Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Voting about vcr logic

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:00:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Hi community!

Right now we arrived at a point were it seems that it is very frustrating
for Tim to make things right for us. My suggestion is to start a voting
where we vote on what we want to have and avoid.

Chtristian Zeitsch sent me a muster for this:

___________________________________________________________
*******************
1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
100) should try to stay at standoff range

1. 100% of the time
2. 75% of the time
3. 50% of the time
4. 25% of the time
5. never

2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
standoff range.

1. Yes
2. No

3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break enemys
Standoff range

1. Yes
2. No

4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break it.

1. Yes
2. No

5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.

1. Yes
2. No
**********************************
_____________________________________________________________

If you want to have an influence on this process then please answer and
write the points which you want to in the voting. But please don't write
long stories just the point in th above manner.
Because I will evaluate all the answers a place the results in a new voting
thread. The evaluation of this will then be sent to Tim and so he knows what
his "customers" want to have.
Currently I'm writing on my own vb routines to test different attack
algorithm designs and I will also sent them to Tim.

Thanks in advance.

GFM GToeroe

More about : voting vcr logic

June 8, 2005 5:01:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Hm, this is more or less adding new functionality. I would rather like
to see a good basis to work from, before making further changes. Combat
as it is now is hard to understand these days. One of the main topics
for me is: Why are battles sometimes so very short? I just had 2
battles where 2 ships and some FWs were involved and they both ended at
around tick 350. If you try to blast an undefended base from space with
Blaster Cannons, that is also nearly impossible to achieve. The weird
thing is a ssoon as th eenemy has something for defense, your chances
increase! Only once we underastand the logic behind this, then we can
match our strategy to it. Currently it is more stumbling in the dark.

Therefore I would say let's hear Tims thoughts first, as otherwise it
will all be fruitless if we come up with something he isn't going to
implement afterwards.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:01:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

To those that say that combat is too buggy to comment on, GToeroe isn't
asking for comments on the current state of the code, he's asking for
what we as players expect combat to be. This is useful to a game
designer if only that it puts himself and his "customers" on the same
page with terminology.

My votes:

> 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
> 100) should try to stay at standoff range

1. 100% of the time

> 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
> standoff range.

2. No - Leave evasive to hit probability only.

> 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break enemys
> Standoff range

2. No - Again, leave this to hit probability only.

> 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break it.

2. No

> 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.

2. No - Ships should just execute orders, plain and simple.


Scytale
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
June 8, 2005 5:01:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

The problem is, that I give it close to 0 chance that we will get the
old behavior back, as too much has happened by now. To achieve your
goal you would need to specifically say what you want to have back,
just as I said combats need to last longer again.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:01:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

> --We need at least one thing that influences the ability to stay at a given
> standoff range. What would make more sense than engine speed?

How about what it is now: hull max speed? Why change it? Just because
an engine can only move 30 ly/turn doesn't mean it's necessarily slow
in close-range combat. Besides, some races, like the Aczanny, have a
max hull speed greater than it can normally go specifically for combat
speed.

Scytale
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:15:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0;
speed
100) should try to stay at standoff range


2. 75% of the time
(I would like to see ship experiance affecting the chance)

2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
standoff range.


1. Yes
(again ship experiance...)


3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break
enemys
Standoff range


1. Yes
(again experiance...)


4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to
break it.


2. No
(EE, Rebels would become sitting ducks wouldn't they?)


5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.



1. Yes
(yeah, why should fighters get this only)

Keep the questions coming GT. I think though there should be a third
answer available. This would be 'unsure', which could reflect that they
are unsure/undecided or think that the question needs reframing.

Robert.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:43:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

My Answers :

> *******************
> 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
> 100) should try to stay at standoff range

> 2. 75% of the time
(Actually it should try to maintain the Standoff-Range if possible (if the
other ship is closing in faster this will be hard)
>
> 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
> standoff range.
>
> 1. Yes

> 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break
> enemys
> Standoff range
>
> 1. Yes

>
> 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break
> it.
>
> 1. Yes

>
> 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.
>
> 1. Yes

> **********************************

I think, that combat should be influenced by things that influence it in
real space fights...
I would like to see the ships fly more direct routes and "sneak up" to the
enemy instead of constand circeling around.
I like the current logic more than any before BUT I hate that the VCR stops
before Tick 5000, because I never find out why...Yes I'm sure there is still
ordenance and shoots being fired
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 7:19:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

As I said, Sparrow, make your suggestions and don't tell a story: This could
be in your case:

- No short combats anymore or at least an explanation why they occur
- Blaster cannons should kill bases again
- Have a basic logic where the basic principles are observable und
unterstood.

GFM GToeroe

"Sparrow" <e.kueper@gmx.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1118229148.406818.112320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hm, this is more or less adding new functionality. I would rather like
> to see a good basis to work from, before making further changes. Combat
> as it is now is hard to understand these days. One of the main topics
> for me is: Why are battles sometimes so very short? I just had 2
> battles where 2 ships and some FWs were involved and they both ended at
> around tick 350. If you try to blast an undefended base from space with
> Blaster Cannons, that is also nearly impossible to achieve. The weird
> thing is a ssoon as th eenemy has something for defense, your chances
> increase! Only once we underastand the logic behind this, then we can
> match our strategy to it. Currently it is more stumbling in the dark.
>
> Therefore I would say let's hear Tims thoughts first, as otherwise it
> will all be fruitless if we come up with something he isn't going to
> implement afterwards.
>
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 7:24:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

As I not understand the new combat, I wish me the old back before all the
changes where made andmaybe some smaller changes from that point again.

As I not understand it now I can nothing say to the voting and it seems me
uniteresting as the combat seems me real "buggy" or I see no logic in it
how it works now.

And as I not know how it shall work I can not look or search for bugs.

Bye-Bye JoSch.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 8:37:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Ok, this had look then like

- wish back old logic (host189 or earlier)

"nospam" <j_schwarze_@freenet.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:42a6f37b$0$8312$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de...
> As I not understand the new combat, I wish me the old back before all the
> changes where made andmaybe some smaller changes from that point again.
>
> As I not understand it now I can nothing say to the voting and it seems me
> uniteresting as the combat seems me real "buggy" or I see no logic in it
> how it works now.
>
> And as I not know how it shall work I can not look or search for bugs.
>
> Bye-Bye JoSch.
>
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 12:04:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

> *******************
> 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
> 100) should try to stay at standoff range
>
100% of the time; this means it should try.

> 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
> standoff range.
No. I agree on Ralph Hoenig on this matter.

> 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break
> enemys
> Standoff range
No. Same here.

> 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break
> it.
Yes.
--We need at least one thing that influences the ability to stay at a given
standoff range. What would make more sense than engine speed? Maybe
tractor beam should be important, too. [Ship can't escape if its engines are
overpowered by the tractor beams of the other ship. Exception: hyp]

> 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.
No. Ships should follow my orders 100% of the time. HG should only be
usefull
in fighting against spying.
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 12:06:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

.... in fighting and against spying.
June 9, 2005 8:36:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Ok, here is what comes to my mind immediately:
A) Combat should only end when there are no enemy objects left to fight
anymore (destroyed, fled, disabled, pods while attack soft is not set)
B) Ships should not move stupidly to the center, unless they attack a
base there
C) Stay off range should be kept, if the enemy allows it
D) Engines decide the speed ships move with
E) More flexibility in combat:
e1) 3 new selection lists, when to enter combat. Possible selections
are:
e1.1: Always,
e1.2: Only if enemy has no Weapon slots,
e1.3: Only if enemy has no Large Weapon slots
e1.4: If the enemy has in total less weapon slots than my fleet
e1.5: If the enemy has in total less LW slots than my fleet
e1.6: If the enemy has less ships
e1.7: If the enemy has no fighter bays
...
e2) 3 new selection lists, when to flee:
e2.1: Always
e2.2: When the shields are down to 50%
e2.3: When the shields are down
e2.4: When the armor is down to 50%
e2.5: When the armor is down
e2.6: When the hull is damaged
e2.7: When the enemy has fighters
e2.8: When the enemy has more fighters
e2.9: When the first ship from me got destroyed
...
F) "Hold the Line" switch should be made to "Keep Formation". All ships
with that setting should stay together and never single themselfes out
(due to hits)
G) Fighters should get a Stay Off range, which they should also stick
to

And now to your suggestions:
Q: 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0;
speed
A: 1. 100% of the time

Q: 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in
executing
standoff range.
A: 1. Yes

Q: 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to
break enemys
Standoff range
A: 1. Yes

Q: 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to
break it.
A: 1. Yes

Q: 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all
orders.
A: 2. No = All orders should always be executed as best as possible!!!
June 9, 2005 8:51:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Hi Group!

As I put it togeather I just want to add a few comments on that.

1. This is an example right now and the whole survey would involve much
more so answering it now is not necessary.
2. It should give a survey what this comunity want. (For example take a
DS with PTT at standoff range and a Gorbie without SL and without long
range weapon. Who shall win, how effective is standoff range, how long
should the battle last and how should the results look like? I belive
that asking 10 guys here I get 10 diffrent answers ranging fron "The
DS, it stays outside Gorbies weapons range and fire till ord is empty"
to "The Gorbie, of course".
3. I want to take out 2 main problems that involve other threads and
minimize their usability:
a) Threads only watch a single part of the vcr and not the whole
concept.
b) Threads end in two opposite dogmatic possitions and do not help
anyone in the last half of the thread.
4. This is not to tell Tim what he should do. Tim has done a very good
job on its own during the last years. This is more for us to check how
we as comunity think the vcr should look like. I am sure that we still
don't know.
5. This survey will include some simple and some stupid questions and
also some "new features" questions. But they are asked to show Tim what
we want. What he do with this information is his desicion (as always).
6. These questions are not about whats doable with programming, whats
the best solution or what takes the less time. It is what you think
battle should look like and honestly said I doubt that the gold VCR
will look like the answers this comunity gives.
7. We togeather played more vgap than Tim could have done and we all
are betas. I think that this comunity should inform Tim in a reasonable
way about players point of view on the VCR, their advantages and
disadvantages and let him decide.
8. After all I COULD imagine that if 95% of comunity think "this weapon
is to powerful in vcr", "standoff should work other way", "wings should
attack other way" etc, Tim MIGHT change something.

A survey how we think vcr should work. Not more, not less.


Loki
June 9, 2005 12:38:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

First of all a few general marks on the vcr:

- The vcr model gives, only considering that it is 2 dimensional and
a static area, advantageous to the attacker (and disadvantageous to the
ships (etc.) just wanting to survive or flee a battle), since the
fleeing ship cannot , at least
not before tick 1500 (unless Cent in which case it is 500), flee from
the combat by just flying
constantly in the same direction (and if faster being succesful even if
chased by the other ship
(for readability I use ship as generalized term for ships and wings
here and in the following paragraphs)).
With the current vcr model a ship needs to fly in greater circles than
the chasing ship (which can just take
a short cut and most likely will) to stay out of weapon range. Moreover
we have to consider the
ratio of weapon_range to max vcr distance (weapon_range /
max_vcr_distance = r), if this ratio r is to near
to 1 (or above) the attacker gets another big advantage, as there might
just be too few space where the fleeing ship
can run to (if it can leave the weapon range of the other, which
depending on the range might not even need to move
a single pixel). If we would not have a rule which prevents ships from
fleeing from vcr, before a certain combat tick,
it would give the one who wants to leave battle a big advantage.

- If ships are moving to fast it might be that, either weapons seem to
be fired eventhough the ship
does not seem to be in target range at the time it does fire its
weapons,reason for this can be a too fast displayed combat speed
and not having all lines, donating shots, drawn before the tick counts
moves one forward and the ships thus move again.
It can also in that case happen that a ship missed to fire at a target
that was only in range for a too short amount of time, reason
for this can be a too fast combat speed of the ships involved.
....

I will hopefully finish this article within the next 14 days.

ps. Loki, there is in my opinion only one answer to the scenario
between DS and Gorbi you did describe, that is that the DS would need
to win (sorry but with current stats, combat rules, I would consider
any other outcome screwed up attack settings, really flawed combat
behaviour of ships, etc.). Of course we would need to ask the question
if the attributes and a few rules (the one preventing ships from
shoting down incoming PTT fired from a DS (or similar high attack bonus
ships)) are choosen reasonable or if they do need in some cases heavly
tweaking.
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 1:57:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

> 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
> 100) should try to stay at standoff range
>
1. 100% of the time (try being the operative word)
>
> 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
> standoff range.
>
2. No
Evasion is for dodging shots. Short quick movements, not marching along
a desired trajectory
>
> 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break enemys
> Standoff range
>
2. No
Attack is for shooting things not chasing another ship around.
>
> 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break it.
>
2. No
Engine speed does not necessarily effect your ability to move at slower
speeds. A ferarri and a VW Bug, VERY different top speeds, but Ill be
the VF Bug is just as easy (if not easier) to drive around a parking
lot.
>
> 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.
>
2. No

If anything I would put crew experience and skill down for this role.
Perhaps simply add a +5% or something if a HG is present. Who knows,
but it should be less importance than crew experience and skill
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 3:43:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

> 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0; speed
> 100) should try to stay at standoff range

1. 100% of the time (assuming ship has maximum skill and experience)

> 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
> standoff range.

2. No (evasion should just reduce enemy to hit chance)

> 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break enemys
> Standoff range

2. No (attack should just increase to hit chance)

> 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to break it.

2. No (Should be max hull speed)

> 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.

1. Yes (but not a huge effect, just add some to skill and experience)

-- Karnak Prime
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 7:02:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

For sake of time & sanity, I will quote **and comment** as all my
desires have already been posted


>From Gabor...

- I wish at a first stage to see that the given attack plan switches
have
that effect which one would expect from commonsense. At least that what
one
can read in the help files.

- I wish to have that skill will have an positive influence on an
additional
attack bonus and that skill comes from succesful hits and destroyed
tonnage.

- I wish to have that Exp will have an influence how well the Captains
will
follow their given orders and also a posivite influence on an
additional
evasive bonus. Exp comes from succesful hostile actions like boarding

- I wish to have built in a natural mechanic which enables ships
fighting in
swarms and/or fleets. Maybe by the rules that ships which enter at same

attack vector will stays together if their vcr speed and accelaration
will
allow it. Or maybe if a fleet enters at same attack vector then they
stay
together or maybe if ships escort a leader than in vcr they tend to
form a
concentrated attack formation

- I wish to have the possibility to attack a specific enemy ship by
entering
vcr with an kill and/or intercept order on that ship.

**This would be excellent, and could be also used in the above comment
by setting one of your own ships as the Escort target, thereby keeping
your ships together**

- I wish to have implemented several flight patterns for intercepting
ships:
dumb ones, intermediate ones and sophisticated ones. If done by
equation of
motion or scripted doesn't matters

- I wish to have several general flight patterns for ships which have
no
special orders: dumb ones, intermediate ones and sophisticated ones. If
done
by equation of motion or scripted doesn't matters

- I wish to have the fear and anger concept working but in a way that a

swarm turns into a sheepish crowd only because swarmer ships naturally
have
little shield and armor.

**Good, but tough to code I bet. Maybe use the Bad Blood to have them
break ranks and charge**



And from Sparrow...

A) Combat should only end when there are no enemy objects left to fight

anymore (destroyed, fled, disabled, pods while attack soft is not set)

**I cannot stress enough how much I want this**

B) Ships should not move stupidly to the center, unless they attack a
base there

**and if they are supposed to attack the base, then stick around long
enough to use their Blasters, the weapon that is supposed to be best at
killing bases but currently is useless because combat ends too soon.**

C) Stay off range should be kept, if the enemy allows it

D) Engines decide the speed ships move with

**Up to max hull speed. Engines should matter, but putting Transwarps
on a RU-25 should not make it be better than a Nova with FTL-1. Also
putting N-20's on a Roc should not let it be better than a Nebula with
Transwarps. I think that using the Engine Speed with a Max of Hull
Speed would be a good comprimise**

F) "Hold the Line" switch should be made to "Keep Formation". All ships

with that setting should stay together and never single themselfes out

**What is the point of 'Hold the Line' Anyway? Ships will always stand
and fight unless the order is given to flee.

G) Fighters should get a Stay Off range, which they should also stick




And your questions as answered by me:

Q: 1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship

A: 100% of the time is possible, see 'execution of orders' below.


Q: 2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in
executing standoff range

A: No


Q: 3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to
break enemys Standoff range

A: No


Q: 4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to


A: Yes, up to Max Hull speed. Ships moving faster in VCR are naturally
better at this.


Q: 5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all

A: No. Orders should always be executed better for higher Experience.
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 12:20:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Hey GT, maybe you should post questions for discussions here, summerise
the responses and then go to Yahoo and make poll questions. Otherwise
you/we will not get anywhere doing it this way. I mean, with all due
respect Nameless, Loki, Sparrow and others GT did want people to select
their answers only, not use his post as an essay assignment :-)))

By the way, I finish marking them shortly and post your marks back to
you :-D
June 10, 2005 5:30:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

If a single DS would / could win against a Gorbie, then we have a
serious problem. The DS is faster and may be able to maintain the
standoff range, but the Gorbie should never loose! The best a DS could
achieve if the Gorbie has no long range weapons and no fighters, is a
draw. Everything else would ruin the game.
June 10, 2005 3:29:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Sparrow wrote:
> If a single DS would / could win against a Gorbie, then we have a
> serious problem. The DS is faster and may be able to maintain the
> standoff range, but the Gorbie should never loose! The best a DS could
> achieve if the Gorbie has no long range weapons and no fighters, is a
> draw. Everything else would ruin the game.

Of course it would and will ruin the game, therefore we have to change
ie.
a few stats etc.

But lets consider the setup DS (with PTT and Tachyon Guns (and a small
weapon ET able to drain armor)
vs Gorbie (without SL and without Long Range Weapon,
so lets assume that the max weapon range of the LWs and Small Weapons
is somewhere below 600), of course
for the sake of simplicity we could assume that the DS Ord Storage is
large enough to shot down
the Gorbi with PTTs alone:

- The Gorbie will not be able to shot down the PTTs (and Tachyon Guns,
I will refer from now on to both as PTTs)
of the DS , because of the attack rating of the DS (which essentially
means that the PTT will hit if not shot down)
and the rule that if the attack rating is too high the enemy ship (in
this case Gorbie) will not be
able to shot the weapons down with PDs.

- Lets assume that the DS is not starting within range of the Gorbie
and that both ships are not first
travelling into the center of the vcr (which will be about the only
chances that the Gorbie will
take out the DS).

- Now lets assume that combat speed does still depend on the hull speed
(max hull speed)
of the ship. So the Gorbie has a max speed of 20 - the DS has a top
speed of 190.
(Lets for now assume that this donates the combat quickness of the
ships. I will
later on come to the case where we divide the max speed by x and add a
constand of y to
donate the top speed, which would still mean a faster speed of the DS.)

- Now lets assume that the stand of range of the DS does not work 100%
of the time,
but only x% of the time. But leaving the stand off range does not mean
that it will get into
weapon range of the Gorbie. As for one thing leaving the stand off
range can happen in
both directions (larger distance to Gorbie (above 900) or smaller
(basically everything under 900)).
Also if the DS draws accidently near to the Gorbie, we have to consider
that only a fraction
of this is due to the Gorbies movement (as the Gorbie is just too
slow), if it would, it would take over 15 ticks
for the Gorbie to close the distance (assuming the DS is stationary).

- Now lets consider that in order to hold the stand off range the DS
will need to have a similar speed as
the Gorbie (lets neglate the direction of the speed for now), as it
would otherwise very often leave the stand
of range.

- So lets assume that the DS has a similar speed as the Gorbie and is
in the moment holding the stand off
range. Now lets assume that the DS accidently leaves this stand off
range and comes near to the Gorbie, so
that the Gorbie can shoot with its weapons on the DS and destroy it.
Now lets differ between two cases, (a) the DS draws near to the Gorbie
very fast, (b) the DS draws
near very slow:

(a): This means since the Gorbie cannot have such a big effect on this
drawing near, that
the Captain of the DS does so, and that the DS is accelerating fast
towards the target.
Which will probably look to everyone kinda stupid of the DS to do,
especially if it does not
try to negate that acceleration within the next few ticks, we should
consider
that ie. low experience and skill should mean that they do have a
greater deviation (in contrast to high exp and skill ships)
concerning matching speed and keeping combat distance, but that they
should not perform totally contradicting
orders for any amount of ticks. If it is possible we have to consider
that this does not apply to keeping stand off
range, but also to other attack settings, and especially also applies
to all other combat situations, involving different
ships, ie. when ships trying to hold a stand off range of 500 from the
opponent.
In which case (ship, no DS, trying to hold stand of range of ie. 500)
this acceleration of the ship towards its target will be
more devastating, since the absolut amount of distance closed to the
target will be the same (if it has the hull speed and
max acceleration) as in the case of the DS vs Gorbie, but the DS does
have a greater distance it needs to close so that
the Gorbie can fire on it (there are about no ship weapons (in contrast
to fighter weapons) which have a max distance under 200).

Now lets assume that the greater the value of the set stand off range
the greater is the deviation, the actual range the ship will
be in while been considered to be keeping stand off range, and the
chance that it will have a slightly larger or smaller actual distance
to the target. Even in that case this behaviour will have a greater
effect on the non DS vs Gorbie scenario, as the DS is simply too fast.

Now lets consider cases where the stand off range and the weapon range
ratio is as in the DS vs Gorbie case, but the combat
speed of both ships been nearly the same, in that case, under the
assumption that the ship trying to close the distance (not having the
stand off order of 900) has not such difficulties to set speed and
direction correctly as the ship tring to hold stand off range, it
will appear as if the stand off order is not present, the actual
distance will be constantly reduced, only the actual closing distance
will
be random (and might in some cases be zero). (Of course ships with a
lower max speed than the enemy ship will not be able to
hold stand off range, if the enemy ship does not want to).

And then lets consider swarms trying to hold stand off range, and also
assume that their is no leader the rest of
the swarm is trying to follow, lets assume that this effect is random
(hard wired behaviour and deterministic behaviour would
look even more strange), in that case at any given tick a random amount
of ships will leave the swarm in a random direction,
which will very fast lead to a non-existing swarm, and this would make
swarming very ineffective (of course we have to consider
that DS can also be used to swarm...).

So lets assume that the drawing near of the DS towards the Gorbie is
slow.

(b): This means that the drawing of the DS towards the Gorbie can be
due to the movement of the Gorbie
(and probably would mainly be), and the DS is for some reason
unsuccesful to stop this drawing near
before the Gorbie can shot at the DS.
If this can happen we have to consider that this behaviour will also
happen in all other scenarios
between ships trying to hold combat range and ships with lower ranged
weapons trying to come in range (or even trying
to ram the ship ordered to keep its stand off range), and in most of
these cases the speed will not be that favorable for the ship
trying to keep its stand off range and neither will in many of these
cases the actual safety distance (about 300 in DS vs Gorbie)
be greater than in the DS vs Gorbie scenario.


- And now lets consider that the Gorbie is only allowed to leave combat
after 1500 ticks, which is enough time for the DS
to tear the Gorbie, even if the distance between DS and Gorbi is
sometimes greater than 1000.

- Moreover in most cases the Gorbi will not be able shot a single
weapon the DS.

Do I need to go?

We could ie. consider a slightly different scenario with the Lotus as
ship trying to hold stand off range, and the awfully
small range with PBCs of supposely 3750 combat units...
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 8:03:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Sorry if this becomes another essay in the wrong thread.
Just skip it the beginning, my 0,02 € on combat in general, the
answers are at the bottom.
--
I detest the stupid "red baron air battle stuff" you still see in
science fiction movies and would go for a rather realistic scenarios.
I strongly assume that a battle would be an optimisation between
stand-off, recharge periods, information on own and hostile
weapons/shields/ lack of ord, condition of hulls etc.
Beside this there is a degree of risk of calculation and the less
calculable effect of defence mechanism.

So no chance to evade from a lightspeed attack of beam, even missile
would have a much higher agility and speed that any ship or wing of any
race.

Same with attack modifier.. how should that work.. and dont say that
the ships dodge from the beams..
-----------

1. If stay at stand off range switch is activated ship (Att 0; Ev 0;
speed
100) should try to stay at standoff range
> YES (Engines max speed.. wouldnt you go for max in a battle, whatever scotty is moaning ?)

2. Positive evasive modifier should make the ship better in executing
standoff range
> NO (additional engines ? better computers ?)

3. Positive Att modifier should give the ship better chances to break
enemys
Standoff range

> NO (same)

4. Engine speed should have an impact on ability to standoff or to
break it.

> YES (100 % correct.. a standoff battle is a battle of engines)

5. HG on board should have an impact on better execution of all orders.

> No (from the realistic point of view. Battles would be let by computers. No time to shout orders (actually pretty funny if you think about it.. "Starboard, starboard..")


Last comment :-)
Sparrow stated some brilliant ideas about adapted behaviour, that would
make the battle look kind of "intelligent". Pretty good.
So the player has to determine the risk that he is going to accept in
the battle.
Anonymous
June 11, 2005 4:45:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Nameless schrieb:

> We could ie. consider a slightly different scenario with the Lotus as
> ship trying to hold stand off range, and the awfully
> small range with PBCs of supposely 3750 combat units...

Is it really 3750 as in my last fights the enemy PTTs with shorter range
fire first on my Lotus.
Have you tested it, or is it only from Tims site with the LWs descritption
, cause it stand nothing in the newest RCS guides from Thriyon in version 2.4.

And if it really work over such a distance, how can I use this as stand
off if the max is 1000 ?

Bye-Bye JoSch.
June 11, 2005 7:41:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

nospam wrote:
> Nameless schrieb:
>
> > We could ie. consider a slightly different scenario with the Lotus as
> > ship trying to hold stand off range, and the awfully
> > small range with PBCs of supposely 3750 combat units...
>
> Is it really 3750 as in my last fights the enemy PTTs with shorter range
> fire first on my Lotus.
> Have you tested it, or is it only from Tims site with the LWs descritption
> , cause it stand nothing in the newest RCS guides from Thriyon in version 2.4.
>
> And if it really work over such a distance, how can I use this as stand
> off if the max is 1000 ?
>
> Bye-Bye JoSch.

Well around the beginning of the year, it was not working, as it was on
page "bugs reported", I do not know if it was written in the LW
description at that time (I only realized that it is written there, LW
description page, a few weeks back), but fact is that it got removed
(from the bugs reported page), after I commented on it and practically
said that this increased combat range for the Lotus and Aurora would
not be a good idea. So I do not know for sure and then I have said
supposely.
June 12, 2005 3:44:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Nameless wrote:
> First of all a few general marks on the vcr:
>
> - The vcr model gives, only considering that it is 2 dimensional and
> a static area, advantageous to the attacker (and disadvantageous to the
> ships (etc.) just wanting to survive or flee a battle), since the
> fleeing ship cannot , at least
> not before tick 1500 (unless Cent in which case it is 500), flee from
> the combat by just flying
> constantly in the same direction (and if faster being succesful even if
> chased by the other ship
> (for readability I use ship as generalized term for ships and wings
> here and in the following paragraphs)).
> With the current vcr model a ship needs to fly in greater circles than
> the chasing ship (which can just take
> a short cut and most likely will) to stay out of weapon range. Moreover
> we have to consider the
> ratio of weapon_range to max vcr distance (weapon_range /
> max_vcr_distance = r), if this ratio r is to near
> to 1 (or above) the attacker gets another big advantage, as there might
> just be too few space where the fleeing ship
> can run to (if it can leave the weapon range of the other, which
> depending on the range might not even need to move
> a single pixel). If we would not have a rule which prevents ships from
> fleeing from vcr, before a certain combat tick,
> it would give the one who wants to leave battle a big advantage.
>
> - If ships are moving to fast it might be that, either weapons seem to
> be fired eventhough the ship
> does not seem to be in target range at the time it does fire its
> weapons,reason for this can be a too fast displayed combat speed
> and not having all lines, donating shots, drawn before the tick counts
> moves one forward and the ships thus move again.
> It can also in that case happen that a ship missed to fire at a target
> that was only in range for a too short amount of time, reason
> for this can be a too fast combat speed of the ships involved.
>

- And then the lower the combat speed is for all ships, assuming that
the rest (of the combat logic, attributes etc.)
is exactly the same, the bigger will be the advantage of long range
weapons over short ranged ones, since it will
take more time to close the distance (to come in range) for the ship
with the shorter ranged weapons
(more shots can be fired by the ship with longer weapons).

- Also considering the vcr max distance, the smaller this value is, the
smaller is the advantage of the long range weapon above
short ranged ones (if two different weapon ranges exceed this max
distance their is no difference, due to the weapon range,
except for hitting probability).

- Circling is because of the high combat speed and the relative small
max vcr distance, unavoidable, of course with
a different movement behaviour we could also have quaders or triangles
or even pendulum like ship movement.
The problem is we have ships flying very fast and a slow acceleration,
where can the ships go, they can certainly not
leave the combat boundaries, nor are they allowed to slow down to 0
speed almost immediatly, which would also not
necessarily be advantegous (after all the ship they are chasing has
maybe not slowed down, etc.), after all it takes
some time to get its high speed back. And they are also often unable to
change the circling direction after all, they would need
to slow down before (they are just not allowed to leave combat
boundaries). To avoid this behaviour of circling we have about three
solutions, lowering the speed of the objects considerably, amking the
vcr much bigger, or totally neglating (and ignoring) physics,
when it comes down to movement.


- Now lets look again at the long range weapons with high weapon
accuracy (and attack bonus).
In contrast to many land based strategy/wargames in planets are about
no obstacle, no cover of any kind, for ships
(except for the nowaday incredible good screening of lower typed
fighters against ship pds), which can lessen the
advantage of the long ranged weapons. No protection when trying to come
in weapon range for the short ranged weapon ship.
Eventhough one could think about asteroids space debrie etc., which
would not even need to be permanetn objects,
just vcr objects. Also looking at wargames , in historical settings, in
most cases the units with the higher range were the
less mobile ones or had a lower hitting probability, as it is ie. not
as easy to shot a gun from horseback, while riding at full speed, than
when
standing in still, in planets we have ships like the Lotus (with all
attack ETs) and Stormer Ships, especially the DS, and
a few other ships which have incredible long ranged weapons which are
more mobile than most other objects (I will
come to the fighter ship problem later on), which will always hit (and
whose weapons cannot be really shot down).
....


More on this the next time.
!