Author Topic: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free  (Read 16092 times)

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #135 on: 10-11-2012, 16:11:52 »
Friendly fire is also the only thing that prevents StuHs, Sherman 105s and propably ISUs in the future from spamming HE senselessly into fighting areas.  ;D
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #136 on: 10-11-2012, 16:11:49 »
Friendly fire is also the only thing that prevents StuHs, Sherman 105s and propably ISUs in the future from spamming HE senselessly into fighting areas.  ;D
^This
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Natty

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 3.170
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #137 on: 10-11-2012, 16:11:31 »
random specifics
My point was that the encounter between you and the enemy doesnt change. You need to aim just as much to hit enemies with FF on as with FF off. Specific occasions don't justify reducing game play flow for the majority of the round. For every specific occasion you state, I can make 10 for why it would be more fun with it off  8)

Friendly fire is also the only thing that prevents StuHs, Sherman 105s and propably ISUs in the future from spamming HE senselessly into fighting areas.  ;D

No it doesn't. They can spam just as well with FF on, the only difference is that their teammates die and get pissed off.

Naah, no point in discussing. It's better with it off. Anyone can see that

Offline FatJoe

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 686
  • An old timer
    • View Profile
    • My internet
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #138 on: 10-11-2012, 17:11:28 »
Naah, no point in discussing. It's better with it off. Anyone can see that

No point in discussing. it's better with on, anyone can see that.

Offline Hjaldrgud

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1.071
  • BF2 Enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #139 on: 10-11-2012, 17:11:50 »
Friendly fire is also the only thing that prevents StuHs, Sherman 105s and propably ISUs in the future from spamming HE senselessly into fighting areas.  ;D

No it doesn't. They can spam just as well with FF on, the only difference is that their teammates die and get pissed off.

Naah, no point in discussing. It's better with it off. Anyone can see that
No one spams it now, when FF is on.

Also, FF is better on. More realistic. Anyone can see that. On FH2 that is.

"Generous and brave men live the best" -Hávamál

Offline Natty

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 3.170
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #140 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:07 »
No point in discussing. it's better with on, anyone can see that.

Nope.avi

Ever wondered why most games move away from it?  ;)
I think it's more realistic to fight the enemies, not my own teammates

Offline luftwaffe.be

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.360
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #141 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:25 »
For FH, FF has never been a problem because the audience is generally more mature and servers are well monitored. FF prevents nade spam and shooting on sight, an annoyance most shooters have.  For vanilla FF is an issue. Poor monitoring + online trolls ruin the experience of all.

ofcourse FF off also has it's issue's : troll gets into tank and camps airfield, shooting down spawning aircraft and nothing you can do. but that's a bargain I'm willing to take

Offline Tankbuster

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 921
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #142 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:09 »
It is very realistic when a friendly fighter drops a bomb on you and all enemies around  you die while you run around.

Offline LuckyOne

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.722
  • Purple Heart Collector
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #143 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:29 »
The issue here seems to be fun vs immersion. While turning off FF can potentially decrease the amount of frustration for everyone, it can also hurt immersion when you don't have to care where you point your pointy stick... For games that are set in a fictive world this is ok, but for games that try to emulate real world events and situations it can be a detterent for the potential audience.
This sentence is intentionally left unfinished...

Offline Kradovech

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 447
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #144 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:02 »
Or when someone fires his nadelauncer at his feet, killing enemies near him. But fuck realism, noone needs that, at least its fun. Oh, wait....

Offline FatJoe

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 686
  • An old timer
    • View Profile
    • My internet
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #145 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:18 »

Nope.avi

Ever wondered why most games move away from it?  ;)
I think it's more realistic to fight the enemies, not my own teammates

Yep.mpeg

What most games are moving away from it? ;)
I think it's unrealistic to not have to consider if you're teammates are in your way, when you're fighting the enemy.

Offline Natty

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 3.170
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #146 on: 10-11-2012, 18:11:54 »
FF prevents nade spam and shooting on sight
We limit nades on maps we don't want many deaths from nades to happen

It is very realistic when a friendly fighter drops a bomb on you and all enemies around  you die while you run around.
No it's not, but then again I can make a top#100 list of other things which aren't realistic either :) difference is, my things happen all the time all over the server, constantly, while bombs being dropped on friendly is a rare occasion, which don't affect the overall flow of combat much (less than 1% of total game play)
Then again - as in all cases of design - it's not a black-and-white decision. It could totally be that smallarms, roadkills etc don't hurt teammates, while bombs and heavy explosion does.
When developers recognise these gradients and tune the games is when best experiences happen. blindly setting things "on" or "off" based on arbitrary laws is where stale and uninteresting experiences happen.  8)

The issue here seems to be fun vs immersion. While turning off FF can potentially decrease the amount of frustration for everyone, it can also hurt immersion when you don't have to care where you point your pointy stick... For games that are set in a fictive world this is ok, but for games that try to emulate real world events and situations it can be a detterent for the potential audience.

But you do need to care, because you need to point it at enemy and kill him. And when you don't need to worry about the teammates, the interaction between you vs enemy has a good chance of becoming deeper and more exciting.

Or when someone fires his nadelauncer at his feet, killing enemies near him. But fuck realism, noone needs that, at least its fun. Oh, wait....
Again, explosives can hurt you a bit, but not teammates... there's the gradient again. Try BFP4F, pretty much nailed it. You get hurt from your own grenades/explosives, but don't kill teammates.. trust me, I fail alot of time with C4 and nades, often killing or hurting myself with them.

For FH2 and how the maps are designed etc, a decent design for explosives could be;
Enemies = 100% damage
You = 50% damage
Teammates = 25% damage

That would mean by tossing a nade in to an area where both teammates and enemies are, you'd hurt your teammates a bit, not killing them. Then again, already wounded teammates would die, and you yourself would die if you are within say 2meters of the nade and you already had some reduced hitpoints.

It wouldn't be completely unimmersive at all. I mean how often do players from opposing team occupy the same space without killing eachother anyway? A grenade flying in and killing the axis and slightly wounding the allies wouldn't make it less fun to play for the allies. They don't have that awareness, wouldn't be able to say exactly where the nade landed and the "realistic" damages they should take. No one would question what just happened, but game play would triumph.

Open your eyes for these things and take actual test cases as example, and you'll see that all these fears of making FH2 "unrealistic" are just delusions. The mod has potential to be so awesome, but good game play is handcuffed by a bunch of wild speculations and fears. This is sad, and is one of the reasons I will stop developing for the mod. It's like seeing the most brilliant kid in school piss away his talents because he wants to be in some cool group of kids or something. Talent, experiences, game play, all is sacrificed because of some very loose and unwritten and highly subjective ideals that pretty much no one believes in anymore, and which differ from person to person.
That, is heart-aching to see. A real shame and waste of enormous potential.


Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #147 on: 10-11-2012, 19:11:32 »
Nothing against you in person, but someone already fucked up the tank system. Don´t fix what isn´t broken ffs! >:( I didn´t see anyone complaining about the concept of ff in FH2 before.

FH2 serves a certain niche of players that value something special and authentic, not action hungry 14 year olds. We will never ever reach the numbers of BF3 or Call of Duty. The initial concept was to create a (not hardcore) realistic version of the vanilla Battlefield 1942. Stepping away from that is no delusion that´s just something that doesn´t fit into the cocept of FH2.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline LuckyOne

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.722
  • Purple Heart Collector
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #148 on: 10-11-2012, 19:11:51 »

But you do need to care, because you need to point it at enemy and kill him. And when you don't need to worry about the teammates, the interaction between you vs enemy has a good chance of becoming deeper and more exciting.

Please, explain me, oh great god of game design, how does the interaction between you and the enemy suddenly become "deeper and more exciting" if you remove friendly fire? You basically changed nothing, your gun still deals the same damage, your enemy still has the same health, you still have the same options as before, the only thing that changes is that you can now mindlessly hurl whatever explosive you have at hand at any moment, instead of using it as a situational weapon, when the space ahead of you is empty of teammates. You basically remove one thing that the player needs to be aware of and add... nothing?

Or when someone fires his nadelauncer at his feet, killing enemies near him. But fuck realism, noone needs that, at least its fun. Oh, wait....

Again, explosives can hurt you a bit, but not teammates... there's the gradient again. Try BFP4F, pretty much nailed it. You get hurt from your own grenades/explosives, but don't kill teammates.. trust me, I fail alot of time with C4 and nades, often killing or hurting myself with them.

For FH2 and how the maps are designed etc, a decent design for explosives could be;
Enemies = 100% damage
You = 50% damage
Teammates = 25% damage

That would mean by tossing a nade in to an area where both teammates and enemies are, you'd hurt your teammates a bit, not killing them. Then again, already wounded teammates would die, and you yourself would die if you are within say 2meters of the nade and you already had some reduced hitpoints.

It wouldn't be completely unimmersive at all. I mean how often do players from opposing team occupy the same space without killing eachother anyway? A grenade flying in and killing the axis and slightly wounding the allies wouldn't make it less fun to play for the allies. They don't have that awareness, wouldn't be able to say exactly where the nade landed and the "realistic" damages they should take. No one would question what just happened, but game play would triumph.

Open your eyes for these things and take actual test cases as example, and you'll see that all these fears of making FH2 "unrealistic" are just delusions. The mod has potential to be so awesome, but good game play is handcuffed by a bunch of wild speculations and fears. This is sad, and is one of the reasons I will stop developing for the mod. It's like seeing the most brilliant kid in school piss away his talents because he wants to be in some cool group of kids or something. Talent, experiences, game play, all is sacrificed because of some very loose and unwritten and highly subjective ideals that pretty much no one believes in anymore, and which differ from person to person.
That, is heart-aching to see. A real shame and waste of enormous potential.

Yes nobody except the very people that still actually play this mod and love every moment of it. Now I won't say that I would be against toning down explosive damage to teammates in order to help out newcomers not get booted off the server because they didn't know that the thermos nuke has a 50m killing radius, but removing FF completely would just be a stupid move. If by "thriumphant gameplay" you mean holding LMB constantly and pointing in the general direction of the enemy, without caring about teammates, communication or organised advance... then no thanks, I would rather forget about this mod and go play something else...
This sentence is intentionally left unfinished...

Offline Natty

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 3.170
    • View Profile
Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« Reply #149 on: 10-11-2012, 20:11:10 »
how does the interaction between you and the enemy suddenly become "deeper and more exciting" if you remove friendly fire? You basically changed nothing, your gun still deals the same damage, your enemy still has the same health, you still have the same options as before, the only thing that changes is that you can now mindlessly hurl whatever explosive you have at hand at any moment, instead of using it as a situational weapon, when the space ahead of you is empty of teammates. You basically remove one thing that the player needs to be aware of and add... nothing?[/b][/color]

Forget the explosives for a while. 80% of FPS game play happens through the crosshair of the gun, and i already said that sure, explosives could deal damage.
If you can focus all your attention on the enemy, you will obviously be able to commit deeper to those fights than having to worry about what your teammates are doing. This comes down to the very fine fabrics of what makes a compelling gunfight, the micro-decisions you take each second as a player, when to commit, when to evade etc. Having teammates die just disrupts the players attention from his actual targets. When you can give a target your full and undivided attention, then yes it is more exciting IMHO. Your interaction with the enemy becomes cleaner, and you will be able to measure your fails and successes easier comparing to the enemy. Often as well, when many players are standing shooting in the same place (out a doorway for example) it's just silly that I shoot my teammate in the back. No one gains anything from this, and it's distubring our enemies fun, since they want the kill.

We can go really deep and measure each frame a player see for the 2-3 seconds he is involved in a gunfight if you want, from seeing the enemy, to taking the decision what to do, to the ironsight transition, to the aiming, fire, reload/reset of recoild to the actual death of the enemy. During this step-by-step schematic, there are many choices and events that benefit from not having the player deviate his attention from his target. It's the difference between talking to someone who makes eye-contact, and one who keeps looking around the place all the time

The interaction is stronger, deeper & more immersive, without FF, this is my final opinion.

oh an btw, we're discussing FPS games in general and BF4 here. Not FH2... I dont think we will ever change FF in FH2, but I just hope FF will be off in BF4, or at least in normal mode, if they add a hardcore mode it could perhaps be enabled gradually there. All depending on how the rest of the game is designed. Obviously in a game like ArmA FF makes more sense, in Battlefield I think it makes some sense, but shouldnt be 100% across all weapons.

Bombs, hellfire missiles etc = 100%
Tankshells etc = 75%
Grenades, C4, Claymores = 50%
Small Arms, machineguns etc = 25%

Very simple to understand, the larger and more dangerous gun, the more teamdamage it should do.
I still feel FH2 would benefit from such system, but I doubt BF2 supports such tweaks. it's either on or off 100% AFAIK
« Last Edit: 10-11-2012, 20:11:06 by Natty »