The main strategic problem I have with a defense (as opposed to hitpoint) model for building survivable ships is the rock-paper-scissors aspect of defenses. In my experience playing against the AI using defenses I either am frequently refitting (which consumes a fleet's movement points for the turn and thus degrades its strategic mobility considerably), or end up in high-casualty battles anyway when my fleets face AI fleets that are using different weapons than I've defended much against, or are mixed-composition on the fleet level.



The strategic principle behind the destroyer swarm is to embrace that casualties are inevitable, and focus on making the casualties cheap while limiting them via overkill tanking. I noticed in the other thread there was mention that you could counter destroyer swarms with swarms of even cheaper (less heavily armed) destroyers. That's basically the idea here - using the cheapest ship that gets results. Destroyer swarms have a strategic advantage in mobility from stacking fleetwide movement bonuses that no other ships can match, as well, making me feel that they'll be a vital part of strategy in multiplayer due to their ability to appear more unexpectedly than any other sort of fleet, and as response forces for protecting your own rear. It remains to be seen if they're the only sort of fleet that will work, but I think they play very well to the hissho and craver bonuses in particular.



I'm not saying that other strategies don't work, or won't work, or can't work. But I think the destroyer strategy has a lot of advantages that accrue off the battlefield and keep it attractive under a very wide variety of conditions even if it's only making 'even trades' with other ship designs - it's often doing those even trades more conveniently or with a lower tech investment.



Specific to the math I'm seeing in that thread, I really don't know how to check it or comment, since I have no way of telling what the targeting algorithms are for ships and feel that the scenarios being presented are making a lot of assumptions that move them relatively far afield from actual battles. I do think that properly-defended battleships will come close against destroyers in practice. I'm not sure if they will win or not in terms of the production destroyed, but they'll certainly do better than ships who have balanced defenses and the like. I'd expect the destroyer response to that strategy to be to mix weapons, either on the fleet scale, or by mixing weapons on individual ships.

You 2 should duke it out with your preferred strategies and we'll see who wins out.

Actually, you (or anybody who is interested) should go help out here:

/#/endless-space/forum/27-general/thread/8181-multiplayer-team-study-group

hostergaard wrote:








This forum needs a spoiler tag.

I had the same basic idea inspired by the wizardry series of RPGs, that is, having your fleet in ranks so that front row guys are better with kinetics, mid row are with beams, and back row with missiles (and eventually strikecraft).



Also, I like the idea of defenses being effective vs all attacks, but in different ways, and the "rock paper scissors" idea be scrapped (I have no idea why this game design persists, who thinks rock paper scissors is a well designed game?). Instead, I'd say that missiles should be the weapon of choice in uneven matches (both in offense and defense, as these types of battles don't make it out of the long range), kinetics should be the weapon of choice in even matches (since these battles should make it to short range), and beams should be a mix of effectiveness in both. Shields should give a bonus HP, which replenishes every round (limiting effectiveness vs missiles, which don't hit every round), Deflectors a miss chance or shots absorbed for kinetics and beams, and point defenses/flak vs fighters and missiles. Also, battles needs to make it to short range more often, and in fact, I'd prefer it if battles lasted multiple turns if the fleets were close enough in power. This means more staying power.

EDIT: Destroyer swarms may not live up to their hype. Check out the following post, where I demonstrate at both high and low tech levels that glass cannon destroyers can be beaten efficiently by larger ships. There are also lots of efficient destroyer builds in there, since they will remain part of a large range of options for fleet composition.