Ketobor wrote:
Are you sure about this?

540 Beam Strength is 12 Pinch Guns

3 ships of this means 36 Pinch guns

This means that their attacks can deal between 1440 and 1800 per combat turn under optimal conditions.

/facepalm. You are, of course, correct - apparently I am incapable of basic multiplication.



Redid the test a bit more cleanly as well - switched to a dreadnought with no weapons against three 770 beam strength battleships ( 855 damage max ), letting it autoresolve and checking damage taken at the end of combat.



2500 shield absorb consistently resulted in zero damage.



2250 shield absorb resulted in 737-1028 damage each run over the course of ten trials.



That puts it pretty squarely into the temporary hp per turn category.



On that basis, a quick look at the ship builder suggests that it's impossible to build a DN that can absorb the salvo fire from four destroyers of equal tech level, assuming they use power couplings - using cravers, a DN with a cargo module and nothing but shields almost managed to produce enough absorption to stop two destroyers.



Some things seemed a little buggy though - smart cargo ( +50 ton ) actually added 115 tons when added to my ships. This has a particularly crazy effect on destroyers, letting a single destroyer mount a HE coupling and 20 gluon disrupters.

Alright, I updated the Missile and Flak stats on the Wiki. Assuming each Flak blocks on missile per round with 100% probability if its Interception Accuracy exceeds the missile's Interception Evasion, and 0% otherwise:

• At no modifiers, the first Flak module (Offensive Chaff) will block all missiles up to Positron Torpedoes (tier 5/9). Accelerated Magnetics and Optimal Defense II or III will block one more tier up each.
• At no modifiers, the highest-tech missile can be blocked by Lepton Shielding (tier 6/9). Similar to the above, Accelerated Magnetics and Optimal Defense II or III will reduce the requirement by one tier.
• The EMP and Armor Weak Point cards give -20% to Flak.
• Stacking Neutrino Captures (the fleet defense module) could allow even the first Flak module to block the top Missile, but it seems like such a scheme would easily be overwhelmed by damage-boosted beams.
  
  

Do damage bonuses affect interception evasion though? Because otherwise you could use a defense bonus module, the Optimal Defense trait, or admirals to prolong the lifetime of low-level flak. I'll look at the numbers more closely when I get home.

Evil4Zerggin wrote:
Does each flak module only block one missile a turn? If so it seems there's no reason to tech flak, just spam the cheapest flak and stack defense bonuses.

Flak & missiles have competing interception/evasion values - high level missiles will totally ignore low level flak.

Any updates? At least it feels to me that they cut out the first round of shots in each phase; missiles seem to fire almost immediately now. Defenses seem to be very strong now too.



Do damage bonuses help you get past defenses, or do they only affect net damage? Tooltips seem to imply the latter.



Does each flak module only block one missile a turn? If so it seems there's no reason to tech flak, just spam the cheapest flak and stack defense bonuses.

Hi all,



I've been reading the whole thread and seems, even if we had percentages and numbers that precise knowledge of combat/defenses issues is not for now :-)



On thing sure is that death rate is way too high : never went to third phase and never had a battle with less than 80% of losses, one side ar another.



For instance, pirateships fully beam weaponed (and always indexed on my own ships), always wipe my cravers fleets and full destroyer fleets wipe dreadnoughts like they were toys.



Hope that for final release the whole system will be more balanced for less death rate (defence is now totally useless) and more informations about combats. Maybe a more detailed combat report at the end of the fight ?

supersoaker9 wrote:
Excellent build: basically, a survivable glass cannon. In short, uber.

Heh, thanks for the endorsement. You tend to put a ton of effort into your analysis, which is what inspired me to start my own proposals for improving balance in fleet composition and module fitting.



The one saving grace of all this destroyer nonsense, and my build in particular, is that armour plates receive a negligible increase when the ship levels up.

Kreios wrote:


Destroyer Hull

Smart Cargo

Defensive Lensing x4

Neutrino Pulsion

Living Hulls

Gluon Disruptorx4

AGN Slugs x5

Excellent build: basically, a survivable glass cannon. In short, uber.

velk wrote:
Some things seemed a little buggy though - smart cargo ( +50 ton ) actually added 115 tons when added to my ships. This has a particularly crazy effect on destroyers, letting a single destroyer mount a HE coupling and 20 gluon disrupters.

At max tech, think of it this way: if you so desired, you could build a destroyer without the extra tonnage, then add more than a DN's worth of HP to that ship.



This build might not take on all comers, but it has a fair chance of crushing any missile ship in the first round, and it's a great illustration of how stacking repair and damage bonuses at the fleet level can get unreasonable.



Destroyer Hull

Smart Cargo

Defensive Lensing x4

Neutrino Pulsion

Living Hulls

Gluon Disruptorx4

AGN Slugs x5



The weapons mix might need some work, but the intent is to force two defence types. Now, I realize that loading it entirely with guns would have probably been a smarter idea. I posted this build is simply to reinforce just how outmatched large ships are by smaller ones in the very areas in which they should excel.

InFlamesWeTrust wrote:
OP I disagree that Dreadnoughts are bad ships.

If you don't want to continuously replenish your fleets then these heavy ships are a good option. But then again, when I play, I never have the issue of coming up against an even opponent, I'm always ahead in tech and therefore I'm more powerful.

I've tried all strategies and for me the best one is, 4 dreadnoughts and 3 cruisers that I use as support to heal my dreadnoughts. This seems to work extremely well, as I barely ever lose a ship or battle.

Yeah what he said. I spent like 30 turns to get 1 step ahead of my opponent who was more then doubling my score to outclass his weapons/armor. Made 4 Dreadnaughts (I was Cravers so my fleet sizes were bigger too) and my 4 ships destroyed over 100 of his, also instantly invaded his systems. With every CP destroyed I gained 20 RP which shot me up in research and every 2 turns I kept trying to pump out a Dreadnaught. Then once I invaded his home star system, which incidentally was really close to his border, my top-of-the-line system of 500 production was dwarfed by his 2000 production system. I started pumping out 1-2 Dreadnaughts every turn and the rest is history.



Seriously, with like a 15k power group of dreadnaughts led by a commander (his levels skyrocketed) he ended up getting to like 32k or something with this versions. Never lost a ship, won every single battle. Took out entire fleets, I was in LAST PLACE as far as fleet power went and stayed in Last Place for at least another 50 turns or so, which then I rose to second Last Place. This was on Hard though.

velk wrote:
For what it's worth, there seemed to be some question about how shields worked, if the shield was a permanent reduction, or a temporary hp mechanic, and if temporary hp, whether it was replenished per turn or per phase or per combat.



From some testing just then, it looks like it's temporary hp per phase ( or possibly combat, still need to check that further ).



Test case was a combat with a 1250 shield ( 1250 absorption ) dreadnought vs three cruisers with 540 beam strength ( roughly 320 beam damage ) each, which resulted in some 800 or so damage to the dreadnought over the course of the long range phase.



If absorption was a permanent reduction, i.e. each salvo for 320 was reduced by 1250, then the DN should have taken zero damage.



If absorption was replenished per turn, i.e. 1250 vs 3x320, then the DN should have again taken no damage, or at least minimal damage from critical hits.



Per phase would theoretically work out to something like 1250 vs 3x320 + 2x320 + 1x320 ( with a cruiser being destroyed each phase ), or 1250 vs 1600 for 350 excess. ( Unclear on whether the AI built their ships with power couplings or not )

Are you sure about this?

540 Beam Strength is 12 Pinch Guns

3 ships of this means 36 Pinch guns

This means that their attacks can deal between 1440 and 1800 per combat turn under optimal conditions.





I don't know where you get the idea that the enemy only dealt 320 beam damage per combat turn against you from a perspective of maximum potential damage.

Only lucky phase could deal up to 750 damage, without knowing anything about other racial factors, or situational information that is currently lacking.



Assuming average damage, we can then determine the accuracy required.

Assuming exactly average damage this means 89.5% accuracy was required to deal that damage at long range.

Assuming the spread, the damage was probably about 87.5%



By your assumed defense mechanic, your ship would have been destroyed at a 75% accuracy rating at long range. By your assumed mechanics it would take approximately double to tripple the 'fist rating' in shields to negate an equivalent 'fist rating' of enemy beams, and that is clearly not what happens.















With regards to the battleship statement - I am not here to talk about what is "best", merely what is. There are certainly moments, against the AI, when you have an advantage, that such a strategy could be optimal. When you are cruising around defeating vastly inferior ships, his battleship strategy is an excellent way to utilize war resources.

@ ketobor, now that we have moved several posts into this strategy section, we can clearly see two different approaches both claiming "optimal" results. What do you think of the omnitank battleship fleets proposed by supersoaker9?



/#/endless-space/forum/33-strategy-guides/thread/14018-what-is-the-best-fleet-design-strategy

For what it's worth, there seemed to be some question about how shields worked, if the shield was a permanent reduction, or a temporary hp mechanic, and if temporary hp, whether it was replenished per turn or per phase or per combat.



From some testing just then, it looks like it's temporary hp per phase ( or possibly combat, still need to check that further ).



Test case was a combat with a 1250 shield ( 1250 absorption ) dreadnought vs three cruisers with 540 beam strength ( roughly 320 beam damage ) each, which resulted in some 800 or so damage to the dreadnought over the course of the long range phase.



If absorption was a permanent reduction, i.e. each salvo for 320 was reduced by 1250, then the DN should have taken zero damage.



If absorption was replenished per turn, i.e. 1250 vs 3x320, then the DN should have again taken no damage, or at least minimal damage from critical hits.



Per phase would theoretically work out to something like 1250 vs 3x320 + 2x320 + 1x320 ( with a cruiser being destroyed each phase ), or 1250 vs 1600 for 350 excess. ( Unclear on whether the AI built their ships with power couplings or not )

I just started an article on the wiki about combat (they didn't have one, can you believe that!) at http://endlessspace.wikia.com/wiki/Combat



You seem to know what you are talking about, so can you put the info on there so that it will be easy to find. I had to do a search to find this and I don't think many people have seen it.



Any help is deeply appreciated!



Edit: I will do it myself if I have to, but I figure that someone who has looked into it should be the one.

Created a new topic for repair discussion after doing a series of tests.



Now then, I am going to ask that you not debate 'what is better' here. Quite simply, destroyers are generally better right now. I have played many games of this, I have done the math, and it seems the community has mostly had the same experience. You can have fun with other designs, the computer is pretty easy, but that isn't the fundamental debate. Dreadnaughts have a use, but that difference isn't what this topic is for. I know this might seen unfair, but I will ask that you take those debates to the Destroyer thread.





If you want to discuss how combat should work, or get more accurate numbers on accuracy, either would fit better in this topic. I personally am interested if anyone has good ideas on what they think offense-defense interactions should be.

The advantage of a destroyer swarm for hp healing actually comes in the situation where the damage is spread across several ships. Each ship heals simultaneously. So if you have 5 400-hp destroyers, you have 2,000 hp worth of ships that heals a potential combined base 50 hp/turn. If you have 2 1000-hp cruisers, you have 2,000 hp worth of ships that heals a potential combined base 20 hp/turn. Or 1 2,000-hp dreadnought, that heals base 10 hp/turn.



The more ships you have your hp distributed over, the better your healing potential is when the fleet is damaged. Naturally this is offset by the fact that individual ships are more likely to be destroyed in the fleet before they get a chance to heal; if this were the only issue between ship sizes, I'd say it's a fair tradeoff. Unfortunately it's not the only issue.



I'd thought repair modules healed a % of the ship's max hp, not an additional % of the healing per turn. If that's true, those modules are pretty useless.

OK...

a few things. first repair: certain repair mods repair a persentage of health each turn (very small % 5 or 10 i belive) and one (adaptive glue) give 500 per battle phase.



adaptive glue is good for destroyers becuase you basicly ensure they begin each batle phase at full health



on the size of ships and their viability:



i only use dreadnoughts as the UE (humans) for a number of reasons. dreadnoughts are useless in all other situations, as all other races in my opinion.



the UE have a natural armour (HP) buff and race specific armour tech (the orange techs on the military tree)



the first special tech which is about half way up the tree gives a flat hp buff (i belive 25ish hull points) and a 2% hp buff (which i believe stacks). this tech is better than all other stranded armour techs and doesn't require you to research the others! the adamantum armour at the end of the tree is the only better armour.



i give my dreadnoughts the % based repair mod, a few lasers and all my other tonnage goes into reflective armour/tonnage mods (around 20-35 armour mods). i can get a dreadnought to 10,500 hp (much much more with all tonnage mods and adamatum armour) the dreadnought does very little damage but it has the hp of 10 normal dreadnoughts. the natural repair rate per battle phase with my repair mod (i believe 5% repair rate) means that my dreadnoughts gain 525 hp every phase no matter what and if i spam the repair action card (20% repair rate) then my dreadnoughts gain 2100 hp additionaly each phase. meaning that an enemy fleet needs to do more than 2,625 damage to my dreadnought in order for that damage to carry over to the next phase.



as i said these dreadnoughts don't do much damage, but most ships cant take much. destroyers cant survive a few hits with any weapon type. crusers and battleships can hold on only if they have appropriate defences and then only for a phase or two. these dreadnoughts are equally effective against all weapon types, they always survive the battle, and because no other ships are balanced for full three phase combat my dreadnoughts destroy much larger fleets by phase three (the dreadnoughts maintain the same fire-power and HP well through each phase while the enemy fleet shrinks). 4 such outfitted dreadnoughts have a combined 46,000 hp and a per phase repair (with repair card) of 10 500. meaning that an emymy fleet must create 61,000 points of damage to completely wipe out my dreadnoughts.



i have never lost a full fleet.



(my math may be off concerning repair rates, i did not check the numbers in game before posting, nor have i tested this build very thouroly, just for fun)

davea wrote:
Does repair even help that much for destroyers? A fleet of 15 gets +30% increase, which improves the heal rate from 10/turn to 13/turn. Hardly game-breaking. Isn't it still better to scrap damaged destroyers and build new? The repair module takes up the same tonnage as 4 weapons.

See prior post and amend with:



"Passive repair values need to change, right now they favor smaller ships, which are already heavily favored by other mechanics."

datupuki wrote:
Sorry to say there is no DD fleet you can dream up that can even damage a well made DN fleet. DN fleets rule from mid to end game.

100% destroyer fleet with +tonnage module, neutrino pulsion, and the rest on gluon disruptors, will punch through any conceivable defence. There is simply no way to survive this fleet. What you do about it is kill it with something cheaper :P

Velaux wrote:
I should add that it's imperative that the game has a glass cannon configuration that will always win, otherwise it would be possible to create two unkillable fleets and break the game

This is only true because of the specific way defense works right now. For example, if there were no cards and the only two modules in existence were a weapon module that did 100 damage per round, and an armor module that gave 1000 HP, then the optimal configuration would be close to half of each. Here glass cannons would lose badly, but there are no unkillable fleets.



Somebody had a "leaky defense" idea, which would give more leeway to making defenses more powerful without running into the danger of unkillable fleets.