How is combat work?

[Fritzgryphon]

You get to choose from four options, defend, delay, attack, assault, and then some things happen.  It's not clear to me what determines the outcome, or what the strategy is (or if there is supposed to be one).

[Hamilton]

There is some strategy to it, though not much.  Who is attacking, at what terrain and with which units are factors involved.  For example, attacking with Mechs into an urban environment is not a wise choice. 

The details and the matrix will be provided rather than letting people guess and us saying cryptic things.

For the Defend through Assault choices is a matter to increase and decrease attack and defense values.  Full Defense provides a +10 to Defense, but a -10 to Attack, and the opposite if to choose Assault.  If believing your team will not have the initiative (or have lost it in the Arena) then going Defensive is the better choice.  However the AI (a dumb script) goes by a random choice (though influenced by the initiative) as to what maneuver to execute.

We just had one person who doesn't play these types of games (more of puzzle types of games) and pretty much us ripped up of what "I am suppose to do?"
Yes... helps to have a help file and documents...  a ding on me.

[Fritzgryphon]

Ok, so it's kind of like rock-paper-scissors?

Besides help files, it could be more clear in the application itself.  The program tells you that 'you have won initiaitive', but it's not clear what initiative gives you, or how initiative is determined.

Also, the 'Mobile" option is ambiguous.  Is it like 'Flee'?  (if so, it shouldn't have a picture of a corsshair under it).

[Hamilton]

Roger that.
I'll add in a statement of "You/Opponent is going to get the first attack," for the Initiative.

"Mobile" was the word I came up with for going with a 0 Defense and 0 Attack (no positive and negative modifiers).  That is to be balanced between being aggressive and defensive, derived from Mobile Warfare.


Perhaps changing those terms to strategies may be better?
For example:
- Hit and Run
- Flanking
- Balanced
- General Attack
- Frontal Assault

[Fritzgryphon]

The names of the tactics are clear enough, I think.  It's more a matter of the player being aware of how Player A's tactic and stats, Player B's tactic and stats, plus initiative, translates into the resulting hits and damage.

Currently, it doesn't show which tactic your opponent chose, why hits were scored or misses were missed.  So if there's a method, the player might still think the outcome is random.  Displaying a short log of the turn resolution might be the answer, like:

CornPants has initiative.
CorPants takes Assault posture.
BillyBob takes Delay posture.

CornPants fired primary weapon for 17 (attackskill +3, weaponpower +9, tactic +5) .  
BillyBob defends for 12 (defendskill +4, mechdefense +3, tactic +5).
BillyBob takes 5 damage.  BillyBob is stunned!
BillyBob is stunned and fails to attack.
CornPants fired secondary weapon for 12 (attackskill +3, weaponpower +4, tactic +5) .  
BillyBob defends for 8 (defendskill +0 (stunned), mechdefense +3, tactic +5).
BillyBob takes 4 damage.  BillyBob is destroyed!

Or however the turn is actually resolved.

[Hamilton]

A short log can be provided and I think at the low right corner for the Scrimmage Battle would be a good spot.  I'll have to look over the Arena of where that will go...

For a more detailed log/report, I think most users won't care... but some will.  So, perhaps as a pop-up display (click a Report Button to bring up the Combat Report).  It is a good idea and as you said, it would help to provide some means of verification, that there is a method to combat rather than being a made up set of random rolls. (Example: Roll a d10 for each unit to determine what happens).