Development Cycle Archive

Thread: Roundtable Discussion: GCW and TEFs

GotBlueMilk
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:50 pm
#261

I've got no problem with the TEF personally. I'm PvE all the way, but there has to be some consequence to taking out Factoined NPCs. The consequences of removing the TEF entirely would damage the GCW. The exploits would be endless. If I can attack NPCs without repercussions, why wouldn't every group just consist of Covert players who go kill off a defenders NPCs before the Overts go in to take out the PCs?


I was gonna go on, but none of this is new. There's a reason there was a strong push for it pre-launch and there's a reason to keep it now. Maybe a solution would be an instanced dungeon or two where PvEs could go whack some Factoined NPCs without worrying about getting ganked?



GotBlueMilk (-777, -4041)
"I calculated the odds of this succeeding versus the odds I was doing something incredibly stupid... and I went ahead anyway." -- Crow T. Robot

On 9/11/05, Holocron posted: "In plain language, we believe that letting you know of possible changes so that you can affect them, letting you know exactly what is going to change and why, giving you details so you can try out changes in testing and make sure they go smoothly, and making sure that all changes are well-documented is critical to good service."
WesBelden
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:50 pm
#262






Thunderheart wrote:
What about the idea of tying rank to TEF's so that playing in PvE GCW content doesnt gain you a flag unless you've earned a fair amount of Faction Rank?







I think no TEF is somewhat silly. If you see someone shooting at your fellow troops (albeit NPCs) you're going to want to help them out, or at least be allowed to do so. Removing the TEF in that way would restrict players.


However, you could set it so that the higher your rank, the longer the TEF lasts, with Colonel lasting the full 5 minutes it does at the moment. This would mean that those 'unknown' to the opposing side would only be vulnerable from PCs while they are actually in combat, while those high ranking and on the 'known' list would be fair game for a period of time afterwards.



=======================================================================
WesBelden the last Smuggler Correspondent.
Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?
actnjcksn
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:50 pm
#263








Thunderheart wrote:


What about the idea of tying rank to TEF's so that playing in PvE GCW content doesnt gain you a flag unless you've earned a fair amount of Faction Rank?





I think that's a great idea, but what would be considered a fair amount of Faction Rank?




[Jospre Darkstorm] [Ambo Darkstorm]
Master Smuggler * Master Shipwright
Smuggler Supplies and Shipwright Vendors
800m North of Bestine Starport (-1531)(-2804)

Wandering the galaxy we call Kettemoor
Thunderheart
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:52 pm
#264






fatgit wrote:

I agree that covert players SHOULD get a TEF for factional PvE.

However, simply trading with an overt will get you a TEF, this seems to be a bit over the top.




It heavily depends on what you are trading. Certain things that are traded can have a serious impact on the game. To flag each item and do an item check every time a player traded something to another player would give the system an aneurysm. Instead, the prevention measures for the potential combat grief falls on factional status. The side effect certainly is the pain of the "trade TEF" and I am pushing for that to be included in the GCW revamp.







Kurt "Thunderheart" Stangl
Community Relations Manager
RabidEwok2
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:52 pm
#265





What about the idea of tying rank to TEF's so that playing in PvE GCW content doesnt gain you a flag unless you've earned a fair amount of Faction Rank?








I'm personally happy with the current implementation of TEF (in this regard at least). If someone is attacking a factional target I want to be able to defend that factional target regardless if it's an NPC or a player. Current mechanics allows that.





ZEER
Sith Lord | Hatched May 2004

silversaber
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:53 pm
#266






Thunderheart wrote:

This has been a really great thread and new discussions are still popping up.





Paulie35 wrote:
Remove TEF. If a player does not want to PvP they should not have to.




If we did that, it would dramatically change things. As it stands, people don't everhave to play PvP. They can remain Neutral and never have to be involved. Declaring Covert means a player primarily wants to play GCW PvE. There are certain actions that will push them to Overt status or put them at risk, but in each case, its a choice the player makes to get involved.


Should that risk not be part of the conflict? It was something that players strongly requested pre-launch.








If I remember correctly TH, it was the Hardcore PvPrs that insisted that this be the case.


They had to have thier "Immersion" preserved. Heh. Like immersion was on the top of the order when you Devs decided to break with the Movies and make Jedi a widely playable class.


Those that wanted to to enjoy the game without PvP (includeing the GCW) argued till our faces were blue, but eventually were ignored.


The Devs promised us PvE battlefields which were so buggy that they were removed (against the protests of the PvE players) .


Then you gave us the abortion called the Crackdown that switched us involuntarliy Overt.


The PvE players have taken it in the shorts CONSTANTLY since launch.


Bryan1138
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:53 pm
#267






Thunderheart wrote:





uofwi92 wrote:





Thunderheart wrote:

This has been a really great thread and new discussions are still popping up.





Paulie35 wrote:
Remove TEF. If a player does not want to PvP they should not have to.




If we did that, it would dramatically change things. As it stands, people don't ever have to play PvP. They can remain Neutral and never have to be involved. Declaring Covert means a player primarily wants to play GCW PvE. There are certain actions that will push them to Overt status or put them at risk, but in each case, its a choice the player makes to get involved.


Should that risk not be part of the conflict? It was something that players strongly requested pre-launch.






I agree with this poster. I hated nothing more than when I was a noob killing stuff in the Imperial Research Facility on Naboo, just trying to level up and get some decent loot when a master Imperial would show up and wax us because we were TEF'ed. I never made the choice to fight this person, but I had to because I was killing Imp NPCs.

This does, however, create a divide between overt and the rest of the game. If you're not overt, you shouldn't be able to heal someone who is (ala gtef). I think you should be able to trade, though... /shrug



What about the idea of tying rank to TEF's so that playing in PvE GCW content doesnt gain you a flag unless you've earned a fair amount of Faction Rank?







Actually, what we really need is a two-tiered TEF. At character creation (or implementation) you should be allowed to declare "no PVP". You can declare covert and be TEFed by factioned NPCs, but not other players and you can't declare overt. Those who wish to be involved inPVP can declare "PVP" on creation (or implementation). If you really wanted to, you could allow PVP, no PVP to be declared with the co-ordinater just like overt/covert (possibly by going overt)but to prevent abuse you would need a long timer on it (at least one day real time if not one week).







Bryan1138
aka Bryan'sa Fickset on Bria

WS resource fire sale at: 890, -4700 on Correlia 500 m east of Coronet, Bria server!
aka Bryanosk on Radiant

SBRD0C
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:53 pm
#268






Thunderheart wrote:

What about the idea of tying rank to TEF's so that playing in PvE GCW content doesnt gain you a flag unless you've earned a fair amount of Faction Rank?






If you do that... make it so people cant go Overt until they reach that rank.. that way you aren't allowed to dish it out PvP unless you 1st agree to take it.




Colonel Emitt 'Doc' Brown (Starsider)
Master Smuggler | Master Pistoleer | Commando
Interplanetary Shipping Co. Located Crystal Hollow Dantooine (-6833, 4750)
Vendors Deal in Weapon, Droid, and 'Special Shipments'


/Target SOE; /CLAP

ArchFirehaven
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:54 pm
#269


I think TEF's for killing opposing Faction NPC's has to stay. Now I have never once killed a TEF'd player during one of their missions (I have better things to do than grief folks) but at the same time if I am an Imperial and I am in Kor Vella and some guy is offing ST's left and right...well I am sorry as an Overt Imperial I should be able to do something about that.


At some point we need to draw the line and say there has to be risk....has to....for certain actions in the game. This is one of them. Going and killinga kreetle gives you xp....going and killing a Stormtrooper gives XP and faction...and that faction can be used to purchase ingame items (which at some point may be worthwhile). That is the reward for the greater risk. Don't eliminate the risk because the rewards happen to currently suck...make better rewards.


Stop making the game easier....concentrate on making it more fun. There is a difference.


And where is my community leader status!

Message Edited by ArchFirehaven on 07-12-2004 02:55 PM




8Firehaven7
Chilastra Born . Day One


piezo
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:54 pm
#270

I think normal TEF is just fine the way it is. If someone wants to attack soldiers of the opposing side, they should be attackable by the opposing side, including players. This especially important to rebels. If imperials could all easily farm up at-sts without risk, that could be a problem. 1-2 of them in a fight isn't bad, but if they are easily reachable with no risk for any imp, you would have a problem.



Group TEF however, should maybe be looked into. The current implementation has too much room for cheap tactics.



Piezoh
DrPiezo



I SAID WE'LL CUT OFF YOUR CHONSON!
NoxDenosis
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:56 pm
#271

tefs are T E H worst idea ever they are ub3r l33t lam3



-----------------------------------
Zox Denosis

Home filled with tons of rare items and loot (on display) located at
-411 -4444 on Tatooine near Bestine/Ancorhead
hothype
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:56 pm
#272

Group TEF's should be removed. If the group wants to get involved in GCW all should be overt, also give SL the ability to declare overt.


TEF from healing should remain in.


When you declare a house as PRIVATE no one with a TEF can enter. When the house is PUBLIC anyone with a tef can enter. If there is someone on the ban list on a public house tef people cant enter.


You gain a TEF from being hit by person from the opposite faction, thus removing the abuses of /peace macro's



Synir'
Fear Baby Wookiee
VegitoSS
Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:57 pm
#273

The tef system is good and bad. Good it allows people to get healed and assisted in combat. The bad is the tef can be abused easy.


Here are some things I would like to see changed in PVP.



  1. Overts vs Overts Only. Everyone is tired of the tef wars. Then it becomes attack of the clones. Not very fun.

  2. No group tef that starts the tef wars in the GCW. So if you were in a group pvping and got poisoned and had no doc. A doc cannot come and heal you until your 5 min flag wears out. It could tell him it would be unwise to heal such a patient.

  3. PVE tef should make you attackable by overts and faction npc. If you kill rebel or imp pve you should get a tef to be attacked by opposite faction npc and overt pc's.

  4. BH's cannot use group tef to kill their mark. Only BH's with the same mission may group to attack a mark. This would force the BH's to work together to get their mark. With the lower requirements for BH you can make a variety of templates now. Jedi gank squads should not happen.

  5. Jedi who are grouped when a BH attacks should be allowed to have group assist in defense. This goes against my group tef suggestion but consider this. There are many Bh's on the servers. If they planned their attacks out there could be a very large group of Bh's grouped hunting a lone jedi down. I would find it unreasonable to make a lone jedi fight a group of people alone. Therefore, the group tef should work in a jedi defense vs. BH(s). Because this is not GCW involved its ok in my book. Its more or less a personal attack on a single player and members of his/her group should be able to defend.

  6. Overt Jedi vs Overt Jedi & opposite faction overt only. To go along with my original thought of removing GCW group tef no covert should be able to assist any overt while they are flagged. This would cure the problem of negative xp for covert tef kills when they attack perma overt jedi. If a member is covert they should not be involved in the GCW in any way.

I hope this gets read by someone and not blown off. I think this would really help out the GCW, BH missions, and Perma Overt jedi. I dont know anyone who is happy at how the group tef works now.


Page 21 of 48