Crazy Idea: Fleet!

Clearly the best part of Elite Dangerous is combat. What better way to instigate combat and give the the various types of ships we have, big or small, their purposes other than two fleets trying to destroy each other?

Here's a warning first. This is a crazy and very elaborate idea that is more fit for an expansion pack than an update if it ever happens at all.


Overview
Fleets are largely self-sufficient military entities (more on this later) that are composed of a set number of warships of various types. Each type serves a particular purpose. Some are straight forward and more or less expendable (ie: destroyers). Others are essential to the functioning of the fleet and once lost might cause the eventual destruction of the fleet. Think Battlestar Galactica and you get the idea.


Fleet Composition
Destroyers: smaller warships with relatively low health but high density of turreted anti-fighter/anti-bomber weapons. Meant to provide AA screen on the outskirt of the fleet.

Cruisers: medium size warships with a good balance of AA and anti-ship weapons such as torpedos & large calibre railguns.

Battleships: large warships with huge amount of anti-ship weapons but relatively low AA capability. Capable of bombarding planets.

Carriers: large ships that act as mobile space stations. Carriers rearms and repairs docked ships. Unarmed.

Logistics Support: large ships that contains huge greenhouses for food, storage and refines fuel. Unarmed.

Mobile Factories: large ships that manufactures ammunition, missiles, torpedos and smaller crafts from materials. Unarmed.


How do WE, the pilots, fit in this:
To fly as part of a fleet the player must "sign up" for a tour of duty with the fleet. Once signed the player move his base of operation to one of the carriers of the fleet and must generally use the fleet carriers for the duration of the tour. If the player lands anywhere outside the fleet and do not return to the assigned carrier within a set amount of time (ie: 1 or 2 days in real life) the player is considered a deserter and a VERY large bounty may be placed on his head. While the player is on active duty the player respawns on the assigned carrier.

As an active pilot the player's ship & weapons are provided by the fleet, meaning the player is assigned a ship free of charge (maybe by his own choosing in a limited way) with a loadout that is also free (and maybe customizable to a limited degree). However, after the tour ends he doesn't get to keep the stuff obviously unless he deserts. This does not mean people can simply spam the biggest, baddest ships to their desires. See fleet operation.

Different types of fleet missions should be available (see Fleet Operation). The most simple would be combat missions with goals like "escort certain ship" or "destroy certain target". In the case of combat missions, to maintain the scale of fleet operations players should be assigned as squad leaders. Each player commands three AI wingmen and should be allowed to give rudimentary orders such as "Form up on my wing", "Cover me", "Attack my target", "Protect my target" etc similar to the Freespace command interface.


Fleet Operation
The fleet should have some sort of directive (ie: get to this point to blockade/intercept or bombard this particular planet). Successful completion of the directive should have huge consequences (ie: destruction of enemy fleet, immediate change of allegiance for the region, annihilation of population & spaceport etc etc).

Fleet directive should respond to the situation (ie: projected interception by enemy fleet -> directive should change to destruction of enemy fleet or retreat to another location).

The fleet can jump a very long distance compared to the small spacecrafts that we pilot. The fleet flagship (most likely a battleship or carrier) initiates the jump and all warship has their ftl drive slaved to it.

After each jump the fleet requires a very long cool down time before it can jump again (on the order of days).

All ships consume food & fuel at a different rate corresponding to their sizes. The fleet stays operational as long as its flagship is alive and it has enough food & fuel to support all the ships that are still in the fleet. If logistics run low for more than a set amount of time the fleet will either surrender all of its warships to the dominant political entity of the region or disband outright if such an entity doesn't exist (this creates derelicts for salvaging).

Food can be grown, fuel can't -> fleet must periodically dock with compatible space stations with proper allegiance in order to obtain fuel that is then stored on logistics support ships. If the time comes and said stations are not available then the fleet must obtain fuel through an alternative mean (ie: utilize smaller spacecrafts with fuel scoops en masse).

You can't make something from nothing -> the fleet maintains a set number of spacecrafts of each type. Each type requires a certain amount of material and time to be built by the mobile factory. For example, the fleet maintains 40 sidewinders as fighter screen and 5 pythons as heavy assault gunships. After a battle 10 sidewinders are lost and 1 python destroyed. The amount of material and time needed to build 10 sidewinders may be exactly the same as for 1 python! This means that while the python is a much more capable ship, if everyone in the fleet flies pythons soon there will be no ship left to fly (except the sidies that no one flew before).

The fleet also maintains a set number of armaments like various types of weapons and ammunition. Same mechanics should apply to stop people from spamming missiles & railguns.

Keep the factory fed -> while the factory build things automatically it can't get the material required by itself. This means the fleet must maintain a mining or trading operations to get the material the factory needs. In deep space or behind the enemy line incursions mining may be the only way out.


Potential problems
Instancing & solo/group mode: how can we maintain consistency and keep track of the status of each warship if they are instanced in a P2P environment? Solution: some sort of classic server-client architecture that supports fleets. Since it makes sense that the universe only sees a very low number of active fleets in any given time it does not cost too much to have fleets running on a classic dedicated server-client type setup. Interacting with the fleet bubble requires the client to join the server hosting the fleet. Once the interaction finishes the client seamlessly switches back into the P2P architecture.

What about people playing solo/group? Well the design is largely meant for epic PvP conflict and camaraderie. Playing solo or group is the wrong way to go about it, no? Not to mention all the consistency issues when your flagship is being destroyed by some magic pixies no one can see or touch. So yeah, players in solo/group should be barred entry to the fleet bubble to prevent their direct interaction with the fleet (ie: they can see the fleet location in supercruise but can't drop out near the fleet). if a pilot is enlisted with the fleet and switches into solo or group the only fair way is to ask if the player wishes to desert when they try to start. If he chooses yes then he is instantly kicked out of the fleet bubble as a deserter and starts the game floating in the system the fleet is currently at.

Artificial Intelligence: the fleet needs a powerful and strategic mind to plot its course, manage its logistics and maneuver against enemy forces. Also it needs to know how to launch fighter/bomber wings to protect itself and attack others.

Balance: obviously many things need careful balancing. Material & time cost of ships and weapons, fuel consumption etc etc. Too many to mention.


Further down the road
Human controlled warships, human fleet commander that gets to plot fleet course, manage fleet missions, and give orders to his warships for tactical maneuvers, etc etc. One can dream.
 
Last edited:
great idea dude, would give us that cameraderie we all crave and would be epic i am sure. I like the idea of greenhouse ships i hope that future missions will give us more of a relationship with npc traders etc be great to build your own wing of fighters and traders that you want to protect and earn good profit with
 
great idea dude, would give us that cameraderie we all crave and would be epic i am sure. I like the idea of greenhouse ships i hope that future missions will give us more of a relationship with npc traders etc be great to build your own wing of fighters and traders that you want to protect and earn good profit with

Thanks! My hope is to take most of the roles we have right now and make them come together to work towards a common goal. On top of that there is an opposing side that's doing something similar. So instead of the usual "trader hates pirates hates bounty hunters hates ..." type of boring love triangles we can have real conflicts involving the Federation and Empire (or even Thargoids) that will have long lasting consequences. Not to mention the legends that can be made. "Ace pilot who once tossed a torpedo down the vent of enemy flagship..." sounds familiar? :)

Here are more ideas to tie into it:
Players attempting to drop out of supercruise near the fleet should be asked to declare for neutral intent before they are inside normal space (this transition can also be used to hide the client connection to the fleet server). Failure to declare means the ship is automatically considered hostile by the fleet as soon as they show up. The fleet should maintain an off-limits area around its flagship. Sort of like a sphere centered on the flagship that is only open to enlisted pilots of the fleet. Dropping out of supercruise should always put the ship a good distance away from the off-limits area. Obviously if a neutral ship is detected inside the inner sphere or tries to attack any fleet assets then it should be considered hostile.

This means stealth will finally matter now. Whatever factions that are opposing the fleet can have missions where they send out scouts to photograph fleet composition and scan fleet assets for jump trajectories or logistic information. Once said intel is successfully delivered they can be used by the faction to generate their own fleet and plot intercept course. There can even be missions on the fleet carriers given out by spies that ask players to defect to an opposing faction with sensitive cargo/intel, which in turns generates assassination missions targeting transport carrying important fleet personnel etc.
 
Last edited:
Actually, the idea isn't THAT crazy. The more people play ED, the more will want to band together. Clans, fleets, wings... Call it whatever you want, people will sooner or later demand such a thing to some degree, for playing together is way more fun than to play alone. And since open gameplay is ED with other human players, instead of just everyone for himself, people will aim for larger and larger groups banding together in TS3.

Thinking about a fleet mechanic might be early, but by no means crazy or redundant. It's worth a thought and a discussion. No doubt about it.
 
But the idea is still rather crazy to be honest, and sounds more like a totally different game.


Still...


I agree that there should be something to do with your friends, gaming communities, etc.


The background simulator itself should handle demand/supply in far better manner.


People are spending rather many hours to make enough credits to buy bigger ships, that is kinda one big thing in Elite. Letting people to fly these ships without similar investment, I do not see that happening.


(Combat) Missions should be more advanced than we have atm. I have understood that this will get some kind of patch at some point.
There could be a capitalship fighting against thargoids or something similar, and offering missions.
There could be a fleet, but I assume that would be controlled by the developers only.
 
But the idea is still rather crazy to be honest, and sounds more like a totally different game.


Still...


I agree that there should be something to do with your friends, gaming communities, etc.


The background simulator itself should handle demand/supply in far better manner.


People are spending rather many hours to make enough credits to buy bigger ships, that is kinda one big thing in Elite. Letting people to fly these ships without similar investment, I do not see that happening.


(Combat) Missions should be more advanced than we have atm. I have understood that this will get some kind of patch at some point.
There could be a capitalship fighting against thargoids or something similar, and offering missions.
There could be a fleet, but I assume that would be controlled by the developers only.

One of the things I am hoping the fleet mechanics will achieve is to diversify the usage of ships & weapons. I don't believe having a "ship A < ship B < ship C which trumps all" progression is interesting. Gameplay balance aside, there should be practical reasons why the Eagle or Sidewinder designs have survived for such a long time and are still in use by the dominant factions. The simplest explanation I can come up with is cost effectiveness. Perhaps they don't take much credits to make. Perhaps you can stack 30 of them in the space that gets filled by 5 pythons. Or perhaps a swarm of them are credible threats to a small amount of even the largest ships. However, none of this will matter unless the armory the player has accessed to is limited by something other than his bank account. Otherwise everyone will just happily bring the biggest muscle their 1 billion credits from trading can afford. Hence, an actual simulation of a military career with a fleet does the job without breaking the immersion. It's a radical departure from how the game works, I agree. But I think it offers something different without being completely different and can be involving and deep if handled correctly.

In any case, people don't get to keep the ships they fly in the fleet any way unless they want to become a deserting outlaw with the corresponding reputation hit and bounty on their heads. If someone is ballsy enough to do it in order to steal a shiny vulture or something, well why not? Let him do it so the bounty hunters can join in on the fun. :)
 
Last edited:
OP, there is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start. Maybe best to just say 'do some research on the game, the lore and the ethos behind both'. The main thing, however is that you are just dismissing Group and Solo modes and that isn't going to fly. By all means make suggestions for game improvement, but don't just centre on things that improve YOUR game, you need to think of the game as a whole and that includes being viable in all three modes.
 
The idea sounds really cool if executed right, but this would certainly have to be (as the OP said) something to come later in a major update since this idea would essentially be adding a sort of minigame within Elite. It's certainly not impossible, but seems it would be very challenging for the devs. I have to give M3SS3NG3R credit, though, especially if he came up with this idea independently from EVE (I've never played it, only going by what Psycho Romeo said). This fleet idea would give the galactic nations extremely large fleets without players being able to use it to draw out their own borders and ban whoever from wherever for whatever reasons. Devs would maintain control, players would get larger groups to serve in-game.

While I can't say I 100% support this idea, I like the attention to details and thought put into it by the OP. I'll have to watch and see where this idea goes :)
 
I don't believe having a "ship A < ship B < ship C which trumps all" progression is interesting.

Certain amount of A<B<C is a must. The game is following Elite from 1980, and that time there was pretty much always just linear upgrades, so some flaws are coming from the history.

The biggest unrealistic thing about the ships imo is probably how they specify Large and Medium ships.
Also they made multipurpose ships that are better in everything vs single purpose ships.

But if you fly your 3 million Viper vs 500 million Anaconda, I do not see any sense why a Viper should win the day. Even a bad Anaconda pilot should be able to bring down a Viper.
 
...A lot like your suggestion, but with less AI and more players. Google it.

I just did and it seems that EVE basically has players flying capital ships with a control scheme similar to Nexus: The Jupiter Incident. Still have no idea how Valkyrie works because apparently it's not out yet. The point here is players generally only control fighter/bomber sized spacecrafts with capital ships & large scale logistics to be mostly controlled by AI so we can feel like ants fighting for the giants yet still can topple them if something amazing happens. If this is similar to EVE, props to EVE I guess.

OP, there is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start. Maybe best to just say 'do some research on the game, the lore and the ethos behind both'. The main thing, however is that you are just dismissing Group and Solo modes and that isn't going to fly. By all means make suggestions for game improvement, but don't just centre on things that improve YOUR game, you need to think of the game as a whole and that includes being viable in all three modes.

So come up with an idea on how you intend to solve the issue? I am a beta tester so I am well aware of all the solo vs group vs open debate and the antics from each camp. All I am going to say at this point is if you want to sacrifice a feature to accommodate a particular group, then what you are doing is diminishing the game as a whole because if you can't have it, no one else can. Not to mention the fact that some existing features are incompatible with certain modes already. For example, you don't see solo players forming up in wings, do you? That didn't stop FD from implementing it.

Certain amount of A<B<C is a must. The game is following Elite from 1980, and that time there was pretty much always just linear upgrades, so some flaws are coming from the history.

The biggest unrealistic thing about the ships imo is probably how they specify Large and Medium ships.
Also they made multipurpose ships that are better in everything vs single purpose ships.

But if you fly your 3 million Viper vs 500 million Anaconda, I do not see any sense why a Viper should win the day. Even a bad Anaconda pilot should be able to bring down a Viper.

I am not advocating FD to make a viper as strong as an anaconda in a 1v1. If you read the design you will know the balance is achieved through cost of maintenance/construction (ie: $500 million vs $3 million) and sheer available number on the carrier. The idea is to let the ships retain their power disparity in a 1v1 scenario. However, there will be more little guys on the battlefield compared to the big guys. So an anaconda fighting a viper might still happen, but most likely it will be 6 vipers ganging up on 2 anacondas.
 
OP, there is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start. Maybe best to just say 'do some research on the game, the lore and the ethos behind both'. The main thing, however is that you are just dismissing Group and Solo modes and that isn't going to fly. By all means make suggestions for game improvement, but don't just centre on things that improve YOUR game, you need to think of the game as a whole and that includes being viable in all three modes.


Pretty negative Joe.

OP's submission of course is from his own perspective and experience. And why not on areas that improve his game? He paid for it.

Frontier have asked for suggestions, and that is what he is doing.

It is only a collection of a lot of ideas that push forward collective improvement. He doesn't have to get into every aspect of the game to make a suggestion, and certainly shouldn't be flamed for it, especially for a good idea....which might not necessarily improve YOUR area of the game.
 
Last edited:
This sounds like a good idea, though I think it would be best if Devs controlled the fleet, influenced by players behaviours from all 3 playing modes. As for the free rent-o-ship idea, I would say let people fly their own ships, a lot of pilots prefer smaller fighter in combat, a lot more fun than just sitting in a huge ship and letting turrets do all the work.
 
Last edited:
This sounds like a good idea, though I think it would be best if Devs controlled the fleet, influenced by players behaviours from all 3 playing modes. As for the free rent-o-ship idea, I would say let people fly their own ships, a lot of pilots prefer smaller fighter in combat, a lot more fun than just sitting in a huge ship and letting turrets do all the work.

Hey I like smaller ships, too. That's actually why I proposed rent-o-ship in the first place. Most people by now can afford combat ships that are way more capable than the starting sidewinders. So while there might be some that are willing to take their viper, maybe even the eagle, what about the sidies? Where is the love?

So the love comes in the form of rent-o-ship and 100 shiny sidies waiting in the carrier and only 3 pythons on the side reserved for critical roles.

Maybe we can have a compromise and let the players bring their own ships in. However, once their ship is destroyed, no replacement for their own ship & weapon loadout on the fleet carrier. They have to take one of the ships provided by the military from that point on. Once their tour of duty finishes they can still buy it back from a civilian spaceport).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom