Sokar408 wrote:
Sorry for necro'ing, but this post is still valid and shouldn't be forgotten. As it stands there really is no justification for building Dreads over Battleships

Eh. In multiplayer there is very, very strong reasons for building Dreadnoughts. To the point everyone goes pure Destroyer and/or Dreadnoughts late game.



Dreadnoughts are able to stack defenses heavily to the point of being virtually invulnerable with a hero while having the firepower to destroy any combatant they engage (assuming its not a hard counter). Because ships only target 1:1 per firing sequence, a Dreadnought guarantees it can punch through the defenses of any smaller vessel (barring, one again, hard counters) due to their tonnage while still retaining enough defenses to have survival & hp & repair to be difficult to kill.



If you lose one battleship, the equivalent dreadnought would be 100% combat functional (despite having half or less HP). This combined with the above makes them the most powerful ship class. Especially when properly supported with destroyers (which burn off but spread the damage while making hard counters hard [sinceyourdreadsusebeamorkineticwhilethedestroyersusemissiles]).



So, say player A has 5 dreadnoughts and player B has 3 dreadnoughts and 8 destroyers. The first round, 3 destroyers are destroyed and two A dread hit two B dreads. However, 3 dreads for player B are hitting 3 dreads of A (which combined with missiles breaking through due to the 8 destroyers hitting some of the same targets as the 3 dreads due to the way combat works). So without a hero, that is deceptively strong. With a hero, a pure Dread fleet gets the best multipliers from the Hero offensively (since it amplifies the advantage of a weapon tonnage advantage the Dreads have over small warships).



The reason Destroyers are still dangerous is their weapons require less tonnage so CP for CP, you can throw Beam (w/ +40% wep module, since Shields work like HP and Destroyers aren't going to survive a single phase of fire anyway) and Missile destroyers to wear down otherwise unbeatable ships. [e.g.Throwaroundofmissilespamdestroyers,aroundofbeamspamdestroyers,thenhitthemwithyourownkinetic-mounteddreads...thisforcesthemtomountalldefensesandaslongasthereisn'taheroonthefleet,itdoesn'treallygivethemthatmuchXP]



And at that stage of the game, I can usually produce on one of my 'ship systems', like 6 CP of destroyers in a turn vs. 1 dread due to the price advantage as well.

Chibiabos wrote:
I was attempting to enlighten to you as to what dreadnought actually means. It does not "really" mean what you seem to think it does, because its become a misnomered and common cliche in sci fi that dreadnoughts were bigger or tougher than battleships when, in fact, they were proto-battleships -- a midstep between ironclad warships and true battleships.

That's not really true though. The dreadnought was essentially an advancement of the Battleship design. There was an era of battleships between the construction of Iron Clads and the appearance of Dreadnought battleships. These battleships tended to pack a wide variety of different turrent sizes, while the Dreadnought concept was one of an all big-gun armament. HMS Dreadnought, when she entered service was a huge leap forward in design and essentially made all other battleships before her obselete. The dreadnought style design, which was relatively slow, heavily armed and armoured was a contemporary of the Invicible Class Battlecruiser designed around the same time, this ship being equally heavily armed but much less armoured permitting greater speed.



The later battleships after the Dreadnought/Battlecruiser era, were also capable of operating at high speed - these then became known as "fast battleships" though these ships were still also classified as Dreadnoughts all the way up to HMS Vanguard, which was the last battleship launched in the world.



I would argue then, that when people refer to Dreadnoughts in sci-fi they are referring to this design of large heavily-armed, all big-gun, heavily armoured ships in contrast to what in naval terms would be a pre-dreadnought battleship - packing a more varied armament.



There is very little reason such warships would not be the most deadly things available in space combat, the main factor that lead to their redundancy was the advent of aircraft carriers and fighters. Fighters offered the advantage of being able to go where a battleship could not (i.e. in the air, over land) as well as allowing effective combat over the horizon. Of course, in space, there is no horizon and a massive battleship could go anywhere a smaller fighter could go and kill the smaller ship/fighter well before it even entered the fighter's weapons range.

Chibiabos wrote:
It does not "really" mean what you seem to think it does, because its become a misnomered and common cliche in sci fi that dreadnoughts were bigger or tougher than battleships

Words have context based on the setting they are in. When I say the word Dreadnought to a sci fi community, those people think of a big and powerful ship. So....that's what the word means.

Stalker0 wrote:
Words have context based on the setting they are in. When I say the word Dreadnought to a sci fi community, those people think of a big and powerful ship. So....that's what the word means.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

i like them as buff boats. fleet wide critical buff, speed buff, repair, host to invasion and loaded with defenses. a huge ass buff bot turltle thing.





More like a command ship rather tha nthe brawn of the fleet.



I like 2 BS over one dread because of the 2 ships engaging 2 targets while the dread only targets one.

If there were any change that I would agree with, is that Dreads should get a HP buff.



Otherwise their Tonnage is good, as it is 2 battleships worth.



But I don't feel like Dreads should replace the battleship in any sense, as the battleships should the the warship of choice, with dreads being the weapons of terror and battle sponges.



(Imagine a module that decreases an enemy's approval when you invade!)



But anyway that's my reasoning.

I personally really like dreadnoughts; with the AI unable to use 50% of their tonnage, one of my dreads can face down one of their fleets.



Regarding the changes, the one thing I would like more than a dreadnought is a more powerful dreadnought. Never enough Dakka.

I think giving them a -10% defensive and -20% on all support modules would work. After all these are supposed to be a mobile fort. As such, they should be able to take a lot more punishment, have increased defenses and support the actions of the smaller ships in the fleet. So they should be able to have a few more defensive modules, plenty of health modules, a good engine that gives bonuses to the whole fleet, the best repair capabilities, the best radar system (scout module), the best energy module, etc. In fact I think the Dreadnaughts should also be allowed to have 2 energy modules instead of just 1, but only 1 offensive and 1 defensive.

Sorry for necro'ing, but this post is still valid and shouldn't be forgotten. As it stands there really is no justification for building Dreads over Battleships

Chibiabos wrote:


I was attempting to enlighten to you as to what dreadnought actually means. It does not "really" mean what you seem to think it does, because its become a misnomered and common cliche in sci fi that dreadnoughts were bigger or tougher than battleships when, in fact, they were proto-battleships -- a midstep between ironclad warships and true battleships.

To be fair, Dreadnought means somebody who fears nothing. In the context of history as we know it, this obviously applies to proto-battleships. In the realm of endless space however, dreadnoughts are top tier class warships that really should fear nothing, assuming they are loaded out with good weapons/defenses. Realize that science fiction itself does not need to be realistic, it just needs to give a sense of realism.

Hmmm, since fighters & bombers will be out, could dreads get a discount on their modules, so they can be dedicated carriers?

WhiteWeasel wrote:
Hmmm, since fighters & bombers will be out, could dreads get a discount on their modules, so they can be dedicated carriers?

I think that's what carriers are for. I'm thinking that bombers and fighters will be support roles, and if I remember cruisers get reduced support tonnage. Do dreadnoughts get any bonus? I was thinking defense but it's probably no benefit

stasik28 wrote:
I think that's what carriers are for. I'm thinking that bombers and fighters will be support roles, and if I remember cruisers get reduced support tonnage. Do dreadnoughts get any bonus? I was thinking defense but it's probably no benefit

That's what I meant, dreds have no bonus right now, so why not make them the fighters.

Maybe that's what they were saving them for?? O__o Mind = blow

In my FF mod, i did improve Dreads to be the flagships of the fleet. They give some bonuses to the fleet for merely being there, and i ensured than several late game support modules can only be fit on them. Next i also doubled the number of salvos per phase (also doubled ship's HPs so overall firepower remain the same) meaning ships with huge firepower can match spam of destroyers and such. But to not make them too OP, i also buffed battleship in HP and tonnage (and set them to 3 CP), making them good Dreads escort and a cheaper alternative.

You know what? You remind me of Kael from the Fall From Heaven mod for Civ4. You are seriously reworking the game. Thank you.

My fleets



Invasion fleets



2 dreads rest battleships



defenders/harass fleets



5 cruisers rest destroyers



battleships/cruisers have the fleet defence +% when it unlocks

other ships have defence mod +% rest into weapons/defences



dreads normally get +% armour mods when they unlock for tons of hp/cruiser get some as well helps preventing one shots.



however I play SP only and rarely get ships high levels because the ai just quits making ships/fleets unless im losing fids wise then they win attrition



I would like to see high end fleets fight because far as i see hp is somewhat pointless because you can instant gib ships at high end or humans will just run/not fight uphill battles.



One of my invasion fleets has 130k might with hero atm in one of my lp its rank 5 (10 is max never had that, that be epic but unlikely to get to)



p.s



it also annoy me that the ai spams dreads because they normally suck and don't kit them right



also recently the ai didn't realise that it can't hurt my fleet with lasers but one of its missile ships did hit, why didn't it remake all ships missiles.

Are dreadnoughts powerful enough for their class?



The facts:

+Get large HP bonuses when leveled up. (Assuming it sees and survives that much action).

-The only ship class that does not possess any bonuses.

-Dreadnoughts provide twice the HP and tonnage for four times the price of battleships and cruisers.

-Fleets with dreadnoughts are (slightly) more likely to get out numbered.



Now that's the statistics on paper, and they can play out much differently.

From your personal experiences do you dreads should be helped out or not?



If it's a problem in the first place, I have two solutions that can correct it.



Solution A: A bonus to HP gained on armor modules.

Either a +20-25% hp gained on armor module, OR +15 additional Hp per module.

Flat rates will have a significant buff early on, but will get proportionately less effective as tiers go up

%ages will have little effect early on but will get stronger as tiers go up.



Solution B: Jack of all trades.

Since every ship specializes on a specific module type, the dreadnoughts can get a [Edit]7% discount on everything. That's about 1/3 the normal discount price on other ships.

Chibiabos wrote:
British, actually, the HMS Dreadnought for which the first several proto-battleships were named was a British ship.

Battleships AND cruisers both require 2. 3 would still be 50% more CP than 2.

My apologies. I had been taught that the Germans were the first to build Dreadnoughts. Although I did also learn quite a few things from that teacher that were later called into question...

And I see your point. It would definitely be a viable solution, I just don't really like it; I would rather have a ship worth 100% more CP and did ~100% more damage than have a ship worth 50% more CP and dealing ~50% more damage. But that's personal preference.

Chibiabos wrote:
I was attempting to enlighten to you as to what dreadnought actually means. It does not "really" mean what you seem to think it does, because its become a misnomered and common cliche in sci fi that dreadnoughts were bigger or tougher than battleships when, in fact, they were proto-battleships -- a midstep between ironclad warships and true battleships.

And I was attempting to remind you that what they actually mean is different from what they mean within the game. Like you said, it's become a common cliche that sci-fi Dreadnoughts are bigger than battleships, and Endless Space isn't attempting to reverse that. Dreadnoughts could have originally been unarmed PT boats, that's not going to change the way sci-fi fans perceive them, nor is it going to rename the ships in Endless Space or make them any less powerful.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
I wasn't talking about the German warships that came around on Earth a few decades ago, I was referring to the massive warships present in the future of Endless Space. Battleships take up two command points while Dreadnoughts require four, clearly and vividly displaying the intention for them to be the big guns of the fleet.

British, actually, the HMS Dreadnought for which the first several proto-battleships were named was a British ship.

Battleships AND cruisers both require 2. 3 would still be 50% more CP than 2.

If they're only worth 3, they're not really "Dreadnoughts."

I was attempting to enlighten to you as to what dreadnought actually means. It does not "really" mean what you seem to think it does, because its become a misnomered and common cliche in sci fi that dreadnoughts were bigger or tougher than battleships when, in fact, they were proto-battleships -- a midstep between ironclad warships and true battleships.

Dreadnoughts should probably get a larger discount on Defense modules. They need to take a lot more punishment, but there's no reason for them to do more damage than other ships; like Ganpot said, they're unlikely to destroy many ships in a battle anyway.

I have no idea why people would agree that dreadnaughts are not cost-effective, then say they want them to stay that way. It literally doesn't make sense to me .



I agree with your basic idea, but the module size reduction needs to be bigger than 7%. Why? Because every ship can only target one other ship per phase, which means a Dreadnaught can only kill 3 ships in a single battle. On the other hand, 4 Destroyers can kill 12 ships per battle. Additionally, Dreadnaughts cost a TON of time/money to build. Systems which take 2 turns to build a Dreadnaught can pump out 4-5 equivalent Destroyers per turn instead. All of this makes Dreadnaughts basically useless. So I recommend Dreadnaughts get a 15-20% reduction bonus to all module sizes, as well as increased starting storage space.

Beefhater wrote:


it would be better if the dreadnoughts have a bonus on support- and offensivmodules

or on support- defensivemodules.

A full 20-25% discount on two types of modules?

in my opinion there miss something on the dreadnoughts and thats defently the specification on an module type

but a jack of all trades isnt the best solution

it would be better if the dreadnoughts have a bonus on support- and offensivmodules

or on support- defensivemodules

but i prefer my first suggestion because there is already a good ship with bonus on defensiv modules(my favorite ship by the way)

Well, in realistic terms, at least so far as we can predict: Dreadnoughts ought to be the most efficient ship by a significant margin. There is little reason that mounting lots of long range guns on the largest, greatest power output platform that you can find wouldn't be far superior to any other combat strategy.



A cool solution might be redistributing the hit probabilities for each ship class, rather than basing it solely on the combat phase and the weapon round. That way you could simulate a dreadnought's long range guns deriving an advantage without neccessarily having to make many other changes.

I consider Dreadnoughts pretty crappy. I've come to find uses for the cruisers. There efficiencies combined with defensive heroes can let them take a lot of punishment, even against all destroyer fleets. But the dreadnought is even more outnumbered and doesn't get the equivalent efficiencies to help it out. It serves no purpose that 2 ships can't serve better.

I too like the current dreadnaughts, big heads of the fleet, but not efficient warships.

Personally, I love the Dreads in the game. Once I unlock them, my main war Heroes all get dumped at the head of Dreadnought fleets. Two or three fleets of five Dreadnoughts (the most I can play as the vanilla Sheredyn faction) and one Destroyers (because why not? ), as well as their support fleets of Battleships and Cruisers...



I rarely have trouble with this. I might lose a Dreadnought every now and then, but that usually is only after a good number of battles in a row, and I've been sloppy picking cards or with auto battles, and this not letting them heal.



And Chibiabos, while you are right about that being the origin of the term, "Dreadnought" has simply come to mean so much more in sci-fi. They're now the huge, often lumbering, capital ships of fleets with the most guns, the biggest guns, tend to have the admiral aboard, and can really wreck your day.

Chibiabos wrote:
Do you even know the origin of the term, not what its abused to be? They aren't super-battleships, they were pre-battleships. They were actually named for the HMS Dreadnought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadnought_battleship

I wasn't talking about the German warships that came around on Earth a few decades ago, I was referring to the massive warships present in the future of Endless Space. Battleships take up two command points while Dreadnoughts require four, clearly and vividly displaying the intention for them to be the big guns of the fleet.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
I was thinking about that, but it's probably not the best solution, since Dreadnoughts are supposed to be worth those 4CP. If they're only worth 3, they're not really "Dreadnoughts." It would be better to buff them more than to debuff them and reduce their CP value.

Do you even know the origin of the term, not what its abused to be? They aren't super-battleships, they were pre-battleships. They were actually named for the HMS Dreadnought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadnought_battleship

Chibiabos wrote:
Have you considered reducing Dreadnaughts from 4 to 3 CP?

I was thinking about that, but it's probably not the best solution, since Dreadnoughts are supposed to be worth those 4CP. If they're only worth 3, they're not really "Dreadnoughts." It would be better to buff them more than to debuff them and reduce their CP value.

Have you considered reducing Dreadnaughts from 4 to 3 CP?

I don't play them much, but theoretically they don't need extra HP buffs. If a battleship has 2000 HP, then 20% extra would be +400 HP. If a Dreadnought has 4000 HP, then 20% extra would be +800 HP. The bigger the base value the greater the increase.

Of course, other players may feel differently.