Are cruisers and destroyers still pointless?

[loveless]

I've played in almost every version 1.7 onwards and in every iteration, there is absolutely no reason to invest in cruisers and destroyers because corvette fleets decimate them. And in the event that corvettes are hard-countered, I can always sit them in a border citadel and wait for white peace. That's playing at the hardest difficulty with scaling set to max.

When battleships come around, cruisers and destroyers become useless as a pure battleship fleet plus a corvette screen usually gets the job the done with minimal losses. What about in this patch?

[Cryten]

Largely yes, against the end game crisis definitely yes. But against normal AI opponents it doesnt hurt to use some destroyers as flak since they are the most efficient per point on flak. Cruisers and destroyers should be built during the early research phase as they are more effective then corvettes and kill them well.

[Jurazon]

Anyone who says cruisers and destroyers are pointless doesn't know how to use them. Corvettes are good for swarm tactics, hence use the swarm combat computers. The cruisers should be using the the picket and some line to provide support to the corvettes and a line of defense between the enemy fleet and your battleships. The destroyers should be using line and artillery. Keep the destroyers armed with point defense and flak to help protect your battleships. And of course have your battleships with artillery and carrier computers. If you do this the corvettes will swarm, the cruisers will support the swarm, the destroyers will hang back with the battleships and provide long range artillery and protection for the battleships, and of course the battleships will provide long range attacks. As for titans and juggernauts, I usually keep them with the battleships.

It seems confusing because the way it unlocks the ship types is corvettes - destroyers - cruisers - battleships. However, if you ever notice when attacking, the order of battle of the ships always take is corvettes - cruisers - destroyers - battleships. This is cause of the speed of the ships. Using the combat computers properly takes advantage of that.

[loveless]

I appreciate the tips you gave, but please do not presume that I do not know how to use them. I have read multiple guides and watched videos on ship composition and experimented with destroyers and cruisers myself. My conclusion was, while they can fulfill certain roles, the costs of planning, building, and maintaining them are not efficient because maintaining a full corvette fleet basically does the same job: killing the enemy.

When fleets start to cluster into a ball all that separates corvettes, destroyers, and cruisers from are design. The distance between artillery destroyers from corvettes is too negligible. Picket cruisers is a fascinating concept but something which, in my experience, a handful of picket corvettes can just as easily do.

A fleet of swarmer, missile, and picket corvettes at a 2:1:1 ratio easily destroys whatever fleet the AI can muster before battleships at a cost far less than a mixed fleet. This is more efficient. Destroyers and cruisers must, sadly, be relegated to a flavor role.

[Jurazon]

Originally posted by loveless:

I appreciate the tips you gave, but please do not presume that I do not know how to use them. I have read multiple guides and watched videos on ship composition and experimented with destroyers and cruisers myself. My conclusion was, while they can fulfill certain roles, the costs of planning, building, and maintaining them are not efficient because maintaining a full corvette fleet basically does the same job: killing the enemy.

When fleets start to cluster into a ball all that separates corvettes, destroyers, and cruisers from are design. The distance between artillery destroyers from corvettes is too negligible. Picket cruisers is a fascinating concept but something which, in my experience, a handful of picket corvettes can just as easily do.

A fleet of swarmer, missile, and picket corvettes at a 2:1:1 ratio easily destroys whatever fleet the AI can muster before battleships at a cost far less than a mixed fleet. This is more efficient. Destroyers and cruisers must, sadly, be relegated to a flavor role.

First, I'll presume whatever I want. My opinion is just that, my opinion. It's a free country and you are not the thought police. While I am glad you have read guides and watched videos, I have actually used the tactics I have mentioned and know for a fact they work. If you don't want take my advice, that's fine. You do you. Your fleets do not effect my game in any way.

[loveless]

They might work, but are as they as cost-efficient as a pure corvette fleet?

[Jurazon]

Originally posted by loveless:

They might work, but are as they as cost-efficient as a pure corvette fleet?

In my playthroughs, I don't have any problems with cost as by the time I am in the mid to late game, I have more resources than I know what to do with. The market makes it even easier.

[Zorlond]

The way I do it, Destroyers start off life as 'Line Ship Lite', a bunch of small guns that work to pick off any enemy Corvettes that are swarming around. My Destroyers don't operate without their own batch of Corvettes, of course, so there's plenty of guns firing all over.

Later on, as serious Large Guns start showing up (like Proton guns), I convert the Destroyers to artillery. They basically turn into a cheap Mobile Gun, with a couple small guns to help keep Corvettes at bay. Sure they can't live very long, but the enemy is going to have to rush through all of my other ships to reach them, have artillery themselves (which will likely be too busy to shoot Destroyers), or just straight up overwhelm everything in which case it doesn't matter. The point is, two Destroyers can bring two Large Guns and be two separate targets that you have to aim at and kill. That's not nothing.

Cruisers are my Main Line Ships. The 'Battleships' I use are actually Carriers with Spinal Guns, so that makes Cruisers the next logical choice to be the literal meat shield of the fleet. This is why the enemy artillery is going to be 'too busy' to shoot at my Destroyers. They've got a bunch of Cruisers in the way ready to blow them to pieces if they get too close. My Cruisers are a bunch of Large and Medium guns all in the anti-armor weapon type, usually Plasma. Anti-shield is sprinkled in the rest of the fleet, so that's covered. My Cruisers just blow holes into anyone dumb enough to get close, to keep the Artillery Destroyers and Carrier Battleships safe. Cruisers are at that great balance point of tough enough to take a serious beating to kill, yet not as expensive to build or maintain as a Battleship.

[Danny]

Destroyers are far from pointless, they're my support ships for the Corvette fleets.

[Jurazon]

See, I’m not the only one who thinks destroyers and cruisers are useful. It’s fine if you want to spam corvettes and battleships, but there is more than one way to skin a cat and in Stellaris, there is more than one way to win a battle. Don’t say destroyers and cruisers are pointless when they do have value. Just because you don’t prefer them doesn’t make them less useful.

[Nightmyre]

Originally posted by Jurazon:

Anyone who says cruisers and destroyers are pointless doesn't know how to use them. Corvettes are good for swarm tactics, hence use the swarm combat computers. The cruisers should be using the the picket and some line to provide support to the corvettes and a line of defense between the enemy fleet and your battleships. The destroyers should be using line and artillery. Keep the destroyers armed with point defense and flak to help protect your battleships. And of course have your battleships with artillery and carrier computers. If you do this the corvettes will swarm, the cruisers will support the swarm, the destroyers will hang back with the battleships and provide long range artillery and protection for the battleships, and of course the battleships will provide long range attacks. As for titans and juggernauts, I usually keep them with the battleships.

It seems confusing because the way it unlocks the ship types is corvettes - destroyers - cruisers - battleships. However, if you ever notice when attacking, the order of battle of the ships always take is corvettes - cruisers - destroyers - battleships. This is cause of the speed of the ships. Using the combat computers properly takes advantage of that.

I don't think you really understand the reason why people say "use only battleships".

It has nothing to do with whether corvettes, destroyers, or cruisers can be effective in specific scenarios. It actually has nothing to do with whether any of those ships can be effective in ANY scenario.

What it comes down to is basic math. When you're playing on harder difficulties, and especially on higher crisis strengths, you simply cannot afford to fight wars of attrition. Every ship you lose is a significant blow to your overall economy. It represents resources lost that could otherwise have been spent building yourself up to handle that eventual endgame crisis.

If you're using corvettes/destroyers/cruisers, you're almost certainly going to take losses in combat. You'll probably still win, but you'll lose ships.

If you stick with purely battleship and titan fleets, you simply will not lose any ships. Your fleet will strike before they get to fire, and you'll win with zero losses.

This means even if you have to build a slightly bigger fleet in order to accomplish that objective (and realistically, you won't, because of the way the AI builds their fleets), it's still worth it.

[Zorlond]

Originally posted by Nightmyre:

If you stick with purely battleship and titan fleets, you simply will not lose any ships. Your fleet will strike before they get to fire, and you'll win with zero losses.

Zero losses does not mean zero damage. If all you've got are Battleships and Titans, then that's the only thing the enemy will shoot at. They will accrue armor and hull damage every single fight, and every time you Will have to pull back for repairs. That's time lost, and time is another resource that you can't afford to overspend. And if you don't pull back for repairs? Some of your precious Battleships gonna blow up. And as you said, you can't afford that.

Using Destroyers and Cruisers is an acknowledgement of one major factor of war: You Can't Save Everyone. Ships are going to explode and be lost. The difference is that shipyards can quickly replace Destroyers and Cruisers in a matter of a couple months. Battleships take over a year at twice the cost of a Cruiser.

You can't fight a war of attrition not because the higher difficulty won't let you. You can't win a war of attrition because you are deliberately setting yourself up to lose it.

[RawCode]

all hull sizes are usable just do not let automatic fleet manager to make void beam cruisers or point defence battleships

[RhyoliTe]

Originally posted by Zorlond:

If all you've got are Battleships and Titans, then that's the only thing the enemy will shoot at. They will accrue armor and hull damage every single fight, and every time you Will have to pull back for repairs. That's time lost, and time is another resource that you can't afford to overspend. And if you don't pull back for repairs? Some of your precious Battleships gonna blow up. And as you said, you can't afford that.

Its much easier to just repair your fleet at a (captured) station, than it is to go back to your shipyard starbase and re-build your losses. Then there's also self-repair options that can essentially bypass the requirement to park at stations to repair. You can't build new ships on the go though (without the new juggernaut that is).

When I use lower tier ships during the mid-late game there's no real fight where I don't end up with a bunch of losses, which reduces the overall effectiveness of that fleet noticably.

Whereas in the rare instances where I lose a single ship in my battleship fleets, I still have 19/20 battleships left which for most fights makes that fleet just as effective as without having occured that loss.

I also think the cost you mention is easily returned by their massive increase in surviability. Sure, a destroyer may only cost 1/10th of a battleship but a battleship is much more likely to survive 10 engagements.

There's really no valid reason to use lower tier ships besides not having researched higher tiers yet. They are just factually better in 99% of situations.

[Dakota]

I consider destroyers, and especially cruisers to be a better investment than corvettes.

Corvettes die a lot more often so the cost of their replacements is much higher. Destroyers can carry around double the firepower of a corvette while having over double the health. Generally I run 2 small weapons and 2 medium weapons, the medium weapons thrown in do more damage per shot while still having good hit rates so it is more likely to destroy a corvette before it can warp out while corvettes have no way to kill a destroyer before it warps out assuming it was going to. So if you build towards disengagement chances then destroyers will be massively more economical.

Cruisers just further expand this and also have access to hangar bays and carrier computers so you can do massive damage to a corvette fleet before they can even get into range with their tiny guns, massively reducing the blow of their attack.

Of course battleships later on are just a sort of direct upgrade to cruisers though.

[Nightmyre]

Originally posted by Zorlond:

Originally posted by Nightmyre:

If you stick with purely battleship and titan fleets, you simply will not lose any ships. Your fleet will strike before they get to fire, and you'll win with zero losses.

Zero losses does not mean zero damage. If all you've got are Battleships and Titans, then that's the only thing the enemy will shoot at. They will accrue armor and hull damage every single fight, and every time you Will have to pull back for repairs. That's time lost, and time is another resource that you can't afford to overspend. And if you don't pull back for repairs? Some of your precious Battleships gonna blow up. And as you said, you can't afford that.

Using Destroyers and Cruisers is an acknowledgement of one major factor of war: You Can't Save Everyone. Ships are going to explode and be lost. The difference is that shipyards can quickly replace Destroyers and Cruisers in a matter of a couple months. Battleships take over a year at twice the cost of a Cruiser.

You can't fight a war of attrition not because the higher difficulty won't let you. You can't win a war of attrition because you are deliberately setting yourself up to lose it.

Actually, most of the time, no - you won't take any damage either. Your fleet will simply destroy the other fleet without them getting to shoot at all.

But even if they do take damage - the enemy ALWAYS has stations you can repair at.

I don't know what game settings you play on, but I can guarantee you that if you're trying to win against an X25 crisis-strength fleet, you simply cannot use anything other than battleships and titans.

And if it works against the hardest possible enemy, why would you not just use it always?

Once again I must reiterate - I'm not saying you *can't* win with other fleet compositions, nor am I saying that pure battleships are the most efficient. I'm simply saying that if you ramp the difficulty settings up, pure battleship fleets are the only way you can win.