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

Friendly Fire 'explained'

Recommended Posts

Like others have said, there are all sorts of subtle ways to betray allies, abandonment, spying, sabotage. Just imagine one of your factions builders intentionally designs a trick wall which can be ruined with one Confessor blast... It's gonna be complicated.

 

Or build a meat wall at a choke point thus not letting the rest of their faction through to stop an opposing faction from grabbing an objective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Counterpoint to griefing concerns: if one guy is clearly griefing his team, wouldn't the problem be easily solved by his team using their own FF capabilities to just make him dead and thus nolonger a problem?

 

All a griefer does is take away one ally and add one enemy- and they could have accomplished that save thing by just being on the other side initially.  Sure they may gain some initiative with a surprise betrayal(I'm not sure that's a bad thing), but if they tie it wrong, they could very well find themselves completely surrounded by enemies.  But imagine the emergent gameplay of putting plants in another guild/kingdom you plan to make war on so that when the siege comes, you've got a few guys on the inside who can make a play to open the gates or kill key defenders in  a properly timed betrayal.

 

Not to mention in any guild vs guild setting(much of the non 1v1 PvP from what I can tell), such griefing will likely get you kicked and just treated as the enemy you already are.

 

 

 I will say it will be VERY important to make it easy to revoke guild privileges quickly and easily in the case of such betrayals- perhaps give officers a command which labels a guild member a traitor, provisionally revoking guild privileges at least for long enough for the current battle to conclude and the guild has time to discuss said treachery.

Edited by bilun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Counterpoint to griefing concerns: if one guy is clearly griefing his team, wouldn't the problem be easily solved by his team using their own FF capabilities to just make him dead and thus nolonger a problem?

 

All a griefer does is take away one ally and add one enemy- and they could have accomplished that save thing by just being on the other side initially.  Sure they may gain some initiative with a surprise betrayal(I'm not sure that's a bad thing), but if they tie it wrong, they could very well find themselves completely surrounded by enemies.  But imagine the emergent gameplay of putting plants in another guild/kingdom you plan to make war on so that when the siege comes, you've got a few guys on the inside who can make a play to open the gates or kill key defenders in  a properly timed betrayal.

 

Not to mention in any guild vs guild setting(much of the non 1v1 PvP from what I can tell), such griefing will likely get you kicked and just treated as the enemy you already are.

 

 

 I will say it will be VERY important to make it easy to revoke guild privileges quickly and easily in the case of such betrayals- perhaps give officers a command which labels a guild member a traitor, provisionally revoking guild privileges at least for long enough for the current battle to conclude and the guild has time to discuss said treachery.

As someone that would like 100% FF on all campaigns I can see on a one on one level that is very true and  it would be relatively easy but I can see the other side of it when you factor in an entire 30 man guild that does that in the 3 faction campaign. Imagine a siege with 100 of faction A attacking 90 of faction B in their keep when a guild group of 30 turns as a guild and starts killing the other 60 of faction B because they don't like a certain another guild in Faction B that is also there. Think that wouldn't happen? It would if you got two old Shadowbane guilds that never liked each other in there, they would do it just for that reason alone.

 

Remember you can have whole guilds in one faction on the 3 faction server and them using their own voice comms, so you can't just look at it from a lone griefer type deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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."

So we were right, FF is active only on the FFA server. While some debuffs might substitute (or not) friendly fire on carebears shards.

 

I may be reading this completely different than you but it doesn't say FF is active only on FFA servers.  More like they are developing systems to prevent griefing not keeping it out from the start.

 

Proof: 

 

"If this proves not to be a good enough deterrent, however, we may have to turn friendly fire off for particular Campaign worlds."

 

And no FF doesn't mean you cannot openly PvP in any world.  I think the only world currently from what was released that has the potential of no PvP is the EK if the world rule sets are set to no PvP.

Edited by lakez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, there's a certain appeal to suspecting a griefer may be among your group.  This creates a dynamic element in the game and encourages the guilds to determine their own method for testing and ensuring loyalty. Hey, if we're seeking to simulate a true throne war simulator, then back-stabbing is a realistic element.


LW_sig_concept3_zps7zqmgbno.jpg

         http://crowfall.shivtr.com/  The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think as penalties are enacted, especially automatically detected ones, and players turn to police themselves with friendly fire in faction combat, sabotage will become more common, unlike open rebellion which can be caught and punished, hidden sabotage can ruin things without penalty.

 

The question is, is it Okay? Sabotage can happen both ways, wars even in faction warfare can be full of disloyalty and tight groups of trust. Fortifications and battle strategies may be unique to paranoid faction warfare :)


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

There is also the possibility of having FF reduced for team members, in addition to the other options JToddColeman listed.

So that if you do accidentally swing and hit an ally, they don't take quite as much.  Esp if that hit would otherwise be lethal 

 

It's very easy to modulate FF until it's just right.

Hard enough to dissuade blindly mashing the keys in a fire fight, but soft enough not to accidentally kill every other ally.

So naturally I'm all for it.

 

It'll put a dent in mindless zerg activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I explored a few related subjects here dealing with collision in general and the subject of melee collision or striking allies.

 

http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/1959-when-forces-collide-collision-and-obstruction/?fromsearch=1

 

The main thing is that the attack operation should have at least 2 variations to utilize in open combat with foes, or closed combat surrounded by allies. Group warfare would demand for allies to stay organized and strike specifically in front, rather than sweeping around striking allies all around you.


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

I actually found more often than not I got almost all of my grief points from some dumb-bottom running in front of me unloading 200 round MCG magazines into a doorway.

 

Or when I throw a grenade just as some dude goes to run across my line of fire, the grenade bounces off the back of his stupid head and it lands at the feet of my squad killing a couple of us.

 

Finally getting my MAX into position and into lockdown turret mode to cover a hallway....and some hooligan on my side inevitably decides to run into the hail of bullets I was intending to pump into enemy bodies.  *eyetick*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope that if they add friendly fire, you won't drop equipment/items when you get killed by a "friendly player"... if you will still drop stuff it will just turn into troll paradise and everyone will just kill their supposed allies  :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope that if they add friendly fire, you won't drop equipment/items when you get killed by a "friendly player"... if you will still drop stuff it will just turn into player paradise and everyone will just kill their supposed allies  :angry:

 

ahhh, heaven :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the answer was clear, but in case it was not:

 

We WANT to make FF work. And we are willing to try find ways to make it work, for all servers.

 

But if it doesn't, then we may have to fallback to other ideas to discourage it on some rule sets, specifically the ones where players have less control on who joins their "team" (not just the FFA server).

 

and if THAT doesn't work, maybe it becomes another optional flag for all Campaigns (like the victory conditions.)

 

and if THAT doesn't work, may have to turn it off on some Campaigns or rulessets. To me, that's the option of last resort.

 

Our debates on how to solve this internally echo many of the points and concerns made here. But to be clear, our goal is to make it work.

 

Todd

ACE

 

Here's my take on a way to help balance the issue; I copied it in from the "Suggestion Box" thread http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/5553-friendly-fire/

 

 

Yeah, this is a complex topic. Here's my personal take on it:

 

Full friendly fire by default. This makes organizing an effective large combat group a genuinely skillful feat instead of g-o-n-z-o mode

 

Some exceptions would be available but they would be specifically called out as exceptions

For example:

  • Fireball normally does 20 damage to everyone in 25 squares
  • Friendly Fireball is a separate ability that does 10 damage only to enemies in 16 squares.
  • Whirlwind attack hits everyone within 1 square of your knight for base weapon damage with no "windup" time
  • Careful Whirlwind hits only enemies within 1 square of your knight but requires a 1.5 second "picking your targets" animation "windup" before engaging.

 

These make the avoidance of friendly fire a decision you can make that has a price. The players get to decide when it's worth reigning in their power enough to not hit friendlies and that reigning in comes at the cost of either a less powerful effect or prep time and indicating what you're doing to an observant opponent.

 

CopperStall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These make the avoidance of friendly fire a decision you can make that has a price. The players get to decide when it's worth reigning in their power enough to not hit friendlies and that reigning in comes at the cost of either a less powerful effect or prep time and indicating what you're doing to an observant opponent.

 

CopperStall

 

I am against ally friendly versions of every skill, if we want to avoid hitting allies, we should use more controlled attacks to begin with.  The point of fireball isn't to do fire damage, it is to kill everyone.  I mean help my team.  I'm totally on your side I swear.

 

If players want to avoid hitting their allies, they should use small spells (Non AoE), and make sure they hit their intended target (Through careful aim, or hitting enemies with no allies nearby)

 

Dude I swear I didn't mean to turn you into ash, I just wanted to burn Timmy into ash.  Great now I'm restless again.


How Can Mounts Add to the Crowfall Experience?  Caravans, Hunting Boars, and more.

 

How Complex can Mining be in Crowfall?  Mining difficulty, fatigue, infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is if someone does use FF to grief you have FF so just kill him. If they were a spy or something and did this their cover would have a short shelf life. Yea they could be like "my bad" or whatever but even if you give them the benefit of the doubt for awhile wouldn't you eventually just kick or kill the guy?

 

I'm for FF for all rulesets. One of the best anti-zerg mechanisms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is if someone does use FF to grief you have FF so just kill him. If they were a spy or something and did this their cover would have a short shelf life. Yea they could be like "my bad" or whatever but even if you give them the benefit of the doubt for awhile wouldn't you eventually just kick or kill the guy?

 

I'm for FF for all rulesets. One of the best anti-zerg mechanisms.

 

The big thing I like is that full friendly fire makes organizing a large combat group a challenge. One of the advantages that being outnumbered is supposed to give you is that you now have a 'target rich environment' where you can cut loose and they have to be careful. Or they can cut loose but they will face losses for it.

 

CopperStall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Glad I wasn't the only one who thought he just couldn't read!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I get excited about a hardcore Friendly Fire system I need to know how certain things will work.

 

Let's talk about "supports" and "range classes", those of which who need to be protected by their melee teammates for supports and peels. Now if friendly fire works in the way that if you target an Ally with a skill shot, the Ally will get it, so doesn't this require those "squishy" classes to get out of position and have to work around melee classes in order to even attack the enemy?? I am trying to think of good ways for this to be implemented so that range can be effective while not simply having to get out of position and wrecked by enemies. 

 

It will be interesting to see how they implement this system and I hope they are smart enough to realize if it simply isn't working / creates inbalances between play styles.


KjUVOZg.png

Varius - Veteran Member of LG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I get excited about a hardcore Friendly Fire system I need to know how certain things will work.

 

Let's talk about "supports" and "range classes", those of which who need to be protected by their melee teammates for supports and peels. Now if friendly fire works in the way that if you target an Ally with a skill shot, the Ally will get it, so doesn't this require those "squishy" classes to get out of position and have to work around melee classes in order to even attack the enemy?? I am trying to think of good ways for this to be implemented so that range can be effective while not simply having to get out of position and wrecked by enemies. 

 

It will be interesting to see how they implement this system and I hope they are smart enough to realize if it simply isn't working / creates inbalances between play styles.

 

One would suppose they would have to use terrain/height among other things to hit their target, or simple not  shoot AE spells into the mass of melee bodies fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would suppose they would have to use terrain/height among other things to hit their target, or simple not shoot AE spells into the mass of melee bodies fighting.

Also, your Archer will either need line of sight on their target or will have to arc the shot and cope with the time delay that produces.

 

Copperstall

Edited by CopperStall

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...