|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Exactly, combat is loving dull and if your fleets decided to emergency FTL on their own because they were scared it would not improve things If ships were sometimes disabled instead of blown up and auto retreated (with more surviving in friendly territory) when they ran out of working ships kind of like shattered retreat it would in fact be good
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
I mean, ships retreating on their own could be both annoying and good depending on the situation. But there's so much other poo poo that is more important to fix than how fleet battles currently work so
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Omniblivion posted:I mean, ships retreating on their own could be both annoying and good depending on the situation. But there's so much other poo poo that is more important to fix than how fleet battles currently work so Strategic combat and diplomancy are probably the two most important things in a fighty map game though? So like transport bullshit, war in general and diplomancy are kind of improtant
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Why morale!! Why!! How is the ship feeling about this battle it's in?? Will the ship fail its morale roll and begin to flee? Flee how, like will the crew drop oars into space and start frantically rowing? Who knows, hell at any moment the crew may mutiny!! Make the captain walk the plank!! It's the 1600s in space because we have to imitate everything that ever happened in the past forever and ever Obviously the captain goes out of the porthole on top of the bridge and takes down his space flag. The same way ships fled historically, the captain says "gently caress this" and legs it. Captains are not, despite the best efforts of admiralties the world over, perfect patriotic automatons. Unless they literally are because you appointed PatriotismBot9000 as leader of your fleet. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Aug 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
all of my ships are piloted by sentient ai whose increased performance is derived from their fear of death ...i think that's what the flavor text says
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:all of my ships are piloted by sentient ai whose increased performance is derived from their fear of death Mine are piloted by Marvin from Hitchhiker's Guide.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
War is the core of the game, and the core of the game should be good. Shattered retreat helps wars in other Paradox games have more than a single fight. What we're talking about is reducing the impact of a decisive victory on the losing party, in order to make wars less all-or-nothing. The flip side of this is making aggression have a cost to the victor. Right now, only early game fights have the winner taking significant losses, as they tend to be when fleets are much closer in relative power levels. Some form of attrition would help here, or possibly making energy costs scale with distance from the nearest starbase, rather than the on/off switch it is now. A lot of numbers in the game could do with being rescaled though, not just that one. Another option is making ships hardier but much more expensive and fleet caps more punishing, to deliver smaller fleets where even the victor's losses can be significant throughout the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:So like transport bullshit, war in general and diplomancy are kind of improtant These are separate things than how fleets retreat from each other with emergency FTL
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:War is the core of the game, and the core of the game should be good. Shattered retreat helps wars in other Paradox games have more than a single fight. Yeah they just have to crib some incarnation of combat width and shattered retreat from their other games. Condottieri rebranded as lend/lease or some poo poo would be good too as would a space UN.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
But Sandwiches, there should totally be morale mechanics in Stellaris because XCOM has them  Despite his real dumb shitposty reaction, I'm actually with Sandwiches/Rhakthar on not adding in a whole morale mechanic, but I also think retreat in general is a thing that needs to be looked at. Something like this: Nuclearmonkee posted:If ships were sometimes disabled instead of blown up and auto retreated (with more surviving in friendly territory) when they ran out of working ships kind of like shattered retreat it would in fact be good Seems like a good base to build off of, since I'm already toting the idea of ships having a chance of surviving fatal damage when in friendly territory and all that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
morale in every other paradox game is an hp bar that turns combat-ready troops into retreating troops. you can call it whatever you want, it's still the same thing if it means that most of a losing fleet is just hors de combat instead of dead loving dead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:But Sandwiches, there should totally be morale mechanics in Stellaris because XCOM has them if i remember right, distant worlds has a thing were severely damaged ships would become disabled and it was possible for anyone to come in, repair them and take the ship for theirselves. although i think the ai would usually just keep firing until everything blew up regardless
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Wouldn't area effect weapons incentivize people to split up fleets? Sure it would be a tricky thing to balance but I think incentivizing people to do something is better than forcing them to do it. These area effect weapons would damage a large % of the ships in a fleet, meaning they are more effective against bigger fleets. It would need to come with general improvements to fleet and battle management though.. otherwise it would create too much micro babysitting the 10 fleets instead of the 1. Combined with working fleet formation mechanics I think it would create a pretty fun experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
As someone who isn't great at combat and who just goes "auto-best" on all ships, area of effect weapons to make a tricky balance whatever sounds like the opposite of a fun experience. And having morale is dumb when morale is just like another health bar except this one makes you have to sigh and go track down your rear end in a top hat fleeing troops. I don't really play CK2 or Stellaris for the deep combat experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Can someone explain whats going on with this tooltip? I'm the Dyss Republic and they clearly don't dislike me so why is that being used as a reason for them to turn down a federation invitation?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Spaseman posted:Can someone explain whats going on with this tooltip? I'm the Dyss Republic and they clearly don't dislike me so why is that being used as a reason for them to turn down a federation invitation? Your Republic's logo is way too fancy for them. Logo envy as it were.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
SirTagz posted:Wouldn't area effect weapons incentivize people to split up fleets? Sure it would be a tricky thing to balance but I think incentivizing people to do something is better than forcing them to do it. That would just mean there's an optimal fleet size that constantly changes depending on how much AoE the AI feels like putting on it's ships - it means there's a constantly shifting breakpoint of when you should switch your entire fleets weapons to AoE and when you should keep them single target. That just sounds like a nightmare - and a really unintuitive implementation of an AoE weapon in the first place. Which is mostly because you can't put the common sense version of an AoE weapon (you know, the one just does damage in an area around the thing it hits) in the game because we don't have control over how ships move or behave in fights. The lack of any hands-on combat limits how much interesting weird stuff you can do with direct combat mechancis, so the automated, hands-off stuff like automatic retreats and partial-routs instead of ship destruction is the only design space left. Personally I'd go for either a maximum fleet size supported per system so your increasingly large deathball stops scale infinitely or, and this is I think the better option: A hard limit on fleet number by forcing a fleet to have an admiral and a hard limit on the size of the fleet by linking it to the skill of the admiral and technologies. That way small warlike empires can punch above their weight by skimping on governors, generals and (in emergencies) scientists to hire more admirals, to get more ships on the board. More scientific empires might opt to go for less admirals with better CnC technology and ship tech - fewer fleets with more powerful ships. Government and Ethos bonuses can be made more directly impactful on war in that way too - with military focused governments getting access to more admiral slots, or admirals that don't take leader slots, etc. Factions in your empire might want you to maintain a minumum numbers of fleets or fleets of certain sizes - or dislike it if you have too many fleets and so on. If we do get a big Space UN they might dictate that all member empires maintain no more than x number of fleets - things like this were always fun in MoO3 because you had to weigh the benefit of being in the big boys club that protects you when someone outside is mean to you with the negative of being constrained in what technology you use or how you expand. Wait this isn't about fleets anymore I'll stop. DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Aug 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
BadOptics posted:Your Republic's logo is way too fancy for them. Logo envy as it were. Pretty sure it is broken, I have that on all the empires with a stacking malus for everyone in my federation. Stellaris
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:A hard limit on fleet number by forcing a fleet to have an admiral and a hard limit on the size of the fleet by linking it to the skill of the admiral and technologies. That way small warlike empires can punch above their weight by skimping on governors, generals and (in emergencies) scientists to hire more admirals, to get more ships on the board. More scientific empires might opt to go for less admirals with better CnC technology and ship tech - fewer fleets with more powerful ships. Government and Ethos bonuses can be made more directly impactful on war in that way too - with military focused governments getting access to more admiral slots, or admirals that don't take leader slots, etc. This is also a thing I think would be a good idea. For how stupid the SotS2 mission system was, I did actually really like the Admiralty and Command limits it had in place. It made multi-front warfare more feasible and individual fights less immediately decisive. On paper anyway, this is SotS2 we're talking about so what actually ended up happening was everyone spawned inside the sun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Why morale!! Why!! How is the ship feeling about this battle it's in?? Will the ship fail its morale roll and begin to flee? Flee how, like will the crew drop oars into space and start frantically rowing? Who knows, hell at any moment the crew may mutiny!! Make the captain walk the plank!! It's the 1600s in space because we have to imitate everything that ever happened in the past forever and ever Ham Sandwiches posted:It's always nice when people drop by threads full of content and engaging in lively discussion only to post crap like this. Thanks for your contribution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Shaman Ooglaboogla posted:Pretty sure it is broken, I have that on all the empires with a stacking malus for everyone in my federation. Stellaris At least it doesn't really matter in this case I guess, one or five -1000s is still the same at the end of the day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 05:39
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Implement ship supplies like SEV or better still, Aurora. And make them a physical good that has to be manufactured on a planet and shipped out to supply outposts or the like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Implement Aurora. Wiz do this. Give Steve a couple thousand bucks for the rights and just make Aurora With Modern Code.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
Shaman Ooglaboogla posted:Pretty sure it is broken, I have that on all the empires with a stacking malus for everyone in my federation. Stellaris Could it be that you are allied or federated with a race that has comitted genocide? Are you Italy to Nazi Germany and no-one likes you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:47
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Personally I'd go for either a maximum fleet size supported per system so your increasingly large deathball stops scale infinitely or, and this is I think the better option:
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Shaman Ooglaboogla posted:Pretty sure it is broken, I have that on all the empires with a stacking malus for everyone in my federation. Stellaris It's a misleading tooltip. What it actually means is 'acceptance for joining a federation is too low with this empire'. It'll vanish if all other reasons to say no also vanish.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
Splicer posted:This doesn't really touch the deathball issue, it just makes it more fiddly to manage. A while back someone suggested a soft cap per fight rather than per system, which works for me. There was something like that in the Europa Universalis games with naval combat, where only a certain percentage of a large fleet could bring their guns to bear at the same time based on how many targets there were. I don't know if that makes sense in a space combat setting though, since there's so much room and more degrees of freedom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
I'm wondering how the machine empire localisation will work. *hopes for an easy way to overwrite localisations so hive mind/machine empires can have their own style of event texts/messages* I would totally rewrite all my events in a cold calculating machine empire style for them. Man 1.8 is looking cool, hope it doesn't arrive too soon. I have 30 more mini events to write <.<
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:That would just mean there's an optimal fleet size that constantly changes depending on how much AoE the AI feels like putting on it's ships - it means there's a constantly shifting breakpoint of when you should switch your entire fleets weapons to AoE and when you should keep them single target. That just sounds like a nightmare - and a really unintuitive implementation of an AoE weapon in the first place. Which is mostly because you can't put the common sense version of an AoE weapon (you know, the one just does damage in an area around the thing it hits) in the game because we don't have control over how ships move or behave in fights. I basically agree with all you say about my AOE idea. Your thoughts on capping fleet size using leaders/tech are better. However I disagree with most which just tries to push the game into EU in space category because it is a familiar format - like max fleet size supported per system. That just makes no sense for me. The fleets cannot forage off planets like they can off land in EU. Also there is no terrain or spacing problems in space. bla bla gameplay over realism but I think there are better options than going this strict limitation way (like your leader idea) Overall I wish there was a way to incentivize people to split up the fleet themselves without hardcapping them to anything. Tweek the mechanics so that multiple fleets would have a distinct benefit - that is what I was trying to (badly) offer with AOE. If that requires more direct control over fleets then that is fine by me. However I realize I am the minority here among all the hardcore Paradox fans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
SirTagz posted:However I realize I am the minority here among all the hardcore Paradox fans. This is my second Paradox game ever, I just don't want to micromanage my fights. Because as I mentioned, they aren't really the main draw for me. There are other reasons one might not want to micromanage combat!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
I have another great idea inspired by the upcoming planetary invasion mechanics. Lets remove fleets alltogether and just add an 'INVADE' button to the diplomacy screen that calculates your win chances from your leader stats / production capability etc. Micro is such a drag
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 08:40
|
|
|
SirTagz posted:I have another great idea inspired by the upcoming planetary invasion mechanics. Lets remove fleets alltogether and just add an 'INVADE' button to the diplomacy screen that calculates your win chances from your leader stats / production capability etc. Micro is such a drag
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 09:06
|
|
|
Attrition was also a part of keeping EU deathballs under control so maybe what we need is space attrition or some other way to make ship limits a per-system rather than per-fleet issue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 10:45
|
|
|
Maybe make it so that the larger a (system-wide) fleet is the less cohesive it is and the more likely it is to have collisions or desertions or mutinies or the like. And tie that to the admiral's skills and traits so that a good commander nullifies or mitigates those adverse effects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:Or it would improve stuff greatly, since your fleets would flee when they're getting creamed, without you having to babysit them constantly. But if your fleet is getting creamed you've lost the game anyway so what's the point? Other than when it's fighting static stuff like Leviathans or whatever. So recently I've noticed the AI doing really bizzare things with corvettes. Flying them around lots all on their own then attacking spaceports or frontier outposts. Has anyone else seen this? I can't work it out. It's almost like they think these small fleets are full powered ones because it's meaning "Inferior" ranked races are declaring war on me to get themselves genocided.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:22
|
|
|
Taear posted:But if your fleet is getting creamed you've lost the game anyway so what's the point? Other than when it's fighting static stuff like Leviathans or whatever. Only if your fleet is currently assembled in a single huge blob and you have no prospect of enlarging it enough to overcome the enemy fleet. I mean literally every other paradox game has this mechanic and it's not the case there so why would it be here?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Only if your fleet is currently assembled in a single huge blob and you have no prospect of enlarging it enough to overcome the enemy fleet. I mean literally every other paradox game has this mechanic and it's not the case there so why would it be here? I dunno, I feel like Crusader Kings 2 it's basically the same. A single huge blob that fights their huge blob and whoever loses that fight has almost definitely lost the war. Although I guess there are more ways to enhance that blob in CK2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
In both CK2 and EUIV you have to pay something to siege down a fort, namely manpower. In Stellaris sieging is effectively free, assuming you win, and if you bombard down defences first winning is practically guaranteed. This means that while an aggressor in the former two games will grow weaker even if they win the first big fight, in Stellaris they keep their victorious level of strength. I would make bombing cost energy, to emphasise the volume of munitions you're throwing down. Edit: or just have planetary defences continue to shoot down ships until the planet is sieged down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
Invasions are too one-sided. Either your planet isn't being attacked, or it gets bombarded and invaded and there's really no way to win a ground combat as the defender except hoping the enemy didn't bring enough transports. I am not sure how to fix it but it's so simplistic now it isn't interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Invasions are too one-sided. Either your planet isn't being attacked, or it gets bombarded and invaded and there's really no way to win a ground combat as the defender except hoping the enemy didn't bring enough transports. I am not sure how to fix it but it's so simplistic now it isn't interesting. This was my point from earlier. Yes space combat needs sorting but at the moment ground combat is pointless busy work. You may as well switch the "invade" button for an "I win" switch. And that's not factoring in having to babysit the transports in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 12:13
|
|
