Why Stellaris Endgame will suck forever (Maybe)

[Imp0815]

I made many posts about this in the Past and i will continue to do so until it changes.

Stellaris has one Major Problem and it is the Combat.

Recently i talked to someone who enjoys Stellaris very much and i tried to discuss how Stellaris has many facets and RP opportunists and all he responded was "YOU NEED A GIANT FLEET AT THE END!".
And no matter how i looked at it he was right. In the end there is no finesse need as long as you got a Giant Fleet. Any problems any goal or obstacle can be solved with a giant fleet. Composition does not really matter as long as it is big.

I know in the past there where some efforts to shift this and obscure it with fleet capacity and ship capacity. But in the end you still just use a bigger fleet to win(or two of them).

And here comes my (now two? three year old?) suggestion in place: Manuel Fleet positioning in Systems and Supply systems.
Bigger fleets should have many more drawbacks: Big Supply need. Only one Supply rout that can be cut. Can be outmaneuver by smaller fleets.

Smaller Fleets should have some Advantages and their should be much more mechncis around them: Naturally can hide in Asteroid belts or in Gravitation Zone of planets to ambush.
Can make use of stealth technologies.
Has a flanking bonus.

Wars should be a much more restitution and drawn out effort. Tactics and Strategic preparation should matter. Building supply depots at the border and stock them up. Production of Ammunition and Fuel should be a thing or a kind of arbitrary "Supply".
Protection and establishing of Supply routes.
Something to engage the player in Wars that does not boil down to A-click with a bigger fleet stack.
Smaller Empires should have some sort of chance to win a war by attrition with ambushes and cutting supply lines. At least to force a white peace.

I know the Contra to all of this:
To much Micro!
AI can't handle it!
Not the Focus of the game!

The amount of Mirco i want is halve of that HoI IV has. And this game works pretty well with it. In the end Fleet positioning and Supply lines can still be bypassed by A-Click. It's just not as effective anymore and should sometimes result in a fail-state.(just as in HoI IV)

The AI should receive a Weighted Behavoir module(As most of AI is already working) to position/compose fleets based on enemy predicted or know fleet strength, positions and strength. This is the only part i see as an obstacle if Paradox is willing and able to set up such a system.

But in the End Stellaris player interaction is about conquest and management so why stop at Building Planets and Ships?

I think if Stellaris finally reworks how Combat and Wars work it will elevate to the best Space game ever made. I a strongly disagree that Stellaris should stay in the soft niche of "RP" focus because RP dies when all Conflicts boil down to a big boring Slug-fest.

[MaGicBush]

Adding a supply mechanic or fuel mechanic would be great I agree.

[coolman552]

the most based suggestion i have ever seen, space and land combat needs a complete rework

[Ryika]

Eh. Try to fight a large-scale war with maximum hyperlanes and you'll see how futile it is to run around with one massive fleet. The Ai will poke you at 50 fronts and you won't get anything done if you don't split up yourself.

The problem isn't that there are no combat mechanics that punish having stacked fleets - they do exist, and the AI will abuse them heavily if it gets the opportunity. The problem is that the default galaxy generation simply doesn't offer the space to avoid having to fight that one big fleet.

[Imp0815]

Originally posted by Ryika:

Eh. Try to fight a large-scale war with maximum hyperlanes and you'll see how futile it is to run around with one massive fleet. The Ai will poke you at 50 fronts and you won't get anything done if you don't split up yourself.

The problem isn't that there are no combat mechanics that punish having stacked fleets - they do exist, and the AI will abuse them heavily if it gets the opportunity. The problem is that the default galaxy generation simply doesn't offer the space to avoid having to fight that one big fleet.

Before ten small fleets gets anything done the large fleet gets uncontested to the homeworld and sweeps up every defense station. Because of bigger numbers.

If that fleets get cut off while playing "spearhead into territerroy" that would be futile. Chaseing smaller fleets atm. is like swatting flys - no challange and just a matter of time. If you had to Protect your giant supply lane for that spearhead and to think about engagements in systems the fly swatting becomes a gambit and challange. You would feel somewhat enganged and not annoyed.

There is no denying that Stellaris just feels boring and lackluster when it comes down to warfare and winning wars. All the "RP" and "Systems" now added by Nemesis will just add more useless clutter that will End in the same boring and lackluster game play: Warfare in Stellaris.

[Danny]

You don't need a giant fleet in the end to win.
It makes things ALOT easier, but it is definitely not required.

Without support, grand admiral AI empires usually can deal with an endgame crissis at 2.5 times.
If you really play the field from behind the curtain, and you very much strengthen them.
I think they might eventually be able to defeat an 5 times crisis.

I would recommend you thus play a fanatic xenophile, pacifist Megacorp.
Boost your AI allies their planets through branch offices, make sure you get all the right galatic community resolutions going.

And just have a few small tactical fleets at most for dealing with small isolated threats and defence.
You might even get away with just a federation fleet.

[Ryika]

Originally posted by Imp0815:

Before ten small fleets gets anything done the large fleet gets uncontested to the homeworld and sweeps up every defense station. Because of bigger numbers..

So what? Wars aren't decided by conquering your opponent's capital.

Originally posted by Imp0815:

If that fleets get cut off while playing "spearhead into territerroy" that would be futile. Chaseing smaller fleets atm. is like swatting flys - no challange and just a matter of time.

But time is exactly what you don't have in a war. Every month spent chasing 5 smaller fleets around your own territory is a month not spent working on your own war goals.

[Sardorim]

Well, multiplayer endgame with friends is fun... Especially with Nemesis coming.

[Big [REDACTED] Marty]

Imagine thinking that combat that amounts to smashing two blobs together until one of them cries uncle or dies isn't a nuanced, and stimulating system for a game that has as much complexity as Stellaris.

[Imp0815]

Originally posted by Ryika:

So what? Wars aren't decided by conquering your opponent's capital.

But time is exactly what you don't have in a war. Every month spent chasing 5 smaller fleets around your own territory is a month not spent working on your own war goals.

Capitals have more Warscore and often the Main Production is located there so taking it early mostly decides the War early.

Capitals have more Warscore and often the Main Production is located there so taking it early mostly decides the War early.

If you know you will clearly win by a bigger Fleet time does not matter. If you defeat one small fleet after another the enemy bleeds out and you can conquer all you want in peace.
The point in game where Fleets in smaller sizes can still conquer planets alone, with defeating defense stations, is such a narrow windows that it will likely never be a scenario at the moment. There are mostly two phases in Stellaris for Experienced Players: One is buildup where you cap out your fleet and avoid conflict and two where your fleet is so strong that no enemy is a real challenge.
Increasing the numbers in the background is not the solution to make the game more engaging. You can "RP" your game by playing on a very high difficulty or as a fanatic purifier with 10x Crisis and max Lanes but in the end Combat will still be a boring slug-fest where bigger numbers or a rock-paper-scissor dice roll will decide who wins.
No Strategies or Tactics involved.

This is why i say Stellaris needs a more interesting System for Warfare.
Positioning should matter, supply should be a factor and this should result in a much more exciting game play. Having to plan out your conquest by setting up Stations for Supply. Composing Fleets dedicated to different tasks and keeping track of how much supply can be brought to different System. Knowledge of Enemy supply lines. Setting up Raiding Fleets to cut supply. Setting up convoy Escorts. Splitting fleets to outmaneuver the enemy to engage from behind. Using stealth technologies or terrain to hide Smaller fleets to strike in a critical Moment in battle. Tactical retreats that don't result in a magical "Fleet is gone for 30 Days".

I dont know why anyone who enjoys Space games and especially Space Battles and Grad Strategy games of PDX would argue against such an addition that would clearly expand the game in a much more exciting direction.

And don't get me started on Sector and Internal Politics.

[Imp0815]

Originally posted by Sardorim:

Well, multiplayer endgame with friends is fun... Especially with Nemesis coming.

As i said, in the End you will still wade through the abysmal swamp that is Combat at the moment.

[Imp0815]

Originally posted by Danny:

You don't need a giant fleet in the end to win.
It makes things ALOT easier, but it is definitely not required.

Without support, grand admiral AI empires usually can deal with an endgame crissis at 2.5 times.
If you really play the field from behind the curtain, and you very much strengthen them.
I think they might eventually be able to defeat an 5 times crisis.

I would recommend you thus play a fanatic xenophile, pacifist Megacorp.
Boost your AI allies their planets through branch offices, make sure you get all the right galatic community resolutions going.

And just have a few small tactical fleets at most for dealing with small isolated threats and defence.
You might even get away with just a federation fleet.

I dont want a resolution to avoid playing teh Comabt game entirely by myself i want a deeper an more enagening comabt system as a whole! I really want Warfare to be fun and exciting!

[Ryika]

Originally posted by Imp0815:

Capitals have more Warscore and often the Main Production is located there so taking it early mostly decides the War early.

Ah, complete nonsense. I have no idea what game you're playing, but in Stellaris wars are decided by whether you can achieve your goals before the opponent can force status quo or not. Taking out production is largely meaningless, since it's very easy to offset a negative income for a very long time if you've got enough surplus production of _something_.

There isn't even such a thing as "warscore" in the game right now, there's war exhaustion which doesn't get you any closer to victory, and there's the AIs willingness to make peace - which heavily depends on how much territory they occupy vs. how much you occupy.

If you rush to their capital with one big doomstack and allow the AI to attack you from 4 angles unopposed, you lose more than you gain. If you chase one of their 4 fleets with your doomstack, you will eventually catch them, but there's three fleets doing work against you while you're flying after that one fleet, doing essentially nothing other than reducing their fleet size a bit once you've finally caught up to that one fleet.

As for the rest... don't get me wrong, war could certainly be a lot more interesting, and I'm not even against your proposition... but what you're saying about the current war system is just completely wrong. Like I said earlier, doomstacks are strong because there's not enough room to fly around with standard settings (+ because of overly strong starbases in the first half of the game / fortress habitats in the second half blocking entry to your territory). Play a map that has lots of room for counter-attacks and doomstacks are entirely meaningless.

[Imp0815]

Originally posted by Ryika:

Originally posted by Imp0815:

Capitals have more Warscore and often the Main Production is located there so taking it early mostly decides the War early.

Ah, complete nonsense. I have no idea what game you're playing, but in Stellaris wars are decided by whether you can achieve your goals before the opponent can force status quo or not. Taking out production is largely meaningless, since it's very easy to offset a negative income for a very long time if you've got enough surplus production of _something_.

There isn't even such a thing as "warscore" in the game right now, there's war exhaustion which doesn't get you any closer to victory, and there's the AIs willingness to make peace - which heavily depends on how much territory they occupy vs. how much you occupy.

If you rush to their capital with one big doomstack and allow the AI to attack you from 4 angles unopposed, you lose more than you gain. If you chase one of their 4 fleets with your doomstack, you will eventually catch them, but there's three fleets doing work against you while you're flying after that one fleet, doing essentially nothing other than reducing their fleet size a bit once you've finally caught up to that one fleet.

As for the rest... don't get me wrong, war could certainly be a lot more interesting, and I'm not even against your proposition... but what you're saying about the current war system is just completely wrong. Like I said earlier, doomstacks are strong because there's not enough room to fly around with standard settings (+ because of overly strong starbases in the first half of the game / fortress habitats in the second half blocking entry to your territory). Play a map that has lots of room for counter-attacks and doomstacks are entirely meaningless.

Yes i am not 100% accurate on how the current system works. But War exhaustion is just Warscore with a different name on it. It works basically the same. Capture stuff to win a war. Capture more and faster to win faster. Loosing the Homeworld is a bigger hit than loosing a border world.

And i still think that even with the non-standard changes to lane density bigger fleets will still win the war 9 out of 10 times. Because that how the Combat works as of now.

You already mention it that Fortresses and other static defenses are strong enough to handle smaller fleets. If not they stall them so your doom stack can come and wipe them away.
In a System with Supply a Fortress should also have a Supply-stat that depletes as long as a fleet can hinder the supply from reaching the Fortress. So "Sieging" a sector becomes a real thing. Not a "wait until captured"-loadingbar or just a "brute force" attack. Hell with the new Espionage System we could get a way to infiltrate and sabotage Fortresses.

[Elitewrecker PT]

Warscore and war exhaustion are not the same.
One is close you are to victory, the other is how close you are to being forced to truce.
Also, I don't think the capital generates any more exhaustion or counts for more occupation than any other colony.

[DiscoShark]

I think some of these gameplay elements would be more at home in an RTS rather than something like Stellaris. I agree that combat is pretty lackluster in its current state though. You may be interested in Falling Frontier though, it's an upcoming title that really focuses in on the logistics of war, but it doesn't have anything in the vein of Stellaris' diplomacy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBOreVx6Z1M