Weak Ship Screens

[Kurassier]

Just my two cents worth and I know no game is perfect.

That being said, my personal 'opinion' is that each ship in a fleet that has at least one computer, should be able to target on its own with maybe a 'bonus' to each ship based upon overall fleet FC and commanders.

Imagine if I have a fleet of 1000 swarm ships and 50 capital ships. And further let's say my FC is one. (dumb me I know) Let's say the enemy has the same.

So, in turn one, all of my 1050 ships in the amount of 'space' it takes to hold these ships, are going to fire at ONE enemy ship, and probably a 1000 ton screen. Not likely under ANY circumstances. It would seem more likely that my front line ships would paste away at the nearest enemy front line ships while my capital ships would attempt to aim at the bigger ships (if possible) and my flag ship(s) would direct all from the rear. The better my 'fleet' FC, the smoother this works out, etc.

[EternusIV]

Just my two cents worth and I know no game is perfect.

That being said, my personal 'opinion' is that each ship in a fleet that has at least one computer, should be able to target on its own with maybe a 'bonus' to each ship based upon overall fleet FC and commanders.

Imagine if I have a fleet of 1000 swarm ships and 50 capital ships.  And further let's say my FC is one. (dumb me I know)  Let's say the enemy has the same.

So, in turn one, all of my 1050 ships in the amount of 'space' it takes to hold these ships, are going to fire at ONE enemy ship, and probably a 1000 ton screen.  Not likely under ANY circumstances.  It would seem more likely that my front line ships would paste away at the nearest enemy front line ships while my capital ships would attempt to aim at the bigger ships (if possible) and my flag ship(s) would direct all from the rear.  The better my 'fleet' FC, the smoother this works out, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

/agree

 

The entire fleet focusing on one target at a time (or two if you have FC of 2 etc.) is the root of the actual screen strategy....we could avoid the whole screen dilemna if FC worked as you suggest.

[Ur Lord Tedric]

Again, we must also ask everyone to think a bit more laterally.

 

This is a strategic game.

 

The space combat module is designed to produce a corrsponding strategic result, this is the whole reason the report was so sparse in the first place.

 

However, the ships are designed tactically - which is why we do actually need something more akin to a blow by blow account so we can make sense of what we're supposed to be designing. And ensure things are working properly.

 

However, the fire control and screens and every other permutation of what we see, doesn't matter a bean - it's only the overall result of the battle that matters, not the petty detail of how we got there.

 

If only it worked properly, then the battle system would be considered beautiful.

 

We just need to know it works so that we can appreciate it for what it is.

 

Let's make sure it's right before worrying about the detailed aesthetics of it.

 

We need a proper Naval Combat Supplement and then the work to make sure that things actually do happen the way it says.

 

3 years in - that's not unreasonable.

 

Chief Warmaster to Ur-Lord Tedric

[ShadowKitsune]

Again, we must also ask everyone to think a bit more laterally.

 

This is a strategic game.

 

The space combat module is designed to produce a corrsponding strategic result, this is the whole reason the report was so sparse in the first place.

 

However, the ships are designed tactically - which is why we do actually need something more akin to a blow by blow account so we can make sense of what we're supposed to be designing.  And ensure things are working properly.

 

However, the fire control and screens and every other permutation of what we see, doesn't matter a bean - it's only the overall result of the battle that matters, not the petty detail of how we got there.

 

If only it worked properly, then the battle system would be considered beautiful.

 

We just need to know it works so that we can appreciate it for what it is.

 

Let's make sure it's right before worrying about the detailed aesthetics of it.

 

We need a proper Naval Combat Supplement and then the work to make sure that things actually do happen the way it says.

 

3 years in - that's not unreasonable.

 

Chief Warmaster to Ur-Lord Tedric

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Dang! I couldn't have said it any better myself. (Actually, I probably would have said it a lot worse with twice as much verbage. ) Well put, ULT.

 

-SK

[SargonKingOfSlith]

Dang!  I couldn't have said it any better myself.  (Actually, I probably would have said it a lot worse with twice as much verbage.    )  Well put, ULT. 

 

-SK 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Ditto

[EternusIV]

ULT-

 

I find it interesting that several players have different interpretations of what type of game SNROTE was designed to be. Our own bias interferes with such analysis (mine included )

 

It is clear that you are satisifed with viewing the game as merely a 'strategic' one.

 

I would beg to differ...the strategic elements of space combat in this game, are, well, brutally simplistic (unless there is simpy more to the concept of sending a fleet towards your enemy? oooo with the twist that you might have an allied fleet coordinate the same? EUREKA! )

 

What keeps me playing is the empire building aspect of the game, coupled with the promising complexity of a tactical game represented through ship design, fleet design and research.

 

The Weber/White series is laced, not with moments of strategic breakthrough, but tactical.

 

I think it too convenient to sweep criticisms of the current FC/Screen system under the rug as a mere symptom of someone's lack of "lateral thinking" and "reminder" that SNROTE is, after all, a strategic game (and as long as the means justify the end, the details are just beans )

 

I'm quite familiar with lateral thinking....hell, its the lateral thinking that keeps me playing. Although, the result of the current rules require us to ignore the 'petty' details of how we acheive the strategic endgame, it doesn't preclude each and every gamer's perference for a different combat system to enhance tactial gameplay and realism.

 

I think an underlying problem with FC is rooted in my own expectation on how space combat might work (I'm a fan of Sim models and having quasi-realistic foundations behind gaming systems, and the physics therein) but I don't expect any PBM game to encompass such rules anyway However, its been stated on more than 3 occassions by different players, how 'unnatural' the FC system feels, ie: "Ignore the capital ships, mates! All weapons on that screen ship!" (a scene never seen in the Weber/White series in all my reading)

 

I will submit to you, that the 'strategic' game fails without a solid understanding of the tactics therein...and surprisingly, the tactics at the foundation of any successful strategic campaign are the very beans you are willing to ignore Hell, its the tactics, the beans, the players are wanting more clarification on, not the strategic game.

 

I might be presuming too much here....but...have you had your strategic plans thwarted by your lack of understanding of how the tactical game plays out? When that happens, feel free to discuss FC as a mere bean, destined for the garbage disposal (Luckily I was privvy to the victorious side of that mistake The aggressor had beautiful strategic timing, a lucky guess at the HW, only to be decimated by a dreaded screen fleet )

 

The FC/Screen issue has had such import as to affect the very heart of a successful strategic campaign: disassociated ships now rely on crucial jump timing to consolidate slow moving screen fleets and the larger battleships. This translates into even less strategic control!

 

On the flip side, the tactical game is simple, too. Some of us would prefer more variance on the tactical side of things. How many options are left to those who would prefer a more tactical game if we must forego many creative fleet designs in order to account for screen ships? The tactical aspect of the game was already reduced to Rock-Scissor-Paper (R-S-P) matchups...and then further reduced by the exisiting FC system.

 

Perhaps my lateral thinking has stretched backward upon itself and is now inside-out? LOL In any instance, its how space combat, strategic and tactical, works (no extra guide needed in this camp.)

 

Lastly, with everything said, I still rate the combat system highly in the context of a PBM, a business which, must delicately balance complexity with coding to sustain sanity/profitability (But that still doesn't mean we can't come here to scratch our heads, and say, WTH?)

[Kurassier]

I agree this is a strategic game, that's what I like about it. But the combat is a tactical element of the overall strategy. Heck, if it was purely strategic, why design ships at all? Just build the components and throw them into 'fleets' to move around strategically.

 

don't get me wrong, I like this game, but I also want to help work to make it better than it is.

[WKE235]

When I first started playing SNROTE, I was amazed at the depth put into the various weapons and defenses. Every weapon has a specific set of items you can research as a defense. Every weapons line has CIDS type research in the line (so when you specialize you can still get defenses versus drones and fighters). And then the three types of defenses: Force Shields (Absorb damage in each battle, but, costly to make), Armor (absorbs damage in battle but destroyed in process), and Defense Specific (reduces damage of targetted weapons class). Ah, the fun I had imagining different types of builds and ships designs (when we knew nothing about how the system worked). All of the wonderful possibilities. What planning and depth for a gaming system!

 

Alas, my dreams are brought back crashing to Earth with the understanding of how targetting works, how armor grows at leaps and bounds to obscene protection levels, and how swarms of tiny ships can rule the game. I admit that even in this universe of gnats flying about, the whole concept of weapons versus defense still is important. Why, just imagine Locklyn's installing some CID's in his small ships instead of weapons when going up against a drone/fighter using race. He blasts the drones out of the sky in the first few rounds, ensuring victory. Or instead he adds Phase Lockers when going up against someone with Fusion Weapons. You thought the wall of ships was tough? Now what happens when they reduce the effect of the enemy weapons by 50% because of the right defensive add-on?

