Targeting team-mates (45 Votes)
Yes	55.56% - 25 votes
Yes, but only in the arena	11.11% - 5 votes
Yes, but only in the wilderness	4.44% - 2 votes
No, it should never be allowed	28.89% - 13 votes

Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3 next >>

Targeting team-mates

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Should it be allowed at all to target and shoot at team-mates? ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 1:30 pm

*Zothen* Knights Templar Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals Posts: 841 Joined: Jun 11, 2007 Sam, I miss the point - what is DW meant to be? Is it a Player vs. Environment game? Or PvE with PvP? Will we get Camp combats sooner or later, or never? Im confused about such reactions only cos somebody lost a car and a member... Well, nobody bothers that much when losing a whole scout to a NPC gang.. Maybe a bit too much waves?? ......................... vet marshal wv Posted Aug 30, 2008, 1:35 pm

Ivan Kerensky Les Loups Gris Autodueller Civs Faction Group: Members Posts: 419 Joined: Mar 1, 2008 I think firing at teammate could still be there. Or at least accidental friendly fire. What sam is suggesting, I suppose, is that you are not allowed to deliberately target yours guns at someone that is in your team in a scout or combat arena. It make sense. It could still be bypassed by targetting ground but it make it harder to do... After all, what decent use have to for an instruction to voluntarily target someone in your team ? I think there is need to split the pool a bit. There should be an option to disallow targetting your teamate will still allowing for friendly fire. ......................... vet wv Posted Aug 30, 2008, 1:39 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 1:40 pm by Ivan Kerensky

Alocalypse Advanced Race Labs Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: May 6, 2007 I think this might be one poll that doesn't end up as a stalemate (anyone who votes yes is a backstabbing monster!) ......................... vet deathrce1 raceL1 race1 combat1 northernsummer gateautumn elmsautumn deathrceL1 semiprocombat wv cont Posted Aug 30, 2008, 1:41 pm

*Chase Bansi* Team Bansi Darkwind Guru Merchants Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 693 Joined: Aug 13, 2007 I will take the unpopular side. Yes it should be allowed. It should be a choice of the player to behave in anyway they see fit. Because PvP is not a hot topic on the forums anymore there should be more information provided to the newer players as to the possible results of their actions. This could be done with a 'sticky' topic on the forum as well as a wiki entry. Firing on player vehicle could still be done by targeting past the player in your LOS. Even though I'm no eager to engage in PvP it should remain for those who do. ......................... marshal vet gateautumn wv e2g0,1,0 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 2:38 pm

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Quote: Sam, I miss the point - what is DW meant to be? Is it a Player vs. Environment game? Or PvE with PvP? Will we get Camp combats sooner or later, or never? I'm not suggesting you can't fight against other players, only not if they're on the same side of the combat as you. You can still fight them in the arena, scouting combats, later camp combats etc. Accidental friendly fire will still be there, of course. And accidental collisions etc. But it will stop community-damaging backstabbing from happening. In an ideal world, backstabbing is a part of the game. Sure I wanted it to be part of your available play styles - but if it's turning many players off then its not good. It's not something I wanted to do, as it's unrealistic, but it's worth a poll surely? If the majority think we'd be better having a game-enforced rule stopping you targeting team-mates, then it's worth listening to them, I think. Quote: Even though I'm no eager to engage in PvP it should remain for those who do. With this proposed rule in place, pvp will still be an option. All that will change is that the potential for tricking your enemy into a one-sided situation where they can't win will be much reduced. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 2:43 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 2:47 pm by *sam*

Alocalypse Advanced Race Labs Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: May 6, 2007 I'll reiterate what I said in the other thread: Quote: I think backstabbing is a valid strategy, but if you make normal pvp so hard and opt-in then why is backstabbing, which is a more advanced and mean form of pvp, so easy? Quote: Yes it should be allowed. It should be a choice of the player to behave in anyway they see fit. Ideally yes, but I don't see anything positive coming out of this and it bypasses all other PvP barriers and the victim has no chance to surrender because the combat doesn't end until the NPCs die. Quote: Firing on player vehicle could still be done by targeting past the player in your LOS. I think along with no targeting there should be a substantial penalty for players blatantly bypassing it and teamkilling despite. I'd suggest a 3-day scout ban. ......................... vet deathrce1 raceL1 race1 combat1 northernsummer gateautumn elmsautumn deathrceL1 semiprocombat wv cont Posted Aug 30, 2008, 2:53 pm

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Quote: I think along with no targeting there should be a substantial penalty for players blatantly bypassing it and teamkilling despite. Very hard to robustly detect that though alo. LOS accidents do happen. Or I guess you mean if it happens multiple times? ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 2:57 pm

Alocalypse Advanced Race Labs Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: May 6, 2007 *sam* said: Quote: I think along with no targeting there should be a substantial penalty for players blatantly bypassing it and teamkilling despite. Very hard to robustly detect that though alo. LOS accidents do happen. Or I guess you mean if it happens multiple times? Yeah, I meant this as something that is only applied if the victim complains and there's proof that it was intentional (such as "accidental" friendly fire for more than 3-5 turns despite being told to stop or ground-targeting to hit friendlies, etc). Once it's clear that there's such a rule in place and that the victims have a right to complain I doubt it'll come up again. ......................... vet deathrce1 raceL1 race1 combat1 northernsummer gateautumn elmsautumn deathrceL1 semiprocombat wv cont Posted Aug 30, 2008, 3:15 pm

*Ninesticks* The Wombles Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 3,371 Joined: Apr 11, 2008 I no more want to see an available game style become unavailable than anything else, as people rightly point out it is a dark gritty post-apocalyptic setting etc. And suprisingly it being in so far has not caused more problems, which speaks volumes for the level-headesness and maturity of the community. Rather than limit everybody's play, would it be possible to geographically (Evan wise) vary the application of the rule. There is a whole continent to be dark and gritty, and for those who want pink and fluffy keep SS 'safe'. I would rather have people allowed a choice. ......................... vet wv marshal pvp4 community pvp20,1,0 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:26 pm

Jety Cuddle Fiesta Darkwind Guru Badlands Truckstop Faction Group: Members Posts: 910 Joined: May 9, 2008 I think one of the main issues at hand was the Vet Picking on Newbie aspect. I would vote "Yes it should be allowed, just not in Somerset" [edit] To expand on this a little, it might make sense to have a PvP system where things are more or less nasty depending on the town you're in. SS and Elms being quite safe. By the time you get to firelight, you can *hunt* specific player squads and they can't buy their way out by trucing a trivial amount of money. ......................... vet wv Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:27 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 4:35 pm by Jety

pweelg Canis Lupus Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 741 Joined: Aug 19, 2007 its got to be allowed unless we suspend all attempts at realism. personaly i dont agree with it as a valid action and/or tactic, but to disallow it isn't the solution either. i know there is a rep penalty for this sort of action, maybe we need a "trustworthness" score or something that will highlight to new players that a player has attacked team mates deliberately ?. just feels like a more realistic solution to me ......................... vet combatL1 raceL1 wv Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:33 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 4:33 pm by pweelg

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Quote: I think this might be one poll that doesn't end up as a stalemate Haha you spoke too soon alo! This is getting funny. edit: the idea of having rules per-town is a good one. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:51 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 4:52 pm by *sam*

Valiance The Vanguards Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Storytellers Posts: 1,175 Joined: Jan 15, 2008 We are responding to a single particular (albeit highly charged) issue. A paid-for assassination attempt by someone on the same side i.e underhand PvP. And here is the basic problem. There is no negative consequences for doing this. If there was a potential negative $1,000,000 impact of doing this (I'm not talking a fine, but gameplay impacts), things might be different. There is no negative of having negative rep. You get bounty hunters hitting you when you are weak (at gates), which is a pain, but usually you win and get good loot, otherwise there is no problem. I'm not having a go at darth and Longo's play styles. Hitting traders, being generally a bad guy towards the NPCs, is fine. And I think that it is good to have different play styles. But Doctor Matthias, who accidentally targeted a team mate and saw his rep drop, went over to the dark side and hunted traders. Now he has a bounty of $5728 on his head. Task, who as I understand it, intentionally targeted a team-mate in a paid-for revenge attack, has no bounty on his head and a reputation of 31. Hell, I had a bounty of $87 on my head for failing a mission until yesterday. So not only is the sneaky, underhand attack possible, there is absolutely no comeback for it. In a game which condones PvP, there have to be real human bounty hunters to control it. I have no desire to go after Doc Matthias or Longo to punish them for their play styles, and yet the game doesn't allow a distinction between their "negative" play and play which looks like griefing. I'm still on the fence about this poll though. Generally, I am all in favour of choice. Rather than limiting our choices, can we make a serious griefer like this the target of the whole of Evan? Or do I then open up the scenario that a simple mistake could you turn into Evan's equivalent of a rabid dog, a target to be shot at by anyone passing. PS, and off-topic: whatever happened to the dogs? ......................... vet combat1 wv ped1 northernsummer Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:54 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 4:55 pm by Valiance

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Quote: Rather than limiting our choices, can we make a serious griefer like this the target of the whole of Evan? That's a possible solution too, yeah. Make the rep. hit for each shot at a team-mate add up, rather than only count once. And make the bountyhunters get heavier and heavier when you get a seriously negative rep..? Quote: PS, and off-topic: whatever happened to the dogs? I have a nice dog model actually, but not yet animated. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:57 pm

Alocalypse Advanced Race Labs Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: May 6, 2007 *sam* said: Quote: I think this might be one poll that doesn't end up as a stalemate Haha you spoke too soon alo! This is getting funny. Bah. I doubt anyone would've noticed for at least a couple of months if you'd just have removed it without telling us. There's also the option of letting the squad leader decide if friendly-targeting is on or off. ......................... vet deathrce1 raceL1 race1 combat1 northernsummer gateautumn elmsautumn deathrceL1 semiprocombat wv cont Posted Aug 30, 2008, 4:57 pm

Valiance The Vanguards Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Storytellers Posts: 1,175 Joined: Jan 15, 2008 Radical solution - make it that there is *no penalty" for shooting at a team-mate with a negative rep. That way, you take away any protection at all from them from being shot at. Or, as a variant, make it that you cannot target a team-mate in Somerset at all. Except if they have negative rep. Or both. I can already hear Longo and darth bleating that I am trying to kill their play style. I'm not. I think it's valid. But so are the consequences. How about then, as an alternative, a player-killer flag. If your negative rep is from hitting traders, fine. But if it is from Player Killing, then the rules above apply. And to make this work, you would need Player Killer Status to be clear. Perhaps like Hero Points "Player Killer in Somerset", which means that when scouting from Somerset, the above rules apply. I'm trying to find in-game ways to solve this problem without putting a blanket ban on 2 entirely valid if morally questionable playstyles (Player Killer and Trader Hunter). ......................... vet combat1 wv ped1 northernsummer Posted Aug 30, 2008, 5:07 pm

Alocalypse Advanced Race Labs Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: May 6, 2007 Quote: I'm trying to find in-game ways to solve this problem without putting a blanket ban on 2 entirely valid if morally questionable playstyles (Player Killer and Trader Hunter). This doesn't have anything to do with either in my opinion, player-killing and team-killing are two different things. Quote: Radical solution - make it that there is *no penalty" for shooting at a team-mate with a negative rep. That way, you take away any protection at all from them from being shot at. When someone on your team targets and attacks you you can attack them back without any penalty. ......................... vet deathrce1 raceL1 race1 combat1 northernsummer gateautumn elmsautumn deathrceL1 semiprocombat wv cont Posted Aug 30, 2008, 5:11 pm

Valiance The Vanguards Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Storytellers Posts: 1,175 Joined: Jan 15, 2008 Quote: player-killing and team-killing are two different things Very valid point Quote: When someone on your team targets and attacks you you can attack them back without any penalty. But I mean anyone else can too, in any event, until the PK status (or Team Killer status if you prefer, maybe we should just call it BackStabber) rep is gone. What I'm getting at is that there are no more negatives of being a Player Killer/Team Killer than there are of being a trader hunter. Being a trader hunter has no impact on other people's enjoyment of the game; being a PK/TK does. So should they have different gameplay impacts? ......................... vet combat1 wv ped1 northernsummer Posted Aug 30, 2008, 5:14 pm Last edited Aug 30, 2008, 5:15 pm by Valiance

Jety Cuddle Fiesta Darkwind Guru Badlands Truckstop Faction Group: Members Posts: 910 Joined: May 9, 2008 I think there is more of a negative than you realize. How many would go out scouting with task or darth today? Even if you don't think they're going to kill you, do you really think you can trust them? ......................... vet wv Posted Aug 30, 2008, 5:19 pm

Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3 next >>

Powered by MercuryBoard [v1.1.4]
© 2001-2005 The Mercury Development Team

0.1402 seconds - 33 queries - 0.43 load