I'm worried that paradox will remove armies from Stellaris.

[Vrael Olo]

Well if they are going to freaking remove armies, then I wasted my time trying to research the techs for a psionic army for ground invasion role play

This is my personal fear about any upcoming updates to the game. I know it's ridiculous to be concerned over it, but I actually like the ground invasion mechanics at the present moment. Anyone have any ideas or information concerning this? I feel like a empire should be able to fight on the ground as well as in the voids of space.

 

[Mitchz95]

Wiz already said they would never remove armies because, like it or not, it is part of the game and removing it outright would be unfair. Removing it and replacing it with a DLC down the line would be bad enough that he'd quit his job in protest.

I don't see things changing one way or another on that front during his reign.

 

[Foraven]

Nah, they won't remove them, main reason is it's a bad idea to remove a game feature even if the devs believe it was a bad one. They may never bother to improve the system though.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

I think Wiz indicated that he wants to streamline, not remove it. Something like having all fleets automatically carry armies with them, so you don't have to build them manually.

 

[Rubido]

Wiz already said they would never remove armies because, like it or not, it is part of the game and removing it outright would be unfair. Removing it and replacing it with a DLC down the line would be bad enough that he'd quit his job in protest.

I don't see things changing one way or another on that front during his reign.

When did he said it? Because removing and reworking is two different things. And they can perfectly rework armies by removing them. As independent units.

 

[Vrael Olo]

Wiz already said they would never remove armies because, like it or not, it is part of the game and removing it outright would be unfair. Removing it and replacing it with a DLC down the line would be bad enough that he'd quit his job in protest.

I don't see things changing one way or another on that front during his reign.

Thanks that's a relief. I'm okay with streamlining. As long as I can still use my Warlock companies for ground assault.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

When did he said it? Because removing and reworking is two different things. And they can perfectly rework armies by removing them. As independent units.

i think 'somebody will aways have to land on planets' is the idea

 

[Pchang]

I always look forward to finding a very strong species. I turn them into Military Academy trained clone warriors and pretty soon, I've got unbeatable hordes who don't even need any bombardment help to capture planets. This include planets with a planetary shield.

FEs don't even seem to use gene warriors any more.

 

[Vasious]

I always look forward to finding a very strong species. I turn them into Military Academy trained clone warriors and pretty soon, I've got unbeatable hordes who don't even need any bombardment help to capture planets. This include planets with a planetary shield.
.

Me too, especially a bonus if the are presentients before hand

 

[Me_]

Even if they were to remove armies 1.5 is faaaaaaar away. Months, maybe even half a year (it seems to be quite large). There's no reason to be worried about the state of your current campaign.

Plus as far as we know right now, they have no plans of removing ground combat, so even if they were to make armies a part of ship design (dedicated invasion ships) the armies would still exist.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

No real need to "remove" them outright. Also doesn't have to be Star Ruler / Sins of a Solar Empire levels of simplified, but I wouldn't object if armies were reworked into fleet attachments at this point.

Would certainly save a lot of micromanagement in the later stages of the game...

 

[Koopatin]

Fleet attachments that take up slots or energy in ships would, for me at least, still lead to designated transporter fleets. Because my real warships would always use all slots and energy for fighting purposes. And fleet attachments for armies only could work. But would that eliminate the RP factor of genetically engineered dedicated warrior races? One might say that is unnecceserry anyway but half of the games actions are unnecceserry if not for RP reasons. I for one, would prefer the system now over simple attachments that say "this fleet has army power" (if it would be something like that)

 

[Paul31264]

No real need to "remove" them outright. Also doesn't have to be Star Ruler / Sins of a Solar Empire levels of simplified, but I wouldn't object if armies were reworked into fleet attachments at this point.

This is how Endless Space does it, and I hope Stellaris will end up going that route as well.

 

[alxgvr]

Armies should be attached to fleets, but NOT to utility slot (cost of/shield/armor/energy).
Because player will be confused: build strong fleet to fight another fleet, or weak fleet to siege planets. Player will end with strong fleet with no "transport modules" on it to fight another fleets, and separate "transport ship" design (full of transport modules to carry troops). This will be separate transport fleet. So we will end with same "micro" as it now.

