| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
![[Veteran_Findor Yolunda]](https://forums.dust514.com/themes/ccpDust514/dust-avatar-128.png "[Veteran_Findor Yolunda]")
[Veteran_Findor Yolunda]
0
   |
Posted - 2012.06.05 11:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
We all know that FF will be coming SOON but IGÇÖm wondering what type of FF penalty CCP are intending to apply.
The typical FF penalty in most FPS is a negative score for that kill and an auto kick after a certain number of FF kills. The main aim of the GÇôive score is to punish carelessness and accidental FF kills whilst the auto kick is to punish/discourage griefersGǪ
I donGÇÖt really think though that this typical model translates well to the EVE/Dust universe, particularly since I think deliberate sabotage by a player by FF should be an acceptable part of the traitorous meta-game that is so prevalent in EVE and that we should expect to see in Dust.
I say this for two reasons, firstly will a reduction in War Points by applying a GÇôive score for a FF kill, and hence a reduction in SP gained for a match, really deter anyone since we will accrue SP over time as well as from matches? Secondly if someone (or indeed a group) wants to double-cross their corp. by sabotaging a crucial battle by going on a mass FF killing spree to result in an easy win for the opponent this will be prevented if an auto kick for excessive FF system is in place.
So, what solution to discourage careless fire/spamming GÇÿnades/swarm launcher in CQB etc whilst allowing deliberate FF with some related penalty?
My suggestion would be for an Isk penalty to be applied to the killer and that Isk penalty to be the cost to replace the lost equipment (with the added advantage being the victim does not get hit for the cost of their lost fit). This could be applied to both infantry kills and destruction of friendly vehicles/equipment.
This system would discourage careless fire, allow deliberate sabotage (ie you can FF as much as you want and destroy as much friendly equipment as you like as long as you are willing to pay the price in Isk) and not punish the victim of FF by it costing them Isk to have been killed.
The Isk cost of FF could also be scaled depending on where the battle takes place eg 50% in High-sec, 100% in low-sec and 200% in null secGǪ
Thoughts?
PS, I did a search and couldnGÇÖt find anything on this but apologies if it has already been discussed. |
[Veteran_Orin Fenris]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 11:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
OMG, had a whole long post, and it got deleted.
Lets try this again. I'm fine with FF being off (it can even be justified by saying nanomachines). I hope they don't turn it on until after they introduce, and "perfect" grouping, as I wouldn't be eager to have any random trigger-happy Tom, ****, or Harry "watching my back" with my ISK on the line.
Also, if they went with your ISK idea (which isn't actually a bad idea), I'd say the victim's suit's cost in ISK should actually be transferred from the killers account. However, with this system, how would suits that people paid AUR for be compensated? I know I would be extremely angry if I went and spent real money on an item just to have some guy on my own team kill me just cause he can. Not only would it make for upset customers, but it would also be a rather large deterrent for people to buy in-game items (other than boosters). which means slightly less income for CCP.
Thats just a possible outcome, but is it worth the risk, just so you can go around griefing people?
Also, another issue with TKing is, how do you define a TK? what if the team mate you killed was at 1% armor and ran into your line of fire? what if you are using a turret/explosive device and your team mate happens to be on the recieving end, along with 4 or 5 enemies?
Basically, FF is such a touchy subject, and really all case by case, which makes it a very difficult perdicument for a game as reliant on efficiency and posession as Dust (and EVE for that matter).
The thing is, and this is a big difference. In EVE, you can practically hand-pick who you trust to fight by your side. So if someone pulls a sabotage, someone may lose a ship, but that person will get griefed to hell and probably lose his ship in the process. In DUST, you are stuck with whoever gets thrown into your game with you. At least until player contracts are introduced, which will probably be sometime long after launch. |
[Veteran_steadyhand 08 ortis]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 12:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
why not use planetsides system, where you rack up points for friendly fire and once you hit the limit you're suit is locked down and you cant shoot until the points drain off again.
this allows the clutch betral in a match and stops greffers from ruining peoples day. Just i thought i dread to think whats DUST 514 version of concord is going to be |
[Veteran_Danfen Stark]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 12:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
As ISK is lost in death, I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of world of tanks system in the game. I.e, a portion of the TKers earnt ISK goes to their victims to recoup their losses.
Of course, this doesn't really help double crossers much, but could be easily explained by an automated contract feature (Such as the automated kick/removal from battlefield for being AFK on spawn) |
[Veteran_Absolute Idiom]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 13:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
For highsec public matches I can easily see someone being kicked for TK griefing - since you already get kicked for inactivity ("All mercs are contractually obliged to enter the burnzone").
For lowsec fights where territory is being won/lost - let the battlefield commander decided tbh. |
[Veteran_Erahk Manaan]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 13:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
It would make since that a commander or squad leader could cut off a mercs access to clones so that when the traitor dies he cannot spawn again and will eventually be kicked from the match for FF.
And of course when the game goes live only your most trusted mercs will be in leadership positions which makes it all the more pain full when your commander cuts off everyone's clone access in a match and steals your corp assets as he leaves to join your enemy.
This is New Eden after all. Trust no one! |
[Veteran_D-PARK]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 15:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
It is not a total solution but how about a 5 second weapon lock after friendly fire?
If the shot was inadvertent the hit player would have time to reposition and the shooting player could reposition or re-aim.
If the shot was malicious the hit player / team would have a chance to identify and trash the shooting player and the shooting player would have some added risk.
This scheme tries to strike a balance between limiting the damage a malicious player can do (which we DON'T want to nerf too much) and keeping friendly fire from simple mistakes minimized.
Of course it could be combined with the more traditional limits like ISK / Kick / BAN for situations when a longer lasting penalty is appropriate. |
[Veteran_Findor Yolunda]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 16:01:00 -
[8] - Quote
Some good feedback and alternate suggestions!
Orin you are right that FF and TK is a touchy subject and any punishment system needs to be implemented in a thoughtful way, I guess I was just trying to frame a slightly different approach that fits within the EVE canon of betrayal, back stabbing and subterfuge! To address a few of the points raised by you -
1. AFAIK FF will be coming SOON and DUST will be an always on FF environment, however perhaps someone who is more in the know can clarify.
2. I wasn't clear in my OP but my intention was that the victim of a FF death would receive the full cost of their lost fit/equipment regardless of the value of the ISK "fine" paid by the killer hence the victim not being out of pocket as a result of being killed in a FF incident.
3. AUR stuff! You're right I hadn't considered that however it would be easy to just have it so that AUR stuff wasn't consumed from a FF death and the killer could still be fined a suitable ISK amount based on the AUR value of the gear the victim was using. So no loss for the victim and the killer still gets hit in his wallet!
4. The couple of examples you give of TKs are, to me, perfect examples of accidental TKs that in a FF on world will always happen and will always be punished regardless of the system in place. However, what ever system is in place should be sufficiently harsh to discourage lack of fire control (and indeed griefing) whilst at the same time not adversely penalizing those occasional genuine accidents that are unavoidable.
5. Just to be clear, the origin of my idea was in no way "just so you can go around griefing people"!!! (I have never, in 10 years of online FPS gaming deliberately TK'd anyone!) The intention was that it would place a significant real cost on any griefer and hopefully discourage them whilst still allowing deliberate and focused treachery. I mentioned scaling the ISK fine based on location, in addition to this you could also exponentially scale the fine based on frequency... I would assume the kind of betrayal in battle I am imagining would be a rare and infrequent occurrence (for any one player) however griefers would most probably engage in this kind of behavior regularly in in bursts...
Absolute and Erahk both mention commanders having some sort of control over spawning/kicking - is this a confirmed feature?
Finally D-Park, I think the downside of your idea is it would be an adverse punishment on accidental FF incidents in intense firefights (where they are most common!) and where you least want to be left standing with no way to return fire to the enemy! |
[Veteran_Danfen Stark]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 16:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
D-PARK wrote:It is not a total solution but how about a 5 second weapon lock after friendly fire?
If the shot was inadvertent the hit player would have time to reposition and the shooting player could reposition or re-aim.
If the shot was malicious the hit player / team would have a chance to identify and trash the shooting player and the shooting player would have some added risk.
This scheme tries to strike a balance between limiting the damage a malicious player can do (which we DON'T want to nerf too much) and keeping friendly fire from simple mistakes minimized.
Of course it could be combined with the more traditional limits like ISK / Kick / BAN for situations when a longer lasting penalty is appropriate.
I like this idea, but as Findor said it 'could' be quite annoying to innocent (accidental) players. How about making it an increasing timer with each TK, e.g. 1 TK = 1 sec, 2TK = 3 sec, 3 TK = 5 sec and so on. This way, if a player only does it by accident, then it'd be at max (usually) 2 per game (up to 3 sec), and if it is more but still an accident, well then its on their head to work on improving their aim  |
[Veteran_Jerec Suron]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 16:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Personally this is the future, Only friendly fire should be from explosives. Guns should be smart enough to disable when pointed at a friendly target... |
|
|
[Veteran_Ceerix MKII]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 16:46:00 -
[11] - Quote
Well there is also the flip side, What happens when a friendly is repping an enemy tank as it tear through your team? I would shoot him in a heart beat, but why should I get punished for someone aiding the enemy? Or more when they keep spawning and doing the same thing now i have killed him 3-4 times in the time it takes to kill the tank. Then there is the problem with making the commander the one to kick people, now he starts to kick noobs because he wants better players so that they win. Not a huge problem if its all corp mates in the fight but terrible for new players just trying to join a game and getting the boot for nothing other then all they can use is militia gear. Then there is the fact the PS3 has limited power, and I rather not devote all of it to it trying to figure out who I can and can not shoot. Dust is going to be one of the few games that has to come up with a real solution to it though, simply because there is real money on the line that can be lost. But at the same time CCP has always tried to offer minimal protection to players when it comes to social parts of the game, such as CEO's stealing billions of isk worth of stuff from a corp. |
[Veteran_D-PARK]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 17:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ceerix-
I didn't know we could repair enemy equipment while occupied. I never tried it. Have you actually done it? |
[Veteran_SILENTSAM 69]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 18:43:00 -
[13] - Quote
I agree with Orin that it would be smart to have both FF and grouping get turned on at the same time.
Although I am sure everyone here would love to be able to TK Bad Furry all day as soon as they can. I could just see a match where both teams work together to spawn camp him alone. lol |
[Veteran_Soven Taliesyn]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 19:19:00 -
[14] - Quote
IMO, FF should be left off in empire. New players will have it hard enough w/o constantly loosing fits to griefers. As far as low sec and null space there shouldn't be any sort of penalty at all. Just like eve, anything goes in low sec and null sec. |
[Veteran_Ceerix MKII]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 23:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
I have not repaired an enemy tank, I would imagine you can only because you could do it in eve if you wanted. But I have no way to confirm it one way or another. The other thing is just make it so the Commander can set the TKer as red to the team, then have a way for the team to be able to vote to remove a Commander if they abuse the position. It would be similar to how eve deals with it. Then on the side track any TK with each weapon type in the user profile that CEO's can look at when they are applying to join a corp. That way you can base a decision to let a guy in or not on real information. Same idea as looking at APIs of eve players. If they are running around with a huge amount of TK with Sniper rifles, SMG, or Assault rifles you know they either suck at aiming or just Team killers. This also will separate players that are are getting them for throwing a grenade in a pile of enemies even though there is a friendly there. Or if a guy is killing your team so you end up just killing him every time you see him. You would end up building some TK but compared to the 100 other kills on the weapon it doesn't matter to anyone looking at it. It would almost be like building Sec status but for each weapon that you use. |
[Veteran_Noc Tempre]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:14:00 -
[16] - Quote
FF should be turned on 100% with no penalty. Heck let them rack up the SP and ISK for it. But then they'll lose a lot faster if they focus on the wrong team. I could see auto-suicide in high-sec and kick after a few, but all else goes. |
[Veteran_Schweinstein]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:41:00 -
[17] - Quote
- Friendly fire should be on.
About TK-griefers,
SUGGESTION:
Perhaps commander should have the option to deny griefing/infiltrating tk'er from access to his clones = respawning?
Might be possible after 1 or 2 TK's. If the possibly griefing person would kill real targets/do hacks, the option would close.
Point is, it's about trust that no one happens to be a spy.
Commander abusing this?
If the commander would be spy, that would be very very Eve. ;-)
I guess FC's (field commanders...=) have much power anyways by then.
About NPC contracts with no pre-determined teams, a bit trickier to ensure basic playability. Probably the infringing character would reimburse from his mission salary as much as possible, and denial of skill points might help a tiny bit. |
[Veteran_Orin Fenris]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 04:08:00 -
[18] - Quote
Hmm, what about...
Maybe make it so if you TK 7 or so people in one match, you are flagged as a traitor, and for the rest of the match, both teams see you as red, (and you see both teams as red) and maybe make it so they can only spawn in default/static spawn points? maybe even make it so they can't hack stuff? (preventing them from taking spawn points/emplacements, but still allowing them to blow them up.) They could still earn points from killing, they wouldn't lose any isk, but they would just be marked as traitors, and maybe even have a "times marked as traitor" kind of stat on their player cards.
Treachery is punishable by death. I think in high-sec, the "punishment" for TKing should be minimal. I personally like the flagged as red thing. That way you'll be getting shot at by both sides, and you'll be able to be spawn camped. but if you're good, you could still get away with it, and if there are multiple traitors, it'd almost be like three sides to the fight :D |
[Veteran_Zeidrich Sinclair]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 13:33:00 -
[19] - Quote
Orin Fenris wrote:Hmm, what about...
Maybe make it so if you TK 7 or so people in one match, you are flagged as a traitor, and for the rest of the match, both teams see you as red, (and you see both teams as red) and maybe make it so they can only spawn in default/static spawn points? maybe even make it so they can't hack stuff? (preventing them from taking spawn points/emplacements, but still allowing them to blow them up.) They could still earn points from killing, they wouldn't lose any isk, but they would just be marked as traitors, and maybe even have a "times marked as traitor" kind of stat on their player cards.
Treachery is punishable by death. I think in high-sec, the "punishment" for TKing should be minimal. I personally like the flagged as red thing. That way you'll be getting shot at by both sides, and you'll be able to be spawn camped. but if you're good, you could still get away with it, and if there are multiple traitors, it'd almost be like three sides to the fight :D
If EVE is a basis for how the world in DUST can be... I don't think CCP would/should implement a penalty system for SPIES/TKers. It would just defeat the purpose of infiltrating a corp and turning the tide in a crucial battle. I like Orin's idea of flagging a TKer. Have everyone else know that the guy is a spy/tker and just deplete his/her dropsuits until he/she cant spawn anymore.
One of the things that intrigued me about EVE/DUST is the ability to infiltrate/spy/sabotage from within. Taking that out or even limiting would just destroy the one of the many reasons why the game is great or would be great. I remember the story about how one scammed the universe of their ISK by being the world bank or something like that and CCP didn't lift a finger (I may be wrong) about it since it was the players fault for trusting them. The same should apply to those you ally or recruit.
TL-DR: Dont gimp the TKer/Spy. FLAG them so that everyone is aware who it is and deal with them accordingly.
On Friendly Fire: I hope they dont give it 100% damage. I'd like to see it as reduced damage that way, One wont accidentally kill someone from a burst or wayward grenade. Allow the unintended victim a way out and it would easily alert a would-be spy if he/she persisted in trying to take down one of their own. |
[Veteran_Cantus]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 17:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
I agree with Zeidrich Sinclair on this.
I don't mind friendly fire being off for now until CCP fix the bugs or until a certain update that includes player-driven corporations, but I sure as hell don't want FF to be penalized. In Eve, player-driven corps can have their own corp mates legally shoot each other without Concord intervention in high-sec space. This makes it perfect for spies to go in and kill off expensive ships for an enemy corp or alliance. It's been like that for about 9 years in Eve and so far almost no one complained since directors and CEOs can manually kick the spy out when it happens.
I like to see that system in place for DUST as well. We are fighting in New Eden after all. |
|
|
[Veteran_Findor Yolunda]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 18:09:00 -
[21] - Quote
Some more great feedback and discussion!
As a long time EVE player I agree that perhaps the best implementation that fits in the EVE canon is as several have stated to simply have no FF/TK penalty at all... I just wonder, considering the reality that griefing is a feature of the FPS scene, if such a pure EVE way of doing things would encourage this juvenile behavior?
I also like Orin's idea of flagging TKers (who pass a certain threshold) as Red to all players! |
[Veteran_Ryk Hawthorn]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 20:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
I like the idea of flaging TKer.
In Templar One are a few mechanisms described:
- the commander cuts the clone supply for the TKer
- traitor gets marked as red to his (former) teamates
- traitor can get marked as blue by enemy commanders
This would give the opportunity to defect to the enemy or even double spy (both sites).
Imagine:
One teammate is tking. The command will get the info by the squadleader and decides to mark him as a traitor and cuts the clone supply. Since then he is outlawed and marked as a traitor for everyone. The enemy commander has noticed that and decides to form an ally with the traitor and marks him to his team as blue.
EDIT: The traitor who defected to the enemy by getting marked as blue gains clone supply again and fights for them.
Would be cool and fits to the scenario of Templar One.
Best regards,
RykDXIV |
[Veteran_iwillrock yourworld]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 21:07:00 -
[23] - Quote
I believe there must be an aditional mechanism, reporting.
Many people will play this game as random matches, so if a player is deliberated tk'ing someone in these matches there should be a report tool.
If enough reports are given this is escalated toa gm that can then take action against the player.
I know WoT has this feature built in. Its a interesting option to protect the random people that may gain a enemy within its own npc corp lines and help to keep the game clean and fair play on. |
[Veteran_Dezick Ariv]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 23:03:00 -
[24] - Quote
Idea. TK abuse means access denied to clone, you will not be payed for that match (atleast, if I was corporation CEO, I would not pay you for killing my other soldiers) Marked as red for both teams. You still could get skillpoints for teamkills, because it is impossible to deny someone battlefield experience because they shot the wrong guy.
This could also then go on some sort of permanent record or something to warn your future employers that you are a turncoat.
Full damage friendly fire would have to be happening for sake of realism (bullets in and of themselves have no sides, I don't care if it's the future) |
[Veteran_Cantus]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 01:39:00 -
[25] - Quote
iwillrock yourworld wrote:I believe there must be an aditional mechanism, reporting.
Many people will play this game as random matches, so if a player is deliberated tk'ing someone in these matches there should be a report tool.
If enough reports are given this is escalated toa gm that can then take action against the player.
I know WoT has this feature built in. Its a interesting option to protect the random people that may gain a enemy within its own npc corp lines and help to keep the game clean and fair play on.
Not gonna happen. The Game Masters of Eve Online don't usually ban team killers because of the nature of New Eden. Suicide ganking is allowed. Corpmate killing is allowed. Hell, corporate theft is allowed.
The Game Master is not going to ban any team killer just because you get annoyed by it. They will most likely tell you to A) harden the **** up and B) make sure you do better job at background checks the next time you allow someone to join your corp. It's something they have been doing for 9 years. |
[Veteran_Orin Fenris]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 05:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
The thing is, if you make them red to everyone, they can still get points just like everyone else.
In null sec, when that becomes available, then they can work out how to handle it there, when there are actual field commanders present. But for now, I just think flagging the TKer as hostile to both sides, and make them fight against everyone should be enough of a drawback to prevent the simple griefers, yet still be viable for sabotage, especially on larger scales. |
[Veteran_Bob Deorum]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:13:00 -
[27] - Quote
i really like the idea of flagging the tker as red for both parties but this brings up other questions like how many times to kill before this happens. should the player get any isk rewards after the battle?
The biggest issue I have with the paying isk is what if they have no isk left. what if someone just creates a acount to do nothing but tk. |
[Veteran_Orin Fenris]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:19:00 -
[28] - Quote
Bob Deorum wrote:i really like the idea of flagging the tker as red for both parties but this brings up other questions like how many times to kill before this happens. should the player get any isk rewards after the battle?
The biggest issue I have with the paying isk is what if they have no isk left. what if someone just creates a acount to do nothing but tk.
Well, with my idea, the TKers would still get ISK after the battle. Everyone deserves the ability to come out ISK efficient. But since they would be red to everyone, and possibly not be able to hack (but still able to blow up assets manually), and , to cap it all off, be limited to static spawns, it would greatly reduce their effectiveness on the battle field, and the odds of them coming out ahead in efficiency would be dismal.
My idea of flagging the person isn't to penalize saboteurs, it's to discourage idiot kids who don't know what they ard doing from griefing, as well as discouraging careless trigger-pulling.
Unless you are confident you can take on 31 other people yourself, when you are limited to where you can spawn... then I would suppose you'd be a bit more careful :P |
[Veteran_Van Lorringen]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:37:00 -
[29] - Quote
Lots of great ideas in this thread, but if we are going to try to keep things in the spirit of EVE we have to rethink a few things.
I mostly support the ability for the commander to cut the clone supply of the TK'er. Here is why:
In EVE, unless you are using AOE weapons like bombs or smartbombs it is really hard to accidentally kill one of you're own teammates. So when there are situations where a player attacks his own allies he is often flagged as an enemy by the commander and destroyed. The difference happens now after death. In EVE there are logistic issues where the TK'er will most likely be either too far away from the battlefield, or it would simply be inefficient to attack again as the player will most likely be marked.
However since DUST is an FPS, we have to take into account strafing accidents, unlucky grenades (Don't hit the doorframe smartass, or the classice grenade hit a guy in the face 2 feet away from you), poor aim and frantic tank combat, aka the suprice roadkill.
An isk punishment system would be handy, but is has to be ontop of a hard response tactic. People can afford to waste millions, even outside of shady tactics, a lunatic with a bit of cash could go on an expensive TK shopping spree.
If there are cases where there is no commander or in perhaps highsec combat, that system can be automated. |
[Veteran_Van Lorringen]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:44:00 -
[30] - Quote
Van Lorringen wrote:
However since DUST is an FPS, we have to take into account strafing accidents, unlucky grenades (Don't hit the doorframe smartass, or the classice grenade hit a guy in the face 2 feet away from you), poor aim and frantic tank combat, aka the suprice roadkill.
Oh and don't forget the famed: Your troop transport got shot to hell, then you hit a twig and exploded. Suddenly all your passengers blood is on your hands.
*Yes, I'm looking at you battlefield!* |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |