Latest News «
Submit News «


Articles «
Comics «
Journal Entries «
Squad Reviews «
Rat Profiles «


Infantry Bootcamp «
Creating A Squad «
Maps & Radio «
FAQ «
Dictionary «


Official Forums «
Chat Room «


Previews «
Screenshots «
Book Listing «
Equipment Specs «
Links «


Feedback «
Site Info «
Link to Us «

Freezeshooter?
by Blackhawk

There's been plenty of debate on the boards regarding the "Killshooter" question. Killshooter is a system that guards against friendly fire by applying any damage inflicted upon friendly targets to the shooter instead. The merits of this system are clear: no one is ever frustrated by the experience of getting killed by a traitorous cur on a team-killing (TK) spree.

Killshooter has severe drawbacks, however. Many times, the friendly fire (FF) is actually the fault of the player that got shot. How many times have you watched as an allied fighter pilot swooped in the 25 yards of space between you and the enemy plane you've been shooting at for 30 seconds, blocking your shot and stealing your kill? It's happened to everyone. For the icing on the cake, as the allied fighter pulls into your tracers Killshooter grants you a few holes in your plane for the pleasure of having your kill vulched.

Another scenario puts a player behind an artillery piece. A fire mission is called by some infantry engaged with the enemy. The gunner lays on the correct target and fires for effect. A squad of friendly infantry is directly under the blast, because the observer accidentally called in the wrong coordinates! But the gunner lays dead, perhaps owing more to his accuracy and skill with his weapon more than anything else. Clearly, the killshooter system leaves much to be desired.

Other systems fall short of the ideal for one reason or another. Ignoring friendly fire effects altogether is better than killshooter, as it avoids punishing the innocent, or the clumsy. However, it takes away a very real (and somewhat enjoyable, in small doses) consideration of the battlefield: the risk of friendly fire. If you simply ignore friendly fire effects, there would be nothing to prevent you from calling in bombs and artillery on your own position when the enemy was near, as you would suffer no ill effects. Such is hardly realistic. Some sort of representation of friendly fire has an undeniable place on the battlefield.

So how to address the question of Friendly Fire? What about a "Freezeshooter" system?

First, let me explain my philosophy on friendly fire. In general I think it's deplorable and extremely frustrating to have a player deliberately shooting friendlies, so I'm adamantly against having no penalty at all - we want to play a game, and getting TK'ed all the time is definitely NOT fun. Offsetting this sentiment, however, is my belief that friendly fire is in some cases the fault of the victim, and in other cases it is an unintentional and realistic misfortune. Thus, blanket punishment for the shooter is not a suitable response. Lastly, I do think players should suffer some ill effect from friendly fire, to prevent unrealistic use of area effect weapons as well as model a real battlefield concern.

A Freezeshooter system would literally "freeze" the controls of the shooter for a set time. While frozen, all controls would be unresponsive. The shooter would drop prone, or if in a vechile he would lose the ability to man a station for the duration of the freeze. If the shooter was at the controls, the vehicle would behave as if their driver/pilot/helmsman had passed out (sometimes having little effect, other times being potentially fatal such as in an aircraft at low altitude). Maybe something like a 15 second freeze would be appropriate (a lifetime in a firefight).

The target would take up to the equivalent of a light wound / 25% damage / (insert whatever measure is coherent with the locational damage system here) in the location of the first hit inflicted by the friendly fire. After the victim takes a single FF hit, all additional damage from that shooter is ignored, even if there were several more MG rounds (for example) that hit in the friendly burst. Any nominally fatal/disabling damage levels would automatically be reduced to the (e.g.) 25% damage cap level. The victim is notified he was FF'ed, and identifies the shooter.

Finally, even after unfrozen, the shooter would be "on probation" for another minute or so, with a flag. If another friendly fire happens during the probation, the shooter is killed instead of frozen.

Since damage is assumedly additive, this system would also let a consensus of players frag a friendly. This is a great resource for players to self-police. No one person could do a great deal of damage on their own, but several players could kill a single player if there was good reason (that being to put down a TKer, most likely). The light wound/25% damage will make FF sting, but won't make it independently deadly.

So, this solution covers my philosophy, I believe, as follows:

- Satisfies the need for discouraging FF. Freeze is no fun, and violating probation is deadly. Further, if a player is intentionally TKing, his teammates will notice and they can frag him by ganging up.

- Allows for limited consequences of FF, thereby preserving the realistic possibility of FF damage while preventing deliberate FF from spoiling anyone's gaming experience.

Imagine Freezeshooter applied in the following circumstances:

1) A malicious TK'er takes a potshot at a friendly soldier. He's frozen, and the soldier takes a light wound. After unfreezing, the shooter cleverly waits out the probation period to avoid the killshooter effect, and then makes another intentional FF shot. Another light wound, and only a freeze as punishment. But now every friendly in the area is on to the shooter, and takes a shot at him. All those 25%/light wound hits = dead TK'er, but the friendlies that put him to death suffer no ill effects after 15 seconds pass.

2) A well-meaning jabo drops some bombs in a daring CAS mission. They land a little short, causing some damage to friendly troops. The plane is pilotless for 15 critical seconds, a sitting duck for enemy fire and possibly impacting the terrain, but it is not killed outright for the mistake and will hopefully live through it (though certainly not wanting to repeat the experience). Meanwhile, the troops down below are miffed, with several suffering light damage to their personas or vehicles, but none have died as a result of the FF.

I know, I know: scary new idea, run for the hills! Hey, everything's new at least once (bell bottoms and disco more than once, apparently).