'Opportunity Fire' for Sattelites & WPs

[TM]

Okay, I like the idea of ‘supercharged’ WP and Satellite weapons. As far as the cost question goes, perhaps a series of ‘Energy Grid’ facilities could be added to one of the research areas (Physics?) that each increase the range of direct fire WP and orbital weapons by +1.

The main goal here is to give the AI better defensive capability during tactical combat, so whatever the solution is the AI needs to be changed in order to use it. From that perspective the ‘Opportunity Fire’ solution is by far the easiest to implement. I think the PD cannons already use this method.

TM

[Taqwus]

Ow. I wouldn't want to fight a well-armed Ringworld then. ;-)

Planets, IIRC, get a *slight* advantage against seekers -- apparently, (maybe this depends upon from what direction the seekers are fired?) the square to which range is calculated may not be the square of impact. That is, a planet can have WPs with the exact same missile Version as an attacking ship, and (perhaps only some of) the WP's missiles might be able to go the distance but the ship's fall a single square short. ISTR that the attacking ship should be at least 1, and perhaps 2, squares closer than nominally required by weapon range. But it's not exactly much of an advantage, when a fast ship (at least pre-patch, or versus the earlier missiles) can basicaly orbit a planet, firing beam weapons while dodging seekers.

It does make sense that a planet could have bigger, meaner guns than even a Starbase, and with better stabilizing mechanisms and so forth. I wonder if it should be possible to hide them (at least until they fire)... muhahahahahaha.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

[Psitticine]

I think a weapon facility would be a good option. WPs could remain small(ish) autonomous units and for the big "Grand Cannon" guns, use a facility that would act as a weapon in combat.

Wave Motion Cannon Facility, anyone? It'd have a BIG boom.

[Jubala]

While added range, opportunity fire, remove mp after fire are all good ideas I have an even better one. If my idea can't be implemented (or is just to much work) I would vote for opportunity fire first, added range second and killmove not at all. Anyone ever seen a vetnavy battleship stop dead after it fires it's guns? No? Didn't think so.

Here's my idea:
Make combat simultaneous. Both sides move and shoot at the same time. First there's an order phase where all sides give movement, targeting and firing orders at the same time. Then there's a move/fire phase in which movement occurs and fire happens when the targeted enemy comes into range. We would of course need primary, secondary and tertiary firing orders in case the primary target moves away and the secondary comes closer. We would also need to introduce speed as opposed to movementpoints so fighters and faster ships can actually move up close to the big boys. No fun if they can only move one square/turn. That's the bare bones of my idea but it needs to be fleshed out. But think about, it would solve alot of problems and also eliminate the "pick a victim and pound it until it dies" syndrome we have now. We would have to decide if we want to make absolutely sure we kill a target and do some massive overkill on it or spread our fire in hopes of damaging as many targets as possible. Formations would also be more important for mutual point defense support.

Which brings up another point. I want some kind of combat command net and point defense net like in David Webers Honor Harrington books. A flagship that calls the shots and all ships tracking systems are working together to get better firing solutions on seekers, ships and fighters. Task Groups of smaller ships with their own flagships and so on. Several levels of course. The higher the level the more ships can be in it. Bust the flagship (unknown to the enemy which it is btw) and you get a turn of confusion until a new flagship can be assigned. Bust a ships communication net components and it falls out of the net and fight on it's on. Well, you get the idea, especially if you have read the books. But I'm wandering off topic so I'll stop here.

[Dutch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jubala:
Which brings up another point. I want some kind of combat command net and point defense net like in David Webers Honor Harrington books.

---

This is Starfire's "datalink" (and Command Datalink) system(s). They have quite an effect in Weber's Starfire books, too.

I wouldn't mind seeing something like this implemented. But it could be a bear to balance.

Dutch

[Dutch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psitticine:

I think there should be a penalty assessed for beam weapons used by and against ground targets on worlds with an atmosphere. Missiles should be able to avoid this .

---

I agree.

[Arc.Smiloid]

What you guys are thinking of is an RTS-style combat system.

Basically, when a battle begins, it is paused. Once all units have been given orders, it unpauses and the ships fight it out in real-time like a movie. Orders may or may not be issued while the battle rages, but after a set time increment the battle pauses and orders can be changed.

A) After the initial orders, the battle plays out in real-time where you can issue orders as the battle rages until the battle ends.

B) After the initial orders, the battle plays out in real-time for a set time. The battle pauses and orders can be changed. Unpause, watch, pause, orders, unpause, watch, etc. until the battle ends.

(I prefer A)

This is always something I have desired in a game like this. It fixes a lot of problems inherent with turn-based combat. I.E. whoever attacks first will usually win (most evident in MOO2). Plus, it would just be fun to watch!

Just imagine, full 3d fleets with incredible visual effects set loose upon each other in a real-time combat scenario with you, the player, strapped in for a good show. Sit back and watch the action! (Okay, a bit overboard, but I can dream can't I?)

But that is something for SEV.. maybe. I hear a lot of good about MM and how they respond to player input.