Preface:
Well, let's move on the topic. Elite's combat is a very complex theme, but I'll try to be short and hide certain statements and thoughts under spoilers to avoid mess.
There are some combat issues some players are complaining about. Shortly:
- Low variety in ship builds
- Mandatory and straightforward engineering
- Small ships have no place in the game
- Heat mechanics insufficiently affects gameplay, stealth builds are not viable
Let me make a short comparison with the game itself, but in the times before SCBs were introduced:
Possible solutions for the bigger part of the problems above:
The Simpler, But More Painful One:
The Complex, But Potentially Satisfying:
Those potential changes are massive, but could be applied in an iterative way during the long time.
I hope that FDev will turn their attention to this post and extract something useful for themselves, or even join the discussion. We need your opinion, FDev!
I'm playing this game almost since it was released. I love this game, it is unique, and has its own personality and atmosphere, corresponding with the original Elite games.
My main target is to help to make this game better, and do anything I can do from a player position to help FDev with it, basing on my overall competitive and simulation games experience, and opinions I got during discussions with all categories of players. Here you can see re-compiled version of suggestions I've proposed in different topics related to combat. I'm not a PvP or PvE inclined player, and I'm equally interested in both game styles, so all my suggestions below are related to the combat itself.
My main target is to help to make this game better, and do anything I can do from a player position to help FDev with it, basing on my overall competitive and simulation games experience, and opinions I got during discussions with all categories of players. Here you can see re-compiled version of suggestions I've proposed in different topics related to combat. I'm not a PvP or PvE inclined player, and I'm equally interested in both game styles, so all my suggestions below are related to the combat itself.
Well, let's move on the topic. Elite's combat is a very complex theme, but I'll try to be short and hide certain statements and thoughts under spoilers to avoid mess.
There are some combat issues some players are complaining about. Shortly:
- Low variety in ship builds
Why to change: to bring some variety in combat ships, reduce gap between combat and other ships
How to change: described below
Current combat ship building is a pretty straightforward:
- Install A-graded combat-related modules
- Install D-graded (most lightweight) combat-unrelated modules
- Install a weapon into every slot
- Install a Shield Boosters/Shield Reinforcements/SCBs/HRPs/MRPs into every free utility/internal slot.
- Engineer it all to maximum performance or health gain.
The variety of the final result is low, primarily it is:
- Weapon loadout - varies very low in PvP
- Prismatic Shield Generator vs Bi-Weawe Shield Generator - shieldless builds are not viable now
- SCBs vs HRPs vs Shield Reinforcements - in which way to stack health.
Mass and power consumption are not an issue, due to the very steep Velocity-Mass curve and PP Overcharged engineering mod.
How to change: described below
Current combat ship building is a pretty straightforward:
- Install A-graded combat-related modules
- Install D-graded (most lightweight) combat-unrelated modules
- Install a weapon into every slot
- Install a Shield Boosters/Shield Reinforcements/SCBs/HRPs/MRPs into every free utility/internal slot.
- Engineer it all to maximum performance or health gain.
The variety of the final result is low, primarily it is:
- Weapon loadout - varies very low in PvP
- Prismatic Shield Generator vs Bi-Weawe Shield Generator - shieldless builds are not viable now
- SCBs vs HRPs vs Shield Reinforcements - in which way to stack health.
Mass and power consumption are not an issue, due to the very steep Velocity-Mass curve and PP Overcharged engineering mod.
Why to change: make engineering optional for combat --> much easier to enter combat and PvP, large grind reduction
How to change: described below
Engineering, objectively, significantly increases an overall module performance; due to this fact it makes a sense to consider engineering as an another progression system. But this progression system at the top of another (A-graded modules installing) brings much less variety than it could be, due to the low drawbacks while engineering a module for a maximum output. There are some exceptions, but the most preferred upgrades are:
Weapons:
- The one with the maximum DPS increase (Overcharged or analogs on bigger part of weapons)
- The one which makes a hard-to-use module usable (Efficient on PA's and beam lasers)
Armor:
- Heavy duty
Shields and Shield Boosters:
- Thermal Resistant shield + few Resistance Augmented boosters and the Heavy Duty the rest
- Reinforced Shield + few Thermal Augmented boosters and the Heavy Duty the rest
Both give pretty equal results
For hybrid-tanking ships
- Bi-Weave (doesn't matter, but with a special effect for fast recharging) + Resistance Augmented stacked boosters
Increased mass and power consumption are not an issue again, due to the very steep Velocity-Mass curve and PP Overcharged engineering mod, as I've said before. And due to the massive benefits from the performance-oriented engineering unengineered ships cannot compete with the engineered, in other equal circumstances.
