[MONOLITH]

Just a wild thought;

But since other games clearly show you can carry a body around, if a teammate goes down, you could be required as part of the mission to still keep him with you, and get him to the extraction zone intact.

This could always be a secondary objective for higher scoring, or it could be a mission failed if you don't get the body to the extraction zone.  

"No man gets left behind".

[Fumarole]

MONOLITH, on Aug 6 2007, 04:20 PM, said:

Just a wild thought;

But since other games clearly show you can carry a body around, if a teammate goes down, you could be required as part of the mission to still keep him with you, and get him to the extraction zone intact.

This could always be a secondary objective for higher scoring, or it could be a mission failed if you don't get the body to the extraction zone.  

"No man gets left behind".

I just played through Full Spectrum Warrior and liked how that game handled this. When a man went down you were made to pay the price of losing two weapons in your fireteam. That definitely lends itself to being more careful.

Perhaps the player who goes down isn't dead but merely wounded, and if he can reach an aid station or something along those lines can rejoin the action.

I like it.

Edited by Fumarole, 06 August 2007 - 05:23 PM.

[Relinquish]

Being blackops leaving evidense of your existence behind is not oging to be a good idea.

Leaving a corpse of a fallen comrade would probably a big piece of evidence you were there.

I say either evacuate the evidence, or hide and leave to die. Players chooses, player lives with consequences.

Edited by Relinquish, 06 August 2007 - 07:05 PM.

[MONOLITH]

Relinquish, on Aug 6 2007, 09:13 PM, said:

Leaving a corpse of a fallen comrade would probably a big piece of evidence you were there.

LOL. Indeed.

[relaxative]

Deniability is the big catch word for blacker-than-black ops!

I agree with above. Leave no man behind, or dispose of the body very well.

Also consider stripping equipment from casualty and distributing amongst the team. I hated OGR for that. Equipment should not be wasted; we live in the 21st Century and we're pretty sure that men don't need servants, weapons, tools in the afterlife.

@ original topic - Limb-specific wounds. Affect speed/accuracy (legs and arms respectively?). Torso wound debilitates over all, head shot = death. Treatment should be simple...something like a medic being equipped with the passive skill and a generic medic kit that takes up a large amount of inventory space or something, then the on-screen treatment is different according to the wound and its location. Then each time a medic treats someone, he  loses a charge (simulate reduction in equipment, operator fatigue).

Perhaps some sort of mini-game? Just as players need specific skills to use the 203 or snipe, a player who specialises as a medic should have some sort of specific challenge to differ him from the other class types. It'd be cool for said mini-game to be pseudo-realistic (i.e., involve use of bandages, CPR, epinephrine, whatever).

Unrealistic for a medic to be peering around while his hands magically do the work for him; player should be totally immersed into saving this man's life and not scanning for enemy threats!

Edited by relaxative, 06 August 2007 - 08:31 PM.

[Seven7h_Column]

i dont think i like the magical healing idea, but the knock down wounded aspect of the GRAW 2 multiplayer is great.  it actually accounts for incapacitating shots instead of everything resulting in death.  i think a health system with more complex body reactions to wounds coupled with knock downs and medic help to get the soldier back on their feet would be wonderful.

[krise madsen]

From a realism perspective, anything but light fleshwounds would probably leave you more or less incapacitated. Having a bullet graze your thigh will probably leave you with a limp. Having the same bullet smash your thigh bone would pretty much ensure you can't move on under your own power anymore (if the major artery isn't severed and you bleed to death, that is).

So if you're grazed by a bullet, slapping a field dressing on it should do the trick. Maybe some mild painkllers to take the edge of the pain. Anyting bigger than that and the rest of the team basically has three options:

1- Pump you full of morphine and drag you along (either towards the objective or, more likely, back to the extraction point, mission aborted).

2- Pump you full of morphine and leave you either to be captured or to be picked up on the way back.

3- Terminate you and get on with the mission.

On the whole, I wonder if including medics is worth the trouble. I wouldn't mind someone suprising me though.

Respectfully

krise madsen

PS: See Wade? You make us stop and think. Keep it up!

[ZJJ]

Merged the Health System/Medic threads.

[relaxative]

Remember the fine balance between realism and fun.

Thus I like the incapacitating idea mentioned by Seven7th Column.

Quote

I wonder if including medics is worth the trouble

Pfffft, include include!

[Sanctuary5]

I haven't read the whole thread so sorry if any of what I've got to say has been said.
From what I did read of the first page I like what I see with mobility and hearing and visual impairment when wounded but I don't want my sense affected that much. Vegas had it all wrong with its near-all-black screen following injury; I certainly don't want this. Mabey like Monolith said a bit dark around the edges of the screen and I was thinking mabey have your hearing adopt a slight echo.

I was also thinking mabey if say your ancles wounded, running on it for extended periods of time should make it worse and if you ran down a slope it should worsen further and mabey your character would trip over. If penalties for being wounded are too bad, I think many people will just soul-swap and leave the wounded guy to die.

[MiStAPePPa]

I believe medics should not be included, but I do not think that the ability to provide medical attention to a teammate should be left out. Every SF operative is given some sort of medic training and I would imagine that any team member in GB would have excellent medic training. So instead of a designated medic, everyone has the ability to tend to someones wounds.

I like the idea where your teammates cannot respawn but have to be revived to play on. It should also be mandatory to get every casualty, fatal or not, to some sort of extraction point, or safe area. That would be for single player. Multiplayer and coop can do something like this.

When a player is wounded somehow or another, and they are incapacitated, another teammate has to do something to fix the problem. Now, depending on how bad and where the wound is, the player has to decide what to do. There are three main choices he has right off the bat. 1) He (or she) decides that the wound can be tended to in the field and begins to provide medical attention. 2) The area is too dangerous to stay in for any longer and the operative must be evacuated to a safe(er) zone. 3) The wounds are too severe and the operative is going to die, take him (or her) to a designated extraction zone, or leave the corpse for later extraction.

Once the player makes a decision to provide attention they must first decide what must be done. Here I would like to see what is discussed in the  Body Awareness thread. Does the operative remove the bullet or shrapnel? Morphine? Every thing can be done dynamically. Once the action is engaged, the player can scroll through a list of tools. Pliers, bandages, scissors, morphine, blood clotting powder (what's that stuff called?) After the tool is selected the player can have at it. If the wrong decisions are made, or the wounded operative is already dead, you fail and the operative  dies, or you wasted time on the corpse.

Once a successful, or semi-successful revival has been performed, the previously downed operative has limited mobility again. There is a lot to work out, but the theory has been set forth. Kind of a mixture of what has been said in previous posts in this thread.

Edited by MiStAPePPa, 07 October 2007 - 09:19 PM.

[Sanctuary5]

MiStAPePPa, on Oct 8 2007, 11:22 AM, said:

I believe medics should not be included, but I do not think that the ability to provide medical attention to a teammate should be left out. Every SF operative is given some sort of medic training and I would imagine that any team member in GB would have excellent medic training. So instead of a designated medic, everyone has the ability to tend to someones wounds.

I like the idea where your teammates cannot respawn but have to be revived to play on. It should also be mandatory to get every casualty, fatal or not, to some sort of extraction point, or safe area. That would be for single player. Multiplayer and coop can do something like this.

When a player is wounded somehow or another, and they are incapacitated, another teammate has to do something to fix the problem. Now, depending on how bad and where the wound is, the player has to decide what to do. There are three main choices he has right off the bat. 1) He (or she) decides that the wound can be tended to in the field and begins to provide medical attention. 2) The area is too dangerous to stay in for any longer and the operative must be evacuated to a safe(er) zone. 3) The wounds are too severe and the operative is going to die, take him (or her) to a designated extraction zone, or leave the corpse for later extraction.

Once the player makes a decision to provide attention they must first decide what must be done. Here I would like to see what is discussed in the  Body Awareness thread. Does the operative remove the bullet or shrapnel? Morphine? Every thing can be done dynamically. Once the action is engaged, the player can scroll through a list of tools. Pliers, bandages, scissors, morphine, blood clotting powder (what's that stuff called?) After the tool is selected the player can have at it. If the wrong decisions are made, or the wounded operative is already dead, you fail and the operative  dies, or you wasted time on the corpse.

Once a successful, or semi-successful revival has been performed, the previously downed operative has limited mobility again. There is a lot to work out, but the theory has been set forth. Kind of a mixture of what has been said in previous posts in this thread.

Your idea's cool but I think it's got too many componants. I think if a teammate's downed and you choose to help him then forget all of the tools etc, you either can fix him or you can't, depending on the severity of the wound. If you can't then you can take him to the designated extraction zone or obviously just leave him to die which I would think most people would do.

[Tactical Jerky]

Quote

Your idea's cool but I think it's got too many componants. I think if a teammate's downed and you choose to help him then forget all of the tools etc, you either can fix him or you can't, depending on the severity of the wound. If you can't then you can take him to the designated extraction zone or obviously just leave him to die which I would think most people would do.

I agree realism is good but it should still be a shooter not a medical sim but I do like the rest. Also this brings us back to a previous discussion about an alternative scoring system. The idea behind that was in order to improve teamwork to reward players for certain tasks instead of simply kills, headshots etc, like done in most other shooters.

So I think helping and evacuating teammates would be another good example to be rewarded for. And in combination with no or limited respawns it's in your own advantage to medic people. Otherwise people simply think: leave them why bother taking the risk if it gains me nothing and in a sec they respawn anyway.

[Sanctuary5]

Tactical Jerky, on Oct 8 2007, 07:30 PM, said:

I agree realism is good but it should still be a shooter not a medical sim but I do like the rest. Also this brings us back to a previous discussion about an alternative scoring system. The idea behind that was in order to improve teamwork to reward players for certain tasks instead of simply kills, headshots etc, like done in most other shooters.

So I think helping and evacuating teammates would be another good example to be rewarded for. And in combination with no or limited respawns it's in your own advantage to medic people. Otherwise people simply think: leave them why bother taking the risk if it gains me nothing and in a sec they respawn anyway.

Agreed.

[Megalodon]

"I agree realism is good but it should still be a shooter not a medical sim but I do like the rest. Also this brings us back to a previous discussion about an alternative scoring system. The idea behind that was in order to improve teamwork to reward players for certain tasks instead of simply kills, headshots etc, like done in most other shooters."


I like the idea about taking care of the wounded, but I do not like the idea of scoring. You either get the mission completed or you don't. If there are scoring requirements, like in BF series, we will be inundated with stat padders, that it ruined that series.

[Tactical Jerky]

Quote

I like the idea about taking care of the wounded, but I do not like the idea of scoring. You either get the mission completed or you don't. If there are scoring requirements, like in BF series, we will be inundated with stat padders, that it ruined that series.

Stat padders = People increasing their score by using cheap tricks? (didn't knew the word)

But if so I understand your concern but it should ofcourse be made impossible to bypass it's original goal, like for example shooting your wounded teammembers on purpose than heal them in order to gain points.

The idea of an alternative scoring system isn't in first place to focus on getting the most points like the current scoring systems actually will do, but to bring out the game's core essence by:

Encouraging teamwork, discouraging run and gun gameplay and to encourage creating a more real life experience: Penalties for deaths so players with same amount of kills but with less deaths will be rated with a higher score, reward people for taking risks by healing their teammembers, no more personal kill scores but a team score instead.

These are just a few things previously mentioned that could be in such a system. Also this is mainly a multiplayer thing just in case for those who didn't got that.

[}SkOrPn--7]

Tactical Jerky, on Oct 8 2007, 11:30 AM, said:

I agree realism is good but it should still be a shooter not a medical sim

I  

What's the point of a medic if you got respawns it's totally pointless just place the gimp back in or a similar system to GR it seemed to work just fine. Even if you had the ability to fireman carry the wounded body would be better than a medic in a game that way two people are taken out and if the turd hit's the fan then they can stop and at least try and fight there way out or die trying.

I'm sure john will do what is ever best for the game without making it a run of the mill medic power pack driven injection taking instant healing nobified totally over the top game........

[EskimoBob32]

I think the health system in RvS was good, but I think if it were immediately obvious without HUD whether someone was healthy or injured that would be preferable. No health bars, please.

Edited by EskimoBob32, 05 February 2008 - 02:47 AM.

[tomshackell]

EskimoBob32, on Feb 5 2008, 08:47 AM, said:

I think the health system in RvS was good, but I think if it were immediately obvious without HUD whether someone was healthy or injured that would be preferable. No health bars, please.

I agree, definitely no health bars. However I would be happy with a hud icon showing your virtual body. If you were shot in the leg you could see that because your leg would be red on the indicator. This would make up for the fact that the only information that can be presented in games is audio or visual.

That said, if you can reasonably tell where you are injured (and thus what your limitations are), without a HUD icon then that's fine too.

[FoxTwo]

Sanctuary5, on Oct 8 2007, 06:35 AM, said:

Your idea's cool but I think it's got too many componants. I think if a teammate's downed and you choose to help him then forget all of the tools etc, you either can fix him or you can't, depending on the severity of the wound. If you can't then you can take him to the designated extraction zone or obviously just leave him to die which I would think most people would do.

If you don't want to get to close to "Americas Army" gameplay:

Simply limit the first aid to two ways:

1) bandage based (that means the shoulder / knee is patched up and the projectile removed on the field -> takes more time and encourages teamplay since others have to guard the comrade against any kind of threats while he's getting treated but stabilizes the soldier and prevents him from bleeding to death as a result he's able to fight but only limbs & aming is also affected)

2) pull the man out of the line of fire / carry him to the next Hospital / Medic / MedEvac etc. -> easiest way since one comrade carries the other that means 2 are unable to run (the one that carries the other and the casualty itself) however that encourages teamplay since other comrades will have to guard the 2 guys but there's still the risk the casualty is bleeding to death if he's not getting treatment fast