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...

Baron Munchausen · #7 February 13th, 2002, 04:56 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Hadrian Aventine:
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...

Actually, all we need is some way to avoid getting caught in the 'invisible corner'. He wouldn't have to implement strategic movement, just let the pursued ship 'disappear' from combat if it gets a certain distance ahead of the pursuers. Out of range of all weapons when it hits the wall, maybe? Something like that.

PvK · #8 February 13th, 2002, 06:50 AM

The problem though is the "retreat forward" tactic. You want to get through an enemy position, so you engage them, and immediately retreat, getting back to the strategic map, where you then go forward. They can never intercept you. Or, worse, you move onto an enemy homeworld, then immediately retreat in tactical. With no strategic movement, you'd be on the homeworld sector, and could lay mines, use stellar manipulations (destroy planet), etc. That's why a retreat needs to result in strategic movement (as in SE3), or at least, restricted strategic movement and actions following the retreat.

PvK

Talenn · #9 February 13th, 2002, 07:09 AM

IMO, in a game system as abstracted as SE4, any retreat function is just going to cause FAR more problems that it solves, especially by players exploiting it against the AI.

In order for a retreat system to really be viable, some or all of the following would be necessary:

1) some sort of 'mass based' movement system so that smaller ships were truly faster and/or more economical per movement point than larger ships.

2) some sort of inertial movement system and/or maneuver system such that ships cant simply up and change direction at will.

3) some sort of an 'orders blackout' on retreating ships while they return to some point(closest friendly base?).

Without some or all the above, any retreat system is just a disaster waiting to happen. How do you defend your systems? Maybe on the Warp Points, but only if the retreaters are sent back through it (which seems odd if you drive them AWAY from the WP in combat).

Also, once in your system, they can dance around your defenders at will and glass your colonies unless you have local superiority at ALL of them...not likely.

If there was an easy way to implement it, I'm sure it would already be in the game.

Talenn

Marco · #10 February 13th, 2002, 10:24 AM

How about a simpler system where retreat will be allowed only:
1)After a fixed number of round of tactical combat.
2)For ships with a tactical movement greater than enemy ships.
3)Exactly in the location of the strategic map from where the retreating ships come from, just before starting tactical combat.
4)If the retreating ships have strategic movement points left.
5)Eventually the retreat option can be set to cost a number of strategic movement points greater than 1.

This will not allow to bypass defenders with "forward retreat" tactics and, beaucause the retreat move is a backward move to the starting strategic position, it can't start another tactical battle.

[ 13 February 2002: Message edited by: Marco ]

[ 13 February 2002: Message edited by: Marco ]