Fleet Battle

FZD

Space Marshal
Nov 22, 2016
1,351
5,018
2,750
RSI Handle
FZD
Hmm, one thing that's bit unrealistic about these events tends to be that either there's a flag ship that once you destroy will end the match, rendering most tactics kinda moot since you can just do suicidal pressure against the flag ship, or that you need to annihilate the entire opposing force even though usually people wouldn't just hang around once the battle is lost.

So a proof of dominance from somewhere in between might be better. Like say you got to destroy the enemy flag and then demonstrate they're too weak to continue by bringing in a reclaimer and scrapping the flagship (or a portion of it). So if you were to just suicide against the flagship, you might actually end up weakening your own forces more than the enemy's, and subsequently wouldn't be able to protect the reclaimer while it's doing the scrapping.

To make such rule more feasible, the reclaimer wouldn't start off in the play area, you'd have it in reserve. And since it's possible both sides manage to destroy the opposing flags, but also be reckless with their reclaimers, the reclaimers should be the only ships you can respawn. OR maybe instead of respawning the Reclaimers, it becomes a draw if both sides lose both their flags and their reclaimers.

Just an idea.
 
Last edited:

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
Yeah well, too late. Not gonna stop me from adding my 5 cents. This stage is public anyhow. Maybe the final planning commitee?


I'm not sure in how far this can be made applicable under these conditions but Mechwarrior (Tabletop and Online alike) has a pretty nifty system when it comes to picking your forces.
You got Lances and you got tonnage.
Lances consist of 4 Mechs max. Tonnange can usually be chosen between 100 and 400 Tons though average is around 250 Tons.
Mechs come in tiers of
Light (20-35t)
Medium (40-55t)
Heavy (60-75t)
Assault (80-100t)

As you can see it's impossible to bring a 4 Assault Mech Lance to a 200 points fight.
And a waste to bring 4 Lights to that same brawl.
So choose wisely.
And according to the objective.

I realize that tonnage can't be the currency and the bigger the ship the more crew is needed. But that can be handled by adding a value to a human crew too.
So an Hammerhead is 200 points plus 10 per manned turred.
The pilot comes with the ship obviously.

Maybe put a Reclaimer in the middle.
Winner is the team that takes a hold of the bridge and parks it at Everus armistice zone.
(Distance 200km, no jumping)

So?
Do you bring more men for boarding or more ships for fighting?
WILL your Auroras blot out the sun?
I'll watch that live-stream to find out. 🥳
This is every tabletop game.Exactly the concept. We will likely try different parameters when it comes to fleet makeup requirements as we want to give fleets flexibility while maintaining a competitive stance.

other areas to discuss will include types of battles.Head to head, defiance/attack. Space/atmosphere/ground. Personnel/ship max capacities. Load out limitations or blacklisted ships/modules.

There will be a limited amount of theory crafting as we wantexperience to have the weight in decisions and application to then decide both stratifies and composition changes or adjustments to ROE/Points assignments etc.

Goal is to not only have fun, but to learn to work with squads, crews and fleet management.
 

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
Hmm, one thing that's bit unrealistic about these events tends to be that either there's a flag ship that once you destroy will end the match, rendering most tactics kinda moot since you can just do suicidal pressure against the flag ship, or that you need to annihilate the entire opposing force even though usually people wouldn't just hang around once the battle is lost.

So a proof of dominance from somewhere in between might be better. Like say you got to destroy the enemy flag and then demonstrate they're too weak to continue by bringing in a reclaimer and scrapping the flagship (or a portion of it). So if you were to just suicide against the flagship, you might actually end up weakening your own forces more than the enemy's, and subsequently wouldn't be able to protect the reclaimer while it's doing the scrapping.

To make such rule more feasible, the reclaimer wouldn't start off in the play area, you'd have it in reserve. And since it's possible both sides manage to destroy the opposing flags, but also be reckless with their reclaimers, the reclaimers should be the only ships you can respawn. OR maybe instead of respawning the Reclaimers, it becomes a draw if both sides lose both their flags and their reclaimers.

Just an idea.
I agree that you don’t want a target that can be easily obtained. This is where the balance of points comes into play along side the number of flagships. If you have not seen this video, I suggest giving it a look.

View: https://youtu.be/f3qaRXZqrO8
 
  • Like
Reactions: FZD

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
Here is the link for requesting access to the Google folder with the working documents. Please include your call sign when requesting access.

 

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
Hey team,

I’m attempting to do some data mining for calculating points for the Fleet on Fleet scalable battles.

Looking a way to capture the data that I’m finding from DPSCalculator on the following website https://www.erkul.games/live/ships. Have not tried it from a PC as I’m I at work on my tablet. Usually it has no issues pulling from highlighting, but I’m thinking I’ll have the same issue when I get home to get on my PC.

Below is what I’m looking for at a minimum to create a table i can apply the Balancer formula to establish points to each ship/vehicle in the game. Balancer points are being experimented with currently.

75229B93-9DFD-4140-81C6-B201DD496A16.jpeg
 

FZD

Space Marshal
Nov 22, 2016
1,351
5,018
2,750
RSI Handle
FZD
I got an idea about picking a ship and normalizing the values against it to get a tighter point spread, we can test few different formulas and see what works best. Bit busy RN though.

I think we'd want to have pretty simplistic point spread, perhaps more like dividing ships into just 5 buckets or so (so ships that are 10 points, 20 points, 30 points, 40 points and 50 points). So that when we're picking the fleets it won't get too messy and ships are easier to find alternatives for based on what is actually available at event time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Opiepal and Vavrik

Vavrik

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 19, 2017
5,453
21,836
3,025
RSI Handle
Vavrik
Hey team,

I’m attempting to do some data mining for calculating points for the Fleet on Fleet scalable battles.

Looking a way to capture the data that I’m finding from DPSCalculator on the following website https://www.erkul.games/live/ships. Have not tried it from a PC as I’m I at work on my tablet. Usually it has no issues pulling from highlighting, but I’m thinking I’ll have the same issue when I get home to get on my PC.

Below is what I’m looking for at a minimum to create a table i can apply the Balancer formula to establish points to each ship/vehicle in the game. Balancer points are being experimented with currently.

View attachment 23893
With a PC, you have a few more options that a tablet doesn't have. Example, you can use copy and paste, but the text will show up with the right side butting into the left side because there's no delimiter between the values. It's implemented by css instead.

You can just copy and paste the text you want though, that works normally but feels like a full time job when you're doing it.

The other way, in Windows, is to export the page to a mhtml file. That basically removes all the protections and allows you to do more with the file. That takes a bit of getting used to because if you look at it in MS Edge, some things have a strange alignment But you can work with it on your own computer without using their website, and you can use text editors to find the data you want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Opiepal and FZD

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
4,808
13,972
2,850
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Hey team,

I’m attempting to do some data mining for calculating points for the Fleet on Fleet scalable battles.

Looking a way to capture the data that I’m finding from DPSCalculator on the following website https://www.erkul.games/live/ships. Have not tried it from a PC as I’m I at work on my tablet. Usually it has no issues pulling from highlighting, but I’m thinking I’ll have the same issue when I get home to get on my PC.

Below is what I’m looking for at a minimum to create a table i can apply the Balancer formula to establish points to each ship/vehicle in the game. Balancer points are being experimented with currently.

View attachment 23893
I'm skeptical of the value of any sort of "objective" balancing formula. I understand why you'd want one, but the problem comes that although values like firepower, armor, shielding, speed, and maneuverability can be quantified, the actual value of any quantity is entirely situational. For example, while very high speed is necessary for a fighter to dominate in the interceptor role, most times fighters aren't in that role. Hence the rise of the "multi-role" fighter. Although the F18 Hornet is obviously on paper not the best fighter of any sort, it is widely held as the best fighter in the world because it is a true multi-role platform that can not only be leveraged in an insane number of tasks, it is very good at all of them. That means high marks in any one specific quality mean far less in general, than some simpler, non-combat qualities.

Another example: non-combat fighter qualities like the presence of a cabin and bunk, and the reduced deck footprint from folding wings, will actually matter more in most situations than the number of guns on a fighter. If you're flying many fighters off a ship with limited bunks, say an Odyssey; then having bunks aboard the actual fighters will enable you to field many more fighters. The presence of a bunk is not normally seen as a combat associated quality, but turns out it certainly is. If you're storing ships aboard carriers like the Polaris, Idris, etc., you don't need cabins and bunks in your fighters, but you greatly benefit by the reduced footprint afforded through folding wings. Hence in these two situations, the 325A and Arrow get top marks, despite they don't have the combat capabilities of a Gladius. The Arrow takes up about 1/3 the deck space of a Gladius, so theoretically you can field 3X as many Arrows as Gladius, and 3 Arrows certainly have greater value in combat.

Finally I would urge that the two sides do NOT need to be balanced at all. Depending upon situation, aggressors or defenders can be composed of a larger force. There are very few ways to emulate surprise, since any combat is going to happen when it is planned so the players can show up. You can obtain some surprise based upon what direction you attack from, but that's not much value. You're simply not going to simulate the value of surprise in any of these war games. Surprise is actually going to be about 100X as much value as you'll get in a simulation, especially given the low level of discipline gamers have compared to actual soldiers. So instead of looking to create balance, look to create an individually balanced match. That could include forces that are seriously different based upon any balancing formula. So really, no formula needed, IMHO. No one picks a fight without overwhelming force. The key to simulations that emulate real world conditions therefore requires a defending force that is smaller, but wielding some home court advantage. You might therefore seek to emulate this by giving them a large ship or ships that have to remain stationary and just use guns as defenses, and therefore their success will depend upon whether they can lure their prey into defensive gunfire. Great wargaming scenarios don't rely upon "balance" since real world combats are never balanced.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vavrik

Vavrik

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 19, 2017
5,453
21,836
3,025
RSI Handle
Vavrik
That's a kind of ideal training scenario. When I see videos of fleet battles in SC that have ships firing weapons for 30 or more seconds without stopping... part of me is ashamed, the other part laughs hilariously. Why are they wasting so much good ammo? But if the goal is a game of 3d Chess with spaceships, then I don't mind.

But you're right, we are going to need to do this right sooner than later, but no capital ship is currently in game so, there's that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow Reaper

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
4,808
13,972
2,850
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
What might be instructive is to choose a baseline defensive force and then have a series of attacking forces each with the same number of players, but with very different compositions. So then you hopefully get real world numbers concerning which is better, a wing of Hurricanes or twice as many Arrows. How useful are Harbingers? If you use them alone, you get the benefit of their range but as soon as you group them with light fighters you lose that so are they then a better choice than Gladiators? Only way to know for sure is many iterations on identical assaults. Gladiators are an oft discarded option that needs careful scrutiny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vavrik and Opiepal

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
I'm skeptical of the value of any sort of "objective" balancing formula. I understand why you'd want one, but the problem comes that although values like firepower, armor, shielding, speed, and maneuverability can be quantified, the actual value of any quantity is entirely situational. For example, while very high speed is necessary for a fighter to dominate in the interceptor role, most times fighters aren't in that role. Hence the rise of the "multi-role" fighter. Although the F18 Hornet is obviously on paper not the best fighter of any sort, it is widely held as the best fighter in the world because it is a true multi-role platform that can not only be leveraged in an insane number of tasks, it is very good at all of them. That means high marks in any one specific quality mean far less in general, than some simpler, non-combat qualities.

Another example: non-combat fighter qualities like the presence of a cabin and bunk, and the reduced deck footprint from folding wings, will actually matter more in most situations than the number of guns on a fighter. If you're flying many fighters off a ship with limited bunks, say an Odyssey; then having bunks aboard the actual fighters will enable you to field many more fighters. The presence of a bunk is not normally seen as a combat associated quality, but turns out it certainly is. If you're storing ships aboard carriers like the Polaris, Idris, etc., you don't need cabins and bunks in your fighters, but you greatly benefit by the reduced footprint afforded through folding wings. Hence in these two situations, the 325A and Arrow get top marks, despite they don't have the combat capabilities of a Gladius. The Arrow takes up about 1/3 the deck space of a Gladius, so theoretically you can field 3X as many Arrows as Gladius, and 3 Arrows certainly have greater value in combat.

Finally I would urge that the two sides do NOT need to be balanced at all. Depending upon situation, aggressors or defenders can be composed of a larger force. There are very few ways to emulate surprise, since any combat is going to happen when it is planned so the players can show up. You can obtain some surprise based upon what direction you attack from, but that's not much value. You're simply not going to simulate the value of surprise in any of these war games. Surprise is actually going to be about 100X as much value as you'll get in a simulation, especially given the low level of discipline gamers have compared to actual soldiers. So instead of looking to create balance, look to create an individually balanced match. That could include forces that are seriously different based upon any balancing formula. So really, no formula needed, IMHO. No one picks a fight without overwhelming force. The key to simulations that emulate real world conditions therefore requires a defending force that is smaller, but wielding some home court advantage. You might therefore seek to emulate this by giving them a large ship or ships that have to remain stationary and just use guns as defenses, and therefore their success will depend upon whether they can lure their prey into defensive gunfire. Great wargaming scenarios don't rely upon "balance" since real world combats are never balanced.
To your point on the defend and aggressor roles, that is only one of the types of battles. With that there will be diffent alotments of points as well as objectives. As for the points for ships, setting a baseline helps to have a starting point. I have asked for those with experiance with ships to join the Working Group for this very reason. The formula is set as a baseline with the option to tweak based on the ships uncalculated advantages/performance. If you look at the Large ships, they very alot in reguards thier stats. I'm not saying the Fleet on Fleet needs to be "equal" but within a range. The points will get them there while being vastly different makeups.

In the end , I could be completely wrong. But i'm willing to put the work into it and find out.
 

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
I got an idea about picking a ship and normalizing the values against it to get a tighter point spread, we can test few different formulas and see what works best. Bit busy RN though.

I think we'd want to have pretty simplistic point spread, perhaps more like dividing ships into just 5 buckets or so (so ships that are 10 points, 20 points, 30 points, 40 points and 50 points). So that when we're picking the fleets it won't get too messy and ships are easier to find alternatives for based on what is actually available at event time.
That will probably be the best approach FZD. We could test it and then vote on ships that need bumped up to a higher catagory or lower based on apernt advantages or scenarios. This will aslo help identify ships that will be the go to depending on the objective or composition of fleet.
 
  • o7
  • Like
Reactions: FZD and Vavrik

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
With a PC, you have a few more options that a tablet doesn't have. Example, you can use copy and paste, but the text will show up with the right side butting into the left side because there's no delimiter between the values. It's implemented by css instead.

You can just copy and paste the text you want though, that works normally but feels like a full time job when you're doing it.

The other way, in Windows, is to export the page to a mhtml file. That basically removes all the protections and allows you to do more with the file. That takes a bit of getting used to because if you look at it in MS Edge, some things have a strange alignment But you can work with it on your own computer without using their website, and you can use text editors to find the data you want.
It did work! Thanks... some sites work fine on the tablet, but not that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vavrik

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
Current Progress:

1500 point Fleets with 2 identified flag ships (Main Objectives for attacking and defending).

Max crew is set to 50 Pax: This is set to allow space on a server for video capturing from a birds eye.

8BFE2DFC-12DD-438B-BC72-2C6F84545FBE.jpeg

02649E01-4626-428E-81AD-6D1C433F13F9.jpeg


Points are still in the works for balancing, but are currently calculated based on a combination of HP Hull, HP Shields, DPS, Speed and mobility. I still want to add in Burst damage (damage if all options were deployed at one time: missiles, torps, ballistics and energy weapons) Aposed to sustained damage which would be firing at a rate to not overheat weapons.


Lots of work to go, but just wanted to show progress. More to follow!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow Reaper

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
4,808
13,972
2,850
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
I would recommend you consider expanding your evaluations to include the Lancer MIS, both Talons, the Buccaneer (it would be interesting to see an all Drake "Pirate!" team), and all of the EMP carrying ships. EMP is due to reemerge as a thing in 3.18 with the rebalance of distortion and ballistic damages. Also, building teams that include the Mantis and Cutty Blue would be instructive to the highwaymen and other dastardly bushwackers and Vanduul hunters.

Looks like great work! I'm curious how you assigned points for speed and agility. Do you have a single formula that generates all these scores?

Edit: I just want to plug the Lancer MIS here for a moment. If you load it all with max damage IR missiles, it offers a single pilot 2 functions. First, it can fire 6 S3 missiles at one target, twice; and if that is a medium target with little maneuverability like the Ares, Vanguard, and Scorpios, odds are good it will injure it severely, or kill it if its shield has already taken hits. I don't think heavy fighters can dodge S3 missiles at present time. Please correct me if I'm wrong. That's a kill shot at 10 km. A single MIS is theoretically able to kill two heavy fighters and remove them completely, IF it can remain hidden and unharassed. That's a good trade, and I think a high probability given the MIS tiny signature. You really need to be pinging to find it.

Second use is to harass enemy fighters and force them to evade rather than do whatever they intended. If you fire a pair of S3 missiles at a fighter from 10 km, they'll take about 7s to close, and during that time the target will be distracted if not forced off task. A MIS can also do this 8 times in a battle. I have a personal bias that this could be extremely useful in battle given a screwed MIS pilot. If someone has good situational awareness of the battlefield and can sit quietly, plinking with pairs of Chaos missiles, I think they can really disrupt the field and contribute much more than most single pilots. Even if they don't get any kills, they could assist in many kills across the field. It's like smart artillery, and something that IMHO needs to be tested and explored carefully.

*On S3 missiles--they've always had a special place in that some fighters can carry them but most can't. Just FYI, at current time they have the same range as S2 missiles; 10 km. However, S4 missiles have a 20 km range and it seems very likely to me that when missiles get another pass, the S3 missiles will have their range bumped up to 15 km, which will make them, and the MIS; that much more interesting.

IMHO, missile doctrine needs to presume from the start that they can't hit small ships under normal circumstances. However, hitting a ship doesn't need to be the only goal. If you have good situational awareness and communications (an important goal for any team) a MIS rider should for instance be waiting for calls by any fighter pilot locked in a duel, and if the MIS jockey can fire on any dueling opponent, they can change the outcome of that duel. That is a perfectly utilitarian use of artillery, and one that can tip the odds away from an adversary. Light fighters can kill heavy fighters, unless they have a pair of S3 missiles flying up their butt. There's room to extend this doctrine into specific techniques. So for instance, a light fighter can evade incoming missiles by flying with the incoming "on their wing" or abeam in order to get outside the tracking cone of the missiles. If a heavy fighter pilot knows his light fighter pilot adversary has 2 Chaos missiles incoming, he might at the right time fire his own missiles. So far as I'm aware, there are no fighters that can evade missiles fired at it from two orthogonal positions. While theoretically a light fighter can evade missiles fired from two orthogonal positions at once by flying onto the third orthogonal axis, pilots can't SEE missiles flying in from these two positions so they wouldn't know which way to evade. That kind of teamwork can result in a kill. So good communications between a MIS rider and a Vanguard pilot can yield great results and keep the heavy fighters in the battle.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vavrik

Opiepal

Space Marshal
May 31, 2014
159
154
2,260
RSI Handle
Opiepal
What are your criteras for defining the "size" column?
Size was based one of the websites that had the data. I did not get it striaght from RSI. I have not went and vetted the data yet. Trying to find a simplistic way of pulling that info vs going line by line, column by column.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vavrik and vahadar
Forgot your password?