just one battles per turn

[Suicide Junkie]

You might be able to nuke a bunch of small and/or undefended colonies to glass in one turn with one massive fleet, but why not? If they have the speed to visit each planet in a month, they can easily drop 50 self-guiding nukes as they zoom past to slaughter each colony.

If there are reasonable defenses, however, your fleet will take some damage. Damage to a single ship can slow the entire fleet to a crawl, and wreck your "smash everything with one stack" plan.
If they have engine-disruptors on a weapons platform, your fleet is almost guaranteed to be unable to attack anything else that turn. Null-space and shield-skipping weapons are also particularily effective.

It is up to the defender to make his territory harder to sweep.

[Phoenix-D]

As it is now you can invade several planets with just one big fleet in one turn, without having an advanced plan. With just one battle/turn/fleet you have to divide your fleet and develope an advanced battle plan before the invasion to achieve the same result. "

One turn = one month. It's not unreasonable for a fleet capable of moving that far to hit several targets in a month.

Keep in mind that computers can process a LOT of numbers quickly, thus allowing rules in computer games that would bog down a board wargame.

Phoenix-D

[Skulky]

Pheonix, SJ makes a good point, if the defender makes it hard on you it can be difficult to wrap up (highest theoretical # at 12, realistically more like 3-5) planets then thats good for him, if he leaves them undefended what does he expect.

[President_Elect_Shang]

What I think you are missing KlausD (I too am a big board game fan) is that most board games started (and copied) the one per turn rule because they assumed movement (of non-mechanized units) as a factor. We are talking about ships that are moving at x% of c here. It is not unreasonable for a fleet moving at x% of c to travel to a planet, turn it into glass and move on. If any part of SE should be limited to one battle per turn it should be when a fleet engages in a ground invasion. Now that would be difficult to code in a game I would think.

[Phoenix-D]

"We are talking about ships that are moving at x% of c here. It is not unreasonable for a fleet moving at x% of c to travel to a planet, turn it into glass and move on."

Just to nitpick- *I* am moving at x% of C. It's a low %, but still.

Anyway, SE4 ships don't go FTL. However they are capable of crossing an entire system in one month at max tech, and that is FAST.

Phoenix-D

[kalthalior]

As a old-school strategy boardgamer myself, I have seen a lot of different systems utilized. Some games are one attack/turn, some have different movement phases/impulses where attacks can take place, etc. However, a space game should "feel" different than a ground game IMO. There aren't any "zones of control" to prevent an opponent from moving past you in most space games, nor are there terrain features costing you additional movement points. Apples and oranges to compare the two in my estimation.

[DocShane]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
As it is now you can invade several planets with just one big fleet in one turn, without having an advanced plan. With just one battle/turn/fleet you have to divide your fleet and develope an advanced battle plan before the invasion to achieve the same result. "

One turn = one month. It's not unreasonable for a fleet capable of moving that far to hit several targets in a month.

I cut my teeth as a child on classic board games, namely Starship Troopers, Advanced Squad Leader, Imperium Romanum, and Star Fleet Battles to name 4 of my Favorites. Most of these games assume turns Lasting seconds or minutes. Only one attack could reasonably be accomplished within that period.

Originally posted by kalthalior:
As a old-school strategy boardgamer myself, I have seen a lot of different systems utilized. Some games are one attack/turn, some have different movement phases/impulses where attacks can take place, etc. However, a space game should "feel" different than a ground game IMO. There aren't any "zones of control" to prevent an opponent from moving past you in most space games, nor are there terrain features costing you additional movement points. Apples and oranges to compare the two in my estimation.

I agree. SEIV, however, does utilize "zones of control" with the "Sentry" option. Blackholes cause usage of additional movement points. There are "terrain features" in SEIV that affect combat as well, such as storms. I think that individual battles could benefit from line of sight and even individual firing windows for weapons, borrowing from Star Fleet Battles. This would be cool to add to the present game and create what I would consider an even more satisfying combat experience. That is left for SEV, or at least I hope.