Systemic FTL Blockers

[Falkbeer]

Colonized systems (Planets) and defense platforms could have a system-wide FTL Jammer/Blocker/Delayer that prevents hostile FTL travel in the FROM-TO system are hostile and have this jammer active. It works like Forts in EU4, preventing travel to neighboring hostile systems that also have this blocker active if its not destroyed first.

This will stop the "Destroy fleet - Destroy all Spaceports - Win" strategy. In essence, If hostile forces enter a foreign system, they cannot travel to another hostile system from there (that has the blocker active) as the massive jammers on both sides will block the attempt (you cant calculate the necessary math for the jump).

If the system is colonized, these FTL Jammers are in the planets, thus requiring a full siege to destroy. If uncolonized, they are destroyed together with the defense platform.

This way, allied with:

- Planetary Defenses that delay sieges/attack hostile siege forces,
- Making corvetes and ships without LARGE weapons very ineffective to bombard a planet
- Spaceports working as a Defense platform/spaceport hybrid, allowing ships to be build and defenses to be mounted on/upgraded

...it can make wars more meaningful, allowing the side that lost the "Doomstack battle" to rebuild its fleet (at least partially), wait for allies, etc.. before all its spaceports are destroyed.

 

[Duuk]

Amen. Greatly reduce defensive building upkeep, allow construction ships to upgrade them to latest designs, and make them zone-of-control and I'll build them by the ton.

 

[Falkbeer]

Amen. Greatly reduce defensive building upkeep, allow construction ships to upgrade them to latest designs, and make them zone-of-control and I'll build them by the ton.

I agree on both, reduce price and allow them to be upgraded. They are already obsolete/weak using the latest technology and specs, not being able to upgrade the old ones makes them even worse

 

[deynataggerung]

This is that would severely limit hit and run strategies since fleets wouldn't be able to make tricky dodges, it would also be a buff to wormhole empires since they could strike at planets in the heart of empires while hyperlane empires would be stuck (actually probably a good thing to help differentiate them more).

Also to make it not broken this would definitely have to be something you build as an attachment(or building) which would be somewhat expensive and cost monthly energy as a specific counter to people rushing through your systems and not just a blanket change to gameplay.

 

[Falkbeer]

This is that would severely limit hit and run strategies since fleets wouldn't be able to make tricky dodges, it would also be a buff to wormhole empires since they could strike at planets in the heart of empires while hyperlane empires would be stuck (actually probably a good thing to help differentiate them more).

Also to make it not broken this would definitely have to be something you build as an attachment(or building) which would be somewhat expensive and cost monthly energy as a specific counter to people rushing through your systems and not just a blanket change to gameplay.

Indeed... Perhaps only corvettes, because of the reduced mass compared to other ships, are allowed to make the jumps into these blocked systems. If they are rebalanced, of course, and made ineffective for planetary siege... perhaps even requiring a module to be installed on the ship (reducing firepower for utility) to create this "ghost force"... what bothers me is if this force can destroy spaceports too easily, thus nullifying the purpose of the changes (give the losng side of a SOD battle time to recover)

Wormholes, as it is, would also nullify this Zone of Control mechanism, as it wouldnt matter if you cannot jump from a hostile to a hostile blocked zones, as you can always hop back to your place and to a different hostile system, destroying all spaceports. Perhaps these blockers wont hinder the wormhole jumps, but extremely delay them if they are active, so there is always the trade-off of committing the bulk your forces in offense.

ans sure.. it should be costly