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

So... how's that Friendly Fire going?

Recommended Posts

These kind of discussions provide valuable feedback for the developers about aspects that their target audience does or does not find important.

 

Except only a handful of people demand FF to be in the game and revive this discussion over and over. I feel the target audience you're talking about is rather a small part of the entire community. A vocal minority.


ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These kind of discussions provide valuable feedback for the developers about aspects that their target audience does or does not find important. If you just "keep going according to the plan" chances of coming up with something that nobody likes are higher.

 

Isn't that what gameplay feedback is about? There seems to be a lot of that here.

Also if players want to suggest how FF could work exactly they could try here.

 

But this thread is essentially a debate surrounding how a feature not yet introduced will or wont work - replete with criticisms of that not-yet-introduced feature!

 

Im just trying to approach this logically: Why don't people wait until its introduced before raging about how its not what they wanted?

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except only a handful of people demand FF to be in the game and revive this discussion over and over. I feel the target audience you're talking about is rather a small part of the entire community. A vocal minority.

 

The vocal minority here is a sample of much larger segment, that might be small compared to the general player base but can be influential due to ability to invest a lot of time in games and form public opinion due to being vocal and active online.

Edited by rajah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that what gameplay feedback is about? There seems to be a lot of that here.

Also if players want to suggest how FF could work exactly they could try here.

 

But this thread is essentially a debate surrounding how a feature not yet introduced will or wont work - replete with criticisms of that not-yet-introduced feature!

 

Im just trying to approach this logically: Why don't people wait until its introduced before raging about how its not what they wanted?

 

People don't want to wait to discuss it until it's introduced because

 

a,) They have the ability to post here.

b.) They have certain ideas regarding the subject.

c.) They care enough to voice their opinion.

 

I believe all three are a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd - The question lies on how high you set the bar. Too high = bad, too low = also bad. And if they had turn FF on from the very beginning I doubt we would see any results since the hunger dome is an environment which isn't really suited for FF to begin with. Maybe the first couple of minutes in the outskirts but certainly not when the hunger is already at the keep. Also the goal of the first tests was neither archetype balance nor ff but the combat system which combines security (client server relation), somewhat physics, the action combat approach and well... whatever you want to add. 

 

However along the way I hoped or thought that FF would be introduced with the larger battlezones (for example SP) as you had more room and also more time (kind of - applies to the throne war mod.) to experiment with position play which is crucial for FF. You can't just throw FF into a game and expect people to play with the current HD settings and the current UI setting and say "yeah, here you have it. Now deal with it". 

 

Sure it takes time but sooner or later it is too late which is why I hope they at least do some tries with it soon.

You are right, the Hunger Dome wouldn't really be the best place to test Friendly Fire (so it made some sense not to implement it at the beginning). Siege Perilous and the upcoming mini campaign (looking forward to it !), are better for stuff like that. Kind of a shame they didn't at least try it out with Siege Perilous (could be done during the tests where they hadn't added or changed anything to the game). The thing is just that they are testing out abilities, both with Hunger Dome and Siege Perilous and every design decision regarding abilities will affect how well Friendly Fire could be implemented.

 

Personally, Friendly Fire won't make or break the game for me, but I can't help but feel that it's more healthy to design mechanics in tandem.

Edited by Smed

o8WHnLc.png

THE most active European guild. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe in the vocal minority thing. I think every idea should be judged on its own merits. 

 

Friendly Fire seems like a good idea. Having it in the Dregs seems like a good idea. Making sure its balanced seems like a good idea.

 

Waiting for the devs to introduce it for testing according to their own test plans seems like a good idea.

 

Testing it before critcising the devs for failing to implement it properly seems like a good idea.

 

Waiting for all of that to happen before using the forums to proclaim how the game is doomed if this feature isnt implemented according to a players personal preferences seems like a good idea.


www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

 

Its almost like -- 11 months ago -- we told them they needed friendly fire turned on so that they could develop a combat system that actually had the tactical implications of friendly fire, and they ignored us, and built a combat system with no consideration for the tactical implications of friendly fire!

 

Wait - that's exactly what happened.

 

That is exactly what f*cking happened.

 

We told them to put it in. 

 

We told them it needed to be balanced around, and not added afterwards, or this would happen.

 

F*cking unbelievable incompetence. If this is true, whatever hope I still had for this rooted-combat damage-splitting MOBA-trash piece of poorly made socks game just went out the window.

 

You . . . TOLD THEM . . . you personally . . . TOLD THEM . . . and they had the nerve to ignore your ORDER.

 

You go work up the funds, you go manage and support a company and all the people in it, you engage in a start up in an in credibly expensive to produce and compete in market.

 

You . . . GO DO IT.    I'm TELLING YOU to go do it.

 

Wait, you haven't? 

 

See how that works?  ;D

 

/sarcasm off

 

I've had a great deal of fun in some (some) MMOs in PvP . . . that didn't have FF.  Suck it up, it's not that bad, all of you crying over this put your big boy pants on.

 

A)  The game isn't even released yet for God's sake.

B.)  They have the capability to turn it on . . . the current stance suggests (maybe) it won't be (yet).  The point here is (IMO) they are keeping their options open.  That's called being attentive to the needs of ALL their customers, pro and con FF.

C)  Because, based on B.), maybe it's a case of everyone being patient and letting the game DEVELOP, give them (and Us) time to see how things are gelling.

D)  They aren't blind to the ramifications of FF and their combat system, they've had the ability to turn it on.  That, combined with the fact they've shown the stones (and experience and background) to engage in a startup.  And it's not the first game they've worked on as people.

 

FF, I think everyone would agree, is a high-profile factor that can negatively affect group PvP, or, potentially provide some benefits.  IMO it's a "thin ice" thing however.  "In Theory, Theory and Practise are the same.  In Practice they are not."  My guess is the more practical approach is to step it forward slowly, start out without it then eval from there.

 

In the meantime . . . I'M TELLING YOU . . . ORDERING YOU . . . to put your money where your mouth is:  You signed up for the project, then step up and believe in what's being done.  Cause I guarantee you:  MMOs over the past five years have definitely been LACKING . . . and and I think we have a chance at something different in Crowfall.

 

Be constructive, recognize not every detail from everyone is going to be implemented that everyone wants, at first, or ever.

 

If you are PRO FF your viewpoint is still incredibly valuable if it turns out (who knows) FF isn't turned on at release.  That viewpoint would be a critical lens in the, say, first 3 months of live with real-time commentary taken from ACTUAL live battles in live CWs.

 

If you are actually a . . . planner . . . a strategist . . . a tactician. . . you know, someone thinks he's gonna be leet in a Throne War Simulator and an Econo War specialist, wouldn't you actually alter your sights to that point in time to objectively observe what's going on real-time for feedback on this?  Seems a best case place for a revisit, again assuming it's not going to be turned on at release.

Edited by Bramble

“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

Friendly fire increases the skill-ceiling.  I am all for it.

 

Again, people that say it won't work, don't have to play it, those of us that would enjoy paying closer attention to positioning and the game requiring much more awareness will have a blast with it.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friendly fire increases the skill-ceiling.  I am all for it.

 

Again, people that say it won't work, don't have to play it, those of us that would enjoy paying closer attention to positioning and the game requiring much more awareness will have a blast with it.

 

Cool.

 

Then we'll look forward to your first series of siege / group combat evaluations in the first month of live.

 

You can provide combat byplay of the engagements, outline how those battles went no-FF, provide a net-net assesment of overall player satisfaction no-FF, then provide the counter-point as to how FF would have made it even better and how that would have translated to everyone.

 

Thanks for stepping upl :D

Edited by Bramble

“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

Cool.

 

Then we'll look forward to your first series of siege / group combat evaluations in the first month of live.

 

You can provide combat byplay of the engagements, outline how those battles went no-FF, provide a net-net assesment of overall player satisfaction no-FF, then provide the counter-point as to how FF would have made it even better and how that would have translated to everyone.

 

Thanks for stepping upl :D

Luckily they will try FF and the people that don't want to play it don't have to play it.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was afraid my reply about FF would be taken like this. This was the discussion we had with Todd as well. Again, I'm not willing to talk about what has been said in that discussion in here.

 

It's not your fault. Thanks for sharing that piece of information actually, but you can't expect us not to react to it.

ACE shouldn't fear confrontation on the forum.

 

Like Coolwaters, the question I want to ask you, did ACE actually promised FF to be in the game? You seem to think so, but I'm not sure. Can you show us quotes, or something else as 'proof' that ACE promised that FF would be part of the game? The community asking for FF over and over doesn't make it a 'ACE promised it to us' feature really.

 

I feel like I am the only one with a bit of memory here, and since my memory usually sucks you guys must be bots or something.

ACE has promised FF numerous times. If you're looking for a "WE'LL DEFINITELY HAVE FRIENDLY FIRE" quote you won't find one, 'cause ACE and its developers have been ultra-cautious about any feature (duelist digging, full loot in the dregs, the whole "the shadow" ruleset ordeal... and the list goes on), they're the masters of promising things and not promising things at the same time. Todd's school.

 

Anyhow it's always been obvious to us who have followed the game since the start. At first it was the promise of not having "groups" in The Dregs, not in terms of guilds but rather "targeting groups" so that anyone could attack / backstab anyone at anytime without the hassle of going through "friendly fire toggling" bullcrap. Then it was the promise of going full in with physics, which clearly implied the fact that projectile had to be stopped by bodies (of all kinds, friends included) and of course damaging them otherwise physics goes to the toilet. But now the only thing based on physics are those horrendous pushes that make team fights super chaotic (not even a form of bullet drop included).

 

Even then, things were kinda uncertain... so we asked them. They included the answer in a FAQ which might or might not be there anymore.

I made a thread about it. The FAQ clearly stated that FF would be enabled "wherever possible", which again can be interpreted in many ways but was clearly a sign that the Dregs would at least have it. I made Tully so mad that he had to answer, and oh boy he did it hard:

 

"I'm not entirely sure how you can read an FAQ that mentions the possibility of turning off friendly fire on 1 or 2 of the announced rulesets, and to you that translates to "only FFA has friendly fire". 

 

Make no mistake, we'll be working and testing this area heavily and we'll find what works best for each campaign ruleset. We might find a way to execute it well on all of them, we may not. 

 

It's best not to jump to hyperbolic conclusion's when we're being very forward and open with our thinking with you on this."

 

Tully... look at us now.

A song from Serj Tankian comes to mind.

 

Except only a handful of people demand FF to be in the game and revive this discussion over and over. I feel the target audience you're talking about is rather a small part of the entire community. A vocal minority.

 

Not so sure about that. Now, maybe, that the forum has been basically taken over by the usual casual MMO crowd that buys the game and then leaves it after a month. But it used to be different. I challenge you to try making the poll again, see how things have changed. Definitely not a vocal minority though.

You're the vocal minority.

 

The only way Art+Craft will lose customers is if the finished product doesn't appeal to players. Thats a long way off and at the end of a pretty convincing plan.

This is not the final straw because they will do it if its right for the game they want to sell. Thats it.

They will take our feedback (including *warnings* and panic alerts with the same pinch of salt they give every other suggestion from the players): Under advisement.

 

No poorly made socks sherlock. ACE can do whatever it wants with the game and still manage to make a profit out of it.

We were here to see certain features get done and be implemented though. And without us I am not so sure how well the KS would have ended.

 

Maybe you're new and you don't understand... imagine if your sissy Roleplay got banned somehow from the game.

 

-----------------------------------

 

That being said. Again, ACE can change their design whenever they want and it wouldn't be the first time.

What hurts the most is that WE have seen the combat being built up, WE told them it wouldn't work with FF and if they wanted to stick with that design they had to change it, THEY repeatedly asked us to calm down 'cause they knew what they were doing and it was prealpha after all.

Turns out they didn't know what they were doing and ended up choking on their own food.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so sure about that. Now, maybe, that the forum has been basically taken over by the usual casual MMO crowd that buys the game and then leaves it after a month. But it used to be different. I challenge you to try making the poll again, see how things have changed. But not a vocal minority for sure. You're the vocal minority.

 

 

I'm gonna ignore the derogatory vibe coming from you. We can tell you're upset that the filthy casuals like us have invaded. Even tho..you know, this particular filthy casual is making suggestions around stuff like FF FFA.

 

 The difference between a suggestion thread and a complain thread by the way is that when we dare to suggest something we have to accept we're gonna be disagreed with and suck it in without falling into a tantrum cos - you know - people have different expectations. Maybe its a filthy casual thing that we dont need to insult the people who disagree with us?

 

My point about the vocal minority thing was specifically to denounce the idea of it since it was brought up earlier. I see it as trope that had no real bearing on discussions.. Hence the link. I'm sorry you missed that.

 

No poorly made socks sherlock. ACE can do what it wants with the game and still manage to make a profit out of it.

We were here to see certain features get done and be implemented though.

 

Maybe you're new and you don't understand... imagine if your sissy Roleplay got banned somehow from the game.

 

I don't have to *imagine* anything.. Since *my sissy RP* was mentioned as a possibility I have faith in the devs that it won't be scrapped. But you know I also have to allow for the fact it won't be exactly everything I would personally wish for. It's entirely possible i have to compromise my sissy vision.

 

You know why? Cos Im an adult who doesnt need someone to hold my hand and tell me it will be alright every step of the way of the journey. Or humour me every time I throw a tantrum on a public forum cos *Now I want it!*

 

We aren't visiting the dentist. We aren't all 4 years old. Get a grip.

 

For any member of this community to get so riled up about a *yet-to-be-implemented* *yet-to-be-tested* *yet-to-be-described* *yet-to-be-balanced* feature of a game that they need to resort to ad-hominems is yeah pretty breathtaking and shows that some people really should sit out the *early game development* part of game development.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ACE has promised FF numerous times. If you're looking for a "WE'LL DEFINITELY HAVE FRIENDLY FIRE" quote you won't find one, 'cause ACE and its developers have been ultra-cautious about any feature (duelist digging, full loot in the dregs, the whole "the shadow" ruleset ordeal... and the list goes on), they're the masters of promising things and not promising things at the same time. Todd's school.

 

So there is nothing from ACE that promised us FF. I already knew, but just wanted to make sure we are playing on the same field.


ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there is nothing from ACE that promised us FF. I already knew, but just wanted to make sure we are playing on the same field.

 

So you skipped the part about the FAQ and Tully answering on the forum entirely. Great job carebeard.

 

 I'm gonna ignore the derogatory vibe coming from you. We can tell you're upset that the filthy casuals like us have invaded. Even tho..you know, this particular filthy casual is making suggestions around stuff like FF FFA.

 

Right. The Dayz / H1Z1 mode in a MMORPG where who hides the most, who has more friends or who's the luckiest wins. Great job to you too sir.


y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was afraid my reply about FF would be taken like this. This was the discussion we had with Todd as well. Again, I'm not willing to talk about what has been said in that discussion in here.

 

 

Like Coolwaters, the question I want to ask you, did ACE actually promised FF to be in the game? You seem to think so, but I'm not sure. Can you show us quotes, or something else as 'proof' that ACE promised that FF would be part of the game? The community asking for FF over and over doesn't make it a 'ACE promised it to us' feature really.

I've asked for a link to evidence AC "promised" FF to anyone, ever during KS several times as evidence that imaginary player X relied on that promise to back the game. maybe I've glossed over the quote, but I haven't seen one yet.

 

Can one of the angsty sky-is-falling posters please quote the promise and link it that you claim AC has broken to you? If you can't even link and quote the supposed broken promise you are crying like children about then I suggest the devs ignore you, entirely. I know I will.

 

Because had I thought this game would have DF type FF (what I call pure) I'd not have backed it. because it's a ridiculous idea in very large engagements with diverse powers and ATs. Works in M&B. Doesn't work in a game with dozens or cool abilities. FF with 200 people on the screen would be so damn funny and stupid. I wish they would turn it on for giggles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there is nothing from ACE that promised us FF. I already knew, but just wanted to make sure we are playing on the same field.

Lol. So These guys are:

  1. Literally making poorly made socks up about some "promise" that tricked them into backing the game
  2. Refuse to provide an imaginary quote / link to the imaginary promise
  3. Continue to allude to the vague (imaginary) poorly made socks they made up whole they spew very real vitriol bordering on defamation at the devs for breaking the imaginary promise

Got it. /thread

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. So These guys are:

  1. Literally making poorly made socks up about some "promise" that tricked them into backing the game
  2. Refuse to provide an imaginary quote / link to the imaginary promise
  3. Continue to allude to the vague (imaginary) poorly made socks they made up whole they spew very real vitriol bordering on defamation at the devs for breaking the imaginary promise

Got it. /thread

 

Are you blind?

 

15. DOES THAT MEAN THAT I CAN BE HIT BY FRIENDLY FIRE?

Wherever possible, yes -- but we have to make sure that this is balanced. Some rules sets (like the infected worlds, which are Faction based) divide players automatically into teams. We have to make sure that players can't join teams specifically to take advantage of friendly fire to grief their own "teammates."

Our plan is to try and apply debuffs to players for doing damage to or killing their teammates (the gods curse you for your incompetence). If this proves not to be a good enough deterrent, however, we may have to turn friendly fire off for particular Campaign worlds.

 

I'm not entirely sure how you can read an FAQ that mentions the possibility of turning off friendly fire on 1 or 2 of the announced rulesets, and to you that translates to "only FFA has friendly fire".

 

It's hard to pull back quotes from a year and a half ago, thank god I made a thread about it back then and saved a few.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you blind?

 

15. DOES THAT MEAN THAT I CAN BE HIT BY FRIENDLY FIRE?

Wherever possible, yes -- but we have to make sure that this is balanced. Some rules sets (like the infected worlds, which are Faction based) divide players automatically into teams. We have to make sure that players can't join teams specifically to take advantage of friendly fire to grief their own "teammates."

Our plan is to try and apply debuffs to players for doing damage to or killing their teammates (the gods curse you for your incompetence). If this proves not to be a good enough deterrent, however, we may have to turn friendly fire off for particular Campaign worlds.

 

"wherever possible" doesn't necessarily mean yes.


giphy.gif

You Can't Be A Genius, If You Aren't The Slightest Bit Insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you blind?

 

15. DOES THAT MEAN THAT I CAN BE HIT BY FRIENDLY FIRE?

Wherever possible, yes -- but we have to make sure that this is balanced. Some rules sets (like the infected worlds, which are Faction based) divide players automatically into teams. We have to make sure that players can't join teams specifically to take advantage of friendly fire to grief their own "teammates."

Our plan is to try and apply debuffs to players for doing damage to or killing their teammates (the gods curse you for your incompetence). If this proves not to be a good enough deterrent, however, we may have to turn friendly fire off for particular Campaign worlds.

Reading. It's fundamental.

 

Quote and link please. We need context, date, etc. For example, was that from the KS? Is that quote the reason you backed the game? Is that what you're saying? Or are you perhaps taking a quote out of context? Maybe reading it to support an agenda in a less than honest way?

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading. It's fundamental.

 

Quote and link please. We need context, date, etc.

 

Google. It's fundamental.

 

Physics FAQ, answer 4 or something. Then read out the threads about friendly fire and the devs responses to them.

Thank their horrid devtrack that goes back 3-6 months or so, otherwise there would be plenty more.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...