Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

I always use history as a basis for determining which tactics abuse artificial game mechanics and which are legitimate. The spilt fleet dodge passes the history test. During the first and second world war, whenever unescorted convoys were attacked, they always scattered. Since they were almost as fast as the submarines, once the sub chased do one of them, it was unlikely it would be able to catch-up to the remainder of the convoy. They would essentially use the split fleet dodge.

The same was true for submarines wolf packs. After launching an attack on a convoy, they would scatter in order to make it harder for the escorts to hunt them down. They would later reform and a predetermined location.

Therefore, I recommend that this 'cheat' be specifically allowed during game setup. In addition to my feelings considering whether this tactic is legit, let me say it is also almost impossible to enforce. It is very hard to say whether or not splitting a fleet was deliberately trying to exploit the bug.

I was in a game fighting an SD tooth and nail. I was constantly splitting and joining my sweeper fleets since they absorb minefield hits better as a group but ofter need to split up to track down single mine-layers.

Paladin

Report message to a moderator

The problem is that the interceptors can be tricked to chase fleets that you ordinarily would pass over.

However, disallowing the tactic altogether could end up being much more unbalancing. So, just like the 512 limit on fleets and minefields, I guess it's something we'll have to live with until SSnG arrives.

[Updated on: Wed, 04 June 2003 12:20]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

ASword wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 08:50

Why is this a problem? In the "fog of war" decisions are often made on a tactical level without sufficient information. If a WWII convoy scattered do you think that the U-Boat commanders had the luxury of consulting with an admiral who had perfect knowledge of the convoy contents and could then pick and choose which were the best targets? Not a chance.

True! But they sure would have known the difference in looks between a freighter and an aircraft carrier and could have chosen their targets appropriately.

Is the split fleet dodge at all affected by Battle Orders? For example I have my Battle Orders set to only attack armed ships. The enemy's fleet splits up sending a heavily loaded, unarmed, freighter in one direction while its armed ships split up and head in other directions. Will my fleet track the freighter because it is heavier or will it track the heaviest of the armed fleets? (A U-Boat commander with orders to destroy an Aircraft carrier would not go chasing after a freighter.)

As usual, just my (even if they are Canadian ).

Report message to a moderator

ASword wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 10:50

If a WWII convoy scattered do you think that the U-Boat commanders had the luxury of consulting with an admiral who had perfect knowledge of the convoy contents and could then pick and choose which were the best targets? Not a chance.

That's where the big difference between Stars! and WWII comes in. WWII is reality, Stars! is not. Stars! was simply designed to be a fun game to play not to be a simulation of future space based wars.

The problem with split fleet dodging is that you can protect your expensive fleets and have the interceptors go after the cheap "chaff" fleets.

Report message to a moderator

FurFuznel wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 11:02

As usual, just my (even if they are Canadian ).

O.K so that's actually agout what, 1.2 real cents?

Paladin

Report message to a moderator

Let's consider this. First, you have to assume there's ECM (the equivalent of smoke screens involved here. When they split, they are all just blips on a scanner screen. You would have to assume they have some way of making the little fleets look like big ones and the big ones look like little ones. Or maybe they just jam all the scanners and make you guess.

The bottom line is that I am trying to use an analogy to history to validate the position I prefer which is not to consider the fleet dodge to be cheating.

Paladin

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

mazda wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 12:03

Yes, but your analogy is based on the legitimate uses of the split fleet dodge. You don't tell us why you think the "sneaky" variant should be allowed (basically a cheap way of avoiding battle).

I said it in a previous post but it's worth repeating. There is no definitive way of separating legitimate fleet splits from the fleet splits using the dodge trying to avoid battle. All it does is cause arguments and strife. Plus, avoiding battle is a legitimate battle tactic in my mind based on history and many other war games I've played. So why outlaw something that is near impossible to enforce and in many people's mind a normal war-game strategy.

I've seen people try to ban chaff since it also exploits a "feature" of the games logic. It never works because it is too hard to tell chaff from stack of cheap ships. One reason almost everybody alows it because it is almost impossible to regulate.

Paladin

Report message to a moderator

Chaff? -I like it.
Split Fleet Dodge -I like it.
Minefield bug -I hate it, but what ya gonna do?
Everything else -Bad! Bad!

Just my own opinion, ofc.

The Crusader

Report message to a moderator

Crusader wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 13:35

Chaff? -I like it. Split Fleet Dodge -I like it. Minefield bug -I hate it, but what ya gonna do? Everything else -Bad! Bad!

Minefield bug is dealt with in jrc4 I believe. Even if only the host uses jrc4 this bug is beaten (I think).

Shadallark

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

FurFuznel wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 15:32 Minefield bug is dealt with in jrc4 I believe. Even if only the host uses jrc4 this bug is beaten (I think). Shadallark

Ya don't say?

I don't remember reading that, but then I don't usually remember my name either. That's why it is written on my shorts ... my name, that is.

I thank 'ee, suh!

The Crusader

[Updated on: Thu, 05 June 2003 16:59]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

FurFuznel wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 16:03

Just re-read the first post in the Known Bugs (jrc3) sticky thread at the top of the Academy and it indicates in there that jrc4 fixes the minefield bug. I knew I had read that somewhere. Shadallark

Yep! Right there it was in plain view.

