Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 34

Author Topic: Combat Readyness isn't fun..  (Read 151212 times)

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #105 on: September 18, 2013, 09:35:52 AM »

Quote
We may be talking about different things, I'm not sure. If you "disengage" from the engagement, that's you losing and the enemy winning. You win if the enemy tries to disengage and you pursue/harry/let them go.
Sorry, got terms mishmashed here.  What I meant was that "let them go" isn't coming up in every choice after the initial win; if they aren't coming back for another round of combat, I expect "let them go" to mean the fight's over and I get the loot.

Anyhow, main issue is the weird loops that happen in the battle dialog, where sometimes I'll choose to start scavenging but they come back for a "battle" that they immediately flee, taking me into a frustrating loop where I can Disengage and lose the loot or keep Pursuing / Harrying but they'll get away... and then I've lost the loot.  In terms of feel, this is bad; if they come back for another go, they should come back and fight, not immediately run away, and either way, I shouldn't be forfeiting the loot until one of two conditions happens:

1.  I am defeated in detail.
2.  I choose to Retreat. 

On Disengage, it's unclear that that means that we're accepting defeat and I find that term a little confusing.  When I think of "disengage", in military terms it simply means that you're no longer in dynamic contact with the opposing force.  It is a very different term than "retreat".

If you've already captured their supplies and the remainder of the opfor is retreating, to "disengage" means you've stopped chasing them (i.e., the dictionary definition, "to withdraw (forces) from close action") is the commonly-accepted use of the term in a tactical context). 

It doesn't mean you've lost the battle.  To disengage in that context is simply to let the remaining forces leave.  It's basically just a term used to describe who now has the initiative. 

The term there, if it's meant to convey not only losing the initiative but giving up the "ground", i.e., the current loot pile, would be "Retreat". 

Sorry if that's overly anal, but "disengage" and "retreat" are two different terms with very different meanings, in military-speak :)
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23987
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #106 on: September 18, 2013, 09:47:27 AM »

About the loop - yes, that IS a different issue, and that's fixed in 0.6.1a.

About disengage... hmm. Looking it up, a definition is "to break off action with (an enemy)." That certainly sounds like a euphemism for retreat to me. But that's neither here nor there; added some text to the tooltip to make it clear that this option gives up the opportunity for salvage.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #107 on: September 18, 2013, 09:59:07 AM »

Apologies for being anal about it... here's the breakdown between those terms, if you're bored.

Spoiler
In the military, "retreat" and "disengagement" have two different meanings.  There's no euphemism involved- they're different things.

Retreat is a major tactical decision, and involves the placement of forces.  You're moving back to the start line or to a position to the rear of the start line.  You still have retained the initiative, but you're putting distance between you and the enemy, for tactical purposes.  Retreat doesn't mean defeat, in military terms; you may retreat, reposition, and, with the initiative, counter-attack on a flank, for example. 

But it's a movement of forces away from the objective in the direction of the start-line, which is why it has the connotation that a tactical defeat has been sustained.  But you can retreat in order to win a battle; that happens all the time IRL.  Forces engage, push towards the objective, then retreat to lure the enemy to prepared positions where attrition ratios are favorable.

Disengagement may or may not involve motion; it simply means that your forces are no longer in dynamic contact with the opfor (i.e., you're not shooting at them and vice-versa).
[close]

Anyhow, like I said, that's probably being massively anal about it.  Sorry, I've spent too much time with that stuff in other contexts :)  If there's a tooltip that tells us that's the result and the loop issue is fixed, that's great :)
« Last Edit: September 18, 2013, 10:02:41 AM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23987
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #108 on: September 18, 2013, 10:02:13 AM »

Based on that explanation (thanks, btw!) it sounds like neither is actually 100% correct for the situation :)
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #109 on: September 18, 2013, 10:32:44 AM »

On a lore level, if a Hound's captain *knows* that an Onslaught can't fire back, that's quite different that a normal battle. I'd imagine the Onslaught has to try to get away to preclude all sorts of fancy targeting options the Hound might get otherwise.


Also, a stock Hound (Assault Chaingun + Light MG) actually has considerably more than enough ammo to take out an Onslaught, provided it all goes into roughly the same spot in roughly the right order.

Edit: the latter is really a side point; I don't think getting into trying to calculate that out is a good idea. For one, energy weapons. For two, confusion. As is, if someone wants a fight and you're not ready for one, you lose - clean and simple. Whether they have enough firepower to take a bite out of you comes into play in the escape scenario.

Well on a lore level, putting all that firepower into a single spot wouldn't destroy the Onslaught, merely drill a neat little hole the size of a bullet through it. ;)

Yeah, you're right that it's probably better not to try to calculate that sort of thing. But c'mon, I know this is an edge case, but there has to be some way to handle it better than it currently is being handled. I refuse to accept that obliterating an entire armada worth of cruisers and destroyers and being left with a non-CR Onslaught against a CR Hound at the end of it is a defeat. It is according to the cold hard logic of the rules but it just doesn't feel right. Perhaps there could be some sort of morale system that would make the remaining ships flee? That Hound's captain just witnessed the entire rest of his force evaporate in the face of that battleship, he likely shat himself so hard that he rocketed out of his captain's chair and bonked his head on the ceiling.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23987
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #110 on: September 18, 2013, 11:25:54 AM »

But c'mon, I know this is an edge case, but there has to be some way to handle it better than it currently is being handled. I refuse to accept that obliterating an entire armada worth of cruisers and destroyers and being left with a non-CR Onslaught against a CR Hound at the end of it is a defeat. It is according to the cold hard logic of the rules but it just doesn't feel right. Perhaps there could be some sort of morale system that would make the remaining ships flee? That Hound's captain just witnessed the entire rest of his force evaporate in the face of that battleship, he likely shat himself so hard that he rocketed out of his captain's chair and bonked his head on the ceiling.

The new behavior approximates that, in a way. But regardless of how you go about it, winning vs losing a battle is a binary condition, so there's always going to be a hard boundary there. Sometimes, you're just going to suffer a very close defeat, and it's going to sting, as close defeats do. It'll probably sting less if the reasons are crystal clear - at least you can learn from it and move on.
Logged

Lopunny Zen

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #111 on: September 18, 2013, 03:41:35 PM »

Dude..the Combat readiness is a failure in so many levels...it drains SO FAST im not kidding when i say that in one battle i have to take a break...i mean wtf...in the game days pass by so how are they not rested...i can do WAY more then these guys in a day then they ever can...and in the middle of the battle the damn crew losses CR and the ship malfuctions...really...am i with a bunch of teeneagers...and dont say maintaining a ship is hard work or stressful because every other sci fi or game has spaceships and they are managed and maintained very well...and they dont have the energy span of a Mc Donalds regular.....this is by far the dumbest idea ive ever had to deal with...it sounds good on paper...but this concept is so fuckin broken that i flat out for the first time for a game that was a gold mine stopped playing it and rage quit...i hired pilots not high school drop outs...didnt you test this feature...and did you really think this would work out...im so mad right now...now i cant play this game because its unplayable...almost to the point of collapse....and i have to wait till next upate for the fix...just..no...try again sir
Logged

Silver Silence

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #112 on: September 18, 2013, 04:11:16 PM »

Dude..the Combat readiness is a failure in so many levels...it drains SO FAST im not kidding when i say that in one battle i have to take a break...i mean wtf...in the game days pass by so how are they not rested...i can do WAY more then these guys in a day then they ever can...and in the middle of the battle the damn crew losses CR and the ship malfuctions...really...am i with a bunch of teeneagers...and dont say maintaining a ship is hard work or stressful because every other sci fi or game has spaceships and they are managed and maintained very well...and they dont have the energy span of a Mc Donalds regular.....this is by far the dumbest idea ive ever had to deal with...it sounds good on paper...but this concept is so fuckin broken that i flat out for the first time for a game that was a gold mine stopped playing it and rage quit...i hired pilots not high school drop outs...didnt you test this feature...and did you really think this would work out...im so mad right now...now i cant play this game because its unplayable...almost to the point of collapse....and i have to wait till next upate for the fix...just..no...try again sir

You could really do with some punctuation in there. Along with a spellcheck. Also, Lopunny, is there ever a time when you don't have something to complain about?
Here. This seems like something you need. Replace your ship_data in the core files with this. All ships will cost 1 supply per day to run and will use but a mere 1CR to field.


No, I will say that I'm pretty sure that maintaining a starship, the failure of which could lead to your death, is no easy feat for the crew. You know, I don't know of another recent sci-fi game that asks you to maintain your ships beyond "spend X credits to repair". Also, can I point you to the lore? You may in fact be dealing with high school drop outs. The technology is lost upon most people. They don't know the science behind stuff anymore. They know little more than the fact that taking this part out of that machine causes that machine to break.
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #113 on: September 18, 2013, 04:41:32 PM »

Also, can I point you to the lore? You may in fact be dealing with high school drop outs. The technology is lost upon most people. They don't know the science behind stuff anymore. They know little more than the fact that taking this part out of that machine causes that machine to break.

Isn't that the case even with technology we have today? What percentage of users knows what actually goes on inside a CPU? Or hell, an internal combustion engine?
Logged

Lopunny Zen

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #114 on: September 18, 2013, 05:45:29 PM »

I do...and people...stop telling me to edit the damn variables....that solves the problem for me...not the game in whole...so no i wont...i will speak my mind and yes i complain alot..when im nice im ignored
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #115 on: September 18, 2013, 06:00:00 PM »

thing is, there is no problem with the game as a whole... Not to most people, and certainly not to alex.

No one can love everything about the game, heck I have a lot of complaints on my own, but I brought them up to suggestion, alex and the community in general said not really into that, so I took the matter into my own hands

Many people play personal mods (afaik). I think ships are too floaty for their strength, battles are too short, and fighters are a little too weak for front line combatants. Therefore, in my mod, ships have half their turn rate and turn acceleration, all weapons have double ammo, half damage and half flux cost; and fighters get double speed across the board so they serve another role than brawling. I also have every single ship losing CR over time cuz I think the current CR is way too forgiving :o

That's the way I'm playing SF, and that's probably the only way I'll ever play SF, and there's nothing wrong with that. I think it's highly unlikely that alex will change everything you asked.
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

ciago92

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #116 on: September 18, 2013, 09:15:48 PM »

thing is, there is no problem with the game as a whole... Not to most people, and certainly not to alex.

No one can love everything about the game, heck I have a lot of complaints on my own, but I brought them up to suggestion, alex and the community in general said not really into that, so I took the matter into my own hands

Many people play personal mods (afaik). I think ships are too floaty for their strength, battles are too short, and fighters are a little too weak for front line combatants. Therefore, in my mod, ships have half their turn rate and turn acceleration, all weapons have double ammo, half damage and half flux cost; and fighters get double speed across the board so they serve another role than brawling. I also have every single ship losing CR over time cuz I think the current CR is way too forgiving :o

That's the way I'm playing SF, and that's probably the only way I'll ever play SF, and there's nothing wrong with that. I think it's highly unlikely that alex will change everything you asked.

......I don't suppose you'd be willing to upload that as a mod? That actually sounds pretty fun
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4661
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #117 on: September 18, 2013, 09:25:05 PM »

I do...and people...stop telling me to edit the damn variables....that solves the problem for me...not the game in whole...so no i wont...i will speak my mind and yes i complain alot..when im nice im ignored
Do I know you from the Zero-K forums?

Maybe you're ignored when you're nice, but the way you're going about it right now the only difference will be/is that you get insulted before you get ignored.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #118 on: September 18, 2013, 09:33:19 PM »

......I don't suppose you'd be willing to upload that as a mod? That actually sounds pretty fun


I live to serve ;D

http://www.mediafire.com/download/68alm3gqjy8eak4/gunny-overhaul.rar

there's a few more changes than I listed though. Again this thing is never meant to be released, but have fun anyway :)
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Borgoid

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Readyness isn't fun..
« Reply #119 on: September 18, 2013, 09:38:20 PM »

I do...and people...stop telling me to edit the damn variables....that solves the problem for me...not the game in whole...so no i wont...i will speak my mind and yes i complain alot..when im nice im ignored

You're not responsible for the game as a whole, and thank goodness frankly.

If the vast majority quite like the CR mechanic -or at least have worked around it - and you don't then you have exactly three options.
1) Stop playing the game
2) Adjust the game to your liking
3) Whine and kick and scream that you don't like things being changed, achieving nothing and not enjoying yourself while simultaneously *** off other people
You are but one person and the weight of your opinion is directly correlated to that.


Maybe you're ignored when you're nice, but the way you're going about it right now the only difference will be/is that you get insulted before you get ignored.

Spot on :P
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 34