334 replies to this topic

[Hawkeye 72]

Geist Null, on 19 March 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

report system, no FF, and the ability to put someone on the ignore list would be a good start imo

I think no FF is off the table based on the response on here. This is a sim, and friendly fire happens. Don't want to encourage arcade style play. If i screw up the coordinates of an artillery strike, I want consequences

[LordDeathStrike]

Geist Null, on 19 March 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

report system, no FF, and the ability to put someone on the ignore list would be a good start imo

we have all already aggreed that ff needs to be on, its not mechwarrior without FF, just due to limiting people from hurting themselves with point blank aoe attacks and taking out team mates with sloppy shots.

what we want, is for those that purpose kill team members, to be made to pay the repairs for the damage they do, and if they keep doing it, they need to be punished further with banning. (aka they arent playing in the spirit the game is made, they are playing just to ruin peoples fun and chances of winning)

Hawkeye 72, on 19 March 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

I think no FF is off the table based on the response on here. This is a sim, and friendly fire happens. Don't want to encourage arcade style play. If i screw up the coordinates of an artillery strike, I want consequences

exactly, we dont want a brawl to break out with 2 lances point blank, with commanders dropping artillery on it because it wont hurt their lance, we want them holding off because it will kill their own guys.

[Volthorne]

Alright, here's some options that no one seems to have considered yet:

1) ANY FF fine is split 50/50 by offending party and receiving party. This way, you can't really get away with not paying for FF whether taking it or dishing it out.

2) A built in mechanic similar to those dumb aim-helping-things often found in FPS titles (which always end up making snipers miss their shots while trying to lead a target, go figure) EXCEPT it would work in reverse, where your reticule would automatically drift AWAY from teammates, so that you had to actually try and shoot them (wouldn't be that hard, the drift is usually fairly slow), or that they could only get hit if they walked into your line of fire AFTER you pull the trigger. Note that I don't mention auto-lockout from firing anywhere in this passage (which would require an advanced targeting computer and an advanced IFF).

3) Optional forgiving of FF/PK incident (with no timer, so that s*** can be sorted out, as rushed decisions are always wrong) for accidents/random crap that might occur due to the Black Lady, or for martyrs calling barrages down on themselves to nuke an enemy strike team (as a side note, anything within an incredibly short distance (100m? 200?) of a friendly that gets marked for arty fire should require a second confirmation from another scout to stop idiots from getting themselves killed for trolling or other purposes - this would rely on the Commanders, though).

Edited by Volthorne, 19 March 2012 - 09:36 PM.

[cinco]

it's a game. fine them for the tk and get over it. we're gonna have these complex systems in place now?

meh, i'd rather they dedicate time to making the gameplay great rather than creating systems to prevent people from getting their panties twisted.

[T0RC4ED]

Nice thread, lotsa good posts and thoughts.

I have to say Im thinking no FF would probably be best. I would say I run into at least 1 out of 5 matches in other online games where there are players that dont contribute to the team. Allowing FF just adds one more thing to deal with.

Obviously Most of us are going to have more non-guild drops then we do guild-drops so there is a good chance of running into these players who are looking to ruin the the match or are just terrible gamers.

[metro]

>lookin' round< stopped by to make sure , we are all having fun, and that no one is misbehaving.


Looks good,

Thank you everyone,

carry on!

[metro]

apologies for the double post.


Sorry Mockingfox, while we appreciate your thoughts on this touchy topic,


we are Merging topics as we do not need 2 threads on this topic.


- Everyone remain calm or we're coming in with the clamps.


Thanks, to you and everyone else for your input on this topic.

[Mellowbloom]

Would 'ricochet' style friendly fire make any difference? As in, hitting teammates hits the TK'er too, or even just the TK'er? The latter could be pretty abusable, though.

[metro]

I never saw a ricochet shot in any of the former online games for MW/BT

[Hayashi]

Metro, on 20 March 2012 - 04:36 AM, said:

I never saw a ricochet shot in any of the former online games for MW/BT

Not to mention that ricochet shots are physically impossible to explain and thus require substantial suspension of disbelief.

[Dlardrageth]

LordDeathStrike, on 19 March 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

what we want, is for those that purpose kill team members, to be made to pay the repairs for the damage they do, and if they keep doing it, they need to be punished further with banning. (aka they arent playing in the spirit the game is made, they are playing just to ruin peoples fun and chances of winning)

It's actually a bit more complicated, if you tie punitive payments only to inflicted damage. First of all, blowing a leg off, say, a Locust inflicts relatively little damage compared to killing an Atlas by coring him (usually). Still, the player in the Locust thus getting immobliized right at match start won't have much fun in that match any more. But by "payment for damage" modeling, he'd get way less punitive payment than the Atlas pilot in the example. Doesn't sound particularily fair. Thus you might need a way more complicated mechanism to satisfy all players. Also, you can "grief" other players also without inflicting damage, for example by cornering and boxing in a smaller Mech with a bigger one. And what about just giving away their positions to the enemy? Etc., etc., etc.

And the whole ban issue solely drops the ball again into PGI's court. And leads to the old issue of how much manpower they realistically want/have to employ to make that work efficiently. Because if it takes 2 weeks before a ban is actually instated... in a F2P game where it is pretty easy to just get a new account/character... I would very much prefer some sort of mechanism where I won't have to play a dozen games or more with the offender again, because it takes long-ish to impose a ban. Truth be told, after the 2nd time being teamed up with him, I'd prolly just quit the match myself. Bad or "tough luck" for the remaining team, but I'm not playing to become annoyed again and again. In that case I could just switch games and give MWO a rest. Pretty sure I won't be the only one. YMMV.

cinco, on 19 March 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

it's a game. fine them for the tk and get over it. we're gonna have these complex systems in place now?

I personally care about a fine as much as about some random sack of rice toppling over in central china. So I lose/gain some oh-so-precious in-game currency? Boo-hoo, the riot! I very much do care though about not repeatedly having to be teamed up with some deranged ****, that purposefully ruins one match after another. For me. Because I don't play a game to have no fun.

Quote

meh, i'd rather they dedicate time to making the gameplay great rather than creating systems to prevent people from getting their panties twisted.

Oh yeah, and you'd rather have people depart MWO in droves because it becomes griefer's heaven, than having some sort of mechanism to prevent playing with people you'd not even give a hand in real life eventually? Because all the "great gameplay" won't do **** for you and the game if you can't keep enough people playing it. Because if that doesn't happen, PGI will have to close down the servers ultimately and you will be left with no game at all. How'd you like that, huh?

TL;DR: Over-complicated mechanism risks taking too long. Mere token punishment/recompense won't stop any serious griefing, thus being an impotent measure and just triggering dissatisfaction. Not adressing the issue sufficiently will only give the game and PGI a bad reputation. Outcome of that is forseeable.

[Mellowbloom]

Metro, on 20 March 2012 - 04:36 AM, said:

I never saw a ricochet shot in any of the former online games for MW/BT

I meant less in the way of actual richocheting fire, more in just the damage caused as this would punish people attempting to TK. it's just an idea though, and in hindsight would probably be pretty griefable, in addition to the obvious 'magic reflecting damage' thing.

Edited by Mellowbloom, 20 March 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[Mchawkeye]

I think this is just going to have to be a report system. I cannot see any other way of dealing with it that is either too complex or too pants.

No FF would break reality.
Reflected damage, would break reality. Also I feel it's a bit of smack for what could well be a genuine accident, or even by consent and design.
Giving kick abilities or anything similar to commanders reeks of potential abuse.

So I figure we have profiles much like on the xbox, and people get to report and rate as they see fit. And just to make it positive, let\encourage people to rate good too.

[Bud Johnson]

Charging people for repairs on accidental fire/tk just changes a griefers strategy slightly (wait for a shootout to start. hop in the middle. profit).
Systems like ROE/grief points with a vote-kick system seem to work well.
And if we can see this information before the match all the better.

[Red Beard]

Hexion, on 19 March 2012 - 07:36 PM, said:

And btw not all pub players are the dirtbags and lamebrains they are being made out to be here.

Very true. This thread, unfortunately, seems to have been made with that very idea at it's core.

Quote

over enforcement will give the game a negative side to new players. I think TKers arent in the numbers that they cant be reined in by the community.

Right again. Some of the hysteria be caused in this thread leans toward this. Cmon folks. Lets focus on the game.

Kurohyou, on 19 March 2012 - 07:52 PM, said:

Why sweat this issue. Team killers will become marked individuals. No one will drop with an individual that is capable of shoot their team mates in the back.

Self moderation, at it's best.

cinco, on 19 March 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

it's a game. fine them for the tk and get over it. we're gonna have these complex systems in place now?

meh, i'd rather they dedicate time to making the gameplay great rather than creating systems to prevent people from getting their panties twisted.

Quote of the hour. Anndd, the hour is half way over, but still a good post nonetheless.

Mchawkeye, on 20 March 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

No FF would break reality.

Giving kick abilities or anything similar to commanders reeks of potential abuse.

I agree, FF should be in, but some of these ideas about repaying for the damage is a joke. It is a video game. I swear some folks have their belts on way too tight.

I agree that the commanders should NOT have the ability to kick ANYONE. That is a disaster waiting to happen.

I really think this thread is a huge waste of people's time overall. Worrying about these miniscule irritations like this is a joke to me. But, after seeing that the content of the forums is on the low side, I guess fellas need a bone to gnaw.


Damn...I cannot believe I NEARLY, but didn't, forgot!

God Bless the Scottish!

Edited by Red Beard, 20 March 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[John Wolf]

There are a LOT of posts in this thread and I'll admit I haven't read them all on this so sorry if its been covered. Having no FF in a game would NOT solve griefing. Which is the core of this conversation, not just Friendly Fire. I mean, what happens when a griefer gets the command role? The effected team is at a serious handicap.

Another example, you cannot damage friendly mechs, so the griefer in question stands in front of you a blocks your travel and weapons fire. You can't do damage, and need to back up to move, plus you cannot destroy the object in your path, you're forced to continually back up to try and disengage, meanwhile any hostiles are lighting you both up.

If there was a way to completely remove griefing from games, it would be implemented already. Report systems, active staff reviewing logs, and account bans are probably the best way to go. The better coordinated and active the community is reporting and communicating the problem players the less common griefers will be.in the game.

[Red Beard]

Hayashi, on 20 March 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

Not to mention that ricochet shots are physically impossible to explain and thus require substantial suspension of disbelief.

I mean, let's be real about this. It's a video game. You say that ricochet shots would require a little extra suspension of disbelief like that's a bad thing. Isn't that what we show up for. There are not even really battlemechs in the real world, yet we are worried about ricocheting shots not being real? Cmonnnn....it's a video game!

[Red Beard]

John Wolf, on 20 March 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

what happens when a griefer gets the command role? The effected team is at a serious handicap.

I see this happening like once in every one hundred thousand games. Seriously. Not worth the effort of even debating.

Quote

stands in front of you a blocks your travel and weapons fire.

Hmm...a new thought is coming to me...this may be a new strategy. I will call my new strategy...the Jolly Roger! Stand in front of my friends and shield them from enemy fire whilst they cool!!! See, it's not grieving, it's shielding....Perspective is everything...

Quote

account bans are probably the best way to go.

Whoa whoa whoa....! Just hold it right there big guy! Take a deep breath. Accounts are tied to credit cards and that makes getting more than one account tough for many folks. To ban a player from the game would, in most cases, mean that that player cannot return, at all. I know what you are saying..."But Red Beard, that's the idea of a ban!" And you are right, which is why I would hope that nobody here really thinks that just because you go into a game and get in the way that you should be banned. Banning a player should be for something really off the hook bad. I really don't even know what kinds of things fall into that category, but certainly not anything that has been listed in this entire thread. Grieving, FF abuse and the like is not anywhere close to an offense bad enough to ban a player. I don't care if you are a 47 year old man with high blood pressure and anger issues who cannot put up with even a single instance of this or not. Banning is super serious, and the offenses that this thread is talking about are not.

I would compare this thread to going before congress to petition for the death penalty for anyone caught loosening the lid to a salt shaker in a restaurant. Laughable, at best.

[DeformedSlowest]

The Cheese, on 17 March 2012 - 04:07 PM, said:

It's a difficult thing to sort out, I'm sure.

You can't just say "if a player kills a friendly, they are on the TK list", because they might just bring the target player into the red, destroy weapons, take off a leg, what have you.

Likewise, you can't say "if a player does X damage to a friendly, they are on the TK list", because FF is just a part of this game. Launch a volley of missiles, a friendly walks through the stream. There's some FF right there. Now, Imagine you're in a catapault trying to provide fire support for some nublet in an Atlas who just keeps walking through your firing line. Whelp, I guess you're a TKer.

My suggestion would be a steadily increasing penalty for people who repeatedly attack team mates, intentionally or not. For example, you damage a friendly, your HUD might start alarming that "YOU'RE SHOOTING A FRIENDLY", making it impossible to get any other readouts for a second or so. Continued attacks make the alert show for longer and longer. After enough damage has been done, your computer declares you a rogue agent and sends a message to your team mates saying that you're repeatedly attacking friendly units and should be treated as an enemy.

If it's accidental, you get a few messages and your readouts are down for a couple seconds, so you start being more careful with your shots. If it's intentional, your team will soon turn around and fry you.

Of course, that doesn't really help of the TKer is in an assault mech and goes all Alpha on your ***. Maybe, in the event of a friendly vs friendly alpha strike, make the shooter pay for repairs? I dunno.

I like the idea, but I would actually add in this idea of mine, if you guys are so willing to listen to me. Of course there will be FF because ppl get in the line of fire, but for those who want to intentionally commit FF to someone's back, there has to be a some time of fail safe. This fail safe would be an intentional lockout of FF. If the player still wants to commit the FF, the HUD or something will ask him to disable this FF lockout. In this scenario we all know that the FF to the back of a friendly mech is intentional. For those FF incidents where someone strafes into your line of fire, I would say that it's the player's fault for walking into the line of fire. Not sure how you would actually determine if someone walking into your line of fire was accidental or not, but I guess some type of monitoring should be implemented as other ppl have stated.

[Reb]

I like friendly fire.

However there does need to be some sort of "mercenary rating" or credit rating so folks know what they are getting themselves into. Too many negative ratings and people will be reluctant to buddy up with you, or pay you top dollar to come help. I have seen it happen too many times in W.o.W. that folks would just do crap to make other folks mad. And this was one of the main drawbacks to pvp.

The whole pay back for friendly fire damage just not enough info to even know how that would work.

WoW you might have someone pay for a wipe in a raid but that was rare and far between however those people if they did it too ofter where not invited back for raids or in this case planet drops.

Eve has the whole insurance thing so maybe there could be part of it.

In the end a rating system is needed, just to keep people a little honest. Think about it, folks will not be paying monthly fees so once they own it what keeps them from just logging on to grief people.

Edited by Reb, 20 March 2012 - 02:17 PM.