Arioch wrote:We're going to change things so that retreating ships will automatically withdraw to the nearest friendly system, or if already in a friendly system, will have to spend a turn in hyperspace. So at least there will be a cost to retreating, and ships can't hang around indefinitely in contested systems.
That is interesting, sounds good enough, but I think there should be a % chance of being destroyed if in a friendly system and retreating, not to punish the player, but to make raiding feasible. I mean if you manage to reach the soft underbelly of an empire, well, that attacker should have some sort of advantage.
Alternatively making certain classes of ships take longer to retreat (being non combatants would make them unable to match the specs of warships, or their capabilities)
As it stands, the current system leaves too much to exploitation by the players: As an attacker you would be able to move second, but it is enough to disengage with barely a wound. disengaging should have some sort of cost.
Maybe making that an optional rule? that in case of combat disengagement, there is a chance ships would be destroyed instead of retreated (taking it as a further strain on their FTL drive), not unlike what MoM did for their civilian units (ai, Settler) if you tried to retreat there was a chance the unit would be destroyed/killed