Anyone wish for longer more in-depth and detailed space battles? Thoughts?

  • 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.
I disagree. Battleships last quite a considerable amount of time when taken on by small stuff, and against massive guns they should die fast.
Strike craft could indeed get a noticeable face lift by having some circle the other direction, that would be cool.
You seem to have a very specific visual fantasy you want to be fullfilled, I don't share it.

As I said titans ignoring the artillery setting is a bug that needs fixing.
Admirals are very appropriate in my opinion. A 20% sublight speed admiral is very noticeable. So is a +30% hp one. I don't want every little admiral to be his own tiny hero figure that changes everything has 15 special rules. I have an empire to manage not a Kindergarden. Also, in the end Stellaris is a rather casual experience.
Titans and battleships and cruisers all ignore the arty setting and its extremely annoying.
It sounds like you might enjoy this mod:
This mod is actually really good
 
This is something i've noticed since 2.2. The AI seems to be amazing at somehow having their ships retreat.
I always thought they were cheating... but I think instead that this happens whenever a battle is joined after the AI has started attacking a starbase.

If the AI has a relatively small fleet then the battle is drawn out to the point where 15, or even 30+ days have passed just trying to take the station and it can therefore withdraw at any point. The moment your fleet joins the battle the AI calculates a predicted loss and hits retreat (while your retreat counter is still at full). The AI fails to instantly retreat if you keep your fleet a little further away and wait for the AI to defeat the starbase before attacking... it feels a bit exploity but it works to avoid the annoying whack-a-mole.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
no its not fixed and still cant be followed, a huge freaking joke

Maybe it was the juggernaut following other fleets then? I swear I read about this in a patch note.
 
Besides that it looks ugly, I'm pretty sure that your entire battle-fleet ( with corvettes, destroyers, cruisers, battleships and titans ) would stay in some sort of a formation ( in which bigger ships are usually surrounded / covered by smaller ships ).
I don't know, that actually sounds right to me.
And destroyers are your picket line that protects cruisers and battleships from missiles and small ships.
I should formulate it a bit different: Besides the thing that it looks ugly, I'm pretty sure that your entire battle-fleet ( with corvettes, destroyers, cruisers, battleships and titans ) would stay in some sort of a formation ( in which bigger ships are usually surrounded by smaller ships ) and in which all ships ( bigger as well as smaller ones ) would usually cover each other. I mean yes, the destroyers do somewhat cover cruisers and battleships in a ( forward ) picket-line, but not really the headless chickens ( corvettes ) anymore and if an enemy attacks from behind than the cruisers and battleships have at least a temporary problem, too.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, that actually sounds right to me. Corvettes are your small ship skirmishers, just a notch above fighters. Cruisers are your heavies, the main battle tanks if you will. They won't wade into the fray like corvettes do, but they're definitely in the main fight. Battleships are your artillery, standing well back and blasting away. And destroyers are your picket line that protects cruisers and battleships from missiles and small ships.

For a generic fleet that sounds about right to me. What I'd like is the ability to assign other formations, because you're absolutely right. For some fleets you absolutely want something different. I'd like to be able to assign an artillery formation, where my big ships whale away with their cannons and my small ships protect them. Or an assault formation, where my battleships break the enemy lines and bring all of their firepower to bear. Or a carrier formation where my fleet never leaves the edges of the solar system, setting up a protective picket from which to launch fighters.

I believe NSC2 combat computers do something similar to this.
 
Maybe it was the juggernaut following other fleets then? I swear I read about this in a patch note.
It's easy to check... (ctrl-f for "jugg") in the patch notes, and yes there was a mention... I wonder if the fix actually worked (haven't checked).

For 2.6.1:
Fleets now use pathfinding for both Megashipyards and Juggernauts for upgrading and repairing.
For 2.6.2:
Fixed so a designable starbase updates correctly on upgrading. This fixes the issue with juggernauts that have been upgraded, disappearing.
For 2.6.3:
Juggernauts will now automatically repair themselves after battle.
For 2.7:
Fixed so Juggernauts can now be followed properly.

I haven't actually used a juggernaut in combat yet (it's more of a vanity thing to build one)... since they can't join a fleet, didn't used to work properly with fleet orders and are painfully terrible ships, awkward to use, bugged in several different ways when I first tried them and they messed-up reinforcing by stopping your shipyards and megashipyards from working properly... but I think they don't "disappear" as they once did... so yay? (though I will still never use them, sadly... maybe if they came much, much earlier I would be tempted)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I believe NSC2 combat computers do something similar to this.

Fair point!

I think what I meant was that I'd like it as a fleet setting. Like, instead of having to custom build the ships, I'd like to be able to assemble a fleet with carriers and set it to "Carrier" formation. Or take a generic fleet and send it on an artillery mission by using the "Artillery" formation.

It's not that combat computers are bad necessarily, but they're hard wired in. If they're the only option for fleet behavior, you end up having to redo ship designs, then bring the fleet all the way back to a shipyard and upgrade every ship for every different mission you want to run. I'd like to take my fleet of corvettes and destroyers and flip it between "Skirmisher" and "Raider" formation depending on the strategic needs of a given mission, or detach the cruisers from my Carrier formation fleet and assemble an Assault formation fleet at need. Something like that.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
It's easy to check... (ctrl-f for "jugg") in the patch notes, and yes there was a mention... I wonder if the fix actually worked (haven't checked).

For 2.6.1:
Fleets now use pathfinding for both Megashipyards and Juggernauts for upgrading and repairing.
For 2.6.2:
Fixed so a designable starbase updates correctly on upgrading. This fixes the issue with juggernauts that have been upgraded, disappearing.
For 2.6.3:
Juggernauts will now automatically repair themselves after battle.
For 2.7:


I haven't actually used a juggernaut in combat yet (it's more of a vanity thing to build one)... since they can't join a fleet, didn't used to work properly with fleet orders and are painfully terrible ships, awkward to use, bugged in several different ways when I first tried them and they messed-up reinforcing by stopping your shipyards and megashipyards from working properly... but I think they don't "disappear" as they once did... so yay? (though I will still never use them, sadly... maybe if they came much, much earlier I would be tempted)

Knew I read it somewhere. Thanks for doing the leg work, I was on mobile.

I haven't actually confirmed that this fix works either, not gonna lie.
 
Knew I read it somewhere. Thanks for doing the leg work, I was on mobile.

I haven't actually confirmed that this fix works either, not gonna lie.
Glad to help. Mobile is awkward, and being on mobile obviously means you can't boot up a game to check anything (like booting up the save game from the bug report forum).

I do wonder if it would be constructive to have 2 additional designations for fixes in the patch notes?
1. Fixed
2. Fixed (confirmed fixed)
3. Fixed (failed to fix issue)

Updating when reports come in later so players are aware of what the developers believe to be true - people love to prove something wrong. For example, if you were to say that the fleet manager bugs are confirmed fixed then you'd (hopefully not) get lots of quick reports of how it's still broken - lots of failed to fix issue, and updating the notes would reassure people that their issues are being taken seriously.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Glad to help. Mobile is awkward, and being on mobile obviously means you can't boot up a game to check anything (like booting up the save game from the bug report forum).

I do wonder if it would be constructive to have 2 additional designations for fixes in the patch notes?
1. Fixed
2. Fixed (confirmed fixed)
3. Fixed (failed to fix issue)

Updating when reports come in later so players are aware of what the developers believe to be true - people love to prove something wrong. For example, if you were to say that the fleet manager bugs are confirmed fixed then you'd (hopefully not) get lots of quick reports of how it's still broken - lots of failed to fix issue, and updating the notes would reassure people that their issues are being taken seriously.
The thought of maintaining something like this on a forum post patch notes is.. daunting, to say the least.

Forums aren't ideal for this, it sounds like a 40 hour a week job just reading the comments :D Trello or something similar might work however. We on Community have been brainstorming something similar to this, can't say for certain if/when it will happen, however.

Basically, I have nothing to add but I wanted to respond :D
 
The thought of maintaining something like this on a forum post patch notes is.. daunting, to say the least.

Forums aren't ideal for this, it sounds like a 40 hour a week job just reading the comments :D Trello or something similar might work however. We on Community have been brainstorming something similar to this, can't say for certain if/when it will happen, however.

Basically, I have nothing to add but I wanted to respond :D
I know the forums aren't great for bug tracking... even the bug tracking part of the forum isn't really fit for purpose. Something, anything more would be really great.

I never liked Trello (in games like Subnautica), I much prefer something like MantisBT (AI War). Compare these two sites:
The first is obviously full of nice shiny pictures which probably helps marketing but it's just... not for me. Perhaps my experiences are through rose tinted glasses - AI War had the critical bugs I reported fixed almost instantly (same day) back in AI War 1 development. But the experience I had of reporting bugs and seeing them being handled was so much better (on something like MantisBT) than trying to report bugs, or even understand what's going on in Subnautica:Below Zero (Trello) has been for me, personally.
 
I know the forums aren't great for bug tracking... even the bug tracking part of the forum isn't really fit for purpose. Something, anything more would be really great.

I never liked Trello (in games like Subnautica), I much prefer something like MantisBT (AI War). Compare these two sites:
The first is obviously full of nice shiny pictures which probably helps marketing but it's just... not for me. Perhaps my experiences are through rose tinted glasses - AI War had the critical bugs I reported fixed almost instantly (same day) back in AI War 1 development. But the experience I had of reporting bugs and seeing them being handled was so much better (on something like MantisBT) than trying to report bugs, or even understand what's going on in Subnautica:Below Zero (Trello) has been for me, personally.

Link saved. Will investigate further when I'm actually "working working" and not just posting on the forums, twitter and Facebook :)

Again, just to reiterate: #nopromises
 
Last edited:
Link saved. Will investigate further when I'm actually "working working" and not just sh*tposting on the forums, twitter and Facebook :)

Again, just to reiterate: #nopromises
Thank you for the responses, and for taking the time out of work to post (I certainly wouldn't refer to it as that, spitballing sounds marginally better - at least less vulgar).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Thank you for the responses, and for taking the time out of work to post (I certainly wouldn't refer to it as that, spitballing sounds marginally better - at least less vulgar).

Good point. I edited my post.
 
I love space battles but i feel like they are extremely boring in this game, its to fast paced, instead of a full fledged battle and a detailed battle, if you have a fast pc, even a late game space battle will end in little over 15 seconds on fastest speed.

There is barely even any ship spacing, absolutely no depth in battles in general. Ships like battleship classes and titans should last way longer in combat due to them being capital ships in your armada but instead they struggle and die super fast especially to corvettes. A juggernaut is not even useful when it comes to fleet engagements right now the meta is to use it for raiding as the ship is to slow, and somehow cant be followed FOR SOME REASON. I would not have an issue if it could be followed into battle but instead it lags behind even the slowest of fleets. And its focused fired by ship AI.

A huge deathstack vs a death stack should last a long while as its alot of resources put against each other. Have you seen unbidden 500k fleets just melt in 2 seconds to kenetic battery weapons from a huge range? Yeah this is what im talking about. Space battles are easily one of my favorite things but right now its very bland and all you do is send fleets in a huge stack and they charge towards the enemy and just circle in weird ways. Its awkward. What about strikecraft where they swarm like bees its super weird and fly in unnatural motions like going in and out of engagements and dipping in. There should be two forms of star fighters, bombers for anti ships and fighters for fighting other strike craft and acting as point defense.

We need broadside engagements, ship spacing, fighters fighting independently against each other and chasing other strike craft in the background. Ship depth, multiple ship heights when it comes to battle. Some ships need to last longer. Fighters need new animation and functions. Fleets need new functions instead of swarming each other like angry wasps. You can set battleships to carrier and they STILL charge in head first into battle next to corvettes. Arty battleships should always stay at range against other battleships. Some ships should be able to hold position in defense of planets and star systems but able to fire while in place would be super useful especially with strikecraft and long range weapons. I can list alot more but i know im asking to much im sorry. I like war aspect but its just boring.

ill link some battles from other sci fi for examples

Ship spacing and detailed battles, ships everywhere instead of circling and swarm formations and boring functions.

broad side battles of capital ships

Hold position and defensive position fleets.

Massive over planet space battles

Unpopular opinion but i dont know why they removed infinite stacking fleets.... it added major battles in the late game. I wish they would bring it back. Fighting a 1 million awakened empire fleet power with your own massive fleet brought major amounts of enjoyment to the game for me. Yeah i know ill get hate for saying i like fleet stacking but yes i like it alot. And i wish it could come back into motion with todays version of stellaris
example of old stellaris fleet stacking

You never get battles like that ever again :( the pure amount of ships and firepower and the battle was epic now space battles are boring, lame and tedius. Ground combat is even worse and has absolutely no strategy.

Pdox can’t even get their bare base games to run out of the box even years after release and you are asking for this? Not sure what you are inhaling before posting here but it sure robs you of a sense of reality
 
  • 1
Reactions:
perhaps a way to make battles last longer would be to add a slider at the start of the game that reduces overall weapon damage, like the tech cost slider. so you could choose how long you wanted fights to be? it'd have to be a multiplicative modifier though so it can't be negated by repeatables.
it would add a galactic modifier to all empires that reduced weapon damage by a whatever amount you set and any new empires that form, or crisis factions would get it upon forming. it wouldn't be as good as implementing all the cool complex solutions people are posting but it seems the least likely to fail
this seems like a simple solution that could help out those who want longer space battles and not significantly impact those who don't want anything changed.

what do you think?
 
Looking at battlestar galactica deadlock, total war and other games (I realise that their gameplay is split into discrete tactical/strategic sections) as well as Sun Tzu’s art of war and most other military strategy treaties deployment matters.

The biggest thing we have no control over is the formation our fleets move in.

If we could specify Titans to the rear, battleships in the middle and corvette forward on the wings we could try to shape the initial engagement. Placing point defence destroyers next to titans could be a thing.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Looking at battlestar galactica deadlock, total war and other games (I realise that their gameplay is split into discrete tactical/strategic sections) as well as Sun Tzu’s art of war and most other military strategy treaties deployment matters.

The biggest thing we have no control over is the formation our fleets move in.

If we could specify Titans to the rear, battleships in the middle and corvette forward on the wings we could try to shape the initial engagement. Placing point defence destroyers next to titans could be a thing.

I run NSC2 and Amazing Space Battles.
Using NSC2's ship behaviors causes something like this. You're able to specify that X ship type should charge in, Y should stay back, Z should flank at a certain distance, while W, Q, and R all perform hit-and-run with missiles. It works pretty well, because even though my endgame fleet does tend to lean towards cruise missiles and strikecraft with an escort of PD destroyers sitting at 200 range and just deleting fleets, others can arrange completely different tactics and overall methods (especially with policies letting you focus on armor or shields, or specific weapon types, beyond the ship designer).
 
This is pure eye candy, but I really think the battle overview window should feature a video display with close-up shots of the battle as it's raging. There are a lot of great art assets in this game that are completely wasted because you have to be at full zoom to see them, and you can't play the game at full zoom.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: