STGOD 2k8 Planning thread

[Academia Nut]

Proposed Ground Combat Rules

OR

Everything you ever wanted to know about attacking a planet but were afraid to ask

*This is a proposal, feel free to tear it apart*

Attacking a planet is a difficult thing to do, requiring either overwhelming firepower or a long ground campaign to achieve victory.

To begin with, first any ships in the same system as the targetted planet must be dealt with, otherwise nothing is ever going to land, be it missiles or troops. Once control of high orbit above the world is assured, attack operations may begin, but the planet's defences must still be dealt with.

Currently accepted rule - Planets may purchase defences of a value equal to or less than their industrial capacity. Defences count for 10:1 of the purchase cost.

The enemy fleet in orbit may now perform a number of actions depending on how their total firepower power compares to the planet

<1/2 planet's defences: Planet is immune from attack but may be blockaded. Effectiveness is limited by the number of ships in orbit
=>1/2 planet's defences: Troops may begin landing on the world
=> planet's defences: Planetary bombardment may take place, destroying defensive positions and/or infrastructure
=> 3/2 planet's defences: precision bombardment

Thus states are all cumulative and optional, one can still land troops even if a precision orbital bombardment is possible, and one can allow enemy ships to escape even if a blockade is normally possible.

Proposed rule - To help in the attack of planets, ships may purchase seige upgrades (Se). Each point invested grants 5 points towards calculating attack power against planets, but 0 in combat with other ships barring extraordinary circumstances (eg somehow catching a ship completely immobilized by some means). Mods have total discretion as to when this would occur, if ever. Standard limit of 10 points per ship apply.

Proposed rule - One shot shield cracker weapons deal 10x times damage to a world and, but must cause collateral damage and are completely consumed in the process. Are completely helpless in space combat and must be protected

Proposed rule - During an orbital bombardment, the high energies thrown around cause Very Bad Things to happen to anything beneath the shields just after they fail. Standard collateral damage destroys a number of industrial points equal to half the number of defensive points destroyed (ie if a world has 50 defensive points and thus 500 defence, if 20 of those are destroyed in the bombardment to reduce the world to 300 defence, then 10 industrial points are destroyed in the process). Having enough guns to perform a precision bombardment reduces collateral damage by half. Sensor upgrades on a ship allow for holes in defenses to be precisely detected and fired upon, minimizing energy expenditure. For each point of sensors in the attacking fleet, reduce the collateral damage by 1.

If a bombardment is not desired, then if possible troops may be landed, if any are present. Each unit of troops costs 1 industrial point, excepting planetary defence forces, who are free as part of the initial purchase of a planet and the number are equal to the planet's cost (10 for a Class 1, 5 for a Class 2, etc). Exception to the 1 point per unit rule is if a nation has the Improved Ground Combat attribute, which allows for more expensive units to be purchased, giving more concentrated forces. As part of the purchase cost of a ground combat unit, they recieve a transport ship, which has no attack power and 1 HP in space combat.

Proposed rule - A nation may upgrade transports with the following items: active defence, stealth, and improved hyperdrives. Cost is 0+upgrades. Standard limits apply.

Proposed rule - If a nation wishes to have armed transports, then they may purchase transport (T) upgrades for their ships. Each point allows a ship to carry one ground combat unit, and (following part may not be acceptable) gives 1 extra HP for each point invested. So a ship with 1+1T will be able to transport 1 ground unit and has 1 attack but 2HP in space combat.

Ground combat proceeds similar to space combat, but each combat turn takes 1 week of game time. Additional changes are as follows:

*Force that has orbital control decides how many ground combat units on each side are engaged each turn. Orbital control goes to whoever has a fleet in orbit above the planet, or defaults to the current planet's owner if no fleet is in orbit
*Defenders recieve a 3x multiplier to ground combat. This does not necessarily mean the defenders of the planet, as they are allowed to counter-attack if they wish
*Ground units reduced to 0HP are not destroyed like ships, rather they are no longer capable of fighting. So long as they have logistical support (either a friendly fleet with orbital control or control of the planet) they may still be repaired. Repair rates are affected normally by the Improved Logistics attribute
*Ground troops may choose to neutralize planetary defences. If this operation is carried out then the player in possession of the defences is allowed to choose how many units are participating in the action on their side, in contradiction to the rule that the player with orbital control gets to chose the number on both sides. Planetary defences are destroyed or captured in blocks according to cost, not defensive value. An attacker can destroy or capture a number of defensive blocks equal to the number of units present each turn. Destruction of a planetary defence position grants the standard x3 bonus to defenders, capture intact grants an additional x2 modifier to represent the difficulty in overwhelming forces such that they are unable to scuttle the position. After the units engaged are declared, a capture mission may be downgraded to destruction mission before damage is calculated, but a destruction mission may not be upgraded to a capture mission.
*Ground troops recieve a 5% bonus in combat for every 10% by which a fleet overhead exceeds the minimum value required to land troops (ie if there is a 600 point fleet in orbit about a world with enough defences that 400 points are required to land then they exceed the minimum by 50%, so the troops recieve a 10% bonus). If troops are on the ground and have no defences with an enemy fleet in orbit, then one unit is destroyed per turn automatically and ground forces with orbital superiority get a 1000% bonus to combat.

---

Okay, have fun ripping into all this.

[Darkevilme]

Academia nut, that is awesomely complicated with all the special rules for it.

Some of the changes i'd make.

Bombardment: Bombardment lowers the amount of defences, soldiers and industry by an equal percentage of the total for each. So if you lower defences ten percent you also lower the number of defenders and industrial power of the world by ten percent as well. nuclear weapons are collateral damage happy considering they're being used imprecisely to target cities containing all three elements of industry, troops and defence.

Ground defenders, 10 points of troops is not much to try and overwhelm considering that i myself am willing to put 80 points into troops from the start.

Shield buster bombs of planetary conquest: i dont like this idea for some reason, siege ships are good ideas though.

[Academia Nut]

"A designer knows when he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away" ~ Antoine de Saint Exupery

To a certain extent I prefer to start something off over complicated to try and cover all possible angles, and then start taking things away as they are shown to be unnecessary. Your bombardment rules are probably simpler so they will probably be used.

And I reiterate, you get free units to defend your homeworld, its the PDF, the national guard, the whatever you want to call it. You can add extra ground units in defence, you just have to pay for them. Plus the x3 defence modifer (which is based off of real world combat statistics) means that it will take 30 units just to have parity in an invasion. Although orbital control means that with 10 units an attacker can pick off one or two enemy ground units a turn because they get to decide the battlefield. Of course with ground combat turn lengths, that will take so long that at least one turn will pass, regenerating the disabled ground units. Of course, if the fight is taking that long and relief hasn't come yet, the attacker can build more troops to finish the fight at that point.

Shield buster bombs were to add another level of tactical decision making during the initial fleet battle, and because I wanted to include them as a downgraded version of planet killers. It looks like one-shot weapons are rapidly going to become either an abandoned idea, or something that only the mods can award/use for good/bad playing. They should exist in some form in universe though, seeing as how that's why Earth isn't around anymore.

[Darkevilme]

Okay then, on to another thought i've come up with. Why would anyone sane want to spend their one time only pool of racial bonuses to be able to say 20x2 as opposed to 40x1 when describing their forces? It just doesnt seem like it actually does anything yet it costs to use, if i want to say my ground forces are the uberness under the current system i can just redefine one point to equal say a thousand Chamarans and leave it at that. What bonus does improved ground combat actually give?

[Academia Nut]

To an extent under this system, not a lot other than the fact that you can keep fighting when other units would be out of the fight and disabled, although it does make transporting your troops around a hell of a lot easier and safer. You could for example buy some 2 point transports with stealth and speed so that you could rapidly move your troops around without anyone knowing.

2x20 means that it costs 40 points for the transports
1x40 means that it costs 80 points for the transports

Or you could build a jack-of-all trades ship with some transport capacity, and your more concentrated forces would take up less room, making it better in actual space battles.

Potentially we could also figure out some enhancements for ground troops that would work like space stuff, that would only be available if you could spend more than 1 point on troops. They would have to be to a certain extent better than regular points in that you have to pay an opportunity cost to get access to them. Something like say:

Close quarters combat (CQC) - These troops are specialized in causing fighting in cities, bunkers, and rubble, not on open plains. Ever point invested counts double when assaulting or defending a fortified position.

I'm not exactly happy with the wording of that one, but its more an example of what we could do. On the other hand, this is probably adding unnecessary complexity. I suppose if people like this idea it could be used though. Makes things a bit more flavourful perhaps.

[Darkevilme]

On transports:
Uh Academia, can i point out you've contradicted yourself, earlier you said that transport ships were free with each ground unit. So each ground unit comes with its own dropship or transport as part of the cost of buying it. Does that mean giving your warships troop carrying capacity amount to paying double the cost of the troops?

And assuming we're allowed half point proportions there's still no difference between 40x1 transports with 0.5 speed and 0.5 stealth and 20x2 transports with 1 speed and 1 stealth except that its a smaller mob of the things.

On close quarters combat.
I suspect it's too much complexity and really roleplay fluff and flavour, besides the theater shields that make planetside battles possible are going to be over cities and bases anyway so every battle will be an assault or defence of one of these two as anything else can meet ortillery based death. I assumed that for planetary defences having over half the defence strength means you can create gaps in the weaker overshield or distract the defence network enough to land in the countryside where as over the full defence strength represented enough power to squash the stronger theater shields flat.

[Covenant]

Do we really need all this? If you're assured victory over a single planet's ground forces, given X amount of time to properly demolish the planet why not go with the earlier idea I had?

====================Edit Note====================
Planets in this framework are assumed to be assigned a Value, Worth, Number or some other denotation on a 1-10 scale to clarify their value in terms of production. This was used as the basis for many calcs because it would be extremely easy to reference, as well as make clear the size/potency/value of a given world. There are other systems, such as "Class 1-4" or a system of "Absolute Production Value" (10-100) that would require slight modification of the below system, but when doing calcs according to the below, assume worlds are assigned a 1-10 value according to their potential for production (1 being the lowest, 10 being the highest).
==================New Edit Note===================
I'm also adjusting some numbers and stuff to make the setup more up-to-date. First of all, now it uses the 1-100 setup. I'm also adjusting ground resistance level numbers to benefit smaller worlds somewhat, as that seems fair. Also clarifying an idea of what happens when you invade a world that's currently undergoing assimilation, but is not yet compliant to the enemy.
==============================================

The below are not computations, functions, formulae or otherwise implying one must simply run down from top to bottom through the notes. I made them single-line notations so that it would be clear how simply all these useful values could be arrived at though 2-second mental checking.

Similarly, the Lexicon at the bottom merely makes clear the use of terms. None of these terms are new, none of these numbers are invented, and there would be absolutely no additional note-taking, enforcement, or listing of planetary values needed. The lexicon was included to show how the 'specific' terms I used were just precise versions of terms we already use, but were made specific so as to avoid confusion.

• *Planet Worth x 10 = Planetary Bombardment Shield
  *Fleets in orbit of a planet may bombard the planet once per combat 'day'
  *Fleets in orbit do damage to enemy shields equal to their Fleet Weight
  *Planetary Shield - Fleet Weight = Adjusted Shield Level
  *Shield levels do not recharge during a siege
  *Shield levels are instantly fully restored when sieges are broken
  *One may invade while enemy shields are still up, they do not stop landing maneuvers
  
  
  *If Adjusted Shield Level < Fleet Weight = Planet Glassable
  *Glassing a planet is a seperate fleet bombardment action
  *Glassing a planet may not be done on the same turn as bombarding a shield
  *One may not in any way damage a shield and the planet on the same day
  
  
  *Glassable worlds may have their Worth reduced
  *Worth Reduction amount is any value of the attacker's choosing
  *Such Reduction lower Planetary Resistance Level
  *Repairing damaged Worth may be done after an invasion has achieved Compliance
  *Repairing such Worth after invasion costs equal to the production output you wish to regain
  
  
  *100 + (Planet Worth x 5) = Planetary Resistance Level
  *Resistance Level = Size of Fleet Required to Successfully Invade
  *Resistance Level / Invasion Force = Occupation Modifier
  *Occupation Modifier x 3 = Number of Months/Turns Before Compliance
  *Compliance allows for production to take place
  *Compliance assumes the planet now has it's own police force
  *Such Police Forces operate as Resistance Levels for the purposes of Liberation
  *You gain no benefit for Liberation of a friendly world, and you do not achieve Compliance any more quickly
  *Your opponent cannot resist your Liberation with his landed Invasion Forces
  *Liberations and all Invasion attempts of Compliant worlds only use Resistance Level
  *Liberating a world that your enemy has not made Compliant costs a number of Invasion Forces equal to the planet's current Resistance Level, and the planet automatically becomes compliant to you
  *Your enemy does not get his forces back, they are removed from play
  
  
  *Occupation modifiers can be changed by adding more Invasion Forces or repairing planet Worth
  *When Worth is repaired, Resistance Level rises to match the new planet Worth
  *When computing new Occupation Modifiers, changes occur as if troop levels or resistance levels had been at their current level since the time of the original invasion
  *This does mean changes are computed retroactively
  *Changes to occupation modifier alter the time required for Compliance
  *Changes to Compliance requirements take effect immedietely
  *If more Invasion Forces are deployed to the world and the new duration is less than the total duration the planet has been held for, it becomes Compliant immedietely
  *If restored Worth increases Resistance Levels and the new duration is longer than the total duration the planet has been held for, the planet becomes Noncompliant again (rioting, sabotage, etc) for the difference in requirements
  *Thus, you can either restore a planet to a state of noncompliance, add troops in order to crush a rebellion, or add troops to a compliant world before it rebels in order to increase the Worth without interrupting production
  *Added Invasion Forces do not increase Resistance Levels versus enemy Invaders

Contingent on this is the idea that you could say "I've already wrecked the shields, so I'm going to reduce this 10 world to a 5 and decrease my troop requirements from 500 to 250," and thus easily determine how badly you want to invade a world, and do so, and be done with ground combat in a matter of seconds rather than long deliberations. Short, fast, no extra rules... just a little 'ballparking' to help people Roleplay without making things heated. As for troops, let's also simplify.

• *1 + (Ground Combat Racial Bonus / 100) = Ground Combat Modifier
  *Month/Turn Production Level x Ground Combat modifier = New Invasion Forces
  *These New Invasion Forces come at no additional cost
  *These New Invasion Forces become available during the 'new month' production phase
  *Additional Troops may be purchased without benefit of Ground Combat Modifiers at a 1:1 ratio
  *New Invasion Forces + Current Invasion Forces = Total Invasion Forces (duh)
  *Invasion Forces require Orbital Assistance to begin, as per above
  *Invasion Forces have Free, Unarmed, Automatic Transport
  *Invasion Forces are assumed to accompany fleets at a distance
  *Invasion Forces cannot be fired upon in combat, but may not bypass fleets
  *Invasion Forces are consumed on use (no redeployments)
  *Once Invaded successfully (with assistance as above) no Ships are needed

• *1 + (Ground Combat Racial Bonus / 100) = Ground Combat Modifier
  *Month/Turn Production Level x Ground Combat modifier = New Invasion Forces
  *These New Invasion Forces come at no additional cost
  *These New Invasion Forces become available during the 'new month' production phase
  *Additional Troops may be purchased without benefit of Ground Combat Modifiers at a 1:1 ratio
  *New Invasion Forces + Current Invasion Forces = Total Invasion Forces (duh)
  *Invasion Forces require Orbital Assistance to begin, as per above
  *Invasion Forces have Free, Unarmed, Automatic Transport
  *Invasion Forces are assumed to accompany fleets at a distance
  *Invasion Forces cannot be fired upon in combat, but may not bypass fleets
  *Invasion Forces are consumed on use (no redeployments)
  *Once Invaded successfully (with assistance as above) no Ships are needed

Available invasion forces are thusly automatically increased for those with extra ground combat (RP'd either as forces hitting harder, being more available due to draft, better industry, whatever) and you can then allot them when you invade. This keeps people from invading several worlds too easily, keeps with the theme of 'bombardment versus resistance war,' and neatly and quantifiably regulates the effect of a ground combat bonus without getting into actual ground combat. The Chamarans will be able to RP this as having superior individuals, whereas someone else might claim that they just draft civvies by the ton.

All we need then is some general rule of thumb for how many troops you carry. We really don't need complex rules. Anyone without a spacefleet is going to be successfully invaded anyway, we should just let people RP it out as they wish and otherwise move on with our lives in gameplay terms.

The reason I made troops non-redeployable is to make combat somewhat lossy, and make the 'free garrison on conversion' mechanic fair. A faction that makes even a piddling 1000 per month will have, therefore, a large amount of soldiering capacity. It's only fair to make them one-shot uses, and does encourage people to invade rather than glass planet--or partially glass, invade, repair, etc... leading to an exciting, dynamic, and brutal environment rife with RP possibilities. It also makes it less likely that you'll just dump all your soldiers on a world to convert it ultrafast and then redeploy that force instantly. This builds in some combat fatigue, nonfatal casualty costs, and longterm Iraq-style occupation infrastructure roles, and it makes sure that the bonus troops from ground combat bonuses are always going to be valuable.

I'm going to add a lexicon, just to clarify terms and hopefully nip "Do I get extra points for saving my loyal subjects?" type questions before they start. Please, don't argue the semantics, just mechanics.

• Adjusted Shield Level: Once a planetary bombardment shield takes damage from bombardment, it’s value is referred to as the ‘adjusted’ shield level, since the shield is not permanently damaged, and is only reduced for the duration of the siege.
  
  Bombardment Shield: A planetary bombardment shield is a term referring to the wide range of methods of soaking damage your planets may employ. They prevent an enemy from glassing your worlds, though they do not prevent invasions.
  
  Compliance: When a planet has ceased its armed resistance to a ruler, either out of loyalty or out of fear and oppression, it is said to be in a state of compliance. Compliance means a planet is adding its Production level to the ruling Empire.
  
  Fleet Weight: The total base cost of a fleet used for attack and damage in combat is called the Fleet Weight, which is also the value used for determining a Fleet’s ability to successfully land troops despite the presence of an armed planetary resistance. It is assumed that the ground-attack systems are covered under basic costs, not specialized ship-to-ship systems, and so ship with higher ‘basic’ weight is superior in the capacity for ground invasion.
  
  Glassable: When a planet has not enough shielding to defend it from the fleet above, it is able to be ‘glassed’ or reduced in Worth via bombardment from orbit. If an invader so chooses, he may even reduce the planet to zero, making it worthless, but this value may be increased back to it’s previous amount. A glassed planet is not removed from play, it is listed as producing 0/10, where 10 corresponds to its previous production level.
  
  Ground Combat Modifier: The total number of new invasion forces you gain per month are multiplied by the strength bonus from your racial pool. This is the ground combat modifier, and is only used when calculating new invasion force power levels.
  
  Ground Combat Racial Bonus: All empires are able to upgrade their ground forces via racial points. This allows them to gain extra large allotments of troops via the ground combat modifier, which can be roleplayed as they see fit.
  
  Invade: When one nation lands forces on a planet, it is an invasion. For an invasion to be successful you must have enough Orbital Assistance to land troops. This is now a successfully invaded world, but is considered noncompliant, and does not add its production to your Empire.
  
  Invasion Force: The levels of troops you employ is termed as your invasion force, which is spoken of as a single point total for the whole. You may subdivide the total invasion force of your Empire into individual forces for planetary invasion, but they are not ‘units’ and do not receive damage or require repair or upkeep.
  
  Liberation: When a nation invades a planet that was previously theirs, it is liberation. The standard rules apply for all elements, except you will be fighting occupation forces and police groups instead of militias and organized defenders. You do not get bonus troops. Though it is feasible your people would not be happy to see you either.
  
  Occupation Modifier: The occupation modifier is the ratio of your troops versus the resistance level of the planet. The higher the occupation modifier, the more quickly the world achieves compliance. This can go below 1 if you land a small force. Occupation modifiers are subject to immediate change if you deploy new troops later, or alter the planet’s worth by glassing or rebuilding infrastructure.
  
  Orbital Assistance: During an invasion, it is assumed that your transports would be unable to achieve a beachhead if it were not for orbital ships supporting them with counterbattery fire, landing directly on the surface, and taking the brunt of the attack. None of your ships are damaged in this, though you may roleplay damage and losing transpots. Once an invasion is successful, Orbital Assistance becomes irrelevant as enemy forces begin organized resistance rather than direct confrontation, and the only way to assist the troops would be to attack ground targets like cities, factories or other locations. This is the same as reducing the planet’s worth, and reduces your troop investment requirement, as well as speeding the planet’s conversion to Compliance by forcing a readjustment of the Occupation Modifier.
  
  Police Forces: A planetary garrison of occupiers may not have the support of the people but they will have access to a police force. This is a clarifying term to make it clear resistance level is not tied only to popular support.
  
  Production Level: The amount of resources or money or industry your worlds provide is their production level, and this is added to your Empire’s total production level for the purposes of creating ships and buying additional non-free Invasion forces.
  
  Resistance Level: The amount of preparedness and ability of a planet to repel enemy landings and organize insurgency efforts is called a planet’s Resistance Level. This can be roleplayed in many ways, but larger and more productive worlds naturally have higher levels, whereas smaller or less productive worlds are either less populus or have fewer important areas to control. A planet’s slums may be in open rebellion but if you control all the cities and factories you require to produce, the planet is compliant.
  
  Transport: An invasion force has automatic, free transport. These transports cannot land alone, do not add to ship-to-ship combat, cannot be targeted but cannot escape an enemy fleet if they are trapped on a planet’s surface. They follow at a distance and so are not ambushed along with a main fleet, and are not considered lost even if the fleet is completely destroyed. In game terms, fleets of transports always arrive once you decide to invade a world, but are never present otherwise.
  
  Worth: The amount of production a planet is capable of, and for roleplay purposes can also refer to strategic value, the location of weapon caches, and other more nebulous quantities that allow the world to contribute production to the Empire and allow it to resist enemy attack. Many of the planet’s attributes are directly related to the planet’s Worth, and a damaged world can be repaired, but never above it’s original maximum.

[brianeyci]

Honestly some of those formulas look like they come right of a space empires mod file. Who is going to enforce all those numbers, and record the status of colonies?

Why not a blanket rule, ten turns to own the planet with space superiority (no ships in orbit), no matter what? I thought that was kind of the idea: if there is no way to speed up the fighting with executing civilians and brutal tactics, then there should be no way period.

I think Beowulf was on the right track earlier: ground combat should be an afterthought only, and something as simple as ten turns to own a planet if you got ships in orbit and they don't is pretty doable. If it's not complex enough can always add more rules later, but once the rules are set can't take them away because people will play to them.

[Covenant]

If you read it properly you'd see that it's based on factors that are not only right in front of you as they pertain to the planet's value--probably part of it's name (Wakashi: 10/10, Ord Mantell: 3/3) or related to your fleet, which should be information you can find quickly as you should know how many ships you have left. Counting your ship values up won't take long, since probably about 10 minutes previously you were deducting points from that value from combat losses.

So if that's too much work then I shudder to think how much effort it'll be to actually do ship-to-ship combat. Really, I don't like the claim that we're adding extra levels of frustration to the game when that's absolutely not the case. Did you honestly read what I wrote?

There's no enforcement. It's not about enforcing. It's right there. Your planet is worth 4. It has 400 shielding. It has a resistance level of 200. Why? Because the planet is worth 4. End of story.

Even if we do it your way, we open up a can of worms. 10 turns to victory? How many ships are needed? Is it based on some number? Oh shits! Can it be as little as one ship, worth one point? Is there a minimum value? What if the ship is described as a spacefighter with lasers--it can't possibly hurt my planet. Do I need to surrender to something that can't hurt me? How do we define what's capable of hurting me? Is it a siege? If so, and I break the siege for a turn (using five 1point ships to gank your deadly 1 point siege fighter) do I refresh my rating, or do we need to keep track of how many turns my planets can hold out for?

A method of tracking very basic numbers that are already in the game as dire essentials (removing a planet's Worth is impossible, as we use that to track how much it produces for your Empire, and that's what all the numbers are based off) leaves us with no whining and debating, an internally consistant and logical system, and I wouldn't even stoop so far as to call it a calculation.

Multiplying two numbers? Dividing one number by another? This is hard math? It takes 2 seconds to do in your head. Honestly, I'd rather have 2 seconds of cold, hard math than an arbitrary and vague system that makes no sense, is left to wild intepertation, slows down the game, and at worst is going to cause players to get angry at each other because of the 'massaging' of the rules that happens when you simply can't appeal to an admin who has impartial math to guide them.

So I'm not angry at you, I'm just frustrated with the lack of variables people are seeing with these 'simple' systems. A simple system that is wildly exploitable is really really badly made and one that is completely black-and-white (a planet only requires 10 turns of any number of ships in orbit before it automatically switches to enemy control) makes the situations ridiculous.

There is a certain elegence to being able to descibe the entirety of ground combat within a dozen lines or so of very brief text. A system that is open-ended and does not make guidelines for interpertation isn't more 'clear' or 'condensed' or 'less complicated' it's just poorly designed and not thought out.

[brianeyci]

Don't confuse hard with tedious.

I didn't read all of what you wrote, only the first couple paragraphs, then stopped when I saw planet worth planetary bombardment shield fleet weight planetary shield adjusted shield level planetary resistance level... I don't want to keep track of all those variables. It was very long. Most of this stuff is implied, and in my opinion does not need to be written out. The ten fixed turns to take over planet was your idea, or at least what I thought was your idea earlier when I mentioned glassing cities to make planets surrender faster.

It's only exploitable if we have asshole players and mods who don't want to crack the whip. Ten turns to take over a planet if you have orbital superiority, and breaking it means destroying all the opponent's ships in orbit. If someone is stupid enough to roleplay one fighter taking over an entire planet well SirNitram can tell them to fuck off. I honestly don't think it will happen.

[Beowulf]

Well, I don't think any game has really lasted ten turns. Also, it makes ground combat bonuses moot. A little bit more complexity is warranted. So how about the following:

No racial combat bonuses.
Every planet gets free ground troops proportional to the size of the planet. Similar to Nut's idea.
Nations can buy additional troops from the bonus pool (like shipyards).
Net result of the above is that nations with stronger armies are represented as thus point-wise.
Actual unit size is whatever the player wants. Smaller, superhuman armies, or massive levies.
120 points doubles the army size.

More stealing from Nut:
The uncontested enemy fleet in orbit may perform a number of actions depending on how their total firepower power compares to the planet

<1/2 planet's defences: Planet is immune from attack but may be blockaded. Effectiveness is limited by the number of ships in orbit
=>1/2 planet's defences: Troops may begin landing on the world
=> planet's defences: Planetary bombardment may take place, destroying defensive positions and/or infrastructure
=> 3/2 planet's defences: precision bombardment

Thus states are all cumulative and optional, one can still land troops even if a precision orbital bombardment is possible, and one can allow enemy ships to escape even if a blockade is normally possible.

If a bombardment is not desired, then if possible troops may be landed, if any are present. Each unit of troops costs 1 industrial point, excepting planetary defence forces, who are free as part of the initial purchase of a planet and the number are equal to twice the planet's cost (10 for a Class 1, 5 for a Class 2, etc).

Ground troops recieve a 5% bonus in combat for every 10% by which a fleet overhead exceeds the minimum value required to land troops (ie if there is a 600 point fleet in orbit about a world with enough defences that 400 points are required to land then they exceed the minimum by 50%, so the troops recieve a 25% bonus). If troops are on the ground and have no defences with an enemy fleet in orbit, then one unit is destroyed per turn automatically and ground forces with orbital superiority get a 1000% bonus to combat.

Not stolen:
The planet is graduatally converted to the attacker's control at a rate dependant on the ground force ratio. It normally takes 10 turns divided by the advantage the attacker has. If the attacker has a 2:1 advantage, then it takes 5 turns to gain complete control. The attacker gains industrial points equal to their control percentage. If they have 10% of an asteroid, they gain 1 industrial point. Ownership is not lost until attacker's control percentage reaches 100%.

In space combat, the ground assault force cannot be directly attacked. However, if their escorting fleet is destroyed, all units in the convoy are destroyed as well.

The 3x multiplier doesn't really matter too much, since the nation with orbital control can stop the enemy from manuevering fairly effectively, while they themselves can mass as necessary to whatever amount is necessary.

Ground units reduced to 0HP are not destroyed like ships, rather they are no longer capable of fighting. Once units lose logistical support they are destroyed. Logistical support is either ships in orbit or control.

Bombardment destroyes an equal percentage of defenses (both planetary and ground forces) and industrial capacity. Precision bombardment halves the damage to industrial capacity. Atrocities may also be simulated through the bombardment mechanism.

Note that the only states that has to be recorded is the location of troops, planet defenses, and control levels of planets.

[brianeyci]

Note that the only states that has to be recorded is the location of troops and control levels of planets.

I like that.

I also like no racial combat bonuses. They seem too unbalancing.

[Covenant]

I didn't read all of what you wrote--

Then you really shouldn't make such direct assaults. You didn't read any of the formulae, so how can you really, honestly attack them? And about enforcement, and recordkeeping, that's all bullshit too because you didn't read it. Don't strawman me based on the first 2 lines of a post.

Note that the only states that has to be recorded is the location of troops and control levels of planets.

I like that.

I also like no racial combat bonuses. They seem too unbalancing.

That shows just how ignorant of my setup that you are. Those are the only things you need to be aware of in mine either. All you need to know is the planet's production value (worth in other terms) and the location of your troops. That's all. The rest is for a bit of clarification on how fast you take over the world, if or if not you're able to blow up cities yet, and how you make troops. These are additional clarifications, and yet, still involve no new numbers.

I'm just dumbfounded. For example, the 'uncontested fleet versus planet defense actions' thing--what numbers are this? Do you tally up the planet's defense forces? Well fuckshit, that sounds like keeping track of a number. Free ground troops, right? Well geez, that sounds tedious! C'mon, my writeup not only was more clear but less complex. Free troops per planet? Resistance level. How many? 50xProduction Level.

Damn that's so complex.

Honestly, read the damn thing, use a braincell, and then tell me what's more complex--a "can I or can't I" system that uses the most basic numbers in the game, ones we already have and none that are new, or a system that uses a vague description of doubling sizes, cost values, defense ratings, equal-and-or greater thans with no defined actual function (what does precision bombardment do that destroying defensive positions can't?) and a whole stinking lot of percentile boosts for ground forces in combat with fleets overhead with turns destroyed per round like it was some sort of insane ground combat game.

Honestly, I can't say I support that whatsoever, and I think that I'd utterly curbstomp the numbers and systems you guys are devising right there. I flat out challenge people to read my setup and claim this bizzare network of rules is one tenth as precise, concise, and even as flexible or satisfying. Let's do a hypothetical scenario and see what's simpler. Simplicity will be defined as the ease of effort and a lack of lengthy debate about what is possible and what things mean. A system isn't simple if nobody can agree on it.

[Nephtys]

I like Covenant's system. We discussed it a while, and it seems to me like a pretty easy to do scheme with some variety. It's only about thirty seconds worth of arithmetic to calculate out anyway.

Seriously, we're going to have to actually decide what we're going to use, or this game is dead in the water.

