Facelessclock Facelessclock

Are defenses simply to expensive?

Are defenses simply to expensive?

The 'Exploring effects of simultaneous combat' thread by Velben seems to suggest that while there may be some form of shift in the next version of the combat system, ships with heavy defenses still are not as capable as ships with heavy weapons. It even seems that in some cases, the ship with better weapons is flat out better no matter if attacking or defending.

For example, Kanvium, which has an absorption of 4, costs 80mp. By contrast, a Quantum Driver does 4 damage and only costs 37mp.

Or take Ultimate Invulnerabilty, which is a sheild that has an absorption of 9. That costs 140mp. Disruptors III costs 70mp and does 8 damage. And let's not even get started with the Doom Ray. The Disruptor is also slightly smaller.

I've tried repeatedly to make effective defense-based ships, and its always failed. Not because the defenses are ineffective, per say. For most of the game you can put a ton of defenses on a ship, enough to make the ship very nearly invulnerable to a particular damage type. The problem is that those ships are also absurdly expensive. They're simply not worth the cost. Take the Sheilds vs. Beams example above...Disruptors vs. Sheilds, the weapon is half the cost of the defense. Let's say the hull is small (55mp) and has three Hyperdrives (10mp) for a total of 85mp without weapons. A ship with 5 Disruptors costs 435. The ship with five Ultimate Invulnerability sheilds will cost 785. And it can't shoot. Hah!

Every defense line has its cost increase dramatically as they evolve. This is not the case with the weapons systems, which see costs rise far less. Using the beams vs. sheilds example again, Beams, from Particle Beam to Disruptors III, increase in cost 280 percent, fromt 25mp to 70mp. Sheilds increase 466%, from 30mp to 140mp. Again, I'm not using Doom Ray because trying to use ANY defense against it is just about impossible.

It just isn't fesible to build ships with heavy defenses because they cost far to much. Ships with heavy defenses won't be built no matter the system as long as this is true. At its heart, a 4x game is about it's numbers. And these numbers show that weapons easily beat even the defenses that are suppoesd to stop them, in an economic sense.


I'm also very surprised by their cost becaues of this - trying to counter is, in the long run, is always going to be ineffective. Why? Because a defense only defends well against a certain attack. The other two work. That means if any random empire attacks you, there is a 2 in 3 chance that your defenses won't work. However, there is only a 1 in 3 chance that your weapon type won't work. Supposedly this is negated somewhat because if you're smart, you'll be building defenses for those empire you plan to war or which think are going to attack you. Empires don't randomly declare war. Still, it seems odd.

I think that defenses need a cost overall. What do you think?



42,560 views 111 replies
Reply #76 Top
Hi!
it's September 2229

That's ~240 turns! How did you managed to survive with only 3 planets? Humans and Iconians never were a challenge in my games, but Torians? Were they the farthest away? In my games when they went to war, they literarily flooded the universe with troop transports. To stop them I always needed big military, or lots of fast interceptors. In any case those ships of mine were chased to death by their big fleets, whose they just kept pumping out with insane speed. Well... OK, I'm mixing that experience with the one from Drengin.

Hummm... would you try a reversed challenge: all evils (Drengin mandatory in) + you good? Not that I challenge you, because I wouldn't play. I don't like playing unwinnable games.

BR, Iztok

Reply #77 Top
There were three sectors of empty space between me and any AI, which is what let me survive as long as I did. First strike with small attack ships... I lost that game in 2231 or so when I tried to hold on to some resource starbases, became overextended, and suffered enough casaulties that I couldn't rebuild a full fleet before the 14-speed Torian ships came in and took out my core econ starbases. Because I only had 3 planets and no trade routes, I couldn't afford to support much more than one full fleet. It wasn't a pretty death. I think I could have held on for another five years if I never made a play for any other planets or resources.
Reply #78 Top
Do you reckon it would have helped if you switched towards high population once you became fully developed? swap a factory and whatever to farm and morale, with aphrodisiac... more money would have meant more fleets.

I'm only on my second suicidal game. No resolution to the first as I had a hung game on end turn, it happens very rarely, so i'm not worried. Probably worth sending the debug err to stardock, though. Anyway I'm doing okay, but I'm nowhere near to being able to doing what you are, but i am experimenting with high pop on some worlds. Even at low tax rate you can generate really high returns.
Reply #79 Top
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the wiki states that all defenses, when attacked by the weapons they aren't made to defend against (say, shields attacked by missiles), use the square root of the defense total to act as a defence (rounded).

So 1 point of shields means 1 point of all three defenses. Yay!

2 or 3 points of shield only mean 1 point of missile and mass driver. Not so much yay.

But 4 points of shields means 2 points each of drivers and missiles! Yay!
Reply #80 Top
Nice one Rygar, thats very very interesting.
Reply #81 Top
I have noticed that the AI concentrates on one weapon tree to the highest level possible and almost ignores defences.

That seems to be a good tactic.
Reply #82 Top
Something hardly anyone ever mentions when talking about defenses Vs weaponry, is how easy it is to get maxed out defenses. In the time it takes you to research Aeron missile defenses, the enemy is only up to Photon torpedos, most likely.
Reply #83 Top
Hi!
how easy it is to get maxed out defenses. In the time it takes you to research Aeron missile defenses, the enemy is only up to Photon torpedos, most likely

Erm, not in games with AI on masochistic and above. There YOU have Photon torpedos, and they Aeron PD

BR, Iztok
Reply #84 Top
Yeah, I forget the exact numbers, but it takes something like 60000-80000 research points to max a weapon branch (beam is much less than the other two), but only around 15000-20000 to max a defense branch.
Reply #85 Top
In the games with tech-trading I find that there are certainly niche uses for ships with defenses, though I still generally favor heavy offense.

But in no tech-trading games I never have defenses on my ships for a simple expedient reason. Research points are a cherished commodity on Mas, Obscene and Suicidal. I can focus on a single offensive tree and create ships which are effective against ANY race on the map. Optimal? No. But effective. By focusing on just one tree I can have ships with mediocre offense. If I researched defense as well I would end up with horrible offense and horrible defense and I, for one, do not welcome my new Drengin overlords.
Reply #86 Top
How many are using the 1.2 beta now? No more first strike/no response kills. Now the attacked ship gets at least one shot off, so defenses are now as important as weapons.

Reply #87 Top
It does seem to be suicidal to not use some defenses in 1.2. I was losing ships at a catastrophic rate in a "tough" game against the Altarians. I upgraded the engines on a frigate design, had room left over and put on a shield module. The new frigate did better and it wasn't much more expensive.

When the Altarians started sending in battleship/frigate fleets with no defenses at all, I slaughtered them every time. When they started using missile defense against my harpoons and psionic missiles, it was mutually assured destruction.

One thing is definite: the new system makes it worth using orbital fleet managers and Omega defense, assuming you have room on the planet for it. You get a firepower boost from being in orbit and Omega defense doubles your hit points on that planet. I did better letting them attack my planets than I did launching and trying to drive them off. It was rough on the first ship to be shot at, but the rest of them would blow the Altarians away.

What seemed to work best was to attack using swarms of fighters with heavy weapons and light defenses and use medium hulls for planet defense with orbital managers. It was hell on the fighters but they were cheaper to make and there were a lot more of them per fleet.
Reply #88 Top
Erm, not in games with AI on masochistic and above. There YOU have Photon torpedos, and they Aeron PD


Fraid I have to disagree with you there iztok. The AI concentrate far more on weapons than defence, It seems that maxing out the weapon branch is far more important than defences to the AI. This is for masochistic and suicidal.

That seems to be a good tactic.

Not sure its a good tactic though, revered elder . The AI does use defences on their ships, but these tend to be the early defence techs which take up a lot of space, and are mediocre in their defensive value. the AI would have been better served if they waited until at least halfway up the defensive branch and then used the defenses.

1.2 beta? No, I'm going to hold out until 1.2.
Reply #89 Top
Hi!
The AI concentrate far more on weapons than defence, It seems that maxing out the weapon branch is far more important than defences to the AI. This is for masochistic and suicidal.

Yeah, I know. All AIs prefer offensive techs to defensive. My point was they got huge tech lead in maso+ games.

However given proper stimulation AI gets pretty high on defenses too. In my current 1.11 maso game (still the same, lasts for three weeks now ) with no tech trade and slowest tech, Drengin are very stong tech-vise. It's turn 215 and they just got disruptors, besides having kanvium III, and using it a lot on their ships (15-25 armor on their fregates, AND 20-30 beam attack, and 46 logistic, and ~80% miniaturization ) . Their main opponents Arceans (leading AI) have mass drivers as a main weapon (as do Altarians as drengins' second neighbour), but no beam defenses, just some armor. Me (being in a war with their buddies Korx) bribing Drengin each 3-5 turns, just to prevent Korx to bribe them to go to war with me. They did that twice, I lost in both times most resource starbases close to Drengin, the military-boosting one being the worst loss. OFC I reloaded.

BR, Iztok
Reply #90 Top
My point was they got huge tech lead in maso+ games.


Agreed, in that case. In my present game, I'm the only one maxed out in sheilds, but the drendin are up there with me in pd. no armour though as only the korx went the way of kinetics and they're tiny.

It seems to me that the largest races always seem to go the way of missiles and he other races form a fairly even spread as to what weapon tech to research.
Reply #91 Top

Defences are very expensive. Are they too expensive? Well hey are certainly too expensive to just put them on every ship as a matter of course and I think we can all agree that we can win by ignoring them. The question is, “is this ALWAYS the best strategy?”

Having played with and without defences a lot now (mosty recently in 1.2 - which doesn't seem to have altered the balance as much as predicted). I feel I can impart some of my experience on the subject. It is only based on playing not on mathematical proof.

As with most things in this game it appears to be one of circumstance.

If I am ahead in tech and military production it really doesn’t matter what I do, I am going to win easily.

If I’m ahead in tech but behind in production then defences are worth it. I need to make my limited mp spin out as far as I can. Although with defences being so expensive it means I’ll have ludicrously low number of ships. If my defence tech is ahead of the opponent’s weapon tech I can keep a defence rating at 4/5 of their highest attack and still have quite a bit of space on even my smaller ships to put towards weapons. (Defences are in general a little smaller). I can group them together to get enough fire-power and I can steamroller through wave after wave of opponents using very little mps. If I try to make more powerful offences then their mp advantage can just ware me down too quickly to keep afloat. As always there are exceptions. Even if you are ahead in tech as a whole, if you see a Yor opponent with a mass driver 17 on a small ship in the early game (3 nano rippers + weapons bonus) and you can only get to Armor 5 no matter what you do then forget armor. Keep it simple and churn out the cheap option. You’ll have to swarm rather than stand toe to toe even if you lose 4-1. However keep researching the armor. His ships are costing a lot too and you will catch him up with defence if you are getting more RP than he is turn by turn.

If I’m behind in tech but ahead in production it is the opposite, I forget defences. I use those mps to build wave after wave of cheap disposable fighters. Keep on the offensive and try to take planets to claw back the missing techs. (I largely play on suicidal with tech trading off, so this is the only real way to catch up.)

If I’m behind in both tech and mp I’m in for a struggle. However defences are cheaper to research than weapons. In the past when in a big hole I’ve tended to do 2 defence techs and 1 weapon tech (then design a new ship), then repeat. This has bought me enough breathing space to catch up in one or the other. The AI really does struggle to knock you out when it has you on the ropes .

Sorry for the excessive ramble... maybe it has given something to someone.




Reply #92 Top
Well, it should be easy to mod now. So you can just reduce the cost/size and add a load more defensive techs.
Reply #93 Top
Without concurrent combat defence is useless... Forget the cost to build the ship... building ships is easy... making POWERFUL ships takes into account the cost to research advanced technologies and the SIZE items take on a ship.

using sensors, engines, and distance one can always get first strike. best defense items give 10 defense per item while best offense give close to 30 offense per item, and takes less space!... this is consistant at lower levels too. If you go the balanced route your weapons and defense tech is mediocre, if you go only attack route then you have very advanced weapons, twice the level of an opponent who researched defense and weapons equaly (cause they split their research between the two each is at half the level....).

A strong attack fleet is going to have three digits of attack REALLY fast, and four digits at the end game... a massive ship that is all defenses cant survive that even with a perfect roll on defense (each ship rolls attack seperately, so you have an equalizing effect so to speak).

If your defence tech does NOT keep up with your weapons tech (ie, 50% on each so that they are both half of what you could max them at) then you choose between 2 or 3 weapons or 1 defense tech that only blocks a quarter of the damage ONE of those weapons can dish out.

Alot of anectodal evidence was given as to why defence is a good idea. So lets counter argue a few of those...

1. "High level shields saved me when fighting antaran and torians with my smaller slower less armed ships". Rsearching bigger hulls/engines instead of those high level shields (which, being high level cost alot to research) would have allowed you to have samesize or larger ships which are NOT slower and worse armed (more space = more engines and weapons, also better weapons and engines because they were researched). Its a bang for the buck kind of question

2. "My win record when I started playing defensive went up" Aside from the fact that personal playstyle, racial benefits, etc come into play, you just admitted that when you were completely new to the game and not experienced you lost alot, and now that you are an experienced player you win alot... conincidently you now use shields and before didnt... but EVERYONE looses more early on and wins more after some practice.

3. "I doubt anyone who playes pure offense ever reached level 52"... you are wrong, it happens often. I personally had pure offense (0 defense on everything) ships get to three digits levels... either when playing custom level or when playing against the dreadlords... MOST of those ships were actually MEDIUM HULL ships! (those super strong ships would later be replaced by huge ships who do more damage and have more HP despite being level 0, since levels only increase HP and that just doesn't scale as fast as technology makes it scale)
Reply #94 Top
Well, it should be easy to mod now. So you can just reduce the cost/size and add a load more defensive techs


Those kind of mods apply for the AI as well. So it remains 6 of one and half dozen of the other.
The only way to gain an advantage of size or cost is to up your miniturization, logistics, hit points, economy, etc abilities over that of the AI.
Reply #95 Top
The solution to the problem was posted very early in this thread. If you have a ship with 3 weapons and 3 shields roll once per module. You'd have to be pretty unlucky to get 3 bad rolls. Also because defenses are smaller and less powerful you'll be likely to have more of them on your ship. 5 defensive modules means a minimum defence of 5 regardless of how unlucky you are if the attacker could only fit 3 weapons into the same space he'll have a minimum attack value of 3. This would give an advantage, albeit a small one, back to the defender.

If an attacker gets a lucky roll it is crippling to the defensive ship if he rolls 30 for attack and you roll 1 for defence you're screwed. On the other hand he may roll an attack of 1 in which case he'll do no damage regardless of how lucky your defensive roll is.
Reply #96 Top
Defense is just fine the way it is. It is great in some situations, and bad in other cases, which is the way it should be in a strategy game. Defense is useful when there are more ships in your enemy's fleet than there are in your fleet. The important thing to notice is that every weapon shoots once per round of combat, but defense activates every time a ship gets shot. So if your enemy outnumbers you, your defense activates more often than your weapons. With good defense, a single ship can take out entire fleets. Weapons can't do that, just ask the Dreadlords.
Reply #97 Top
Defense is just fine the way it is.


I personally dont like this "3 types of weapons" idea and think that is actually the problem. Defences would be worth it and useful for what they cost if they defended against EVERYTHING. Right now, in the 1.2 beta, its oh the AI is maxed on PD (they always max on one type), time to upgrade my attack fleets to use laser, and then you devastate for about 10 turns until the AI does the same. However you do it immediately and then devastate for another 10 turns.

They should have that defences are good against ALL of those, just that the 3 weapon types have different special abilities or advantages/disadvantages.

Right now you can get by easily, besides on really high difficulties where the AI has more tech, by just using missiles. Since they do more damage/space than any other weapon and the defences against them are the same as against any weapon your always safe maxing out on that.

That is why defences are BROKEN.
Reply #98 Top
Every defense is more expensive than the matching weapon. At the high end, they are double the cost.


And in theory, it should be just the opposite of that. If you have a fleet of five ships, every one gets to use its weapons every combat. Only one gets to use its shields. So shields could cost five times less than weapons and still be balanced.

Now what if you make a big hull full of shields so they count every time? Well, now you have to defend against five attacks and you only get one. So again, defense ought to be cheaper, not more expensive, than weapons.
Reply #99 Top
I just did a little simulation on my homemade excel combat simulator. A 60 HP ship with first strike going up against 3 ships with 20 attack, 5 defense, 24 HP. In this simulation, all defenses are matched to the attacker's attack type for both sides. Based on the idea that defenses are smaller than offensive modules, I assumed that this one ship could have 5 defense or 3 attack, and that it could fit 12 such groups. So it could have at best 36 attack with no defense, or 60 defense with no attack. The results were surprising: With 3 attack, 55 def. they lost every battle out of 1000. With 6/50 it was 2.3%. 9/45: 15.1. 12/40: 35.7. 15/35: 52.0. 18/30: 61.8. 21/25: 67.2. 24/20: 61.7. 27/15: 49. 30/10: 32.5. 33/5: 23.7. 36 attack and no defense: 14.5.


So the all-attack ship did TERRIBLY, but so did the huge defense ships. The right ship for this battle was clearly the more balanced one at 21/25, which won a large majority of the fights. The first strike didn't benefit the huge attack ships enough because that first strike didn't allow it to take out very much of the opponents' forces. If you had just one ship to defend your planet from the incoming fleet, which would you buy to send out and intercept? The choice is clear, it is not the one with the greatest attack. The huge attack strategy is only effective in large fleets which can quickly tear through an opposing fleet and not give it a chance to do damage. But this is not always possible.
Reply #100 Top
I am currently playing a long game (1.211 Beta ) in a huge galaxy with 9 players. Suicidal Level.

Long game with very aggressive AI.

As the game has progressed, the new combat system and new AI effectiveness, has seemed to make defensive armament more of a necessity in a long game.

Fleets of large and huge hulled vessels are now floating around and the AI has starting generating nicely built mixed fleets. I have found that a mixed fleet of a few huge or large hulled vessels with a optimized defense accompanied by a mixture of small or tiny hulled attack heavy fighters as a chaff screen has become my best option.

Defense has kept my ships alive with the new combat system, and in the long game, those wounded ships coming back into battle is a blessing.

Also, as I have captured military resources, I may have a chance to build an near invulnerable fleet that can chew up the attacking enemy fleets. I love zeros although the occasional hit comes through.

It seems that defenses matter more (a) at higher AI diffficulty levels as you ships have to outlast the AI production bonuses (b) at larger map sizes as it is harder to concentrate forces and the time to conquer territory allows the AI to reproduce, and at (c) higher tech levels where weapons are more deadly.

I find that I haev my maxed out production worlds cranking out Huge and large hulled ships and my lessor worlds cranking out screening fast fighters or transports ro constructors.