Friendly Fire?

[Raymac]

Well the latest interview from StrategyInformer.com made this poll inevitable. Real simple. It seems the devs are still debating on whether or not to keep friendly fire. While it's really hard for us to test this without playing it *cough* beta *cough*, and I can already predict what the poll results may be, but lets talk about it. Try not to accept it or dismiss it out of hand. Fire away.

Should Friendly Fire be in Planetside 2?

[Sirisian]

I won't jump to a bias result, but thinking it over I feel keeping FF is important to stop weapon spam. If special assault still exists then I feel having FF is a good deterrent to it being used "unrealistically". (Not that I'm advocating realism). It just seems odd if you can aim at the back of friendlies with it and kill units in a hallway. Same goes for spamming any fast rate of fire guns or things like flame throwers or camping a doorway with a tank.

[Erendil]

Um, WOW. :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Yes, I believe with 100% certainty that FF NEEDS to be in the game from Day 1.

I don't even want to think of the never-ending barrage of grenades, tank shells, bombs, rockets and other AoE weapons if they don't have FF in the game. A large-scale, combined arms game like PS1/2 has way too many large AoE weapons for FF to not be in the game.

TBH I can't believe they're even considering not including it.

EDIT: For those who haven't read the article yet, here's Matt's quote from the article:

Matthew Higby: Friendly-fire is still something we're working out - the original Planetside had friendly-fire, we have friendly-fire on currently, but we're not entirely sure it will be in at launch. Right now we're iterating on the mechanics for weapons and vehicles.

So I hope that I'm interpreting this correctly, that the Devs believe from a gameplay/philosphical standpoint that FF should be in the game but there might be some technical/Game-mechanics issue that may prevent FF from being in at launch.

[Quovatis]

Strange. Higby's response is quite different from what was given at Fan Faire. At Fan Faire, they said they already had a grief system in place, but differed slightly from PS1. They never hinted at all that friendly fire might not be in the game.

[Erendil]

Strange. Higby's response is quite different from what was given at Fan Faire. At Fan Faire, they said they already had a grief system in place, but differed slightly from PS1. They never hinted at all that friendly fire might not be in the game.

Ok, that makes me feel a little better. My instinct is telling me that it might be some technical or game mechanics issue that may prevent its inclusion at launch.

So it may not be a question or whether or not it'll be included, but how it will be implemented. And maybe, just maybe they don't want the issue(s) with FF to delay PS2's in-house projected launch date.

[Logit]

This game will have way too many people playing for Friendly fire not to be in.

Besides it's not "real" without FF right?

[Miir]

Hell yeah!

They must have friendly fire and the grief system at launch.

[Nephilimuk]

This really is needed from launch.

No ff and it will soon become thumperside

[Accuser]

It's possible that there will be no FF, but there WILL be a grief system. I think that might be best to punish the griefers for hitting friendlies, but ease the pain of friendly fire hitting me in the back all the damn time.

It would be unrealistic, but imagine the possibilities if FF damaged the offender and left the victim unharmed?

[Logit]

It's possible that there will be no FF, but there WILL be a grief system. I think that might be best to punish the griefers for hitting friendlies, but ease the pain of friendly fire hitting me in the back all the damn time.

It would be unrealistic, but imagine the possibilities if FF damaged the offender and left the victim unharmed?

Bye bye dueling :(

[Infektion]

Dueling was stupid... it was just a time killer. I want my FF on, makes no sense to have grief system without friendly damage, that's just retarded. Why get punished for no harm done?

[DviddLeff]

Grief system was one of the near perfect systems from PS1.

No need for any change.

[Talek Krell]

Strange. Higby's response is quite different from what was given at Fan Faire. At Fan Faire, they said they already had a grief system in place, but differed slightly from PS1. They never hinted at all that friendly fire might not be in the game.

I'd almost forgotten that, but you're right. So I guess it's either a technical issue or some sort of major philosophical shift?
Regardless I think FF is one of those things we absolutely need. Just too many spammable weapons in the game otherwise. I mean the crazy shit you could do with liberators...

[Graywolves]

No friendly fire on a max crash? On infantry in the doorway/stairwell/corrridor?

The only moment where I'd be happy there was no friendly fire is if I get hit by a friendly flail.

[Tigersmith]

They need friendly fire in this game. Again it should not be exactly like MW2 or BFBC2. Just because those shooters have it and everyone plays those. Does not mean it has to be like them.

This is war. It will be a shame without it. Sadly. Friendly fire makes everyone realise they cant just go in guns blazing . AKA MW2

Please put in FF

[Hamma]

FF needs to be in the game, hopeful this is just a testing phase and they realize it's really needed. The game would be a spamfest without it.

Just think, enemies in alongside friendly's all you need to do is drop a grenade in the group.

[Raymac]

To play devil's advocate (since finally there is something we all agree on besides the new Hair God), I can imagine an assaulting squad laying down a wall of fire being met by a defending squad doing the same and colliding in a glorious expolsion of death and destruction....of course that can still happen with friendly fire on, I guess.

[bjorntju1]

Accidentally voted for no, but i meant yes. Slipped the button ;)

But if there's no FF everyone would just spam weapons,grenades etcetera. If there is FF you need to be more tactical and you cant just spray away. Now what i personally think is a nice system is that if a bullet does 10 damage to an enemy player, it does let's say 5 to an friendly. It would dis-encourage players to just spam weapons, but it would be harder to kill an friendly then an enemy. So if an friendly walks in front of your gun, grenade etc. it would do less damage. Most of my TK or friendly fire in the original come from people walking in front of my weapon while i am firing.

[Crator]

It's possible that there will be no FF, but there WILL be a grief system. I think that might be best to punish the griefers for hitting friendlies, but ease the pain of friendly fire hitting me in the back all the damn time.

It would be unrealistic, but imagine the possibilities if FF damaged the offender and left the victim unharmed?

Bye bye dueling :(

Comon', dueling doesn't have to disappear. Just give players a duel system. Two or more people have to accept the duel request and then, game on!

[Quovatis]

All I ask for is not to penalize running someone over when on your screen you clearly missed them. I hated that about PS1 where you would get grief for "running over" a player with high ping because you hit them on their screen, but not yours. There's no way to predict someone will run in front of your tank 2 seconds after you passed them! LOL

[Tatwi]

Voted YES, because FF "makes sense" from both grief and game play perspectives and adding it later on would be a very, very bad idea.

[Crator]

All I ask for is not to penalize running someone over when on your screen you clearly missed them. I hated that about PS1 where you would get grief for "running over" a player with high ping because you hit them on their screen, but not yours. There's no way to predict someone will run in front of your tank 2 seconds after you passed them! LOL

Ya, can they not write in code that would invalidate the collision if say the packets were the issue? I guess that would be kind of weird looking though. Your client would all of the sudden say you were hit one second but then give back the HP and grief if it determined you didn't actually collide?

[Malorn]

Friendly Fire is a straight up skill increase to a FPS game. You have to learn fire control and it also keeps cheesy tactics like grenade spam in a busy hallway from being a viable tactic (yes we saw it in PS due to the sheer number of people, but it didn't take long for them to get tons of grief and stop doing it or get weaponslocked - without friendly fire it would have been far, far worse). It also is an increase reward for better positioning & crossfire since too many players in one intermingling tends to cause friendly fire.

The idea of it not being there feels like a step in the wrong direction as I considered the grief system a really good system for friendly fire and one of the great parts of PS1.

[BorisBlade]

FF is key to gameplay, even if you have to delay the game, you just do it, cause the game is not done if you cant even get FF and a grief system. Its like launching without weapons and saying we will get em in shortly. Its too fundamental, you cant even balance things without FF on, that will later have FF included. Someone needs to turn their brain back on and just get it done.

[Lonehunter]

In some other shooters, explosives can be stuck to friendlies so they can jump through a door, hole, what ever. So the explosive goes off instantly.

Just another example of no FF=Bad

[Brusi]

Grief system was one of the near perfect systems from PS1.

No need for any change.

Personally i think that if anyone you know who is palying the game seriously, attempting to minimise their friendly fire and not TK'ing and is still getting weapons lock, then i would not say that it is perfect.

Weapons lock happens if:

You play a lot
You play as infantry in primetime basefights using aoe a lot
You play as a flail
Probably quite a few situations that others will recognise...


I don't do these things very much and thus i never hit weapons lock, however unfortunately there are some game mechanics that rack up greif much faster than others.

The system is not perfect, but it's definitely not that bad. I definitely can see how they may have scalability problems with the current system tho...

[Logit]

Voted YES, because FF "makes sense" from both grief and game play perspectives and adding it later on would be a very, very bad idea.

This, when you try to think about game breaking ideas. This could potentially be something, if they don't add it, that will piss a lot of people off and possibly even turn them off from the game.

Spam is just annoying game play and nobody wants to deal with that shit day in and day out.

[Lonehunter]

Weapons lock happens if You play as a flail

without a spotter.

Just had to add that, it was designed with that in mind. We just need better artillery with a direct view of a base, or more incentive to work as a team in long range siege weaponry.

[Brusi]

Spotters these days have to be pretty skillful, dedicated and patient to stay alive constantly in a hotzone and not run off for kills of their own. In the current system, once grief starts to get high, it gets higher quicker.

Trying to develop a catch all system for griefing wankers, indiscriminate spammers and generally poor-team players is a pretty gutsy endevour.

I watched a douche-bag in a flight variant BFR the other day, jumping up and collecting freindly flail shot because he didn't like the guy who firing the flail. The current system would still need some tweaking, however griefing is a fact of life and having a perfect catch-all system to stop griefing is probably not possible.

[Sirisian]

I watched a douche-bag in a flight variant BFR the other day, jumping up and collecting freindly flail shot because he didn't like the guy who firing the flail.
That one hits. When the flying BFR jumps in the air the shield turns off. At that point it only takes the damage of 3 mines(?) to kill a flying variant. Or was this like directly in front of the flail?

[Azren]

FF is really a big issue in PS1, almost half of the time I die to FF in any close combat battles, but all that aside I would quit playing this game if it ever got disabled.

FF has to be in any massive shooter; there will be AoE weapons, no question about that, and as such there will be hell of an AoE spamm if FF is not inlcuded - just how long would a game like that last?

Even the fact they are considering this makes me very uneasy about other gameplay choices they may make...

[ikon]

really depends on the kill rate and how much aoe is in the game

but there should always be ff, hopefully better grief mechanics this time

[Redshift]

If FF is not included at launch, we'll not retain numbers past the first month, it would be a disaster for PS2

[Aractain]

If FF is not included at launch, we'll not retain numbers past the first month, it would be a disaster for PS2

Dont know if troll.

[Tigersmith]

If FF is not included at launch, we'll not retain numbers past the first month, it would be a disaster for PS2

I agree this has to be on a launch.
There is no way it's going to be implemented after launch. It's too much of a gameplay change.

[Tigersmith]

Dont know if troll.

I'm sure he was somewhat kidding. Like most of us are unhappy about it.

[Crator]

We don't know how game play flow will work. Hard to say if FF is going to matter. I would assume it would though. I'd assume if this was an issue during beta testing that they would definitely add it in.

[Redshift]

Nah I wasn't kidding, if there's no FF it will be a spamfest, spamfests aren't fun, if the first month isn't fun then a load of people won't resub after the first month runs out. Assuming the business model is the same as Ps1

[Crator]

Doubt SOE will treat PS2 like they did with PS1. I would hope, if mass unsubs happen due to something SOE did/didn't do, that they would reconsider fixing the issue to bring back folks to the game.

