Massive amount of text alert! Condition red throughout the ship! :eek:
Now, I realize that with only 18 months allotted to create STO, a coat of Star Trek paint over generic MMO combat is all that could be realistically accomplished. That being said, now that the game is out it's probably time for a plan on how to make ground combat fun.
I won't go over all the reasons why most people and all reviewers don't find ground combat fun, I think that's been done to death already! Rather, let me make the general statement that to make fun ground combat for a Trek game, you need to tailor the mechanics around ST, rather than the other way around (trying to make ST work with whatever mechanics you've done in the past).
There are two ways to go about creating a good trek experience. Either you imitate what is known to work, and in this case the only example I can think of is Elite Force, or you work your way up from the bottom with a new game plan. Lets do the later.
When you watch an episode of ST that involves ground combat of some sort, things usually fall into one of two categories.
a.) People end up getting behind whatever cover they can find, briefly popping out and firing wildly at the enemy. When it comes to outdoors battles, positioning (higher elevation, ambushes, etc) often plays a huge role.
b.) It turns into a brawl. Kirk "two hand" punches, judo throws, bat'leths and other assorted melee weapons, etc.
So, if we want the ideal Star Trek ground combat experience, we should design our game mechanics with both of these things in mind, but if we have limited resources a.) is more important than b.). Since we already have some (albiet unpopular) mechanics in place, any similarities should be exploited. One example is the flanking system, which fits in well with trek combat being largely about positioning. Make some more vertical maps, and add in a vertical bonus (it is easier to shoot down than up, and this point is made in a few DS9 episodes) and you start to have something more cerebral and interesting.
So, lets get started. I believe a good base for our ideal ground combat simulation is a cover shooter. Think GoW or Mass Effect. I don't think this needs much elaboration, but lets look at the significance of the change:
Needs done:
Needs to move from a "select a target and use ability" to a "point and shoot" system. Cover system needs to be implemented, cover needs to be added to future and existing maps, and AI needs to be updated to exploit cover. In other words, it's a **** ton of work

Pros:
If done right, a cover shooter can be a lot of fun. Good mechanics can cover up poor mission design (I'm thinking mostly exploration missions which are created randomly), is generally more engaging, very much fits in with how ground combat is depicted in the trek universe, is more focused on the player character as opposed to the entire tactical situation (would generally use a closer camera, and might help overcome the huge hallways problem). Last but not least, point and shoot adds a lot more player skill to the equation.
Cons:
Probably a higher learning curve. Also makes it more difficult to select abilities since the mouse cursor is going to be an aiming reticle by default. Three abilities (fire 1, fire 2, and shove) and be moved to the three mouse buttons, but that means that the rest of the abilities would need to be accessible by hot keys (probably 1-0, could also use ~, -, and + if adventurous enough) but even then the number of skills may need to lowered so that they are all still selectable. Control over the rest of the party would probably need to be simplified down to a "go here" button ala. Mass Effect. Yes I'm listing this twice, adding more player skill to equation is also a con if you are of a certain school of RPG design where it is believed things like aim should be determined by character skill, not player skill.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
In terms of melee combat, there is a lot that can be done. I don't think there's any obvious "right way" to do it like with cover shooter mechanics for ranged combat, but it should be something easy to get into yet expandable. I would suggest having a few basic attacks, with more advanced combinations unlockable with SP investment. Moves could be executed based on taping direction keys, swiping the mouse, which attack you use, etc... however you want to implement it. If you wanted to get really into it, you could include combos and counters as well, but it may be best to implement a basic subset of melee combat first, and then slowly expand on it in an incremental fashion every season or so.
Last but not least, integrating ranged and melee combat properly is a huge task. Part of the reason current ground combat feels so spazy right now is because the current system does not do a good job of it. The inclusion of cover will create a separation between melee and ranged in that melee users will need to break cover to engage and in doing so make themselves vulnerable. Obviously at a large distance a ranged user has a big advantage, and vice versa for the melee user. The issue is finding the right balance in-between. If its a simple matter for the melee user to close the distance, then melee will be unstoppable. On the other hand, if the ranged user is generally able to stop the melee user before he gets close, or is able to effectively kite him, then it becomes unbalanced the other way. Right now I don't have any suggestions besides doing a lot of play testing to find the right balance.
In the spirit of open brainstorming, anyone else have thoughts on how to fix ground combat?
Comments
http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=153841
Highlights:
- New Weapons
- Combos/Situational Effects
- Improved Cover
- Targeting Improvements
- New Ground Skills (and unlockable abilities)
- Enemy Morale/Fatigue
I'll try and add your ideas (with your permission).Actually, we'd love your feedback over there. Getting fresh ideas from fellow players dissatisfied with ground combat and organizing them to present to the developers can only help everyone in the end.
There's quite a few ground combat junkies that might like a hit of whatever ideas you can bring to the table.
Besides, it got moved to the Combat Feedback forum.
Of course theres a few won't like it that way but the ability to have to aim like in an FPS so you could actually miss the target, has its merits in PvP.
Oh reminds me we wants Photon Launcher guns and grenade launchers, and more swords.
Any kind of fps system is going to automatically exclude the casual gamers, and that is really the audience for the game. Not a good idea to alienate them.
1) Introduce the FPS option, which they use in CO.
2) Remove the expose and exploit mechanics. Instead introduce power settings to weapons (i.e. stun and damage, with a key hold method to select the power of the attack). The longer the attack is held before releasing, the greater the damage or stun duration. Full power will vaporize, if the target has no shield up and the weapon is set to kill. Full power on stun will permanently render the target unconscious, if they have no shield remaining.
3) Remove AoE from rifle weapons. Assault weapons should only be useable by tactical officers and as a result gain a slight base damage increase, while requiring a longer charge period to reach full power.
4) Lower health considerably
5) Buff shield strength
6) Rebalance weapon damage, but generally buffing it to speed up combat. Care would especially be needed for melee weapons.
7) Replace engineer shield recharge skills, with ones that increase their initial strength and base regen rate.
8) Introduce a general shield recharge skill (along the lines of what block does in CO, but without the increased damage resistance). Instead increasing shield regen rate and uses a shield battery each time its used.
9) Remove shield batteries from vendors and make them craftable by engineer and science officers. Remove their cooldown and click to use mechanism.
10) Rolls and dives have an increased avoidance affect for 1 or 2 seconds.
It's odd to see this thrown around. I think that STO feels casual in large part due to time constraints. It's not like the Star Trek fan base is inherently casual after all.
But the game was designed with elements you find more for the casual gamer than the hardcore gamer. It's not the "trek audience" that demonstrates the game was designed with casual or even console gamer in mind ... it's the game itself. Sorry to go off topic, btw. This comment has nothing to do with your thread, or your suggestions. Which are interesting. And totally belong in Darren's other thread, as part of the very fascinating discussion of ideas.
So, again, sorry for being tangential in this post.
I think this needs to be a plan: Cryptic just stop doing anything with ground combat for now. Period.
Focus on starship combat that everyone likes, making it great, and then exploration.
This is were a game needs to enhance it's strengths and forget about the weaknesses for now. They will never make much headway in such a broken ground system.
That's one plan, and you're right that it may not be smart to do too many things at once. The problem with ground combat is that, depending on the type and extent of the changes they eventually make, they might need to rework a lot of the old content to work with the new system. The least painful way to go about that is to do it right away, while there still isn't that much content. The more you put it off, the more painful the eventual change could get.
How does encouraging players (and developers) not to improve ground combat contribute anything to this discussion? :rolleyes:
If I had a second choice, it would be about the frequent holds, especially in melee. Perhaps if they changed the holds in melee to roots it would be sufficient.
Not an overly complex system when it comes to actual gameplay.
IMHO nothing needs to be fixed, I love ground combat just the way it is. I hate FPS games which is why I don't play them, but rather games like .... STO, which has a lean and easy way of fighting, what's more, I vote against your proposal. For those who like challenging shooting action I believe there are already plenty of games out there, no offense.