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

Ladies and Gentlemen I figure it out now, they want to let carebears to stay for a bit more to invite their friends for more pledge and then turn FF on as they leave Crowfall slowly because of their pixels being hurt by their friends and enemies, sounds like an evil plan but i like it!

 

That's it, i solved another problem.

 

Cheers :ph34r:

Because that's what happens when you attract a bunch of consumers with different tastes.

 

If they start seeking a different demographic, and that demographic starts to surpass the other, then they decide to "serve their consumer", it ultimately betrays the advertised features they already shared.

 

It's a systemic problem, they may be struggling to get friendly fire in place, but if they don't show some commitment, opposition will take their claim for granted and push for alternate expectations.

 

They advertised a strategic action game with friendly fire, and that they wouldn't fold to broader audiences. But that's just talk until they actually nail some niche gameplay to the game.

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carebears? Broader audiences? Griefing? I'm sorry...but all of this peripheral noise is irrelevant. The combat system is being designed to allow the smallest level of organization to work without Friendly Fire. The "party" functions with the Legionnaire being within range of his party while he whacks his target with his stick (the 3rd whack and the 5th whack adding 3 ticks of health and rage/mana)...and the Confessor hitting 2-E to launch her pulsating fire aura...and the Champion hitting "C" to knock his enemies down. This has NOTHING to do with Carebears or being HARDCORE or niche or anything else. This is a "do we want archetypes to be symbiotic and function as a group" or do we want individual toons all functioning separate and apart from each other so they stay out of range of each other's powers? Meeting out justice...Killing griefers...being able to mine or fish or bake bread in a pvp-less world is a whole different issue...and group level FF immunity has no impact on any of that. As I've played the Hunger Dome...I cannot envision any scenario where the combat would be fun, rewarding or competitive because of removing the existing group level FF immunity. Groups are ad hoc organizations. You don't like the douchebag who just looted the Ruby Slippers of Uberness? /remove or /disband and drop him from group and PWN him...and loot it back off him. The world is in NO WAY more Carebear with group level FF immunity. Why are people so bloody hung up with these labels and these airs of macho bullsh!t. Sheesh! 

 

To me..the issue isn't whether groups should have FF immunity (I think its an absolute must), the issue is larger levels or organizations. If your standard group is 5 or 6 or 8 or 10 toons (I frankly don't care) that level of organization should always have default FF immunity so they can work together effectively and you build an archetype system where they benefit from being a diverse make up with diverse powers...and being in range of each other. The question is...do you allow "raid groups" of 4-8 of these "sub-groups"...ie 20-80 toons working together to have FF immunity? Do you allow ad hoc player created guilds to have FF immunity? Do you allow Nations (Guilds allied to each other) to have FF immunity? Do you allow everyone within a Faction (all toons pledged to a God or ideal (Chaos/Order/Balance)) to have FF immunity?  At this point, I see it being a campaign to campaign decision...to allow or disallow FF immunity....at all or any level (other than group). Personally, I want to principally play in an environment with only group level FF immunity...where the 8-10 skilled gamers working together as a unit can be competitive against larger numbers of groups who will have difficulty staying outside of each other's AoE ranges. I want to see guild leaders having to strategize about effective group deployments in sieges...either using "waves" of groups or attacking multiple points with multiple groups...all because their powers do not have FF immunity beyond the group level. 

Edited by Gradishar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best mix of this would be friendly fire immunity for everyone in a party of 5. Outside of that you need to work with other groups so you don't blow each other up.

 

Any more than 5 people not having to worry about FF would turn into a cluster custard.

 

It would severely hurt the uncoordinated zerg, spread fights out across a bigger area, and encourage good group tactics. Some of the good guilds will figure out ways how to coordinate their groups to where FF damage is mitigated.

 

Full FF would just be an unfun nightmare. Especially with animation locks and the massive AoE most skills have. I think it's pretty obvious that they aren't going to have full friendly fire at this point. I do think it's still likely that their will be FF for anyone outside of your group.

 

Having small group immunity still leaves in all of the betrayal and other FF goodness. If you want to kill some idiot that's pissing you off on your faction you still can because he won't be in your group. Want to screw over one of your groupmates? Kick him out of the group or leave the party and murder him.

Edited by Zybak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full FF would just be an unfun nightmare. Especially with animation locks and the massive AoE most skills have.

 

 

not "especially", but "just because of that"

 

like I said multiple times before: full friendly fire can work just fine with proper powers designed around them to complement it.

 

But as you said, everything points to the contrary. They apparently never thought about implementing full FF. They're going to have to settle for a cop-out if they keep the current style of powers. Which imo is kinda sad.

Trying it at this point will just enforce their opinion that they need some kinda "group system" when it comes to certain powers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like I said multiple times before: full friendly fire can work just fine with proper powers designed around them to complement it.

 

Sure it could but most people don't want to feel like they're playing Quake in an MMO. I really dislike the DFO in and out figure 8/strafe-spam combat. Sure the game takes skill but it's not fun. People love to think that the most skillful mechanics are always the best ones to implement.

 

The style of combat that would work with FF just isn't very approachable (or really fun in a lot of people's opinion). Ideally they want to make a game that's easy to pickup and hard/impossible to master. 

 

I'm all for mechanics that increase skill gaps (I've proposed a bunch on the forums) as long as they're actually fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it could but most people don't want to feel like they're playing Quake in an MMO. I really dislike the DFO in and out figure 8/strafe-spam combat. Sure the game takes skill but it's not fun. People love to think that the most skillful mechanics are always the best ones to implement.

 

The style of combat that would work with FF just isn't very approachable (or really fun in a lot of people's opinion). Ideally they want to make a game that's easy to pickup and hard/impossible to master.

 

I'm all for mechanics that increase skill gaps (I've proposed a bunch on the forums) as long as they're actually fun.

 

I tried to have this exact discussion the other day. "Skill" is a funny word in this context to me. You can be the best monkey at the zoo at throwing poo, but at the end of the day you've still got a hand full of excrement.

 

If the combat isn't fun long term then arguing about how much "Skill" it takes is fairly dumb. That's how I feel about DF combat.

 

I think what you've described in your earlier post is a far, far more elegant system than full FF.

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mentions periferial noise, follows with a bunch of periferial noise.

 

Friendly fire isn't meaningful if it doesn't work on an internal level. Things like centaurs melee based support healing is everything wrong with their design thus far.

 

There is a metric ton of nuances they can add to decrease collateral damage, from intelligent target acquisition, to reduced friendly fire damage, to effectively shaped hit zones, the list goes on and on.

 

They can make a chaotic brawler if they want, nobodies stopping them, but they advertised a strategy, so I'm requesting some tactical depth. Settle for less if you like.

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, cause fun is universal and objective?

I have fun when a group of 5 I am fighting is unable to hit me properly without killing themselves.

With a combat system that supports it, FF raises the skill level of the entire game.

There's no way for 2-3 people to beat 5 without FF. Is it that you guys have "fun" when your ability to aim isn't compromised?

So much for hardcore gamers, go play in God's Reach.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With group immunity you will get bomb and stack spec groups that aoe everything that come near (or that they pull in). This brings both the skill and fun level down. Sure being the bomb group and blowing up larger numbers is fun but in every instance being better organized and working better together (whether you're part of the group or the intended victim) because of full FF is more fun when these victories occur. Plus you will have a wider range of playable character types that are effective when you avoid this spec group mentality (which will still occur somewhat with full ff but to a lesser degree).

 

Combat and skills as they are now isn't even worth thinking about. It looks like they slapped together a bunch of generic mmo skills that fit within the design flavor of each archetype so they could test background systems and server socks.

 

2.0 is where we will get a better feel for the type of combat they are aiming for. And there better be full ff because if its just two massive teams spamming aoe willy nilly they are going to lose a lot of interest in the game they are making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, cause fun is universal and objective?

 

I have fun when a group of 5 I am fighting is unable to hit me properly without killing themselves.

With a combat system that supports it, FF raises the skill level of the entire game.

 

There's no way for 2-3 people to beat 5 without FF. Is it that you guys have "fun" when your ability to aim isn't compromised?

So much for hardcore gamers, go play in God's Reach.

 

 

With group immunity you will get bomb and stack spec groups that aoe everything that come near (or that they pull in). This brings both the skill and fun level down. Sure being the bomb group and blowing up larger numbers is fun but in every instance being better organized and working better together (whether you're part of the group or the intended victim) because of full FF is more fun when these victories occur. Plus you will have a wider range of playable character types that are effective when you avoid this spec group mentality (which will still occur somewhat with full ff but to a lesser degree).

 

Combat and skills as they are now isn't even worth thinking about. It looks like they slapped together a bunch of generic mmo skills that fit within the design flavor of each archetype so they could test background systems and server socks.

 

2.0 is where we will get a better feel for the type of combat they are aiming for. And there better be full ff because if its just two massive teams spamming aoe willy nilly they are going to lose a lot of interest in the game they are making.

 

 

Mentions periferial noise, follows with a bunch of periferial noise.

 

Friendly fire isn't meaningful if it doesn't work on an internal level. Things like centaurs melee based support healing is everything wrong with their design thus far.

 

There is a metric ton of nuances they can add to decrease collateral damage, from intelligent target acquisition, to reduced friendly fire damage, to effectively shaped hit zones, the list goes on and on.

 

They can make a chaotic brawler if they want, nobodies stopping them, but they advertised a strategy, so I'm requesting some tactical depth. Settle for less if you like.

 

These people get it. Sadly the same can't be said about most of the other posters in this thread.. Friendly fire is unfun? Gee, sure does sound like you're one of those people severely punished by ff because you can't be arsed to properly aim and plan your attacks or be willing to pay the price of dragging your group down. I'm sincerely hoping that ACE are not aiming to make another game where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever, we've had enough of those. I'm guessing you're all part of zergs or you wouldn't be so afraid of this mechanic, it is the best way to fight skill-less zergs after all.


Member of The BlackHand Order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These people get it. Sadly the same can't be said about most of the other posters in this thread.. Friendly fire is unfun? Gee, sure does sound like you're one of those people severely punished by ff because you can't be arsed to properly aim and plan your attacks or be willing to pay the price of dragging your group down. I'm sincerely hoping that ACE are not aiming to make another game where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever, we've had enough of those. I'm guessing you're all part of zergs or you wouldn't be so afraid of this mechanic, it is the best way to fight skill-less zergs after all.

 

This is stretching conclusions a bit: " . . . where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever . . .".

 

FF adds a complication to combat.  But in other games I've played where FF wasn't enabled, if you ran around like a headless chicken in PvP . . .

 

. . . there were plenty of people on the map ready with consequences. 

 

Not having the one (ff) doesn't necessarily equate to the other.


“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is stretching conclusions a bit: " . . . where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever . . .".

 

FF adds a complication to combat.  But in other games I've played where FF wasn't enabled, if you ran around like a headless chicken in PvP . . .

 

. . . there were plenty of people on the map ready with consequences. 

 

Not having the one (ff) doesn't necessarily equate to the other.

 

A bit of hyperbole I'll admit, but my point still stands and FF is one of the best and most meaningful complications that you can add to a game. Situational awareness is always paramount in any competitive game, without FF you've got terrain, enemies and yourself to keep track off while mostly disregarding the exact locations of your allies. Throwing your allies into the mix just adds that much more depth and weight to your actions, it really separates the wheat from the chaff as far as capable players go and the organized group from the disorganized. And once again I can't stress how paramount this is to fighting the ever occurring zergs that bads without fail band together in to combat their lack of skills.


Member of The BlackHand Order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is stretching conclusions a bit: " . . . where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever . . .".

 

FF adds a complication to combat.  But in other games I've played where FF wasn't enabled, if you ran around like a headless chicken in PvP . . .

 

. . . there were plenty of people on the map ready with consequences. 

 

Not having the one (ff) doesn't necessarily equate to the other.

Yeah I'm more with this thinking as well. While I agree it can add depth to the PvP having played many games now I don't think its the end all be all for good PvP some like to make it out to be. Personally I'm fine either way, if its in and works then great but if they decide not to add it or only add it to one type of CW then I'm fine with that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full 100% Friendly Fire is more interesting to me and to most players that want a hardcore skill-based game.

AOE's have been the bread and butter of less skilled players in mutiplayer games ever since I can remember, so putting a CONSEQUENCE on AOE's seems entirely reasonable if we want the game to be more about mastery than about getting a bunch of folks together and blasting away.

With Full FF, (3F or FFF if you will) you have to consider things like threat ranges, the abilities that you have and how they can be appropriate in a group setting. It encourages people to find groups and guilds whose playstyles match and it encourages development of more complex techniques, tactics and strategy.

I don't want another WoW, or any other corny PvP on easy mode.

I want HARDCORE. I want to develop a specific SKILLSET. I want to be able to enter a fight with people I know can fight and avoid the players that are stupidly spamming skills and AOEs and killing their team-mates. If I join a team I want REAL TEAMWORK.

Friendly Fire should be the base case, the standard. If you want anything else, you should join the campaign that has those special fu-fu rules and play with people who want to be sub-par like yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These people get it. Sadly the same can't be said about most of the other posters in this thread.. Friendly fire is unfun? Gee, sure does sound like you're one of those people severely punished by ff because you can't be arsed to properly aim and plan your attacks or be willing to pay the price of dragging your group down. I'm sincerely hoping that ACE are not aiming to make another game where you can just run around like a headless chicken doing combo rotations without any consequence whatsoever, we've had enough of those. I'm guessing you're all part of zergs or you wouldn't be so afraid of this mechanic, it is the best way to fight skill-less zergs after all.

Completely disagree. Those posters just made a bunch of unsupported conclusions. Full on FF is absolutely not required for group coordination to be used to great effect. Neither is it required for smaller numbers to prevail with greater coordination and "skill."

 

Full FF would be ridiculous in a game like this. It shocks me that otherwise reasonable posters don't understand why that reality exists.

 

This game is about group combat. In my experience full FF reduces tactical play ... It doesn't increase tactical group play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let`s talk about Chelsea for minute; Jose Mourinho was fired today, and it cost the club 40 mil. £ salary doing a piss poor job this season.

 

And ACE need to think about FF when they design combat powers with the remaining Archetypes in 2016. I think some of the Fessor powers need to be re-designed to be honest. Because a pvp focused sandbox game does not thrive without friendly fire - it only create 1 mega zerg vs. the remaining players on the map; kind of sub or die tactics, which is really boring political for those are involved in the campaign.

 

We need friendly fire or this so called pvp focused mmo (play to crush) will fail hard, and there are whole guilds at the moment who refuse to participate in testing, because they are worried about details in combat also related to friendly fire when we think about some of the design related to character powers.

 


MQfHl7c.png

Crowfall Game Client: https://www.crowfall.com/en/client/

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.

 

Yes, but it`s necessary, and many players including myself played SB for over 10 years when others joined WoW in 2004 - I still had great fun in Shadowbane, and there are some who still have fun on the emus. Battlefield 4 by Dice is a good example as well  when u play it on some maps without FF - it only end up in throwing grenades. And with friendly fire you need to use a different approach in-game, because u will kill your own team with extensive use of grenades, which increase the overall skillcap in-game and coordination with allied players.

Edited by mythx

MQfHl7c.png

Crowfall Game Client: https://www.crowfall.com/en/client/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely disagree. Those posters just made a bunch of unsupported conclusions. Full on FF is absolutely not required for group coordination to be used to great effect. Neither is it required for smaller numbers to prevail with greater coordination and "skill."

 

Full FF would be ridiculous in a game like this. It shocks me that otherwise reasonable posters don't understand why that reality exists.

 

This game is about group combat. In my experience full FF reduces tactical play ... It doesn't increase tactical group play.

Everyone else posting here has reasoning and examples for backing up their point of view while you're just making completely contradictory claims like "full ff reduces tactical play'. I don't get this aversion to a game taking skill and careful group coordination that you have but maybe you should just come to terms with the fact that the more hardcore and unforgiving rulesets simply isn't for you, there'll be a place for people like you in the faction and God rulesets. Edited by Zushakon

Member of The BlackHand Order

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...