All DR fleets work just fine in late game when your high production systems can churn them out, I have done this in many games. If you are up against better tech or heavy ships, instead of spread fire = your fleet dead, the other fleet not hurt, which result I have seen and had happen to me many, many times - often a very high level leader does this too - NOT spreading fire would be of great benefit and allow you to weaken the fleet. I have seen games where a fleet is unstoppable even when opponents have more production, and the focus fire would prevent this. I can see a LOT of reasons for focus fire and it could vary by round as well, so say you are at long range with short range weapons, you need focus fire to have a chance to kill the enemy vs. dispersed effect, or visa versa.

The formation thing is nice, it could strengthen even more the idea of a mothership/gunship protected by screen ships (it already works, though I don't remember what's the priority target currently). Targetting, well, the middle option seems better to me, but I guess it will depends on the enemy fleet (lots of small ships = spread, a few dreadnought = focused).

PanH wrote:
The formation thing is nice, it could strengthen even more the idea of a mothership/gunship protected by screen ships (it already works, though I don't remember what's the priority target currently). Targetting, well, the middle option seems better to me, but I guess it will depends on the enemy fleet (lots of small ships = spread, a few dreadnought = focused).

Also think of the situation when he has a few big and well defended ships in the front line and you have a lot of glass cannons.

Of course spreading fire would be the most effective then, to hurt him most.

So, now that we actually have the expansion, what are your opinions on this?



My feelings are that Fleet Formations aren't very useful, because there's no incentive to put anything but the best defended ships on top of the list, to tank for your fleet. There's no reason I would risk my glass cannons, for instance.

Well if you use lot's of small meat shields for your less defended bigger ships.



It could be cheaper or quicker to replace a few bricks.

This document is now public!

I don't know if I'd ever phrase: "use weak ships as a shield" as the requirement. If I had a couple of destroyers and a dreadnought, the dreadnought having slightly more weapons than the destroyer but the rest being full of defense, I'd want the dreadnought to tank, right? But this way, my destroyers would be put in the very front row.

Since you already have "defend the fleet", I don't see the sense of that, really.

Also: If you want to protect the supports, shouldn't they be on the bottom of the list?



And I find it nice that you have to live with your selected formation during the fight.



Regarding targeting: I like the options, but I would like battlecards along with it like "taunt": All enemies are forced to strong fire. On block -> All enemies are forced on focus fire.

If you'll want the dreadnought to tank, you'll use the "Defend the fleet" formation but your opponent may use a focus fire to destroy it quickly. By using the "use the weak ships as shield", you'll be sure that your dreadnought won't be focused and will be able to deal more damage while the destroyers are destroyed.



And yes, there are some leads to use battlecards to mess up the targeting and formations during a fight

Here is the list of available formations:

Could we add a "random" (or have that as the default if none selected), and I don't mean randomly pick one of those four, but just scramble the ship list randomly.

Are the dead rounds only in there for some type of game-play balance or something? They don't strike me as really necessary.



Sounds pretty good though and adds does add some depth to battles while keeping things simple enough.



/2cents

Simplicity is good.

Now about the way we'll select them : before battle we'll have to chose a formation then in each phase we'll have to chose a battle card then a targetting order. I hope those thing we'll be chosable with auto-battles.



About formations: will they be updated each round ? for instance, if I chose defend the damaged ships and my first ship got damaged but has now less HP than another ship of my fleet, will that other ship be put on front of the fleet ?

Moreover those ships in the "back" of the formation : shouldn't they get some malus for being farther than other from the front ?

Adds flavour to the game, I like it!



What I would also like to have is something like "Protect the motor"... In fleets, as soon as I can, I try to have one ship design with the speed bonus affecting the whole fleet, giving me a slight speed advantage in strategic terms. Would be nice to be able to protect said ship.



Other thingie (please don't kill me!), I was wondering why the speed only mattered in a strategic sense. Why can't speed affect the battles as well ? What I mean with it .. based on an example....

I have a fleet of VERY fast vessels armed with kinetics. I lunge at full speed towards my opponent to give my weapons the most time in the most effective zone. My speed of closing (and hence the length of the different battle phases, only thing remaining the same is the overall length of the battle) is not static anymore but comes out of a combination of my speed and the enemy's speed. If I am missile heavy, I can then choose, for example, to keep the range open... and so on.

Relative speed could also perhaps affect how fast one can retreat for example, in terms of sustained damage.

Sharidann wrote:
Adds flavour to the game, I like it!



What I would also like to have is something like "Protect the motor"... In fleets, as soon as I can, I try to have one ship design with the speed bonus affecting the whole fleet, giving me a slight speed advantage in strategic terms. Would be nice to be able to protect said ship.



Other thingie (please don't kill me!), I was wondering why the speed only mattered in a strategic sense. Why can't speed affect the battles as well ? What I mean with it .. based on an example....

I have a fleet of VERY fast vessels armed with kinetics. I lunge at full speed towards my opponent to give my weapons the most time in the most effective zone. My speed of closing (and hence the length of the different battle phases, only thing remaining the same is the overall length of the battle) is not static anymore but comes out of a combination of my speed and the enemy's speed. If I am missile heavy, I can then choose, for example, to keep the range open... and so on.

Relative speed could also perhaps affect how fast one can retreat for example, in terms of sustained damage.

What happens, if your hyperspeed fleets closes in faster than the fighters/bombers nominally do? Also I don't see why the overall length of the battle should remain the same. You'd only cut slices off phase 1 and 2, while elongating the short range phase, overpowering kinetics.

Also, logically, if I were missile-heavy and had super engines, I'd keep a slower enemy on max range forever and never close in at all.

What happens, if your hyperspeed fleets closes in faster than the fighters/bombers nominally do?

>>Then not only can you choose to retreat on your own terms, whatever the odds, but also you guarantee that the enemy catches a sore neck trying to follow the swift movement of your ships! (Doesn't work with Amoeba).

More seriously, I would think that Bombers/Fighters get more acceleration in a tactical sense than Ships of the line, unless the technological gap is truly humongous, in which case, they are toast anyway.



Also I don't see why the overall length of the battle should remain the same. You'd only cut slices off phase 1 and 2, while elongating the short range phase, overpowering kinetics.

>>Small misunderstanding: I see it as relative.... You check for each phase what is the most favorable course of action (if you are Fast+Kinetic Heavy = Close in, if you are Slow and Missile Heavy, try to keep range open as long as you can) and the relative values gives you the relative length of each battle phase. The system is supposed to keep track of your relative tactical advantages and weaknesses and cope with it in the best way. Does it make more sense that way?



Also, logically, if I were missile-heavy and had super engines, I'd keep a slower enemy on max range forever and never close in at all.

>>I totally agree, wonder whether the games mechanics allow it, tho.

I'm having some worries about that but it's hard to tell if they turn out to be justified without being able to see this in action.



My main-worry is that the best attacking choise might often be too obvious and thus picking them won't feel very tactical. Also the Formation-choices all don't seem to make that much of a difference.



Ship with most hull, ship with least weapons or ship with best defenses on top?

If I'd design a ship to tank/be on top, it would be all three at the same time, rendering all but the MP-Option useless.



There never is any incentive to not have the ships with the most effective health/best defenses(and thus least weapons) on top.

And if someone sees I have such a ship in my fleet, he'd probably never choose the focus-fire-option. This again would make it questionable if it makes sense to design a dedicated tank-ship in the first place.



I think it would be much more reasonable to sort them by a specific defense type.



Sort by: Deflectors/Shield/Flak/Omni



So my Formation-choice would at least depend on the enemies fleet-composition and not be always the same.



I also like Sharidanns idea of speed having a meaning in combat:



Every party picks which phase he wants to be the longest.



And then a formula depending on speed could determine the length of the phases.



Example:



Player 1 has speed of 4

Player 2 has speed of 7



1st case: Both prefer melee:

Long-Range-Phase: 16.7 % of time

Mid-Range-Phase: 16.7 % of time

Melee-Phase: 66.7 % of time



2nd case: 1 pref melee, 2 pref range:

long: 42.4 %

mid: 33.3 %

melee: 24.24 %



I calculated:

Phase the faster one wants to be in=Speed of the faster/(Speed of the faster + Speed of the slower + Average Speed)

Phase the slower one wants to be in=Speed of the slower/(Speed of the faster + Speed of the slower + Average Speed)

Phase noone wants to be in=Avearge speed/(Speed of the faster + Speed of the slower + Average Speed)



If both want to be in the same phase it is:

Phase both want to be in=(Speed of the faster+Speed of the slower)/(Speed of the faster + Speed of the slower + Average Speed)

Phases noone wants to be in=Average Speed/(Speed of the faster + Speed of the slower + Average Speed)/2

Unfortunately we cannot modify the length of the different battle phase for several reasons: such as the refactoring of the whole battle system.



The formation cannot be refreshed each round, but it may be interesting to resort the ships at the beginning of each phase. I have to check what influence it could have on the targeting selection: can it create some sort of targeting combo? Or will it rather flatten the choices?



The formation has to be more diversifies; it is just a first draft, as well as the targeting orders. When we're talking about best defense / worst weapons, it means "considering the opponent's fleet". For instance if you have a ship A with 200 deflector and 1 ship B with 50 Flak but the enemy only has one Missile, the ship B will be placed before A.However, if the enemy only has Beams, we will place ship A first because its theoretical defense is higher than B.



Thanks for your feedback!

Meedoc wrote:
When we're talking about best defense / worst weapons, it means "considering the opponent's fleet". For instance if you have a ship A with 200 deflector and 1 ship B with 50 Flak but the enemy only has one Missile, the ship B will be placed before A.However, if the enemy only has Beams, we will place ship A first because its theoretical defense is higher than B.

But having some algorithm smartly figure it out for the player takes away the part where he feels that he has made the right decision!



For me the whole point of playing turn-based games is that I like that from time to time am challenged to think and make the right decisions, while having bad results when not making the right decisions.



Having good algorithms for the AI to use is all good. But giving the player access to all of these takes away the incentive to actually play the game.



Imagine playing chess against the computer but instead of thinking and moving your pieces yourself you always click on "suggest move". That might be interesting to watch one or two times but it will become boring really quickly and if you win you will never find it was because of what you did right.



The combat in my opinion, right now is the weakest part of Endless-Space in regards of having your decisions make an impact. Picking cards is better than nothing but when compared to other games' combat it's really lackluster.



With the inclusion of formations and aiming-orders there then would be a great chance to allow the player to make impactful choices.

So I hope you use that chance and don't make it so the choice is almost meaningless and an automatism does the actual important part of the ship-sorting.



I don't know if you guys know the trading-card-game Magic. But that's what I feel has a meaningfull way of combat with it's attacking- and blocking-system.

@Ail: You played Kamigawa second edition?

I'm now imagining the Ninjutsu-mechanic with ES-ships... Damn you for making me imagine that. XD

Here is the list of available formations:

• Protect the damaged ship: ships with the highest Hull Points are on top of the list;
• Use weak ships as a shield: ships with the least weapons are on top of the list;
• Defend the fleet: ships with the highest defence are on top of the list;
• Protect the supports: ships with the most MP are on top of the list
  
  

I've been meaning to comment on this for ages but been literally too busy. Anyhow, I was hoping for something a little more in-depth honestly, good start though



Anti Missile Formation - Ships are grouped extremely close together (requires XP) that allows ships to combine flak values from individual ships into a fleet value. Due to tight formation enemy kinetics are more accurate as if they miss the first ship, they'll hit the second! (ship death can result in aoe dmg to nearby friendly ships?)



Individual Movement Formation - Ships spread out, reducing effectiveness of fleet repair modules (or something, just tossing idea) but reduces accuracy of spread fire order



Protect Colony/Troop Transport Ship - basically protects non-combat ships from damage? (Protect the supports category) This should almost happen by default. /shrug+







Admiral heroes could allow for 1 formation change during battle?

Hi guys,



We've had a lot of headaches with this features but I think that we finally have something cool. So it's different from what I announced in the overview, and I think, for the best. This new approach involves less micromanagement and bring a new simple and efficient gameplay which is going to enhance the battles.



So, here are some of the targeting orders and formations we have in mind. As usual, feel free to comment and bring your own ideas!







Rational



We want to add more strategy regarding the battle, and for that there are two new features: Formation and Targeting.

• Formation allows the player to define how his ships are sorted. This will then define which ships will be targeted first by the opponents.
• Targeting defines how shots are divided: you can either focus on one ship or spread shots on the whole fleet.
  
  

With those two additions, battles are going to be more strategic and require a better upstream preparation.







Formations





Gameplay



From the battle notification, the player can select one formation for its fleet from a list. This list evolves through the game thanks to specific technologies unlocking new formation. Also, some formations require a ship over a specific level.



As previously mentioned, a formation defines how your ships are sorted. Each formation uses properties and sorts your ships either in a top down order or in an ascending order.





Here is the list of available formations:

• Protect the damaged ship: ships with the highest Hull Points are on top of the list;
• Use weak ships as a shield: ships with the least weapons are on top of the list;
• Defend the fleet: ships with the highest defence are on top of the list;
• Protect the supports: ships with the most MP are on top of the list.
  
  

A formation is selected only during the pre-battle and cannot be changed during a fight.







Targeting Orders





Gameplay



From the battle notification, the player can choose a targeting order, which will impact the outcome of the battle.



The targeting order can be defined for each phase, if none are selected, a default targeting order (the Spread fire) is used or the one selected in the previous phase.





There are three different types of targeting available:

• Focus fire: all your ships focus the first ship of the opponent (depending on its formation). Once the target is destroyed, there is 1 dead round to acquire a new target.
• Strong fire: from the top of the list, a third of your fleet targets the three first opponent’s ships. Once the target is destroyed, there is 1 dead round to acquire a new target.
• Spread fire: each one of your ship targets the first ship of the list which is not targeted. If every ships are already targeted, the ship selects the less targeted from the top of the list. Once the target is destroyed, a new target is acquired immediately.
  
  

Ail wrote:
I'm having some worries about that but it's hard to tell if they turn out to be justified without being able to see this in action.

Ship with most hull, ship with least weapons or ship with best defenses on top?

If I'd design a ship to tank/be on top, it would be all three at the same time, rendering all but the MP-Option useless.

I think there may be some additional ship-design subtleties that this proposed design caters for. In our current games, we've started seeing a lot of heavily-armoured ships (cruisers and dreadnoughts that are at least 50% armour modules). This means that they have very low defence scores but have very high health and can soak the damage. Currently the "Protect the damaged ship" formation would work for these, but not "Defend the fleet", so that needs to be considered before any changes are made.



Arguably, a lot of the time you'd get the same result with some sort of omni 'put the toughest ship in harm's way first', but these proposals do provide for at least some flexibility. In theory, you could use "Use weak ships as a shield" to flood the enemy with cheap, sacrificial ships that do nothing other than take fire - perhaps literally bare ship hulls - whilst your big, heavy-hitting dreadnoughts (that have sacrificed defences for weaponry) hammer the enemy fleet.



It should also allow us to finally use support ships, like corvettes with fleet repair modules, without them dying instantly: put your big, defence or armour heavy ships at the front while the corvettes cower behind. So far, I'm really looking forward to these changes.