• 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 particles you so blithely refer to when telling us there is no blast is by the very definition the blast, There is no shockwave, which is what most people think of but the blast itself is very real albeit weakened by the low quantity of matter however in said vacuum there's also no weakening of the initial blast except from dispersion (meaning fewer particles impacting) each individual particle holds its initial energy more or less indefinitely. your welcome to look it up yourself I already have in the meantime i'm done responding until you educate yourself.


Obviously you aim at where it might be, the problem is the massive envelope i just described mathematically for you.

Spotting fire from a launching ship is actually ludicrously easy even with modern radar, or preferably optical sensors, your welcome to look up all the arguments on the realism of cloaking if you want the numbers crunched. Secondly, your in a combat situation in the first place, beginning evasive maneuvers after you've already been shot as it pretty dumb.... Your not maneuvering to avoid a single projectile, your maneuvering to make it hard to be accurately targeted in the first place.
 
I hope someday there is a DD about space weapons so this argument about physics can live another day. ;)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
about nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons still do generate Heat and radiation.

The heat at very close range is more than enough to melt any ship. The radiation also at close range is enough to penetrate any radiation shield a ship might have.

Someone already linked, but most missed, so linking again.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacegunconvent.php

Short aswer from that article.


Nuclear weapons will destroy a ship if they detonate exceedingly close to it. But if it is further away than about a kilometer, it won't do much more than singe the paint job and blind a few sensors. And in space a kilometer is pretty close range.

Please understand: I am NOT saying that nuclear warheads are ineffective. I am saying that the amount of damage they inflict falls off very rapidly with increasing range. At least much more rapidly than with the same sized warhead detonated in an atmosphere.

But if the nuke goes off one meter from your ship, your ship will probably be vaporized. Atmosphere or no.

So we can surely say the missile need to have a direct impact or it will not work.

Long aswer.
Taking the important part from that link in a quote. This is said by Dr. John Schilling.


First off, the weapon itself. A nuclear explosion in space, will look pretty much like a Very Very Bright flashbulb going off. The effects are instantaneous or nearly so. There is no fireball. The gaseous remains of the weapon may be incandescent, but they are also expanding at about a thousand kilometers per second, so one frame after detonation they will have dissipated to the point of invisibility. Just a flash.

The effects on the ship itself, those are a bit more visible. If you're getting impulsive shock damage, you will by definition see hot gas boiling off from the surface. Again, the effect is instantaneous, but this time the vapor will expand at maybe one kilometer per second, so depending on the scale you might be able to see some of this action. But don't blink; it will be quick.

Next is spallation - shocks will bounce back and forth through the skin of the target, probably tearing chunks off both sides. Some of these may come off at mere hundreds of meters per second. And they will be hot, red- or maybe even white-hot depending on the material.

To envision the appearance of this part, a thought experiment. Or, heck, go ahead and actually perform it. Start with a big piece of sheet metal, covered in a fine layer of flour and glitter. Shine a spotlight on it, in an otherwise-dark room. Then whack the thing with a sledgehammer, hard enough for the recoil to knock the flour and glitter into the air.

The haze of brightly-lit flour is your vaporized hull material, and the bits of glitter are the spallation. Scale up the velocities as needed, and ignore the bit where air resistance and gravity brings everything to a halt.

Next, the exposed hull is going to be quite hot, probably close to the melting point. So, dull red even for aluminum, brilliant white for steel or titanium or most ceramics or composites. The seriously hot layer will only be a millimeter or so thick, so it can cool fairly quickly - a second or two for a thick metallic hull that can cool by internal conduction, possibly as long as a minute for something thin and/or insulating that has to cool by radiation.

After this, if the shock is strong enough, the hull is going to be materially deformed. For this, take the sledgehammer from your last thought experiment and give a whack to some tin cans. Depending on how hard you hit them, and whether they are full or empty, you can get effects ranging from mild denting at weak points, crushing and tearing, all the way to complete obliteration with bits of tin-can remnant and tin-can contents splattered across the landscape.

Again, this will be much faster in reality than in the thought experiment. And note that a spacecraft will have many weak points to be dented, fragile bits to be torn off, and they all get hit at once. If the hull is of isogrid construction, which is pretty common, you might see an intact triangular lattice with shallow dents in between. Bits of antenna and whatnot, tumbling away.

Finally, secondary effects. Part of your ship is likely to be pressurized, either habitat space or propellant tank. Coolant and drinking water and whatnot, as well. With serious damage, that stuff is going to vent to space. You can probably see this happening (air and water and some propellants will freeze into snow as they escape, BTW). You'll also see the reaction force try to tumble the spacecraft, and if the spacecraft's attitude control systems are working you'll see them try to fight back.

You might see fires, if reactive materials are escaping. But not convection flames, of course. Diffuse jets of flame, or possibly surface reactions. Maybe secondary explosions if concentrations of reactive gasses are building up in enclosed (more or less) spaces.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
Those particles you so blithely refer to when telling us there is no blast is by the very definition the blast, There is no shockwave, which is what most people think of but the blast itself is very real albeit weakened by the low quantity of matter however in said vacuum there's also no weakening of the initial blast except from dispersion (meaning fewer particles impacting) each individual particle holds its initial energy more or less indefinitely. your welcome to look it up yourself I already have in the meantime i'm done responding until you educate yourself.

I rewote that sentence because there actually wouldn't be particles but instead a gas or plasma.

And I already said radiation will kill off the crew but not damage the ship unless the nuke goes off close enough for the super heated gas to ablate the ships hull. And if that happens you get a hole in the hull, not an explosion. It can kill the ship but it wouldn't result in tiny debris.

Obviously you aim at where it might be, the problem is the massive envelope i just described mathematically for you.

Spotting fire from a launching ship is actually ludicrously easy even with modern radar, or preferably optical sensors, your welcome to look up all the arguments on the realism of cloaking if you want the numbers crunched. Secondly, your in a combat situation in the first place, beginning evasive maneuvers after you've already been shot as it pretty dumb.... Your not maneuvering to avoid a single projectile, your maneuvering to make it hard to be accurately targeted in the first place.

So modern radar can find an object less than 1 meter in length (probably much smaller) at 186,000 miles away? Yea really we believe that one.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
What will stop me from sending a suicide craft and then instantly refitting my fleet to hard counter right before general battle engagement?

Time to refit would be the most obvious one? A ship in spacedock isn't very helpful in engaging the enemy.


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.


Technically it did have combat visualization. Just a simple one.

Which fit with the relatively simple unit types. They obviously want to make ship components a thing so visualization can be a way to convey combat effectiveness (in an entertaining way to some as well).


I would love if we actually lead the battles in real time and not just being an observer but actually using tactics and outsmart the enemy like in Total War games.Too bad the people in this forum hate this idea apparently.It's really a shame because for me the dream strategy game will be the deep gameplay on the campaign map from Paradox and the combat style of fighting from the Total War games (and graphics) from Creative Assembly.
Also I'm really curious what are the arguments of all those 41 people who downvoted me for no reason.

It's an issue with opportunity costs.

I find the strategic component of Total War games to be rather weak (the tactical part can be hit or miss too).

Stellaris could do full fleet control or not, it doesn't really matter to me. Spending time on fleet control does typically come with the opportunity cost of not spending that time on something else though. I like a lot of the strategy aspects of their games however. I'm very interested in some of the components I hear of like, EU4 and maybe even some Victoria, that will make it into a space empire game. I'm all for that and it's what I'd definitely prefer to be there. If they can do that and excellent tactical combat then yay. If they have to choose where to spend time, I'd rather they not take away much from the strategic element.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
Its already done ;) I'm not going to reply anymore to him so you can rest easy ^_^

Sorry for the distraction in the first place

Apologies. I didn't mean that as a slight to anyone in particular.
 
I was hoping that the shields and armor was going to be a bit more complex. Two different species Humans and Thunarians could both develop armor and shields differently.

For example Humans use reactive armor followed by thick composite armor. Very effective against kinetic weaponry. All human space craft generate a electromagnetic field to protect the crew from radiation and micrometeoroids in space. To protect there ships from lasers and neutral particle beams they come up with a cold plasma shield. Basically the cold plasma is ejected around the ship and held in place by the electromagnetic field. The denser the plasma the more effective it will be in dissipating laser beams. The plasma cloud would also help stymie a neutral particle beam. Another advantage of adding this layer of cold plasma between the hull and the magnetic shield is that it would strengthen the electromagnetic field thus being able to deflect shrapnel. such a shield may absorb some of the kinetic energy of a gauss or rail gun thus it would not hit the armor as hard until the shield was down.

The Thunarians developed on a planet with a much stronger magnetic field then Earths. When the went into space they developed a very strong Electromagnetic defense field around there ships. Thunarians have no short term or long term health risks from powerful electromagnetic fields such as a species like humans. And have developed energy tech to maintain such a shield. This defense field works best against metallic objects but due to its immense strength deflects most normal matter. It is also protects the ship from charged particle beams and plasma weapons. However this shield has a negligible effect on Lasers and neutral particle beams. Having engaged the humans in a skirmish they realized they need to develop armor to protect against Lasers and neutral particle beams thus they come up with ablative armor and eventually superconductive energy dispersive armor.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I read what you wrote but it was full of logic holes. First off you never aim at where the target is but where it might be in the future. Now the defending ship has to spot a very tiny object moving at vast speeds and determine it's track. NOT an easy thing to do. And this information travels at the speed of light so it takes time to reach the object and come back to your sensors. If you originally had 7 seconds to impact you just lost 2 or maybe 3 in even finding and evaluating the threat. All important things you left out. Now a computer (human actions would be too slow) ahs to take evasive action.

The real math involved is the energy required to cause a deviation in trajectory along the current path. Since the time to impact is 3-4 seconds that means you need a large impact sooner rather than later. Now assuming there are various gravitational dampining effects this can be done else the people inside are plastered against the walls of the ship and die from that force.

So modern radar can find an object less than 1 meter in length (probably much smaller) at 186,000 miles away? Yea really we believe that one.

I thought you were talking about long ranges. At a light second or two, of course evasive maneuvers are a myth. You'd have to evade before they fire unless they're using contemporary technology, which of course is not intended for use in space or at space combat ranges.
 
Based on what they said yes, swarm missiles (which they mentioned) are usually portrayed as mrv's or missiles that spit out a lot of smaller missiles when they get close to the target.
I just hope all the crazy weapons that you can design in aurora have a possibility of showing up here..... passively heat seeking missile torpedoes :)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
What will the pacing of battles be like? Do engagements go on over time similar to EU, can you go and do other things for a while and just leave the battle to "stew" or would it require moment to moment monitoring?

Similarly are all battles fought to the death (until one side is completely annihilated) or will there be some kind of morale/fatigue value which would cause engagements to break off with both sides leaving to regroup.
 
Wait, are there situations where you'd want to do that? The ships can have sensor blind spots?

I have been wondering that too.
 
Beams & Lasers, I would think you could "easy" protect from them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laser_types

one way like with a mirror armor

or reducing heat damage with isolation material

dam can`t find the picture (block ?glowing red x.000°C and he could hold it on its corners)

or a Dust barrier that absorb most of the energy when activated.
---
What ever I will put this Sticker
laser4.gif
on my ships ,...
Just with the words: "Don`t avoid eye or skin exposure to direct or scattered radiation."


EDIT: English link

Ps.: I was still working on my post, how is watching at 11:55 the Forum to answer that quick,..
I'm sick at the moment and slow to edit, link or think in my current state.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions: