I agree with everyone who thinks that the simultanious turn is flawed. It is just unnerving to do something and suddenly the AI moves during my turn. In consequence I always wait for some seconds at the beginning of a turn until doing anything myself. I would prefer the game to have a traditional turn-based system, though.

ok - on further thought -- here is what I believe would be the IDEAL solution to this situation (as well as being relatively easy to implement programatically):



Create a movement schedule in each "Movement" phase that consisted of a number of segments equal to the currently fastest fleet's movement - then implement each fleets movement simultaneously according to that schedule:



For example, assume the fastest fleet has 12 movement (may be more than one fleet at theis speed, but 12 is the highest speed of all fleets)

there are some fleets with 6 movement, some with 8, and one with 4.



The movement schedule would look like:

segment/speed	12	8	6	4
1	1	0	0	0
2	2	1	1	0
3	3	2	1	1
4	4	2	2	1
5	5	3	2	1
6	6	4	3	2
7	7	4	3	2
8	8	5	4	2
9	9	6	4	3
10	10	6	5	3
11	11	7	5	3
12	12	8	6	4

*This table was created by the simple formula Int(Current Segment * Fleet Speed / Fastest Fleet Universally)



SO there would be 12 segments in this movement phase and each time a fleet of the appropriate speed advances a movement point on the chart in a given segment, it moves one unit (all fleets with speeds that advance a movement point in the segment move simultaneously) - any fleet WITHOUT a movement queue would simply have their movement pool reduced by one as they sit around waiting (This is important - because the fleet may be given orders at a later point in time as events unfold and should not have a stash of unused movement just sitting there - faster ships should be able to outmaneuver slower ones - and events like "attack" don't require any movement so slower ships can still successfully "guard" specific points as they would still get a chance to respond as the faster fleet attempted to move by - and triggered an response event with their movement).



example:

segment 1: all speed 12 fleets move one (variable) unit - check for events

segment 2: all speed 12, speed 8, and speed 6 fleets move one unit - check for events

segment 3: all speed 12, speed 8, and speed 4 fleets move one unit - check for events

segment 4: all speed 12, and speed 6 fleets move one unit - check for events

segment 5: all speed 12, and sped 8 fleets move - check for events

segment 6: all speed 12, speed 8, speed 6, and speed 4 fleets move - check for events

and so on...



alternatively - all fleets could move (Their Speed)/(Fastest Speed) of a movement unit each segment (or lose an appropriate fractional amount of movement pool if idle) - would be smoother, and probably easier to implement programatically. Forget the schedule - do it this way.

A constant number of segments a constant denominator (instead of fastest fleet) would also be viable. -- Dang it - that's what I suggested in the first place -- well, apparently now you have all my ideas, because they're starting to cirlce - lol.



This movement style may seem "clunky" but the computer would implement it quite quickly, and most movement segments would simply be the computer making the moves, checking for events, finding none, and moving on to the next segment -- it would appear seemless to players until an event triggered a pause.



The actual distance traveled on the game map for a given ship would vary depending on off-road or on string movement method.

This would also allow deep space battle opportunities as such would be made available for any two fleets within a "reasonable" distance of each other (ie, the farthest distance - probably the string movement distance - any ship could move during one movement segment - making for a kind of "fudge" factor in the visual UI -- that'll probably end up being almost too small to see anyways).



In any case, all fleets would be at ZERO movement points at the end of the movement phase, and the build phase would commence.

Gyomb wrote:


But I would point out something: travel out of the strings is slow… You have time to see these fleets coming (especially if you build some sensor improvements). Personally, I played against with small fleets distributed among my empire (I merged them time to time in order to fight bigger fleets) and prioritizing sensor and influence improvements in my frontier system.

1) Offraod travel is not that much slower than in-string travel, not once you consider the directness of the route and the wierd movement loss ships suffer each time they enter a system (string travel is actually rather slow if you count the number of turns it ACTUALLY takes to arrive, and not the estimate given in the "flight plan" shown -- they're not the same if you haven't noticed...)

2) Slower speed is EXACTLY the point - the slower the better -- the longer you have to prepare for my "massive invassion", the longer your fleet sits and hemorages dust, and you have more time to build that fleet bigger for better long term hemoraging and misallocation of production. The longer you spend builing a defense force, the longer I have to build my infrastructure or prepare for the nest wave. The whole POINT of the problem is that you can't do anything but WATCH and wait while ships slowly crawl towards your system - you can't ACT, only wait and hemorage dust while wishing your opponent had faster ships, because each turn he takes getting there is a turn you hemorage dust... Whgereas if you had space interception, you could build a real fleet and send it SEVERAL of those ships BEFORE they get anywhere NEAR your systems, AND you'd be in a good position for your counterstrike (ie met them half way so already half way to their source system)



And, the WORST part - is that even if you realize "there have got to be too many ships for them to all be real", it doesn't prevent me from slipping a couple of real fleets into the mix to make it believable, or make you pay for your underreaction - especially if the "real fleets" have actual engines attached and the scare fleets launch first reinforcing the "threat" of the incoming fleets. And the "second wave" legit fleets also have engines and now you have a few extra turns to add "real" ships to the phantoms, and because they fly faster, but are launched later, they arrive very shortly after and are thought to be phantoms. And there is just no way for you to tell, or defend against this kind of tactic, except to be the one who attacks first - now the game isn't about strategy, because there is no move/counter move, no threat/feint/block/parry, no strategy - just a race to be the first to implement the "winning" tactic - it's just an entirely one-dimensional race to the finish line. Ok - there's alittle room for "flair" or "style", but it's just window dressing, everyone's doing the exact same thing, because that's the only thing that wins...

Gyomb wrote:


By the way, I love the idea of chuckrman to build pro-active defense improvements.

Yes, system defenses CAN help a bit IF they do one of two things VERY WELL and MUST prevent invassion as long as they remain undestroyed (or fleets with armor and artillary - no weapons - become the system killers and they just out live the system defenses until the invassion completes):

1) They must be ALOT cheaper (read practically free) to maintain than an equivalent ship (after all, here's a fleet that you can't even use to counter attack after the swarm - if they're even 1/4 the cost of my "phantom fleets", all I have to get you to do is leave them there for 4 times the time it takes my phantom fleets to travel to their destination and be destroyed and the phantoms will have still utterly served their purpose AND I don't have to worry about the possibility of counter attack...

- or -

2) They must defend a system as well or better than an actual fleet sitting there could (or suffeciently assist the actual fleet to justify their expense) otherwise it's cheaper AND more effective to have a real fleet sitting there instead, completely invalidating their existence. If they can't FULLY repel a phantom fleet then the phantom fleet will end up caussing enough havoc while having their mass whiddled away that they'll have served their purpose.



Now, as long as there are both "nearly free" options and probably more expensive "effective" versions, strategy comes back into play (nearly free takes care of scouts/colony ships/phantom fleets/etc and effective options guard a few important and/or border systems allowing for an "entrenched" effect. (ie, there's a clock for taking (back?) a system with a minimal forces)

Gyomb wrote:


PS: I just need to say something about your(everybody in fact) nerdrage: The first thing I wrote before posting was quite angry too. (Maybe that I felt aggressed by your "nerdraging" way of express your diverging opinion). But as I cooled down and read again my post, I redacted it. And I hope now that nobody can feel offended by it.

My point is even if it's written you still can rewrite your posts. It's your posts after all ! And as long as it remain untouched (except maybe by an edited footnote) they still have a lot of impact on there reader. It's awfully easy to get irritated behind our screen and to irritate back. So if we wish to avoid misunderstanding and pointless disputes, there is a need to self-redaction.



I've seen flourish misunderstandings and disputes here and here in this forum the last weeks. It would be great that we do not embark in these and remain a civilized polite crowd.



So it was the corny talk and I still can redact it if someone think it's out of topic. (Vive le bouton "Edit" !!)

Yeah, I know - after all, I wrote the words "Edit:" AFTER all that other text in the edit box (yeah, I had to SCROLL to the bottom PAST all my other text to do that. I wasn't interested in removing a LEGITIMATE emotional reaction to a legitimately perceived slight from these developers - I am really afraid right now that this game will be another Master of Orion 3 -- and I want them to know it. I ALSO want them to know that if they take the appropriate measures to releave that fear, that I'll happily and readily appologize for my lack of faith. Hence the typed edit, instead of the rewrite of the post. (btw: when I do get truly angry in posts and realize I've gone to far, I do infact redact them - there's no need for unnecessary nerdrage - but, unfortunately, THIS is deserved nerdrage - I am legitimately concerned that the product I THOUGHT I was paying for, isn't going to be the product I get - see I payed for an "interactive developement experience" - but so far I am underimpressed by developer response to priority concerns (I am still holding out for that though, I want to give them EVERY chance to prove my fears unjustified and hope every day that they do), and I am COMPLETELY unimpressed with the G2G voting system. Serriously, when they add an "I don't care in the LEAST which of these you chose" (I know personally, most of my votes in the g2g section would be of this category - serriously, I've LOOKED for it - because my mind wouldn't process the absurduity of some of the non-choices being "presented" - no really, remember the SPAM skit from monty python - alot of the g2g votes feel like "Do you want spam and eggs, spam and scrambled eggs, or spam and milk"? with me sitting there going "Umm, I don't LIKE spam...."). A "Wait, there's a difference?", an "Umm, NONE of these - OMG go back to the drawing board and PLEASE try again these are all AWEFUL", and a "Why not just implement them all, it's just a chunk of text that you've ALREADY pasted once, you could've just skipped the voting and pasted it right into the actual game INSTEAD and it'd have been implemented..." voting options would probably also be good choices if they want REAL feedback... Until then I'm afraid I must continue to feel that it's more a dog and pony show than a real tool to get user feedback.



But HEY, maybe I'm the only one feeling like this - it happens to me plenty, so if you feel you're getting everything you paid for, then by all means dismiss my nerdrage and enjoy the game - it really does have MANY splendid features and I have indeed enjoyed many games that have, more or less by pure luck, evaded the game killing problems. But you know what, I dug out my old copy of minecraft after playing for a couple of weeks, so that probably says something.... (I actually do spend a day or so playing after every steam update to see if it's been rendered worth playing by the most recent updates - I entirely hope to be proven dead wrong by a truly dedicated developement team every time they release an update - I'm just saying it hasn't happened yet...

messej wrote:
I maybe got a wee bit nerdrage in this post

No, not at all …



But I would point out something: travel out of the strings is slow… You have time to see these fleets coming (especially if you build some sensor improvements). Personally, I played against with small fleets distributed among my empire (I merged them time to time in order to fight bigger fleets) and prioritizing sensor and influence improvements in my frontier system.



So even if I think, as all of us do, that there still are improvements to do, I don't think we can describe it as a "hemorragia".



I agree I was a little surprised by this "simultaneous turn" (in Civ as in Endless) but I'm used to it now and I must say it allows to experiment some quick thinking and other ways to do things that "regular" turn-per-turn games cannot provide. Without falling in this never ending stress of RTS. So I like it and I want to be able to use it if I want too.

However I understand that some peoples want to have the choice to not to.



By the way, I love the idea of chuckrman to build pro-active defense improvements.



PS: I just need to say something about your(everybody in fact) nerdrage: The first thing I wrote before posting was quite angry too. (Maybe that I felt aggressed by your "nerdraging" way of express your diverging opinion). But as I cooled down and read again my post, I redacted it. And I hope now that nobody can feel offended by it.

My point is even if it's written you still can rewrite your posts. It's your posts after all ! And as long as it remain untouched (except maybe by an edited footnote) they still have a lot of impact on there reader. It's awfully easy to get irritated behind our screen and to irritate back. So if we wish to avoid misunderstanding and pointless disputes, there is a need to self-redaction.



I've seen flourish misunderstandings and disputes here and here in this forum the last weeks. It would be great that we do not embark in these and remain a civilized polite crowd.



So it was the corny talk and I still can redact it if someone think it's out of topic. (Vive le bouton "Edit" !!)

@messej

I understand your frustration and I am sure once this gets to Beta some of these scenario's will play out. I would still like to see systems capable of defending themselves by actually inflicting damage on an attacking fleet if the appropriate upgrades (currently non-existent) are built on the system. This would put a halt to the mass cheap fleet and scouts causing blockades issue. If I had a space stations and a local defense force that could actually inflict damage (like a patrol craft upgrade) then I would need to actually use ships of some strength to attack a planet. I also agree that sitting thee watching a fleet that is traveling to my planet via the non-lane method and not being able to do anything about it until it pops out seems silly. I think there should be some sort of EW like tech that allows you to intercept ships either in the lane or "free moving" outside the lanes. As you have pointed out, if you don't have the ability to address this in some way, human controlled fleets will be making death strikes on your critical planets while you do nothing but sit and watch. Your fleets can't be everywhere or you will be broke. I have found I can take a system in 1-2 turns if I put ships in the fleet that are designed for invasion (using +invasion modules). I just hide those fleets in the lane when they are done. Not like my opponent knows which fleet is which but I can make the most effective invasion fleet virtually untouchable while using my anti-fleet fleets to clear the path. If they never touch my invasion fleet I will just keep trucking through. My opponent will either waste time taking back the planets or be robbed of resources (and potentially increase my resources) while trying to attack my impervious fleet.



Part of this might by addressed by creating an upgrade for a system that does not allow opponents ships to leave the system unless the planet is taken (assumes enemy fleet, does not affect friendlies). This would at least stop the scout chases and possiblly slow down an invading fleet.

completely agree about the chess-ness of a strategy game - if you want a galactic scaled RTS, fine - make one - but then you'd better abolish the whole idea of turns and start from scratch. If the empire is turn-based, then combat needs to not be rushed either (the cinematic combat is qquite fine in my opinion, if the initial timer is not there, and the combat can be paused to issue new orders). The combat timers are completely killing this game for me. Especially after reloading a game - they can take a while (3-5 minutes plus in some of my bigger games) to show up - so there you are thinking everything is fine, you go to start assigning tasks to your system, next thing you know, there's a BEEP and some combat timer has expired -- I never even SAW the Bleppidie bleep bleeping thing, and the combat would've totaly been mine if I had done it manually (as I proved by reloading the game, sitting staring at the empire map for no joke, 5 minutes, when finally I see the combat prompt pop up and I click it an SOMEHOW manage to hit manual despite the blinking button not responding to most of my clicks while the timer is counting down - serriously wans't happy about that. Btw - the combat that had auto-resolved as my loss, manually resolved as my ships leaving the fight with full health - so yeah, the bleeping timers are a complete game stopper for me - if they remain and I am not able to mod them out, this game will be relegated to a virtual shelf on the steam servers and won't see the light of my local hard drive again.



Also guarding is NOT resolving the issue of the movement problem - once off-roading is discovered (early mid-game for most games I play) you need to pretty much build a fleet at every system (not economically feasable). So not being able to intercept incoming fleets IS STILL a problem. The guard thing is at best a field applied torn shirt style bandage, it's stopping the worst of the bleeding (ie, the Endless Leap Frog mini game that was an undocumented feature before), but the injury is not gonna heal, and it's still gonna get worse.



I can tell you EXACTLY what my multiplayer games are going to look like at this point - tech race to offroad tech - massive fleets of DIRT CHEAP ships (read NO modules whatsoever - sped is a DISSADVANTAGE in this scenario) designed specifically to look like full fleets while being as cheap as possible - these trash fleets are then sent at every visible star and detected enemy system to scare them into wasting resources building REAL fleets to defend against the phantoms. Meanwhile, whilst they hemmorage Dust trying to maintain this massive fleet, I build 3-5 REAL top of the line fleets in preperation to send them to the now, or soon to be discovered, capital and maybe some key systems. Any system NOT protected by massive Dust hemoraging fleets will be invaded and conqquered probably rather rapidly (remember off-road tech is pretty easy to get to - so this is still early game since it was raced to, so getting a few defense fleets to stop the invassions in time is simply not going to be possible.) But hey if that's the game they want to make, I'm happy to go play someone else's... >.<



Edit: ok - in all fairness, this game is in Alpha stage, and I maybe got a wee bit nerdrage in this post, but I am not in the least exagurating when I say the movement problems are game breakers for me. As it stands now, this game is going to be another Master of Orion 3- a game that promises much and delievers soo many good things mixed with just enough cripling bad design choices to make it unplayable - I seroiusly want my money back for M of O3 - I seriously don't want to feel that way about this game too - PLEASE adress this issue for real (not with a band-aid) and do this right as the devs so often say they want to do. (And if you don't see the inherent flaw I just pointed out with my multiplayer scenarios, hang up your game designer hats and take up carpentry or something.

Gyomb wrote:


It's a choice. Personally I loved the way multiplayer is treated in Civ5 and the intensity it creates in the game. This way you doesn't wait for your opponent to think his movements.

But I understand that you don't like it. So there should be an option.

I personally believe that the system in Civ V is flawed, for these type of games, games focussed on large scale strategy, I think that there should be no element of speed or quick thinking involved. These games ought be like chess, you think out each move meticulously. Games like starcraft or other such RTS games ought be about quick thinking and reaction times, not games like this.



Anyways, just my two cents!

First of all, I wish to point out that since the start of this thread, the release of the alpha 2 addressed the guarding system issue: You can now command your fleets to block every enemy fleets entering the system they occupy.

Monstrum wrote:


* Fleets are always located at a system, never in between.

Monstrum wrote:


* If the distance between systems is small enough to complete the journey in one turn, the fleet move instantaneously to the other system (at the end of the turn). If not, it spend a number of turns equivalent to the travel time generating enough warp power (or however you want to explain it fluff-wise) in the first system before moving to the second.

I'm strongly against it. being between lanes is part of the game and can be used strategically. Removing it doesn't add anything to the gaming experience (now that you can guard a system)

Monstrum wrote:


* Actual fleet movement (not decisions about movement) take place at the end of turn, after combat.

Monstrum wrote:


* Actual combat (not decisions about combat) take place at the end of turn, but before movement.

* You can't see what decisions regarding combat and movement the opponents take before the end of turn.

* If only one player decides to attack that player is the attacker. If both attack both are attackers (or possibly the one with the strongest fleet).

It's a choice. Personally I loved the way multiplayer is treated in Civ5 and the intensity it creates in the game. This way you doesn't wait for your opponent to think his movements.

But I understand that you don't like it. So there should be an option.



And even with the simultaneous play, I like your idea to plan movements (if you choose it) and to resume all of them at once with one button "resume all pending movements"

I agree with most of the ideas in the OP, but to varying degrees.

However, the thing I think that needs most work is the "attacker" and "defender" spotting. If you're fighting in YOUR OWN SYSTEM, you should ALWAYS be considered the defender. If fighting in a system that belongs to the same enemy that you are currently attacking, you are the "attacker", and he is the "defender". If you're fighting in a neutral system, well... Either the current way works (whoever clicks first wins), or the one with the faster fleet is the "attacker".

Furthermore, there really NEEDS to be a clarification/choice when fighting with multiple enemies in the system. Had a game today where two ships of two different civs were in my system, and both of them were enemies of the same diplomatic standing. The game did not let me know or choose which fleet I was about to fight.

And that brings me to another thing. Please, PLEASE, give us a way to somewhat assess or estimate the size, power, make-up and capabilities of a fleet before we attack it. It's a little bit stupid to have a planet with sophisticated research, industry and military installations that is being bombarded from orbit by a fleet of 1200 mm railgun juggernauts, yet the planet can't tell if the attacker is a fleet of said juggernauts or a single scout.

Monstrum wrote:
There are several threads addressing the issue of intercepting fleets, and that's the most pressing concern, but I think that the whole way that simultanous movement and combat-engaging is implemented is flawed and that it should be top priority to fix it.......



* Fleets between stars cannot be engaged in combat. (It's probably "realistic", but we're dealing with space opera here and gaming concerns are more important.)

why not have a tech for a ship modification/weapon/support module that allows for ship interception or 'interdiction' as used in EVE online. ships equipped or modified for interception can create a radius which freezes enemy ships for a limited time allowing the attacker a chance to engage the enemy in a lane. the idea of having a technology and/or module for this is the ship or fleet in a lane is in warp or w/e (i.e. moving very fast) and not floating around a system which allows for easy interception. seems fitting that you would need something powerful to stop them mid warp etc...

The next important thing to consider is what constitutes an "Event" - I'd suggest the following (also note, the ability to turn on or off a "pause for event X" toggle in an options menu would be super cool - so if you didn't want to interrupt the movement phase because your colony ship arrived at its target system and are quite happy to start your colony when you get alerted at the beginning of your next build phase instead of holding up the movement phase you can.)



A fleet [fromfactionX-allowingyoutoignoreallied(orany)movementifdesired] not previously on sensors enters sensor range of one of your Colonies or fleets (The "Arr - who goes there!" event) - allows for defenses to be scrambled in response to detected threats - giving greater detection range actual value... (It wouldn't trigger this event every segment, only the initiial segment - unless it was "skirting" the edge of some overlapping sensors and disapeared and the re-appeared - but this should be a rare enough situation that this would not be problematic - and if testing shows it is, alternatives can be explored - like a few segments immunity from caussing this event.)

A fleet [fromfactionx] moves within combat range of one of your fleets - allows for "guarding" as you can attack a fleet as it passes by...

One of your fleets arrives at the end of it's movement queue - you can now assign it to move on to another location, or let it sit and guard, or make note to start a colony with iut next turn - etc.



(those are off the top of my head, more could easily be added as testing reveals needs.)



This event - response driven movement method allows for quick movement when nothing is happening and detailed mevement when the proverbial Dust is hitting the fan!

chuckrman wrote:
@messej

I understand your frustration and I am sure once this gets to Beta some of these scenario's will play out. I would still like to see systems capable of defending themselves by actually inflicting damage on an attacking fleet if the appropriate upgrades (currently non-existent) are built on the system. This would put a halt to the mass cheap fleet and scouts causing blockades issue. If I had a space stations and a local defense force that could actually inflict damage (like a patrol craft upgrade) then I would need to actually use ships of some strength to attack a planet. I also agree that sitting thee watching a fleet that is traveling to my planet via the non-lane method and not being able to do anything about it until it pops out seems silly. I think there should be some sort of EW like tech that allows you to intercept ships either in the lane or "free moving" outside the lanes. As you have pointed out, if you don't have the ability to address this in some way, human controlled fleets will be making death strikes on your critical planets while you do nothing but sit and watch. Your fleets can't be everywhere or you will be broke. I have found I can take a system in 1-2 turns if I put ships in the fleet that are designed for invasion (using +invasion modules). I just hide those fleets in the lane when they are done. Not like my opponent knows which fleet is which but I can make the most effective invasion fleet virtually untouchable while using my anti-fleet fleets to clear the path. If they never touch my invasion fleet I will just keep trucking through. My opponent will either waste time taking back the planets or be robbed of resources (and potentially increase my resources) while trying to attack my impervious fleet.



Part of this might by addressed by creating an upgrade for a system that does not allow opponents ships to leave the system unless the planet is taken (assumes enemy fleet, does not affect friendlies). This would at least stop the scout chases and possiblly slow down an invading fleet.

First, I'm really not that frustrated actually, this IS an Alpha level of the game - however what ALPHA testing is SUPPOSED to be for is to find ALL the stupid obvious flaws of the game - like these ones. BETA testin is supposed to find flaws that involve MASS playing or truly obscure choice paths - things like "ok, after the 374th turn, with an 8 man multiplayer game, the save system stops working because the file gets WAY bigger than we ever imagined possible." or "Oh - all 8 players chose to build developement ABC at the same time and crashed the game - that just never came up in the alpha test" -- but this game is not ANYWHERE near that stage imo, yet the g2g progress bar creeps ever closer to the BETA release, so I'm a wee bit worried some arbitrary release date is going to determine the BETA release, rather than the game actually being at that stage of testing is all. So I'm afraid, concerned and honestly, quite worried, but not frustrated - I knew I was taking a gamble, I'm just trying to express my concerns to the developers suffeciently to give them suffecient motivation to do better, and thereby hedge that bet - and I REALLY REALLLY REALLY want a good MoO2 sequel, and I think this game has the best shot at that, but they're HEADED in the same direction all the other flops I've payed too much for ended up at, so I'm a wee bit concerned. Frustrated will happen at the "Gone Gold" phase if these issues are ignored all the way to release. Then I'll get frustrated.



Also, I'm afraid that the system defense suggestions you gave don't do ANYTHING to derail the tactic I outlined - those phantom fleets are MEANT to be destroyed on arrival - in fact if they die the turn after they arrive, that's the IDEAL situation - now that maintenance cost is freed up to make room for REAL fleets to attack the systems that were improtant enough to be defended, and now the systems that AREN"T valuable have expensive defenses sucking resources that should be spent on the improtant systems - which are about to see real invasion fleets arrive.



Because really, the scouts aren't a problem now that the defend option exists, just BUY a cheap defense ship in their destination system and set it to guard - they don't get any further than you let them. (If you don't keep enough dust on hand to just outright buy a simple scout killer in any system, you deserve to have a scout blocading you... o.0 ) - btw - these random "scout killers" make excellent phantom fleet material...



Now, I want to be very CLEAR that I am not attacking your ideas or you, I understand you considered them and felt them appropriate responses. ALl the flak is to make sure the developers can see that the whole reason I suggested the movement system renovation so strongly instead of recommending system defenses (which would, imo, make a much better expansion than release level consideration) is because they don't do jack about the actual problem - they don't add any dimension to a game that is headed for a severly one-dimensional game. Movement needs to be fixed before release or the release version of the game won't be worth playing, and noone will bother with the expansions. But if they release a SOLID (even if its a little "bling" defecient) base game, then people will enjoy playing it while anticipating the next expansion that adds that missing bling. What they have now held my interest for less than 2 weeks - because that's how long it took me to see the problem I outlined, realize what all multiplayer games would look like and realize that I found such a game not entertaining in the least.



So if my responses look like maybe I got them out of the "How to NOT make friends and influence people" best seeler, please understand, I appreciate your feedback, I revel in the fact that you are considering solutions, and the severity of my response is out of a need to make sure the Devs and any reading this thread understand that they do not solve the problem - I need that message to be clear above all else - because I want to enjoy this game, I truly do, and I want to see it done right - and after considering your responses, my response was simply "nah - I'd still do the exact same thing" which means they didn't solve the problem I'm afraid.



(Mind you - I'd LOVE to see system defense options, and the idea of trapping fleets has plenty of strategic merit that give it real value should it be added to the game, it;s just that neither of these ideas actually address the problem I am bringing up in this thread.)

Not sure if this falls under UI or Gameplay - but I would like to be able to set a fleet on "Patrol" routes, and - more inmportantly - a "Guardian" stance (or an implied equivalent). Let me clarify.



1) The ability to tell a fleet to endlessly patrol a certain route (say for pirates or incoming off-road fleets) would be tremendously helpful - around newer colonies that don't yet have much of a sensor range for instance. - This is similar to the waypoints already suggested, just adding the iea of a waypoint circuit that can loop.

2) The ability to stop enemy fleets from BLAZING right past my fleet (or my fleet from blazing right past enemy fleets that were in a system along my path that was outside sensor range - then you aproach, see them, and leave - it's annoying) is utterly important. If an enemy fleet enters a system with a "Guardian" (or maybe ANY opposing) fleet - they need to have their movement interrupted and their opponent(s) need to get a chance to chose to attack them - if I decline the option, they continue as if unhindered, if they win the battle, the same is true. On a draw they need to forfit the remainder of their movement as the guardian fleet outmaneuvers them and prevents their continued movement. (On a defeat the enemy is gone, so the point is moot.) This would continue each round until the aggressor choses a "retreat" option (outside of comabt) that sends them to the nearest friendly system, the "guardian" fails to attack, or the hostile fleet wins and no other "guardian" fleet choses to attack.



To give an example of the kind of thing I'm rying to stop - imagine a chain of 4 systems A - B - C - D. Let's call System A enemy teritory, system B is neutral, C and D are yours. In preperation for an attack, you've started moving a flet into System B, a defense force is already sitting in System C, and system D is your BRAND NEW colony with no ships in orbit. I've seen an enemy fleet launch from A, pass right through B to stop moving somewhere between B and C, then on the next turn, blow through C and stop at D, and start an invassion... Completely ignoring my borders and defenses -- if this was done via the slower Off-road travel, it's a bit more understandable (though the ability to intercept off-road fleets on sensors needs to be implemented too, at least I've never managed it), but when they blaze right past 2 fleets of defrenders because their movement end between systems instead of on it, and because I can't select the fleet and click attack in the .3 seconds available is problematic to say the least - and it'll turn into a HUGE exploit once multiplayer is enabled - as a well plotted movemnet path (that ensures each move ends between systems) can allow players to completely ignore enemy defense lines and attack their capitals for a quick win.



Here's an even better way to address these problems:

I'd like to suggest a completely seperate phase for movement and combat -- build, assign flight paths (no actual movement takes place), etc - hit end turn - refresh each fleet's movement pool. - move fleets along designated paths, interrupt movement for special conditions (like spotting a new enemy fleet on sensors or encountering one at a system), complete with movement phase notifications to tell you why it was interrupted - stop automation and allow player (and/or AI) responses like resolving combats, adjusting flight paths, or any other valid fleet actions (like invasion, colonization - actual colonization would happen at the beginning of the next "Main" phase, and the colony ship may get attacked before it can actually put down this way, but the order would be queued, merging, seperating. etc.), allow a few moments to look over scouted systems and pick a new one to explore - possibly from those just made visible), etc. - hit end turn - continue new/remaining moves - stop automation - resolve consequences/conflicts - hit end turn - continue new/remaining moves - repeat ad infinitum until end turn is hit after no fleet has been given new orders and no fleet has any movement queued (may have movement points left, but they have not been gviven any ortders, so there's nothing left to do) - ZERO ALL FLEET MOVEMNENT POOLS - actually advance to the next turn - build, assign flight paths, etc. (Note, creating a fleet from the hanger may need to be available at any point, or possibly just during the "main" turn - created with zero movement - this would need to be considered more deelpy). It'd make combat/encounter filled (between-)turns a bit longer, granted (but when there's alot going on - I WANT to take longer to consider the ramifications, and I can alway ignore the stop event and hit end turn again to carry on with previous orders) but uneventful movement (like a bunch of fleets in transit, but none reaching their destination) would still still go as quickly as they currently do. It'd make things considerably cleaner though, as a fleet arriving at its destination would interrupt the turn advance and allow a colonization order to be given (for instance) or for enemy fleets trying to cross your borders to be attacked, or defense forces moved into position when an enemy fleet is spotted on sensors (provided suffecient detection range to get fleets to the threatened system before the enemy arrives). This would resolve SEVERAL of the requests being made on the forums.



One simple way to implement this "between" turns phase programatically is to simply break movement into 10 (or some other number, as determinable by a global constant that'd be easily adjusted as testing optimizes this proces) "sub phases" that each run 1/10 of each ship's movement, then checks for notifications/conflicts/etc, then advances to the next 1/10 movement segment for all ships automatically if no player/AI response is needed, or pauses and waits for player/AI response if a notification was given - possibly with a "waiting for players A-B-C-D to respond" screen for those not involved in an notifications.

I really like your ideas. Fixes a lot of the problems I had with movement and ships being in the middle of nowhere and untouchable, and ships bouncing backwards and forwards between systems, which cannot be attacked. Much prefer that movement happen at the end of turns to prevent silly multiplayer games (this is a huge problem in civ 5)



I also definitely want to see the option to not attack, such that scouts can pass by each other safely if both players wish.

I'm also afraid taht in a multiplayer game, that "the one who click first win" and "I wait before moving to see what the other do, but if he do the same ..." will be a problem, a turn based game should be about thinking, not fast clicking.

The game is implemented for multiplayer.

The non interception of the other ships when you're in a system is a bug, the devs are aware of it and work on a fix.

I like the fact that you can't change direction while on a lane. With that you have fewer places to put ships and you have less things to manage as a player. When you think of where you should place your ships you have only a dozen systems to tak einto account versus the entire grid of the usual space 4x.

Nah, simply make it so you only move at the endphase

or by having everyone take turns indipendently.

Seems like you could solve these problems just by giving fleets a "control area" where an opponent can't pass them without giving them a chance to fight.