Federation fleets are broken... very broken

[FelixNix]

So I'm a materialist technocracy, and it's nearly 2400. I was the first in the galaxy to make a federation. I federated the humans who where close-ish to me, and we have set about since than making a large federation. My problem is the federation fleets. It has 500 fleet cap, and a 210 command limit. The AI ignores and overrides this.

At first they would send destroyers to reinforce the fleet. 10 to 20 at a time, regardless of how much command limit or fleet cap the federation had left. Since than it has gotten much worse. And I'm not even going to complain about how they would send them through active war-zones to get obliterated by enemy fleets in the ones or twos driving my war-score into the dirt.

Right now I have 3 federation fleets (that aren't part of the numerous reinforcement fleets that are still floating around) and the command limit for the main fleet is at 305/210. They won't reinforce the other two, and even though the command limit is well past where it is supposed to cap out, they're still sending reinforcements that aren't in the fleet designer. I have to assume the naval cap is also being surpassed, because it says in the federation panel that it's maxed at 500/500 and yet they still keep sending reinforcements. I don't know if this is intended, but if it is, that makes it broken as intended. 110.4k fleet power is broken enough to wipe out any end-game threat with one fleet. I'd like them to stop sending ships. I have a Dyson sphere, and I'm sure that if I didn't, my upkeep for ships would drive my EC into the red, hard.

 

[M@ni@c]

Just to clarify things:
Federation fleets don't have a command limit. That's working as intended.
The ships don't appear out of thin air. They're produced by alloys produced by your allies. The perks of being federated.
Federation ships don't require maintenance, however you do pay 15% of your energy income as federation taxes, so unless the federation gives you a big fleet (as is the case here), it's actually possible to lose economically due to being part of a federation.

 

[V-Metamorph]

So I'm a materialist technocracy, and it's nearly 2400. I was the first in the galaxy to make a federation. I federated the humans who where close-ish to me, and we have set about since than making a large federation. My problem is the federation fleets. It has 500 fleet cap, and a 210 command limit. The AI ignores and overrides this.

At first they would send destroyers to reinforce the fleet. 10 to 20 at a time, regardless of how much command limit or fleet cap the federation had left. Since than it has gotten much worse. And I'm not even going to complain about how they would send them through active war-zones to get obliterated by enemy fleets in the ones or twos driving my war-score into the dirt.

Right now I have 3 federation fleets (that aren't part of the numerous reinforcement fleets that are still floating around) and the command limit for the main fleet is at 305/210. They won't reinforce the other two, and even though the command limit is well past where it is supposed to cap out, they're still sending reinforcements that aren't in the fleet designer. I have to assume the naval cap is also being surpassed, because it says in the federation panel that it's maxed at 500/500 and yet they still keep sending reinforcements. I don't know if this is intended, but if it is, that makes it broken as intended. 110.4k fleet power is broken enough to wipe out any end-game threat with one fleet. I'd like them to stop sending ships. I have a Dyson sphere, and I'm sure that if I didn't, my upkeep for ships would drive my EC into the red, hard.

View attachment 502148
View attachment 502149

You don't know the power of the dark side, this fleet power can be obtained within the first centurie or so on your own. Federation fleet are not free, they're strong indeed but it takes a lot to get there, and their main claim to fame is the ability to have great tech design while some member don't have to focus on tech

 

[AlanC9]

Yeah, but the dark side is boring.

 

[Xaos]

Poor soul. At least now Federations know to build more then just corvettes. Before my Federation fleet was 500+ corvettes. It was madness.

But on a more serious note, yes they are powerful, as they dont cost maintenance, plus all members contribute to it. BUT do note that all members base fleet caps are also lowered, and that most allies will more often then not, depend on the fed fleet to protect them. Leaving anywhere that isn't near said fed fleet vulnerable as hell to a flank. Gateways make it easier, but if you have to fight a war on multiple fronts, you better hope that fed fleet can cover one front, while the others can defend themselves.

 

[FelixNix]

Just to clarify things:
Federation fleets don't have a command limit. That's working as intended.

Broken as intended? Muahahaha! Very well. I foresee the end to a few fallen empires...
though that is still broken, and makes games quite easy when federated and ignoring Empire Sprawl.

The ships don't appear out of thin air. They're produced by alloys produced by your allies. The perks of being federated.

Well, yeah man, I know that. I have been playing this game since I saw a youtuber play it two weeks after release, and common sense is still common sense.

Federation ships don't require maintenance, however you do pay 15% of your energy income as federation taxes, so unless the federation gives you a big fleet (as is the case here), it's actually possible to lose economically due to being part of a federation.

That I didn't know. I thought I should've stayed an independent Science Directorate, though with a 100k fleet, that is continuously reinforced, maybe it IS better to be federated...

You don't know the power of the dark side, this fleet power can be obtained within the first centurie or so on your own. Federation fleet are not free, they're strong indeed but it takes a lot to get there, and their main claim to fame is the ability to have great tech design while some member don't have to focus on tech

Oh, no, I know. I'm achievement hunting at this point, and I was going for the one that you get for having a materialist empire with 75% robots. I already did the devouring Swarm thing, and was doing determined exterminators, but half the game is ignored when you do those runs, and I got bored of it. Figured as long as I have a broken technocracy, i might as well build all the mega-structures as well.

 

[M@ni@c]

Broken as intended? Muahahaha! Very well. I foresee the end to a few fallen empires...
though that is still broken, and makes games quite easy when federated and ignoring Empire Sprawl.

I'm not denying that federations are strong. But I don't understand these specific points:

How are federations related to empire sprawl (meaning admin costs)? AFAIK there is no federation mechanic interacting with sprawl.

Also what's the big deal with there being no command limit? Sure, I guess they could've set the command limit to the highest one of the federation members, but who cares? Having a command limit simply affects how many admirals you need to recruit. It's more a User Interface annoyance than anything else.

 

[Nihilikara]

Poor soul. At least now Federations know to build more then just corvettes. Before my Federation fleet was 500+ corvettes. It was madness.

Which makes them terrible. Federation fleets were OP back when they were only corvettes. The only three ship types you should be building are corvettes, battleships, and titans. By having the AI build the corvettes for you, you can get away with focusing exclusively on battleships and titans, allowing you to build fleets faster and stronger than you could otherwise. Now, the AI is building destroyers and cruisers, both of which are fairly useless, and battleships, which I should be the one focusing on. So far, the only way to prevent the AI from building a ship type is to make it require a resource they don't have access to (thus making nanites useful, since they are the rarest resource, can't be traded, and can't be bought or sold on the Galactic Market).

 

[artemis667]

Poor soul. At least now Federations know to build more then just corvettes. Before my Federation fleet was 500+ corvettes. It was madness.

But on a more serious note, yes they are powerful, as they dont cost maintenance, plus all members contribute to it. BUT do note that all members base fleet caps are also lowered, and that most allies will more often then not, depend on the fed fleet to protect them. Leaving anywhere that isn't near said fed fleet vulnerable as hell to a flank. Gateways make it easier, but if you have to fight a war on multiple fronts, you better hope that fed fleet can cover one front, while the others can defend themselves.

Federation fleets are powerful. I see them as an advantage now, a way to use my federation members to augment my own military strength (assuming I am a leader). And of course that means it is in your interests to help your federation members, using the federation fleet appropriately in engagements, as well as committing your own forces.

I would like the fleet manager interface improved though for it though. For example change it up, so that the federation leader CONTROLS the fleet composition, including reinforcing. You could have a shared alloy pool that federation members will contribute to if they see there is a deficit in the federation fleet (there are missing ships in the composition, the alloy cost for each adds up to the total 'requested' in the pool), than when you hit 'reinforce', any shipyards tagged to 'build federation ships' will be used to build it using the standard 'reinforce' algorithim to select the closest or however it works.

 

[FelixNix]

I'm not denying that federations are strong. But I don't understand these specific points:

How are federations related to empire sprawl (meaning admin costs)? AFAIK there is no federation mechanic interacting with sprawl.

When you ignore empire sprawl you can take as many planets as you want and build as much stuff as you want leading to a bigger fleet cap, more resources etc. All I'm saying here is that ignoring the empire sprawl mechanic breaks the game. Federation Fleets break the game. Doing both of these things make the game dumb easy.

Also what's the big deal with there being no command limit? Sure, I guess they could've set the command limit to the highest one of the federation members, but who cares? Having a command limit simply affects how many admirals you need to recruit. It's more a User Interface annoyance than anything else.

I would disagree. I like the fleet command limit myself. I feel like having a diverse set of fleets suited to specific tasks makes for a more interesting experience, and I wasn't really encouraged to do that before command limit was a thing. I just made death stacks. Of course, that was also when my ships could have warp drives or jump drives to start (I think that was a bad change), so a lot has changed since than, but still.

Which makes them terrible. Federation fleets were OP back when they were only corvettes. The only three ship types you should be building are corvettes, battleships, and titans. By having the AI build the corvettes for you, you can get away with focusing exclusively on battleships and titans, allowing you to build fleets faster and stronger than you could otherwise. Now, the AI is building destroyers and cruisers, both of which are fairly useless, and battleships, which I should be the one focusing on.

Um... corvettes are fairly useless in the late game in the current version. You get more for your alloys having a fleet that doesn't have a load of ships that get nearly one-shot. You end up spending way less alloys if you use destroyers in the role that corvettes USED to fill, unless you're going up against one of the leviathans. Plus, if the enemy doesn't load up on point defense, Cruisers get to fill the most useful role they have, which is missile caddy. It seems you haven't done much testing with the new build. My apologies if my assumption is incorrect.

 

[Nihilikara]

Missiles are known to be damn near useless (even if they weren't, missile corvettes are better than missile cruisers because you get more missiles per fleet capacity) because point defense is a thing and missiles take forever to reach their target (sometimes to the point where the battle is already over by the time the missiles reach their target), and corvettes are much better than destroyers because in the late game, they have 90% evasion, something that cannot be achieved with destroyers, thus making them excellent tanks while your artillery battleships snipe the enemy from halfway across the solar system. This tactic is even better against fallen/awakened empires because escorts and battlecruisers tend to have many large and medium weapons that are terrible against corvettes.

 

[UltimateTobi]

It's more a User Interface annoyance than anything else.

Command Limit forces the AI to split their fleets, making them inferior to players in every case; because they don't doom stack.

 

[M@ni@c]

Command Limit forces the AI to split their fleets, making them inferior to players in every case; because they don't doom stack.

Interesting. Guess what change I'm gonna test next in my personal mod.

 

[UltimateTobi]

Interesting. Guess what change I'm gonna test next in my personal mod.

@Glavius tried to circumvent that in GAI, but it didn't work.
Command Limit is hard coded and there is no feasable way to make the AI merge fleets.

If you figure something out, let us know; especially PDX!

 

[Dragatus]

I have noticed my missile corvettes racing ahead of the missiles they fired at the enemy, which looked quite bizarre. That said the torpedo corvette swarm still seemed to do quite well against the Contingency, but maybe that's because I played on a low difficulty. I also didn't see the AI build all that much point-defense, but yet again, that might be due to playing on a low difficulty.

 

[FelixNix]

Missiles are known to be damn near useless

To you. Statistically, and even practically, I've found them to be quite useful.

(even if they weren't, missile corvettes are better than missile cruisers because you get more missiles per fleet capacity)

That you'll have to replace after one or two minor battles. Haven't needed to replace a cruiser yet.

because point defense is a thing and missiles take forever to reach their target (sometimes to the point where the battle is already over by the time the missiles reach their target),

I'm sorry, I play on a higher difficulty than you do apparently, because battles are rarely over before the entire fleet joins the conflict, unless the battle is of little strategic import, in which case I have a small strike fleet of destroyers and corvettes handling it. I also happen to tailor my fleets depending on the enemy I'm facing, and won't use many missiles if the enemy has a good amount of point defense. I suggest you try whirlwind missile systems, as they rarely get destroyed by PD and fire quite quickly.

and corvettes are much better than destroyers because in the late game, they have 90% evasion, something that cannot be achieved with destroyers, thus making them excellent tanks while your artillery battleships snipe the enemy from halfway across the solar system. This tactic is even better against fallen/awakened empires because escorts and battlecruisers tend to have many large and medium weapons that are terrible against corvettes.

I think you'll find that a destroyer with near 70% evasion and a chance to actually emergency warp out of the fight is much more cost effective than a large amount of corvettes you have to replace after every fight. But you play your play-style, and be horribly inefficient, and stuck in the concepts from 3 versions ago, and I'll play mine, where all the ships have their roles. Again, i suggest more play-testing on your part.

 

[AlanC9]

If you want to re-open the missiles debate, maybe that should be in another thread. But I don't think anyone's going to buy it. I saw the numbers last time, and they were conclusive. AFAIK nothing's changed since then.

Missiles aren't as terrible as strike craft, but they're not very efficient.

As for federation fleets, exactly how do they break the game? The only difference between a federation fleet and several smaller fleets is that you can apply one admiral's traits to all of them. It's a slight advantage.

 

[M@ni@c]

If you figure something out, let us know; especially PDX!

I was just gonna give the AI a static country modifier increasing their command limit by 200, effectively removing the mechanic for them. Since the human can just let a few fleets follow each other to create a doomstack, I don't think that would be giving an unfair advantage to the AI or something.

 

[FelixNix]

If you want to re-open the missiles debate, maybe that should be in another thread. But I don't think anyone's going to buy it. I saw the numbers last time, and they were conclusive. AFAIK nothing's changed since then.

Sure, sure. Perhaps they seem more efficient than they are. In my testing they seem to be quite effective if the enemy has little to no point defense. I hadn't run numbers and so wasn't aware of the direct statistical impact.

As for federation fleets, exactly how do they break the game? The only difference between a federation fleet and several smaller fleets is that you can apply one admiral's traits to all of them. It's a slight advantage.

The federation fleets are enormous. in fact, if I keep taking from the main federation fleet in my game, and making smaller fleets out of it it will be infinitely reinforced by the AI empires, thereby giving me a fleet that grows in fleet power ad infinitum. I don't know how that ISN'T broken.

 

[AlanC9]

What do you mean by "taking from the main federation fleet"? How you stack up ships is just an accounting trick, admiral traits excepted. Four 80k fleets or one 320K fleet is still 320K.

AI federation ship building has nothing to do with how you stack up the ships. They will eventually build to the total federation fleet cap, whether you order those ships into one fleet or hundreds.