New Species trait : maneuverability

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

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

New Species trait : maneuverability

#1 Post by LienRag »

It has long been proposed to separate "good pilots" (for fighter damage) from "good gunners" (for gun damage).

I approve it, but here's another trait : ability to maneuver.
Pilots with good maneuverability are able to launch more fighters per round, as they know how to avoid collision.

Bad Maneuver have one less fighter per launch bay per turn, good one more, great two more, and ultimate three more.

It could be good if it worked for Interceptors also, but I don't know how to do that.

I think that would change a lot of things in ship design and consequently tactics.

Here's the code for the maneuver.macros

Code: Select all

BAD_MANEUVER
'''EffectsGroup
            description = "BAD_MANEUVER_DESC"
            scope = Source
            activation = And [
                Ship
                Armed
                Or [
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_2"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_3"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_4"
                ]
            ]
            effects = effects = SetMaxCapacity partname = "FT_BAY_1" value = Value - 1 
'''

GOOD_MANEUVER
'''EffectsGroup
            description = "GOOD_MANEUVER_DESC"
            scope = Source
            activation = And [
                Ship
                Armed
                Or [
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_2"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_3"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_4"
                ]
            ]
            effects = effects = SetMaxCapacity partname = "FT_BAY_1" value = Value + 1 

'''

GREAT_MANEUVER
'''EffectsGroup
            description = "GREAT_MANEUVER_DESC"
            scope = Source
            activation = And [
                Ship
                Armed
                Or [
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_2"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_3"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_4"
                ]
            ]
            effects = effects = SetMaxCapacity partname = "FT_BAY_1" value = Value + 2 

'''

ULTIMATE_MANEUVER
'''EffectsGroup
            description = "ULTIMATE_MANEUVER_DESC"
            scope = Source
            activation = And [
                Ship
                Armed
                Or [
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_2"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_3"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_4"
                ]
            ]
            effects = effects = SetMaxCapacity partname = "FT_BAY_1" value = Value + 3 
'''


#include "/scripting/common/misc.macros"

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

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#2 Post by LienRag »

Also a Situational maneuverability : Species bearing this trait will launch one more fighter per Launch Bay around Barren planets (the presence of a gravity well without atmosphere around it helps the maneuver).

It is better if Species bearing this trait do not prefer Barren planets, as to diversify gameplay, not encourage static defense.

Code: Select all

BARREN_MANEUVER
'''EffectsGroup
            description = "BARREN_MANEUVER_DESC"
            scope = Source
            activation = And [	
                Ship
                Armed
                Or [
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_2"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_3"
                    DesignHasPart name = "FT_HANGAR_4"
                ]
            ]
	    condition = And [ Planet InSystem id = Source.SystemID Planet type = Barren ])
            effects = effects = SetMaxCapacity partname = "FT_BAY_1" value = Value + 1 
'''
Should I add this to the maneuver.macros file or put it in a specific macro file ?
Or create a situational.macros file and put this one and the radiated_shield macro (and any other that we can think of) in this situational.macros ?

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

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#3 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Tue May 25, 2021 7:18 pm Bad Maneuver have one less fighter per launch bay per turn, good one more, great two more, and ultimate three more.
I think for the normal hangars this would be maybe too powerful balance/power-level wise. For shortrange weapons, each level is 33% of the base level.
For launch capacity 2 it would be 50% better, but launching is only half the fighter game, so it ~may be ok but I am not completely convinced.

Interceptors would probably need some extra launching on higher tech levels(?). Or simply give it a higher bonus, e.g. 2 extra launches per level instead of 1.
So with laser interceptors and great launch trait two launch bays could launch all interceptors from three hangars in a single bout.

If we scale up the number of fighters by two - so half damage, double hangar and launch bay capacity, one point would only be 25% of the base level, that may be better (and it would also allow for a bad trait - launch only 3 instead of 4). Was thinking to do such a doubling anyway for getting some design space for the interceptors (having 100% launch capacity, but 150% hangar capacity). So all hangars doubled, basic interceptors get 6 launch capacity and 9 hangar capacity.
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: 1876
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#4 Post by wobbly »

Ophiuchus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:05 am If we scale up the number of fighters by two - so half damage, double hangar and launch bay capacity, one point would only be 25% of the base level, that may be better (and it would also allow for a bad trait - launch only 3 instead of 4). Was thinking to do such a doubling anyway for getting some design space for the interceptors (having 100% launch capacity, but 150% hangar capacity). So all hangars doubled, basic interceptors get 6 launch capacity and 9 hangar capacity.
So for clarification would flak guns be double as well? How would arc disruptors be adjusted. They are both ship and fighter.

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

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#5 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:10 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:05 am If we scale up the number of fighters by two - so half damage, double hangar and launch bay capacity, one point would only be 25% of the base level, that may be better (and it would also allow for a bad trait - launch only 3 instead of 4). Was thinking to do such a doubling anyway for getting some design space for the interceptors (having 100% launch capacity, but 150% hangar capacity). So all hangars doubled, basic interceptors get 6 launch capacity and 9 hangar capacity.
So for clarification would flak guns be double as well? How would arc disruptors be adjusted. They are both ship and fighter.
I think flak should double. Extra hangar capacity for interceptors should be able balance interceptors vs flak a bit (e.g. a flak costs the same as base interceptors and launch bay, interceptors have 6 shots in bout one, flak has 6 shots at the 6 interceptors, in bout two you have probably 4 or 5 interceptors, having 4 or 5 shots, probably 1 interceptor in the last bout left; so in whole interceptors save up to 9 fighters and probably bring down 9 or 10 fighters (max 24) while the flak probably brings down 14 fighters (max 18)).

About arc disruptors I do not have a clear vision yet. My gut feeling would be not to double those. But as we added structure/damage scaling and nerfed research production those could use a balance pass anyway.

I would be also ok with not doubling, but i am not sure about hangar capacity for basic interceptors then (launch bays: basic: 3; lasers: 4; plasma: 5; death ray: 6) while (hangars: basic: 4 or 5; lasers: 6; plasma: 7 or 8; death ray: 9). Probably round up so it is sure that you can launch all interceptors of three hangars using two bays in a single bout.
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: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#6 Post by Oberlus »

I don't like maneuverability fluff. I have a hard time picturing how that would allow for faster launching. Maybe something like aircraft miniaturization?

The mechanics are difficult to get the most ofit, but I don't know if they are really unbalanced.
DR interceptors with great trait has 6 in hangar and 8 launchs per bay, so optimum is 4 hangars and 3 launch bays (for full deployment in a single round). Only a subset of end game hulls can enjoy that. With good trait it is nearly useless for DR fighters. However the effect early game is bigger. Not so much for good trait.
For strikers, good trait means saving 33% of launch bays, which is 16.6% of total cost and getting more external slots (it really gives strikers a bump, allowing more useful ship designs with more hulls).
For bombers, good means that 2-hangar designs can save one external slot (50%) and 16.6% of total cost weapon cost, useless for 1-hangar designs.
For heavy bombers good is useless except for some bizarre ship designs, and great is useless.

If the trait affects also damage, there can be more space to play with the different kind of fighters to make the trait worth for all of them without making it OP.

So getting back to the miniaturization idea (not sold on the name):
The engineers of this species are capable of producing better fighter designs, saving space for extra fighters in the hangars or more powerful weaponry on them.
Affects hangar capacity of interceptors and strike fighters (+/-33% per trait level, i.e. 1) and damage of bombers and heavy bombers (+/-33% per trait level, i.e. +/-2 for bombers and +/-4 for heavy bombers).


All this is without taking into account what Ophiuchus just said, that I haven't time to digest yet.

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

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#7 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 11:04 am I don't like maneuverability fluff. I have a hard time picturing how that would allow for faster launching. Maybe something like aircraft miniaturization?
That's easy to understand, if pilots are good, you can launch either two of them at the same time, or in rapid succession, as they're able to avoid colliding with each other.
But Miniaturization is good too, also it's better fluff to explain why it doesn't affect combat skills but only launch speed.
Oberlus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 11:04 am The mechanics are difficult to get the most ofit, but I don't know if they are really unbalanced.
DR interceptors with great trait has 6 in hangar and 8 launchs per bay, so optimum is 4 hangars and 3 launch bays (for full deployment in a single round). Only a subset of end game hulls can enjoy that. With good trait it is nearly useless for DR fighters. However the effect early game is bigger. Not so much for good trait.
For strikers, good trait means saving 33% of launch bays, which is 16.6% of total cost and getting more external slots (it really gives strikers a bump, allowing more useful ship designs with more hulls).
For bombers, good means that 2-hangar designs can save one external slot (50%) and 16.6% of total cost weapon cost, useless for 1-hangar designs.
For heavy bombers good is useless except for some bizarre ship designs, and great is useless.
Yes, you've got it (apart from the interceptors, my macro doesn't handle them, as I don't know how to).
Being challenging without being overpowered is indeed my goal there, imho this goal is achieved by what I proposed.
As said above, Fighter damage would be a different trait.

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 11:04 am All this is without taking into account what Ophiuchus just said, that I haven't time to digest yet.
Ditto (especially since I don't know how I would modify my macro to take interceptors into account).

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#8 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 4:29 pm That's easy to understand, if pilots are good, you can launch either two of them at the same time, or in rapid succession, as they're able to avoid colliding with each other.
But Miniaturization is good too, also it's better fluff to explain why it doesn't affect combat skills but only launch speed.
I disagree with all this.
It's not about understanding. My point is it seems wrong, bad, nonsensical. Did you see any space movie with fighters going out a launch bay? It's not about pilot skill, but about the time to relod each fighter launcher (as with torpedoes in submarines, not depending on the piloting skills of the torpedoes). With miniaturization you manage to have more launch "tubes" in the same external slot.
Miniaturization also helps explaining why it can affect combat damage: you can pack more weapon damage in the same space, so you can get more powerful fighters.
LienRag wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 4:29 pm Being challenging without being overpowered is indeed my goal there, imho this goal is achieved by what I proposed.
IMO, it is not achieved, as per what I said, because Impossible or marginal are not equivalent to challenging. It's all about integer maths, you can't beat them.

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

Re: New Species trait : maneuverability

#9 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 11:04 am For heavy bombers good is useless except for some bizarre ship designs, and great is useless.
Well, protoplasmic heavy bomber carrier with an armour comes to mind (or bomber carrier, if you do not mind half of the bombers launch in bout 2).

Great would work well for symbiotic bomber carrier with an armour.

But yes, higher launch rates call for designs with few external and lots of internal slots.
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!

Post Reply