Why a SpaceGame (part 2)

The map

I would love to have a hexagon map that represents a 3-D space map.

Then, when calculating the distance. I know there is a 2-D variant where they count 1 for adjacent squares and 1.5 for diagonal.

The same could be done on a hexagon map???

But what if your XYZ coördinates all 3 change?

1 directions; 1
2 directions; sqrt(2)=1.41 or 1.5
3 directions; sqrt(3)=1.73 or 1.75

I could also say, 4, 6 and 7. But rather not.

Let's begin with the hulls.
First I wanted to know the limits of the game.
Conclusion is that there are 0.5 as "costs" in the game.
Question is that, "should I allow this?" Seeing it is only a half.
The problem lies within the shields that are added. They are going to get a small table or "formula" on how much they cost on ships with a certain movement speed.

Smallest and cheapest hull would be 1 armor, 1 speed, cost 1.5

With a speed setting of a maximum of 9. Maybe "X" which is 10.
Let's go with 10.
Biggest and most expensive hull would be 81 armor (tier 5), X speed, cost 96.
Alas, not adding these for obvious reasons.

The shields are the same. Where each shield will have the following:
Cost equals hulls (( movement speed / 2 ) + 1 ) times #
Where # is given.

Perhaps I can do it differently.
And there might be shields, only active if the ship doesn't move. Thus making them cheap.

Weapons....
They will have 3 turns during a battle.
The normal weapons will shoot the same, each turn.
Other weapons will either be a burst and then they are done.
Or a slow weapon, thus wait till the last turn.

The weights are roughly 3-2-1 or 9-6-4. I have not settled on this yet.
3-2-1 is easy to design. But 9-6-4 is balanced.
It is really that 4, not being a 3. Then again, using a weapon that needs to wait 2 turns before it fires is a gamble in direct combat.
As for long distance, if there is no return fire. You have a sure way to deal a lot more damage.

Example:
Normal weapon fires with "4-4-4" damage, the weight (not cost), is "24", the damage total is 12. Putting this same weight in the last turn only. "0-0-24" The damage total is now "24".

Depending on the designs. It is a fact that the normal vs the long distance. With "4" also being the armor. A normal weapon will have destroyed 1 other ship in the first 2 turns.
With 36 vs 36 (just numbers as examples). We have 36 vs 0 in the third turn. And they still can fire though.
You need to have the upper hand. Or a RPS mismatch.

Would a burst do better? The burst fires with "8-0-0". They too can destroy 1 ship each. Although, they will not fire anymore, in the second and third turn.

If there is a RPS mismatch by 1 tier, then you will see the power of the normal and long range climb.
If you need trice the fire power for destroying a target ship.

Then 36 burst will only destroy 12-0-0.
The normal can do 6-6-6.
And the long range does 0-0-36.
Given, if there are 36 ships present.

With the squads in place.
Burst vs long range would end up in 12 versus 24 after 1 round (3 turns).
Burst vs normal would end up in 22 versus 24.
normal vs long range would end up in 12 versus 18.

Seeing as how a player can throw in any ship in front. It will be possible to have fodder and tank walls as well. Then the whole strategy will change drastically.

With a RPS tier 1 mismatch. It sure is different.

Type of cards:

- Hulls aka bodies aka spaceships. Brings in;
Cost
Armor
Movement speed
Always required as basis

- Modifier for the hull, shield, brings in;
Cost depending on the hulls movement speed
Possible to have a speed limit from 0 to the hulls movement speed
Shield (like a seco d threshold of armor)

- Modifier for the hull, engine, brings in;
Cost depending on the hulls armor
Possible to combine with a shield, engine gets priority due to speed modifier
Extra movement speed

- Weapon system. Brings in;
Cost
Number of projectiles per combat turn
Damage per projectile
Accuracy per projectile (there is always a secondairy roll of 50%, unless noted otherwise, which costs a penalty)
Attack range (possible to have 2 different ones)

Weapon modifiers become a bit more tricky:
- Changing accuracy is difficult, it could be that a weapon system has different accuracies.
- Changing attack range has the same principle.
- Changing tier or damage is easy.
- Changing the number of projectiles is silly, since you can add more of the same system.

Maybe the modifier cards should be personalized to the hulls and weapons. So that less math for the player is involved.But I want to have all players to make use of the same deck.

***

A new rule.
A weapon has 3 turns. But, can be paused.
If you have a burst weapon of a certain tier. You can have it wait a turn or 2 before it fires.
In the meantime, other weapons could clear out shields or something.

Example, a normal weapon is tier 1.
The burst is tier 3.
The enemy has tier 3 hulls with tier 1 shields.
In order to destroy as much ships as possible, the shields are being removed first in the 3 turns. Then the burst is applied.
There are risks, but the rewards are better.

***

A special weapon has EMP.
It can only remove shields.
Works the same in any other regard.
Due to not having the ability to destroy a target.
The weight will only be 50%.
A hull is 100%
A hull with shield is 200%
A weapon system is 100%
2 weapon systems is 200%
A weapon system with an EMP is 150%
Maybe anydice can give me an estimate of how much EMP is really worth.

Corvidae
Most are fast and agile.

Choughs:
Cost 3
Armor 1
Speed 4

Treepie:
Cost 4
Armor 1
Speed 6

Magpie:
Cost 5
Armor 1
Speed 8

Jay:
Cost 6
Armor 3
Speed 4

Nutcracker:
Cost 7
Armor 3
Speed 5

Jackdaw:
Cost 8
Armor 3
Speed 6

Rook:
Cost 10
Armor 9
Speed 3

Crow:
Cost 12
Armor 9
Speed 4

Raven:
Cost 15
Armor 18
Speed 3

***

This list made me realize that the Speed shouldn't only be a fleet limit. But it should also be intertwened into the combat mechanic.

For a public version of my wargame. I dind't had this. For my hobby game, the force movement was a factor, thus you had purification of a force.

But for the space game. During the combat, I could allow the full movement speed "on the spot". I need to think of a way that it isn't too overpowered. And the penalty system pops up in my head.
But...only in combination with a negative effect.

My first idea is to have the spaceships make use of their movement speed as an agility factor while fighting. They can take less damage. But, their weapons will receive the exact same penalty. Each class of designed ships can make use of this on their own. The decision has to be made before hand. Since the opponent will also make decisions like these. Another decision would be if some ships hold fire.

A possible strategy could occur now, that I have not seen before within 1 round. If an opponent has a burst weapon, while the player has a slow weapon. This player is not firing weapons in the first turn. But could decide to be agile. Thus taking less fire. The down side is, that this same class of ships need to lure the fire in the first place.

As for what the penalty could be?
Perhaps the same system as I used in my hobby game.
A penalty score is a 5/6th roll to hit.
Penalty 2: 4/6
Penalty 4: 3/6
Penalty 6: 2/6
Penalty X or 10: 1/6

The fastest and smallest fodder can have X speed, thus a penalty of 1/6th.
The cost for that ship would be 6. It just so happens that if this ship has no ability to move. The value would normally equal 1.
In other words, the 2 extremes cancel each other out here.
If translated to durability, I get this list:
Cost 1.0, Speed&Penalty 0, durability 1.0
Cost 1.5, Speed&Penalty 1, durability 1.2
Cost 2.0, Speed&Penalty 2, durability 1.5
Cost 3.0, Speed&Penalty 4, durability 2.0
Cost 4.0, Speed&Penalty 6, durability 3.0
Cost 6.0, Speed&Penalty X, durability 6.0

Meaning that the durability does not exceed the cost.
Of course there is a damage output penalty as well.
The efficiency of a ship if it has an equal weapon attached that is supposed to fire.
1, 1, 1, 1.... 1 and...yes, 1

Getting a design into the fleet.

When a design is completed. The player needs to research the design first. A ship cost is often around 10 at the early stages. But tanky variants are also possible.

So, the first ship costs 5 times its cost.
Second ship 10 times.
Third 15 times. etc.

2 paths are possible here.

1. The player gets expensive ships first into production. The research is tough, but relatively cheaper now. If a ship cost 30 and you have to gather 150 resources. So be it.
Then you have only a few ships in the fleet.

Later on, a cheap ship costing 10. Would require 30 times for the 6th slot. Thus the research is 300 here.

2. The player starts to get the cheap ship first. 10 for a ship? 50 for research. When you compare with the first option. And you assume the generic resources at that point are 300 in total. The first option has only 5 ships of 30. But the second option has 25 ships of 10.

Of course, if the ship of 30 is finally allowed in the 6th slow. You need 900 resources in order to get this ship into production.

No interest at all
See title.
But why?
What are the reasons?

Too bland?
In space, you got emptyness.
And if you create a 2D map. Well, certain parts would still be missing.

Missing terrain attributes?
1. Gas clouds
Although, I would have implemented gas clouds. As an idea from Star Trek Armadda.
Some clouds and objects would act as mountains. Thus blocking the ships AND projectiles.
Some clouds and objects would act as forests. Partly blocking the ships AND projectiles.
Some clouds and objects would act as water. Blocking the ships, but not the projectiles.

2. The third dimension
As for high ground versus low ground effects.
In certain wargames, shooting from low to high ground would have the projectiles being "blocked". While movement would be less to no way, at a disadvantage.
Gravity around planets and other objects could have been a thing. As influence on position of your fleet compared to an enemy fleet.

3. The third dimension, part 2
Wormholes could have been a thing.
Going from one side to another.
But having the map fold in on itself could also have been a thing.
Stil, these 2 can be done with a "normal" wargame as well. Where magic and stuff.... could serve as well.

4. The third dimension, part 3
Like really a third dimension. In a 2-D wargame with tanks and air and subterrain. But also low and high ground. You really emphazise on 3-D already.
But in a space game, this could come forth as a third dimension all together in which your fleet moves around etc. But, the mapping is more difficult to be interesting. And people tend to think in 2.5-D
3-D is very difficult for most people.
Let alone 3.5-D or more.

Lack of weapon attributes?
Artillery avoiding terrain attributes...
IDK, but correct me if I am wrong. Projectiles could have a propulsion on their own. Thus avoiding certain terrain effects. Like those gasclouds and objects I previously mentioned.

Fear of the unknown?
I don't know, but whilest I wanted to share new and the obvious idea's. It seems there is zero interest from all sides.
As for the whole thing that got this started. The new way of dice rolling. It helped me so much, that I might as well go into seclusion again. And just play with my basic infantry and tanks.

A ship, shiled, weapon system and then upgrades.

A ship is really just a 1 time hit.
It has cost, armor and speed.

The shield really makes this a 2 hits deal. The cost of the shield is already linked to the movement speed of the ship itself.
It has armor and extra cost depending on the ships speed. Which players had to calculate...

Weapon system is luckily separated from the 2 body parts.
It has 3 damage value's, accuracies and multipliers for the 3 turns. And then an attack range. I had the option to have different attack ranges as well.

As for upgrade cards. It really would depend on what I wanted to add. And without realizing back then. I already had these upgrades divided in body or weapon only. And you could add only 1 upgrade.

Somewhere along the road. I had design slots. Meaning that the player could actually get more tech by opening design slots.

A design could cost 1 to 6 slots. And a total of 18 slots would mean a player could have 1 to 18 ships. But.... If it was 18 ships, they all would be powerless.

Ship, shield, weapon system, body upgrade, weapon upgrade, second weapon system, second weapon upgrade.
And that is 7. With allowing 3 weapons system on 1 ship. The total would be 9. So no harm done there.

A player could design 1 of 9 and 3 of 3 or something like that. Perhaps, allowing 2 shields would be funny. Thus a tripple body. It would not be a problem. Since the shield order would always be fixed, and other players can plan ahead with their fire. It is actually not smart to do if you cannot exchange your frontline with the rest in the fleet.

***

Upgrades?

The extra cost should be displayed on them to be honest.

In a sense, the shield could be considered as an upgrade on itself.

- Shield
Extra armor for a threshold.
The extra cost depends on the ship speed.
A table with the movement speeds of 0 to X could tell the player the extra costs. A formula as well. Which would be:
# + (# x Speed/2)

- Engine
Extra speed. The extra cost depends on the ship and 2 shields.
A table could tell the player how much extra cost there will be. For example, a ship has 9 armor, a shield of 3 and a shield of 27. Then the cost is based on a basic cost of 4, 2 and 8. The player doesn't see this. But instead, depending on the engines power. A list... Seeing as how some armor sets are added in later. I find this annoying. And rather use a formula.
Then again, the player would have to calculate it 3 times at most, with the formula. I rather have them only add up.
The total costs...well, for the entire design will be put on a little whiteboard I guess. After the calculation, so it doesn't have to be calculated over and over.
If the engine is +3 speed, then the table would look like this:
Armor - Cost
1 - 1.5
3 - 3.0
9 - 6.0
27 - 12.0
81 - 24.0
And the other armor value's added later on. Which includes the 27 and 81. Could be Not displayed at all?
2, 6, 18 and 54 would come in between. 27 and 81 could logically be explained. Not sure though.

Anyway, the example said 3, 9 and 27 armor. The cost would be 3+6+12 with this upgrade card. Thus +21 in total.

note: upgrade cards for the body always include the effects on both ship and shields.

- Tracker (for attack range)
The same deal as with the engine upgrade. But this time I have a problem.
Where to put the extra costs? I mean, the cost of the weapon could be used. And simply tell the player to use.... No, it cannot be used. Since the attack range depends on damage value's AND accuracy AND multiplier. The cost of the weapon includes the basic attack range. And thus this should be used as well.

I cannot expect the player to calculate this. So the only option I have is to put the cost of the upgrade value on the weapon system card.

Called, upgrade cost.

I need to be very carefull with this, since only 1 upgrade should be applied to begin with. I need to ponder on this. Because I already experienced that certain upgrades have different costs as well.

If a weapon has an attack range of 2 and a multiplier of 2. (And costs 4, has an accuracy of 3)
+ 2 attack range would add 50% costs to the total weapon cost.
But +2 multiplier would add 100% costs to the total weapon cost. I cannot tell the player, through the upgrade card, what costs should be added.

Is this an option?
Range upgrade cost: 1
Multiplier upgrade cost: 2
Accuracy cost, upgrade +3: 4

Only one upgrade would be applied.
It could happen that the range or multiplier upgrades have thirds or whatever decimal. In that case too, the upgrade card would add enough until 0.5 costs are added.
As you can see, the accuracy cost would be an upgrade of +3 per upgrade card. If the upgrade card on accuracy is a level 2. That would mean +6. In a sense, the cost would be +8 and the weapon system would now not have 2, but 4 projectiles, of which 2 have 100% accuracy and 2 have 50% accuracy.

Costs of 0.5 might occur. Perhaps I should force rounding upwards if other fractions occur as well.
There are also stations that have 0 speed.
Stackable means that the same type can stack on each other. But not on other stackable cards. A shield generator is an exception.

Ships (Body; max 1)
- Name
- Ship Cost
- Modifier Costs (needs a Modifier Factor)
- Armor
- Speed

Shield Generators (Body upgrade; max 2 B#)
- Name
- Xtra Cost * Ship Speed + Xtra Cost * 2
(Players see "3 per Ship Speed + 6")
- Modifier Costs (needs a Modifier Factor)
- Shield

Power Cores (Body upgrade; stackable B1)
- Name
- Modifier Factor
- Xtra Speed

Weapon System (Weapon; max 3)
- Name
- Weapon System Cost
- Damage per Projectile
- Modifier Costs (needs a Modifier Factor) per turn #/#/#
- Projectile Multiplier per turn #/#/#
- Accuracy (not mentioned means 6, # for all or per turn #/#/#)
- Attack Range
- AR Modifier Costs (needs a AR Modifier Factor)

The following 2 upgrades make use of the same modifier costs. But only one type can be applied.

Automations (Weapon upgrade; stackable W1)
- Name
- Modifier Factor
- Xtra Projectile Multiplier

Target Trajectory Calculators (Weapon upgrade; stackable W2)
- Name
- Modifier Factor
- Xtra Accuracy (when it exceeds 6, an extra projectile will be added, starting at 1)

Projectile Trajectory Calculators (Weapon upgrade; stackable W3)
- Name
- AR Modifier Factor
- Xtra Speed

Overcharger (Weapon upgrade; stackable W#)
- Name
- Can be used with any other weapon upgrade
- Cost is the immediate sacrifice of the ship
- Xtra Projectile Multiplier Factor = 3 (multiplies all projectiles times 3)
- A weapon system with an overcharger cannot be used anymore as a normal weapon.
[x] If the Factor = 6, then the player will be asked to multiply all costs for that specific weapon system, to be doubled.

Weapon System Reorganiser (Weapon upgrade; stackable W#)
- Name
- Can be used with any other weapon upgrade
- Use this card first, all properties migrate
- Consider this card as a new weapon system card copying the weapon system
- Modifier costs are used of the original weapon system and affect both weapon system and system reorganiser
[x]Depending on what these cards allow. I should limit to one change at a time. I have the following options:
- Exchange 3 projectiles from turn 2 to 2 projectiles in turn 1.
- Exchange 3 projectiles from turn 3 to 1 projectile in turn 1.
- Exchange 2 projectiles from turn 3 to 1 projectile in turn 2.
- Exchange 2 projectiles from turn 1 to 3 projectiles in turn 2.
- Exchange 1 projectile from turn 1 to 3 projectiles in turn 3.
- Exchange 1 projectile from turn 2 to 2 projectiles in turn 3.

***

With this, I can think of many...

...many combinations.

I gave little codes to the types.

Body B# B1 Weapon W1 W2 W3 W#

A # can be combined with any number.
The thing is, there is only B1.

I would love to get some idea's for B2.

Reflector shield.
Could send the damage back, 1 time during combat.
Not sure if I have these as an upgrade to shields themselves. Or as a shield type on itself.

Either way, this would both be a B# type...

Any idea is welcome.

@questccg
I often go overboard. Then cut.

Thing is. Going overboard in the weapons department showed me how limited my idea's in the ship department are.

I could force to a limited ammount of cards per design for certain. I already have a total limit. That can only grow by researching it too. Which either gives the player a fleet of a super ship. Or more variety to the combat.

please note: most described cards above can be added. But are not nessesary. In fact, only a ship is more than enough. And with 1 weapon system. It is costing 2 card slots and good to go for mass production.

I feel sorry that it didn't work out for you in TradeWorlds.

***

If I want to get another ship upgrade.

It shouldn't be a weapon upgrade.

I think I had a lucky shot with the reflector shield. Since it would count double its value. Or, at least double the shield value, that it is applied on.

It is a body property for certain.

***

So, what other options do I have?

Cargo? Ammunition?
Allowing only 1 weapon system. Unless a special card comes along?

Googling as we speak.

Well, counter measures are an option.
They would act as a shield as well. But.... smaller projectiles would actually nullify these counter measures too. Besides, it would cost a weapon system slot tbh. So, I keep this one on a side line for now as well.

Repair beam is yet another "weapon system"
This isn't an upgrade either. But it acts like a shield for another ship. It is an option. But.... I honestly don't see the point in having a fleet configuration of 4 "defences" with 2 "offences". This can be achieved with just shields and rarely weapons as well. But cheaper.

Cargo....
I wonder if I should add this. What are we going to transport in the first place?
But whatever we decide. Cargo is certainly a body upgrade.
But it belongs in the Shield department. Thus B#.

Fuel tanks....
Hold up, I found something intersting here.
We could have this as upgrade that would increase the complete spaceship performance. An upgrade that would cover both body and weapons. Or perhaps only the body. A player would be able to have one extra action turn. One that would only be allowed to ships having this upgrade. The action would certainly be limited to moving around only. Perhaps it would add so much more strategy.
Where 2 players fight. And one player has this weapon that fires in a third turn. The other player can always move out of the way. The fuel tank used for movement would not only pause the turn and limit this to 3. But allow a third grade weapon to fire in the 4th turn.
Those ships that have a first and second grade weapon only, can move in and fight immediately. But the fuel tank upgrade could allow all weapons to fire this way. Another option is moving out of the way of enemy fire. Then the artillery types can still fire, despite wasting a turn on moving around.

***

As for building ships with cards.

Thinking about having "start up cards", being a separate pile. The player can pick these first. Shuffle these. Let's say, 20. Pick 7. And add the remaining 13 into the rest. Shuffle it, and good to go.

Indeed. Often we have similar idea's or ways of working things out.
Personally, I need to document it. Because I often forget. And I do like to look back to what I thought about and as of why. This is mainly for balancing combat purposes.

An example is, some time ago I forgot the weight factor of sacrifical units. It got me to rethink things. And I settled for a factor of 3 on the damage output.

My hobby game considered a portion of the body to be turned into extra damage output. For the spacegame, it would be 50%.
Seeing as how we work with thresholds. This latter is scrapped. Since it would go alongside "stim packs" version as well.

But, I guess I could get a weapon system that buys on the spot. And the cargo could come in handy here.

