Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hyperspace Topography (10/12/22)

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle  (Read 2890 times)

paragonid

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2021, 05:54:59 AM »

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.

You are missing underlying reasoning for why TS has stated he thinks it should be changed. He is not attacking rules symmetry.
"This makes no sense because my ships should be able to stay out of range of the space station."
In other words, battlestation should not participate in offensive because it has no ability to move.

For Suggestions or Bug Reports about "Help!  My battlestation is not helping me!" or something similar answer would be simple: because it has no ability to move, you have to be attacked to get help from battlestation

If you still don't understand the difference, I'll try an analogy.
By law police officer can attack a criminal, but why can not a criminal then attack police officer too? Because the law states that arrest is an action allowed on a criminal only.
In discussed situation, if law allows everyone to attack everyone instead, the TS is arguing with the reasoning for why the law allows it, not the symmetry.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2021, 06:01:15 AM by paragonid »
Logged

Chthonic One

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2021, 11:10:16 AM »

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.

You are missing underlying reasoning for why TS has stated he thinks it should be changed. He is not attacking rules symmetry.
"This makes no sense because my ships should be able to stay out of range of the space station."
In other words, battlestation should not participate in offensive because it has no ability to move.

For Suggestions or Bug Reports about "Help!  My battlestation is not helping me!" or something similar answer would be simple: because it has no ability to move, you have to be attacked to get help from battlestation

If you still don't understand the difference, I'll try an analogy.
By law police officer can attack a criminal, but why can not a criminal then attack police officer too? Because the law states that arrest is an action allowed on a criminal only.
In discussed situation, if law allows everyone to attack everyone instead, the TS is arguing with the reasoning for why the law allows it, not the symmetry.
This 100%

If I attack a ship near a station friendly to it, yes 100% the station should be involved.

If a ship near a station friendly to it attacks me, no, the station should not be able to join it in the attack. The station is immobile.

The same goes for if the enemy attacks me.

If I am attacked near a friendly station, the station should be involved.

If I attack an enemy near a friendly station, I should not get a free station involved in the fight. It is immobile and cannot come to my aid.


Too often I see weak fleets turn to flee to a station, then suddenly turn bloodthirsty the second they get into range of the station. If they do this the options to me should be as follows:
1. Disengage
1a. If the enemy chooses to engage without the station I can choose to engage them without the station involved or disengage while they harry me or perform a Story Point combat maneuver.
1b. If the enemy chooses not to engage without the station I can disengage without penalty as they were too weak to harry me on their own.
2. I have the option to attack if I want.
3. Story point option to trap them away from the station.

If I choose to engage an enemy within the range of a station my options for battle should be similarly altered:
1. Disengage (This can bring up a new set of options depending on enemy decisions)
1a. If enemy chooses to engage the station, they can harry my retreat.
1b. If the enemy chooses not to engage the station, it's a clean disengage.
2. I have the option to attack if I want.
3. Story point to open a fight to maneuver the main fight over to the station. (Need to defeat X CR to complete this action based on relative fleet size) Upon completion of this objective, able to retreat and start a new battle with the station involved.
Logged

KDR_11k

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2021, 01:25:13 PM »

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.
Hm, maybe if the station plus defenders wouldn't be enough to deter raiding then they also shouldn't be able to harry?
Logged

Chthonic One

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2021, 04:49:25 PM »

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.
Hm, maybe if the station plus defenders wouldn't be enough to deter raiding then they also shouldn't be able to harry?
Harry indicates that they want to fight seriously and that they want to chase. The station cannot chase, so it fails that check. The defenders in this case do not want to fight seriously without the station, so they fail that check. Since both fail a check each, no one gets to harry.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2021, 05:02:12 PM »

It seems reasonable that only defenders should get the benefits of a station, because only defenders are retreating to the station for help.
Logged

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2021, 05:17:00 PM »

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.

The campaign UI for entities, like fleets, is primitive. It could really use more features. For example, I made a mod that shows which fleets are hostile and which fleets are pursuing your fleet - vanilla could easily do a superior implementation.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #21 on: April 27, 2021, 05:26:08 PM »

It seems reasonable that only defenders should get the benefits of a station, because only defenders are retreating to the station for help.

Only defenders get the benefit of the station. They can Harry you, since maneuvering to force a pitched battle means they can retreat to the station. And if you try to back off they Harry you again....

That being said a story point to engage without the station present would be nice. “Execute a feint to draw the attacking fleets in where the station cannot support them (1 SP, 0% bonus XP)
Logged

Chthonic One

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2021, 05:31:59 PM »

It seems reasonable that only defenders should get the benefits of a station, because only defenders are retreating to the station for help.

Only defenders get the benefit of the station. They can Harry you, since maneuvering to force a pitched battle means they can retreat to the station. And if you try to back off they Harry you again....

That being said a story point to engage without the station present would be nice. “Execute a feint to draw the attacking fleets in where the station cannot support them (1 SP, 0% bonus XP)
If a defending fleet around a station harries me, that means they are leaving the protective defensive area of the station. What is stopping me from just turning around and smashing them once they've done that?

That's the point. If they want the protection of the station, they can't harry. They lose that protection if they do. If they choose to harry, they lose the protection and the attacker can choose now to engage.
Logged

Stormlock

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #23 on: April 27, 2021, 06:29:33 PM »

It seems reasonable that only defenders should get the benefits of a station, because only defenders are retreating to the station for help.

Only defenders get the benefit of the station. They can Harry you, since maneuvering to force a pitched battle means they can retreat to the station. And if you try to back off they Harry you again....

That being said a story point to engage without the station present would be nice. “Execute a feint to draw the attacking fleets in where the station cannot support them (1 SP, 0% bonus XP)
If a defending fleet around a station harries me, that means they are leaving the protective defensive area of the station. What is stopping me from just turning around and smashing them once they've done that?

That's the point. If they want the protection of the station, they can't harry. They lose that protection if they do. If they choose to harry, they lose the protection and the attacker can choose now to engage.
You could even go a step further and say that if defenders want the protection of the station, they need to retreat to the station first to have that protection, implying they would be harried until they get there and accordingly lose CR before the fight even starts. It's not even that large a penalty tbh, considering the defending fleet can immediately resupply and repair after the fight is done, arguably the biggest advantage of being near a station to begin with.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2021, 06:38:05 PM »

It seems reasonable that only defenders should get the benefits of a station, because only defenders are retreating to the station for help.

Only defenders get the benefit of the station. They can Harry you, since maneuvering to force a pitched battle means they can retreat to the station. And if you try to back off they Harry you again....

That being said a story point to engage without the station present would be nice. “Execute a feint to draw the attacking fleets in where the station cannot support them (1 SP, 0% bonus XP)
If a defending fleet around a station harries me, that means they are leaving the protective defensive area of the station. What is stopping me from just turning around and smashing them once they've done that?

That's the point. If they want the protection of the station, they can't harry. They lose that protection if they do. If they choose to harry, they lose the protection and the attacker can choose now to engage.

If you turn around and smash them they retreat to the station...then you must smash them at the station.

You cannot smash them without flying into the station. They can harass you because they can always retreat to the station...
Logged

Stormlock

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #25 on: April 27, 2021, 08:16:00 PM »

But the whole point of harassment causing CR loss is that the harassed party is forced to create distance. You have no need to create distance from a tiny picket fleet, and a fleet moving to an allied station is being forced to create distance from the attackers.

Imagine it's a water gun fight. On one side you've got 20 kids, on the other side you have 3 + 1 kid at the 5ft garden hose. If the hose is in the back yard and the 20 meet the 3 in the front yard, who is going to get soaked on the way to the back yard? And if the 20 want to leave entirely so they can refill across the street, are they going to get soaked by the 3 kids? No, because they could just fight them in the front yard. The hose (station) doesn't come into play unless someone is willing to fight for control of it's immediate space.

What you're describing, having a small force attack a larger one, then retreat and recover at the base, is already possibly by doing exactly that. You can sit at a friendly station, attack a large force to pick off a couple ships or force them to deploy something you can't pick off, then retreat (assuming they can't catch you.) But this costs the smaller fleet much more resources than the larger fleet and requires much faster ships, as it should, because they need to deploy to attack, and then deploy to retreat as well, and risk destruction both times if the large fleet can catch them.
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • View Profile
    • Bitbucket profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #26 on: April 27, 2021, 08:32:14 PM »

You cannot smash them without flying into the station. They can harass you because they can always retreat to the station...
If they come out to harass me, I stop and prepare to fight them, and they retreat to the station, at that point they have ceased to harass me!

I'd say the situation is symmetrical between the fleets: neither can get close to the other without putting itself in danger. But given this symmetry, one of them should not be able to inflict massive supplies damage on the other.



Actually, I want to say this: Why does harry even exist now? For player it does nothing unless you really want to run some smaller fleet into the ground; for NPCs its main function seems to be to punish the player for committing one of an undefined set of mistakes.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #27 on: April 27, 2021, 09:48:55 PM »

You cannot smash them without flying into the station. They can harass you because they can always retreat to the station...
If they come out to harass me, I stop and prepare to fight them, and they retreat to the station, at that point they have ceased to harass me!

I'd say the situation is symmetrical between the fleets: neither can get close to the other without putting itself in danger. But given this symmetry, one of them should not be able to inflict massive supplies damage on the other.



Actually, I want to say this: Why does harry even exist now? For player it does nothing unless you really want to run some smaller fleet into the ground; for NPCs its main function seems to be to punish the player for committing one of an undefined set of mistakes.

No. As soon as you turn around to leave they harass you again. You can uhhh. "Sit ready for combat forever" but that would be them successfully harrying you by forcing you into peak readiness and thus reducing your combat readiness in the future.

I do agree that harry doesn't really have a particular use except to give yourself from negative rep. AI fleets don't have simulated resources so it only gives them CR damage that doesn't matter anyway because like... You are far stronger than them in the first place to be able to harry.
Logged

Chthonic One

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #28 on: April 27, 2021, 10:09:53 PM »

You cannot smash them without flying into the station. They can harass you because they can always retreat to the station...
If they come out to harass me, I stop and prepare to fight them, and they retreat to the station, at that point they have ceased to harass me!

I'd say the situation is symmetrical between the fleets: neither can get close to the other without putting itself in danger. But given this symmetry, one of them should not be able to inflict massive supplies damage on the other.



Actually, I want to say this: Why does harry even exist now? For player it does nothing unless you really want to run some smaller fleet into the ground; for NPCs its main function seems to be to punish the player for committing one of an undefined set of mistakes.

No. As soon as you turn around to leave they harass you again. You can uhhh. "Sit ready for combat forever" but that would be them successfully harrying you by forcing you into peak readiness and thus reducing your combat readiness in the future.

I do agree that harry doesn't really have a particular use except to give yourself from negative rep. AI fleets don't have simulated resources so it only gives them CR damage that doesn't matter anyway because like... You are far stronger than them in the first place to be able to harry.
No, if they don't chase you consistently, they aren't harassing you. They harassing requires being in weapons range or at least the threat of weapons range, requiring the other fleet to maneuver to dodge. They can't do that from the safety of a station without losing that safety.

This is the whole pit bull on a leash barking at a cat just outside his leash's radius situation. The pit bull can bark all he wants, but he can't harass the cat. The cat can sit and wait as long as he wants, so long as he stays outside of the range of the leash. The leash in this case is the range of the station.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2021, 10:11:45 PM by Chthonic One »
Logged

Stormlock

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: Defending fleets shouldn't be able to force a station battle
« Reply #29 on: April 27, 2021, 10:34:26 PM »

If your force is bigger, how exactly are they chasing you while all your ships have turned around? You can have a small portion of ships waiting for them to approach while everything else retreats. It makes no sense for my paragon to lose CR when only 3 of my kites need to spend the same amount of CR as 3 of your kites to dance around eachother without actually engaging while the fleet moves onward. The idea that 3 of your kites can threaten my entire fleet without even being combat ready themselves, is insanity.

Maybe you could make an argument the station should be able to harass because it's more fun or balanced or whatever (I can't think of one) but you definitely can't make an argument that this is realistic. If retreating back to the station costs nothing, retreating anywhere else would also cost nothing, and I should be able to harass any sized fleet with a rusty buffalo because 'if they turn around to attack me, I'll just retreat.'

The harassing mechanic is based on the premise that you have a superior force, so all you need to do is send a fraction of your force to delay an enemy until your main force arrives casually. Not that you can use your entire fleet at full combat deployment to annoy someone and then leave before they can catch you.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3