Sin Meng
Gallente
Creative Assembly
   |
Posted - 2011.08.17 19:51:00 -
[1]
 Quote:
Diverse fleets
There should be good reasons to field a diverse fleet at this scale, with as many ship classes as possible having a clear reason to be fielded. Diversity here allows more players to fly the sorts of ships that they prefer in large fights; it allows players to specialize more and have that specialization mark them out from others; and it creates more tactical options which should make the fights more interesting. Homogeneous fleets are workable but bland.
-CCP Greyscale Source (Large Combat Heading)
CCP's desire for more diverse fleet makeups is very clear. The intention of this thread is to discuss what I believe to be two major obstacles in making this desire a reality: . While the above quote is referring to large scale combat (100+ ships), I believe these two issues affect fleets of all sizes, so I'd like to have a broader discussion about them. This thread is meant more to generate food for thought than to advocate for specific changes to any given ships or modules, so please keep that in mind.
Role Diversity
For the sake of this issue there are two major questions to be answered:
Are there enough different primary roles (DPS, Logistics, E-War, Tackling / Interdiction, Scouting) in the game to adequately promote the use of diverse fleets?
Are the differences between ship classes and hulls within the same general role (ex. Ares vs. Malediction, Moros vs. Revelation, Tempest vs. Apocalypse) conducive to player choice as opposed to one being declared significantly "better" than the other?
Hull Tiers
Currently basic T1 hulls (As in NOT T2, Faction, or Pirate variants) are tiered to accommodate the following design idea:
Frigate, cruiser, battlecruiser, battleship, mining barge, and industrial hulls have a "progression tier" setup. From the perspective of a new player this would make perfect sense; you enter a new hull size and you start off with the cheaper "entry level" ship and upgrade to the higher tier ones once you have better skills and the money to afford them. However this design breaks down when the skill and cost issues change from being barriers to entry into relevant but certainly less important figures to consider. As players grow in skillpoints and wealth, the "entry level" ships become less and less attractive compared to their higher level tiermates (This is particularly true of battlecruisers, mining barges, and industrials).
I believe this flies in the face of promoting diverse fleets. A Celestis should be just as good at providing e-war support and light damage as a Vexor is at dealing heavy turret and drone-based damage. A Ferox should be just as good at dealing turret-based damage as a Drake is at dealing missile-based damage.
I'll not delve too far into my own opinions about these things because I want this thread to be a discussion, not dissolve into "argue with the OP." Please post your thoughts and try to keep it civil and productive. Again please try to refrain from nitpicking anyone one ship, module, weapon class, etc. Think overarching design philosophy.
--------------------------------------------------
|