These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Changes to combat and fleet mechanism
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sam Davaham
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2012-06-30 19:08:02 UTC
I wanted to send it as a word document. Instead I will just post several post in one thread.

On Combat – Improving PvE, PvP and Fleets in EVE Online
1. General: EVE Online is a Massive Multiplayer Online Game that presents the player with a vast, open ended, sandbox universe. A big part of the game revolves around combat between live players (Player Vs. Player – PvP) and combat between live players and computer generated players (Players Vs. Environment - PvE). This paper will try to frame current problems with combat in the game and suggest solutions.
2. Framing the Problem: Combat is a very big part of EVE Online. However, while the fitting of ships to battle and the training of characters can be very intricate and complicated, combat itself is very much an automated, hands-off, experience where the players involvement centers around turning weapon systems on and off, and determining the range and type of movement of his ship. While small PvP battles can be somewhat tactical, the problem intensifies when big fleets are involved - when individuals are reduced to "cogs" in what is being termed as a "blob" fleet, and usually, the bigger blob wins the day, almost regardless of the individual player's actions. Player's involvement is also being minimized in PvE battles where bigger ships (Battleships and above) are being used. This creates a situation where combat becomes repetitive and un-challenging, while in big fleets, individual fitting of ships matter little. Ultimately, it hurts the enjoyment of the game.
3. Solution: This paper will argue that the solution to the above mentioned problem is composed of three different areas: Combat mechanics, Ship fitting and prices and Fleet command mechanics.
a. Combat Mechanics: Currently, combat in EVE Online is very "automated" experience. A player can influence the activation of his ship's systems, the speed of his ship (to a degree) and its vector of movement (orbit or straight line) and range from the enemy. Also, combat is being influence by the speed of the ship, its range and the strength of its shield, armor and haul. There is little relevance to the direction of the ship in relation to the enemy and to its state, beside the basic factor of remaining hit points (HP).
• Directional Combat: To add a tactical volume to combat, it should include the aspect of position in relation to the enemy. The shield, armor and haul should be divided into several areas (usually in other games, it is divided into 4-6 equal parts) and damage done should influence the sector of impact. Once haul is being breached in a certain area it should either go out of action, or the entire ship should be destroyed. Shield power and repair efforts should be able to be diverted to damaged sections to aid in the resistance to damage. Furthermore, every ship should have firing arches that would give meaning to its position in relation to the enemy – thus, ships with gun ports in the front only would be used in a different way than ships with rotating gun ports or with gun ports on the side only. Directional guns can further differentiate between ship types (e.g. small ships with limited firing arches and big ships with several fire arches) and gun types (e.g. multi directional missiles vs. single directional guns). These two changes will cause the position of the ship on the battlefield to be an important, and might even a decisive, factor and greatly improve the experience of combat. A further development of the theme will be to divide the ship to multiple sectors and calculate damage, degradation and repair efforts on every one of them. However, this might cause over complications of combat. Implementing directional combat will also require the ability to determine more accurately the position of the ship in space (and to a point, its speed), either via keyboard or by better designing the manual direction system then the one that currently exists in EVE Online. One might add that directional combat mechanics exists in computer games for years now (if you could recall Wind Commander and X-wing series, the MechWarrior series and later on in Star-fleet Fleet commander and Star trek Online – to name but a few).
• Repair and Damage: As mentioned above, during combat, damage is dealt to the vessel as a whole. If Directional combat would be implemented, damage should be done to specific areas in the ship. Farther more, once shield are down, a certain amount of damage can penetrate the armor and damage individual modules in that area (and hence, directional fitting will also have significance). This will increase further the significance of the ship's position in relation to the enemy and will further require tactical thinking as the ship takes damage. If visual indications will be given for damage (i.e. impact on shields will be visible and so will damage to armor and haul in specific areas), it will allow the parties to further calculate their actions in battle. Repairing the damage can also be done in a more specific way where efforts are focused on specific damaged sections and systems.
Sam Davaham
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2012-06-30 19:08:27 UTC
b. Ship Fitting and Cost: Currently, while EVE Online has a wide variety of ships and fitting options (and indeed, this aspect is the most developed in the game), there are several problems that should be addressed to better facilitate the experience of combat.
• Ship Types: Currently, ships, especially Tier 1 (T1) ships, are not specialized enough. T1 frigates are underpowered and can do little in PvP or PvE combat against bigger opponents, T1 destroyers and cruisers are unfit to conduct independent PvP, while T1 Battle cruisers and Battleships are very general purpose combat ships. To solve these problems, all ships should be specialized according to roles and size i.e: Frigates should be the only ships that can use warp scramblers and warp disruptors and be able to be used as navy jet fighters in modern fleets – thus increasing their value to fleets as the tackler and swarming component. Destroyers should receive "Anti-Submarine Warfare" capabilities by allowing them to detect cloaked ships. Cruisers should be toughened up to become them main ships of the line, while battleships and battle cruisers should become heavy drone and gun platforms and carriers should be purely fighter platforms and require armed escorts etc. This specialization already exists in EVE Online to a degree but mostly with frigates and T2 and above ships.
• Ship Costs: Currently ship costs influence greatly the combination of fleets. While all ship up to T1 Cruisers are cheap, all ships above T1 Battle cruiser and all T2 and T3 ships are highly expensive and underinsured. This creates a situation where, since Battle cruisers are the lowest ship viable in most PvP scenarios, fleets are composed almost entirely of a single model of battle cruiser or battleship, and smaller fleets are rare due to the risk of losing such expansive assets. Actions should be taken to lower prices of T2 ships, while improving the potency of T1 frigates, destroyers and cruisers. This will diversify the fleets and lower the bar to PvP combat in the game. Simultaneously, Battleships and above should be made more expensive to make them true capital ships in fleets and cause so no more than several ships will participate and every fleet and will become a major, strategic target in it (similar to carriers and titans today).
• Modules: EVE Online features an extensive array of equipment to outfit a ship with. Currently, there are too many different T1 modules that have very little difference from one another, while the real difference appears only in the T2 and above versions, which are usually the ones used for PvP combat. These T2 and above modules are considerably expansive, which adds to the risk aversion of players and increases the size of fleets. Hence, all the T1 versions of a module should be consolidated into one module, while T2 module prices should be adjusted downward and T3 and up should keep their current prices to avoid flooding the market (faction etc). Also, fitting of a ship should take consideration of the location of the module on the vessel, for damage and effects purposes in directional combat.
• Modules Diversity: Currently players are dissuaded from fitting several different types of weapon systems on their ships, which causes the creation of template fits and reduce the variety of fittings. By Enabling ships to use more effective countermeasures (anti-ship missiles, point defenses etc.), players will have to diversify their ships fitting, which will add another tactical layer into combat.
• Crews: Every ship has crews, but their skill levels, quality and experience has no bearing on gameplay. Crews can be made to become a "universal module". Every ship should have a different crew compliment (X officers, Y sailors) for its optimal employment. In case of combat crew can take casualties and in case of ship destruction, life boats will follow the player's pod, allowing to save (or capture) some of the crew. Crews can be trained to specific tasks and ships and increase effectiveness of modules (like implants). Crew training will be conducted in corporation academies, which will be located in important bases or POSs, which will increase the strategic importance of systems. Trained crews sold with ships would increase their price, however, unlike rigs or implants, crews should be able to be transferred between ships and will not be ship specific – i.e., a player will have X amount of sailors, and Y amount of officers and every ship would require its own amount (as opposed to "frigate's officers" or "destroyer's officers").
Sam Davaham
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2012-06-30 19:08:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Sam Davaham
c. Fleet Command Mechanics: Currently, fleet control mechanics encourage the use of blob fleets due to the fleet commander's ability to control massive amount of ships, while not being able to give them specific orders, beyond the general nature of fleet's broadcasts. The fleet command mechanics should be improved in the following manner.
• Span of Control: The ability of trained fleet commanders to ultimately control hundreds of ships, regardless of their type and size, causes the creation of blob fleets as a "sheer force" method to achieve victory. To eliminate blob fleets, the span of control should be drastically reduced and be ship type specific – i.e. a fleet commander will be able to control up to X frigates, Y destroyers, Z cruisers etc., while most fleet commanders won't be able to accommodate more than several big ships (battle cruisers and above). This will cause the creation of several fleets for big operations, under the command of several commanders, which will grant more flexibility – i.e. the ability to simultaneously operate in different places in a system or in different systems, while denying the ability to operate huge blob fleets.
• Tactical Direction of Squadrons and Fleet Members: As mentioned above, currently, the ability of fleet commanders to issue orders is limited to voice commands and fleet broadcasts, both methods are very general. Fleet commanders need the ability to issue orders via a "tactical map" that will allow them to direct squadrons and individual ships to specific locations in space, allowing for tactical maneuvers like flanking and enveloping of enemy formation and assets. Also, fleet commanders should be encouraged to issue orders to their squadron commanders rather than the entire fleet as a whole, allowing squadron commanders a more active role in fleets. An example for an effective control system in an MMO can be seen in the game Battlefield 2142.
• Situational awareness: Currently, situational awareness of players in EVE Online is limited to the sensor strength of individual ships and intelligence given over communication channels, without an ability to mark enemies in game for the entire fleet. Players should be able to mark enemy ships for their allies in fleet, an identification that should appear on the fleet commander's and fleet members' tactical map.
• Nukes: In real wars, the ability to create huge, concentrated, ground formation was virtually eliminated with the invention of tactical nuclear weapons. Such weapons caused the concentration of large forces a tempting, lucrative target for the employment of such a weapon. An equivalent weapon in EVE Online can be design so to have more power the more ships it impacts at once (like a chain lightning in several games). Thus the impact of such a weapon on a huge blob fleet will be destructive, while the impact on smaller fleets might not be worth the price of the bomb (which should be considerable). To avoid the over use of such weapons, it can have adverse environmental effects such as gravimetric disorders, electro-magnetic distortion, the creation of wormholes etc. The fear of such weapons could be increased by allowing their employment only from an equivalent of a nuclear submarine – i.e. a stealth destroyers or cruisers, only detectable to anti-submarine warfare ships.
4. Summary: The combat in EVE is lacking in tactical sophistication and depth, which undermines the attractiveness of the game to gamers looking for challenging, tactical, PvP and PvE combat. The solutions mentioned above might be useful in addressing the matter.
5. With regards,
Shmuel
(a.k.a Sam Davaham or Gaius Makenen)
Eternal Error
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-06-30 20:16:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternal Error
Without writing an essay of my own, no. Most of your suggestions are either bad or bad and have been previously tried (e.g. nukes vs. AOE DD). I mean come on, consolidating all t1 weapons of each type? Also, you can mark up the opposing fleet. I'm pretty sure directionally based combat would require a total rework of parts of the game engine.