Topic: Big maps and SFB style disengagement rules?

[NuclearWessels]

OK, just screwing around here (blame DH, he got me looking into the tac-warps, which in turn got me thinking about map sizes and disengagement techniques).

Suppose we had MUCH bigger maps, but allowed disengagement by seperation and/or disengagement by acceleration, rather than the Taldren fly-off-the-map-edge approach?

By big maps I'm talking about something that would take an hour or so to cross at speed 31, with players starting out about range 100 from each other in the center of the map.  (If a "big" map currently is 350x350, this would be along the lines of 4000x4000.)

The SFB rules basically say you can disengage by seperation if you're more than distance 50 from your opponent (75 if they have a scout), there are no hostile boarding parties on your ship, and there is no possibility any seeking weapon currently on the board can catch you.

On the other hand, you can disengage by acceleration (jumping to high warp speeds) if you've been travelling at the maximum speed attainable by your ship for at least a full turn, and you still have at least 50% of your engines left.  (The idea being you've revved the beastie up and are ready to jump to a speed that will renders ship-to-ship combat ineffective.)

Both of those could be monitored by the script, and I suppose we could have a dialogue button you click when you want to disengage and have met one criteria or the other.

Of course, there is no reason we'd have to stick precisely with those, so feel free to suggest tweaks.

One other possibility is to actually have the ship jump to a high speed but drop to green alert, giving the enemy a chance to score a last couple of potshots.  (I've played with setting the speeds as high as 500 so far, boy do turn modes suck at that speed!)

Needless to say, any of this would have a rather profound impact on how one plays the game, so it's not something to blindly plunge into, but I'm tempted to try out a couple of scripts just to see what it plays like.

EDIT: we could also use things like the goal indicators to give players a rough idea of where an enemy force was outside sensor range (I can't remember the exact SFB rule off the top of my head, but it was something along the lines of detecting their position to within 5 hexes at up to double the standard sensor range.)

dave

[Lepton]

It's an interesting idea.  I see two problems.  First, people I think like to use the map edges for tactical purposes.  Second, I am always hesitant to rely too heavily on a scripted solution to add a game feature.  It would seem that any and all scripts would need to be modified to include such a feature and this feature would not be present in our scripter's mission packs.  That said, I'd love to see huge maps to remove the artifice of the map edge.  I had no idea such a thing was possible.

[Riskyllama]

What if you tied the tac warp button to a end mission condition so if you tac, it forces a close game? That way you can't tac warp just to avoid drones coming in(the other party gets their shift).

As for those turn modes, is it anything like what you see when you HET back onto the map after crossing to border?

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Wow... 4000X4000 map certainly would change the aspect of the game....

No more worrying about that DN trying to run you in to a corner to either force disengagement or take a wallop....

[FPF-DieHard]

This would be very cool, very "Trek" if you will.   

Make a script or 2 to test out, I'd love to see this.

Warp send you to green alert, Fiendish

"Cheese and chase" will loose some potency

[Hexx]

"Cheese and chase" will loose some potency

Actually 2 ways to take that, but we'll assume you mean "lose".
Although you'd be incorrect, as the basic concept still works, simply a matter of having to chase them farther.

Would the warp be able to ignore terrain? Or is there a chance you'd run smack into something beyond wht you can see?

[Hexx]

Oh, and would it be PVP ? ie can it be kept from AI missions where you have to spend time looking for your opponent?
(Or at least could the AI missions be restricited to Kzin)

[Dizzy]

Hrmmmm

[Dfly]

Oh PLease, just put 1 rock near an edge.  Hexx will find it I am sure 

[NuclearWessels]

What if you tied the tac warp button to a end mission condition so if you tac, it forces a close game? That way you can't tac warp just to avoid drones coming in(the other party gets their shift).

That could certainly be done (actually it would be the easiest way to script it).

As for those turn modes, is it anything like what you see when you HET back onto the map after crossing to border?

Yes now that you mention it - very similar

dave

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Hrmmmm

[NuclearWessels]

...  Second, I am always hesitant to relive to heavily on a scripted solution to add a game feature.  It would seem that any and all scripts would need to be modified to include such a feature and this feature would not be present in our scripter's mission packs. 
...

I hear ya!   For now I'm just looking at this as an experiment to see what we might be able to do.  If it pans out, then maybe come up with a small set of scripts implementing this -- I can't see replacing the entire current script set with something like this, just because the play style would be so different that it seems bound to screw someone.

dave

[NuclearWessels]

...

Would the warp be able to ignore terrain? Or is there a chance you'd run smack into something beyond wht you can see?

Depends on which way we do this - if we use a sort of imaginary/mission ending warp ("Drive engaged Captain" - "Mission Incomplete") then we can duck the terrain issue.  If we actually have the ship go to high speed and fly off the map then hitting terrain is a definite possibility - maybe one of the dangers of a sudden jump to warp speed from the midst of a combat situation

dave

[NuclearWessels]

Oh, and would it be PVP ? ie can it be kept from AI missions where you have to spend time looking for your opponent?
(Or at least could the AI missions be restricited to Kzin)

For AI missions they'd have to be set up within sensor range ... well, that or you just sit still and wait til the AI comes to you, since the AI always magically knows exactly where you are, even when you're way the hell out of sensor range.

dave

[Dfly]

just for those that dont know, if against AI or even humans, hitting the ` key(the one above the tab), it automatically gives you the direction of the nearest enemy ship.  At least you would know which direction to fly.

[FPF-DieHard]

I think running into a rock at warp speed is to funny to NOT leave as a possibility.   

[KBF-Crim]

Oh, and would it be PVP ? ie can it be kept from AI missions where you have to spend time looking for your opponent?
(Or at least could the AI missions be restricited to Kzin)

For AI missions they'd have to be set up within sensor range ... well, that or you just sit still and wait til the AI comes to you, since the AI always magically knows exactly where you are, even when you're way the hell out of sensor range.

dave

That brings up a semi interesting observation.....

The last game I played where the AI enemy actually didnt know where you were, and had to find you was *drum roll please*

Red Storm Rising...C64....

Being able to shake an alpha off yer tale and then sill set him up again was....priceless...

(then again...I havent tried any of the current generation of sub sims)

[Lieutenant_Q]

You know, as dull as it would be, I'd like to see missions where you don't start within sensor range of each other, and the AI doesn't know where you are.

Can we get Scouts to have a doubled sensor range?

[Mutilator]

I would miss the excitement of just scrapping over the map edge or the horror of that last second tractor pulling you back to a certain  death. While the taldren fly off the map is not the SFB method of escape it certainly added some climatic conclusions to many battles I have been in over the years.

As a gang bang pilot I perfer guns at twenty paces and have at it. Big maps looking for enemy might eat up my hunting and killing pace. 

[Commander La'ra]

Don't suppose Disengagement by Sublight Evasion would also be possible?

I like these ideas.