Disengage Button

[AngleWyrm]

If running away at equal speed or better, then there is no chance to catch up -- The faster ship determines the range of the engagement. So in this situation, the proposed EndCombat button would be available as a shortcut instead of waiting for the timer to run out.

I also like the infinite field much better than the previous version. In SEIV, retreating ships would just get stuck in the corner of the map, and be hunted down like fish in a bucket. Space is supposed to be big, and the infinite field does a great job of portraying that.

[Slick]

Running away should be determined something like this: the minimum distance between enemies is calculated periodically, say every second. A critical distance is initally established and reduced slightly every second. At any time, if the separation distance is greater than the critical distance, then the combat ends with disengagement.

The numbers should be chosen so as to ensure that combat won't immediately end due to initial placement, and that a faster ship should be able to catch a slower ship without combat ending first.

This way, ships of equal speed will end up disengaging after some time and immobile ships, no matter how close will eventually meet the criteria.

I also agree that disengagement should result in moving the fleeing ship/fleet to another sector. Which sector it moves to should be random so as not to be exploitable in rushing to an enemy homeoworld with a superfast fleet - the slower fleets, being able to set up defensively ahead of time, would (in a "real" battle) block the faster fleet from "retreating forward". Moving the disengaging ship/fleet to another sector is strategically important so as to prevent blockading planets with superfast ships.

[DarkHorse]

Perhaps there could be an option in Fleet/Ship strategies to specify how far/long to pursue a fleeing ship before automatically acquiring another target or ending combat if there are no other valid targets.

[Blueentity]

Playing Demo ver 1.00

It seems that the game already has a default for ending battle when nothing can be accomplished.

Had a race that gave +1 to movement. Researched Frigate hull size till I could put a colonizer on the Frigate. Another race “attacked” my colonizer that had 1 more movement that the attacking frigate. “Battle” ended in about 30 seconds on the game battle clock as my colonizer ran away.

Had another battle where I took a fleet across a defended warp point. Destroyed most of the defenders; the remainder of the ships had no weapons left and retreated. After a short chase, the initial battle ended. Since my fleet still had movement remaining, I ordered them to attack. Both sets of ships had the same speed and moved away from the warp point. The "Battle" ended in about 30 "seconds" according to the battle clock. Repeated "Attacks" took the same time, with ship using supplies to move and retreating further from the warp point. At the beginning of the next turn, the original ships left the sector to repair at a nearby planet and the defender brought over some fresh ships to the warp point. My ships started from where they had left off, a distance away from the warp point. The battle was significantly longer than 30 seconds, but played out to conclusion.

It appears that the game does recognize when a battle is futile and will terminate battle, such as trying to land troops on an empty population planet (wish that could be changed), or when the retreating ships have the same speed or better than the pursuers. Entering battle under these circumstances does use supplies, but of course no ordinance.

[tmcc]

There is an exploit built in to the current version. You can switch to sector view after that first combat and phsically reposition your ships right next to the enemy ships. Issue the second attack order and the battle will begin with the ships in the positions you just set.

[Suicide Junkie]

Slick:
Your method falls apart when there are more than two clusters of ships.

Under your system (and also sometimes under SE5's current detection system), you can have battlegroup A smash battlegroup B, and then turn to head for battlegroup C, which was started far off and is charging in. But the combat ends because the distance between enemy ships just went up (B died and C is far away still).

[Suicide Junkie]

You also have to decide how to charge strategic movement points for retreats.

And what happens if they have none.

Consider mostly simultaneous games, since these issues are most important in multiplayer games.


Running away is realistic, yes, but is it fun?

[AngleWyrm]

The main problem I still have with the infintite running away thing is that nobody has to engage in combat until they want to

That might have to do with the speed cap in stock SEV. If the game were such that you could design ships that had different speeds, it could be different. like if I could design a ship that had just one gun, but travelled at 18, or another that had no guns but travelled at 24.

As for the way combat ends: I like the idea of ending combat when both parties agree to end it.

[Suicide Junkie]

QNP dosen't help the situation much, though...
Those fast ships are going to have to be light on armor and guns to get that speed, and will thus get their asses kicked by the warships that are running away

What I'd like to see is a circular map limit.
There would be no corners to be caught in, and even if you're heading right towards the wall, your ships will end up randomly turning left or right to escape. Then it becomes a more reasonable chase around the perimeter. Equal speed ships will slowly catch up to the runners, while faster ships do get to stay away.

[Phoenix-D]

Being able to pin them in a corner EDIT: or against a side doesn't make much sense either SJ, and having battles so large no one can manuver is just silly.

A faster ship should be able to keep ahead until supplies run out or its boxed in; the only problem with the SEV system IMO is the later isn't really possible.