• Crusader Kings II Expansion Subscription

    Subscribe to the CK II Expansion and enjoy unlimited access to 13 major expansions and more!


  • Paradox Midsummer Sale has arrived! Up to 75% off!

    Enjoy some sun and song this Midsummer, but when the sun goes down, the fun doesn't have to stop! Paradox has a festive sale on plenty of games to keep your summer nights going!


    June 18th - June 30th
  • Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning

Shadowstrike

Terrestrial Liability #168
85 Badges
Mar 17, 2001
2.375
1.385
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
One of the big motivations for 2.0 back in the day was to prevent doomstacking. In 1.9 times, doomstacking was the top strategy, and wars would be ended simply by the size of fleet you could mass for the one major confrontation. That's still kind of true post-2.0, probably far more than Wiz and the other devs intended. This is hardly an original thought, but Stellaris really needs a supply system to limit the concentration of fleet strength, and it feels really simple to just steal a working system from HoI4.

So under this system, each ship would have a variable called "supply", of which the total and the consumption rate would depend on the size of the ship. This would represent the stock of weapons, fuel, replacement parts, and crew that can be used to keep the ship running. You would be able to increase the supply rate of a ship by building storage bays - these could be either auxiliary components, or actually eat up weapons slots. In a vacuum, each ship's supply would dwindle over time, depending on what it's doing. Staying stationary would eat the least supply, while moving, firing weapons and repairing damage would all consume supply (even docking at a starbase should have some minimal level of supply consumption, to prevent people from amassing huge fleets at any given location). If the supply goes to 0, the ship becomes unable to repair, unable to fire, and limps along at a fraction of its top speed. Basically, this is a state you want to avoid.

Supply would be produced and stockpiled at starbases (i.e. it would have both a "stored supply" and a "supply replenishment rate"). Anchorages and naval logistics bases could be adapted to the role of creating and storing supply (possibly axing the concept of ship caps entirely). Each starbase would supply ships in controlled systems that are not cut off by enemy controlled systems, within a certain range (which would be based on tech) - this would draw down the stockpiled supply of the station, which is replenished by the supply generation of the station. If multiple starbases are in range, fleets would draw from the multiple starbases if necessary. If you have too many ships in an area, then supply consumption might outpace supply generation, and the stockpiles in your starbases will start drawing down.

Now, if a starbase is not at maximum supply storage, it would also draw on the supply from other adjacent starbases that have a positive rate of supply generation (again within a certain range, but larger than the range in which it supplies ships). Basically, the starbases further back would contribute their excess supply generation to a starbase that doesn't have maximum supply storage. Critically, this process would create a "supply line", like a trade route, which could be raided by enemies (or privateers), or cut off entirely if you lose control of all possible pathing between your backwards and forward supply lines. Because the rate of supply transfer is limited in throughput (because each starbase would be drawing from another starbase further back in your space), there is some limiting rate to how much supply you can "pull" to an area, which can be reduced by raiding activities along the supply line. If you start drawing a lot of supply, this might then cause supply at a starbase further back to start running out, causing supplies to be drawn from even further back in your empire, etc.

As a result of this whole system, there's now a cost to keeping ships in one place. Massing your fleet together is likely to not only eat up all the current supply generation, but also eventually all of the supplies you are able to drag forward through nearby starbases (and also make you more vulnerable to supply line raiding), meaning you can do it in a pinch, but it will leave you vulnerable in the future (this also makes it possible to do "defense in depth" strategies, where you simply withdraw deeper into your territory so enemies can't mass huge amounts of ships to attack you with at any one location). In peacetime, you would want to have your fleets spread out, so that you can collect as much supply at your starbases as possible (or even not have ships built so they don't eat supply at all). In wartime, you would have to think hard about where to amass fleets, or invest majorly in starbase modules to produce and store supplies in forward positions. Further, your progress into "enemy" territory is also limited by how much supply you can channel through captured starbases, and how quickly you can adapt them to handle higher levels of supply (and high supply generating bases would be a strategic liability if the enemy is winning, as they would be able to use your own supply facilities to run their fleets).

Edit: borrowed the idea of adapting anchorages as the supply generating/storage starbase building.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:

WeeBigTerd101

First Lieutenant
Nov 16, 2020
214
168
gonna comment so it appears in recent or somthing like that cool idea i've seen something like this before but cool idea I like It i think it's cool good job cool idea.

edit: there should be a map mode for this along with techs to increase supply or supply storage or rate of gain stuff like that. Also each weapon and module should consume different amounts of supply
 

MordridBlack

Major
18 Badges
Jan 1, 2020
705
242
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
There are some key areas that would be hit by this

1) Resources - How the supplies are quantified via resources is possibly the biggest thing. Is it a new tile building? If so, is there a limit to how many we can build per planet [akin to something like Allor or Civilian Factories]? If not, then how are the supplies being made?

2) AI - We all know that the AI for Stellaris isn't exactly very smart [they still tend to build really horribly on their planets]. Adding in another system, where they could possibly either get wrong or just not use at all would make things worse.

3) Restocking - Can fleets restock at any starbase? Or would they need a starbase with shipbuilding slots on it? [This leads into the next area]

4) Placement - As it sits, players place starbases either at a choke point, or in a random spot to fill a need [ship building, trade network, etc]. If a fleet can restock supplies at any starbase, then restocking isn't as bad. But if a fleet needs to go to a starbase with a shipbuilding module in it, it can create problems.

5) Ship Design - Obviously something like "ammo" would only apply to kinetic or explosive weapons, but energy weapons don't need that. This would pretty much make any kind of design that uses kinetic weapons either completely obsolete or exceedingly rare.

6) War - Do you realize this would probably encourage people to play either really aggressive so they can deal with any problems as soon as possible; or really defensive so that any issues that do arise are more of an annoyance than anything else. And having to constantly restock would likely mean keeping multiple back up fleets on standby to be ready for the moment when you need to pull back your primary fleets for a restock.


TLDR: The idea is interesting, but the cons of adding in a system like this seem to heavily outweigh the pros.
 

Cordane

GW/SC/PD/Flak Wonk
15 Badges
Sep 25, 2013
355
151
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
One of the big motivations for 2.0 back in the day was to prevent doomstacking. In 1.9 times, doomstacking was the top strategy, and wars would be ended simply by the size of fleet you could mass for the one major confrontation. That's still kind of true post-2.0, probably far more than Wiz and the other devs intended. This is hardly an original thought, but Stellaris really needs a supply system to limit the concentration of fleet strength, and it feels really simple to just steal a working system from HoI4.

So under this system, each ship would have a variable called "supply", of which the total and the consumption rate would depend on the size of the ship. This would represent the stock of weapons, fuel, replacement parts, and crew that can be used to keep the ship running. You would be able to increase the supply rate of a ship by building storage bays - these could be either auxiliary components, or actually eat up weapons slots. In a vacuum, each ship's supply would dwindle over time, depending on what it's doing. Staying stationary would eat the least supply, while moving, firing weapons and repairing damage would all consume supply (even docking at a starbase should have some minimal level of supply consumption, to prevent people from amassing huge fleets at any given location). If the supply goes to 0, the ship becomes unable to repair, unable to fire, and limps along at a fraction of its top speed. Basically, this is a state you want to avoid.

Supply would be produced and stockpiled at starbases (i.e. it would have both a "stored supply" and a "supply replenishment rate"). Anchorages and naval logistics bases could be adapted to the role of creating and storing supply (possibly axing the concept of ship caps entirely). Each starbase would supply ships in controlled systems that are not cut off by enemy controlled systems, within a certain range (which would be based on tech) - this would draw down the stockpiled supply of the station, which is replenished by the supply generation of the station. If multiple starbases are in range, fleets would draw from the multiple starbases if necessary. If you have too many ships in an area, then supply consumption might outpace supply generation, and the stockpiles in your starbases will start drawing down.

Now, if a starbase is not at maximum supply storage, it would also draw on the supply from other adjacent starbases that have a positive rate of supply generation (again within a certain range, but larger than the range in which it supplies ships). Basically, the starbases further back would contribute their excess supply generation to a starbase that doesn't have maximum supply storage. Critically, this process would create a "supply line", like a trade route, which could be raided by enemies (or privateers), or cut off entirely if you lose control of all possible pathing between your backwards and forward supply lines. Because the rate of supply transfer is limited in throughput (because each starbase would be drawing from another starbase further back in your space), there is some limiting rate to how much supply you can "pull" to an area, which can be reduced by raiding activities along the supply line. If you start drawing a lot of supply, this might then cause supply at a starbase further back to start running out, causing supplies to be drawn from even further back in your empire, etc.

As a result of this whole system, there's now a cost to keeping ships in one place. Massing your fleet together is likely to not only eat up all the current supply generation, but also eventually all of the supplies you are able to drag forward through nearby starbases (and also make you more vulnerable to supply line raiding), meaning you can do it in a pinch, but it will leave you vulnerable in the future (this also makes it possible to do "defense in depth" strategies, where you simply withdraw deeper into your territory so enemies can't mass huge amounts of ships to attack you with at any one location). In peacetime, you would want to have your fleets spread out, so that you can collect as much supply at your starbases as possible (or even not have ships built so they don't eat supply at all). In wartime, you would have to think hard about where to amass fleets, or invest majorly in starbase modules to produce and store supplies in forward positions. Further, your progress into "enemy" territory is also limited by how much supply you can channel through captured starbases, and how quickly you can adapt them to handle higher levels of supply (and high supply generating bases would be a strategic liability if the enemy is winning, as they would be able to use your own supply facilities to run their fleets).

Edit: borrowed the idea of adapting anchorages as the supply generating/storage starbase building.
There is a big difference between a doomstack-reduction effort and a pure fleet-support mechanic. As a fleet-support mechanic, I think what you've proposed is certainly more detailed than what is currently in vanilla - whether its value as a better representation of fleet logistics is worth the additional complexities is its own discussion. But the question of doomstack reduction requires a different tack. The OP works to a certain extent when looking at attacking distant enemies, especially across multiple no-man's-land systems. But attacking a neighbor isn't going to cause enough stress to keep a player- or AI-empire from massing their fleets up, and definitely a defensive fleet is not going to worry about it. Vanilla Stellaris has already tried to limit single-fleet doomstacking by limiting the number of command points in a single unit, and tying that to admirals also limits how extensive their abilities spread.

I think the one single-thing that could be done to limit the effectiveness of doomstacking would be reducing hyperlane travel speeds. I would add to this a limiting of the data available to rival empires regarding fleet size and capabilities, as well as for ETAs of fleets using hyperlanes. This would create a bit of a whack-a-mole gameplay when an empire isn't able to gain enough intel to more accurately view the battlespace, but would also keep a single doomstacked fleet from effectively being everywhere or even knowing where they should be. There also needs to be more vulnerability and loss if there isn't a capable fleet or station in the area to defend it, to incentivize both attacking and defending as many of these targets as possible.
 

Tamwin5

General
19 Badges
Dec 3, 2017
2.104
2.074
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn