Battles in space for the future - Page 4

Gelgoog · 2012-05-25, 12:07 PM

I think the only way you could make space work without depopulating the land combat is to make the two interconnected. Create one large space station. When captured they allow the controlling faction to launch drop pods over the entire planet effectively making the other factions very vulnerable to instant raids at any base. This will be enough of a threat that the other factions will want to keep control of the space station. The trick is, that keeping control of the space station will be difficult, and the more soldiers you send down to the planet in drop pods reduces your ability to defend the space station (as well as defending your own land bases). So controlling the space station can be a tactical advantage as well as a disadvantage.

As for space combat, you could have space fighters, and large galaxy type transports used for boarding the station. The space station could also be bristling with turrets to defend against fighters and transports.

kaffis · 2012-05-25, 12:55 PM

I've got Shattered Horizon to pew-pew with awesome physics in SPAAAAAAACE.

I'm okay with Planetside focusing on what it's good at: combined arms on a massive scale.

Stardouser · 2012-05-25, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

I've got Shattered Horizon to pew-pew with awesome physics in SPAAAAAAACE.

I'm okay with Planetside focusing on what it's good at: combined arms on a massive scale.

Combined arms is ok as long as we don't combine it with space arms?

Does shattered horizon have any infantry? Never heard of it.

VelRa · 2012-05-25, 01:12 PM

Obviously this kind of thing would be amazing to behold. But it would have to do something which CCP is not with Dust 514. One thing that would be nice is character transferability, like Gelgoog said. In Dust and Eve the two games are independent but joined on the level of metadata. With Planetside it could be the ability to take your character to space and back down again.

Stations would work much like bases, with several capturable stations orbiting the planet each with their own advantages and resource bonuses. I would love to see starship battles done with Forgelight, something which Eve's technology cannot begin to approach. Frigates and cruisers escorting a transport ship onto an enemy base platform, etc.

Holy crap this is getting far out there. I can't see this kind of thing being implemented annny time soon...

As to benefits of holding stations, I don't really think continent-wide hotdrops are the smartest idea. The benefit, I suppose, would be similar to the benefits of holding any regular base, namely resources.

kaffis · 2012-05-25, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Combined arms is ok as long as we don't combine it with space arms?

Does shattered horizon have any infantry? Never heard of it.

Shattered Horizon is an infantry-only, multiplayer-only game from Futuremark. It's been out for a couple years, now. It's pretty unique.

That said, combined arms is okay so long as the combined part of the combined arms makes sense. I see people talking about capital ships and bombers and whatnot, and have a difficult time figuring out how you make infantry make sense in that context. As such, I'd prefer to just leave it out.

And what I wouldn't want is the Planetside infantry/vehicle/aircav formula IN SPAAAAACE with just zero-G applied. That's a recipe for lameness.

Stardouser · 2012-05-25, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

Shattered Horizon is an infantry-only, multiplayer-only game from Futuremark. It's been out for a couple years, now. It's pretty unique.

That said, combined arms is okay so long as the combined part of the combined arms makes sense. I see people talking about capital ships and bombers and whatnot, and have a difficult time figuring out how you make infantry make sense in that context. As such, I'd prefer to just leave it out.

And what I wouldn't want is the Planetside infantry/vehicle/aircav formula IN SPAAAAACE with just zero-G applied. That's a recipe for lameness.

Well, in space, obviously the formula would be different. First of all, infantry would physically be unable to go anywhere without riding in an assault ship. And fighter aircraft would be of EXTREME value compared to on the ground, those are two huge changes right there.

Infantry doesn't have to make the same sense that it does on the ground and YET, infantry can be just as required in space as on the ground. Space stations would not be destructible, they'd be permanent assets, and to take them, you MUST use infantry in breeching pods.

Now, if people are going to be upset that they can't just walk out the airlock and jog to the space stations, well, that's just not how it would work but that's no reason not to have this kind of this, especially when there would still be ground battles working the same.

And naturally, unless the devs have some trick up their sleeve, I am talking about something beyond the life cycle of PS2, ie, PS3.

Originally Posted by VelRa

Obviously this kind of thing would be amazing to behold. But it would have to do something which CCP is not with Dust 514. One thing that would be nice is character transferability, like Gelgoog said. In Dust and Eve the two games are independent but joined on the level of metadata. With Planetside it could be the ability to take your character to space and back down again.

Stations would work much like bases, with several capturable stations orbiting the planet each with their own advantages and resource bonuses. I would love to see starship battles done with Forgelight, something which Eve's technology cannot begin to approach. Frigates and cruisers escorting a transport ship onto an enemy base platform, etc.

Holy crap this is getting far out there. I can't see this kind of thing being implemented annny time soon...

As to benefits of holding stations, I don't really think continent-wide hotdrops are the smartest idea. The benefit, I suppose, would be similar to the benefits of holding any regular base, namely resources.

You mean it would have to distinguish itself from Dust 514? That shouldn't be impossible but even if it were, Dust 514 is console only.

I think the ultimate way to do this, even if it's 10 years down the road with 2022 GPU/CPU and internet 2, is to have all the continents of Auraxis be on the planet, and you can literally fly from continent to continent, and not only that, up and out of the atmosphere, and all the way around the planet.

Or, alternative, SOME of the continents on one planet, and others on other planets, and you can fly between them through the use of jump gates/trade acceleration lanes.

Turdicus · 2012-05-25, 01:28 PM

Hey guys, long time PS lover and forum user, first post.

Naval and space expansions sound fantastic. Actually I'm not worried about the possibility of those in the future, but I am worried about depopulation. It wouldn't do any good to pull players away from continents, so some interesting solutions will have to be thought up.

They could make it so that each continent and space area runs on a cycle, like if there are 3 continents and a space zone only 3 of those can be accessible at any one time. So 2 continents are active, and a space zone, then one continent is locked for whatever reason. Excuses can be made, but by doing this there wont be any nasty depopulation. This kind of thing can be scaled and is very dynamic, and can be used for every expansion to come.

Just a thought

Stardouser · 2012-05-25, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by Turdicus

Hey guys, long time PS lover and forum user, first post.

Naval and space expansions sound fantastic. Actually I'm not worried about the possibility of those in the future, but I am worried about depopulation. It wouldn't do any good to pull players away from continents, so some interesting solutions will have to be thought up.

They could make it so that each continent and space area runs on a cycle, like if there are 3 continents and a space zone only 3 of those can be accessible at any one time. So 2 continents are active, and a space zone, then one continent is locked for whatever reason. Excuses can be made, but by doing this there wont be any nasty depopulation. This kind of thing can be scaled and is very dynamic, and can be used for every expansion to come.

Just a thought

I would really like to see the devs talk about depopulation. I think it's a non-issue.

Look at it this way:
If we have 5 infantry continents with 2000 players each and we have exactly 10000 regular players(I'm making this easy for discussion's sake). And then you add space, that could hold say, 2000 players. Bear in mind that if you're going to be able to fly from the ground to space, it would be ridiculous if you could not also fly between continents. Therefore, we're talking about ONE server that can hold 10000 players. So, if you add space, and it can hold 2000 players, that's a total of 12,000. Now, obviously, 2000 more regular players are not going to magically appear(or maybe they will, because a lot of people might be interested in space that are not interested in ground combat). So, at least initially, people will shift to play space and they will come from the 10000. So, where you had 10000 for 5 continents before, you've got 8000 for 5 continents now. Not a huge loss, and especially not a huge loss if you consider that Planetside 1 only had what, 450 per continent? Even with 1/5 of the population going to space you'd still have far more than that per continent.

Also, people would be invading space from the continents and in turn, people would be invading the continents from space, too. It all works out into a very dynamic war.

Stardouser · 2012-05-25, 01:45 PM

double post.

proxykalevra · 2012-05-25, 02:32 PM

i had a thought during the space to navel expansion conversion of this thread...

maybe the first expansion should be deep sea landmasses each vehicle would still be viable they would just handle differently.. i.e. soldiers running around, weps and lights ranges limited by water. aircraft might be replaced with subs with varying ability to move i.e. some can jump to get around a little but nothing else (tanks?) others are quick and can go just about anywhere(aircraft)

mostly i think this would work because it would be a stepping stone to the vastly different environment of space(astronauts train under water for space) so you can have everyone be forced to move a little slower and be able to jump a good bit higher.

SurgeonX · 2012-05-25, 03:12 PM

I've been yearning for space combat ever since I first loaded up PS.
For me, it's a natrual evolution.

This is from my PS survey, the one they sent out years ago.
The Star Wars reference is a bit lame maybe, but is useful for context...

A combination of space combat and planetside combat, with shared objectives between the two.
So imagine if you could take the last battle from Return of the Jedi, where a war was being waged on Endor and in space above it, and there are shared objectives between the two. So the battle planetside involves disabling the shield generators to allow the Rebels to attack the Death Star. And only when the generators are down can they proceed with the attack. If you could translate the cool factor and scale of that kind of experience to PS, I could die a happy man.

Space and ground combat would definitely have to be connected IMO, otherwise you've just got two completely separate games vaguely stitched together.

Sirisian · 2012-05-25, 03:12 PM

I've mentioned this before (probably in another thread), but these kind of ideas are as badly thought out as the navy combat or outfit housing ideas. Basically you want to pull people into an area where most vehicles aren't useful (except air?) fragmenting the balance of vehicle combat. The whole idea of space combat with battle stations really reserves the fighting for infantry unless they are massive stations with indoor areas for tanks and other vehicles.

Also how would players attack a battle station? Would they fly to it? From where? Would their galaxies spawn in space when they choose to go there are or are there unconquerable space stations like on the ground?

I really don't like the idea of separating combat from the main world. Really any addition to the game should just add onto the continents. People have suggested for instance cutting into the ground to build cave networks with caverns and capture points with their own unique feel. I suggested massive floating islands with bridge networks above the continents. These kind of things give the continent a truly 3D feeling by bringing altitude to them while still allowing all the vehicle types to flourish and allow the introduction of new vehicles. Adding a separate space area I think will do the same thing the battle islands and the cave systems did. That is people will be like "why would I play in that area if I can just play in the huge main continents?". I think the developer's goal of 50% infantry and 50% vehicle combat is better carried out by focusing on upgrading the continent gameplay and adding new continents.

That and space combat is notoriously bad. The limited amount of obstacles and the openness of space (even with random asteroids) makes for very poor gameplay.

Stardouser · 2012-05-25, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

I've mentioned this before (probably in another thread), but these kind of ideas are as badly thought out as the navy combat or outfit housing ideas. Basically you want to pull people into an area where most vehicles aren't useful (except air?) fragmenting the balance of vehicle combat. The whole idea of space combat with battle stations really reserves the fighting for infantry unless they are massive stations with indoor areas for tanks and other vehicles.

Space isn't land. The balance of combat would be different, obviously.

Things will be different, if some people don't like it, there will still be fighting on the land for them.

I get the feeling you're actually talking about why tanks and other ground vehicles won't be usable in space combat, please tell me that's not what you're worried about? Because obviously they won't be usable in space.

And there's nothing wrong with 99% air to air(starfighter to starfighter) combat. Inside space stations it would be 99% infantry only, as well. Higby himself said, variety is good.

And remember, what I'm talking about might be 10 years in the future...so I'm assuming that you will also be able to fly directly from ground to space and back. I'm quite sure that ways can be devised to make this all work.

Gandhi · 2012-05-25, 03:23 PM

Imagine this x1000

Someone needs to make an MMO space combat sim that isn't point&click.

Sirisian · 2012-05-25, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I get the feeling you're actually talking about why tanks and other ground vehicles won't be usable in space combat, please tell me that's not what you're worried about? Because obviously they won't be usable in space.

And there's nothing wrong with 99% air to air(starfighter to starfighter) combat. Inside space stations it would be 99% infantry only, as well. Higby himself said, variety is good.

Yeah this doesn't really sound like Planetside at all. Variety involves ground, air, and infantry fighting alongside one another. Space combat can't capture that.

Also I hope you're not trying to also introduce new vehicles that are only useful in that map type. It's as asinine as creating navy vehicles because one of the maps has some water. That is you're introducing developer resources for niche concepts.