What kind of combat MMO games do you want to see made?

[Weirdguy]

If I could do full war combat game I would have 3 separate games that cross connect to each other, but still maintain their own, unique environments.

It would be sci-fi based because they're easier to play balance (nobody has any pre-conceived notions on how something is supposed to work), and to get some good "naval" combat using starships that do not take days of real time to play out.

The different layers are:

1.  The solar system, for space battleships to blast each other and weave between planets at faster than light speeds.  If you need a point of reference, then think "space Jutland".  No, I don't use space fighters.  Fighters fly in the air, while warships sail on water in real life, but in space they're sharing the same medium.  That means they're not really fighters, but 1-man PT boats.  Besides, I don't want warships to be second rate in their own theater of war.  I like battleships and so outer space is a battleship vs battleship game.

2.  The atmosphere of a planet above a battlefield for an area dozens of kilometers in size, for fight planes to dogfight in a true flight sim, yet has simple ground details of just low res trees and buldings.  It would be a joystick controlled game very much like playing a stealth jet fighter game with radar and short range missiles, yet easily spoofed and dodged to promote some dogfighting.  You have to use your eyes since you can't see very far with "radar" or whatever they're using.  The closest game I can think of would be Wings over Vietnam, but replace the Phantoms and Mig-21s with sci-fi fighters.  I would also add that you can break the sound barrier, but you are detected.  This is to explain why jets are optomised for slow and stealthy, instead of fast and not armed any BVR missiles.

3.  The ground fight in a single, highly detailed square mile of the ground that plays out similar to BattleField 2142.  Yes, you would have helicopter like vehicles, and even floating tanks, but not any fast, jet fighters.  I would even have power armor suits you can use, but in my case I'm partial to copying something like the Cyclones from Mospeada/RoboTech.

The interaction between the various games would be things like a ground combatant requesting an air strike.  When that happens an automated request for laser guided bombs to be brought to a waypoint on the air map is added.  If you fly a plane loaded with LGB's to that spot, then the laser spotter on your belt in the ground game is activated for use.

It would also have the ability for the ships and planes to interdict transports bringing cargo to the ground battles.  The less supplies that make it there, the less often tanks, power armor, and heavy weapons will respawn back at the home base for the ground guys to use.  In space they're AI cargo ships heading for the planet.  In the air you see convoys of trucks from their side of the map head to the middle of the map where the "ground game" is represented.

The reason I think having separate arenas for the different types of combatants is they do really have different needs and requirements for how they play.  Games like Arma-2 and Aces High do have both ground and air assets in one game, but they sacrifice things to get them together.

[titanic3]

If I could do full war combat game I would have 3 separate games that cross connect to each other, but still maintain their own, unique environments.

It would be sci-fi based because they're easier to play balance (nobody has any pre-conceived notions on how something is supposed to work), and to get some good "naval" combat using starships that do not take days of real time to play out.

The different layers are:

1.  The solar system, for space battleships to blast each other and weave between planets at faster than light speeds.  If you need a point of reference, then think "space Jutland".  No, I don't use space fighters.  Fighters fly in the air, while warships sail on water in real life, but in space they're sharing the same medium.  That means they're not really fighters, but 1-man PT boats.  Besides, I don't want warships to be second rate in their own theater of war.  I like battleships and so outer space is a battleship vs battleship game.

2.  The atmosphere of a planet above a battlefield for an area dozens of kilometers in size, for fight planes to dogfight in a true flight sim, yet has simple ground details of just low res trees and buldings.  It would be a joystick controlled game very much like playing a stealth jet fighter game with radar and short range missiles, yet easily spoofed and dodged to promote some dogfighting.  You have to use your eyes since you can't see very far with "radar" or whatever they're using.  The closest game I can think of would be Wings over Vietnam, but replace the Phantoms and Mig-21s with sci-fi fighters.  I would also add that you can break the sound barrier, but you are detected.  This is to explain why jets are optomised for slow and stealthy, instead of fast and not armed any BVR missiles.

3.  The ground fight in a single, highly detailed square mile of the ground that plays out similar to BattleField 2142.  Yes, you would have helicopter like vehicles, and even floating tanks, but not any fast, jet fighters.  I would even have power armor suits you can use, but in my case I'm partial to copying something like the Cyclones from Mospeada/RoboTech.

The interaction between the various games would be things like a ground combatant requesting an air strike.  When that happens an automated request for laser guided bombs to be brought to a waypoint on the air map is added.  If you fly a plane loaded with LGB's to that spot, then the laser spotter on your belt in the ground game is activated for use.

It would also have the ability for the ships and planes to interdict transports bringing cargo to the ground battles.  The less supplies that make it there, the less often tanks, power armor, and heavy weapons will respawn back at the home base for the ground guys to use.  In space they're AI cargo ships heading for the planet.  In the air you see convoys of trucks from their side of the map head to the middle of the map where the "ground game" is represented.

The reason I think having separate arenas for the different types of combatants is they do really have different needs and requirements for how they play.  Games like Arma-2 and Aces High do have both ground and air assets in one game, but they sacrifice things to get them together.

Look at Eve and Dust 514. You may get your wish in 10 years time.

[Weirdguy]

Everything I've seen about EVE, which includes my twin brother playing it for a year, says that EVE is more of a spreadsheet simulator.  The entry level player just trying out EVE for the first time is pretty much working up a cliff to figure out that game.

However, I do like the basic idea of Dust514 and EVE.  That is somewhat of how I think it should work, but with far more emphasis on BattleField type gameplay, and far less on going out and mining asteroids.

[titanic3]

Agreed, played the demo, spent the entire time scratching my head. But I figured if you had a PS3, Dust 514 might not be too bad. And it's good to know cross platform and a full scale "war game" can be achieved. Pretty sure the World of Tanks/Warplanes/Battleships are trying to do the same on PC.

[Sabre]

Weirdguy, what you're describing is pretty close to what Battle Line was aiming for.  The ship to ship combat was very much a "Jutland in space" style (think "Starblazers").  The smallest unit was what can most accurately be described as a torpedo gunboat, at least initially. We were going to launch with space combat only, where planetary assaults were conducted by simply bombarding a few planetary installations until a cumulative damage amount was reached. However, phase 2 was to create a second game within a game, where a RTS type battle would occur to assault and capture ground objectives (think "Command and Conquer"). Phase 3.0 would be to add a ship-capture mini-game. At first, this would involve  smashing a hole in an enemy ship's defense screens (i.e. shields), than launching an assault shuttle that would attach to the enemy ship. A fairly simple, "Risk"-style battle would take place, with assaulting troops taking over a ship one sector at a time, and the defending captain managing the defensive battle at a very high level.  Phase 3.1 would be to upgrade this to a FPS, where the assault shuttle becomes a spawn point for individual players in space battle suits.  I can post some concept art, if people are interested.  Auto-convoys would move from core worlds to outer planets, in a fashion analogous to trains and truck convoys in AH. Side balancing would be handled by the server auto adjusting the required ranks and/or prestige points required to take command of capital ships.

[uptown]

I want to fly a A10 and blow up enemy armor. 

[Weirdguy]

I want to fly a A10 and blow up enemy armor.  

"This is a combat FLIGHT simulator.  Get your ground vehicles out of my dogfight.  I came here to fly, not rocket attack panzers."

Oh, wait.  That is 200 chat in AH.  My bad.

All kidding aside, I do think some aviation is allowable in a ground game like Battlefield.  I would allow helicopter analog vehicles.  Battlefield 2142 had both attack and transport "choppers" that flew on vector thrust engines.

It is the "fast mover" jets that tend to make me rage when I play those games.  Being a flight sim fan-boy I cannot stand aircraft that are so poorly implemented like they are in Battlefield Vietnam and the rest, and the view controls are usually never on par with a flight sim  Bizarrely the flying tends to have the worst situational awareness of any of the games.  2142 was my favorite because they only ever had helicopter style vehicles, yet you still couldn't have looking and flying controls separated from each other.

I never fly anything in Planetside 2 because I absolutely HATE their stupid mouse and keyboard controls.  I want pitch and yaw on my mouse, but they have it permanently stuck to pitch and roll.  I sidestrafe using A and D on the ground, and the aircraft equivalent when hovering is to roll a bit to the side.  I've tried using a joystick with some success, but then the aim is not precise enough for shooting.  It isn't like other flight sims where a good 1 second hit that is difficult to achieve will bring down an enemy.  PS-2 you have to unload on a guy for several seconds straight to bring them down, and that makes your aim precision critical.

However, AH-2 whiners about ground vehicles and the poor flying in PS-2 are the inspiration for my game design. I would rather have a separate naval game, one ground combat game, and one flight combat game.  They all need different things and maps to play on, and I don't want to compromise features so they can all be in the same 3D environment together.  I would rather play interconnected, but distinct games.

[BoilerDown]

I've tried using a joystick with some success, but then the aim is not precise enough for shooting.  It isn't like other flight sims where a good 1 second hit that is difficult to achieve will bring down an enemy.  PS-2 you have to unload on a guy for several seconds straight to bring them down, and that makes your aim precision critical.

Me too, but their flight model works as if they're flying in a vacuum.  A joystick is pretty much unusable in practice imo.

[Weirdguy]

WOT is a FPS with tanks, though done pretty well.   They are printing tens of millions of dollars each month so even though it's of limited scope, they are doing some thigs right.  If HTC made some progress with the ground game, they would do a lot better.  Throw in some player driven strat and it would be most of what I would want.  Unfortunately, the drive to build on the existing infrastructure doesn't seem to be there.

Starcitizen looks hopeful but is still in development.  If done as they say, it will offer a space based open system with a ton of possibility.   

I agree with you 100%.  It is surprising to me that WoT is so popular, but they are and expanding to World of Planes, and World of Warships.  I don't think the world of planes will be that good, so lets hope actual dogfighting techniques will allow me to clean house, and a joystick is the preferred control.  However, I'm more interested in World of Warships and I'm curious to see how that will play.

I also caution anybody looking at YouTube about World of Warships.  There are some idiots posting "official videos" that were taken from BattleStations Pacific and claiming they are from World of Warships, disabling comments so people can warn the viewer, and not surprisingly getting a lot of views and collecting the add revenue as their video gets watched and watched.

Right now there isn't any video of World of Warships.

Now Star Citizen looks interesting, but they're too far from being a real game right now.  I hope they pull it off, but it could also go horribly wrong.  I also prefer real world aircraft over starfighter games, and that seems to be what they're aiming for.  An MMO starfighter game.

[TheMercinary60]

I want to fly a A10 and blow up enemy armor. 

might i suggest ARMA? lord knows my laptop struggles in single player, but i believe it could be just what your looking for

[Wiley]

I never fly anything in Planetside 2 because I absolutely HATE their stupid mouse and keyboard controls.  I want pitch and yaw on my mouse, but they have it permanently stuck to pitch and roll.  I sidestrafe using A and D on the ground, and the aircraft equivalent when hovering is to roll a bit to the side.  I've tried using a joystick with some success, but then the aim is not precise enough for shooting.  It isn't like other flight sims where a good 1 second hit that is difficult to achieve will bring down an enemy.  PS-2 you have to unload on a guy for several seconds straight to bring them down, and that makes your aim precision critical.

I found a somewhat workable solution for using the stick in PS2.  I've got an X52, and in the profiling software you can change the stick axes to mouse input.  It works much, much better than their "implementation" of joystick axes.  If your stick supports it, it's not terrible.

I found later though that the mouse works a lot better once you get used to it.  Right now I use an unholy combination of my X52's throttle for throttle/yaw/strafe up/strafe down among other things and my mouse for roll and pitch.

I hope someday they actually implement real joystick controls/TrackIR.

Wiley.

[SmokinLoon]

they need to remake X-Wing vs TIE Fighter

with better graphics and TrackIR support

I agree.  I'd like to see the "flight" models of the space fighters broadened a bit.  Acceleration rates, turn rates, etc, can all be diversified a wee bit so that *every* X-Wing is not the same.  I know all the science fiction vs reality stuff is debatable, but the less cookie cutter things are the better.

[BoilerDown]

I agree.  I'd like to see the "flight" models of the space fighters broadened a bit.  Acceleration rates, turn rates, etc, can all be diversified a wee bit so that *every* X-Wing is not the same.  I know all the science fiction vs reality stuff is debatable, but the less cookie cutter things are the better.

Was there ever a reason to have the X-Foils in non-attack position?  It seems like that feature was there just because it was referenced once in the movie.  Maybe if the X-Foils are in non-attack (or whatever its really called) position the X-Wing has different performance characteristics, like fuel efficiency or speed.

[rabbidrabbit]

Was there ever a reason to have the X-Foils in non-attack position?  It seems like that feature was there just because it was referenced once in the movie.  Maybe if the X-Foils are in non-attack (or whatever its really called) position the X-Wing has different performance characteristics, like fuel efficiency or speed.

Not doing so would negatively affect their coolness coefficient by .03.

[ToeTag]

The perfect game would be one that humans still have to act like humans in EVERY aspect of this example.  Then make them think about it in a tactical sense.  Then on the basis of commodities in very short supply that can't be bought but only scavenged, would be the ultimate model of what humans are like/capable of in a modern world yet acting on the individuals primal instincts.  Could be made in any setting.  Would be a great model of our current mind set if the world were lawless!