Combat Zone Improvements: A Suggestion

Combat zones suck. We all know it. From a design standpoint, they are a pointless Horde Mode killing floor with zero consequence and zero persistence.

Ostensibly, combat zones manifest, grow and disappear organically as battles for space supremacy over a planet grow and evolve. This is, in theory, how combat zones develop.

So lets change the way they WORK to reflect that:


Combat zones should require the defeat of a certain number of enemies before they are "cleared." That number of enemies should exist within the zone at the start of a battle. As your chosen side gains dominance, then, the number of remaining enemies dwindles, until finally the zone is cleared and dominance is "won" over that field of battle.

Such a system rewards success, by making the zone progressively less dangerous over time. As your chosen side wins more battles, the enemy presence decreases. Conversely, if your side begins losing the fight, reinforcements may not magically appear, upping the risk of a losing fight and urging players not to spend too long one any one target lest their AI battle partners suffer. Risk/Reward is increased as a side effect of this system.

But that is not all.

As zones are cleared around a system, several things can happen (ideally, dynamically, generated by systems within the game):

-Faction influence for the winner would increase, especially at nearby stations

-The faction would select a new area within a system over which to begin establishing dominance, possibly spawning more combat zones

-Salvage missions would kick off for the previous zone, now cleared

-If the zone was near a landable planet, dynamic missions would kick off there for rescue, salvage, base clearing and scanning, etc.

-Missions to scan nearby planets and other bodies would appear dynamically, asking the player to perform these scans as part of intel gathering for the selection of new target areas the faction wants to control

-The more work a player does for one faction, the more the other turns against them. At some point pretty early, the player cannot simply swap sides without a penalty any longer


Ideally, new missions generated by combat zone and influence changes, would be acceptable from inside your ship, without docking. War moves quickly, and battlefield intel is needed NOW. Likewise, the player should be able to complete/turn in these missions from the cockpit without docking.

Wars and Civil Wars need more dynamic events and missions, more system changes and more immediate impact on game play. The suggestions above, while likely not perfect, would go some way toward making conflicts more fun and dynamic, while also making them more believable.
 
I agree with almost everything, +rep

Wouldn't it just be easier to work for Frontier, rather than spend hours suggesting huge fundamental game changes every fortnight that will almost certainly never get implemented?

Also, maybe try posting in the correct forum for a change?

Combat Zones are clearly a placeholder mechanic that should've never made it out of beta. I also don't see anything wrong with discussing them in a discussion forum.
 
I know of one way to improve it: Give me a bigger paycheck for participating.

EDIT: This actually is the largest reason why I never bother wasting my time in combat zones. They don't really reward me for my time and effort. The pay structure for fighting in these zones is still the same despite pay increases for almost every other activity; massacre missions help, but they're not guaranteed to spawn and the particular group I may want to support may not offer any at all.
 
Last edited:
You know what would improve a CZ by around 80%? Some kind of installation, disabled capital or other things they are actually fighting over in the center. Will also help finding your way back to the middle when you drifted off in a fight.
 
There are already enough rewards for engaging in stupid repetitive game mechanics in Elite, I'd prefer they make the game more interesting instead.

This is true, but like I said in my edit elaboration: They will still need to have some sort of worthwhile reward attached to it. Dynamic wars are a great idea if there's an easy way to code them in a game like this, but offer, let's say, a seven figure reward for winning a major battle plus a bonus for contribution done, going from six figures to nearly eight on top of regular combat bonds. You can even structure missions around this for even further rewards, and you can set rewards based on both combat rank as well as the level of intensity in the combat zone (lower rewards for a low intensity, large rewards for a higher intensity, and add another category for Capital Ship involvement or real "Prokhorovka" level battles.
 
Since it's not a single player BGS, I don't see how the finite number of ships concept would work. It has to exist during a state, not a certain number of ships.

The great thing about combat zones is that they are completely ala carte. You don't need to do them for any reason. It's just a period of time when you can be assured that you'll see some action, have teammates and make some money (or die).
 
This is true, but like I said in my edit elaboration: They will still need to have some sort of worthwhile reward attached to it. Dynamic wars are a great idea if there's an easy way to code them in a game like this, but offer, let's say, a seven figure reward for winning a major battle plus a bonus for contribution done, going from six figures to nearly eight on top of regular combat bonds. You can even structure missions around this for even further rewards, and you can set rewards based on both combat rank as well as the level of intensity in the combat zone (lower rewards for a low intensity, large rewards for a higher intensity, and add another category for Capital Ship involvement or real "Prokhorovka" level battles.

Regarding your edit, yes you are right, CZs pay poorly compared to the other activities in game. Piracy is probably even worse. I just don't think that increasing payments would fix the underlying issue.
 
I know of one way to improve it: Give me a bigger paycheck for participating.

EDIT: This actually is the largest reason why I never bother wasting my time in combat zones. They don't really reward me for my time and effort. The pay structure for fighting in these zones is still the same despite pay increases for almost every other activity; massacre missions help, but they're not guaranteed to spawn and the particular group I may want to support may not offer any at all.

I agree too that payouts are pathetic. Not just bad. But so bad its pointless. You can make more bounty hunting, for much less risk. And that is if you DO find massacre missions. Without those, CZ work is far more risk than reward.

The entire War state needs a MASSIVE overhaul. Like most, if not ALL, of the BGS, its effect on the game is no negligible it might as well not exist.
 
Since it's not a single player BGS, I don't see how the finite number of ships concept would work. It has to exist during a state, not a certain number of ships.

The great thing about combat zones is that they are completely ala carte. You don't need to do them for any reason. It's just a period of time when you can be assured that you'll see some action, have teammates and make some money (or die).

As everything is an instance, this really isn't a problem.

The above system works on a per instance basis for how things work inside the combat zone itself.

Outside of the combat zone, it would indeed require probably another server, or using some of one of the current servers, to update some things about system players are interacting with.

Essentially though, it would be the same as what is already done, one a more regular basis than weekly (or whatever the BGS tick is)

Player clears combat zone------>Update system combat zone status for any future super cruise instances
 
*Conflict zones.

You can forget influence changes happening dynamically. At the moment, the BGS ticks once per day at around about 12PM server time. All actions since the last tick are calculated and summed using a formula that takes the previous tick's influence values, system population and the sum of the relevant actions into account. Wars last a minimum of three ticks, so your suggestion about reconaissance and establishing control over particular regions, while interesting, wouldn't really work in anything but the largest systems - most wars involving players are decided before the conflict starts anyway, so they tend to last the mimimum time, which doesn't really give your suggestion the time it would need to be engaging.

If you want to change that, you're basically suggesting changing part of the fundamental architecture of the game, which I don't see happening any time soon. More ticks would be nice though.
 
Last edited:
CZs are perhaps the biggest anti-climax in Elite, especially after the amazing warp-in of a capital ship & then its subsequent laughable impotence & lack of interactivity!

I always believed since my first experience of these zones that PP should have been incorporated into the feature & maybe even an element of CQC/Arena too...fight for your power/superpower in these areas receiving unique benefits (weapons, rank, medals etc) - yeah, I said medals!!

There I go, drifting into fantasyland again...just like the other deluded players here, suggesting features that are simply pie-in-the-sky because Frontier never deliver thrilling gameplay - after 3 yrs, you'd think I'd have learned my lesson by now!

+1 Blackcompany - you might be a moaning git, but at least you are passionate with good intentions & besides, if we were all like the fawning fan-boys, the game would be even more anodyne

...& the store would be ****ing massive! [big grin]
 
Back
Top Bottom