Are Destroyers Worthless?

[Zenopath]

Maybe the solution could just be give the different sizes bonus against other sizes, like a rock paper scissors thing

Like if Battleships dealt +20% damage to Cruisers, and Cruisers dealt +20% damage to destroyers, and destroyers dealt +20% damage against corvettes.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

Ok, well, how much of a buff would destroyers need to be meaningful as corvette killers? because as they are, 2 corvettes of same tech will kill 1 destroyer.

Right, and that's a huge problem since it's supposed to be the other way around. I'd say either give them significantly more S / P slots - one more per section, perhaps - so that they actually have more guns than the corvettes, or give them more base HP, or give them M-size defenses (but probably only 4 defensive slots instead of 6).

As is, they have 2x the defense slots of a corvette and less than 2x the everything else good. However, they cost 2x the alloys, 2x the time, 2x the fleet size, and are both slower and less good at piracy suppression than even a single corvette, much less two of them. They also can't mount missiles at all (although they make up for that somewhat with their larger gun slots). They're pretty bad.

 

[fodazd]

...Why do so many people keep saying that destroyers have less HP than 2 corvettes? They clearly have more HP than 2 corvettes (not by much, but still).

 

[Zenopath]

Sure, if you're using mixed fleets (though note that one PD doesn't fully counter even one non-swarm missile, and swarm missiles are what you use if you see the enemy building lots of PD but you still want to be able to punch battleships). I was responding to the "corvettes can't throw enough DPS to kill battleships" claim. You never said anything about mixed fleets in the post I was responding to.

No, in the OP i stated that the optimal mix is corvettes + battleships, some people do perfer to use pd corvettes instead of 3x small mount corvettes, in general, this is actually considered a good idea.

Also you overestimate the damage output of missles, they are better than 2x small mounts or a medium mount, but not as good as a large mount proton missle or kinetic battery. Definately not a match for an x turret which can do about 4 or 5 missles worth of damage at longer range.

 

[Zenopath]

not wi

...Why do so many people keep saying that destroyers have less HP than 2 corvettes? They clearly have more HP than 2 corvettes (not by much, but still).

Sure but they have like 35% less evasion, which means they have less effective hp when you consider % of shots that miss. Also, I dont remember them having 800 hp before, wonder if that changed recently.

(edit) Either way, the difference between 90% and 55% evasion is massive, makes it so destroyers will take somewhere between 2x and 3x as many hits, depending on opposing accuracy bonuses.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

Also you overestimate the damage output of missles, they are better than 2x small mounts or a medium mount, but not as good as a large mount proton missle or kinetic battery. Definately not a match for an x turret which can do about 4 or 5 missles worth of damage at longer range.

Missile (G) slots are equivalent in size to M slots, half the size of L (or carrier, whatever their letter is) slots, and 1/4 the size of X slots. Yes, a X weapon does more than 4x the DPS of a missile, but it does so with no tracking, very slow fire rate (and thus high chance of overkill), good but not always great accuracy (which is figured into the calculated DPS, but the variance matters a *lot* when the whole point of the weapon is its alpha strike), and can only fire forward (which mostly doesn't matter at the start of the battle, but can make it difficult to track swarming corvettes).

Also, missiles have retargeting (helps avoid overkill) and while they can be killed by PD, if the PD doesn't kill them in time then the missiles effectively shield your ships from the damage the PD guns (which are comparable to or more effective than most S weapons) would otherwise be doing to the ships.

I'm not saying missiles are the best weapon ever (though I realize how it might sound that way), but they're still very effective as long as you don't mess up and let the enemy have enough PD to counter them, and they can be mounted on what is quite arguably the best hull in the game (yes, corvettes tend to have more attrition, but they're dirt-cheap and very quick to replace, and in most other ways they are superior to other hull sizes).

 

[Zenopath]

I use them in my QRF fleets of destroyers and cruisers with afterburners, they end up with very similar speeds. I fit about 2/3 with M plasma, S plasma, S autocannon, and 2 PD and the others with Kinetic Artillery and 2 PD for extra anti-shield and some PD to hang with my Kinetic Artillery/Neutron Launcher Cruisers. The pickets rush in close to engage and give a small time buffer to get those extra L shots in. Have had good results so far, they evade enough that they don't die like my corvettes but are still much cheaper to replace than cruisers/battleships.

That sounds interesting, like, you are trading raw power for extra speed and slightly cheaper build costs. But wouldn´t you achieve much same results with just corvettes and cruisers? Two afterburners on a cruiser makes them pretty fast...

 

[Zenopath]

Missile (G) slots are equivalent in size to M slots, half the size of L (or carrier, whatever their letter is) slots, and 1/4 the size of X slots. Yes, a X weapon does more than 4x the DPS of a missile, but it does so with no tracking, very slow fire rate (and thus high chance of overkill), good but not always great accuracy (which is figured into the calculated DPS, but the variance matters a *lot* when the whole point of the weapon is its alpha strike), and can only fire forward (which mostly doesn't matter at the start of the battle, but can make it difficult to track swarming corvettes).

Also, missiles have retargeting (helps avoid overkill) and while they can be killed by PD, if the PD doesn't kill them in time then the missiles effectively shield your ships from the damage the PD guns (which are comparable to or more effective than most S weapons) would otherwise be doing to the ships.

I'm not saying missiles are the best weapon ever (though I realize how it might sound that way), but they're still very effective as long as you don't mess up and let the enemy have enough PD to counter them, and they can be mounted on what is quite arguably the best hull in the game (yes, corvettes tend to have more attrition, but they're dirt-cheap and very quick to replace, and in most other ways they are superior to other hull sizes).

My only complaint with this is that AI seems to really like pd a LOT. In past i have fielded pure missle corvettes only to watch them die to smaller AI fleets. In actual combat, least so far as I can tell missle corvettes are really bad against AI fleets.

(edit maybe because AI will absolutely build pd destroyers)

 

[Zardnaar]

They dont do enough damage, 3 small mounts don´t compare to the 300+ dps of an X mount BB with all large turrets, so they wouldn´t be able to really hurt the battleships that easily at all. A fair number would die before getting into range.

Also while the evasion is nice, it actually gets countered by tracking and accuracy boots, so if you have 90% evasion but the enemy has teir 4 sensors and combat Ai artillery installed, they get to negate about half of that or more. Much of the usefulness of corvettes actually has to do with the problem of overkill, not raw evasion. When you hit a damaged corvette with your X mount you could well waste a great deal of the damage. But the lack of damage makes pure corvettes are pretty weak against high tech BB.

10 Corvettes with 2autocannnons and a plasma .weapon might disagree with ur assumption.

Late game BBs can almost deal with Corvettes but until then level III to V the Corvettes are a better counter.

I'll use Cruisers and BBs for less war exhaustion though. Crusisers tend to counter everything except maybe late game fully upgraded BBs.

 

[Adolf - Finite War]

You can also create a battleship type with X-Hangar-Art Layout to get smaller ships and defend against torpedos while still benefitting from the spinal weapon slot. The fighters aren't much use till they are fixed but this ship section also comes with 2 FLAK and small mounts to cut smaller ships to ribbons. I'm not gonna do the math for this section versus arty. Just closing with the opinion that I'd rather have more realistic ship layouts (battleships and titans with secondary batteries & missile slots, smaller ships with spinal-like weapons & hangars) than a simple-rock-paper scissors solution. Better roles for smaller ship classes should come from a more sensible approach - take a look at the HOI4 dev-diaries concerning the navy-overhaul (fuel constraints, raiders that are to fast to get caught by larger ships, stealthy enemies spread out over a large area).

 

[Losttruppen]

But wouldn´t you achieve much same results with just corvettes and cruisers? Two afterburners on a cruiser makes them pretty fast..

Yeah I roll with 2 afterburners on the cruisers and one on the destroyers. I bet it would be similar in stats but I was losing way too many corvettes even in fights decidedly in my favour that I just sent them home for anti-piracy. You don't gain any speed from the corvettes until you engage the enemy and I kind of use the picket destroyers to take all the fire, where in any real engagement all my corvettes have exploded or run away leaving my cruisers exposed. You also get the PD from the artillery destroyers hanging out at max range where corvettes and pickets just rush in, gets you a bit better coverage while also giving more kinetic artillery for alpha strikes.

For big threats I have a stomping fleet with 2 titans and Lance/Gigacannon Battleships, with two of the QRF fleets stationed on my frontier. Has got me through until the lag sets in every game since 2.2.

 

[Zenopath]

10 Corvettes with 2autocannnons and a plasma .weapon might disagree with ur assumption.

Late game BBs can almost deal with Corvettes but until then level III to V the Corvettes are a better counter.

I'll use Cruisers and BBs for less war exhaustion though. Crusisers tend to counter everything except maybe late game fully upgraded BBs.

well, in all honesty i only build corvettes untill i get battleship tech, like you said, you can get very far with pure corvettes... its just when you at BB with X mounts that are so powerful that you should go for mix of BB and corvettes

 

[Bankipriel]

why would you ever build destroyers?

I build one fleet of 100% destroyers with L/PD set-up & artillery computer. I set them to follow my "vanguard" fleet (which is always pure corvette), and mid/late game I set them (the DD fleet) to follow my lead Battleship fleet.

This is useful (IMO) for two reasons: 1) early game, it makes both my corvettes & destroyers hit harder because they are in mono-fleets, and the destroyer L weapons keep both fleets competitive against mixed fleets with cruisers (which *are* worthless IMO), & 2) it means I always have significant point defense backing up my battleship fleets, with no need to retro-fit my battleships if facing heavy missile/torp fleets, and no need to sacrifice any battleship load-outs with their crummy point defense options or dubious hangers.

Lots of other opinions here to choose from. These reasons, however, are why I build one destroyer fleet every game.

 

[Roddo]

I always build my fleets in a RP fashion, I don't really mind about efficiency in that regard so I'm not the best source of information about this but, I can say this for sure:

Destroyers are the n° 1 victim in space battles after the appearance of Cruisers in game. I reckon this is because they lack the hull endurance to survive long enough, don't have enough evasion to survive either, and therefore are left in a crappy position in the rooster line up.

Also, the fact that the devs keep adding new ship classes everytime, each one 10x more overpowered than the last one has never sit well with the balancing of this poor lackluster class of ship, it's the one that suffers the most.


That said, no. I don't think they are quite there yet as to be considered worthless.
Still from an efficiency point of view, you might opt them out completely in exchange for just more corvettes and get the same or even better results.

 

[Zenopath]

I build one fleet of 100% destroyers with L/PD set-up & artillery computer. I set them to follow my "vanguard" fleet (which is always pure corvette), and mid/late game I set them (the DD fleet) to follow my lead Battleship fleet.

This is useful (IMO) for two reasons: 1) early game, it makes both my corvettes & destroyers hit harder because they are in mono-fleets, and the destroyer L weapons keep both fleets competitive against mixed fleets with cruisers (which *are* worthless IMO), & 2) it means I always have significant point defense backing up my battleship fleets, with no need to retro-fit my battleships if facing heavy missile/torp fleets, and no need to sacrifice any battleship load-outs with their crummy point defense options or dubious hangers.

Lots of other opinions here to choose from. These reasons, however, are why I build one destroyer fleet every game.

I have noticed that using mono fleets in combination tends to work well. Like if you have a fleet of corvettes following your full battleship fleet around, they can both target an enemy, and the battleships will stay further away and the corvettes will get up close and get all the agro. It is supposed to work that way in mixed fleets, but it seems like the AI doesnt quite do it correctly. Seperating them into fleets lets you put your admiral with movement speed buffs on battleships, and maybe one of those hit and run admirals on the corvettes so more of them withdraw.

I suppose having a dedicated destroyer PD fleet might be useful, in situations where you are encountering a player or AI who really likes missles, as destroyers are better PD than any other class.

 

[Roddo]

Mixed fleets seems to respond correctly in my games, corvettes charge, destroyers and cruisers linger in middle and battleships/titan lag behind. The only ones doing whatever are the strikecraft but those are just borked.

Still, there's truth in what you say about having mono fleets and hand picked admirals.

 

[MarKr]

I've modded some changes - actually most of if addresses the stuff mentioned here.
First of all, Corvettes are very versatile because of their possible loadouts, especially later in the game when equipped with Torpedoes they can shred even Battleships easily. So I removed the Missile section for Corvettes and left there only the 3xS and 1xPD+2xS sections.

Then I gave to Destroyers Missile sections so that they can serve as the first real rocket carriers.

Making loadouts like these possible:

But ofcourse you can have the Stern section 2xS to have a Missile and 4xS in total which works nice against Corvettes too, due to the high tracking of Missiles. Corvettes can have PD sections too so they are not completely screwed against Destroyers like these but the PD counters the rocket slot and the Destroyer is still left with 4xS guns while a Corvette at this point has 2xS guns.

Anyway, I've also reworked the Strikecraft. There are Interceptors and Bombers again. Interceptors have high tracking and their targetting priorities are highest at smallest ship and go down to the biggest ships - so they go after Corvettes first, then Destroyers, Cruisers, etc. while Bombers have low tracking but their targetting priorities go the other way - start at big ships and stations and go down to Corvettes. At the same time Cruisers got one more possible Hangar section at the back so Cruisers can carry two hangars.

The fact that interceptors go after smaller ships first makes it important to keep some PD corvettes and Destroyers in fleets too, so if opponent uses Hangar defense stations or later Cruisers with Stricraft, Destroyers like these are also quite useful.

Also later on when you get your hands on bigger ships, it is not a bad idea to design Destroyers with Missiles and lots of PD to defend your Cruisers and BBs from Bomber Strikecraft in case the opponent builds them.

I'm not sayin it is perfect. I'm still tuning the settings (especially the Strikecrafts and PD) but seems to me it works better than what vanilla game currently has.

 

[Urza1234]

maybe one solution would be to allow destroyers to have hangers or a total of 3 missles. I imagine the sheer volume of missles from 3xdestroyers worth of missles would pose a problem to bb, even if they are using a screen of pd corvettes.

Yeah thats what I think.
Destroyers just dont have great weapon options.

 

[Zenopath]

I've modded some changes - actually most of if addresses the stuff mentioned here.
First of all, Corvettes are very versatile because of their possible loadouts, especially later in the game when equipped with Torpedoes they can shred even Battleships easily. So I removed the Missile section for Corvettes and left there only the 3xS and 1xPD+2xS sections.

That is pretty cool, maybe will give this a try see how it does.

 

[Zardnaar]

2 missiles would make sense. Corvettes can carry one, cruisers have 3.