***

I noticed I had a gap at the body side.
B1 and B# makes no sense.
W1, W2, W3 and W# does make sense.
Just making sure that once I add more cards for designing. I can add more feeling of completeness for the players.

So, I am looking at something that is like a B2.
B2 is supposed to be a choice with B1. B1 is extra speed and should not be able to combine with whatever B2 is going to be.
B# are the shields.
B1 stacks with B#.
B2 should be able to stack with B# as well.

Let's review my idea options so far:
- B# Reflector Shield (it is a B#, but it's in)
- B? Counter Measures (I need to brain on this one to see how it would combine with the other body cards, it is a form of a shield AND weapon. I should see how the mechanics work in the first place)
- Repair Beam (scrapped, reparation should be aftermath, there is none!)
- B# Cargo (needs more game mechanics, needs more brainpower from me, but it can already serve a fleet for certain weapons)
- B? Fuel Tanks (1 extra movement turn, stacks exponentially with a speed upgrade? The extra cost would be the total body plus body upgrade costs, divided by 3?)

So, 2 options are in. But not what I seek.
1 option got scrapped.
And 2 options need work.

If there are any idea's. I will be all ears.

I also had an idea with militairy crew. But this got scrapped within a minute.

I don't want to sound like a jerk. And will not put it in the open for you what my cousin thinks of the rulebook. And he and I kinda understand where you are comming from
As for the rest of the game. It looks good.

***

Anyway, when I went to bed yesterday. I felt heavy...it sparked an idea... For an upgrade on the ships. This wall of text will support that upgrade.

The "terrain" in a space game is hardly noticable. But gravity wells could be used in an interesting way.

I plan on having rather small hexagons on the map. Big enough to fit 3 fleets. A fleet is compiled off map.

Thus my gravity well plan can work well.

What objects could be placed? (Not saying all will get in)
But also their hexagon "radius"? Meaning, 1 is 1 hexagon, but 2 would be a 7 hexagon field. etc. (I honestly don't know how to do it otherwise/correctly) And of course the outer edge gravity. As in, the hexagons around the object have this gravity.
I am doing a first list of properties. Plenty of changes are avaiable. You know, build first, cut later.

The gravity works as following. The space hexagons directly around the surface have this gravity. Then it goes down lineair by distance. Meaning that if an object has a gravity of 2. The gravity of 1 is around that field.
2 Objects close to each other might have the gravity cancel out in between. Making an invisible canyon.
It should be simple enough to see. Especially if the map has like only 4 objects or so.

My idea's so far:
Radius - Gravity - Gravity reach from centre - Object(s)

1 - 1? - 0 - Astroids, which also serve as a good defensive position. A fleet can park in the centre.
1 - 1 - 2 - Small Rocky Planet/Moon. Since planets serve as bases. Fleets should be able to park on the surface.
1 - 2 - 3 - Medium Rocky Planet/Moon.
2 - 3 - 5 - Gas Giants/Large Rocky Planets?
3 - 5 - 8 - Small Star (Brown Dwarf)
3 - 7 - 10 - Medium Star (Our Sun)
4 - 9 - 13 - Big Star (not to be confused with red giants)
1 - 5 - 6 - White Dwarf
1 - 7 - 8 - Neutron Star
1 - 9 - 10 - Black Hole
2 - 11 - 13 - Large Black Hole
1 - -1 - 2 - Ahem....Void? A negative gravity. And a fleet can park in the centre.
2 - -2 - 4 - A bigger void. Again, a fleet can park in the centre.

Not much time, this list will certainly change.

Now, how will this affect combat and movement?
Know that each fleet has 3 actions.
A weapon system can go to up to 3 actions.
If a fleet moves, the number of actions for the weapon system goes down.
Some weapon systems only fire in the 2nd or 3rd turn.
Which means that if such ship is present, and the fleet moved too much. These ships are unable to fire.

A gravity well, can be moved in and out. The gravity they are in costs actions. Thus 1 gravity costs 1 action. It is in order to stay into position. But this costs really only 1 action per round. A negative gravity does the same. So, the voids, knowing the edge is the gravity. Inside, you might have guessed it, costs nothing.

If the gravity is 3 or more? Well, there is already no escaping with the current rules. So I need to think this over. Perhaps movement speed should be a factor too.

