• 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:
Which means that you won't be able to play effectively as a Despotic Slaver Empire because you must spend all those Resource Tiles on... useless Fortresses just to quell any Unrest.

Such Empires simply won't be viable anymore because either you will be crushed by the first 'Fed Builder Democracy' that you encounter simply because you didn't have the Resources to build enough defenses and ships or you will be crushed by your own slaves revolting.
That's a HUGE oversight... but so far on par with the update, with the whole reducing playstyles theme going on.
Someone doesn't get that in the current build slavers are kinda overpowered and having to devote an extra tile to a fortress is a great way to balance things a bit.
 
Tomb Worlds can easily be colonized with mid- or late-game tech.
  1. Droids/Synthetics can be used to colonize them.
  2. Machine Empires can do it right from the start.
  3. Habitability-boosting techs can be stacked, with one that specifically boosts the habitability of Tomb Worlds.
  4. Adaptive/Extremely Adaptive further reduces the habitability penalties of Tomb Worlds.
  5. Some species that you Uplift can have "Irradiated", which boosts their habitability. Others specifically have Tomb World Habitability class, which makes them perfect for colonizing any world.

So at the start of the Game, and I want to be a "Glasser", I have to be one of those, or learn to live with super shitty habitability rating on those Planets that I "Glass"? Ok was just checking... ;)
 
So... to summarize:

- We can build absolutely impervious and unskippable Chokepoints that can hold enemy fleets indefinitely
- We have yet another big Influence Sink which would mean it will yet again be another slow down of the player
- We have yet again less options and ways to play because any other method besides literally building a Cadia-Type Border Fortress is useless.

Okay... I don't know what I expected to be honest.

Where ever did you get that idea? Even if you only have 1 Planet, it may have 4-5 avenues of approach. If so, you will be required to build and maintain all of those "absolutely impervious and unskippable Chokepoints".

But yes, from the "Pessimistic" view point, I guess you could be right... ;)
 
Someone doesn't get that in the current build slavers are kinda overpowered and having to devote an extra tile to a fortress is a great way to balance things a bit.
I am pretty sure that if Stellaris was a competitive game, in high rankings 100% of players would pick a slaver build with mineral guilds + slave guillds of starting civics and past the mid game synthetic ascension would be mandatory.
 
Someone doesn't get that in the current build slavers are kinda overpowered and having to devote an extra tile to a fortress is a great way to balance things a bit.

Key point is "Balance"... given the potency of Slave Unrest/Revolts this requires more than one tile PER PLANET be converted to just Unrest Reduction...
Given that not every planet is a lush 25 Tile world this poses a very serious problem.
Again, it's the decision between "Will I be crushed by Anti-Slaver Empires in 100 Years or will I be ripped apart by Slave Revolts in 100 Years", this reduces the appeal and incentive to play as a Slave Owning Empire completely.

Where ever did you get that idea? Even if you only have 1 Planet, it may have 4-5 avenues of approach. If so, you will be required to build and maintain all of those "absolutely impervious and unskippable Chokepoints".

But yes, from the "Pessimistic" view point, I guess you could be right... ;)

Fill the Planet with fortresses and a single subspace snare... Did you miss that the Subspace Snare isn't a Station module anymore? That you need to conquer the Planet to shut it off or your Fleet is trapped unless you use Emergency Warp to return them to you?
 
Key point is "Balance"... given the potency of Slave Unrest/Revolts this requires more than one tile PER PLANET be converted to just Unrest Reduction...
Given that not every planet is a lush 25 Tile world this poses a very serious problem.
Again, it's the decision between "Will I be crushed by Anti-Slaver Empires in 100 Years or will I be ripped apart by Slave Revolts in 100 Years", this reduces the appeal and incentive to play as a Slave Owning Empire completely.

Fill the Planet with fortresses and a single subspace snare... Did you miss that the Subspace Snare isn't a Station module anymore? That you need to conquer the Planet to shut it off or your Fleet is trapped unless you use Emergency Warp to return them to you?

Or just Scout ahead and simply go around said Fortress Planet until such time I have need to destroy it and replace all that wasted stuff with Resource supplying buildings...

But regardless. You have made your position well known. Your pissed off and no matter what anyone says to the contrary, they are simply wrong. Good, at least we can simply ignore you from here on out until we actually get to see the Update in action.
 
Or just Scout ahead and simply go around said Fortress Planet until such time I have need to destroy it and replace all that wasted stuff with Resource supplying buildings...

But regardless. You have made your position well known. Your pissed off and no matter what anyone says to the contrary, they are simply wrong. Good, at least we can simply ignore you from here on out until we actually get to see the Update in action.

"Going around" a Chokepoint is really something, but okay... I will not stop you.
 
I hope this addition doesn't turn ground warfare into raw numbers. Not all armies should be made equal. A small force of technologically superior soldiers should be able to take a planet-full of spear throwing savages with little to no casualties (I know my analogy is extreme). Technology should play a part in this, as should army composition with differing kinds of mobile forces each with their own set of pros and cons contributing to any successful defence or invasion. If it's just turn up with 10x your opponents numbers it's not really going to make a whole lot of difference to the fundamentally flawed invasion system.
 
That depends on the cost of the armies. It´s worth remembering that 10 troops costing 60 minerals is 600, and that is a lot in mid game in this current version. Their objective is that some of those troops will die in the invasion (which is not really the case right now, you swarm a planet and sometimes lose zero troops), but the better your army, the less you will lose. It´s reasonable.
 
That depends on the cost of the armies. It´s worth remembering that 10 troops costing 60 minerals is 600, and that is a lot in mid game in this current version. Their objective is that some of those troops will die in the invasion (which is not really the case right now, you swarm a planet and sometimes lose zero troops), but the better your army, the less you will lose. It´s reasonable.

I don't disagree that army loss should be a thing, all I'm saying is reducing it to raw numbers will not improve gameplay in any meaningful way, or to put it more bluntly, it'll be just as bloody boring as it is now.

As things stand ground warfare in Stellaris is spreadsheets in space and simply turning it into a case of he-who-has-the-most-numbers-wins isn't going to improve that, which is why I'm hoping they don't make this mistake. Having fortified worlds that shut down FTL is a great idea because it creates choke points and slows down invasions, allowing reinforcements to be moved into place or rebuilt, but that's rendered completely useless if all I need to do is turn up with 10x more numbers than you in order to win.

To my mind, ground warfare should be a game of Paper, Rock, Scissors, with differing armies being a counter to each other which adds a deeper strategic level to it. No longer will an one-size fits all army work, you need different armies to take on different species, or potentially, different planets.
 
Last edited:
I hope this addition doesn't turn ground warfare into raw numbers. Not all armies should be made equal. A small force of technologically superior soldiers should be able to take a planet-full of spear throwing savages with little to no casualties (I know my analogy is extreme). Technology should play a part in this, as should army composition with differing kinds of mobile forces each with their own set of pros and cons contributing to any successful defence or invasion. If it's just turn up with 10x your opponents numbers it's not really going to make a whole lot of difference to the fundamentally flawed invasion system.

As far as I'm aware, they're not removing army damage techs, plus they've mentioned rebalancing different army types so high tech will be more effective but cost more.
 
Key point is "Balance"... given the potency of Slave Unrest/Revolts this requires more than one tile PER PLANET be converted to just Unrest Reduction...
Given that not every planet is a lush 25 Tile world this poses a very serious problem.
Again, it's the decision between "Will I be crushed by Anti-Slaver Empires in 100 Years or will I be ripped apart by Slave Revolts in 100 Years", this reduces the appeal and incentive to play as a Slave Owning Empire completely.



Fill the Planet with fortresses and a single subspace snare... Did you miss that the Subspace Snare isn't a Station module anymore? That you need to conquer the Planet to shut it off or your Fleet is trapped unless you use Emergency Warp to return them to you?

The problem is that it is almost impossible to have any situation where all roads lead to your super space fortress planet, unless you happen to spawn at the butt end of the universe and never settle more than your homeworld - but then again, if you make your only planet a fortress planet you probably won't get anywhere anyways.

Just start a game up with hyperlanes active and look at how many connections there are between any given region of the galaxy and another. While I don't argue that there isn't a way to make your empire hard (not impossible, just hard mind you) to invade, it comes with absolutely TREMENDOUS trade-offs.

You're investing:

- Core systems that could be economic power houses but that are instead devoted to systems that might not even have a habitable planet in it just because it happens to be one of 4 systems (by the way, good luck praying that the other three have something in it worth coring) that form a natural chokepoint to a part of space the AI is holding.

- Several tens of thousands of minerals for the fully upgraded starbase, satellite swarm and modules/buildings to grant your base the damage and weapon slots it needs + however many slots on any planet that MIGHT be in the system devoted to ground troops to make it harder to take.

- At least as many planets as you have chokepoints to defend literally wasted because all they'll contain is a bunch of 1 unity troop buildings and a planetary shield, while still tanking your unity and science output because planet + pops = why even science?

- High upkeep in minerals, energy credits and quite possibly influence (note that the developers explicitly stated that the level zero bases you need to claim an empty system don't cost influence upkeep but they never mentioned if the upgraded starbases you need to colonize said system do, did they?).

- All the system you could have claimed that might contain highly valuable planets but that you can't really settle/develop if they're outside your defended chokepoint pocket, otherwise why invest that much in the fortresses anyways if you're gonna place more assets outside that protection that might yield enough warscore to claim stuff from you?

- A harsh reduction in fleet strength and building capacity because you're going to need most if not all your starbases to be fortresses so they can't have 6 shipyard modules - and until you can build habitats, that also means less planets and less navy cap because you claimed empty systems to deny the AI entry into your core area.

- The crushing feeling of rage you will feel when the AI first developes jumpdrives and jumps straight past your "impenetrable" fortresses to attack your cores with much bigger fleets because all your minerals went to stations and satellite swarms that ain't exactly mobile.

Also: I didn't actually notice the devs stating that stations can't be snares anymore, only that planets CAN be, now. I feel it makes sense, because lets be honest: there was really no reason to fortify a planet before if the enemy can just bypass it and conquer all your other planets that aren't similarly fortified.
 
Well, what do you know, I just fired up a game and looked around...

Spiral 4 Arm, 1000 Stars and a decent chunk of an outer Arm was completely mine with just TWO Chokepoints :)
So I would only have to fortify a grand total of two Systems with Cadia-Style Fortress Worlds and that's about it.
Anyone wanting to actually assault me would have to spend almost all of their actual and military resources just to breach the border and that is before I react and counter-attack.
Also most of your arguments would require me to be absolutely passive or rather on the toilet for most of the game for these to happen :)
 
besides that they are reworking mapgen a bit, you also have to count gateway stations and wormholes when talking about a territory of any real size
 
besides that they are reworking mapgen a bit, you also have to count gateway stations and wormholes when talking about a territory of any real size

Unless it's a complete rewrite the problem will persist...
And those are Late Game Techs and again would need the Player doing nothing for most of the game so the AI can freely research it and build ships to pose a real danger or given how Tech RNG works might never really pop up :)
 
Well, if they introduce a new version of hyperlane mapping where your Empire discovers new hyperlanes not formerly known, and you DON'T, then a player could evade your chokepoints via backdoor access. So that situation isn't entirely stalled. Of course, if you get that potential hyperlane mapping first and build fortresses on the new choke points as well, you could prevent that. Would definitely make it more interesting - do you invest in more weapons, or more strategy? What does the opponent do?
 
Well I can. Can you point me to the quote that makes you think it protects them from all types of damage?

Been away for a couple days, but I felt I should address this even though it's a bit 'old' now. Here's the quote, with my own emphasis on the part that lead me to see that:
Armies spawned by Fortresses are also impervious to orbital bombardment, and will not be able to be killed without first ruining the building itself.

It's the "and" that leads me in that direction. If he'd instead said "meaning that they will not be able to be killed" I would have read it the way you did, but the way it's worded that sounds (to me) like an additional clause rather than an explication of the first one: you can't touch them with orbital bombardment whether the fortress still stands or not and even your ground troops can't kill them until the fortress is broken.
 
Unless it's a complete rewrite the problem will persist...
And those are Late Game Techs and again would need the Player doing nothing for most of the game so the AI can freely research it and build ships to pose a real danger or given how Tech RNG works might never really pop up :)
Fortess worlds and fortress starbases will be expansive and need a long time to be builted and cant be moved.
If you are a tall empire, so, yes, you can heavily fortifier all your entry points and try be a turtle.
But if you are a wide conqueror empire your new territiry dont will be protected by your old starfortress and here is a limit in the number of starfortress that you can have, this will create a important difference between inner systems protected by fortress and outer system beyon your choke points.
 
Fortess worlds and fortress starbases will be expansive and need a long time to be builted and cant be moved.
If you are a tall empire, so, yes, you can heavily fortifier all your entry points and try be a turtle.
But if you are a wide conqueror empire your new territiry dont will be protected by your old starfortress and here is a limit in the number of starfortress that you can have, this will create a important difference between inner systems protected by fortress and outer system beyon your choke points.

I have the feeling you completely miss the point...
I am not talking about Starbases and Starfortresses, I am talking about the Planetary Fortresses... not Space... apart from being a Chokepoint and the Subspace Snare I haven't touched Space and System control at all.

Edit: Besides that, you will be able to downgrade Stations if I remember correctly... so that really isn't an issue, just... well, literally move your Fortressworld to the new Chokepoint and the game begins anew.
 
Last edited:
Would be cool if there were edicts that would increase army Combat Width, maybe with a small penalty

Better idea.
Generals that skew the combat width in their favor. Like the "Tactics" skill in Mount&Blade, if you have a better general you can slap

Saying that a video game is, or even just can be, too "gamey" is such a bizarre notion.

I take it you've never heard of GNS theory in game design?

Originally developed concerning RPGs, but the concepts extend fairly well out to other genres as well, it contrasts three elements or approaches to game design: Gamist, Narrativist, and Simulationist. When a game is described as "too gamey" it's an accusation that it's lacking in the other areas. (Or that the speaker would prefer a game with more focus on one or both of the other two areas.)

Stellaris - and Paradox games in general - are kind of interesting, in that the community itself tends towards a higher level of Narrativist interest than I see in most other strategy games.

Well yes there is an opportunity cost, that choice is the heart of strategy games though isn't it?

The trick is to make it an interesting choice. If the opportunity cost is too high, then it's a nobrainer not to bother with it and thus not really a 'choice' - just a trap for new players and dumb AI, or perhaps a penalty for taking a more Narrativist approach. (Ie. if fortresses cost too much for their value, but someone really loves the idea of Cadia and builds them out anyway just to have their Fortress World and to hell with whether it's optimal or not.)

If it's too low, then it's still a no-brainer; just from the other angle.

Well, what do you know, I just fired up a game and looked around...

Spiral 4 Arm, 1000 Stars and a decent chunk of an outer Arm was completely mine with just TWO Chokepoints :)
So I would only have to fortify a grand total of two Systems with Cadia-Style Fortress Worlds and that's about it.
Anyone wanting to actually assault me would have to spend almost all of their actual and military resources just to breach the border and that is before I react and counter-attack.
Also most of your arguments would require me to be absolutely passive or rather on the toilet for most of the game for these to happen :)

Not quite so lucky on my the map I fired up. Standard (600) size spiral 2 arm; 12 AIs + 1-3 (random) fallen empires, default planet habitability & primitives.

Early game, I can grab about 30 systems with 7 planets easily behind 3 chokepoints. Coincidentally, that's also how many systems I can likely grab before I run into my neighbours and get cut off from any further peaceful expansion. If I can take out my nearest neighbour to the north, based on what I've scouted past him I'll be adding another 20 systems and still have only 3 entries into my territory. If I go for my neighbour to the south instead, I've got 30 more systems and - again - still have only 3 entry points. Taking them both out, if I can pull it off, would put me to about 80 systems with about 17 planets. And *still* have exactly 3 literally unskippable (but not necessary impervious) chokepoints into that section.

3 is coincidentally the starting Starbase Cap that they had in place when they were showing us screenshots, so fortifying them up should be well within my grasp. Expanding past that point is going to get a bit messier, in part because I don't yet know who is out there that taking up what real estate.

Edit: one caveat is that none of those chokepoint systems have a colonizable planet in them, so I wouldn't be able to stack a FortressWorld on top of the starbase there.
 
Last edited: