• 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:
Better idea.
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.

I have heard of it and it's an idiotic concept. A video game can only be at most 100% gamey, there is no such thing is "too gamey". Are you going to accuse a movie of being too movie-y? Of course not. If you want more narrative, try a different game genre more suited to it like an RPG, or maybe even a whole different medium, like a book, visual novel or movie, and if you want a simulation, engage in a simulation. Why would you, or Paradox for that matter, restrict a FourX game like Stellaris to petty realism when that directly contradicts the core point of any game, and genres like FourX in particular - having fun with competition?
 
Forcing assault armies to remain in space at all times except when they're invading is a terrible idea. Not only does it make no sense to house your soldier in space even at peacetime (sounds like a good way to cause a mutiny, if you ask me), it's also impractical gameplay-wise, as it makes both newly conquered worlds and the assault armies themselves more vulnerable, likely ending up actually increasing micromanagement.
 
Saying that a video game is, or even just can be, too "gamey" is such a bizarre notion.

Not at all, it's the difference between a game function or rule meant to represent something 'realistic' or a game function or rule that is purely based on arbitrary reasons and gives it a rigid and non intuitive feel.
It's the difference between the original Xcom games, and the remake versions. The original was very sim-like in approach, while the remakes had a far more 'board gamey' feel with arbitrary rules like using one action to reload or shoot ends your turn, even though you have 'two' actions.

A magical station in the center of a system that magically stops invasions is arbitrary and has no logical reason for being so. The station is in no position to prevent invasion, it's an arbitrary restriction.
It makes it feel less like a 4x space empire simulator, and more like a 4x space empire board game, since board games by their nature have to abstract a lot of things.

Now a station orbiting a planet preventing invasion is more reasonable, you can argue while the planet has control of it's skies so to speak, they can shoot down invading transports.

It's just this trend of changes that I'm not too keen on, for every good feature they're adding it seems like their gutting old ones or adding two I don't like.

That is why I added I really hope they make it possible to switch some of these things back via modding, I know some people love all the changes but I'm seeing more and more of the elements I like about this game getting cut off.
 
Just because the starbase renders in the center of the system for simplicity and understand-ability doesn't mean it is literally orbiting the star, or a continuous object. One space station couldn't secure a large asteroid let alone a solar system.

I think of the starbase as an abstraction of thousands of facilities, defense emplacements, and stations throughout the system. Think the defensive orbital batteries from halo, there are hundreds, if not thousands of space stations involved. And taking down the starbase only represents gaining space-borne superiority over the system.

And that is part of the reason I despise the idea.
I understand some abstraction is needed, but this takes it too far for my tastes.
After all, to attack the starbase you would need to head to the center of the system where it is.
 
It's. A. Game. A simplification for the sake of balance and fun. Get over it.

If you want an at least semi-accurate space simulation, you're in the wrong place.
 
Last edited:
I am not talking about Starbases and Starfortresses, I am talking about the Planetary Fortresses... not Space...
So, just build high quality assault armies and their fortress worlds dont will be so effective. I think that this is the point, incentive both (attack and defenders) to significantly invest in armies.
 
So, just build high quality assault armies and their fortress worlds dont will be so effective. I think that this is the point, incentive both (attack and defenders) to significantly invest in armies.

You don't want to get it, do you?
Okay, you did it... I concede my point, I am seriously too tired to try to explain to a Wall why there is a problem.
 
It's. A. Game. A simplification for the sake of balance and fun. Get over it.

If you want an at least semi-accurate space simulation, you're in the wrong place.

No need to be a jerk.

As I said, I'm not asking for an accurate space simulation. I simply want the game mechanics to make coherent logical sense instead of things being abstracted to the point of absurdity.
A magical station in the middle of the system that controls everything and stops troops touching foot on a planet, even at the very extremities of the system, is absurd.
If you like such absurdity, power to you, but I for one don't like about 50% of the changes they're planning to make.
 
Does this mean that assault armies cannot be used to defend planets? If so, it's going to look really silly to have armies just floating in space while the enemy is taking their planets.
 
Does this mean that assault armies cannot be used to defend planets? If so, it's going to look really silly to have armies just floating in space while the enemy is taking their planets.

Think "Defensive" Armies on Planet... Just like now. ;)
 
No need to be a jerk.

As I said, I'm not asking for an accurate space simulation. I simply want the game mechanics to make coherent logical sense instead of things being abstracted to the point of absurdity.
A magical station in the middle of the system that controls everything and stops troops touching foot on a planet, even at the very extremities of the system, is absurd.
If you like such absurdity, power to you, but I for one don't like about 50% of the changes they're planning to make.

I would imagine early space stations you could go around and try to avoid, however later you should be able to arm them with long range weapons such as tachyon lances or some sort of small super weapon as space stations are large enough to be able to mount those. Also I could imagine a gravity module that, instead of strait up drops enemy fleets on top of it which would completely negate any long range advantage the space station had over a fleet, it would slowly pull fleets towards it and/or not allow any ships to retreat or leave the system until the module is destroyed, basically making it so you have to destroy the station in order to take the planets.
 
It's. A. Game. A simplification for the sake of balance and fun. Get over it.

If you want an at least semi-accurate space simulation, you're in the wrong place.

So in the year 2200, when mankind is ready to cross in to the stars, guess where our starport and all our space based defenses are hoing to be built. Around Earth? Nope, we put everything around the sun, needed efficient solar panals. All invaders better pass through there before they consider bombarding Earth.

Sigh. Isn't that a little immersion bursting?
 
So in the year 2200, when mankind is ready to cross in to the stars, guess where our starport and all our space based defenses are hoing to be built. Around Earth? Nope, we put everything around the sun, needed efficient solar panals. All invaders better pass through there before they consider bombarding Earth.

Sigh. Isn't that a little immersion bursting?

Immerse yourself harder. Your imagination can use improvement, lol.

Frankly, that is what is wrong with our Western Civilization in this time. We lost imagination of our forefathers. We cant entertain our selves. We want everything from others, to be delivered perfectly on demand. Then we wonder, why everything is going to sht ? lol. If this is our collective attitude, we don't deserve even the least of what we getting.

If you have constructive input, please by all means, contribute. If you have constructive suggestions or even critic, please, contribute. If you think you can make a better game, please, make one. Dont be vain and useless. Happy New Year, Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Sure, starting space port should be around your homeworld, and new builds should be anywhere you want in the system.

Let ground invasion happen, but you don't get the warscore unless you invade and destroy the star port, but can be done in any order.

EDIT: Most all sci-fi source material has starship construction occur on or above populated planets. Building all your parts for spaceships isn't going to happen in a spaceport, it seems silly to export all the parts and crew to the sun for assembly.
 
That
Sure, starting space port should be around your homeworld, and new builds should be anywhere you want in the system.

Let ground invasion happen, but you don't get the warscore unless you invade and destroy the star port, but can be done in any order.

EDIT: Most all sci-fi source material has starship construction occur on or above populated planets. Building all your parts for spaceships isn't going to happen in a spaceport, it seems silly to export all the parts and crew to the sun for assembly.

Fine, you made me do it. Lets go to imagination land together, I will hold your hand. I, the president of the Interstellar civilization, desire to build a new military shipyard, to build and maintain a navy. I want something massive. Something what can build and repair 100 of ships at the same time. We need a lot of energy to keep this thing working. Hmmm.. where can we get massive amount of energy ? Where can we get this in space ? I have an idea, how about a star! Yep, a star, should provide a constant supply of energy we can harness into mechanical power, to maintain a massive space shipyard. Great idea! Lets build this shipyard around a star then. See ? easy.
 
its just unfortunate that we cant "roleplay" invasions that happen, you know, IN WAVES
 
I love stellaris,but there are some things that i would like to see:
1-Better ground wars where you control the armies and tactics used
2-Fleet controls (like different formations and random attack animations instead of the repetitive circle jerk)
3- Incentives to have multiple moderate or smaller fleets instead of death stack
4-Sneak attack system to get the jump on a more powerful civ,instead of letting them know before hand so they can decimate you
5-Spys,stealing tech and other info + sabotage & assassination
6-Being able to trade tech
7-And finally being able to automate your civ so you can pick certain things that can be set to auto, to let you say for instance pilot a single vessle while the empire is controlled by ai