And this might sound better. To stay in "orbit", the movement speed is consumed by the gravity well. If 2 turns are needed, so be it. If a third turn is needed... perhaps I should allow a rest movement speed to occur. So, example, a movement speed is 2. The gravity well is 3. The fleet needs 1.5 turns. Has 1 rest movement speed in that second turn. It can not fire yet. But, if it wants to move out, now is the time to move 1 spot. Preferably to that gravity of 2. The last turn can be used to fire.

As for combat itself. Some projectiles like bombers. Have almost no attack range. But it increases into a gravity well. Thus a gravity well of 3 would inavertly increase the attack range by 1+2+3=6. A bomber, has an attack range of 0. But attacking a planet will certainly increase this. For this to happen. A bomber needs to be in the upper layer of the gravity well. Then the rest goes automatically.

A void is a very good launching platform.

Now, why would ships even be in the gravity wells? Only planets are interesting since the bases will be on the planets. And astroids serve as a forest, reducing incomming fire with a penalty.
I don't know yet what the positive thing could be. A penalty on any projectile perhaps? But what about lasers? Oh, I almost forgot, light gets bend in gravity. Or better said, it follows the shortest path.

Time to go now. But the upgrade?
An anti gravity generator. Which reduces the effects of gravity on the body by 1.
Can be stacked.
Probably it can be stacked with movement speed too. But I need to think of the costs calculation, clean on ships. The costs will be linked to a ship and thus its movement speed. Just like shields. I need to think more on this too.

I have several options for this card?

I need to make sure the mechanic is solid first.

A fleet can move or attack per turn.

If it moves from 1 gravity level to another. Each level difference costs a turn. This will not influence the movement distance. Nor will it influence attacks. Since a player can choose to not move at all.

When being in a gravity well. The fleet and/or station is always in "orbit". The same counts for ground defences.

A fleet normally can move up to a difference of 2. This costs 2 turns. And the third turn is used for this movement. This includes going from 0 to 1 back to 0. Thus trying to take a slightly shorter route, closer to a planet.

Also, launching new ships into space around a planet, will cost turns. If the gravity of a planet is 3 or more. The fleet will need to go into orbit on the even levels of gravity, until the gravity doesn't change anymore.

***

I deleted a lot of reasoning. Only posting a conclusion.

The card would be named 'Gravity Neutralizer'.

Each level will allow for 1 level of gravity change.
Meaning that a fleet can move 3 times in a round, and is free to do this with 1 level each turn. A total of 3.

The cost?
Seeing as how each level can save the player 3 turns while trying to move 3 times.

The cost is entirely based on the body.
And the cost is 100% that of what the body costs?
No, it should only be based on, if the ship moves.
Thus movement speed IS a factor. But by choice.

Here is what I mean:

***

Let's say, we have the cards of:
+ Cruiser, costs 12, modifier costs 2, armor 9, speed 4
+ Level 3 Shield Generator, costs 1 per Ship Speed + 2, modifier costs 1, shield 3
+ Level 3 Power Core, Modifier Factor 3, Xtra Speed 3

The cost of a cruiser is 12.
The cost of a level 3 shield generator is 1 x 4 + 2 = 6.
The cost of a level 3 power core is 3 x 2 = 6 on the cruiser.
The cost of a level 3 power core is 3 x 1 = 3 on the level 3 shield generator.

The cruiser will have 9 armor, 3 shield, speed 7 and a total cost of 12+6+6+3 = 27

Gravity Neutralizer (Body Upgrade; stackable B#
- Name
- # x Total Speed x Total Modifier Costs
- Gravity Neutralizer #

+ Level 3 Gravity Neutralizer, 1.5 x Total Speed x Total Modifier Costs, Gravity Neutralizer 3

The cost of a level 2 gravity neutralizer is 1.5 x (4+3) x (2+1) = 1.5 x 7 x 3 = 31.5

The total cost is now 27+31.5 = 58.5

Do you guys see this happening with players? And yes, I initially planned to have 0.5 for the cheapest of ships.

I personally don't think that players can handle this much.

Also, this neutralizing effect should leave a heavy impact if it costs that much. I already estimated that each level would roughly equal 1 time the entire body cost. So, 3 levels costing this much is acceptable. If it was 2 levels, the cost would have been 21 on top of 27. Thus 48 in total.

Back to the drawing board.
Or just drop the entire project in a long hiatus?