Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NaniByte]

If I'm attacking, then it makes sense since the defenders can just run to the station. However, if I'm defending from a small picket it can force a station battle. This makes no sense because my ships should be able to stay out of range of the space station.

[Megas]

If I'm attacking, then it makes sense since the defenders can just run to the station. However, if I'm defending from a small picket it can force a station battle. This makes no sense because my ships should be able to stay out of range of the space station.

If it goes both ways, we could have "Why is my battlestation next to me not attacking that invasion fleet I am fighting?"

[paragonid]

If it goes both ways, we could have "Why is my battlestation next to me not attacking that invasion fleet I am fighting?"

I think it's because battlestation doesn't have ability to move and can't follow you into attacking. Therefore battlestation can not attack or participate in harassing.
But if you are attacked next to battlestation, there's no reason why it can't fight alongside battlestation just as TS stated.

What you stated is not "both ways", it's a strawman

[Megas]

Not a strawman.

If I wait next to my station until an invader comes, then I intercept it, I want my battlestation to attack the invader with me, and it does if contact is close enough.

If an enemy intercepts my fleet when it is almost next to their station, they all attack my fleet as expected.  Can be an annoyance.

If there is symmetry in rules, then if an enemy battlestation does not back up the fleet that intercepted mine, then it stands to reason that if my fleet intercepts an invader, then my battlestation would not back my fleet up due to rules symmetry.  If that happened, we can expect complaint in patch notes or new topics in Suggestions or Bug Reports about "Help!  My battlestation is not helping me!" or something similar.  All because the current rules are inconvenient when our fleet is invading the enemy.  I merely pointing out the downsides if rules symmetry is enforced to make things fair.

[KDR_11k]

Can't you tell your fleet to disengage? The side with a station can never pursue a retreating fleet AFAIK.

[Megas]

Can't you tell your fleet to disengage? The side with a station can never pursue a retreating fleet AFAIK.

Yes, except their harassment costs huge chunks of CR from all of your ships, more than usual because a battlestation was involved.

Instead of losing about 20% CR from all ships, I lose about 50% from all ships instead.  That is too much.

[Drazan]

I think it should go both ways, a station should only be able to participate in a figt if it is attacked (reallyreally close to the encounter) no matter if it yours or the enemies.
One thing I find really irritating in this forum is old players acting like all things are fine in the current game. But they are not. This is an awesome game, but until it is done a lot of things need to be changed.

[Goumindong]

If I'm attacking, then it makes sense since the defenders can just run to the station. However, if I'm defending from a small picket it can force a station battle. This makes no sense because my ships should be able to stay out of range of the space station.

The engagement system is symmetric. So there isn't a way to differentiate that they're attacking you or you're attacking them. The only thing that matters is whether or not they want to take the fight or not and whether or not they can force a retreat battle. When you're close to a station there are overrides such that any fleet with a station cannot pursue.

So if you want to fight and they want to fight they want to fight at the station. And if you want to retreat they're going to harass you and you cannot turn around and fight them because they're going to retreat back to the station.

You could always attack, kill the defending picket and then retreat from the station. Just put the avoid command on the station and it shouldn't be too difficult if you have a decent fleet

[IonDragonX]

You could always attack, kill the defending picket and then retreat from the station. Just put the avoid command on the station and it shouldn't be too difficult if you have a decent fleet

Maybe they could just add the option to disengage from the station in the Dialog Tree. You would be in the "retreat scenario" type battle, which could cost you your logistic ships but the station would not be pursuing you.

[KDR_11k]

I think stations being dragged into fights near them is the only way to really make them matter, otherwise the best approach would always be to fight any defending fleets separately. The harrying feels quite BS since it's usually some tiny picket fleet versus a much larger force but OTOH if you can just get away without much CR loss then you could just plow past the picket fleet to the planet the station is defending.

[Histidine]

Random concept for how the dialog should play out:

Don't let the station insta-join, unless it's really close. Instead, if engagement occurs near a station friendly to one side, that fleet can choose to run to the station, or fight where it is.

If it chooses to run, the attacker can choose to follow and fight it with the station, or walk away (should absolutely not be subject to harrying in this case, since that would require the enemy fleet to come out of station cover where it can be killed in a fair fight).

[KDR_11k]

That action already takes place on the campaign map, the defending fleets will flee into the range of the station and if you follow them you get dragged into a fight with the station. The difference is that you don't have to touch the station on the map to be considered in range of the station.

[Histidine]

That action already takes place on the campaign map, the defending fleets will flee into the range of the station and if you follow them you get dragged into a fight with the station. The difference is that you don't have to touch the station on the map to be considered in range of the station.

Good point, but problem with this is the station join range is huge and not indicated on the map. If stations had a big circle showing their join range, at least players would know the risk they take by entering it.
(Also I'd like it to be harder or outright impossible to have the 'tiny picket harries huge fleet by claiming to use station as cover' thing)

[KDR_11k]

That action already takes place on the campaign map, the defending fleets will flee into the range of the station and if you follow them you get dragged into a fight with the station. The difference is that you don't have to touch the station on the map to be considered in range of the station.

Good point, but problem with this is the station join range is huge and not indicated on the map. If stations had a big circle showing their join range, at least players would know the risk they take by entering it.
(Also I'd like it to be harder or outright impossible to have the 'tiny picket harries huge fleet by claiming to use station as cover' thing)

Showing those ranges would definitely be a good step. Also applies to one fleet dragging allies into a fight so you know when they're separated enough to be picked off individually. Though maybe showing circular ranges would get cluttered so just show connecting lines between fleets (and stations) that are close enough to support each other in a fight?

The AI is clearly aware of these ranges and the player can drag allies into a fight as well so it would make sense to show these.

[prav]

The problem I run into is when I kill a defensive patrol outside of station range, but a lone frigate survives. Then, as I approach the colony, the lone frigate can run up and force me into a nasty station battle when I just want a quick in-n-out raid for some commodities, even though the ship is entirely harmless on its own - and so would the station be, had I been a smidge luckier when my CO cleaned up the survivors of the battle.