• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #41 - Heinlein patch (part 2)

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. This is the second in a multi-part dev diary about the 'Heinlein' 1.3 patch that we are currently working on. This week's dev diary will be focusing on a series of changes made to ship design and fleets that we call the Fleet Combat Overhaul.


Dedicated Roles
One frequent critique of the ship types in Stellaris is that they don't really have roles - besides corvettes being unable to mount large weapons, there is basically no difference in what type of weapons can be mounted on what type of hull, meaning that there is no actual reason to use a proper mix of ship types - often the best strategy is just to find a single effective design (such as all-corvette fleets on release version or the currently popular destroyer tachyon lance fleet). To address this we sat down and thought about what the roles of each type of ship should be, and came out with the following:
  • Corvettes are fast, agile ships that excel in taking out capital ships at close range.
  • Destroyers are screens for your capital ships that excel in taking down corvettes and countering missiles and strike craft.
  • Cruisers are close-range capital ship brawlers that tank enemy fire and engage enemy destroyers and capital ships.
  • Battleships are artillery and carrier ships that provide long-range fire support.

Somewhat simplistically, you could say that corvettes are good against cruisers and battleships, destroyers are good against corvettes and strike craft, cruisers are good against destroyers/cruisers/battleships (depending on how they are designed) and battleships are good against cruisers, other battleships and fixed installations. This change should give each ship a clear purpose, while allowing for some flexibility within by purpose through the ship designer (for example, cruisers can either be tough battleship killers or fast attack ships that clear the way for your corvettes depending on design). It's worth noting that designs may not start with a dedicated role like this - at the very start, corvettes not have torpedoes and destroyers will lack the targeting that makes them such effective corvette killers. Their roles instead come fully into play as technology advances and capital ships enter the stage.

In order to make this specialization possible, we have made a few changes to ship design. First of all, we have added three new weapon slot types:
  • Torpedo slots mount Torpedo and Energy Torpedo weapons, which are short range extreme damage weapons meant to take down capital ships. They can only be used by corvettes and cruisers.
  • Point Defense slots mount point defense cannons, which is the primary defense against missiles, torpedoes and fighter craft. Destroyers can be designed to field large amounts of point defense weapons.
  • Extra Large slots mount massive long-range weapons that can only fire in a fixed arc ahead, such as Tachyon Lances, Arc Emitters and Mega Cannons. These can only be mounted on battleships and take up the whole bow section.

We've also tweaked ship modules and retired a couple of modules that we feel did not fit the new design, so that it is no longer possible to make a 'corvette killer' battleship with huge amounts of small weapons, for example. While there realistically is no reason you couldn't mount small weapons on a battleship, going with a realism angle would simply put us right back where we are now, so we chose to sacrifice some realism for what we feel is better gameplay.


Utility Slot Rework
Another area we felt sorely needed some attention is the utility slots - right now there is often little meaningful choice, with the best strategy usually being to stack either armor or shields depending on ship size, enemy weapons and tech level. Most of the special utilities, such as shield capacitors or regenerative hull, are either woefully underpowered or extremely overpowered. To address these issues, we've made the following changes:
  • The amount of damage reduction provided by armor now depends on the size of the ship, so a single piece of armor will do more for a corvette than for a battleship. This should make armor useful even for smaller ships.
  • The 'special' utilities (crystalline hull plating, shield capacitor, etc) will use their own slot type that is limited by hull size, and so will only have to be balanced against each other instead of having to also be balanced against shields and armor.
  • A new utility type, afterburners, provides additional combat speed, allowing you to design ships that can closely quickly with your opponents.


Misc Changes and Notes
  • As part of these changes we're looking over the balance of every weapon in the game, especially strike craft, point defense and creature weapons.
  • Combat computers will be changed from being universal to being based on ship type, so corvettes have specific corvette computers that focus on boosting evasion, while destroyers have computers that impove targeting, allowing them to keep up with corvette evasion better than other ship types.
  • We're changing emergency FTL so that it sets the fleet as MIA, meaning that fleets that successfully escape combat will always be able to flee to friendly space rather than getting stuck and ping-ponged to death. To compensate, we're making it so every ship (no matter how undamaged) has a chance to be lost when you use emergency FTL, so it's always a risky maneuver.
  • We're looking into creating a special class of flagships that are limited in number by your fleet size, and are the only ones able to use auras, instead of all-aura battleship fleets.
  • We're looking at balancing the different FTL types and making it less hard to catch enemy fleets. Some of our current ideas is having fleet speed depend on how far away you are from friendly space (and thus resupply) and boosting the speed of warp.
  • We're looking into fleet formations and some basic orders during combat (priority targeting, etc). At minimum the basic fleet formation will be changed to be more sensible (no more suicide corvette leading the charge).

Note that the changes listed in this DD are not fully done, so some of them may not show up in below screenshots.
iUSvWHQ.png

S0eS3HZ.png

TAqi5VO.png

DD980B8.png

apVYe0u.png


That's all for this week! Next week we'll talking about yet more features and changes coming in Heinlein.
 
Last edited:
  • 262
  • 51
  • 14
Reactions:
It's good to work on fleet combat!

But I wonder how many people will like their complete gamestyle to be completely wrecked. You made the game for lances to be the natural choice, lances enable players to deal with AI that has double production capability and any late game crisis. Battleships are too slow, that's why I have support fleets for them. I never have them in my regualr fleet. Restricting lances to battleships would be effectively removing them from the game for me. You know I dont need tachyon lances, but particle lances on destroyers - which are meant to destroy not to protect - and cruisers I do need. Close combat cruisers.. come on.. please just don't.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't like this set of changes at all. For example, battleships should positively bristle with secondary armament and point-defense weapons.

Instead of this bad game logic/game balance system, do ship differentiation by weapon range and weapon number based on hull size: larger craft have more hard points to mount weaponry, and the range of the weaponry that they can mount increases with hull size.

Make the weapon limits physics based and not bad-game-logic based.
 
  • 12
  • 3
Reactions:
What i don't like here is all that means that the just would be so much more tedious hassle with fleet micromanagement. Especially when our wonderfully balanced fleet gets loses like usual, where one class gets wiped, and you need to manually order new ships, move them etc. New fleet building will be borefest too.
Please Paradox, let us have fleet templates and fleet-level reinforcement UI.

Also, those changes means huge, and i mean really huge, buffs to Prethoryn and Unbidden.

Last thing, i hope that it would affect everyone, like the lancefest fallen empires fleet.
 
  • 3
  • 3
Reactions:
They're adding in rally points, which should make fleet management a bit less of a chore but, yeah, I hope they also find the time to improve the fleet UI's generally.

Fallen Empires, otoh, are supposed to be imba. I hope they give everything in a Fallen Empires a lance. I hope they give their space ports and troops transports lances. Even their colony ships can have lances. Mining stations and research outposts? Lances. Group troops? Lances. All lances, all the time, forever.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I think that a combat system like HOIV naval warfare can be implemented in Stellaris. Ships being stronger against other kind of ships and smart use of small ships to soak damage to the biggest ships. Each ship with it's role and no useless one. The same with weapons and armor. The classical rock-paper-scissors way can't be wrong.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
There is absolutely no benefit whatsoever to using large weapon variants over their smaller counterparts, because all you get is a weapon that fires less, misses more, and does far less damage overall, in exchange for a miniscule range bonus.
...
That is the reason corevettes get spammed 24/7, that is the reason a clusterfuck of corvettes absolutely demolishes every higher tier ship, and fortress.
You must clearly be playing an older version of the game or something
 
  • 6
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I think that a combat system like HOIV naval warfare can be implemented in Stellaris.
HoI4 naval warfare works totally different and I don't think it can be easily implemented in Stellaris. First and most important: HoI4 fleets automatically operate on very big areas, and fleet generally do not move as one - specifically because it's forced to work on such big areas. HoI4 fleets doesn't begin fight at the same moment - first light ships detect enemy, then heavy ships move closer to hit someone with its big guns.
On the other hand, space opera strategies are often very... small. Galaxy is big, that's true, but in video games it consists only few(hundred) of worlds. It do makes sense to make deathstack battlefleet, kill enemy deathstack battlefleet and bombard his worlds into submission, if you do not need control over billions of stars.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Personally i would like the Fleetbuild would be somehow like in Star Ruler 2. So you set Rally Point where the Ships meet and automaticly join a Fleet. Than you set Fleet size, lets say 100 Ships and define, either by % or Numbers lets say 20 BB, 30 CA, 30 DD and 20 Corvettes....than all Planets assignet to the Rally Point start automaticly build and send Ships here if enough resources, while AI Checks for Modules on Star Bases..so if BB Module it starts with BB building if DD Module than prefers DD etc cc.

That would really help a lot to menage Fleetbuilding. And like in Star Ruler 2 automatic rebuild and rainforcement of ships if some go lost and Fleet drops under the Numbers that are set.
Of course only if you allow it and if enough Ressources to do it.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
HoI4 naval warfare works totally different and I don't think it can be easily implemented in Stellaris. First and most important: HoI4 fleets automatically operate on very big areas, and fleet generally do not move as one.

I mean in combat. Not the whole system, only the rock-scissors mechanic. I like to use a "balanced" fleet composition, and I dislike the idea of having useless ships or fixed setups where certain battleship can't use a weapon or not. This will be finally fixed, but I guess it will take some patches until stellaris warfare is in a good shape.
 
Than you set Fleet size, lets say 100 Ships and define, either by % or Numbers lets say 20 BB, 30 CA, 30 DD and 20 Corvettes
One thing: not 20 BBs, but: 20 Demise-class BBs, 10 Remise-class CAs, 20 Somerandomname-class CAs etc. Nobody said that you cannot have more than one class of that hull-size. :)

I mean in combat. Not the whole system, only the rock-scissors mechanic.
I understand. Through I am not sure if battlesystem will work properly without the rest of the system. In HoI4 I can totally see myself making some garbage-ships just because I need more ships to patrol some areas. In Stellaris I would probably make the strongest ship possible (which is connected with interesting design problem - if I can have only X ships, it makes sense to make them as powerful as possible).
But the idea is worth trying.
 
Last edited:
Corvette swarm still dominates, and in the case of MP games those finish in 20-30 years anyways.

The only reason in MP corvs get spammed is because its the only ship type u can build early on. And since destroyer arent that great against corvs and u get the corv assembly yard fairly quickly, spamming corvs is just the more efficient way to play. And of course if your neighbour is spamming ships u just have to do the same because right now there is no way to put up a decent defense otherwise. So in the end everyone is spamming corvs until mid game when everyone gets destroyer.
But that has nothing to do with the weapons.
How do you guys even get your informations ? 30 corvs with SM weapons win vs 30 corvs with SSS weapons (tested with railguns).

To go back to the topic. Since the current change obviously restricts the ship building (which is no problem for me - coz there is just one good build available right now).
Maybe you should just give those guys their options back. Let them use the super short range torpedo in their battleship if they want. Let them have the point defense weapons without the bonus u get in your destroyers.
It might not be the best use of your weapons but apparently some people dont care. I dont really see any problem with that ?
This way you still get things balanced and people have their choices.
 
  • 7
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
After some more thinking I've decided that the possible reduction of Lance slots is a mistake, and unnecessary.

1. The main reason Lances dominate right now is range. The main reason range dominates is because ship behaviour is simply awful. Ships usually move fast, BUT as soon as they engage they sort of freeze, making it a turkey shoot for Lances. Make fast ships close the distance faster (which should anyway be the case) and you've effectively nerfed Lances.
2. Lances are fun, and they look good. Having 1 per Battleship remove them from most of the game. That would just be sad.
3. Balance issues with FE: If FE can't mount Lances in L slots, the devs will have to make sure they have Lances some other way. Sounds like a headache.
4. Balance issues with Unbidden and Prethoryn: Without Lances, players will have serious problems unless the devs introduce new tweaks.

Make it easy on yourselves PDX and solve the Lance balance issues by solving ship behaviour, not by removing them.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
After some more thinking I've decided that the possible reduction of Lance slots is a mistake, and unnecessary.

1. The main reason Lances dominate right now is range. The main reason range dominates is because ship behaviour is simply awful. Ships usually move fast, BUT as soon as they engage they sort of freeze, making it a turkey shoot for Lances. Make fast ships close the distance faster (which should anyway be the case) and you've effectively nerfed Lances.
2. Lances are fun, and they look good. Having 1 per Battleship remove them from most of the game. That would just be sad.
3. Balance issues with FE: If FE can't mount Lances in L slots, the devs will have to make sure they have Lances some other way. Sounds like a headache.
4. Balance issues with Unbidden and Prethoryn: Without Lances, players will have serious problems unless the devs introduce new tweaks.

Make it easy on yourselves PDX and solve the Lance balance issues by solving ship behaviour, not by removing them.

Actually, the main reason lance dominates is because they have that perfect combination of high damage, accuracy, range and perfect armour penetration. High accuracy means they can hit small ships easily, with high damage meaning that the few shields they have can be take down quickly. Armour penetration means they're the perfect counters to large ships like cruisers and battleships, which are the natural users of armour. It's only if you go up against BBs with crystal hull plating or the odd player that goes shield heavy that the lance becomes less effective, but even then it's just less effective, not countered.

Tl;dr Lances are the ultimate weapon because they combine all the best attributes you can have in the current game state.

Personally, I think switching the lance bonus from armour pen to shield damage would help balance them out a lot, and make kinetic weapons into big ship killers, which should be their natural role as low accuracy, high rate of fire weapons.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Interesting. This has the potential to be really good, all depends on how it is implemented, but this has certainly piqued my curiosity. Can't wait to try it out.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
They're adding in rally points, which should make fleet management a bit less of a chore but, yeah, I hope they also find the time to improve the fleet UI's generally.

Fallen Empires, otoh, are supposed to be imba. I hope they give everything in a Fallen Empires a lance. I hope they give their space ports and troops transports lances. Even their colony ships can have lances. Mining stations and research outposts? Lances. Group troops? Lances. All lances, all the time, forever.

Rally points resolve only one point on the boring route of ship micromanagement, that is building from multile planets.

Totally disagree about the Fallen Empires. If they made it untouchable with exceptions from lances nerf, you will feel like damn prethoryn, bring 20x their numbers and you will still lose just because game devs don't have an idea how to balance weapons and are instead forcing you to play rock paper scissors instead of space strategy.
Fortunately, above titan screen clearly shows that FE also use normal, nerfed hulls, so that won't be the case i think.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
For me atmosphere and immersion are the most important things regarding long term playing a game. Illogic limitations (almost hilarious illogical) negate a good game atmosphere.

I guess 2-3 days after heinlein a reasonable MOD is out.

(this and this and ofc that can only be put on a small corvette - but not on a giant battleship -> makes sense lel...)
 
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.