DUST Search - Here is why we should welcome Friendly Fire

All Channels

General Discussions

Here is why we should welcome Friendly Fire

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.01.31 17:18:00 - [1] - Quote Friendly fire done as thoughtlessly as the OP suggests it might would be a terrible idea. Here's how you do FF: 1) If you damage a friendly, you are fined an ISK/SP penalty based on the amount of damage you do. The penalty grows larger the more damage you do in a short period of time. One stray shot isn't a big deal, but unloading into a friendly would be heavily penalized. Similarly, if the game could track whether the friendly target shot were near an enemy target, and increase the penalty if the friendly was not (so as to differentiate accidents from malicious acts better) that'd be helpful. 1a) The exception to this is that, people in your corp, people in your pre-made squad, they do not cause you to be penalized as all if you shoot them. You can always leave your squad/corp if you started getting maliciously teamkilled by your "friends". So for corp battles, for example, there'd be friendly fire, but there'd never be penalties for it beyond what the corp works out for itself, should one of its members start going rogue. 2) If you kill a friendly, you are fined the cost of their fitting/vehicle on top of other expenses. 3) If any character on any of your accounts kills more than two or three friendlies a game, or deal X amount of damage, you become designated as a teamkiller. That is, you'll show up with a special chevron rather than regular blue or red one -- perhaps a purple chevron to split the difference. The status will persist for 30 minutes, through multiple games. When so designated, anyone in the game, on your team or the other, can kill you without repercussion. 4) If you are designated as a team killer more than X times in Y period of time on any of your accounts, you get banned for 1 day. If after that ban expires you again become designated as a teamkiller, you get banned for 3 days. Then 7, then 15, then 30. After, if you get designated as a teamkiller again, your account is permanently terminated and all your characters are deleted. I assume that the PS3 is able to ban by machine, so that's what it'd end up as. Without meaningful punishment for TK'ing that prevents alt PSN accounts being used to just go wild with friendly fire teamkilling, FF would be a bad addition to the game, and you'd routinely have to deal with people abusing friendly fire. The only way to make friendly fire work for a free game like this is to put access to the game at jeopardy for people should they abuse the system.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.01.31 17:50:00 - [2] - Quote Ghost-33 wrote: #4 Sounds ridiculous for New Eden but I like the other suggestions. If people can just make alts or new Dust accounts to TK, then people will do just that, and friendly fire will become a problem with the game rather than a solid addition to it. The only way to make people care about not abusing FF is to put the one thing that matters to them on the line. There is no TK stat, security status, ISK/SP penalty, or anything else that'd matter to someone rolling out with a full militia set and just shooting allies in the back of the head in game after game.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.01.31 21:04:00 - [3] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: Banning for multiple team kills? No. That's not the New Eden experience. Go play another game. And this is exactly what people will do. They'll go play another game, and Dust will fail because it will be rife with TK'ers whom nobody wants deal with, and then it'll just be you and a handful of other people murdering each other in the MCC spawn, gloating about how hardcore you are for enduring the "New Eden experience". If CCP's goal is to make a game that people want to play, they should ignore the kind of sentiment you've expressed. It's possible to have a more unforgiving sort of game that does have friendly fire, without crippling the game through not doing anything to stop people from maliciously teamkilling to their heart's content. There is a middle-ground between the thoughtless elitism you've expressed, and the rather shallow life of no FF at all. Just to be clear though, it'd be banning for numerous obviously malicious instances of team killing. What I've suggested is a blatant copy of the friendly fire system used by the free-to-play game World of Tanks, and it works perfectly in that game. It's the only way to prevent teamkilling from ruining the game. Without eventual machine bans, people will TK on alts, TK on alt PSN accounts, and otherwise simply circumvent the typical penalties. There needs to be something that actually matters at risk, otherwise many people will continuously TK, and the system will be a huge detriment to the game, rather than a valuable addition.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.01 02:25:00 - [4] - Quote Arramakaian Eka wrote: Dust will not fail due to FF; don't be ridiculous. There are plenty of FPSs out there which have FF mode or are completely FF, some of them AAA. And you never ever hear anyone quitting due to FF. Granted, in Dust there is more to lose from TK. But as his been pointed out in the OP and other posts and threads, there are many ways to fix it with in-game mechanics, or coordination. You're right, it won't, but that's because CCP knows better. Other FPS games with FF have significant differences. Servers you can be kicked/banned from by the host, optional non-FF servers you can play on instead, and in particular, you don't actually lose anything in those games when you die, other than your time. The game I compared Dust to -- World of Tanks -- is the best comparison there is. Both games make a big deal out of making and losing money, both games are free to play with a single server (although WoT has a single server per region instead). You can't compare a game like Battlefield 3 to something like Dust. Someone starts TK'ing in BF3, you shrug your shoulders, maybe say a swear or two, and either try to ignore it or move to a different server. In Dust, you can't help but play on a FF server if they were to make FF for Instant Battle games. And each death is, potentially, the loss of ISK. The solutions I've seen, the ones that act as if rampant TK'ing isn't a problem, and have some pithy comment about how "New Eden" works -- as if that's at all relevant or even accurate -- aren't sensible solutions. Either CCP makes teamkilling heavily penalized, or it keeps FF off of Instant Battles, or it accepts that its game will be far less popular than it would if it had no FF on Instant Battle servers, and indulges the inner child of people who go about that TK'ing business. Unless the penalties are such that making an alt PSN account and TK'ing with throw-away characters would substantially endanger your main PSN account with your real Dust characters, FF' for Instant Battles would ruin the game. Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: I ran my PS3 as a dedicated Warhawk server many time and I always ran it with FF on. Didn't get many players. Just proved to me that a lot of PvP FPS players lack the intestinal fortitude to go all the way. I'm seeing a lot of that here. Saying FF in pub matches will kill Dust is the same, in my opinion, as all those people that said it would kill Eve. It has nothing to do with fortitude. The only people who enjoy being killed by people on their own team is... well, nobody. Some people may like to do it, but nobody likes being randomly shot in the back by a supposed ally. So yeah, amazing as it must be, most people prefer to play the game, rather than be randomly killed by people they have no way of identifying. And the EVE comparison is fairly ignorant of how EVE actually works. Most EVE players play in Empire space. It's safe there, unless you're flying something compelling enough to attract a suicide gank squad, and unless you're in a corp that goes to war or recruits new players only to PK them. For the majority of EVE players, they've probably never been killed by another player outside of a wardec. Now, that might change a bit with bounties, but in any case, it's not like new players spawn in nullsec with their pants around their ankles. The idea that EVE is this brutally hostile and totally crazy charnel house of players killing players is mistaken. Anyone who wants to avoid dying to other players in EVE can easily do so, while still playing the game and having fun.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.01 10:04:00 - [5] - Quote Arramakaian Eka wrote: Either you didn't read what I wrote, or you just wrote two long paragaphs agreeing with my arguments. One of the main points and the original reason I wrote the OP was the notion that people will start TKing players left and right. This is a ridiculous proposition. It will happen, but there's no way it will become an epidemic due to numerous reasons I and others have listed in previous posts. A small note: you can switch to another server in Dust. Server defined as understood in FPS games. I read what you wrote and I told you why you're wrong. If two paragraphs is too long for you then feel free to not respond to things I write in the future. Sometimes I say things with more than a few words. Welp. People will TK left-and-right because Dust isn't like any random FPS you've ever played. Even in those games, people absolutely do TK maliciously fairly often. Many of those servers with FF enabled require admins to kick/ban people for TK'ing. In Dust, however, it will be far worse, because people will know that they're causing real harm to a person's character by costing them money when they die. TK'ing members of rival corps would be pretty much SOP for many groups out there as well. You really have no idea how bad TK'ing will be if CCP were to take your hands-off approach. If they add friendly fire to Instant Battle games, then no, you can't move to a new server. You can quit your game, but your next game would invariably include FF as well. My point, which I thought I made fairly clear, was that in other FPS games where it's a bunch of separate servers with different configurations, players are free to choose the ruleset that suits them best. People wouldn't have that choice with Dust (as nobody would ever voluntarily play on a FF server if they could help it, aside from people looking to play what's essentially a free-for-all). Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: I know all too well how Eve works. I've had three years experience in Eve and spent a significant amount of that time living in wormhole space. No-one is safe in Eve even if you're the nicest carebear in the galaxy, someone will likely get around to ganking you sooner or later. No, Eve isn't always a brutal carnage filled game but it isn't safe. FF isn't going to be the epidemic many think it will be even if it did come to pub matches. Your odds of being killed as a new player by enemy players is basically zero unless you wander off into nullsec or something. People aren't going to get popped by CONCORD over someone in a T1 frigate. And as that new player gets to understand the world, he'll know about the various tricks that people use to get players to make themselves attackable, or the kinds of ships people would gank, or to avoid warring corps if they don't want to fight other players. EVE is pretty safe unless you do things that make you a target. And that's why FF in Instant Battles isn't the same, as a person playing Dust for the first time ever would conceivably be maliciously TK'd in their first game, if CCP did what you people want and didn't penalize TK'ing at all essentially. Someone getting killed repeatedly by their own team before they even have any idea what's going on would lead to a pretty quick deletion of the game, as the disgruntled newbie moves on to greener pastures.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.01 21:17:00 - [6] - Quote Arramakaian Eka wrote: I read both your posts in entirety. You yet again just keep rehashing your argument, and don't bring any new insight into the discussion. I've already responded to all your items in my previous posts and I'm not going to repeat them, and others have also addressed your concerns. People don't TK maliciously "fairly often" in other games; it's rather rare as I pointed out in another post (yet another one of these). By moving to a new server I meant you can change to another game to leave the TKer behind. Duh. Other solutions have been posted in the thread. Even suggesting that FF would make the game FFA outs you as a clueless knee-jerk CoD gamer who doesn't know FF FPSs at all. In best case it is FUD, and we have too much of that with all the nerf discussions going on already. I'm done with you. Have a nice day, good sir. Tell me how often people TK using numbers rather than words. Oh, that's right, you have no idea how often the TK beyond your own limited experience. So much for that. I know what you meant when you said moving to a new server. And I specifically said that you can't move to a server that doesn't have FF, so unlike other FPS games, you can't avoid FF if you'd rather not deal with TK'ers that day. I've never played CoD, but good guess. I suppose you using "CoD gamer" as an epithet for someone who disagrees with you outs you as something as well. You should sit and think about what unrestricted TK'ing would mean for people who have personal or corp rivalries as well. Even if malicious TK'ing weren't something you'd get every game (and you would), corps which don't like each other and people who don't like each other would shoot each other in the back constantly. The game would be pretty unplayable if you ever had two squads from rival corps on the same team, as they'd start a TK'ing war that wouldn't finish until their team lost. Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: You obviously haven't hung around with some of the people I have in Eve if you think it doesn't happen. And if someone is coming in that's going to rage quit and delete after a bad battle or two, it won't make a difference if there's TK or not. Just think of all those players that did it when they found out they couldn't max out their characters in about a month, there were no titles, and no achievements, just to name a few. But, like I said, carebears will have their high sec plus zone in pub battles as it looks highly unlikely that friendly fire will be turned on in pub matches. Unless you're mining in an exhumer or flying around a freighter, you are very unlikely to be killed, as you won't be worth anything. Try to remember that the point I'm making isn't that you will never ever die as a highsec non-warring player in EVE, just that it's highly unlikely, and compared to how rampant TK'ing would be in Dust should CCP be stupid enough to do what that Arramshdjadhsa person suggested. Dust would be far, far more unforgiving to new players if it had unfettered TK'ing.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.01 23:50:00 - [7] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: I know from experience that there are people who will run through high sec in cheap high damage ships blatting frigs and low end cruisers just for kill mails. I'm just saying that it happens more than you seem to be implying. And I'm saying it happens far less than you'd get TK'd in Dust. The whole point is to smash to bits this false equivalency you've drawn between EVE and Dust with penalty-less FF turned on all the time. Dust would be far less forgiving to new players with FF on than EVE is to new players who may, very rarely, get killed flying in something like a newbie ship. That's my point. You aren't making Dust just like EVE by adding unrestricted FF on, you're making it far worse. Amahsjdhasd has zero clue what he's talking about.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.02 04:48:00 - [8] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: TKing will happen, that's a given. Can't be helped. But the solution needs to come from the community in game, not through some unnecessary game mechanic that will penalize good players for the suicidal actions of idiots or suicide griefers as well as actual intentional TKers. You get VTK/Auto Kick/Field Marshalled, a few times you'll end up on the other end of this conversation talking about how broken the mechanic is or how it was a bad idea to begin with because you got booted out for no good reason. So someone gets kicked and they just queue up again, pull their militia stuff, and continue to TK. Or the team they're on, for whatever reason, doesn't kick them and they keep TK'ing there. In either case, the problem of malicious TK'ing is not solved. As for VTK being the "solution from the community", how many VTK's will snipers end up having directed at them out of spite? How many new players with a bad KDR will get booted? This system will be abused. We know it'll be abused, because it's abused every day on FPS servers which allow VTK. In other words, your "solution" will actually not deter TK'ing whatsoever, will not punish TK'ing when it happens, and will in fact lead to even bigger problems, as now people can maliciously boot others from matches if they don't want to bother with repeatedly TK'ing them. Just so we're clear on this, CCP is trying to make a game that people who don't necessarily have an antisocial personality disorder. Normal people are supposed to like to play this game. CCP is going to make its money back by getting people to really like Dust, such that they buy AUR and stuff. So maybe some solutions to the problem of FF other than what you and Amahadshj would be sensible. And, to reiterate, there is already a game which is F2P, which is very similar to Dust in having earning money/experience for matches being a central part of the experience, which has FF. And the FF system they have is coupled with an intelligent and effective way for friendly damage and TK'ing to be automatically and appropriately punished. CCP doesn't need to look any further than World of Tanks to see a game with always-on FF, with zero cost for people to make an account and play, and which does not have any significant problem with TK'ers as a result. Your fantasy about the solution coming from within the community, and involving a flawed voting system, are totally unneeded, even if they were sensible answers in the first place.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.02.02 12:17:00 - [9] - Quote I guess I could go the route of "in-game realism" with this, too. I don't like these arguments, but I guess it's not so terrible in this case. The whole premise behind Dust is that you're a mercenary. The Instant Battle matches you fight are contracts you've accepted from a larger organization. Even ignoring the very real gameplay reasons why FF that is not punished automatically is a bad idea, how would it make any sense in the context of the very premise of the game for FF to not be punished? Like the empire that hired you wouldn't care that you're shooting the other people it hired and causing the mission to be put in jeopardy? Again, the gameplay reasons are the only really important part and stand on their own, but it's worth considering at least that a mercenary hired to work on a team, who subsequently starts murdering members of that team, would probably be heavily sanctioned by their employer, right? ISK penalties and account suspension all make perfect sense in the context of the game, simply because an employer would not pay you if you violated the terms of your contract, and if you were to do so egregiously they'd certainly be reluctant to hire you again. But, for the nth time, the gameplay reasons suffice. I just thought I'd mention that FF which didn't have automatic, serious sanctions would be pretty silly from a "lore" or "fluff" perspective, or whatever you call it. If the FF penalties involved reducing, then removing your ISK payout, then booting from a match (contract termination), then account suspension (temporary merc license revocation) and then permanent suspension (merc license termination) after too many account suspensions, it'd be WoT's very effective anti-TK system, and also totally plausible within the context of New Eden. Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: WoT's system is fine for that style of game. I've played WoT. But there's going to be more at stake in New Eden than the immediate match. It's called persistence. Something that WoT has only when it comes to tanks and crews one has in one's available inventory Nothing in WoT carries any real potential weight. When considering the direction Dust is intended to go, and where CCP is inexorably taking Dust because it's their game, we need open friendly fire. If one can't find a way to deal with FF in game without some game breaking mechanic, then one isn't going to be able to deal with New Eden when the main elements of the ground aspect are brought in. There is nothing at stake in Dust. The idea that it's relevant to EVE is simply an idea that will, a year or more from now, become a reality. For now, WoT has by far more at stake than Dust. Not only are tanks really expensive to buy and equip and maintain (such that people consider WoT a "grindy" game) but the Clan Wars aspect, where you fight for territory, awards you an AUR-equivalent very helpfully called "gold". That's more than you can say for Dust. So let's not pretend Dust is some special snowflake here. And more importantly, the majority of Dust players will never go beyond Instant Battle. They'll never do corp wars, never do nullsec stuff. They'll just play Dust like any ol' FPS game. And Dust needs to be fun for those people, too. Sacrificing the fun of those casual folks, simply because of some nonsense about how "New Eden" is "supposed to be", as if that's more important than making a fun game, isn't a winning strategy. It's possible for CCP to add FF, and to make FF a good addition rather than a detriment. WoT has done it. Amarhadhsdb and his ideas won't do it. Your opinion that the community will magically find a solution (just like it finds a solution for tanks that start dominating their team, right?) is a work of fiction. There are real solutions out there that allow FF but don't make Dust into a cesspool of TK'ing. Rejecting those solutions based on your misguided ideas about how EVE works doesn't cut it. Arramakaian Eka wrote: Planetside 2 is much closer to Dust, has Friendly Fire, and doesn't use VTK. Your weapon gets locked after enough FF damage/kills AFAIK. You don't lose money when you die in Planetside 2. You do lose money in Dust and World of Tanks. That's what makes WoT a better example than Planetside 2. Death is a very temporary setback of, at most, ~20 seconds in Planetside 2, and nothing more. In Dust, dying can be very expensive. This is why comparing Dust to other FPS games is so useless. Some people who see you using an AUR weapon will kill you simply because they know you're more likely to get pissed off at that loss. They'll blow up your tank because they know those are also expensive. The fact that death matters, and everything is paid for (or so CCP likes to claim) is meant to be one of Dust's biggest draws. With unrestricted FF, it'd make it one of its biggest shortcomings.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.