Combat, is this all there is to it?

[Grubnessul]

So, I've picked up this game some time ago and spent most of my weekend playing.

The disappointing thing so far is the way combat works. Apart from combat only being throwing doomstacks at each other and shipbuilding the standard 4X unguided mess you can better leave on auto upgrade, fleets move also ridiculously fast, making placement before a war fairly irrelevant.

So is there anything else to combat? Splitting my fleet up and harassing enemy stations also doesn't seem very efficient given the speed of bombardment by the aforementioned doomstacks...

 

[Alblaka]

Yup. Doomstack warfare is probabyl the most prominent issue Stellaris currently has. And whilst it's apparently not being adressed in this patch, I'm pretty sure Paradox is aware of it and will consider reworking it. It doesn't even need a rework, just some solid tweaking, and the forum's overflowing with suggestions and ideas on how to achieve that. I would speculate 1.6 will roll in another combat change (since we had one in 1.4 earlier).

 

[ColCarp]

I have never found fleets about 25K to be that effective.

When my main fleet reaches that amount, I normally switch to fleet two, then fleet 3. But I play Stellaris almost exclusively multiplayer. So YMMV

 

[Exarian]

I have never found fleets about 25K to be that effective.

When my main fleet reaches that amount, I normally switch to fleet two, then fleet 3. But I play Stellaris almost exclusively multiplayer. So YMMV

Well... Direct attack on Awaken Empire require 200k-300k fleet. Tons of clipping, terrible lag, and lack of any battle control.

 

[stumason]

I have never found fleets about 25K to be that effective.

When my main fleet reaches that amount, I normally switch to fleet two, then fleet 3. But I play Stellaris almost exclusively multiplayer. So YMMV

Same here, probably even smaller and I never play MP.

Sure you can have doomstack vs doomstack and have one big orgy where mass casualties are the order of the day, or you can lead their doomstack on a merry dance with one fleet while systematically eliminating their mining stations and spaceports with others. I've taken down far more powerful enemies by avoiding the massive fleet engagement as long as I can.

And I have seen the AI run 2-3 fleets before, but they do generally have one big doomfleet.

 

[terrycloth]

Same here, probably even smaller and I never play MP.

Sure you can have doomstack vs doomstack and have one big orgy where mass casualties are the order of the day, or you can lead their doomstack on a merry dance with one fleet while systematically eliminating their mining stations and spaceports with others. I've taken down far more powerful enemies by avoiding the massive fleet engagement as long as I can.

And I have seen the AI run 2-3 fleets before, but they do generally have one big doomfleet.

It takes a while for the AI and its allies to get their fleets in the same place, so sometimes you can take them out one at a time if you can catch them quickly.

Haven't had much luck leading AIs around on a 'merry dance', though. They always catch me.

 

[stumason]

It takes a while for the AI and its allies to get their fleets in the same place, so sometimes you can take them out one at a time if you can catch them quickly.

Aye, did that the other day in fact. Each fleet of this 3 nation alliance was almost as powerful as all mine... Managed to get them all one by one though and with some planning ahead with ship building, kept replacements up with the losses. A late addition of an allied fleet helped with the last fleet though.

Haven't had much luck leading AIs around on a 'merry dance', though. They always catch me.

Yeah, they will eventually, but hopefully it's far enough away that you can cause mayhem in their Empire with your other fleets in the meantime. Maybe even take their homeworld...

 

[zanaikin]

A few things I've discovered that invalidates this:

1. Prepositioning matters, especially when waging a war against alliances, when your fleets could jump in and smash half their empires' fleets before the rest can even mobilize. As alliances grow as the games goes on, this becomes important.
2. There is a maximum limit to planetary bombardment. My fleets hit it at somewhere around 30k power? (can't remember exactly), and I discovered I could split fleets and still have the same bombardment/day. This means that yes, once you go into late-game when fleets can easily brush aside fortresses, it is MORE efficient to split your fleets and invade from multiple fronts. If your enemy keeps their fleet in a doomstack and tries to hunt down your fleet A who keeps running away, then your fleet B get free sieges + invasions + war score.
3. By mid-game, stations account for more than 2/3 of your fleet capacity (Stellaris' primitive version of fleet logistics). Raiding enemy systems and destroying stations will quickly make their fleet become WAY overcapacity, posing a huge drain on their energy. Guess what happens once they go energy-bankrupt? -50% weapon strength. Now you can fight that doomstack in pitched battle.

