Astro Galaxy - a realistic space exploration game
  November 24, 2017, 01:24:57 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: AG battle system  (Read 6327 times)
BB Goode
Corporal
*

Reputation: +4/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


I'm somewhere in here...


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2013, 12:37:41 AM »

The general VIP advantages are more than enough compensation for purchases of QP. If the economics of the game were a bit further along, those advantages would manifest themselves there, and getting them out of combat would become more of an urgency as economically active players would demand a fair chance to defend what they have built.

I played Medieval Europe before he had the combat system worked out. The Dev there was adamant about getting his economic house in order. Once he did, and added the combat components, including individual dueling, there was a brief flurry of "quick" skirmishes as the idiots that didn't prepare got taken out. Then, things settled down and it became a more economically focused game where conflicts took more time and intrigue to accomplish. I left the game, but still have friends there, and it is quite an involved, deeply strategic game that embodies what the Dev envisioned. And that is because he created a complex, thoughtful, viable economic fabric first. He gave them something of value to fight about!

Two things I would like to see here is Colonization, and the addition of Food (proteins is good enough) and Water as commodities. We could add Rare Biologicals and use them to manufacture Medicines, Drugs and Delicacies. A corp that can lay claim to a planet can choose to ban Nukes, Drugs and Delicacies, driving up their prices on a black market. It would create avenues for smugglers and 'law enforcement' to cross swords. Again, letting economic choices drive the decisions to engage in combat.

Just thinking out loud now. Didn't mean to ramble. But that is how I think about economic developments in these things. Any one who can code, and wants to... 7
Report to moderator   Logged

Starbender Enterprises
Conquering the Universe
One Galaxy at a Time
sargas
Guest
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2013, 01:08:59 AM »

I'm liking that, BB...
Report to moderator   Logged
JamJulLison
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +55/-35
Offline Offline

Posts: 1672



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 29, 2013, 11:02:11 AM »

I wouldn't mind seeing those things either bb.



Quote
This quote makes me laugh and shake my head all at the same time. Will the REAL JamJulLison please stand up? You point out how unfair it is, but are probably one of the biggest advocates of the wanton use of QP i have ever heard of. (and that is probably only because you are one of the biggest comment-makers in the game forums to give you some dues back)

Most of my QP sped up attacks was done during our war.  A few notable exceptions is one guy who left our corp without notice and then decided to ignore me when I asked him why. Though he had been a bit angry about the GC Charter despite him having plenty of chances to speak up when we were working out the details. He got his space station blown to shreds.  The other one who I have done this with a few times was  Tumppi when he was trying to hit Morbius. Morbius was in no danger but I figured I would send the guys ship running anyways. I was paid in QP for my services though. lol.

In normal past raids I have done, I don't bother with QP spending. It really isn't needed for my raiding ship and really would be a waste to spend QP on them.

Also note just cause I think this is unfair doesn't mean I won't take advantage of it in certain situation if I feel it is worth the use of QP. I would be an idiot in certain situations not to use it.  I am sure you yourself have done this with QP in the past.  I do wish Emi would take it out though. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Dadds
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +41/-142
Offline Offline

Posts: 734



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2013, 02:50:50 PM »

Quote
Also note just cause I think this is unfair doesn't mean I won't take advantage of it in certain situation if I feel it is worth the use of QP. I would be an idiot in certain situations not to use it.  I am sure you yourself have done this with QP in the past.  I do wish Emi would take it out though.
yes of course i have used it. i didnt like it when it came in, like many developments that may never go the way a player wants them to go. You then have to learn to adapt to the change. Darwin theory. Evolve or cease to exist lol. It is still the only quick way(read, the only way) to catch a pirate ship, which is unfortunate.The "attack, but leave my options open" combat gives all the advantage to the aggressor as i have been saying for a long, long time. At best all a defender can do is keep putting ships in place, anticipate the pirates next move to block that, ad infinitum, until one of us gets bored, runs out of fuel or QP. or their internet connection drops out (also from boredom) i still want to see an aggressor PvP pilot being forced to run a combat round if they attack, to give the defender time to bring troops in, rally and counter the strike. All that happens now if i was to bring overwhelming odds into the equation, the pirate just wanders off someplace else without even a scratch to his badge....here is a thought...i recall one game i used to play once that got a retreating shot off as the enemy turned tail and thought the better of a combat. It minimised the aggressors possible losses if he was to have faced the enemy directly, while allowing the defender some sort of victory in blood for being attacked.
Report to moderator   Logged

___________________________________________
Dadds
Commander-in-Chief [IMG], Galactic Council member
BB Goode
Corporal
*

Reputation: +4/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


I'm somewhere in here...


