|
Kinda seems like the way to fix it is to take a cue from real life: small ships just couldn’t mount weapons that could realistically harm big ones. More hard counters for things. You need corvettes late game for picket work and for killing the other enemies pockets but they really can’t do poo poo to the enemies battleships - that’s what your battleships are for. You also need an ability to actually hold ranges - this makes carriers useful because the point of strike ships is that they can engage while the mothership is safe. Battleships are killed by other battleships, by strike craft, and by a submarine equivalent. Strike craft and missiles are countered by corvettes or other dedicated point defenses and corvettes are countered by dedicated corvette killers. Destroyers are like amped up corvettes but are more expensive. Cruisers are a middle ground.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 13:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
The balance seems to swing between 'all small ships' and 'all big ships' and never has there been a time where all ship types were useful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 13:57
|
|
|
All ship types are currently useful though. (Except maybe carriers)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:All ship types are currently useful though. (Except maybe carriers) Carriers are never going to be useful unless there’s a system where they can stay physically unthreatened except by specific counters unless you’ve already lost the battle
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
The only problem with a hit n run fleet is to make sure you never fight while injured, since ships have trouble disengaging when they start with very low hp. Carriers arnt useful because strike craft are underpowered; they arnt intrinsically fragile or anything, they don't need to stay away from enemies. if anything they are tougher than other classes because of intrinsic PD. Strike craft being underpowered is also why corvettes are stronk since given their high tracking its apparent strike craft are meant to be good against corvettes. Corvettes also stronk because its easy to max out their bonus hp. bonus hp techs are a mistake TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Mar 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Phobeste posted:Kinda seems like the way to fix it is to take a cue from real life: small ships just couldn’t mount weapons that could realistically harm big ones. More hard counters for things. You need corvettes late game for picket work and for killing the other enemies pockets but they really can’t do poo poo to the enemies battleships - that’s what your battleships are for. You also need an ability to actually hold ranges - this makes carriers useful because the point of strike ships is that they can engage while the mothership is safe. Counter Point: In WWI battleships really feared attacks by torpedo boats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Counter Point: In WWI battleships really feared attacks by torpedo boats. Well, the easiest submarine analogue Stellaris has is the Torpvette, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Real life was basically rock-paper-scissors - every ship is countered by a ship that's slightly bigger, slightly better-armoured, and slightly up-gunned. Until the ships become so big that tiny "glass cannon" ships can inflict losses far greater than what they themselves cost, thus closing the loop. Basically, corvettes beating battleships is totally fine. Corvettes also beating anti-corvette destroyers, not so fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Playable galaxy centers is good, especially if you hate staring at the pointless searing light from galaxy centers. I'm probably dumb for this but keeping the centre like that is a big part of my immersion. The centre of the galaxy would be such a different place to the outlying regions and settling there I'd rather leave to a full on DLC that creates mineral rich but dangerous areas in there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:In my experience, the most powerful fleet by far is a corvette swarm with the Hit and Run war doctrine and a Trickster Admiral. This has been my experience as well, I've taken to running corvette/cruiser armies if I want to have some larger guns because the cruisers can run 2 afterburners. Disengage chance is hella overpowered right now, I run 100% trickster admirals and I delete anyone who gets unyielding trait that reduces disengage. Repairs are super fast and easy compared to rebuilding half a fleet. No Retreat is a laughably bad doctrine and needs to be changed to -10% disengage or something to even be remotely usable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
Gadzuko posted:This has been my experience as well, I've taken to running corvette/cruiser armies if I want to have some larger guns because the cruisers can run 2 afterburners. Disengage chance is hella overpowered right now, I run 100% trickster admirals and I delete anyone who gets unyielding trait that reduces disengage. Repairs are super fast and easy compared to rebuilding half a fleet. No Retreat is a laughably bad doctrine and needs to be changed to -10% disengage or something to even be remotely usable. Or you just slow repairs down and harshly increase upkeep for damaged ships, but I mean, "No Retreat" meaning "until you have to I guess" is alright in my book if only a pisstake at old Josif. Also, it seems a Devouring Swarm AI who takes Superiority first and goes Hit and Run is insanely hard to fight. eXXon posted:Playable galaxy centers is good, especially if you hate staring at the pointless searing light from galaxy centers. Hahaha, this was so ludicrously broken with the old borders system, seems it'd work a lot better now. (Didn't stop me always having it on anyway  )
Playstation 4 fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Mar 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:The only problem with a hit n run fleet is to make sure you never fight while injured, since ships have trouble disengaging when they start with very low hp. Bonus HP techs are cool, but they show up too early for vanilla ship progression, and don't scale enough for bigger classes. Strikecraft being just "strikecraft" isn't great either, it feels like they're worse than either bombers or fighters at their old jobs. These are all things that are fairly easy to fix for yourself though with a bit of modding (I start with destroyers as the default ship size and you gotta grab corvettes with tech if you want them and gunship strikecraft that are much easier to PD down but are a lot stronger to punish PD-less fleets).
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
Playstation 4 posted:Or you just slow repairs down and harshly increase upkeep for damaged ships, but I mean, "No Retreat" meaning "until you have to I guess" is alright in my book if only a pisstake at old Josif. Actually going the full meatgrinder route with No Retreat is a good idea, make it give huge buffs to ship production speed and slash production costs in addition to the fire rate bonus, but it only applies (or provides full bonuses at least) during defensive wars? That would be fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
So effectively Harmony's "Bulwark of Harmony" bonus, possibly upgraded, and possibly stacking with it? Sounds vaguely interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Bonus HP techs are cool, but they show up too early for vanilla ship progression, and don't scale enough for bigger classes. Strikecraft being just "strikecraft" isn't great either, it feels like they're worse than either bombers or fighters at their old jobs. I used to play my Cruisers with a carrier module and seeing the fighters all storm out and blow up any missiles that were heading towards me was amazing. I miss that, it's a shame they're useless now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
One way to make strike craft more useful would be for them to give an "Air Superiority" strength multiplier if you have them in a ship orbiting a world undergoing invasion. They could make taking fortified planets held by Very Strong/Resilient species much less of a bloodbath for the invader and reduce the number of armies that need to be maintained.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
Taear posted:I'm probably dumb for this but keeping the centre like that is a big part of my immersion. The centre of the galaxy would be such a different place to the outlying regions and settling there I'd rather leave to a full on DLC that creates mineral rich but dangerous areas in there. The verisimilitude angle doesn't work in the time frame of the game. There's roughly one supernova per century in the whole galaxy so other than having a higher density of stars there wouldn't be anything radically different about the galaxy center. Sure there might be fewer habitable planets but the conceit is now that only a tiny fraction of stars have hyperlanes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
Is it possible to demand vassalization from someone you have a defensive pact with?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
eXXon posted:The verisimilitude angle doesn't work in the time frame of the game. There's roughly one supernova per century in the whole galaxy so other than having a higher density of stars there wouldn't be anything radically different about the galaxy center. Sure there might be fewer habitable planets but the conceit is now that only a tiny fraction of stars have hyperlanes. The density of stars is sort of what I mean - wouldn't it be packed? And also have more collisions and asteroids and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
popewiles posted:Is it possible to demand vassalization from someone you have a defensive pact with? Yep, break your pact, wait 10 years, demand vassalization, go to war. Can't wait for a huge gutting/expansion of the diplomacy, federation, and subject/vassal system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
eXXon posted:The verisimilitude angle doesn't work in the time frame of the game. There's roughly one supernova per century in the whole galaxy so other than having a higher density of stars there wouldn't be anything radically different about the galaxy center. Sure there might be fewer habitable planets but the conceit is now that only a tiny fraction of stars have hyperlanes. You're coming at this all wrong We're playing a game with stellar dragons that predate the big bang, and 5th dimensional invaders. Who gives a flying gently caress about realism? The real question is, would you rather have a galactic core that's just More Space or would you rather have a Story Pack dlc that fleshes it out as a weirdo high concept scifi zone that's meaningful to find a way to get into, and hold, and give it event chains all its own? If we're going to the galactic core I want to find weird poo poo like Destiny's vault of glass, experiments to break causality or whatever. Lets get weird.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
Taear posted:The density of stars is sort of what I mean - wouldn't it be packed? And also have more collisions and asteroids and so on. space is way less dense than you think it is - even in an asteroid-"dense" area like the asteroid belt in our solar system there's millions of miles between any object larger than a golf ball that said, this guy Captain Oblivious posted:You're coming at this all wrong has the right idea, make the core an endgame area
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
The Core's a dumping ground. Literally-'Missing in Action' fleets and the Science Ships that 'disappear' during that one event get sent there before heading home.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Have the core cluster cut off from the rest of the galaxy's hyperlane network, and only accessible by either jump drive or several wormholes, but the wormhole systems in the core are guarded by ancient automated fortresses. The reward for breaking in (or getting jump drives and sneaking in) is access to mineral/energy-rich systems, and things like the ruined megastructures should only spawn in this core. Fake edit: This is giving me an idea for isolationist fallen empires - in their last exercise of power they cut off their remaining systems from the galactic lane network, leaving a few inactive gates in nearby systems. If and when they awaken, the gates are activated and their fleets emerge, with their first targets being anyone unfortunate or stupid enough to build in their gate systems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:You're coming at this all wrong This would be nice. And the supermassive black hole. And just...it needs to be different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
Well, I mean, the obvious explanation for the core being empty of navigable lanes is that the massive gravitational forces of the core destabilise hyperspace travel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:These are all things that are fairly easy to fix for yourself though with a bit of modding (I start with destroyers as the default ship size and you gotta grab corvettes with tech if you want them
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yep, break your pact, wait 10 years, demand vassalization, go to war. Also- I have a Marauder raiding fleet parked outside my borders, just parked there, not attacking. I've tried talking to the Marauders about them raiding somebody else, but they say they're busy. If I destroy this fleet, will they go to war with me, or will they just accept it as "the cost of doing business is that they don't always come back"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:In my experience, the most powerful fleet by far is a corvette swarm with the Hit and Run war doctrine and a Trickster Admiral. Based on my experience of Void Clouds straight whacking my vettes in one shot (4 cloud lightnings kinda pack a punch), I wonder just how effective it would be to go for a build that aims for as much shield/armor penetrating alpha as possible to annihilate the vettes before they even have a chance to warp out. This of course relies on the bigger mounts not only hitting the nimble bastards, but concentrating fire and not spreading it across the multitude of targets. There's just gotta be a happy medium between pre-2.0 doomballs ending in a complete wipe for one side and potentially shattering losses for the other, vs a fleet bugging out after losing 7/103 ships and coming back for another round in a couple weeks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
there's counterplay to disengage, like fighting in black holes and equipping starbases with comm jammers; or just continuing your march forward and seizing the starbase they're retreating to. what id like to see though is high disengage chance resulting in ships disengaging at pretty high HP....because of Cowardice Stacking
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
I like what disengage results in: continuous fighting instead of just annihilating their entire navy in the first battle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:Also- I have a Marauder raiding fleet parked outside my borders, just parked there, not attacking. I've tried talking to the Marauders about them raiding somebody else, but they say they're busy. If I destroy this fleet, will they go to war with me, or will they just accept it as "the cost of doing business is that they don't always come back"? They absolutely don't care. You can even destroy everything they have in a system and they still don't care. I don't like the Mauraders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
I just wanna say I think I might appreciate the strategic mobility that jump drives lend to my troop transports and construction ships even more than my fleets.GotLag posted:I like what disengage results in: continuous fighting instead of just annihilating their entire navy in the first battle. Yeah, me too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Splicer posted:That's a really neat idea I'd never have thought of. Wiz, for real, check this out. Here is the rough version if you want to try it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Taear posted:They absolutely don't care. You can even destroy everything they have in a system and they still don't care.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
How do I transfer system to other players in a multiplayer game? I don’t seem to have the option at all and we’re in a federation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
Habits posted:How do I transfer system to other players in a multiplayer game? I don’t seem to have the option at all and we’re in a federation. You can only transfer systems that border the person you're giving it to
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
So I am sitting at 2373 and can research Synthetics. I have 3 planets of about size 20ish fully loaded with Droids for mining, and a combined fleet power of about 22k, which is only half of my capacity. Is it worth going for Synthetics, or will I almost certainly regret it? Edit: I am a fanatic materialist / egalitarian
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
Sandwich Anarchist posted:So I am sitting at 2373 and can research Synthetics. I have 3 planets of about size 20ish fully loaded with Droids for mining, and a combined fleet power of about 22k, which is only half of my capacity. Is it worth going for Synthetics, or will I almost certainly regret it? Do it. Nothing bad can happen, they are your trustworthy machines that have served you for centuries.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
Crazyeyes24 posted:Do it. I'm aware of the Contingency and AI Rebellions, I just don't get if they WILL happen, CAN happen, or PROBABLY will happen, and whether or not I can handle it if it does. You response leads me to believe "don't do it" is actually the right answer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 23:33
|
|