g. lower structure but better gravitational stealth.
Also lower damage but better EM stealth. This reminds me of Geoff's weapons noisiness branch.

Post Reply