Stellaris Dev Diary #163 - Juggernaut & Mega Shipyard

[sortulv]

Also, on that note. Someone else mentioned that because Bombardment damage is capped, the 30% boost to bombardment damage would be useless by the time you get it. Maybe instead it could just increase the cap 30%?

I had assumed that the 30% would be after the cap was applied. If it is not, then that is pretty much useless, yes.

 

[Bitzo]

acutally that would be "the arc hammer"

Nah, I'm pretty sure the Arc Hammer in Stellaris would build Robotic Assault Armies instead of ships, have a much longer and narrower profile and be equipped with a non-insignificant armament consisting of a few guns (no idea on size and amount; no official numbers on that) and missiles.
The Juggernaut is definitely closer to the Supremacy in form and function.

 

[king of AR]

can we get auto cannons extended back into the medium slots again ? Clouds of ordinance from one of these would be hilarious .

 

[MarKr]

I've been gone since about the time the Megacorp was released so I need to ask - have the strike craft been made useful since then? Because I can remember them being a lackluster, pretty much never worth using and these new mega space stations come with pre-installed strike craft modules.

 

[House Centipede]

I've been gone since about the time the Megacorp was released so I need to ask - have the strike craft been made useful since then? Because I can remember them being a lackluster, pretty much never worth using and these new mega space stations come with pre-installed strike craft modules.

Unfortunately, no. You're still better off going with Corvette swarms. They're essentialy just Strike Craft with better evasion, higher damage, and the ability to take hits.

 

[MarKr]

That's a bummer...It is weird that PD cannot make these things useful when you can mod the game to make the Strike Craft useful yet not OP...well, I'll be sticking with my mods then...
Thanks for the answer

 

[Chief of Staff]

Speaking of the shipyards, it would be great if we were to somehow allow modders to enable shipyards for the specific planets instead of having them all in a single base orbiting the star. This way, it would allow for true representation of shipyards orbiting the planets Earth (San Francisco Fleet Yards) and Mars (Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards) as depicted in Star Trek franchise. Star Trek: New Horizons mod could definitely use this change but this may require decoupling the shipyards from the base. I would also like to be able to select which major celestial object (planet or star) the base should be orbiting. I want a Spacedock next to the Earth, damnit. ;P

From what I can tell, the restrictions as presently implemented for shipyards in each star system appeared to be a matter of game balancing. However, I think we still should allow modders to override this rule and put in their own rule. As to how that would be balanced for a mod, I am uncertain. One possibility is to restrict the number of shipyards for empires directly through some kind of cap or indirectly through their maintenance costs overall (which may simply be a total of all shipyards built or that for each shipyard built, the maintenance cost are multiplied either normally or as result of going over the empire cap). Perhaps someone here could offer a better solution to this.

 

[jdlech]

Bigger is, indeed, better. But I think Stellaris is moving in the wrong direction and missing out on some intriguing gameplay.
As it stands, we get vanilla ship hulls with specific modules. And as we advance tech, we get bigger vanilla hulls with either more modules, and/or bigger modules. But that hull is pretty much the same from play to play with always the same number/size of modules available with each section.
But what if hull modules was a repeatable tech? What if the player gained hull modules gradually with both physics and engineering tech?
What if the player could choose the size of the module by combining basic modules? Thus, a ship with 12 modules available would have to use at least 1 for engines, 1 for a power plant, 1 for sensors, and at least 1 for utilities. But that leaves 8 modules left. All could be used for weapons, 8 tiny weapons, or 1 big one. A single 7 module weapon and a single tiny 1 module weapon. Or any combination. Maybe 5 modules used for extra utilities, and only 3 modules left for weapons. Maybe 4 modules used for engines for a really fast ship. The techs are repeatable, so it's natural for an end game empire to have huge 100 or 200 module ships. Call them whatever the player wants to call them.

What if a player could arrange those hull modules to his/her liking, and the ships look is a reflection of how the player arranged those modules? Thus, even though a ship can be functionally the same, it could look like a cube, or wide, tall, or flat, or needle like, swept wing, or a flying ring, or have modules jutting out at odd angles, etc.. Let's say modules could be arranged in any way the player wanted as long as they physically touched one another. Instead of using bland squares, we could build with 3 dimensional cubes and combining cubes to get larger modules. Thus, a ship design using 8 modules starts with 8 cubes, arranged as the player wants. Then cubes are combined to get the module sizes the player wants. Again, as long as the cubes physically touched, they could be combined into larger modules. So larger modules need not be cubes, they could even wind and wend around the ship.

Then we can dispense with the specific module sizes, weapon sizes, utility sizes, etc. This might simplify some calculations since you need only store the stats for a small weapon or utility, then multiply it by the # of modules used. But it might complicate other calculations. For instance, sticking a reactor in a 3 module box multiplies its output by a factor of 3. Of course, stats like weapon range wouldn't be a straight 1 for 1 multiplier. So extra modules would increase range by .. say 20%... (balance and gameplay would determine the actual multiplier). So a 1 module weapon with a range of 30, and each additional module used would add 6 to the range. Thus a 5 module weapon would double the range to 60, and a 12 module range would be 96. Then you get to the really big weapon sizes like 25 modules with a range of 174. But that means you might have fleets with 50 different weapon ranges.

Of course, it would require a whole rewrite of the ship designs, a massive undertaking to be sure. But I think that direction would provide more interesting play and far greater diversity than adding vanilla hulls with specific sized weapons/utilities.
In game play, having just a couple extra modules to work with might make all the difference in a war. Or not, depending on how those modules are utilized. It could also increase diversity among science ships and even allow for more efficient constructor ships as technology improves.

 

[jdlech]

Speaking of the shipyards, it would be great if we were to somehow allow modders to enable shipyards for the specific planets instead of having them all in a single base orbiting the star.

They used to do that, but players kept finding ways to build these megaplexes of defense stations that were basically unassailable.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

I guess I should throw my 2 cents in on this as well.

Bigger ships are cool and all, but in Stellaris in its current state, bigger ships just mean bigger targets. You have to research lots of tech, sink lots of resources into making purpose built starbases to even create them, spend even more resources to actually make them, and even take an Ascension Perk for some, and in return you get a super slow ship with virtually no chance to escape combat that can be overwhelmed by its cost in Missile Corvettes.

Titans sound like some huge intimidating presence on the battlefield, but I've taken out a huge fleet that included 3 using only MCs and lost about 10% of my power. (Corvettes have a huge chance to escape battle and come back btw). So really a Titan's primary use is as a support ship. But it's self defeating in that respect as well, because that means it needs a fleet to travel with, and as previously mentioned it's really slow. And with all the resources and time you spent making a Starbase for it, and then building the Titan itself, you could have built a powerful regular fleet and won the war already.

Colossi are both slow and have 0 means to defend themselves, meaning much like the Titan, they seem like some sort of thing a regular fleet has to tow along with it at a snails pace.

Juggernauts at the very least seem to have a good function as a large mobile shipyard, but it's still a lot of effort.

That's... an interesting mix of truth and falsehoods.

Generic agreement, though not particularly strong, on your first real paragraph. I do feel like the big ships should be more useful.

Missile corvettes are literally meant to be the hard counter to titan+battleship fleets, especially if the battleships don't use strike craft (which suck, hard, but are at least capable of hitting corvettes and also allow the battleships to mount some PD). However, unless you drop almost immediately on top of the battleship+titan fleet, you should take significant losses from the alpha strike. It also depends a lot how the big ships are fitted (are they shield-heavy? Are they using high-damage weapons like Neutron Launchers?) and what auras the titans have (the tracking aura is a must-have for an artillery fleet, while the repair aura is garbage on anything but corvettes, for example).

Corvettes have literally the lowest chance to disengage out of any warship (1.0x base; destroyers and cruisers have 1.5x while battleships and titans have 1.25x; see https://stellaris.paradoxwikis.com/Ship_designer#Types). I'm not sure how you got this exactly wrong.

That's BEFORE considering the fact that their hulls are so weak that it's dead easy for large ships to one-shot them from "too healthy to disengage" all the way to "dead". A Neutron Launcher does 819-1820 damage against hull, base (i.e. before any bonuses from tech, edicts, admirals, civics, etc.). That's enough to take a corvette from "undamaged" to "dead" in one lucky hit. In fact, it's enough to guarantee that a corvette dies in one hit if it isn't heavily shielded. Ships won't even disengage until they're well into hull damage, and against Neutron Launchers or even Kinetic Artillery, a corvette's 500 HP hull will usually shatter in a single hit. That's not a single volley, that's from literally one shot by one weapon. Also, that's not even counting spinal mount weapons. Every single spinal mount weapon, from the Arc Emitter to the Perdition Beam, will on average one-shot any corvette. They also massively outrange every corvette build possible, so the big ships will get at least one full volley off before the corvettes can even get their initial missile launch.

This has been borne out in test after test: missile corvettes "win", but it's a Pyrrhic victory. Assuming both sides are well-designed (meaning artillery fit battleships, not carrier fits) and of roughly similar strength, the corvettes lose far more alloys worth of destroyed hulls than the titans and battleships do, because nearly every corvette hit is a corvette killed, but the battleships and titans are quite likely to successfully disengage. Even torpedoes don't individually do a very large portion of a big ship's total HP each, and you get a disengage chance from each weapon that damages you beyond the 50% hull threshold.

Titans have exactly the same base movement stats as Battleships: 100 move speed + up to 175% bonus from improved engines. With late-game engines and some good admiral traits you can get them to well over 300 move speed. You can actually easily make Titans faster than battleships; they can use three afterburners, while a BS can only use two. In fact, with three T2 afterburners, a Titan is the same speed as a Corvette (that isn't using any afterburners)! In a mixed fleet of titans and battleships, assuming neither hull type is mounting more afterburners than the other, the combined fleet will move exactly as fast as a monofleet of either type would.

As for the time to build a titan, it's quite a lot, but the titan still only takes one shipyard slot while building. Since you can only build them at citadels, you have 6 module slots, which are all shipyards because starbases (like most things in Stellaris) can and should be min-maxed. Therefore, each titan you build occupies only 1/6th of the starbase while it's building. Titans take a bit less than 4x (3.75x, to be exact) times as long as a battleship to build. This means that if you build 1 titan (one after another, not in parallel) and 18 battleships - a cool 160 fleet points, just right for a late-game fleet - it'll take you only very slightly longer than the titan by itself takes (and you'll have three shipyards idle for part of that time, so they can be building other warships, such as the start of a new fleet, or spares to replace losses).

Colossi are in fact quite expensive, slow, and vulnerable. Aside from getting the achievements, I see little reason to actually use them in war; their primary purpose is just to give you a Total War casus belli, which they can (and should) do while sitting over your homeworld or in some similarly-unreachable system. Nanobot Diffuser is the only colossus weapon that's generally worthwhile but is limited to only one empire type; Neutron Sweep is arguably worthwhile against FE/AE planets just to avoid dealing with their damn armies but still usually not worth the hassle.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

Colossi are in fact quite expensive, slow, and vulnerable. Aside from getting the achievements, I see little reason to actually use them in war; their primary purpose is just to give you a Total War casus belli, which they can (and should) do while sitting over your homeworld or in some similarly-unreachable system. Nanobot Diffuser is the only colossus weapon that's generally worthwhile but is limited to only one empire type; Neutron Sweep is arguably worthwhile against FE/AE planets just to avoid dealing with their damn armies but still usually not worth the hassle.

Divine enforcer is great for the lulz

Planet cracker for the hyperspace bypass

But like this is just for ... reasons, no argument in general with your post

 

[NguyenReich]

There is also one problem with corvettes. They dying fast means that you will rack up war exhaustion very fast and it can force you to peace out even if you are winning the war.

Corvette doomstacks are only good for crisis and Total War CB. Or rekting somebody weaker than you.

 

[Deknay]

Will you still be able to repair and upgrade ships on an controlled- enemy owned- starbase?.


If so I don't see the usefulness of the Jughhhhsmsonaut*.

 

[UnitedBlorgFreinds]

Divine enforcer is great for the lulz

Planet cracker for the hyperspace bypass

But like this is just for ... reasons, no argument in general with your post

I like the idea of the borgification colossus. Assimilate an entire eccumenopolis at once, (if the species on it aren’t psychic). I have never used colossi before (mainly due to lack of games that I’ve stuck with to late/mid game).
Edit: I meant The nanobot diffuser. Just forgot the name there.

 

[BudaKhan]

Now that's what I call end-game content... holy smokes! You guys still haven't used Dreadnought yet... will that be bigger or smaller than the Jugg?

 

[MelkorDarkstar]

Now that's what I call end-game content... holy smokes! You guys still haven't used Dreadnought yet... will that be bigger or smaller than the Jugg?

They have the automated dreadnought already. It has more weapon and utility slots (I believe) than the Juggernaut but in terms of spacial size, it is much smaller.

 

[Zarpaulus]

They used to do that, but players kept finding ways to build these megaplexes of defense stations that were basically unassailable.

To say nothing of how those spaceports would have to be rebuilt from scratch after every, freaking, battle.

 

[NguyenReich]

To say nothing of how those spaceports would have to be rebuilt from scratch after every, freaking, battle.

Especially with big guns of bigger ships that can one-shot or two-shot them since they are, well, stationary.

 

[DrNukeLear]

They used to do that, but players kept finding ways to build these megaplexes of defense stations that were basically unassailable.

Yeah, I would like to see the following changes to defence stations:

• Keep the limit on defence stations by system (moving it away from the starbase as they would be in a separate fleet).
• Switch them to be self repairing like Starbases, but have an alloy upkeep cost while repairing (to simulate the rebuilding).
• Allow defence platforms to form fleets and move around (very slowly) as ships, but without FTL.
• Bring back the Defence Station and Fortress (but rebalance).
• Add a new Ion Cannon section (same slot) giving it an XL component slot (for early long range cannons)

That way we have the same limit on defensive emplacements, but can deploy them in defensive positions and don’t have to rebuild them when they’re destroyed. We could also put admirals in charge of our defences and add System Defence boats to the same fleets!

 

[Etrutian]

I've been gone since about the time the Megacorp was released so I need to ask - have the strike craft been made useful since then? Because I can remember them being a lackluster, pretty much never worth using and these new mega space stations come with pre-installed strike craft modules.

they have always been least optimal