230 lines
6.0 KiB
Markdown
230 lines
6.0 KiB
Markdown
# Combat
|
|
|
|
This document defines the intended combat model for the simulation.
|
|
|
|
Combat is primarily a local-space activity. It is how factions, pirates, and defenders contest access, claims, stations, and logistics.
|
|
|
|
## Design Goals
|
|
|
|
The combat model should support:
|
|
|
|
- local-space tactical fights
|
|
- piracy and harassment
|
|
- claim destruction and station contestation
|
|
- station defense
|
|
- commander-driven engagement behavior
|
|
- policy-aware hostility and access denial
|
|
|
|
## Core Principles
|
|
|
|
- combat happens in `local-space`
|
|
- claims and structures are physically contestable
|
|
- piracy should target valuable traffic and vulnerable infrastructure
|
|
- stations should be defensible but not magically safe
|
|
- combat behavior should come from commanders and policy, not only from raw proximity
|
|
|
|
## Combat Space
|
|
|
|
Combat belongs in `local-space`.
|
|
|
|
This is where entities can:
|
|
|
|
- maneuver with thrusters
|
|
- approach targets
|
|
- engage with weapons
|
|
- defend stations and claims
|
|
- intercept miners, haulers, and construction support
|
|
|
|
Ships in `system-space` warp transit are not in normal tactical combat.
|
|
|
|
This keeps tactical fighting distinct from travel.
|
|
|
|
## Combat Actors
|
|
|
|
The main combat actors are:
|
|
|
|
- combat ships
|
|
- escorts
|
|
- station defenses
|
|
- pirates
|
|
- claim objects
|
|
- vulnerable civilian or industrial ships
|
|
|
|
Combat should matter not only for fleet battle, but also for logistics disruption and territorial contest.
|
|
|
|
## Claims As Combat Targets
|
|
|
|
Claims at Lagrange points should be valid combat targets.
|
|
|
|
That means:
|
|
|
|
- enemies may destroy a claim before it matures
|
|
- pirates may harass or destroy claims
|
|
- destroying a claim reopens the location for future contest
|
|
|
|
Claims should not be protected by abstract immunity.
|
|
|
|
They are real objects in the world.
|
|
|
|
## Construction As A Vulnerable Phase
|
|
|
|
Station founding and expansion should be dangerous.
|
|
|
|
Vulnerable targets include:
|
|
|
|
- claim objects
|
|
- construction storage
|
|
- constructor ships
|
|
- supplying haulers
|
|
|
|
This makes station growth something that may require escort and local protection rather than being a purely economic background action.
|
|
|
|
## Station Defense
|
|
|
|
Stations should be able to defend themselves through modules and local defenders.
|
|
|
|
Station defense may come from:
|
|
|
|
- defense modules
|
|
- docked or assigned defenders
|
|
- nearby fleet response
|
|
- friendly system presence
|
|
|
|
Station safety should depend on actual defensive capacity, not only ownership flags.
|
|
|
|
## Piracy
|
|
|
|
Pirates should be a meaningful local-space threat.
|
|
|
|
They should favor:
|
|
|
|
- industrial ships
|
|
- haulers
|
|
- construction traffic
|
|
- station approaches
|
|
- valuable logistics lanes
|
|
|
|
Piracy is especially important because it creates pressure on:
|
|
|
|
- escorts
|
|
- trade profitability
|
|
- claim security
|
|
- station recovery
|
|
|
|
Pirates should not behave like generic random attackers if the game can instead make them economically disruptive predators.
|
|
|
|
## Hostility And Access
|
|
|
|
Combat should interact with policy and diplomacy, but not be replaced by them.
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
- a hostile faction may be denied docking and attacked on approach
|
|
- a neutral faction may be tolerated in-system but not allowed to build
|
|
- pirates may ignore policy altogether and simply attack vulnerable targets
|
|
|
|
See [POLICIES.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/POLICIES.md) for the access side of this relationship.
|
|
|
|
## Commander Role In Combat
|
|
|
|
Commanders should determine combat behavior.
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
- faction commanders set threat posture
|
|
- station commanders request local defense
|
|
- ship commanders choose whether to attack, escort, retreat, or hold
|
|
|
|
Combat should therefore depend on:
|
|
|
|
- commander doctrine
|
|
- assigned role
|
|
- local threat level
|
|
- policy and hostility state
|
|
|
|
This is better than a purely reflexive “closest target” model.
|
|
|
|
## Engagement Rules
|
|
|
|
Commanders should eventually carry engagement rules such as:
|
|
|
|
- attack hostiles on sight
|
|
- defend only if attacked
|
|
- prioritize claims and stations
|
|
- prioritize civilian protection
|
|
- avoid battle unless escorted
|
|
|
|
These rules can begin simple, but they are important for faction identity.
|
|
|
|
## Civilian And Industrial Vulnerability
|
|
|
|
Non-combat ships should not be expected to behave like warships.
|
|
|
|
Industrial or civilian commanders should prefer:
|
|
|
|
- fleeing
|
|
- docking
|
|
- requesting escort
|
|
- rerouting
|
|
- abandoning low-value trade under danger
|
|
|
|
This gives escorts and station defense real purpose.
|
|
|
|
## Claim And Station Contest
|
|
|
|
A system can be contested without full conquest mechanics.
|
|
|
|
Useful examples:
|
|
|
|
- destroy the enemy claim before activation
|
|
- raid construction storage
|
|
- kill the constructor ship
|
|
- deny safe trade to a vulnerable station
|
|
- force expensive escort commitments
|
|
|
|
This creates strategic conflict even before fully mature station warfare exists.
|
|
|
|
## Destruction And Recovery
|
|
|
|
Combat should create lasting economic consequences.
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
- destroyed claims delay expansion
|
|
- destroyed haulers create shortages
|
|
- destroyed defenders weaken a system
|
|
- damaged or powerless stations need recovery support
|
|
|
|
This is one of the main ways combat feeds back into the economy.
|
|
|
|
See [EVENTS.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/EVENTS.md) for the combat and claim-related event families.
|
|
|
|
## Minimum Rules
|
|
|
|
The following rules should remain true unless deliberately revised:
|
|
|
|
- combat is primarily a local-space activity
|
|
- claims are destructible and contestable
|
|
- station construction is a vulnerable phase
|
|
- piracy should prefer valuable and vulnerable traffic
|
|
- station defense depends on real assets
|
|
- commander doctrine should influence combat behavior
|
|
- combat outcomes should affect logistics and expansion
|
|
|
|
## Relationship To Other Documents
|
|
|
|
- [SPACES.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/SPACES.md)
|
|
- defines where combat is allowed
|
|
|
|
- [POLICIES.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/POLICIES.md)
|
|
- defines access and hostility context
|
|
|
|
- [COMMANDERS.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/COMMANDERS.md)
|
|
- defines who decides engagement behavior
|
|
|
|
- [STATIONS.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/STATIONS.md)
|
|
- defines vulnerable stations, claims, and local defense context
|
|
|
|
- [ECONOMY.md](/home/jbourdon/repos/space-game/docs/ECONOMY.md)
|
|
- defines the economic consequences of combat disruption
|