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 #101 Top
In a huge galaxy the AI is pumping out a lot of ships with high attack value and a has a few large ships with a large defense.

Under 1.2, I now have to build large ships to have weapons capable of penetrating the shields of their large ships and shielded enough to withstand the return fire of the mass of their little ships with high attack values firing back at me.
Reply #102 Top
Anyone else noticing that the AI puts massive defenses on their ships now and few weapons? That's when set to Intelligent. I'm continuing to do the same thing I did before simultaneous firing - 1 defense per medium hull, 2 per large, 3-4 per huge, plus massive firepower. Just enough so that the game doesn't confuse escort with flagship. And, well, the AI is being slaughtered by me for very little in return.

One good example of this from a brutal game the other day. The Drengin built a battleship with one blackhole missile launcher and FIFTEEN ultimate invulnerability fields. I can't imagine why they did that. It was a brand new ship and I'd switched from doom rays to blackhole missiles 30-40 turns earlier, before the most recent UP meeting, so they'd had plenty of time to upgrade their designs. I was the only civ in the entire game that had ever used a beam weapon and I'd long since stopped.

In a previous game, the Altarians had battleships with 3 or 4 graviton drivers and 10 deflectors - probably all they had room for. My psionic beams cut through it like a torch through butter.

It seems to me that the AI is seriously overcompensating for losses due to simultaneous firing, to the point that they are seriously limiting their firepower. Just think of all the weapons they could have had without all those deflectors.
Reply #103 Top
I'm finding that the AI is placing one of two high defense medium atk strength large hulled ships with a herd of small ships around it in a fleet. It is not a bad strategy as the smaller ships fire enough times that they were destroying my medium defense ships initially. I had a battle where I could not penetrate one of the AI's ships and it eventually chewed up my fleet.

I had to compensate with a mixed fleet of superior huge and large hulled ships with defenses of my own and a mass of small hulled high attack escorts.

All in all, if I did not already have the momentum of a higher production base from previously conquered empires, I could not sustain the attrition to counteract it.

The AI in this 1.2 game has been by far the most competitive I have seen. The only reason I have been able to defeat them is my initiative in attacking and in my production base.

Does anyone else notice that the Ai seems to be producing new designs more often? In my current 10 turn offensive I swwea rI have seen continuously upgradeed designs.

Reply #104 Top
Yep, I got that lesson about number of ships also.

I had a fleet with Missile-20, they had Missile-16, and we were under my military starbase's attack and defense bonuses. So I engaged without further thought, and watched them murder my two new frigates.

What I hadn't noticed until combat was they had four small hulls vs my two medium hulls. The list in the middle of the battle window was dominated by enemy fire. I felt like I wasn't getting a word in edgewise!

I killed one of theirs, and then they killed one of mine. They lost 1/4 of their firepower, but I lost half of mine. Didn't take them long to finish the other one off.
Reply #105 Top
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.


I concur.
Reply #106 Top
I've got to agree with the initial argument. Making ships with a billion attack is easier, cheaper and overall more efficient than making ships with a billion absorbtion.
Reply #107 Top
Not one for the mathematics of things, but I am just wondering if any of these simulations included any starbase bonuses?

I for one end up fighting nearly all of my battles in military starbase spheres of influence. With mixed ships and the bonus from fully upgraded military bases my ships becoming near invicible. There defneces protect from all but the most powerful enemy ships, and even with minimal weaponary, the boasts the Starbase provide give my ships more than enough capability to destroy the attacker, especially seens as they boost attack in all three weapon fields.

I must admit, I've never played an all attack game to be honest. The thought of making purely attacking ships just doesn't sit well with me personally. I like the balanced approach more. Plus theres just something satisfying about seeing ships with the abilitiy to throw back everything being thrown at them and then turn round and decimate the opposition. I've have fleets of 3 ships, destroy entire enemy fleets while barely recieving a scratch. That right there just pushes all the right buttons for me.
Reply #108 Top
Yet more anacdotal (and therefore maybe wrong!) observations from 1.2 combat:

1. Logistics got a lot more important. If every ship gets an attack then the number of ships is more important. The balance has swung from huge hulls having a big advantage to them probably still having a slight advantage.

2. Keeping ships alive so that they get to extreme HP's is harder. This means that that defence heavy ships that cost so much more are more likely to get killed. Therefore they are harder to justify. Ouch - I didn't expect that.

3. I concur that the best solution looks to now be mixed fleets of expendable, cheap, attack only fighters guarding expensive larger ships which have SOME defence. Desparately trying to keep the larger, expensive ships alive and removing them from the front when they get damaged until they build up reasonable hit points. The arguement will continue as to what level that defence should be... and I'm sure that will depend on circumstances.
Reply #109 Top
1. Logistics got a lot more important. If every ship gets an attack then the number of ships is more important.


Doesn't compute to me. If every ship gets an attack then there's less advantage in numbers. In 1.1, if you had a large hull versus four small hulls that attacked individually three would die. But if they attacked together none would die. Now if they attack together at least one will die. So logistics helps less.
Reply #110 Top
I think you've missed the point of why I am observing logistics as important.

Imagine 1 large attacking 4 small ships.

For the large to win it has to survive all the attacks from the more numerous fleet:
Assume 1 large fires and kills every round remaining ships fire back.
... so it used to have to withstand 3+2+1 = 6 attacks from the small ships
... now it is 4+3+2+1 = 10 attacks from small ships.

If you can get your logistics up to support another ship then that is going to add 5 more attacks that the large ship has to withstand to win the battle.

Like I said this is from observation so if you see huge ships being more potent then say so... to me it looks to have swung the other way.
Reply #111 Top
By observation best fleet seems now to be a combination of (1) several large or huge hulled ships with a big enough attack to penetrate the best enemy ship on average with max optimized defense and (2) a mass of fire support screening ships that are either (2a) A small hull with best weapon x 1 and some defense or (2b) a small or tiny hull ship best weapon no defense and very cheap.

With 2a some small hull ships may survive, especially if you have tech edge.

With 2b you assume none survice the exchange they are like vulnerable PT boats or manned expendable kamikaze missiles