Enemy building in your system

[Reaperdamo]

Wiz said during the stream that he may set it so that they only build them when they have conquered a system. Maybe that would be a mistake, but there does need to be a balance between that and overdoing it otherwise they will never have minerals for their main fleet.

 

[kalauer]

If you send just one corvette to destroy the construction ship, the enemy can jump in a squad of ships to destroy it, then jump back out again. If you want to stop them building stations in your systems, you have to devote a significant force to doing it, or risk being ambushed.

But is having to committ a significant force to Counter one construction ship not a giant mismatch? Besides, I think the appropriate reaction to s ingle construction ship is a single Corvette. And if the enemy follows with a fleet (thus "ambushing" your single Corvette, which would not be a significant gain), you follow with your fleet, because at that Point, it would be a serious Military Operation. And at that Point, i would consider it a valid strategy and not a Problem anymore.

Yes. That would be great AI and an interesting challenge. The entire point of wormhole stations is they give you unprecedented striking distance within their range. The need to counter enemy forces building them in your territory presents a problem for the player to solve - does he ignore it and focus on achieving his objectives, counter it with defence stations to hold off enemy strike forces, or split his forces in an effort to engage the construction ships while also attacking enemy systems?

A few weeks ago people were complaining about the seeming simplicity of Stellaris warfare - two huge doomfleets smashing into each other and resolving the war in one fight. Wormhole strategy demonstrates that this is not the case - the player has to carefully position his forces, counter enemy strikes etc. Where you see a micro-management chore, I see fun and engaging warfare.

As stated earlier, this seems to be a matter of taste. Hunting unarmed ships (potentially many ) with Corvettes does not seem fun and engaging. On the other side, if the enemy had to committ a significant part of his fleet (I argued 15%, but that is of course indicative) to These endeavors, I would agree: This would add another layer of strategic possibilities and could be interesting.

 

[kalauer]

Wiz said during the stream that he may set it so that they only build them when they have conquered a system. Maybe that would be a mistake, but there does need to be a balance between that and overdoing it otherwise they will never have minerals for their main fleet.

Did he? I honestly believe this might be too far, I think the amended option I came up with (with all due credit to the other side of the discussion) regarding fleet presence would be softer and more flexible.

 

[beartjah]

Just a quick question: How cheap can we make the designs of defensive stations? If we could make a design that's very cheap(yet also rather weak) it could be viable to just build one in each of your systems. Add in a rule that you can't build if there's a hostile(non-envirnment, so amoeba don't count) military presence in the system and I think it couldfix the problem: we coudl then build stations that force the enemy to send something of an escort in there to blow up these kind of stations, but any serious military force would just wipe them out.

So basically: just make it cheaper for the defender to establish some kind of military presence in every single system he owns, without letting said presene be strong enough te seriously influence anything bigger than small skirmishes.

 

[kalauer]

Just a quick question: How cheap can we make the designs of defensive stations? If we could make a design that's very cheap(yet also rather weak) it could be viable to just build one in each of your systems. Add in a rule that you can't build if there's a hostile(non-envirnment, so amoeba don't count) military presence in the system and I think it couldfix the problem: we coudl then build stations that force the enemy to send something of an escort in there to blow up these kind of stations, but any serious military force would just wipe them out.

So basically: just make it cheaper for the defender to establish some kind of military presence in every single system he owns, without letting said presene be strong enough te seriously influence anything bigger than small skirmishes.

Yes, this might also solve it. But sadly, only to a certain degree, I guess. Since the strength of the Station would be known, one would only send the Minimum needed, which, as you rightfully said, should not be much. Also, one of the main Features of the stations, the FTL-drain, would be quite inflationary then. And the Basic question, why one Needs to model it (the resistance) explicitly when it is the same for all Systems, remains.

 

[Chrysaetos]

But is having to committ a significant force to Counter one construction ship not a giant mismatch? Besides, I think the appropriate reaction to s ingle construction ship is a single Corvette. And if the enemy follows with a fleet (thus "ambushing" your single Corvette, which would not be a significant gain), you follow with your fleet, because at that Point, it would be a serious Military Operation. And at that Point, i would consider it a valid strategy and not a Problem anymore.

So my strategy is to send 2-3 Construction ships into your territory to build Wormhole stations.

If you don't respond, I gain tremendous access to your systems and can afterwards run circles around your fleets over all your territory.

If you do respond, with a small force, then I'll ambush it and destroy part of your military with little commitment.

So you learn and send a bigger force, if it's big enough that I can't ambush it without issue then some other part of your empire is weakened and I'll hit that.

The strategy is valid. I'll force you to move fleets to where you don't want to move them and while you're dealing with my wormhole stations, I'll be taking worlds and building more stations somewhere else. If you don't want to destroy my stations because you want to be strong somewhere else? That's fine, I'll use my stations to leap across your systems and hit your undefended worlds.

It's a strategy that exploits a weakness in your defenses, defend the systems where I can build with little risk (a construction ship) or be subject to me extending my reach all over your space.

This is fun, engaging gameplay to me. It's a strategy trying to beat another strategy through player choice.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

So my strategy is to send 2-3 Construction ships into your territory to build Wormhole stations.

If you don't respond, I gain tremendous access to your systems and can afterwards run circles around your fleets over all your territory.

If you do respond, with a small force, then I'll ambush it and destroy part of your military with little commitment.

So you learn and send a bigger force, if it's big enough that I can't ambush it without issue then some other part of your empire is weakened and I'll hit that.

The strategy is valid. I'll force you to move fleets to where you don't want to move them and while you're dealing with my wormhole stations, I'll be taking worlds and building more stations somewhere else. If you don't want to destroy my stations because you want to be strong somewhere else? That's fine, I'll use my stations to leap across your systems and hit your undefended worlds.

It's a strategy that exploits a weakness in your defences, defend the systems where I can build with little risk (a construction ship) or be subject to me extending my reach all over your space.

This is fun, engaging gameplay to me. It's a strategy trying to beat another strategy through player choice.

This still is a waste of resources, these stations are not exactly cheap to build and neither are the construction ships, both can be destroyed with relative ease and the defender almost always have the edge here since they are the one fighting on their home turf and close to supportive bases.

This strategy might work if you have a vastly superior fleet, but I would not try it against an opponent who has an equal or stronger fleet.

I would also not do it unless I had an over arching goal with placing those stations there. If your goal is to just to draw out the enemy then raids seem like proper and more effective way to do it.

A single corvette or small group of corvettes might also be difficult to ambush. If they see an incoming fleet they just withdraw and run away. There are always some warning before an enemy appear.

If you don't mind being thorough and micromanage your fleets the station building strategy are very likely to become costly and most likely pointless.

 

[Chrysaetos]

This still is a waste of resources, these stations are not exactly cheap to build and neither are the construction ships, both can be destroyed with relative ease and the defender almost always have the edge here since they are the one fighting on their home turf and close to supportive bases.

Construction Ships looked to be cheap on the Stream, a fraction of a corvette. The stations, we don't know how expensive they are, we haven't seen it.

It's not that you should employ the strategy regardless of circumstance, it's that if the situation allows for it, you use it and reap massive advantages in a war.

 

[King of Malta]

I think it would be very useful: with Military Space Stations.

I find out that a Hyperlanes enemy only has one way to get into my empire. So I invade that system and build a bunch of fortresses and essentially fortify it. Then I turtle up and ping down the enemy fleet as I beat them up, and can invade further systems knowing the system I captured is at least minor semi defended.

Wasn't there a space station mod to pull Warp ships to the system the station is in? If I spread those out, especially with a raiding ng oriented enemy, I will be able to pull and engage them.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Construction Ships looked to be cheap on the Stream, a fraction of a corvette. The stations, we don't know how expensive they are, we haven't seen it.

It's not that you should employ the strategy regardless of circumstance, it's that if the situation allows for it, you use it and reap massive advantages in a war.

Construction ships are not super expensive but more expensive then a corvette... but that is not really the main point.

Just risking them to draw out the enemy when there are easier way to do that seem a bit pointless.

If the point is to extend your reach and you have the resources to protect them then it is another matter.

 

[macd21]

This still is a waste of resources, these stations are not exactly cheap to build and neither are the construction ships, both can be destroyed with relative ease and the defender almost always have the edge here since they are the one fighting on their home turf and close to supportive bases.

This strategy might work if you have a vastly superior fleet, but I would not try it against an opponent who has an equal or stronger fleet.

I would also not do it unless I had an over arching goal with placing those stations there. If your goal is to just to draw out the enemy then raids seem like proper and more effective way to do it.

A single corvette or small group of corvettes might also be difficult to ambush. If they see an incoming fleet they just withdraw and run away. There are always some warning before an enemy appear.

If you don't mind being thorough and micromanage your fleets the station building strategy are very likely to become costly and most likely pointless.

On the contrary, this is the kind of strategy you use if you're outnumbered and up against certain types of enemy. Your opponent either lets you strike anywhere in his empire, or else is forced to tie up resources (ships) trying to deal with your construction ships. Either way allows your smaller force a better chance of survival - you can strike at vulnerable systems, far from his fleet, or you can hit his forces while they're split up, then pop back home before his forces can move to intercept you. The only enemy it won't be effective against is another wormhole-empire, who'll be able to quickly move to intercept you. Warp-empires (like the Blorg) will be particularly susceptible to this kind of attack, due to their slower ships (hyperlane fleets may be able to intercept in time, if the theatre of war isn't too big).

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

On the contrary, this is the kind of strategy you use if you're outnumbered and up against certain types of enemy. Your opponent either lets you strike anywhere in his empire, or else is forced to tie up resources (ships) trying to deal with your construction ships. Either way allows your smaller force a better chance of survival - you can strike at vulnerable systems, far from his fleet, or you can hit his forces while they're split up, then pop back home before his forces can move to intercept you. The only enemy it won't be effective against is another wormhole-empire, who'll be able to quickly move to intercept you. Warp-empires (like the Blorg) will be particularly susceptible to this kind of attack, due to their slower ships (hyperlane fleets may be able to intercept in time, if the theatre of war isn't too big).

No... I would never waste my resources like that... I would rather raid the enemy and destroy their infrastructure.

As soon as I build a static station a superior enemy will easily deal with it.

I would rather build the WH stations in my own system close to the enemy with defensive installations to protect them and then strike deep from there.

 

[kalauer]

So my strategy is to send 2-3 Construction ships into your territory to build Wormhole stations.

If you don't respond, I gain tremendous access to your systems and can afterwards run circles around your fleets over all your territory.

If you do respond, with a small force, then I'll ambush it and destroy part of your military with little commitment..

This small force would be one Corvette. So unless you suggest that will slowly build up be successive reinforcements (all very micro heavy) to a real significant fight, what exactly have you gained?

So you learn and send a bigger force, if it's big enough that I can't ambush it without issue then some other part of your empire is weakened and I'll hit that.

So you say it should be aviable tobind a Major enemy force (since as you put it, minors won't do it) with a single constrcution ship? So you use three construction ships to have the entire enemy navy busy, while he does the same (and possibly three other war participants, too)? This is exactly what I was pointing at when saying it turns into Micro-hell. Because you would have to spend a considerable amount of Attention to an insignificant enemy presence.

The strategy is valid. I'll force you to move fleets to where you don't want to move them and while you're dealing with my wormhole stations, I'll be taking worlds and building more stations somewhere else. If you don't want to destroy my stations because you want to be strong somewhere else? That's fine, I'll use my stations to leap across your systems and hit your undefended worlds.

Quite the Scenario I imagined: one side sends small Units of Little to no combat capability to make the other side hunt them down while using him being busy with stuff that normally would not be the Task of a commander in chief to attack. And calling it a strategy. It is not. It does not qualify as ruse or distraction. It is abusive use of a flawed System.

It's a strategy that exploits a weakness in your defenses, defend the systems where I can build with little risk (a construction ship) or be subject to me extending my reach all over your space.

This is fun, engaging gameplay to me. It's a strategy trying to beat another strategy through player choice.

No, it is annoying another Player (or being annoyed by another Player or the AI).

i would like to take up your example: The Defender sends one Corvette, tha attacker sends a stronger force t oprotect his construction ship. Then thedefender sends an even stronger force and so on ... In the end, we might reach a true battle betwee nsignificant parts of the respective fleets. Why have the Micro-managemant of increasing reinforcement? Why not saying from the beginning, that building requires a protecting force of the same size? Same outcome, much less Micro.

Also, I agree with most of @Jorgen_CAB Points (though this might not be surprising).

I think it would be very useful: with Military Space Stations.

I find out that a Hyperlanes enemy only has one way to get into my empire. So I invade that system and build a bunch of fortresses and essentially fortify it. Then I turtle up and ping down the enemy fleet as I beat them up, and can invade further systems knowing the system I captured is at least minor semi defended.

Wasn't there a space station mod to pull Warp ships to the system the station is in? If I spread those out, especially with a raiding ng oriented enemy, I will be able to pull and engage them.

Yes, if you invade this chokepoint and then build stations, that seem perfectly fine to me. But you would surely invade with a proper navy, not with construction ships. So again my proposal that a considerable fleet may allow for the building of stations in enemy territory.

 

[Mackrels]

Remember construction ships are set up to run as soon as they encounter hostile forces and the jump out of system would make whatever wormhole station they are closest to busy. A fact which could be used against a wormhole empire. (assuming you haven't already allowed them fill your space with WH stattions already)

Being able to task small fleets to auto patrol would probably take care of most of the micro frustration of having to "hunt" down construction ships for those that find it overly aggravating.

 

[TheBeautifulVoid2]

Military stations are pretty brutally effective in a fight, for their build cost. Where they suffer is their upkeep cost.

As such, building a nest of several mutually-supporting military stations within an enemy's territory may, if not prevented, be very costly for them to uproot later.

If you agree with my classification of Blue Sky vs Black Sky decisive battle theory, then this offers a way for a Blue Sky fleet to take the strategic initiative.

 

[Reaperdamo]

Did he? I honestly believe this might be too far, I think the amended option I came up with (with all due credit to the other side of the discussion) regarding fleet presence would be softer and more flexible.

yeah he did mention it, that doesnt mean that is what he will decide in the end but it is on the stream during the war. By the way what does it mean when planets in your system have red boxes? I imagine red boxes mean enemy, but what do they mean in your own systems? It kind of never gets explained during the stream.

 

[kalauer]

Military stations are pretty brutally effective in a fight, for their build cost. Where they suffer is their upkeep cost.

As such, building a nest of several mutually-supporting military stations within an enemy's territory may, if not prevented, be very costly for them to uproot later.

If you agree with my classification of Blue Sky vs Black Sky decisive battle theory, then this offers a way for a Blue Sky fleet to take the strategic initiative.

Question is, should one be allowed to build These stations with an unprotected construction ship in enemy territory or should one be forced to have it protected while it does?

yeah he did mention it, that doesnt mean that is what he will decide in the end but it is on the stream during the war. By the way what does it mean when planets in your system have red boxes? I imagine red boxes mean enemy, but what do they mean in your own systems? It kind of never gets explained during the stream.

I guess it just means there is enemy presence, most likely restricted to stations only?

 

[Reaperdamo]

Question is, should one be allowed to build These stations with an unprotected construction ship in enemy territory or should one be forced to have it protected while it does?



I guess it just means there is enemy presence, most likely restricted to stations only?

Thanks i wish they would explain the UI a bit more. I love the stream, but they could spend more time explaining the new UI and why they feel it is better than any previous games.

 

[beartjah]

Yes, this might also solve it. But sadly, only to a certain degree, I guess. Since the strength of the Station would be known, one would only send the Minimum needed, which, as you rightfully said, should not be much. Also, one of the main Features of the stations, the FTL-drain, would be quite inflationary then. And the Basic question, why one Needs to model it (the resistance) explicitly when it is the same for all Systems, remains.

I think it only needs to be enough that you'd need to send a force of similar strength to a raiding force to take down without losses. Basically making sure that this kind of stuff becomes similar to say, raiding a non planet system to destro all the mining stations, but just with a different goal, would make it more tolerable then hunting down individual ships all over the place.

It would also have the advantage of the player getting a notification of this(you're under attack here), though they could also just make a notification for an enemy building a wh-station in your space or something.

The FTL-drain thing can be fixed quite easily by making that feature more costly to have, so it becomes too expensive to have for stations that are mostly meant to extend control/block constructions.

The reaosn this needs to modeled explicitly in some way is so you can, f.e. build in a systme wiped clean of enemy resistance that's now behind the frontlines of the war(and thus completely safe for unarmed construction ships to work in) without needing to send in military forces there. Basically: you can set up bases in areas the enemy can't reestablish control over.

The micro of reestablishing control over such systems could possibly be takin care of by automation of constuction ships(if we can reach this place without getting killed, rebuild the station. Though this might actually end up being just another variant of the hunting stuff down micro now that I'm thinking about it... Just with a different kind of ship.


hmmmm... There's got to be a way to have a cheap, not micro intensive, method of blocking construction without it having a significant military strength...

 

[Chrysaetos]

This small force would be one Corvette. So unless you suggest that will slowly build up be successive reinforcements (all very micro heavy) to a real significant fight, what exactly have you gained?

Time and attention. If you're paying attention to my construction ships, you're not paying attention to another front. Or even to your production.

So you say it should be aviable tobind a Major enemy force (since as you put it, minors won't do it) with a single constrcution ship? So you use three construction ships to have the entire enemy navy busy, while he does the same (and possibly three other war participants, too)? This is exactly what I was pointing at when saying it turns into Micro-hell. Because you would have to spend a considerable amount of Attention to an insignificant enemy presence.

If it was an insignificant enemy presence then you wouldn't feel compelled to react to it. The threat behind the construction ship (ambushing small forces you send to deal with it or just letting me have unrestricted access to your space with my new stations) is a real one. Just because there aren't military ships there, does not mean there isn't a significant threat.

Quite the Scenario I imagined: one side sends small Units of Little to no combat capability to make the other side hunt them down while using him being busy with stuff that normally would not be the Task of a commander in chief to attack. And calling it a strategy. It is not. It does not qualify as ruse or distraction. It is abusive use of a flawed System.

Hardly. Logistics win wars just as much as guns and ships do. Stopping the enemy from establishing supply, communication and travel lines is important. Belgium absolutely made efforts to blow up train tracks to hinder Germany in WW1.

No, it is annoying another Player (or being annoyed by another Player or the AI).

It's a gambit. "React or deal with my new found increased range and speed."

i would like to take up your example: The Defender sends one Corvette, tha attacker sends a stronger force t oprotect his construction ship. Then thedefender sends an even stronger force and so on ... In the end, we might reach a true battle betwee nsignificant parts of the respective fleets. Why have the Micro-managemant of increasing reinforcement? Why not saying from the beginning, that building requires a protecting force of the same size? Same outcome, much less Micro.

Simple. Once the reinforcements that the defender sends become significant enough to weaken another front, the Wormhole Faction can hit the newly weakened front that'll take too long to get reinforced. The WH Faction commits some construction ships and having some Wormhole stations ready to send ambushing forces and in exchange, it forces the opponent to move. Once he moves, the WH Faction gains new avenues in the war. Divide and Conquer, a war staple.

Yes, if you invade this chokepoint and then build stations, that seem perfectly fine to me. But you would surely invade with a proper navy, not with construction ships. So again my proposal that a considerable fleet may allow for the building of stations in enemy territory.

That's a different strategy altogether and one that'll be more useful against Hyperlanes. The one I outlined is more apt to deal with Warp.

What you need to realize here is that you have this concept that Wars should always be defined by clashing of Fleets and the Empire with the best fleet, wins. There should be space for the Empire with superior logistics and speed to create advantageous situations so that he can overcome a stronger, slower fleet and this strategy is one of them.