Battles, battles and MORE battles ! Turn based vs real time.
Moderator: Oberlus
what would truly be neat is a truly 3 dimensional battle field instead of the age old 2-d planar battle feild with 3-d graphics. add into that stuff like gravity, mommentum, firing arcs and 6 or 8 sides of armour, space debris from exploding ships and the tactical possibilities explode.
and then there was dirt!
-
- Creative Contributor
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
- Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Sounds like HomeWorld, not that its a bad game but it would just take up too much of the players time and energy (not to mention ours).
Some of thouse ideas can be incorporated though.
When a ship explodes it could leave behind some "scap" in one or more of the Hexagons and then the other ships can interact with the scraps. Such as harvisting it for parts to reverse enginer or taking damage from hiting it. Also I dont see any fundimental reason why armor and firing arcs could not be included in a hexagon based map.
Overall I like the direction this is going, thumbs up to NF's sugjestions on Task Forces they could do a great job at redusing Micro managment.
Some of thouse ideas can be incorporated though.
When a ship explodes it could leave behind some "scap" in one or more of the Hexagons and then the other ships can interact with the scraps. Such as harvisting it for parts to reverse enginer or taking damage from hiting it. Also I dont see any fundimental reason why armor and firing arcs could not be included in a hexagon based map.
Overall I like the direction this is going, thumbs up to NF's sugjestions on Task Forces they could do a great job at redusing Micro managment.
-
- Creative Contributor
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
- Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
well RT would look REALY lame across hexes, the ships would just blink from one hex to the next. Hexagons are something that would be great in turn based combat but poor in RT. So thats one of the major resons I suport Turn based, so I can get me some hexagons.
Also let me reiterate the combined ground/space philosophy and explain how simple and fun it can be. A modest sized planet of 20-100 hexagonal cells will alow for breif yet exciting battle that is closly linked to the space portion of the battle. As your armada aproatches the planet it first engages orbital defences, enemy fleets and missle bases. Once you get your drop ships next to the planet they land and unload troops probly taking casualties in the process. Now your ships bombard the enemy positions from space and the troops launch their attacks. The ground combat might last only a handfull of turns as moving troops across the planet would be relitivly quick. Each combat turn represents a few days. (space ships will be moving at more realistic speeds inside of a system, it would take several turns to go from planet to planet so battles can sprawl from planet to planet) The pressence of your space fleet will be crutial to the success of your ground troops so an enemy counter attack in space at this point could swing the tide of battle on the ground! If your sucessfull the ground troops can be rediployed to another planet in the system. Battles can be far more interesting and dynamic rather then "defend the marble".
Also let me reiterate the combined ground/space philosophy and explain how simple and fun it can be. A modest sized planet of 20-100 hexagonal cells will alow for breif yet exciting battle that is closly linked to the space portion of the battle. As your armada aproatches the planet it first engages orbital defences, enemy fleets and missle bases. Once you get your drop ships next to the planet they land and unload troops probly taking casualties in the process. Now your ships bombard the enemy positions from space and the troops launch their attacks. The ground combat might last only a handfull of turns as moving troops across the planet would be relitivly quick. Each combat turn represents a few days. (space ships will be moving at more realistic speeds inside of a system, it would take several turns to go from planet to planet so battles can sprawl from planet to planet) The pressence of your space fleet will be crutial to the success of your ground troops so an enemy counter attack in space at this point could swing the tide of battle on the ground! If your sucessfull the ground troops can be rediployed to another planet in the system. Battles can be far more interesting and dynamic rather then "defend the marble".
-
- Space Kraken
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:17 am
I don't like the idea of using hexes or other wargame units of measurement. Hex and grid sheets come from wargammers not wanting to bother with a ruler and protractor, the trade off being a reduce set of facings.
We don't have to use a hex (or large grid) for measurement--we got a computer to magically measure distances for us.
Plus horizontal movement is so odd when using hexes.
We don't have to use a hex (or large grid) for measurement--we got a computer to magically measure distances for us.
Plus horizontal movement is so odd when using hexes.
-
- Space Floater
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am
About time in battles : I dont know what type of time measurment FO will have, but I think it will be atleast 1 month / year per move. So When 2 fleets meet eachother it would be logical to end the battle in 1 turn. Second argument for quick battle results is that games should be fast. In SP games player dont care about time. However in MP games time is very important and battles cannot take forever, because it wont be fun anymore.Impaler wrote:well RT would look REALY lame across hexes, the ships would just blink from one hex to the next. Hexagons are something that would be great in turn based combat but poor in RT. So thats one of the major resons I suport Turn based, so I can get me some hexagons.
Also let me reiterate the combined ground/space philosophy and explain how simple and fun it can be. A modest sized planet of 20-100 hexagonal cells will alow for breif yet exciting battle that is closly linked to the space portion of the battle. As your armada aproatches the planet it first engages orbital defences, enemy fleets and missle bases. Once you get your drop ships next to the planet they land and unload troops probly taking casualties in the process. Now your ships bombard the enemy positions from space and the troops launch their attacks. The ground combat might last only a handfull of turns as moving troops across the planet would be relitivly quick. Each combat turn represents a few days. (space ships will be moving at more realistic speeds inside of a system, it would take several turns to go from planet to planet so battles can sprawl from planet to planet) The pressence of your space fleet will be crutial to the success of your ground troops so an enemy counter attack in space at this point could swing the tide of battle on the ground! If your sucessfull the ground troops can be rediployed to another planet in the system. Battles can be far more interesting and dynamic rather then "defend the marble".
Idea of hexes. In TB battle system some unit of movement must be applied to maintain order in the chaos of battle. I see here 2 kinds of different things :
# remove the dots in your mind, they are needed here to maintain shape, because this forum dont see spaces.
1. mesh, which could look like Moo2 :
.._ _ _ _
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
2. mesh, same idea but on elipse / circle :
...._ _ _ _
._|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
...|_|_|_|_|
3. hexes ... every one know how they look like
I vote for mesh nr 2. It is bit more tactical to me, because the map will always be round, so enemy wont put u in the corner. It is bit more realistic this way.
But the most important thing is : movement and fireing in the battle. It doesnt matter what type of unit we will have. All it matters is clear and logical m/f system. So when enemy moves 2 units of h/m circle of his movement will go lower down to finally reach 0.
Fireing : In moo2 we have :
1. Forward / backward : 45 angle
2. Forward / backward extended : 270 angle
3. Full : 360 degrees.
I propose :
1. Forward / backward : 45 angle
2. Forward / backward extended : 180 angle
2. Forward / backward extended : 270 angle
3. Full : 360 degrees.
Now the final stuff : hexes limites the player to only several types of turnarounds = 8 positions (S=ship):
..\..|...../
....\|_./
..../...\
---| S |------
....\_./
.../..|..\
../...|.....\
While normal mesh have more LIMITS. So ship can turnaround in about .. hmmm even 16 different positions. It is no longer blocked by a hex, so player always can fit his ship as he wants.
Guest
That is no problem, if space combat and ground combat continued through many turns, then it would just be as quick as you want. You could have a set limit of 5 mins or something and when the time is up space/ground combat is halted and continues over into the next turn.Plasma Dragon wrote: Second argument for quick battle results is that games should be fast. In SP games player dont care about time. However in MP games time is very important and battles cannot take forever, because it wont be fun anymore.
Really this is just the shape of the map, I don't see the point of making the map have corners.Plasma Dragon wrote: 1. mesh, which could look like Moo2 :
.._ _ _ _
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
2. mesh, same idea but on elipse / circle :
...._ _ _ _
._|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
...|_|_|_|_|
This is an octogon. Hexegons limit the player, but octogons don't, they allow for 8 directions, which is acceptable.Plasma Dragon wrote: 3. hexes ... every one know how they look like
Now the final stuff : hexes limites the player to only several types of turnarounds = 8 positions (S=ship):
..\..|...../
....\|_./
..../...\
---| S |------
....\_./
.../..|..\
../...|.....\
You did forget one option though. Point to point. You can make a ship go anywhere, there are no cells of any shape. You define the path the ship has to travel to get from point a to point b, and it doesnot need to be a straight line either, the ship could go around in circles and figure 8 loops before it gets to the destination, if that's what you want.
Impalers idea could still work with the point to point method, ie ships could still drop troops onto a planet, that is not made up of hexegons but is a circle shape, kinda like a big cell. You could even have lots of little funny shaped cells inside to represent territories.
-
- Creative Contributor
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
- Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
I think their may be some confusion on the turn length I was refering too, 3 days is the length of a COMBAT turn, 100 combat turns are equal to 1 GAME turn. Game turns are the normal traditonal turns we are all familiar with where we make the big strategic desision and look at the map of the galaxy, combat turns are used only in combat (which tecnical happens "between" turns if we have simultanious turn exicution). Thus combat can only run for a maximum of 100 turns atwhich point you return to the "normal" game.
If I combine the two I can express them like this GG.CC GameTurn.Combat turns like 3.56 meaning 3 years (game turns) 56 combat turns (56x3= 168 Earth days) for my fleet to reach the Drek system which is filled with the unpronouncable race (by Utilae). When my combat starts it will be on combat turn 56 when my ships enter the system and each turn as I move my ships towards the unpronouncables planet will take another combat turn. Lets say on turn 68 I have finished wiping out the enemy fleet and then blow up their orbital ship yard (thus destroying the cruiser they had under construction) now I comence bombarding the planet unoposed. At the end of turn 100 their are still some unpronouncables alive on the planet so the "combat intermission" screen comes up and the combat is saved. Their is a small note pad for me to record some strategy for next turn for example "finish wiping out planet, retreat before enemy reinforcments arrives".
This ends the combat and I go on to resolve the rest of my combats in other systems (if any). Then go into my normal strategic galactic view and make my normal high level strategic choices. When I end my turn the combat resolutions begin. My saved battle is then reloaded and I am presented with my notes along with options for auto resolutions like "auto retreat" "auto fight" or "auto bombard". I choose manual because I can see that an enemy is enroute to the system in the "Incoming fleet Quee". This is a listing of all known information on fleets I have detected that are headed for this system both friendly and unfriendly, its organized cronologicaly and at the top I see the enemy has a large fleet that is 0.49 turns away (meaning they will arive durring this combat seshion). So I naturaly bombard the Unpronouncable planet for 48 more turns and on turn 49 I get a pop up message notifiying me of the arrival of this new force. The new fleet apears on the edge of the map and it looks a bit too big for me to handle. Its a good distance away though so I keep bombarding a few more turns untill I judge its time to run. For another 10 turns they chasse me across the system and I reach the edge just in time to do a system exit just ahead of the persuers. I select the destination/s of the retreting task forces as Kyrton 4 and Vrognol 7 the ETA's are 1.35 turns and 5.98 turns respectivly.
Thats how I see combat turns working, how you agree.
If I combine the two I can express them like this GG.CC GameTurn.Combat turns like 3.56 meaning 3 years (game turns) 56 combat turns (56x3= 168 Earth days) for my fleet to reach the Drek system which is filled with the unpronouncable race (by Utilae). When my combat starts it will be on combat turn 56 when my ships enter the system and each turn as I move my ships towards the unpronouncables planet will take another combat turn. Lets say on turn 68 I have finished wiping out the enemy fleet and then blow up their orbital ship yard (thus destroying the cruiser they had under construction) now I comence bombarding the planet unoposed. At the end of turn 100 their are still some unpronouncables alive on the planet so the "combat intermission" screen comes up and the combat is saved. Their is a small note pad for me to record some strategy for next turn for example "finish wiping out planet, retreat before enemy reinforcments arrives".
This ends the combat and I go on to resolve the rest of my combats in other systems (if any). Then go into my normal strategic galactic view and make my normal high level strategic choices. When I end my turn the combat resolutions begin. My saved battle is then reloaded and I am presented with my notes along with options for auto resolutions like "auto retreat" "auto fight" or "auto bombard". I choose manual because I can see that an enemy is enroute to the system in the "Incoming fleet Quee". This is a listing of all known information on fleets I have detected that are headed for this system both friendly and unfriendly, its organized cronologicaly and at the top I see the enemy has a large fleet that is 0.49 turns away (meaning they will arive durring this combat seshion). So I naturaly bombard the Unpronouncable planet for 48 more turns and on turn 49 I get a pop up message notifiying me of the arrival of this new force. The new fleet apears on the edge of the map and it looks a bit too big for me to handle. Its a good distance away though so I keep bombarding a few more turns untill I judge its time to run. For another 10 turns they chasse me across the system and I reach the edge just in time to do a system exit just ahead of the persuers. I select the destination/s of the retreting task forces as Kyrton 4 and Vrognol 7 the ETA's are 1.35 turns and 5.98 turns respectivly.
Thats how I see combat turns working, how you agree.
-
- Creative Contributor
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
- Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Oh yes another thing.
I was imagining the planet as a roughly circular/hexagonal group of hexagons with a planet "picture" projected over it that would be perfectly circular, all of the planetary "ground" would be covered by this picture. A few Hexs along the edge would end up getting split or almost fully covered by this picture but they would still be counted as space. Their would also be some smaller hax size pictures layed down over some of the hexagons for the representation of terrain features.
Also it would be cool if the number of hexes or squares that a planet has to be equal to the planets "size" factor, so a size 25 planet has 25 hexs, a size 38 planet has 38, a small asteroid might just be 3 or 4.
I was imagining the planet as a roughly circular/hexagonal group of hexagons with a planet "picture" projected over it that would be perfectly circular, all of the planetary "ground" would be covered by this picture. A few Hexs along the edge would end up getting split or almost fully covered by this picture but they would still be counted as space. Their would also be some smaller hax size pictures layed down over some of the hexagons for the representation of terrain features.
Also it would be cool if the number of hexes or squares that a planet has to be equal to the planets "size" factor, so a size 25 planet has 25 hexs, a size 38 planet has 38, a small asteroid might just be 3 or 4.
-
- Space Floater
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am
Shape
Hmm, battle time limit ? This can work somehow in RT system, also in TB SP, but it could have real troubles in TB MP. Opposite site can just sit down and wait 5 minutes as battle ends. Solution to this is small clock for each move : for example 10 seconds per ship. However in MP even this method can fail as lag hits the players. Also it could unbalance the whole fight : 1 ship vs 10 ships = 10 seconds to 100 sec. Or even worse 20 vs 50 = 200 to 500. This could really slow down whole game and battle system. And sending more ships to fight each turn. Woohooo ! This could make battles almoust endless !utilae wrote:That is no problem, if space combat and ground combat continued through many turns, then it would just be as quick as you want. You could have a set limit of 5 mins or something and when the time is up space/ground combat is halted and continues over into the next turn.Plasma Dragon wrote: Second argument for quick battle results is that games should be fast. In SP games player dont care about time. However in MP games time is very important and battles cannot take forever, because it wont be fun anymore.
I like your idea. However this seems bit unrealistic. Space battles are generally very quick and compared to turn time ( 1 month / year ) is unreasonable. Imagine 2 BB fireing thier lasers for 1 month without final result. In ground combat this idea looks better, because fights on the ground can really take several months.
.Plasma Dragon wrote: 1. mesh, which could look like Moo2 :
.._ _ _ _
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|
2. mesh, same idea but on elipse / circle :
...._ _ _ _
._|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|
...|_|_|_|_|
[/quote="utilae"] Really this is just the shape of the map, I don't see the point of making the map have corners.
[/quote]
Every map has its borders. In elipse / circle maps there are no corners.
I dont understand your point : do u propose map without borders ? Unlimited ?
Guest
-
- Creative Contributor
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
- Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
If yall would read my proposals you would see that I said a combat turn should be 3 days. which I belive is a resonable time for space and ground turns. The ships are going to be moving at sublight speeds across a whole solar system and firing at each other across HUGE distances, heck the torpedos might take multiple combat turns (almost a week) to reach their targets! Its also good for ground combat, look how fast that war in Iraq lasted ony 21 days or 7 turns, as tecnology progresses combat becomes faster on the ground, especialy when troops can be orbitaly inserted anywere on the planet their si no "front".
In multiplayer I see a system like this, the game maker selects one of several options for how combats are resolved. In most cases the players view combats in the "pre combat" screen ware they make various selections much like a single player game. How many desisions they are alowed and how far the players control the process untill automation starts is determined by the game makers selections.
Auto All- automaticaly calculates the battle.
Auto Discresionary - before each combat the players view their precombat screen and select auto or manual, If either player chosses auto then the combat is determined automaticaly. If none chosse auto then the combat is performed manualy.
Manual All - manual combat for all battles, a player can ofcorse choosse to let his side be controled automaticaly at any point inside the battle.
Manual Discretionary - if either player chosses manual then the combat is resolved manualy, if non choose manual then it is done automaticaly. This would likly be the most populat setting as it assures everyone that any battle they or their oponent consider critical will be manual controled but the minor battles or borring routine bombardments can be skipped.
Their would be a set of calculations that dettermine time for each turn. A simiar system is used in Civ 3 though I have not tried it. Basicaly their are a number of data points that can be entered that corespond to seconds of time for various elements in the combat. For example 15 seconds per Task Force, 30 seconds per planet, and 30 seconds for each active ground troop unit. Thesse all get added up to produce a time limit on each combat turn. Larger battles would have longer turns to acomidate them.
Their also might be a chess style option that gives each player a (not nessarily equal for purposes of handy capping) quantity of time to make all desisions. The players clock runs down untill they hit "finish turn" and then their oponent takes their turn. Once a player runs out of time their forces will be AI controled for the rest of the fight. This system could be combined with the above system for an interesting combination.
An additional option of key importance when combat is being calculated automaticaly would be the Pre-Combat phase. It can be turned on or off and has a time limit of its own.
In the pre-combat screen the player selects some tactics for his forces such as "retreat" or "bombard" or "fight to the death". The player can also set turn timing on these functions to have them "retreat on turn 4" or casualty settings "retreat when half of you/them are dead" and lastly pick place to retreat too. Their would ofcorse be a physical time limit on how long each player has to make these desisions and when their up the combat is resolved with what ever has been entered. A player can select tacticas on this screen and then chosse to play manualy, if so the ships start off performing the program tactics untill the player instructs otherwise.
In multiplayer I see a system like this, the game maker selects one of several options for how combats are resolved. In most cases the players view combats in the "pre combat" screen ware they make various selections much like a single player game. How many desisions they are alowed and how far the players control the process untill automation starts is determined by the game makers selections.
Auto All- automaticaly calculates the battle.
Auto Discresionary - before each combat the players view their precombat screen and select auto or manual, If either player chosses auto then the combat is determined automaticaly. If none chosse auto then the combat is performed manualy.
Manual All - manual combat for all battles, a player can ofcorse choosse to let his side be controled automaticaly at any point inside the battle.
Manual Discretionary - if either player chosses manual then the combat is resolved manualy, if non choose manual then it is done automaticaly. This would likly be the most populat setting as it assures everyone that any battle they or their oponent consider critical will be manual controled but the minor battles or borring routine bombardments can be skipped.
Their would be a set of calculations that dettermine time for each turn. A simiar system is used in Civ 3 though I have not tried it. Basicaly their are a number of data points that can be entered that corespond to seconds of time for various elements in the combat. For example 15 seconds per Task Force, 30 seconds per planet, and 30 seconds for each active ground troop unit. Thesse all get added up to produce a time limit on each combat turn. Larger battles would have longer turns to acomidate them.
Their also might be a chess style option that gives each player a (not nessarily equal for purposes of handy capping) quantity of time to make all desisions. The players clock runs down untill they hit "finish turn" and then their oponent takes their turn. Once a player runs out of time their forces will be AI controled for the rest of the fight. This system could be combined with the above system for an interesting combination.
An additional option of key importance when combat is being calculated automaticaly would be the Pre-Combat phase. It can be turned on or off and has a time limit of its own.
In the pre-combat screen the player selects some tactics for his forces such as "retreat" or "bombard" or "fight to the death". The player can also set turn timing on these functions to have them "retreat on turn 4" or casualty settings "retreat when half of you/them are dead" and lastly pick place to retreat too. Their would ofcorse be a physical time limit on how long each player has to make these desisions and when their up the combat is resolved with what ever has been entered. A player can select tacticas on this screen and then chosse to play manualy, if so the ships start off performing the program tactics untill the player instructs otherwise.
-
- Space Floater
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am
Hmm... 3 days. Not bad. But how much will take normal turn in producion ? Aslo 3 days or more ? Normally turn takes a month or more. I am not sure if I understood you good enough.Impaler wrote:If yall would read my proposals you would see that I said a combat turn should be 3 days. which I belive is a resonable time for space and ground turns. The ships are going to be moving at sublight speeds across a whole solar system and firing at each other across HUGE distances, heck the torpedos might take multiple combat turns (almost a week) to reach their targets!
Torpedos fire : If torpedos will go by multiple turns then battle will be quite boring. So noone will use torpedos as a weapon. Even in Moo2 torpedos are last used weapon since they are weak.
Generally I like your idea - it looks good in theory, however in practise I am wouldnt vote for it since it is unpractical.
Guest
Re: Shape
I did not say there should be a time limit per ship, but for the player to order all ships. So you have 30secs to order all ships, the time could be changed of course.plasma Dragon wrote: Hmm, battle time limit ? This can work somehow in RT system, also in TB SP, but it could have real troubles in TB MP. Opposite site can just sit down and wait 5 minutes as battle ends. Solution to this is small clock for each move : for example 10 seconds per ship. However in MP even this method can fail as lag hits the players. Also it could unbalance the whole fight : 1 ship vs 10 ships = 10 seconds to 100 sec. Or even worse 20 vs 50 = 200 to 500. This could really slow down whole game and battle system. And sending more ships to fight each turn. Woohooo ! This could make battles almoust endless !
I like your idea. However this seems bit unrealistic. Space battles are generally very quick and compared to turn time ( 1 month / year ) is unreasonable. Imagine 2 BB fireing thier lasers for 1 month without final result. In ground combat this idea looks better, because fights on the ground can really take several months.
It would be the same in singleplayer as it would for multiplayer. In multiplayer players could chat and watch the battle as they wait. Plus if space combat spilt over many turns, then the combat would take 5 mins if that was the set time. A player would never take longer than 5 mins. If they don't finish the battle in 5 mins, it continues to the next turn, which may take two mins or 5 mins and continue again.
There would not be any point to making the map have rounded corners, there would be no real strategy or advantages, etc.plasma Dragon wrote: Every map has its borders. In elipse / circle maps there are no corners.
I dont understand your point : do u propose map without borders ? Unlimited ?
@Impaler
What do you mean by each combat turn lasts 3 days, there are 100 combat turns in 1 game turn. How does this correspond to gameplay time, what is it in minutes, seconds. And if a combat turn is equal to 30sec, then 100 times that means combat is 50mins. Should we not just have a set time of 5 minutes. If it goes over 5 mins, then combat is continued into the next turn.
-
- Space Floater
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:13 am
Re: Shape
1. 30 secs to order all ships : This purely favorite small number of BIGGER ships over the LARGE number of smaller ones.utilae wrote:I did not say there should be a time limit per ship, but for the player to order all ships. So you have 30secs to order all ships, the time could be changed of course. It would be the same in singleplayer as it would for multiplayer. In multiplayer players could chat and watch the battle as they wait. Plus if space combat spilt over many turns, then the combat would take 5 mins if that was the set time. A player would never take longer than 5 mins. If they don't finish the battle in 5 mins, it continues to the next turn, which may take two mins or 5 mins and continue again.
2. Idea of chat in MP as players fight is good. However watching battles should have an agreement of players who fight for others to watch.
3. 5 minutes battle : It still favorites bigger ships over smaller ones, but it is not so bad as lower values of time.
4. Spliting combat over turns :
a) positives : always X minutes of battle - time is important in MP,
b) negatives : favorites player who is defending his position : he can runaway forever and painfully delay battle.
I think size and SHAPE of the battle map is very important and have a HUGE impact on battle scenarios :utilae wrote:There would not be any point to making the map have rounded corners, there would be no real strategy or advantages, etc.
1. Moo2 map : corners - tactical disadvantage for defender - he cant runaway forever - better for attacker.
2. Circle / elipse map : more balanced for defender vs attacker, better missle / torpedo defence, tiny - fast ships can move at borders and runaway - this can favorite defender as well as attacker : depends on missle / beam strategy.
3. No borders map : I will ask last time : Do u mean a map with unlimited space ? If I this is a truth then battle will loose all strategy sense. Imagine a fleet of good heavy BB vs one tiny super fast FF. FF can runaway forever in space and if it has good defence bonus. This bonus plus speed will win for defender any battle, beacause no missle/beam can hurt tiny superfast FF.
Utilae : do u still think there is no strategy in map shape ?
Guest
-
- Space Kraken
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:17 am
Re: Shape
This whole notion of the defender running away forever is silly. Defenders who run should lose. Delaying actions are fine--running one measly cloaked scout all over the edges of the map is twinky.
This is a very good reason to allow the attacker to conquer planets on the space combat screen, rather than have two seprate phases for space combat and ground combat. If a defenders runs around trying to bleed away time, the attacker takes or glasses the objective.
For each board game style abstraction added to combat (hexes, map borders, TB moves, phases) there's a layer of undesirable crap that has to either be dealt with with yet more rules or just accepted as a part of the "tactics" of the game. We all have extremely powerful computers sitting on our desks--there is little reason to continue to use abstractions that add to the complexity of design (aside from nostalgia).
imho, every board game rule that adds to complexity of the game and/or the silliness of tactics ought to be nixed.
This is a very good reason to allow the attacker to conquer planets on the space combat screen, rather than have two seprate phases for space combat and ground combat. If a defenders runs around trying to bleed away time, the attacker takes or glasses the objective.
For each board game style abstraction added to combat (hexes, map borders, TB moves, phases) there's a layer of undesirable crap that has to either be dealt with with yet more rules or just accepted as a part of the "tactics" of the game. We all have extremely powerful computers sitting on our desks--there is little reason to continue to use abstractions that add to the complexity of design (aside from nostalgia).
imho, every board game rule that adds to complexity of the game and/or the silliness of tactics ought to be nixed.