Offensive/Defensive Operations

Hi all, today I want to start a short series on Defensive/Offensive operations as they pertain to ISG. In order to keep this short, concise and sweet, I will focus only on the in-game universe and only offer a few scenarios as examples. I will also break this post into three parts so the reader doesn’t fall asleep while reading it.

Now is speaking of “operations”, I am not talking about grand strategy or battle tactics, these are different topics. For example, the player that likes to turtle and build up a compact well defended Empire before making contact with other factions, could be said to be pursuing a “defensive grand strategy”. Tactics are also a different matter as they are experienced on the actual field of battle. Do I focus fire on that Titan first and then the escorts or the other way around?

Operations on the other hand are what happens when conflict arises, how do you plan and execute your attacks and how do you defend yourself from being attacked.

With that then, let us begin with the first part of this puzzle, some basic requirements.

Part 1 Basic requirements

A player striving to prepare and execute Offensive/Defensive operations is going to need some adequate technology, and not necessarily in the realm of shields armor and weapons. A good FTL drive, Scanning tech, and logistical range are just as important if not more so. An axiom that holds true in both offensive and defensive operations is to “get there first with the most”, well in order to do that you are going to need some things.

Your starting FTL drive is not really that great for warfare, even if a navigator is leading your fleet. As a minimum, you should have Fusion drive (or Mag drive) before getting involved in any conflict. This will ensure that you can deploy your forces in a way that they can quickly support each other. Once we start playing on larger maps, this will become far more pronounced and both the player and AI should strive to upgrade their FTL accordingly.

Initial scanning technology is also severely in-adequate. Here I suggest that the player (and AI) research two additional levels of scanning tech as a minimum. It’s hard to plan operations when you don’t know where the enemy is headed and have no idea as to the composition of his fleet. This holds equally true regardless if you are on the defensive or offensive.

Finally, we conclude (this part) with range/logistics. The good news is that the range offered by initial logistics can be adequate, however, gaining the next level allows the player, (and AI), to strike deeper and wider and opens up far more possibilities on the offense. The defense can also benefit from expanded logistics by virtue of having increased choices in preparing counter-attacks. Indeed, sometimes even the possibility of a counter-attack can be just as effective as the actual fact.

 

Part 2


In the second part of this series we will look closely at some basic concepts for defensive operations. Once again I apologize in advance for the crude graphics I am about to employ but it should suffice for our purposes.

The situation is this

The aggressor is based at System X and has the required logistics to attack the defender at systems A, B and C. System D is not in range for an attack. The aggressor has a 20SSP force at System X, the defender has a total force of 30 SSP with which to defend.

Based on this set up then, let us look at some basic types of defense that can be used.

Static (passive) defense

This is the situation that we as players currently face when attacking the AI at its current state. While there are some exceptions, most games devolve into what I am about to describe.

In this scenario, the defender garrisons the threatened systems and takes no other action. There may be Star- bases augmenting the defenders, (and they are encouraged) and perhaps some telemetry buildings as well. In truth though, defense structures in ISG are seriously under-powered when compared to MoO2, they are intended to act as a supplement and cannot defend a colony on their own, (unlike MoO2, where in the early game, a missile base could defend a world quite nicely).

At a quick glance then, it would seem the defender has the upper hand, 30 SSP versus 20 for the aggressor. However, when the defender employs a static defense, it is the aggressor that has the upper hand. For example, in this scenario, the attacker could take 75% of his forces, attack one of the systems in question, and gain local superiority (15SSP versus 10). In fact, this is the worst type of defense that can be employed as the defender can be defeated in detail, the only saving grace, (and a small one at that), of a static defense is that it is not susceptible to a feint.

Reactive defense (without reserves)

The next step up in defensive operations is a reactive, fluid defense. In this instance we would be looking at the same situation described above, but in this case the defender would react to the attack by sending forces from an adjacent system to the area being threatened. In short then, the aggressor attacks system A with the same 15SSP force. The defender counters by sending a number of SSPs from system B to system A. It is here that the need for a better FTL drive becomes apparent for defensive operations. In order for a reactive defense to be effective, the reaction force must arrive at its destination in time to affect the battle.

The main drawback of this type of defense is that it is susceptible to feints and mis-direction, however, a feint could require that the aggressor had a larger force in play than the one depicted here. This is also where the need for improved scanning technology becomes apparent, the more you know about what’s coming at you, the harder it is to fall for a feint and the easier it becomes to determine what forces to react with when a system is threatened.

Reactive defense (with reserves)

A more sophisticated and effective approach to a reactive defense is the use of a reserve force. In this scenario, the defender reduces his front-line defensive forces by 30%. Systems A, B and C respectively, are now garrisoned by 7SSPs each, the remaining 9 SSPs form a reserve force at System D, (if system D is not within scanning range of the aggressor, so much the better).

This defense allows even more flexibility as the defender can react from either the front-line worlds, the reserve force at System D, or any combination thereof. Furthermore, this type of defense is far less susceptible to feints and mis-directions, indeed, it could even be viewed as a mis-direction itself. Once again, good FTL drives and scanning technology are critical.

Defensive Counter-attack

In closing the defensive side of operations we will conclude with the counter-attack. The aggressor selects his target and moves out the majority of his forces for the attack. The defender counters by both a reactive defense and a counter-attack at system X.

This is a very desirable situation for the defender but isn’t always available. The Defender must have the forces available to gain numerical superiority in at least one battle, preferably both. FTL drives, scanning tech and logistical range are absolutely critical here. If executed correctly, the counter-attack can confer tremendous benefits and relieve pressure from the defender for many turns. The main drawback to the counter-attack is that the countering force can be decimated if the initial aggressor has reserves and they are brought into play.

In conclusion then, while there are many possible scenarios that can arise in ISG, the defensive operations detailed here, (and variants thereof), could be adequate in covering a lot of the contingencies that can arise, and perhaps act as a good base for preparing both the player and AI for a more robust defensive posture in times of conflict.

As soon as time permits, I will post the third and final part of this series focusing on the offense, (my favourite)

 

Part 3

Offensive operations

At first glance, offensive operations seem to be a lot more straight-forward compared to defensive ops. Select a target, send a fleet to attack it, and that’s about it. Appearances however, are often misleading in ISG, meaning that offensive ops can be far more complex and nuanced than one might think.

When to attack, when to draw back, and when to be relentless is not our concern here, rather, we will focus on how to get the most out of the offense once we do decide on that course. Here are some sound basics then that will hold true no matter the situation.

Strike hard

While obvious, it is very important to bring enough power against your opponent. If he has 10 SSP defending a system, don’t attack with less, and always strive to attack with more. All things being equal, the defense enjoys a slight advantage in ISG due to star-bases and planetary installations, this means that you may not only be attacking the force that you see, but a base as well.

Another advantage to striking hard, (with a superior force), is that it could negate the defenders ability to effect a reactive defense, meaning that the threat of defensive re-enforcement is diminished.

Strike Fast

Just as important (and just as obvious), is the need to for the aggressor to strike a target without giving the defender the time to react. The aggressor should strive to attack targets that can be reached in a single turn. Advanced FTL drives will need to be researched and attacks that intersect through a nebula should be avoided at all costs as these will slow down the attacking force considerably. Where possible, the aggressor should exploit wormhole connections when considering targets. (However, in order to not attack into the unknown, it is prudent to send a scouting expedition through the wormhole first)

Avoid the strength of the defense

Where possible, the aggressor should avoid attacking defensive strong points. Using the example from yesterday, the aggressor would be better off attacking system A or C instead of system B. A and C are the flanks of the defense whereas B is the center. This means that system B could theoretically be re-enforced from more points than either A or C. Generally speaking, when offered a choice of targets, go after the weakest one first, this way you stand a chance of wearing the defender down via attrition, he gets weaker with the passing of turns, you get stronger.

Similarly, just as the aggressor should avoid attacking through a nebula, he should never miss the opportunity to attack a system that is isolated by one.

Cover your base

Another critical aspect of offensive operations is for the aggressor to ensure that the base he is attacking from does not fall to a defensive counter-strike. Again, using the example from yesterday, System X should not be left devoid of forces when attacking from it, the reason is many-fold.

First, by leaving a reserve in system X, the aggressor ensures that a counter-strike by the defender becomes less attractive and viable.

Second, in the event that the aggressor is defeated, his remaining forces can regroup at system X and receive the benefit of joining their combat strength with the garrison there.

And third, in the event that the attack is successful, the garrison at system X could be used to further exploit gains against the defender.

In the end, it’s always a good idea to leave behind a reserve force when you go on the attack, ISG does not seem like the type of game to be won in a single battle, (thank you devs!) and you should hardly ever commit all your forces in a single engagement.



Well Gents, that should cover the basics, a lot of you are familiar with these practices already and I haven’t brought anything new here, but once again, I want to stress that the MoO2 approach to offensive/defensive operations wont work in ISG. MoO2 was far more simplistic when it came to these considerations and I am happy to see that ISG has brought them to the next level.

 

An excellent example of playing to your strengths while masking (minimizing) your weakness. Here, you could not strike fast, so the most viable alternative was to keep the defender guessing as to your true target by keeping the composition of your forces hidden. Note that had you, (and the AI), had the ability to react swiftly, the game could have easily devolved into two doomstacks countering each other. Not much fun that, all that work of building an Empire so a that a conflict could be decided with a single battle... seems anti-climatic.
Here I commend the devs for ISG. You can research extremely powerful FTLs, Logistics and Scanning techs, but, the tech tree is so huge and packed with essential technology, that a player that focuses too much on these three areas can be left critically behind in other vital areas. I hope this balance is retained then, it works well.

It does sound intriguing, but until you research a few levels of scanning tech, you are essentially blind anyway, you only know that something is out there. You don't know where it's going, how fast, or what it's composed of. It's like the default state of the game is exactly what you describe.

 

Well Crazy Elf, what you say is true and holds value, but it isn't really the scope of what I posted about.

Here I'm strictly focusing on basic tenets of offensive/defensive operations that hold true universally.

In other words, regardless of the race, regardless if it's the AI or the player, the fundamentals still apply. I also kept to the basics rather than going into more sophisticated situations as I believe it is important to get them as close to 100% as possible. Without them, any race perks in offense or defense, ship design, etc. would easily be negated.