Jump to content


Poll: Disabling Friendly Fire / Team Damage

friendly fire team damage

  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

Poll: Disabling Friendly Fire / Team Damage (214 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

Impressions on the proposed changes to friendly fire / team damage

  1. Very Good (58 votes [27.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.10%

  2. Good (20 votes [9.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.35%

  3. Indifferent (21 votes [9.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.81%

  4. Bad (32 votes [14.95%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.95%

  5. Very Bad (83 votes [38.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.79%

Vote Hide poll

bnmm113 #101 Posted 29 July 2019 - 12:03 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9248 battles
  • 203
  • [ISW2] ISW2
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View PostSuperOlsson, on 29 July 2019 - 09:17 AM, said:

"Easily resolved", or not. Heavier punishment simply won't solve games ruined by ff, at all. A ruined game is a ruined game no matter what punishment is dealt out. Unless you turn blue from a single shot people will just like today abuse the system, today you can pretty much shoot twice without turning blue, kill off someone with the third shot and turn blue, then just not shoot allies for 15-20 games and repeat. But please, do come up with a solution that can't be abused while not punishing an accidental shot now and to them too much.


well if you take the same % of dmg as you caused, that would be a not so harsh punishment for accidents, and it would punish heavy offenders



spamhamstar #102 Posted 29 July 2019 - 06:22 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,476
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

I can see that I appear to have upset a great many people by suggesting that the game should attempt to remain at least a little bit realistic.  Certainly I belive that FF shouldn't be removed just because a few people get upset about what has certainly in my games been an extremely rare occurrence.

 

If people misbehave you should punish them for it or remove them completely.  Not encourage them to be more imaginative with their misbehaviour.  I firmly believe that accidental ff should be included in any shooter as part of the tactical element of the game.  Don't shoot your friends.  Just like in real war.

 

Listing things that are included in the game to make it playable does not justify removing something from the game that doesn't make it unplayable.  This is just another example of WG dumbing down the game to try to make it fun for the lowest common denominator.  Everyone will be a unicum soon, once they've removed all the funskill from the game.  Enjoy.


Edited by spamhamstar, 29 July 2019 - 06:22 PM.


SuperOlsson #103 Posted 30 July 2019 - 10:01 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23926 battles
  • 1,210
  • [E-5OM] E-5OM
  • Member since:
    08-07-2012

View Postbnmm113, on 29 July 2019 - 12:03 PM, said:


well if you take the same % of dmg as you caused, that would be a not so harsh punishment for accidents, and it would punish heavy offenders

So instead of removing teamdamage you want to double it? Sorry but I don't see how that would improve gameplay over removing friendly fire.



Kozzy #104 Posted 30 July 2019 - 11:18 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

Person a) "Keep element X BECAUSE it increases realism"

Person b) "Using that argument means a LOT of very unrealistic stuff that is in the game would logically need to be changed"

Person a) "OMG stop mentioning realism"

Person b) *sigh*


Edited by Kozzy, 30 July 2019 - 11:19 AM.


Geoffrey_Ironfist #105 Posted 30 July 2019 - 11:57 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28201 battles
  • 436
  • [YBB] YBB
  • Member since:
    06-23-2018

View Postspamhamstar, on 29 July 2019 - 06:22 PM, said:

I can see that I appear to have upset a great many people by suggesting that the game should attempt to remain at least a little bit realistic.  Certainly I belive that FF shouldn't be removed just because a few people get upset about what has certainly in my games been an extremely rare occurrence.

 

In my games it has happened enough times to care about it, because it disrupted some of those games and besides it is pointless. It is not realistic because almost nothing else about this game is realistic, it is like saying the name Mickey Mouse is realistic in Walt Disney cartoons and should not be changed to just Mickey because it is supposed to be a mouse, something ridiculous like that. Practically none of the situations in which friendly fire occurs in game are realistic and then the whole thing is not realistic anyway, except for the graphics. Why cause upset in even 1% of the games or whatever, for no reason?

 

EDIT: Like the guy above said, if someone calls for realism everyone pipes in this is just for fun, it is just a game, it is not a simulation. But when someone says remove friendly fire because it is just a way to abuse the game mechanics by malicious players and causes upset even if it happens by mistake, oh no, it has to stay, it is realistic (when it is anything but realistic the way it happens) and all that when the community of players in their majority seem to argue for games being fun and not a simulation. What is fun about this stupid mechanic? It should not have been there in the first place in a game where green tanks shoot around corners red tanks perhaps even of the same nationality, like cowboys shooting cowboys  in a pretend context of some kind.


Edited by Geoffrey_Ironfist, 30 July 2019 - 12:05 PM.


vasilinhorulezz #106 Posted 30 July 2019 - 03:02 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28180 battles
  • 2,024
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014
What I want to ask WG is how disabling team damage will help me against people that push me out of cover? At least for team damage there is a counter measure, that can lead to a ban, but if I get pushed out of cover by a teammate in front of enemy guns and die, is there an automated system to track and ban those people, and if I send a ticket with a replay is there someone who will do something about it? Because I have been very rarely killed by teammates, and most of the cases it was on accident, but I encounter people that push you/block your retreat very often. At least with team damage I can retaliate against them.

Baldrickk #107 Posted 30 July 2019 - 04:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32165 battles
  • 16,804
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostGeoffrey_Ironfist, on 30 July 2019 - 11:57 AM, said:

 

In my games it has happened enough times to care about it, because it disrupted some of those games and besides it is pointless. It is not realistic because almost nothing else about this game is realistic, it is like saying the name Mickey Mouse is realistic in Walt Disney cartoons and should not be changed to just Mickey because it is supposed to be a mouse, something ridiculous like that. Practically none of the situations in which friendly fire occurs in game are realistic and then the whole thing is not realistic anyway, except for the graphics. Why cause upset in even 1% of the games or whatever, for no reason?

 

EDIT: Like the guy above said, if someone calls for realism everyone pipes in this is just for fun, it is just a game, it is not a simulation. But when someone says remove friendly fire because it is just a way to abuse the game mechanics by malicious players and causes upset even if it happens by mistake, oh no, it has to stay, it is realistic (when it is anything but realistic the way it happens) and all that when the community of players in their majority seem to argue for games being fun and not a simulation. What is fun about this stupid mechanic? It should not have been there in the first place in a game where green tanks shoot around corners red tanks perhaps even of the same nationality, like cowboys shooting cowboys  in a pretend context of some kind.

I use the fact that enemies are less likely to shoot when I'm using their allies as cover in far more than 1% of my battles. 


Edited by Baldrickk, 30 July 2019 - 05:02 PM.


Kozzy #108 Posted 30 July 2019 - 04:15 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostBaldrickk, on 30 July 2019 - 03:04 PM, said:

I use the fact that enemies are less likely to shoot when I'm using their allies add cover in fast more than 1% of my battles. 

 



BrinklyWollox #109 Posted 30 July 2019 - 04:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 27533 battles
  • 11,116
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

I remember my first battles in BF3, the first in the series to do away with friendly fire. It changed the game from a tactical shooter (not claiming it was a sim or a realistic game, only a more tactical one) into a run-n-gun CoD clone. Instead of planning your attack and working with a squad, it became a question of who had the quickest reflexes.

 

I don't think WoT will lose as much of the 'feel' by removing friendly fire but I can't see how it's not going to lose some depth. Want to fire into a brawl? Go ahead, you don't have to aim fully while coming under fire from the enemy support now, just peek and snapshot because who cares if you ping an ally? Friendly got to your preferred sniping bush first? Who cares?! Ram him and drive him out of it, there are no consequences.

 

I'm against removing FF in favour of stronger sanctions but I guess that would create work for Support replying to all the "oMg sO uNfArE" tickets. I appreciate why it's being done but I think it's a disappointing move nonetheless.

 

That said, I've just watched a streamer get shot by a friendly for half his hp because he drove across the friendly as they left spawn. Innocuous event, didn't even turn the friendly off course but he fired anyway. The result was the streamer spending the next several minutes harassing the friendly, blocking him and eventually pushing him out in front of the enemy to get wrecked.

 

Without FF that incident wouldn't have happened but if the friendly had been a bit more grown up in the first place, it wouldn't have happened either.



SuperOlsson #110 Posted 30 July 2019 - 04:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23926 battles
  • 1,210
  • [E-5OM] E-5OM
  • Member since:
    08-07-2012

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 30 July 2019 - 03:02 PM, said:

What I want to ask WG is how disabling team damage will help me against people that push me out of cover? At least for team damage there is a counter measure, that can lead to a ban, but if I get pushed out of cover by a teammate in front of enemy guns and die, is there an automated system to track and ban those people, and if I send a ticket with a replay is there someone who will do something about it? Because I have been very rarely killed by teammates, and most of the cases it was on accident, but I encounter people that push you/block your retreat very often. At least with team damage I can retaliate against them.

Already today you can send those replays to support for physics abuse, and get the guy banned. 

 

Though I'm still not buying it (as some seem to think) that all of a sudden you will get pushed out of cover every third game from 1.6 onwards.



Baldrickk #111 Posted 30 July 2019 - 05:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32165 battles
  • 16,804
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostKozzy, on 30 July 2019 - 04:15 PM, said:

 

Autocorrect + bad headaches



Kozzy #112 Posted 31 July 2019 - 08:41 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostBaldrickk, on 30 July 2019 - 04:02 PM, said:

Autocorrect + bad headaches

 

I know the feeling.  But make sure you stay hydrated, lower your processed sugar and caffeine intake.

 

View PostSuperOlsson, on 30 July 2019 - 03:43 PM, said:

Already today you can send those replays to support for physics abuse, and get the guy banned. 

 

Though I'm still not buying it (as some seem to think) that all of a sudden you will get pushed out of cover every third game from 1.6 onwards.

 

Remember when players putting their gun barrels inside their arty team mates' gun barrels was all the rage?  Well people got reported, replays sent to support etc and that craze all but died out.  There will always be trolls doing troll things, I imagine their will be a spike in blocking/ramming but this will die out after the novelty wears out / first bunch of sanction handed out.



tajj7 #113 Posted 31 July 2019 - 09:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28260 battles
  • 16,462
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View Postspamhamstar, on 27 July 2019 - 11:48 AM, said:

 

Even you have mentioned other unrealistic elements in the game in an attempt to justify adding even more.  That is a very weak argument.

 

How can you possibly claim that FF "has no logical reason to be in the game"?   That's pure lunacy.  The logical reason for it to be in the game is because it is something that really happens in war.  For example, according to google, 77% of American combat vehicles losses were attributed to friendly fire during the 1991 Gulf War.  So how on earth can it be logical to remove it from the game?

 

As I said, the gameplay issues could easily have been resolved by looking at the current team damage system again.  Even accidental team damage could be reduced by increasing the penalties for FF as players would be forced to take a lot more care over their shots.  Instead WG have decided to buff arty by allowing them to shoot allies in physical contact with enemies without damaging the ally.  Not only unrealistic & illogical, but also game breaking.

 

It being 'realistic' in a game that is unrealistic in almost every way, is in fact not logical at all.

 

Considering the game is very arcadey and has little link with realism, and does not and has not ever tried to be or advertised itself as simulation or realistic game, then its very illogical that friendly fire is in the game at all. 

 

It's a realistic element in a game that is not realistic at all and is not designed to be realistic.

 

This is not war, it is not even vaguely like war, this is a computer game that has little basis in reality, thus logically FF being off fits neatly with the rest of the game.

 

As for the rest, increased punishments cannot fundamentally fix the fact that people's games get ruined by FF and people being either extremely careless or through them abusing it. 

 

No punishment system cannot achieve what turning friendly fire off can, thus its the clear best solution to those problems. 

 

Thus what do we have, we have the best solution to the problems caused by friendly fire and not only that, it fits logically with the unrealistic nature of the rest of the game. 

 



8126Jakobsson #114 Posted 31 July 2019 - 10:36 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 79628 battles
  • 5,387
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
It's one more tick on the dumbing down column and I don't like it. And I must add that I am very surprised to see tajj on team gutter bumper. Frowny face. 

Kozzy #115 Posted 31 July 2019 - 10:39 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 31 July 2019 - 09:36 AM, said:

It's one more tick on the dumbing down column and I don't like it. And I must add that I am very surprised to see tajj on team gutter bumper. Frowny face. 

 

It's a shame you don't feel like reading or understanding what he wrote. Par for the course for this forum, I guess.



8126Jakobsson #116 Posted 31 July 2019 - 01:04 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 79628 battles
  • 5,387
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostKozzy, on 31 July 2019 - 10:39 AM, said:

 

It's a shame you don't feel like reading or understanding what he wrote. Par for the course for this forum, I guess.


Yeah I would probably love the removal of FF if only I could read and understand the English language. Sucks to be me, I guess. 



Kozzy #117 Posted 31 July 2019 - 01:20 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 42114 battles
  • 3,182
  • [RINSE] RINSE
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 31 July 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:


Yeah I would probably love the removal of FF if only I could read and understand the English language. Sucks to be me, I guess. 

 

It seems like there's actually some unintended irony in there.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users