All about ships

Knowing what works is equally valuable to knowing what doesn’t. With that thought then, I want to spend some time taking a close look at ships in ISG.

Beginning with civilian ships, here are some observations about all the ships that can be found in ISG at this point in time.

Freighters

Yeah, I know, not really a ship is it? Freighters have the distinction of being the only “ship” type in ISG that is completely abstracted. I surmise that this was done consciously as a way to preserve the flavor of MoO2, as well as a way to keep micro management down. Over all, the freighters as imagined in the game serve their purpose well, even if that purpose is far more limited than in MoO2.

Verdict? This is the only ship that gets a “meh” from me, I hardly ever use them and they are a not a must have unless you specifically go for asteroid mining, on the plus side, not that difficult to build.

Survey ships

Fragile, un-armed, you can’t assign a leader to it and an absolute must have. A player can be well served in acquiring one of these ships as soon as possible and keeping it on the active roll through-out the game. Just the fact that it will reveal full system information upon its arrival makes exploration, (and deciding where to colonize), much easier and much faster. A good tactic in using these ships is to escort it with a single warship, preferably one with a leader on-board. This means that the ship will always be able to withdraw, (instead of being destroyed), from a nasty situation, such as a space monster. It also means that the leader on the escort ship will level up much faster from all the experience gained in exploring. They are difficult to construct early on.

Verdict? Yummy! Give me one every time.

Outpost Ships

Sigh… Outpost ship, we hardly knew you. This ship is a must if you want to create outposts and is consumed once the outpost is constructed. You need them, but they don’t play any other role or stay on the board for long. Difficult to construct early on but not too much so all things considered.

Verdict? No complaints from me.

Colony Ships

Same exact description as a survey ship but geared towards colony construction, they are also far more difficult to construct, especially in the early game.

Verdict? OK. Bring out the pitch-forks and torches, for ISG, I think these are well balanced in their construction costs, I’ve seen what happens when it is too easy to grow early on and it made for a very boring experience.

Support Ships

Another difficult undertaking in the early game, plus you are not allowed to build them until the prerequisite tech is built. These ships however, can drastically accelerate the development of a colony. This is another ship that is a must have and at least one should be kept active at all times in your fleet.

Verdict? Nice touch! I love these babies and the effects they bring, nicely balanced in the early game, but too easy to acquire later, perhaps if they leveled up in capability, (and cost), they could be balanced to perfection.

Now let’s get to the military ships, the guys that will make or break you on the field of battle, what does ISG have to offer here?

Frigates (FFs)

This is your ” mosquito”, it’s high evasion value makes it difficult to hit but its small hull size means it wont pack much of a punch either. Direct fire weapons, especially kinetics, are virtually useless against these ships but they are extremely vulnerable to missile fire. So far, I find that they manage to retain a role throughout the game, but I suspect that once the game gets longer, (6 races, huge maps), they will not really serve any purpose towards the last third of the game. Relatively inexpensive to construct, this is your starting ships and it makes sense to upgrade the ones you have as the game progresses.

Verdict? Good, but the hull size is not in line with the rest of the ship classes which may lead to class obsolescence in a long game.

Destroyers (DDs)

Now we’re getting somewhere. Destroyers are perhaps one of the best ship classes in the game. They can be built without the need of a star-base, (turn one) and have a large enough hull so that you can pack some serious hurt into them. Their evasion stats are not as good as the lowly FFs, but they have over 100% increased hull size, I’ll take that every time. They are twice as expensive, (and difficult to construct), in comparison to a Frigate, but a determined effort could see you fielding one relatively quickly. Upgrade them over time as new tech becomes available, you should never scrap one of these.

Verdict? Perfect score in my book!

Cruisers (CAs)

This is your first capital ship in more ways than one. First, you need a star-base to construct one, so until you research star-base tech and actually build one, you can’t start production. Then we have a hull size double the size of a Destroyer, this means your options on what components to install increase a lot. Here is where it gets tricky though. If you elect to install bomb racks on your cruiser… it can only have the offensive capability of a Destroyer. True it will be better shielded, (due to larger shields), but that will be negated somewhat by lower evasion inherent in the Cruiser hull. Still, I will point out, that so far, (with the AI at 1/3 capacity), I have won most games without ever building or fielding anything larger than a Cruiser. These are quite an effort to construct, even during the early mid-game, but they are a must have if you plan on offensive actions.

Verdict? Another perfect score in my book!

Battleships (BBs)

Now we’re talking. A true capital ship with crappy evasion that can dish out a lot of pain, even if carrying bomb racks. At twice the hull size of a Cruiser, it takes quite an effort from a well developed colony to construct one. It is however, susceptible to all weapon types, even direct fire Kinetics. While the battleship can be used as a single ship force, I prefer to only do that against targets that are not heavily defended, otherwise it is a good idea to escort this baby with some FFs and DDs

Verdict? Good job all the way around, no complaints from me.

Titans

To be honest, I hate titans. This goes back to MoO2 where the game seems to have been intentionally geared towards doomstacks consisting of Titans only. Luckily, ISG has avoided the doomstack and makes an all titan fleet doable but impractical, especially on larger maps. They are prohibitively difficult and expensive to construct, but at twice the size of a Battleship, they offer the greatest freedom on what components you can place on them. Obviously, their evasion is akin to a pregnant Sloth.

Verdict? Not bad for a Titan.

Finally gents, before I sign off, I want to talk about the balance of ship construction. Early on, it’s difficult, but as I explained elsewhere, it can be accelerated quickly. Now in one game, (PA10), I had a colony with over 1000 base production,(most of my production was geared towards ship construction), I also had completed all six ship related infrastructure projects, meaning I was getting a good bonus towards ship construction. I was quite happy to see that I still needed more than a handful of turns to produce a Battleship!

 

Greetings Herr Wanderer

Thank you for the kind words sir, I am pleased that you enjoyed the post. I thought about what you propose, and agree that ISG might be more interesting if civilian ships were not abstracted, if it could be accomplished in a way so that it does not interfere with the game flow, it would be ideal.

I never had the opportunity to play “Lords of the Black Sun” but I have played some games that did something similar. Based on those experiences then, here are some thoughts.

Freighter fleets could no longer be abstract, they would need to be physically present on the map. Freighter routes would need to have the option of being automated or under manual control.

For Asteroid exploits, the route would be from the Asteroid field to the colony receiving the benefit.

For Strategic resources, we could add a route that would be from the system with the resources to the homeworld, (or even a system with a tech capitol or other Empire-wide facility)

Once the freighters are depicted and the routes are set, the question becomes how to attack and defend those freighters. We cannot intercept ships in space, only in a system, and that could be problematic. For example, if I engage a Freighter and its Escort at a system that only has an outpost, (the case with strategic resources), why not destroy the outpost once I am victorious instead of capturing the freighter?

As I thought more about this I remembered something I posted a while ago as a possible solution, though it would still be abstract, take a look and tell me your thoughts when you have the time. It is not as detailed as what you propose, but it may be a good balance for between having nothing and a solution that is too labor intensive.

My own belief is that this project should mimic Moo2 as far as possible when it comes to logistics and supply. this doesn't mean that the mechanic can't be upgraded however.

Using the same mechanic as freighters, a new type of ship could be produced, a commerce raider. These ships, when built, would go into a pool of their own similar to freighters. The player could then deploy some of these raiders at enemy (and non-enemy) systems when desired. The effect would be similar to the event in Moo2 which causes losses in a system until enough ships are deployed there to neutralise the threat. The cost of these raiders should be similar to freighters.

Think of it this way

I deploy 5 raiders at system X which has no combat ships available.

On turn one the owner of system X loses 5 freighters from their pool.

On turn two the owner of system X places 2 ships there. I now lose 2 of my raiders and the owner of X loses 3 more freighters

This would continue until I either withdraw my raiders or they are eliminated.

The ships sent to clear the raiders should work in a manner based on quantity (number of ships count not size). Alternatively a dedicated escort vessel could be made available to the player which could be enhanced through research. (early escort defeats 1 raider, mid-escort 1.5, late escort 2)

This could then be an interesting mechanic especially if a player were allowed to use it without a formal declaration of war.

The goal would be to keep logistics light, clean and similar to Moo2 while at the same time expanding the mechanic to make it more interesting by adding a sense of WWII submarine warfare in space.

 

Good morning Herr Wanderer,


You are welcome sir, and yes, your post did make me think about the concept, it can be improved without changing the economic system. This would benefit the game in my opinion.

I like what you are proposing now very much, using the pirate skill of leaders to disrupt trade routes is intuitive and natural, it would also enhance leaders that much more and aid with immersion. At the same time, it would increase the importance of freighters and add some fun to their use. The player would no longer treat them as an after-thought, the concept you propose would also not be management heavy.

Perhaps then, we can streamline this further and make it specific to ISG

We would need a new type of ship, a "raider". This could either be a specific ship type as you propose, (unlocked by having a leader with the Pirate skill), or it could be a module on an existing ship class, (also unlocked by having a leader with the Pirate skill).

This ship could then be deployed to an enemy system at either end of an existing trade route and would disrupt the route, perhaps even by eliminating the freighter assigned there.

Defending against a "raider" could be in the traditional sense, meaning, a war ship present at the target system. If the "raider' is engaged and destroyed in combat, I would like to see the leader killed (though a very skilled leader could have a chance of surviving) The "raider" could be sent alone on a mission and be stealthy but vulnerable, or it could be escorted and lose its stealth. What I mean here is that a single "raider" would not show up on scanners, the player would only realize its presence once it arrives on the target system. If the "raider" is escorted, however, normal scanning rules would apply.

In order to keep things abstract, the raider would not actually "steal" anything, it would simply "deny" the benefit of either a strategic resource or an asteroid exploit to the owner, while at the same time, destroying the freighter, (if any) assigned to the route.

Perhaps this could be a good compromise solution?


And now, it is my turn to thank you for the time you are expending in discussing this topic and the attempt you are making in proposing viable solutions to enhance game-play. It is very much appreciated!

 

I too enjoyed the discussion my friend and don't worry about Google translator, it may not be perfect, but it was adequate. Enjoy the game!

 

I think having command ships would definitely be a plus to the game and fit well with the philosophy of “fewer but more important ships”. As to how it would work out, I theorize that there are multiple ways to accomplish it, ranging from the easy to hard.

If you want an approach that involves the least amount of coding and effort, borrow from what already exists in the game.

First we could start by adding a new early-mid level tech to the research tree, a ‘command module”. Once researched, the module should be available for placement on large hulls, Cruisers and up. The module should be expensive in construction cost, (perhaps prohibitively so), and take up a considerable amount of space, (like bomb racks).

The attributes of the command module could be similar to telemetry buildings, giving small boosts to evasion, targeting, etc. This would be the “least effort, least reward” solution, but it would suffice as a bare minimum. Obviously, only a single command ship could confer bonuses in battle, they would not stack.

A more sophisticated approach that would fit well with the existing game, (but require more work to implement), would be to give command ships the ability to use formations in combat. For example, at a basic level, the player could select from a number of pre-defined formations when entering combat, (line, wedge, concave, etc.), rather than the random placement we currently have. Additional research could unlock more advanced command modules, the player would then have more formations to choose from, (or maybe even be allowed to set his/her own).

Perhaps we could even combine both approaches and really get something formidable in play. We could even make it so that the loss of a command ship in battle has very negative consequences for the owner, this would really spice things up.

 

Welcome aboard Komandar, nice to have you with us. I've also played those games as well, and agree about the AI in SEV

For ISG in PA 10, use a support ship, it will give you an instant boost in production. This will be felt more acutely in newer colonies, the boost in production, infrastructure improvement etc, is drastic. In a way, it works just like pop transfer in those other games but is more abstract and way more streamlined.

 

I'm confused my friend, I've played quite a few sessions, the only resources I've ever needed were strategic, and those don't require a freighter. I've built massive empires repeatedly, the only time I used freighters was;
If I took over an existing asteroid mine that required them, (done only if I need the strategic location of said mine)
And for testing purposes.
In my later games, I don't even bother building freighters for the conquered mines as they still extend my logistical range without freighters being assigned to them. I'm a war-monger and prefer to spend my SSPs judiciously.

Hmm. perhaps all outposts should require freighters before being operational? It could be assumed that they are not self-supporting and need a constant supply (hence the freighter)

This would increase their importance tremendously... at which point I would want a mechanic for attacking those freighters (some have already been proposed)

In conclusion, I just don't see where they are more than a "meh" as currently implemented.

 

Obviously...haven't you seen one of my numerous disclaimers ...
All opinions are mine and mine alone, they reflect my perspective only and those who have a similar style. So for me, until I actually "need" freighters, they are a "meh", just there as an optional choice. Contrast that to the other ships, I can play an entire session on the hardest difficulty and not build or use a single freighter, I can't do that with most of the rest.
So regardless of playing style, this following holds true...they are not critical to have, they are abstract, they can't be targeted...
I'm sorry my friend, I don't disparage your opinion or point of view, (you know that's not my style), and anyone can, (and should) play the game in the way it suits them best... but at the end of the day, in comparison to the rest of the ships in ISG, I find them "lacking"