Proposed 'Quick Fix' for some Combat 'Anomalies'

[Tenryu]

The better solution is the opportunity fire suggestion by Bill. I'm not so sure I like the no moving after shooting suggestion, Talen.

What do ya do if you have a ship with long range and short range weapons on it. It is your turn. You are within range of the enemy with all your weapons.

Forget about what the enemy is going to do or can do for a minute.

Should I move to maximum range for my shortest range weapon( I might be there already) fire and maybe get more pounded in return or move to maxium range for my longest range weapon and lose the use of my shorter range weapons and maybe get less pounded.

All because if I shoot even one weapon I can't move.

Hmm, sorta sounds like trading one problem for another to me.

Maybe I'm not understanding something fully
though.

I am not trying to be a nay-sayer or bust on your idea Talen. I really am not sure if it makes things really any better ... maybe just different.

[Marty Ward]

How about being able to fire then move or move then fire. Until opportunity fire is installed there are to many ways to abuse the system.

[Daynarr]

I think Talenn has explained the reasons why opportunity fire is not good in this game. You can make a decoy ships that will take away the fire from ships and then have the big guns get close and personal. In the game where you can have custom designs that is always the case, and in the game like "Steel Panthers" you can't make decoys.

There are 2 options for opportunity fire:
1) The point-defense type that reacts automatically as the ship moves in range. Decoys can easily divert this type of fire.
2) The type that is used in most tactical games like Jagged Alliance where you get limited control of the unit and the ability to choose its actions (retreat or fire). There are several issues here:
- In order for ship to move, it would have to have movement point left (right now almost all ships use up all their movement points when they can). You will have to make AI wait for the enemy to come in range and then use opportunity fire which means completely rewriting the algorithm AI uses in tactical combat. It is exactly the opposite of the 'simple' and 'easy to fix' solution. It may be a long term solution until all other issues are solved.
- That wouldn't help static units since they can only wait for enemy units to come in range and that puts us back to point-defense type of reaction.
- How do you make AI decide what ship is a real threat in a game where everybody can make custom ships, components, etc. If you make AI see threat in ships with lots of weapons on them, you can use a ship with lots of low-cost weapons with smallest weapon-mounts and use it as a decoy. If you make AI see threat in ships with most powerful weapon on it, you will make a ship with single most powerful weapon and lots of shields and use it as a decoy. If you make AI see threat in ships that have the biggest overall damage potential of all weapons on them, it will completely ignore the weapons that damage weapons, engines or shields only.
In short opportunity fire is no go because you give human much more options to (ab)use AI in this kind of game. There are simply too many options for scripted AI.

If you want to have AI and human on more even grounds in tactical combat, you have to limit the human to do what AI can do. AI can't move-shoot-move at this point and removing this will help make game more interesting. Just like Talenn said this could be a temporal solution until MM makes AI use move-shoot-move tactic efficiently.

[Talenn]

Tenryu:

No probs at all. The reason I posted it here was to elicit feedback. I agree that its not perfect, but it is fix to some of the existing problems. Whether or not it would introduce more problems remains to be seen and is the very reason I want others to consider the permutations.

The long and short range weapons on a ship could be a potential problem. I dont think its anywhere near as bad as the current 'hit and run' or 'missile dance'.

Thanx for the input all.

Talenn

[Tenryu]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daynarr:
.
If you want to have AI and human on more even grounds in tactical combat, you have to limit the human to do what AI can do.

---

I guess that's the crux of the issue.

Rather then asking MM to limit our options, I'm more in favor of asking them to get the AI working better. Maybe all that's needed for this issue is for the AI to start using decoys also.

I do understand your point though.

[Talenn]

Tenryu:

I also think these changes would benefit player vs player games as well. At the very least it makes it so that 'static' defenses are more worthwhile.

But even if it didnt do so, I think it is a good way to help the AI without giving it 'cheats'. I cant really think of any other good ways to help it vs the 'missile dance'. Even HUMANS cant beat it unless they simply pack their ships with PD weapons or missiles themselves.

I dont see any reasonable way to have the AI modify its ship designs to respond to other's missile/fighters. In the absence of that, I think this would go a long way to helping restore some fight from the AI.

FWIW, I would, of course, prefer the AI to be strengthened to the point where it wouldnt be necessary as well. Regardless, I think this change will add a certain element of thinking to the tactical combat and also on the design table.

Talenn

[Tenryu]

Talenn,

LOL!
I don't really disagree with your points.
If you can get MM to do it.
I'll not stop playing the game.