• 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.

Stellaris Dev Diary #18 - Fleet Combat

Good news everyone!

Today’s Dev Diary will be about Fleet Combat and the different things affecting it. Like always it is important for you to remember that things are subject to change.

In Stellaris we have a number of different types of weapons that the player may choose to equip his/her ships with. All weapons can be grouped into either energy, projectiles (kinetic), missiles, point-defenses and strike craft. Their individual effects and stats vary somewhat, so let’s bring up a few examples. One type of energy-weapon is the laser, using focused beams to penetrate the armor of a target dealing a medium amount of damage. Mass Drivers and Autocannons are both projectile-weapons with high damage output and fast attack-speed, but quite low armor-penetration. This makes them ideal for chewing through shields and unarmored ships quickly, but are far worse against heavily armored targets. Missiles weapons are space-to-space missiles armed with nuclear warheads. Missiles have excellent range, but they are vulnerable to interception by point-defense systems. There’s of course far more weapons in the game than these mentioned, but it should give you a notion of what to expect.

Strike crafts are different from the other weapon types since they are actually smaller ships that leave their mothership. Cruisers and Battleships can in some cases have a Hangar weapon slot available, in which you may place a type of strike craft. Currently, we have two types of craft; fighters and bombers. Fighters will fire upon ships, missiles and other strike craft. Bombers however may not fire on other strike craft or missiles, but they will do more damage than fighters against capital ships. Point-defense weapons can detect incoming missiles and strike-crafts and shoot them down. These weapons may also damage hostile ships, if they are close enough, but will do significantly less damage against those.

1.jpg


When it comes to defenses, you may increase the durability of your fleet in combat by placing armor and shield components in the utility slots on your ships. Armor components will reduce the incoming damage and can’t be depleted during combat. Shields work much more like an extra health bar to your ships and will be depleted if they take too much damage. Shields will automatically regenerate after combat, unless you have certain components that allow your shields to regenerate during combat. Both shields and armor can have their efficiency reduced if the enemy uses armor and/or shield penetrating weapons.

The different components you place on your ships will also affect certain other key combat values:… Hull points is a value corresponding to the “hit points” or health of your ship. Evasion affects the chance for your ship to evade a weapon firing at it. You may also affect the overall stats (values) of your fleet by assigning an Admiral to it. The stats of your fleet will both be affected by the skill and the traits of your leader. But be aware that traits will not always have a positive effect. I would recommend everyone to always have good admirals assigned to their military fleets since they can really improve your stats, like +20% fire rate and +10% evasion.

Once the combat has begun, you very few options to control what happens, much like it works in our other grand strategy games. For this reason it is really important not to engage in a battle that you are not ready for. As a fallback, it is possible to order a full retreat through the “Emergency FTL Jump” option, this will basically cause your fleet to attempt to jump to the closest system. However, during the windup for the EFTL jump your ships will not be able fire back at the hostile ships, so you put yourself in an exposed situation. Depending on what type of fleet you have, you might want them to always engage in combat or always try to avoid it; for this purpose we have different fleet stances. The evasive stance will try to avoid combat and the fleet will leave a system if a hostile arrives. Civilian fleets have this stance on per default. Aggressive stance will actively make your fleet attempt to attack any hostile that enters the same system as them. Passive stance will, like the name suggest, make your fleet only engage in combat when enemies are within weapon range.

2.jpg


The combat might be off-hand, but you can still indirectly affect how each individual ship will behave. When you design your ship you may specify what combat computer to use on the ship. These computers range from making your ship super aggressive, and basically charge the enemy, or be really defensive and keep formation. At the start of the game only the default combat computer is available, but more are unlocked through normal research or reverse engineering.

It is very possible that your fleet might end up in combat with multiple fleets. This means that you can have a combat with three different empires that are all hostile to each other. To help you keep track of everything that happens we have a combat view, which will appear as soon as a combat is initiated. This view will list you (and any other friendlies or neutrals) on the left side and every hostile on the right side. The combat view is currently being reworked, so you will get to see that interface at a later date, but the idea is to provide you with crucial feedback on how effective your weapons and defenses are.

Once the battle is over, you may want to investigate any debris left from destroyed vessels. If you weren’t the one being wiped out, perhaps you can salvage something?

