• 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.

Dev Diary #99 - Ground Combat & Army Rework

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris dev diary. Today's dev diary is about some changes coming to ground combat and armies in the 2.0 'Cherryh' update. This will be the last dev diary before we take a break for the holidays, so there will be no diaries in the next week or the week after that. Stellaris dev diaries return on Thursday January 11th, 2018.

Defense Armies and Fortresses
Constructing Defense Armies have always been largely a meaningless exercise in Stellaris. While they are useful for reducing Unrest and occasionally might be able to beat off an unprepared attacker, the fact that a planet is capped on how many armies can be defending it while the attacker is *not* capped on how many armies are attacking, coupled with the general weakness of defense armies, means that defending a planet against a ground invasion is generally an exercise in futility and will at most delay an attacker by a few weeks. However, if we solved this by just making defense armies a lot stronger or capping the number of attacking units, the result would turn every invasion of a backwater colony into a big affair - something that is not particularly desirable when a war can involve several different actors with hundreds of planets between them.

For this reason, we have decided to rework Defense Armies into something that is actually useful, but requires a significant investment of resources to muster more than a token defense. Instead of being directly buildable by the empire, defense armies are created from certain buildings. The capital building will produce defense armies depending on its level, as will some other planetary uniques like Military Academy. If you want a planet to be well defended, however, you will need to construct Fortress building on its tiles. Fortresses require a pop to work them, do not produce any other resources than a small amount of Unity, but provide a significant amount of defense armies to protect the planet. Armies spawned by Fortresses are also impervious to orbital bombardment, and will not be able to be killed without first ruining the building itself. The armies generated by a building have their species and type set by the pop working it, so a Very Strong Battle Thrall will produce several powerful defense armies if placed on a Fortress, and special pops like Droids will produce their own variants like Robotic Defense Armies rather than the normal ones. Fortified worlds will also be able to be fit with an FTL inhibitor (the exact way they get them is not yet determined) that prevents enemy fleets from leaving the system unless the world is captured, which allows for the creation of Fortress Worlds to protect strategically important systems.
2017_12_21_3.png

(Building icon is a placeholder)

One more important change related to Defense Armies is a change to Unrest: Armies on planets no longer reduce Unrest directly. Instead, to handle a planet with high Unrest, you will need to construct Fortress-style buildings or take other measures (such as using Edicts) to reduce the planetary Unrest. This means you cannot simply capture a planet and then spam a dozen defense armies to immediately zero out the Unrest. As part of this, we will be balancing certain events and effect to ensure newly captured worlds do not instantly defect back to their former owner.

Finally, as part of all these changes Defense Armies have received a general buff and there are several new technologies that unlock additional tiers of forts and various improvements to Defense Armies' combat ability, meaning that they will grow stronger alongside the invention of new, more powerful assault armies.

Assault Army Management
A major aim of our changes to armies is to reduce the amount of unnecessary micromanagement of armies. For this reason, and to make Assault Armies' role more explicit, we have decided to change Assault Armies to always be based in space. Whenever not directly engaged in an invasion, Assault Armies will now always automatically embark onto their transports, ready to be used to invade another world. We also aim to fix the minor but immersion-breaking bug where transport fleets are giving endlessly increasing sequential names whenever they land and embark again.

Combat Width, Retreating and Collateral Damage
Another change to ground combat is the introduction of new mechanics in the form of Combat Width. Combat Width is determined by the size of the planet, and decides how many armies can be taking and receiving damage at the same time: For example, if 20 assault armies invade a world held by 10 defense armies with a combat width of 10, all 10 defense armies will be immediately engaged in battle while only half the assault armies will be able to deal and receive damage, with additional assault armies joining the fray as the armies in front of them are destroyed. This means that it is no longer possible to take a well defended world without losses by simply throwing a hundred clone armies at it: If you wish to minimize losses (and thus War Exhaustion), you will need to invest in expensive, high-maintenance elite armies.
2017_12_21_1.png

(Interface not final)

We've also added the concept of Collateral Damage: As armies fight on the planet, civilians and civilian infrastructure is caught in the fighting. Each time an army deals damage in battle, it will inflict a random amount of Collateral Damage, which increases Planetary Damage similar to Orbital Bombardment (see below) and can lead to the death of Pops and the destruction of buildings and tiles. Some armies will deal more Collateral Damage than others: For example, Xenomorph armies are highly destructive and cost-efficient, but will wreak immense havoc on the planet, potentially leaving it in ruins in the process of capturing it for your empire.

While working on combat mechanics we also took the time to change the way Morale Damage works, making it something that is suffered by both sides (instead of just the loser) and making the effects of it more gradual, so that armies suffer a drop in combat efficiency once they are <50% morale, and then another, sharper drop when they are broken (0% morale). This should make certain armies, such as Psi Armies, highly effective against low-morale opponents like Slave Armies, but less effective against an unfeeling army of Droids. Finally, we've also tweaked the damage-dealing algorithm so that damage is less evenly spread among combatants, making it so that even an outnumbered force can destroy regiments and inflict war exhaustion on the enemy.
2017_12_21_2.png


Finally, we have made some changes to retreats. When an attacker retreats from a ground combat, there is now a significant chance that each retreating regiment is destroyed while attempting to return to space, making retreat a risky endeavour and eliminating the tactic of simply send in the same army again and again in wave attacks, instead making retreats something you do in order to preserve at least some of your army in a poorly chosen engagement.

Orbital Bombardment Changes
Finally, again in the interest of reducing the micromanagement needed during war, we've changed the way orbital bombardment works. Fortifications have been entirely cut from planets, so that there is no need to bombard lightly defended worlds before going in with the ground troops. Instead, we have added a requirement that planets cannot be invaded if there is a hostile Starbase in the system, so that transports cannot snipe worlds that are protected by defensive installations present in the same system. Orbital Bombardment, instead of being something you have to manage and wait for in every single planetary engagement, is now something you do to soften up a particularly well defended target, or simply to wreak havoc on the enemy's planet and drive up their War Exhaustion.

As a planet is bombarded, the fleet will deal Planetary Damage, ruining buildings and killing Pops. Bombarding fleets will also do damage to armies present on the planet (unless those armies are protected by a Fortress), and over a long enough time can decimate a defending force, though doing so will likely cause heavy damage to the planet and may delay the attacker long enough that the owner of the planet has time to build up their forces or inflict enough war exhaustion to force a peace. The rate at which the planet is damaged can also be slowed with the construction of buildings such as Planetary Defense Shield, further dragging out the process.

As part of these changes, we've consolidated the Bombardment Stances into the following:
  • Selective: Deals normal damage to armies/buildings and light damage to pops. Cannot kill the last 10 pops.
  • Indiscriminate: Deals heavy damage to armies, buildings and pops. Cannot kill the last 5 pops.
  • Armageddon: Deals massive damage to armies, buildings and pops. Can turn planets into depopulated Tomb Worlds with enough bombardment. Only available to certain empires such as Purifiers.

Attachments
Finally, on the topic of attachments, we have decided to cut them entirely from the game. We discussed a variety of ways to improve the way you assign them, but ultimately decided that we already have so many types of armies and not nearly enough combat mechanics to justify a significant investment of UI time that could go towards something like the Fleet Manager instead. The technologies that previously unlocked attachments will be changed to give other effects, such as direct buffs to certain army types.

That's all for today! As I said, we're now going on hiatus, so I'll see you again on January 11th with a dev diary about... well, that's a secret, actually. You'll just have to wait and see!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Wait a moment... So let me get this straight those armies cannot be defeated by bombardment by i still need to bombard those planets in order to have a slight chance for the bombardments to ruin the fortress ? that doesn't seem right ¿aren't you afraid that the defense armies could become slightly OP ? i love the dev you finally made ground combat actually important but i don't know i think you need to make the "ruin mechanic more reliable at least so the first building to always goes first is the fortress or made the player be able to prioritize which buildings your armies get to destroy first because know it seems that a 3 defense armies can destroy 10 armies just because you didn't get lucky enough in the ruin rolls in the bombardments or with the armies and the fortress never got destroyed maybe it's me ¿am i misunderstanding something?
I think the point is that the attacker bombarding the planet can't just eliminate the armies from orbit. You HAVE to send armies down to deal with the ones from the fortress unless you get lucky enough to ruin it. Otherwise, the bombardier could just chill and burn your defense armies down to no hp and then send in the clean up crew. It would defeat the purpose of defense armies. This way, the defender is guaranteed a set number of full hp defenders. The bomber can still bomb the blorg out of the other defense armies softening them up for the invasion forces.
 
I think the point is that the attacker bombarding the planet can't just eliminate the armies from orbit. You HAVE to send armies down to deal with the ones from the fortress unless you get lucky enough to ruin it. Otherwise, the bombardier could just chill and burn your defense armies down to no hp and then send in the clean up crew. It would defeat the purpose of defense armies. This way, the defender is guaranteed a set number of full hp defenders. The bomber can still bomb the blorg out of the other defense armies softening them up for the invasion forces.

Yeah... well still kinda makes bombarding a planet somewhat useless unless you want to destroy buildings... one or two every 5 Years...
 
Yeah... well still kinda makes bombarding a planet somewhat useless unless you want to destroy buildings... one or two every 5 Years...
You now destroy buildings by progress, instead of planetary fortification there is a damage meter until you destroy a random building/kill a pop, so you can absolutely level planets if you are determined to do so.
 
You now destroy buildings by progress, instead of planetary fortification there is a damage meter until you destroy a random building/kill a pop, so you can absolutely level planets if you are determined to do so.

Still random, still slow af... and now bombardement doesn't even help your Assault Armies :D
Well, I could level a Planet right now the same way... just need a lot of time, so I am not sure what would change apart from the visual representation...
 
Still random, still slow af... and now bombardement doesn't even help your Assault Armies :D
Well, I could level a Planet right now the same way... just need a lot of time, so I am not sure what would change apart from the visual representation...
It will be faster overall, and more consistent. Currently you CAN depopulate and annihilate a size 25 planet in 25 months, but that is an edge case, and most of the time you can bomb a size 10 world for decades without destroying it completely. It is all luck.

With the change there will be a very fixed time frame to destroy a world, and by extension the buildings on it, so even the hardest fortress world will fall in time.

Whether the buildings destroyed have any sort of priority will matter, if the fortress is particularly likely to be bombed is an important detail. One we don't know yet.
 
You now destroy buildings by progress, instead of planetary fortification there is a damage meter until you destroy a random building/kill a pop, so you can absolutely level planets if you are determined to do so.

So, do we still capture planets to deny the owner resources, or is that solely depending on if we've disabled the system's starbase?
 
how will the "militia" work? as in when you take over a world and continue with the war, will the number of fortresses that player/ai have on the world count towards your potential militia?
 
You mean reduce it? For the defenders lower combat width is to their advantage. Unless you are suggesting we be allowed to edict other people's planets.

For whoever has inferior numbers, a lower combat width is to their advantage. The whole point of width is that it curbs the benefits of superior numbers. That is likely to be the defenders, or the attacker planned poorly, but it is not guaranteed.
 
I'm not sure if this is the proper place for this question as I've just recently joined but do you think they will ever put back the death flower stations? Forcing them to have an arbitrary distance away honestly feels cheap to me. Military stations are essentially a waste in the game, really only delaying an enemy slightly. Fleets easier become extremely strong in the game causing even the strongest of stations to be quickly destroyed. I genuinely feel that they should remove the stations distance limit to as least some degree. The death flower strategy was a good use of the stations, one to trap and debuff the enemy fleet and the others to bombard it from afar, either destroying or allowing your own fleet enough time to respond. It also made systems with a fleet garrison not already doomed the moment an enemy fleet entered it. They should instead increase the upkeep of those stations as a trade-off, choosing either between a strong fleet but very few defenses or strong defenses but a small fleet. Obviously it doesn't need to be that extreme but you get my point. The closest thing we have towards a defense outside of a garrison fleet is a ring world with a military station in the center with the FTL inhibitor with the star ports acting as pseudo defenses. If a player wants to spam stations everywhere then let them, just make sure they understand that upkeep costs will be a factor.
EDIT: My query has been resolved. Please disregard this post.
 
Last edited:
I find the fortification system is broken part of it, it's too easy to grind down and serves little purpose in it's current form. It's especially late game that a significant fleet can wipe it out within a couple of days and drop an army with a +100% attack bonus. I believe the fortifications should be strengthen making bombardment slower and the defending army should get a defensive bonus in line with a percentage of the fortifications present. At 0% perhaps give a small bonus to attacker based on size of support attack fleet in orbit in comparison to starting fortification number. Also add a ground battery and change the shield building to reduce damage/kill chances of bombard to buildings/pops.
 
Dear Developers.

I have reviewed your proposal and find it lacking. I do not believe the changes you are proposing will encourage any form of enhanced military forethought, and instead will simply encourage more players to just up their bombardment policy's and encourage more xenophobic purging strategies rather than waste time on invading planets. however I would like to make some suggestions. based on relevant points.

1: Constructing Defense Armies have always been largely a meaningless exercise in Stellaris. While they are useful for reducing Unrest and occasionally might be able to beat off an unprepared attacker, the fact that a planet is capped on how many armies can be defending it while the attacker is *not* capped on how many armies are attacking, coupled with the general weakness of defense armies, means that defending a planet against a ground invasion is generally an exercise in futility.

This statement is more true than you know, I for one never use defense armies when playing, after all why build them when a assault army does everything they do only better. and once a defense is complete you can embark a assault army to launch a counter attack. something defense armies are useless for. in my opinion, the defense army should be changed to replace the militia that appear on planets during attack instead of being a separate buildable army. which you have basically done. with: Instead of being directly buildable by the empire, defense armies are created from certain buildings.

2: Fortresses require a pop to work them, do not produce any other resources than a small amount of Unity, but provide a significant amount of defense armies to protect the planet.

Fortresses. this is one idea I have problems with for this reason. the main being the whole doesn't produce anything but unity, I get it don't want to unbalance the game but this just makes no sense. why does the military academy generate research and boost troops but a actual military base does nothing. military bases are commonly for more than decoration, as military personnel provide many benefits beyond simply just being there. To that effect I suggest that fortresses be and upgrade to military academies, or to your administration centers. To explain why is quite simple, if you look through history, most major forts and large fortresses were constructed at capitals and major cities as they were often home to high ranking officers or to protect vested interests, Fort Knox being a prime example, very rarely did you just build a massive fortress out in the wilderness, and when you did it rarely lasted long. Either way fortresses were mostly meant to protect major cities, so I feel this slight change may be beneficial, and make it more useful to build a fortress as in their current state sacrificing a tile to build yet another useless building isn't very appealing. and yes it is otherwise utterly useless.

3: we have decided to change Assault Armies to always be based in space

Why. If your intent was to make them utterly useless then this makes sense, otherwise it is the most pointless thing I have ever heard of. do you have any idea how many time I have had to leave by assault forces behind to go chase a dangerous fleet or enter a system with a massive fortress in it, only to have an enemy fleet jump behind me while I was busy and attack the planet I just captured. forcing all my forces back to space after taking the planet leaves them vulnerable and easy to destroy, it makes no sense tactically or logically. unless they will now be deployed by the fleet itself from orbit, this decision is not a good one, in my opinion.

4: Another change to ground combat is the introduction of new mechanics in the form of Combat Width. Combat Width is determined by the size of the planet, and decides how many armies can be taking and receiving damage at the same time

This I actually have no problems with, it only makes sense that on a planet with five available land mass tiles, you wouldn't be able to put 50 million assault armies on it, And still have room for your defenders and buildings.

5: Finally, again in the interest of reducing the micromanagement needed during war, we've changed the way orbital bombardment works. Fortifications have been entirely cut from planets, so that there is no need to bombard lightly defended worlds before going in with the ground troops. Instead, we have added a requirement that planets cannot be invaded if there is a hostile Starbase in the system, so that transports cannot snipe worlds that are protected by defensive installations present in the same system.

This is questionable. Why would I need to destroy the starbase of a planet in the same system as the one I am attacking if it isn't in range of my fleet, though if I am attacking a system I generally destroy it all anyway, so what's the point? how does forcing us to hunt every starbase in a system decrease micromanagement? Why isn't sniping a world a valid strategy, and if the world has defensive structures how would you snipe it anyway? the entire argument for this change makes no sense.

I will leave this as is, though I feel most of my thoughts are fairly incomplete. I hope this makes some sense, as I have indeed put more thought into this than I should have.
 
You mean reduce it? For the defenders lower combat width is to their advantage. Unless you are suggesting we be allowed to edict other people's planets.

Don't think it would make any sense to stop invaders from landing more armies.
I was thinking of a 'Quantity has a quality of its own' Edict where you can cram more armies into a smaller planet. Something like that.
 
Not thrilled about the idea of having to use multiple tiles to properly defend a planet, not if they aren't going to produce anything other than a "small" amount of unity.

I would hope that the higher upgrade tiers of fortresses would also be able to support more armies instead of just upgrading the effectiveness of whatever their base number of armies is. Either that or allow more specialized military buildings like the academy which give research versus a standard fortress. Perhaps one upgrade path for a fortress that turns it into a subterranean fortress that is all but impervious to orbital assault. More stuff along those lines.

From a roleplaying perspective when I'm playing an empire with multiple species I'm also not happy that in order to have troops pulled from my different citizen species I would need to use multiple tiles with a different pop on each one. Perhaps the capital building armies should be generated automatically with a number of armies belonging to all species on the planet relative to their population ratio.

And regarding assault armies what happens if a planet comes under attack while they have assault armies stationed in orbit? Logically they should defend the planet but under the current game mechanics their transports would instead engage in and lose a fleet battle.