just one battles per turn

[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.

[klausD]

There have been some comments about the "realism" of invading/nuking several planets per turn/month. Of course I can imagine a world/universe where this is possible. But IMO this is not really the question. The point for me is not the simulation of a pseudo-realistic universe. The point is to create a game which has more challenging core-rules than SE has yet. With challenging I mean rules which force me to make more and advanced tactical and strategic decisions.

Of course the game is good as it is now, but it has also its failures and its far from beeing perfect. My post was intended to show up one of these problems. I know there are a lot of people which are content with the core-rules of the SE series. Thats fully ok for me. I am not the guy who wants to put my opinion on everyones "head" (are these words correct? Dont exactly know because I am Austrian )

I would wish Aaron would rework some of the basics of the core rules of SE5. And he should also be aware of some of the excellent board game systems out there. Why inventing an oval wheel when there is already a round one existing?

Things I like (and would not like to have changed) in SE are:

-The adaptibility of many game areas (modding)
-extensive design of war-ships
-tactical ship combat

Things I would like to have changed
-planetary combat
-units (fighters, drones, ground units etc.) as such. I liked the system of SE3 more, with fixed stats of units. It was simpler and had the same flair
-supply should be a resource (like organics)
-just one battle per turn/fleet
-simpler diplomatic model (one of reasons the AI dont work good is that the diplo model is not really thought out very good. There are too many choices which dont have much impact in the game)
-people which operate facilities
-better immigration rules
-more and more dangerous internal problems (rebels, pirates, dangerous technologies etc.) to force the player to have internal security fleets and units.

Ok thats a few of the changes I would suggest.
KlausD

[Phoenix-D]

-planetary combat

To what?

-units (fighters, drones, ground units etc.) as such. I liked the system of SE3 more, with fixed stats of units. It was simpler and had the same flair

Must disagree. There is a LARGE difference between fighters armed with guns, and fighters armed with rocket pods! Especially in mods. Same thing for the other units.

-supply should be a resource (like organics)
Ehh..

-just one battle per turn/fleet

Must continue to disagree, it would lead to cheap crap more than anything else IMO (line the system with one-engine escorts!)

-simpler diplomatic model (one of reasons the AI dont work good is that the diplo model is not really thought out very good. There are too many choices which dont have much impact in the game)

Also disagree. Removing something just because the AI can't use it is bad. Just have the AI ignore it if that's the case!

-people which operate facilities

Ehm.

-better immigration rules

Hmm?

-more and more dangerous internal problems (rebels, pirates, dangerous technologies etc.) to force the player to have internal security fleets and units.

Maybe.

Phoenix-D

[Suicide Junkie]

Actually, regarding the "One-battle-per-turn" thing:
That IS included in SE4. There is a tech to get around it, though: Multiplex Tracking.

Each vehicle can only attack once per combat round, except for opportunity fire (point defense). With multiplex you can divide your firepower into a few attacks each round.

A lot of those changes can be modded:

-planetary combat
I have modded it so that it Lasts years, and reinforcements can be added from both sides of the conflict...

- Units
You like the complex ship design, but not units design???
Whatever. You can easily mod things so that only one component can fit on each unit, and that one component has all of the fixed stats for a particular tech level.

- Supply is a resource
I've done this for P&N PBW (v2.6)

-just one battle per turn/fleet
Very silly, IMO. These ships have an entire month to fight various battles. But you could give ships 1MP max, and play that way, if you really want to...

-simpler diplomatic model
It is already pretty darn simple. LIke you, hate you, treaty level X, give stuff.

-people which operate facilities
See Proportions, P&N, all kinds of mods do this.

-better immigration rules
If you mean the shipping around of billions of people in a single huge transport, see Proportions.

--more and more dangerous internal problems (rebels, pirates, dangerous technologies etc.) to force the player to have internal security fleets and units.
Intel typically does this; Planets deep in your empire can rebel. You could add random event rebellions, and pirate attacks, and whatnot...

SE4 is what you make it.

[ September 17, 2002, 21:08: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

[klausD]

SJ,
planetary combat:
maybe it can modded but not in the way I want it to have. Just simple.

units:
your argument is a very good one. Why do I want to have units with fixed stats, while I like at the same time the ship-design?
The reason I would like to have units changed is that for me units and ships are different parts of the game. Units are not just "little" ships for me. They are rather mobile components and they should be treated like this. Sometimes fewer options are better than many. And for units I think this is true. Especially the design of ground units is not really the time worth. I liked the system of SE3 and its predecessors where you had just premade Fighter I-XII or so. It was clean and easy for the player to modify and AI to comprehend.

supply as resource -
If you have already modded this I am wondering that there are posters at this forum which want to have this feature too. Are these all people who dont try your mod? I will try it the next time I am setting up a new game. (Does your mod provide manual resupply and supply-warehouses?)

-just one battle per turn/fleet
Very silly, IMO. These ships have an entire month to fight various battles. But you could give ships 1MP max, and play that way, if you really want to... I dont know what is more silly - my wish or your proposal?

-people which operate facilities - all mods do this? I just tried the TDM mod, but there was nothing in this respect. Maybe you misunderstood me: I meant: population which operate facilities.

-with better immigration rules I meant good rules for having alien population (conquered or immigrated) in the own empire. (realationships between your race and the foreigners, living- conditions of the aliens etc.)

-internal problems: maybe with modding you can increase such events, but this is by far not enough for me. Eg modding as good as it can be dont force an empire to have internal security personnel and fleets.

klausD

[Suicide Junkie]

-people which operate facilities - all mods do this? I just tried the TDM mod, but there was nothing in this respect. Maybe you misunderstood me: I meant: population which operate facilities.

TDM is not a mod, its the must-have collection of improved AIs.

Proportions, and P&N and a few other mods do it, not ALL.

maybe it can modded but not in the way I want it to have. Just simple.

Perhaps a better definition of "Planetary Combat" is required.

Do you mean combat while attacking planets, or the combat between troops dropped on the surface?

supply as resource -
If you have already modded this I am wondering that there are posters at this forum which want to have this feature too. Are these all people who dont try your mod? I will try it the next time I am setting up a new game. (Does your mod provide manual resupply and supply-warehouses?)

Not everybody has played P&N, and the supply = resource Version of P&N cannot have AIs playing it, so it is not very well known.

I dont know what is more silly - my wish or your proposal?

Sorry.

I think the whole scale of things is off here.
In a month, an army could easily attack many cities, or even sweep through a small country.
IMO, the "one attack per turn" type rules only become "realistic" at the tactical combat level.
EG: Do you shoot at the missile base about to reload and fire at you, or the Cruiser bearing down on you with Ripper Beams?

[President_Elect_Shang]

Where to start?
1)Phoenix-D: thanks for the *I* correction.
2)DocShane: Have you tried games like Imperator? That’s where I “cut my teeth”. Supremacy, StarFire, Axis and Allies, the list goes on and on.
3)I agree with DocShane’s point that “Most of these games assume turns Lasting seconds or minutes. Only one attack could reasonably be accomplished within that period.” That to me seems to be a point we are all missing. The fact is each turn of SE IV assumes one month, err I assume it does anyway. Is this in any of the documents? In one month a fleet can accomplish a lot. Even a fleet constrained to sailing on water could do a lot in 30 or so days, much less sailing in space.