Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

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

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
unjashfan
Creative Contributor
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:08 am

Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#1 Post by unjashfan »

Planets don't always seem to actively defend themselves against space monsters when there are no friendly ships in the system, regardless if their supply is being interrupted by said monsters. It can get frustrating when one would have to leave some ships behind just to get rid of them; the monsters can't be left untouched either (small snowflakes might evolve at any time and start disrupting supply, and floaters can spawn dyson forests). As the empire expands, it becomes really tedious to maintain a monster-free empire, and we'd want to avoid this kind of unnecessary micro-managing.

My idea is that we could have aggressive/passive options for planets, like the ones we have for ships. This way planets can actively initiate battles against monsters or enemy fighters/scouts to protect themselves. Sometimes it would be advantageous not to initiate battles, especially if planets are heavily stealthed. Enemy ships would still disrupt supply, but no battle would take place since the ships can't see the planet, and the planet doesn't want to get rid of them yet because it doesn't want to reveal its presence (albeit the planet would be scanlined after a battle, but the gig would be up then - presence revealed).

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#2 Post by Dilvish »

On a related note, it seems especially unfair that monsters biological attacks can apparently reduce planet population without triggering a battle that allows the planet to defend itself. I have sometimes sent a scout on Aggressive to a planet with a hovering monster, just to trigger a battle to allow the planet to defend itself (it works even though the scout can't attack).

The simplest fix for my pet peeve would probably be to add a minor physical attack (like mass driver 1) to all these critters that currently only carry biological attacks. That would make them more of a nuisance to scouts, but would still leave them less than a deadly threat even to intro scouts (at least, a scout would survive a turn of combat and have a chance to go heal).

As for the OPs concern with nuisance -- what I do is just be sure to track down every nest in my territory and establish outposts (or colonies) on them so that any new monsters spawning are domesticated. Besides getting rid of the Supply Line nuisance, any domesticated monsters generally have high Detection ranges and can actually be a little useful. The Dyson Trees you just have to clear out. I don't think the dynamic is faulty, and Geoff's recent stop to monster camping of colonies will reduce the hassle as well.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Bigjoe5
Designer and Programmer
Posts: 2058
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Orion

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#3 Post by Bigjoe5 »

unjashfan wrote:Planets don't always seem to actively defend themselves against space monsters when there are no friendly ships in the system, regardless if their supply is being interrupted by said monsters.
So if a space monster is at a starlane entry point eating supply ships as they enter the system, an armed planet should be able to go kill it? Think ahead to 3D combat...

[edit]On the other hand, if planets are armed with LR weapons, that could actually be a reasonable sequence of events, minus the word "go", and the implied existence of supply ships in combat.[/edit]
Dilvish wrote:On a related note, it seems especially unfair that monsters biological attacks can apparently reduce planet population without triggering a battle that allows the planet to defend itself. I have sometimes sent a scout on Aggressive to a planet with a hovering monster, just to trigger a battle to allow the planet to defend itself (it works even though the scout can't attack).
This I agree with.
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.

unjashfan
Creative Contributor
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:08 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#4 Post by unjashfan »

I have sometimes sent a scout on Aggressive to a planet with a hovering monster, just to trigger a battle to allow the planet to defend itself (it works even though the scout can't attack).
This is the cumbersome part about triggering planetary battles. Why not just have the planet take the initiative instead of sending a scout there to do that? Isn't that the point of having planetary defense - to allow planets to protect themselves from enemies and monsters alike? It sort of takes some use out of planetary defenses when a planet has 100 shields and 45 defense and not being able to fry that floater sitting there because it needs a ship in the system to start the hostilities.
track down every nest in my territory and establish outposts (or colonies) on them so that any new monsters spawning are domesticated.
Yes, this is one of the best ways to deal with them, but weaker empires might want to spend their precious PP elsewhere (say extra warships to defend against other empires). Or how about if a monster nest is blocked off by a sentinel? The only option then would be to pick off the monsters one by one.
I don't think the dynamic is faulty, and Geoff's recent stop to monster camping of colonies will reduce the hassle as well.
The problem isn't the fact that monsters are camping on colonies. The problem is that planets don't make use of their defenses when monsters actually do camp in the system. So what happens when enemy ships camp in the system, but are set to passive and won't initiate a battle (maybe a scout spying on the planet)? Does that mean I have to send a ship over there to blow it up when it can just run away? Ideally, it would be great to have ships in every system to prevent this, but it can't always be done, and to quote the planetary defense network tech: "to give that planet defensive capabilities without the need for ships". That, I think, is the whole concept behind planetary defense. The way it works right now is completely contradictory.

yandonman
Creative Contributor
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 12:32 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#5 Post by yandonman »

an armed planet should be able to go kill it? Think ahead to 3D combat...
Planetary defense is not necessarily physically tied to the planet. When combat happens in a system, all planets are involved - indicating either very long range weapons or intra-system mobile defense. It could be logical that planetary defenses can reach out and intiate combat.
Code released under GPL 2.0. Content released under GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0.

Karoushi
Space Squid
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 6:08 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#6 Post by Karoushi »

unjashfan wrote:The problem isn't the fact that monsters are camping on colonies. The problem is that planets don't make use of their defenses when monsters actually do camp in the system. So what happens when enemy ships camp in the system, but are set to passive and won't initiate a battle (maybe a scout spying on the planet)? Does that mean I have to send a ship over there to blow it up when it can just run away? Ideally, it would be great to have ships in every system to prevent this, but it can't always be done, and to quote the planetary defense network tech: "to give that planet defensive capabilities without the need for ships". That, I think, is the whole concept behind planetary defense. The way it works right now is completely contradictory.
It isn't ~not~ a problem either, both points are valid if you ask me.

If a planet can't initiate a battle it is stuck, even worse if monsters just keep piling up onto it like the problem I had just a couple days ago, discussed in another thread.

User avatar
eleazar
Design & Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:09 pm
Location: USA — midwest

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#7 Post by eleazar »

unjashfan wrote:Planets don't always seem to actively defend themselves against space monsters when there are no friendly ships in the system, regardless if their supply is being interrupted by said monsters.
Behind the fluff-- the issue is (if i'm not mistaken) that some monsters are "unarmed" as the combat engine understands it, but have scripted effects that do damage to planets. There's no intention to make planets incapable to respond to these threats -- it it just scripting that has outsmarted the rest of the game.

Of course there may be other broken/unfinished things involved as well.

User avatar
em3
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#8 Post by em3 »

eleazar wrote:Behind the fluff-- the issue is (if i'm not mistaken) that some monsters are "unarmed" as the combat engine understands it, but have scripted effects that do damage to planets. There's no intention to make planets incapable to respond to these threats -- it it just scripting that has outsmarted the rest of the game.
Using this logic it would be possible to sneak some colony or troop ships through enemy systems as long as there are no enemy ships there, right?
https://github.com/macmodrov
[...] for Man has earned his right to hold this planet against all comers, by virtue of occasionally producing someone totally batshit insane. - Randall Munroe, title text to xkcd #556

Karoushi
Space Squid
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 6:08 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#9 Post by Karoushi »

em3 wrote:
eleazar wrote:Behind the fluff-- the issue is (if i'm not mistaken) that some monsters are "unarmed" as the combat engine understands it, but have scripted effects that do damage to planets. There's no intention to make planets incapable to respond to these threats -- it it just scripting that has outsmarted the rest of the game.
Using this logic it would be possible to sneak some colony or troop ships through enemy systems as long as there are no enemy ships there, right?
And they have bad sensor technology, I'd say.

User avatar
Bigjoe5
Designer and Programmer
Posts: 2058
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Orion

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#10 Post by Bigjoe5 »

em3 wrote:
eleazar wrote:Behind the fluff-- the issue is (if i'm not mistaken) that some monsters are "unarmed" as the combat engine understands it, but have scripted effects that do damage to planets. There's no intention to make planets incapable to respond to these threats -- it it just scripting that has outsmarted the rest of the game.
Using this logic it would be possible to sneak some colony or troop ships through enemy systems as long as there are no enemy ships there, right?
Getting past such a system is no problem. Actually invading a planet though, requires the shields to be down, which there's currently no way to accomplish without combat, or a lazy opponent.
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.

User avatar
em3
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#11 Post by em3 »

Bigjoe5 wrote:Getting past such a system is no problem. Actually invading a planet though, requires the shields to be down, which there's currently no way to accomplish without combat, or a lazy opponent.
Well, yeah, but this way one can lay siege to a system deep within enemy territory and send troop ship reinforcements without being harassed by planetary defences along the way. The fact that planetary defences cannot attempt to shoot down ships crossing their system from one starlane to another irks me a bit.
https://github.com/macmodrov
[...] for Man has earned his right to hold this planet against all comers, by virtue of occasionally producing someone totally batshit insane. - Randall Munroe, title text to xkcd #556

Karoushi
Space Squid
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 6:08 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#12 Post by Karoushi »

em3 wrote:
Bigjoe5 wrote:Getting past such a system is no problem. Actually invading a planet though, requires the shields to be down, which there's currently no way to accomplish without combat, or a lazy opponent.
Well, yeah, but this way one can lay siege to a system deep within enemy territory and send troop ship reinforcements without being harassed by planetary defences along the way. The fact that planetary defences cannot attempt to shoot down ships crossing their system from one starlane to another irks me a bit.
Perhaps we could say that planetary defenses only protect from planet invasions and attacks and offer a new tech/building: Orbital Defense.

Orbital Defensive Measures?

AndrewW
Juggernaut
Posts: 791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#13 Post by AndrewW »

Karoushi wrote:Perhaps we could say that planetary defenses only protect from planet invasions and attacks and offer a new tech/building: Orbital Defense.

Orbital Defensive Measures?
Hmmm, I see Orbital as still being planet bound though. Maybe: System Defensive Measures would cover it better?

Karoushi
Space Squid
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 6:08 am

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#14 Post by Karoushi »

AndrewW wrote:
Karoushi wrote:Perhaps we could say that planetary defenses only protect from planet invasions and attacks and offer a new tech/building: Orbital Defense.

Orbital Defensive Measures?
Hmmm, I see Orbital as still being planet bound though. Maybe: System Defensive Measures would cover it better?
So, Galactic Defensive Network?

Sounds bad ass.
It could be late-phase tech, so fairly advanced ~ I'd suggest using the self-gravitating tech to make some kind of small laser platform that could possibly function like a small moon or something of that nature.

AndrewW
Juggernaut
Posts: 791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Aggressive/Active Planetary Defense

#15 Post by AndrewW »

Karoushi wrote:
AndrewW wrote:
Karoushi wrote:Perhaps we could say that planetary defenses only protect from planet invasions and attacks and offer a new tech/building: Orbital Defense.

Orbital Defensive Measures?
Hmmm, I see Orbital as still being planet bound though. Maybe: System Defensive Measures would cover it better?
So, Galactic Defensive Network?

Sounds bad ass.
It could be late-phase tech, so fairly advanced ~ I'd suggest using the self-gravitating tech to make some kind of small laser platform that could possibly function like a small moon or something of that nature.
"That's no moon. It's a space station."
"It's too big to be a space station."

Wouldn't limit it to lasers though, once you have researched more weapons those could be used instead. Some sort of Space Defense Platform.

Post Reply