Crowd Control.

[Borathian]

By conventional Crowd Control I would mean those specials or abilities that would be similar to (but not limited to):
- Rooted (immobile)
- Dizzy (can't do jack)
- Fear (run away)
- Knocked Down (I've fallen and I can't get up)
- Wall of Something (temporary blocking barrier)


For example, I have a Laser Pistol.  For me to make someone "Dizzy" with a Laser Pistol, I would think is impossible.  But if a person became Dizzy (disoriented) from sustaining a head injury from my attack, then that can be possible.  What I am trying to say, is that some of the forms of Crowd Control (or states) are caused from the effect of the injuries, but not from the action made of the attacker.  But that such states cannot be made by actions or professions alone.

I'll admit there can be exception, for example a knock-out punch.  To knock someone out with minimal damage.

OK now I get it.  Actually earlier in this thread I suggested the very thing of which you speak for mech combat, of debilitating ailments being the side effect of an attack instead of the direct effect of an attack or weapon, however in addition to this I thought it might be a good idea if depending on the weapon used there might be a higher chance of such injuries or hindrances, like low velocity rounds having a higher chance to cause concussions, or using a flame thrower to heat a mech to the point of the pilot getting heat sickens, etc. tho in these circumstances I don't think you should take away the pilots ability to fight but rather hinder it, with effects like, a blurred screen with off colours for heat sickness, a shaky blurred screen that fades in and out for concussion, smoke effects for a fire in the cockpit, etc.

[Kellzz]

Effects like slowed momentum upon receiving fire, knock downs, or partial disablement due to leg joints failing would be acceptable.


What i was trying to get at from my Original post was the fact that many PvP oriented MMOs seem to go overboard with the amount and length of Crowd control there is in the game.


How many of you play(ed) WoW in whatever battle ground. wandered into a group of the opposite faction (thinking you were appropriately covered by allies) only to be stun locked by a rouge, or chain feared by a (insert class here), or mind controlled and forced to jump off a cliff to your death.


Or if any of you played Dark Age of Camelot, any one remember the AOE stun? this enabled a group of 8 players to effectively neutralize a group of 30+ and be able to kill them all within the 9 seconds that the stun lasted.

[Borathian]

Very true that kind of thing is extremely annoying.  which is why I find the FoA dev teams outlook on combat very refreshing, that outlook being that no technology is absolute in its superiority on the battlefield and thus has some kind of counter, or at least that's the impression I have been given so far.

[Kellzz]

To play devil's advocate:


Each form of CC has a counter in WoW.

pally bubble, mass dispell, cleanse, de-curse, racials, etc.

[Borathian]

very true however those things aren't things that everyone can use, you need to be a certain class or race or what not.  However in FoA which is without classes if you want a certain kind of defence you merely add a component to your mech, vehicle, aircraft, or even to your clothing.  That's what I was trying to say, not that the other games don't have counters to magic, tho as I look at it now I did word it quite ambiguously. 

[Helphyre]

I think that an appropriate balance can be reached for crowd control options.

http://www.forceofarms.com/msgbbs/index.php?topic=684.0

Has some weaponized ideas that could satisfy what people are looking for. Please let me know if any of you think those ideas need some elaboration.

[Borathian]

I like some of the ideas, but others are not that well thought out IMO, like the biogel missile, H.A.C.K gun, and EMP bang, for various reasons.  different ammo types is a good idea, along with some of the defensive field ones however they seen more suited to a static perimeter defence role rather than for battlefield implementation.

[Beovvulf]

This thread feels like people want a 'fantasy' mech game to me.  I envision mechs roaming around the world in flowing wizard robes, brown leather armor, or those really serious ones in full plate.  Some carry only wands, while others a bow of some sort, and then the ones with swords.

The term 'crowd control' indicates some method to deal 'effectively' with multiple targets.  Is the game going to have nuclear bombs?  That's about the only way I can truly envision dealing effectively with multiple mechs.

You are in a Mech designed to take direct hits from major weaponry.  One hit should not take a mech out, unless there is that catastrophic combination of the location of the hit and the seriously bad die roll.  Try to keep some perspective concerning the genre of the game.

Crowd Control for Vehicles, Mechs and Aircraft are most likely going to be minimal.  As mentioned above, Computer virus (warfare) will be in use, which could affect an area (broadcast range).  But the effect when used for an area, would be limited than if used as a specific target (game balance).  Crowd Control is mostly going to be of Area Denial, for example mines.  Denying an area for the enemy to manuever into, forcing them to move somewhere else.  Immobilizing, will be against individual targets and not against mass targets (example: targeting legs, wheels, tracks).

Crowd Control for Avatars and Creatures...  similar in that area denial will be used, but also area dispersion (example: tear gas).

For every method of attack, there will be counter-meaures (ex: tear gas = gas mask or sealed helmet/suit/armor).  Crowd Control capabilities are unlikely to be effective against military units, just as in the real world. 

Unless players want conventional Crowd Control capabilities as done in the majority of MMO's...

As for mind control... Official Answer: No comment.

These seem to be valid concepts to me.  Most of the other posts belong in a different MMO concept.

As far as mind control is concerned, aside from a fear concept, I have not seen that successful in any game so far.  I know that if you are talking about suddenly taking control of my avatar and making him fire on his own squad I am not going to stay in game long.

Some of these posts talk about having fun BECAUSE of having these types of things available.  It seems to me that you are relying on gimmicks to make up for poor strategy and sloppy execution.  Mechanized warfare doesn't have root but it does have spike traps/mines/etc. but these have to be placed somewhere and can be avoided by someone alert enough.  A broadcast virus is only as good as the effectiveness of the anti-virus software that it is going up against.

Don't substitute game gimmicks for intelligent play.  The devs has stated all along that this is not some click and go game.  It will require people that think and many of the things suggested here take away from thinking as it's easier to use option such and such instead of biting the bullet and wading into the fray.

[Overshot]

I like the idea of electronic warfare .....its something that will always be in war zones that contain electronics , Abrams tanks are full or electronics , that could be hit by an EMP , at the same time im sure there are counters.

like was said for every attack there is a defense, and vice versa . a military will always...ALWAYS , develop some kind of counter. if force fields are invented and counter every known weapon then the other army will develop something that can either extremely drain the energy source providing the force field, or use some form or develop new projectile that could pass through and do direct damage.

Emp's are area effect type things thou , if it was being dispersed from a weapon i assume that it'd be more of a Cone Effect , if it was a area of effect type thing , you'd have to fire it into the air , but unless you had a counter measure it'd also effect you're own mech.

although most likely it'd be the infantry using such weapons against the mech(s) or air/land vehicle(s)--uh side question , are there Naval ships/Mechs/bases??--

in terms of concussion weapons ..considering a mech is big heavily armored...would be almost ineffective..although...i suppose a large flash bang might work , after all the pilot is watching and listening on screens so large flashes of light and echo sounds , could cause him to lose conciseness .

of course every weapon you have uses energy/fuel and since the mech is limited in its power source, even if supplied(supplies runs out eventually) ...so why not have them ? after all as they say "all is fair in love and war".

[Borathian]

This thread feels like people want a 'fantasy' mech game to me.  I envision mechs roaming around the world in flowing wizard robes, brown leather armor, or those really serious ones in full plate.  Some carry only wands, while others a bow of some sort, and then the ones with swords.

if I'm not mistaken, and I'm not, this game happens to be set in the future....the far future, so the skys the limit on weaponry which is one of, if not the single fastest advancing and most diverse forms of technological innovation.

The term 'crowd control' indicates some method to deal 'effectively' with multiple targets.  Is the game going to have nuclear bombs?  That's about the only way I can truly envision dealing effectively with multiple mechs.

please explain how a Nuclear bomb is the only effective form of crowd control, when disablement is far more effective not to mention profitable

You are in a Mech designed to take direct hits from major weaponry.  One hit should not take a mech out, unless there is that catastrophic combination of the location of the hit and the seriously bad die roll.  Try to keep some perspective concerning the genre of the game.

you appear to be new to the concept of the mechs in this game which are more or less basses off of the Mechwarriors/Battletech universe so I will enlighten you.  Mech come in different classes which equate to different sizes, so smaller mechs are NOT designed for direct hits from "major weapons" and considering some of the "major weapons" are horrifyingly powerful not even the largest and most well armoured of mechs are able to deal with them for certain, so on small mechs you ether have speed or your dead no exceptions as direct hits from "major weapons" will destroy them with a single shot.  funny I thought the genre of the game was scifi which is science-FICTION, emphasis on the fiction, so crazy ass weapons are entirely plausible and indeed expected, tho I have to admit weapons like the Bio-gel missile most likely wont work ever, op never mind just had an idea on a good delivery method

These seem to be valid concepts to me.  Most of the other posts belong in a different MMO concept.

again the Genre is SCIFI, so why?

As far as mind control is concerned, aside from a fear concept, I have not seen that successful in any game so far.  I know that if you are talking about suddenly taking control of my avatar and making him fire on his own squad I am not going to stay in game long.

I'm pretty sure mind control will be in the game in some form as one of Genomas things is altering and controling the minds of captured people, tho this may not necessaryly equate to anything on the battlefield.

Some of these posts talk about having fun BECAUSE of having these types of things available.  It seems to me that you are relying on gimmicks to make up for poor strategy and sloppy execution.  Mechanized warfare doesn't have root but it does have spike traps/mines/etc. but these have to be placed somewhere and can be avoided by someone alert enough.  A broadcast virus is only as good as the effectiveness of the anti-virus software that it is going up against.

Don't substitute game gimmicks for intelligent play.  The devs has stated all along that this is not some click and go game.  It will require people that think and many of the things suggested here take away from thinking as it's easier to use option such and such instead of biting the bullet and wading into the fray.

my my how simple minded some people are.  Is not good strategy and execution simply the utilization of ones resources and surroundings?  you cannot make up for sloppy strategy and execution with gimmicks, as gimmicks are non-existent in strategy, as every "gimmick" as you pit it is simply a resource to be utilized within ones strategy, I simply think that your thinking at the moment is to constrained to realize this.  So I'm truly sorry but your attempt at a straw man argument wont work in this case.

please explain to me what "these types of things" refers to? as again unless I'm mistaken all that was said was what "the more options the better" which is very non specific, and doesn't promote or condemn anything, but merely expresses a wish for more options.  yet you turn this into a promotion of specific ideas were there is non.

I should also like for you to explain to me how "wading into the fray" constitutes as intelligent play as last time I checked running in guns blazing and coming out alive only works in the movies?  especially when "option such and such" keeps more people alive, and reduces the costs of repairs, which would just so happen to be the desired outcome and indeed the reason for any good stratagem.

it might just be a misunderstanding but much of your argument doesn't make any sense, as even a game like WoW can very easily be made into a game this is not "click and go", as this kind of game play and indeed any kind of game play has little or nothing to do with WHAT is utilized but rather HOW it is utilized, meaning it does not matter what weapons, spells, etc. are used, but rather how the game allows them to be used, so the non "click and go" aspect of FoA and IMO the inherent qualities for an exceptional mech game do not revolve around what weapons are used as again this is a SCIFI game and odd weapons are to be expected, but rather how the combat system within the game allows you to use them and the general fact that no weapon or ability is without some kind of counter.

perhaps next time instead of needlessly attacking other peoples positions(especially when the attacked point is moot in the first place) a good idea would be to suggest alternatives and an opposing viewpoint with good explanations and ideas that don't revolve around something as base as " I don't like it so your an idiot for thinking that way, and my viewpoint is the only valid and intelligent one" as that kind of thinking brings nothing to the table for bettering the direction of the game, and simply makes you look like an ass.


@overshot, a concussion(or other effect) weapons effectiveness would be relative to the class of weapon causing the effect compared to the defenses of the opponent, so for instance a small concussive weapon wont effect a heavily armored opponent at all but a large concussive weapon would most definitely effect a small opponent etc. so no effects would just be automatic like in many other MMOs but rather would be dependent on many variables.

tho IMO it would be a better idea to simply not have weapons that rely solely on an effect as the basis for the usefulness of that weapon, but rather have such things be side effects of weapons in general, like lasers causing heat, projectiles causing concussions etc. however these things would be after thoughts to the damage these weapons caused, tho some weapons secondary effects would be more prominent than others, like flamethrowers for instance would cause overheating and the melting of critical components tho because the weapon is based off of the fact that it produces heat over a wide area the chances of heat related ailments caused by it would be much higher than that of a laser, tho using such a weapon would also be much riskier as you would need to get much close to your opponent for it to be effective than you would with a laser, and it would have a far more limited ammunition supply, would be much heaver, etc. all related to the fact that you would have to tote around the fuel for it were as a laser gets its ammo/energy from the craft itself.

[Overshot]

well some weapons , are primarily made to(atleast now a days) to do certain functions . for instance Flashbangs are used by both military and civilian law enforcement. to stun an enemy long enough so that you may go in and detain them while there stunned to reduce the likely hood of casualties. while it may not effect a mech , <Unless its a sizeable EMP > you have people going to have to do what the US military is doing now in Iraq  which is clear house after house to make sure there are no enemy soldiers remaining. Flashbangs . are the best non-lethal method of clearing a house . due to the fact they release high frequencies of sound and light that will make them blind/deaf or cause them to pass out in some cases .

I assume in the future, there will be more targeted effects.

there should be weapons that have primary effects that cause a person to become blind/death/pass out immobilize but they shouldn't be perfect weapons because even a flashbang can be avoided , wear ear plugs , wear a pair of specialized glasses that cover you're eyes completely that block out almost all light <or just use you're hands(thou wouldn't work to well)

Mech wise , you'd probably have to use a cable , and a hook- and shoot it into the cockpit and have it release like knock out(maybe even poison or hallucinogens) gas or release a high voltage shock. that could frey the controls and maybe cause the pilot to lose consciousness of course the Shock would damage alot of the systems of the mech so you'd have to repair/replace them. of course to use weapons like that you'd have to have almost perfect aim<or be very lucky)

 of course a mech should be able to have spaces on the outside that can drop mini flashbangs could use it against infantry. as well as smoke releasers , to cloud the sensors of an enemy mech , or hide a path of retreat. after all alot of warfare stratagems will most likely work long into the future. 

not to mention mechs have a limited power supply , and fuel . so the harpoon(kinda reminds me of one)
would shoot and of course be a close quarters weapon once it hit , then you'd release the shock or the gas and release the cable.

should be limited to one shot unless you wanna wait while it retracts which would take a bit more power after all it has to rip free of the metal , which would also cause you to remain stationary so not to cause it to tangle up around the enemy mech. if you're in a wageing battle taking time to wait for it to retract. is just costly and extremely hazardous to you're health. 

and the counter to the harpoon would be pretty much just to keep moving and stay out of range.

weapons with secondary effects means you have to intentionally miss if you aren't trying to kill someone .. what if i wanna capture the enemy mech? for some reason. I'd wanna do as little damage as possiable. or what if im being attacked but don't wanna kill the people i dunno , maybe im like the Vash Stampede of Mech warfare - You should never kill anyone . everyone deserves  to remain alive and given chances to change
 

[Beovvulf]

I usually try to take issue with ideas and avoid any character or personal attacks.  I do not participate in the forums of other games as they run rampant with those types of posts and do nothing to advance ideas or the game.  However, I have to take a moment here since I have been taken to task in a very personal way.

Borathian, you do not know me.  Even if you have read every post that I have made on these threads you DO NOT know me.  You do not know what I know or don't know.  Your post takes many of my statements and tries to take issue with them.  However, what you left out, whether intentionally or not I don't know, is that my post was in support of Hamilton, a dev, who posted earlier in the thread stating pretty much the same thing, just in a different way.

Even when you attempted to criticize my comments about mind control you concede that it will probably not take place in combat.  Did you not notice the title of this thread, Combat System?

I suggest that what you did not like about my post was its style.  Get used to it.  I use sarcasm and may blow things out of proportion to make a point.  I will not waste any further space here with your obvious attempt to start some kind of flame war.  YOU DO NOT KNOW me so don't make it personal.

Finally, I stand by my post that many of the ideas put forth in this thread belong in another game genre, such as WoW or DDO and not a scientific mechanized warfare game.  Yeah, rah, Hamilton.  Please keep your vision of the game and don't be swayed by out of place ideas.

[Borathian]

@overshot, I know were your coming from, but I was talking about vehicle combat specifically.  person to person combat would have some different rules obviously as there is a limit to the effective protection one can have outside of a vehicle and so things like flash bangs, rubber/beanbag rounds could indeed be effective when when vehicles are taken out of the equation.

@Beovvulf, why would I pretend to know you, all I can glean about you is what I read, so if you wish to be portrayed in a different light than that which you cast upon yourself, perhaps being more tactful in your expressions of thoughts would help. 

you obviously don't understand so I will try and enplane.  The reason for my comments or in most part explanations is directly linked to how you worded yours, for instance, just because the game has a "root spell" esk weapon does not make it fantasy as long as the effect is based on technology(which would be the bio-gel missile), and has nothing to do with weather or not the comment is in support to some one else's post.(again tactfulness is the key)

the comment about your view on mind control was not critisizum but rather the statement of facts as I to believe that mind control on the battlefield is something to be avoided however that does not exempt it from the game entirely which was the essence of the statement, as it sounded like you were adverse to the concept entirely, so don't read to much into it.

style has nothing to do with it but rather tact, if you don't want an argument then don't make one.  Sarcasm  is a bad idea in written text without something to follow it up that would suggest that you were being sarcastic as it can be very easily misinterpreted, as much as I enjoy arguing in this instance it achieves nothing were I wish to achieve something so starting a "flame war" wouldn't be in my best interest.  making things personal again achieves nothing, so perhaps you should listen to your own advice next time before attacking others peoples viewpoints on O you know strategies

who are you to say what ideas are out of place or not?  considering how wondrous and divers technology can be, one need not limit themselves by simply thinking something like a root spell which is produces in a fantasy game with a bunch of flashy BS cannot be reproduced in a mechanized warfare game through the use of technology, those being things like EMP, fast solidifying polymers, or something as simple as the right weapon used in a specific way.

as you in fact oddly enough seem to think very much like myself despite a few obvious exceptions, I would be very interested in hearing what interesting weapons or equipment you can think up or whos ideas you can improve upon or have an alternative for, instead of simply condemning the ideas of others, as after all this game is still very much a game of ideas, and just condemning the ideas of others only takes away from the table without of adding anything to it.

[Beovvulf]

Crowd Control for Vehicles, Mechs and Aircraft are most likely going to be minimal.  As mentioned above, Computer virus (warfare) will be in use, which could affect an area (broadcast range).  But the effect when used for an area, would be limited than if used as a specific target (game balance).  Crowd Control is mostly going to be of Area Denial, for example mines.  Denying an area for the enemy to manuever into, forcing them to move somewhere else.  Immobilizing, will be against individual targets and not against mass targets (example: targeting legs, wheels, tracks).

Crowd Control for Avatars and Creatures...  similar in that area denial will be used, but also area dispersion (example: tear gas).

For every method of attack, there will be counter-meaures (ex: tear gas = gas mask or sealed helmet/suit/armor).  Crowd Control capabilities are unlikely to be effective against military units, just as in the real world.

I agree completely.  As a result of this view there are NO crowd control weapons that I consider applicable and thus have none to offer as I feel they are irrelevant.

Just because people post some futuristic "scientific" validation for a concept does not mean that it matches a games concepts or goals.

Hamilton, all I can say is think about how many games are no longer around due to the devs "listening" to the player base.  For every idea that you bring in that was suggested by a "minority" of that player base you will lose other players.  Also remember that a few people posting 1000 times about the same idea does not make it a total player based desire.  It merely means that the posters are persistent.  If you do chose to bring in player suggestions make sure that they truly fit the overall concept that you are trying to create.  Stay true to your vision for the game and you will draw the majority of players wanting a game like this and regardless of what is posted, if yours is the best out there they will play.

[Borathian]

I agree completely.  As a result of this view there are NO crowd control weapons that I consider applicable and thus have none to offer as I feel they are irrelevant.

what do you consider "crowd control"?  as it seems to me this word means something different to you. so in your mind why is crowd control not applicable?

Just because people post some futuristic "scientific" validation for a concept does not mean that it matches a games concepts or goals.

why do they need to be futuristic?  I can think of many effective crowd control options that are currently used by law enforcement and military personnel around the world as we speak.  Also how do you know what the games concepts and goals are, and what do you think they are?

Hamilton, all I can say is think about how many games are no longer around due to the devs "listening" to the player base.  For every idea that you bring in that was suggested by a "minority" of that player base you will lose other players.  Also remember that a few people posting 1000 times about the same idea does not make it a total player based desire.  It merely means that the posters are persistent.  If you do chose to bring in player suggestions make sure that they truly fit the overall concept that you are trying to create.  Stay true to your vision for the game and you will draw the majority of players wanting a game like this and regardless of what is posted, if yours is the best out there they will play.

I seriously would like to know where you get off being so judgmental of others ideas as after all there only ideas, you know a thought, as in not concrete, insubstantial, not set in stone, a simple idea, and your dislike or disapproval of such a thing does not require the kind of hostility, judgmentalism, and general tactlessness you seem to think is required to express your opinion on subjects you feel strongly about, so seriously take a chill pill, calm down, and be more respectful of others.  I think we all want this game to be the best it can be, and as such the devs themselves have asked for our ideas and will weigh then equally against others if they happen to conflict with each other, and just because your opinions are different than others does not make other peoples opinions wrong, or even contrary to your own; if you would just ask questions and try to actually understand the reasons for others opinions instead of automatically being so critical of them without a second thought, and then if you still disagree with them give them an explanation to help them understand why you disagree with them instead of just doing the " your wrong because I say so" routine you are apparently so fond of which does not provide anything worthwhile.

So simply.

what does crowd control mean to you?  and why don't you think it fits in a sci-fi mech MMO?

also what do you consider the concepts and goals of this game that you so fondly refer to time and again?