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2013, 06:14:26 PM »

I am always amazed at how over-done and convoluted people make combat. The old paper and dice D&D had it right: start with a 50/50 chance of hitting and work form there.

The best combat systems are the most basic in nature.
-Start with a 50-50 baseline
-Use technology and equipment choices to adjust those percentages
-Add your personnel bonuses or deficits
-Decide initiative and adjust percentages again
-Fire
-Adjust (or partial adjust) for damages
-Counter fire
-Final adjust for damages
-Everyone (including AI) decides what they want to do for the next round


If you want to have other complexities, that is fine, but they should fit onto that timeline, and everyone gets a chance to shoot. Almost anything else is bound to fail, or at least be prone to cries of "Unfair!"  and they usually are.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. But you can build on it. Face it, that basic combat timeline has been around since the Renaissance, when miniature war games were first played for prizes (maybe late Middle Ages, I will have to check that to be sure. Its been a while since I read on this topic.) and units were measured for distances and "points" were given for the damage of catapults and culverin, and charges were different than marches for lines of cavalry, and tactical deployment of archers to cover flanks instead of cutting infantry advances was a major decision.

Let the players all have a chance to play, and have a chance to win, or at least make a fair choice about how to proceed.

Along these lines, I recommend the Honor Harrington series by David Weber for understanding "realistic" space combat.
It also begs the question: Where are the missiles? Missiles are more basic and than "vipers," and more useful than a laser gun that is designed to fail anyway, from the looks of these debates. (I agree with those that wonder how a weapon that IS LIGHT can miss what a weapon that IS MASS traveling near the speed of light can hit.  21)
Report to moderator   Logged

Starbender Enterprises
Conquering the Universe
One Galaxy at a Time
JamJulLison
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +55/-35
Offline Offline

Posts: 1672



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2013, 08:06:48 PM »

Dadds I actually one time months and months ago when I was doing a raid had someone I was raiding speed up the attack time from their end so I would hit them even faster.  This was with like a 3-4 min timer as it was.  All I could think was man what an idiot lol.

I got no issue with attack timers in games. But it is how this one is done that I have an issue.  I used to play a game called ogame a lot. They had attack timers. But the timers was actually how long it would take for a fleet to reach the planet they were attacking.  The time was based on the slowest ships in the fleet.  Now the target couldn't see the timer if I recall. But there was a way to track fleets. It involved a device on moons. Though Moons were hard to get.  Using these it was actually possible to track enemy fleets and actually plan ambushes on them.  The game's travel system and stuff were a lot different then astro.

My issue with the timers in the game is the length of them.  The timer becomes so ridiculously high that the only way to actually hit someone with a powerful ship or to take out a powerful installation is to hope they don't play anymore or use QP to speed up the attacks. To me that is a huge problem.  I do think having a cancel option isn't a bad idea simply because the battle hasn't even started yet. The timer is how long it takes to prepare for battle. Though I honestly can't see why it would take so dang long to prepare for the battle.
Report to moderator   Logged
SirEmi
Administrator
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +246/-129
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151



View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2014, 08:59:50 AM »

I will make a note to add some more explanations to how the battle works and how damage absorption works, as we get more weapons that absorb or penetrate trough defenses it may get confusing.

The damage shown in the battle report is the damage supposed to hit the target. Any damage that gets absorbed because of the laser / railgun vs. armor / shields efficiency will be decreased from the supposed damage. So the battle report might show a bigger damage that actually gets to penetrate armor / shield. This may lead to some confusion.

Will see if maybe we can show the actual damage after absorption or find some better way of reporting it.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 09:01:24 AM by SirEmi » Report to moderator   Logged

raphael
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +60/-165
Offline Offline

Posts: 792


Victory is certain.


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: August 21, 2014, 10:11:47 AM »

The damage shown in the battle report is the damage supposed to hit the target.

Based on this thread's age, it took almost two years for is very simple yet very important fact to be stated! There is actually no need to change it--now that we know for sure how it works, and now that it is officially announced.

I just don't understand how you expect players to know that the damage displayed is just the supposed damage and not the actual damage. It is so misleading.

There is also no formula shown whatsoever on how attack damage is calculated so the only thing that we players rely on is the battle report, and that turns out to be inaccurate. That inaccuracy don't matter much at lower levels, but at my railgun mk CD with 1209000 attack, they sure do.

Are there any other nasty surprises that we don't know of?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 10:17:11 AM by raphael » Report to moderator   Logged

It is illegal to attack a SEA official!
It is illegal to attack in Earth orbit!


JamJulLison
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +55/-35
Offline Offline

Posts: 1672



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2014, 11:00:45 PM »

I will make a note to add some more explanations to how the battle works and how damage absorption works, as we get more weapons that absorb or penetrate trough defenses it may get confusing.

The damage shown in the battle report is the damage supposed to hit the target. Any damage that gets absorbed because of the laser / railgun vs. armor / shields efficiency will be decreased from the supposed damage. So the battle report might show a bigger damage that actually gets to penetrate armor / shield. This may lead to some confusion.

Will see if maybe we can show the actual damage after absorption or find some better way of reporting it.


So why did it take to long for you to post on it? Why post now at all?  Also you should really make it show the actual damage because I always assumed the damage we saw was the real damage. I had no reason to think otherwise. With how long it took for you to reply though it makes me wonder if sometimes you got the brains of a Slowpoke. (Yes I made a pokemon joke)
Report to moderator   Logged
Dadds
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +41/-142
Offline Offline

Posts: 734



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2014, 03:02:58 PM »

JJL he posts it now because his railgun CD ship attacked my corp ship VIGILANT and got bounced, and it cost him a pretty penny of QP lol. I have been saying for a while now the numbers dont seem to add up, especially with opti ships (eg bomber) on the potential damage they should inflict vs the actual damage inflicted...the numbers just seem so random it doesnt make sense. I see a reports of light hits doing not much less than direct hits sometimes, for eg. It starts to come down to a toss of a coin almost.
Report to moderator   Logged

___________________________________________
Dadds
Commander-in-Chief [IMG], Galactic Council member
JamJulLison
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +55/-35
Offline Offline

Posts: 1672



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2014, 09:56:51 PM »

JJL he posts it now because his railgun CD ship attacked my corp ship VIGILANT and got bounced, and it cost him a pretty penny of QP lol. I have been saying for a while now the numbers dont seem to add up, especially with opti ships (eg bomber) on the potential damage they should inflict vs the actual damage inflicted...the numbers just seem so random it doesnt make sense. I see a reports of light hits doing not much less than direct hits sometimes, for eg. It starts to come down to a toss of a coin almost.


Wow he actually tried to hit someone with one of his weak ships.  I mean seriously I have been using his ships as target practice for ages. I would have thought those combat reports would have tipped him off.
Report to moderator   Logged
raphael
Sergeant First Class
*

Reputation: +60/-165
Offline Offline

Posts: 792


Victory is certain.


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: August 22, 2014, 10:14:29 PM »

Jam, he means me and not SirEmi. And just for the record, it didn't cost much as I got a refund! LOL

All the previous reports were inconclusive, and like what Dadds said, didn't add up. So I powered down my ship to put it to its limit. its power was below Dadds', but just had enough firepower to jump him. Or so I thought.

Total damage: 13,791,670
Total shields: 9,261,563

The damage is way above his limit. As I have railguns for many months now and used it in many battles, I always assumed that the damage displayed is the actual damage (who wouldn't??). In the end, I lost, but not because of my fault but because the game informed NO ONE that the damage players have been seeing FOR YEARS now is just the damage supposed to hit the target, not the actual damage. wtf right? LOL

All is well since I came back and kicked his ass for good. It was still 1v2 ships, and his interceptor didn't make a difference. I can and will always be kicking Dadds' weak ass easily, anytime I want.  12
Report to moderator   Logged

It is illegal to attack a SEA official!
It is illegal to attack in Earth orbit!


JamJulLison
First Sergeant
*

Reputation: +55/-35
Offline Offline

Posts: 1672



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: August 22, 2014, 10:17:08 PM »

Jam, he means me and not SirEmi. And just for the record, it didn't cost much as I got a refund! LOL

All the previous reports were inconclusive, and like what Dadds said, didn't add up. So I powered down my ship to put it to its limit. its power was below Dadds', but just had enough firepower to jump him. Or so I thought.

Total damage: 13,791,670
Total shields: 9,261,563

The damage is way above his limit. As I have railguns for many months now and used it in many battles, I always assumed that the damage displayed is the actual damage (who wouldn't??). In the end, I lost, but not because of my fault but because the game informed NO ONE that the damage players have been seeing FOR YEARS now is just the damage supposed to hit the target, not the actual damage. wtf right? LOL

All is well since I came back and kicked his ass for good. It was still 1v2 ships, and his interceptor didn't make a difference. I can and will always be kicking Dadds' weak ass easily, anytime I want.  12


So then this raises another question.  Why did he assume I was talking about and not SirEmi? I was referring to SirEmi taking so long to post back. No wonder I got confused.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!