(For the Future) What Will FPS War Look Like?

[Kylby36]

Now obviously we don't know anything at all about how the FPS module will be developed, or how warzones/combat in general will play out. Thought it would be a bit interesting to see other CMDRs perspectives on what they would like to see. Space legs can't be too far away after all. We're getting multi-crew this season. Would be crazy not to expect it in season 3 at least.

For the CMDRs out there who really enjoy being a realist and saying "That'll never happen because this and this..." We already know. This is just a fun discussion thread Chill.


My vision of what would be an amazing warzone on the ground....

Ships carrying troops swooping down to deliver their cargo (Tanks, supplies, etc etc..) Troops being deployed/extracted... Being able to participate in that traffic by getting transport missions or credit vouchers for being a mercenary transport possibly. Would be pretty satisfying flying into a hot LZ dropping troops off.

Large scale warfare. Now this is obviously not possible with the way the servers are set up. They can't handle a huge amount of AI which I understand. But I can dream right? Would be amazing seeing fighter ships swooping down, doing gun runs on enemy armored vehicles, being able to do that yourselves... All the while infantry are shooting back and forth at each other, explosions everywhere.. Mmm... Of course this would only happen in systems that are at war with the governing faction. (Civil war)

Bases that have defense systems that must be bypassed to get to the next level of defense and whatnot.



Ability to have special forces missions. (Wing or AI) Go into a building that is heavily guarded by the Empire's finest... You must be stealthy and extract a scientist that they have captured to do tests for them. That sort of thing.




So idk, what do you guys think? I wanna hear your thoughts.


REMINDER: This is not a thread about whether or not you think there should/should not be any warzones on foot. It is about you giving us your image of a warzone on the ground in general.

 

[anikaiful]

Uh... that's one mega-scope of things right there. People make fully fledged games from even a fraction of those ideas ...

 

[Kylby36]

Uh... that's one mega-scope of things right there. People make fully fledged games from even a fraction of those ideas ...

I said in my post that this is a fun discussion. I even edited it to say realists need to chill. Second line. Look at it. This is just for fun, not giving suggestions to FD.

But either way. Isn't a 1:1 scale of the galaxy a mega-scope by itself? And if people actually made a fully fledged game with a fraction of those ideas... I'd be playing them, not ED.

I don't think transport missions would be considered "mega-scope" anyway. Neither would dropping off tanks/supplies. We can already drop SRVs from our ships.

 

[anikaiful]

I said in my post that this is a fun discussion. I even edited it to say realists need to chill. Second line. Look at it. This is just for fun, not giving suggestions to FD.

But either way. Isn't a 1:1 scale of the galaxy a mega-scope by itself? And if people actually made a fully fledged game with a fraction of those ideas... I'd be playing them, not ED.

I don't think transport missions would be considered "mega-scope" anyway. Neither would dropping off tanks/supplies. We can already drop SRVs from our ships.

Heh, large scale war brought immediately PlanetSide into mind. Storming into bases sneaky-style sprang Tom Clancy's series ...

 

[Kylby36]

Heh, large scale war brought immediately PlanetSide into mind. Storming into bases sneaky-style sprang Tom Clancy's series ...

I suppose lemme rephrase that.... The games that do do that, are crap And Tom Clancy is a completely different genre... Unfortunately Planetside 2 didn't implement vehicles correctly, or implemented things that completely make them irrelevant, so transport vehicles like I mentioned is quite pointless.

However, you're completely missing the point of this thread. I asked others what their visions of FPS combat would be. You, like in all other threads I see you post in, decide to discredit the OP in any way you can unless you are the OP, which is exactly what I asked people not to do since this is a discussion about what people would like to see, but what obviously may never be. -_- You high ranked forum members are smart as hell but tend to be quite oblivious to the overall points of threads. Please stay on topic.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

If it's just for fun ...

... then I expect a smell-o-vision gedget will appear in the store to augment the experience : That person over there looks greasy ... go ahead - sniff n see

 

[anikaiful]

I suppose lemme rephrase that.... The games that do do that, are crap And Tom Clancy is a completely different genre... Unfortunately Planetside 2 didn't implement vehicles correctly, or implemented things that completely make them irrelevant, so transport vehicles like I mentioned is quite pointless.

I never said anything about success/failure, just noted use of ideas.

 

[Kylby36]

I never said anything about success/failure, just noted use of ideas.

Edited my previous reply to better explain to you what this thread is about...

If it's just for fun ...

... then I expect a smell-o-vision gedget will appear in the store to augment the experience : That person over there looks greasy ... go ahead - sniff n see

There we go. That's what I'm talkin about.

 

[Becks]

Planetside 2 is a pretty good example for that
But I think that would be not really the point of Elite Dangerous.

You're a pilot, not a footsoldier, so they're going to use situations where it's possible for a Pilot to get into a firefight.

I would like to have supply run and air raid missions to be implemented at some point. Would be even more fun to fly this in a planetside battlefield setting.

But fighting as a footsoldier on one? That's not the point of Elite

 

[Kylby36]

Planetside 2 is a pretty good example for that
But I think that would be not really the point of Elite Dangerous.

You're a pilot, not a footsoldier, so they're going to use situations where it's possible for a Pilot to get into a firefight.

I would like to have supply run and air raid missions to be implemented at some point. Would be even more fun to fly this in a planetside battlefield setting.

But fighting as a footsoldier on one? That's not the point of Elite

I respectfully disagree. The original Elite series was about being a pilot. FD want it to be an all-around space sim this time around. If it was all about being a pilot, they wouldn't have added SRVs or the future ability to even hold a weapon in your hand.

While I agree that you are in a ship when traveling to planets/systems... FD are giving us the choice to be whatever we want.

Regardless, it won't harm the gameplay if they add it. If you don't want to be a foot soldier, you don't have to be. That's the beauty of it.



Again, I strongly urge people to stick to what the thread says. I must remind you that this isn't a discussion thread about whether or not you think war on foot should/should not be a thing. It's about you imagining what ground warzones in general will be like.

 

[Red Anders]

It will look like you with a gun standing on a planet in one of the 100 billion systems completely alone, shooting rocks. Perhaps the game will allow you to shoot yourself in the foot.

 

[anikaiful]

Personally, having hard time imagining ground warzones (except for very high-G worlds and/or urban warfare) - on open field it's pretty much: a wing of PA "bombers" level the field--war over.

Maybe I'm just a notch too much a realist in that sense, I just don't see ground warfare viable/sane option except where you can't fly spacecraft efficiently.

 

[The_Quasar]

Bring back the Energy Bomb! That'd make short work of ground based warfare!

 

[Skizomeuh]

If I had to transpose ED's ship combat to the ground, I'd love it to be more like Tribes than any other FPS. Period.

 

[Thetele]

I would say that ground combat is really rare in elite universe. Bombing planet and all ground forces from orbit would be much easier and cost effective than trying to land. Killing couple billion civilian in progress wouldn't even be seen in statics. The faction that controls space around planet will always win because they can trike where ever they want and those on planet can't hide or run. Defensive structures would be expensive to build and less effective than building fleet, you would need to build defensive systems around hole planet when fleet can take fight to enemy or intercept/follow enemy. So major factions would only use ground forces to secure locations after all planetary defensive forces have been destroyed from orbit or after conflict is over (planet have surrendered). Like UN troops secure areas today. Tanks, inf etc. are too slow to be useful in war situation.

Fights between small minor factions would probably happen on ground to capture settlements and star ports. Tanks would still be useless because ships are faster, more fire power and have more use. Ships would be the weapon used to take down defensive structures and anything hostile outside and then ground troops (infantry) would go inside and clear it. If they fail ships could just destroy the structure.

I think that in universes like in elite, star trek and star wars ground combat would be unrealistic and make no sense.

 

[Cmdr Cheese Wedge]

Nice idea, but I think full out ground warfare in the Elite Universe would be suicidal and ultimately pointless, we're getting HUGE hardpoints in 2.1 could you imagine what a fully kitted out corvette could do, a few well placed shots. game over.
Planetside 2 did pop into my head when you brought up the topic OP and I thoroughly enjoyed it when it first came out. so a rep to you.

 

[tawittle]

I would get into my corvette and deploy a federal dropship. Then I would land in a hostile warzone with the dropship and drop off 2 assault and 2 light mechs. After my mechs run out, I eject and set up sniping position.

 

[Becks]

Again, I strongly urge people to stick to what the thread says. I must remind you that this isn't a discussion thread about whether or not you think war on foot should/should not be a thing. It's about you imagining what ground warzones in general will be like.

Personally, having hard time imagining ground warzones (except for very high-G worlds and/or urban warfare) - on open field it's pretty much: a wing of PA "bombers" level the field--war over.

Maybe I'm just a notch too much a realist in that sense, I just don't see ground warfare viable/sane option except where you can't fly spacecraft efficiently.

Bring back the Energy Bomb! That'd make short work of ground based warfare!

Well, a bit of the stuff I wrote in the Lore and RP forum plays in such a ground war zone.

Like anikaiful and The_Quasar already said air superiority and orbital superiority would be a big deal. On the other side you can expect infantry and armoured vehicles to carry potent anti air weaponry, when they operate without air support. Bigger ground wars would either take place on Earthlike Worlds or in/around cities. There's simply no use in battling somewhere on the open uncovered plains of an airless, barren world. The damage done to infrastructure and environment by orbital and aerial bombardement so it depends on the goals of the bombing faction. If they want to conquer a world, too much orbital bombardement would only destroy the stuff they want to use after the war.

We already know that it's possible to shield larger areas (just take a look at the planetside cities), so most cities would probably have their own shields to protect them from bombarding.
I'm uncertain if tanks should can their own shields. Even a Sidewinder can have shields but a Sidewinder (15 meters long, 21 meters wide, 5 meters high) is pretty big compared to a todays main battle tank (Leopard 2 is 11 metres long, 4 metres wide and 3 meters high) and the bigger the tank, the bigger the sh*tmagnet.

Ground wars or at least parts of the military were already mentioned in GalNet (for example Imperial Infantry was mentioned several times during the stuff with Emperor Duval).

Maybe it's worth to summon Drew and ask him if there's anything in the lore about ground wars.

 

[Tenshi]

First off this idea has been spoken of by the devs in Kickstarter but on a much smaller scale. Such as instead of huge warzones on planets which would be difficult to populate due to the way the game works. I can see it working though by using the players as crack commando teams to take down capitol ship systems or to aid in Civil Wars by taking and holding locations at outposts and space stations, or to rescue political prisoners from penal colonies/ prisons. These missions would be far to difficult to do solo but in a team it would be possible, so this would add more team gameplay to the game.

For that to happen though there would need to be in place something akin to guild tools and mechanics to allow players to communicate easier in game and manage themselves which I know has also been spoken about by the devs during Kickstarter.

Really not sure how much of these pre-alpha notes survived and we will see though, as I am still waiting to hear about player owned outposts that can be destroyed and the dark systems that have no stars but allows players to jump further due to special rules.

 

[Thetele]

Well, a bit of the stuff I wrote in the Lore and RP forum plays in such a ground war zone.

Like anikaiful and The_Quasar already said air superiority and orbital superiority would be a big deal. On the other side you can expect infantry and armoured vehicles to carry potent anti air weaponry, when they operate without air support. Bigger ground wars would either take place on Earthlike Worlds or in/around cities. There's simply no use in battling somewhere on the open uncovered plains of an airless, barren world. The damage done to infrastructure and environment by orbital and aerial bombardement so it depends on the goals of the bombing faction. If they want to conquer a world, too much orbital bombardement would only destroy the stuff they want to use after the war.

We already know that it's possible to shield larger areas (just take a look at the planetside cities), so most cities would probably have their own shields to protect them from bombarding.
I'm uncertain if tanks should can their own shields. Even a Sidewinder can have shields but a Sidewinder (15 meters long, 21 meters wide, 5 meters high) is pretty big compared to a todays main battle tank (Leopard 2 is 11 metres long, 4 metres wide and 3 meters high) and the bigger the tank, the bigger the sh*tmagnet.

Ground wars or at least parts of the military were already mentioned in GalNet (for example Imperial Infantry was mentioned several times during the stuff with Emperor Duval).

Maybe it's worth to summon Drew and ask him if there's anything in the lore about ground wars.

I have to say that i disagree. Bombing hole cities and killing billions of people on one earth like planet wouldn't matter for empire, alliance or federation. They have Thousands of systems worth of income, so they can rebuild anything they need easily. Also population is so high in elite universe that killing 10 billion people while clearing planet would have same effect on elite universe than USAs airstrikes against ISIS have on hole population of earth.

It would make more sense to just bombard from orbit until all resistance on planet is dead or they surrender and then secure area with ground troops like UN secure conflict areas after fighting has stopped. For major factions property, structures or population on one planet doesn't matter at all because those can be replaced easily and relatively on low cost.

Between minor factions ground combat could be possible but would only limit on controlling some key places. Ships would still be the key factor because ships can move fast have huge weaponry and can help in controlling space and protecting space station.