2.0 Space Combat Speculation Thread

[zizard]

Damage to hull decrease ship war power, damage to shields and armor not.
A mixed design with disruptors will soften your target while other weapons are wreaking shield and armor.

Not sure that this works out if you look at it more closely. If the ships only get full penalty at low hp, e.g. below 1/2, then better to just finish the job. If the ships get a big penalty even with losing a little HP, then a small number of piercing weapons is used to apply the debuff and the rest goes into non piercing higher dps weapons.

 

[Promethian]

Not sure that this works out if you look at it more closely. If the ships only get full penalty at low hp, e.g. below 1/2, then better to just finish the job. If the ships get a big penalty even with losing a little HP, then a small number of piercing weapons is used to apply the debuff and the rest goes into non piercing higher dps weapons.

It will likely be sooner than 50% since that is the hull threshold they start attempting to flee at.

In fact that actually puts disruptors in a really interesting place. If they can trigger ships to flee while they still have shields and armor that makes them better than I initially estimated.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

It will likely be sooner than 50% since that is the hull threshold they start attempting to flee at.

In fact that actually puts disruptors in a really interesting place. If they can trigger ships to flee while they still have shields and armor that makes them better than I initially estimated.

yeah, i was thinking about that also, but i wasn't sure whether flee chance was checked at like 1% or if you could flee at higher hull.

 

[Akela]

yeah, i was thinking about that also, but i wasn't sure whether flee chance was checked at like 1% or if you could flee at higher hull.

It needs to be significantly higher than 'normal' incoming damage or it'll be pretty much useless, especially on smaller ships (which are supposed to be the best at evasion). If corvettes flee at 1% hull, then they'd have effectively no chance to disengage from a serious enemy fleet - they'll go from 10% to dead in a single volley unless they're only facing small weapons (and not too many even of those...).

The whole point of the retreat mechanic is to make battles less deadly - that only works if ships start rolling to retreat early enough that they might actually survive to flee.

 

[Xaelyn]

I think I read somewhere that the default point is 50%, and then they roll each time they get hit thereafter to determine if they will disengage.

 

[GloatingSwine]

I think I read somewhere that the default point is 50%, and then they roll each time they get hit thereafter to determine if they will disengage.

Yeah, I think that was in one of the DDs. I think the chances also increase the lower the hull is.

Also worth noting that most ships will end up with considerably more hull points, as they can be increased twice with research and hull can be stacked in utility slots again.

 

[Fjolsvid]

From Aspec 2.0 video:
All missiles ignore shields (not news)
Marauder missiles: +25% bonus damage to Hull, 86-114 damage, cooldown 5.00, 25 tracking, 100 range, 18 HP, 40 evasion, 15 speed, -26 energy at 58 minerals .
Whirlwind missiles (only 2 levels): 33-48 damage, cooldown 3.30, 30 tracking, 100 range, 60 hp, 0 evasion, 18 speed, -26 energy at 65 minerals .
Devastator Torpedo: +100% bonus damage to Armor, 275-445 damage, cooldown 17.10, 10 tracking, 80 range, 30 hp, 0 evasion, 12 speed, -26 energy at 68 minerals.
Point defense is now energy weapon
Flak Artillery (Flak level 3): 2-6 damage, kinetic, cooldown 0.80, 75 accuracy, 75 tracking, 20 range, -10 energy at 13 minerals.
Autocannons are now only S slots
Stormfire autocannon: 14- 27, cooldown 2.30, 85 accuracy, 75 tracking. 30 range, -17 energy, at 25 minerals, +100% bonus to shields, +25% bonus damage to hulls, -75% bonus damage to armor
Phase Disruptor is now S and M slots only.

Ship Ranks:
Regular
Experienced: 100 xp to reach, +10% to damage;
next rank (Veteran?): 1000 xp (counts previous xp too, so 900 to level up)

Last tier corvette costs about 310 minerals
Corvettes: 300 base hp (+200 from researches), 0 armor, 60 evasion, 170 speed, 3 S, 1 Aux, weapons: either 3 S, 1 S +1 G(guided, old torpedo), or 1 P, 2 S.

Destroyers: 800 base HP, 0 Armor, 35 evasion, 120 speed, 6 S, 1 A, weapons: 2S 1M or 1L + 2S or 1M - about 310 minerals at Tier 1 equip and tier 2 lasers.

Evasion can go above 100 again.
Shield capacitor gives +10% to Shields (Wiz, why? They are terrible now, unless, i suppose, for Titans and Battleships)
Advanced Reactor Booster - +100 energy at 15 mins - with the last reactor (Dark Matter), there doesn't look to be much sense for those on Corvettes, unless going full shield.
Dark Matter reactor - +285 energy at 45 mins
Neutronium armor - 140 armor for S slot
Dark Matter Deflector - 200 hp for S slot at 50 energy

Will update as i watch

Corvette's HP - 500 HP, 140 Armor, 440 Shields
Destroyer's HP - 800 (+400) HP, 420 Armor, 660 shields - 6s, 1 a, weapons: 2S 1M or 1L + 2S or 1M
Cruiser's HP - 1400 (+800) HP,
Battleship - 3000 HP(+1600) HP, 2625 Armor, 4600 Shields
Titans - 10000 (+4000) HP, 5250 Armor, 9750 Shields - 12 L, 3A, weapons: 1 T(Titan), 6 L.
Perdition Beam: 5000 - 10000 HP, cooldown 21.75, 85 accuracy, 0 tracking, 250 range, -500 energy at 500 minerals, NO damage type specified (could be intended or could be a bug), -25 damage to shields, +25% bonus damage to hulls, +50% bonus damage to armor.

Defense platforms - 1000(+500) HP, 6 M 2 A, Weapons: 8 S or 4 M or 2L.

War doctrines:
Defense in Depth: +10% to Home Territory Fire rate.
Hit and Run: combat disengagement chance +33%, emergency FTL damage risk -25%
Rapid Deployment: +25% sublight speed, +10% weapon range
NO Retreat: +33 Fire Rate, emergency FTL cooldown +50%, combat disengagement chance -100%

P.S. Ambitions - the unity edicts are super-powerful. Megastructure build speed, doubled ship construction, grand fleet was moved here, +33% to mineral yields, ethics boost, doubled fortress upgrades. Those are really crazy.

 

[Tavior]

Did they fix point defense vs missile/fighter bug in Cerryh 2.0?

It would be great to know for sure one way or another if possible.

 

[Dr_Gentech]

Did they fix point defense vs missile/fighter bug in Cerryh 2.0?

It would be great to know for sure one way or another if possible.

Would be, but we should repeat the test on release to find out anyway.

One change in this patch could be that having missiles or some strike craft is not going to be a significant performance penalty for your PC, because of the smaller fleet sizes, and the bug with strike craft flying off to the side should be over too. My computer isn't a potato anymore, but I still have empathy for the potatoholders amongst us.

 

[Tavior]

Would be, but we should repeat the test on release to find out anyway.

One change in this patch could be that having missiles or some strike craft is not going to be a significant performance penalty for your PC, because of the smaller fleet sizes, and the bug with strike craft flying off to the side should be over too. My computer isn't a potato anymore, but I still have empathy for the potatoholders amongst us.

Well I am in a kind of weird situation where I have to downgrade my video card driver each time I want to play Stellaris to a very old version (like 6-7 month outdate). What happens is that when I try to run Stellaris on a Vega video card. It just freeze up.

So it is kind of a shame I can't even try Cerryh 2.0 without borrowing someone else's rig.

 

[Matt516]

P.S. Ambitions - the unity edicts are super-powerful. Megastructure build speed, doubled ship construction, grand fleet was moved here, +33% to mineral yields, ethics boost, doubled fortress upgrades. Those are really crazy.

That's pretty awesome. Looks like Unity ambitions are (in general) on par with Ascension perks in terms of power, just temporary. Seems that they're making it so choosing to stop before getting all traditions is actually a viable choice. Maybe even better than getting all traditions - time will tell.

 

[Dr_Gentech]

Well I am in a kind of weird situation where I have to downgrade my video card driver each time I want to play Stellaris to a very old version (like 6-7 month outdate). What happens is that when I try to run Stellaris on a Vega video card. It just freeze up.

So it is kind of a shame I can't even try Cerryh 2.0 without borrowing someone else's rig.

I'm having the exact same issue, so is everyone with a Vega card. There's a workaround, but it's slightly buggy and causes the game to crash unexpectedly. If you go to the posts I've made in my profile you'll see it, I'll go try find a link for you.

Edit: here is the link: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...g-new-game-causes-the-game-to-freeze.1060214/

It really sucks that we've received no word on whether or not this bug is going to be fixed in 2.0. Anyone with a Vega card should probably hold off buying Apocalypse until we get confirmation that that bug has been fixed.

 

[zizard]

P.S. Ambitions - the unity edicts are super-powerful. Megastructure build speed, doubled ship construction, grand fleet was moved here, +33% to mineral yields, ethics boost, doubled fortress upgrades. Those are really crazy.

Disappointing that they moved grand fleet from the base game to DLC.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Disappointing that they moved grand fleet from the base game to DLC.

It's entirely possible (likely, even) that its only a Unity Ambition if you own Apocalypse (like how you can research Psionic technologies without taking the Ascension Perk if you don't own Utopia).

 

[Naeglin]

The idea of bonuses for a small fleet looks very strange. In real life, the three ships that are opposing the fleet are also increasing their rate of fire?
A large fleet should win a small group with practically no problems, is it?

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

its an abstraction of the smaller fleet being better coordinated and more able to create opportunities to attack effectively. Not that their guns literally fire faster. See also: Admirals, which work the exact same way, yet noone bothers to express their incredulity at that.....

 

[Akela]

The idea of bonuses for a small fleet looks very strange. In real life, the three ships that are opposing the fleet are also increasing their rate of fire?
A large fleet should win a small group with practically no problems, is it?

Realistically? Yeah, they probably would have a higher rate of fire compared to their opponents. It's going to be a mix of the smaller fleet firing faster and the larger fleet firing slower, but the overall effect is right (and for game-purposes, bonuses are just more fun than penalties).

The smaller fleet is in what's called a 'target-rich environment'. Doesn't matter which way they point their guns, there's probably an enemy there to shoot at, and they don't have to worry much about friendly fire. They also have their backs against the wall, so they have an extra incentive to fight harder, and it makes sense for them to try risky tactics and push their equipment to the limit because what have they got to lose? Dying because your weapons overloaded is no worse than dying because you were outnumbered and couldn't shoot fast enough.

On the other hand, the large fleet has fewer targets, and far more friendlies that they have to not shoot. Chances are some of them can't fire at all some of the time, because an ally is blocking their shot, and even when they can shoot they have to be more careful. They've also got exactly the opposite incentive when it comes to taking risks - no-one wants to be the guy who lost the fleet flagship despite outnumbering the enemy 10:1 because he did something dumb, so everyone is going to be very conservative and by-the-book.

The large group will still win (and they'll still win in Stellaris as well, unless there's a major technological mismatch), but they won't win by as much as you might expect.

 

[Naeglin]

Realistically? Yeah, they probably would have a higher rate of fire compared to their opponents. It's going to be a mix of the smaller fleet firing faster and the larger fleet firing slower, but the overall effect is right (and for game-purposes, bonuses are just more fun than penalties).

The smaller fleet is in what's called a 'target-rich environment'. Doesn't matter which way they point their guns, there's probably an enemy there to shoot at, and they don't have to worry much about friendly fire. They also have their backs against the wall, so they have an extra incentive to fight harder, and it makes sense for them to try risky tactics and push their equipment to the limit because what have they got to lose? Dying because your weapons overloaded is no worse than dying because you were outnumbered and couldn't shoot fast enough.

On the other hand, the large fleet has fewer targets, and far more friendlies that they have to not shoot. Chances are some of them can't fire at all some of the time, because an ally is blocking their shot, and even when they can shoot they have to be more careful. They've also got exactly the opposite incentive when it comes to taking risks - no-one wants to be the guy who lost the fleet flagship despite outnumbering the enemy 10:1 because he did something dumb, so everyone is going to be very conservative and by-the-book.

The large group will still win (and they'll still win in Stellaris as well, unless there's a major technological mismatch), but they won't win by as much as you might expect.

This question lies beyound game mechanics and refers to features of space war.


We have two fleet with equal tech-level. In first fleet we have 10 ships and 20-30 in second.

A) Aiming system working without humans. Guns don't targeting by gunners as in 18th century. In space visual targeting is impossible because between two fleets lies billiions miles. All weapons depend on workspeed of aiming computers. The vigilance of gunners does not play a role. Big fleet have a equal aiming system and he will take aim of a small fleet is also easy.

B) Really distance between ships in fleet are gigantic. In open space fleet formation must enable maneuvering without problems (simple logic). If not - admiral is dumb. Space is not the ocean. Ships may appeared lower and higher. No one natural barriers and borders. No water level or horizon line. No atmospheric effects. All targets are visible for scanners. Also spaceships don't need "line" formation for fire to one target. So, one ship never block actions of other ship with normal aiming system or in normal starfleet formation.

In star system spaceship is a very tiny object. Fleet is a very tiny object. Even planet is a very tiny object. At such distances ships will not interfere with each other regardles of a size of the fleet. Friendly fire in space battle is impossible because distance of fire is enormous. Rockets and torpedoes may have "ally-enemy" system preventing occassionaly strike.

C) Rich-target environment not worked too. Targets are lot, but quantity of guns on the ships from small fleet not increased. You can't choose more targets than you have cannons. Fire-rate don't changing too.


Normally smaller fleet don't have bonuses. In space nowhere to hide. Opponent's targeting system is equivalent to their targeting systems. Firerate depends not on the number of ships but on the quality of the guns. The technique does not work better with the numerical superiority on the enemy side.

This arguments is true for other enhancements on small fleet. The engines suddenly worked better or the armor suddenly increased...


In game mechanic small fleet may become stronger by admiral's perks and fleet's doctrines. But not from this terrible "bonuses for small fleet". Race without tons of colonies may expand this abilities except bonuses for massive fleet.

But now this mechanic looks like: "We simply want bring bigger fleet more casualities. Because we can."



Р.S.

I have 30 ships and my opponent have 20 ships. I divide my fleet in two parts. Now I have two fleet with 15 ships in one star system and they both have bonus against one fleet with 20 ships.

This another cause why "small fleet bonus" is a bad idea.

 

[EntropyAvatar]

I have 30 ships and my opponent have 20 ships. I divide my fleet in two parts. Now I have two fleet with 15 ships in one star system and they both have bonus against one fleet with 20 ships.

Not how it works. It counts all ships engaged on each side, so dividing your fleet will do nothing.

I don't know why you are so sure that ships will engage at a range of billions of miles. That seems quite excessive.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Р.S.

I have 30 ships and my opponent have 20 ships. I divide my fleet in two parts. Now I have two fleet with 15 ships in one star system and they both have bonus against one fleet with 20 ships.

This another cause why "small fleet bonus" is a bad idea.

You haven't been paying attention. The bonus calculates all forces involved- those two fleets are counted as 30 ships total, so neither would get the bonus.