Space Battles!

[Clayton]

SPACE....The Final Battlefrontier
"Captain Thames, hostile ships on sensors," said the droid helmsman.
The captain leaned back in his velour chair and grinned. "Excellent, are our shields...up?"
"...They're always up, Captain."
"Good. Engines full forward, prepare to fire turbolaser at will!"
"Captain, we're against four star destroyers; this plan is deeply flawed."
"DAMMIT SP-0K! This is a time for...action! not thinking."
​

What are space battles?

Space battles are, obviously, battles and skirmishes that happen in space. They follow much the same rules that ground battles do, and can range from a single 1 on 1 dogfight to a fleet-wide engagement. Success in a battle depends more on the tactics employed by the commanders rather than how big their tech is. Rather than commanding entire fleets (except, perhaps, in rare exceptions) PvP space battles will be limited to one wing or one battlegroup in a fleet, and the success of the battle as a whole depends on how well that battlegroup performs. Why is this? Glad you asked!

Tactics in Space Battles:
On an OOC level, space battles in Star Wars is treated like an odd mixture of WWII naval battles and Age of Sail engagements. There can be maneuvering and an attempt to out-wit your opposing commander, but in the rare, dire circumstance...a good old-fashioned broadside or ramming is not out of the question. Very rarely will a whole fleet be destroyed to the last ship. Why is this? If a commander sees that he has lost a severe tactical advantage, he would rather retreat his ships than lose the majority of vessels under his command. Ships are expensive, and it is easier to reinforce a fleet than build an entirely new one. It saves a faction's ability to project force. Battles in which an unacceptably high number of ships are destroyed will often be a career (or even life) ending event for many of the people involved.

As it relates to SWRP, the PvP space battles represents the "tactical advantage" being sought. If one side wins the needed number of fights, the opposing side will withdraw to hyperspace. The level of destruction will depend on how many fights are won, and the circumstances of the battlefield. If a commander is foolish enough to let his fleet get trapped somehow with no access to hyperspace (perhaps between a planet and several moons) and lose all his battles, he may face complete annihilation. On the opposite end, an overly cautious commander may see that his fleet (PvP battles) are in trouble and in danger of losing their advantage and send the order to abandon the battle early, thus maximizing the ships saved.

The Scope of Space Battles:
As mentioned earlier, space battles can be almost anything. You can have a 1 on 1 dogfight, you can ambush a patrol corvette, you can try and break a blockade, or participate in a serious fleet to fleet battle. But for the purposes of inter-faction conflict, we'll more or less see these most commonly:

1. Dogfight: We already have these, so we know how they work.

2. Patrol Skirmish: 1v1 battles between two corvettes or frigates, with PCs in command of the ships. Fighter/bomber squadrons could play a role in these, as with potential boarding action.

3. Small battle groups: Tactical battles with frigate class command ships, a few corvettes, and fighter/bomber squadrons.

4. Battle group engagement: Tactical battle between full sized battle groups. Star Destroyer class flagship, possibly a pair of frigates and 3-4 corvettes, as well as a wing or 2 of fighter/bombers.

These are bare-bone examples. Flavor should be added to make the consequences more vital. Perhaps for the dogfight thread, you're escorting a bomber group to attack a troop transport, and the opposing side needs to defend that transport. Or the strike group is targeting a key warship in a battle formation. At the end of the day, warships are a resource for factions and their destruction should be felt.

Tech in Space Battles:
So how do all the fancy ships fit in to this? For sake of balance, and to avoid arguments of "my ship has two more guns than yours and it has 'strong' armor in the write-up so it should win!!1!1!!!", ships of the same class (as defined in the Anaxes War College System) will be an even match against other ships in their class. A frigate vs a frigate will be an even fight. Again, this is to place emphasis on tactics and not having a dozen different ships in each class. Starfighter engagements are a little different, a Nubian starfighter probably won't be an even match against a swanky Sith fighter, but that doesn't mean it can't prevail.

There can be exceptions to this norm, key emphasis on exceptions. Specialty ships can be developed by a faction. What is a specialty ship? Think the B-Wing in Rebels, a particularly tanky frigate, or stealth. A stealth corvette (for example), used correctly, can be a formidable asset. Essentially, it is a unique ship line in it's class that allows it to do something special and give a tactical edge. Factions should not start out with specialty ships, they will have to be developed over a series of threads and outside groups can attempt to sabotage or even outright steal your work. Granted they would have to find out about it, but that isn't an impossible task.

OOCly, when a faction wants to develop specialty ships (or other specialty tech), they should follow the same rules as for prep threads. They are to be mission-style threads focused on gathering resources, protecting against espionage, stealing plans or prototypes, etc. 3 threads per tech, maybe more if it's something super-duper like a superweapon. One of the threads may be between factions rather than PC and NPC. So the Mandos want to steal a prototype from a Sith factory, or vice-versa. This could also sabotage the development of said project.

Say the Sith are developing a new starfighter and the Mandos say "hey, we actually need one of those now that you mention it." They could undertake their own mission to steal a prototype or designs. Alternatively, if they already have a starfighter, they could attempt sabotage: destroying the prototype, plans, or facility where it's located.

What about the "troop count"?
Keep in mind these are subject to adjustment for balance issues once we see space battles play out.

Fighter Squadron (12) - 10 units
Bomber Squadron (6) - 20 units
Corvette - 25 units
Frigate - 50 units
Cruiser - 100 units
Star Destroyer - 250 units

The amount of units a ship costs also can give a good indication of power in comparison to others.

A squadron of Starfighters would likely be dominated by a corvette, however they are close enough that with extremely good tactics a starfighter squadron might prevail with heavy losses. However a squadron of Starfighters and a squadron of Bombers would be more than an even match for a corvette, though the starfighter squadron might take some heavy hits to give the bombers the chance to do crippling damage to the corvette.

 

[Loco]

I dig it.

 

[Gamov]

I like how the numbers for the "troop count" are being divided up so far.

If I may make one suggestion moving forward though, it has always bothered me (because I'm a sad nerd) that the Empyreal SD which the Sith use here can hold two full wings worth of fighters (144 in all), while an Imperial SD, which is a full 100 meters larger than the Sith's current ship of the line, can only field one wing (72).

I would personally like to see 72 fighters adopted as the standard maximum across all similar capital ships on the site. Not only is the math easier - you can field one SD and a full wing of fighters with plenty of wiggle room for support craft - but it just makes plain sense. That's not to say people couldn't bring more starfighters in if they were equipped with hyperdrives, but over the long haul if you are going to be engaging in large scale feet battles it is much easier to calculate your forces if you can just assume from the get go that you will eat up 310 of your allotted 500 "troop points" by deploying an SD with a full wing of fighters.

Just a thought anyway. Probably not a very good one either.

Don't post tired/on allergy meds kids!

 

[Clayton]

We actually looked at that very ship last night.

 

[Darasuum]

so much info, gotta read this later.

 

[Korvo]

So does this mean some details are still more-or-less being worked out? Or is this pretty much the final form?

 

[Clayton]

So does this mean some details are still more-or-less being worked out? Or is this pretty much the final form?

More or less, unless things need tweaking for balance.

 

[vamp]

...large scale feet battles...

 

[Dawyn]

@Clayton Good overall, though you should consider putting some form of dedicated carrier in there, they were shown in Rebels recently and offer an interesting tactical choice, e.g. making a traditional space action group with SDs, corvettes, frigates, and cruisers vs a carrier task force, each with their own strengths and weaknesses depending on your creativity and circumstance, more heavy guns vs more strikecraft.

 

[Eccles]

I'm really looking forward to a Patrol Skirmish :)

 

[Darasuum]

Just remembered @wristclerk ' post about a pilot group. Make sure you read this wrist since it has to do with all that space stuff.

 

[Clayton]

Questions have been asked about how do you determine damage to ships in naval battle threads. For the benefit of everyone, I'll post an answer here as well.

It's very hard to quantify that, and ultimately both sides need to cooperate to a somewhat greater extent than before (Which is a good thing, really). Damage to certain areas of a ship would result in differing amounts of damage and the ship's ability to function. A barrage on the prow would do less crippling damage than a barrage on the engines or hangar bay for example. If you want to see an example of how superior tactics results in a decisive victory, and I'm sure @Brandon Rhea knows exactly where this thread is stored in archive, you should look at the thread where Empress trashed the Mandalorian fleet.

As far as how do you know who has the victory over another ship, that's something people will have to get a feel for as these threads are played out. Admins are always here to give their thoughts on the matter when those questions do come up. As the site in general sees more of these engagements, it should be clearer of how things are realistically going in a thread and the staff will need to weigh in less often because you guys can work it out amongst yourselves.

Tactics should more or less fall along certain principles: Maneuver your ships into a position where you have more ships in better firing positions than the enemy does at you. This can involve deliberate sacrifices of ships, ie take Age of Sail strategy of "Crossing the T" where faced with a line of enemy ships, you sent your own ships in a straight line. The idea being you'd sacrifice the lead ship or two in order to bring twin broadside after broadside after broadside on the enemy fleet and once your ships were firing, because the enemy ships down the line on either side of the top part of the T couldn't fire through their own ships, their firepower was greatly reduced.

AC: Black Flag gives a decent (if a little gamey, ignore the "bracing" for less damage and upgrades) look at how to approach the concept. The Jackdaw at the beginning would be suicidal to go against a ship of the line, which it should be. But against ships closer to its tonnage, to a little heavier, the concept is to hamper the enemy ship's ability to maneuver and not expose yourself to its main lines of fire. If you could manage to sail around in front or behind it, you could inflict damage. In many ways naval warfare is a complicated dance of getting yourself into prime firing position while trying to avoid falling into the enemy's ideal position.

That's partially why the Empire was so overpowering. Their star destroyers attacked head-on, all their guns were designed to have a clear line of fire ahead of them. So when they dropped three ships out of hyperspace, they were ready to roll right at the start. It made it harder to defend stationary positions, however.

Ships aren't going to last very long in open combat. We've seen bleed-through of damage once shields are weakened to around 50%. If you want numbers, all things being equal...two ships pounding it out with each other wouldn't last more than a handful of posts. But if you manage to maneuver behind your opponent you should be able to trash them handily without taking much damage yourself.

Take what we've seen of the Empire's battle doctrine: Attack swiftly with overwhelming firepower. The Rebels tended to take a more asymmetrical approach because they couldn't stand toe to toe, they lost one of their few flagships doing that at Scarif.

 

[Darasuum]

Questions have been asked about how do you determine damage to ships in naval battle threads. For the benefit of everyone, I'll post an answer here as well.

It's very hard to quantify that, and ultimately both sides need to cooperate to a somewhat greater extent than before (Which is a good thing, really). Damage to certain areas of a ship would result in differing amounts of damage and the ship's ability to function. A barrage on the prow would do less crippling damage than a barrage on the engines or hangar bay for example. If you want to see an example of how superior tactics results in a decisive victory, and I'm sure @Brandon Rhea knows exactly where this thread is stored in archive, you should look at the thread where Empress trashed the Mandalorian fleet.

As far as how do you know who has the victory over another ship, that's something people will have to get a feel for as these threads are played out. Admins are always here to give their thoughts on the matter when those questions do come up. As the site in general sees more of these engagements, it should be clearer of how things are realistically going in a thread and the staff will need to weigh in less often because you guys can work it out amongst yourselves.

Tactics should more or less fall along certain principles: Maneuver your ships into a position where you have more ships in better firing positions than the enemy does at you. This can involve deliberate sacrifices of ships, ie take Age of Sail strategy of "Crossing the T" where faced with a line of enemy ships, you sent your own ships in a straight line. The idea being you'd sacrifice the lead ship or two in order to bring twin broadside after broadside after broadside on the enemy fleet and once your ships were firing, because the enemy ships down the line on either side of the top part of the T couldn't fire through their own ships, their firepower was greatly reduced.

AC: Black Flag gives a decent (if a little gamey, ignore the "bracing" for less damage and upgrades) look at how to approach the concept. The Jackdaw at the beginning would be suicidal to go against a ship of the line, which it should be. But against ships closer to its tonnage, to a little heavier, the concept is to hamper the enemy ship's ability to maneuver and not expose yourself to its main lines of fire. If you could manage to sail around in front or behind it, you could inflict damage. In many ways naval warfare is a complicated dance of getting yourself into prime firing position while trying to avoid falling into the enemy's ideal position.

That's partially why the Empire was so overpowering. Their star destroyers attacked head-on, all their guns were designed to have a clear line of fire ahead of them. So when they dropped three ships out of hyperspace, they were ready to roll right at the start. It made it harder to defend stationary positions, however.

Ships aren't going to last very long in open combat. We've seen bleed-through of damage once shields are weakened to around 50%. If you want numbers, all things being equal...two ships pounding it out with each other wouldn't last more than a handful of posts. But if you manage to maneuver behind your opponent you should be able to trash them handily without taking much damage yourself.

Take what we've seen of the Empire's battle doctrine: Attack swiftly with overwhelming firepower. The Rebels tended to take a more asymmetrical approach because they couldn't stand toe to toe, they lost one of their few flagships doing that at Scarif.

Thanks for that info @Clayton that clears up a bunch of stuff.

However, one thing people need to remember doing this "crossing the T" often requires npcs so you'll have to ask yourself if you think someone's PC will "get baited" by such strategies and that it doesn't pass the line of trying to use npcs to get an advantage in combat.

 

[Arturia Paorach]

@Clayton
I have one question about this section:

What about the "troop count"?
Keep in mind these are subject to adjustment for balance issues once we see space battles play out.

Fighter Squadron (12) - 10 units
Bomber Squadron (6) - 20 units
Corvette - 25 units
Frigate - 50 units
Cruiser - 100 units
Star Destroyer - 250 units

The amount of units a ship costs also can give a good indication of power in comparison to others.

A squadron of Starfighters would likely be dominated by a corvette, however they are close enough that with extremely good tactics a starfighter squadron might prevail with heavy losses. However a squadron of Starfighters and a squadron of Bombers would be more than an even match for a corvette, though the starfighter squadron might take some heavy hits to give the bombers the chance to do crippling damage to the corvette.

A Corvette can carry a Fighter Squadron OR a bomber squadron (at least the sith empire one can) are the unit values of those squadrons included in the corvettes total or is the 25 for the corvette with out a squadron?

Especially as it equates to the power curve of the vessel. Assuming its 25 with out a squadron, then a Corvette with a bomber squadron would be worth 45 on cost or power output?

 

[Gamov]

However, one thing people need to remember doing this "crossing the T" often requires npcs so you'll have to ask yourself if you think someone's PC will "get baited" by such strategies and that it doesn't pass the line of trying to use npcs to get an advantage in combat.

Given that tactical battles involve the use of NPCs anyway, one should attempt to use any NPCs at their disposal to gain the advantage. That's the nature of the beast. If a player is baited into an unfavorable tactical position by the opposition, then it was through no fault but their own.

Outside tactical battles though, there are already restrictions on the use of NPCs in combat.

 

[Darasuum]

Given that tactical battles involve the use of NPCs anyway, one should attempt to use any NPCs at their disposal to gain the advantage. That's the nature of the beast. If a player is baited into an unfavorable tactical position by the opposition, then it was through no fault but their own.

Outside tactical battles though, there are already restrictions on the use of NPCs in combat.

Fair enough.

 

[Clayton]

@Clayton
I have one question about this section:


A Corvette can carry a Fighter Squadron OR a bomber squadron (at least the sith empire one can) are the unit values of those squadrons included in the corvettes total or is the 25 for the corvette with out a squadron?

Especially as it equates to the power curve of the vessel. Assuming its 25 with out a squadron, then a Corvette with a bomber squadron would be worth 45 on cost or power output?

Included with the base value, otherwise the bigger ships would quickly spiral into unstoppable territory.

I said this before, but it would be interesting to see how a PvP squadron battle and a PvP tactical battle could interlink (ie escorting bombers to attack a corvette that's fighting your own corvette). You'd have to run them both at a certain OOC pacing so it would make sense, but it would be neat to see if that is a feasible option. So if anyone wants to be the guinea pigs on that, feel free.