Malfador, Bring back retreat option from SEIII - Page 4

Dravis · #31 February 19th, 2002, 01:52 AM

Another option could be a wrap around map. That wouldn't be very realistic, but it might work. One more option could be that it takes more than 1 movement point to retreat (sorry if somebody thought of that before).

Either way I miss the ability to retreat...

Instar · #32 February 19th, 2002, 02:47 AM

"But more important it was a possibility to cheat and see what was the exact strength of the enemy in a sector."
Well, you could consider when that happens as them to be scout units, but it is kind of unfair for the defenders, as they get no chance to get at the ship.

PvK · #33 February 19th, 2002, 05:04 AM

quote:
Originally posted by geoschmo:
I too was not a huge fan of the retreat in SEIII, and am happy it's not in SEIV. Consider the following. An attack ship attacks a colony ship. The attack ship has the speed advantage but because the combat starts with the ships on opponsite sides of the screen, the clony ship can retreat before the attacker can catch him. So the attaacker is forced to either allow him to escape, or spend another strategic movement point chasing him into the next sector. BUT, that combat starts with the ships on opposite sides of the combat screen again. Rinse and repeat, until the attacker gives up or the one of the ships runs out of strategic movement points. This has the effect of greatly increasing the speed of the colony ship in relative to the attacker. ...

That's not how the SE III system works. Ships can only retreat if they have unspent movement points from their previous turn. The enemy colony ship can only run if it didn't use all it's movement Last turn. The enemy ship can never move farther than its speed on the strategic map, and only ships that don't use all of their movement have any chance to retreat. If a scout of the same speed moves into your sector and retreats, it will have used two movement points, so you will be able to chase it down unless it has a speed advantage of at least two greater than yours. Also, with the SE III ability to specify a change in strategy based on enemy strength, if you have a battlefleet that you don't want scouted by trivial enemy ships, you can place a screen of light ships in between that fleet and the enemy, with orders to chase up to a strength ratio, or retreat if a real threat appears.

PvK

CW · #34 February 19th, 2002, 06:23 AM

IMHO, something serious is lacking if ships can't retreat from combat (as of present). The current "space is nothing but a little square" setup means that even if I've a dedicated fast scout it won't be able to make use of its speed advantage to survive. Do you really think ships will get trapped in a corner in combat in real life 300 years from now?!?!

No offense intended to anybody but the argument on whether a retreat order should be implemented as some of you suggested is quite pointless - it SHOULD. The real question is HOW you are going to do it.

geoschmo · #35 February 19th, 2002, 04:33 PM

CW, The argument that retreat should not be allowed is only pointless if you disagree with it.

I for one think it has a valid point. Many games do not allow units to leave the combat phase before it is over. And, as much as I hate to use the "R" word, this has some realism to it. In real life war if one side retreats, the other side doesn't always stop shooting at them. They will often persue and attempt to destroy them. Now, if the retreating unit can disengage without being destroyed, and has sufficent speed to withdraw without being run down, yes eventually they should be able to get away. That is why I would agree with modifying the combat screen to allow more room for movement. But that's different than allowing one side to completely disengage from combat unilaterally.

Pvk, I believe nothing I said about the SEIII system is incorrect. Please explain.

I was using the example of an attacking ship trying to run down a slower, retreating ship to point out an obvious flaw in the SEIII retreat system, that is the fact that by retreating a slower ship can in effect increase his speed in relation to the persuer. As I stated eventually he would run out of strategic movement and be caught, if the attacker felt it was worthwhile to persue. But that could draw the attacker out of position as others have pointed out.

Your example was different, one of unit attacking and withdrawing, more of a skirmishing type action. Something that could be done with a larger combat screen as well. The "scouting" unit could attack, and then evade for the duration of the combat phase. Then with their strategic movement withdraw afterwards.

Geoschmo

PvK · #36 February 20th, 2002, 02:32 AM

Ok, let me quote a smaller part. Regarding your colony ship example:

quote:
Originally posted by geoschmo:
... This has the effect of greatly increasing the speed of the colony ship in relative to the attacker.

I don't think it increases the speed of the colony ship in any way. Say it is speed 5 and the warship is speed 6 (the typical ion engine example). In the first place, if the colony ship used its strategic movement on its turn (the usual situation), then it can't retreat and gets stomped immediately. However, if the colony ship didn't move at all on its turn, then it will be able to retreat five times. If the warship starts adjacent to the colony ship, it will be able to try to engage it six times, and on the sixth time, it will catch and stomp the colony ship. This actually coincides quite accurately with what would be expected for a speed 6 ship to catch a speed 5 ship that is one sector away and wants to flee - in a precise simultaneous movement system, this is exactly what would happen.

PvK

Marco · #37 February 20th, 2002, 10:09 AM

I completely second the system explained by PvK, but I think there is some more point to solve:
1. What happen if the retreat movement is in a strategic location with others enemy units, may be from another player ? In this case another tactical battle begins among three or more players, very difficult to handle with the new retreat option. A possible solution: prevent retreat in strategic locations with enemy units.
2. The direction of the retreat in the strategic map: a “forward retreat” tactic to bypass enemy units, let say a enemy blocking fleet at a warp point, must be allowed or not ?

Marco

PvK · #38 February 21st, 2002, 02:18 AM

quote:
Originally posted by geoschmo:
...
I suppose that allowing retreat would simulate the effect, but really combat should not occur to begin with, until the persuer catches up to the colony ship.

Yes, definitely, unless only some of the ships retreat. That is, the game should determine which ships are retreating and if they have the speed to do so and a legitimate retreat direction, and then only start a combat where there are ships that aren't running or that are too slow to get away.

PvK

Edit/P.S.: Of course, ships should still be able to change their minds during combat and retreat, for example if they get bLasted but still have speed.

[ 21 February 2002: Message edited by: PvK ]

PvK · #39 February 21st, 2002, 02:23 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Marco:
I completely second the system explained by PvK, but I think there is some more point to solve:
1. What happen if the retreat movement is in a strategic location with others enemy units, may be from another player ? In this case another tactical battle begins among three or more players, very difficult to handle with the new retreat option. A possible solution: prevent retreat in strategic locations with enemy units.
2. The direction of the retreat in the strategic map: a “forward retreat” tactic to bypass enemy units, let say a enemy blocking fleet at a warp point, must be allowed or not ?

Marco

Yes these both have to be resolved.

SE III denied retreats into sectors with hostile ships.

I mentioned earlier that forward retreats have to be limited somehow. I thought SE3 did pretty well by simply basing retreat direction on map edge used. Thus, it was possible (in tactical combat, anyway) to break through enemy forces, but only if you actually did so in tactical combat.

PvK

geoschmo · #40 February 21st, 2002, 02:54 AM

Pvk, You are correct to a point. When I stated that the slower ship is gaining speed, I was talking about the fact that in the combat screen the attacker can close on them, and then after they retreat and the attacker persues, they are back to the same distance at the begining of the next combat.

You have a good point about in a true simultaneous motion system the attacker and the colony ship would reach the same point at about the same time the colony ship ran out of movement points. Of course the attacker doesn't actually have to reach the same point as the colony ship, only reach the point of where their weapons can be in range. But coding that would probably complicate matters so much that it wouldn't be worth it.

SEIV doesn't have true simultaneous turn movement. What he has done is break up the turn into 30 "days", and then a ship with 6 movement poinst gets to move every 5 days, and a ship with 5 movement points gets to move every 6 days.

I suppose that allowing retreat would simulate the effect, but really combat should not occur to begin with, until the persuer catches up to the colony ship.

Geoschmo