Friendly Fire: A Discussion

KhajiitiLizard

My team on Halo once beat a team 100 to -10 (so many betrayals and suicides).

Friendly fire works in FPS because they tend to have very few AOEs (rocket launchers, tanks are the exception)

In an MMORPG there are so many AOEs that everyone would die. If you simply turn friendly fire on a zerg would kill itself, while funny it would be broken. A better solution would be to reduce the effectiveness of attacks the closer you are to an ally.

And since ESO has no realistic (with physics) projectiles or hitboxes, friendly fire would happen constantly. Would make tab target necessary.

Gidorick

dday3six wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

In PVE, arenas are not big enough for this to work. Using the City of Ash boss fight for example, many aoes cover most, if not the whole safe zone. This is pretty much a 'no-go' for the bulk of PVE content as many encounters do not have enough room to fit enemy aoes, friendly aoes, and safe spots in managable distances to still actually complete the encounters.

With IC there is a lot more PVE and PVP cross-over, and just imagine the war of grinding spots. Just imagine being able to kill that player who set up siege in the spot you want. There is not work around for fiendly fire. The game is not set up for it.

What you are talking about would require the game to be fundimentally redesigned. It's not creative to want one game to morph into another.

Sure... but that is what I'm asking. What would be a good deterrent to dissuade a player from doing this?

It is not the game that would need to be redesigned but player habits.

Not having friendly fire is the best deterrent. If there needs to be such a complicated and creative dissuasion. Perhaps the solution is it shouldn't be implemented in the first place.

I hate the answer of not having features in a game because some dingleberries would abuse it. To me, not having it in the game is the ultimate grief. We can't have it because griefers = griefing win.

So what would this actually do to improve the game? It needs to have heavily regulation to stop it from being abused. It certainly comes off as being more trouble than it's worth.

Zergs are the only reason we've ever really been given for the lag. Friendly fire with dissuade and reduce zergs, spread out combat, increase PvP gameplay variety, and in theory reduce lag.

Gidorick

Thank you for your input @LordSemaj. Unfortunately that's kind of where I landed to. That's why I came on the forums asking the question. I was hoping other people might have a different perspective from me and therefore different ideas.

Grampa_Smurf

No-Yes..mmmm maybe

Don't think you can get a group friendly fire PvP working, For 1 you should not be able to punish players for friendly fire as you can't punish for killing enemy. There is always going to be the nobb ( idiot ) out there who will always wants to play by their own rules, you can't punish them for playing the way they want this is PvP and if you can kill friendlies then there is no rules broken.

In the end it will just turn into a death match type of game, If this is the case then just create a death match map that will last 24 hours with only 1 winner. When you die in this map you cannot re-enter till reset, player that is still alive and with most kills at end wins. Open PvP no worry about enemy-friendlies best man-woman wins.

dday3six

Gidorick wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

dday3six wrote: »

In PVE, arenas are not big enough for this to work. Using the City of Ash boss fight for example, many aoes cover most, if not the whole safe zone. This is pretty much a 'no-go' for the bulk of PVE content as many encounters do not have enough room to fit enemy aoes, friendly aoes, and safe spots in managable distances to still actually complete the encounters.

With IC there is a lot more PVE and PVP cross-over, and just imagine the war of grinding spots. Just imagine being able to kill that player who set up siege in the spot you want. There is not work around for fiendly fire. The game is not set up for it.

What you are talking about would require the game to be fundimentally redesigned. It's not creative to want one game to morph into another.

Sure... but that is what I'm asking. What would be a good deterrent to dissuade a player from doing this?

It is not the game that would need to be redesigned but player habits.

Not having friendly fire is the best deterrent. If there needs to be such a complicated and creative dissuasion. Perhaps the solution is it shouldn't be implemented in the first place.

I hate the answer of not having features in a game because some dingleberries would abuse it. To me, not having it in the game is the ultimate grief. We can't have it because griefers = griefing win.

So what would this actually do to improve the game? It needs to have heavily regulation to stop it from being abused. It certainly comes off as being more trouble than it's worth.

Zergs are the only reason we've ever really been given for the lag. Friendly fire with dissuade and reduce zergs, spread out combat, increase PvP gameplay variety, and in theory reduce lag.

ZOS also mentioned line of sight abilities contributing to lag.

Anyhow there are better ways to combat zerging besides adding in a feature that would need to be overly regulated. Simply decrease the max party size. Further penalize large group numbers with more than less experience. IC seemed like the perfect time to dropped the max group size in the city, and ZOS declined to do that. Stating players would just follow each other anyway.

Frankly Cyrodiil is a mix of many good and bad ideas. I personally think if ZOS had elected to go the typical route of smaller scale, instanced PVP matches. With a mix of objective and kill based win conditions. The gameplay would be more stable. The main reason Cyrodiil lags is there is so much going on, in such a large area.

Shimmer

In APB reloaded, there is friendly fire. If you kill another teammate, you get a demerit and lose points for that mission. It starts at a 40 point loss for 1 team kill, then 60 for two and increases in intervals. If you a teammate more than 5 times in 5 minutes you are kicked from the server for excessive team killing (that moment when you fire a rocket at the enemy and don't notice your team driving up to them...)

Maybe a loss of AP per team kill?

But yes repercussions are needed for something like this or you are asking for a troll fest.

Aelthwyn

My concern with friendly fire is how ridiculously annoying it would be given that I'm already auto-targeting rats all the time and wasting magic on them in the midst of chaotic battle, to have even more possible wrong targets that are likely darting across my view more often, faster, and more unpredictably would just lead to so many annoying misfires I'd never want to do anything with other players in the vicinity. And what about cloak-type spells that damage anyone closeby? Forget about using the protection those give if you're next to your allies. Yeah... with friendly fire, just forget about doing anything in groups, no thanks.

deathbykarma

Lol reflective damage.... Considering aoe which has a lot of aoe's I could imagine 60 some people dropping dead all at once lol

deathbykarma

Plus I and a lot of others would just love to find ways to purposely make you hit me with your attacks just to see you get penalized on purpose to have a laugh and hear you rage.

RSram

I think friendly fire would definitely spread out the combat calculations and help eliminate PVP lag, but I believe that a majority of the players in PVP lack the self-control to take advantage of friendly fire. Anyone who has experienced a siege on a keep or watched a video of it would understand what I'm referring to: the fog of war, the chaos theory, etc.

I agree with several previous posters who stated that too many players would be accidentally killed using such a system, so the disadvantages would outweigh the advantages.

I'm for friendly fire, but it wouldn't work in the way ESO handles combat calculations using soft targeting.

Gidorick

I agree that the targeting would be an issue. Friendlies would have to immune to targeting. I'm not sure if ZOS could do that since we have other targeting issues.

RAGUNAnoOne

I would love to see it someday but as you said OP we need heavy penalties.the problem with that is this though: too light a penalty=people abusing it. Too heavy a penalty=people flooding everyone with complaints if they accidentally kill someone due to the crap targeting system ect. in a sense this system has no middle ground that I can see and either way I can see a sharp decrease in the number of casual players and more newer players rage quitting early if this happens.

Personofsecrets

No.

I get my answer from DK Chains. Over and over I get pulled to enemies because a teammate unwittingly used a crowed control on that mob. It makes an already broken ability that much more frustrating.

Moral of the story. ESO combat just doesn't have the precision it would take to make friendly fire mechanics fun. AOE would be a nightmare, targeting already is a nightmare, we would have to use the broken tab targeting system, and it would be frustrating because of all of those reasons.

dafox187

it would be nice if it were only in pvp areas [unless duel idea]

Tarum

@ZOS_GinaBruno this is a must! At least a single campaign with friendly fire special rules
The only reason I don't play PvP is that it's just a mess of huge mass of players spamming AoE. I would gladly play in a Friendly Fire campaign, where you actually have to think on what to do and tactic is the key.
A lot of fellows here suggested the perfect way to punish exploiting aswell.

Gidorick

Personofsecrets wrote: »

No.

I get my answer from DK Chains. Over and over I get pulled to enemies because a teammate unwittingly used a crowed control on that mob. It makes an already broken ability that much more frustrating.

Moral of the story. ESO combat just doesn't have the precision it would take to make friendly fire mechanics fun. AOE would be a nightmare, targeting already is a nightmare, we would have to use the broken tab targeting system, and it would be frustrating because of all of those reasons.

It would change the mechanics of combat... but I don't think that's necessarily a BAD thing. I would at least like to see what this would be like. I'm starting to think ZOS needs to have "test scenarios" on the PTS server to let players give their input on design concepts such as these.