Fwurg

[Brend]

I've been working on the rules for Military operations. I first draft (with a lot of open spaces and unanswered design issues) can be found in user:brend:military. I will keep you all up to date on the development of the rules in this thread.

The rules are bit rough right now, but feel free to comment on the rules as they are -- the wiki allows us to look at previous revision, so we can always place any remark in the context of the rules as they were at that moment.

To start of some discussion on the rules, here are some open issues:

Level of Grit Large parts of the combat system itself are unclear it this moment. Partly because the granularity issue needs to be resolved, and partly because we need to determine the level of 'grit' in the system. As we're talking about the military, we are talking about some very destructive things. For example, should it be possible to bombard a planet's surface until only a glass sphere remains? What about targeting population for either termination or mass capture?

Granularity Granularity of position and combat is an unresolved issue. It's not yet clear how the exact positioning of fleets impacts the actions they can take; I feel most positioning should be based on the sector the fleet is positioned in However, this quickly becomes mucked up by things like orbital defences (how does attacking a system work? Do you target the system as a whole, or do you target a certain orbit, or even a certain orbital body?)

Having granularity at the orbital (or even planetary) level might induce too much bookkeeping to stay interesting – this is especially true for blockades and other things interacting with the economy.

I'm especially interested in your opinions on the first issue right now, but the second issue is of importance as well, as you (the players) are going to use the system. So if you have ideas on this: Let's hear it!

[Elmer]

I like the basic idea of the possibilities of the fleets. I also approve the force time sink by switching their status of readiness. I think we can make some galagtic rules of combat. I believe at the moments there are some rules like no use of hyperspace weapons and light speed rockets, stuff like that. We can expand these rules to:

No attacking of civilian targets
No bombing of living targets other than military (I mean trees and stuff, to prevent entire planets to become glass. The Great Intergalactic Discussion of Life will help in defining the Union view of Life.)
No starvation of populations
No blowing up of stars, supernova’s, black holes and stuff like that.

Simply put: At this moment are already international rules about war on earth created by, I believe, the United Nations. We can expand those rules to galaxy-scale.

For the warships, I got some idea’s to better personalize those fleets. Because some nations might simply not be able create capital ships, but are able to produce 10.000 corvettes, which are still a formidable force. Therefore I had the idea to create the classes:

Figther
Corvette
Frigate
Capital ship

(derived from the game Homeworld2)

Each class has some basic stats. Fighters have for example a high attack in the middle ring, and low defense in the middle ring. While capital ships have a high damage in the outer ring, and low defense in the outer ring. But to keep the options open, every class can have some special ships, like boarding frigates to board other ships, bombers, and carriers. This system does create a lot of options for very interesting combat, but it creates a LOT of bookkeeping.

I also think that a fleet can be sent to somewhere for a restricted amount of turns without a support fleet. As a ship can probably store enough stuff for a quick skirmish.

Maybe we can make the map fancier with fleet updates on their numbers and location. Or make a table based part of the wiki to keep track of the location and the status of the fleets. There are a lot of table based games, like Ogame (I can’t remember the names of the other games). They can be of great inspiration of how to keep track of the ships. But it might also be a lot of work to create. I don’t know.

I also have a question to think about for later: How do fleets work for minor worlds and protectorates? I would like to play with fleets, but I don’t yet like to play an economy to build those fleets. So maybe a fixed growth can be used. With a restriction in mind because of the limited population.

[Brend]

I'm in the progress of writing a reply to clarify some things; you can expect it to be finished tommorownight at last.

[Brend]

In light of the recent post with a lot of interesting comments, I think I should clarify some things while replying to it.

I think we can make some galagtic rules of combat. I believe at the moments there are some rules like no use of hyperspace weapons and light speed rockets, stuff like that.

First off, I make a distinction between rules and laws. To me this means the following:

Rules are rules and mechanics defined by the out-of-character game system. These are used to determine how the world operates, and are about things like meta and system creation. In short, everything in the rules namespace. Usually a rule is absolute -- while we do like to make exceptions in the form of (for example) technologies -- it is not possible to break a rule.

Laws on the other hand, are drawn up by the in-character factions. They govern things like tax rates, civil conduct, subsidies on products or zones, the union grant, and military conduct amongst members of the Union. This includes both the alliance declaration and the Kinewa conventions. These laws however, are not absolute. One can break the law, by submitting fraudulent subsidy requests (which breaks the Union Laws), or by starting research on a hyperspace disruptor weapon (which breaks with the Kinewa Convention).

So to sum up: Laws define things that are possible, but prohibited. Rules define what things are possible.

That being said, I would classify your contribution as laws. This does not say that I'm not interested in them though -- in fact, they would make for a good political debate! I suggest that we start up an IC thread on this topic once the rules come into effect. Some of the points you raise (for example the attacking of civilian targets) might make for some very interesting discussion, as some factions are basically a single military hierarchy.

What I was looking for was a comment or two on things that should or shouldn't be in the rules. I ask this because I would not have a problem with having the option of comitting genocide on a galactic scale (this does not say that I approve of it, or that my faction will be a proponent of this).

For the warships, I got some idea’s to better personalize those fleets. Because some nations might simply not be able create capital ships, but are able to produce 10.000 corvettes, which are still a formidable force.

A point to consider is the fact that FWURG is a politics focussed role playing game, not a strategy game. This can be seen in most facets of the game, from economics to Jedis. Because of this, the main focus of the military rules is to make them have impact on the political and economical aspects of the game. For example, the fleet readiness levels are designed not only to use up valuable time, but also to be able to make a statement: if your neighbour is willing to put a fleet at your border, and move it up to combat-ready (and thus starts paying extra as upkeep), he might also be willing to actually start a war...

Furthermore, the whole game operates on a very high level. An example: 1 is roughly equivalent to 1.000.000.000€ (not an exact conversion, don't use this for any further reasoning on the value of things). So any military rules we use should satisfy both the political aspects of the game, and be high level enough to actually warrant your attention.

The idea of the military rules is to abstract away the details of capital ships, corvettes, bombers and fighters. We do this by defining the 'Military Fleet' which is basically a single military unit consisting of multiple capital ships, corvettes, bombers and fighters, in most any ratio you can imagine. I must admit that the 'Capital Ship' good is a bit of a misnomer, as it is actually the 'any kind of military space-faring vessel you want' good (much like the Entertainment good includes things like news, art, computer games, holonet series and pornography).

This is also why the current rules do not allow unsupplied military fleets: any group of ships that is able to skirmish is likely to small to warrant your attention, and will be part of some larger fleet. The larger fleet however, is not able to go without a good supply line.

So to conclude, all the ship types you suggest are available. It's completely up to the player how he wants to fill in the abstractness of the Military Fleet. Some players might go 'larger is better' all the way, and describe their fleets as being composed of "Flying fortresses with enormous plasma cannons pointing to all sides", while others might go with a more modest look.

Maybe we can make the map fancier with fleet updates on their numbers and location. Or make a table based part of the wiki to keep track of the location and the status of the fleets.

Making the map fancier has been on my todo list for some time now. Though I can not give you a time estimate, I assure you that the map will be the focus of some of my developer time soon. (Especially relevant once noting the trade routes becomes mandatory)

I think giving orders to your fleets will become part of the turn reports, and as such, the users will be responsible for updating their fleets information on the wiki... (I have never played games like OGame, and as such can't really compare them to what I have in mind.)

I also have a question to think about for later: How do fleets work for minor worlds and protectorates? I would like to play with fleets, but I don’t yet like to play an economy to build those fleets. So maybe a fixed growth can be used. With a restriction in mind because of the limited population.

The short answer: Fleets are not possible for minor worlds and protectorates.

The long answer: An explicit decision was made to remove any -related issue from the playing field of minor worlds and protectorates. We did this because they make too little money. (See 'Protectorates and Minor Worlds' thread for more information on this.)

A minor world or protectorate (the name does kind-of give it's lack of significant army away) can have some ships for defensive purposes, but anything beyond that is just too expensive for their tiny economies. When compared to an actual inner-world economy they would get blown away, and any fleet they could support could likewise offer very little resistance to an actual military fleet.

So with regard to having a fleet I suggest you do the following: wait till the system builder is up and running, create a base system, become an Inner World, and keep it at that. Just let the economy do it's thing. You're not required to grow it in any way, and a basic setup gives you a cosy 600 to spend on whatever project takes your fancy

[Mercury]

I like the fleet rules as they have been written - the current concept fits very well in the Fwurg setting and it is easy to understand if you know the Jedi rules and vice versa if you know the fleet rules, it becomes easier to play a Jedi.

I think the rules as they are now need some polishing, but the framework looks to me like it will be solid. I am curious to see a few test playthroughs to see how the rules work out.

[Brend]

I would still like the comments of other players on:

Granularity Granularity of position and combat is an unresolved issue. It's not yet clear how the exact positioning of fleets impacts the actions they can take; I feel most positioning should be based on the sector the fleet is positioned in However, this quickly becomes mucked up by things like orbital defences (how does attacking a system work? Do you target the system as a whole, or do you target a certain orbit, or even a certain orbital body?)

Having granularity at the orbital (or even planetary) level might induce too much bookkeeping to stay interesting – this is especially true for blockades and other things interacting with the economy.

Level of Grit Large parts of the combat system itself are unclear it this moment. Partly because the granularity issue needs to be resolved, and partly because we need to determine the level of 'grit' in the system. As we're talking about the military, we are talking about some very destructive things. For example, should it be possible to bombard a planet's surface until only a glass sphere remains? What about targeting population for either termination or mass capture?

[Elmer]

As I believe the smallest scale in which we operate is planetary scale, so I suggest we don't go underneath that scale. I don't really know how you would seen orbital levels, but I think that is to much work.

The reasons to use fleets in planetary scale for me are:

• Bigger is to unrealistic for my taste, fleets are not that big.
• As I believe that economy's work with planets who produce goods, a fleet can stop this production/ export with a blockade. This would not be possible on a bigger
• scale. Or you must want to shut down an entire system with a fleet. Which is stupid in my opinion.
• It must be possible to have more fleets of different factions in one sector without problems. Or even within the same system. (aggressive attitudes not taken into
• account.) One orbiting one planet, the other orbiting the other planet.
• By the use of planetary scale, it will be easy to make use of beneficial circumstances, like an asteroid belt.

I have no problems with the opportunity of destroying planets and stuff. I see no reason why we would restrict that kind of stuff in the rules. We have laws for that

[Elmer]

I have a small addition in my opinion about the military rules:
If the fleets are measured in things like a fleet of size 1 costs 1 , than I would like the possibility to make small adjustments to the fleets like: the fleet is now size 1.2 and costs 1.2 , following the smallest scale we use in the economics. In this way, it will be possible to improve a nation his fleet without having to dig deeply into the treasure.

What I want to achieve in this way is Nation A has a fleet of size 2, and nation B has a fleet of size 2, When nation A wants to go to war with nation B, It probably likes to increase its fleets. When both sides are equal, one side only needs to infest a little bit in the fleet to get the upper hand. (although in the end the winner will have only a very, very small fleet left.)

In short: I would like to be able to slightly improve a fleet with a small investment of

I also have a small addition to the names of the rings:

| | Attack | Defence |
_________________________________________________________________________
| Outer Ring | Long Range Weapons | Manoeuvring/planetary shielding |
| Middle Ring | middle range turrets/ missiles| Deflector shields |
| Inner Ring | short range turrets | armor |

ps: I cannot make the table better readable

[Brend]

If the fleets are measured in things like a fleet of size 1 costs 1 , than I would like the possibility to make small adjustments to the fleets like: the fleet is now size 1.2 and costs 1.2 , following the smallest scale we use in the economics.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. For starters, the smallest possible amount of tax is 1 , and all tax amounts are always integers. Next to that, the fleet size doesn't really matter to any of the costs at the moment; upkeep is measured in distance, and upgrades are a flat 500 + 200 capital ships. (The 'capital ship' special good is not necessarily a 'Capital Ship' class space vessel. It might also be a squadron of corvettes or a multiple squadrons of fighters or bombers.)

What I want to achieve in this way is Nation A has a fleet of size 2, and nation B has a fleet of size 2, When nation A wants to go to war with nation B, It probably likes to increase its fleets. When both sides are equal, one side only needs to infest a little bit in the fleet to get the upper hand. (although in the end the winner will have only a very, very small fleet left.)

In short: I would like to be able to slightly improve a fleet with a small investment of

You can do that, as it is now a fleet upgrade costs only 500 and 1000 in capital ships (when available at 5 per special good). This will offer the smallest possible upgrade (a +● attack and +● defence) -- this amount of tax is lower than the normal investment of a single zone. To make things even less strenuous, an upgrade takes at least 5 , so in effect the required cost per turn for an upgrade is only 300 per .

Another thing that I take from your text is the following: you seem to work under the assumption that a fleet will grow ship by ship (i.e. a 'spend some tax -> get a ship' thingy), and that it will shrink during combat as ships are destroyed. If this is so, I would stress again that such details are below the level of abstraction we are aiming for. True, ships will probably be disabled in combat, but I'm not going to represent the 'health' of a fleet by keeping track of the amount of ships in the fleet.

For example, depending on battle strategy, some factions might allow their ships to be fully destroyed, while others retreat disabled ships before they can be destroyed. Such distinctions are below the level of abstraction; this allows players to fit such details within their faction's culture or idea about military conflict.

I also have a small addition to the names of the rings:

Code: Select all

|               | Attack                          | Defence                          |
______________________________________________________________________________________
| Outer Ring    | Long Range Weapons              | Manoeuvring/planetary shielding  |
| Middle Ring   | middle range turrets/ missiles  | Deflector shields                |
| Inner Ring    | short range turrets             | armor                            |


ps: I cannot make the table better readable

(Tried to fix the table a bit)

More suggestions for names are always welcome.

I'm trying to get names that are as broad as the names of the jedi rings. Though this might be tricky, as the jedi rings are all focused on melee combat while these rings are both fleet-to-fleet combat and fleet-planet combat. The three descriptions for the different rings do give a good overview of what each ring does; so far I've not been able to think up good (broadly applicable) names for these things.

I really like the Defence names you pose, as they clearly indicate how they apply. To be honest, I'm less enthusiastic about the Offence names, mainly because they can't be applied to a planetary situation. I'm going to note them down on the wiki page none the less, as we can always determine the exact names later, and we need more inspiration