Commerce Raiding

[Erik L (OP)]

How viable is it in Aurora?

And should there be a provision for capturing cargo?

[Kurt]

How viable is it in Aurora?

And should there be a provision for capturing cargo?

This is interesting.  Cargoes in my empires typically include factories, resources, fuel, and colonists, all of which should be useable by other races if captured.  

In terms of game mechanics, the following things would need to be included in the game for this to work:
1.  A surrender mechanism;
2.  A way to disable rather than destroy enemy ships (as an alternative to #1);
3.  A way to transfer control of a surrendered ship to the capturing player;
4.  A way to transfer cargoes to the disabling player's ships.  

It would seem to me that Piracy and commerce raiding would be more viable in Aurora than in Starfire.  The absence of buoys and the combination of larger territories, lower overall population, and fewer ships would all conspire to make this a possibility.  

Kurt

[Erik L (OP)]

I'd like nothing more than to hijack... err... liberate goods from an opposing empire, especially if they've rejected my attempts at peaceful assimilation.

[Kurt]

I'd like nothing more than to hijack... err... liberate goods from an opposing empire, especially if they've rejected my attempts at peaceful assimilation.

Hmmm...how would you control a known contact point with a race, friendly or not?  In Starfire I usually station at least a squadron of warships at the warp point to watch for attempts to enter my space, and if I don't trust the other race I'll try to build some fortifications.  

I forget, can bases be towed through warp points in Aurora?  In any case, bases or ships will still need to be overhauled periodically.  Long-endurance scouts with good sensors, good speed, and lots of spares would seem to be a good idea.  

Kurt

[Brian Neumann]

Hmmm...how would you control a known contact point with a race, friendly or not?  In Starfire I usually station at least a squadron of warships at the warp point to watch for attempts to enter my space, and if I don't trust the other race I'll try to build some fortifications.  

I forget, can bases be towed through warp points in Aurora?  In any case, bases or ships will still need to be overhauled periodically.  Long-endurance scouts with good sensors, good speed, and lots of spares would seem to be a good idea.  

Kurt

Bases can be towed through a warp point, but the base size has to be no larger than the jump engine on the ship bringing it through the jump point.  Also remember that even at the most basic level ships will appear in a 100,000km diamater area.  At lower tech levels this may easily put ships outside of point blank range of any bases that are stationed there.  In addition, unless you have a ship on the other side of the warp point you would need to keep the shields up with the resulting use of fuel.  This could get expensive fairly quickly if you are not carefull.  I think my prefered method would be to keep a scout like you proposed at each warp point and have a reaction fleet sitting back far enough not to be engaged imediately.  The fleet might not even be in the same system depending on the layout of the warp point and system bodies in question.

Brian

[Erik L (OP)]

If you are going to fortify the jump points, I'd think it would be the "inner" side. The side closest to the homeworld. That way, ships coming through would have no warning about the defenses.

For interdiction, I usually run a small task group (4-5 ships) in a pattern between warp points.

[Steve Walmsley]

How viable is it in Aurora?

And should there be a provision for capturing cargo?

This is interesting.  Cargoes in my empires typically include factories, resources, fuel, and colonists, all of which should be useable by other races if captured.  

In terms of game mechanics, the following things would need to be included in the game for this to work:
1.  A surrender mechanism;
2.  A way to disable rather than destroy enemy ships (as an alternative to #1);
3.  A way to transfer control of a surrendered ship to the capturing player;
4.  A way to transfer cargoes to the disabling player's ships.  

It would seem to me that Piracy and commerce raiding would be more viable in Aurora than in Starfire.  The absence of buoys and the combination of larger territories, lower overall population, and fewer ships would all conspire to make this a possibility.  

You can transfer a fleet from one race to another using the Fleet window. This was converted from SA and I am not sure all the latest class information is supported. I'll update that for v1.6. Any cargo would be transferred along with any ships in the fleet so the surrender mechanism (which could be roleplayed in the meantime) seems to be the best option. Hmm, hidden commander surrender modifier perhaps

Steve

[sloanjh]

If you are going to fortify the jump points, I'd think it would be the "inner" side. The side closest to the homeworld. That way, ships coming through would have no warning about the defenses.

For interdiction, I usually run a small task group (4-5 ships) in a pattern between warp points.

OTOH the choke point is on the "outer" side (due to jump dispersion), plus the defending fleet can't see what's coming if they're on the "inner" side, i.e. they have to worry about being surprised.  I remember Steve interdicted the far side of the WP in his first test campaign.

I don't have a good feel for how jump dispersion relates to weapons range, i.e. if there's effectively a choke point on the inner side as well because weapons can cover any possible exit point.

John

[Steve Walmsley]

You can transfer a fleet from one race to another using the Fleet window. This was converted from SA and I am not sure all the latest class information is supported. I'll update that for v1.6.

I've checked the code and updated all the necessary fields. I'm too tired to test it tonight though

Steve

[Brian Neumann]

I don't have a good feel for how jump dispersion relates to weapons range, i.e. if there's effectively a choke point on the inner side as well because weapons can cover any possible exit point

That depends on the tech level involved, and if the defenders are using missles.  For early tech levels there is a pretty quick drop-off of range.  Most weapons and fire control have a real problem hitting, or damaging anything at 100,000-150,000 km range.  To get a jump engine that can handle out to 150,000 km takes 3 levels of reasearch totalling 14000 rp and has a size multiplier of 1.2.  A comparable tech fire control is at the 50% mark around 100,000 km and a 15cm UV laser is down to 1, maybe 2 points of damage.  This would not be hard to defend against if you want to build raiders, or missle ships that will try to hold the range open then blast the defenders.

Did you ever play with the jump drives in Starfire that came out with Akelda Dawn.  Their jump drive worked in a similiar fashion and the battles I played out were a sprawling mess.  The defender would start with a smaller, but cohesive force and would be trying to destroy the attacker in detial before they could consolidate.  Bases without missles rarely had any effect unless they were present in huge numbers.  The biggest benifit of bases was they often would prevent jump ships from going back to get more attackers.  Mine fields were almost useless as well due to the large area that attackers could come out in.  IDEW actually were often of use because they would keep incrementing damage over time, and they could cover a decent volume of space.

Brian

[sloanjh]

Did you ever play with the jump drives in Starfire that came out with Akelda Dawn.  Their jump drive worked in a similiar fashion and the battles I played out were a sprawling mess.  The defender would start with a smaller, but cohesive force and would be trying to destroy the attacker in detial before they could consolidate.  Bases without missles rarely had any effect unless they were present in huge numbers.  The biggest benifit of bases was they often would prevent jump ships from going back to get more attackers.  Mine fields were almost useless as well due to the large area that attackers could come out in.  IDEW actually were often of use because they would keep incrementing damage over time, and they could cover a decent volume of space.

Brian

Nope -  but I was familiar with them to the extent of thinking that they would pretty much blow away the SF choke-point defense doctrine.  Interesting that you mention that beam-armed bases were mostly used to prevent transits in the other direction - that's very similar to the "other side" doctrine.

John

[Brian Neumann]

In Starfire the biggest problem with stopping the jump drive attack was that most weapons didn't cover more than 30 hex radius, and jump ships could be anywhere out to 100 hexes from the jump point.  This meant that it was hard to have enough force at any one point to be usefull.  Also any bases away from the warp point needed to be designed to handle close range engagements as there was no way to guess how close an attacking ship would be when it appeared.

I don't think that things will be as bad as this in aurora as weapons range goes up fairly quickly, and missles will always have the potential to cover the entire area that enemy ships might appear in.  Having enough missles might be a problem, but their range is more than ample even at very beginning techs.  

Brian

[Michael Sandy]

One of the difference between Aurora and Starfire is that a situation where two sides heavily defend opposite sides of a warp point would be fairly rare, in my opinion.

I could see a lot more "Far-side" defenses.

Why?  Several reasons.

On the Strategic side, the offense has the option of jumping everything into the system at once.  That requires a bit more expenditure on jump ships, but with higher tech level the jump systems shrink so that is less of a problem.

The offense jumping into a system has the advantage of having their shields at full power when they need it.

Defending Far side has some significant tactical advantages as well.  Missile flight times are significantly greater in Aurora, and missiles are more expensive and more of a limited resource.  Being about to jump out before an enemy missile wave arrives, and being able to jump ships with major shield damage out could be a major advantage.  And definitely being able to jump fragile carriers out is a potentially major advantage for a Far Side defense.

For stopping raiders, Far Side defense has advantages.  The raiders have to close through the long range envelope, where they may take mostly shield damage, and then they enter the intense close range firepower where beams do more damage and their shields are down.  With near side defense, the raiders enter the intense beam enviroment with shields up, and if they can withstand that then the long range envelope would probably bounce off armor, or do negligible system damage.

There is also the moral and political advantages.  Approaching ships can be warned off.  You don't have the situation of peaceful explorers being blown to bits lest they compromise system security.  As a legal doctrine, Far Side defense demonstrates control and ownership over the warp point itself, rather than just ownership of the system on the other side.

In fact, the necessity of Near Side defense in Starfire lead to what I considered fairly peculiar "legal" doctrines.  It would be considered an act of aggression for peaceful explorers to defend the straits by which they entered a system.

In Aurora, you can have weapons range, missile range, sensor range or fighter range as the effective "legal ownership" range.

[Michael Sandy]

Comparing Far Side and Near Side defenses.

Near Side advantages:  A race at a relative disadvantage in long range weaponry, or with an advantage in short range ships may prefer an engagement which starts at fairly close range.

Similarly, a race with a speed advantage and long range weaponry advantage may _also_ prefer a Near Side defense, because of there preferred tactic of maintaining a given range would force them off a Far Side warp point, allowing the aggressor to transit.

On the disadvantages, the attacker can choose the time for the attack, and so will be at full shields.  In Far Side defense, the defenders will see the attackers coming for long enough to raise shields, generally.

Near Side defense has better communications with defenders in system, in general, and doesn't need to have jump ships to withdraw.  On the other hand, a Far Side defense force can terminate a missile or fighter engagement at will, if it has jump ships, so that factor is a bit of a wash.  Engaging in "Hot Pursuit" of a Far Side defense force could result in a _nasty_ surprise, as a Far Side defense doesn't precluse having a strong Near Side force with a different weapons mix.

As a legal ownership thing, I think Far Side Defense makes a far more convincing case that the defender controls transit.  Near Side Defense says that one just bars entry, not that you have a right to enter as well.

In Starfire, entering a system is the first step towards owning it.  I don't think we will see that in Aurora.  There is a lot more potential for multiple powers to use a given system relatively peacefully.

[Steve Walmsley]

In Starfire, entering a system is the first step towards owning it.  I don't think we will see that in Aurora.  There is a lot more potential for multiple powers to use a given system relatively peacefully.

Interesting analysis in both posts. I hope the situation above will be fairly common in Aurora as that is the time of gameplay I was aiming for. More skirmishing and politics in comparison to all-out fleet battles.

Steve