3.jpg


Sadly, neither the “Picard Maneuver” nor the “Crazy Ivan” are currently possible in the game, but who knows what the future might hold…

Stellaris Dev Diary #19 - Diplomacy & Trade
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 142
  • 48
  • 4
Reactions:
Those screenshots look amazing! I'd actually zoom in to watch those battles if they look like that! :D

Actual Qustions: If I use shields and armor on my ships, will kinetic weapons deal reduced damage against my shields? Or is only the damage against my hull reduced?
Does armor reduce the damage from missiles as well or only kinetic weapons?
About shield penetrating weapons: do they just deal increased damage against shields, or are they actually penetrating the shields? i.e. dealing damage against the hull while the shields are still up.
 
So basically fighters and bombers is the same shit that other 4x games have done.It makes no sense and will be a balance issue like all the other 4x games that add these suicide darts than are supposed to be fighters.

Looks good apart from that.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
Dear Dev, how will you balance strike craft so that they won't be suicide dart like in some other 4x games?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
See now I wished all Paradox grand strategy games had little animated battles you could watch :)

Honestly, what does it add to the game? I guess it's adds more "Theme" but in reality it's just spreadsheets in graphical form. EU4 was great and it had no tactical combat view. From what I can see Stellaris will be identical, but the combat will just also be visualized. I will likely never even watch a tactical battle - it's not like my being there changes anything (which I think is a good thing).

If tactical combat animation doesn't take a lot of effort for the devs to add I guess it's fine, but it really doesn't add anything substantive to the game.
 
  • 9
  • 2
Reactions:
Honestly, what does it add to the game? I guess it's adds more "Theme" but in reality it's just spreadsheets in graphical form. EU4 was great and it had no tactical combat view. From what I can see Stellaris will be identical, but the combat will just also be visualized. I will likely never even watch a tactical battle - it's not like my being there changes anything (which I think is a good thing).

If tactical combat animation doesn't take a lot of effort for the devs to add I guess it's fine, but it really doesn't add anything substantive to the game.

Visual presentation is important in a video game. Not everyone wants to play excel the space sim.
 
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:
Would it be possible, depending on research, to play with almost exclusively carrier craft in your fleets? Say in the first few years we get the chance to research carriers and we simply don't research regular ship hulls larger than the smallest base one?
 
Visual presentation is important in a video game. Not everyone wants to play excel the space sim.

That's funny, EU4 had no combat visualization and I thought it was awesome. Are you suggesting that combat visualization would have improved EU4 somehow? Because I don't see why that would be the case.

What keeps me coming back to a strategy game is how interesting the strategic options are. Graphics can add theme and so forth, but I would consider good UI far more important to a strategy game than graphics.
 
  • 11
  • 5
Reactions:
That's funny, EU4 had no combat visualization and I thought it was awesome. Are you suggesting that combat visualization would have improved EU4 somehow? Because I don't see why that would be the case.

What keeps me coming back to a strategy game is how interesting the strategic options are. Graphics can add theme and so forth, but I would consider good UI far more important to a strategy game than graphics.

I love Europa Universalis 4, it's a fantastic title that I still play regularly. Would it be improved if I could watch a 3D representation of a battles unfold? Sure! Why not!? That would be awesome as hell! Of course it would take a ton of work to implement so it will never come to pass but I think the game would be cooler if such a thing did exist.

Maybe you misread my original statement as "should" instead of what I actually said, which was "wish".
 
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't quite understand how the picard maneuver was supposed to be unbeatable as the description doesn't quite make sense.

According to the description the ship is
1) In one place far away out of firing range
2) Seemingly in 2 places at once for the target's sensor. One is position 1) and the other is close to the target in firing range and position
3) Firing at a confused target who aims at the wrong ship.

The effect of surprise might work the first time, you ever use it on a target not aware of the technique. But if the target is aware this maneuver exists, it can easily countered by firing at the ship's second location once the sensors pick it up.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Cheers for the DD Zoft and the extra detail Jormungandur :cool:. It sounds really, really good - am a big fan of being able to set fleets to different stances at the fleet level, as well as the combat computer approach to tactics at the ship level. If there was ever an eye to individual component damage then you could maybe add in modules for repair during battle/damage control down the track, maybe a DLC idea?

It's more of a cost-efficiency thing. Lasers will still do decent damage against shields, but it will not be the perfect choice. If you know an enemy fleet has gone 100% missile-weapons and you can get full point-defense coverage you'll do very well (though not win unharmed).

Efficiency-wise we'd like it to be Corvette < Destroyer < Cruiser < Battleship < Corvette. This is of course an over-simplification but that's the general idea. We do a few things to try and achieve this, such as Corvettes gaining full Evasion from all sources while Battleships only gain 25% (Destroyers and Cruisers gain 75% and 50% respectively). This in combination with the fact that the larger weapons used by Battleships have lower attack speed, higher damage per attack and somewhat lower hit-chance should make it less cost-efficient to overkill small corvettes with huge weapons (lots of missed shots, those that do hit deal far more damage than needed). Corvettes in turn will struggle with the higher armor and shields of a Destroyer etc. up the chain.

Both of these approaches sound tops, love you work :).

Strike Craft use their own type of weapons and are not dependent on what type of lasers etc. you've researched. Any Strike Craft lost during a battle slowly regenerate over time automatically. They can be upgraded should a new rank of them be researched and the design of the carrier-ship updated.

I've always felt a bit uneasy about strike craft magically reappearing regardless of circumstance (although think it's good that there's at least a slow delay on their regeneration). Just mentioning it in case it helps, but some alternatives are:

- returning to a friendly base/planet;
- requiring a production ship to be with the fleet to build strike craft (such a ship could also help repair other ships after combat);

It'd be nice (at least from my point of view) if sending a carrier-based force deep into enemy territory came with the risk of the strike craft being wiped out and the carriers being far more vulnerable (although the speed of the regeneration of strike craft is likely to help this at least).
 
  • 2
Reactions:
No, we don't track individual component-damage.



The speed of the ship is mainly dependent on the Thruster, which can be upgraded. In rare cases there might be other components that improve speed as well (such as a Combat Computer). Strike Craft do have a range-limit. We're still tuning that so not sure on range just yet, what do you all think makes more sense?

Also, there might just be a thing called Swarm Missiles that do overwhelm point-defenses (somewhat).


I would like to think that missiles would have significantly longer range due to the fact that nobody expects them to return. Although if you have realistic physics then one could poor on the thrust and then coast in a frictionless environment, using fuel only to course correct. But thats its very own design choice. My sentiment lies with the first option and limited fuel.
 
The way it's been put into this DD, the weapons look almost similar to GalCiv where the three categories are entirely symmetrical and might as well be called red, blue and yellow. Is it going to be like in that game and Endless Space, where research into say missiles will lead to more missiles research and only that ? Or is the research less linear and you'd be unlocking new missiles along with engines and powerplants ?
 
Metztli: "Paradoxian fans will probably hate me but why the player should have so little "power" during the combat phase ? Why not Stellaris be the first Paradox game that will offer a Total War style of combat or something simillar or anything more involving than just watch and chose to flee or not ?"

Well, TW might be a bit over the top, but maybe some buttons ready to press along the lines of "Breakthrough Attack", "Defence Formation", "Skirmish Tactics" were you can designate the basic tactic that your fleet should follow during specific parts of the battles could have been nice.

Edit: I deleted the first part: Where have I messed up with the formating?
I hope not, I have no desire to micromanage the combat. I want to make the decision of fighting or not fighting. I got troops and admirals to do the fighting for me.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
In most settings, missiles will significantly out-range beams. Beams have maximum effective ranges against maneuvering targets due to beam dispersion and light-speed delay. Unless you are talking chemical rockets versus star-trek phasors, some sort of small guided spaceship will always have the edge there. So your efficient beams aren't much use if they are wrecked before getting in range of the enemy.

Missiles can be quite deadly if they aren't stopped from reaching their targets. It's sure expensive to lose the drive, electronics and warhead, but not as expensive as losing a full-sized ship.

It's not a given that you can stop them. Intercepting a missile isn't a question of how quickly you can calculate the intercepting trajectory. That's a matter of a millisecond, even on current-day cell phone. It's more a question of how well you can observe the trajectory, can you get something to the intercept location in time, can you anticipate how the missile might maneuver in between your last sensor reading and the intercept point. How good are you at confusing the missile? How good is the missile at confusing your countermeasures? If you are burning the missile down with a beam, does that have enough power to overcome the missile's defenses in time? There are a ton of possible factors, so how hard or easy it is to kill a missile depends on the details of the setting.

You forget that missiles could be launched from ships much like railguns, at extreme speeds, and go "dark" (drift through space at crazy speeds), nearly invisible until they are within close range of enemy ships. Then they activate and deliver devastating payloads at short notice, with thrusters to hit home. With a railgun you could easily miss at relativistic distances as you have no way of altering course, and an enemy ship would only need to move a few meters to avoid shots, or move in an unpredictable pattern to avoid enemy targeting computers from correctly guessing where your ship will be.

TL;DR: In space, missiles could be invisible rocks for 99% of the journey, and your worst nightmare for the last 1%.
 
  • 7
Reactions: