Yes...but just because something works in EVE doesn't necessarily mean it would work in another game of a different genre and type. We don't want to encourage newbies to be griefed straight out of playing because of friendly fire happy trolls that can easily kill them!

To do that you would need a system that allows the abillity to choose in what security systems we play in, thus forcing allot of battlefields to be empty and others over full. Meaning all will flock to there own type of battlefield. As it is now we cannot choose and are forced into one type or the other.

A major part of Legion will be the star map, where players choose exactly where to deploy.

A major part of Legion will be the star map, where players choose exactly where to deploy.

I highly disagree with always-on friendly fire, especially with just basic matches. A few points of umbrage:

1. "Make the game more like EVE!" is something that I simply do not understand. They are different products; why should they work the same? That kind of reasoning would have people yelling at Blizzard that World of Warcraft isn't closer to Warcraft 3 or that Portal is more lighthearted-fun than the intense action of Half-Life. They both exist in the same universe but it is okay for them to be quite different.

Yes, he is I also agree with Wolfman here - I think it's important to offer both aspects of gameplay. 'High Sec' space should be less daunting to newbies!

I think it's important that we offer both FF and no FF gameplay. The latter being particularly important for newcomers to the game.

My take:
- Friendly fire for Sandbox and organized matches (i.e. Corp battles and PC)
In the sandbox, this adds a gameplay of risk/reward, due to the dangers of doing an ad-hoc team-up.
In Corp Battles it adds tactics, because firing lines have to organize properly in order to not shoot each other in the back of the head. It also allows spies to sabotage corp battles.
When you have hand-picked your team and comms are implicitly expected, it makes sense to enable friendly fire.

- No friendly fire for modes where you are forced to work with blueberries
Blueberries are lobotomized chickens with a grudge.
I do not like the idea of starting a pub game, taking out my AV weapon and being greeted by a blueberry tanker who accidentally thought that I was a red.
I also do not want some ****** to punch my REs and get my kicked
And I don't want to be the guy who's carrying the entire team, with half of the team having given up and doing situps in the MCC, only to get shot in the back by a bored blueberry, which causes a loss of expensive gear that could have given my team a win despite the bad odds.
The kind of ****** griefing that is created by FF in pubs should not exist in this game. It adds no value. There is no fun in starting a 15 minute match at the end of the day for some relaxation, only to have some ******** punch you in the nose because he likes to annoy people. And the griefer doesn't get anything out of it, except for annoying people, which is a horrible motivation for this specific game mode.
Yes, this is New Eden. But pubs are contract battles. I'm pretty sure that employers would want a mechanism to prevent the mercs from going AWOL and shitting on everything, considering how unstable these individuals are.
It would be hard to justify in lore, aside from "weapon locks up when looking at a blueberry", which only covers direct fire weapons. But this is a case where the gameplay is simply more important.
You will have many fuckheads ruining the game for new and casual players if you can't enforce a clear-cut sense of safety (or at least "he can't kill me directly!") around blueberries in pub matches.

P.S.
Have you thought about making a game mode that is tied to a faction?
I don't mean faction warfare. I mean a mode where one side can only consist of Amarr players (Or players with Amarr gear), for example. I would love to see the effect of asymmetric gameplay, if you go all the way and make drop uplinks Amarr-only, nanohive Caldari-only, etc.

Yes...but just because something works in EVE doesn't necessarily mean it would work in another game of a different genre and type. We don't want to encourage newbies to be griefed straight out of playing because of friendly fire happy trolls that can easily kill them!

Votekicking a person out of space in eve would be a hilarious proposition.

If Legion is trying to be sandbox, it shouldn't have to rely on that kind of stupid structuring.

wrong topic area.

Votekicking a person out of space in eve would be a hilarious proposition.

If Legion is trying to be sandbox, it shouldn't have to rely on that kind of stupid structuring.

Yes...but just because something works in EVE doesn't necessarily mean it would work in another game of a different genre and type. We don't want to encourage newbies to be griefed straight out of playing because of friendly fire happy trolls that can easily kill them!

I assume you mean that you posted in the wrong area. If you mean that the thread is in the wrong spot, that is false.

Except, its not space in EVE and its a match that will, probably, be lobby based.

So basically, your clone access for that match would be locked. And you would need to seek another match to grief.

Or give the commander this power. Whatever the method, griefing in high sec should be countered, but also FF shoule be on, because FF is hilarious.

It's either lobby based or sandbox.

CCP can't promote it as both. They need to choose.

Because Bust 514 is a bad product and EVE is a good product. It is therefore natural to want Legion to be more like EVE and less like Bust.

Its only a problem if you design the game to allow it to be a problem.

Enable votekick based on FF. Every friendly kill lowers player status. Being votekicked because of FF lowers the status even more. FF voteckick kicks in automatically if player kills more than 3 players. Killed players can forgive the TK if it was an accident.

They can do both actually. No, I'm serious. It's technically possible. But in the case New Eden, instead of being like PvP and PvE separately, it would be like PvPvE. Eve Online does that perfectly by allowing mission running in high-sec systems but allow outside players to scan down the system and steal the loot that the mission runner is after. It allows for a more emergent style of gameplay. The same for incursion running.

They COULD do both, but they shouldn't. Trying to split the gameplay in a major way diminishes the devtime they attribute to it. They have already had their staff crippled in terms of size. Cutting resources further isn't a good option.

That is facile.

Call of Duty is a good product. It is therefore natural to want Legion to be more like Call of Duty and less like DUST.
Team Fortress 2 is a good product. It is therefore natural to want Legion to be more like Team Fortress 2 and less like DUST.
Papers, Please is a good product. It is therefore natural to want Legion to be more like Papers, Please and less like DUST.
Assassin's Creed is a good product. It is therefore natural to want Legion to be more like Assassin's Creed and less like DUST.

The first two make sense to an extent because they are the same genre and type of game, First Person Shooter, but the others are entirely different beasts. EVE and DUST/Legion share just as much in common with each other as Hearthstone shares with World of Warcraft. They share similar concepts because they exist in the same world but don't share much gameplay as they are different types of game. It is okay for DUST/Legion to have its own identity without having to take it from his big sister.

In that case, they could still achieve both if Dev time is a concern to you. If they want to PvPvE experience, they could go with PvP first and focus on that for a long while and make sure they smooth out any rough edges they find along the way. Once the PvP aspect has been settled, they can then implement the PvE aspect of the game and merge it with the PvP to make PvPvE. They already have experience doing that with Eve Online. The only difference is that in Eve it's point-n-click while in Legion it's aim-n-click. It's still doable and it allows Legion to have something no other first-person shooter has which is an emergent New Eden style gameplay.

Its only a problem if you design the game to allow it to be a problem.

Enable votekick based on FF. Every friendly kill lowers player status. Being votekicked because of FF lowers the status even more. FF voteckick kicks in automatically if player kills more than 3 players. Killed players can forgive the TK if it was an accident.

Allow also players to form squads with minimum ~standing~, or a honour score, whatever, that will allow them to filter off griefers.

Only allow players to join high-sec pubs if they are also in good standing.

Its only a problem if you design the game to allow it to be a problem.

Enable votekick based on FF. Every friendly kill lowers player status. Being votekicked because of FF lowers the status even more. FF voteckick kicks in automatically if player kills more than 3 players. Killed players can forgive the TK if it was an accident.

Allow also players to form squads with minimum ~standing~, or a honour score, whatever, that will allow them to filter off griefers.

Only allow players to join high-sec pubs if they are also in good standing.

It's either lobby based or sandbox.

CCP can't promote it as both. They need to choose.

And really, what's wrong with Concord showing up GTA style? That'd be funny as hell.