Numbers of troops you can attach to ship should be constant for every ship.

 

[Suor]

What?! When they said that? I miss something?

 

[Suor]

No real need to "remove" them outright. Also doesn't have to be Star Ruler / Sins of a Solar Empire levels of simplified, but I wouldn't object if armies were reworked into fleet attachments at this point.

Would certainly save a lot of micromanagement in the later stages of the game...

Simplification is not a solution. Ground Combat and Army have so much potential!

 

[Seelensturm]

With the exception of invading primitives my transports always follows my doomstack fleet because without prior bombarding they can't really do much. I wish I could just merge them together because the following command is just awful with transports lagging behind and getting intercepted. The whole army thing is just horrible in my opinion. Investing in better armies, army attachments, generals? Useless! Adding a few extra basic assault armies does the same job.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

This is how Endless Space does it, and I hope Stellaris will end up going that route as well.

It was a bit too fiddly in ES for my taste - at least if you are talking about the drop pods that you had to refill manually after use.

Simplification is not a solution. Ground Combat and Army have so much potential!

They do, but always consider the cost at which complexity does come. There is a reason why the current combat system is already more abstract than, let's say, HOI.

My suggestion was less about simplification and more about usability. Remove the over-the-top micromanagement to get armies into position and you can instead focus on making the actual combat more interesting.

Yes, the system has immense potential. For example, we could have air units that zip around in a planet's atmosphere (middle layer), fighting over air superiority and shooting down drop pods as they try to land. We could have planetary artillery and orbital satellite defence networks. Planets could have randomly generated maps where the units auto-move around, fighting over strongholds and key points. We could have an elaborate resistance / guirella warfare system that drags out the actual invasion for decades of ingame time for larger worlds.

However, with the current system that would probably become a bloated mess, making it more complex but not necessarily more fun.

 

[Suor]

My suggestions concerning Ground Combat is:

1) Implement Ground Combat Events when fighting other Stellar Empires, Primitives and Fallen Empire

- For example, if you invade Atomic Age Primitives they can throw at you ultimatum to withdraw or they use their nukes to make sure you dont get their world in one piece

2) Add more complexity in process. Ground combat must be big chunk of the game itself. Make it more diverse, complex and roleplay friendly. Also taking a planet must be achievement in early game or even mid-game. Maybe add Phases like in Infiltration:

- I) Invasion
- II) Ground War
- III) Occupation

2.5) Redo Defence Armys. They must be much-much tougher and hard to overcome

3) Add Battleplans and modifiers for troops like in HOI.

4) Add new types of armys and attachments with cool features to acquire them
- For example, give option to draft Stone Age Primitives as cheap cannon fodder (like salarians did with krogans in Mass Effect) - some "Cavemens with Blasters" army type

5) Add Soft and Hard Attack/Defence to implement Armoured Armys and attachments like Super-Heavy Warmachines/Warbeasts

 

[Suor]

It was a bit too fiddly in ES for my taste - at least if you are talking about the drop pods that you had to refill manually after use.


They do, but always consider the cost at which complexity does come. There is a reason why the current combat system is already more abstract than, let's say, HOI.

My suggestion was less about simplification and more about usability. Remove the over-the-top micromanagement to get armies into position and you can instead focus on making the actual combat more interesting.

Yes, the system has immense potential. For example, we could have air units that zip around in a planet's atmosphere (middle layer), fighting over air superiority and shooting down drop pods as they try to land. We could have planetary artillery and orbital satellite defence networks. Planets could have randomly generated maps where the units auto-move around, fighting over strongholds and key points. We could have an elaborate resistance / guirella warfare system that drags out the actual invasion for decades of ingame time for larger worlds.

However, with the current system that would probably become a bloated mess, making it more complex but not necessarily more fun.

I see your point of view and understand it, but i just more a Aurora 4x type guy. More complex - more fun for me.