That's why you need to be capable of killing them: so that you actually have to think about that. It's a hazard that you have to try to avoid, on both ends: you try to avoid blocking friendly shots, and you try to avoid firing at friendlies. It's part of the game's skillset. A death is a death, and one of your jobs as a player is to maximize the number of deaths on the enemy team while minimizing the number of deaths on yours, regardless of where those deaths came from. When your actions contribute to this goal you gain EXP/points, when they harm this goal you either take damage, die, or get hit with FF punishments. It seems like the real issue is you don't want to learn to play, and you'd prefer the game do that for you. Would you like "aim assist" too? Maybe omni-radar so the enemy can never sneak up on you?
Then do the same here: learn what to do and adapt to the environment. It doesn't only apply to simulators, you know. At some point you've got to start playing the game rather than expecting the game to play itself.
If you can't die from friendly fire then all the methods of exploiting a lack of ff still work, grenade spam in a room, blocking doors with tanks/unkillable objects, and blocking friendly shots just to name a few.
[quote="Rasczak, post: 284081, member: 3544" ... rather than expecting the game to play itself.[/quote] When did i say anything as stupid like that? that is simplyfying all the discussion to the kindergarten level again.
We've already established that friendly fire is essential to balancing a game this size, that it adds depth to the game, and that working around friendly fire is a fundamental part of of the skillset for a game of this type. But you stubbornly refuse to accept it because you have some kind of personal vendetta. At that point the only real advice I can give you is "deal with it."
Most people that play good shooters are. That is why FF is in at launch and I doubt very seriously it will be taken out. No matter how much the few cry.
What the heck are you talking about? Can you give me any examples of my quotes where I say something about 'vendetta'? Where did you get this from man? And who is 'we'? take a look at the poll, there is a substantial group of people who don't want FF -that's a fact -deal with it. yeah, this too, but you only flatten the problem as usually Raszczak. Galen said:
EC is not a shooter Einstein. And it's not said anywhere ff is at launch, there is still a long way to the launch + nobody's crying, this discussion is about finding a solution suitable for all players not just one group.
The solution for players who don't like FF is to put on their big boy pants and deal with it. I mean really, it's like saying "well there's a substantial number of people who want to be OP/like Pay2Win, we should put a couple OP weapons in the cash shop for them as a compromise." Or for your earlier idea of making it "optional": "Some people like OP stuff, instead of nerfing things that are OP we should release the balanced version separately so people can decide if they want to be OP or not." No. We make a balanced, functional game and if you can't handle the fundamental mechanics that make the game work then you're not just in the wrong game, you're in the wrong genre. Finally, a third-person shooter is still a shooter.