[brianeyci]

What direct assault? Direct assault would mean me quoting each and every one of your ideas and replying to it. You seem to be taking this a little too personally, just like my suggestion of ganker play. If you had come out right away and said I don't like ganker play, and most people don't either, let's forget it, it would have been end of story but it dragged on so long because I was wondering whether you were confused about my idea. But instead I now see you're trying to prove something as if it was a versus debate, and you even issue a challenge. Geez.

I did not get into this to start some kind of fucking debate over rules, which are entirely subjective and based on who wants to do what. You're treating this as if it was some kind of objective thing, where there is only one right answer. Well too fucking bad, I thought this was a game, with moving forward going on consensus and what people liked.

Strawman my ass. How many variables do I need to keep track of in your system compared to one where I know how many defenders are on a planet and know how how tough the planet is and know how much of the planet is under whose control? The more calculation someone does the more variables you create. Did you really expect a point by point rebuttal of your thing? Maybe I should ask you to go back and point by point my dead idea of ganker.

Why don't you go ask Beowulf to "challenge" his idea compared to yours? Why go after me, a relative outsider? His opinion is the one that matters, given he is mod, so you got to convince him. Why focus on me? Do you think that Beowulf didn't read your post either, and based his idea solely on my alleged "strawman" of your post? Give me a break.

[brianeyci]

I like Covenant's system. We discussed it a while, and it seems to me like a pretty easy to do scheme with some variety. It's only about thirty seconds worth of arithmetic to calculate out anyway.

Seriously, we're going to have to actually decide what we're going to use, or this game is dead in the water.

Well if you say so, I will try it.

I will go with whatever most people want to use. I am new to this thing, so maybe I'll just shut my trap.

I will not get into a point by point debate the merits of one system compared to another, especially when someone throws out words like "strawman" and "retarded." I'm not here for that, if I was I'd just swing over to Star Trek versus Star Wars forum.

I think I'll go work on my OOB and leave the rules alone.

[Beowulf]

Really? You've got troop levels that may or may not benefit from ground combat modifiers. These may or may not be free. Larger invasion forces cause your system to take longer to pacify a system. Similarly, you'll typically end up with a negative adjusted shield level. To invade even an asteroid, you require a 500 point fleet. Terraformed worlds are impossible at 5000 pt fleet requirements. It's hard to figure out how long it's going to take to finish conquering if I have to change the amount of troops.

Industrial points should represent your total warmaking capacity, not just what you stick into ships. And why shouldn't I be able to redeploy troops from an asteroid I just conquered to that moon I want next? They're still alive. And, once a planet has been invaded, you no longer need to keep a fleet in orbit. Ground combat modifiers don't affect the defender. So even someone with a 2x modifier doesn't get any bonus in defense. How does counter-attacks even work? You have resistance levels on both sides, possibly, as well as invasion forces on each side.


In my system:
The bonus for overmatching the defenses is possibly unnecessary.

[Academia Nut]

Whoooo-boy. Well, at least I achieved my goal of kicking over an ant's nest. Anyway, let's begin.

While it looks like my idea for how racial combat bonuses work will be thrown out the window, I did not contradict myself on the transport issue. Basic transports are free. Ones with extra engines, defences, or stealth systems are not free. Basically if you want your troops capable of slipping quickly and quietly into a system, those extra advantages cost extra. The way I had it set up, it would cost you a lot in various things, but you could have a lot of power and flexibility in your armed forces.

Now then, on to Covenant's proposal. First off, I have a couple problems with your math, the biggest one being that you counted fleets numbers twice for whether or not a planet is glassable. You compare the adjusted values to the current fleet values, when the adjusted values already include the fleet values. This means that you only need a 500 point fleet to glass a planet. Not only that, but your occupation modifier is backwards the way you have it written, in that the bigger the army the invaders bring, the longer it takes.

Second, all worlds have more or less max defence for their level. We could make the defence part of the purchase cost and call it a day, but from where do we buy extra defences? Or strip them away? Basic purchases always assume an "Average" level in everything, so how do we represent fortress worlds and lightly defended colonies?

Finally, I'm having a hard time following your math for how big the armies are, and yeah, it does seem that they are not reusable or anything like that. I figured that we would want to keep ground combat as close to possible to space combat so that we would have to keep track of as few rules as possible. Just moving around units seemed like the simplest idea, and Beowulf's version of my proposal seems to do that very well.

[Covenant]

I can't believe you've gotten this much wrong.

Really? You've got troop levels that may or may not benefit from ground combat modifiers. These may or may not be free.

Untrue, ground forces do not benefit directly from ground combat modifiers, this is explicitedly stated several times. The modifier is only used when giving people their allotment of free troops. That's very explicitedly stated, so the 'may or may not' language just shows you didn't read the top part carefully or the bottom part at all. The ground combat modifer is just the term for the ground combat bonus, something we've already been over quite a bit. If you want to remove ground combat racial perks alltogether you're going to make a lot of players very unhappy, so I was trying to make an inclusive system.

Larger invasion forces cause your system to take longer to pacify a system. Similarly, you'll typically end up with a negative adjusted shield level.

Bah, thanks for catching that, but c'mon, you have to know what I mean. You reduce the shield by the amount of damage done to it. Duh. And the same for the other value. I suppose you could think I was merely insane but c'mon. Sorry for writing it backwards, I have a bad habit of transposing things. If you really didn't see that I meant to have them reversed then I apologize, but I thought the intent was clear.

To invade even an asteroid, you require a 500 point fleet. Terraformed worlds are impossible at 5000 pt fleet requirements. It's hard to figure out how long it's going to take to finish conquering if I have to change the amount of troops.

Seriously, what's with the goddamn lies? If planets are now rated between 10-100 fine, but weren't asteroids classed in at a 1 before, with big worlds as a 10? Or are we now on the ass-backwards 1-4 scale again? And, as above, please don't be so intentionally dense as to not understand my meaning when I make the numbers so clear.

If we're working on the 1-10 system that I reference many times, it works perfectly according to Nut's stats: 1000 point shield, with a 500 point minimum for invasion. If we're working on a 1-100 point scale, just slash a zero off my numbers. It's completely dishonest to claim that I didn't reference a 1-10 system, and to act as if my numbers weren't in context of that specifically is crude. I did, in the paragraph under it, where I mention reducing a planet from 10 to 5 and reducing troop requirements from 500 to 250. And again in my 11:00 post when I talk about a 10 and 3 class planet. Don't claim ignorance unless you want to admit you can't read context whatsoever.

Industrial points should represent your total warmaking capacity, not just what you stick into ships.

Other warmaking capacity is already unstated, such as ammo and fuel and parts and such. We don't deduct costs for that and those elements are not and never have been discussed. I don't see why we need to seperate these 'production totals' into seperate catagories when shipping is the only thing you can buy besides infantry, which is given free until you spend 'above your max' level of free infantry.

Shouldn't that excess spending come from the ship production pool?

And why shouldn't I be able to redeploy troops from an asteroid I just conquered to that moon I want next? They're still alive.

Because even after a planet has been conquered you're going to need forces there for a very long time to keep the peace. Are you seriously suggesting that an invader takes NO CASUALTIES ("they're still alive") and has absolutely no need to remain behind in an organizational capacity to make sure they don't just flip back to working for the enemy?

And those free troops you get for defending a world, where are those drawn from? Did you mind-control the entire populace so that they suddenly want to fight and die for you against their liberating homenation's armies even though you never left any forces behind to insure their capitulation?

The forces you deploy are expended either as combat deaths, woundings that are going to be unavailable for a few years (if at all), and soldiers put into positions as population control and policing, protection and facilitation of the planet's new administration and their goals. You can't land on a world, reprogram the civilians, and then pack up your soldiers. Not unless each turn covers a span of 10 years.

And, once a planet has been invaded, you no longer need to keep a fleet in orbit. Ground combat modifiers don't affect the defender. So even someone with a 2x modifier doesn't get any bonus in defense. How does counter-attacks even work? You have resistance levels on both sides, possibly, as well as invasion forces on each side.

I don't really understand what you're referring to. Are you referencing my system's setup where there's no ground force counter-attack from the defenders? In my system it's assumed that once you've finished the 'invasion' scenario (the landing part) you've settled all the combat elements and are into Insurgency mode, but that it's only a matter of time, essentially, as represented by other elements of my system--in a nice clean number modifier.

If you're talking about something else then I really don't know. My 'take over' mechanic is nearly identical to the one you posted, except that I don't allow you to gain partial control and that I don't include a 'ground force' ratio, I just measure your troops versus the planet's already-determined resistance level.

I'd say that's simpler.

[Covenant]

Ugh, I apologize for another post, I didn't finish mine before Nut posted.

Note, I am editing my above ruleset to correct the math.

First off, I have a couple problems with your math, the biggest one being that you counted fleets numbers twice for whether or not a planet is glassable. You compare the adjusted values to the current fleet values, when the adjusted values already include the fleet values. This means that you only need a 500 point fleet to glass a planet. Not only that, but your occupation modifier is backwards the way you have it written, in that the bigger the army the invaders bring, the longer it takes.

Yeah, I flipped those values. As for the bombardment mechanic, I didn't think I needed to make it explicitly clear that it's NOT A COMPUTER PROGRAM. It doesn't run to the end--each turn you'd get to fire at the shield, reduce the shield by that amount, and see what you have left. You're not allowed to fire twice, since that's how ships are assumed to bring downa shield, right? Firing? A 500 point fleet fires the first day, brings a 1000 to a 500. It fires Tomorrow and brings it to zero. Thus on the third day, and only the third day, is it able to glass a planet. A 501 fleet would be able to hit it the first day, but even a single little ship with multimegaton firepower would be able to do some serious damage, so that's just an extreme example that isn't even all that unreasonable.

Second, all worlds have more or less max defence for their level. We could make the defence part of the purchase cost and call it a day, but from where do we buy extra defences? Or strip them away? Basic purchases always assume an "Average" level in everything, so how do we represent fortress worlds and lightly defended colonies?

Do we need extra bonus purchased defenses? One of the faux-complaints against my system was the need for record-keeping and enforcement. I think adding in purchasable levels of defense and special crud like that for each system uniquely would bog us down and potentially encourage turtling. It would also be an example of extra record keeping, since now instead of just listing the planet's worth, production value, class, whatever... now we also need to seperately list it's space defenses, it's ground forces, and such. If it's equal for all planets of a similar type we have a more streamlined system. If people want more defense, buy fleets that stay home, not satellites.

Finally, I'm having a hard time following your math for how big the armies are, and yeah, it does seem that they are not reusable or anything like that.

Armies are not resuable since we're not modelling the way in which an army is often needed for years afterwards. If a single turn is a month or so, letting a planet be invaded in the span of a single month or a week or so is pretty amazing anyway, and compressing the entire process of turning a populace into friendlies seems to be a point at which you can't just say "lol instantaneous". Besides, this is a useful gameplay mechanic, as it discourages steamrolling without forcing people to spend a lot of time managing piles of little men.

Essentially, you spend the amount of troops on a world that you consider worth it for the speed at which it falls under your control. You have a limit to how many planets you can invade, therefore, and helps model the difficulty of controlling vast amounts of territory at once.

I figured that we would want to keep ground combat as close to possible to space combat so that we would have to keep track of as few rules as possible. Just moving around units seemed like the simplest idea, and Beowulf's version of my proposal seems to do that very well.

I figured we'd want to keep ground combat as basic as possible--not at all like space combat. Ground combat can't be both an afterthought AND similar in complexity to space combat. There's no reason to try to model a little ground war with little individual units of men, tanks and such which can be repaired and so on--that's way too complex and utterly unnecessary, as the result will always be the same and just take more time and open us up for more aggrivation.

[Academia Nut]

Okay, you do have a point in that you need occupation forces, but I can solve that problem pretty easy under my system of actively deploying troops. It would work something like this:

*For every troop unit you have on a conquered world, you activate 1 industrial point (on the 1-100 scale) each turn, plus bonuses for improved assimilation (so if you have 20 troop units on a 100 world and +25% improved assimilation, you activate 25 industrial points per turn). Once all points are activated and repairs made (to prevent disaffected citizenry supporting a resistance in the rubble) a world is considered pacified and a relatively peaceful, productive part of your nation. There's the occasional car bombing from diehards, but in general the citizenry have decided that resistance is futile at this point. Once a planet becomes fully pacified, a planetary defence force is automatically raised and the offensive forces you paid extra for can go to a new target.

Incidentally, I propose we refine our terminology for time scales, say something like:

*1 space combat round = 1 hour
*1 ground combat round = 1 week
*1 production turn = 1 month

These are rough, kludgy figures, but they make a nice baseline that we can talk about. The second one is of course presuming some sort of ground combat turn basis.

Anyway, maybe I'm just too attached to my own ideas, so perhaps we should let some of the other people who will be affected by these rulings chime in about their opinions on our systems. I think both our problems is that if we try and present a full system things get too complicated quickly, but a piecemiel construction would go nowhere.

[Covenant]

Nut, I love your stuff, and I always have--and that's where I draw a lot of the inspiration for these systems, but that paragraph of explination details a lot of new stuff and I thought we were trying to simplify? Your own quote was dead on--when there's nothing left to take away, we're finished, so adding another big goofy set of activation of industrial points calculated across the breadth of the 1-100 industrial scale on top of, what, a Class 1-4 system and other things? I think that's way too much effort to achieve the same result I did.

Instead of spending extra points as you go like that... why not just spend your infantry via allocation? It's more fair and it takes less to explain. Sure, they become one-use, but one-use infantry and a complicated moneysink system are not equally as easy to use.

Maybe I just hate percentages, but I'm not in favor of them in general, especially where they overlap, like with assimilation bonuses and ground combat bonuses and two armies apparently fighting as you compare their fighting forces and slowly activate the industries.

I think both our problems is that if we try and present a full system things get too complicated quickly, but a piecemiel construction would go nowhere.

I don't think things are complicated at all. The big complaints against my system were that my math was off (flipped, anyone but me saw that instantly, easily fixed without detriment to the system), that it had unquantified involvement of the ground combat modifier (not true, it's just only involved in new levels of troops and not in an actual ground combat phase, which I removed) and that it required extra numbers and values to be tracked and tabulated, which is patently false and I'm the only one who doesn't require extra values to be tracked.

The only 'extra' value I track is your total troop numbers, from which you spend troops on planets--but this is a simiplification of every other system besides the "Sit in orbit until you capture their Flag" system.

I honestly did mean my challenge. Let's have a hypothetical ground invasion scenario and list the numbers involved from the end of the space combat to the final conquest and overtaking of the ground forces. I don't think mine is complicated in the slightest, and without that complaint we really don't have a serious critique of mine except that other people seem to want more detailed ground force simulations (with losses and battles and actual abstracted but calculated unit fighting mechanics). And I think that's somewhat ironic, as it's the opposite of simplicity.

Either we come up with a new system based on that demonstration, we decide one of the existing systems is good, or we decide they all suck and go back to the drawing board (or call any captured world 'invaded' after 3 turns of squatting or so). Instead of debate, why not just test them? This isn't philosophy here, but engineering. Let's put the system through it's paces and see what happens.

[Academia Nut]

So you're suggesting that we basically run two identical scenarios and field test each proposed system to see which is more balanced, fair, and easy to use?

Hmmmm...

Well, consequences wanted to run a little pre-game battle with me (I'll have him explain why because you guys probably wouldn't believe me if I said it). That would include a space battle too, but I suppose we could field test those rules too. If he still wants to do something like that we could arrange a testing ground to check things out.

[Covenant]

I think it's probably the most fair and intelligent way to do it. At the very least, by putting our systems through the paces we will find scenarios in which they fall apart (such as I would have learned early on with my flipped math) and be able, in a worst case scenario, to at least use that data to come up with something better.

If we detail all the work involved and allow people to 'follow at home' in order to see how we did what we did, then we'll be making more informed choices. I'm pretty sure mine is clear, but apparently some people would disagree. I can either call them stupid, argue that they're just lying, or we can see if it's as clear as I think.

It needn't be anything fancy, but a few different scenarios just to quickly demonstrate it. For example, what happens when a 100 production world (equal to a 10 point planet in my system's original phrasing) is attacked by a 300 point fleet? In some systems this means no invasion is capable at all, and there'd be no scenario. Some people might prefer that, some people might prefer if a 300 point fleet could whittle down the shield. Regardless, demonstrating it in non-lab conditions would give people an interesting way to relate to the systems. And the non-lab element is somewhat important, as I could easily write up situations that work well for my system, and you for yours--but I'm sure there are odder and more complex scenarios imaginable, such as asking how different special powers intract. Like can people in your system more accurately target ground units using Improved Offensives? Stuff like that.

They need to ask themselves which system is simpler for them, less frustrating for th em, and more condensed for the retrieval of information. It's not a contest to show which is faster or simpler persay, but to just demonstrate how they're done. I've already done this in my head with yours and Beowulf and that's why I'm so annoyed nobody has apparently actually done it with mine. How can we really judge how complicated something is until we know what's required to make it go?

--note--

I don't think it's entirely necessary, but I think it'd help us understand each other, and for everyone to understand the options on the table, or to come up with ones of their own, suggest solutions, etc.

We could just list a few scenarios arbitrarily, but the real purpose is to show a side-by-side comparison of the amount of effort and notation required to arrive at a solution in the current situations. That way people can decide what they think is an acceptable level of math and how deeply they want to model ground combat at all.

This is just for ground combat that I'm talking about. It'd be interesting to discuss a system of ballparking ship-to-ship damage values as well, something we haven't even really come close to a consensus on.

[Darkevilme]

Sample ground combat thought experiment using Covenants rules(please correct me if i've gotten anything wrong covenant)

Chamaran's invade the human world of Eden, ohnoes.

Prelude:
Eden defence fleet destroyed
Eden is a value 10 world
Chamaran's have a combat racial bonus of 200 and therefore a Gcombat modifier of 3
Chamaran production has not taken hits, chamaran produce 600 so therefore have 1800 points of ground forces.

Initial barrage:
Planetary shield at 1000(valuex100)
400 points of Chamaran ships in orbit
shield bombarded down to 600 on first round (1000-400)
remaining shield > fleet, bombardment/invasion may not commence

Second barrage:
Shield bombarded down to 200 on second round (600-400)
Fleet strength > remaining shield, invasion may now commence (or alternatively we could have nuked the planet into the stone age at this point.)

invasion:
Planet has 500 points of defending resistance(valuex50)
1800 points of Chamaran overpack battalion equivalents deployed.
Occupation modifier=(resistance/invasion force) 0.27
Resistance will be crushed in (occupation modifierx3=0.83) one month near enough and planet will be forced to obey.

This took very little time to write and puzzle out.

Thoughts.

How would Chamaran psionic planetary pacifier devices such as hypnotic wave emmitter masts affect this or be modelled.

Do Gcombat modifiers affect the amount of resistance and defences at all? surely space sparta with uber trained troops would be good at defending as well as attacking planets.