Dear community,



Here is the second design document for the expansion pack! Don't hesitate to have a look and give us your comments.









Rational

The invasion needs to be more strategic and provide different options to the player. In addition to the current siege system, the player now has the possibility to bombard system in order to weaken the population and the infrastructure and to start a land invasion to conquer a system faster.



Using the siege strategy requires time but allows capturing a system without damaging it while the Land Invasion is instant but involves loss in both sides.







Gameplay



Siege



When a player sends fleets in an opponent’s orbit, he can start a siege if there are no fleets from the opponent or other enemies. Once the siege is started, he cannot be stopped even if enemies’ fleets arrive in orbit of the system. Each turn, the invasion progress from X percent equal to:









The invasion power is only defined thanks to Invasion Module of the different ships. Moreover, the progress is capped between a minimal (1) and a maximal (10) value. When the progress reaches 100% the system is conquered. No population nor improvements are destroyed. However, the initial ownership is very low. The maximal value should not exceed 10% to make a siege during 10 turn at least.



During a siege, a siege descriptor is applied, reducing the dust income and the science in order to penalize the development of the empire. The penalty depends on different parameters: heroes, faction traits, star system improvements, etc.





System Bombardments



If the player chooses to use the bombardment action on a system, he cannot use the Land Invasion in the same turn. Using this action consumes all the movement points left. This action is a “System Action”, which means the entire player’s fleet orbiting is going to be involved.



While the player is sieging, he can click on the bombardment button to weaken the system. For each type of bomb module within the fleet, a new bombardment option is unlocked. The different options can be: destroy improvements, create anomalies, terraform planets or kill population. Each time the player wants to drop bombs on a system, he has to choose one and only one option from the available list.





The probability to succeed is then related to the number of fighters / bombers and to the defense of the system. If the quantity of fighters / bombers is higher than the system’s antiaircraft defenses, the bombardment will succeed.







Each hitting bomb improves the effect of the bomb type previously selected. For Instance, if the player chooses to use a bomb killing population, with 1 bomb hitting, there is 1 dead whereas with 3 hitting bombs there are 3 dead.





Land Invasion



If the player chooses to use the Land Invasion action on a system, he cannot use the bombardment in the same turn. Using this action consumes all the movement points left. This action is a “System Action”, which means the entire player’s fleet orbiting are going to be involved.



While the player is sieging, he can click on the Land Invasion button to conquer the system within the turn. In order to do so, it requires at least one ship with troops and then fighters or bombers provide additional bonuses.



The invasion success is calculated depending on:

• Invasion Percent: The higher the lower is the chance to succeed is.
• Invasion Defense: Value of the system given by specific building, heroes or traits and ships within the hangar.
• Troop Quantity: Number of troops.
• Fighters & Bombers Quantity: Number of fighters & Bombers.
  
  

In the tool tip of the action we display the content of the result array.

[LIST=1]

If Success Probability is > 1 then we display: Invasion will succeed.

If Success Probability is between 1 & 0.75 then we display X% to succeed.

If Success Probability is between 0.75 & 0.5 then we display Y% to succeed.

If Success Probability is between 0.5 & 0.25 then we display Z% to succeed.

Else we display: Invasion will fail.

[/LIST]





In any case, an Instant Invasion causes damage to both sides. The following values may be influenced thanks to star system improvement and troops characteristics.



If the winner is the invader:

[LIST=1]

A random number of improvement is destroyed between 0 to 75%

A random number of population died between 25 to 50%

A random number of fighters / bomber are destroyed between 0 to 25%

A random number of troops died between 0 to 25%

The system is now owned by the invader

If the invader has troops, it adds one population per X troops module and it give + Y ownership per troop module. All the troop module are considered as killed on the ships.

[/LIST]



If the winner is the defender:

[LIST=1]

A random number of improvement is destroyed between 0 to 25%

A random number of population died between 0 to 25%

A random number of fighters / bomber are destroyed between 25 to 75%

A random number of troops died between 0 to 100%

[/LIST]





Content



Common Troop Modules



They are only used to invade system. Depending on their level, they require different resources: population, industry, strategic resources…





Race Specific Troop Modules



Horatio

Their troops are cheaper and count as 2 population once the system is conquered.



Sowers

For each troop succeeding the invasion, the system obtains a permanent bonus in industry of +X





Common Bombardment Modules

[LIST=1]

Improvement destruction

Population destruction

Anomaly 1 creation

Anomaly 2 creation

Planet retrograding

[/LIST]





Race Specific Bombardment Modules



Cravers

They bombard with locust, starting a plague in the system. An event spawns on the system for X turns. Pop to troop (conversion?)



Sophon

They have a special bomb which is able to leech science but making no damage to the system. Pop to science



Star System Improvements

Using current Star System Improvement or add new ones? Or both?







------------------------------------



Like for the previous feature, you can be proactive regarding all the content and how the feature works.



Cheers,

This sounds way more fun and interesting than the fighter/bomber-thingy that totally confused me and sounded like a lot of work for very little gameplay-value. ^^

Okay, that is a nicely and much more diverse ground combat system than before.



I've just got a little problem with the maths.



You stated: Success Probability = {Invasion Percent * [(TroopQuantity*CoefficientTroopefficiency)+(F&BQuantity*CoefficientF&Befficiency)] - [InvasionDefence*(1-InvasionPercent)]} / Invasion Defence



Let me make this more convenient for calculating:

Success Probability := S

Invasion percent := I_%

Troop Quantity := N_T

Troop efficiency := e_T

Strikecraft Quantity := N_Str

Strikecraft efficiency := e_Str



Then your formula is:

S = I_% * [N_T*e_T+N_Str*e_Str-I_D*(1-I_%)] / I_D



There are three terms, which can be identified, let's just name them.

Trooper Term: I_% / I_D * (N_T * e_T)

Strike Term: I_% / I_D * (N_Str * e_Str)

Progress Term: I_% * (I_%-1)



On the one hand I do get the idea of combining an efficiency with the bare number for Strikecraft and Invasion troops and I do understand, why the success probability contribution of those two terms is proportional to I_%, which basically means, that the longer the siege goes, the more effect troops and strikecraft have. And I also get, why this should be normalized to the defense power.

On the other hand, you have the progess term, independent of defense power, which scales quadratically. For a number smaller than 1, since x^2 <= x for x element of [0,1[(1isofcoursemoot,sincethentheinvasionwouldhavebeensuccessful,thisisofcoursealwaysnegativeor0.



Myproblemnowis,thatthisisasymmetricparabulafunctioncenteredabout0.5andI'dliketohearandunderstandyourreasoning,whyitisnecessarytoincludeanumber,thatmakesithardesttoattackafter50%invasionprogress?Isthismotivatedlikeakindofdigin-term,thatwouldbasicallystate,thatcivilresistance(sincethisis,asIhavetosayagain,independentofinvasiondefense!)isatamaximumhalfwayduringaninvasion?

Let'shavealook,howthatturnsoutforI_D=N_T*e_T=N_Str*e_Str=1withI_%onthex-axisandSonthey-axis:







The red points are derived by your function with all three terms, the yellow function just drops the progression term.



For I_D<


Well, that's my basic problem, I don't understand, why this term is even in there.

You missed a bracket

S = {I_% * [N_T*e_T+N_Str+e_Str] - [I_D*(1-I_%)]} / I_D

Here is a quick simulation I did when I wanted to check the formula







Higher the invasion progress is, easier the land invasion becomes, which seems logical to me. Isn't it?



Anyway, thank you for the time you took to give me such a feedback and if you have other doubts on another formula, I'll be glad to discuss with you =)

If the winner is the defender:

[LIST=1]

A random number of improvement is destroyed between 0 to 25%

A random number of population died between 0 to 25%

A random number of fighters / bomber are destroyed between 25 to 75%

A random number of troops died between 0 to 100%

[/LIST]

Ouch >_< That's harsh. I hope you won't use a uniform law of probability to know if 0% or 100% of troops died.



Anyway I onemorize Ail : it sounds a lot of fun to invade now.

Will the bombardment bonus apply from one turn to another ? If I bombard to destroy with one bomb at turn 1, then one bomb at turn 2 will I have the effect of 2 bombs on turn 2 ?



EDIt: Whahahahahha I almost forgot that :

Cravers

They bombard with locust, starting a plague in the system. An event spawns on the system for X turns. Pop to troop (conversion?)

Huuuum... sounds good for the craving

Meedoc wrote:
You missed a bracket







Here is a quick simulation I did when I wanted to check the formula







Higher the invasion progress is, easier the land invasion becomes, which seems logical to me. Isn't it?



Anyway, thank you for the time you took to give me such a feedback and if you have other doubts on another formula, I'll be glad to discuss with you =)

Okay, then it's just a linearly scaling offset, probably to prevent easy land invasions with equal powers? I can live with that. ^^

Whoever is defending always should have an advantage. Although he can still be overrun, since it is a constant related to defense/attack. Only turn zero is sacrosanct, since no invasion can succeed here. I'm okay with that.

Just one more thing:

If you need pop for troop modules, but can just use strikecraft with high invasion, instead: Why do you use more than one troop module at all, then? It has to be much more effective than strikecraft for invasion, otherwise you'd never willingly sacrifice that much pop.



And how does the repair of the troop modules work? Do you need to reload troops at any planet at the cost of pop?

Meedoc wrote:


If the winner is the invader:

[LIST=1]

A random number of improvement is destroyed between 0 to 75%

A random number of population died between 25 to 50%

A random number of fighters / bomber are destroyed between 0 to 25%

A random number of troops died between 0 to 25%

The system is now owned by the invader

If the invader has troops, it adds one population per X troops module and it give + Y ownership per troop module. All the troop module are considered as killed on the ships.

[/LIST]



If the winner is the defender:

[LIST=1]

A random number of improvement is destroyed between 0 to 25%

A random number of population died between 0 to 25%

A random number of fighters / bomber are destroyed between 25 to 75%

A random number of troops died between 0 to 100%

[/LIST]

Question: Why would the Attackers or Defenders lose a random amount of anything? Certainly if you win you would still likely lose something, and certainly if you lost your opponent would also still likely lose something, but is this suggesting your losses will be totally random between these values? I ask because it seems like the amount of losses should be based upon things such as strength of enemy troops, planetary defense installations, and the harshness of the invaded environment. For example, a well planned attack with a 6:1 advantage on a Terran World might be relativly easy, compared to a pitched battle with 1:1 odds on an arctic world. Losses in the latter situation should be much higher, and while SOME randomness makes sense, the outcome would not be entirely based on chance.



Napoleon didn't lose 90% of his troops invading Russia because the dice were rolled and he came up short, it was because he invaded during the Russian winter, where they had a large number of defenders. On the other hand, Germany's successful Blitzkrieg of Poland in WW2 was so successful and resulted in very few casualties because they attacked with overwhelming numbers, superior troops, and in ideal weather conditions.

KingJohnVI wrote:
Question: Why would the Attackers or Defenders lose a random amount of anything? Certainly if you win you would still likely lose something, and certainly if you lost your opponent would also still likely lose something, but is this suggesting your losses will be totally random between these values? I ask because it seems like the amount of losses should be based upon things such as strength of enemy troops, planetary defense installations, and the harshness of the invaded environment. For example, a well planned attack with a 6:1 advantage on a Terran World might be relativly easy, compared to a pitched battle with 1:1 odds on an arctic world. Losses in the latter situation should be much higher, and while SOME randomness makes sense, the outcome would not be entirely based on chance.



Napoleon didn't lose 90% of his troops invading Russia because the dice were rolled and he came up short, it was because he invaded during the Russian winter, where they had a large number of defenders. On the other hand, Germany's successful Blitzkrieg of Poland in WW2 was so successful and resulted in very few casualties because they attacked with overwhelming numbers, superior troops, and in ideal weather conditions.

Adding to this idea, you could add a stat "collateral damage" to each troop, describing the likelihood of destroying improvements/killing population.

So infantry would have the least likelihood of collateral, while armored vehicles would have a medium amount and artillery had basically a guarantee of dropping buildings.

Same for strikecraft, which will always generate collateral damages, anyway. This could also be an incentive to use troops, even if they do cost pop, instead of just strikecraft.

Gameplaywise, this would enhance verisimilitude on the one hand and open use of less efficient invasion troops in greater quantities for high value targets as a strategic option on the other hand.



Elsewise I do agree that the death toll should be dependent on the attack to defense-ratio, but on top of that, you could introduce an asymmetry term to the equation: [2*|N_T-N_Str|/(N_T+N_Str)]

This would reflect that the use of only strikecraft would be very detrimental to the invasion, as only ground troops would be, so you're forced to maintain some kind of balance between strikecraft and invasion troops for maximum efficiency.



P.S.: Doing this would additionally allow the interesting defense strategy to pack in a lot of superiority fighters to kill off the enemy fleet's strikecraft. This would slow down the siege and make any land invasion fruitless, due to the asymmetry term. No air support? Then no chance of a successful invasion, sir!

Collateral damage, I like that idea. Like you said, it would really mimic the reality in a good way (should I use troops but it's costly or bombard, it's easy but I'll have to rebuild a lot)

The fact troops cost pop is a good idea : the planets with a high pop number and the food dev would have a role : to provide large troop numbers and to refill pop really fast.

yes this could be fun to add to the game

This is going to be an extremely great addition to the game. I can't wait for it to be added



Here are my suggestions so far, there should be an invasion module for the Hisso because they are a warlike race by which they are just better at ground combat because they're birds so they're not so ground like. I'm not really sure how to put it but I'll come back when I've thought this through some more.

By the way: Do we get neutron beams to kill off troop modules as a new special ship weapon?

LOL too much Eclipse play Nos ?



My thoughts:

1) I definetly like it, it adds flavour to the game!

2) If I read the document correctly, you need to replenish your troop modules after an invasion, as they are considered as staying on the planet. It's ok, but wouldn't it be more fun to actually let ground troops accumulate experience, the way fleets do and have - perhaps - 2d rank troops sent to occupy? Veteran units having a bonus surviving an invasion.

3) Do you plan to have two different populations on invaded systems? "Native" + "Invaders" with the native being slowly converted as the Control slide works towards 100% ?

4) Do you plan "resistance" type actions which can lead to an overthrow of a successful invasion if the invader doesn't leave enough troops as garrison? (Would be kinda cool and slow the invaders)

5) Is one troop module = to 1 population unit or is there a hidden multiplier somewhere?

6) I would add specific troops for the Hissho, invasion bonus and/or resistance crushing if you go with my point 4.... After all, those guys are naturally born warriors.



That's all for the moment, except to say that the expansion is really shaping up nicely.

Sharidann wrote:
LOL too much Eclipse play Nos ?

I rather thought of Moo2 and have no idea, what Eclipse is.

Eclipse is boardgame. An excellent one. And neutron beam can destroy all pop in a system .

Neutron bombs actually, if memory serves VieuxChat!



@ NOS: yes, you had such weapons in MOO2 too, I agree.

Yep, I realized after I wrote my message : It's neutron bombs and it's very usefull. And cheap. But it serves well the gameplay of the game. I don't think such a weapon in ES would fit.

What I would like is the way TI3 handles biological bombardement. You destroy everyone in the opposition, then you discard all your action cards. It could translate in ES by a huge diplomacy malus that would last long. So cravers or anyone with eternal war would really love that tech.

First of all, Eclipse is an excellent boardgame indeed =)



Then, you have awesome idea to complete the invasion document



Regarding the Hissho, it's planned to give them a special Fighter (to fit with their bird background). Maybe, we could define that this fighter is considered as a troop for Invasion instead of having a special troop module for them.



Regarding the troop, they are needed to start an invasion AND at the end, they are added to the population of the system and give a bonus on the initial ownership. That's why they are more important than fighters & bombers in order to invade a system instantly.

Then I'm not sure about weapons being able to kill troop module; it could be both exciting and frustrating (because it may become too hard to use them; maybe a weapon only working during the melee phase?)

As troops are considered a module, it will be strange to have experience on them and maybe hard to feedback clearly. However, resistance actions can add some spicy event, I'll think about what we can do on this matter =)

One troop module can have different costs we could have:

-1 population required for 10 weak troops;

-1 population and Adamantian required for 5 strong troop.



Finally, I'll rework on the way losses are calculated, I'll try to construct a system based on the collateral damage idea.



Thanks for your feedback so far, and keep commenting

Meedoc wrote:
Regarding the troop, they are needed to start an invasion AND at the end, they are added to the population of the system and give a bonus on the initial ownership. That's why they are more important than fighters & bombers in order to invade a system instantly.

So you can skip the rebellish phase of any new colony? This would make a rapid invasive expansion a lot more attractive.

Only possible exploit I could imagine would be, if you could reload troop modules after the invasion from the planet you just invaded or hadn't to reload troops, at all. That could have a nasty avalanche-effect, either way.

In the first case, you'd get free pop, since it never was born and put into the modules. In the second case you'd get one army for conquering all planets and directly including them into your empire without rebellion. That would be overpowered, too, since you'd only pay the pop price, once.

Meedoc wrote:
Then I'm not sure about weapons being able to kill troop module; it could be both exciting and frustrating (because it may become too hard to use them; maybe a weapon only working during the melee phase?)

That and the idea with strikecraft to troop balance for efficiency just opens up more strategic depths, since it allows for alternative ways to hinder or even cancel an invasion. I fully agree that such weapons should be special.

And now I'm imagining a few neutron beams in a cruiser fully packed with def, coming closer and closer to the doomed marines... o_O

Meedoc wrote:
One troop module can have different costs we could have:

-1 population required for 10 weak troops;

-1 population and Adamantian required for 5 strong troop.

Of course you could divide tech advancement for "strong" troops with heavy collateral damage, like tanks and artillery, vs pinpoint "weak" troops, so players can choose brute force versus subtility and enhance their style even more. Topping that off with a few racial traits shouldn't be out of the question, either.

Meedoc wrote:
Finally, I'll rework on the way losses are calculated, I'll try to construct a system based on the collateral damage idea.



Thanks for your feedback so far, and keep commenting

To sum it up, that sounds very nice, so far.