Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Roundtable Discussion: GCW and TEFs
leeds
Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:50 am
#183
nikolai wrote:Because of the TEF system, I can make my ATST 100% unkillable by allowing it to follow me into a private house, or I can allow it to follow me into ANY house, because the attacker will get a TEF by attacking it, and thus get kicked out of the house.
Here is the reason for the house kicking. Before they had this rule in it was possible for a hord of imps to swarm the area around anchorhead, attack all the lower level people with heigher level pets and retreat into their houses before the reb fighter types around the town could either intercept them or at least kill them removing them from the area for a while. On nars there was even an imp house labeled rebel safe house where imps would wait for theri buddies to flush them inside where they would be insta killed. Now with you being kicked from a house if you have a tef this no longer can happen. This has cut way down on the number of imp hunting squads roaming around as the rebs can now get to them. I suppose as a compermise have any house with soemone on the entrance list with a tef automaticly makes that house public. But the coding for this will take time. As i have said before I do not wish the tef to go away because i think it removes realism from the game. The tef makes the game more intresting and it would be a shame to remove it because of the few who can't use it corectly....
Envoy3113
Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:53 am
#184
As far as a GTEF goes, I think the idea is solid. You should by all means be able to place an ambush. However, I think a simple change would be that any group member who utilizes a GTEF for their attack becomes OVERT the moment they execute an attack. This way, you have a limited surprize capability. You can still ambush, but you would need to stagger the persons whom you want to take advantage of the GTEF. ie, 20 person group, 2 overts, 18 coverts gets attacked. The 2 overts and 9 of the coverts engage in battle. Now the group is comprised of 11 overts and 9 coverts. The nine coverts can choose at anytime to enter a future conflict, but know that once they do, they are popped overt and can no longer act as a sleeper for purposes of an ambush.
This system would be impossible to greif with. Anyone in that group who is a covert will become overt the moment they attack, this way you have a manner in which you can flush any sleepers out of hiding. You can still be ambushed, this would be visualized as a Rebel who is showing his affiliation coming under attack by imperials. The moment the attack begins you have people in the crowd that pull their weapons and make themselfs as known affiliation, thus they are exposed, not for just 5 minutes, but untill a recruiter is visited and they can reset their status.
The only problem that would be accompanied by this...Medics, docs, and merchants need a way to easily tell whether a same faction member is overt, or tefed. This way traders and doctors can avoid a situation that would cause them to become Overt, just as in the example abouve.
A more difficult solution would be that healing an overt simply causes a TEF, while any attack on a GTEF causes overt status.
RethPilot
Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:51 am
#185
There is a War going on.
Please,to redefine the factional sides and the player status.
"This is a Galactic Civil War, not this inappropiateness, incongruity and ambiguous situation."
The GCW in Star Wars is so much more than just a PVP conflict, Its the setting of the entire Galaxy and it should influence all aspects of the game, including those who are not faction aligned.
-It shouldbe overridethe “Covert” status from the game.
“Remove it! this is hypocritical, false and a coward role-playing.”
“Harsh? Perhaps, but very necessary. The number of issues related to covert status are too numerous to detail, but including issues like group TEF’s, people wearing faction equipment while covert (i.e. die in your ST armour and keep it on), problems with trading, a pathetic faction members standing by while conflict rages, etc...”
”Essentially covert status should mean that you are treated as Neutral. The only way for an Imperial PC to slip into covert mode, would be to train up to the 'Spy' profession. Otherwise, all Imperials are Overt.”
That's the point here though; join a side; accept the consequences… If you want to join the GCW you should be prepared to battle and be prepared to die. If u don’t like the war, stay Neutral. This is the most important and significant role-player component really based on the GCW.
”The GCW at this moment It is a series of random tactical fire fights, but at the end of the day (or month), there is no real consequence to winning or losing these engagements. For that reason, there is never any sense of progress or accomplishment in the GCW.”
For those who do not wish to participate in PvP and they do not have a chance as a factional members here is a simply solution: search for a remote mission terminal and run there NPC’s missions.
(Extract from my old post "Just a dream...")
Squidwalker
Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:53 am
#186
TH where are the 19 Answers this week? I'll give you a little slack for the other weeks with E3 and FF, but what about this week?
I know, I know, Thursday isn't over yet, but you usually have them out by now. Are they coming this week at all? The second list of professions still has not heard it's 3rd answer yet.
jimcabtv
Thu Jun 24, 2004 12:26 pm
#187
Nah, we were an imperial group with a mix if covert and overt...point being a covert in my group went to heal the rebel and got the tef. Those involved in the guild war weren't overt at all, so I guess the healer recieved the TEF against the imperial guild. Guild wars should honestly be removed...you can easily bribe members of a different faction guild to farm fp off of 'em. (unless they took this out? I have no idea, but in theory it should work) Hence, devs...take out guild wars for now, too many bugs and pretty useless now.
Dasyra wrote:
jimcabtv wrote:
Bah, lol...everyone seems to be ranting about the same thing, group tef...but I have a new problem, that just doesn't seem right at all...hopefully it's a bug, but we shall see. So I was on a rebel hunt with imperial buddies from different guilds. We met up with 2 people that were involved in a guild war....the rebel was just getting killed for fun while my bud was doing the killing...no overts at all, just guild war stuff. So one person goes and heals therebel, not knowing the guild war was going on....and at that time both imperials started attacking each other....it was more like **edit**? Are they dueling? No...they weren't...something called a guild war TEF, and what do you know, I was able to target and engage another imperial. So complete insanity ensues, we all pretty muchkill each other...a couple rez's later, a group of overt rebs find us, and pretty much kill us all. So the guild war TEF pretty much ruined the night of good rebel killing fun...so, devs....is this typically "supposed" to happen, or is it a bug?
I'm confused on this.
Are you saying you were grouped with coverts of different alignments? And something caused the group to get agroup tef?The only thing I could see is thatthe faction rules over ride guild war rules. Not sure guild wars even work right as so few use it so it probably really hasn't received much feedback.So if you heal a reb and you are animp you get the reb TEF flag, which would allow imperials to attack you and since you imperial you could attack each other.Guild wars should probably be removed, I see to many confusing elements to them especially combined with the GCW. It seems it would only work wellin context of neutrals fighting each other but doesn't fit well with the GCW focus.
Having rebs fighting rebsand so on just doesn't seem to fit with the theme of the overall game. Not sure it is even worth investing time in that. Might want to see whatother players think but I personally have no use for guild wars. I get more than enough pvp with the GCW.
JanuHull
Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:00 pm
#188
RethPilot wrote:
There is a War going on.
Please,to redefine the factional sides and the player status.
"This is a Galactic Civil War, not this inappropiateness, incongruity and ambiguous situation."
The GCW in Star Wars is so much more than just a PVP conflict, Its the setting of the entire Galaxy and it should influence all aspects of the game, including those who are not faction aligned.
-It shouldbe overridethe “Covert” status from the game.
“Remove it! this is hypocritical, false and a coward role-playing.”
“Harsh? Perhaps, but very necessary. The number of issues related to covert status are too numerous to detail, but including issues like group TEF’s, people wearing faction equipment while covert (i.e. die in your ST armour and keep it on), problems with trading, a pathetic faction members standing by while conflict rages, etc...”
”Essentially covert status should mean that you are treated as Neutral. The only way for an Imperial PC to slip into covert mode, would be to train up to the 'Spy' profession. Otherwise, all Imperials are Overt.”
That's the point here though; join a side; accept the consequences… If you want to join the GCW you should be prepared to battle and be prepared to die. If u don’t like the war, stay Neutral. This is the most important and significant role-player component really based on the GCW.
”The GCW at this moment It is a series of random tactical fire fights, but at the end of the day (or month), there is no real consequence to winning or losing these engagements. For that reason, there is never any sense of progress or accomplishment in the GCW.”
For those who do not wish to participate in PvP and they do not have a chance as a factional members here is a simply solution: search for a remote mission terminal and run there NPC’s missions.
(Extract from my old post "Just a dream...")
This is the kind of elitist leet dewd attitude that's the death of PvP on just about every server.
PvPers are in the minority, I don't give a damn how loud you scream, the game doesn't revolve around you. If anything, PvPers are the cause of more grief than any other type of player in the game. More exploits, more mechanics abuse, more template abuse, more skill stacking abuse than any other breed of player has been the legacy of PvPers. Whether they keep two factions or not, this game would be better served in the long run with your extinction.
I have more respect for Aklay loot campers than the average PvPer.
pax_mayor
Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:34 pm
#189
I think Group TEFs are okay, at least as far as rebels go. It's very rebel like... Much like in the movies it allows the rebels to ambush and use 'gorilla war'style tactics and fight an unconventional war.
KillerZeke
Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:59 pm
#190
There should be no TEF for covert players, when you get into a case that would cause a TEF you should be made OVERT for the same amount of time the TEF now lasts, not for an Hour.
There should be Covert and Overt the TEF just needs to go.
kimirahi
Fri Jun 25, 2004 3:32 am
#191
Group TEF needs to be abolished.
It completly ruins one's fun. Take this for example;
Bobby Tom is an overt imperial raiding coronet he attacks Marey Anne (who is overt) and kills her, suddenly Bobby Is poisoned/diseased by a blue dot? And t
kimirahi
Fri Jun 25, 2004 3:33 am
#192
Group TEF needs to be abolished.
It completly ruins one's fun. Take this for example;
Bobby Tom is an overt imperial raiding coronet he attacks Marey Anne (who is overt) and kills her, suddenly Bobby Is poisoned/diseased by a blue dot? And then head spammed by another blue dot. Tell me how this is fair/fun.
Overts ONLY should be able to participate in PvP.
Message Edited by kimirahi on 06-25-2004 03:36 AM
WarNerve5776
Fri Jun 25, 2004 4:47 am
#193
Group TeF needs to be changed. but don't just remove it. Make it so that if a covert groups with an overt member they also become overt.
Rubicon49BC
Fri Jun 25, 2004 7:31 am
#194
JanuHull wrote:
Rubicon49BC wrote:
No, scenario 1 does not appear now anyway. Only if that rebel chooses to attack you, would you be able to gank him. If the rebel is smart, he will size you up, maybe look for a few friends.
Ah, but there's the rub, in Scenario 1, in order to be attacked the defender MUST be overt, he has therefore stated his intentions to participate in PvP, so he acknowledges the risks involved.
I think we differ in opinion what it means to be overt. In my mind it means: willing to engage in PvP against opponents he has a chance to see and anticipate on. Not being engaged in PvP by an opponent who can at any time engage you in the middle of your own stronghold and you have no option to defend yourself byattacking him until after he has made that choice.
Rorenikibi
Fri Jun 25, 2004 8:36 am
#195
Rubicon49BC wrote:
JanuHull wrote:
Rubicon49BC wrote:
No, scenario 1 does not appear now anyway. Only if that rebel chooses to attack you, would you be able to gank him. If the rebel is smart, he will size you up, maybe look for a few friends.
Ah, but there's the rub, in Scenario 1, in order to be attacked the defender MUST be overt, he has therefore stated his intentions to participate in PvP, so he acknowledges the risks involved.
I think we differ in opinion what it means to be overt. In my mind it means: willing to engage in PvP against opponents he has a chance to see and anticipate on. Not being engaged in PvP by an opponent who can at any time engage you in the middle of your own stronghold and you have no option to defend yourself byattacking him until after he has made that choice.
Perhaps, but I take that scenario as a direct counter to the longstanding issue of raiding forces camping recruiters which makes the very idea of declaring instantly suicidal.
It can be justified as "controlling" a city all you care to, but its still the same kind of griefing in reverse.