Malfador, Bring back retreat option from SEIII

thorfrog · #1 February 12th, 2002, 10:59 PM

Bring back retreat option from SEIII. The ability to retreat should be available. Perhaps give it a 3 turn delay. Either way this should be an option returned to the game.

Dravis · #2 February 12th, 2002, 11:42 PM

A 3-5 turn delay. hmm, that might be work. E-mail Malfador with that.

PvK · #3 February 13th, 2002, 12:23 AM

Ya, sounds good to me.

Suicide Junkie · #4 February 13th, 2002, 12:31 AM

Would this retreat be limited to "back where you came from"?

Perhaps the turn-delay required for retreat should be 30 / (combat speed).

[ 12 February 2002: Message edited by: suicide_junkie ]

PvK · #5 February 13th, 2002, 01:33 AM

Yes, retreating ships should end up moving strategically the direction they leave the tactical map (as in SE III). This would also want the addition of the SE III movement tactic "Retreat" (keeping "Don't Get Hurt" as it is).

A comprehensive solution probably requires some thorough design of how exactly it works both in turn-based and simultaneous movement.

For example, do you prohibit retreating in the direction of hostile-occupied sectors? If not, then does the retreat start another battle? (This was the main thing MM brought up as a problem in SE3).

In SE3 (which is turn-based), strategic movement points were required and consumed by retreating, which made it possible to eventually run down a slower ship. With simultaneous mode, it's not clear how this would be accomplished (maybe by adjusting starting positions - actually, currently in simultaneous, if you overrun a fleet heading away from you, combat starts with the ships deployed in the same part of the tactical map... done correctly, that might work out ok).

It's a complicated problem to solve completely with the abstractions of SE IV, but it wouldn't be impossible. The current box around the tactical map isn't very satisfying, at least to me.

PvK

disabled · #6 February 13th, 2002, 04:37 AM

I recall MM saying they were considering bringing it back for SE5... So it's kinda a break even on it. We get it back, but not for a year or so.

I think if enough letters are emailed to MM demanding it, MM would re-add it.

But I don't know if it's worth the number of hard code changes...