226
Suggestions / Re: Fleet control system suggestions and feedback.
« on: February 23, 2012, 09:24:41 AM »
First off I'd like to say I like the current fleet control system. I've never played 0.34 and is not aware of how hectic the old system was, but did had bad experience in other games when heavy micromanagement was needed and my skills simply weren't up to the task. It wasn't the game's fault but it did feel bad.
I find the current fleet control system to be quite effective - this is a testament to the capable AI of the game, which I find handle assignments pretty well. I do hope they have more sense of self-preservation - that is knowing who they should avoid and let other suitable craft handle. Maybe assignments details should include Both What to do and what not to do: say, if a certain hostile craft is worthy enough to be given a "strike" order, wouldn't your carriers and whatever crafts incapable of striking want to avoid it? It's all about common senses. Assignments could be a way to tell the AI how to approach a problem (namely killing a hostile craft) and avoiding complications (getting friendlies unfit for the task killed).
I have never run out of command point myself. Maybe I'm just lazy, and never have some elaborated plan for engagements, but most of the time I find it unnecessary to give many direct orders when my fleet is handling themselves well enough. I do believe a bit of leniency won't hurt in terms of allowing player to specifically telling which ship what to do - Maybe upon creation of a new assignment, we could let player assign a ship or two this assignment for no CP cost? In Alex's own words, the current system is "Telling ships what to do", then isn't "Telling which ship what to do" alright? "Intercept these bombers" take a few seconds to speak, "Alpha wing intercept these bombers", while do take a bit more time to say, is probably not long enough to validate use of an extra CP.
I never know re-capturing objective also grant CP but that's pretty neat, and probably good enough to keep your commanding juice going.
And I do find a lot of room to abuse the assignment system : I don't need a scout command when telling them to "capture" an objective would send a ship towards the area somehow - most of the time the objectives are where it's meaningful to go anyway. A lot of time I simply tell my carrier group to rally at the central objective, and you hit two bird with one stone. You concentrate your forces with one assault/defence, split your forces with two, possibly controlling the composition with one assault/defence paired with a rally [shiptype]. If you want a small detachment use patrol. Cancelling assignment also affect how ships behave. Do understand that "no assignment give" does not mean "not doing anything", at times "search and destroy" is simply enough. It is usually enough to tell them "where to go", and the task is accomplished with minimal amount of clicks. It may not be how you envisioned to be, but it does not have to.
As for micromanagement ,When I seriously need it I simply transfer command to one of the ships suitable for the task at hand - there's no better way isn't it? the ultimate form of micromanagement, to be in the unit's commplete control. The rest I'd just have to cooperate with the AI. It's not like I need to tell them to circle around that assault cruiser when that's what they're going to do anyway.
But as a commander I'd love to see more events get reported. Regularly checking map works but require me to actively doing it and also cause a break in action. It would do much help if we're told "XXX's shield overloaded" or "AAA's hull integrity at 75%", which usually spell trouble can could probably need some attention. Reports on "bomber sight close to [certain carrier]" may also be good but a balance need to be striked between lack of heads up and information overflow. A toggleable mini-map (or radar even) is also a good idea, those icons on the edge of the screen is okay but sometimes they overlaps and make it hard to read them.
I find the current fleet control system to be quite effective - this is a testament to the capable AI of the game, which I find handle assignments pretty well. I do hope they have more sense of self-preservation - that is knowing who they should avoid and let other suitable craft handle. Maybe assignments details should include Both What to do and what not to do: say, if a certain hostile craft is worthy enough to be given a "strike" order, wouldn't your carriers and whatever crafts incapable of striking want to avoid it? It's all about common senses. Assignments could be a way to tell the AI how to approach a problem (namely killing a hostile craft) and avoiding complications (getting friendlies unfit for the task killed).
I have never run out of command point myself. Maybe I'm just lazy, and never have some elaborated plan for engagements, but most of the time I find it unnecessary to give many direct orders when my fleet is handling themselves well enough. I do believe a bit of leniency won't hurt in terms of allowing player to specifically telling which ship what to do - Maybe upon creation of a new assignment, we could let player assign a ship or two this assignment for no CP cost? In Alex's own words, the current system is "Telling ships what to do", then isn't "Telling which ship what to do" alright? "Intercept these bombers" take a few seconds to speak, "Alpha wing intercept these bombers", while do take a bit more time to say, is probably not long enough to validate use of an extra CP.
I never know re-capturing objective also grant CP but that's pretty neat, and probably good enough to keep your commanding juice going.
And I do find a lot of room to abuse the assignment system : I don't need a scout command when telling them to "capture" an objective would send a ship towards the area somehow - most of the time the objectives are where it's meaningful to go anyway. A lot of time I simply tell my carrier group to rally at the central objective, and you hit two bird with one stone. You concentrate your forces with one assault/defence, split your forces with two, possibly controlling the composition with one assault/defence paired with a rally [shiptype]. If you want a small detachment use patrol. Cancelling assignment also affect how ships behave. Do understand that "no assignment give" does not mean "not doing anything", at times "search and destroy" is simply enough. It is usually enough to tell them "where to go", and the task is accomplished with minimal amount of clicks. It may not be how you envisioned to be, but it does not have to.
As for micromanagement ,When I seriously need it I simply transfer command to one of the ships suitable for the task at hand - there's no better way isn't it? the ultimate form of micromanagement, to be in the unit's commplete control. The rest I'd just have to cooperate with the AI. It's not like I need to tell them to circle around that assault cruiser when that's what they're going to do anyway.
But as a commander I'd love to see more events get reported. Regularly checking map works but require me to actively doing it and also cause a break in action. It would do much help if we're told "XXX's shield overloaded" or "AAA's hull integrity at 75%", which usually spell trouble can could probably need some attention. Reports on "bomber sight close to [certain carrier]" may also be good but a balance need to be striked between lack of heads up and information overflow. A toggleable mini-map (or radar even) is also a good idea, those icons on the edge of the screen is okay but sometimes they overlaps and make it hard to read them.