Proposed 'Quick Fix' for some Combat 'Anomalies'

God Emperor · #1 February 5th, 2001, 05:41 AM

Will upload them into the Mod Archive when I get home from work in about 7 hrs time.

What I have done is to edit the AI_DesignCreation files for the Attack Ship and Defence Ship on the point defence lines, and the Components file for point defence (Space Tonnage lowered from 20 down to 15).
This does lower the cost of PD for me too, but, I build my ships as though they cost 20 space (leave 5kT free per PD that I include). I didnt see much point doing a more complicated mod to make them cost 20 for me and 15 for the AI as a "house rule" seemed does the job fine and means that the mod will be more capatible with the next patch.
This mod doesnt actually improve the AI's tactics, it just designs the ships better for the AI's current tactics....

jowe01 · #2 February 5th, 2001, 10:50 AM

has anybody mailed MM about Talenns original proposition ? As far as I am concerned it is an excellent and easily implementable way to remove some of the weak spots in tactical combat.

Nitram Draw · #3 February 6th, 2001, 02:52 AM

No matter how tactical combat is changed I don't think you will ever make it "fair". One side or the other will always have an advantage, this is why we experiment with new ship designs.
The only thing that shoud be done, IMO, is to make changes that help make tactical combat more interesting and fun or correct an obvious error in the way it is handled.
The missle dance etc. does not seem to make much sense but firing out of your opponents range makes perfect sense.
Of the ideas suggested I like the loss of movement points for firing the best. It seems reasonable and maybe not to difficult to implement.

Talenn · #4 February 5th, 2001, 08:38 PM

Nitram Draw:

Well, the objective isnt to make it fair for both sides but 'fair' within weapon Groups. When one weapon type has a tremendous advantage over the others, something needs to be adjusted IMO. The mark of a good game is that it takes differing weapons systems and units to achieve victory, not just using the same one over and over.

Also, firing outside their range DOES make sense, but entering their range, firing, and then leaving without being shot at doesn't and that is problem I am trying to see corrected.

A side benefit of that change would be an increase in the usefulness of orbital and planetary defenses. It also gives a new hook on which to hang small ship 'maneuverability'...ie, the small ships CAN hit and run, but the large ones must commit. I think this is the best option as well, but I'd be more than happy to see anything that works that will aleviate some of the more persistant problems plaguing the tactical combat.

jowe01:

I havent emailed MM with this suggestion. I was hoping to post it here and generate feedback and potential modifications. I kind of hope that MM or other testers read stuff like this and can draw their own conclusions as to what is good for the game or not. If they dont get the time to check out this board, I suppose I should send them a note pointing them to this thread so they can see the pros and cons of the idea.

Talenn

Barnacle Bill · #5 February 5th, 2001, 09:24 PM

Talenn:

Alternating moves in which everyone gets the number of movement points their engines entitle them to is an abstraction compared to simultaneous movement, but having to stop a spacecraft in order to fire is not an "abstraction". It is just plain wrong. The thing being modelled is in actuality continuously in motion. Making ships stop to fire is just arbitrary. I find that far more disturbing than the idea that only one weapon type would be viable. Sure, it is cool to have options, but you can have a very good naval combat game (in space or otherwise) where only one type of weapon is in use. You can't have one where ships have to stop to fire, IMO. That is the logic behind my complaint. IMO, this "fix" is worse than the problem it is supposed to cure.

Daynarr:

My comment regarding the impact that the proposed change would have on my enjoyment of the game was not intended as an insult to anyone. It is just an honest expression of my opinion. SE4 is certainly not perfect, and I'd be happy to see more changes to improve it. However, I am enjoying as it is right now. I would not enjoy it anymore if this particular change was made, and in such a way that I could not undo it in my own data set. If I don't enjoy it, I won't play it. I'm only in this for the fun.

Nitram Draw · #6 February 5th, 2001, 09:29 PM

Maybe fair was the wrong word. Balanced might better describe what I am looking for. After all who wants to be in a fair fight, I need every advantage I can get

The ducking in and out does seem wrong. I'm am not sure what the solution should be but the current tactical combat certainly gets old. I hope someone can come up with a workable solution.

Tomgs · #7 February 5th, 2001, 11:22 PM

Perhaps stopping all movement would be too drastic but adding movement penalties for firing would help. Perhaps some weapons like missles would have more penalties then others or the penalties should be moddable including 0 delay for all weapons if you want. A solution that is modifiable would be much better than a hard coded drastic change that some would like and some dislike. I personally would not mind a movement penalty for firing especially if you could move your full range then fire as an option. That would stop a lot of the move, fire, then move again strategies but would still allow full movement and firing. Otherwise someone would design a ship with high shields and/or armor and just not fire a few rounds to "catch up" with a faster but firing opponent.