Escort & Capital ship type?

Distant Worlds is a vast, pausable real-time, 4X space strategy game which models a "living galaxy" with incredible options for replayability and customizability. Experience the full depth and detail of large turn-based strategy games, but with the simplicity and ease of real-time, and on the scale of a massively-multiplayer online game. Now greatly enhanced with the new Universe release, which includes all four previous releases as well as the new Universe expansion!

Moderators: elliotg, Icemania

Post Reply
User avatar
kirk23
Posts: 3033
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:19 pm
Location: Fife Scotland
Contact:

Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by kirk23 »

The game uses the term Capital ship as a specific ship type,this is incorrect,a Capital ship in history,usually applies too Battleships,Battlecruisers and Carriers,and yet Carriers are listed in game as an individual buildable ship type in its own right.I think the term Capital ship should be changed to Battleship.

Also the term escort,is not really a ship type,but a mission or job given to a ship to perform? Any off the following ship types, could be called an escort : Sloop,Corvette,Frigate,Destroyer even a Cruiser, can be an escort,in fact even Capital & Carriers could be classified as Escorts?[;)]


In game warship types.

Sloop or Corvette.
Frigate.
Destroyer.
Cruiser.
Battlecruiser.
Battleship.
Carrier.
Make it so!
feygan
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:41 am

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by feygan »

The issue i that DW uses these type names for no real reason as such. Changing them to suit as you suggest will no doubt have some players saying the types now no longer fit with how they use them.

Generally I do tend to have the types for certain tasks, however I also sometimes have different versions of types. So two destroyer ships could be set for different roles and I will add something to the design name to reflect this. In DW you need to try to get out of your head that the game set types mean anything at all, when you have the full tech tree there is nothing to stop you making a 1500 size escort and a 200 size capital is you desire.

Generally in DW ship types are abitrary and mean nothing.
Aeson
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:36 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Aeson »

Any off the following ship types, could be called an escort : Sloop,Corvette,Frigate,Destroyer even a Cruiser, can be an escort.
Any ship type other than perhaps transports and tankers can be considered escorts. Battleships and battlecruisers were assigned as convoy escorts and escorts for carriers, and carriers were assigned as escorts for convoys and battle fleets.

The roles exist to give the player some idea of how the computer will use the vessels if they're automated - capital ships will be the lead ships of big fleets, cruisers are the primary fighting vessels of big fleets and lead ships for smaller fleets, destroyers are fighting vessels in smaller fleets and the main component of raiding forces, frigates are primarily used for system patrol and defense, escorts are used to patrol minor facilities and escort civilian vessels such as freighters and colony ships. The roles are also a convenient way for the player to create multiple ship classes, as multiple classes within the same role can be annoying the way Distant Worlds handles things, and if automation is not set, the name of the ship role need not have anything to do with the purpose for which you build your ships. I can have size 300 capital ships assigned to patrol outlying systems while my size 1200 destroyers form the backbone of my battle fleet, if I want, and changing the name of the role to 'battleship' or 'battlecruiser' will not change that.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Shark7 »

What I'd rather see is player defined roles.

I design a ship, designate it FFL (Corvette) because I want it to escort freighters.

However, I might design a similar ship that I want to patrol its home system only and call it PG (Gunboat).

Something similar can be done with big ships. A battleship (BB) is for fighting battles in enemy territory, but a monitor (MON) stays home to defend the home system, etc.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
feygan
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:41 am

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by feygan »

That is a much better way of doing things and a lot closer to how Aurora works. I think that perhaps ship type names should be scrapped totally, you could have a drop down menu filled with various type names (that you could add to) for the class name section. Then have have a drop down picture selection for personal choice only.

