• 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:
Flak Cannons are M-only weapons right now, basically intended to be cruiser weapons.

We're reviewing defense stations and seeing how feasible it is to put X-large weapons on them.

Thank you for clarifying that.
I always found it odd that there were S and L point defense weapons, but not M sized.

Kinda hope that you'll end up boosting platforms, its kinda sad how even fortresses are easily blown up right away.
 
Sounds great!

Somehow, I think that I will end up with destroyers and battleships only.
Battleships as long range artillery to take out the enemy fleet, destroyers to defend against attacking corvettes.
 
  • 9
  • 2
Reactions:
Cool!
 
I have to be honest, i dont like the sound of these ship changes at all..
The entire joy and drive to further technological advancement and industrial output in these types of games, is the allure of building massive ships with loads of guns (small guns, even, if you wish to be efficent against small ships, but then you will be woefully weak to other big ships).

Many many games managed to do this. Distant Worlds for example. Star Ruler, is another.
I just immediately feel "bored" when i hear stuff like "torpedoes can ONLY be fitted on corvettes, because game logic". Or "battleships cant fit many small weapons, because game balance."
Perhaps one should find a better way to balance it then, rather than destroy the fun allure of big capital ships?
And classifying Cruisers as "short range brawler Battleship killers" makes no sense. A cruiser has never been a short range brawler in any sense of the word.
And classing Corvettes as "anti-battleship" also sounds ridiculous, just the concept of it. The entire point of a massive expensive Battleship is to be safe from and dangerous to Corvettes.

I've played many other games where there is a rock-paper-scissors type of balancing, but not where it just sounds so weird as this dev diary makes it seem.
There are a hundred other ways to balance things while still having big ships be big and powerful, against smaller ships.
Upkeep. Cost. Research. Speed. Maneuverability. To-hit ratio. Fleet support point cost. Unique resource requirements and upkeep.
So many ways. Instead of just nerfing the entire concept down to being an artillery piece that's "vulnerable to corvettes". Silly.

I personally think it sounds great and interesting. Having to worry about fleet composition, and bringing more strategy is a good move!
 
  • 11
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
I generally like these changes, especially the limiting of weapons to certain ship classes. I do have a few concerns:

My first concern is if corvettes won't be useless in the late game when everyone has enough destroyers to counter it. The way it sounds here is that corvettes are really strong, unless the enemy has enough destroyers with PD, then they're utterly useless. Seems like battleships and cruisers will be the late-game way to kill other cruisers and battleships (not that that's necessarily a bad thing, I just wonder if that's what the dev team wants).

Also, corvettes seem heavily focused on using torpedo tech. How is this balanced with the other two starting weapon types? What if I start with kinetic weapons, for instance? Am I forced to also research explosives in order to make an effective corvette?

The second thing I'm worried about is static stations. Right now, fortresses and other defense stations are fairly useless, apart from being an FTL snare or providing a healing aura. I never rely on stations as an actual defense mechanism, since they can be blown up by a single battleship, most of the time, and the smaller platforms are often about as strong as a spaceport. I wonder what role static stations will play in this new system? Can we give them varied roles? Do they have loads of PD to defend against corvette spam, do they have big weapons to blow up cruisers? Since it sounds like torpedo corvettes are even stronger in this patch, it sounds like any station is almost defenseless against a small fleet of corvettes if it doesn't have destroyers defending it.

But the thing I'm most worried about is Emergency FTL. While I applaud the deleting of ping-ponging, and I think the MIA solution is pretty ingenious, I feel like the game is desperately missing an 'Ordered Retreat' option. In fact, there's no disengage option at all. If my raiding fleet is blowing up mining stations in an enemy system, and an enemy fleet warps in, I can't tell my corvettes to get the heck out of there. I can only use the Emergency FTL and risk damage or loss of ship, all because I'm "In combat" with a freaking mining station! It's the same for attacking military stations or smaller fleets: I should have the option to tell my fleet to escape combat using sub-FTL speed, then use FTL to get out in a controlled manner.

The lack of this ordered retreat option causes these all-or-nothing battles, where you can't retreat from a fight you're losing (even if your fleet is faster and could outrun their pursuers), because the Emergency FTL will just blow up your fleet even more. Heck, I'd even accept the option to sacrifice ships as a diversion, leaving a couple of cruisers behind to delay the enemy while the rest of my fleet flies away. But now either the entire fleet stays and dies, or the entire fleet E-FTLs out and gets badly damaged, skewing the war even further in the advantage of whoever won the first engagement.
 
  • 40
  • 3
Reactions:
Sounds great looking forward to it.

I have a couple of suggestions for things I think would benefit the game though.

1) Being able to move your fleets during combat, especially with the different ships having different roles. I would expect the moving ships to get a debuff of some sort, maybe losing offensive capability.

2) The other thing that's been bugging me is about Hyperlanes, I play hyperlanes only for the strategic value of certain systems but then this is gone once psi drives are developed. Could we get an option to ban jump drives in FTL locked games.

Anyway, looking forward to this patch regardless of that :)
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Torpedo's for corvettes and cruisers but not for frigates, destroyers or battleships? Not sure I understand this
 
  • 12
  • 1
Reactions:
I generally like these changes, especially the limiting of weapons to certain ship classes. I do have a few concerns:

My first concern is if corvettes won't be useless in the late game when everyone has enough destroyers to counter it. The way it sounds here is that corvettes are really strong, unless the enemy has enough destroyers with PD, then they're utterly useless. Seems like battleships and cruisers will be the late-game way to kill other cruisers and battleships (not that that's necessarily a bad thing, I just wonder if that's what the dev team wants).

Also, corvettes seem heavily focused on using torpedo tech. How is this balanced with the other two starting weapon types? What if I start with kinetic weapons, for instance? Am I forced to also research explosives in order to make an effective corvette?

The second thing I'm worried about is static stations. Right now, fortresses and other defense stations are fairly useless, apart from being an FTL snare or providing a healing aura. I never rely on stations as an actual defense mechanism, since they can be blown up by a single battleship, most of the time, and the smaller platforms are often about as strong as a spaceport. I wonder what role static stations will play in this new system? Can we give them varied roles? Do they have loads of PD to defend against corvette spam, do they have big weapons to blow up cruisers? Since it sounds like torpedo corvettes are even stronger in this patch, it sounds like any station is almost defenseless against a small fleet of corvettes if it doesn't have destroyers defending it.

But the thing I'm most worried about is Emergency FTL. While I applaud the deleting of ping-ponging, and I think the MIA solution is pretty ingenious, I feel like the game is desperately missing an 'Ordered Retreat' option. In fact, there's no disengage option at all. If my raiding fleet is blowing up mining stations in an enemy system, and an enemy fleet warps in, I can't tell my corvettes to get the heck out of there. I can only use the Emergency FTL and risk damage or loss of ship, all because I'm "In combat" with a freaking mining station! It's the same for attacking military stations or smaller fleets: I should have the option to tell my fleet to escape combat using sub-FTL speed, then use FTL to get out in a controlled manner.

The lack of this ordered retreat option causes these all-or-nothing battles, where you can't retreat from a fight you're losing (even if your fleet is faster and could outrun their pursuers), because the Emergency FTL will just blow up your fleet even more. Heck, I'd even accept the option to sacrifice ships as a diversion, leaving a couple of cruisers behind to delay the enemy while the rest of my fleet flies away. But now either the entire fleet stays and dies, or the entire fleet E-FTLs out and gets badly damaged, skewing the war even further in the advantage of whoever won the first engagement.

Destroyer spam to counter corvettes can be in turn countered with aggressive use of cruisers. The idea is to have shifting fleet compositions depending on what your enemies are using.
 
  • 18
  • 8
Reactions:
It's worth noting that some of the historical namesake of the Stellaris ship-types weren't ever intended to fight in the battle line, but were constructed to fulfil other roles - corvettes were coastal petrol ships and convoy escorts, and cruisers were intended as long range patrol and raiding craft.

There are ways to give all types of ship a use without making them necessarily useful in battle.

Having corvettes in orbit around a world could give ground troops a combat bonus (because they're small enough to go much further into the gravity well without difficulties), cruisers having special modules that give them sensor bonuses, and so on.

If trade ever gets added to the game, then there's a whole raft of stuff you can do with ships beyond killing stuff, al la light ships in EU4.

That's for future patches though, I don't have a problem with what's in this DD at all.
 
  • 26
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Interesting stuff, hope it will work out.

What would the possibility of having HoI 4 style "designers" that can modify the basic statlines of the different ship classes? Or a sort of doctrine system to give your fleet more character?
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Well it does sound fun and interesting. Although keeping proper proportions of your fleet is gonna be quite a chore without any kind of fleet manager.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Nice, although I don't see much incentive to build cruisers or battleships, in extremis. With corvettes and Destroyers you have effectiveness against all types, it would seem.

To make warp more effective, you could give it (higher tech?) semsors that can see hyperlanes. Hyperdrives have huge limitations, but only a view of the hyperlanes makes it clear exactly what they are.

Finally, any intention to "fix" the odd FTL mix you get with uplifted/elevated races? If I assist a race to get to the stars, they can get a different FTL tech than me. If I then integrate them into my empire, I get some of their ships - which can be handy - but I can't upgrade them at all. Solutions here night include the ability to upgrade non-FTL elements of such ships, or (perhaps better) just have assisted/uplifted races get the same FTL type as their patron.
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
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.

So fleet tactics will definately be a thing now, albeit only late game and only to a limited extent.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
These changes sound great in a vacuum but on my initial reading, one fear I have is that small ship fleets will still reign supreme. If battleships are only good against capital ships and fixed objects, then why bother at all with them. Fixed objects can still be swarmed and I can use corvettes to eliminate enemy capital ships.

Also, I don't like the idea of flak and PD in general being restricted. One of the major themes of sci-fi is giant capital ships with tons of PD and a single large weapon or 2. Enemy fighters and allied fighters fighting for control with PD trying to eliminate the enemies is as much a staple of Sci-fi as pretty much anything else. If my largest ships are just glorified artillery, it will take away much of their "cool" factor.
 
  • 12
Reactions:
Nice, although I don't see much incentive to build cruisers or battleships, in extremis. With corvettes and Destroyers you have effectiveness against all types, it would seem.

To make warp more effective, you could give it (higher tech?) semsors that can see hyperlanes. Hyperdrives have huge limitations, but only a view of the hyperlanes makes it clear exactly what they are.

Finally, any intention to "fix" the odd FTL mix you get with uplifted/elevated races? If I assist a race to get to the stars, they can get a different FTL tech than me. If I then integrate them into my empire, I get some of their ships - which can be handy - but I can't upgrade them at all. Solutions here night include the ability to upgrade non-FTL elements of such ships, or (perhaps better) just have assisted/uplifted races get the same FTL type as their patron.

Cruisers and destroyers will wreck a corvette/destroyer combo, which means you'd want some battleships or cruisers of your own to counter their cruisers. That's the idea anyway - it will of course require playtesting and tweaking on our balance to get the balance right.
 
  • 20
  • 10
Reactions:
Does this mean stats for weapons,shield and armour will change?
 
Please make an option for a "semi-emergency FTL retreat" where your ships are disabled for the time it takes to make a normal travel between a system and keep the only 1 system retreat-distance rule.
So we can get rid of this following scenario:
-This is the homeworld calling the main battle fleet. We are under attack by the enemy. Repeat, under attack by the enemy. He is bombarding the planet and an army of xenomorphs have just entered orbit. Rape and pillage is impending.
-This it the main battle fleet, our strike crafts have just been launched on a mission to take out an enemy mining station half way across the system. We expect the fighting to be tough but we're sure that we will destroy the station in 2-3 months from now and then be ready to return home and defend our homeworld.
 
  • 19
Reactions:
Would you consider making the hit formula a bit more sophisticated than just "accuracy - evasion"? I was really stoked when the community discovered that it apparently had been changed to "(accuracy - evasion)/accuracy", but it turned out to be an UI bug in the battle report.

A better hit formula would allow to balance weapons against different evade values (and therefore ship sizes).

PS: A different formula to consider "accuracy/(accuracy + evasion)".
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Cruisers and destroyers will wreck a corvette/destroyer combo, which means you'd want some battleships or cruisers of your own to counter their cruisers. That's the idea anyway.
So if Cruisers wreck Corvettes, then Corvettes aren't really "Anti-Capital ship" and more "Anti Battleship", right?
So it's Corvettes < Destroyers < Cruisers < Battleships < Corvettes?
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.