After scouring the computer stores for any kind of grand space fleet sci-fi naval simulation and coming up empty handed, I''m actually more motivated to create the Naval game than my ground component (fear not...I''m in no way abandoning it, for if anything, my creativity block has gone now that I''m working on the Naval side of things). A long time ago I played Starfire, and I''ve also played Full Thrust, Star Cruiser and Star Fleet Battles (the board game). I bought Noble Armada, SpaceFleet (a BattleTech game), Lightning Strike and Starmada though I''ve yet had a chance to actually play the games with anyone. So I''ve had a fondness for boardgames in the sci-fi spaceship genre. But what I''m really looking for is a Fleet level (or at least Task Force level) representation of naval combat. The trick here is that most computer games focus too much on the empire building, and not enough with the combat. MOO3, Hegemonia, Imperium Galactica etc all had too much extraneous stuff in the way of combat, and even Homeworld made you lose your concentration from the fighting to deal with your harvesters and research. I loved the tactical depth of Star Fleet Battles, but wished it was grander in scope (I want to see 20+ ships duking it out with each other). So basically I want a grand scale combat system with a minimum of nation management, though I still want the necessities of logistics. The first thing I started thinking about was the warship construction and I thought I''d just extrapolate on my design concept that I''ve been working on with my ground-based strategy game. But then I got to thinking about doing it a little differently. In my ground game, the design construction is very meticulous, and essentially you attach "Modules" to the main Hull Module. The Hull Module gives you a maximum "volume" and mass to work with. So you then add your Offense Modules which in turn have construction rules depending on what kind of a weapon it is, how it deals out damage, how much damage it does, etc. I then realized that some of this wasn''t necessary, especially for a strategic level game. A part of me realized this earlier, but I thought that if I make it fairly detailed at the beginning, I can always make a tactical game later. But now that I''m looking at building warships, I thought I might take a different design tack. I got a lot of inspiration from an old role-playing game...the Hero system. Basically you have Powers and modifiers called Advantges and Limitations. Powers are essentially what something does. Like Move, Damage, Sense or most other verbs that relate to what things would commonly do in games. Modifiers in turn further describe how the Power works. For example, if you create a weapon with Damage, is it armor piercing? Would it have an advantage against armor plating? Is it capable of Autofire? Does it have an area of effect? Now modifiers only affect the power itself, it does not describe how the Power itself works. For example, Damage could be from a kinetic weapon or from an energy blast. If you wish to simulate special effects then you must either buy Powers or Modifiers that represent the special effect. For example, let''s say you create an Ion Cannon that does minimal damage, but is excellent at temporarily draining power or knocking out sensors. To simulate this, you buy the Damage Power and couple it with Drain (which subtracts from the Energy Pool of the ship). It might also have the modifier Bypass Armor (though shields can stop it). Modfiers change the value of a power for better or worse. For example, the Bypass Armor modifier is extremely handy, so it might double the cost of a Power (and btw, Powers are bought at certain levels which represent the intensity of the effect). It''s also possible to have Modifiers which reduce the cost of a Power like, Prone to Malfunction which could represent guns that frequently jam, or thrusters that occasionaly fail to respond. So ship design is basically about choosing a certain sized Hull (which costs points) and you plug in as many things as you want that can fit (the various Powers will have associated Mass and Volume levels...so that you can''t have an unlimited number of things on a ship). You tally up the point totals for how much the ship is "worth". I''ll start fleshing this out to see how it comes out...and who knows, maybe I''ll put my ground-based construction rules on the back burner for a tactical game.

Here''s a few ideas to better flesh out ship design

1) Have the ship divided into quadrents Forward, aft, port and starboard. When placing a gun the player chooses where which quardrent to place it in, you could even include a fixed number of gun ports in each quadrent the limit the maximum number of weapons that can be placed there, this would also depend on the hull. For instance a Galleon class ship, has 1 forward gunport 2 aft gunports, and 10 port and starboard.

2)Each modifaction and power has a five factors, cost, mass, volume, power consumption, and heat generation, and a possible sixth being noise.

cost- reprents how much the unit costs to install.
mass- being how heavy the item, the heavier the ship the slower its.
volume- the amount of space an object takes up.
power consumption- the amount of energy required to operate the item. Since a ship can only generate a finite amount of energy each turn, the amount used by devices can become crucial. A player could place a super energy cannon on board but the amount of energy is consumed to fire it could drain the ships energy completely leaving it helpless for several minutes.

heat generation - the amount of heat generated by the items use. If a ships heat level gets to high equipment starts to malfunction.
noise- the amount of detectable signls the item generates this increase the sensor image making it easier to detect.


3) make armor and shields mutually exlusive by this i mean that a ship should use one and not both as it main defense. They both have there advantages and disadvantages, but combining them to highly together should be discouraged.

4)Capital ships and fighters... Its up to you wether or not to include fighters but unless they are going to have a major impact I would avoid using them.

I''ll definitely be dividing the ship into various sections with at least the number you mentioned, and maybe more. Since I''m still debating whether to make it 3d or not, I''d also need a "top" and "bottom" if I do that. Extremely large capital ships like Carriers and Battleships might need two port and starboard sections.

Like my ground vehicle design system, each subsystem (or module as I call it in my ground game) has mass, volume, reliability, maintenance and cost. In the Naval game, it will also have a Power consumption. I''m not doing a heat generation system like the Battletech universe does and the noise factor is implemented in something else that I call a "signature". There are 3 kinds of base signatures....passive, radiated, and active. Passive signature is your visual silhouette or how easily it is to be seen with the naked eye. Radiated signature is the "energy" leakage of your ship and includes things like thermal output, and other EMP generation on your ship. Active signature is how visible you are when you actively chose to use your active sensory or targeting systems as this normally will light you up like a christmas tree. It improves your aim, but it also makes you easier to hit as well especially for certain types of guided weapons.

I don''t want the player to have to delve into the minutiae of power consumption however on a moment to moment basis. I''m basically going for a "pool" effect so that all systems can run, but there will be a reservoir available to dump where it''s needed most (for example boosting shields, boosting energy weapon output, boosting sensor strength, etc). Doing that is like playing Star Fleet Battles, which is nice for tactical battles, but slows things down too much for huge fleet actions.

I''m going to have both armor and shield capabilities on ships...but shields are essentially weak things. They are basically magnetic containment fields that hold suspended particles. They are somehwat effective against energy weapons but fairly poor against kinetic weapons. Armor on the hand is based off of a material that can have it''s molecular bonds strengthened through applied energy. So in a way, it''s another kind of shield. Plus, my armor isn''t ablative...it''s not ticked off like hit points. Instead, a weapon has to do enough damage to get past the armor, and anything remaining goes on to hit the internals of the ship.

I like the concept of fighters, but after thinking about it, I realized that most sci-fi games make them too powerful. The only way fighters really can hope to take out a warship is with torpedoes or bombs and they only have a limited number of these of course. But given enough fighters, they CAN take out warships, so it is important to have good fighter defense. I''m also including the concept of Mecha fighters. I normally detest the idea of giant mecha for ground warfare, as I think the whole idea is somewhat ludicrous to make 30` or taller vehicles striding around on the battlefield (you may as well put up a neon circle saying, "shoot me here"). But in the vastness of space, and against targets as large s battleships...30'' tall humanoid vehicles definitely have their place. If they can latch onto enemy hulls, that ship is the for the most part doomed as the Mecha can slowly rend it''s way through the hull. Of course, that''s why most ships have Point Defense Systems all around the hull to help prevent such things.

Going with this, I also like the idea of boarding party actions, but realistically, usually only ships that have had their engines highly damaged or disabled can be successfully grappled for the boarding parties to launch. Immobile targets like starbases, spacedocks, gateways and comm stations are different matters those, and these must always fear the threat of being boarded.

For boarding parties why not take a pages out of scifi and have assult craft. These are small fast fighter like ships specially designed to latch on to a capital ship and allow a squad of marines to disembark. The capital ship does not have to be disabled, however the assult ships are vulnrable to enemy fire on route.

For fighters you could have three types, Normal designed to attack other fighters and small targets, can be used to damage engines and weapons on a cabital ship but not much else. Bombers carry powerful exposives use to damage capital ships or nutron bombs designed to flood a ship with radiation and kill the crew. Torpedo fighters, minimal weapons except for a single large anti-capital ship torpedo.

Also Here's an idea you might want think about, super conductive coating for armor as a power. It dissapates most of the energy for energy based weapons but is useless against kenetic weapons.

Or how about mass packets as weapon, they stick to a ships hull increasing its mass.

[edited by - TechnoGoth on July 12, 2003 5:19:37 PM]

The super conductor power is a good idea...sort of like the Andromedan Power Absorbers in SFB.

As for the boarding parties with assault craft, I thought about that, but basically a warship under decent speed will be able to make enough course corrections to make grappling an extremely difficult task. Now huge ships which can''t make many course corrections due to its inertial mass may still be vulnerable (like Carriers or Battleships) but these also probably have excellent point defense systems and or escort ships to help deal against the pesky assault craft. Which is why boarding party actions usually only take place once the craft has taken a fair amount of beating unlike the historical age of wooden ships in which a ship could realistically grapple at any time (assuming it didn''t mind a full broadside enfilade at point blank range). So it''s possible I suppose, but the wise player wouldn''t attempt boarding actions until the target ship has taken some abuse (and usually by that point, it has taken some abuse as well).

Also, I don''t want my ships to be too outrageously high tech, as the game is only about 100-160 years in the future. Basically, man has been to the stars for less than a hundred years, so starships are still relatively in their infancy.

But thanks for the ideas...keep em coming if you have more.

Actually Dauntless, I like nearly everything you both have said so far, except 2 things:

1 - mecha in space make even less sense than mecha on the ground - we developed diferent hands and feet due to gravity - the feet support and move the body against gravity, while the hands get nearly independent movement, and the head is facing in the direction of our perpedicular motion ... with a front back and side orientation, this is silly in a thrust / inertia oriented system - instead your mecha would look more like cylenders, with arms coming out in a ring around the center and a bridge facing opposite the main thrust - just a fighter ship with limbs as far as I can see

2 - the idea of adding a top and bottom for 3d is fairly weird ... of source there would be such things, jut realize that there is no diference between the 4 sides ... they are just 90 degree arcs perpendicular to the thrust. and at that point, the arcs can become arbitrary ..


Once you decide on a basic means of locomotion, be it rocket type boosters in one primary direction, or arbitrary (anti-gravity) style force generation, your ship sections will come from that - for example, we think of ships which thrust in one direction, and shoot forward, but it would be possible to mount the weapons to face sideways, and have the thrust gimbled ... then the ship could thrust always to be engaged in evasive manuevers, and still maintain a fairly constant range for firing (I''m picturing small craft here) ... many many neat things in space combat, as long as you decide what primary technology rules are going to drive your system ... (IE, is the living people ability to sustain G the primary limit, or the presence of fuel ... or the weight of the weapons systems ...)

Xai-
A Mecha could have thrusters on the back or at attachment points along the arms and feet thus making the mecha highly manueverable. And my envisionment of space mecha are a little different. They have manipulators that resemble arms, and some form of bipedal movement, but that''s about where the anthropomorphic shape ends. The important thing is that the mech must be able to attach itself to the ship''s hull and be able to have some sort of non thruster based locomotion. Also, the "head" of a mecha doesn''t have to correlate with the same forward facing position that we humans have (I actually just see it as a housing for sensory systems). In my game world, mech pilots (I called them Exo-Frames) must undergo neural training in order to get a feel for their vehicles. For example, there are some combat walkers that have 4 legs...humans would have difficulty piloting such a vehicle without serious gyroscopes and other AI "balancing" systems in place. So the same goes for mech pilots who have to undergo training specific to the Exo-Frame they will be piloting as they have different nuances involved.

If you haven''t seen the game yet, look for Dream Pod 9''s Jovian Chronicles paper and pen roleplaying game in which they use something called "Exo''s" which are essentially fighter sized mecha used in space combat. While space mecha are not as fast as dedicated fighters, they have the advantage of being able to cling to a hull. And that alone would make them fearsome opponents. Because once they latch on, if the ship can''t repulse them, the Mech will ultimately find a weak spot on the armor or use special demolition breaching charges (and muscle power) to tear its way into the hull. And once it''s in the superstructure...what''s going to stop it? Marine Boarding parties? Even granted that some Marines will have powered armor...if the weapon is strong enough to pierce the Exo-Frame''s armor...it''s also strong enough to damage the hull of the ship. Therefore collateral damage will be of the utmost concern.

So I think the mecha''s only true place in realistic sci-fi would be involved in Naval combat.

As for the "top" and "bottom" I realize there is no such thing in absolute terms...only in relative terms. Indeed, even "port" and "starboard" are relative terms since a ship could easily roll around on its own axis...thereby presenting whatever side it wished to its foe. So you have some kind of "absolute" measurement, otherwise any side could become any other side (even fore and aft assuming you put the engine in the middle of the ships hull...but on external mountings). Just as there is no "up" or "down" in space, for the sake of human reference, it''s often convenient to do so.

Actually good thing you mentioned G-forces. I''m not sure how to do maneuvering in the system because not only does the ship superstructure have to be able to withstand the chances in the changes in angular velocities but the humans have to be able to cope with it too.

I postulate no artificial G-forces so that means good old fashioned centrifugal forces to create G''s or constant forward acceleration that equals 1G. The problem with constant acceleration is that a ship would quickly leave the battlefield if it did that...so it''s more of a roleplaying thing. So I''m really concerned with how much G-forces a human crew could take...assuming the ship could take the stress (and how much stress can a ship take anyways?).

Sometimes I wonder if it''s really necessray to do 3d combat. If you take only two ships fighting each other, the only thing that matters is the distance between the two, and the heading and bearing of each target. The X, Y, and Z coordinates relative to each other aren''t important...only what side of the target is presented to each other, how far apart they are, and the velocity (velocity...in the definition of both magnitude and direction). Now once you have more than two opponents, then it does get alot more tricky, but I''m not sure if a squadron commander would want all of his vessels to be facing every which direction, or be far "up" or "down" relative to his flagship. So I think each squadron would move very similarly to the lead vessel (sort of like a school of fish that pretty much all face the same direction and move in the same direction...though it may be a huge blob in shape).

G-forces would not play a major factor in a space games unless they are fighting very close to to planets,since there is no friction or resitence from air pressure. In fact there is constant acceleration in space, so that mean large bulky capital ships would have massive turning circles.

Exo-frames.... isn''t that from an old cartoon? But Mecha could be very useful in term space and ground basically they large highly mobile weapons platforms. There was a scene in andromeda where they use to Mecha as heavy point defense weapons patrolling the ship''s hull.

What would make an interesting battle field is if you could fight inside astroid belts. A very hazardous enrvironment but a great place to hide a base.

I think you should decied at the begining wether or not use 3D combot or 2D. It will make things far mor compliacted using 3D but it has adavangates in terms of tactics. Since it allows a great deal of manuvarabily a fast ship could ly loops and barrel rolls around larger slower ships.

How about including lamprey weapons. These a small drones that use magnetic grapples to attach to enemy vessels, and either use lasers to cut holes in the hull, or use power piledrivers the damage the outer hull.

Have you thought about EMP? What sort of effect will electo magnetic attack do to enemy ships. Will they short out systems, drain energy.

Then there is energy weapons how powerfull will they be? Will they be of the school of short range and enormas power? Being able to cut an enemy ship in half. Or other school of just regular reusable weapons.

Actually there are G-forces involved whether there is a gravity nearby or not. It''s the change in angular velocity....or in other words overcoming your inertial momentum when you change direction. Think about when you make a sharp turn in your car...you veer towards the direction you were originally traveling in.

Otherwise, there''d be nothing to stop a 10mile long ship from rotating 180 degrees in a second (assuming it had sufficient attitude thrusters to do so). Whenever there is a change in velocity, it artificially creates "G-forces". Another car example is when you rapidly accelerate...the feeling of being pushed back in your chair is caused by constantly accelerating...once you let up on the accelerator you don''t feel it anymore (and this "thrust" is perpendicular to the force of gravity). That''s how some sci-fi stories work their "gravity"...they essentially assume a ship is on a constant 1G acceleration burn...and they make the "floor" of the vessel facing the forward direction.

So the problem is in factoring in how much force is created whenever the angular velocity changes. Unfortunately, I''m not a great physicist so I wouldn''t know how to work out the formulas...though I suppose I could look them up. The other problem even once I know the forces applied is in determining the material integrity of the ship''s hull, and how many G-forces it will create on human beings. I have a hunch the human''s will be able to take far less stress than the ship will. But I know that in my example of a 10 mile long ship rotating around it''s own Y -axis to change 180 degrees...the change in speed of the end sections (the angular velocity) is far greater than at the axis...and this change in speed will create huge stress along the ship hull...even though there''s no air pushing back against the ship, it''s like putting a wooden board on a table, and then hitting one side extremely fast and hard...if you hit it hard and fast enough, the board will break...but if you apply that same force along every point on that board, nothing happens).

So I''ll have to come up with some sort of "Agility" stat for ships that take into account it''s mass, structural integrity, and how many attitude thrusters it has.