Forums » Suggestions

On the Removal of Friendly Fire: Request for Comment

May 01, 2007 Ghost link
How about a cooldown timer when forfeiting a duel? A ten second countdown exactly like the log out countdown before the duel will be forfeited.
May 01, 2007 mr_spuck link
uhm .. both duelistants have to agree to forfeiting. or am I missing something?

and player A will get a big fat warning telling him that "he shouldn't do that again or else.. !!!" and will hopefully stay away from player B.

/me kicks spider
May 01, 2007 moldyman link
One side can forfeit, both have to agree to make the duel not count.
May 01, 2007 LeberMac link
Good scenarios, Spider, that's exactly the kind of thing I think the devs are trying to prevent.

With the 1% bus, I think collisions should never count as kills. Sure, the noob "destroys" the "noob-killer", but no one would get a penalty for a collision.

And, I think both parties need to agree to cancel a duel, although this could be exploited to harm a n00b's standing as well, depending on timing. Perhaps when a duel is forfeit, all weapons fire from either side vanishes just as if they had left the sector?

I don't think Corvus should be able to acquire nation-specific ships. Unless, in some future time, players can buy and sell ships like they do weapons and cargo. Then I think it would be fine to sell ships to Corvus, but it would come with a faction penalty.

Overall, I think basic common sense should apply. I know this is a game, but the easiest model for friendly-fire comes from real life. Advanced-style militaries have IFF signatures which identify friend or foe and are configurable as the situation develops. You should always KNOW what you're targeting, based on the HUD element. If you shoot at someone designated as friendly, you should immediately get a warning (we do already, at least in station NFZ).

I think the warnings should also be specific to the amount of standing loss - and which factions you will lose standing in - if you kill that pilot.

I agree that there should be some kind of "weapons safety" which, if disabled, shows up on your HUD when you target another ship, like "Weapons Live" or "Weapons Safe". Having the safety off means you might be perceived as more of a threat by others. All modern ships, aircraft, tanks, whatnot have weapons safeties. How come not in VO?

That way, if a vet saunters into a nation's capital with a bunch of n00bs flying around in buses, and he flips off the safety, a station guard can take up position behind him just to make sure there's no funny stuff. Maybe the pilot will get a messsage like "Pilot, you have disengaged your weapons-lock. Please ensure you have secured your weapons before approaching further."

Hell, for pilots with low standing (dislike), perhaps simply disengaging the safety is enough to launch a station SF to surround the pilot. You know... just in case...
May 01, 2007 yodaofborg link
I think you should just impliment your idea Inc, and listen to our whining afterwards. nuf said.
May 01, 2007 LeberMac link
Yeah, I agree with the little green guy.
May 01, 2007 SuperMegaMynt link
I noticed a problem with the moving of a character's items/equipment after deportation.

1. Buy 10,238,729,179,081,273 things for cheap at Dau.
2. Get deported
3. Sell 10,238,729,179,081,273 things for Corv-tastic profit.
May 01, 2007 Impavid link
Very good point. Makes more sense to impound their goods.
May 18, 2007 SuperMegaMynt link
Someone hated or KOS probably shouldn't have access to nation chat on channel 11. For that matter, it might be cool to have 'faction chat' on certain channels where anyone in decent standing would be able to participate. Maybe like, you can only listen until you're respected or something.
May 20, 2007 look... no hands link
reposted in what is probably the correct thread

Perhaps we could have automatic weapons safeties instead of FF. you could set nation, guild, or group weapons safeties. the way this could work is if i enabled my guild weapons safety, i could not damage any guild members with my shots. if i had my group safety on and the others off then i couldn't hurt any group members, possibly useful for nation wars. having the safeties turned on doesn't protect me from incoming fire but it would prevent me from accidentally damaging people i don't want to.

This would add convenience to working together with members of other nations and remove the ability to hide behind a borked faction system (ex: UIT pirates that the vprs cant hurt cause they have good uit standing). Also with group safety enabled, you won't have to worry about accidentally hitting a convoy you're guarding.
May 21, 2007 Roda Slane link
I don't mind any kind of safety feature that prevents your weapon from firing. For example: A group safety that will not allow your weapon to fire when you have a group member selected (with provisions to allow repair modules). However, once a weapon is discharged, it is live, and anything it strikes should suffer it's full effect, weather it was the intended target or not.

Another example: Mines could be equipped with fuse safeties that will disallow detonation while a "friendly" is in range, but once the mine detonates, it's effects should be felt by everyone in range.
May 22, 2007 SuperMegaMynt link
This is true.
Jun 16, 2007 SuperMegaMynt link
Aerna seekers ought to be less exploitable. The other day I flew by an innocent bystander in a clever fashion, so that when the SF flew up to me, it exploded on him instead. It wasn't as difficult as I thought'd be either.
Jun 16, 2007 SilentWave link
I agree with Roda, although I would want mines to be live to all ships, including my own.

EDIT: No, wait, I meant to agree with look... no hands.
EDIT: These ideas needs to be revised.
Jun 20, 2007 The Ori link
I think there should be a lot in the game dependent on weapons powered up/down. Thinking about SF taking action when a player is in a station system with their weapons powered up makes the game feel so much more like I felt the game would feel like when reading the box (the ideal game reality for me).

I think that weapons powered up in a system that is neutral or lower (or perhaps one tier up from neutral, whatever that is...) should get SF riding your tail, and of course, a warning. In a station that has you lower, the SF should warn you, move to firing position near your ship, and give you "x" amount of time to power them down, or else they shoot, and you die.

In general, the entire idea of being able to shut down certain parts of the ship makes the game feel more like my ideal game universe, as well as more ship customization, but that's for another thread.
Sep 21, 2007 MSKanaka link
Bumped the thread because it seems that the defcon-level style SFs have been put ingame. Suggestions for how to make them more (or less) effective should probably go here.
Oct 01, 2007 dangpp link
I really like Look... no hands ideas on the safety feature. Like said It would solve many.. issues with nation wars and the like. For the people who think that weapons fire should affect all who it hits I'm assuming then you hate the FF setting on now since it is the same idea but this is optional and much more flexible.
Oct 01, 2007 Ghost link
The problem with that is it still doesn't fix one of the biggest FF issues. A friendly can still flare spam all around you, kill any enemy near you and not harm you a bit. I'm afraid it has to be all or nothing.
Oct 02, 2007 break19 link
Ghost, the way I see it is.. if you target a "friendly" your weapon is "safed" or powered-down, or possibly even shooting blanks as is the current way. however, those blanks should also be "blanks" to any nearby enemies, and this should be a toggle.. some of us dont want to auto-safe weapons, and would prefer doing it manually..

However, if you are targetting an enemy, and a friendly gets in the way of the shot.. then, he should take full damage just as if it were an enemy in the way.
Oct 02, 2007 Ghost link
I'm not sure I follow you. To clarify, what you're saying is that whenever you target a friendly ship, your weapons cease doing damage to everything or stop firing?