SE5 Demo Bug Reports & Annoyances/Requests

[Captain Kwok]

Strategic combat is just the same as tactical minus the graphics component - so it's likely to carry over there. However I think the current workaround in that PD weapons should fire at an increased rate is a good solution. Although I'm running some more tests to confirm the effectiveness of this change.

[jimbob]

Phoenix: Yes, they were boarding one at a time. You're probably correct, but I still don't think this is a good way for the combat to work. Furthermore the odds of one boarding party to one crew quarter should be even enough (IMO) for the boarding party to cause some degree of damage.

Kwok: Thanks for forwarding that to MM. Tell them I'll buy the game either way, but a fix will make me extra giddy.

Cheers all.

[EDIT] Oh, and is there a way to avoid ALL the boarding parties heading for the same target ship? Would task groups change this?

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Maybe boarding parties are killed one component at a time?

[Q]

Blockade of an enemy colony by a fast ship with "don't get hurt" strategy can be very powerful, too powerful IMHO. The ship can fly away and avoid combat indefenitely without leaving the sector therefore maintaining the blockade.
And in SE V a blockeded colony not only produces no resources but costs maintenance!

[Phoenix-D]

Only really a problem if the planet has ships defending it or the blockader doesn't have weapons, IMO.

[Captain Kwok]

Fighters move much faster than ships so it might be a good situation to deploy them.

Although I've suggested elsewhere that ships that go "off" the combat map should move into the adjacent system sector...

[arthurtuxedo]

One way to deal with this, of course, is to use the sector view to place a ship, satellite, etc. right next to the blockading ship. Kind of cheap, but so is blockading with a fast ship.

[dmm]

Captain Kwok said:
Fighters move much faster than ships so it might be a good situation to deploy them.

Could use drones too. They get a speed bonus.

Captain Kwok said:Although I've suggested elsewhere that ships that go "off" the combat map should move into the adjacent system sector...

Agreed. And if there are enemy combat vessels there, they should be lying in wait. But, practically speaking, this has been suggested (and debated) for a LONG time (at least 6 years), and it's pretty clear that Aaron isn't going to put this in. It's not like he didn't know about the issue or the suggestion. Rightly or wrongly, he decided to implement an endless attack map. I think that his solution would work if ship movement during combat used supplies. Does it? I hadn't noticed. If it doesn't, can it be modded in? If it can, then retreating won't be such a big deal.

[dmm]

Q said:
Blockade of an enemy colony by a fast ship with "don't get hurt" strategy can be very powerful, too powerful IMHO. The ship can fly away and avoid combat indefenitely without leaving the sector therefore maintaining the blockade.
And in SE V a blockeded colony not only produces no resources but costs maintenance!

There are 4 problems that you bring up:
1) Retreating from combat is too easy. Like Kwok says, if you retreat past the edge of the map, you should wind up in the next sector. The opponent can then choose to stay away from the edge and remain in that sector, or follow and also wind up in the next sector. If the opponent chooses to follow and already has ships in that next sector, then you should start the next turn in space combat, surrounded.
2) Movement during combat should use up some supplies. So a blockader who is repeatedly attacked but keeps fleeing should run out of supplies and become a sitting duck.
3) You probably should not be able to totally blockade an undomed colony with only one ship. We usually can't do that for islands on Earth's oceans, and that's only two dimensional. And blockades should be less (or not at all) effective if the enemy has better cloaking than you have scanners.
4) Blockaded planets should be able to use their resource production to maintain themselves, even if they can't get anything in or out. (Conversely, if a blockaded planet doesn't produce the required resources to maintain its facilities and population then those should degrade. And a blockaded planet shouldn't be able to build stuff from non-existent resources.)

I think that #2 would be pretty easy to put into the game, would be well-received, and would take care of the "chicken blockader" problem, not to mention the "unstoppable colonizers" and "untouchable explorers" freely passing through hostile systems. (One can put colony components into fast hulls.)

[dmm]

Q said:
Blockade of an enemy colony by a fast ship with "don't get hurt" strategy can be very powerful, too powerful IMHO. The ship can fly away and avoid combat indefenitely without leaving the sector therefore maintaining the blockade.
And in SE V a blockeded colony not only produces no resources but costs maintenance!

A very simple solution would be that ships with the "don't get hurt" strategy do not impose any blockade. Can this be modded? Plus, normal attack ships with no working weapons, or no movement, whether due to design or damage or no ordnance/supplies, should also not impose a blockade. (Really, helpless ships orbiting a colony all by themselves should be destroyed or captured after one turn by freebooters. But I don't suppose THAT can be modded!)