A better system for combat

[Verigen]

All said and good, perhaps the simultaneous way would work but it still doesn't solve the problem. No matter what someone is going to have to shoot first, there by makeing it unfair to someone. If we were to get malfador to implement the initiative plan at least there would be some standard to go by.

[capnq]

quote:

---

BTW, what's the point of initiative, if damage is applied at the end of the round?

---

Movement order is still important, especially when ranged weapons are involved.

quote:

---

I have seen this argument before of the defender getting a bonus or even defender going always first. Personally I would like it to see it the other way around, because that would encourage aggressiveness.

---

Ideally, the advantage would be implemented in a way that could be modded to match individual opinions.

quote:

---

Alternate idea: Simultaneous combat resolution. Fleet A moves, Fleet B moves, Fleet A assigns targets, Fleet B assigns targets, Resolve attacks and damage.

Just one problem with that, how would you dictate movement? If you were not currently in range but would be after the turn was comenced it would be wasted fire. On the other hand if a ship moved out of what would have been in normal range you would also have wasted your shots.

---

That could be fixed with a more complex sequence: Some of A's ships fire, some of B's fire, A moves, B moves, rest of A fires, rest of B fires. With simultaneous resolution you could even have opportunity fire.

This kind of problem has already been addressed in tabletop (i.e. non-computer) wargames; one could look at them to see what works and what doesn't.


------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

[Commander G2]

Most wargames introduce Opportunity fire either by the defender interrupting movement with an announcement or deferring opportunity fire until the defender is done moving. If a computer generated combat were to interrupt movement, we would have to specify parameters such as what targets to fire at and at what range. It could get complicated.

I would suggest eliminating the range darting issues by having all fire at the end of both players movement and conducted simultaneously. That would allow range advantage to only be countered by a mobility advantaged. An enemy with longer range and greater mobility should always win unless you can push him into some barrier (which there should not be in space, but that is another issue).

As others have suggest, the quick solution is to eliminate the ordinal advantage with one of the following: Randomized Side Order (can be race or component factors or 50/50, either would be an improvement), Defender always goes first or has a higher chance of going first(but that might stagnate the game), Attacker always goes first or has a higher chance.

How about giving computer controled ships a higher initiative factor because they respond quicker. Of course, one good Null Space hit on the computer and they should stop firing unless one of the other crew components still exists (Life Support, Crew Quarter, or Bridge).

Alternating ships would be a rather major engine change and to use the same engine for tactical mode he would need to mark moved versus unmoved somehow. It would be better than alternating entire players sides.

Simultaneous plotting and fire would be a full rewrite and not something that could be done quickly, I would think.

I am Last in a current PBW game and I only win at warp points if I overwhelm them or if my enemy cannot hit because of to hit modifiers. I have to defend one off the warp points and intercept anyone coming through (unless they lure back through the warp point, then I am burned). My main advesary knows he wins at warp points if we have equal forces. I will not start any more games until initiative issue is fixed.

[AJC]

I have been trying to convince Aaron to alternate ship movement and firing between opponents for sometime. Especially during Beta. No success so far....argh

IMO- Initiative is too complicated to introduce now that the game is released and the MOO2 system doesnt really work for SE. There are too many variables can be introduced to SE4 with custom techs. Moo2 wasnt customizable so setting up intiative based on weapon types and movement speeds worked.

I think the easiest way to integrate this into the game is allow the attacker first move , first shot but alternate ship moves and ship firing between the opposing fleets/ships. maybe it could work as follows:

All ships move - player 1 , player 2 until all ships/units have moved
then move to firing sequence player 1 then player 2 until all ships have fired



[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 11 October 2001).]

[Lerchey]

While I will happily agree that the combat system could use some modification, I have never seen a "one of mine goes, then one of yours goes" system that doesn't a) bog down and b) end up with its' own problems - like the barrage of units at the end of the turn when one side outnumbers the other significantly.

An initiative system based on indivdiual ships (when not in fleets) and fleets would be interesting. A random seed would be set for each individual ship, and one for each fleet. Each ship which is not in a fleet could be a "manuever element" and each fleet would be one.

Each ship or fleet would add it's experience rating to the seed, and maybe if there were race traits for initiative, those could be added/subtracted as well. Then, in order, each element performs an action set.

This would combine the "balance" of "one of yours/one of mine", but would tip that balance in favor of the units with better initiative. So it may be that two or three of yours go, then one or two of mine, based on the initiative scores each turn. I would keep fleet initiative as well, but enforce that only the fleet leader can be selected for movement, and the other members hold formation. That gives the fleet a huge firepower advantage when it activates, but removes the temptation/allowance for each ship in the fleet to move individually and separately. One of the cheats (IMHO) that used in tactical against the AI was to move my fleet members where I wanted them, typically burning all of their movement, THEN move the fleet leader so that they don't stay in a formation that I don't like (this was way back when there were fewer formations available).

This gives an incentive to operate in fleets, but allows flexibility if you don't. And gives individual ships more tactical freedom.

Just another opinion, and worth what you paid for it.

General John

[Kadste]

Not sure why initiative would be too complicated to implement. Stars another one of those space 4E games that has been out for a long time has initiative built in.

Different components can have an initiative modifier that is cumulative per ship.
Example:
Ion Engine I: 1 point
Jacketed Photon Engine I: 3 points
Bridge I: 1 point
Auxillary BridgeI: 1 point
Master computer I: 1 point
Depleted Uranium Cannon: 3 points (total regardless of the number)
Anti-matter torpedo: 1 point total regardless of the number)

Therefore faster ships would have higher initiative. Ships with shorter range weapons that do not require longer targeting times like the DUC vs Torpedo will have higher initiative.

Ship size initiative can use the number of engines, or a separate modifier.

Ship 1
6 ion I 6 points
Bridge I 1 point
3 DUC I 3 points
total 10 points

Ship 2:
6 ion I 6 points
Bridge I 1 point
2 anti-matter torpedos 1 point
total 8 points

Therefore ship 1 goes first.

I know this is a simple example, but could work.

------------------
In difficult ground, press-on;
In encircled ground, devise stratagems;
In death ground, fight.
Sun Tzu (circa 400 B.C.)

[Tampa_Gamer]

I agree - some good ideas here. There have been a number of similar threads over the past 11 months. I believe most of the gamers (PBEM and single player) would like some sort of initiative-based system ala MOO2 or otherwise. All I can say is MM listens to the masses so everyone who wants it must e-mail him the request. Even if you e-mailed him 6 months ago about it, do it again - now.

[This message has been edited by Tampa_Gamer (edited 11 October 2001).]

[geoschmo]

I like it. I have sent soemthing like it earlier in the week to Aaron as a suggestion. Hopefully it's something he can work into this patch.

Geoschmo

[Taqwus]

It might have been easier in Stars! if the latter did not allow custom tech trees.

Here, retrofitting initiative at the level of individual components would be, er, tricky. And what if components get damaged during combat, or if a ship has different weapons, some of which are considered fast and others slow?

Hmmm. More complication could be tolerated if the interface becomes simpler, such as the AI picking all targets and when to fire -- IOW, user intervention (and thus, constant interruption) wouldn't be as much of an issue. Plot courses, give some hints perhaps (targetting priorities, say), and then the system executes for some number of rounds.

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

[AJC]

I would like to see an intiative system too, I just wonder how it would respond to the many different custom tech trees..and how much work it would take to do it right..But better than nothing would be alternating firing and moves...which is probably relatively simple to implement.

[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 12 October 2001).]