 

So this whole wonderful design of weapon vs defense balance / counterbalance is still important to the game. But, it is diminished due to the ability to build hulking swarm fleets at little to no cost that are dang difficult to penetrate due to thousands and thousands of points of integrity per armor point. The biggest problem I believe is the increases in armor protection are way our of balance. For example, early on Titanium composit gave you 5 points per ton of protection, when similar "class" weapons did about 2 points per ton in damage. By Superior class levels, Trizenium has grow to 400 points of protection per ton, and similar class Weapons only do about 15-20 points of damage per ton. Armor has grown in protection at a far, far greater rate than weapons. The balance between a general defense item and weapons is out of whack. I believe to balance things, all of the armors need to be "nerfed" down to much lower levels. Sure it can still outpace weapons growth. But not at a rate of 10 times faster.

[hobknob]

Armor itself does nothing to win a battle, it only prolongs the agony. The counter to high level armor is better weapons. It is way too late to reduce armor efectiveness, but it is never too late for anybody to decide to go for better weapons. If I have decent armor and really good weapons I will not have a problem against somebody with the best armor and average weapons.

 

The other key to victory over the super armed is joint opperations. Even the best armor will have serious problems vs a couple 2 or 3 determined adversaries.

 

[Kurassier]

I would agree with the Knobster. This game is geared toward cooperation, whether that be trade or war.

 

are turns here yet????

[EternusIV]

I would agree with the Knobster.  This game is geared toward cooperation, whether that be trade or war. 

 

are turns here yet???? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True, true!

 

If I wanted to solo a game like this, I'd play MOO, Galactic Civ or Spaceward Ho (all of which I don't play now that SNROTE is around)

 

MOO3 is really broken BTW...kudos to those who've tried it and enjoy.

[Damiano]

In this respect armour is actually realistic, just think how much damage the old dreadnaughts could dish out and receive, The Iowa class's armour belt can pretty much shrug off most modern AS missiles and was well nigh invulnerable to shell fire (the superstructure is another matter). WWI and WWII fleet battles where long winded affairs when the ships would shoot at each other till it got dark and usually only loose a few of the lighter units, look at the first monitor battle in the Civil War etc.

[Justinian]

Gone are the days of weak screen ships.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

***Press Release from Roman High Command***

 

The Roman High Command is pleased to refute the above ill-advised quote. The Combined Fleet of Rome and Valkor, under the command of Admiral King, had the honor of bringing an enemy fleet comprised of Eyre and Go'ald forces to battle. Adm King's daring plan involved coordinating a Valkor in-system attack with a Roman warp point assault against a known superior enemy fleet. Adm King's Combined Fleet had a total integrity of 265 million and a firepower rating of 75 million for all ships from screen- to battleship-class. The enemy fleet massed 1.25 billion in integrity and wielded 119 million in firepower.

 

Adm King's decision to include hundred's of screen ships, despite earlier predictions of their obsolescence, paid off immensely. While Valkor and Roman capital ships poured broadside after broadside into the larger enemy ships, Combined Fleet screen-ships maintained their positions to shield friendly units from the massive volleys of enemy return fire. Despite the Alexander's code-omega, the Combined Fleet's Monitors and Star Cruisers could sense their advantage after the enemy's first massive Dreadnought, Tuetonberg Forest, erupted into a miniature supernova.

 

Adm King continued to direct fire against the enemy's leviathans, thanking providence for the steadfast screen-ships still holding enemy fire generally at bay. Only occasionally did enemy beams and plasma torpedoes make it through the shoals of screens to impact against friendly capital ships. Finally, the last three enemy ships went down in a torrent of fire--Winged Death, Mother Ship, and Al Bakor--ending their existence in near simultaneous explosions that seemed to merge together in one brilliant flash before darkness once again reclaimed near space.

 

Battle honors were appended to the unit histories of all Allied ships, but pride of place goes to the Battleship Lord Valwyn, which led the Roman fleet through a warp point assault and direct contact with the enemy fleet. The Roman High Command, while thanking Adm King for recognizing Lord Valwyn's contribution, thanked the many Valkor screen-ships that shielded the Roman transit, preventing the enemy from picking off Roman ships one-by-one. In addition, Emperor Justinian extended heartfelt appreciation to the Valkor Star Kingdom for lending aid in such troubled times. Eyre and Go'ald reinforcements, just arrived in Shai, were obviously preparing for another assault on the Roman homeworld. Justinian hopes the high cost in tonnage and weapons, in addition to the loss of 1 Grand Admiral, 7 Fleet Admirals, 1 Admiral, 1 Field Marshal, 1 Ranger, and 11 more divisions will make the enemy leave Roman space for good.

 

Meanwhile, Roman citizens have broken out in planet-wide celebrations. The streets are filled with jubilation as the dark cloud of enemy invasion was finally lifted in what is being called the 2nd Battle of Shai. Valkor too has proclaimed an empire-wide holiday to celebrate the largest victory yet in the ongoing war against PA aggression. There is no holiday, however, for the Combined Chiefs of Staff. The CCS is reportedly in session plotting the next military moves to maintain a continued Allied advantage in the war.

[Justinian]

A few details to throw a bone to the crowd...it is edited to maintain operations security (sorry, but it's a bitter war):

 

VSK Valkor Star Kingdom # 232 'A Three-Pointed Golden Crown Fixed Above A Shield Of Vertical Blue And White Stripes, All

Set Upon A Field Of Black'

Fleet 520, Admiral Ernest King

1,257 Strike Fighter

Assorted Screens (Light Auxiliary - 1,000 tons)

1 SCA Alexander (Strike Cruiser - 703,000 tons)

1 SCA Phalanx (Strike Cruiser - 713,000 tons)

1 BC THERMOPYLAE C (Battle Cruiser - 1,101,000 tons)

1 BC THERMOPYLAE D (Battle Cruiser - 1,031,000 tons)

1 SC Syracusa (Star Cruiser - 1,669,000 tons)

1 SC MESSINA (Star Cruiser - 1,669,000 tons)

1 SC BRINDISI (Star Cruiser - 1,894,200 tons)

1 BM Royal Valkor (Monitor - 2,470,000 tons)

1 BM GRAND ALLIANCE (Monitor - 2,312,200 tons)

 

ROM Roman Empire # 760 'Golden Eagle Enshrouded By A Wreath Of Olive Branches'

Fleet 590

2,100 Attack Fighter

Assorted Screens (Light Auxiliary - 1,000 tons)

1 CA PRAETORIAN GUARD TUG (Heavy Cruiser - 520,200 tons)

1 FC CENTURION (Frontier Cruiser - 322,700 tons)

1 CVFA DALMATIA LEGION (Frontier Assault Carrier - 355,800 tons)

1 BB LORD VALWYN (Battleship - 3,416,700 tons)

 

EYR The Eyre # 2335 'Jolly Roger On A Black Background'

Fleet 9001 [Romeo] Fleet Admiral Daphne Hawksblood ... Fleet Admiral Cullen Falconclaw ... Fleet Admiral Julius Ceasar Hawksblood

Ranger Odysseus Hawksblood

1,132 Attack Gunboat ... 2,170 Bomber

1 XS The Leprechaun (Express Ship - 110,600 tons)

1 DN Tuetonberg Forest (Dreadnaught - 11,725,000 tons)

1 CVVA Carrier Resupply (Attack Assault Carrier - 1,589,000 tons)

1 DN Winged Death (Dreadnaught - 9,795,000 tons)

 

GLD The Go'ald # 3841 'Jaws Devouring A Sun With Vines Wrapping The Sun'

Fleet 6000 [Quebec] Field Marshal Heru-ur ... Fleet Admiral Isis ... Admiral Osiris ... Fleet Admiral Tirid

Fleet Admiral Lammu ... Grand Admiral <needs name> ... Fleet Admiral <needs name>

Troop Berthings: ... 11

1 FML Mother Ship (Fleet Minelayer - 6,143,100 tons)

1 FML Front Line (Fleet Minelayer - 2,629,600 tons)

Fleet 6003 [Romeo]

1 AUXF Al Bakor (Fleet Auxiliary - 2,926,000 tons)

 

Results:

**DESTROYED** [6th] CVVA Carrier Resupply (Attack Assault Carrier - 1,589,000 tons) [integrity: 1,527,000] (Green, Timid)

100 Fighter Bay, 70 Fuel Shuttle, 122,000 Fuel Tankage, 3,000 Mk I Antimatter Engine, 1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive

100,000 Standard Hull Plate

Maneuverability: 15.103

 

**DESTROYED** [7th] XS The Leprechaun (Express Ship - 110,600 tons) [integrity: 136,700] [shields: 1,500] (Green, Timid)

5 10cm Gauss Gun, 10 Fuel Shuttle, 15,000 Fuel Tankage, 1 Mk I Computer System, 5 Mk I Deflector

5 Mk I Force Shield, 5 Mk I Short Range Sensor, 1 Mk I Thunderbolt Arc generator, 445 Mk II Fusion Engine

1 Mk III Jump Survey Sensor, 1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive, 10,000 Titanium Composite Armor, 2 Type B Defense Screen

Energy Discharge: 2,200, Projectile: 2,200

Deflectors: 0.022, Maneuverability: 8.047, Screens: 0.180, Sensors: 0.011

 

**DESTROYED** [79th] FML Front Line (Fleet Minelayer - 2,629,600 tons) [integrity: 76,909,600] (Green, Timid)

370 Blaster CIDS, 7 Fuel Shuttle, 200,000 Fuel Tankage, 10 Light ESAP Beam, 9,500 Mauler Mine Rack

5 Mk II Jump Survey Sensor, 10 Mk II Long Lance Torpedo, 40 Mk III Interceptor Missile, 9,000 Mk IV Nuclear Engine

1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive, 500,000 Vananite Battle Armor

EnergyAbsorber: 6,600, Mines: 10,032,000, Missile: 60,000

Maneuverability: 6.845, Point Defense: 0.028

 

**DESTROYED** [142nd] FML Mother Ship (Fleet Minelayer - 6,143,100 tons) [integrity: 378,073,100] (Green, Timid)

100,000 Cargo Bay, 80 Fuel Shuttle, 450,000 Fuel Tankage, 30,000 Mauler Mine Rack, 1 Mk I Nuclear Engine

100 Mk IV Short Range Sensor, 1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive, 1 Troop Berthing, 2,500,000 Vananite Battle Armor

Mines: 31,680,001

Sensors: 0.032

 

**DESTROYED** [149th] AUXF Al Bakor (Fleet Auxiliary - 2,926,000 tons) [integrity: 401,655,000] (Green, Timid)

1,000 Cargo Bay, 250,000 Fuel Tankage, 5,000 Mk III Computer System, 4,500 Mk V Nuclear Engine

1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive, 1,000,000 Trizenium Flex Plate, 10 Troop Berthing, 6,000 X-Ray Laser Mine Rack

Mines: 10,560,000

Maneuverability: 6.151

 

**DESTROYED** [115th] DN Tuetonberg Forest (Dreadnaught - 11,725,000 tons) [integrity: 175,307,500] [shields: 4,800,000]

(Green, Timid)

10,000 6cm Gatling Gauss Gun CIDS, 200,000 Cargo Bay, 3,000,000 Cordellium Composite, 15,000 FCS-1 Archer Fire Control

200 Fighter Bay, 800,000 Fuel Tankage, 1 Fusion transwarp drive, 1,000 Medium Graser, 10,000 Mk I Antimatter Engine

1,000 Mk III Deflector, 3,000 Mk III Force Shield

Coherent Beam: 45,760,001

Deflectors: 0.170, Maneuverability: 6.823, Point Defense: 0.341

 

**DESTROYED** [125th] DN Winged Death (Dreadnaught - 9,795,000 tons) [integrity: 216,315,000] [shields: 1,280,000] (Green,

Timid)

700,000 Cargo Bay, 3,500,000 Cordellium Composite, 4,000 FCS-1 Archer Fire Control, 250 Fuel Shuttle

1,000,000 Fuel Tankage, 2,000 Mk II Antimatter Engine, 400 Mk II Deflector, 9,000 Mk II Fusion Engine

800 Mk III Force Shield, 1 Nuclear Transwarp Drive, 800,000 Selenite Battle Weave, 200 Type A Plasma Torpedo

Plasma Torpedo: 21,120,001

Deflectors: 0.040, Maneuverability: 5.104

 

**MINOR DAMAGE** BM Royal Valkor (Monitor - 2,470,000 tons)

**MINOR DAMAGE** SC Syracusa (Star Cruiser - 1,669,000 tons)

**DESTROYED** [108th] SCA Alexander (Strike Cruiser - 703,000 tons)

**DESTROYED** 150 screens from the Combined Fleet

[octagon999]

You forgot to say... "Have a nice day".