How to change: described below
Engineering, objectively, significantly increases an overall module performance; due to this fact it makes a sense to consider engineering as an another progression system. But this progression system at the top of another (A-graded modules installing) brings much less variety than it could be, due to the low drawbacks while engineering a module for a maximum output. There are some exceptions, but the most preferred upgrades are:
Weapons:
- The one with the maximum DPS increase (Overcharged or analogs on bigger part of weapons)
- The one which makes a hard-to-use module usable (Efficient on PA's and beam lasers)
Armor:
- Heavy duty
Shields and Shield Boosters:
- Thermal Resistant shield + few Resistance Augmented boosters and the Heavy Duty the rest
- Reinforced Shield + few Thermal Augmented boosters and the Heavy Duty the rest
Both give pretty equal results
For hybrid-tanking ships
- Bi-Weave (doesn't matter, but with a special effect for fast recharging) + Resistance Augmented stacked boosters
Increased mass and power consumption are not an issue again, due to the very steep Velocity-Mass curve and PP Overcharged engineering mod, as I've said before. And due to the massive benefits from the performance-oriented engineering unengineered ships cannot compete with the engineered, in other equal circumstances.
Why to change: medium ships can do everything small ships can do - do maneuvering combat, land on outposts; maneuvering characteristics of small ships are often inferior to the mediums, they are less durable and less functional - no objective reason to fly them
How to change: inter-class balancing based on Rock-Paper-Scissors principle; providing unique gameplay (like missions or abilities) for small ships; Class 4 Enhanced Performance Thrusters as a temporary buff while making other tweaks
Possible (but not only) inter-class balance implementation:
- Small ships cannout be effectively targeted by large and slow weapons or large ships, but are effectively destroyed by mediums;
- Medium ships effectively hunt small ones, but get a lot of damage from large ships
How to change: inter-class balancing based on Rock-Paper-Scissors principle; providing unique gameplay (like missions or abilities) for small ships; Class 4 Enhanced Performance Thrusters as a temporary buff while making other tweaks
Possible (but not only) inter-class balance implementation:
- Small ships cannout be effectively targeted by large and slow weapons or large ships, but are effectively destroyed by mediums;
- Medium ships effectively hunt small ones, but get a lot of damage from large ships
Why to change: to revive a really interesting combat build class; to bring some depth to combat by introduction a heat management;
How to change: remove engineered upgrades which help to target cool/silent running ships; make a Night Vision mode display ships depending on their emissions level; do not display a ship on a radar as an unresolved contact, if an emissions level is lower than a certain threshold; make a new detection mechanics for NPCs with a possibility to not see or lost a cool/silent-running player if he's out of the NPC's viewing range/cone; make a working heat mechanics for NPC's to use heat weapons on them.
Complex question needing separate attention and topic to discuss, but not so prior as some other tweaks now.
How to change: remove engineered upgrades which help to target cool/silent running ships; make a Night Vision mode display ships depending on their emissions level; do not display a ship on a radar as an unresolved contact, if an emissions level is lower than a certain threshold; make a new detection mechanics for NPCs with a possibility to not see or lost a cool/silent-running player if he's out of the NPC's viewing range/cone; make a working heat mechanics for NPC's to use heat weapons on them.
Complex question needing separate attention and topic to discuss, but not so prior as some other tweaks now.
Let me make a short comparison with the game itself, but in the times before SCBs were introduced:
I think we had a nice situation with the attacker-prey balance before SCBs were introduced in game - reasonable time-to-kill and reasonably small combat vs multirole vs trader ship gap, and assault of any ship was a risky for a ganker also. But then SCBs, shield boosters and other health stacking modules has come, and now we have lost the simplicity and aesthetics of the old (and nicely working!) combat system.
Before:
- Medium-length time-to-kill - big enough to have a chance to escape, short enough to outmaneuver and kill an enemy using your own skill on an inferior ship
- Attacker and assault ships had pretty similar strength and firepower --> piracy/ship massacre for salt mining was risky
- Free space to install other equipment --> small or no gap between combat/multi-purpose/trader ships, usability of all kinds of scanners and a possibility to be competitive in combat while pirating or delivering a cargo.
Now:
- Enormous time-to-kill - it's really difficult to kill an armored ship, only possible way to do this with confidence is a ganking with a Containment Missile. Most of 10-30 minutes duels end with the highwake of the "lost" player.
- No risk for an attacker - his ship is invulnerable to another non-combat ships due to the shield boosters/armor/scb stack
- No risk for a target - engineered shield is durable enough to charge FSD and wake away
- Installing anything to internal compartments/utilities without HP-gain makes your ship weaker
Before:
- Medium-length time-to-kill - big enough to have a chance to escape, short enough to outmaneuver and kill an enemy using your own skill on an inferior ship
- Attacker and assault ships had pretty similar strength and firepower --> piracy/ship massacre for salt mining was risky
- Free space to install other equipment --> small or no gap between combat/multi-purpose/trader ships, usability of all kinds of scanners and a possibility to be competitive in combat while pirating or delivering a cargo.
Now:
- Enormous time-to-kill - it's really difficult to kill an armored ship, only possible way to do this with confidence is a ganking with a Containment Missile. Most of 10-30 minutes duels end with the highwake of the "lost" player.
- No risk for an attacker - his ship is invulnerable to another non-combat ships due to the shield boosters/armor/scb stack
- No risk for a target - engineered shield is durable enough to charge FSD and wake away
- Installing anything to internal compartments/utilities without HP-gain makes your ship weaker
Possible solutions for the bigger part of the problems above:
The Simpler, But More Painful One:
Well, instead of making a complex rebalance tweaks for the stacking or engineering stuff we have now, there is a possibility to rollback a combat part of a game to the pre-SCBs time and focus on a nice Crime-and-Punishment to satisfy PvPers and traders/explorers/other non-combat players. This is a simple and potentially working (we've already seen this kind of combat system in-game before) solution, but it wastes the time FDev spent making those modules and players spent on their engineering (and engineering at all).
The Complex, But Potentially Satisfying:
The complex numeric tweaks, trying to make a combat ship building compromise-based.
The idea is to describe ship's combat possibilities in three ways - durability, agility and firepower. If the player wants to build a combat ship, he has to choose between these three or combine them in different ways, but the idea is that no one ship should be outstanding in all three characteristics, and any of this characteristics ship can use as the main combat advantage if properly built.
Sounds more complex than it really is. Some specifics:
1. Let's make mass affect a ship speed, rotation rates and acceleration much more than we have now. Like we have it on small ships with EPT - heavily armored ship will be really slow, getting bigger penalties than -20 m/s to max speed, and turn/accelerate much slower.
2. And vice versa, lightweight ships will have a possibility to evade hits and use their speed and overall agility to outmaneuver armored builds, and effectively use boom-zoom tactics.
With the current game balance, there are no reasons to reduce ship mass now, and armor stacking will always be preferable, except some special non-combat racing builds with EPT.
3. The main limiter in a combat ship building could be a Power Plant energy output, and PP could be the only module which affects the overall ship combat capabilities. PP output may be very limited, and we potentially should to choose between durability, agility and firepower according to our playstyle and ship's basic stats.
4. Other modules, like shields, thrusters, armor, etc. could have a much bigger variety in mass and energy consumption. We have a module grades E-A now, and we can make usable all of them, depending on how much PP energy we allocate for our shields, thrusters, guns, etc; and how much agility we can sacrifice for the ship durability or module output. E-grade install could be meaningful if E grade was the most energy/mass efficient. And vice versa, the most performing A-graded module could be less efficient than others --> efficiency decrease with the module performance progression.
5. Guns could consume much more power, and installing guns to all hardpoints may consume a LOT of energy, so you couldn't install a powerful thrusters or a heavy shield, or probably both.
Installing A-graded thrusters you should to know, that you will probably have no energy for installing a guns to all of your hardpoints, or for a high-grade durable shield. And that should be a normal situation!
6. Engineering may work like a module specializing: exchanging between mass and power consumption, strength and mass, applying special effects for example. The main idea is that engineers doesn't increase overall module output, but precisely tune your module stats to fit your build and playstyle better. SCB engineering could be a current in-game example.
All these changes could make maneuverable builds more maneuverable, slow builds become sluggish, and reduce time-to-kill a lot to make hit-and-run tactics possible to use, and to make a speed and acceleration a true advantage. To make a fight possible to win with a fewer amount of guns, but with a compensation as a significant agility/strength boost.
As the result, we may expect to see small ships doing maneuvering combat, and large ships like a Cutter or an Anaconda being much more of a static target, utilizing their current armor and shield advantages, turrets, and SLFs for defense against small ships. Thanks to CMDR Darrett that formulated this thought.
Example:
Pros:
- Increases a number of viable builds A LOT - agile builds for assault-style gameplay, armored for defensive and more strategic, or mediocre at all - depending on what do you prefer, or how you combine E-A graded modules;
- Doesn't require programming of new mechanics - numeric values rebalance;
- Reduces gap between combat and multi-purpose builds - some builds may have empty slots left, allowing to fill them with cargo racks;
- Engineering is not mandatory to be effective in combat - unengineered ships are just less specialized, and not a garbage at all;
- Much easier to enter combat and PvP;
Cons:
- Requires complete re-definition of all parameters of all modules - massive balancing and testing work;
- May require some netcode improvements for more accurate agile ships displaying via p2p network.
The idea is to describe ship's combat possibilities in three ways - durability, agility and firepower. If the player wants to build a combat ship, he has to choose between these three or combine them in different ways, but the idea is that no one ship should be outstanding in all three characteristics, and any of this characteristics ship can use as the main combat advantage if properly built.
Sounds more complex than it really is. Some specifics:
1. Let's make mass affect a ship speed, rotation rates and acceleration much more than we have now. Like we have it on small ships with EPT - heavily armored ship will be really slow, getting bigger penalties than -20 m/s to max speed, and turn/accelerate much slower.
2. And vice versa, lightweight ships will have a possibility to evade hits and use their speed and overall agility to outmaneuver armored builds, and effectively use boom-zoom tactics.
With the current game balance, there are no reasons to reduce ship mass now, and armor stacking will always be preferable, except some special non-combat racing builds with EPT.
3. The main limiter in a combat ship building could be a Power Plant energy output, and PP could be the only module which affects the overall ship combat capabilities. PP output may be very limited, and we potentially should to choose between durability, agility and firepower according to our playstyle and ship's basic stats.
4. Other modules, like shields, thrusters, armor, etc. could have a much bigger variety in mass and energy consumption. We have a module grades E-A now, and we can make usable all of them, depending on how much PP energy we allocate for our shields, thrusters, guns, etc; and how much agility we can sacrifice for the ship durability or module output. E-grade install could be meaningful if E grade was the most energy/mass efficient. And vice versa, the most performing A-graded module could be less efficient than others --> efficiency decrease with the module performance progression.
5. Guns could consume much more power, and installing guns to all hardpoints may consume a LOT of energy, so you couldn't install a powerful thrusters or a heavy shield, or probably both.
Installing A-graded thrusters you should to know, that you will probably have no energy for installing a guns to all of your hardpoints, or for a high-grade durable shield. And that should be a normal situation!
6. Engineering may work like a module specializing: exchanging between mass and power consumption, strength and mass, applying special effects for example. The main idea is that engineers doesn't increase overall module output, but precisely tune your module stats to fit your build and playstyle better. SCB engineering could be a current in-game example.
All these changes could make maneuverable builds more maneuverable, slow builds become sluggish, and reduce time-to-kill a lot to make hit-and-run tactics possible to use, and to make a speed and acceleration a true advantage. To make a fight possible to win with a fewer amount of guns, but with a compensation as a significant agility/strength boost.
As the result, we may expect to see small ships doing maneuvering combat, and large ships like a Cutter or an Anaconda being much more of a static target, utilizing their current armor and shield advantages, turrets, and SLFs for defense against small ships. Thanks to CMDR Darrett that formulated this thought.
Example:
Imagine, we have a Python as a true multi-purpose ship. Basic speed stat is low, but it's pretty durable.
- We can use lightweight armor mods and powerful thrusters to create an interceptor with an opporunity to impose or escape fight; with, for example, 2 x Advanced Plasmas - we can't afford more due to the PP's limited output;
- Or, we can make an armor-stacked tank with a big firepower, which can stand in a fight for a long. But it can't leave fight immediately, and can't chase enemies - it's very slow due to the armor and weaker engines, so - defensive style of combat.
- Or, we can make a medium-weight shield-tank with a medium firepower, mediocre at all for balanced gameplay.
- Or something else...
I'd like to see all those builds viable and have their own role in the game.
- We can use lightweight armor mods and powerful thrusters to create an interceptor with an opporunity to impose or escape fight; with, for example, 2 x Advanced Plasmas - we can't afford more due to the PP's limited output;
- Or, we can make an armor-stacked tank with a big firepower, which can stand in a fight for a long. But it can't leave fight immediately, and can't chase enemies - it's very slow due to the armor and weaker engines, so - defensive style of combat.
- Or, we can make a medium-weight shield-tank with a medium firepower, mediocre at all for balanced gameplay.
- Or something else...
I'd like to see all those builds viable and have their own role in the game.
Pros:
- Increases a number of viable builds A LOT - agile builds for assault-style gameplay, armored for defensive and more strategic, or mediocre at all - depending on what do you prefer, or how you combine E-A graded modules;
- Doesn't require programming of new mechanics - numeric values rebalance;
- Reduces gap between combat and multi-purpose builds - some builds may have empty slots left, allowing to fill them with cargo racks;
- Engineering is not mandatory to be effective in combat - unengineered ships are just less specialized, and not a garbage at all;
- Much easier to enter combat and PvP;
Cons:
- Requires complete re-definition of all parameters of all modules - massive balancing and testing work;
- May require some netcode improvements for more accurate agile ships displaying via p2p network.
Those potential changes are massive, but could be applied in an iterative way during the long time.
I hope that FDev will turn their attention to this post and extract something useful for themselves, or even join the discussion. We need your opinion, FDev!
Last edited:
