Frogboy Frogboy

RTS Battle Mechanics and Ships

▼

RTS Battle Mechanics and Ships

Let's brain storm together!

from Sins Forums

By now some of you have probably realize just how much power you have in the beta process. That this isn't some late stage marketing excercise. We (you guys and us) are helping make a game together.

So let's talk about battle mechanics in space.  How do we make them more fun? What do we have to work with that will be intuitive from a strategic point of view and enjoyable to make use of?

Let's start with ships (in no order):

ASSUMPTION #1: Swarming is bad, combined arms is good.

In my opinion, we need more ships in the game. I also think that the FLEET should be the key building block of your strategy. That is, the player who utilizes "combined arms" with their fleets should be able to do vastly better than the player who is just swarming.

ASSUMPTION #2: Fleets should work together as a single combined arms fighting force

In most RTSs I play, I select several units, hit Ctrl-# and the units are grouped. I then right-click wherever and they scatter.  If I hold down the right keys, I can get them to move as a single force.

I think in Sins, it should be the opposite. A fleet should move together as a single formation by default. I should be able to put together the right mixture of ships to counter my opponent's strategy and be able to right click on the other fleet and let them fight it out while I go work on another battle elsewhere if I want (sure, I *can* micro manage the battle but I shouldn't get much, if any, advantage to doing it IMO).

ASSUMPTION #3: The fleet mechanics should be logical and require no explaining

What I mean is that I shouldn't have to look at the manual or some strategy site to figure out how to put together a good fleet or counter to an enemy fleet. 

This means we have to work with things that are obvious on screen when it comes to ships.  So what can differentiate different ships:

  1. How fast they move.  A battleship might pack a powerful punch but move and turn very slowly for instance.
  2. Rate of fire.  Some ships might shoot lots of wimpy but constant shots. Others might shoot less often but more devastating shots.
  3. Range. Some ships might have long range shot capability while others can only shoot short-range.
  4. Accuracy. How often the ship hits its target can be based on the accuracy of the ship.

Based on thes 4 simple game mechanics, one can imagine how one could put together various kinds of ships that counter someone else's fleet.

For example, you could have a Targeting Frigate which improves the accuracy of ships in a given fleet (as long as it's relatively close).  You could have a ECM Frigate which decreases the accuracy of ships in a given fleet.  Ships that have a long range may be more depenedent on accuracy than shorter range (for obvious reasons). 

Another example, a fleet that is heavy with big slow but powerful ships might be more vulnerable to an attack by a fleet of more nimble ships and fighters.  But that fleet might be countered by putting in a few anti-fighter frigates in with the fleet.

What I'm referring to here isn't rock-paper-scissors per se since one doesn't completely counter the other. It's reduction or maginfication of effectiveness that we're talking about. 

IMO, the true tactical skill in the game is the person who relies on combined arms.  The guy who just cranks out tons of heavy frigates and tosses them at their enemy should get mowed down by the player with a more thoughtful strategy.

The key thing though is that I really think that the strategies in this game should be straight-forward and intuitive.  In one of my favorite recent games, Company of Heroes, the replayability comes from having so many strategic options. And the game only has a handful of units. 

What's your view?

 

68,289 views 239 replies
Reply #126 from Sins Forums Top
and speaking of critical hits

it was a critical hit that sank the hood the yamoto and the mighty mo

a shot hit the mag. on the hood

a bomb hit the mag on the mighty mo and the yamoto

so critical hits happen too
Reply #127 from Sins Forums Top
You've got to have randomness - otherwise, you're playing space chess. It might still be a good game, but once one side gets an advantage, the battle becomes predictable.

There is a similar dichotomy in boardgames: Random (Axis&Allies)vs Pure number crunching (A Game of Thrones). Randomness or not is a matter of tastes really and I won't discuss that.
But when you say that a game without randomness becomes predictable and thus, dull, I have to obnject.
A well designed game should provide enough different strategies and intricacies to allow a player which seems behind on some aspects (military might for example) to get the upper hand by other means (tactics, influence).
A strategy game where the leading player can only be defeated thanks to sheer luck is fundamently flawed. The opposite is true too of course.
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #128 from Sins Forums Top
@ a few people

Nonono , the random and number crunching arent the deciding factors . The deciding factor is YOU and yep micro

If someone has paper and scissors , and you have rock and scissors , its you and Micro that determines whether or not you win.

Can your rock evade paper fast enough to hit the scissors? Can your scissors cover your rock well enough and counter attack the paper as it tries to fire on rock.
Reply #129 from Sins Forums Top
i want skill and skill only to win these games, if anyone plays a shoddy game vs a player that plays a perfectly executed game, the shoddy sucker better lose

yes, in real life there is a certain of what you might call "randomness", though to be technical nothing is random - nothing. the more information you acquire and the smarter your decisions, the less unexpected or "random" things happen to you

the reason "random" things happen in war is because there are just WAY TOO many variables for commanders to take into account, weather being a common example as something that is difficult to predict and has won/lost major battles in the past

but this is a game... a strategy game... not real life, and for it to be practical and playable, it cannot try to copy real life in every aspect, take that into account
Reply #130 from Sins Forums Top
random events in real war usually only affect one battle they do not decide the war

and you are right it shouldn't dictate the winner of a game
Reply #131 from Sins Forums Top
@Wraith - I have to agree with you. I dont think any people are advocating a full blown simulation just some game dynamics that try to some degree to account for highly improbable occurrences to spice up that "what if" or "divine" factor a tad.
Reply #132 from Sins Forums Top
i put a similar thing in my post escort problem

now i will expand on it here

functions of the ships as i see them

frigates

flax-fighter protection-defense against other ships so if escorting (will us the flag ship as the ship being escorted)would stay near the flag to provide fighter protection

heavy-fleet protection-agressive would move to intercept any enemies targeting the flag

scouts-scout systems in front of the fleet if so ordered-provide ecm and eccm for fleet when in a fleet. would stay near the flag for protection

colony-colonize planets/rocks in battle would stay near flag for protection when no more hostiles would move to colonize planet/rock when it is able to be colonzed

siege-bomb planet actions same as the colony

cruisers

escort cruisers would move forward of the flag to protect it and bring its main guns to bare provide target inhancement (which by the way is ecm)

carrier provide fighter protection or provide bombers for ship attacks would remain in the rear launching said small craft fighters remaining over fleet for cap
bombers being aggrisave and attacking along side the heavies

all other cruisers would move to intercept incoming enemies

these are my thoughts no one else in this feed has really spelt it out like this


ps
sorry about all my misspells
Reply #133 from Sins Forums Top
random events in real war usually only affect one battle they do not decide the war

and you are right it shouldn't dictate the winner of a game


but in an rts, one battle can win the war, and hence you cannot say that a couple random events (which might cause a battle to be lost) will never lose the war

and if the random events never do change the outcome of our soase wars, then whats the point of them? (don't misunderstand my question, i am still strongly against anything random, at all)
Reply #134 from Sins Forums Top
unless you have a scout in the system before and during your complete jump everything in your battle will be random to start with


eisinhower went from being the most powerful man on the planet to a spectater with one order and that was GO
Reply #135 from Sins Forums Top
I thought it was Douglas MacArther - I must be getting to old.

I guess it might be true that us old soldiers just fade away.
Reply #136 from Sins Forums Top
macarther was in the pacific

Reply #137 from Sins Forums Top
macarther was in the pacific



OK. I must have missed the reference to the Atlantic or SHAPE.
Reply #138 from Sins Forums Top
rofl, yes you would need to scout a system b4 entering it... lol

and whoever the heck it was didn't have all the information, if you read my post above you'll notice i said in real life there are too many variables to consider (and still no randomness), but in a game you cannot make it exactly like real life and still make it enjoyable/practical
Reply #139 from Sins Forums Top
i have been giving the micro macro discussion some thought and came up with a rough idea.

one of the or rather the most imporatant taks of a commander in battle is to identify threats how to deal with them. in a space game this usually means, figuring out which ships are the most dangerous for your fleet and the response is most of time to destroy them. this often does result in considerable clicking and checking.

the idea now is rather simple: designate threat levels and let your ships handle it mostly themselves, only fine tuning some of the more delicate issues if necessary. so you more or less select a few enemy ships and list them as high priority and as a result more fire will be concentrated on them, the higher the level, the more ships will direct fire. as such, I would imagine it roughly as follows:

low priority: only ships designed to counter these units and that are in vicinity will fire.

medium priority: all or most ships fit to counter these units will move to fire on the selected target, some of the ships in the vicinity will also direct fire on them, even though it is not their primary counter.

high priority: most fire in the fleet will be directed on these targets.

and as I said, direct orders will override the priorities, so you can always make adjustments as you see fit. initially I played with the idea of fleet orders, like giving your fleet primary, secondary objectives like taking out certain classes of ships, protecting certain classes of your own ships, but the other stuff seems a bit better.

true, it does result in a degree of simplification, but with a game of this level of detail and magnitude few people will be able to manage multiple battles as well as in say homeworld as well as managing your vast empire. at least thats what I expect.

so, what do you think?
Reply #140 from Sins Forums Top
Yeah, but a range algorithm would have to be added that decides between proximity and threat priority. Otherwise, you could put a single high priority ship on the other side of the gravity well in order to force AI fleets to move into your defenses in order to get at their priority target.
Reply #141 from Sins Forums Top

Yeah, but a range algorithm would have to be added that decides between proximity and threat priority. Otherwise, you could put a single high priority ship on the other side of the gravity well in order to force AI fleets to move into your defenses in order to get at their priority target.


I'm not sure if I get your point. this would be an aspect of changed controlls and automation / reduction in micromanagement. does this have so much to do with how the opponent ai works? problem is, I have little idea of how ais in games work, so if the are in a way using the same "controlls" as players ie. selecting units, giving them inital order, etc. i suppose you are correct in that routines need to be established, so as to prevent the ai being baited so horribly.
Reply #142 from Sins Forums Top
Yep without a range restriction crafty tricksters can set bait and wait traps like a dog against the AI.

I think it should be very easy to set up such a system. All it really needs is just to have the priority system based on range. For example one selects the effective range they want for the unit then sub selects the primary target under that range option. A more advanced system could allow for primary targets at different ranges. However I feel something like that should be a tech based option.
Reply #143 from Sins Forums Top
but with a game of this level of detail and magnitude...

so far this game has very little detail, at least not in terms of strategy/tactics

and all this talk about algorithms setting up target priorities... you guys are talking about making this game into a movie where you build/research then send some ships into a battle, sit back and watch the show
Reply #144 from Sins Forums Top

but with a game of this level of detail and magnitude...

so far this game has very little detail, at least not in terms of strategy/tactics

and all this talk about algorithms setting up target priorities... you guys are talking about making this game into a movie where you build/research then send some ships into a battle, sit back and watch the show



that is incorrect. that concerned only the ai opponent. what I suggested was that you discern and evaluate the threats and let your fleet take a little work off you by responding accordingly to it. it's to avoid having to tell every little frigate (or group of frigates if you prefer) what to fire at and repeat those orders every minute when the target has been destroyed. I say what I want to be destroyed the most and the rest will be taken care of. it's a suggestion no more. oh, and yes, I would want to enjoy and just watch the battle just for a few moments in between.
Reply #145 from Sins Forums Top
Hi! I'm new to the forums, so I gotta apologize if I'm posting this in the wrong place. I actually posted this in a the beta-feedback sticky, but it looks like it would be more appropriate here. If this is the wrong place, let me know and I'll erase it.

Anyways, here it goes, my impressions and ideas for game play:

1- 3D movement in the game is a big concern for me. After reading some of the many detailed posts from other beta testers on a variety of subjects, it seems that for most people the realism in a game directly correlates to their enjoyment. Needless to say, 3D environment is an absolute essential to the spirit of the game. From what I gather, the functionality is there (‘~’?), but it’s totally useless as all of the planets are in a 2D plane, so there is no need for it.

Also concerning this, I think it would be pretty cool if there were some sort of bonuses for attacking ships from the top/bottom/side. Realistically, the armor on ships would be less on the top, right?

2- Speed of the cap ships. I think this is pretty closely related to the size of the gravity wells. The lumbering capital ships are really spry in their movements, whereas their large size seems to dictate a slower rate of acceleration. They can move from one end of the grav well way too quickly, which makes the placement of forces less tactically important, as you can reposition quickly in case of attack.

Lowering the speed of the cap ships, and increasing the size of the grav wells would be great, and go far towards achieving the ‘epic’ ambitions of this game.

3- On a side, slightly related note, the planets should probably be increased in size, as currently they are tiny! A fleet moving from one side of the well, to the opposite barely has to alter their course to go around the planet, and the size of the orbiting structures is ludicrously large in comparison to the plants.

4- When attacking a planet, why destroy the infrastructure? Some planetary bombardment would be a god idea to soften up the defenses, but there should really be a drop ship / troop ship option that lets you capture the planets infrastructure / population. Also, planetary bombardment should cause some sort of environmental problems that need to be fixed after taking over.

5- On a related note to #4, why destroy the orbital structures at all? When you have control of the planet, the orbital assets should be transferable / captureable.

6- Jumping through grav wells. Its been mentioned before. I’m with the folks that thinks it’s a bad idea to be able to jump through the grav wells.

7- Attack priority list. When the fleet is engaged in combat, it’s not practical to assign targets to each ship at all times. I think there should be a target priority type menu that lets you select what types of targets each one of your ships should attack (ie: the flack frigate should take out bombers first, than the fighters, THAN fire on whatever else is around, instead of ineffectively firing on the cap ship while the bombers are swarming all over the place).

* Misc stuff I saw on other peoples wish list / complaint list :
-Planetary defenses and such, originating from the planet itself (IE planetary missiles).
-Planetary shields, on the planets surface. That just makes sense.
-Point defenses on cap ships / pd frigates
-Subsystems on ships that can be disabled. EI: Disable the weapons/engine and send a boarding party!
-And yes, the COL cap ship is wimpy looking.
Reply #146 from Sins Forums Top
@Max - welcome to the microcamp!
Reply #147 from Sins Forums Top
pd frigates


this is the role that the flax frigates should be playing
Reply #148 from Sins Forums Top
I'm just going to throw the "that taxes the system too much" comment in there. mostly because you said it would be cap ships only...
Reply #149 from Sins Forums Top
@Maxxa - Welcome


Also concerning this, I think it would be pretty cool if there were some sort of bonuses for attacking ships from the top/bottom/side. Realistically, the armor on ships would be less on the top, right?



Not really - If you know that you are going to be operating in a 3D environment, you would build your ships/vessels to have 360 degree scan/fighting/defending capabilities in the x, y, and z planes.
Reply #150 from Sins Forums Top
@ SrGalen


Not really - If you know that you are going to be operating in a 3D environment, you would build your ships/vessels to have 360 degree scan/fighting/defending capabilities in the x, y, and z planes.


Your right. I guess I just want some sort of tactical advantage for thinking in 3D. I really like these games for the freedom they bring in a tactical sense. It would be a shame if it was another c&c clone, in space.