Just replace the Naval units with ground infantry and armor/titan divisions and make it possible to also build orbital fighters/bombers and "attach" them too armies/planetary defences.
How to make Stellaris ground combat awesome
- Thread starter Jularbo Kizn
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
As long as it combines the whole bombardment & invasion process into something fleets can Just Do.
Also death to transport ships.
Also death to transport ships.
I don't see how it would make it awesome though. Basically, you just want the same thing as space battles, but without the fancy graphisms, and with the tedious attachment system...
@Summin Cool Not really. In ES2 you don't build ground armies: you decide the ground armies composition (between Infantry, Vehicles and Air force if I remember correctly), you can invest in each kind so they get more powerful. Then you have to put some invasion modules on some ships so you can invade planets. Then you have a choice between 3 tactics (3 in offense, 3 in defense) and you have a little animation to show how the battle went. The battle can last several turns.
While this is not a bad system - it's certainly better than the current one in Stellaris - I wouldn't call it awesome. There's very little you can do, it's pretty straightforward, there's no big difference between each civ...
What I hope for Stellaris ground combat (as well as space combat) is strategies and combat approaches that change depending on the empire and the choices you've made. In science fiction the way each species/culture fight is often how they are defined (it's not only true in sci fi btw - it's an easy way to define a fictional people in general, like super heroes, fantasy species etc.).
@Summin Cool Not really. In ES2 you don't build ground armies: you decide the ground armies composition (between Infantry, Vehicles and Air force if I remember correctly), you can invest in each kind so they get more powerful. Then you have to put some invasion modules on some ships so you can invade planets. Then you have a choice between 3 tactics (3 in offense, 3 in defense) and you have a little animation to show how the battle went. The battle can last several turns.
While this is not a bad system - it's certainly better than the current one in Stellaris - I wouldn't call it awesome. There's very little you can do, it's pretty straightforward, there's no big difference between each civ...
What I hope for Stellaris ground combat (as well as space combat) is strategies and combat approaches that change depending on the empire and the choices you've made. In science fiction the way each species/culture fight is often how they are defined (it's not only true in sci fi btw - it's an easy way to define a fictional people in general, like super heroes, fantasy species etc.).
No the Naval Combat in Hoi4 and Stellaris space battle are very different, maybe not in the algorithms but in the visuals. But yeah if they make it as deep as that then i would be very happy instead of just fortification x damage x health.
To demonstrate the naval combat system of Hoi4 would allow you too have a Eldar type of race with high evasion, lower health and armor but good damage or if you want to be more bulky be more like the space marines of few but strong and durable troops that act like a form of battleship except short range. Or if you are a technological race you could be like the Tau with high end quality units with long range and rather squishy close combat.
Also if you prefer to combine like be a evil slave empire have your citizen race use long range weps basically be your battleships while you use slave army divisions as cannon fodder as in destroyers.
I don't see how this system can't be awesome, personally I love the Hoi4 naval combat. It's like a story you could write a lot of fiction around just one battle. And it would adhere to the requirements you say you want to have as in type of empire can result in very different forms of ground combat.
Paradox, if you are reading this. You already have made it in the same engine why not build on what you have and make it greater instead of reinventing the wheel for everything?
Nice idea - I'm really here though to wait for all the "but I have a spaceship in orbit of your world - you lose!" crowd who think that ground combat has no place at all in a "space" game (that's almost entirely about the planets....)
What's interesting is that the UI already has an air and space layer graphically. They just aren't used (except for representing the troops in space as they are landing. But not for orbital fire support):
Last edited:
I wouldn't be against a Dominions-ish system where you set up formations and basic orders in advance, and then the battle is played out automatically with both sides forces doing what they are "programmed" to do. Or a HOI4/EU/CK land combat system.
Don't know if either would really fit Stellaris, though. Land combat should perhaps remain something that happens in the background. Perhaps things like the planet's terrain should matter, though. Invading a mountainous planet should be more tricky than one consisting of plains, for example.
Don't know if either would really fit Stellaris, though. Land combat should perhaps remain something that happens in the background. Perhaps things like the planet's terrain should matter, though. Invading a mountainous planet should be more tricky than one consisting of plains, for example.
Where is the 'Skip' button? Can't see it.Just replace the Naval units with ground infantry and armor/titan divisions and make it possible to also build orbital fighters/bombers and "attach" them too armies/planetary defences.
You just click the cross and let it carry on with the window closed.
Sarcasm overload.
I mean that as long as I can't alter anything in the process since it's started, I don't care about how it goes. I can't manage it until it's done, so all that visualisation is just a procedurally generated movie, adding nothing into gameplay of a strategy game.
Current Stellaris's battles at least has 'Retreat' buttons.
Currently, wars are decided by fleets in space, so, while ground armies are not able to affect fleets in some way, ground combat will be irrelevante or useful just to cheese the AI, I think that a attrition damage against fleets bombarding a planet based in the number and types of armies defending the planet have potential to fix the problem.
The perfect balance spot in my opinion would be if in a PvP war if you have armies much better than your enemy, was possible lose the space war but have very superior armies in your planets, so, you could reliably force a status quo peace without lose planets.
The perfect balance spot in my opinion would be if in a PvP war if you have armies much better than your enemy, was possible lose the space war but have very superior armies in your planets, so, you could reliably force a status quo peace without lose planets.
Play dwarf fortress then come back and say that what is essentially a procedurally generated movie adds nothing too a strategy game
Wiz said in the design corner stream that they will change UI on ground combat, so players can see what's actually happening on the ground during battle. I'd assume the formation and the troops movements etc, which unit is attacking which...
My only dream, is to make fleets more involved. More direct bombardment. Options what to bombard: cities, mines, farms, military building or direct support for troops on the ground. Maybe even friendly fire(if you nuke a planet it can hit your own!). Strike craft flying on planets bombing regimens(from hungars of your ships). Being more effective and precise damage dilers than fleet in orbit.
The rest of us can use visualisations to tell what works and what we can do better the next time.
Play dwarf fortress then come back and say that what is essentially a procedurally generated movie adds nothing too a strategy game
Just like with DF's logs, both of you could use 'Battle at %system_name% ended' sheets to say what works and what is not. There is a ton load of essential numbers, you know.
And for what? As long as player doesn't manage formations and movement of troops, all that visuals adds nothing.
Umm... Okay, what more do you want? You want to be able to control your units or something? There's enough micro as it is... Go play RTS games or something.
Manage. Not 'control'. Manage.
I am, personally, wish to be able to decide which troops will go first. Without magic.
Example.
I brought combined army of xenomorphs, slaves, normal assaulters and gmo warriors.
Planetary defence forces consists of defence armies and some others.
What will happen when I press the 'Attack' button?
Planetary forces will send defence armies first (at least this is what I saw, never saw any explanations this have to happen this way).
But what about invading forces? No way to properly manage them. I have no idea who will go first, who second, and so on. I could use some magic: split combined army into several coherent and manually send 'em one after another.
But as you said,
So instead of wasting manhours of devteam to add meaningless show, I suggest there would be much more point in some new buttons and code, i.e. to give some tools that would replace existing micro.
Not saying about invasions are completely aimless. That's just one wall against another. I can't specify priority targets, even if I wish to. Such as Planetary Shield Generator for party of xenomorph armies as DS/FP.
What the ground warfare really needs is focus: Only fortified planets should need an invasion. Others should he occupied with the system. Why? Because with a proper army those non-fortified planets are just steam rolled anyway. It's just few extra clicks you have to do.
On the other hand, the struggle for fortresses could be more meaningful: I think the current cheese strategy of creating complete fortress worlds is the right idea. It's just that instead of stalling the fleets, those worlds should require a protracted invasion: Unless a relief force arrives for the defenders, the attacking army would slowly gnaw them to dust, but also drain resources of the invading empire.
On the other hand, the struggle for fortresses could be more meaningful: I think the current cheese strategy of creating complete fortress worlds is the right idea. It's just that instead of stalling the fleets, those worlds should require a protracted invasion: Unless a relief force arrives for the defenders, the attacking army would slowly gnaw them to dust, but also drain resources of the invading empire.
Last edited: