Ownership of the star is something that did occur to me, yes. If you were to adopt my model, whoever has the majority of the connected planets would own the star. However, stars themselves don't have a defined method for takeover. So the "ownership" is really more of an enabling ability to send in your LEVs. The way you lose ownership is by not owning a majority of the planets/asteroids linked to the star.

A jump inhibitor was *definitely* on my mind when I made this post; agreed 100%. It would be one of the tactical structures you could build on a planet, so I assumed that it would carry over to stars, too.

Rather than have this thread become a discussion about adding new tactical defenses, maybe you should start one about that and create a list/description of the defenses you'd like to see? Not that I disagree with your suggestion, but I'd like to keep this thread focused on the idea of defending a star's sector with tactical defense in general.

Continuing on that subject, here is my first cut at what seems to be a reasonable algorithm for calculating the tactical defense of a star:

Let OSLP ("Owned Star-Linked Planet") = a Planet or Asteroid, Owned by the star owner, AND linked directly to the star
Let SLP ("Star-Linked Planet") = a Planet or Asteroid linked directly to the star, regardless of who owns it

StarTacDefense = 1.5 * AVERAGE(TacDefense of Each OSLP) * (Number of OSLPs / Number of SLPs)

Worked Example of Formula - just illustrating that it won't overpower the defenses, in my opinion, and greatly depends on how strongly you hold the system.

Let's say there are 9 SLPs. Listed:
1. Dead Asteroid
2. Asteroid
3. Asteroid
4. Terran Planet
5. Arctic Planet
6. Desert Planet
7. Volcanic Planet
8. Terran Planet
9. Asteroid

For simplicity's sake, we assume that a Dead Asteroid has a tactical value of 20, an Asteroid and a Terran Planet have a tactical value of 35, an Arctic planet has a tactical value of 30, a Desert Planet has a tactical value of 50, and a Volcanic Planet has a tactical value of 55. I don't recall the *actual* values in-game; besides that, they depend on your level of tactical development. I just chose these values arbitrarily.

Now, let's compare two examples, where the only variable is the number of OSLPs.
(I) In the first example, the star owner has 5 OSLPs: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9.
His AVERAGE tactical defense of these is: (20 + 35 + 30 + 55 + 35)/5 = 35.

Applying the formula,
StarTacDefense = 1.5 * 35 * (5/9) = 29.16667 =~ 29. So the star can potentially be as well-defended as our hypothetical arctic planet - with this kind of defense, and a large sector to defend, a reasonably organized invader could make short work of the defense.

(II) In this example, the star owner has 9 OSLPs: all the items 1 through 9 from above.
The average tactical defense is 36.667 =~ 37 (rounded up; calc omitted for brevity.)

Applying the formula,
StarTacDefense = 1.5 * 37 = 55. So the star can be as well-defended as our hypothetical volcanic planet. Now we're talking!

In both of these cases, the star's defenses were not ridiculously overpowered beyond what a normal planet could have. Also keep in mind that tactical upgrades are expensive, and getting all your OSLP planets to full tactical capacity could take a while. Until then, you might have just 10 to 12 capacity on an owned star.

This formula is not affected by the sheer number of planets linked to the sun, but it is affected by their type. If ever a game were created where only volcanic planets linked to the sun, it could become quite the stronghold (the average planet tactical value would be multiplied by 1.5, giving you a star with 1.5 times the defenses of a fully-defended volcanic planet!) This needn't be a bad thing, since there are many ways to destroy defensive structures; and in any case this sort of "star strongholding" would be quite rare given this formula.


One open issue with this star defense idea is how to keep players from ambushing incoming fleets by building defense structures only at the phase-link point. By surrounding it with gauss cannons, and putting phase inhibitors, hangar defenses, etc. on the opposite side of the sector, it could be very difficult to invade a star - particularly one with many volcanic planets around.

One solution is to create a non-circular build radius for stars: you can build reasonably well out to the edge of the gravity well in areas that don't link to other stars; but for a certain area around phase-link points from other stars, it should be unbuildable.

Another solution, perhaps technically simpler to implement, would be to constrain the star's build radius a bit, and ensure that all links from other stars come in at the edge of the gravity well (if they don't already). Ships would still be fired upon immediately when entering the gravity well from another star, but they wouldn't be surrounded with an impenetrable wall of gauss cannons.

Thanks for your feedback...

allquixotic

Yeah, the game doesn't have enough neutral, un-static-defensible grav wells as it is by endgame, don't take away the only ones left.

Kudos on your post Allquixotic. It was a fun read and I agree entirely. The mean defence formula you made perfectly proportion the defences in a star's gravity. Even with a max-out of defences according to the hypothetical best of the formula you made, the defences would not be indestructable yet they would still be a good fight. Having other enemies or allies build defences on the same star's gravity well would be interesting. For multiplayer this would be a real cunning element I imagine.

35 Star tactical points is UBER regardless if you own the entire star system or just a few of the planets.

Scenario 1 (A player conquered all the Planets in a Star System in a multi star game):

The player builds up all 35 points of the Star's Tactical slots. Then he positions his entire fleet in the star's gravity well since there is no need for it to be anywhere else. Any other player that attacks will have to deal with the player's fleet that is likely the same size PLUS all of his Tactical Defenses.

His opponent will never be able to overcome his star's combined forces. Just like he'll never be able to overcome his opponents star's combined forces. In a 2 star game, this could very easily equate to a stalemate.

If there are more than 2 stars, then an alliance and joint invasion between two "System Lords" could take out the 3rd player's star. Of course, timing such an invasion would be difficult over those distances.

Sure, this would be interesting and kind of cool, but it would make for a very long games that favors the defender.


Scenario 2 (a player only owns some of the planets in the Star System when he gains control of the Star)

His opponents in the same star system have their Trade/Refinery Ships pour through the Star's Gravity well like they always do....except now the player will kill them all. Any bounties are immediately collected by the player that owns the Star. This impoverishes his opponents while enriching himself.

This basically gives the player who owns the Star enough of an edge to wipe out his opponents pretty easily.

Ahh, I could go on with this but there really is no need. The developers aren't going to make Star Strongholds possible. The risk of stalemates and crazy long games is too high.

IF we are super lucky, they will however allow the use of Phase Inhibitor equipped ships. Ships with that ability would make for some interesting encounters around stars.