After that have a role selection instead of type selection, this could then be drawing from a data file that defines how ship roles work, how far away from home they will travel on their own, what sort of ships they try to escort and what level of threat they respond to or ignore.
User avatar
kirk23
Posts: 3033
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:19 pm
Location: Fife Scotland
Contact:

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by kirk23 »

Thanks for all the replies guys! The thing is, I'm old school naval,and I'm busy modding the ship types in game to the way I intend to use them,so Battleships will be the main heavy units in any battlefleet,while Escorts/Corvettes will always be small in size,weak in offence, but fast and agile.[;)]
Make it so!
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Thanks for all the replies guys! The thing is, I'm old school naval,and I'm busy modding the ship types in game to the way I intend to use them,so Battleships will be the main heavy units in any battlefleet,while Escorts/Corvettes will always be small in size,weak in offence, but fast and agile.[;)]

Exactly how I do it. Big ships do big ship things, small ships fly the flag in low threat areas.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
CyclopsSlayer
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by CyclopsSlayer »

I agree 100%. DW does a terrible job of fleet/escort mechanics in any automated roles.
Assign a unit to patrol Planet XX, it engages in one combat and parks in mid space as the patrolled planet orbits away. Later an enemy appears and the 'Patrol' now has reaction time, travel time and fuel expenditures to deal with. Meanwhile the 'Patrolled' Planet gets raided, bombarded and invaded while its escort is still half a system away.
User avatar
kirk23
Posts: 3033
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:19 pm
Location: Fife Scotland
Contact:

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by kirk23 »

I think the maximum size off ships is something like 2000 give or take race bonuses.Maybe an option to stop having escorts & Frigates being built to size 1500 late on in the game,might be to have ship types,have a Minimum-maximum size limit per type/role?

Examples.

Minimum size early game.

Maximum size late game.

Escorts = Minimum size 100 - Maximum size 200

Frigates = Minimum size 200 - Maximum size 400

Destroyers = Minimum size 400 - Maximum size 700

Cruisers = Minimum size 700 - Maximum size 1100

Capital / Carriers = Minimum size 1100 - Maximum size 2000


Another option maybe instead of trying to follow naval tradition for ship type names,ie : Frigate,Destroyer,Cruiser etc,maybe its time the game just designed and built ships,according to the mission or job they are being asked to perform : Escort,Patrol,Blockade,Bombard etc?[;)]
Make it so!
User avatar
CyclopsSlayer
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by CyclopsSlayer »

I have NO Proof that the Stealth Techs do anything, yet I have always envisioned an entire fleet of sized 800 ships sneaking around the map.

As to the above; Carriers have the +50% size bonus, so by the above a Carrier would cap at 3000?

As to Naval Doctrine, we could always impose rules that limit the number in class to something like... For every 3 Escorts you can build 1 Frigate. For every 3 Frigates, 1 Destroyer... For every 4 Cruisers you can build 1 Capital/Carrier.

OR...

Fleet total tonnage (with size limits as you list above.)
40% - ES/FF
30% - DD
20% - CA
10% - BB/CV

Nothing in the game currently prevents, and in fact it promotes, that every ship be as large as possible. You can either worry about escorting your backfield freighters from Pirates, OR you can just eliminate all pirate facilities and run your ships uncontested. The latter is my preference.
User avatar
Skyjack
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:14 am

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Skyjack »

ORIGINAL: CyclopsSlayer

I have NO Proof that the Stealth Techs do anything, yet I have always envisioned an entire fleet of sized 800 ships sneaking around the map.

As to the above; Carriers have the +50% size bonus, so by the above a Carrier would cap at 3000?

As to Naval Doctrine, we could always impose rules that limit the number in class to something like... For every 3 Escorts you can build 1 Frigate. For every 3 Frigates, 1 Destroyer... For every 4 Cruisers you can build 1 Capital/Carrier.

OR...

Fleet total tonnage (with size limits as you list above.)
40% - ES/FF
30% - DD
20% - CA
10% - BB/CV

Nothing in the game currently prevents, and in fact it promotes, that every ship be as large as possible. You can either worry about escorting your backfield freighters from Pirates, OR you can just eliminate all pirate facilities and run your ships uncontested. The latter is my preference.

This is what I do. I hunt and kill all pirate facilities. No escorts needed. I also use all large as possible ships with different designs.

My fleets are simply: carriers, capitals(backbone with long range AND point blank weapons) and cruisers the SAME size as capitals for close in only fighting.
User avatar
CyclopsSlayer
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by CyclopsSlayer »

ORIGINAL: Skyjack


This is what I do. I hunt and kill all pirate facilities. No escorts needed. I also use all large as possible ships with different designs.

My fleets are simply: carriers, capitals(backbone with long range AND point blank weapons) and cruisers the SAME size as capitals for close in only fighting.

