Defending with an Ally at a Warp-Point. Bug or not?

LGM · #1 February 11th, 2003, 05:57 PM

Using 1.78 in a PBW game, we have discovered that if you defend a warp-point with an ally, you will both be place further away from the warp-point than if you defend by yourself. This means that having an ally with only a couple of ships or units could actually weaken your defense as you are likely to give up the first fire advantage.

This could probably be considered a bug? What do others think?

Arkcon · #2 February 11th, 2003, 06:46 PM

This is a common occurrence.

When one race occupies a sector, and an enemy enters, the spacing is tight. When, for example, one race occupies a sector, and (to give a different example than yours) the enemy is there already in an engine destroyed ship, and reinforcements arrive, the game disperses them. The same result for an ally.

Another example: You colonize a planet and it's moon. Enemy arrives to find moon close to planet. OK, now an ally or enemy colonizes the moon. Now when combat starts, the moon and planet are dispersed.

OK, now it's opinion time. Is it a bug? If the game must be logical, and a defense must be perfect once set up, then it is a bug.

I think SE4 would be weakened if there were foolproof defenses. I personally like a little FUD from time to time. It has saved and hurt me off and on, it just seems correct for the game to throw a wrench at me once and a while.

Other examples:

Fast colonizers escaping missile sats at a warp point.

Ships evading sats when they approach the same side of the warp point, then warping through.

I once had a mineral rich breatheable planet, with shipyard and training facilities and a moon. An ally had the other moon. He dropped the treaty. Instantly next turn, his moon glassed my planet, and my moon glassed his moon. I was furious -- at him, not at SE4.

[ February 11, 2003, 16:58: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

Baron Munchausen · #3 February 11th, 2003, 06:51 PM

Actually, I consider the way it places your ships in the 'one on one' battle to be a bug. I'd much rather have the space to organize and move in for attack like it gives you in three or more player battles. This is especially important when you are relying on seekers as your main weapon but it's still useful with direct-fire. I have specifically requested MM to allow the defender to be set back from the WP and already arrayed in formation.

[ February 11, 2003, 16:51: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Desdinova · #4 February 11th, 2003, 09:32 PM

i prefer to start as close to the wormhole as possible. this allows me to take out a good portion of the enemies ship before they can react.

just for the heck of it i built a starbase at an enemy controlled planet, figuring to use it to help me in combat. when i went into combat it was at an extended range and was useless in combat. after i took over the planet it continued to be at a distance when they came back to attack me. needless to say i lost it a few turns later since i couldnt defend it that far away.

"....one lone station all alone in the night...."

[ February 11, 2003, 19:33: Message edited by: desdinova ]

PvK · #5 February 11th, 2003, 09:54 PM

It would be nice if you had more control over how to deploy defensive units for tactical combat. In SE3, players got deployment zones and the first stage of a tactical combat was to place units manually.

PvK

Shadowstar · #6 February 18th, 2003, 11:01 AM

Here's a thought:

Would it be possible to, by modding the formations.txt file, to allow players to control the distance they start out at to a degree by using formations?

What I'm thinking is that by creating formations with the ships closer to the bottom of the formation grid you can essentially start further away. It wouldn't be a heck of a lot, but it would be enough to make a difference. Alternate formations could be made higher on the grid, to allow ships to start closer.

Would this work?