[Discussion] Fleets waiting in line at war!

Morningstars

Newcomer

12 years ago

Jun 11, 2012, 3:05:26 PM

I totally agree with the OP on this issue

Luminoth

Newcomer

Luminoth

Newcomer

23 400g2g pts

12 years ago

Jun 11, 2012, 5:49:28 PM

I have an other solution that could possibly reconciliate both sides (overkill stacking and enless number of battles).

Combats could be managed as they allready are but with a tweak: any additional fleet in the system could feed it's ships to replace the destroyed ones, but as they enter later in a combat their range to enemies ships would be greater and the combat fase would be the respective one between the new ships and the ones allready fighting, constantly forcing the use of all weapons at a given time, only the targets being different ones. This would give aditional strategy options (why not send long range speciallized ships later in the combat to finish the job?)

Meanwhile you would have to limit the total number of ships in a system.

I propose it to be proportional to what the system can support (itself proportional to FIDS) in case it's yours. Otherwise if the system isn't yours the amount of ships would be limited by the supporting capability of the attaking system and you could not attack a system with more than two systems at once.

Any ship over those limits would have to remain in the hangar or leave the system for another one. Ships in the hangar could not be fed to a fight but you could replace your destroyed fleets after the combat is over preparing so for the next turn. Of course you would have to render an invasion on the same turn as a combat impossible and to equalize chances you could only stack in your hangars the same amount of ships that you're supporting in orbit.

This would better render the differences between systems, turning better developped systems better defended!

What do you think? Let me know.

lyravega

Newcomer

lyravega

Newcomer

12 years ago

Jun 11, 2012, 9:02:09 PM

Just... no. I am sick of stacks of doom. This is fine.

TheVulture98

Timer

TheVulture98

Timer

12 500g2g pts

12 years ago

Jun 11, 2012, 10:02:21 PM

lyravega wrote:
Just... no. I am sick of stacks of doom. This is fine.

It doesn't have to be stacks of dooms. There have been several good ideas brought forward by people in this thread that fix this issue and avoid the dreaded stacks of doom.

TheFrozenOne

Newcomer

TheFrozenOne

Newcomer

12 years ago

Jun 12, 2012, 6:39:38 AM

Do not add stacks of doom.

Please add something like the Total War series "reinforcements". It could be a card that could be played or something.

Shogun_Of_Sorrow

Stellar Survivor

Test

Shogun_Of_Sorrow

Stellar Survivor

18 600g2g pts

12 years ago

Jun 12, 2012, 8:33:26 AM

n18991c wrote:
It itself it would be a good idea to have additional fleets participate in the battle, for example as reinforcements to be called upon to replace destroyed ships and also to make battles more spectacular, but I recently encountered Horatio having a full 15 (!) or so fleets with twentytwo CP each parked in its home system and if I hadn't been able to fight them piecemeal then I would never have been able to take that system! So while I'm for it, I can see some negative side-effects already. What do you think?

It sounds like what you are saying is that you wouldn't have been able to defeat a superior military force if it wasn't for the game mechanics. Personally, I would prefer to see a fleet with a decent numerical superiority to win over a 1vs1. I understand tactics are a part of why you won, and I don't believe tactics shouldn't play a feature in an "updated" battle system, just that it should be a little like Risk. What I mean by that is if someone comes in with a huge army, and you're the defender and really outnumbered, it's going to take some good roles to come out the winner. Just replace dice rolls with the battle choices and you're all set imo.

Although I'd also be amenable to Luminoth's suggestion.

Tiggy

Newcomer

Tiggy

Newcomer

14 800g2g pts

12 years ago

Jun 12, 2012, 6:02:48 PM

if you ask me i belive the currant CP is WAY to small, i honestly think it should be doubled at least, the fleets feel so tiny compared to the sheer amount of fleets ive had in my game flying around or i should say stacked in system, just today i moved a fleet across and found a massive stack of 19 stacks of 24CP craver fleets , unfortunately i could only move 1 tiny fleet there at a time rather than bring sevral of my other fleets with me.

id rather be able to have my hero commanding my ENTIRE armada that i decide to attack a system with rather than just either my first or last fleet i decide to send in. esepculy on large maps where you need huge amounts of ships and fleets.

TheFrozenOne

Newcomer

TheFrozenOne

Newcomer

12 years ago

Jun 12, 2012, 6:35:37 PM

Tiggy wrote:
if you ask me i belive the currant CP is WAY to small, i honestly think it should be doubled at least, the fleets feel so tiny compared to the sheer amount of fleets ive had in my game flying around or i should say stacked in system, just today i moved a fleet across and found a massive stack of 19 stacks of 24CP craver fleets , unfortunately i could only move 1 tiny fleet there at a time rather than bring sevral of my other fleets with me.

id rather be able to have my hero commanding my ENTIRE armada that i decide to attack a system with rather than just either my first or last fleet i decide to send in. esepculy on large maps where you need huge amounts of ships and fleets.

Agreed, fleets are WAY too small. I'd rather have 2 massive fleets than 4 tiny ones.

TheVulture98

Timer

TheVulture98

Timer

12 500g2g pts

12 years ago

Jun 13, 2012, 12:43:03 AM

TheFrozenOne wrote:
Agreed, fleets are WAY too small. I'd rather have 2 massive fleets than 4 tiny ones.

I also agree and maybe doing that alone will solve the problem...but maybe not. I still think a limited Total War-style reinforcement function could also help a lot to solve this issue without making it stacks of doom.

Hollow

Newcomer

Hollow

Newcomer

500g2g pts

12 years ago

May 29, 2012, 10:27:38 PM

What if the additional fleets provided a reduced power bonus. The primary fleet is being attacked, the next largest fleet provides 75% strength, the next provides 50%, then 25% and possibly then 0% thereafter. Or put a minimum of something like 10%. This should provide a clear bonus for having several fleets available for support, but not so much that players can openly circumvent the CP system by stacking fleets.

To combat the additional bonuses from defenders you'd need to give attackers the same boosts though.

StealthyGeneral

Newcomer

StealthyGeneral

Newcomer

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 12:32:53 PM

i agree this would be neat, instead of having to do the 1 v 1 space battles

craigbic

Newcomer

craigbic

Newcomer

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 12:49:59 PM

I totally agree - ES needs fleet stacking.

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

11 400g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 12:54:18 PM

As a british man, this type of civil conduct in war is most spiffing!

sp23hagbard5

Old Survivor

sp23hagbard5

Old Survivor

23 400g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 1:07:43 PM

i don't know. it would kinda break the balancing. maybe make it an option at the start of the game

MODVieuxChat

Chameleon

Truth is a chameleon. Herbert

MODVieuxChat

Chameleon

25 400g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 1:11:54 PM

And what would be the point of CP ?

Dirtysox

Newcomer

Dirtysox

Newcomer

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 3:17:07 PM

the point of CP would be so you could split your fleets of to different systems separately, I agree that all fleets on a star system should be involved in a battle, because you aren't going have your 1 ship fleet get attacked by a 5 ship one while your other fleets(of course, too big to merge) stand idle.

another suggestion is that you increase the rate at which CP can be obtained and make battles go for longer, even if they go until all ships in one fleet are destroyed, or a fleet retreats, and then you can add a regroup option or something along those lines.

n18991c

Old

n18991c

Old

13 100g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 4:03:32 PM

It itself it would be a good idea to have additional fleets participate in the battle, for example as reinforcements to be called upon to replace destroyed ships and also to make battles more spectacular, but I recently encountered Horatio having a full 15 (!) or so fleets with twentytwo CP each parked in its home system and if I hadn't been able to fight them piecemeal then I would never have been able to take that system!

So while I'm for it, I can see some negative side-effects already. What do you think?

MODVieuxChat

Chameleon

Truth is a chameleon. Herbert

MODVieuxChat

Chameleon

25 400g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 4:09:25 PM

Maybe a battle card ?

davea

Newcomer

davea

Newcomer

700g2g pts

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 4:14:46 PM

Please see related discussion:

http://forums.amplitude-studios.com/showthread.php?3047-annoyance-enemy-can-maintain-blockade-break-siege-with-scouts

There are two interesting cases: (a) one big fleet on little fleets, and (b) big fleets on big fleets. For (a), which is the subject of the above thread, it would be really nice if multiple tiny enemy fleets, such as scouts, were automatically collected into one fleet so I could wipe them out at once. For (b), I think the CP limit should still be a factor. I don't think allowing fleets to violate the CP limit in order to make the game go faster, is a good tradeoff. It would be nice if the "auto resolve" option actually worked well. Several people have reported that it seems your ships play no cards at all, when you choose auto-resolve.

chaz420

Newcomer

chaz420

Newcomer

12 years ago

May 28, 2012, 11:10:08 PM

I agree with you completely