Author Topic: Forum game: Rules/Discussion  (Read 86138 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
My fleet and Jellyfish’s 4th SF would remain behind, I would Resupply and use Zeal, and Jellyfish would Resupply and Defend.
We could do that in Algol. We would be in range to shock jump Kardoen and hit the 3rd Hertak. If we can destroy them, that will hopefully force the 2nd Fur'angle to surrender, and we'd survive the engagement even if both fleets focus on either of us.
We can't push into Crux though from Algol. I think we need at least 5 fleets on that front. We don't know what's happening in Tauri yet either.

 

Offline Droid803

  • Trusted poster of legit stuff
  • 213
  • /人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\ Do you want to be a Magical Girl?
    • Skype
    • Steam
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
IIRC Tauri is about to asplode.
Go Capella.
The way of the Nubula.
(´・ω・`)
=============================================================

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
IIRC Tauri is about to asplode.
Go Capella.
The way of the Nubula.
We only think it is. We don't know.

 

Offline niffiwan

  • 211
  • Eluder Class
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
The two UGCR fleets alone can kill the 5th Cordi, which I’ll show below, but I want to do more than that:

1st UGCR Fleet:
- Fighter attack strength: 20+9=29 (13+2+1)
- Capital attack strength: 17+10=27 (15+1)
- Fighters at 131% Strength, 3rd Gen
- Capital ships at 106% Strength
- Morale: High
- Mercs on Cooldown, Available again on turn 10

2nd UGCR Fleet:
- Fighter attack strength: 18+8=26 (13+2+1)
- Capital attack strength: 15+9=24 (15+1)
- Fighters at 116% Strength, 3rd Gen
- Capital ships at 92% Strength
- Morale: High
- Mercs on Cooldown, Available again on turn 10

5th Cordi Fleet:
Fighter attack strength: 14+3=17 (20)
Capital attack strength: 6+7=13 (12)
Fighters at 48% Strength
Capital ships at 51% Strength
Morale: Normal

51 capital ship damage exactly. You’d receive a paltry 9/7 damage each in return.

I would like to have the 1st SF enter Crux and attack the 5th Cordi as well, to spread the damage out, so that it would be just 6/4 for each fleet, and because the 1st SF is the only one on full strength.

The 5th Cordi may have resupplied twice in turn 8, if so then we can't destroy it as it'll be back @ 100%.  And as Jellyfish said, I think we'd be better served with more fleets moving towards the south, 2 fleets in Algol will encourage the Hierachy to leave fleets in Kardoen, fleets which otherwise could attack our southern fleets.  And Algol is close enough to move back north should something unexpected happen.

As for the 1st SF covering the 2x UGCR, I don't think its absolutely necessary.  The 2x UGCR could attack turn 9, 1st then retreats & resupplies.  2nd remains in Crux to cover them, and then takes retreat damage switching places with the 1st in turn 10 (1st also re-mercs before re-entering Crux), but the 2nd can resupply 50% in a turn, so I'm not too worried by that.

What I'm trying to say is that if we think that having 3 fleets standing by for a devastating attack into Kardoen in turn 10 is worth it, then we should do that rather than cover the 2x UGCR tanks :)


IIRC Tauri is about to asplode.
Go Capella.
The way of the Nubula.
We only think it is. We don't know.

Yes, it would be rather interesting if created a portal (+ Capella-style-BBQ) in Tauri which the Hierarchy could use to bypass Aldebaran...
Creating a fs2_open.log | Red Alert Bug = Hex Edit | MediaVPs 2014: Bigger HUD gauges | 32bit libs for 64bit Ubuntu
----
Debian Packages (testing/unstable): Freespace2 | wxLauncher
----
m|m: I think I'm suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Bmpman is starting to make sense and it's actually written reasonably well...

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
The 5th Cordi may have resupplied twice in turn 8, if so then we can't destroy it as it'll be back @ 100%.  And as Jellyfish said, I think we'd be better served with more fleets moving towards the south, 2 fleets in Algol will encourage the Hierachy to leave fleets in Kardoen, fleets which otherwise could attack our southern fleets.  And Algol is close enough to move back north should something unexpected happen.

As for the 1st SF covering the 2x UGCR, I don't think its absolutely necessary.  The 2x UGCR could attack turn 9, 1st then retreats & resupplies.  2nd remains in Crux to cover them, and then takes retreat damage switching places with the 1st in turn 10 (1st also re-mercs before re-entering Crux), but the 2nd can resupply 50% in a turn, so I'm not too worried by that.

What I'm trying to say is that if we think that having 3 fleets standing by for a devastating attack into Kardoen in turn 10 is worth it, then we should do that rather than cover the 2x UGCR tanks :)

I think it would be a completely unnecessary risk to have just two fleets up there. I don't even want less than 5 up there, 4 if we absolutely have to. All it takes is like a Zy and Fura'ngle fleet to show up next turn, or a Zy fleet slipstreaming in behind us and we've got a proper fight on our hands up there. If anything gets through at the top, they have the fastest route to Sol and some of our richest systems to conquer. Eventually, the vanquished allied fleets will get back here and we can send them down South (or whever they are needed.) There's been some hard fighting up at the top, let's not get overconfident about the top. There's still more coming I'm sure.

Quote
Yes, it would be rather interesting if created a portal (+ Capella-style-BBQ) in Tauri which the Hierarchy could use to bypass Aldebaran...
This is exactly what I have thought of. Though even without it I'd still want 5 fleets at the top.

 

Offline Jellyfish

  • 29
  • No relent
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Prudent as that strategy is, I still see two or three fleets defending against hypothetical threats while actual threats paste our dudes in the south.
And those two or three should still be in a position where they can flex back to respond should the hypotheticals become real.
"A weapon is only as powerful as its wielder. With this weapon, you'll be but an annoyance, which would greatly dishonor it. With this weapon, I can change history. With me, this weapon can shape the universe."

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
@niffiwan I forgot this bit. The 5th Cordi can't have resupplied. Last turn, they travelled twice to get to Crux. And your invasion of Crux means they didn't get a chance to resupply.

Prudent as that strategy is, I still see two or three fleets defending against hypothetical threats while actual threats paste our dudes in the south.
And those two or three should still be in a position where they can flex back to respond should the hypotheticals become real.
There are real enemy fleets up there to attack and destroy. If we kill everything up there, then this idea I think would be worth entertaining. I would be shocked if more don't arrive though.

 

Offline niffiwan

  • 211
  • Eluder Class
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Prudent as that strategy is, I still see two or three fleets defending against hypothetical threats while actual threats paste our dudes in the south.
And those two or three should still be in a position where they can flex back to respond should the hypotheticals become real.

This - and Algol is only a single turns movement from Tauri.  If we don't move to Algol I feel there's more of a chance of fleets in Kardoen joining the attack on the south.  3 fleets on their doorstep would probably make them leave at least one fleet in Kardoen, which means one less fleet for the south front to fight.

And, why didn't the 3rd / 5th Cordi counter-attack the 1st or 2nd UGCR in turn 8?  That would make sense if there aren't many reinforcements up north & they're just trying to delay us.

@niffiwan I forgot this bit. The 5th Cordi can't have resupplied. Last turn, they travelled twice to get to Crux. And your invasion of Crux means they didn't get a chance to resupply.

5th Cordi, Aldebaran -> Crux

??  Am I missing something?
Creating a fs2_open.log | Red Alert Bug = Hex Edit | MediaVPs 2014: Bigger HUD gauges | 32bit libs for 64bit Ubuntu
----
Debian Packages (testing/unstable): Freespace2 | wxLauncher
----
m|m: I think I'm suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Bmpman is starting to make sense and it's actually written reasonably well...

 

Offline Flak

  • 28
  • 123
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Maybe you end up hitting them while resupplying, with their pants down that is. I wonder what going on with Tauri though. A new portal? Maybe more enemies coming, or unknown fleets (Aleyurians anyone?), or suddenly more allied fleets like Cyrvans or some hidden Terran factions coming in? If that is the case I wish Isa herself is coming to kick the Hertak in the balls.

  

Offline Jellyfish

  • 29
  • No relent
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
There are real enemy fleets up there to attack and destroy. If we kill everything up there, then this idea I think would be worth entertaining. I would be shocked if more don't arrive though.
Two weakened Cordi fleets vs. two 100+% UCGR fleets. And I say again, from Algol we can flex to Crux if something else arrives and they can't handle it.
"A weapon is only as powerful as its wielder. With this weapon, you'll be but an annoyance, which would greatly dishonor it. With this weapon, I can change history. With me, this weapon can shape the universe."

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Prudent as that strategy is, I still see two or three fleets defending against hypothetical threats while actual threats paste our dudes in the south.
And those two or three should still be in a position where they can flex back to respond should the hypotheticals become real.

This - and Algol is only a single turns movement from Tauri.  If we don't move to Algol I feel there's more of a chance of fleets in Kardoen joining the attack on the south.  3 fleets on their doorstep would probably make them leave at least one fleet in Kardoen, which means one less fleet for the south front to fight.

And, why didn't the 3rd / 5th Cordi counter-attack the 1st or 2nd UGCR in turn 8?  That would make sense if there aren't many reinforcements up north & they're just trying to delay us.

@niffiwan I forgot this bit. The 5th Cordi can't have resupplied. Last turn, they travelled twice to get to Crux. And your invasion of Crux means they didn't get a chance to resupply.

5th Cordi, Aldebaran -> Crux

??  Am I missing something?
I really don't think we can risk leaving yet.

They could be waiting for help to strike hard.

No, I am. Sorry. And thank you. I don't know how that happened! :)

You are correct, I expect they're like this now:

5th Cordi Fleet:
Fighters at 78% Strength
Capital ships at 81% Strength
Morale: Normal

We can still kill them if you drop back and Resupply, and the 1st SF and 4th SF join the 1st UGCR:

1st UGCR Fleet:
- Fighter attack strength: 20+9=29 (13+2+1)
- Capital attack strength: 17+10=27 (15+1)
- Fighters at 131% Strength, 3rd Gen
- Capital ships at 106% Strength
- Morale: High
- Mercs on Cooldown, Available again on turn 10

4th SF Fleet:
- Fighter attack strength: 19+9=28 (18+2)
- Capital attack strength: 17+10=29 (18)
- Fighters at 92% Strength, 3rd Gen
- Capital ships at 93% Strength
- Morale: Normal

1st SF Fleet:
- Fighter attack strength: 20+9=29 (18+2)
- Capital attack strength: 18+10 =28 (18)
- Fighters at 100% Strength, 3rd Gen
- Capital ships at 100% Strength
- Morale: Normal

5th Cordi Fleet:
Fighters at 78% Strength
Capital ships at 81% Strength
Morale: Normal

84 capital ship damage.

There are real enemy fleets up there to attack and destroy. If we kill everything up there, then this idea I think would be worth entertaining. I would be shocked if more don't arrive though.
Two weakened Cordi fleets vs. two 100+% UCGR fleets. And I say again, from Algol we can flex to Crux if something else arrives and they can't handle it.

3rd Cordi is full strength and there could be more. And the UGCR will not be 100% long. They need to pull out the turn after this.

 

Offline Spoon

  • Moderator
  • 212
  • ヾ(´︶`♡)ノ
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Turn 8 vid's up
Urutorahappī!!

[02:42] <@Axem> spoon somethings wrong
[02:42] <@Axem> critically wrong
[02:42] <@Axem> im happy with these missions now
[02:44] <@Axem> well
[02:44] <@Axem> with 2 of them

 

Offline Enioch

  • 210
  • Alternative History Word Writer
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Hey, Spoon, I was thinking about changes to the Fighter strength mechanic. I also think that stances are the way to go. Here are some suggestions:

Aggressive stances:

Saturation Strike: Things work exactly as they do now. Fighters engage enemy fighters (Damage = Fi + 1/2 * Cap) and they assist the Capships (Damage = Cap + 1/2 Fi). The 'capship support' is considered the stance's ability, for the purposes of interception.

Interception: Fighters focus on enemy fighters with the support of Capital ships (Damage = Fi + 1/2 * Cap). They do not cause damage to Caps. Instead, they reduce the effective strength of the enemy fighters's stanceby their own effective strength. In case of more than one enemy fleets being present, the Admiral MUST specify which fleet's fighters he will intercept (only 1). Intercepted fighters can be intercepted in turn, and this will reduce their own interception capability FIRST.

EXAMPLE: SF fleet VS Zy Fleet (both 100%). Zy flies Saturation, SF flies Interception. Zy would cause 21(cap) + 11 (1/2* Fi) = 32 Damage to SF caps and 22 (Fi) + 11 (1/2 Cap) = 33 Damage to Fighters. However, the SF flies interception. This allows the SF Admiral to reduce the effect of the enemy fighter support by his own fighter strength (20). Which means that the Zy fighters can contribute only (22-20)/2 = 1 Damage to their capship's attack. Note that the Zy fighters still engage the SF strikecraft and still do full damage to them - and they receive full damage as well.

USES: Desperation move, to prevent the killing blow on a friendly fleet, or to support other fleet's saturation strike.

Defensive Stances (If no fleets are adopting aggressive stances, fighters do NOT enter the fight and do NOT contribute in any way)

Ambush Tactics: Fighters ONLY engage the enemy strikecraft if the fleet is targeted. If it is, the fighters deal full (not half) damage to enemy caps (Cap Damage = Cap + Fi). Note that they can still be intercepted (and this can force the enemy to fly interception instead of saturation, thus preventing damage to player's fleet).

Logistics Escort: Fighters ONLY engage the enemy strikecraft if the fleet is targeted. They do NOT cause damage to Caps. Instead, the player can restore HP equal to his fighter strength, by paying enough resources for a resupply. Note that this can be done in a Contested system and that it does NOT count as a resupply for the purposes of determining extra damage to resupplying fleets, or for the purposes of 'Master of Logistics'. Note also that the fighters can be intercepted and that the restoration of HP goes down accordingly.
'Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent'  -Salvor Hardin, "Foundation"

So don't take a hammer to your computer. ;-)

 

Offline Spoon

  • Moderator
  • 212
  • ヾ(´︶`♡)ノ
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Fighter stances were something I've briefly considered when I first started writing down the rules but quickly realized that it would be hard for me to keep track of. (Considering how often I've seemingly missed a prepared barrage already...) It's not that I don't like your suggestion there, but it would make turn calculations increasingly complex for me.
Urutorahappī!!

[02:42] <@Axem> spoon somethings wrong
[02:42] <@Axem> critically wrong
[02:42] <@Axem> im happy with these missions now
[02:44] <@Axem> well
[02:44] <@Axem> with 2 of them

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
I personally don't think we should change the rules mid-game anyway.

If Spoon wants to do another game after this one, then we can look at revised rules.


 

Offline Enioch

  • 210
  • Alternative History Word Writer
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Fully agree on that. Just throwing ideas at Spoon and seeing which stick.
'Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent'  -Salvor Hardin, "Foundation"

So don't take a hammer to your computer. ;-)

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Fully agree on that. Just throwing ideas at Spoon and seeing which stick.
I had one for how I'd do it if I was running the game regarding the math.

I was thinking to simplify the math. I thought of having values change every 10% only. Take the Cordi for example, I’d have charts for every fleet type, the Cordi would look like this without modifiers (morale/specials):

Cordi Fleet:
(health % - fighter damage/capship damage)
91-100% - 26/22
81-90% - 23/20
71-80% - 21/18
61-70% - 18/15
51-60% - 16/13
41-50% - 13/11
31-40% - 10/9
21-30% - 8/6
11-20% - 5/4
1-10% - 3/2

Then I can just consult the chart and the info is right there, the calculations would be done very fast, open tab with charts, find info, open tab with combat results, add modifiers, apply.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 12:44:04 pm by Lorric »

 

Offline Enioch

  • 210
  • Alternative History Word Writer
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Uh...you do realize that if you make an Excel spreadsheet you can have all calculations done as quickly as you can type in the percentages?

Like, ten seconds for each fleet.
'Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent'  -Salvor Hardin, "Foundation"

So don't take a hammer to your computer. ;-)

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Uh...you do realize that if you make an Excel spreadsheet you can have all calculations done as quickly as you can type in the percentages?

Like, ten seconds for each fleet.
I've never really got the hang of spreadsheet formulae, and it's years since I've used one. Would you mind telling me how to do it?

 

Offline Lepanto

  • 210
  • Believes in Truth
    • Skype
Re: Forum game: Rules/Discussion
Thanks for the awesome vid.

Strategically, I still support pulling what fleets we can spare off the north; we need to handle the actual threats down south, not hypothetical ones up north (besides, Spoon's admitted that he's almost out of fleets).
"We have now reached the point where every goon with a grievance, every bitter bigot, merely has to place the prefix, 'I know this is not politically correct, but...' in front of the usual string of insults in order to be not just safe from criticism, but actually a card, a lad, even a hero. Conversely, to talk about poverty and inequality, to draw attention to the reality that discrimination and injustice are still facts of life, is to commit the sin of political correctness. Anti-PC has become the latest cover for creeps. It is a godsend for every curmudgeon and crank, from fascists to the merely smug."
Finian O'Toole, The Irish Times, 5 May 1994

Blue Planet: The Battle Captains: Missions starring the Admirals of BP: WiH
Frontlines 2334+2335: T-V War campaign
GVB Ammit: Vasudan strike bomber
Player-Controlled Capship Modding Tutorial