It appears that you have not registered with Aurora 4x. To register, please click here...
C# Aurora > Development Discussions
STO Operations
Steve Walmsley:
I've reached the point of coding how Surface-to-Orbit weapons function in naval combat.
As part of that process, for each STO ground unit design I have added a small resolution - 1 active sensor with a minimum size of 5 tons (0.1 HS) and a maximum size equal to that required to exceed the range of the mounted weapon. In practical terms, because of the new active sensor rules, this is going to be very small in comparison to the size of the STO unit and add minimal cost. This functions like any other active sensor, detecting ships and being detected by EM sensors. The active sensors for each formation element can be turned on and off using a button on the Ground Forces window.
This doesn't mean that STO units can be pinpointed by their sensor emissions as the sensor is assumed to be remote from the weapon. I also considered having separate sensor vehicles but decided it was easier to keep everything together, like a CIWS.
Which brings us to how the STO weapons are targeted. Originally, I planned to add the STO weapons to the naval organisation window, or perhaps a new tab on the ground forces window. However, I ran into some questions. For example, should ground units follow the same restrictions as naval units when changing targets mid-combat? Should training mitigate that? Should all units in the same formation element target the same ship, or should I allow individual weapon targeting? Another concern was the sequence of play, where combat follows detection. Given that hostile ships will be trying to get in and out of range as quickly as possible, giving them a potential 'free round' while the player allocates targets post-detection may not be a good idea - although I could ensure ground-based sensors are more powerful to mitigate that (with increased cost and easier EM detection).
As a result of all that, I reached the conclusion that STO weapons should probably be treated like point defence. The player provides some rules for each formation element and the STO weapons (if active) target anything in range according to those rules. Different elements on the same planet could have different rules. On this basis, they would be able to engage in the same increment as the target was detected (like point defence). Rules could have multiple elements and cover areas such as:
* Whether to engage at all
* Whether to concentrate fire, target individually or target with groups of weapons (in pairs, triples, etc.)
* Whether targeting should be random or according to a rule
* Non-random target rules could be based on closest, slowest, largest, smallest, highest chance to hit, etc.
* When STO weapons do not all attack the same target, the above could be in order of closest, largest, etc. I am looking for feedback on this idea, or suggestions for alternatives, bearing in mind the questions I raised.
Bremen:
One option I could consider would be to treat them like PtS (Planet to Space) weapons in Emperor of the Fading Suns.
In EotFS, ground based weapons couldn't directly attack ships in orbit (it was assumed they'd just stay out of range/sight if they could), but would automatically fire when a space unit attempts to interact with the planet - either coming in to land troops or conduct orbital bombardment. I think this would be the option if you wanted STO weapons in Aurora to function on the ground combat time scale. It would limit the situations they'd be useful in (unable to support a fleet in orbit), but also have some advantages (they could get away with powerful, low charge rate lasers since they'd be firing once every 3 hours, and they couldn't just be picked off like ships using the naval targeting window, but would have to be targeted through orbital bombardment). This would also set up the situation where it was feasible for ships to conduct ground bombardment without wiping out all STO weapons first, since they'd be taking 1 round of fire for 1 round of bombardment instead of 3 hours worth of fire.
How I would see it working is that ships would have an additional order option with regards to planets - one for providing orbital fire support to FFD units, and one for "Bombard STO Weapons." During a ground combat round STO weapons would fire on any ships that were either landing troops, bombarding STO weapons, or providing orbital fire support, then any surviving ships would carry out those orders. If going with this, I would probably make drop ships take one ground combat increment to drop troops - even drop ships should be vulnerable to STO weapons, and it doesn't really have to represent an actual three hours so much as moving into position to drop troops and then the STO weapons firing at the drop ships as they race in. The bonus of using drop ships instead of normal transport would be a single combat increment and that the troops all get unloaded at the same time and can't be attacked piecemeal.
The other option would be the current method of having them function sort of like ships, on a naval combat time scale. I'd suggest that either player directed targeting or completely automated would be the way to go - I think the player trying to set rules for what target to pick would get complex fast, there's just too many variables for it to be user friendly to set up a list of targeting priorities. Possibly both - players could specify targets for STO weapons but if they don't they fire on any ships firing on them first, random targets second.
If you do go for automated targeting, I think it's only fair to make it automated the other way around, too. STO weapons on a planet could be considered hidden (just showing up as normal ground forces) except when firing, and weapons on ships could gain a new point defense setting - "Suppress Planetary Fire" or something like that. STO weapons would attempt to fire (randomly or automated targeting priorities of some sort) at ships in range, and all weapons set to Suppress Planetary Fire would attempt to fire back at all STO weapons that fired that increment. Their sensor would only need to turn on while firing, assuming automated targeting. An option to have STO weapons hold their fire would be useful there (possibly just having them set on rear instead of support) - it would mean you could conceal their existence until you wanted to have them fire.
sloanjh:
In terms of game physics/engineering/playability, why are STO weapons systems (including/especially sensors) any different from ship-based systems? I think you should follow your core principle of "if I can put this weapons system on platform x, then why can't I put it on y" very closely.
If I follow through on this the following consistency questions arise:
1) Why shouldn't an active sensor be vehicle mounted (if small) or static (if big)?
2) What's wrong with a response of "too bad - so sad - can't be justified by Aurora physics" when players complain that the range of their active sensor is too short to allow them to acquire and fire when a spaceship does a rapid fly-by? (Something I just thought of - Aurora sensors don't have line-of-sight requirements, so active sensors can still target a spaceship below the horizon/on the other side of the planet.) This was the response for years when people wanted specialized weapons systems to put on fighters (to be clear, that was a neutral observation, not a complaint).
3) Why are ground-based active sensors limited to resolution 1? That would mitigate the range problem a lot for large spaceships.
4) Why aren't ground-based weapons designed exactly the same way naval weapons are designed? (Possibly with some alternative [EDIT] tech tracks [/EDIT] for things like magazines to represent vehicle hauled missiles, although even there a patriot battery looks an awful lot like a box launcher.)
5) Why not simply allow the put a CIWS system in some STO units and "regular" weapons systems in others.
6) Why not allow ground-based missile systems?
I think that where this leads is:
A) The ghost of PDCs comes back as a ground unit. I think that an STO unit should show up as a formation(?) (that can have mobile and/or static elements) - the formation could then be the equivalent of a ship in terms of user interface. Formation might not be right term here - I mean a grouping of elements that isn't necessarily highest in the chain of command. Maybe the STO system becomes HQ-centric - there's a special HQ that acts like a spaceship's bridge, and that's the thing that binds the weapons systems, magazines, and sensors. Essentially, PDCs turn into an HQ.
B) Players use the naval technology/systems development mechanism to design STO systems (sensors, energy weapons, missile launchers, magazines,CIWS). There are probably separate "ground based" tracks for portability and reload efficiency.
C) There might be a "CIWS control truck" that can meld the individual components (sensor+weapon+computer) of a CIWS into a sub-formation that can be attached to any formation (not just an STO formation). Note that this might feed back into changes in how CIWS is considered in ship design.
D) The rules of STO combat follow "regular order" :) in all ways. An STO HQ essentially acts as a space system on space system timescales.
E) Active sensors and fire control are probably going to generally be too big to be mobile, so there's going to be a lot of static stuff.
F) This brings up the question of armor for static units, which begins to circle back to PDCs.
G) In terms of the original Aurora concept, that planets are tough nuts to crack, I think the general philosophy should be the same as 19th century coastal forts: the ground is a very stable and tough weapons platform that can be used for area denial.
H) The naval crewing requirements will translate into manpower requirements in the STO units.
I) From a coding/design point of view, this minimizes the amount of big-bang rewrite/introduce a bunch of new set of rules. This is good both because it cuts time-to-release and (probably more importantly) it cuts back on the potential for inconsistency between the two rules sets.
There are probably more, but I can't think of them at the moment....
John
Steve Walmsley:
I probably didn't make it clear but the STO weapons are not any different from ship-based systems.
1) The weapon is a normal weapon designed for use in warships and the cost/size/ minerals are the same.
2) The active sensor uses the normal sensor design rules. It is resolution 1 so it can shoot at anything. Cost/size/ minerals are the same. Range is the same as ship-based.
3) The beam fire control uses the normal beam fire control rules. Costs are halved with the rationale that it is intended to control a single weapon.
4) A reactor is designed using the normal rules to power the weapon. Cost/size/ minerals are the same.
The active sensor range isn't a problem. For the Commonwealth with Strength 21 and EM 11 tech, a 0.1 HS resolution 1 sensor has a range of 2.7m km.
My only question here is how to control their targeting. Automatic or manual.
Steve Walmsley:
I want STO weapons to function on naval timescales as part of naval combat. Their main function is to counter planetary assault, prevent orbital bombardment and interdict fighters moving to and from the planet. Warships will be able to directly target STO units once they fire (in effect they will be detected as a separate target from normal ground forces once they fire).
I will tackle the orbit-to-surface next, which is easier because the whole naval fire control situation is well-defined. First though, I need to determine how the STO units handle target assignments.
It's also worth pointing out that while ground combat takes place every three hours, this is intended as a summation of all the events in those three hours, not a situation where everybody fires once every three hours. Orbital bombardment support represents ships firing when required during that period, rather than either continual combat or a three-hour cycle. Slow-firing weapons will be penalised when used for orbital bombardment support.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version