CoD4 Tournament - Friendly Fire

[codedigital]

In our upcoming tournament...do you believe friendly fire should be turned on?

Please do not vote in this thread if you aren't staff involved with the tournament or members actually participating.

[v0lum3]

Well as most people know, I think Friendly Fire should be turned on (which means you damage your teammates)

I understand why the decision was made to leave it off in most standard matchmaking playlists to eliminate griefers and team killers, but in our tournament I don't think that people will be choosing to play with teammates who would intentionally team kill them. Ergo, I don't believe there's a justifiable reason to have Friendly Fire turned off, the need to protect you from your teammates shouldn't be an issue if you have chosen them yourself.

[justcallmeChill]

agreed volume, i believe friendly fire should be on for any tournament circumstances

now i only have to get someone to let me on there team:wizard:....if they only knew i raped at this game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[codedigital]

agreed volume, i believe friendly fire should be on for any tournament circumstances

now i only have to get someone to let me on there team....if they only knew i raped at this game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even if you don't get on a team...which I'm sure you will...you can still be a sub. You're in the tourney.

[Stinkyfire]

The only thing i have to do is get one of my friends to let me borrow the game :D

[JJ UK]

friendly fire on = martyrdom backfiring = i vote yes :p

[Brighton X]

friendly fire on = martyrdom backfiring = i vote yes :pLol, that would be awesome. I voted yes.

[Anti Hero]

I for one would hate to have friendly fire on..

Does it count against your score? Because I don't want to be shooting and have someone step in front of me or the other way around.

[Razor]

Yeah thats what i said Anti. If someone runs in front of you while your shooting and you kill your teammate then you will get minus points and everyone will start fighting and shit like that. Other wise i voted to keep it off.

[JJ UK]

its all about team work, this would make you have to be more in touch with your team, and to not run blindly into gun fire, thinking up tactics and strategies, but then there is also the people who will still run into the blazing gunfire and shout about how they got team killed leading to inter-team aguments etc... i dunno :p but i still voted yes

[AJMac]

Only you get deducted points, not the team. I voted yes. One person dying is pretty bad, especially where brute force is everything.

[v0lum3]

Yes, he's correct. The standard rule does not take points away from your team, only your overall score, so if you kill your teammates a lot you won't do very well, but your team will not be penalyzed for it :)

I was wondering if anyone else was going to comment on their votes? I mean I love a good discussion :)

[Veritas347]

I don't think it should be on because I seem to fire at my friends a lot due to the fact i don't see their name and I would probably end up going negative in the games...I also don't think it should be on because I don't like it :D

[DrHerbz]

My reasons for voting against it was because friendly fire in CoD is different to other games like halo, to kill your team mate with friendly fire in halo you have to put like a whole clip into them, if I was firing with my m16, it would need about one burst.

I can see the good points to it like stopping martyrdom and random grenade throwing, but I doubt many will be using martyrdom anyway.


Last time I played team hardcore, on crossfire two of my team mates came up some stairs as I was coming out the door and made me jump and I shot them both by accident xD
Obviously that's retarded, but I'd rather not have to worry about accidentally shooting my team mates.

[v0lum3]

My reasons for voting against it was because friendly fire in CoD is different to other games like halo, to kill your team mate with friendly fire in halo you have to put like a whole clip into them, if I was firing with my m16, it would need about one burst.

I can see the good points to it like stopping martyrdom and random grenade throwing, but I doubt many will be using martyrdom anyway.


Last time I played team hardcore, on crossfire two of my team mates came up some stairs as I was coming out the door and made me jump and I shot them both by accident xD
Obviously that's retarded, but I'd rather not have to worry about accidentally shooting my team mates.

Well I can understand the accidentally killing your teammates aspect, but I would like to point out that the Hardcore comparison is a little off because of the large increase in weapon damage in HC, only a round or two is required to kill anyone which makes an errant shot worse.

I too have had those situations where I've shot my teammates but team on team combat usually has a much different flow than matchmaking where you don't know your teammates and what they're attempting to do (and how a lot of the times they're pretty random :() But I've found that for every game where I accidentally kill a teammate there are about 10 where it doesn't happen (hardcore and privates w/ FF on) It always stands out in my mind when it does, but it's not very common.

So during standard settings you are required to put a lot more rounds into a teammate which is assisted actually by the amount of auto aim in the game (quite a bit) try actually shooting a teammate who is running and moving and you'll see what I mean... it's quite a bit harder than downing an opponent (much like in Halo) While it is true that you "could" kill a teammate with a single burst from your M16 (a weapon I don't use because it's overpowered, but a lot of people do) it's not very likely to happen, and with the use of any regular weapon (which doesn't kill in a single trigger pull) you wouldn't run even the one burst risk, having time to think about what you're shooting.

And I think you'd be surprised at how much Martyrdom, Grenade launchers, and RPGs would be used, there's a reason a lot of people don't want them restricted ;)

[Predator]

I want it off leave it like a regular online game.

[AJMac]

Last time I played team hardcore, on crossfire two of my team mates came up some stairs as I was coming out the door and made me jump and I shot them both by accident xD
Obviously that's retarded, but I'd rather not have to worry about accidentally shooting my team mates.

But that forces you to play more tactically and as a team. Communication and teamwork would be key. And after all, isn't that what a tournament filled with teams is all about?

[DrHerbz]

I see the points, and to tell you the truth it wouldn't bother me if friendly fire was implemented since volum3's post pretty much makes my point void :P

I can kind of see why it might bring more communication, but what's that communication really going to be? While writing this I guess it might encourage people to mention where they are more which would be a good point, but I don't personally feel friendly fire will benefit more then not benefit.

Advantages and disadvantages of leaving friendly fire? These are my personnel opinion, and others might feel that advantages are more disadvantages and vice versa.

No accidental killing, no having to worry about accidental team killing, most people more comfortable with it not being on. Without friendly fire I personally think that it would mean a more comfortable style of play.

Potentially stopping the use of various explosives, potentially increasing team communication, potentially bringing about more tactical play. With it on it might mean more tactical and skilled play e.g- No spraying and praying when your team mates are with you.


This is what I think, if anyone has anything to add, or disagrees with my points please state as I'd like to see others views. Also once again, What type of extra communication is going to happen with FF on? I would like to see a point as I don't see how it will atm, but if someone was to give a reason why, it would be appreciated ;)

[AJMac]

Also once again, What type of extra communication is going to happen with FF on? I would like to see a point as I don't see how it will atm, but if someone was to give a reason why, it would be appreciated ;)

That way, team members are always on there toes, telling each other there positions, and encourages them to tell where the enemy is. So say there is an enemy in a room and you spot him. Tell your teammate where he/she is so that the do not have to worry about it not being the enemy.

FF makes it more war like. The game is based more on team play, like team deathmatch should be.

[deathbypig37x]

I can see where and why peopel would want friendly fire, but I think the game is built around not having friendly fire, and to take it off would take too much adjustment.

I mean friednly fire would add a lot of strategy, but people would have to learn it. The best competition we can get out evryone will most likely be the most similar interface and rules they have been previously introduced, and have spent hours playing.

People will play their best as they are now IMO, if friendly fire was turned off. That's just my thought...Friendly Fire would be cool, but not for me once I've been betrayed 5 times. :p

[v0lum3]

What type of extra communication is going to happen with FF on? I would like to see a point as I don't see how it will atm, but if someone was to give a reason why, it would be appreciated ;)

Well I shall give it a try :)

With friendly fire on, you would need to coordinate team movements before airstriking in particular, letting your team know that you want to call in an air strike on an area so that they don't wind up charging in and getting killed... while this isn't required it does reward the more thoughtful teammate for telling his team what he is doing on the battlefield.

It also encourages you to tell your teammates when you're tossing a grenade into a room, keeping them from charging in and taking a grenade... while again not directly demanding communication, but rewarding the team with better communication and teamwork directly, while penalyzing people who don't pay attention to their teammates during combat.

As well as with fire, telling a teammate that you're following them so that they know that if they turn around it's not an enemy, or informing your teammates that you are carrying martyrdom and are about to enter a room to keep them from being in the blast.

While these situations themselves won't force anyone to communicate, it will directly result in the teams that do communicate and pay attention to their teammates performing better.

Carelessness is a horrible thing to have in a friendly fire situation, while it's completely rewarded without it.

I will concede that most people will be comfortable with FF turned off, of course they would since that's what we're mostly uesed to playing, but if we're competing we don't really need to be comfortable, we should be on the edge of our seats paying as much attention to what's going on as possible to perform the best that we can, I simply think that friendly fire on will help display who has more discipline when it comes to their game, who shoots where they should, pays attention to their teammates, and tells everyone what's going on.

Challenging competitors to adapt a slight bit isn't really a bad thing and would help give a unique feel to the tournament as the players play it, at least in my mind :)

[angry]

With FF on it would be as Realistic as it get's i know i have been there in "Real Life" and trust me i have read all the comments here and with that said it is at the end of the day Tamwork "you watch my back i watch your's etc etc. With this you could sot enemy positions and because you are more involved with speeking with your whole team you could put your flanking measures to the test and use your teamwork as it should be used. That is what it is all about, also you would play more serious and not just run around like a headless chicken shooting everything that moves, you could use all the strategies in the book and make this game a true skill as it should be. End of the day you would use team tactics to there full advantage and it would be real to life.

Now with FF of i think it would change the style of play big time as you would not communicate as much as if it were on and you would in my eyes get killed more often, you see with FF on you would be Sneaking / Crawling taking full advantage of the cover system allsorts which is the true way forward for a game liek COD 4.

Well that's my 2 cent's worth.

[v0lum3]

With FF on you would play more serious and not just run around like a headless chicken shooting everything that moves.

lol, I just had to say that I love that quote :) I could just picture my mother "Jessie, quit running around shooting everyone like a headless chicken!" lol!

[DrHerbz]

Well I shall give it a try :)

With friendly fire on, you would need to coordinate team movements before airstriking in particular, letting your team know that you want to call in an air strike on an area so that they don't wind up charging in and getting killed... while this isn't required it does reward the more thoughtful teammate for telling his team what he is doing on the battlefield.

It also encourages you to tell your teammates when you're tossing a grenade into a room, keeping them from charging in and taking a grenade... while again not directly demanding communication, but rewarding the team with better communication and teamwork directly, while penalyzing people who don't pay attention to their teammates during combat.



Those two points there are the best reasons I've read so far for reasons why it will bring about more communication. At this point, I really wouldn't mind which wins, as FF on could make it quite a deal more interesting, but one thing that comes to mind is, why the hell do we need FF on just to make us talk to our team? lol surely we should be communicating enough without having FF on to force us to narrate through our actions?

[v0lum3]

why the hell do we need FF on just to make us talk to our team? lol surely we should be communicating enough without having FF on to force us to narrate through our actions?

lol, I completely agree! I'm not trying to control your actions at all, and if teams don't want to communicate, more power to them (or less... whichever way you look at it :))

I just think FF on would be a nice rule change, it would encourage and reward communication, it isn't a huge change from standard play settings, and IMO enhances gameplay by limiting abuse of what many people consider to be the "cheaper" weapons (RPGs, Martyrdom, 3x Frags, Noob Tube, etc.) without having to restrict anything.

I just have a nightmare of a team with no communication just running around using RPG's, martyrdom, and the noob tube and putting a huge damper on everyone's fun.

Of course that's a bit exaggerated and one team wouldn't ruin everyone's fun, but I see FF as a nice solution to solve both sides of the coin, the people that want to use Martyrdom/RPG's and those that don't want to have them in the tourney. Friendly fire would make the use of them require more caution since you run the risk of killing your teammates as well, avoiding having to restrict the perks and weapons used while still making abuse of them less appealing to the players :)

[justcallmeChill]

you cant make a case for "friendly fire should be off bc its too easy to kill them and its hard:("...thats the point, tournaments are competitive and are meant to be played at the highest level of difficulty. They should be challenging and then the truly skilled players will shine about the rest.

FRIENDLY FIRE=ON. It is just noobish to turn it off. End of discussion.

[DrHerbz]

you cant make a case for "friendly fire should be off bc its too easy to kill them and its hard:(".

You can make a great case from that :p

FF should be on cos it's more 1337 and not n00bish could be argued as not making a case :p


Also, I think its safe to say its not going to be that easy to kill your team mates as volum3 has said, I still think it should not be turned on just because people are more comfortable with it off, as that's the standard style of play on CoD. Having it off may make it a bit more competitive and maybe more enjoyable IMO, but I just feel its going to be more restricting then anything.

I would like to know how many that have voted play with FF on regularly? I'm sure there's quite a few, but just wondering ;)

[Azeron]

CoD doesn't have much of a private match community, but when live was having problems I and others ran some privates and FF was allways on. You'd barely notice it though, the only thing that could cause some major TKs was a bad airstrike.

If you're talking about hardcore, I can't stand it and never play it, the increased damage destroys the weapon balance and overpowers explosives.

Edit: also, well said Chill, that's the way I feel about it, but we've got to keep in mind that not everyone on the site has such a competitive mindset.

[L3giOn]

but we've got to keep in mind that not everyone on the site has such a competitive mindset.

Don't worry, if you actually make it far enough in the tounament to face my team you'll find out just how competitive we are. :cool:

[Azeron]

Um, thanks for your contribution to the discussion?

Edit: Here we go again...

[Phenom]

I hope it is not to late for my vote to count but I voted yes. I voted Yes because with friendly fire on people will use teamwork and be more careful and alert at what they are doing as to not harm a teammate.