New Concept For Troops and Fighters

[Kana]

President_Elect_Shang said:
Units don't get experience? I guess I better stop moding and start playing. Oh wait; can't do that the darn thing is so broken it can't be played! Seriously if units don't get experience than why the heck not? That is just nuts! Is it really that impossible (from a coding perspective) to keep track of experience for units if you can already keep track of experience for every other vehicle? I think it's time for yet another email.

Units are attrition resources/assets. While they may survive combat, how many will survive more than 2 or 3? Its like expending ammo that you may or may not use, or gain back...

[President_Elect_Shang]

I see what you are saying, and looking at it that way (the whole picture that is) it makes sense. I think what I was doing was focusing in on the element of At's suggestion. You see what I mean, it isn't just one tank/soldier, although it may appear as 1 unit on the design, queue, and cargo screens. It is really hundreds, or thousands, or tens of thousands. In that sense I couldn't understand why experience would not be a factor. I just needed to pull back a minute and take into consideration this would only be one mod, maybe two. Like the SFTC; this wouldn't work since it would void the way PCF are handled. Fighters... but that is there and we are here with At's idea/question.

[Kana]

President_Elect_Shang said:
Like the SFTC; this wouldn't work since it would void the way PCF are handled. Fighters... but that is there and we are here with At's idea/question.

Well as you know SF PCF's are probably whole divisions or armies of troops. And the fighters are usually grouped by squadron, even though they are tracked seperatly based on their storage/launch bays. There is no reason why you couldn't make an individual fighter model represent a squadron of fighters, and instead of adding weapons you just add the figher to the squadron, when it takes damage, you destroy a fighter, and its removed from the squadron.

[President_Elect_Shang]

That is a good idea for the PCF, and as you point out pretty much the way it is now. In the case of the fighters it wouldn't work. I would have to create every variable of every design that can be made. Simple with prototype fighters but much more complex with the 6th Generation Fighter. Then there are issues with speed mixes. Besides the only reason SF works them as squadrons is for the ripple weapons effect which can't be done in SE5 and for the ease of playing when the hex map is littered with counters. Which SE5 handles for us. I can't see a real advantage when it comes to applying this to the SFTC. All I am saying is that this has massive potential for a mod. The hull ideas I have touched on from At's prior suggestion along with this to make ground combat more challenging but less graphics intense. Add to those two ideas facilities along the lines of SJ's; but using a more streamlined approach, so that planets become far more valuable. Decrease reproduction and migration; which is something I am already testing in the SFTC. By slowing them both down the populations have become far more valuable and I have found a reason not to sterilize planets. My populations just can't reproduce fast enough to fill those loses, it is honestly more advantageous for me to conquer. Also I have implemented longer build times for facilities and slowed ship build times for planet side industry. It takes longer to build up a colony and if I find an enemies I have a reason to take it intact. In stock I just don't get that feeling since I can raise a planet to the ground and rebuild/repopulate it much to quickly!

I'm rambling. Point is I am starting to see elements of a mod that would make planets, populations, ships, and troops more valuable. Not just another build and conquer, more like a space epic!

[Kana]

On the population front, I wish there was a more quanitative tracking of population vs crew. Crew I guess is abstractly represented by the Organics resource, but I would much rather have crew as a fourth resource. Crew could the represent the amount of adult aged, trained personel available for either ship crews, or for ground combat armies...Small populations will be limited in the number of armies, and ships they can field because of the lack of trained individuals. Also if we can track the crew amounts and their experience, then we should be able to have special 'individuals/heroes' that could add their special talents to a ship or army.

[President_Elect_Shang]

I would have to give that thought; however, just off the top of my head. The SFTC is only using 2 of the three resources. Minerals which I will probably rename to MC (Mega Credits). Then Organics which I made focused more on colony demand but also used in scarce amounts for ships/bases and in larger amounts for troops. I won't rename that one but if I were to I would rename it FS (Food Stuffs). That leaves a third element unused. I could make that into CP (Crew Points or Crew Personnel). Then I could charge based on that. Unfortunately I do not know of a way to keep the cost of an item down (i.e. you only pay a few hundred crew points) to build something then inflate the maintenance cost of that item. I may not need to inflate it. It could be argued that the high initial cost isn't just crew but workers and support personnel who are building the item/ship/base/whatever. Another problem is the maintenance can be explained away as crew rotation and/or new members replacing those that had to leave the service and/or wanted to separate. However, there is no way to control the originating source. See what I mean? A Spaceport ships all production and I have never heard of a way to limit that. So your restriction based on planet population wouldn't work. More experienced crews could be simulated by Military Academies which raise the experience of the ship. Then you wouldn't need to worry about tracking crew experience. Also the AST allowed you to build captains. That could be brought back and implemented the same way I did my XO Weapons. They are 0 HS items with 1HS damage absorption. Then you could give the captains bonuses as in AST and call that experience. You could also take that one step further and make whole bridge crews. It would be simple to limit a ship to just 1 Science Officer. You could also make a science hull size ship that can handle 2 science officers instead of 1. That would add another dimension to the value of hulls because you could make whole components that will only work on a science hull. Now add another component called a Command Center and make it so that you have to have an Admiral with the Command Center. Make the Command Center big and poof; you have an admiral in charge of your ships/fleet! Oh dinners ready...

[President_Elect_Shang]

The Science Hull was just one example of the hulls you could make. Also SJ did implement a crew requirement of sorts. However, that is not the same as you or I are talking about here. Eat now talk later...

[AstralWanderer]

While an interesting idea, it does have 2 downsides not mentioned so far:

• No Partial Construction - if a build order for 100 ground units reaches 50% completion when the planet is attacked, the defender has 50 units to play with. If one "100-strength" superunit is 50% complete, the defender gets nothing.
• Scale on map - scaled-up units won't require proportionately more space on the tactical map making very large (100+) scale combats less realistic. This could also result in tactical exploits like using large numbers of single-units to tie up opposing troops while having one super-unit tackle them piecemeal.

Adding the option to manage ground units in "fleets" would seem a better option for simplifying control but perhaps a better way is to implement auto-stacking where similar units are grouped together once they exceed a certain threshold (e.g. more than 20 units results in each model representing 2 units, more than 50 makes it 5, etc - such stacks having the number of units displayed alongside). This is how large numbers of units are handled in Imperium Galactica II and it keeps numbers down without imposing too many other compromises.