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

Friendly Fire isn't something you tack on at the end...


freeze

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 283
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Friendly Fire; personally I don't give a rats ass about it. But I realize a few players really want this, which is okay. I think the current combat system doesn't work with FF though. But I agree FF should be tested rather quickly.

 

Two things can happen imo; testing will show FF doesn't work:

  1. FF gets ignored from there on.
  2. The combat model will get changed to accommodate for FF.

We all know what's going to happen and it's not option 2. So the sooner we can test FF, the sooner we can rest this whole discussion.

ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think FF should be a campaign option. More hardcore and small group campaigns should have it. Ones where it is 2 factions should not. No one would play front liner if it was enabled everywhere. 

That's already the plan. It will be on a campaign by campaign basis. 

 

My question is, how would they change the combat to accommodate FF? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think developers say to themselves "we'll just put this game altering, combat defining feature in and let the players worry about it, no need to build our abilities around it" You're delusional.

 

There ARE a lot of different abilities, except 80-90% of them are AOE based. Almost everything you do in the game is a cone or a cleave based attack. The reason for this is they don't want an extremely high skill ceiling where you need pin point accuracy to hit your target. It is very easy to hit somebody in CF when the awful camera is not fighting against you. That's fine, most of the people playing this game are old custards trying to recapture their nostalgia for games like DAOC and SB, neither of which were the highest echelons of skill based play. That alone right there should be a clear indicator that FF will never make it in to the game.

But that's the thing, it is tactics altering, it isn't game altering in the way you guys are trying to make it out to be. 

 

FF changes tactics completely, but it doesn't really need to change game design at all.  If an AOE does an AOE whether FF is on or not doesn't really matter, just how players will react to it if FF is enabled or disabled matters. 

 

I think people are trying to make it out like it is some impossible task to use AOE in an FF game, which simply is untrue, it just requires smarter play and more precise coordination.

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's already the plan. It will be on a campaign by campaign basis. 

 

My question is, how would they change the combat to accommodate FF?

 

Less cone based abilities, less cleaves on melees, less animation lock (more mobility options in general).

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's already the plan. It will be on a campaign by campaign basis. 

 

My question is, how would they change the combat to accommodate FF? 

It doesn't really need to be changed, players will just need to adapt to the spell behaviors and play based on that. 

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's the thing, it is tactics altering, it isn't game altering in the way you guys are trying to make it out to be. 

 

FF changes tactics completely, but it doesn't really need to change game design at all.  If an AOE does an AOE whether FF is on or not doesn't really matter, just how players will react to it if FF is enabled or disabled matters. 

 

I think people are trying to make it out like it is some impossible task to use AOE in an FF game, which simply is untrue, it just requires smarter play and more precise coordination.

 

Almost all abilities at this point have some sort of cone or AoE. 

 

So "tactics altering" becomes "almost never use most of my abilities"

   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost all abilities at this point have some sort of cone or AoE. 

 

So "tactics altering" becomes "almost never use most of my abilities"

No, it becomes coordinating properly to know when to use them for max effectiveness.  Just because you can't spam AOEs willy nilly doesn't mean you can't use them.  Perhaps they never intended the game to be a button masher. 

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it becomes coordinating properly to know when to use them for max effectiveness.  Just because you can't spam AOEs willy nilly doesn't mean you can't use them.  Perhaps they never intended the game to be a button masher. 

 

I play mostly knight. My CC counter is a PBAoE. So my choice is lie on the ground getting pounded on, or AoE.

 

My main 3 tier combo lines end with either a wide cone or PBAoE.

 

My "Ult" is a PBAoE.

 

My only ranged ability is chain pull, so I have no option but to fight in melee range, which means I will almost always be fighting with an ally nearby.

 

You are right, combat will be super tactical when 90% of the time my only options are basic attack, shield bash, and block.

 

 

I am 100% in favor of FF. I'm just saying it needs to go in very soon if it is going to happen at all, because all of archetypes that currently exist will need to be rethought for combat to remain satisfying.

   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I played for the last two tests will not work with FF

 

​That's the whole point of this thread. Either they scratched it and don't want to inform us or this is a giant development mishap of apocalyptic proportions. In either case, clarification is required.

 

​ 

testing will show FF doesn't work

There is no such a thing as "testing will show if FF works". Either you want FF in your game and develop the mechanics on top of it or you simply don't want to have FF and therefore don't bother to adjust combat accordingly.

 

Simple development credo:

 

a. abilities developed with FF in mind will also work without FF.

​b. abilities developed without FF in mind, will not work with FF.

​Case b. applies to the current situation in CF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go ahead and describe an instance in which AOE attacks will be usable in a FF world.

- You won't be able to fight as a mixed group of melee and ranged since the ranged squishies that need to stay behind their melee tanks will only be able to hit their own team. Many archetypes eliminated from feasability already.

 

https://youtu.be/dMv2NcIBu_g?t=777

 

No but please, let's hear more of your theorycrafting regarding things you've never experienced.

aka honeybear

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

​This kind of thinking is the core problem here, because people think FF is something you can tack on at the end, like OP said.

​The line of reasoning is very simple: FF requires abilities to be built around it, not 'tuned' or 'balanced' at a later date. It's the lowest common denominator under which abilities will be developed and used. Not a custard ruleset for the "unwanted psychopaths" of this community being switched on at the end of development.

​All the current abilities and mechanics, which were designed on the drawing board seem to be created for a combat system which has:

1. slow pace

2. low player skill cap

3. no FF.

​Most  seasoned PvP players from FFA PvP games unwillingly got to know the Red Flags of game mechanics during development of games over the years. With over 99% of Kickstarter projects utilizing the patented "Ye, we're making a game for hardcore PvP players, this is only a Beta, real game will be different, we pinky promise!!"-treadmill, you can't play this card conveniently anymore - even if you show people that you put in all of your savings as a developer, as this is not a statement of guarantee either.

​Don't mistake our feedback here for some random uninformed user's opinion who simply wants to get his way. We simply see how developers react and how much Red Flags pop up and make the decision to either bail or stay. Simple as that. No drama, just honesty.

​3/4 of my 300 man strong community, which is currently getting tired of Eve,  and some other guilds I know of gave this project a big "custard you!" just because of Eternal Kingdoms and some other factors I don't want to mention out of sincerity. So I'm actually the optimistic one around here.

 

Well I don't want to tack it on the end saying "hurr durr, we can do it at the end". What I want to say is "I don't want to have a half assed poorly made socksty combat system with a perfectly fleshed out friendly fire system". And to me a well done combat system is way more important than any archetype, campaign ruleset or eternal kingdom stuff. It is the base the game is built on. Therefore they should take as much time as they can to create the combat system they and we want - a good one.

 

Friendly Fire should be introduced with a complete overhaul of the current archetype settings - which I really want to have with 2.0 but well.... can't have anything.

 

But what the most important questions is right now: What is the purpose of 1.1 and would Friendly Fire benefit that goal or not? If yes - they get it implemented, if not then not. However I do agree that the sooner they get it into their game, the better the outcome will be.

You get the wolves...lots of wolves...and sheep that wear armor and have developed an appetite for blood soaked grass - dubanka

Even insects smell good when roasted - a random confessor

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://youtu.be/dMv2NcIBu_g?t=777

 

No but please, let's hear more of your theorycrafting regarding things you've never experienced.

 

I think we can agree that we are all talking about FF in this game. And (so far) in this game we have 4 archetypes and the moves they have are in no way like what ever was in that video (I didn't like what I saw in that example for the record - not a game I'd play). I read people saying they want FF included so that development can change to fix this problem and I am saying that this is true IF FF is going to be a mandatory part of this game. I am also saying that the design we see right now is NOT FF friendly like the video you've provided. Question: Was there collision in the game you have in that video? I couldn't tell and I don't know.

 

So let me reword that question for your narrow field of reading. Go ahead and describe an instance in which the AOE attacks we have right now will be usable in a FF world AND makes it fun to be the confessor that only gets to attack from atop a wall or use the rest of the moves at their disposal only in the last 30 seconds before death because all their allies are already dead? I understand that changes have to be made if FF is going to be a big part of this game and not just a niche campaign rule and I'm not arguing that. All LOS moves will have to use arcs and lob or have much faster travel time and AOE moves will be more like bombs lobbed in or a few that are front line moves OR stances that change all moves to be FF friendly as was suggested. I for one am happy without being killed by allies though. MWO team killers are an example of bad players, but that's simple LOS attacks in an FPS MMO...  This is not that. It might be fun to add another layer of complexity with FF in this game. That's not my view so far with what I've seen so far.

 

I'm all for trying new things, that's why I'm so interested in Crowfall. It's my hope that a thinker will thrive in this combat more than a twitch player, so far I'm liking the potential of adaptable combos, player looting and many other things I've never experienced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Go ahead and describe an instance in which AOE attacks will be usable in a FF world.

 

I think we can agree that we are all talking about FF in this game. 

 

So let me reword that question for your narrow field of reading.

 

Maybe you should read your own posts before posting; you asked for an example, in a FF mmo world where aoe's were used successfully in team combat. I provided you an example. Yes collision was enabled for that game. There are much better videos than mine of field AOE's (things like that poison rain you might have seen in that video) being used by large groups against large groups without mass casualties by friendly fire. That along with the ubiquitous presence of heavy splash nukes were a constant consideration in team fights. Mobbing people with melee was just as dangerous for teams because you'd melee each other. 

 

In crowfall, right now we see videos of hunger dome teams all ganging up on one mob and meleeing it to death. With friendly fire, you could never do that. You'd have to tag people in and out. In pvp, you'd probably see fights break into a lot more 1v1s or 1v2s -- things would spread out a bit more. You wouldn't be able to have your whole team gang-bang one confessor, unless your team was all confessors, and then you could all nuke one guy down at range.

 

You need to have more imagination to see the potential this game has for including friendly fire. If you never played an mmo with friendly fire you don't have that mindset and imagining battles with it is harder for you. My point in linking that video was to cite a game with very enjoyable, highly tactical team combat that had a high skill ceiling for team coordination. 

 

Friendly fire allows for more depth and new metas to evolve in team based pvp. Its a more rich experience to fight a battle with more elements in play than with fewer, and even in its current iteration, Crowfall is more than capable of accommodating such depth to its pvp. 

aka honeybear

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Maybe you should read your own posts before posting; you asked for an example, in a FF mmo world where aoe's were used successfully in team combat. I provided you an example. Yes collision was enabled for that game. There are much better videos than mine of field AOE's (things like that poison rain you might have seen in that video) being used by large groups against large groups without mass casualties by friendly fire. That along with the ubiquitous presence of heavy splash nukes were a constant consideration in team fights. Mobbing people with melee was just as dangerous for teams because you'd melee each other. 

 

In crowfall, right now we see videos of hunger dome teams all ganging up on one mob and meleeing it to death. With friendly fire, you could never do that. You'd have to tag people in and out. In pvp, you'd probably see fights break into a lot more 1v1s or 1v2s -- things would spread out a bit more. You wouldn't be able to have your whole team gang-bang one confessor, unless your team was all confessors, and then you could all nuke one guy down at range.

 

You need to have more imagination to see the potential this game has for including friendly fire. If you never played an mmo with friendly fire you don't have that mindset and imagining battles with it is harder for you. My point in linking that video was to cite a game with very enjoyable, highly tactical team combat that had a high skill ceiling for team coordination. 

 

Friendly fire allows for more depth and new metas to evolve in team based pvp. Its a more rich experience to fight a battle with more elements in play than with fewer, and even in its current iteration, Crowfall is more than capable of accommodating such depth to its pvp. 

 

 

Fair enough, I can imagine the possibilities. I'm not as enthusiastic about them as you are...  Just got off a match where I was playing as if there were FF and you're right, zerg tactics would wind up in failure and we would see a lot more 2v1 1v1 and different formations to accommodate the FF. The match I was just in, I would have made about 2 attacks and spent the rest of my time maneuvering to get angles that won't kill team mates and wound up pulling adds because of it and dieing.

I'm open to having FF but I want better control of my moves, movement, frame rates and more before I also have to contend with FF. Feel free to disagree, but I stand by my opinion that there are other priorities at the moment - Accuracy, movement and control before FF. BUT it should be noted that FF would lead to Accuracy, movement and control being priorities. I'm saying egg, you're saying chicken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to have a half assed poorly made socksty combat system with a perfectly fleshed out friendly fire system".

 

​There is no such thing as "friendly fire system". There is only a "well designed combat system based on friendly fire."

​unless... you mean a system wich deals different damage to allies than to enemies, which is a "carebear skill cap mitigation system" - that's something else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More than anything else, I'm not entirely sure why FF isn't on from the get go?

 

I know nothing about coding, but with that lack of knowledge - I'm going to assume it's not implemented because of any reason on the back end?

 

It's seems like an odd decision to start with it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More than anything else, I'm not entirely sure why FF isn't on from the get go?

 

I know nothing about coding, but with that lack of knowledge - I'm going to assume it's not implemented because of any reason on the back end?

 

It's seems like an odd decision to start with it off.

 

Trust that they DO know and ARE sure what they are doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about AOE heals if FF is engaged would you heal the enemy?!

 AOE heals should also heal both enemy AND mobs.

 

This should be tactical game.  If you AOE heal with enemies around your just not playing smart.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...