Please, somebody explain me fleet combat

[Krieg]

Hi everyone,
I have already posted about this issue, but for me the new battle system has ruined the game. Fleet power makes no sense, enemy ships escape way more than mines so please, tell me how you make the weapons configuration or whatever, because I had it quite controlled and since they introduced the new system with the frigates it all went down.

And please, don't tell me "it's the weapons configuration" or "it's the war policy that allows ships to run away" or "admiral trait". 70k of power vs 25k, loosing ships and not destroying a single one it's not normal.

[VoiD]

Yes, it is.

What does it matter if you have 70k power based on DPS if your weapons never get close enough to fire even once?

And it's not any different from the previous system, it just has more depth and more options, but this kind of situation never changed, a big fleet of missile (only) destroyers+cruisers with artillery and/or carrier computers kiting a fleet of mostly autocannons with 1/3 of DPS could kill them all with zero losses, just like, in the previous system, a big fleet of artillery battleships with Ballistic X weapons and energy artillery L weapons could wipe out a fleet 3x "stronger" before they could even start dealing damage.

The difference is that now you can also play around with shield bypass, anti-shield bypass (hardening), armor is no longer a noob trap and has very good merits and more raw power, computers can be used to tell your ships exactly how to behave in combat, and there is more than one viable late game fleet composition (and yes, artillery fleets still work well, if you want to use them, just avoid the artiller computer).

As for your main question, try a big fleet of destroyer swith swarmer missiles on the M slot, fill out the rest of your slots with small missiles, 3 afterburners and use an artillery computer to tell them to stay away and see what happens when they engage "stronger" fleets, if they are not cornered, and if they don't engage multiple targets (the AI is quite stupid and doesn't know which enemy it should try to stay away from) it should be able to destroy most things around midgame, also, don't touch shields early on, only armor, if the AI is spamming autocannons, shields are useless.

You can eventually add a carrier missile cruiser to these fleets, with 3(?) afterburners as well, a hangar module, fill out the rest of the M slots with swarmer missiles then use either a carrier or artillery computer, it should behave just like the destroyers, and both should bypass shields completely, still vulnerable if they are caught in bad positions where they can't kite.

Late game pretty much anything goes, you could try ambushing enemies with autocannon cloaked corvettes near system connections, spam torpedos against leviathans, stations or if, for some reason, the AI ends up using too many battleships, keep using missile fleets, or even attempt to create carrier or artillery battleships, they all work fine, just try to get a doctrine, and an admiral that makes sense for the fleet composition (IE: Range for X slot battleship fleets, speed for kiting missile fleets, etc...)

Also, yes, that "war policy" you mentioned, along with an admiral which further boosts the chance of ships retreating should make it so even if you lose you probably shouldn't be losing many/any ships after combat, but that's for fighting losing wars, if your economy is strong and you don't mind losses the other one (forgot how it's called in english) with +speed and +range is usually the better one, it would help both artillery fleets, and fast moving missile ones.

[Postron]

You might find this site helpful:
https://stellaris.paradoxwikis.com/Space_warfare

[pete3great]

Whether you totally smash their fleet or make it retreat for a few years, it's out of the fight. Keep pressing. I find this complaint strange, like I'm finding a lot of the complaints about the game lately strange.

But also, a lot of people are confusing mercenaries being hired with enemy fleets being instantly built, or appearing out of nowhere. Is that what's happening here? Hard to say without more info/

[Sero]

But it is the weapons configuration and it is the war policy and admiral trait.
You want alternative facts but we won't lie to you. Doesn't matter how often you ask.

[Xaphnir]

They definitely overtuned disengage chance. Way too high of a chance for ships to disengage even with only a single chance.

[Krieg]

Originally posted by VoiD:

As for your main question, try a big fleet of destroyer swith swarmer missiles on the M slot, fill out the rest of your slots with small missiles, 3 afterburners and use an artillery computer to tell them to stay away and see what happens when they engage "stronger" fleets, if they are not cornered, and if they don't engage multiple targets (the AI is quite stupid and doesn't know which enemy it should try to stay away from) it should be able to destroy most things around midgame, also, don't touch shields early on, only armor, if the AI is spamming autocannons, shields are useless.

You can eventually add a carrier missile cruiser to these fleets, with 3(?) afterburners as well, a hangar module, fill out the rest of the M slots with swarmer missiles then use either a carrier or artillery computer, it should behave just like the destroyers, and both should bypass shields completely, still vulnerable if they are caught in bad positions where they can't kite.

Thanks for the answer. I have to say that actually I realized that, that ca cruiser with hangar and swarm missiles were quite effective. I just tried making the fleet only with missiles and it's actually quite good. I still have the issue that I loose more ships than the enemy, Let's see how this goes, because even if I win, if I loose more ships I can't replace them fast enough

[Xaphnir]

Originally posted by PinkerStinklage:

I have been observing something strikingly similar lately, and i think it might be a bug. To sum up what I've been experiencing, my vastly superior fleet is taking insane losses compared to the "0" losses the AAR (after action report) gives me.

However, when I watch the battle, I can see that the enemy is losing huge swathes of ships. I am at a complete loss as to why these numbers are not being mirrored in the AAR. Idk, its extremely confusing and it leads to me endlessly chasing around the same fleet that seems to be taking no losses, all the while i can see the same cruiser, battleship, etc. exploding during every fight. When i check the report? They took zero losses? Huh?

That's not new, that's been happening for a while.

[.anointed.]

Originally posted by Xaphnir:

Originally posted by PinkerStinklage:

I have been observing something strikingly similar lately, and i think it might be a bug. To sum up what I've been experiencing, my vastly superior fleet is taking insane losses compared to the "0" losses the AAR (after action report) gives me.

However, when I watch the battle, I can see that the enemy is losing huge swathes of ships. I am at a complete loss as to why these numbers are not being mirrored in the AAR. Idk, its extremely confusing and it leads to me endlessly chasing around the same fleet that seems to be taking no losses, all the while i can see the same cruiser, battleship, etc. exploding during every fight. When i check the report? They took zero losses? Huh?

That's not new, that's been happening for a while.

oops, mb

[Legiondorf]

Lol I use to rage about this yes they will jump... but they will take hits... and ever so surely with attrition and advancement their worlds will eventually burn. You have to ADVANCE. Play Stellaris like the only way you can currently play TW Warhammer kek.

[pipo.p]

Originally posted by Xaphnir:

That's not new, that's been happening for a while.

Yeah, since 2.7 at least.

[dalemq]

Yeah I have to say the new combat system has "forced" me to stop playing. Someone above said that 70K vs 20K fleet strength doesn't matter if the 70K fleet didn't bring torpedoes (or get in range to use them or whatever). Thing is it should. That's what numbers like that exist for - relative power comparison. I "should" be able to send a fleet that the game is telling me is 3+ x more powerful than its opponent into battle confidently expecting a win.

Maybe not a stomping but a win. Which is good enough most of the time for me because I don't play Stellaris for THAT particular X of the 4X. Relative strengths and autocombats are fine for me 4 out of 5 times. But that's not possible anymore - you have to micro-design and build multiple fleets (and I have no idea how fast they age out of usefulness). Bleah.

But that's the way the cookie crumbles. I like the rest of the game pretty well and maybe someday they'll add a "go ahead and build generic fleet strengths" option back in. Till then I have other games to play.

[Elitewrecker PT]

The power rating assumes your fleet can shoot at the enemy. They'd "win" easily against a regular empire with that difference.. if the enemy isn't built to stay out of range for enough time (which AI doesn't do).

Can a bodybuilder tackle a runner if he can't catch up?

Regardless the issue OP said wasn't even winning the battle, it was about him losing ships but not the AI even if you win. Which can have a myriad of explanations.