Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Gradishar

Friendly Fire...let's talk about this for a minute...

Recommended Posts

Ok...I've been playing Hunger Dome for about 2 weeks now...and I think I've got a pretty good understanding of the combat system as it stands now (at this early phase) and I've also read this other thread about implementing FF now (rather than later) and contained within that thread are a whole host of conflicting assumptions about that FF was in the past, is at present or should be in the future. I've seen some discussion and concerns of "griefing" within guilds, nations or factions and how FF is either good or bad for these situations. So...lets take a step back a minute and really talk about what the hell FF is and how (I believe IMHO) it should implemented.

 

1. FF can be implemented (or ignored) on numerous different levels. We have Group, Raid-Group (assuming CF has the ability of combining groups to form such raid style groups), Guild, Nation and Factions levels. Wether FF is enabled or disabled at each level is an important issue as it fundamentally effects combat, strategy and game dynamics (for both open field combat as well as sieges). 

 

2. If the default position is that FF is always on, on all levels...you have severely limited your options and flexibility IMHO. Having played the Hunger Dome these past 2 weeks, I do not support having FF on at the micro level (within groups). The Lego is designed to be a melee healer who powers his group HoT by being within melee range of his target and having his party within the range of his group HoT. The same range that the Confessor's AoE pulse fires...the same range as the Champion knockdown...the same range as the Knight AoE...etc. Turning on FF at the group level fundamentally changes the dynamics of the group such that you are creating spacing concerns and encouraging engaging your enemy in one-on-ones rather than as a group. A poor decision IMHO...and severely limiting the symbiotic nature of the various archetypes. Combat is chaotic as hell as it is (in a good way)...without concerns about hitting your group mates with your AoEs. Changing this to enable all your powers to hit your group mates at any time? You've turned a fun (if not chaotic and stressful) situation into a grade A cluster.

 

3. Having FF as the default position for Raid-Groups (assuming that they will exist), Guild, Nation or Faction does not create these problems. The group...being the smallest cell of organization, should be able to stand within range of each other's AoEs. However, this should not be the case for Guilds, Nations or Factions (as a default position). Battlefield strategy...where to deploy your groups...and how..is another important aspect of combat (either open field or sieges). Again, knowing that if you get your groups too close to each other they will AoE the hell out of each other...is important to know and consider. You don't lose the symbiotic nature of the archetypes by allowing FF within the guild, nation or faction...so long as it is off at the group level.

 

4. Now, while the default position should be that most powers are group friendly, that doesn't mean that all of them should be. Think of the Sentinel big bomb from Shadowbane...knowing that X class has Y power that isn't group friendly and that everyone should scatter...is also cool as hell...and adds an additional level of strategy (and level of uniqueness between archetypes). Having all powers always effect all group members all the time, eliminates this possibility and level of diversity.

 

5. The reverse can also be true on the Raid-Group, Guild, Nation or Faction level. You could add powers to certain archetypes which were friendly to the entire Raid-Group, Guild, Nation or Faction...perhaps an extra long casting Druid Root or Frostweaver persistent AoE (think Shadowbane Fury). If all combat is always FF (or if the default position is group combat is always FF) you lose this diversity and customization IMHO.

 

6. Finally, we have the targeting system. Without Tab targeting, I again would argue that FF should not be the default position of group v group combat. Rectile targeting, velocity damage, physics...all the cool (and often frustrating) aspects of the combat system as implemented beg for GrVGr immunity from FF. 

 

7. Does this have any impact on the "griefing" issues discussed in the other thread? Absolutely not...guy's being an asshat, you drop him from group and WTFPWN him. Self policing on a guild, nation or faction level is an entirely different issue, apart and aside from GvG FF. Groups are an ad hoc designation...designed to optimize archetype diversity and coordination. At that level...all combat being FF enabled is a serious mistake IMHO.

 

Just my $.02 ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish they'd turn on FF in a few Hunger Dome matches so we can laugh our asses off at the explosion of FF deaths.

 

On a mage channie in SB I considered it collateral damage to roast a few friendlies. Small price to pay to see all those death messages flying around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post.

 

And I like #7.

 

Also, don't rule out that they wanted ff in some of the campaigns to give negative debuffs... I'm sure ACE will answer the FF question and how they plan to implement it. But I would assume no FF at a group level would make the most sense.


[TB] The Balance
Nation of Equilibrium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think friendly fire could work in this game pretty smoothly if your group members we're immune to FF. From what Blair said in the Arawulf interview about ability cones it's a fair assumption that they aren't going to be getting any smaller. Extremely precise abilities probably aren't going to be a thing (especially when you factor in latency).

 

However I do really like the idea of FF when it comes to nerfing the effectiveness of zergs. Let's say the max party size is 5 people. People within that group don't have to worry about nuking their own 20 foot tall champion with their own massive fireballs. However they will have to worry about the surrounding groups and friendly fire will actually be something you have to plan around when coordinating sieges BUT won't be insanely annoying all the time for people who play giant melee classes.

 

Friendly Fire with group immunity will break up the zergs very nicely and cause big battles to be nice and spread out. Also it will encourage grouping and social interaction which is something MMO's have desperately needed.

 

I was fully against FF but I think group immunity could actually work. I definitely think full FF would be an absolute nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 From what Blair said in the Arawulf interview about ability cones it's a fair assumption that they aren't going to be getting any smaller. Extremely precise abilities probably aren't going to be a thing (especially when you factor in latency).

 

 

can you find me that part pls?

I'm too lazy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think friendly fire could work in this game pretty smoothly if your group members we're immune to FF. From what Blair said in the Arawulf interview about ability cones it's a fair assumption that they aren't going to be getting any smaller. Extremely precise abilities probably aren't going to be a thing (especially when you factor in latency).

 

However I do really like the idea of FF when it comes to nerfing the effectiveness of zergs. Let's say the max party size is 5 people. People within that group don't have to worry about nuking their own 20 foot tall champion with their own massive fireballs. However they will have to worry about the surrounding groups and friendly fire will actually be something you have to plan around when coordinating sieges BUT won't be insanely annoying all the time for people who play giant melee classes.

 

Friendly Fire with group immunity will break up the zergs very nicely and cause big battles to be nice and spread out. Also it will encourage grouping and social interaction which is something MMO's have desperately needed.

 

I was fully against FF but I think group immunity could actually work. I definitely think full FF would be an absolute nightmare.

Good points. I think posters are thinking in absolute terms. i.e. all ff or no ff.

 

As you say, FF could be limited to non-group members and simply limit group size to ... 10 or so? That would be interesting. SB was like this for most of its existence with regard to many powers. Others just hit everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points. I think posters are thinking in absolute terms. i.e. all ff or no ff.

 

As you say, FF could be limited to non-group members and simply limit group size to ... 10 or so? That would be interesting. SB was like this for most of its existence with regard to many powers. Others just hit everyone. 

 

I'd rather have smaller 5 man groups in regards to FF immunity. Maybe you could make a raid group with sub groups but only each individual group of 5 had it's own FF immunity.

 

That would keep small groups of 2-3 still plenty viable. I feel like the more you increase the FF immunity group size the more power zergs would have.

Edited by Zybak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The combat is Tera+DCUO with a bit of Wildstar, none of which are anything close to FF games.

 

The only large scale MMOs that I can remember which had FF were Planetside 1+2, and Darkfall - FPS games -  the farthest thing possible from animation lock / cone aoe combat. As far as I can tell none of the devs here have ever worked on a FF game and it isn't going to happen with the present system without a huge overhaul.

 

Putting in rules like no FF on group members just seems really wierd. You AOE 2 people in front of you, but one defies the laws of physics and avoids damage simply because he has /join protection? All it will do is make group management a nightmare. Either everyone is vulnerable or nobody is.

Edited by jacobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was fully against FF but I think group immunity could actually work. I definitely think full FF would be an absolute nightmare.

You are assuming that the game won't be re-balanced around FF once it is implemented. The fixes seem to be rather simple(smaller cones etc.), its just a matter of adding it early enough to allow that re-balancing to take place.


Might I interest you in a low-interest mortgage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shadowbane.

 

SB had very very very limited FF, basically negligible imo

 

pretty much everything was grp friendly, only a select few powers affected everyone, including the caster, like the mentioned sentinel bomb or Fury AoEs

there was no accidental buffing, enemy healing or even melee FF whatsoever

 

Even UO's FF system was harsher than SB's

Edited by freeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah at this point I'm just like if it works and adds to the game then great but if it doesn't oh well move on. The games success or failure won't hinge on one feature. One feature that lets be honest isn't exactly a staple or requirement for a good PvP game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are assuming that the game won't be re-balanced around FF once it is implemented. The fixes seem to be rather simple(smaller cones etc.), its just a matter of adding it early enough to allow that re-balancing to take place.

 

In Arawulf's interview with Thomas Blair they essentially said they are happy with the size of the cones/projectile sizes and think that once they get the client side prediction software dialed in the game's performance will be pretty good (paraphrasing but it went something like that)

 

Essentially the attacks are going to be fairly large for latency reasons, which makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...