Laserbrain Studios Forum

Ascii Sector => Development Discussion and Suggestions => Topic started by: GLI on July 17, 2010, 03:26:43 PM

Title: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 17, 2010, 03:26:43 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9456#9456)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
I've made it so that fleets will ignore single hostile ships unless they attack them or are part of another fleet. Fleets will only attack other fleets (unless provoked). This means that you'll still be able to land at pirate bases, for example, as any pirate fleets won't attack you unless you attack them. The randomly generated pirate ships will still attack you, so it'll probably be pretty much as hard/easy as it is now.


So, it'll be possible to fly through hostile fleet and they will not shoot at my ship? Strange...
Maybe they should at least send some warning message (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBwNwoDVT8E) to "avoid" their fleet? In this situation player should "made big circle" around them (not through fleet). For slow ships like Drayman maybe player could stop and disable turrets AIs?

Player: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the South, to avoid a collision.

Confed: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the North, to avoid a collision.

Player: Negative. You will have to divert your course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.

Confed: This is the Captain of a Confed navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.

Player: Negative. I say again, You will have to divert YOUR course.

Confed: THIS IS THE HEAVY CARRIER TCS HAWAII! THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE CONFED ASCII SECTOR FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS, AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH, I SAY AGAIN, THAT IS 15 DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER-MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP.

Player: We are a lighthouse planetoid base. Your call.


 :eeeee:

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
When that fleet in the movie turns hostile on me, it also becomes pretty clear that the AI really needs improving. And friendly missiles shouldn't hit you (I think 5-6 AI ships are taken out by friendly missiles without me doing a thing!). Maybe friendly gunshots shouldn't hit either. That'd definitely make it easier for a group of ships to engage a single target, as they wouldn't have to worry about friendly fire.


First of all they need tactics! Right now it looks that everybody are trying to hit one ship (without any cooperation) regardless of friendly fire. Maybe "friendly fire" will be "corrected" but I propose to do more:
- divert them to groups of 4 ship/fighters,
-  one group is hunting/shooting and other is "foxhunting" [I can't find a word for a group of people, sometimes with dogs, making noise to scare and chase prey; "hunting with beaters"/"beating"/driving (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting#Hunting_methods)"?],
- when some ships will lost too many of its shields or even armor then should be changed by another group,
- capship should be "the hunter" for "beaters",
- fleet is a "tactical group" and shouldn't "disperse"(?) because of one opponent (it could be a trap for them); after some distance from capship fighters (or at least most of them) should move back.

Did I mentioned that NPCs are too aggressive (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6834#6834)? ;)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 17, 2010, 06:03:45 PM
Quote from: "GLI"
-  one group is hunting/shooting and other is "foxhunting" [I can't find a word for a group of people, sometimes with dogs, making noise to scare and chase prey; "hunting with beaters"/"beating"/driving"?],
"?],


Sounds like foxhunting to me.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Bugamn on July 17, 2010, 06:41:46 PM
Good one, GLI, I'd heard that before. But I wonder: is there a North in space?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 17, 2010, 06:45:48 PM
Turn to a heading of 280 degrees.

No YOU turn to a heading of 280 degrees.


Lol
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 17, 2010, 08:33:03 PM
degrees x or y?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 17, 2010, 09:09:51 PM
Z!!!!!
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on July 19, 2010, 11:00:23 AM
I think it makes sense the the fleet will ignore you, since they operate at a tactical level. It's not like in Rambo 3 where they send an entire army after you. Or Rambo 1 and 2 for that matter. Or any random action flick...

It would be cool if the fleets had different tactics. I remember reading about the tactics of ancient Greece (Sparta?) where the commander lined up his soldiers as:

Code: [Select]

   Enemy Line
-------------------

       
-----\      /------
      \----/
  Greek Soldiers


so when he moved north (up) the enemy would get trapped in the middle, and the flanks would fold around the enemy, thereby trapping them completely.  (I wonder if something as advanced as this is programmable?)
I cant remember the name of the commander or the name of the battle, but it's famous.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 19, 2010, 01:03:32 PM
Quote from: "Cthulhu"
I think it makes sense the the fleet will ignore you, since they operate at a tactical level.


Hmm... such fleet shouldn't chase hostile ships (when e.g. pirate is in radar range) but could fight when their "line"/formation will be crossed/approached.

Quote from: "Cthulhu"
It would be cool if the fleets had different tactics. I remember reading about the tactics of ancient Greece (Sparta?) where the commander lined up his soldiers as:

Code: [Select]

   Enemy Line
-------------------

       
-----\      /------
      \----/
  Greek Soldiers


so when he moved north (up) the enemy would get trapped in the middle, and the flanks would fold around the enemy, thereby trapping them completely.  (I wonder if something as advanced as this is programmable?)
I cant remember the name of the commander or the name of the battle, but it's famous.


Well, IMO navy tactics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of_battle) should fit better... but for modern fleet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_naval_tactics) with radars, rockets and fighters/bombers. P:AS is just a game so implementing "simple tactics" will be major improvement to present "bloodlust-kill'em-all".
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 19, 2010, 01:03:37 PM
But if you had turrets on all sides, that wouldn't make a difference.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 26, 2010, 05:46:51 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9774#9774)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
I followed the Confed fleet as it navigated to the jump point to Vortex Prime, jumped through (one ship at a time, but as soon as the first ship has jumped through, you can jump to the next system and the entire fleet will already be through)[...]


What will happen if I'll attack fleet in the middle of "jump" (some ships are there, some ships are here)?
- Destroyed ships will "respawn" on the other side of jump point (here: Vortex Prime)?
- Or maybe destroyed ships will be... well, (persistent/permanently) destroyed?
- "Firsts" ships will jump back to defend rest of the fleet?

IMHO Capships should jump after advance guard and before rearguard.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 26, 2010, 09:35:49 PM
I'm eager to have my own fleet to bring into the fray...

Could also open some very interesting fixer/merc guild missions:
"It will be profitable if X fleet in X system wins/loses"
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on July 27, 2010, 10:07:35 AM
Is the idea that we are to buy each ship ourselves from the ship dealer? So I can use them for trade as well, or in capital ship missions?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 27, 2010, 10:22:12 AM
Quote from: "Cthulhu"
Is the idea that we are to buy each ship ourselves from the ship dealer? So I can use them for trade as well, or in capital ship missions?


Buying ships for player's fleet? Maybe... but if I understand correct it'll be possible to capture ships (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9402#9402).
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on July 27, 2010, 10:44:15 AM
If we are to transfer people on to other ships we need to be their superior, so we need a military rang right? Like "Fleet Admiral" or something. :)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 27, 2010, 11:13:21 AM
Fleet admiral sounds too high and mighty for a small fleet... How about plain old captain and downwards...
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 27, 2010, 11:13:52 AM
Quote from: "Cthulhu"
If we are to transfer people on to other ships we need to be their superior, so we need a military rang right? Like "Fleet Admiral" or something. :)


I'm against any "military" ranks. I'm privateer and for my "operators" I'm The Boss. If they want "ranks" they should join "The Navy"... IMHO. :heh:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Bugamn on July 27, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
Custom ranks?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 27, 2010, 11:33:20 AM
I have to kinda agree with gli, as long as they are ready to die for "The Boss"" :eeeee:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on July 27, 2010, 11:52:37 AM
Yeah, I guess our own fleet will be a mishmash of various half rundown ships, and not a part of the Confed faction. More like Hunter. My rank would be "Boba fett". :)

I... I just want some cool ascii-art medals, that's all. (we discussed that last summer I think, as a quest reward)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 27, 2010, 07:24:38 PM
Traditionally a Privateer is a sailor and ship commissioned by a King or Queen to commit acts of piracy.

So in the case of our game I would agree no military ranks. However we are the captains of our starships, so our "crew" (operators, boarders, etc) could follow maritime tradition. (first mate, crewmen, etc)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 27, 2010, 08:50:41 PM
I know, but 'privateer' in the game is not exactly legal. (Just because i have a short crime record doesnt mean im legal!  :D )
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 27, 2010, 09:13:13 PM
Right, which is why I said traditionally.

I've kinda embraced a privateer-y play style, hence my criminal record is long  :heh: but half the charges are accidental (jumping/landing just as a confed/militia starts a contraband search, friendly fire and accidental rammings, and some carelessness like leaving corpses in the ship).

Unless once we can amass a fleet we become a private force (mercenaries) maybe you could be bestowed rank (commander, boss, captain, what have you).

EDIT
Thinking about it just now, it would be interesting if, in addition to possibly having a governor on bases (bases large enough to need them I mean), we could curry favor with said governing individual (bribery, or a kind of favor system) and procure a Letter of Marque so we could privateer.

Now the Letter of Marque could cost (maybe 20K-30K) and only cover certain types of privateering (smuggling certain types of contraband, or maybe a souped up "X is flying from Y to Z in X system destroy them and bring me cargo")
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 27, 2010, 09:37:09 PM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Traditionally a Privateer is a sailor and ship commissioned by a King or Queen to commit acts of piracy.

So in the case of our game I would agree no military ranks. However we are the captains of our starships, so our "crew" (operators, boarders, etc) could follow maritime tradition. (first mate, crewmen, etc)


Theoretically it is possible that space ships could have "sails". Hopefully P:AS hasn't such "things"...

If player will be able to hire crew (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4822#4822) then their ranks should be taken from present seafarer's professions and ranks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seafarer%27s_professions_and_ranks). With a little addition of "turret gunner"... :eeeee:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 27, 2010, 09:46:56 PM
Quote from: "Lexus"
I know, but 'privateer' in the game is not exactly legal. (Just because i have a short crime record doesnt mean im legal!  :D )


Privateering is legal when you'll attack only enemies of your country (i.e. Terran Confederation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terran_Confederation)). IRL it was banned in 1856 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer#History).

In P:AS I'm legal privateer because I'm hunting Pirates, Retros and Kilrathies only.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 27, 2010, 09:50:21 PM
Quote from: "GLI"
Theoretically it is possible that space ships could have "sails". Hopefully P:AS hasn't such "things"..

Lol well a starship might have solar sails (see: Star Wars Ep 2 or 3)
But its mainly a tradition to keep those old nautical terms (see: Star Trek).

A starship still has a fore, aft, port and starboard side. There is still a captain and a first mate (Number One from TNG)

I bet the Confed Navy still uses the traditional Navy rank structure.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on July 27, 2010, 09:53:39 PM
Quote from: "GLI"
In P:AS I'm legal privateer because I'm hunting Pirates, Retros and Kilrathies only.


"TECHNICALLY" :eeeee: you're self proclaimed Privateer. I kinda hope CK implements Base Governors and Letters of Marque I spoke of in another thread today. Then we could get some REAL Privateering on! Lol
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 27, 2010, 10:10:29 PM
Quote from: "Cthulhu"
If we are to transfer people on to other ships we need to be their superior, so we need a military rang right? Like "Fleet Admiral" or something. :)


There is already proper list of military ranks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terran_Confederation#Rank_structure) for P:AS. ;)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on July 28, 2010, 10:04:34 AM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Lol well a starship might have solar sails (see: Star Wars Ep 2 or 3)

Have you seen any suns/stars in asciisector?   :D
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 28, 2010, 10:14:31 AM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Quote from: "GLI"
Theoretically it is possible that space ships could have "sails". Hopefully P:AS hasn't such "things"..

Lol well a starship might have solar sails (see: Star Wars Ep 2 or 3)


I mean IRL "solar sails" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sail). Wait! Japanese already launched such ship - IKAROS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKAROS). :blink:

Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
A starship still has a fore, aft, port and starboard side.


Only in 2D game. Space is 3D (+ time as 4th dimension (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time#Spacetime)) so space ships has "top&bottom" too: The Enemy's Gate Is Down! (http://www.timp.net/osclistgallery/gateisdown.htm) :hehe:

Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
There is still a captain and a first mate (Number One from TNG)

I bet the Confed Navy still uses the traditional Navy rank structure.


Like I wrote in previous post it looks like they have... :heh:

Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Quote from: "GLI"
In P:AS I'm legal privateer because I'm hunting Pirates, Retros and Kilrathies only.


"TECHNICALLY" :eeeee: you're self proclaimed Privateer. I kinda hope CK implements Base Governors and Letters of Marque I spoke of in another thread today. Then we could get some REAL Privateering on! Lol


In year 2671 Terran Confederation isn't at war with any other "country" so Letter of Marque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque) shouldn't be signed by anybody.

It is allowed to hunt, board and loot criminals (Pirates), rebels (Kilrathi) and terrorists (Retros). Isn't it "privateering"?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 28, 2010, 09:53:23 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9456#9456)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
I've made it so that fleets will ignore single hostile ships unless they attack them or are part of another fleet. Fleets will only attack other fleets (unless provoked). This means that you'll still be able to land at pirate bases, for example, as any pirate fleets won't attack you unless you attack them. The randomly generated pirate ships will still attack you, so it'll probably be pretty much as hard/easy as it is now.


Another thing. Since P:AS v0.7.x ships will be "persistent". Will they have persistent "memory" too?

Let's assume that I'll attack particular fleet and even destroy some of its ships and then I will escape (without destroying whole fleet). Will "fleet" remember my previous doings? Will they attack me when we'll met another time?

Maybe fleet commander could be able to send (by hire) some hunter(-s) after us? I mean ship(-s) from their faction but "outside of fleet".
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 28, 2010, 09:56:01 PM
revenge of the kilrathi fleet...  :eeeee:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on July 28, 2010, 10:17:32 PM
Quote from: "Lexus"
revenge of the kilrathi fleet...  :eeeee:


"Kilrah strikes back"... no, wait! This planet was destroyed in 2669. Bad luck. ;)

Back to serious bussiness.
If a fleet will survive an attack (our or from other fleet) will it be able to "call for reinforcement"? I mean if capital ships will survive then fleets could be able to take new ships (fighters/bombers) to their ranks. Of course, it should take some time to fully restore fleet and could depend on how many system they control.

If fleet's capship will be destroyed then remain fighters/bombers could regroup with other fleet (from the same faction).
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Bugamn on July 29, 2010, 06:33:18 AM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Quote from: "GLI"
In P:AS I'm legal privateer because I'm hunting Pirates, Retros and Kilrathies only.


"TECHNICALLY" :eeeee: you're self proclaimed Privateer. I kinda hope CK implements Base Governors and Letters of Marque I spoke of in another thread today. Then we could get some REAL Privateering on! Lol

Are we making Christian Knuden's Privateer?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on July 29, 2010, 08:34:50 PM
The Privateer 2.0  :hehe:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: sudo on July 29, 2010, 09:43:09 PM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Quote from: "GLI"
In P:AS I'm legal privateer because I'm hunting Pirates, Retros and Kilrathies only.


"TECHNICALLY" :eeeee: you're self proclaimed Privateer. I kinda hope CK implements Base Governors and Letters of Marque I spoke of in another thread today. Then we could get some REAL Privateering on! Lol


I am taking over the sector so I am my own privateer!   8)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 11, 2010, 09:29:15 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10125#10125)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
Fleets are made up of a hierarchy of ships, with the first ship not escorting anybody, but carrying out the fleet's order, and then every other ship in the fleet escorting/following either the first ship or one of the other escorting ships. The problem was that if one of the leading ships (a ship that has escortees) was destroyed, the escorting ships would no longer follow the fleet's order as their "link" to the first ship was destroyed. So I had to make it so that another ship would take the place of the destroyed ship and give the escorting ships a new ship to follow.


I'm thinking how to bite hostile fleet... and to protect MY future fleet.

A -> flag ship
B+B+B+B -> "close" escort of flag ship (Alfa wing)
C -> first capital ship from escort of A
D+D+D+D+F+F+F+F -> "close" escort of first capital ship (Beta and Delta wings)
G -> second capital ship from escort of A
H+H+H+H+I+I+I+I -> "close" escort of second capital ship (Gamma and Epsilon wings)

This is "Fleet Task Group" (FTG). OK, fleet will not attack if not provoked by player but they should have some tactics not just "blood-lust/kill'em-all" like right now when attacked.

What will happen right now if any ship will be attacked by player? Everybody will attack him/her. One lone ship against whole fleet will have some big problem to destroy them all. Should all ships from the fleet break formation and attack one opponent? Slower capital ship will be left behind. What if it will be part of some ambush (e.g. player's mission from fixer)? If/when escort will be in hunt for that one opponent (player's character) then other fleet (or bunch of mercenaries) could make "quick approach" and destroy slower capital ships.

I wonder how could they react IF they will be assigned to "wings" (groups from OP (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9457#9457))? E.g. 8 ships is 1 squadron which has two wings (Alfa, Beta). If attacked by small force (like player's single ship) only one wing should attack hostile ship (with optional medium range pursuit) and second wing should only defend in close range (fire to hostile if escortee will be hit but without chase).

What if ship from "F" wing will be attacked by player? Ships from this wing should attack such hostile but "C" with "D" escort wing are flying their way... until "F" will have some problem with elimination of a threat (to much time or some ships will be destroyed). Then sub-fleet ("C" + "D" + rest of "F") should together attack dangerous opponent. I think that sometimes (when player has capital ship like Pegasus or Nexus) whole sub-fleet could react a little faster (for bigger threat).

While sub-fleet C-D-F will be engaged in combat then A-B and G-H-I could fly slower, wait for sub-fleet or even stay close (more ships in small area means e.g. difficult maneuvers for attacker). In case when sub-fleet will be in danger (one wing destroyed +1) then another sub-fleet (G-H-I) could help. Well, they could react faster launching missiles from long range or even torpedoes. Otherwise it could look like "wolf ate sheep one by one while shepherd's dog was asleep"...
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 12, 2010, 01:12:42 PM
Another idea for tactics.

If fleet will be attacked by smaller forces (e.g. player) then FTG could try to surround them:

Code: [Select]


          B
        /   \
      /   P   \
    A - - - - - C



A -> main fleet's capship
B, C -> sub-fleet's capships
P -> attacker (e.g. player)

Like I suggested in previous post when one ship from fleet will be attacked then they should act properly (tactics: wing -> squadron/sub-fleet -> two sub-fleets -> fleet). If one sub-fleet will be engaged in combat other two (rest of FTG) could react properly to support fighting party. In above diagram I tried to show what I mean by "surround enemy":
1) P is attacking sub-fleet B,
2) other two sub-fleets are trying to get closer from both sides to make some kind of triangle,
3) when close A+C are trying to get even closer to limit P's movement,
4) when A+C will be close enough then they could use missiles/torpedoes or even send one or two wings of fighters/bombers.
It'll be hard to break out from such trap...

OK, but what to do if attackers are equal (e.g. hostile fleet)? I propose:
1) some kind of "flanking maneuver" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanking_maneuver),


Code: [Select]

1st stage

        E-N-M

           ^
           |

        B-A-C


2nd stage

        E-N-M

           ^
           |
   
    B - - - - - C
      \       /
        \   /
          A

3rd stage
   
    B   E-N-M   C
      \        /
          A



2) break enemy line to split them (like during Battle of Trafalgar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Trafalgar#Battle))

Code: [Select]

1st stage

         E-N-M

           ^
           |

        B-A-C

2nd stage

         E-N-M
         
          ^
          |
          A
        /  \
      B - - C

3rd stage

        A
     B E  N M
        C

4th stage like for "flanking maneuver"

        A
      B  N M
        C



But what to do if opponent will be stronger (e.g. two joined fleets)? Hmm, maybe some "evasive maneuvers"? Retreat to vicinity of asteroid field for some "tactics advantage"? Call for back-up (one or two additional wings)?

Quote from: "Cthulhu"

It would be cool if the fleets had different tactics. I remember reading about the tactics of ancient Greece (Sparta?) where the commander lined up his soldiers as:

Code: [Select]

   Enemy Line
-------------------
       
-----\      /------
      \----/
  Greek Soldiers


so when he moved north (up) the enemy would get trapped in the middle, and the flanks would fold around the enemy, thereby trapping them completely.  (I wonder if something as advanced as this is programmable?)
I cant remember the name of the commander or the name of the battle, but it's famous.


I don't remember it too but I think it could be Scipio Africanus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scipio_Africanus) (Roman). I found some nice site about Roman Empire (http://www.roman-empire.net/). There are descriptions of many Roman battles with some nice pictures of "tactics" (e.g. Battle of Ilipa (http://www.roman-empire.net/army/ilipa.html)).

EDIT: Many years ago I played Centurion: Defender of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion:_Defender_of_Rome) (at Abandonia (http://www.abandonia.com/en/games/23/Centurion+-+Defender+of+Rome.html)). There was some tactics to use but back then I didn't know what is it for... :D
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Cthulhu on August 12, 2010, 01:26:52 PM
Quote from: "GLI"
Code: [Select]
         B
        /   \
      /   P   \
    A - - - - - C

Looks like there could be some serious friendly blue-on-blue fire there, unless the AI get updated, or the base of the triangle is relatively large.

Anyways, looks like some serious coding needs to be done to implement this, I guess.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 12, 2010, 01:31:04 PM
Quote from: "Cthulhu"
Quote from: "GLI"
Code: [Select]
         B
        /   \
      /   P   \
    A - - - - - C

Looks like there could be some serious friendly blue-on-blue fire there, unless the AI get updated, or the base of the triangle is relatively large.

Anyways, looks like some serious coding needs to be done to implement this, I guess.


If/When "Targeting Computers" (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9741#9741) will be available then "friendly fire" shouldn't be a problem. I assume that Fleets will have "maxed" ships (e.g. fighters like these from bounty missions).
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 13, 2010, 01:59:43 PM
Quote

A -> flag ship
B+B+B+B -> "close" escort of flag ship (Alfa wing)
C -> first capital ship from escort of A
D+D+D+D+F+F+F+F -> "close" escort of first capital ship (Beta and Delta wings)
G -> second capital ship from escort of A
H+H+H+H+I+I+I+I -> "close" escort of second capital ship (Gamma and Epsilon wings)


I wonder how could look "perfect" Confed fleet. Let's imagine that:

A => Paradigm
B => Broadsword
C => Nexus
D => Broadsword
F => Gladius
E => ... I forgot about "E", yhyhy!
G => Pegasus
H => Gladius
I => Stiletto

A-B-C are core of a fleet (commands usually and attacks larger capital ships)
C-D-F are defenders of a fleet (don't chase usually but launch a lot of missiles/torpedoes)
G-H-I are attackers of a fleet (first to attack and to chase smaller/faster prey)

I wonder how it will look when Confed and Pirate/Retro fleet will cross their paths. Pirates/Retros without destroyer(-s) and heavy bombers doesn't have much chance to survive open battle. They need some "sabotage action" (like mission from fixer).

Kilrathi could have only one fleet that can be match to Confed's... but then again they don't have other capships than Kamekh. Kilrathi fleet with more than one Kamekh will be over powered.

Well, future factions needs new ("medium") capital ships (after "Wing Commander: Privateer" IP will be removed).
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on August 13, 2010, 08:55:00 PM
AhHhh! My brain is melting from all this strategy!  :eeeee:  :crazy:  :crazy:  :eeeee:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on August 13, 2010, 11:47:37 PM
Yikes... Put a bunch of thought into this haven't you GLI?

Maybe something to keep handy for when we have fleets of our own...
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 14, 2010, 10:15:35 AM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Yikes... Put a bunch of thought into this haven't you GLI?


... and it's just few ideas for fleets AI behavior only. I'm afraid that the game needs better "flight model AI" (e.g. for priority of flight (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8947#8947)).

Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Maybe something to keep handy for when we have fleets of our own...


I don't know what CK want to implement but IMHO there are two solutions:
1) build fleets (more than one!) and "unleash" them to patrol/protect/fight through systems (using "general" fleets AI),
2) build fleet, be "commander" and lead them in battle.
But I think that from some point of the game player could use both methods.

For commanding fleet we need new system of "orders". Those from "wingmen" isn't enough. Example of orders:
- some "old" like for wingman (e.g. attack/(dis-)engage, protect/cover),
- patrol nav-points (select points in one system),
- patrol systems (select systems and eventually nav-point in there),
- "go to / wait here" (with selection of nav-point),
- battle tactics (sub-menu for tactics options).

I propose to add (another (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1072)) new skill: "Fleet Commander" (available when fleets will be... well, available). It could increase while commanding a fleet and could give:
- new commands for "battle tactics sub-menu" (more experienced player's character means additional "advanced" maneuvers; like in "Centurion: Defender of Rome" game),
- better cooperation of ships in fleet (whatever it means...),
- possibility of "hyperspace" communication (more experienced player's character means longer range for "transsector" communication with our fleet; like in "Dune" game but this time without narcotics/melange).

Well, actually this "skill" could increase when:
- after given order fleet successfully accomplished mission (e.g. patrol); slower,
- when personally commanding during e.g. patrol; a little faster ,
- when personally commanding during battle (especially with other fleet); faster.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 14, 2010, 01:34:23 PM
Quote
I propose to add (another (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1072)) new skill: "Fleet Commander" (available when fleets will be... well, available). It could increase while commanding a fleet and could give:
- [...]
- better cooperation of ships in fleet (whatever it means...),
- [...]


I have some idea for this. When I played "Battle Bugs" (http://www.abandonia.com/en/games/43/Battle+Bugs.html) game then I saw "a commander". Such "commanding unit" was able to gave +1 to all stats of friendly units (from BB's manual: Commander - A commander gives attack and defense bonuses to friendly bugs within his command radius). Of course, it worked for units in some specific range.

Maybe "Fleet Commander" skill could work like this? I mean more experienced player's character could give better bonus IF will personally command his/her fleet.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: VincentFirePony on August 15, 2010, 02:50:11 AM
Quote from: "GLI"
Maybe "Fleet Commander" skill could work like this? I mean more experienced player's character could give better bonus IF will personally command his/her fleet.


Another open source game I have and play occasionally  Warzone 2100 (http://warzone2100.net/) has a commander unit that gives bonuses to the units it commands.

I would say you get the commander skill once you get your second ship and when you gain experience in the commander skill you can add more ships to your fleet (otherwise the extra ships might go rogue)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 15, 2010, 04:30:30 PM
Quote from: "VincentFirePony"
Quote from: "GLI"
Maybe "Fleet Commander" skill could work like this? I mean more experienced player's character could give better bonus IF will personally command his/her fleet.


I would say you get the commander skill once you get your second ship and when you gain experience in the commander skill you can add more ships to your fleet (otherwise the extra ships might go rogue)


I think that in this way "space-sim" will get more RPG's features than right now (and it could work because many modern games isn't "pure genre"). I mean if Charisma for above idea will be added then why not other "special" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECIAL_%28role-playing_system%29) attributes.

I wonder why some other NPC should obey our orders IF not well payed (like regular wingman)? Without NPCs we can't manage more then on ship let alone fleet(-s).

If I understand correct player will be able to "have" fleet after some point of main plot (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=913#913):
Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
0.9
First half of the primary plot: getting involved in shady business that threatens the entire sector, while earning enough credits to finally buy your own base.
Second half of the primary plot: expanding your base, building your own fleet and taking control of the entire sector.


Well, it was over two years ago and some things has changed (e.g. fleets for 0.7 version) but...

Right now player can't transfer "free" NPCs between ships. For some future version of the game it seams that we'll be able to capture disabled ships. Great! But why NPCs should obey our orders? I mean when they'll get "new" ship they could be able to flee/run away. Few ideas:
- player is "savior" for them (e.g. small group of pilots rescued e.g. from hands of pirates),
- player hired some "privateers" without ships (e.g. scooped ejected pilots),
- ex-military and/or ex-militia will(?) "join player",
- ex-pirates (for "villain player") will(?) "join player",
- ... and so on.

Amount of NPCs that player will be able to "hire" could depends on "Fleet Commander" skill or "Charisma" attribute... or just money.

That way or another NPCs must earn money to live so it means that player must pay them (maybe significantly less than for wingmen but still should pay them). How player will be able to do this? Missions? Tribute? Taxes?!
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 22, 2010, 12:42:12 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10663#10663)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
Next, I'll probably start work on the abstraction algorithms of fleet battles in systems the player isn't present in.


Who (which fleet) should win a battle? This with more ships and/or fire power? That with better tactics?

IMHO it should depends on few elements:
1) amount of ships - e.g. 20 Talons with missiles can take out 5 Broadswords,
2) ships' classes - e.g. 10 Talons against 10 Dralthies can't stand long,
3) time reaction - who first will notice hostile fleet then first will "deploy" proper formation/tactics and will take advantage (e.g. near jump point),
4) more experienced fleet could be able to use more/better tactics variants (IMO it's better to replenish "Veteran" unit than make whole new one full of rookies; something like in "Panzer General" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_General) game),
5) luck - well, even greatest commanders had bad day and then game could "calculate" some chance/advantage (e.g. if one of equal fleets will have luck then will win; if weaker fleet will have luck then will make bigger loses/damage for hostile fleet... regardless of their defeat).

Location of battle should be important too:
- Pirates/Kilrathies could have some advantage while fighting near or inside of asteroid field,
- fleet in "home system" could have some little advantage because of reinforcements and/or "free patrols" (especially near planets and Naval Bases... or Pirate Bases).

BTW Should fleets fight to death/destruction of a last ship or maybe they could "retreat" if 30-50% of their ships will be destroyed? Shall winning fleet chase/pursue them?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 23, 2010, 01:16:32 PM
Quote
Should fleets fight to death/destruction of a last ship or maybe they could "retreat" if 30-50% of their ships will be destroyed? Shall winning fleet chase/pursue them?


Ha! It's a good idea for another type of hunter's missions: Remnants of hostile fleet fled to X system. Join mercs and make sure that fleet will not make problems anymore...

Isn't it the same like for "destroy capital"? Well, not exactly. There could be some variants:
1) like for "DC" - one capship and some fighters/bombers,
2) fighters/bombers only,
3) above + hostile ships have some damage,
4) above + time limit after which reinforcement will come (e.g. 10 hours for mission accomplishment but 5 only before reinforcement will come).
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 26, 2010, 03:03:52 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1398)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
- Factions can take control of systems by having a fleet in that system (and no other faction has a fleet there).

- Randomly generated ships in a system is partly based on the faction controlling it.

[cut]

- Information about faction control of systems in the player's Quine, as well as news updates when fleets clash and systems change hands.


I wonder what will happen if/when player destroy hostile fleet? I mean before he/she will be able to "own" fleet:
- system will be "ownerless", neutral or previous owner will claim for it?
- how will look randomly generating of faction ships?
- what will be displayed at Quine's nav-map?
- will be some news/rumor that "The Player" defeated (alone) whole fleet?

... or maybe it'll be impossible to beat alone whole fleet? :pinch:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Christian Knudsen on August 26, 2010, 03:33:57 PM
There'll be news about the fleet being destroyed, but the system won't change control as that'll require another fleet from another faction being present in it.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on August 26, 2010, 07:56:27 PM
Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
There'll be news about the fleet being destroyed, but the system won't change control as that'll require another fleet from another faction being present in it.


When systems will be controlled by fleets then who will control system without fleet? Maybe such system (where player defeated hostile fleet) could gain status "neutral" after some amount of time (if other fleet didn't come there)?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 04, 2010, 11:20:49 AM
FLIGHT IN FORMATION

[Previously on Random stuff that came up (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=11230#11230)]

Quote
For "convoy missions" it'll be good to have "Join formation" ("follow my target") command/function like in "Freelancer" game. It could prevent "proximity alert" or even collisions during such missions.


Well, "Join formation" could work for fleets too. I mean old command "form on my wing" for Wingman could be not enough when player will be able to posses own fleet (few or even several ships). It could be something like: "Form at my formation" (for player's character's battle group).

WRECKS
I proposed before to make "wreck-ships" (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9498&highlight=wreck#9498). It cloud be not only good for boarding and looting but for fleet tactics too. Just imagine that wreck of destroyed capital ship (especially big one like Kamekh) could interfere with ships movement. It could be use to gain some "tactical advantage" for attack... or defense.

You know, gun/cannon shot and missile/torpedoes could be blocked by ship wrecks. (Sub-)Fleets could be forced to "break formations" and so on...
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Iltsuger on September 04, 2010, 12:31:22 PM
I talked about something similar with derelict ships, although my idea was more finding them and extracting loot or black boxes.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on September 04, 2010, 11:40:33 PM
I like derilict ships... I was going to do that at first for a quest, but 'DontMove' wasnt yet implemented... This would add a level of randomness, find a damaged ship, but you dont know whats in it..
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: sudo on September 05, 2010, 01:46:40 AM
If you boarded a destroyed ship then you would probably need to buy some oxygen tanks to take along.
Title: Derelicts, et al
Post by: Iltsuger on September 05, 2010, 11:25:31 AM
Oxygen tanks were also part of my http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=724&highlight=derelicts proposal. I wanted to have a suit puncture rating, so if you got shot you might slowly leak air, as part of another stat sort of thing. You get back inside your ship you're fine, but you'll maybe need a repair kit to make the suit usable again.

That means enemies would be more vulnerable to fire that would puncture them, while grenades would might be useless, depending upon what sort of alternate rules we set up to add a bit of flavor to it.  Bullets might still fire because they might be made to function in space, with a self-sealed propellant, but grenades are cheap and plentiful, but they're also made for oxygen environments.

Ton of other ideas in that post, as well, although some of it's out of date now.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Lexus on September 06, 2010, 01:34:45 AM
Yes.... bullet holes is a good idea.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: xqz on September 06, 2010, 02:16:52 AM
Laser resistant spacesuits are the first thing I thought of for some reason. Maybe three varieties, standard, laser-resistant, and bullet-resistant.
Speaking of lasers and bullets, does anybody know whether Kilrathi weapons are energy or projectile weapons? I've only boarded a single Kilrathi ship and I don't think I had the sound on for it, so I don't have anything to go off of there.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Iltsuger on September 06, 2010, 06:41:01 AM
I'm pretty sure, at least from the old games, that they're old-style energy weapons that fire a pulse that pretty much disintegrates what they hit. The only reason I think I know this is because I remember a cutscene in one of the old games where a Kilrathi ground trooper blasts somebody.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: toupz on September 06, 2010, 07:23:25 AM
Ahah kilrathi technology rocks
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 06, 2010, 11:13:57 AM
Space suits like some "Combat Armors" in e.g. Mass Effect game. IMO right now the game has vests and helmets like for "planetary ground fight" only.

I'm against "making holes" in armor while in "vacuum". Something like this could just "kill" gameplay. Why? Because "even small leak can decompress whole ship"... let alone "small" body armor suit when one shot means immediately death of player's character.

The same for using heavy rifles and grenades inside of space ship and docking tube. Every "way out shot" or shrapnel means a hole in ship's hull... and sudden decompression or even destruction of a ship.

In case of exploding grenade we have "drastically increased pressure" too what means "extreme stress" for nearby ship's constructions (e.g. docking tube, air lock doors).

For saving gameplay I'm decided to "sacrifice realism"... in this case.  :pinch:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Iltsuger on September 06, 2010, 05:46:29 PM
You really like to use quotes :)

I'm not sure where you get the idea that a small hole will decompress a whole ship, or that a tiny hole in a space suit will kill someone instantly. It doesn't work that way in real life, if that's what you mean, especially with small holes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi1_1l7M8FA

You could also have zero-difference thermal suits, which are basically weird but plausible alternatives to the puffy suits we're used to seeing.  If you get shot in one of those, it's cold, but you don't lose any pressure on the inside because there's none.  All the pressure that's on you comes from the constriction of the suit itself.

As far as science fiction fantasy land, which is what this is, you could say that the suits have some degree of self-sealing, but eventually heat and air will leak out, so you get an increased loss of oxygen.  I think it would be a fun complication, but I like the kinds of movies that show this sort of thing.

As for grenades, say they need oxygen to detonate, that they're not made for use in a vacuum.  We already have boarding tubes that are unusually sturdy.

Think about it in terms of gameplay.  I think that's an important framework to use.  Will this add an extra bit of challenge, cool deaths for the enemy, different tactics, reliance on different weapons...  that sort of thing.  We can always come up with science fiction excuses later, while we're in the middle of having fun.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 06, 2010, 11:12:06 PM
Quote from: "Iltsuger"
You really like to use quotes :)


It's because my poor English. IMO it looks better than using phrases "so called" or "if I say so". Some terms are more metaphors than actual meaning of typed words... :$

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
I'm not sure where you get the idea that a small hole will decompress a whole ship, or that a tiny hole in a space suit will kill someone instantly. It doesn't work that way in real life, if that's what you mean, especially with small holes.


That text is a paraphrase (or even direct citation; I don't remember) from one of loading screens of "Vegastrike" (http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/) game. :heh:

"Laser Pistol" that is able to  make serious wounds or even to kill human makes holes big enough to emptying space suit in very short time. Bullets makes even bigger holes (or two holes: inlet and outlet).

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi1_1l7M8FA


If we're talking/writing about "MythBusters" I'm reminding that it's a SHOW. Yes, they're using science but their "methodology" is... debatable. E.g. in this particular episode they "forgot" to tell what forces are affecting a hull of FLYING plane (and its windows!). They "forgot" to tell about underpressure that affects (works on?) hull and widows(!) in flying plane. Such forces could destroy "glass" of window and then rest of the plane.

Did you heard about de Havilland Comet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Comet) world's first commercial jet airliner? It had some nasty crashes due to metal fatigue. Do you know i.a. where (which part of plane)? Windows! First planes had "square" windows. Tensions in corners of windows caused faster than planned metal fatigue... and planes where shred to parts. Since that incidents passengers jet planes have windows with "rounded corners".

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
You could also have zero-difference thermal suits, which are basically weird but plausible alternatives to the puffy suits we're used to seeing.  If you get shot in one of those, it's cold, but you don't lose any pressure on the inside because there's none.  All the pressure that's on you comes from the constriction of the suit itself.


In open space without proper pressure in suite thermal "add-ons" will not keep humans life for long. Human body is very sensitive for changes of pressure and we're talking about "absolutely zero" pressure.

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
As far as science fiction fantasy land, which is what this is, you could say that the suits have some degree of self-sealing, but eventually heat and air will leak out, so you get an increased loss of oxygen.  I think it would be a fun complication, but I like the kinds of movies that show this sort of thing.


Yeah, sometimes we need "a big hook to hang disbelief". For games we're assuming that Combat Armors can take some hits before destruction (even in vacuum space).

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
As for grenades, say they need oxygen to detonate, that they're not made for use in a vacuum.  We already have boarding tubes that are unusually sturdy.


Present regular grenades can detonated under water. IMHO it means that they don't need oxygen to detonate (see: combustion of high energy materials (http://scholar.google.pl/scholar?q=combustion+of+high+energy+materials&hl=pl&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart)). BTW VincentFirePony played with it, right?

Oh! One more thing. In open space with temperature near 0 K present grenades could not work... because of temperature. :hehe:

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
Think about it in terms of gameplay.  I think that's an important framework to use.  Will this add an extra bit of challenge, cool deaths for the enemy, different tactics, reliance on different weapons...  that sort of thing.  We can always come up with science fiction excuses later, while we're in the middle of having fun.


Yes, I'm thinking about gameplay. Realism too but when some solutions/ideas are "radical" or "ridiculous" (IMHO!) it's better to sacrifice it.

Please don't stop writing ideas! Maybe some will be used by CK or at least other users could "invent" something similar.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Iltsuger on September 07, 2010, 09:31:35 AM
I get the feeling a lot of the stuff I mention will just go under the bridge. I don't know how to organize it properly so that it'll be seen. It makes for interesting discussions, though.

It's funny, there's this tendency for people to refer to earlier conversations, although it's hard to find the links. This game has an under-utilized wiki page, but there's enough density in the forums to fill a wiki, if only the forums were as easily navigable.

I've actually reached a point now where I've maxed out both guilds, and switching to a Drayman just means slower mission resolution for a lot more money (assuming I don't ram into anyone). I've actually reached The End until someone makes a new quest, or until version 7.  Running errands for fixers doesn't appeal to me, although I haven't maxed them out yet.  I don't do assassination missions for them, though, so other than rescues there's not much that I want to do for them.

For the null-pressure suit, wordsearch for MCP on this page:

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3m.html
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 07, 2010, 02:23:59 PM
Quote from: "Iltsuger"
It's funny, there's this tendency for people to refer to earlier conversations, although it's hard to find the links. This game has an under-utilized wiki page, but there's enough density in the forums to fill a wiki, if only the forums were as easily navigable.


I'm using "Search" function and when I'll find post I was looking for I'm changing link for "quotation":
Code: [Select]
e.g.
http://asciisector.net/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&p=[number]

I'm taking [number] for making link to particular post:

http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=[number]#[number]


It'll be much easier if CK could make some improvements for "quick links". I mean some forums have posts with "#" sign which offers direct link to particular post.


Quote from: "Iltsuger"
I've actually reached a point now where I've maxed out both guilds, and switching to a Drayman just means slower mission resolution for a lot more money (assuming I don't ram into anyone). I've actually reached The End until someone makes a new quest, or until version 7.  Running errands for fixers doesn't appeal to me, although I haven't maxed them out yet.  I don't do assassination missions for them, though, so other than rescues there's not much that I want to do for them.


Yeah... recently I didn't played much and since "sell boosters" bug was discovered I make some test only.

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
For the null-pressure suit, wordsearch for MCP on this page:

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3m.html


"Marsskin" (http://www.marssociety.org.au/marsskin.php)? It looks like some kind of space activity suit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_activity_suit). Interesting idea, indeed. But some serous research must be done to resolve problems with keeping human body temperature. I mean problems with "terminal cold" (near 0 K) is one story and overheating caused by lack of "temperature exchange" (like for radiator) is whole different one. Some kind of "advanced goretex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goretex)" material should be used. Besides IMHO time required for putting it on could be longer. Why? Well, let's imagine full body "spandex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spandex) uniform" that is 2 cm thick and it is VERY tight because of "mechanical counter pressure" effects... Ouch! Without some improvements and new materials (that are able to change its volume after "receiving" some voltage) it could be very difficult.

It was well described in "The Forever War" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forever_War) novel by Joe Haldeman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Haldeman) - soldier in malfunctioned Space Combat Armor almost died because of thermal shock after destruction/damage of suit's radiator.

I'm recommending Anime series "Planetes" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes) (short review (http://kurogane.animeblogger.net/category/anime/planetes/); and another (http://omohide.com/943/planetes-review/)). There were shown some adventures of a team of "space cleaners". Authors tried to present "space realism" as much as possible... and as contrasted with popular Anime series there are only adult persons as protagonists (the youngest "rookie" girl in team is 20 year old). I like it very much.

What is this info for? Well, for space suits of course! Official (English) trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DakRYsUIiIE) shows some action with space suits. Opening (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRM585MVvyA) shows a little bit of actual conquest of space history... and idea for space suits too. It looks like improved present solution for future open space EVA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra-vehicular_activity).

Some pictures of space suits:

(http://s3.postimage.org/K6ayJ.jpg) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=PqK6ayJ)

(http://s3.postimage.org/K6kxi.jpg) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=PqK6kxi)

(http://s3.postimage.org/K6x00.jpg) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=PqK6x00)

(http://s3.postimage.org/K6Ot0.jpg) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=PqK6Ot0)

(http://s3.postimage.org/K6_WJ.jpg) (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=PqK6_WJ)

Official Japanese site (http://www.planet-es.net/) (suit is well presented). Especially I like idea of "hard cover" for helmet. Every time when I see "glass bubble" I think: "One hit and game is over"... :pinch:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 07, 2010, 02:53:59 PM
Back to fleets business...

[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1398)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
- Factions can take control of systems by having a fleet in that system (and no other faction has a fleet there).


I wonder how it'll work when two hostile fleets will be in the same system:
- Will whole fleet "patrol" all nav-points in a system to find potential hostile fleet? Or to mark "system is ours"?
- What will happen if fleets will not encounter each other for long time? Will they claim a system as "their"?
- Should they use "scouts" for quick search for opponents?
- Maybe fleets have "loooong range scanners" to scan whole system at once?
- What if fleet with "LRS" and persistent memory will find "hostile" player's character? Will they immediately start pursuit/chase after such PsC?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Christian Knudsen on September 07, 2010, 03:08:00 PM
Quote from: "GLI"
It'll be much easier if CK could make some improvements for "quick links". I mean some forums have posts with "#" sign which offers direct link to particular post.

(http://s2.postimage.org/jr8b9.png) (http://www.postimage.org/)
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: Iltsuger on September 07, 2010, 03:17:38 PM
I read the first Forever War and liked it a lot.

I haven't seen more than the first episode of the Planetes series, but I have all the manga (translated into English) and it was one of my favorite series for a while. I usually don't read manga, but it was very sober and accomplished, and seemed to be dead-set on telling a realistic story with human beings instead of idea-storage-devices like so many hard sf books.

As far as adapting that type of suit for deep space, I imagine several layers, with a pneumatic system for the outer layer to allow for assisted movement. Not power armor, but just something to help you get over the stiffness of the joints that would come with such a setup.  I dunno, it's all speculative at this point but it's a possibility.  Would be cool to do EVAs, too.

Speaking of fleets, wouldn't it be cool if there were radar planets?  Like, one planet or station in each system would be its sort of "capital", where you would have a defensive last line of defense, and there you could access a system-wide scan that only a huge installation could manage to perform.  

As far as the hostile player, I think individual ships are ignored except by patrols. Fleets go after fleets, and that coordination system would be for stopping fleets, since individual ships don't affect sovereignty.

What I'm interested in learning is what might happen when fleets of SEVERAL different factions wind up meeting in the same place :)  I also missed mention of what actually determines area control, because if both sides wipe each other out, does it default to another faction?  Like, if the winning fleet is heavily damaged and you wipe them out, what happens?
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 07, 2010, 06:40:39 PM
Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
Quote from: "GLI"
It'll be much easier if CK could make some improvements for "quick links". I mean some forums have posts with "#" sign which offers direct link to particular post.

(http://s2.postimage.org/jr8b9.png) (http://www.postimage.org/)


Did you just make it or maybe it was since the very beginning? :$
Yhyhy... :eeeee:
Thanks for pointing it. :heh:

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
I haven't seen more than the first episode of the Planetes series, but I have all the manga (translated into English) and it was one of my favorite series for a while. I usually don't read manga, but it was very sober and accomplished, and seemed to be dead-set on telling a realistic story with human beings instead of idea-storage-devices like so many hard sf books.


Usually I first will watch at least 2-3 episodes ("from Internet") and then I'll buy it on DVD/BD (if available in Poland). But when I saw a short movie (AMV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime_music_video)) about "Planetes" then I immediately ordered all DVDs. Really great series.

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
As far as adapting that type of suit for deep space, I imagine several layers, with a pneumatic system for the outer layer to allow for assisted movement. Not power armor, but just something to help you get over the stiffness of the joints that would come with such a setup.  I dunno, it's all speculative at this point but it's a possibility.  Would be cool to do EVAs, too.


IMO it could be "internal" suit for exoskeleton systems (like "Power Armor"). Since we're talking about combat then let's assume that player's character always is wearing such thing and sometimes uses additional armor (like vests and helmet).

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
Speaking of fleets, wouldn't it be cool if there were radar planets?  Like, one planet or station in each system would be its sort of "capital", where you would have a defensive last line of defense, and there you could access a system-wide scan that only a huge installation could manage to perform.


Maybe not all planets but naval bases could have better radars/scanners to fully control such sensitive/strategic system.

As for defense then IMO all bases/stations/planets should have their own security forces depends on size.

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
As far as the hostile player, I think individual ships are ignored except by patrols. Fleets go after fleets, and that coordination system would be for stopping fleets, since individual ships don't affect sovereignty.


It was mentioned that fleet will remember hostile actions from player's characters side. I wonder how fleet will react if they encounter such PsC? Will they pursue/chase PsC? Whole fleet or just sub-fleet? Maybe lone squadron only?

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
What I'm interested in learning is what might happen when fleets of SEVERAL different factions wind up meeting in the same place :)  I also missed mention of what actually determines area control, because if both sides wipe each other out, does it default to another faction?  Like, if the winning fleet is heavily damaged and you wipe them out, what happens?


Yeah, I wondered before (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10839#10839) about this. IMHO system could become "neutral" until player will be able to posses own fleet for such situations.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 18, 2010, 10:45:03 PM
[Previously on Development Updates (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=11477#11477)]

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
The randomly generated ships are now based on the faction controlling the system. This means that if the pirates decide to move their fleet from TC-101 to Vortex Prime (which won't have a Confed fleet in it at first), they'll take control of Vortex Prime and that system will be swarming with pirates the next time it's generated. That situation will also mean that all production of goods on Hooper's Hope will stop, as I've now made it so that when a system is "occupied" (meaning that it is controlled by a faction different from the faction it starts out with being controlled by) it'll no longer produce goods. Consumption of goods will continue though, so the stores will eventually be emptied. At some point the Confeds will of course launch a counter-offensive and hopefully take back the system and return production levels to normal. I may change it so that production won't halt entirely but just decrease considerably, but that's all for future balancing.


I'm still wondering about "taking-control-over-system". Let's take above example: Pirate Fleet comes to "neutral" Vortex Prime system when there are no other fleets.

Will all bases/stations/planets be automatically "taken over"? Without any assault?! I mean such Pirate Fleet should at least "visit" (even without landing) e.g. Mining Base and give them "an offer"... ;)

Some bases/stations/planets could resist (not surrender at once) and then Pirate Fleet" (if strong enough) could assault them on a ground (sent troops of pirates/mercs). Player could join such fight and defend or attack "defenders". If place will be taken then Police Officers could be replaced by some kind of Pirate Guards.

Pirate Fleet shouldn't "automatically" takeover over(?) Naval Base because Confed Fleet was beaten. Such military base has its own troops and should fight much longer than Mining Base. For "resisting" bases could be offered Blockade Runner Missions (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1453).

BTW Maybe at the very beginning some systems could be "marked" as Confed's (especially around system with Naval Base) and few/other as neutral? Maybe all are Confed's systems and other factions will try to "takeover" over them?

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
Next up is having fleets replenish and repair their destroyed and damaged ships after a battle. One way is to return the fleet to a faction base (retros and Kilrathi will also have bases at some point), but I also need to figure out a system that doesn't require a fleet to return to a faction base -- otherwise a faction that has lost control of all its bases will be unable to rebuild fleets and will effectively have lost.


Maybe "homeless fleet" could use Supply Convoys (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1556)? IMHO making one neutral system with some kind of "Shipyard Base" for all... doesn't look correct (realistic?).

With supply convoys option fixers could offer new jobs:
- "Deliver to Fleet Mission",
- "Disrupt Supply Convoy".
Title: Retake the homeworld + Ship Pipeline
Post by: Iltsuger on September 19, 2010, 12:39:13 AM
The thing that sprang to my mind was that any force that loses its home will establish a temporary home somewhere else. That place will be away from other conquered systems, if possible, and will not produce as much repair and ship results as the main home would.  But it will serve as a staging ground for fleets to eventually retake the lost home base.

Once the home is retaken, the temporary home ceases to have the home status. If you lose the temp, another home will take its place, as long as there are potential homes remaining.

If ALL homes are gone, then you trigger a "Reinforcements from the Homeworld" event, where many fleets just appear out of nowhere (or a one-way jumpgate that serves as a ship-generating pipeline that can never be destroyed or blocked).  Several fleets will appear in succession, and will try multiple strikes on multiple conquered worlds...
Title: Re: Retake the homeworld + Ship Pipeline
Post by: GLI on September 19, 2010, 03:20:35 PM
Quote from: "Iltsuger"
The thing that sprang to my mind was that any force that loses its home will establish a temporary home somewhere else. That place will be away from other conquered systems, if possible, and will not produce as much repair and ship results as the main home would.  But it will serve as a staging ground for fleets to eventually retake the lost home base.

Once the home is retaken, the temporary home ceases to have the home status. If you lose the temp, another home will take its place, as long as there are potential homes remaining.


Fleets without own system could have "nomad" status. I mean they should "escape/run" from other hostile fleets (e.g. to unsettled systems) looking for new allies/ships and supply (e.g. from piracy).

Quote from: "Iltsuger"
If ALL homes are gone, then you trigger a "Reinforcements from the Homeworld" event, where many fleets just appear out of nowhere (or a one-way jumpgate that serves as a ship-generating pipeline that can never be destroyed or blocked).  Several fleets will appear in succession, and will try multiple strikes on multiple conquered worlds...


If a fleet lost own system and wasn't able to rebuild during "nomad" status then (e.g. after some defined time) should be disbanded... and gather again in better place/time. Of course if other fleet will not find and destroy them.
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on September 03, 2011, 06:00:07 PM
I propose to change "occupant fleet" behavior. Right now this game (v0.7.1.3) allows to occupy any system if there is no "home fleet"... and it works immediately after arriving to such system.

(http://s1.postimage.org/2pr7t1vlw/asciisec_v0_7_1_3_occupied_system_01.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/2pr7t1vlw/)

I've encountered Pirate Fleet during jump-in to New Frankfurt. I managed with their escort Talons and then with 3 Nexus class capital ships (they're far more easier to fight than ships from missions). So, technically they didn't cleared nav-point but they was able to "occupy whole system"... :crazy:

I think it should be changed (I proposed it above (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=11480#11480)):
1) First stage of invasion - hostile fleet should "make a run" around invaded system; at least they should visit (just passing) most of bases or nav-points if there is no base,
2) Second stage of invasion - after ground assault (and "removing" defenders) setting up security forces on bases.

During second stage players could be able to do blockade runner missions (http://asciisector.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1453)... :heh:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on June 09, 2012, 01:23:36 PM
I met some pissing off situation when hostile fleet attacks me after my jump. Why they attacks me? Well, because one of capital ships rammed me while mine was still "stopped" after jump. Directly after jump! My ship was 0 (zero!) tiles from main cap-ship after my jump while fleet was still moving/maneuvering near jump-point (TC-101 from Vortex Prime).
 :blink:

After resuming from save I tried it second time and then I saw something strange. Actually there were two Pirate fleets (two [] on nav-map). When I jumped to TC-101 from Vortex Prime I was ready to avoid collision and I managed somehow but then two of Pirate cap-ships collided with each other... and all pirates started to attack me (sic!). I didn't have chance to escape or fight with two fleets in asteroid field.
 :crazy:

At third attempt to scan Nav-2 in TC-101 I was ready to see something strange. And I did! I managed to get out of jump-point's circle without collision, I saw one fleet jumped out and then lone Confed ship fire back to Pirates and (probably) hits one of fleet's ship... and I was attacked again!
 :@

I propose to change fleet behavior. Well, other "single" ships behavior too but with fleets it's especially annoying.

Fleet(s)/ships should NOT (randomly) fly/maneuver inside of jump-point's circle. Fleet(s)/ships should make fast and clear attempt to jump not just circling around changing their rate all the time. And after jump fleet(s)/ships should clear jump-point ASAP.
 :heh:
Title: Re: Fleet tactics
Post by: GLI on June 09, 2012, 04:52:40 PM
I forgot to record movies previously. This time movie shows (see: [RS (https://rapidshare.com/files/355573407/movie070_jumping-fleet.7z)]) that I managed but Pirate fleet didn't - they stuck at jump-point (sic!). After I launched from Munroe base Pirate cap-ship were still "wrestling"... :eeeee:

It looks that was matter of "timing" - when I reach jump point then Pirate fleet will try to "improvise" something because of my "interruption".