Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

3 things:
1. if this game will have no friendly fire at all it will feel very strange
for example if there is a melee battle between 10 SM and 10 CSM and suddenly 3 devastor SM and CSM appear and cause there is no FF they just shoot all they bullets into the group of melee fighters in the knowledge that they will just kill enemies and need not to fear hitting allies
that would just feel wrong, they should need to aim carefully or just fight the 3 other devastors but not just shooting brainless around
for meleecombat FF should be off, cause it would be hard to aim carefully there cause of the wide swings some big weapons will do

2. "mini games":
some of you mentioned capture the Flagg and stuff like that, we need to be careful with that. if there is to much we will have to less players who are joining the real battlefield or do you want to implement this in the battlefield?
the battlearena in each factions homebase sounds good to me so friends in the same faction can duel and train each other or fight something out (leadership for orks maybe?)

3. we started a vote for the 5 spacemarine chapter on mmorpg.com
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/954/view/forums/thread/390949/Newest-newsletter-possible-5th-chapter.html

leave your vote and comment there

Savij wrote:

for meleecombat FF should be off, cause it would be hard to aim carefully there cause of the wide swings some big weapons will do

Defending yourself in a melee with a ranged weapon, e.g. a pistol, will be even more one-sided if only you have to watch your fire. I'd like to have FF in melee as well. The attacker needs to spread out a bit or watch where they swing. It'll help the immersion.

Savij wrote:


3. we started a vote for the 5 spacemarine chapter on mmorpg.com
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/954/view/forums/thread/390949/Newest-newsletter-possible-5th-chapter.html

leave your vote and comment there

Hey, just wanted to pop in to report a bug: in your poll, somehow, the Necrons option has disappeared :(

Savij wrote:
3 things:
1. if this game will have no friendly fire at all it will feel very strange
for example if there is a melee battle between 10 SM and 10 CSM and suddenly 3 devastor SM and CSM appear and cause there is no FF they just shoot all they bullets into the group of melee fighters in the knowledge that they will just kill enemies and need not to fear hitting allies
that would just feel wrong, they should need to aim carefully or just fight the 3 other devastors but not just shooting brainless around
for meleecombat FF should be off, cause it would be hard to aim carefully there cause of the wide swings some big weapons will do

2. "mini games":
some of you mentioned capture the Flagg and stuff like that, we need to be careful with that. if there is to much we will have to less players who are joining the real battlefield or do you want to implement this in the battlefield?
the battlearena in each factions homebase sounds good to me so friends in the same faction can duel and train each other or fight something out (leadership for orks maybe?)

3. we started a vote for the 5 spacemarine chapter on mmorpg.com
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/954/view/forums/thread/390949/Newest-newsletter-possible-5th-chapter.html

leave your vote and comment there

1 is my main reason for wanting FF to some degree, it would completely break immersion for me seeing 2 devastators waste a whole unit of raptors that are tied up with an assault squad and the assault squad walk out un harmed.

I am also pleased with a certain chapter appearing on that list.

 Minx wrote:

Savij wrote:

for meleecombat FF should be off, cause it would be hard to aim carefully there cause of the wide swings some big weapons will do

Defending yourself in a melee with a ranged weapon, e.g. a pistol, will be even more one-sided if only you have to watch your fire. I'd like to have FF in melee as well. The attacker needs to spread out a bit or watch where they swing. It'll help the immersion.

I hope pistols and other off-hand ranged weapon will be incorporporated in the melee animation attack (no fear to aim with pistol in melee) something like a "combo" you hit RMB+LMB+RMB = slash+blam+slash a combo with a CC shot without need to actually aim, but if you simply press LMQ you do a standard aimed ranged attack, and i think is better do something to make impossible to use ranged weapon in melee, like an automatic conuterattack if a space marine try to shoot with a heavy bolter when engaged (only if try to shoot instead of hitting me with the gun like a mace or kick me with his power feet for push me back and shoot me ) i simply hit RMB and deal huge damage/special animation with my melee weapon.

it's a good idea for balancing pistol (lower damage lower precision lower range) vs two handed ranged weapons. Also, devastator or equivalent stop shooting or they dying instantly when engaged melee.

Thanks dear fans!

By the way.... if you allow me to tease you... I was told DakkaDakka is the most hardcore Forums for 40K fans....

Well, maybe not anymore. Check here: http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/954/view/forums/post/5856585#5856585

Its an Orks ONLY forum LOL you need to speak Orks to post there LOL.

Miguel

Again, I think SM answered the idea of FF perfectly. Friendlies don't take friendly fire, but they instead block your shots, meaning that if a devastator just sprays and prays into the ranks of a melee, he has a very small chance of hitting anything.

Plasma cannon shots can still be deflected, but again, they are just as dangerous to the user as they are to the enemy. I've killed myself more times than I'd like to admit using the Plasma Cannon - and I'm happy with it.

Friendly fire happens in BF4 with big explosions and tanks. That to me seems reasonable. Having FF on all the time just seems ridiculous when there's 2000 - 4000 people to contend with at once.

I'm not sure how having a FFA arena in the flavor of the Blood God breaks or even bends lore. Bloodlust is a pretty simple mechanic, fits in with every race, and would make for a very fitting piece to the last bastion for Chaos.

As to hardcore, Dakka's more concerned over content and substance than flavor. Only high rollers post here

miguelcaron wrote:
Thanks dear fans!

By the way.... if you allow me to tease you... I was told DakkaDakka is the most hardcore Forums for 40K fans....

Well, maybe not anymore. Check here: http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/954/view/forums/post/5856585#5856585

Its an Orks ONLY forum LOL you need to speak Orks to post there LOL.

Miguel

Miguel you git...

...derz ovva furom yav ave ta bowwer abot. MMMORKPG iz not dat one. You betta fix you brainz on yourz own or 'ere...

Look at de Bosses flash 'ere. Da'ss de fing to do.

Miguel, I really like your idea of Friendly Fire. I would not mess with the damage output. It should be full damage no matter who you shoot and no matter what level you are.

The one other thing I would add, make it so that when a person has successfully connected with a melee blow, ranged weapons do not hurt him as much. for like 2 or 3 seconds That way it discourages shooting into melee and also give the shooter a kind of 'oops' buffer to let up on the trigger.

Oh and for the people with the dummy teamkill logo floating above his head for 15minutes- reduce it by a minute for every time he gets team killed. Thats mostly a suggestion to keep the team killer slightly happy. Because I know that i personally will take every opportunity possible to kill the team killer dummy, every time

Im extremely excited for this game to come out

The bf4 reference was a good one. Explosions and such has friendly fire, and that makes sense because even as a bad about you can generally not hit friendlies on purpose.,but explosions are harder to manage

What if it were possible to program in a reversing damage scale for friendly fire?

What I mean is, at lvl one, a person who hits a friendly with a non AoE weapon incurs 100% damage. But by the time they hit max lvl (say, lvl 80 as is the usual MMO standard), the FF damage is down to something like 10-25% of their weapon damage. IMO, this would teach people who are new to the game to watch their fire in crowded areas, but at the same time, not penalize people in the high lvl war zones because there could be such a large number of people that not everyone can keep track of everyone else.

No, if you pull the trigger you damage whatever stands at the wrong side of your weapon for the same amount as your last shot. Keeps it simple and believable. No magical fairy tale level dependent friend or foe armor.

Keep programming simple.

Keeping track of 2 to 4 thousand players and their bullets, firing at anywhere between 4 to over 600 rounds a minute means you've got to keep track of anywhere between 8 thousand to almost 2,400,000 interactions.. of just projectiles leaving their chambers every minute. Double that number for every hit a bullet makes, then double it again if it's on a friendly with its own friendly fire mechanic because each one of those instances is another series of strings that have to be programmed and then executed.

That, on top of particle explosions, character movement, streaming map updates, a full scale tryanid invasion of hundreds if not thousands more units and other things this studio would like to possibly implement, like character customization, destructible objects, ect just seems like a recipe for disaster if the programming is any more complicated than:

1. Bullet fired.
2. Bullet hits.

3. A. Enemy? Yes. Proceed. No? See B.
Bullet damages.

B. Friendly or environmental? Yes. Proceed. No? See A.
Bullet stops.

Again, BF4 seems applicable to this as it's:

1. Fire Cannon.
2.Hit.
3. Everything takes x damage.

Even the Plasma Cannon in SM did the same thing. I've denied countless enemies kills by just blowing myself up and taking them with me with this mechanic.

And remember, even Table Top supports the BF4 mechanic. You can't use small arms fire to kill your teammates while in control of your own units, you can't melee others unless you have a weapon (or are Kharn the Betrayer) that forces you to, nor can you shoot into CC effectively (unless you're the freakin Tau, because hey, who needs more overwatch than them right?), but when it comes to template weapons, Emperor help you if you decide to point them over the heads of a nearby enemy and the wind is blowing your dice in the wrong direction....

I get team killed pretty darn often in games like chivalry. It doesn't have blast or rapid-fire weapons outside of a fire bomb and certain siege weapons. And those ones get the most team kills every time. Firebombs tossed tend to just obstruct team members or light friendlies on fire, and catapults almost invariably slaughter far more of your team than the enemy. Also, these are both very uncommon weapons. Firebomb isn't that popular, and siege weapons are immobile, usually only one on most maps if at all, and take forever to re-load. Just thinking of much faster-loading and more common blast weapons on more crowded fields of battle just sounds bad.

The arguments for seem to be this:
Friendly fire is more immersive as it brings an element of realism to the game.
Friendly fire forces people to think about attacks they make.

The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire sucks ass and it will suck more ass in an MMO.

I think it's obvious which is the better argument.

You *do* have a very subjective way of reading.

 purplefood wrote:
The arguments for seem to be this:
Friendly fire is more immersive as it brings an element of realism to the game.
Friendly fire forces people to think about attacks they make.

The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire sucks ass and it will suck more ass in an MMO.

I think it's obvious which is the better argument.

Basically.

The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire opens up a lot of opportunies for griefing.
Friendly fire leads to toxic (vocal) behavior as people will start flaming others when getting shot at.

The arguments for seem to be this:
Friendly fire is AWESOME LOLOLOL

I think it's obvious which is the better argument.

See what I did there? Not to mention you completely ignored the fact people are, right now, actively interested in finding a middle way solution to it.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire opens up a lot of opportunies for griefing.
Friendly fire leads to toxic (vocal) behavior as people will start flaming others when getting shot at.

See what I did there? Not to mention you completely ignored the fact people are, right now, actively interested in finding a middle way solution to it.

There is no compromise that prevents your counter-arguments though other than removing FF altogether. And at that stage why not remove all damage from the game to prevent opportunities for griefing and toxic behaviour? The game could be renamed to Space Hugs then. There are only hugs and kisses in the 41st century after all.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire opens up a lot of opportunies for griefing.
Friendly fire leads to toxic (vocal) behavior as people will start flaming others when getting shot at.

The arguments for seem to be this:
Friendly fire is AWESOME LOLOLOL

I think it's obvious which is the better argument.

See what I did there? Not to mention you completely ignored the fact people are, right now, actively interested in finding a middle way solution to it.

You're right I did, which is why it was a joke.
Calm down.

No level in eternal crusade: the progess is orizzontal not vertical.

friendly fire: teamplay, tactics, "that guy", harder to learn to play, immersion, butthurt, grimdark, syr the artillery is killing our troops, precise weapon is better, team killers, tank: HONK HONK SPLAT SPLAT.

no friendly fire: easy to learn, casual fryendly, less skill to aim, grenade and explosive spam, spray and pray, "shooting on the melee", less immersion, no team killers, tank stuck on infantry.

 Minx wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire opens up a lot of opportunies for griefing.
Friendly fire leads to toxic (vocal) behavior as people will start flaming others when getting shot at.

See what I did there? Not to mention you completely ignored the fact people are, right now, actively interested in finding a middle way solution to it.

There is no compromise that prevents your counter-arguments though other than removing FF altogether. And at that stage why not remove all damage from the game to prevent opportunities for griefing and toxic behaviour? The game could be renamed to Space Hugs then. There are only hugs and kisses in the 41st century after all.

 purplefood wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
The arguments against seem to be this:
Friendly fire opens up a lot of opportunies for griefing.
Friendly fire leads to toxic (vocal) behavior as people will start flaming others when getting shot at.

The arguments for seem to be this:
Friendly fire is AWESOME LOLOLOL

I think it's obvious which is the better argument.

See what I did there? Not to mention you completely ignored the fact people are, right now, actively interested in finding a middle way solution to it.

You're right I did, which is why it was a joke.
Calm down.

Ignoring Minx's attempt to troll...

The thing is that all of us are extremely excited about the game and everyone wants the game to be what he personally wants it to be like, thus stuff gets heated sometimes. Friendly Fire, however, is an important issue that can't just be waved off and one-sided "summaries" that antagonize one side of the argument are rather unconstructive. If it was meant as a joke, then I am sorry as I perceived it wrong and thought it wasn't - the eternal curse of the internet Sorry!

We got a lot of ideas so far and could easily work on top of those. I like the idea of explosions dealing more FF than direct fire does, meaning that e.g. direct fire deals 25% damage to friendlies whereas area of effect deals 50% (just random numbers here).

 Sigvatr wrote:

We got a lot of ideas so far and could easily work on top of those. I like the idea of explosions dealing more FF than direct fire does, meaning that e.g. direct fire deals 25% damage to friendlies whereas area of effect deals 50% (just random numbers here).

Personally I like this idea, and if the game has any sort of class system, then the SM Apothecary would become invaluable (as all healers in MMOs tend to be), and would need to have some short ranged healing abilities.. Emperor knows how a Painboy would work though

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
What if it were possible to program in a reversing damage scale for friendly fire?

What I mean is, at lvl one, a person who hits a friendly with a non AoE weapon incurs 100% damage. But by the time they hit max lvl (say, lvl 80 as is the usual MMO standard), the FF damage is down to something like 10-25% of their weapon damage. IMO, this would teach people who are new to the game to watch their fire in crowded areas, but at the same time, not penalize people in the high lvl war zones because there could be such a large number of people that not everyone can keep track of everyone else.

The game has no level up system, there are no levels.

 Soladrin wrote:

The game has no level up system, there are no levels.

That hasn't been said. There is progression in the game, it just isn't up. A lvl 41 in SM is arguably more talented than a lvl 5, has more gear, perks, and weapons, but isn't necessarily stronger than a lvl 1.

Anyway, I can't stress enough that there should be no friendly fire in this game apart from what types of friendly fire we already see in Table Top. Those who are arguing for uber-realism need to be kicked in the teeth. This is a universe with 8 foot armored giants firing fully automatic rocket lanchers as a primary weapon at Space Orks and Space Elves.

As it's already been expressed, BF4 is as realistic as it can be, and part of the equation of realism is taking into account that :1. when you die, you're coming back, kicking realism in the face. 2. It's the internet, and if the internet can agree on anything, it's that it can't agree on anything - making trustworthy teamwork hard to come by, especially on a grand scale.

Honestly, I'm surprised that the same arguments haven't been brought up when I proposed the Khornate Arena. When griefing comes into the equation, and people aren't controlled by parameters (like the elimination of friendly fire) Chaos will reign. This is exactly the reason why I thought that if there's any reason to put a FFA arena in the game (allowing FF) it would be in that flavor, for that exact purpose.

We don't have to reinvent the wheel to have an awesome game. BF4's mechanics of blast zone Friendly Fire are possibly the best example we have and just about anyone I've ever talked to who's played the game loves it.

No FF at all would just be silly though, I would rather have a toned down FF or something, just something so that we dont see vindicators just blasting the enemy apart with no friendly casualties at all, but at a level were I wont see a thunder hammer terminator take out 5 fellow marines in one swing or being insta killed by a land raider because the driver didnt bother to care.

Most team based shooters had friendly fire in the past and it wasn't limited to certain weapons and there certainly was no damage reduction based on friend or foe. It worked perfectly back then.
I don't know where this fear for friendly fire comes from and why some games nowadays (BF4?) have changed the FF mechanic.

As for additional ways to grief with FF, i have to agree, it does offer more options for both the griefer and everyone else. So instead of limiting the options for everyone i would rather they implement a robust, meaningful and quick way to punish those that are only trying to lessen the fun of everyone else. As even without FF people will find ways to grief and flame other players.

You could make it so any explosive damage (I.e. from rocket launchers or siege weapons) causes damage regardless of teams.

 unmercifulconker wrote:
No FF at all would just be silly though

Why? Lots of games have no FF like TF2, LoL, CoD, etc it isn't exactly an unusual idea.

 purplefood wrote:
You could make it so any explosive damage (I.e. from rocket launchers or siege weapons) causes damage regardless of teams.

That's exactly what Battlefield 3 and 4 [will] do. (And Halo 1,2, [I never played 3] did now that I think about it.) So did SM - to an extent. Every 10/10 FPS has this mechanic in it, and it's because it compromises between immersion and realism. If you fire a rocket launcher, plant C4, throw a grenade, shoot a tank's main battery, or launch a Plasma Cannon bolt, everything in your way get's obliterated, friend, foe, or even yourself.

 Minx wrote:
Most team based shooters had friendly fire in the past and it wasn't limited to certain weapons and there certainly was no damage reduction based on friend or foe. It worked perfectly back then.
I don't know where this fear for friendly fire comes from and why some games nowadays (BF4?) have changed the FF mechanic.

As for additional ways to grief with FF, i have to agree, it does offer more options for both the griefer and everyone else. So instead of limiting the options for everyone i would rather they implement a robust, meaningful and quick way to punish those that are only trying to lessen the fun of everyone else. As even without FF people will find ways to grief and flame other players.

Step into Khorne's Arena, otherwise leave this kindling for a never ending in game civil war at home. Trust me, I know how immensely satisfying it is to kill teammates who aren't really being your teammates, but if this mechanic is in the game, I can attest to spending literally hours of doing nothing but finding the miscreant and destroying him as he attempts to do the same. There have been times when our KD's have amounted to negative numbers lower than the efforts of both teams combined. It's not a good deterrent, and severely detracts from the game. If it means that much to you, see the idea's above proposed by Troike, it was a stellar idea to have inner faction arena's where you could go challenge the griefer and settle your grievance without detracting from everyone else's play time.