Topic: Ruleset and other game play Specifics

[Lieutenant_Q]

Getting this items situated will help us figure out what to do with Dyna, it may be that we're stuck with the SFC2/3 Hex grid anyways

Not sure hat you mean
[/quote]

If there wasn't going to be a server, the peer-to-peer transition from the main server would require even a momentary pause as the server drops the players and they join their own private network.  As it's all going to be run server side, this won't be necessary, and we won't NEED the hex grid, although I'm sure that Race Commanders will want it for Strategic Planning.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Sensor ranges and sensor returns proposal:

Every ship has both a sensor strength and a return strength.  In general a larger ship has a larger return signal.  Certain actions will increase your sensor return. Things like performing a deep scan, or being at warp.

Ship's sensor range are determined by their sensor package, this would be the base range that an object can be detected. I would say the base sensor range for any starship would be 20. Adding extra sensor hits, labs, or scout packages would increase the range. To determine what range you detect someone at, you multiply the sensor strength of the ship scanning, by the ship type value.

Ship type:
Shuttlecraft 1 (detected at range 20)
Fighter 2 (detected at range 40)
Runabout 2.5 (detected at range 50)
Frigate 3 (60)
Destroyer 4 (80)
Cruiser 5 (100)
Dreadnought 6 (120)
Large freighter 6 (120)
Battleship 7 (140)
Station 15 (300)
Battlestation 20 (400)
Starbase 40 (800)

Long range sensors
Even beyond short range sensors, you can detect ships at greater range with your long range sensors. Little details are available unless you've performed a detailed scan of the ship before. You can determine that a ship is there, the size of the ship, and the race that built it. But nothing else until it enters short range sensor range.  Ships have a different return signal on long range sensors. The base range is in light years but ship return values are divided by ten.  So using a base sensor package of 20, a cruiser is detectable 10 light years away (5/10).

Actions a target ship is taking (affects both long and short range sensors):
Ship is cloaked: half size rating, half sensor strength
Ship is at impulse: no effect
Ship is deep scanning: +1 to size rating
Ship is at tactical Warp: double size rating
Ship is at medium warp (warp 3-5): triple size rating
Ship is at high warp (warp 5+): quadruple size rating

I tried to come up with a balance that allows cloakers the ability to move undetected but doesn't allow them to deep strike a base without some warning.  I think the system above works.

Thoughts?

[[UFP]Exeter]

I take it the ranges are SFB hex ranges?

[Lieutenant_Q]

Yes.  I think keeping the tactical game as close as possible to SFC 2 would allow the best transition to it.  I know somethings are going to change, they have to. But keeping the sensor ranges and movement rates will make the changes in weapons specs and hit tables less drastic than a complete overhaul.  It's hard to sneak up on someone, even with a cloak, because you'll appear on long range sensors well outside of weapons range.  The cloak makes it easier to sneak up, but you'd need to be crawling at impulse in order to get really close.  I don't know if a Romulan would want to spend five hours to cross the neutral zone to ambush a station, although if it did, a Balance of Terror scenario is certainly possible.

[[UFP]Exeter]

The re;ationship ratio could be kept the same. but the hex range is balanced with other factors, besides the tactical does not use hexes

[Javora]

Maybe include ships that forgo sensor range for weapons and vice versa.  This would fit in with some Fed science ships that have been refit for battle.  I bring this up because there might be some minor coding issues.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Yes.  When I said 20, I was thinking like a Base Federation Cruiser.  Obviously Frigates are going to have less sensor power than a Cruiser, unless they spend space that could have otherwise been used for weapons or other equipment for more sensor power.  Klingons, for example, might forgo sensor power to get better targeting scanners.  And obviously there isn't going to be SFB hexes, but there still is range that has to be figured.

Another thing I probably wanted to make a little more in depth is the relationship between the Cloak and the sensors.  A more modern cloak would be harder to detect by a ship with older sensors, and a ship with top of the line sensors would be able to easier spot a ship with a cloak from 20 years prior.

Using the half detection size as a base. I think the formula should probably be... (second attempt... first one had an easy to achieve divide by zero error in it) IF C > 0; S+Sc/(C*2)  Where S=Sensor Level, Sc=Scout (The value here should only be more than 1 if in the case of a Scout Cruiser or bigger, and then to a max of 2), C=Cloak Level.  If there's no cloak, then just skip the entire line and figure detection normally. (Otherwise there's a divide by zero error too, I thought about eliminating the error, but it skews the power of the cloak too much I think)  Also I need to edit the above post just a bit with regards to the cloak, the ship that is cloaked has their sensor range halved, not the ship looking for the cloaked ship.

[[UFP]Exeter]

seems like sensor detection needs to be  factor of both sensor capability or the hip and the anti senor detection of the other.  For simplicity vall it ECM

[Lieutenant_Q]

I'm hesitant to use ECM for that simply because ECM is throwing up a lot of electronic "chatter" to confuse sensors.  That actually makes you easier to detect, not harder.  All that noise is going to tell the detecting ship that something is out there.  Won't know what, but you'll know something is there.

[[UFP]Exeter]

I like the concept, sensor detection as a function of both ships

[Tulwar]

First thing to consider with electronic warfare is active vs. passive sensors.  Keeping your radar off makes you a lot harder to detect.  Switching it on broadcasts you'r location across the galaxy.  After that, we can worry about making the enemy play Space Invaders on their targeting screen.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Good point.s  I would suggest a sensor detection function that takes multiple factors

[Tulwar]

Personally, if I were making a game from scratch, I'd equip different ships with different sensor suites.  Scientific vessels might have excellent passive sensors, or maybe their sensors wouldn't be designed for detecting ships at warp.  The big headlight on the front of the Enterprise might prove to be an excellent target acquisition sensor, while a ship like the Reliant might not have much range.  A Klingon player might want to trade TMP's photon for TOS radar.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Ship customization is planned bu need to get basic gameplay working.

[Tulwar]

Ship customization is planned bu need to get basic gameplay working.

Forget I mentioned anything!  Customization is something that very few captains ever get any say on.  Maybe in WWII, PT boat skippers could get a selection of guns, but the commander of a real ship gets what he's given and makes it work!

The whole ship customization scheme that SFC3 borrowed from Activision's earlier titles was so unmilitary that it left me completely unable to suspend disbelief.  A starship is not a personal hot rod for some captain to play with in the garage.  The company car isn't making money for the boss if the driver keeps it in the shop!  I know people think that the governments are just here to waste money, but bosses are bosses.  Starfleet does not want to see its ships coming back to dock, just because the captain isn't happy with the torpedo launcher that came with his ship.  When the boss wants you to get better equipment, he will call.  Believe me, when the boss wants you to come to shop, he will call.

[[UFP]Exeter]

the customization is closer to upgrades

[FPF-DieHard]

Meh, nothing to see here.

[FPF-DieHard]

Ship customization is planned bu need to get basic gameplay working.

The ship customization in SFC3 was utterly retarded.  Not saying all customization is retarded, maybe the fail of SFC3 was just that strong.

Refits work, funny how I thing the SFC1 Refit system had it best.

[Corbomite]

It's a lot easier to make a system for a single player vs a balanced one for thousands who all have their own ideas about what the best thing is.

[FPF-DieHard]

It's a lot easier to make a system for a single player vs a balanced one for thousands who all have their own ideas about what the best thing is.

Very true, but I don't think with SFC3 anyone even tried.  Any trek game where it was a good idea to REMOVE THE SHIELDS FROM YOUR SHIP is a bucket of fail.

That said since this game doesn't look like it's gonna use SFB IP who knows what'll work best.

That's the thing with customization is it opens so many cans of worms.  I re-read the SFC:OP warp-missions thread from 2006 and was laughing at all the INSANE exploits we found with this.  it's probably why they never were used on a server.