Precisely. My endgame Fleets are Carriers, Capitals w/guns and Cruisers configured for planetary bombardment, all max sized.
Troop Transports tend towards max speed and mobility, but smaller sized, all defense, no offenses, typically 5 Troop Bays. I would rather risk a fleet of 20 transports scattering independently, than a single target with 100 bays all in one.
Aeson
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:36 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Aeson »

As to Naval Doctrine, we could always impose rules that limit the number in class to something like... For every 3 Escorts you can build 1 Frigate. For every 3 Frigates, 1 Destroyer... For every 4 Cruisers you can build 1 Capital/Carrier.
This kind of balance is rather arbitrary and silly. 160 ships before I can build my first capital ship or carrier? No thanks. Especially not when 108 of them are escorts and a further 36 are frigates. Going into World War Two, the Royal Navy had 22 battleships, battlecruisers, and carriers (combined total), 66 cruisers, 184 destroyers, 45 escort and patrol craft, and 60 submarines, according to Wikipedia. The US Navy at present has 10 carriers, 22 cruisers, 62 destroyers, 10 frigates, and 76 "escorts" if you class submarines and littoral combat vessels as "escorts," again according to Wikipedia. By your rules, the Royal Navy should have had about 3542 ships going in to the Second World War and the modern US Navy should have about 1610 ships, over two thirds of which are "escorts" - types that are easy enough to build rapidly when you need them - and if you include frigates, nearly nine tenths of the fleet is composed of types which are barely used during peacetime.

What you really should be doing, if you find yourself lacking a reason to build small ships, is finding a reason to make them rather than imposing arbitrary and ridiculous limitations on fleet composition - why do I need to build 108 escorts, 36 frigates, 12 destroyers, and 4 cruisers before my shipyards magically become capable of building a capital ship? Why do my shipyards suddenly lose the ability to build a capital ship once I build that one ship, at least until my fleet's size reaches 216 escorts, 72 frigatse, 24 destroyers, and 8 cruisers? Instead, make it so that having an adequate number of escorts patrolling the trade lanes gives a 10% bonus on trade income and tourism due to increased feeling of security felt by the civilians who know that there's always an escort within a reasonable distance able to render assistance in case of accident or attack, which increases their willingness to engage in shipping and tourism. Give all colonies in a star system a happiness bonus when they have their own dedicated defensive squadron. Maybe countermeasures work better on smaller ships (of course, given that it's not all that clear how countermeasures work currently, it's not clear that this isn't the case already), or maybe smaller ships are relatively more difficult to detect at long range (e.g. something like Long Range Scanner detection range = basic detection range multiplied by [0.7 + 0.3*(ship size)/1500] or some such thing). Now you have a reason to build little ships, because you have a reason to have large numbers of ships and it's cheaper to have lots of little ships than lots of big ships. It's true that this is still arbitrary and a bit silly, but it's far less arbitrary and silly than the "my shipyards forgot how to build capital ships and can only rediscover this arcane technique after I build 160 assorted other vessels." You can keep your battle fleets of big warships, but now there's a reason why you'd have little ships to go with them, even if they don't accompany them into battle.

That being said, I don't feel that there's a significant problem with the current system. It's entirely realistic for several little ships to be at best a poor match for a single larger ship in a straight fight. I feel that the larger issue is more that the game's economy allows you to support an all big ship navy while providing adequate coverage for your empire.
User avatar
CyclopsSlayer
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by CyclopsSlayer »

Whether realistic or artificial it was just a rough suggestion on a way to make the lesser class vessels significant. Currently there is no special significance to Escorts at all. I may well never build a single Frigate, Destroyer, Cruiser or Capital ship, and instead just build streams of max sized Escorts.

What is the difference between a 1000sz Escort, a 1000sz Cruiser and a 1000sz Capital? Not a single thing beyond the name.

The game itself provides ZERO reason to build any particular class. Only Carriers have any special rules. Rather than the meaningless Escort/Destroyer/Capital classes, they should be more appropriately listed as Warship Type 1, Type 2 ... Type 5.

As to the Economic Issues, true, there should be some tax, cost, any reason at all to build smaller ships. As it stands, even with punitive economic game settings it just takes longer to have those millions of surplus credits laying around.
At game start the only reason to build all the freighters is the tech size limiter. Once the tech allows the costs of a Small Freighter versus a Large are so insignificant I will redesign the Smalls to be clones of the Large design.
Aeson
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:36 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Aeson »

The game itself provides ZERO reason to build any particular class. Only Carriers have any special rules. Rather than the meaningless Escort/Destroyer/Capital classes, they should be more appropriately listed as Warship Type 1, Type 2 ... Type 5.
The names of the roles have meaning. That meaning is found in how the computer uses the ships. If you choose not to automate any of your navy, then sure, the names are arbitrary. If you let the computer control the ships of your fleet, though, you'll typically find that ships of a given role are more frequently used for one task than ships of a different role. Escorts tend to patrol outlying mining bases and escort the odd civilian ship. Frigates tend to patrol colonized systems. Capital ships tend to be the centerpieces of large fleets.

If you insist on controlling everything manually, then yes, you will not see any reason for the roles to be named as they are. That, however, is your fault, not the game's.
User avatar
CyclopsSlayer
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by CyclopsSlayer »

ORIGINAL: Aeson
The game itself provides ZERO reason to build any particular class. Only Carriers have any special rules. Rather than the meaningless Escort/Destroyer/Capital classes, they should be more appropriately listed as Warship Type 1, Type 2 ... Type 5.
The names of the roles have meaning. That meaning is found in how the computer uses the ships. If you choose not to automate any of your navy, then sure, the names are arbitrary. If you let the computer control the ships of your fleet, though, you'll typically find that ships of a given role are more frequently used for one task than ships of a different role. Escorts tend to patrol outlying mining bases and escort the odd civilian ship. Frigates tend to patrol colonized systems. Capital ships tend to be the centerpieces of large fleets.

If you insist on controlling everything manually, then yes, you will not see any reason for the roles to be named as they are. That, however, is your fault, not the game's.
Interesting, I have never seen the behavior you describe. might have just missed it.
Leaving the ships on automated I frequently saw Carriers assigned to escort freighters. Any ship on Auto was always available for any automated task. Fleet formations, Escort duty, System Patrols, Attack on Pirates/Monsters. etc...

I gave up on any flavor of ship automation due to the endless frustrations it causes:
- Fleets arriving at an attack target only to depart immediately for refueling. Just to run dry half way back and deadhead. Nothing will force them to resume attacks.
- Issue a Fleet 'Patrol Planet XX' orders. Any fight, refuel, flee, and the fleet forgets all existing orders and stops dead in space on 'No Mission'.
- Leave Fleet automation ON, and fleets form including unbuilt but queued ships. If the game assigns the fleet an order while some ships are unfinished, the incomplete ships can get stuck and never move or accept any orders correctly.
Bingeling
Posts: 5186
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:42 am

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by Bingeling »

ORIGINAL: CyclopsSlayer
Leaving the ships on automated I frequently saw Carriers assigned to escort freighters. Any ship on Auto was always available for any automated task. Fleet formations, Escort duty, System Patrols, Attack on Pirates/Monsters. etc...
The AI should prefer to use higher class ships for more valuable tasks. So prefer an escort to guard a small freighter, and a cruiser to guard an important gas mine.

Does it work that way? No clue. For it to work you need a decent selection of ships of different sizes, maybe in proportions similar to what the AI would build.
catweasel
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:27 pm

RE: Escort & Capital ship type?

Post by catweasel »

The AI should prefer to use higher class ships for more valuable tasks. So prefer an escort to guard a small freighter, and a cruiser to guard an important gas mine.

Does it work that way? No clue. For it to work you need a decent selection of ships of different sizes, maybe in proportions similar to what the AI would build.

What I have observed, it does not work that way. I'm playing full manual for state military ships out of the same reason as CyclopsSlayer reported.

Anyway, in theory it would be great as you describe, thinking of a typical sci-fi universe. But then again in the game a typical escort ship will be too weak to defend their assigned freighters from anything more than some small space monster. Same for the important gas mine: A single cruiser will not hold-off a typical pirate attack in mid or late-game.

Thus I started to arm my mining stations and usually work with several smaller, but fast and well armed 3-4 ship guard fleets to defend systems in a half-automated way (stance set to defend home and nearby systems), so usually a base can survive just long enough for the cavalry to arrive ;)
Post Reply

Return to “Distant Worlds 1 Series”