DOOMSTACK AND FLEET DOOMSTACKED SUPER-THREAD OF DOOM

[Huck Sunbh]

Um I see you have the Stellaris since you have the icon, so you are aware there is already 'leader' slots right that all people count against (governors, scientists, admirals and generals). If they recruited no other leader they would be unable to perform research, survey systems, would have mass rioting in their sectors, and their ground troops for colony invasions would be at a negative for not having a general assigned. And I didn't say have a ship cap I said have after a certain number of ships in a fleet it receives negatives and Amdirals reduce those negatvies.

What i said still applies. Preventing players from properly utilizing their fleet to the best of its ability using a half irrelevant resource instead of other industrial means won't do good.

and besides, so what if the other player has scientists and governors ? The player who can blitz half the galaxy with superior military will be on top of everyone else within a few years.
With all the significance of research considered, an all admiral player will be unchallenged. all he has to do is conquer as much as he can, as fast as he can. And with current war considered, you don't even need ground armies if you navy is absolutely unrivaled.

 

[EntropyAvatar]

There are just so many critical differences between the Honorverse and Stellaris:

1. Detection: In the HV, a giant fleet can come crashing over the hyper limit with no warning
2. Raid Vulnerability: If unopposed, even a very small raiding fleet can almost instantly wreck many times it's cost in space-based infrastructure
3. Infrastructure in Space: More of the economic base is in space, vulnerable to raiding
4. Interstellar Communication Time: Instant in Stellaris, limited to speed of fleets in HV.

I think you put the above 4 points together, and if you don't defend your systems against small raids, your economy will be very quickly wrecked. At the same time, the communication lag would mean a concentrated fleet would have a lot of trouble trying to chase down smaller fleets operating independently.

 

[Von Thoma]

... hhhmm haven't read everything, I only have
ONE PROBLEM , even I also would want a solution for that doomstack problematic :

WHO IS PROGRAMMING the AI to use that concept, it even is now helpless , without cheating

... we have some fantastic Mods already (not for doomstack solution) but they are most worthless, as the AI couldn't use all that ideas

 

[Mltdwn]

What i said still applies. Preventing players from properly utilizing their fleet to the best of its ability using a half irrelevant resource instead of other industrial means won't do good.

and besides, so what if the other player has scientists and governors ? The player who can blitz half the galaxy with superior military will be on top of everyone else within a few years.
With all the significance of research considered, an all admiral player will be unchallenged. all he has to do is conquer as much as he can, as fast as he can. And with current war considered, you don't even need ground armies if you navy is absolutely unrivaled.

You missed the 2 day 20 player Paradox game then. Quill and an ally tried that and had both of their doomstacks destroyed by a single player with a fleet that had half of their combat value. He actually has a video on YouTube about this.

 

[Huck Sunbh]

You missed the 2 day 20 player Paradox game then. Quill and an ally tried that and had both of their doomstacks destroyed by a single player with a fleet that had half of their combat value. He actually has a video on YouTube about this.

It was not because the other guy had higher tech, it was because he actually built his ships with both armor, shields and pd as well as a variety of weapons, instead of the only shields and lasers(?) that quill and his buddy built.
Has nothing to do with anything i said, and is irrelevant to our discussion.

 

[Agathors]

That is only an option because not all realistic modifiers can be implemented to the game.
We can't add highly calculated micro tactics and such, therefore artificial modifiers are necessary to make the game closer to reality by other means.

can you be more precise ... I can't follow your resonning

 

[Huck Sunbh]

You can see 'hey they are sending a doomstack' and send your ships to their backline systems to capture them as their doomstack travels towards you. They'll take longer to jump as it is, while you can go quickly from origination to destination in a much shorter time frame and rack up your war score. There are means to counter it that aren't overwhelmingly difficult. If they split up and try to do the same with you, well then great, they don't have a doomstack anymore and the issue you were complaining about is now fixed. And you are still up in the war score due to the time it would take them to seperate out the doomstack. and jump to different systems.

Nothing says you have to engage them. Tactical withdrawls are a perfectly valid tactic.

And thats the problem. Option B of the 2 only viable war options.
I wrote is here too:

Currently, in order to win there are only 2 options:
Full engagement. The winner of the first decisive battle wins the war.
No engagement. Sending small fleets to attack his mining and ports, running from battles, and waiting until you have enough warscore without a single battle fought.

Main problem is that there is absolutely no inbetween. Either option A or B.

You shouldn't be able to win a war by abandoning everything you have and base rushing the enemy.

 

[Huck Sunbh]

can you be more precise ... I can't follow your resonning

Well, simple:
We implement modifiers, some realistic and some made up with some degree of realism, in order to have the game play out in a realistic manner.

We do that because implementing "reality" into a video game is, impossible to say the least.

Doomstacking is a problem because it is not realistic, examples are modern and ancient naval warfare, yet because we lack the ability to implement "reality" as a whole, we make modifiers and small adjustments to numbers so the game plays out more realistically.

Key word being "plays out"

 

[Mltdwn]

It was not because the other guy had higher tech, it was because he actually built his ships with both armor, shields and pd as well as a variety of weapons, instead of the only shields and lasers(?) that quill and his buddy built.
Has nothing to do with anything i said, and is irrelevant to our discussion.

Has everything to do with it, given you have to research shields and a variety of weapons and you CAN'T research them if you spend all of your leader slots on Generals. Just like you can't survey enough systems to get the resources because you don't have scientists on your survey ships so it does address the issue. You would have to use, at minimum 4 of your slots for scientists. Late game you have what... 15-20 slots. That's a full quarter of your slots. And given you can only have late game, what 9 colonies directly under the homeworld (again with research to expand your colonial control) and the rest must be in sectors and if your sectors don't have a governor they are more likely to rebel that means someone sinking their slots exclusivly into Admirals will be heavily gimping themselves because you'll have smaller segments of space under your control, lower technology, and less overall projected power.

 

[Mltdwn]

Well, simple:
We implement modifiers, some realistic and some made up with some degree of realism, in order to have the game play out in a realistic manner.

We do that because implementing "reality" into a video game is, impossible to say the least.

Doomstacking is a problem because it is not realistic, examples are modern and ancient naval warfare, yet because we lack the ability to implement "reality" as a whole, we make modifiers and small adjustments to numbers so the game plays out more realistically.

Key word being "plays out"

You mean like the Doomstack of 1200 warships, 4000 transports, with an additional 5 battleships, 20 cruisers, 65 destroyers, and 175,000 troops we used as part of Operation Neptune?

We also did the same thing in Desert Storm. We, as a nation have a tendency to Doomstack in our wars.

 

[Huck Sunbh]

Has everything to do with it, given you have to research shields and a variety of weapons and you CAN'T research them if you spend all of your leader slots on Generals.

And what of the first stages of the game ? Ever heard of snowballing ?
You rely too much on people playing by rules not implemented in the game. Given your suggestion, a player would simply rush for conquest, where investing purely in admirals will assure him victory over anyone who isn't.

You won't solve the problem by limiting one's naval ability and efficiency based on a resource where everyone gets the same of, but use differently. A better option would simply be lowering the fleet cap so everyone has similar fleet sizes. Would end up pretty much the same to you suggestion. But i would still object to it as well.

 

[Summin Cool]

We need a compilation of doomstack threads

 

[Huck Sunbh]

You mean like the Doomstack of 1200 warships, 4000 transports, with an additional 5 battleships, 20 cruisers, 65 destroyers, and 175,000 troops we used as part of Operation Neptune?

Coordinated naval invasions are obviously more sensitive. Losing all those transports because you have too little of an escort would not benefit you, so you send more ships with it.
Invasions are completely different then what would be called regular engagements, in which fleet concentrations can only harm you.

Edit: pretty sure even in normandy the naval force wouldn't be called a "doomstack" cosidering it wasn't nearly all allied naval forces, or even the absolute majority of them. A large fleet isn't a doomstack.

 

[Mltdwn]

Coordinated naval invasions are obviously more sensitive. Losing all those transports because you have too little of an escort would not benefit you, so you send more ships with it.
Invasions are completely different then what would be called regular engagements, in which fleet concentrations can only harm you.

Well part of the problem comes down to the way the game is designed. You can only engage in hostilities when you are at war. When the US is 'At War' we doomstack. We throw overwhelming force at the opposition to 'shock and awe' them into compliance. We did it with WW-II, we tried it with Korea and failed (because the Koreans didnt really care), we were ready to do it for Japan, we did it with Iraq 1 and 2 and with Afghanistan. What you are talking about aren't "actions of war" but more of what Germany did in the late 30s with Czechoslovakia or Russia with Crimia if you want a more recent example, and when full on war broke out and they attacked Poland they too 'doomstacked', and then proceeded to doomstack France (until Hitler became a moron and turned on Russia).

 

[Huck Sunbh]

Well part of the problem comes down to the way the game is designed. You can only engage in hostilities when you are at war. When the US is 'At War' we doomstack. We throw overwhelming force at the opposition to 'shock and awe' them into compliance. We did it with WW-II, we tried it with Korea and failed (because the Koreans didnt really care), we were ready to do it for Japan, we did it with Iraq 1 and 2 and with Afghanistan. What you are talking about aren't "actions of war" but more of what Germany did in the late 30s with Czechoslovakia or Russia with Crimia if you want a more recent example, and when full on war broke out and they attacked Poland they too 'doomstacked', and then proceeded to doomstack France (until Hitler became a moron and turned on Russia).

Land combat can't really be called a doomstack, due to the significantly different nature of land warfare.
If when speaking of naval use in wars like Iraq and korea, calling it "doomstacking" is still unfitting as it wasn't nearly the majority of US naval forces, but a main large fleet used as a command post. Rarely engaging in combat with anything but shore bombardment.

And yes, the problem is undoubtedly in the games current design, but it revolves around how there is no incentive to split forces. Direct or indirect. Most suggestions so far either focus on everything before the battle (logistics options) which means nothing to the battle itself, or provide small or insignificant penalties that don't quite discourage doomstacks as they merely weaken them, yet they still remain the best option.

 

[Agathors]

.
Doomstacking is a problem because it is not realistic, examples are modern and ancient naval warfare.

What wrong is considering doomstaking as bad or undesirable but when we speak about navy (surface or space) doomstack will always be rightly legitimate. You can watch one of the Blorg stream where Wiz adresse this issue. Of course, the warfare mechanic in Stellaris is lacking for a game pretending to be a GSG but artificially removing or negating the use of assembling a large armada would not resolve the case.



Well now I see why I can't understand you...

 

[Huck Sunbh]

Well now I see why I can't understand you...

Now i don't follow.

 

[Agathors]

Coordinated naval invasions are obviously more sensitive. Losing all those transports because you have too little of an escort would not benefit you, so you send more ships with it.
Invasions are completely different then what would be called regular engagements, in which fleet concentrations can only harm you.

Edit: pretty sure even in normandy the naval force wouldn't be called a "doomstack" cosidering it wasn't nearly all allied naval forces, or even the absolute majority of them. A large fleet isn't a doomstack.

You need to look how the naval component works for a nation particularly beyond tactical level

 

[Agathors]

Now i don't follow.

Look what I highlighted

 

[Huck Sunbh]

You need to look how the naval component works for a nation particularly beyond tactical level

What exactly do you mean by that ?
A nation spreads its navy all across the waters or space they need to defend or operate in. In some seas, or sectors there are more then others but in no case would a nation send all combat assets to one place. The basis of a doomstack has no tactical value in reality, and shouldn't have one in Stellaris.