[Logit]

We don't know how game play flow will work. Hard to say if FF is going to matter. I would assume it would though. I'd assume if this was an issue during beta testing that they would definitely add it in.

FF will always matter when the battles include hundreds of people.

No matter what. Without FF, the game will be lame as balls. Spam spam spam

[Atuday]

Hey Higby, take a look at the poll results and you may find we the fans answered the question for you. :lol: You now know what we want so please reassure us that we will get what we want. Because one way or another we always get what we want :vsrocks:

[Aractain]

Nah I wasn't kidding, if there's no FF it will be a spamfest, spamfests aren't fun, if the first month isn't fun then a load of people won't resub after the first month runs out. Assuming the business model is the same as Ps1

Grief stoped the spam. The actual damage to friendlys was mostly just annoying.

FF is directly tied to grief in some peoples views, it dosn't have to be. Doing something with FF (like just halfing the damage) dosn't have to change grief in anyway.


Hopefully they play around with it (without telling people) in beta to see what happens.

[TacosWLove]

Yes FF!! How else are we going to keep those camping vangaurds and prowlers from shooting me as I run up the tower stairs?

[Raymac]

Yes FF!! How else are we going to keep those camping vangaurds and prowlers from shooting me as I run up the tower stairs?

Keep the door closed. You should be doing that anyways because do you know how expensive it is to run the A/C in those towers? I'm not paying to cool the whole neighborhood. ;)

[Krowe]

Of fucking course?

Who the hell voted no?

[Raymac]

Of fucking course?

Who the hell voted no?

LOL I know 1 guy said he did it by "accident", as for the 2nd, I have no idea, but if I was him I'd be hesitant to explain why considering the near unanimous poll. The poll has turned out pretty much as I thought, but I am always surprised when we all agree on something.

[Accuser]

Quick definitions for those who are confused:
FF = Damage you take when I spam the hell out of a doorway trying to get one random kill with my tank.
Grief = The punishment I receive from damaging you.

Which do I care about more? In a big spamfest, kill-crazy spammers dont give a f**k about FF, they care about grief. So, make the grief punishment unpleasant and implement reduced FF damage. FF punishes the victim, Grief punishes the spammer.

[Logit]

Quick definitions for those who are confused:
FF = Damage you take when I spam the hell out of a doorway trying to get one random kill with my tank.
Grief = The punishment I receive from damaging you.

Which do I care about more? In a big spamfest, kill-crazy spammers dont give a f**k about FF, they care about grief. So, make the grief punishment unpleasant and implement reduced FF damage. FF punishes the victim, Grief punishes the spammer.

Or we could just leave it the way it was, because if it aint broke. Don't fix it.

[NewSith]

Or we could just leave it the way it was, because if it aint broke. Don't fix it.

Sounds like a plan...

Although I do agree with devs that adding noFF on day 1 OF BETA is a wise idea. Why? Simply because it'll define most overpowered guns.

However it should not last more than a week. Or even less.

EDIT: is bolded.

[Aractain]

I voted no, but the poll is falwed as there are no options between "FULL FF KILL KILL KILL" and "NO FF!!! YAY SPAM".

Personaly I want full grief and either no or half or so FF.

[Raymac]

I voted no, but the poll is falwed as there are no options between "FULL FF KILL KILL KILL" and "NO FF!!! YAY SPAM".

Personaly I want full grief and either no or half or so FF.

I don't quite understand what you mean. I don't see how a poll can be "falwed" which obviously we all know is a synonym for "fallow" meaning inactive or unseeded land. This isn't a farming forum...yet. :D

But seriously, I wanted to keep it a simple yes or no. K.I.S.S. There are always shades of gray, but it really is a question of 0 penalty for hitting your own team whether it is on the shooter or the victim or both vs. having some sort of penalty. So if you want full grief, then you should have voted yes.

[Talek Krell]

I don't quite understand what you mean. I don't see how a poll can be "falwed" which obviously we all know is a synonym for "fallow" meaning inactive or unseeded land. This isn't a farming forum...yet. :D

Planetside 2: Unprecedented levels of detail!

[Logit]

Full Damage Friendly Fire, with Grief.

I believe that's how they did it in Planetside 1. And I believe they would be idiotic not to do it pretty much the same exact way in the sequel.

There should no reason to promote spam at all, it's annoying, and lame tactics.

There should be a penalty for shooting your own team. Because well, your um, shooting your own team. I don't think the new game will be as dumb as being hit my a vehicle and receiving grief for it. Obviously not.

There is already a ton of spam in the original, people will spam more, especially since the game is MASSIVE. You need to force people to be careful when firing there guns or people will just be out there shootin all willy nilly.

[krnasaur]

didnt they say how they are going to update the grief system? i think higby is trolling us

[Gandhi]

Imagine maelstrom spam without FF...

Maelstroms aren't in PS2... right? ...right?

[exLupo]

I don't think the new game will be as dumb as being hit my a vehicle and receiving grief for it. Obviously not.

Without grief for people who get hit, what type of system do you propose to keep people from standing (on foot or in another vehicle) in front of others either to grief or out of simple stupidity?

The current PS1 system exists specifically due to traffic jam and griefer issues that made ground vehicles eventual lock-out guarantees simply due to driving them around. Getting grief for getting hit isn't perfect but the current situation is far, far better than the way things were before.

If you've got a more elegant solution that isn't grief to both (current and debatable) or grief only to driver (original and failed), we're all ears.

[Logit]

What I meant to say was...The new system shouldn't be as laggy so hitting people you think you missed, or people who think they dodge a vehicles still somehow being hit. This kind of stuff should just fix itself on a new fancy schmancy engine.

So the old system would work fine, I really don't think changing it, removing it, or reducing FF damage are good ideas at all.

[Crator]

I'd be interesting to hear from the devs on how the whole back-end system really works in more detail. CSHD/SSHD? Hybrid of two. How does the system being chosen work (better/worse) then the current PS1 system?

[CutterJohn]

Preference would be for FF on, but I could handle reduced or no FF if they severely curtailed the ammo supply of certain spam weapons, which i think they are doing anyway. I imagine they might be running into issues with TKs with the reduced TTK.


Yeah, it increases skill, but if i had a nickel for every time some bozo ran in front of me... Really, it wouldn't be the end of the world, so long as bullets didn't pass through friendlies.


Oh, and I certainly could go along with axing vehicle collision FF/Grief.

[firecrackerNC]

Personally id rather there be like a server with FF off lol. Too many times id be laying waste to people and 3 or 4 teamates run directly in front of me. Now this happens half a dozen times in a base assault/defense and now im banned from weapons for like 30 mins. The all a sudden one stray bullet from me hits someone and its another 30 mins or whatever. Was really annoying. Same with plasma nades, id go to throw them into a big group of hallway defenders and bam teamates run straight to it. So personally, I HATE FF. I prolly just suck or something but for me it was a major reason I never subscribed to the game and only played beta/free trials

[Bags]

Personally id rather there be like a server with FF off lol. Too many times id be laying waste to people and 3 or 4 teamates run directly in front of me. Now this happens half a dozen times in a base assault/defense and now im banned from weapons for like 30 mins. The all a sudden one stray bullet from me hits someone and its another 30 mins or whatever. Was really annoying. Same with plasma nades, id go to throw them into a big group of hallway defenders and bam teamates run straight to it. So personally, I HATE FF. I prolly just suck or something but for me it was a major reason I never subscribed to the game and only played beta/free trials

You're right, the problem is you. I've certed SA and managed to avoid grief lock in hour long interfarms.

[eebster]

Yes, but the grief you get needs to be changed, it kind of sucks to get weapon locked when you try to use the thumper or radiator.

and give tanks a HORN!! "AWOOOOOOOOGA" damn infantry running across when you're doing 50km an hour in a 50 ton vehicle

[Graywolves]

I almost never run into people, even in the prime days.

[Krowe]

You're right, the problem is you. I've certed SA and managed to avoid grief lock in hour long interfarms.

This. Its not difficult to do, although I dropped SA for HA simply because I'm not a huge fan of that style of combat.

[GTGD]

Yes to friendly fire, with reduced damage. Since it will be easier to kill, we don't want to have spammers taking out legions of friendlies. Maybe like 75% or 50% damage to friendlies would be a good number.

[Lokster]

Another a-hole accidentally voted no ...

Give u a hint.. It was me. My bad. FF is a MUST!

[Aractain]

Yes to friendly fire, with reduced damage. Since it will be easier to kill, we don't want to have spammers taking out legions of friendlies. Maybe like 75% or 50% damage to friendlies would be a good number.

Id be fine with this if only to remove the "why arn't my bullets doing damage?!?!" strangeness if you hit your own team.

[waldizzo]

Personally id rather there be like a server with FF off lol. Too many times id be laying waste to people and 3 or 4 teamates run directly in front of me. Now this happens half a dozen times in a base assault/defense and now im banned from weapons for like 30 mins. The all a sudden one stray bullet from me hits someone and its another 30 mins or whatever. Was really annoying. Same with plasma nades, id go to throw them into a big group of hallway defenders and bam teamates run straight to it. So personally, I HATE FF. I prolly just suck or something but for me it was a major reason I never subscribed to the game and only played beta/free trials


Even though it has been said many times, I'll say it again. If friendly fire is disabled, no one would use the "conventional" weapons. Going back to the situation in the hallway of the quote, if FF were disabled, everyone would have plasma grenades. All the time. Constant grenade and rocket spam would be the name of the game.

The player must decide what weapon to use for the situation they're in and suffer the consequences of their decision. Is it a good idea to use a grenade in an enclosed space with lots of friendlies around? You'll hit a bunch of the enemy, but you'll also hit a bunch of friendlies and potentially weapon lock yourself. That is the consequence for using that weapon in that situation. Is it worth it? It is up to the individual player to decide.

Without consequence, this game will become yet another "Press A to win" genre of game. That would be a sad trombone indeed.

[Aractain]

And as it has been said many times also that grief not friendly fire "stopped" spam. Also long as Grief remains, changing FF will do little but change the experince of the person shot.

[Lokster]

Even though it has been said many times, I'll say it again. If friendly fire is disabled, no one would use the "conventional" weapons. Going back to the situation in the hallway of the quote, if FF were disabled, everyone would have plasma grenades. All the time. Constant grenade and rocket spam would be the name of the game.

The player must decide what weapon to use for the situation they're in and suffer the consequences of their decision. Is it a good idea to use a grenade in an enclosed space with lots of friendlies around? You'll hit a bunch of the enemy, but you'll also hit a bunch of friendlies and potentially weapon lock yourself. That is the consequence for using that weapon in that situation. Is it worth it? It is up to the individual player to decide.

Without consequence, this game will become yet another "Press A to win" genre of game. That would be a sad trombone indeed.

^-^ .. This.

[Aractain]

-_-

[Azren]

And as it has been said many times also that grief not friendly fire "stopped" spam. Also long as Grief remains, changing FF will do little but change the experince of the person shot.

You are wrong about that. If there were no FF Platoons could freely spamm all around them with AoE weapons since there is no grief in squads. Even if there were grief in squads, any outfit could just come up with strategies to exploit the no FF rule (for example: throw down tons of AoE nades, and rush inside generating grief points for your outfit members, but dealing massive damage to the enemy at the same time). No FF is not an option here.

[Aractain]

Im sure they would find some way to exploit a lot of things in the game, that dosn't mean you should scrap good design to cater to the explotiers.

The main point is that the design is more important, issues can be delt with and grief was the only defense against greifers shooting people - not FF.

(Also I hope AOE is no where near as powerful as it was in PS1, that was straight up crap design)

[Talek Krell]

Im sure they would find some way to exploit a lot of things in the game, that dosn't mean you should scrap good design to cater to the explotiers.
How would having weapons deal damage to friendlies cater to exploiters? Or be scrapping good design for that matter.

grief was the only defense against greifers shooting people - not FF.
Grief was a defense against people using friendly fire by accident or to be assholes. The defense against people using friendly fire as a battle tactic was friendly fire. If grenades don't hurt friendlies then people will exploit spam tactics as often as they can get away with it. Outfits are liable to be setting up rotations to make sure that they spam explosives as much as possible without grief locking people.

[nathanebht]

Preference would be for FF on, but I could handle reduced or no FF if they severely curtailed the ammo supply of certain spam weapons, which i think they are doing anyway. I imagine they might be running into issues with TKs with the reduced TTK.


Yeah, it increases skill, but if i had a nickel for every time some bozo ran in front of me... Really, it wouldn't be the end of the world, so long as bullets didn't pass through friendlies.


Oh, and I certainly could go along with axing vehicle collision FF/Grief.

Good points. Since there is no inventory in PS2, its not clear if we will have unlimited ammo or what.

The limited ammo and having FF in PS1 made the game feel much different from most other FPS games. Different in a very good way.

[wildcat140679]

As much as I want PS2 to have Friendly Fire enabled, after listening to the AGN broadcast and where the Friendly Fire topic got talked about it my mind started grinding over the topic, for Highby I believe talked about an improved/modified grief system or at least spoke about it confirming it was there.

With friendly fire turned off, whats the points of having a grief system?

So what if, Friendly Fire is turned off but the grief system still registers Friendly Fire hits?
Would it reduce careless use of weapons and abuse splash damage with friendlies and enemies in close proximity of one another?

[outsider]

When I was playing PS I actively tried to get as many friends come over and experience what is the best game I have ever played. And the main complaint they had was there was so MUCH going on they couldnt keep up, they didn't know what to do, they actually felt fear and reacted badly to what was happening. PS was so in youre face, so frontloaded that if you didnt have a hint of hardcore in you, you couldn't keep up.

Friendly fire occured. And they did lots of it. For most of my friends it was a turn off getting weapon locked, though for a couple it was a positive selling point that Firendly Fire as in place.

Now PS2 is promising there will be even MORE things happening, BIGGER battles. And I think of my friends who won't play because it's too much for them to be thrown in the middle of. And thats a shame.

I believe Friendly Fire needs to be in the game and I think the community here is so experienced with the tactics and the style of gameplay in PS that when PS2 comes out, our learning curve will be alot smoother than what the hordes of new players will experience. If the learning curve is too steep and the game overly penalyses players who are doing their best to learn but can't help but make mistakes along the way Then we are going to loose them. If a level 1 noob first time player gets weapon locked for 2 hours because he felt fear and stuffed up, than we loose that player for good, before they even realise there is a greater experience out there.

The Online space is alot different that it was 8 years ago and games need to change to accomodate.

What I suggest is Friendly fire disabled for basic non modified weapons, as soon as you start being able to mod your weapon of choice than bring in Firendly Fire. And to avoid possible exploit tactics perhaps make it level based as well, so say at lvl 7 Friendly Fire is enabled across all weapons.

It allows the new players to get an understanding of what they are seeing, get 'em "hocked" and when they start wanting to explore deeper into the game provide these deeper levels of gameplay.

[Bags]

I've never been weapon locked, even as a new player. And the people helping me "learn the game" did helpful things like load me into a galaxy and drop me into the middle of the ocean.

Beyond terrible players (your friends it sounds) should be punished for shooting friendlies constantly.

[Krowe]

I've never been weapon locked, even as a new player. And the people helping me "learn the game" did helpful things like load me into a galaxy and drop me into the middle of the ocean.

Beyond terrible players (your friends it sounds) should be punished for shooting friendlies constantly.

That and chances are if they were hitting friendlies that much, they were either doing it on purpose or just didn't care until it hit them.

Either way they weren't doing a very good service to their faction.

[outsider]

Yes Bags and yes Krowe, my friends are terrible players. They are so bad in effect they qualify to be called Casual Players. Casual Players make up the large majority of any active healthy game and their needs must be taken into account for PS2 to warrant the financial investment being put in it.

I will take responsibility that maybe it wasn't a great idea to give my friends access to an end game character with an '03 Lasher.

If you ramp up the difficulty, force a steep learning curve with hefty penalties for not being proficient in the most basic mechanics all you will achieve is forcing the major bulk of gaming enthusiasts to disengage from the franchise. All that will achieve is another dead game that could have been, and a lot of people playing Firefall. Nobody wants to be learning something and getting hate tells from a bunch of angry people they accidentally killed, its just not fun.

Besides whether my friends suck or not isn't the point of my post ( nor to quantify just how much the majority of the gamer base sucks ). My post is about bringing in Friendly Fire at a latter point of the players learning cycle, so that we can still have the FF rules we like after the first few days/weeks of play, without it being such a contentious problem as to offside novice players struggling to come to terms with the scope of what this game offers.

A good time to bring in Friendly Fire would be when the player is at the point that they are starting to experiment with weapon modifications. So while you can mod to a better weapon that suits your playstyle with it comes further dimension of gameplay.

[Brusi]

What about if FF could not get you past 1 hp?

[Krowe]

Yes Bags and yes Krowe, my friends are terrible players. They are so bad in effect they qualify to be called Casual Players. Casual Players make up the large majority of any active healthy game and their needs must be taken into account for PS2 to warrant the financial investment being put in it.

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/9/9e/HA_HA_HA,_OH_WOW.jpg

Casual does not mean bad bro. Your friends are just bad.

The point is making friendly fire have absolutely no downside (other than getting grief) will still allow spams.

[Wahooo]

The point is making friendly fire have absolutely no downside (other than getting grief) will still allow spams.

This. The game has enough spammy weapons, and from some of the interviews it sounds like the PS2 devs would like to steer a bit away from that, but the simple point is the difference between a game with FF and without FF is the crazy amount of AOE spam that occurs.
It has always been the case. I've played many games such as UT and the original Tribes and Quake and the like, and games without FF or servers that have it disabled, result in massive amounts of spammy AOE weapons reducing the fun of pointing and shooting.

As to the point about having it be disabled for lower levels? That is even worse due to the tendencies of new, casual (read bad) players to gravitate to those spammy weapon choices. When I was new to PS I was grieflocked a couple times. Using SA and a pounder indoors did it. You know what i did? I didn't bitch the system was unfair or needed changed, I used weapons I could control, I stopped shooting friendlies unless it was on purpose. You know what happens now? After 4-5 hours in game i'm usually in single didgets in the grief department, which allows me to go spawn camp people like bluechina who IS careless and shows up with as many friendly kills as enemy in the kill spam.

[outsider]

Casual does not mean bad bro. Your friends are just bad.



Everyone is "bad" when they first start off learning how to do anything, it is human nature to fail and make mistakes when you are trying out something new. The great masses of people who will be discovering planetside for the first time in PS2 will all be learning and making big mistakes along the way.

If Planetside was as small in scope as the other games on the market than I wouldn't be as concerned about the learning curve, because there isn't that much thinking involved in other FPS multiplayer titles. PS was always titled the "thinking persons FPS" and forcing that much of a learning curve with harsh penalties for not being on point is the reason why the devs are talking about removing Friendly Fire in the first place and looking at something else.

There are reasons why Planetside became a dead game, which is why the devs are making these changes. I want Friendly Fire but it's obvious that a number of people who quit, quit because of it ( and informed Sony in the details box when they cancelled their sub ). I think Friendly Fire is an important part of what made PS so great and provided a deeper connection to the side I was playing with. There has to be a way that we can preserve it while still adressing the reasons why it's getting pulled.

And Krome quit the trolling man and come up with something usefull

[sylphaen]

About FF as a way to enjoy the game more

I really like a lot of the things the devs have mentionned up until now (still waiting to hear more about vehicle mechanics) but the "No FF" part would definitely push me out.

I cannot conceive playing a game without it anymore and it's not just about griefing, it's about the extra challenge you get when you play. When you decide to shoot in a pack, you take the risk of hitting a friendly by mistake. I find that having think and make such a choice in a split-second very exciting ! It's risk vs. gain condensed in an short firefight !!!

I am an average player and do make mistakes but those mistakes make the game more alive to me !

When I choose to fire and finish off a hurt friendly instead of the enemy, I stay speechless (thinking "ah f***********k!"). When I self-damage myself with a grenade, I feel terrible. When I make a very good shot and save a friendly, I feel like I saved the day !

A no FF game can be ok but I find that mode bland. I used to play Enemy Territory (RtcW) and would specifically look for servers with FF. Same with Day of Defeat. Same with CS. In my eyes, taking a shot without a risk to majorly fuck up (i.e. no downside) takes away all the upside.


About no FF as a way to abuse game mechanics

Examples such as thumper spam and people rushing into a room with guns blazing are good examples (mentionned a thousand times) of what would happen without friendly fire. I'll add my stone to the stack with the PS1 Aurora for camping towers as another example: park one or two auroras, spam a spot and let friendlies take that spot more easily since only enemies get damaged.

A game working like this could still be playable but imo, a lot of the enjoyment is lost. I found PS1 grief system quite adequate in pushing someone to be careful with FF (i.e. exponentially increasing penalty for a string of friendly hits in a short period of time with a constant rate decrease over time of accumulated grief). Once your grief points stock was nearing its max, you just could not take as much risk anymore because the lock bat would drop hard on you.

Not having to watch out for friendlies when being in front or in the back makes shooting a lot more trivial.


An idea for FF

If the whole point of no FF is to help new players, an option could be added so that you could switch freely between the 2 below:

1-No FF
You do 30% less damage to enemies with weapons, cannot hurt friendlies and get a brief grief lock (5-8 seconds or whatever) if you hit a friendly.

2-Activate FF
You do normal damage to friendlies and enemies. Grief points are accumulated when you hit friendlies. You get grief locked once you reach a certain level of grief points.


Choosing no FF would be penalizing enough that you would prefer to choose to activate FF over that. It would also prevent spamming of AoE weapons since a short weapon lock would trigger.


------------------------------------------------------------


Anyways, just my 2 cents... I'm glad that we are all so passionate about PS2. Great ideas to read all around.
:)


Edit:
@outsider: btw, it is my belief that some players have trouble getting thrown in the heat of battle and shooting at things should not be a reason to dumb down the game. Planetside IS about great battles where things happen all around you !

A friendly shooting you by mistake is part of the immersion in the battle for both you ("Ah f***!") and him (*oh s***! I f***ed up!"). Things get confusing in a fight !

I guess you may have overwhelmed your friend by giving him a lasher... Did you run him to the training VR ? Because you do get a warning in there saying that shooting friendlies is highly disregarded by the empire, etc... but you need to follow the walkthrough to get there and learn to play.... Everyone feels confused when playing a game for the first time. It's like learning a new thing, it's normal.

Don't go conclude that I do not understand your point... When I tried playing EVE, I felt very confused so I did end up deciding not to play it (the other part was the "grind" game feeling - I'm scared about offline skills development in PS2 too but I hope they implement it well). However, it's not because I did not take the time to get used to EVE (while thousands of others enjoy it) that it makes it a bad game.

In addition, PS was a lot simpler than Eve:
1. start the tutorial
2. learn to use an equipment terminal
3. instant action !
4. point and shoot

IMO, a good tutorial for PS2 would be way enough to learn to play (with a short version for people who want to play NOW). FF is just unrelated to that issue for a new player: he will adapt to the rules of the game !

@outsider2: just noticed your other post. We do agree about FF then. If it makes people go away, then it's more about making it easier for very casual players to like FF as a challenge. I am pretty confident that if they played another FPS games they know well and had FF activated, it would not be a big issue for them. I think what you describe is more an issue of learning curve and getting used to something totally new... If they truly are turned off specifically by friendly fire though, well, what else can I say... Their gamer soul can't be saved ?
:P

[Accuser]

I've played many games such as UT and the original Tribes and Quake and the like, and games without FF or servers that have it disabled, result in massive amounts of spammy AOE weapons reducing the fun of pointing and shooting.

I'm pretty sure those games don't have a grief penalty with no FF. Do you really think the F2P crowd feels worse about hurting friendlies than about getting grief-locked?

Make Grief receipt linear and double that of PS1 and disable/minimize Friendly Fire. There will be minimal spamming and the guys in front wont get F***ed by newbies.

[Kalbuth]

Everyone is "bad" when they first start off learning how to do anything, it is human nature to fail and make mistakes when you are trying out something new. The great masses of people who will be discovering planetside for the first time in PS2 will all be learning and making big mistakes along the way.

If Planetside was as small in scope as the other games on the market than I wouldn't be as concerned about the learning curve, because there isn't that much thinking involved in other FPS multiplayer titles. PS was always titled the "thinking persons FPS" and forcing that much of a learning curve with harsh penalties for not being on point is the reason why the devs are talking about removing Friendly Fire in the first place and looking at something else.

There are reasons why Planetside became a dead game, which is why the devs are making these changes. I want Friendly Fire but it's obvious that a number of people who quit, quit because of it ( and informed Sony in the details box when they cancelled their sub ). I think Friendly Fire is an important part of what made PS so great and provided a deeper connection to the side I was playing with. There has to be a way that we can preserve it while still adressing the reasons why it's getting pulled.

And Krome quit the trolling man and come up with something usefull

I'm sorry, but if you shoot something and get a big red text on screen and a "BEEEEP", if you're minimally sane, you're going to at least ask questions about it, and once you know, you'll stop.
Continuing until you're grief locked, multiple times? This has nothing to do with being casual, this is being stupid

There are many many more reasons why PS lost subs. Grief is a very minor factor

[Krowe]

Snip

It isn't trolling when you, yourself, say your friends are bad. They're bad, therefore they probably didn't understand how to actually play the game. THEREFORE, the game should NOT be built around their handicaps.

And honestly if they don't figure out what that ear-rending beep and flashing red +# means either by themselves or from their friend (which I assume is you), then maybe they should respec into something in more of a support role.

Of course if they can't figure out that shooting friendlies is bad, maybe they should play Black Ops or something.

[Firefly]

A good time to bring in Friendly Fire would be when the player is at the point that they are starting to experiment with weapon modifications. So while you can mod to a better weapon that suits your playstyle with it comes further dimension of gameplay.
Or you (generally-speaking you, not you specifically) could just learn how to play the fucking teamwork-oriented MMO-FPS the way the rest of us play, and stop being a goddamned n00b. Just sayin'...

A good time to bring in friendly fire is exactly how it's done now - at the start of the game, and inside the VR room. Turning it on halfway through the game once you learn how to stop being a careless idiot is not a good idea.

[basti]

You guys got a good list of reasons why they may need to disable Friendly fire, but theres one thing:
None of those points are actually reasons. In fact, there is NO reason to disable friendly fire, but loads of reasons to have it on.

And thats enough on that topic. Everything else will be dealt with during beta.

[Traak]

Easiest implementation of Friendly Fire:

Each point is a second you spend unable to pull the trigger.

To be more specific, it INSTANTLY gives you trigger lock. And lasts as long as how many points are still ticking down from FF damage you are credited with.

[Talek Krell]

A good time to bring in Friendly Fire would be when the player is at the point that they are starting to experiment with weapon modifications. So while you can mod to a better weapon that suits your playstyle with it comes further dimension of gameplay.

If your friends have managed to get themselves grief locked without learning how to tell the bright red people from the bright yellow people from the bright purple people, then giving them free license to shoot whoever they want until they hit a certain XP level is unlikely to make them less confused.

[Scow2]

Easiest implementation of Friendly Fire:

Each point is a second you spend unable to pull the trigger.

To be more specific, it INSTANTLY gives you trigger lock. And lasts as long as how many points are still ticking down from FF damage you are credited with.

I disagree with this. In hectic firefights, there will be inevitably be Friendly Fire due to the confusion. I liked the scaling system from the first Planetside: It was okay if you got an occasional grief point for W/E reason (Guys run in front of your crosshairs, Pedestrians don't get out of the way of your tank, n00b won't get out of the way, a bit larger blast than you intended, etc.), but it caused problems when it scaled.

I know as Special Assault and Tank Driver characters, I never racked up an extraordinary amount of grief points, despite occasionally interrupting "duels" in the middle of the road on my way to a combat zone in a Vanguard (And causing the audience to lock their weapons against my shield), or lighting up an entire hallway.

I think managing grief added an interesting, personal tactical choice because I was concerned about my team's performance. Team-killing weakened my own survival. On the other hand, when there are far more enemies than friendlies in a tight area, Rocklet's away.

Situational awareness goes both ways: If you run in front of the guys with the long-range, large-Fire-cone guns, you're gonna get shot. If you're in the middle of an ideal AoE spot, you're gonna get blown up. Give the guy with the Dragon right-of-way. He'll be dead soon enough.

[Brusi]

Just to point something out...


Question: Friendly fire?
TRay: Current stance is Friendly fire On**

[Crator]

^^^ Ya, now the question becomes, "How are you planning on implementing FF in PS2?". I'm sure they are still ironing that out though...

[outsider]

Of course if they can't figure out that shooting friendlies is bad, maybe they should play Black Ops or something.

Well that's what the wider gaming community did didn't they ? played something else ? They didn't stop playing because they felt awesome, they left the game in droves because playing the game made them feel like they sucked.

If Friendly Fire wasn't a contributing factor then discussions wouldn't be ongoing on how to best implement it.

It was obvious from the time Markhov and Johary merged that PS was failing to penetrate into the gamer base and while it had so many Epic elements there were also glaring issues that was making people not want to continue paying a sub.

I'm coming at this from the grand mayhem that occurred everyday, where even really good players would kill friendlies by mistake because there was just such a high concentration of people in tight spaces. Friendly Fire was inevitable and came with the territory of base def/assault mechanics when so many people were in tight spaces.

The game I want to go back to is the big scale combat, not some piddly 50vs50vs30, and friendly fire in its present inception will turn off players. Not because of weapon lock but because its so rage/frustrating to be killed by your side as well.

And yes if people don't like it, they will leave ... again!

[Brusi]

This is a good point...

There are loads of casual players who prefer to play FPS games on easy mode, and that is exactly what the difference between playing on a server with FF-OFF vs FF-ON resembles.

fuck i'm sick of speculating... let me into beta already!!

[JonJonPoPong]

I don't think the devs have even played planetside.
The people who have played planetside KNOW and are 90% FOR friendly fire, so WTF are these devs debating?

[FIREk]

WTF are these devs debating?

I think they're debating on whether or not today's gamers are too retarded to let them hurt friendlies. :P

[Raymac]

I don't think the devs have even played planetside.
The people who have played planetside KNOW and are 90% FOR friendly fire, so WTF are these devs debating?

Hey Trolly McTroll, Friendly Fire in currently in PS2. As for what the devs are debating, everything is a work in progress which means they are looking at everything considering how early in the development it is.

tl;dr Chill

[NapalmEnima]

I don't think the devs have even played planetside.
The people who have played planetside KNOW and are 90% FOR friendly fire, so WTF are these devs debating?

Die hard PS1 fan players will make up X% of their player base. Froo-froo dingle-berry-brains players will make up Y% of their player base. I strongly suspect that X will be less than Y. How much less? Dunno.

Which option will net them the most players ergo the most money, both in the short and long term.

SOE is a business. Their business is Making Games.

CoD hardcore mode is a LOT of fun. For me. Many disagree, as the server populations showed Back In The Day. As such, characters in the vast majority of shooters can take more than a shot or two to the torso before they die.

FF:Off appeals to less hardcore gamers (unlike you and I). I find the idea of PS2 shipping that way to be... distasteful. OTOH, I'm not flying into a Nerd Rage and proclaiming this to be the Doom of PS2.

[Crator]

FF:Off appeals to less hardcore gamers (unlike you and I). I find the idea of PS2 shipping that way to be... distasteful. OTOH, I'm not flying into a Nerd Rage and proclaiming this to be the Doom of PS2.

You didn't hear? They change it to FF: On!

[FIREk]

You didn't hear? They change it to FF: On!

That can change in minutes, though! :D

[Crator]

Never said it couldn't.

[Whoknowswhat1]

As much as i love Friendly fire in planetside 1, the kill time was very long (longer than 15 seconds) while the kill time in Planetside 2 is said to be much shorter. so i will have to wait and see how it plays out in beta, but as of now, i am leaning towards no FF. (BEFORE YOU PANIC READ BELOW)

How many times have you been facing someone 1v1 only to get the person down to 1% health and someone team kills the person (either accidentally or on purpose) leaving u nothing but low health, ammo, and no EXP?

People are bad at shooting whether its server issues, lag, or just bad aiming/ mouse controls. Why should they be punished because of [insert reasons stated above] and Planetside does nothing to help besides giving them a lock and saying "if u shoot friendlies you will not be able to play"

F2P aspect. This is still relatively unknown. Reports as of this post are that you will have to buy the game one [1] time and have it for the rest of your life. This doesnt bother me, but as with most, if not all, MMO's there will be a trial, or completely free aspect (PS Reserves). THE POINT: it is very easy to create a SOE account, easier to create a character, and even easier to team kill people when they are not expecting it. some may argue that one person will not change a battle of hundreds, but multiple people can, just so friends and/or team members can win on another empire. (DISCLAIMER: this is subject to a COMPLETELY FREE TO PLAY aspect. Please disregard if there is no COMPLETELY FREE TO PLAY aspect in planetside 2)

on a side note: i really do hope there is FF, but unless they get their grief system working, it wont happen anytime soon. and you cant just add in friendly fire 2-3 months down the road, that would completely change warfare. if they want to implement it later on, they should create a new server with FF on, and have free transfers onto that server.

[Brusi]

If the grief system is clever enough, it should be able to limit the potential damage of dedicated F2P griefing accounts.


the type of weapon used
the distance between the griefer and griefee
damaging the same player repeatedly
damage to enemies during the period of grief
damage sustained by enemy fire during the period
how recently the account was created
how often the account is played
the overall non-greifing damage to griefing-damage accumulated during a play session


The list could go on forever, but the simple basic fact is, we won't know how much of a problem griefing will be until beta (i know i personally intend to test this... exhaustively, eheheh).

The devs should then be able to respond with appropriate tweaking and updating of the grief system.

[sylphaen]

If the grief system is clever enough, it should be able to limit the potential damage of dedicated F2P griefing accounts.
the type of weapon used
the distance between the griefer and griefee
damaging the same player repeatedly
damage to enemies during the period of grief
damage sustained by enemy fire during the period
how recently the account was created
how often the account is played
the overall non-greifing damage to griefing-damage accumulated during a play session

The list could go on forever, but the simple basic fact is, we won't know how much of a problem griefing will be until beta (i know i personally intend to test this... exhaustively, eheheh).

The devs should then be able to respond with appropriate tweaking and updating of the grief system.

Very good post. It would also be able to differentiate between intentional griefers from careless trigger-happy players.