I have a serious problem with the notion that late games fleet should consist solely of Dreadnoughts. I also agree that there should be more hull types - Certainly not Death Stars and other end-alls, but definitely Carriers (I would KILL for strikecraft), Light/Heavy/Battle Cruisers, and Frigates.



I spent the first 150 turns of my first game building balanced fleets, 3-4 corvettes, 2-3 destroyers, 2-3 cruisers, 2 battleships, a dreadnought. Then I went to war, and got slaughtered by full dreadnought/battleships fleets. I just don't see why it should be that way.

Wenchbane wrote:
You've also got to consider the fact that this is Amplitude's first game so they're trying to get all the core things right before they move onto more advanced things.

(Apparently a 10 character minimum to posts, excluding quotes!)

Admiral666 wrote:
Although I understand the current ship design and combat mechanics, I feel as though it needs to be improved upon or entirely redone. Not necessarily going to happen, and certainly not a game-breaker if it does not, but I can still hope! I see incredible potential in Endless Space. It is everything Sword of the Stars 2 wanted to be, and far, far more.

The idea might sound good but I think you're just asking for more "hulls" after all you do design the "class" of the ship.



I totally agree though on carriers (and that is a work in progress post release if I've read correctly)

When it comes down to it the hulls should give you an idea of what to invest into them (Not saying that is what it should always have or be, etc etc) but shouldn't restrict them to it (like giving them a specific class)

There was someone throwing around an idea for "Flagships" in another thread, if that interests anyone, they might be bigger or more flashy (guns-wise) than a Dreadnaught...



You've also got to consider the fact that this is Amplitude's first game so they're trying to get all the core things right before they move onto more advanced things.

I'm pretty sure it still isn't balanced yet and last but not least the other 3 factions haven't been revealed yet so they might have totally different gameplay than the mirrors we have now.

True, but to combat battleships and dreads, cruisers should be fine, i numbers they should compare the power of dreads.

Gameplay considerations should come first, who cares what resource it may or may not realistically require.



Again, if you have 1 or more hulls be better than the others then you take away the choice of how to make your ship. Modules that require the resource achieve the same thing while going with this games system of having resources become obsolete.



Edit: This game seems to use a system where at each tech level there is a new resource that the techs at that level require.

Zougkla wrote:
I agree. Each ship class should focus on a broad category of modules (or in the case of dreadnoughts, I think it should be xp), but otherwise be balanced.







Maybe, just maybe, something like that could work. But I would not want it to be the hulls. You can't have a hierarchy of ships, each being better and requiring a rarer resource because that eliminates all choice, strategy, and uniqueness from the ships.



I think that it should be the advanced modules that do that and the hulls should have no strategic resource requirements.

Well you are going to require stratigic materials for better ships, otherwise they would collapse!



but in retrospect you should at least have at least one type of heavy sip size avaliable while the other more varied ones would be avaliable wherever there are the resorces to create them.



Cruisers should possibly fill that role leaving battleships and dreadnaughts (The irony that drednaughts actually being the precursors to battleships) squarely to empires with Titanium-70 and possibly anti-matter (Ships got a fat ass that needs a moving).

Admiral666 wrote:
I have a serious problem with the notion that late games fleet should consist solely of Dreadnoughts. I also agree that there should be more hull types - Certainly not Death Stars and other end-alls, but definitely Carriers (I would KILL for strikecraft), Light/Heavy/Battle Cruisers, and Frigates.



I spent the first 150 turns of my first game building balanced fleets, 3-4 corvettes, 2-3 destroyers, 2-3 cruisers, 2 battleships, a dreadnought. Then I went to war, and got slaughtered by full dreadnought/battleships fleets. I just don't see why it should be that way.

I agree. Each ship class should focus on a broad category of modules (or in the case of dreadnoughts, I think it should be xp), but otherwise be balanced.

zdesert wrote:
i think the ship classes are fine as they are. what i think is missing from this build are the resource requirements.



only the cruiser has a strategic resource cost (titanium). i think in the final game the intent will be that every following ship will also need titanium. that battleships will require titanium and .... something eles and that dreadnoughts will require three resources. the strategic resource requirements are missing from weapon/armour/support techs as well. and the ship/weapon/defence/weight/bonuses haven't been balanced yet.



what this means is that low tier ships may be a players only option, battles over planets with strategic resources will be wild. how many dreadnoughts can you build while you own the requisite resource planets? do you have the resources to outfit them with the high level weapons so as not to waste the dreadnought completely. missile spam will not be the norm once balancing is done, and i think that dreadnoughts will be more powerful in the final game. a dreadnought with last teir weapons/defences should be awe inspiring and rare until very late game.

Maybe, just maybe, something like that could work. But I would not want it to be the hulls. You can't have a hierarchy of ships, each being better and requiring a rarer resource because that eliminates all choice, strategy, and uniqueness from the ships.



I think that it should be the advanced modules that do that and the hulls should have no strategic resource requirements.

Indeed good buddy!

Yes, it is based on modules, but that is coloured by the bonuses/penalties assigned to each hull (If I remember correctly, cruisers are innately better at support roles). My thought is that where a Dreadnought has a bonus for weapons/armour (I forget exactly what it is in game), it would have a rather high penalty in terms of flight decks or support modules, while a carrier would inversely have bonuses for flight decks and penalties for weaponry.



Although I understand the current ship design and combat mechanics, I feel as though it needs to be improved upon or entirely redone. Not necessarily going to happen, and certainly not a game-breaker if it does not, but I can still hope! I see incredible potential in Endless Space. It is everything Sword of the Stars 2 wanted to be, and far, far more.

Admiral666 wrote:
Hardly. In my mind, a Dreadnought or a Battleship is optimized with heavy weapons, armour, and survivability in mind, whereas a carrier is designed with the support of strikecraft ops in mind e.g. flight crew accommodations, hangar bays, maintenance facilities, ordnance storage, etc. I can see a hybrid of the two, something I generally see termed as an Assault Carrier, a heavily armoured ship touting a flight deck and decent armament, meant to survive the heat of battle.



Perhaps I should mention that I also favor a revamping of combat?



I also partly would like to SEE more than 5 hulls per race. Seeing the same ships over and over late game gets a bit tiresome.

Well ship type is baised on what moduels you pick, and with the suggestion of adding stuff onto ships that match moduels your dreads would even look like carriers!

Hardly. In my mind, a Dreadnought or a Battleship is optimized with heavy weapons, armour, and survivability in mind, whereas a carrier is designed with the support of strikecraft ops in mind e.g. flight crew accommodations, hangar bays, maintenance facilities, ordnance storage, etc. I can see a hybrid of the two, something I generally see termed as an Assault Carrier, a heavily armoured ship touting a flight deck and decent armament, meant to survive the heat of battle.



Perhaps I should mention that I also favor a revamping of combat?



I also partly would like to SEE more than 5 hulls per race. Seeing the same ships over and over late game gets a bit tiresome.

Admiral666 wrote:
I have a serious problem with the notion that late games fleet should consist solely of Dreadnoughts. I also agree that there should be more hull types - Certainly not Death Stars and other end-alls, but definitely Carriers (I would KILL for strikecraft), Light/Heavy/Battle Cruisers, and Frigates.



I spent the first 150 turns of my first game building balanced fleets, 3-4 corvettes, 2-3 destroyers, 2-3 cruisers, 2 battleships, a dreadnought. Then I went to war, and got slaughtered by full dreadnought/battleships fleets. I just don't see why it should be that way.

Wouldnt a carrier just be a dreadnaught with hanger modules?



After all the ship classes are baised on size, not actual ship types.

Hey i recently bought endless space and i have been enjoying it greatly how ever it doesn't take all that long to get to the dreadnought which is the only thing to use late game i find this unfortunate since i'd like to have some more diversity.



The current ships classes that are corvette a small and dinky early game system defence-esque ship which destroyer replaces in 20 turns which isn't much better or more special in anyway. The cruiser replaces the destroyer and corvette just as fast and swiftly becomes the main battles ship in all fleets for it is infinately more superior compared to the previous ships. After cruiser comes the battleship personally at this point i got dreadnought maybe ten turns later and since it is the ultimarte craft (which btw my main "forgeworld" can pump out at one ship a turn)all battleship production has been halted.



I think that all the ships should useful in their own ways throught the entire game maybe even add a unique research tree that improves all the ship hulls and specializes them more.

Additional ships should be added to fill all the gaps between the "tech levels" . Below are my suggested ship classes from the smallest to the greattest including the improvements to the excisting classes.



-Corvette, this ship should fill the role of a dedicated scout and early game support ship which is pretty much what it does now. Perhaps give it -30%/40% weight for support modules and some +20% weight for weapons.



-Frigate this ship should be early researchable maybe after destroyer. It should be one of the first proper military ships. The frigates roles could be anything from harassing enemy planets behind the lines to forming simple small fleets and intercepting enemy scouts. Stats could be -10% weapon weight -20% support weight.



-System defence monitor or just monitor. This is queer beast indeed it's cheap and packs serious punch for it's size however if it's possible this ship class should not be able move from the star system it has been manufactured in or if so at a snailpace (10 turns for a ly) -30% weapon weight and -30% defence weight +100% support weight.



-Destroyer, these ships should be a large part of every races arsenal throught the entire game. Used as war ships in early game and as escorts for larger ships late game. -20% defence weight +20% support weight and if possible perhaps copy their actual usage which during the 2nd world war was mainly anti sub duty and spotting torpedos by giving them +50% anti-missile efficiency and perhaps +5% fleet anti missiles efficiency up to 15%



-Cruiser a fair leap forward in size and power -20% weapon weight -20% defence weight +40 support weight. Pretty straight forward really.



-Battlecruiser these are more offensive and agile than their cousins the cruisers, but aren't as tough. -30% weapon weight +40% defence weight -20% support weight.



-Pocket Battleship, now that i think about maybe having faction specifig ships would not be a bad idea. These are not quite battleships they are stronger and tougher than cruisers but in 1vs1 regardless of modules actual battleships should prevail. -25% weapon weight -25% defence weight + 20 support weight.



-Battleship. These beings are strong and mighty and can best small fleets of equally advanced lesser ships in combat. -35% weapon weight -30 defence weight -10 support weight. It might look op but then again it's a damn battleship it's supposed to best all things lesser in size.



-Escort carrier. If carriers are possible to create in the game engine this should be the first one empires get their hands on. It's not very magnificent and only carriers a limited number of fighters/bombers. Carriers aren't meant to be leading the spearhead in the battle and they aren't all the that strong. +40% weapons weight +40% defence weight - 20 support weight.



-Dreadnought these ships are what lesser ships aspire to be when they grow up, building one requires great deal of time and resources, they are bristling with weapons and armour and are so large that one could fit a number of lesser ships inside them. -40% weapons -35% defence -20% support weight



-Carrier, this is the real deal capable of carrying hosts of fighters and bombers and able to defend itself to some extend. +20% weapon +20% defence - 20% weights



-Super-dreadnought, there have been many races that have attempted to best each other in the infinite battlefields of deep space, some of them succeeding in it.

Manufacturing and designing these immense vessels some like floating fortresses each an empire wide superconstruct requiring time and unparallel craftmanship. These exceedingly rare ships are capable of causing unimagineable destruction, equipped with guns rivalling planetary defence guns of some age old long lost civilizations. To bring one down required combined effort of a number of fleets working in unison to perform the tireless assault needed to bring one down. -60 weapon weight -55 defence weight -30 support weight. (these are largest ships that can be build)



-Titans (only works if random events are ever added) It has been rumored by travelling merchants and rogues that they have encountered ships size of small planetoids or moons drifting in deep space, powered down and sustained what appear to be massive damages in hands of some long lost foe. No official statements have been made.



i had some other ideas as well but i forgot them during the time it took to write this :V



oh and when i mention weapon i mean weapon module and defence i mean defence module and support against all odds means support module.

/#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13275-composite-suggestion-evolving-the-combat



already working on classes and other combat refinements like weapon variants and ship speed giving evasion boosts.

I dont think ships should become much bigger then dreadnaughts, ive seen alot of posts covering the idea of doom stars or mobile platforms but really? really!? it seems stupid and a cheap way for a really powerful race to just dominate and compleatly elimonate any weaker empire.



it just seems stupid, like planet destroying weapons....you dont need to destoy a planet to elimonate its usefullness.....Commting exterminatus seems fair enough.



http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Exterminatus

i think the ship classes are fine as they are. what i think is missing from this build are the resource requirements.



only the cruiser has a strategic resource cost (titanium). i think in the final game the intent will be that every following ship will also need titanium. that battleships will require titanium and .... something eles and that dreadnoughts will require three resources. the strategic resource requirements are missing from weapon/armour/support techs as well. and the ship/weapon/defence/weight/bonuses haven't been balanced yet.



what this means is that low tier ships may be a players only option, battles over planets with strategic resources will be wild. how many dreadnoughts can you build while you own the requisite resource planets? do you have the resources to outfit them with the high level weapons so as not to waste the dreadnought completely. missile spam will not be the norm once balancing is done, and i think that dreadnoughts will be more powerful in the final game. a dreadnought with last teir weapons/defences should be awe inspiring and rare until very late game.

Zougkla wrote:
It is not just engines: reactor modules also work this way as well as the repair system that heals a portion of your ship's hp.



This gives larger ships a significant advantage, especially as the increased hull costs matter less in the late game.

Build me a dreadnought my destroyer fleet can't kill in a single salvo, and I'll accept your argument.

It is not just engines: reactor modules also work this way as well as the repair system that heals a portion of your ship's hp.



This gives larger ships a significant advantage, especially as the increased hull costs matter less in the late game.

So, they're obsolete because my destroyer fleet has 32 movement instead of 36? Meh.

If you want a bunch of cheap ships with only weapons, you can't do better than Destroyers.



However, they do become obsolete in that the most advanced engine costs 90 tonnage, 67.5 tonnage for Corvettes, which makes them very week in a fight. Yes they provide fleet movement, but that is small for the cost and doesn't matter so much if you get stomped when you get there. I favor making engines tonnage and cost scale with the ship size, only giving ship movement, and on doing the same with other components that give a proportional bonus to ships.

As above, I'm not sure that destroyers become obsolete. But certainly the smaller ships could do with something to help them stay relevant in the endgame.

I'm amused by the notion that cruisers and dreadnoughts obsolete destroyers, since poking around it seems that a fleet of pure destroyers with nothing but weapons defeats *everything*, but I'll wait until we have multiplayer to completely pass judgment.



The current system actually penalizes larger ship sizes (lower total displacement), which seems to be in the interests of the folks who would prefer not to have late-game fleets but nothing but dreadnoughts.



I like the idea of system defense vessels (no FTL drive) and having something larger than dreadnoughts (since you've maxed ship size less than halfway through the tech tree at the moment, which is kind of sad).

The ship xp actually improves something? Damn, well i guess you learn something new everyday.

I agree that Corvettes and Destroyers become obsolete and that Dreadnoughts may be overpowered. While larger ships have the advantage of being able to survive longer in the random firefights in Endless Space, their hulls also cost exponentially more. They are overpowered mainly because engines and other systems provide the same bonus to larger ships for the same tonnage and cost and become too big for small ships to carry effectively.



I like the simple ship classes and how each of the ship classes has a bonus regarding each of the broad categories of components.



I would make it so that Dreadnought get, say, a 25% bonus to ship xp (which currently seems to improves hp, but I think should have bonuses to all aspects of the ship), or -20% ship level up cost, to make them less expendable. This would be balanced by altering those components that favor larger hulls and, if that is not enough, by increasing the cost of the dreadnought hull more so.