• 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 #45 - Ship Balance

Hello everyone!

Today we will go into the sixth part in a multi-part dev diary about the 'Heinlein' 1.3 update and accompanying (unannounced) content DLC. The topic of today's dev diary is the changes to ship roles and ship balance.

Ship Roles
The new design intends to give each ship a more unique combat role. Some ships will be defensive, while others will be more offensive.

Corvettes
Small and aggressive ships with high evasion that can be equipped with torpedoess. They will be very effective against large ships like battleships due to their high evasion and access to torpedoes. They have very low armor, but a very high chance to evade.

Destroyers
Defensive ships that are designed to counter corvettes, which is why they receive an innate +10 bonus to Tracking. They can be equipped with point-defense weapons, to shoot down the torpedoes fired by corvettes. They have moderate armor, and a moderate chance to evade.

Cruisers
These aggressive ships should be able to put out a lot of damage, but at the cost of less defense. Cruisers, like corvettes, can also be equipped with torpedoes. But unlike corvettes, they can also be equipped with hangars for strike craft. They have somewhat high armor, and a small chance to evade.

Battleships
The new role for battleships will be durable capital ships that fire at its enemies from a long distance. They are the only ship size that can be equipped with extra large weapons. They have very high armor, but minimal evasion.

upload_2016-9-12_14-53-30.png


Evasion, Tracking & Armor
A new feature in the Heinlein patch will be the Tracking stat. Each weapon will have a Tracking value that determines how effective they are against ships with high evasion. Every point of Tracking reduces the target’s chance to evade that attack by the same amount. Small weapons will have high Tracking, medium weapons will have medium Tracking, and large weapons will have minimal Tracking.

This means that large weapons - with a poor Tracking value - will still be very effective against large ships like cruisers or battleships, but almost useless against small ships like corvettes due to their high evasion.

The armor penetration of weapons has also been rebalanced so that large weapons have a much higher armor penetration values than smaller weapons.

In effect, this means that small weapons are good at shooting at small ships, while large weapons are good at shooting at large ships.

Another note is that missile weapons no longer ignore evasion, and can be evaded like normal. Most missiles, however, will have a very high Tracking value.

upload_2016-9-12_14-53-50.png


New Slots
Something new in the Heinlein patch will be the introduction of a couple of new slot types.

x.png

The extra large slot will contain powerful spinal-mounted weapons that are designed to target and take out enemy capital ships. Only Battleships will have a ship section with this weapon slot.

t.png

The torpedo slot, as evident by its name, will hold torpedoes. Torpedoes are slow firing weapons that deal massive damage, perfect for taking down larger ships. Unlike other missiles, however, torpedoes do not have good Tracking, which means they are very ineffective against ships with high evasion, such as corvettes or destroyers.

a_ux.png

The auxiliary slot will hold components that have ship-wide effects. Crystal-Forged Armor, Shield Capacitors and Regenerative Hull Tissue are examples of components that will now be equipped in this slot.

pd.png

Point-defense weapons now have its own slot size. The idea is that you should need to specialize some ships into countering enemy torpedoes

upload_2016-9-12_14-53-13.png


Major weapon rebalancing
Most weapons have been rebalanced to better suit the new design.

That's all for this week! Join us again next monday when we’ll be back with another dev diary!
 
Last edited:
  • 147
  • 51
  • 13
Reactions:
I apologize in advance if my comment has already been answered - I haven't read all the 13 pages of this particular thread...


My question regards the idea of specialized ships... will there be a way to upgrade our ships in a specialized manner - that is: if I have two different types of corvettes or destroyers will I be able to choose their upgrade paths or will they upgrade according to their named class instead of all of them upgrading to the same type and effectively ruining any specialization?


As it is now it is very difficult to keep a particular design upgraded - I usually keep the design in the list and then in order to keep the ships of that particular type upgrading to a specific design choice I have to remove all of them of a given fleet and then update their design, choose to upgrade them and only them return them to the fleet... the same happening to the other types - it is very boring and thus my idea of having different types of ships is not as appealing anymore (laser and missile corvettes, torpedo and point defense destroyers). After a while it gets tiresome to upgrade them and I choose just one type.


Will this be changed with the new patch?

As someone who constantly runs at least two versions of every class in the current version, if you have A-Class destroyers, and B-Class destroyers, when you upgrade a fleet with A-Class and B-Class in it, A-Class ships become the newest version of A-Class, and B-Class versions become the newest B-Class. I have never had any problems getting this to work, so maybe shoot me some screenshots of what your doing, and I can try to figure out why it isn't working for you?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
That's very strange. I usually give names to my classes, like Vigilant for a defense destroyer filled with point defense weapons and Javelin for an attacking one... and when I click the upgrade button, if both types are in the same fleet only the design I updated last is used as an upgrade blueprint by the game... I will try to change the names to something more technical like you suggested and see what happens.
 
I apologize in advance if my comment has already been answered - I haven't read all the 13 pages of this particular thread...


My question regards the idea of specialized ships... will there be a way to upgrade our ships in a specialized manner - that is: if I have two different types of corvettes or destroyers will I be able to choose their upgrade paths or will they upgrade according to their named class instead of all of them upgrading to the same type and effectively ruining any specialization?


As it is now it is very difficult to keep a particular design upgraded - I usually keep the design in the list and then in order to keep the ships of that particular type upgrading to a specific design choice I have to remove all of them of a given fleet and then update their design, choose to upgrade them and only them return them to the fleet... the same happening to the other types - it is very boring and thus my idea of having different types of ships is not as appealing anymore (laser and missile corvettes, torpedo and point defense destroyers). After a while it gets tiresome to upgrade them and I choose just one type.


Will this be changed with the new patch?

The issue here is you need to have to different "names" for the ship class. so destroyer "alpha" and destroyer "beta". This way you can modify appropriately.

The only ship type where this doesn't apply i believe is the military dictatorship super ship... which i have no idea.....(I think its last updated)
 
That's very strange. I usually give names to my classes, like Vigilant for a defense destroyer filled with point defense weapons and Javelin for an attacking one... and when I click the upgrade button, if both types are in the same fleet only the design I updated last is used as an upgrade blueprint by the game... I will try to change the names to something more technical like you suggested and see what happens.

technical sounding shouldn't matter. It should just be a check for ship name unless they made a booboo somewhere cause i do this all the time with my ships and I name them whatever I want, and differently depending on the type of empire i play. From "Striker" to "PeWPeW"
 
  • 2
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
I wonder where Defense Platforms stand in all this? Perhaps a counter for Destroyers, in the event the opponent acquires Destroyers before you do (and will hard-counter your Corvettes), and the only effective way to defeat a Fortress w/o terrible losses being Battleships with XL siege.

It would also put some Battleship worries to rest, as XL slot is described as strong vs very little (Battleship+maybe Cruiser fleet?). Getting Battleships should still be plenty of hype in Heinlein still, since they can still be outfitted in other places with weapons to stomp the pesky smaller ships with! Not mention that it'll be awesome to use something other than Tachyon Lances! ^__^

Also are Larger-than-Battleship-ships with auras still going to be a thing? They were announced some time back, last I heard of those, it was the new Fallen/Awakened Empire's "Titan" ship!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I apologize in advance if my comment has already been answered - I haven't read all the 13 pages of this particular thread...


My question regards the idea of specialized ships... will there be a way to upgrade our ships in a specialized manner - that is: if I have two different types of corvettes or destroyers will I be able to choose their upgrade paths or will they upgrade according to their named class instead of all of them upgrading to the same type and effectively ruining any specialization?


As it is now it is very difficult to keep a particular design upgraded - I usually keep the design in the list and then in order to keep the ships of that particular type upgrading to a specific design choice I have to remove all of them of a given fleet and then update their design, choose to upgrade them and only them return them to the fleet... the same happening to the other types - it is very boring and thus my idea of having different types of ships is not as appealing anymore (laser and missile corvettes, torpedo and point defense destroyers). After a while it gets tiresome to upgrade them and I choose just one type.


Will this be changed with the new patch?

I had this same problem when I first started playing until I figured out you have to keep the same name and just upgrade it and overwrite the old version. If you have a laser vette and a missile vette make sure you have both versions in the ship designer at the same time and if so, then the ships in the fleet should upgrade to whichever name they match.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't know if it has been mentioned before or already answere, in any case:
If the game gets the said changes, we definitely need the option to assign "target-priorities" into our ship configuration.

For example, if you design a cruiser (with torpedos), you need to target priority (in thise case, battleship > cruiser > destroyer > corvette), so that your cruisers won't waste its torpedos against the first target that comes into weapon range (in the worst case, corvetts).
 
That's very strange. I usually give names to my classes, like Vigilant for a defense destroyer filled with point defense weapons and Javelin for an attacking one... and when I click the upgrade button, if both types are in the same fleet only the design I updated last is used as an upgrade blueprint by the game... I will try to change the names to something more technical like you suggested and see what happens.

I run those cool semi-descriptive flavor names too. A-Class, and B-Class are just generic placeholder names for my example. Like I said, a couple screenshots could help me figure out your problem in a way that words can't. I recommend: 1 of ship designer screen, 1 of fleet before upgrade, 1 of fleet after upgrade.
 
Please dont add a tracking modifier. you already have accuracy. dont increase confusion where it isn't necessary.

It seems unclear to me if they're actually going to use both. I get the impression more that they're going to rename Accuracy to Tracking, and make it work differently.

I could be wrong. Still doesn't seem all that confusing to me, if so.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I went back and looked at the 2nd DD for this patch and it has a screen shot of a battleship with PD so now I'm wondering if we are wrong and that PD can go on any ship or if that has changed since that previous DD to today.

Edit: But that raises a whole other issue of why didn't they just keep PD as a small weapon mount.

Because if they want battleships to be able to mount some PD, but also want to prevent people putting small turrets in those slots instead, that's how you do it.
 
That's very strange. I usually give names to my classes, like Vigilant for a defense destroyer filled with point defense weapons and Javelin for an attacking one... and when I click the upgrade button, if both types are in the same fleet only the design I updated last is used as an upgrade blueprint by the game... I will try to change the names to something more technical like you suggested and see what happens.

Not sure if you've already worked it out but it matches by name exactly. If your new design is called "Vigilant Mk2" or "All-seeing", etc. then it will upgrade to whichever design was done latest. If you leave the name "Vigilant" it should upgrade appropriately.
 
The distances and speeds of the targets involved are exactly the reason why aiming a small weapon is easier than a large. Consider yourself the captain of spacecraft under fire, You are flying at relativistic speeds and the incoming fire is likely even closer to the speed of light. What are your options if you want to survive? You will of course attempt to evade! How do you evade in such a scenario? You don't have a spotter looking for incoming fire and then reacting to this information. You will instead try to wildly and unpredictably accelerate your spaceship in a 2D plane orthogonal to the view of the enemy!
This will lead to the enemy having a very hard time getting a good firing solution with a large weapon than with a small, where the time taking to move and settle the gun on the desired trajectory is much faster, simply due to the mass of the weapon.
The time needed to do this is small, relative to our daily reference of time, but in a space battle going at relativistic speeds, even a tiny miscalculation will lead to a shot missing by kilometers.

Some issues with this:
  • Even today most bigger ammunition is already 'intelligent', .i.e. able to correct its trajectory.
  • Can't be really applied on beam weapons. Even today we can move mirrors (which would be the last stage of a beam weapon) with piezo elements within nanometers and nanoseconds.
  • The inertia of the target is much bigger then the one of the gun as long as the target is much bigger.
So this can be used to explain why a huge battleship gun can't hit a fighter. But for everything else a better explanation for "tracking" is imho the problem of detecting. If you move at relativistic speeds (i.e. not so much slower then em waves, like radar for instance) it becomes hard to detect stuff in front of you in time, as long as your targets are small enough to not cause substantial changes in space time due to their mass. (Big variables are the engines, as we don't really know how they could work, they could make tracking easier, but whatever)
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Not a single question was answered by devs in this thread. :(
Be of good cheer! It doesn't mean they are not reading the thread. Just be patient and see what comes up in the future DD's, or patch, or DLC. They don't have time to argue with players right now. :)
 
So, I'm noticing a few things in the majority of the posts so far. They're very irrationally reactionary. As if they didn't comprehend what they read in the DD. Lemmie see if I can help with that...

Firstly, this is a game. And I don't say that thinking that people don't understand that, or that somehow being a game makes any particular issue unimportant. I say it, because it means the game world is going to be a ridiculously abstracted and simplified version of any possible reality. The current main complaint is about the nature of the ship roles and the rebalancing of ships and their components, to match those changes. These range from complaints that it's restrictive, to complaints that it somehow doesn't make sense.

This is because it's not even possible, with current, commonly available technology, and even the most powerful programming language developed yet, to create the kinds of modeling of these functions that the complainers seem to want. Is it possible to make an almost completely open-ended system for ship designs...sure. Does it work...absolutely not. It is exactly that kind of system that leads to the "one and only superfleet" kind of game. The kind where, if the AI is actually set up to make (ab)use of that particular strategy, it becomes impossible for players to beat it. Please don't say you've done it, because you haven't, because such a circumstance has never existed in any game in history. Moving along...

It is restrictive, by necessity. The quantity and frequency of change of variables involved in the real processes of developing war technologies and making strategic use of them, is literally incalculable at this time. They are, in fact, currently unknowable for the most part. That will not remain so, but it is such for now. So they made the simplest, most flexible rules they could, that actually mostly parallel real naval doctrines and technological employment. Ships of specific sizes have specific jobs to do. This isn't because of some particular artificial rule, as it is in the game, it's because of the limits of naval technology. The volume of the ship can only hold so much. That means power, supplies, weapons, and all the infrastructure to run it all. As technology improves, that balance changes. But, in general, small ships are meant to be hunter-killers, and long-range guided weapons are unbeatable for that purpose...and frankly likely always will be. Anybody remember the Ancient Drones from Stargate SG-1/Atlantis?

Now, it's true that they could've gone through and simply added a bunch of new values to ships and juggled all the stat balancing needed to make the new system do what they want. And the net result would've been the same, except that you could hypothetically could make a small ship do something (very poorly) that it's not suited for. Which, you'll be able to do under their announced system, it's just necessarily simpler and more direct. It is the best way to avoid the problem of "the best possible fleet setup". This way, you can't just make and uberfleet and coast through. You'll have to change it...probably make multiple fleets simultaneously to deal with multiple threats.

All that said, I myself have mixed feelings about this setup. I currently run my fleets with the best disruptors I have at the time, and the best armor piercing weapons I have at the time. It is, essentially, unbeatable...regularly taking down enemy fleets with significantly greater MP. Even maxed out shield-using ships don't last long under the disruptor fire; and after that, their armor is all but meaningless (and obviously PD is completely useless against me). No matter what defense they build up, I will cut through to their hull and wreck them in a couple of volleys at most. That won't work anymore under this system, and that bugs me. But, I'll deal with it, and hopefully get to enjoy making more varied and more fun fleets.

Hope that helps anyone who was confused on what these changes actually mean.

This, the rest of this thread should just be this post repeated several times over until people stop posting about how this restricts gameplay.

They're not saying 'you now have four ship types' with no customisation. They're now stopping play from being 'all battleships with tachyon lances' or 'all destroyers with tachyon lances' which IS a restrictive form of gameplay. Yes, on a individual ship basis your options are probably stripped back a little (but whiz stated in an earlier DD you can still make ships that deviate from their role, they just may not be as effective) but now there are more options available what what type of fleet set-up you have.

Also you'll spend time tweaking your ship load outs to try the new mechanics and find the best solution, meaning you'll have many choices in how you approach this.
 
  • 7
  • 6
Reactions: