DOOMSTACK AND FLEET DOOMSTACKED SUPER-THREAD OF DOOM

[Pavane]

I agree for the most part. Travel time in the Honorverse is longer than in Stellaris, though it is faster than most Moo2 clones. It takes weeks to months for a fleet to reach a deep strike target and only hours to wreck havok in HV. Compounding that, you've got little to no sensor coverage in hyper and interstaller comm speed is limited to ship speed. So flying your doomstack around to intercept other doomstacks is a no-go. The only way to defend your assets is to sit on them, and the best way to find a large opposing fleet is to hit something they absolutely have to protect.

Warp Factor 3 (27 x light speed) was the standard cruising speed in the Star Trek original series. That works out to 0.075 ly/day. Compare that to the slowest FTL drive speed in Stellaris of 2.0 ly/day.

 

[Galactic Origins]

It would be neat if you could choose two auras. I always use the heal ships one anyway. I do not bother with different designs. Old way was very redundant with many BBs and all had heal aura.

 

[Cikomyr]

Warp Factor 3 (27 x light speed) was the standard cruising speed in the Star Trek original series. That works out to 0.075 ly/day. Compare that to the slowest FTL drive speed in Stellaris of 2.0 ly/day.

You think about it. Armies in EU move way slower than fleet in Stellaris...

How would you then balance the Warp Gates?

 

[Huck Sunbh]

For the definition I will go for a large number of units concentrate in one area and group

Well that's entirely inaccurate. Doomstacks are relative.

 

[apoc527]

I agree for the most part. Travel time in the Honorverse is longer than in Stellaris, though it is faster than most Moo2 clones. It takes weeks to months for a fleet to reach a deep strike target and only hours to wreck havok in HV. Compounding that, you've got little to no sensor coverage in hyper and interstaller comm speed is limited to ship speed. So flying your doomstack around to intercept other doomstacks is a no-go. The only way to defend your assets is to sit on them, and the best way to find a large opposing fleet is to hit something they absolutely have to protect.

I think what this shows as well is that the relevant tactics and strategies in a given sci-fi setting depend entirely on the many, many factors and choices related to speed of travel, communications, sensor techs, damage and defense capabilities, etc.

This is a perfect example of why tactics and strategy make no sense in a vacuum. It's very easy to talk about these things in history because we all know, more or less, the rules of the game. In sci-fi, you have to define all of it before you can start talking about tactics and strategy.

In Stellaris as it exists now, the following is true:
1. Communications and sensors are FTL.
2. Ships are visible at a relatively short distance from your border, but speed of travel is such that it's hard to intercept. But it's also true that it takes so much time to fly around in-system and do damage, that you DO have time to get a fleet to the invaded system before anything really bad happens.
3. Damage takes a long time to inflict on basically anything.

Stellaris is extra challenging because it tries to bring in so many tropes. This is why a hyperlane-only game is more strategically satisfying because there's a clearer set of rules and limitations to build strategies around.

 

[ashbery76]

Game needs flagships in limited number.

 

[Agathors]

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.

Like hoi3 with the hull penalty....


We needed to take in consideration the lake of crucial mechanics like intelligence, logistics, proper fortifications (even if the flower defences is potent if well used) etc. Just consider how games like Distant Worlds, Polaris sector and the like really take account of the war at a strategical level. Few realise the missed opportunity in Stellaris at the hands of paradox.

 

[Cikomyr]

Honorverse: both Battle of Manticore (Manticore v. Haven, Manticoran Alliance v. Solarian League)
Star Trek: Battle of Wolf 359
Star Wars: Battle of Endor
B5: I forget the name, but the big fleet battle at the end.

But everyone of these examples are instances of a SINGLE battle.

We are talking about the conduct of an entire WAR. When in these stories have the entire fleet of a faction aggregated in a single doomstack, and remained as such for the entire duration of the war?

 

[Pavane]

You think about it. Armies in EU move way slower than fleet in Stellaris...

How would you then balance the Warp Gates?

I was only observing that warp travel in Stellaris is much faster than in Star Trek, but I would thik about the following for the purpose of balance. FTL has three phases in Stellaris: warm-up, transit, and cool-down. Wormholes have no transit or cool-down times so you have to tinker with the warm-up time, while compensating for the drawback of having to have a wormhole station. Unless you start or end in a start system with a wormhole station you will have to make two FTL transits.

 

[Admiral Adama]

Ah my bad, thanks

 

[Cikomyr]

Do you think Fleets could have massive maintenance penalties unless they are assigned to a Central Staging Point? Like a Starbase that serves as supply centre and HQ. The amount of Tonnage that could be serviced by that Starbase would depend on the level of development that Starbase has been built.

Offensive fleet would need to remain in border systems. Either that, or you would need to construct a forward staging point for deep strike capacity if you dont want to your invasion force to cost you 10x its usual maintenance cost.

I got the idea from the Babylon 5, when the Narn learned the location of the Centauri advanced base where it was planning its forward operations. The Narn sent their entire home fleet in a Hail Mary attack to stop temporarily the Centauri invasion.

Turned out badly for them. Both the idea was sound. Id like to see something like that implemented.

This could force you to maintain local fleets locally stationed around your Empire. Hell, you could even perhaps automate them for defense purposes.

 

[apoc527]

But everyone of these examples are instances of a SINGLE battle.

We are talking about the conduct of an entire WAR. When in these stories have the entire fleet of a faction aggregated in a single doomstack, and remained as such for the entire duration of the war?

Well, at least in the Honorverse, those fights tended to end the war. I forgot a few of the Havenite wars too--there were some massive doomstack fights that ended those wars as well.

Basically, a doomstack v. doomstack almost always IS the war. Everything leading up to that is just minor skirmishes. It's these minor skirmishes that Stellaris is lacking, largely because of travel time and the lack of other things for ships to do (i.e. protect trade ships). Now, you can have a really long war in Stellaris where multiple "doomstacks" fight it out. That's happened to me just recently. I lost and rebuilt about 3 fleets before that war ended in a white peace. It was epic. Each major battle was basically my entire fleet.

There is precisely ONE reason why you wouldn't fight with your whole doomstack in Stellaris right now: if you are fighting on multiple fronts with individually weaker empires and can't afford to leave one front totally exposed to raiding because you need the resources to pay for your fleet. That's a good reason and about the only one right now.

 

[Agathors]

Doomstack is not a problem itself for me, it causes problems because you don't have a Safe Heaven to retreat and rebuild. If you lose the main battle, it's over because you can't rebuild your fleet to become stronger than the enemy and counterattack his doomstack.

We need a Safe Heaven and the doomstack will not be a problem anymore. I will post my solution some day from now.

 

[Cikomyr]

Well, at least in the Honorverse, those fights tended to end the war. I forgot a few of the Havenite wars too--there were some massive doomstack fights that ended those wars as well.

But.. no. Again. I am in the middle of reading the Honorverse books. Sure, there are large fleet movements at times. But they are NOT Doomstacks. Just large deployed fleets that serve specific purposes.

The Third Battle of Grayson. The Fourth of Grayson. The Battle of Trevor's Star. All of those involved a massive fleet, but also every single one of them was staged as part or an overall strategic plan that involved other Task Forces coordinating. This is not an example of "Doomstack Wrecking Ball".

 

[Huck Sunbh]

Do you think Fleets could have massive maintenance penalties unless they are assigned to a Central Staging Point? Like a Starbase that serves as supply centre and HQ. The amount of Tonnage that could be serviced by that Starbase would depend on the level of development that Starbase has been built.

Offensive fleet would need to remain in border systems. Either that, or you would need to construct a forward staging point for deep strike capacity if you dont want to your invasion force to cost you 10x its usual maintenance cost.

I got the idea from the Babylon 5, when the Narn learned the location of the Centauri advanced base where it was planning its forward operations. The Narn sent their entire home fleet in a Hail Mary attack to stop temporarily the Centauri invasion.

Turned out badly for them. Both the idea was sound. Id like to see something like that implemented.

This could force you to maintain local fleets locally stationed around your Empire. Hell, you could even perhaps automate them for defense purposes.

I love this.
But it would require some adjustments. Like when you fight a much smaller nation in size, but with enough pops to sustain a fleet similar to your own, then will their local fleet be larger then yours ?

 

[Mr. Capiatlist]

We need a compilation of doomstack threads

A doomstack of doomstacks you say?

 

[Cikomyr]

I love this.
But it would require some adjustments. Like when you fight a much smaller nation in size, but with enough pops to sustain a fleet similar to your own, then will their local fleet be larger then yours ?

I dont see why we need a tech limit on the size of a Starbase's development. If they are willing to heavily invest in a few starbases, good for them. But it also mean they will need to invest a LOT of time in their forward bases if they want them to be as capable as their defensive bases.

 

[Smorensky]

A doomstack of doomstacks you say?

Lolz, was gonna propose the same thing. That was fast...

Now all we need is some way to prevent spamming and this mega-doomstack thread from going off rails

 

[Summin Cool]

A doomstack of doomstacks you say?

Cheers!

 

[Xerberus]

1. So let's say you attack using wormholes and you jump with your entire fleet of say 40k in the middle of my territory and I have a fleet of max 25k.

2. Instead of taking your fleet head on I split my forces into 3 stacks of 8k. Since your forces jumped into the middle of my empire and are rather far from your border, their attrition is accumulating like crazy.

3. I send one stack of 8k to delay your fleet and leave the other 2 stacks at a starbase. My 8k fleet engages your stack of 40k and locks it down for a short while. Both fleets are now accumulating attrition, but your doomstack accumulates it much, much faster then my fleet (since my force is in my own system). So my 8k stack dies to overwhelming numbers, you occupy a planet and take out my starbase in that system.

4. By that time the attrition rating of your fleet had already reduced their combat potential by say 60% and movement by say 50%, you decide to go back and refuel. I then bring in my remaining fleets of 16k. Your doomstack is tired and it's effective strength is maybe 18k, my fresh troops are at full readiness with a strength of 16k and they move much faster. As I counterattack and lock down your fleet in battle the attrition keeps on eating away at your combat strength. So in the end I take out your entire 40k stack of tired troops while loosing only a half of my 25k.

a) why should the one who invest tons of minerals for production and time and energy for maintenance get such hefty debuffs and waste his resources just because he has the bigger fleet? sounds stupid!

b) so instead of your 8k fleet low attrition vs 40k high attrition i split my 40k up into 5x 8k (same as yours)....so now i still have more ships and firepower than you! still a doom stack, just sligthly broken up in pieces!