My Wishlist, Dream, Suggestion whatever for the Fabled Ground War Rework we hopefully get one day ^^

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Wartraveler

Second Lieutenant
68 Badges
Mar 4, 2010
123
114
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Impire
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
This Topic is purely my Personal Wishlist or Dream for how Ground Forces would work.
It can be seen as a Suggestion as well.
Albeit I do actually think at this point Paradox has some idea of what they might want to do with it in the Future.



1.
I think Armies should be alot more Relevant for Warfare.
Armies should not be an Endless Produced throw away Unit. Instead being limited in some way.
Maybe each Badge of 10 Armies costing a Population. Or maybe there being a Similar Limit as with Fleets so that only a Limited number of Armies can be Sustained depending on how much Population and Industry a Player has.

2.
I think Armies should work similar to Fleets. With an Army consisting of Multiple Units which its filled with and which are Grouped together as an Army under a General.
Which can then be Rebuild with 1 Click similar to how Fleets are Build and Structured.
This would also remove the Doomstacks which are currently the most common form of Army and thus actually make it meaningful for Planets to have Defenses.

How many Troops an Army can have will be decided by the Transport Capacity of its Invasion Fleet.
The Invasion Fleets Command Points will be decided by its own Tech and will work the same way as Normal Combat Fleets. But with a much smaller Limit.
Starting on 5 Points and going to Max 80 Points.
Ships for the Invasion Fleet are Standard Ships Equipped with the Invasion Middle Section of the Ship.
This System will work Similar to Weapons Platforms. Where the Main Section of a Ship being Changed will Automaticly move it to that Category.
So if the Main Section of a Ship is Changed to a Normal Ship Section it will only be available for Normal Fleets and if its an Invasion Section it will be a Ship only available for Invasion Fleets.

the Invasion Ship Section has Special Slots which can be used for Transport Hangars of different Sizes. As well as Invasion Support Modules that will Provide additional Benefits for an Invasion like Buffs if the Invasion Fleet Stays in Orbit of a Planet after Dropping their Armies.
Its each Players Decision if he wants to use these Slots for more Capacity and thus more Units in that Army. Or if he wants to instead use Fighter Hangars, Repair Pods, Ammo Supply Storage etc etc to give Buff to an Army at the Expense of having less Units in that Army.
This would also mean if Armies were to cost Population this would allow him to put more Cost on the Ressources side instead of Pops.

Transport Hangars have different Sizes and thus Decide what Units can be Carried with them. Heavier Units like Tanks or Warforms etc would require Larger Sized Hangars.

For example A Standard Assault Army which is mostly Infantry and light Vehicles would cost 1 Point. The Starting Setup for Invasion Fleets is 5 Points. Which at start would be 5 Corvettes each with a Single Transport Hangar and thus each Ship having 1 Point to Transport.
Which means the Starting Invasion Fleet would be able to Drop 5 Assault Armies.

In later game. A Cruiser might have Improved Hangars. Thus actually being allowed to Carry up to 6 Points of Armies in his Belly. And thus also being able to for example Carry 3 Tank Units instead of 6 Standard Assault Units. Thus if you got 20 Points for the Invasion Fleet and thus have 5 Cruisers in it right now. You would then be able to have a total of 30 Points for the Army. Thus for example being able to Drop 10 Assault Armies and 10 Tank Units.

Invasion Ships go up to Battleship Size.
Advantages and disadvantages can be Set. I personally would use a System where Bigger Ships have more Capacity for Buffs but less Carrying Capacity.
For example. A Corvette Starts with 1 Hangar Slot and Costs 1 Point same as normal Corvettes. The Cruiser will have 3 Hangar Slots but same as normal Cruiser Costs 4 points.
So he actually has less Hangar Slots per Points. However he does have Bigger Weapons and has a Medium Slot for Support Modules thus providing Bigger Buffs than a Corvette.
But this can also be reversed or otherwise handled. This is just a side Suggestion on my Part.


Pls note. Invasion Fleets can Fight and can be Armed with Space Weapons on the Bow and Stern Section (if applicable) They can also be used for Bombardment before an Invasion.
However. Any Ships lost will also lose Ground Units equivalent to the Transport Capacity of the lost Ships.

Once an Invasion Starts. Invasion Ships will become Immune to the Attrition Damage of Orbital Guns as now their Damage and the Damage to Landing Forces will be decided on the Special Projects mentioned in Point 5 below.
During the Invasion. the Invasion Ffleet will move into Low Orbit to Avoid Detection and Attacks from Space Fleets which cannot enter Low Orbit to Fight them.


4.
Planets which are Bombarded should cause Attrition Damage to Fleets from Defensive Fire. (Only if they have Fortresses)
This is a Simple Mechanic that would allow for Fortified Planets to Defend themselves a little and thus it not being possible to just put a small Fleet there which will bomb it endlessly for years to avoid the planetary defenses having any effect.
A New Building which is Planetary Missile Silos or Defense Guns would also be added which allows for Planets to massively Increase this Attrition Damage that Enemy Fleets Suffer when Bombarding a Planet.




5.
And Finally the Invasion itself.
I would love to see the following System.
Invading a Planet works like an Archeological Dig Site. With the General being the Scientist. And the Army he has being his Power Level which is boosted by his Skill level.
The Planetary Defenses meanwhile being the Difficulty Level for that Invasion Site.
Thus the Invader constantly running up Progress for the Invasion. While the Defender will get a Special Project similar to the First Contact Event.
If a General was on the Planet he will be automaticly assigned to that Project. Otherwise the Player can afterwards assign a General to it. The Garrisson Armies and any Armies Stationed on the Planet will be the Power Level of the Defender. Buffed by Defensive Buildings and the Skill Level of the Defending General.
Both sites will get Decisions to make and Events from their respective Sites.
The Invader gaining Progress and allowing to Progress to the next Stage or Weaken the Defenses etc.
While the Defender can Reduce the Power Level of the Attacker slowing down his Progress or if he has Superior or Equal Forces even push back the Progress form the Invader ultimately forcing him to retreat from the Planet.

This would make Invasions especially for Big Planets with alot of Defenses into a quite a Big Event :)
And would also mean that a Fortress Planet can be a very Valid Defense.

At the same time. The Attacker of course has the Choice to Sacrifice Ships into the Attrition to Bombard Down enemy Fortress Planets if he doesnt have Sufficient Ground Power to Invade them.

If the Defender Manages to Sneak Reinforcements onto the Planet. He will get a Special Buff to his Progress with the Invader getting a Special Malus.
Afterwards the Reinforcements will be added to the Defending Power Level.

Likewise having a Fleet either from the Invader or Defender will of course Buff that sides Power level.


An Example for the Progress Stages is.

((Special Stage if the Planet has Planetary Shields and Orbital Defenses)) with Events Focused on Bypassing or Destroying the Shield to Land.
Landing, (Events Focused on Initial Losses during the Landing as well as Damages to Ships and Buffs from Ship Modules etc.)
Securing a Bridgehead. (Events Focused on First Assaults and the Struggle to Create a Safe Landing Zone to Receive Reinforcements and Supplies)
((Special Stage if the Planet has Fortresses to Defend)) with Events Focused on breaking the Resistance and Defensive Installations.
Obtaining Superiority (Events focused on the actual War to Control the Major Cities and Strategic Points of the Planet)
Final Stage of Subduing Resistance (Events signifying that Victory is Close with last Pockets of Resistance being Eradicated and the Population being bought under Control for Occupation by a Garrisson Force so that the Invasion Force can Take off from the Planet again and go for the next Mission)

The Defense is Mirroring these Stages.

((Special Stage if the Planet has Shield or Orbital Guns)) with Events Focused on preventing the Landing.
Landing (with events for causing damage to the landing Forces)
Throwing the Enemy Back into Space (with Events focused on Denying the Enemy a Bridgehead and force him off the Planet)
((Special Stage with Fortresses)) with Events were the Defender will Fortify his Positions to Fight the Enemy off from its Fortresses))
Defending the World (with Events of the actual War to Fight over Major Cities and slow down the Enemy advance)
And Final Stage (of Events trying to Resist Occupation by Guerillia Actions and Hit and Run Attacks of the last remaining Forces)

And Finally. An In between Special Stage for Reinforcements from an Defending Invasion Fleet.
This Special Stage can happen at any time in the Situation. And will contain Special Events of Invasion Fleet Ships causing Losses to each other. As well as Landing Reinforcements taking losses or launching Reargard Attacks on the Invasion Force etc.
This Stage will be Time Limited rather than bound to Progress. Which means once the Reinforcements have Landed it will go back to the Original Tug of War between the Two Sides.
Albeit with now new Forces on the Defender Site.

A Similar Special Event also is possible to happen for the Invader if he decides to Send a Second Invasion Fleet as Reinforcements.



Which means a Planet can have 5 to 7 Stages depending on how well Fortified it is. And can have Extra Stages in between if either Side manages to get Reinforcements into the Fight.
Pls note. For the Defender the Stages are reversed in Order.
Meaning if the Defender is Stronger. He can actually Progress his Stages towards the Landing and thus Force the Enemy off the Planet.
Or if the losses for the Attacker are too big. Deny the Landing entirely already at the start.



Greetz Sun.
ps
Hopefully we will one day see something

And now I wish everyone Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.
Stay Healthy and Happy :)
 
  • 7
  • 6
  • 2Like
Reactions:
  • 19
  • 7Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I should head this off by confirming that prismaticmarcus is right - they've been quite clear on the subject.


However, this idea is interesting, so I'll run with it a bit. Seeing as the archaeology system comes from the EUIV (and I:R) siege mechanic, it's not a bad idea to apply it here.

Rather than making the events separate, why not make the ground combat rolls happen side-by-side? This way, all the modifiers ("space control," "bombardment," "general skill levels," and so on) add together in a chance to progress or retreat a combat phase.

I'd also reduce it to 3 phases by base, combining the landing and bridgehead and the last phases. That way, it goes from 3 phases at base to 5 with initial defenses and fortresses.

Finally, I'd not make armies so tied to physical ships, since escorting around assault armies is one of the more tedious parts of the current system. However, that would probably require the creation of a separate army screen and a limit to their unit size and number similar to fleet cap / naval cap.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I should head this off by confirming that prismaticmarcus is right - they've been quite clear on the subject.


However, this idea is interesting, so I'll run with it a bit. Seeing as the archaeology system comes from the EUIV (and I:R) siege mechanic, it's not a bad idea to apply it here.

Rather than making the events separate, why not make the ground combat rolls happen side-by-side? This way, all the modifiers ("space control," "bombardment," "general skill levels," and so on) add together in a chance to progress or retreat a combat phase.

I'd also reduce it to 3 phases by base, combining the landing and bridgehead and the last phases. That way, it goes from 3 phases at base to 5 with initial defenses and fortresses.

Finally, I'd not make armies so tied to physical ships, since escorting around assault armies is one of the more tedious parts of the current system. However, that would probably require the creation of a separate army screen and a limit to their unit size and number similar to fleet cap / naval cap.

1.
I didnt know that they actually said something regarding that.
Last time I heard about it was a side comment that they are considering to look at Ground Combat in the Future. So I actually tought they might already be planning to do it and just havnt yet decided what to do exactly.

2.
I was actually planning to have it run in the same Window anyways. As I said. I want it to basicly be a Tug of War.
Just the Place where you Enter the Window is different. Because for the Invader its more Practical to use his Invasion Force like a Scientist for a Digsite.
While for the Defender its easier to have it as a Project in the Situation Protocol like a First Contact.

3.
The Exact Phases are just an Example so People get how it works. :)
So I am not nailing it onto being 5 to 7 or 3 to 5.
That can be decided by the Devs later on. After all they might have other Ideas for it as well.

4.
Thats the Plan Yes.
The Unit is not directly Tied to the Specific Ship. Its more like the Fleet in total is a Container which Carries the Army. Meaning the Fleet is Created and has a certain Capacity for an Army.
It would still need Escorting as its not gonna be a Super Strong Fleet. But at the same time especially in later Game it would at least be able to handle small reinforcement fleets or outposts by itself.
The Attached Fleet also allows for a Specialized Landing Fleet that allows Counter Buffs to Planetary Shields and Fortresses etc.

An Alternative would be the Armies instead just get an Army Command Limit. Meaning just like you got Fleets. You also got Armies with a Specific Limit per Army.
In that case you could actually just make that Army use a Specific Large Landing Ship or a Preset Fleet of small Landing Ships.
Or you could just remove Landing Ships alltogether and instead Require Space Fleets to Pick up Armies from Planets and Deliver them.
In that case tough. You would either end up with a Strange case of an Larger Army being Transported by a few Corvettes. Or you would need to impose a Transport Capacity on Space Fleets thus a Large Army also only being Carriable by a Large Space Fleet.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
1.
I didnt know that they actually said something regarding that.
Last time I heard about it was a side comment that they are considering to look at Ground Combat in the Future. So I actually tought they might already be planning to do it and just havnt yet decided what to do exactly.

this is from here


Question
are there ground combat reworks/improvements planned for the future?
Answer
No current plans that we can share, but any system can attract the gaze of game design at any time. We're unpredictable children of chaos.
Answered by
Stephen "Eladrin" Muray (Designer)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
this is from here


Question
are there ground combat reworks/improvements planned for the future?
Answer
No current plans that we can share, but any system can attract the gaze of game design at any time. We're unpredictable children of chaos.
Answered by
Stephen "Eladrin" Muray (Designer)

This is a reoccurring question from basically every Dev Q&A we've held, ever. :D If you ask 12 different devs about ground combat, you will get 12 different opinions on what should happen with ground combat.
 
  • 8Like
  • 4
Reactions:
This is a reoccurring question from basically every Dev Q&A we've held, ever. :D If you ask 12 different devs about ground combat, you will get 12 different opinions on what should happen with ground combat.
most do seem to say, 'not worth the resources'
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This is a reoccurring question from basically every Dev Q&A we've held, ever. :D If you ask 12 different devs about ground combat, you will get 12 different opinions on what should happen with ground combat.

most do seem to say, 'not worth the resources'

Well. This is just my Personal Opinion of course.
But I would certainly like to See a Ground Combat Rework with Planetary Invasions and Planetary Defenses actually being something that has a Meaning in Wars.
And Fortress Planets really being something that will be able to Hold out for quite a while as well as there actually being possibilities of Failure of Invasions as an Empire cant just have a Stack of 500 Assault Armies which thus effectively Ignores any and all defenses of a Planet anyways :)
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Making ground combat works as acheology site is quite interesting idea, but it would flatten all army statiscics whatsoever leaving only 1 army = x points of difficulty, same with generals - they would not need any traits... escept - General traits and special typoes of armies (clone, psychic, droid, gene worriors etc.) would trigger special events, like in time of invasion defence psy armies took controll over some portion of attakers armies, greatly reducing their number, while increasing their own.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is a reoccurring question from basically every Dev Q&A we've held, ever. :D If you ask 12 different devs about ground combat, you will get 12 different opinions on what should happen with ground combat.

And the "correct" answer is remove it

(This is the personal opinion of a single dev, and not the views of the team as a whole)
 
  • 27
  • 10
  • 3Like
  • 2Haha
  • 1Love
Reactions:
And the "correct" answer is remove it

(This is the personal opinion of a single dev, and not the views of the team as a whole)
i agree! and i disagree! 100% .. both...

ground combat might be.... well.... greaterrible

but the memes and tropes.. stellaris is memes and tropes... and we need ground combat for a big part of memes and tropes..
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The ground combat aspect of Stellaris as it currently stands doesn’t add anything worthwhile to the game for me. It’s just a bit tedious, and that’s about the extent of it. I’d like to see it just rolled into the bombardment mechanic, perhaps with battleships having components that replace some weapon slots with troop bays or whatnot. Kind of like hangars, but they allow invasions and facilitate taking planets with less infrastructural damage and death of pops (with certain important genocidal xeno cleansing related exceptions). I think with them being ship components you could still maintain regular troops vs psi troops vs warforms, etc., with modifiers like how fighters and bombers used to be differentiated in hangar slots. Or just leave it as is. At the end of the day I feel pretty ambivalent about ground combat in Stellaris.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
And the "correct" answer is remove it

(This is the personal opinion of a single dev, and not the views of the team as a whole)
Correct!

I made a long post about this somewhere, but the tldr is that ground combat in space 4x games was cool in MOO(2). Other games have tried to copy it since, without understanding that this was a fundamental part of those games, tied into acquiring tech, population etc etc.

Having a game mechanic that only adds busywork, it is better to remove it.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
And the "correct" answer is remove it

This would also fix the issue of terrible pop traits that no one should use. For some reason the devs love to include army damage bonus traits even though everyone agrees these are never worth using. Nothing is gained from having bonuses that are so bad they are a trap to unsuspecting players. Then they could remove all the army damage bonuses and replace it with useful bonuses in all cases.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Making ground combat works as acheology site is quite interesting idea, but it would flatten all army statiscics whatsoever leaving only 1 army = x points of difficulty, same with generals - they would not need any traits... escept - General traits and special typoes of armies (clone, psychic, droid, gene worriors etc.) would trigger special events, like in time of invasion defence psy armies took controll over some portion of attakers armies, greatly reducing their number, while increasing their own.

Well not entirely. Because the Army would still take losses. Which basicly means the General would lose Skillpoints during the Invasion and so would the Defender.
So its not as flat as it seems.
But it is much more Simplified and yet much more meaningful :)

And Yes. Some Events and Effects would of course affect or not affect certain Units.
I mean an Event where a Garrisson Panics and launches an Assault thus incurring heavy losses despite their Fortified Position usually protecting them from that.
Is not likely to happen for Drones that cant Panic xD
Likewise a Succesful Hacking Event just taking an Enemy Fortress out with no losses would of course not happen for Organic Forces either :)

And the "correct" answer is remove it

(This is the personal opinion of a single dev, and not the views of the team as a whole)

I would be absolutely against that to be Honest.
Even in its very Rudimentary Form right now. Ground Forces do Add quite a bit of extra Security to the Game.

If you were to Remove it you are faced with a Decision.

Replace it:
Which means using a non Ground Combat System to Replace the Invasion Mechanics. For example Conquering Planets purely by Bombardment. Which would then ask the Question if you just assume Space Fleets to Carry Invasion Forces and thus the Bombardment just doubling as Invasion.
Or if you literally remove Invading Planets and only leave the Option of Bombing them to Oblivion.

Remove it entirely:
Which means that Planets will either never Switch Sides and have to be Bombed into Oblivion to Proceed or Planets are just irrelevant to War and thus will switch hands after Peace Settlement


The First being just a Simplification of the System which takes away all Complexity and in my Eyes is not really worth it for Stellaris as the current System is in my Eyes Superior. Albeit of course thats just my Opinion.
And the Latter would frankly said kill alot of Playstyles and War Mechanics. Because suddenly Wars would be very Short and entirely Focused on Space Battle.
Which in my Eyes would basicly turn the Game into Sins of Solar Empire rather than Stellaris. And would take away alot of what makes Stellaris its own Space Empire Game. Its basicly like you would try to turn Anno 1800 into a War Focused Game and thus remove stuff like Fertilities and Complicated Production Chains so you only have to Produce Ships and Fight instead. Thats just really the worst idea in my eyes (no offense intended)
 
  • 9
Reactions:
- Mr. President, our fleet controls the orbital space around your planet. Surrender or we start throwing rocks.
- No, we will never surrender!
- Ok, we will throw small rocks at your military stuff until you surrender. Some might miss.
- We will fight with fists and knives!
- Ok, larger rocks aimed at your largest cities.
- You will never get us all!
- And that was the last concentrated population center. I guess it will take couple decades for the dust to settle?

The current army mechanics are just annoying and boring. Any changes should be targeted to reduce annoying micromanagement. I find the idea of a full planetary invasion to be pretty silly when the attacker could just use whatever rocks the star system has to bombard the planet until the planet submits.

My personal suggestion would be to convert the planetary occupation to work like the bombardement system works now, progress bar over X times. Normal empires would be likely to surrender quickly when the enemy fleet is controlling the space. Xenophobe and especially Purifier empires might resist longer so the planet gets more damaged. Ships could get special components for planetary invasions etc. This would also force the attacker to split their resources between destroying the enemy space assets and invading the planets. Full invasions should be rare and very expensive, especially against non-genocidals.

System could be expanded further by allowing the attacker determine what sort of control they want, eg. just the space ports to keep the locals damaging the space assets, full occupation to try to utilize resources of the planet etc.

From books I like how Weber's Honorverse handled the planetary invasions: generally planets were expected to surrender once the enemy controls the orbitals and at the same time attacker shouldn't bombard the planet. If the planet refuses then some level of bombardement would be allowed until the planet surrenders. Of course actually occupying the planet would still require massive number of troops... Obviously Stellaris would need special mechanics for gestalts and genocidal empires.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
- Mr. President, our fleet controls the orbital space around your planet. Surrender or we start throwing rocks.
- No, we will never surrender!
- Ok, we will throw small rocks at your military stuff until you surrender. Some might miss.
- We will fight with fists and knives!
- Ok, larger rocks aimed at your largest cities.
- You will never get us all!
- And that was the last concentrated population center. I guess it will take couple decades for the dust to settle?

The current army mechanics are just annoying and boring. Any changes should be targeted to reduce annoying micromanagement. I find the idea of a full planetary invasion to be pretty silly when the attacker could just use whatever rocks the star system has to bombard the planet until the planet submits.

My personal suggestion would be to convert the planetary occupation to work like the bombardement system works now, progress bar over X times. Normal empires would be likely to surrender quickly when the enemy fleet is controlling the space. Xenophobe and especially Purifier empires might resist longer so the planet gets more damaged. Ships could get special components for planetary invasions etc. This would also force the attacker to split their resources between destroying the enemy space assets and invading the planets. Full invasions should be rare and very expensive, especially against non-genocidals.

System could be expanded further by allowing the attacker determine what sort of control they want, eg. just the space ports to keep the locals damaging the space assets, full occupation to try to utilize resources of the planet etc.

From books I like how Weber's Honorverse handled the planetary invasions: generally planets were expected to surrender once the enemy controls the orbitals and at the same time attacker shouldn't bombard the planet. If the planet refuses then some level of bombardement would be allowed until the planet surrenders. Of course actually occupying the planet would still require massive number of troops... Obviously Stellaris would need special mechanics for gestalts and genocidal empires.


That would basicly be Option 2 of what I Described.
You remove the Invasion Mechanic of Ground Troops and Replace it with Ships basicly being assumed to automaticly carry Groundtroops along.

But as I said. That would simply remove a level of Complexity from the Game and would basicly turn it into Sins of a Solar Empire rather than Stellaris.
Its like asking Anno 1800 to turn into Age of Empires.

Thats why I am against it. This isnt supposed to be a Simple Wargame. Its supposed to be a Complex 4X Strategy Game.
Complexity is why I am Playing Paradox Games.

The reason for my Suggestion is because I actually want this to be more Complex and thus become an actual Factor in the Game.
I am not interested in having things Dumbed down even further.



Oh and just because this irks me a bit.
The Rock example Sucks lol.

We are talking about Wars between FTL Traveling Species Firing Lasers and Railguns at each other.
Such a Species would be more than Capable of Simply Shooting down any Rocks thrown at them from Space.
And the Attacker is an FTL Species too. Why would they bother hurling Rocks through Space when they got the required Supply Lines to have their Space Ships travel through the Universe and Fight Battles with enemy Space Fleets. They can easily use proper Ordnance which they dont need to hurl through the System for Years first.

Needless to say that it would be completely ridiculous for a Planet to Surrender over this.
Because the Attacker effectively only has 2 Choices.
Option A: He uses Rocks whose Destructive Power are basicly like Tactical Nukes or less. In which case Bombing an entire Planet into Surrender would take Centuries.
Option B: He uses Rocks whose Destructive Power are basicly like Strategic Nukes or less. In which case the Planet will be rendered Uninhabitable after a few Impacts and will effectively become a Tomb World.

Both is already in the Game by the way.
You gain Warscore by Bombing Planets but it takes forver as it should.
Or if you are a Species that does that. You can use Armageddon Bombing thus turning Planets into Tombworlds and killing the Population.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
The current army mechanics are just annoying and boring. Any changes should be targeted to reduce annoying micromanagement. I find the idea of a full planetary invasion to be pretty silly when the attacker could just use whatever rocks the star system has to bombard the planet until the planet submits.

My personal suggestion would be to convert the planetary occupation to work like the bombardement system works now, progress bar over X times. Normal empires would be likely to surrender quickly when the enemy fleet is controlling the space. Xenophobe and especially Purifier empires might resist longer so the planet gets more damaged. Ships could get special components for planetary invasions etc. This would also force the attacker to split their resources between destroying the enemy space assets and invading the planets. Full invasions should be rare and very expensive, especially against non-genocidals.

System could be expanded further by allowing the attacker determine what sort of control they want, eg. just the space ports to keep the locals damaging the space assets, full occupation to try to utilize resources of the planet etc.

From books I like how Weber's Honorverse handled the planetary invasions: generally planets were expected to surrender once the enemy controls the orbitals and at the same time attacker shouldn't bombard the planet. If the planet refuses then some level of bombardement would be allowed until the planet surrenders. Of course actually occupying the planet would still require massive number of troops... Obviously Stellaris would need special mechanics for gestalts and genocidal empires.
And the "correct" answer is remove it

(This is the personal opinion of a single dev, and not the views of the team as a whole)

Any ideas that involve turning involved gameplay mechanics into ever more automated progress bars are terrible ideas.

Ground combat is dull, but at least it's SOMETHING that allows some level of skill expression and tactical gameplay during wars.

Without ground combat, wars would be even more of a binary "throw doomstacks at eachother and the highest number wins and takes everything from the loser". Which is immensely unsatisfying for everyone involved. At least currently there is the possibility of sniping transport fleets and the logistics of using them. Ideally said logistics would be expanded upon further like OP suggests, with armies being limited and possibly costing pops.
 
  • 9
  • 5
Reactions: