Battle Simulators

[Dr.0]

Hi Guys,

 

I would like to suggest that fleet battle simulators be added to the game. I suggest that space traveling empires have the computational ability to model the effects of offenesive and defensive weapons sytems. This could be implemented in one of two ways:

1) Use two actual fleets to fight a mock battle.

2) Use two mock fleets using actual designs to fight a computer simulated battle. (Possibly refighting the battle 100 times to get better statistics)

 

I think we players could have a lot of fun designing ships and fleets to try to optimize are naval philosophies, OOB's, and ships designs. For example, an empire has just buiilt/designed a 400,000 ton CA. Is it better to build a 2nd 400,000 ton CA or maybe 2 200,000 ton CL's or what about 1 200,000 ton CL and 2 100,00 ton DD's? A battle simulator could help us make this decision.

 

Now from a practical point of view, how much programing on Pete's part will this take? If battles are fully automated, then very little. If not, then this proposal would have to wait. Respectfully,

 

Jack

[ShadowKitsune]

I think the most difficult portion of the simulation would be that it would be limited to the ships that your empire has designed and can actually build. Just because you know that you can research Heavy Death Beams, doesn't mean you can use them in the simulation. You have to actually complete Heavy Death Beam research to put it in a ship design for the simulation. Additionally, depending on the nature of the battle reports that are generated, it could be potentially useless.

 

YMMV

[Dr.0]

ShadowKitsune,

 

I agree that the component should be limited to items that an empire actually has on hand in order to model that items effectiveness.

 

Even a primitive battle report should give a victor or loser. So, you could fight Heavy Cruiser 'ALPHA' versus Heavy Crusier 'BETA' ten times and if BETA won 9 times you could guess that at least for one-on-one ship battles BETA was a better design.

 

Or you could fight 3 ALPHA's in Englobe versus 3 ALPHA's in column attack and possibly determine which battle plan better suited design ALPHA.

 

Of course you are not fighting enemy designs and weapons so it does have a restricted usefulness.

 

I use to play the old e-mail game Galaxy, and we did have battle simulators and it was a lot of fun (for me anyway) to try to design the the most effective ship designs and fleet compositions.

 

Jack

[ShadowKitsune]

Don't misunderstand, I'm not against having a BSIM (Battle Simulation) order. I just question the overall efficacy of such an order without a detailed battle report. In your example, BETA is a better design than ALPHA, but it doesn't answer the question of "Why?" Additionally, if ALPHA did win one of the battles, what was the difference in that single instance that turned the tide of battle. Lucky shot? Single point of failure on the BETA design. I would be a little nervous if I was building ships with a major Achilles heel and had know idea what it was.

 

On the flip side, why stop at a Battle Simulation order? Why not have a PROV (Proving Ground) order where you can test Weapons against Defenses? "How many shots with a 100 tons of Light Beam Lasers does it take to penetrate a sheet of Standard Hull Plate at point blank, short, medium and long ranges? What if you change it to 100 tons of Light Thermal Lances? etc."

 

While I am an advocate of greater disclosure, I understand the reasoning behind the major "Fog of War" in the design of SN:ROTE. I am also on board with many of the players desires to be given the tools to "Unravel the Mysteries" of the SN:ROTE universe. Right now, I think the biggest barrier to the whole thing is that there is only so much Pete and Russ can do on any given day or week and they have a lot on their collective RTG plates already.

 

FWIW

[Dr.0]

I agree that this is just a wish list item that should only be done if the programming time required is small.

 

But, with both my races (both in from turn 1) I have met no other empires. This is ok. But I can see that even in the future (next calendar year or two) there is going to very limited opportunity to test the combat system to try to discover 'achilles heels'.

 

To further clarify how I would use a battle simulator I would try to answer some basic questions.

 

First: I have been building ships with 40% tonnage dedicated to engines to gain a high maneuverability. This was needed in SNII to increase the hit% of weapons. I have read nothing in ROTE to indicate this is desireable. With a battle simulator I could investigate this or similar design questions.

 

Second: From reading the thread on the combat primer I have concerns that the rulebook statement that bigger ships are better. Consider a million ton fleet.

Which of the following is more effective:

A: 1 x 1,000,000 ton ship

B: 2 x 500,000 tons

C: 1 x 500,000 + 5 x 100,000

D: 1 x 500,000 + 50 x 10,000

E: 1 x 500,000 + 500 x 1,000

I would have guessed from rules A, but now I expect E might be more efficient. I think this is where any fatal achilles heels could lie.

 

Third: I could specifically design a minimum fleet to take out a Bastion.

 

Jack

[ShadowKitsune]

Jack,

 

Based on commentary by Pete on the boards, Maneuverability is a Defensive feature in SN:ROTE while Sensors & Computer Systems are for Offensive targetting (increasing hit percentages). Sensors & Computer Systems are rated based on tonnage of systems versus overall ship size.

 

-SK

[AKO]

In other threads it was pointed out that "Big is beautifull". It is more effective in battle to have 1 big ship that 2 smaller ones with in total the same number of components.

 

Kind regards,

[Dr.0]

From reading the Naval Combat Primer and thread I got the idea that fleet computers and other bridge systems would aim the fleet firepower at a group of selected (randomly?) enemy ships. The better the computers -> the more ships targeted and I seem to recall that Pete said this was not necessarily good.

 

So, I extrapolate from this the following argument for a 1,000,000 ton ship losing every time to a fleet consisting of 1 500,000 ton ship and 500 1,000 ton armored decoys. For the sake of argument let us say that the big ship has twice the offensive and twice the defensive capability of the 500,000 tonner.

 

So, I can easily imagine that the big ship randomly selects 20 ships to fire at => 1 chance in 25 of targetting the 500,000 tonner and then if does target the opponents big ship it uses only 1/20 of its firepower against it. Mean while the 500,000 tonner is targetting the 1,000,000 tonner every turn and should easily destroy it.

 

Comments?

 

Jack

[AKO]

Hello Jack,

That would be correct when the selection would be completely random.

I think the chances are great that the logic in the battle system is good enough to first target the 500.000 before it starts hitting the decoys.

 

I base this on comments made long time ago on the old EZ board.

Kind regards, André

[ShadowKitsune]

I disagree, AKO.

 

Your logic would hold true if all of the ships were on the same Battle line.

 

However, if Jack put his 500 1000-ton armored Decoys in "front" of his 500kTon Battlewagon (e.g. the Decoys are closer than the Battlewagon), the on board computers might target the nearer "threat" first.

 

I would see this to be an effective strategy especially with Drone and/or Fighter Carriers, since the Drones and Fighters are long range weapons.

 

Admittedly, these are all thought experiments because we have no hard data to go by. Combat, like so many things, is a giant question mark as to how things actually work at the "nuts-and-bolts" level.

[RTGPete]

If you put a stack of tiny decoys in the front rank and held back your larger ship, your decoys would have greater odds of being targeted. The downside to this strategy--and it's a big one--is that your enemy could either (1) build decoys of his own, (2) build a small number of tough screening vessels to eliminate your decoys, (3) crank up his fire control or (4) some combination of the above.

 

In short, decoys can be a very effective strategy if not countered, which is easy enough so as to discourage the mass use of this type of tactic. There was also the issue of building a lot of shipyard slips to get those ships built in the first place.

 

If you don't build screens, a single large ship with poor fire control can face trouble. A balanced, screened fleet is generally able to handle more unusual situations such as the decoy strategy.