A better system for combat

[Verigen]

I would say that a fleet initative would be a better idea than haveing anyone "always go first" even on warp points. If an individual ship was given an initative then maybe the fleet's initative could be the average with the larger ships haveing lower (big, bulky) and the smaller ones haveing higher initative(small, more manuverable). Also it would be advisable to use the number of engines to add into this factor. This would give players some incentive to build the smaller ships later on in the game. Unfortunately, I don't think the AI could handle that.

[zircher]

Alternate idea: Simultaneous combat resolution. Fleet A moves, Fleet B moves, Fleet A assigns targets, Fleet B assigns targets, Resolve attacks and damage.

The perks of such a system is that everyone gets to fire. It also eliminates much of the micro-management of tactical combat. Currently, it is far too easy to dodge in and out of your enemy's maximum weapon range or walk your firepower down a line of enemy units scoring just enough to cripple or destroy the enemy, one ship at a time.
--
TAZ

[Verigen]

Just one problem with that, how would you dictate movement? If you were not currently in range but would be after the turn was comenced it would be wasted fire. On the other hand if a ship moved out of what would have been in normal range you would also have wasted your shots. It could work but the system would turn out worse than what we have now.

[Kadste]

The simultaneous resoltion of movement and combat firing should include oportunity fire or just like we have target priorities, we could have target fire priorities like:

Fire at range 'x'
Fire at max weapon range
Fire at max damage range
Fire on command (manual)

Then ships would automatically fire based on these rules.

------------------
In difficult ground, press-on;
In encircled ground, devise stratagems;
In death ground, fight.
Sun Tzu (circa 400 B.C.)

[Verigen]

All said and good, perhaps the simultaneous way would work but it still doesn't solve the problem. No matter what someone is going to have to shoot first, there by makeing it unfair to someone. If we were to get malfador to implement the initiative plan at least there would be some standard to go by.

[capnq]

quote:

---

BTW, what's the point of initiative, if damage is applied at the end of the round?

---

Movement order is still important, especially when ranged weapons are involved.

quote:

---

I have seen this argument before of the defender getting a bonus or even defender going always first. Personally I would like it to see it the other way around, because that would encourage aggressiveness.

---

Ideally, the advantage would be implemented in a way that could be modded to match individual opinions.

quote:

---

Alternate idea: Simultaneous combat resolution. Fleet A moves, Fleet B moves, Fleet A assigns targets, Fleet B assigns targets, Resolve attacks and damage.

Just one problem with that, how would you dictate movement? If you were not currently in range but would be after the turn was comenced it would be wasted fire. On the other hand if a ship moved out of what would have been in normal range you would also have wasted your shots.

---

That could be fixed with a more complex sequence: Some of A's ships fire, some of B's fire, A moves, B moves, rest of A fires, rest of B fires. With simultaneous resolution you could even have opportunity fire.

This kind of problem has already been addressed in tabletop (i.e. non-computer) wargames; one could look at them to see what works and what doesn't.


------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

[Commander G2]

Most wargames introduce Opportunity fire either by the defender interrupting movement with an announcement or deferring opportunity fire until the defender is done moving. If a computer generated combat were to interrupt movement, we would have to specify parameters such as what targets to fire at and at what range. It could get complicated.

I would suggest eliminating the range darting issues by having all fire at the end of both players movement and conducted simultaneously. That would allow range advantage to only be countered by a mobility advantaged. An enemy with longer range and greater mobility should always win unless you can push him into some barrier (which there should not be in space, but that is another issue).

As others have suggest, the quick solution is to eliminate the ordinal advantage with one of the following: Randomized Side Order (can be race or component factors or 50/50, either would be an improvement), Defender always goes first or has a higher chance of going first(but that might stagnate the game), Attacker always goes first or has a higher chance.

How about giving computer controled ships a higher initiative factor because they respond quicker. Of course, one good Null Space hit on the computer and they should stop firing unless one of the other crew components still exists (Life Support, Crew Quarter, or Bridge).

Alternating ships would be a rather major engine change and to use the same engine for tactical mode he would need to mark moved versus unmoved somehow. It would be better than alternating entire players sides.

Simultaneous plotting and fire would be a full rewrite and not something that could be done quickly, I would think.

I am Last in a current PBW game and I only win at warp points if I overwhelm them or if my enemy cannot hit because of to hit modifiers. I have to defend one off the warp points and intercept anyone coming through (unless they lure back through the warp point, then I am burned). My main advesary knows he wins at warp points if we have equal forces. I will not start any more games until initiative issue is fixed.