My preferences are based on my own, personal views of what would constitute the "real world" in the Stars! universe. Naturally, I would simply not play in a game where split-fleet dodge and chaff are outlawed, unless I was just looking for something a bit different to pass the time. If I agreed to a game with those restrictions, I would do my best to stay "lawful". Isn't that what it really boils down to anyway. I try to win by thinking outside the box, not by playing outside the rules.

Respectfully,
The Crusader

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

OOMatter wrote on Thu, 05 June 2003 16:20

How about if you use the split fleet dodge to send your heaviest fleet through a wormhole? Then the fleet who was targeting your fleet will go toward your fleet which is now on the other side of the wormhole, without using the wormhole. So the chasing fleet ends up at their max warp distance away from the near side of the wormhole heading toward the other end of the wormhole. Similarly, if you get jumpgates you can do this anywhere. It seems to me that the chasing fleet shouldn't be going after a fleet that vanishes across the universe when there are parts of the original target fleet in range or at least nearby. That seems like more of a "real world response". For example, If the majority of a military force gets airlifted out of a combat area, do all the enemies run after the guys who are vanishing into the horizon, or do they hunt down the poor suckers who got left behind?

Oh, I would never dream of disagreeing with anyone whose personal view on this subject differs from mine, on account of I'm sure that your "real world" is more real than my "real world" any day.

However, you are not likely to actually change my mind. First I would have to have one, IIRC.

Remember! Opinions are like rear ends. Everyone has 'em, and I surely do enjoy showing mine.
(Ron, I hope that wasn't inappropriate. I've always liked that saying, even in its crudest form which is how I first heard it)

Respectfully,
The Crusader

Report message to a moderator

For anyone who's interested: There's a similar discussion going on on the newsgroup.
Funny how a normal question gets everyone started

F

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Fri, 06 June 2003 07:02]

Report message to a moderator

Well, yes, I suppose. Games I host generally allow the SFD, but the rules are not "strictly determined"-it is just simply allowed. That's about as strict as I get regarding SFD. However, I've never known of anyone (*YET*) to actually take advantage of the dark side of this tactic. I guess I've been lucky with the players in my games, or the ones who like to sit down and figure all the smallest, most obscure odds for success are in the vast minority around here. Having a wormhole nearby to lure an enemy fleet through constitutes being "lucky" or "innovative", depending on who's talking. I suppose if you are the one who was lured, then it becomes "cheating", or at least "dishonest".

Is it a cheat?

Well ... not if the host has allowed the tactic in his game!

And most hosts are pretty good about specifying up front just what the ground rules are in a Stars! game. At least the better ones are. New hosts have to be allowed a little slack to make mistakes, just as new players are (or should be).

So, my advice, poor and uneducated as it is, is to ask a host before committing to a game just what the ground rules are. If SFD is an unpardonable sin in your rule book, then ask about it in particular. Make the host specify it as a ground rule before agreeing to joining the game. If he won't, then don't.

Oh my! I've strayed again. Sorry.

If I decide to host another game in the near future, those of you who like the SFD are invited to ask to join. I will not mind at all. Those of you who hate the SFD, but want to slum a bit are invited to ask to join also.

I appreciate the chance to speak my mind. Thank you for your kind consideration.

Your humble servant,
The Crusader

Report message to a moderator

Reading over this I find it funny that many people don't like the SFD tactic because it is not realistic but at the same time those same people use chaff in their games. Can you really think of something that is more unrealistic than making ships that are in close proximity fire at visibly useless ships instead of the real threat (well except for the minefield immunity thing)?

I don't believe that you can use the "realistic" argument unless you are also willing to apply that tactic to chaff as well.

I believe that both chaff and SFD are legitimate tactics. Although SFD is a problem and it can be very frustrating the simple solution is that if someone does it to you then do it back to them. Yes, if you are playing with players who can use this to their advantage, you will want to pull your hair out but then that means that you have to adapt.

Report message to a moderator

The problem with deciding what is and what isn't considered a cheat is the same as any other problems in the world. There are always people who disagree with one thing or another no matter what the subject.
The usual solution, as you can't please all of the people all of the time, is to find an acceptable medium. The solution most acceptable by the majority of Stars! players and hosts after many discussions over the years is to allow chaff and not the other bugs or cheats as listed in the Stars! FAQ as a guide to give everyone some idea as to what is and isn't proper. Even so there is flexibility in that the host can always opt to include anything as long as he announces this in his game invitation to players. So there really is no ban on anything with the exception of the pop cheats that are disabled on AutoHost with JRC4. And even there you are not forced to use AutoHost and can opt to do your own hosting via other means, use other versions of Stars! and allow such things as SS popsteal if you so desire. Good luck if you don't play SS in that game.
So even though opinions are like airholes, in that everyone has one, the majority of players usually have the final word, which is good.

And Jeff said: "let there be light", and there were stars everywhere. But mostly just planets. And he saw that it was good.
And Jeff saw that some races were causing much trouble. And he saw that it was bad.
And Jeff said: "let there be bugs". And there were bugs everywhere. And the galaxies became infested with bugs. And still the evil ones did not repent. And many races suffered much. And still they continued to devise new ways to become like the gods.
And Jeff said: "let there be patches", and there were patches everywhere. Good patches and bad patches and buggy patches. And he saw that it was.
And Jeff said: "let there be SuperNova". And Jeff said: "let there be SuperNova". And Jeff said: "let there be SuperNova". And he saw that it was not good.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator