tbh I'd kind of like some kind of logistics or local production advantage to counterbalance colony hyperspecialization.
- 5
War Rationing
- Thread starter HFY
- 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.
I think they key difference is that war is an interaction between two opposing forces, while the economy is (usually) a solo game. So while supply lines in wartime provide new tactical choices as both parties interact with each other's systems, simulating the cost of goods transport in a similar way would just be a number balance minigame. And IMO that sort of thing is simulated by trade already, enough so that the two systems would feel redundant.
I expect you're underestimating the value, but it's not the sort of thing you can really know until you test it and get the numbers where you want them.
A fully-fledged logistics model would be a lot of work, but some sort of discount on locally-sourced upkeep (or equivalently, a shipping tax on upkeep that needs to be paid from off-world resources) would be fairly easy to implement, so that e.g. there's an incentive to put mines on the same planet as industrial districts or to put labs on planets that make CGs. This sort of vertical integration is never going to compete with Ecumenopolises and the like, but with the right balance it could lead to some interesting choices in the early game.
- 3
yeah one of the tropes in sci-fi I find stupid. We have agri-worlds and some worlds with next to no plants...so now we have a fleet of "honey" ships transporting it back to restore the soil lol. Meanwhile a large part of the planet is now taken up with the air-processor to ensure people can still breath.
But it's the point when it becomes about "realism" and "logic" in it. It also applies the exact same options. You can cut off another empires access to research, food, alloys...that can cripple an empire far more than cutting off a fleet.
Only if they made it a terrible mechanic. As I said to run behind enemy lines you need supply yourself which you are cut off from by being behind the lines. If those ships can carry enough supplies to run such a mission my doomstack can.
It's also a mechanic that becomes redundant with techs and building up. Jumpdrives and gateways.
- 1
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
1. No, it wouldn't. It would add complexity and another annoyance for the sake of complexity and being annoying.
2. War in Stellaris is already slow, tedious, and annoying. This idea would make that worse, especially for the attacker.
3. No, it would not. It would just lead to even more micro, massively benefit the defender, and make wars more frustrating and unfun.
Doomstacks are not a problem, never really have been. And any "fix" for them has made things worse. Because Doomstacks are a consequence, a consequence of winning, a consequence of how the war system itself works, how battles work. This is a bandaid aimed at annoying attackers and making the weakest aspect of Stellaris worse.
- 3
- 1
This thread has absolutely nothing to do with doomstacks.
The ideas in this thread will not impact doomstacking either way.
Is there another doomstack thread somewhere else maybe?
- 1
Why are you responding to me, rather than the guy who brought up how this would be a "solution" to doomstacks?
Because time is linear and I wasn't here right then.
You're the most recent person to talk about doomstacks as if they were topical, which they are not.
============
Anyway, more ideas:
- Auth / Mil might plunder supplies from their enemy; gives a good reason to invade planets as you go instead of purely as mop-up.
- Xenophobes and Hive Mind armies might eat a xeno pop or two instead of consuming supplies. Very cheap upkeep (if you don't mind the warcrime record).
- Mega Corps might liberate (or "liberate") funds owned by the fat-cat ruling class during an invasion.
- Egalitarian invaders might liberate workers to such an extent that the planets must be re-conquered by an Auth / Phobe slaver -- and might be harder to re-conquer than they were to conquer. If this can be fit into the game mechanics, it might be a balancing factor for stronger Slavery, if they're very powerful but also dangerous during a war.
This is the kind of indirect strategic thinking that this game lacks.
- 1
Lets fix the war system itself before adding new layers to it please. Currently it's a buggy annoying mess already. if we full revamp wars, then we'll talk.
- 5
Alloys-and-Energy-Credit upkeep for ships TECHNICALLY simulate War Production. It's just a bit disjointed.
Energy-Credit upkeep for armies implies that all of your armies are mercenaries, drawing from the invisible pool of infinite bounty that is the Local Market. (Just trying to think about Stellaris's open-system economy hurts my brain.)
Making Food a universal, poolable resource (just to distinguish the game from Civilization) was a mistake.
Energy-Credit upkeep for armies implies that all of your armies are mercenaries, drawing from the invisible pool of infinite bounty that is the Local Market. (Just trying to think about Stellaris's open-system economy hurts my brain.)
Making Food a universal, poolable resource (just to distinguish the game from Civilization) was a mistake.
- 2
Sorry, but no. You don't get to ignore the people who support you bringing up Doomstacks as an argument in favour of your idea. Then chide those who respond to them and disagree for "going off topic". That's incredibly dishonest a way to approach this discussion.
Also, what's going to happen to the basic ship upkeep in terms of alloys and energy. Are they going to be revamped/cut out? Because they already simulate all of this.
I'll take responsibility for going off topic. Thoughts on supply lines and how they might affect doomstacks withdrawn with apologies. Let's return to the topic at hand please.
- 1
I'm assuming it would shift a portion of the energy upkeep to food or minerals as appropriate, and robotic empires would see no change in upkeep since it would just stay as energy.
- 1
I once made a lengthy suggestion post about how i imagine a system that incorporates supply in a meaningful way while also removing doomstacks and make warfare a much slower and strategical affair. (Link down below)
It really brights my day every time i see like minded posts here as people start to realize the warfare and space combat is severely lacking and trying to promote change. And happy me - these posts are getting more and more frequent!
- 1
- 1
To clarify my previous comment I think being able to win wars by cutting supply lines is a great idea especially given upcoming cloaking mechanics, but before we can implement supply mechanics we need to fix the war system, badly.
- 1
Yeah that's a reasonable way to do it.
The exceptions would generally be things that temporarily reduce upkeep for some units -- like raiding the locals for supplies instead of shipping them from back home.
- Non-Philes might hunt Tiyanki for food during a long planetary siege.
- It would be cool to be able to steal your opponent's logistics vessels and so reduce your fleet's upkeep while reducing their naval effectiveness.
- Barbaric Despoilers might restore supply and morale by looting, just so it has something Nihilistic Acquisition doesn't emulate.