Some new ideas about war (deployment time and supply)

[ShadowDaPatriot]

Hey, my very first post.

I have been playing Stellaris for awhile and the concept about war in Stellaris, well, for me, is too simple and straight-forward. So I got some new ideas. Dev, please hear me out.

1. Definition: I think the concept of "deployment period" should be introduced into Stellaris. A ship in Stellaris now has 3 bars: Shields, Armor and Hull points. "Deployment Period" can be put in as the 4th indicator. A ship can not have an unlimited supply. "Supply" for each ship is from 100% and it will decrease based on the time a ship is not docked with a Starbase and it will decrease faster while the ship is in combat. When the ship reach 0% of supply, it will automatically make an emergency jump back to homebase and rejoin the fleet just like as new ship just finished being built.

// Or the ship will not regenerate shields and take big penalties to its fire rate, evasion etc...

2. Apply: Bigger ships have bigger supply bar, thats for sure. Now when you go to offensive war, you have to take supply into consideration. And you have to make sure that your fleet doesn't get cut off, otherwise your newly built or newly supplied ships will just get destroy. Its the same way that reinforcing a fleet works.

3. What it will do:
- Spamming torp corvettes won't work. It can get you to win a battle, but not a war (maybe defensive war only). Since corvettes can only carry a small amount of supply.
- It creates a more realistic war. Hit and run now works perfectly when you try to use a small fleet of corvettes to try and intercept the supply route. -> this is when the "force disparity" introduced in 2.0 really make em hurt.
- You can not bombard a planet forever.
- Now you have more incentives to split your fleets and try to go for a war of attrition in a defensive war as you try to force the enemies to waste their supply and then retake the captured systems with a smaller fleet that can be easily supplied in your territory.

4. Add-on: We can introduce a new class of ship, "Cargo ship" or "Fleet Carrier". Which works like a mobile starbase. However, you can not upgrade your ships using cargo ship and it also has supply points which can be upgraded through tech. So when your ships are repairing or taking supplies, the supply points of cargo ships will decrease significantly. The amount of supply can also be upgrades via tech. Cargo ships should also be as expensive as a titan so you can only have a few cargo ships. (of course the more supply it carries the more expensive it is, we can make it just like a module where you can upgrade and change to fit your needs). When a cargo ship is out of supply you can split it and take it back to homebase for resupply and then direct it to merge with your fleet again.

I love stellaris, and I want the war to be more complex and in-depth, not the economy. I think the economy now is too complex and I think a lot of people will have the same feeling as I am. Managing the economy it just non-stop but the war in Stellaris, the most exciting feature, is just too simple.

 

[ShadowDaPatriot]

bump

 

[Zergor]

I am afraid that representing realistically the logistic part of war may be a bit tedious.
Sometimes making a bit of simplification can avoid headaches.

 

[Methone]

I disagree with this. We already have this, in a sense, by Ship Upkeep. That alloy upkeep cost is repairing the wear and tear of your ships over time, out in the field. You don't see the repair ships, but neither do you see the cars moving about on your colonies. All this promises to do is make war extremely tedious. You already have to be careful your fleet doesn't get cut off for strategic reasons, hit and runs already work - fight the Crisis on 5x to see that! - and this seems it would make war go the way you feel economy has; too tedious, needing constant management.

 

[UltimateTobi]

With that you'd finally render the AI incapable and give it the rest. It already has problems with tactics as is (Fleet Targeting, Fleet Movement (sending two fleets together if one doesn't suffice), etc).

 

[MichaelJanuary]

I disagree with OP.

We do alrdy have maintenance costs for fleet. Which is higher when fleet is not docked.

Only ... maintenance costs are near negligible. It might be worth increasing maintenance significantly for fleets that are campaigning.

 

[Spartan322]

I'm a bit skeptical on forcing anything on players instead of hitting them with a debuff to incentivize player behavior (hence why I fucking hate the lazy forced war exhaustion status quo peace) and I also don't like the requirement to go back to base for ships. I actually love the idea of logistics since its one of the prime points of managing and maintaining an empire, especially a fucking war, (given there isn't a single nation, even in fictional space stories, where logistics isn't a prime factor in success) so the fact that every ship is feasibly able to attack with the same effectiveness regardless of whether they can actually coordinate their offensive supply or not does break my interest in the game a bit. I would love the idea of being able to manage (or let the game manage it for me) the supply and military logistics if we can get usable QoL stuff in it, but it would probably just be a bunch of trade routes 2.0 only more fucking annoying. If we could get around the crappy annoyance that is trade routes: the second coming, I'd totally be up for a logistics supply train with a moderate debuff on low supply. (I don't think ships should just blow up due to lack of supply personally)

 

[KingAlamar]

I wouldn't mind the idea of "trade convoys" or "supply ships" or similar as long as:

• War was redesigned so that intercepting enemy trade / supplies / cutting supplies / etc. was a viable option
• We did something to make sure that the current annoyance of "fortress worlds" was rebalanced. A Colossus should be a choice not a practical necessity. Make sure all war, ship speed, etc. systems are rebalanced to take the new system into consideration.
• It wouldn't be too much of a hassle to keep supply lanes open as long as you have clear superiority, can attach a fleet(s) for security, etc.

TL/DR: I'd like it if you can implement it as another set of strategic [or tactical?] decisions you should make. As long as it's not a huge annoyance I'm good.

 

[thetick2]

I've thought about stuff like this a lot. It is a mechanic I would like to see in a game, but not this game.

It comes down to scope. Stellaris is a galactic level grand strategy game. Mechanics such as these are wrapped up in maintenance costs and detract from the fun and scope of the game. You're not managing a fleet, you're managing an Empire. The meta is different.

 

[Zergor]

Let's note that there are ways to make logistic problems feel tangible without unnecessary complexity.
Gal Civ series use logistic as a limit for the distance your ships can move from your planets. This allow ot avoid being able to colonize planets on the other side of the galaxy in the early game. They don't force ships to move back though. They just can't go past a certain point without increased life systems giving them more autonomy.

But here the distance limit would probably not add that much. Ships are already limited by the fog of war (non explored systems) except science ships (but contrary to gal civ serie, here it seem important that science ship can reach the whole galaxy) and colony ships are limited by the fact that you need to control the system and taking a system far away cost a LOT of influence.
Maybe for war it may be useful to prevent attacking civs far away from you but is it really necessary a good thing? I am not sure.

 

[thetick2]

About the only change along these lines I would suggest is something like:

Number of jumps to home base increases maintenance costs. This reflects the cost to the Nation state for supporting wars at great distances.

It allows you to reduce the costs of your foreign wars by building starbases closer to the action, building star gates to reduce jump distances and so on. this may be unnnecessarily punishing during Endgame Crisis, but fighting a war on the other side of the galaxy should be a daunting prospect, even for a nigh ascendant empire, until you get access to the star gate network.

This might need some system to allow Fleets to be rebased (like a base in a friendly nation). A similar mechanic to the corporate system could be used for this I imagine.

 

[KingAlamar]

About the only change along these lines I would suggest is something like:

Number of jumps to home base increases maintenance costs. This reflects the cost to the Nation state for supporting wars at great distances.

It allows you to reduce the costs of your foreign wars by building starbases closer to the action, building star gates to reduce jump distances and so on. this may be unnnecessarily punishing during Endgame Crisis, but fighting a war on the other side of the galaxy should be a daunting prospect, even for a nigh ascendant empire, until you get access to the star gate network.

This might need some system to allow Fleets to be rebased (like a base in a friendly nation). A similar mechanic to the corporate system could be used for this I imagine.

Your proposal sounds like a reasonable extension of the current system so "good". How would your suggestion work with Total War CBs? Would other CBs gain similar benefits such as taking over enemy supply networks and using it for your own purposes DURING the war??

 

[Blurb]

Your proposal sounds like a reasonable extension of the current system so "good". How would your suggestion work with Total War CBs? Would other CBs gain similar benefits such as taking over enemy supply networks and using it for your own purposes DURING the war??

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few ways to approach that

• Accept that total war behaves very differently from limited war, state that these differences are intentional
• Allow occupied worlds/starbases to also be considered as owned with respect to maintenance reduction (modify limited war)
• Add in a grace period to newly conquered territory, preventing it from being used as "supply" points

I think increasing maintenance costs as the fleet gets farther from home is one of the better suggestions when it comes to logistics: It doesn't add a massively complex system to bother the player or break the AI, although it still gives rise to various considerations, such as how to build stockpiles and infrastructure for war. Depending on implementation, scorched earth tactics might even become feasible via evacuating planets and downgrading starbases, which'd be cool.
However, I do think the system will result in some strange behaviour if one uses jump drive to get behind enemy lines. Sure, the enemy's territory might be "right next door" in terms of distance, but could be dozens of jumps away, resulting in a very sudden and very large increase to fleet upkeep. Stellaris warfare is already extremely static, and I'd hate to see the tiny room for maneuver warfare completely disappear.

 

[KingAlamar]

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few ways to approach that

• Accept that total war behaves very differently from limited war, state that these differences are intentional
• Allow occupied worlds/starbases to also be considered as owned with respect to maintenance reduction (modify limited war)
• Add in a grace period to newly conquered territory, preventing it from being used as "supply" points

I think increasing maintenance costs as the fleet gets farther from home is one of the better suggestions when it comes to logistics: It doesn't add a massively complex system to bother the player or break the AI, although it still gives rise to various considerations, such as how to build stockpiles and infrastructure for war. Depending on implementation, scorched earth tactics might even become feasible via evacuating planets and downgrading starbases, which'd be cool.
However, I do think the system will result in some strange behaviour if one uses jump drive to get behind enemy lines. Sure, the enemy's territory might be "right next door" in terms of distance, but could be dozens of jumps away, resulting in a very sudden and very large increase to fleet upkeep. Stellaris warfare is already extremely static, and I'd hate to see the tiny room for maneuver warfare completely disappear.

I like ideas like your "modified limited war" combined with "grace periods". I can imagine how that could work in game, how it could make at least some sense, etc. I agree that we should consider the role of Wormholes, Gateways, Jump Engines, intervening enemy territory, etc. but I think it would be workable and add an extra layer of interest.

Then again the way I fight wars I will often take a system, solidify control, move on to the next system, etc. So most of the time it would be relatively straightforward ... at least with the primitive way that I fight wars

 

[thetick2]

However, I do think the system will result in some strange behaviour if one uses jump drive to get behind enemy lines. Sure, the enemy's territory might be "right next door" in terms of distance, but could be dozens of jumps away, resulting in a very sudden and very large increase to fleet upkeep. Stellaris warfare is already extremely static, and I'd hate to see the tiny room for maneuver warfare completely disappear.

Strange behaviour with jump drives is not something I considered with this idea! Good point. Jump drives are a strategic tool and may count as linking you to the closest system you own and have supply to, that is in range, regardless of jumps?

I don't know if that would be difficult for the game to calculate or not. I don't think the AI handles jump drives very well as it is.

Maybe supply could work in a similar way to trade, using anchorages or naval bases instead? Inside normal supply network, no extra maintenance costs, reflecting the home ground advantage the defender has. Outside that, increased costs. Maybe piracy could also affect supply as well as trade.

 

[methegrate]

Hey, my very first post.

I have been playing Stellaris for awhile and the concept about war in Stellaris, well, for me, is too simple and straight-forward. So I got some new ideas. Dev, please hear me out.

1. Definition: I think the concept of "deployment period" should be introduced into Stellaris. A ship in Stellaris now has 3 bars: Shields, Armor and Hull points. "Deployment Period" can be put in as the 4th indicator. A ship can not have an unlimited supply. "Supply" for each ship is from 100% and it will decrease based on the time a ship is not docked with a Starbase and it will decrease faster while the ship is in combat. When the ship reach 0% of supply, it will automatically make an emergency jump back to homebase and rejoin the fleet just like as new ship just finished being built.

// Or the ship will not regenerate shields and take big penalties to its fire rate, evasion etc...

2. Apply: Bigger ships have bigger supply bar, thats for sure. Now when you go to offensive war, you have to take supply into consideration. And you have to make sure that your fleet doesn't get cut off, otherwise your newly built or newly supplied ships will just get destroy. Its the same way that reinforcing a fleet works.

3. What it will do:
- Spamming torp corvettes won't work. It can get you to win a battle, but not a war (maybe defensive war only). Since corvettes can only carry a small amount of supply.
- It creates a more realistic war. Hit and run now works perfectly when you try to use a small fleet of corvettes to try and intercept the supply route. -> this is when the "force disparity" introduced in 2.0 really make em hurt.
- You can not bombard a planet forever.
- Now you have more incentives to split your fleets and try to go for a war of attrition in a defensive war as you try to force the enemies to waste their supply and then retake the captured systems with a smaller fleet that can be easily supplied in your territory.

4. Add-on: We can introduce a new class of ship, "Cargo ship" or "Fleet Carrier". Which works like a mobile starbase. However, you can not upgrade your ships using cargo ship and it also has supply points which can be upgraded through tech. So when your ships are repairing or taking supplies, the supply points of cargo ships will decrease significantly. The amount of supply can also be upgrades via tech. Cargo ships should also be as expensive as a titan so you can only have a few cargo ships. (of course the more supply it carries the more expensive it is, we can make it just like a module where you can upgrade and change to fit your needs). When a cargo ship is out of supply you can split it and take it back to homebase for resupply and then direct it to merge with your fleet again.

I love stellaris, and I want the war to be more complex and in-depth, not the economy. I think the economy now is too complex and I think a lot of people will have the same feeling as I am. Managing the economy it just non-stop but the war in Stellaris, the most exciting feature, is just too simple.

Fwiw, I think this or something like it is an excellent idea.

Stellaris is a grand strategy game, but that's why you're not actually commanding the battles themselves. There still should be strategy in how you fight a war. Right now that's pretty lacking. It shows up in so many ways, but the biggest is simple: War is still a fleet numbers game. If you have the bigger fleet, you will win. We need something to add an element of cleverness. Some mechanic that lets you outplay your opponent, which would answer the question "If I have a smaller fleet, but I have a better strategy than my opponent, how would I win?"

Not to mention the fact that one of the biggest reasons doomstacks are a problem is that all ships have infinite range and infinite operating capacity. If your ships could only get so far, and if committing them all to one battle meant risking them being unprepared for a counterattack, then doomstacking would be a much less viable option.

Something that introduces logistics, ranges, forward operating bases and resupply would all go a long way toward making war much more interesting and dynamic.

 

[MichaelJanuary]

Lots of good ideas.

Governors, fleet supply and maintenance all linked to trade posts.

No need to use additional distance calcs based on number of jumps, a simple docked, friendly territory or enemy territory could do.

Personally I would remove the global fleet limit and introduce a soft supply cap linked to the nearest starbases. It would work the same way as piracy suppression currently does with each star system getting a 'supply limit' based on distance to nearest starbase.

Systems with upgraded starbases would have bonus to supply cap, and docked fleets would get additional bonus to supply cap.

Thus distributing your fleet amongst several starbases or systems would reduce maintenance but concentrating it would increase maintenance.

The player would be encouraged therefore to distribute fleets to suppress piracy and reduce maintenance, but could concentrate fleets for war purposes at the cost of extra maintenance.

Outpost .... 20 supply to local system. Base supply range of 1. +20 supply and +1 range for each starbase upgrade.
Supply is reduced by 5 points for each jump away from the outpost (outside supply range).
Crew quarters.... +20 to starbase supply.
Anchorage ... +10 to supply and +1 to supply range.
Shipyards... +5 to supply.
Dry docks.... -10% upgrade cost, 20% faster upgrades.
Techs .... instead of increasing global fleet command limits, would increase base starbase supply.
Etc.

So a level 5 starbase would have 100 supply to all systems within 6 jumps, and this would be modified by techs, shipyards, crew quarters and anchorages.

You might comfortably be able to supply a 160 point fleet at such a starbase, but as it moves away you would incur maintenance penalties. Concentrating multiple fleets at such a starbase would also incur maintenance penalties.

 

[MichaelJanuary]

An additional suggestion on top of my prev suggestion ..... having supply ships in your fleet.

E.g. if a supply ship provided 10 pts of supply this would be added to the local star system supply cap before calculating maintenance. You could add multiple supply ships or modules to your fleets to reduce maintenance penalties but the supply ships themselves might be expensive to build or maintain, and would contribute nothing in friendly systems.

Obviously you would have to find a balance. You would want them to be useful on offensive campaigns but a burden in defense.