Fractal Softworks Forum
April 23, 2014, 05:16:36 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: New blog post: Comm Relays (4/16/14).
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
  Print  
Author Topic: Fleet Encounter Mechanics, Part 2  (Read 7418 times)
Alex
Administrator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 5830


View Profile
« on: April 08, 2013, 01:05:26 PM »

Blog post here.
Logged
Sproginator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 3318


Banned
Resident Shenaniganator of the modding forum.


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2013, 01:14:04 PM »

Just finished reading it, that travel drive seems awesome! and the boarding mechanics, wow, Just wow.

Looking forward to its release
Logged

A person who's never made a mistake, never tried anything new
- A Einstein
icepick37
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1645



View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2013, 01:15:49 PM »

Can't wait to cull a fleet together to specialize in boarding.  :p

This all sounds interesting and intense. Can't wait to actually try it! 
Logged

“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire
CopperCoyote
Commander
***
Posts: 194



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2013, 01:22:41 PM »

I seem to recall burn drive is stated to be travel mode engaged while in combat. Will burn drive be synchronized with travel drive?
Logged
Alex
Administrator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 5830


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2013, 02:23:01 PM »

I seem to recall burn drive is stated to be travel mode engaged while in combat. Will burn drive be synchronized with travel drive?

No - travel drive is a much more extreme version. Might rename it to something cooler, though - "full burn", perhaps.
Logged
Thaago
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1821

Quantum Mechanic


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2013, 02:35:15 PM »

This all looks really good! I remember quite a lot about of discussion about boarding a while back - I'm glad that you decided to keep it. Does choosing which ships try and board (and that determining allowed boarding composition) mean we will be manually assigning crew and marines?

Also, will ships be able to fight past the 'travel drive' edge? I'm imagining fleeing ships accelerating quickly into a cloud of fighters that I'd stationed for ambush or something.

Quote
(Currently, fighters can’t be boarded. Need to reconsider some mechanics around fighters anyway; stay tuned.)
Only with this game can a nebulous statement fill me with such hope for AWESOME Smiley
Logged
Gothars
Global Moderator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 2263


Boterator


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2013, 02:48:19 PM »

You made boarding a meaningful choice! Yeah Cheesy
Overall I like it very much, I'm sure risking your ships and crew for boarding will be a most interesting decision. I'd like to go into some details, though.

That stuff about ships reactivating and having a chance of getting away sounds good, but:
Quote
One disabled enemy ship may be randomly picked for boarding after combat.

Why make that random and not let the player choose which of the re-activating ships to board? You also said "boarding should be a way to get new ships rather than a way to get more ships", isn't randomizing the ship choice counteracting that intention?


In principle I also like the choice between "risk for the fleet but high boarding chance" vs "no risk for the fleet but low boarding chance and more crew losses". But...

If you choose a lot of (utility?) ships for a boarding task force and have a lot of marines, and you choose to launch assault teams, are there really high enough costs/risks? What if the target is a destroyer with 20 crew and you have 200 marines launching from your cargo ships? How could the costs of such a tactic balance out with or even surpass the cost of purchasing that destroyer? Are marines that expansive now?

(btw there's missing a space behind "HSS Tuat" in the boarding message)



The border and escape mechanics sound also really good. I'm looking forward to some exciting chases Smiley
Just a question: You said before that there can be only one escape scenario in an engagement. What happens if a retreating fleet destroys most pursuers and the remaining ones have to flee now? Do the pursuers still win?


Quote
Need to reconsider some mechanics around fighters anyway; stay tuned.

!Carrier launch conf....OK, sorry.

 
Logged

Starsector Manual

If you'd like to bring realism in, I'd suggest you don't.
icepick37
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1645



View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2013, 02:54:15 PM »

Quote
One disabled enemy ship may be randomly picked for boarding after combat.

Why make that random and not let the player choose which of the re-activating ships to board? You also said "boarding should be a way to get new ships rather than a way to get more ships", isn't randomizing the ship choice counteracting that intention?
Would that make it too easy, though? To get a ship you want I mean.
Logged

“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire
harperrb
Lieutenant
**
Posts: 83


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2013, 03:01:36 PM »

really enjoy the development of the pursuit and board edge.

My only concern on the boarding is that the value of boarding attempts (one) is arbitrary.

Isn't there a better limiting factor(s)?

I completely understand the means by which getting a new free ship is something that should be avoided; but i feel like limiting the number of boarding actions to one, no matter the size of the fleet is a somewhat glaring gamey-mechanic. That is - to recall a previous blog post, breaks the game's immersion.

I feel by
  • controlling the amount of repairable damage while in transit
  • the cost of those repairs both in space and at a dock
  • the viability of towing near-scrap ships

that boarding a ship for only vessel-gain would be nearly prohibitive in a similar fashion.  Additionally, I really enjoy the options to assault other ships - but following the logic just stated, making those options tied to specific hullmods would also limit the opportunities you can attempt to board. (eg. adding "Boarding Craft" or "Assault Dock" tied to those relative actions.

That way players have the choice to board as many ships as they can, even if in the end, its a negative gain.

Other options like making boarding for special cargo/information/people are too far off to mention here.

Still, loved what your giving us Alex, thanks for taking the time to break it down.

[edit: to clean up my points]
« Last Edit: April 08, 2013, 03:18:39 PM by harperrb » Logged
Gothars
Global Moderator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 2263


Boterator


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2013, 03:08:03 PM »

Would that make it too easy, though? To get a ship you want I mean.


As I understand it the main difficulty is now supposed to lay in the boarding itself, not in the dice roll which decides which ship is boardable. At least that's how I understand:
Quote
boarding should be a way to get new ships rather than a way to get more ships. Thus, there’ll be a very high cost to successful boarding.
How can you get "new" ships with increased probability if the selection is completely random?

Besides, it's not like you can freely choose between all enemy ships, just those who managed to stay sufficiently intact and are able to come back on-line. Which may well only be one.
Logged

Starsector Manual

If you'd like to bring realism in, I'd suggest you don't.
icepick37
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1645



View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2013, 03:29:15 PM »

Gotcha. Yeah I agree with all that.
Logged

“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire
hairrorist
Commander
***
Posts: 183


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 08, 2013, 03:32:38 PM »

Another element to test against boarding cost:reward would be to have derelict ships classified as "refurbished xxxx," being a version of the same ship but has ever so slightly lowered stats.  That way the player is motivated to actually by a ship once in a while!
Logged
Alex
Administrator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 5830


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2013, 04:09:10 PM »

This all looks really good! I remember quite a lot about of discussion about boarding a while back - I'm glad that you decided to keep it. Does choosing which ships try and board (and that determining allowed boarding composition) mean we will be manually assigning crew and marines?

No, its just assumed that the ships in the boarding task force gather up as many marines as are available (and can fit), and fill the rest of the space (if any) with crew of whatever experience level is handy. If you'll notice, there are no separate sliders for what XP crew to send - would be a bit much, I think, and marines dwarf crew effectiveness in combat anyway.


Also, will ships be able to fight past the 'travel drive' edge? I'm imagining fleeing ships accelerating quickly into a cloud of fighters that I'd stationed for ambush or something.

Yeah, it's still part of the map. There's nothing special about it beyond it being the only zone where travel drive can be turned on by the AI. (Which, as the player, you can do by pressing "enter", again only in that zone, and with a prominent UI element telling you to do it.)


That stuff about ships reactivating and having a chance of getting away sounds good, but:
Quote
One disabled enemy ship may be randomly picked for boarding after combat.

Why make that random and not let the player choose which of the re-activating ships to board? You also said "boarding should be a way to get new ships rather than a way to get more ships", isn't randomizing the ship choice counteracting that intention?

No specific reason, just to keep it more manageable UI-wise. It may or may not be a good thing to allow choice here (i.e. pick one, the rest get away!). Perhaps the "engage" option would even engage all of them, while board meant all but the one being boarded got away... hmm. Basically, I'm trying to keep it simple to start.

I don't think it specifically counteracts that intention. It just makes it a little more difficult to get the ship you want. Still, expanding it is a possibility.

In principle I also like the choice between "risk for the fleet but high boarding chance" vs "no risk for the fleet but low boarding chance and more crew losses". But...

If you choose a lot of (utility?) ships for a boarding task force and have a lot of marines, and you choose to launch assault teams, are there really high enough costs/risks? What if the target is a destroyer with 20 crew and you have 200 marines launching from your cargo ships? How could the costs of such a tactic balance out with or even surpass the cost of purchasing that destroyer? Are marines that expansive now?

Well, marines cost something like 300 credits now. A launch can result in the enemy ship maneuvering to get out of the way and getting away, which in turn results in the assault teams missing their targets, and some are lost in space. If they DO land, the combat odds are very poor and they'll take heavy casualties. If there's a self-destruct, the ships may be safe, but the boarding party certainly isn't. Finally, if they manage to get through all that and secure the ship, there's a high chance it'll be too damage to actually repair and has to be scrapped. So, yeah, it's the safe option for your ships. It's also extremely rough on the marines, and unlikely to produce results.


(btw there's missing a space behind "HSS Tuat" in the boarding message)

Thanks, fixed that up Smiley

Just a question: You said before that there can be only one escape scenario in an engagement. What happens if a retreating fleet destroys most pursuers and the remaining ones have to flee now? Do the pursuers still win?

The pursuees (is that even a word?) win in that case, but the encounter is still over.


really enjoy the development of the pursuit and board edge.

My only concern on the boarding is that the value of boarding attempts (one) is arbitrary.

Isn't there a better limiting factor(s)?

I completely understand the means by which getting a new free ship is something that should be avoided; but i feel like limiting the number of boarding actions to one, no matter the size of the fleet is a somewhat glaring gamey-mechanic. That is - to recall a previous blog post, breaks the game's immersion.

I feel by
  • controlling the amount of repairable damage while in transit
  • the cost of those repairs both in space and at a dock
  • the viability of towing near-scrap ships

that boarding a ship for only vessel-gain would be nearly prohibitive in a similar fashion.  Additionally, I really enjoy the options to assault other ships - but following the logic just stated, making those options tied to specific hullmods would also limit the opportunities you can attempt to board. (eg. adding "Boarding Craft" or "Assault Dock" tied to those relative actions.

That way players have the choice to board as many ships as they can, even if in the end, its a negative gain.

Other options like making boarding for special cargo/information/people are too far off to mention here.

Still, loved what your giving us Alex, thanks for taking the time to break it down.

[edit: to clean up my points]

Well, it's a fair point. As mentioned above, this may get expanded (and, by the way - the boarding mechanics are fully moddable, so this could be coded up).

I do want to say that this "only one" restriction isn't front-and-center in terms of being presented to the player that way. It just doesn't happen more than once. So, I don't think it's particularly immersion breaking there.

Another element to test against boarding cost:reward would be to have derelict ships classified as "refurbished xxxx," being a version of the same ship but has ever so slightly lowered stats.  That way the player is motivated to actually by a ship once in a while!

Hmm, neat idea. I like it! Will keep it in mind as a potential solution for any boarding related problems that may develop down the line.
Logged
FlashFrozen
Admiral
*****
Posts: 878



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2013, 04:10:46 PM »

I seem to recall burn drive is stated to be travel mode engaged while in combat. Will burn drive be synchronized with travel drive?

No - travel drive is a much more extreme version. Might rename it to something cooler, though - "full burn", perhaps.

Interplanetary drive/burn?  Cheesy

As a question, do the drives have a significant chargeup or effect like deactivation of weapons/shields to be used?



Logged


Alex
Administrator
Admiral
*****
Posts: 5830


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: April 08, 2013, 04:45:47 PM »

As a question, do the drives have a significant chargeup or effect like deactivation of weapons/shields to be used?

Not sure what you mean, could you explain in a little more detail?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!