View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001978 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Unit Abilities And Behaviors | Dec 10, 2010 5:40 pm | Dec 17, 2010 10:59 am | |
| Reporter | Sizzle | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | considering | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 4.048 | ||||
| Summary | 0001978: Fleet / escort behavior tied to Flagship line | ||||
| Description | I like ShadowOTE's concept 0001966 of tying this ability to the flagship line -- actually I like the idea of tying more "advanced" tactical behaviors on the part of ships to the presence of some sort of "leader" craft; this introduces more of an emphasis on combined arms that is not insurmountable, with a little extra effort (read micro) you can get the same behavior. I know we don't want unnecessary micro in the game, and there is a certain argument to give all AI behaviors out of the box, but I think this makes the flagship line be more than just a "big starship" that goes pew pew in a certain way. It already provides ammunition boosting which is a certain abstraction of "improved command and control" of the local fleet, and I see provision of certain advanced behaviors as a good extension of that. My personal definition/suggestion (please note this is a very rough outline, if people like the concept it certainly could do with fleshing out!!!): An auto "fleet" maintenance system that simplifies fleet movement, and makes it simpler to split your fleet up for flanking etc. "ships rally on fleet command ships in their control group (ie, flagship line) and as a toggled behavior flagships group together when not in combat regardless of control group." -- ShadowOTE is modified to "flagships within a control group act as a "magnet" (up to X*Mark) for un-engaged fleetships in the immediate vicinity" - flagships without a control group do not exhibit this behavior Please define: "rally" - do you mean the when ships are just built or come through a wormhole onto the planet (which is the only time they rally now, iirc), or when they no longer have a target, or both, or what? - The flagship will fill it's "CnC pool" from any ships within a system. Any fleet ship that does not currently have a target and is not part of another "CnC pool" will get a move order to go "near" the flagship using the same move algorithm that you currently use for fleet "blobs" (however that works). Fleet ships that are explicitly assigned to a control group will take precedence over ungrouped ships when determining "CnC pool membership", so you can make sure that the "magnet effect" makes fleets that have the makeup you desire. "flagships" - do you mean absolutely all of your flagship-line ships on the planet? - each ship in the flagship line that is part of a control group contributes to the total "CnC" size for that control group. Larger groups are possible without sufficient "CnC" size, but they will tend to be "messier" and require more "hand holding" as the auto-regrouping or "magnet" behavior will not occur for all nearby ships. Really large control groups require more "flagships" or higher tier flagships within the flagship line, or both. "group together" - do you mean move towards their averaged center? Group together in my concept means: as is used currently when you have a large banding box and are moving a 'blob'. A question I have NOT yet *fully* answered in my head is: What if you have 3 light starhips in control group 1, and you separate the light starships in 3 different directions? My current thought is that each ship within that control group will "attract" it's share of the total "CnC pool" for that control group. "when not in combat" - do you mean when they don't have something in their target list, or when there are no dangerous AI units on the planet, or what? When they don't have a current target. The upshot of this should be: * Flagships make their own "escort group" automatically. * To split a fleet, you just split the command ships, and the fleet auto splits and follows, or you assign some of the command ships to a different group, and the fleet will split accordingly. * Move the flagship, and you move the fleet. -- In other words you're abstracting the fleet to just needing to manage the flag ships, the fleet ships will more often take care of themselves. * If you want specialist groups, assign all fleet ships of type X to group Y and move one or more flagships into group Y. They will "make a fleet". * Ships that auto kite once they don't have a target will tend to gather themselves back to their fleet flagship (less manual "herding" of ships). * Contributes to MACRO control of fleets, and provides a tool to minimize micro control. Provides a "bolt on" place to incorporate further advanced AI and micro control reducing functionality. These advanced tactics require the officers / support facilities available on a flagship. Feel free to adapt / criticize / applaud / what have you. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
| related to | 0001966 | considering | Chris_McElligottPark | Flagships can build shortlived rally stations |
| parent of | 0002013 | considering | Chris_McElligottPark | Command and Control Starship |
| Not all the children of this issue are yet resolved or closed. | ||||
|
|
Wouldn't this present a rather severe balance problem? It'd make flagship unlocks virtually mandatory. It might be better to just create a new class of starship specifically for this. |
|
|
I mentioned it in the forums but I'll mention it here too. I suggested that the Rally Station idea be a module on a new class of Starship that is modular like the Riot ships but can only build fleet enhancement things (Modules for Attack Boost, Armor Boost, Speed Boot, Rally Point, etc). Think of it as a "Command and Control" ship, which would make sense thematically since these ships are supposed to be automated drones anyway, and you gotta control them all somehow right? |
|
|
I like that idea Echo. I'd be completely behind a dedicated, modular CnC ship. |
|
|
There, I made a separate ticket for it: http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=2013 |
|
|
I'm not opposed to a separate class of ship, but thematically the flagship line seemed appropriate. All that means is that this new CnC ship is now "mandatory" (and really not so, I mentioned that anything the CnC ship could do should also be possible to perform manually via micro). |
|
|
If I get around to doing something like this the CnC ship will basically be a glorified rally post, and thus non-combatant and knowledge-free. From there I guess we could look at providing a way of having an actual "combat command ship", but there are various problems like having to micro to avoid losing a particular ship that would impair your interface abilities, etc. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 10, 2010 5:40 pm | Sizzle | New Issue | |
| Dec 10, 2010 5:41 pm | Sizzle | Relationship added | related to 0001966 |
| Dec 10, 2010 5:42 pm | Sizzle | Description Updated | |
| Dec 10, 2010 6:05 pm | Sizzle | Severity | minor => feature |
| Dec 10, 2010 8:54 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Dec 10, 2010 8:54 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => considering |
| Dec 10, 2010 9:47 pm | Vinraith | Note Added: 0005916 | |
| Dec 10, 2010 11:31 pm | Vinraith | Note Edited: 0005916 | |
| Dec 11, 2010 8:07 pm | Echo35 | Note Added: 0006003 | |
| Dec 11, 2010 8:24 pm | Vinraith | Note Added: 0006015 | |
| Dec 11, 2010 8:37 pm | Echo35 | Note Added: 0006020 | |
| Dec 11, 2010 8:57 pm | Vinraith | Relationship added | parent of 0002013 |
| Dec 17, 2010 10:52 am | Sizzle | Note Added: 0006350 | |
| Dec 17, 2010 10:59 am | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0006351 |