Seriously, there are more strategies in here than simply grouping all your ships and smashing it into them. Paradox games are more about Operational Strategy than Tactical Strategy. Learn to war at that level.

 

[Alblaka]

Seriously, there are more strategies in here than simply grouping all your ships and smashing it into them. Paradox games are more about Operational Strategy than Tactical Strategy. Learn to war at that level.

The problem is, you don't need to do what you described, to win against the AI. Unless you are behind it in fleet strength. Whcih, so far, has never once happened to me (except for FE/Crisis). Which again is based upon the fact everyone more or less starts at the same footing and the AI is close to abyssimal in managing it's ressources (as proven by the sector AI).

If I have the choice between micro and taking 20% losses, or doing no micro and taking 30% losses, whilst sitting on technically infinite minerals and being able to replace my losses with a few clicks, why bother with the micro?

Of course, warfare in MP is different, but let's be honest, this isn't a MP game inherently and most people will ever only touch SP.

 

[Diezy]

1. There is a maximum limit to planetary bombardment. My fleets hit it at somewhere around 30k power? (can't remember exactly), and I discovered I could split fleets and still have the same bombardment/day. This means that yes, once you go into late-game when fleets can easily brush aside fortresses, it is MORE efficient to split your fleets and invade from multiple fronts. If your enemy keeps their fleet in a doomstack and tries to hunt down your fleet A who keeps running away, then your fleet B get free sieges + invasions + war score.

Bombardment gets quite pointless later on. A good Psionic/Clone troop army of 20 can just drop down there and win the invasion without a problem; all you need is to escort them as they go in, cap the planet and get out. It saves you lots of Terror Bombing trouble too

Depending how fast other fleets can FTL and reinforce each other, maaaybe it's good to split a bit. Especially if all your groups have good admirals. Just to bait them and start a fight on your own terms, especially if you know the FTL entry-points in the system. You risk much, though, as you'll suffer lots of losses by the time everyone's there and the fight begins in earnest.

I'd advise sticking together as a solid group, and force a decisive fight on your own terms before you can safely split up!



Personally I don't like how the combat is... forced? They get close enough to each other and then they just aggro directly charge into each other.

I'd love it if you could still retain control of the fleet's movement direction. Two fleets could strafe each other and shoot at what's in range as they move, with formations maybe adjusting a little to face each other while strafing. Faster ships could kite and disengage. Combat could end as soon as the two fleets both decide to walk away from each other. If you are close enough to the system edge, you could even have your ships even start to prepare to FTL away normally. You could keep your fleet in the Capacitor/Repair field, or out of the Quantum Destabilizer, those'd be some sort of uphill and downhill battles.

It would be nice to get transports out of trouble. Also Covettes and Cruisers would only preffer to rush into the enemy if the suggested movement route is towards the enemy. Otherwise they'd stay behind the BB's. It could make for calling in a well timed charging attack on the enemy fleet.

 

[Exarian]

I don't understand why developers didn't pick the idea of annihilation of population and infrastructure from orbit. Modern weapons of mass destruction need few hours to destroy every sign of civilization - super-duper scifi weapons in stellaris need years of constant full bombardement to make any noticible damage to pop and infrastructure.

Make extermination from orbit great again!

 

[Summin Cool]

Have a manual disengage where a fleet will try to move out of range. At beyond 1.10x weapon range combat disengages?

Personally I would like the combat to approach something near Sword of the stars I or Empire at war. A system requiring multiple fleets in almost all wars on the grand strat level and some degree of micromanagement (or AI control if you are too busy!) on skirmishes and big fleets on the battle level.

 

[zanaikin]

Turn the AI difficulty level up. They're still stupid (especially when it comes to fleets). But their fleets are large enough that it'll force you to fight intelligently instead of relying on head on clashes. One of the best wars I've had was when an alliance of nations who dislike my growing empire declared war on me and caught me unaware, and while individually their fleets was smaller their collective force was about x3 of mine. It forced the use of some intelligent tactics that really made the game interesting.

I don't understand why developers didn't pick the idea of annihilation of population and infrastructure from orbit. Modern weapons of mass destruction need few hours to destroy every sign of civilization - super-duper scifi weapons in stellaris need years of constant full bombardement to make any noticible damage to pop and infrastructure.

Multiplayer balance issues.

Also for the same reasons humanity signed the geneva convention. Sure, it feels great when you're doing the extermination... then the reprisals come. The Wehrmacht slaughtered and burned its way to Moscow. The Red Army repaid it by looting and raping their way into Berlin.

 

[Exarian]

Multiplayer balance issues.

Also for the same reasons humanity signed the geneva convention. Sure, it feels great when you're doing the extermination... then the reprisals come. The Wehrmacht slaughtered and burned its way to Moscow. The Red Army repaid it by looting and raping their way into Berlin.

1. I don't say full planetary genocide should take hours - but few in-game months should be enough to purify the planet (at cost of destroyed infrastructure and nuclear fallout reducing habitability for time).
2. Neither my empire never signed such convention, nor such convention officially existed as part of game diplomacy. I don't want artificial barriers preventing my empire doing galaxy-size extermination of all alien species. If my purpose is removing alien race, then why game is forcing me to do it while manual purge button - instead of easiest and most logical solution (nuclear holocaust from orbit).
3. I don't say such gameplay should not have consequences (like reprisals you mentioned) - I just want to have such choose. ATM game is preventing me to be as evil as I want, by giving me unnatural, illogical obstacles.

 

[Slarkon]

Yup. Doomstack warfare is probabyl the most prominent issue Stellaris currently has. And whilst it's apparently not being adressed in this patch, I'm pretty sure Paradox is aware of it and will consider reworking it. It doesn't even need a rework, just some solid tweaking, and the forum's overflowing with suggestions and ideas on how to achieve that. I would speculate 1.6 will roll in another combat change (since we had one in 1.4 earlier).

Pretty sure they where aware it before the game got released. Im amazed it has not been fixed . has it been 9 months ish? poor show paradox. DLC is great and all but fix the base game already

ATM game is preventing me to be as evil as I want, by giving me unnatural, illogical obstacles.

Yup the invisible walls in space (closed borders being a magic wall and not what it really is which is a REQUEST dont enter our space) the mercians violate borders all the time as do other contries because they are big and they can. this game should reflect that

Also the enforced 10 year no declare war thing is a pain

 

[Slarkon]

Bombarding and ground combat should be 2 separate things. Bombardment should not just be -20 or -30 opinion. It should be closer to -100 or higher like purging. Move in Glass a planet - establish outpost to prevent re-colonisation.

Also very important this will increase game performense cause with less planets inhabited the engine has less to process

 

[Thygrrr]

Doomstacks could use a nerf to speed, combat power, and to logistics costs. (because Attrition doesn't really cut it in space, I suppose).

Or fleet size limit, 10 fleet capacity per star of admiral or something. Or Buffs to fleet if Admiral Skill is better than fleet size.

More on topic: I'm mildly disappointed with combat as well. It's fun and punchy, but it only is for about 15 seconds before the fleets crash into each other and become one big furball. I'd like my kinetic weapon ships to stay at a distance, forcing the enemy destroyers and corvettes to break out and hunt them down.

Combat speed only has a very limited time advantage / disadvantage, and I actually abuse it to "program" my fleet so the heavy hitters stay behind while the shield and PD ships form a wall in front.

 

[Inkidu]

I like the fleet stuff (as much as I can, because I seem terrible at it) armies on the other hand need a total rework. You shouldn't need ten-twelve armies to take a planet. They need to give you an army builder that allows you to utilize more add-on options at once, and species make up of cosmopolitan empires. Army fights should be smaller and deeper. You're not trying to take the whole planet in a space-level game. You're trying to control two things:

Main centers of industry and administration
High orbitals.

You don't have to flood a planet with millions and millions of cannon-fodder to take it. I would like a whole rework of this.

 

[Exarian]

I like the fleet stuff (as much as I can, because I seem terrible at it) armies on the other hand need a total rework. You shouldn't need ten-twelve armies to take a planet. They need to give you an army builder that allows you to utilize more add-on options at once, and species make up of cosmopolitan empires. Army fights should be smaller and deeper. You're not trying to take the whole planet in a space-level game. You're trying to control two things:

Main centers of industry and administration
High orbitals.

You don't have to flood a planet with millions and millions of cannon-fodder to take it. I would like a whole rework of this.

I wish to be able to remove enemy presence from planet via most obvious and logical way:

Annihilating everything from orbit via full-scale nuclear bombardment (at cost of destroying planet infrastructure and making most of planet tiles temporarily inhabitable).

Land invasion should be an option, not only way.

More details:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...interaction-and-possible-improvements.994839/

 

[Thygrrr]

"temporarily" -> a couple thousands of years.