remove friendly fire recoil

[4Prop]

But it does hurt. It hurts when you're being chased by 5 people that for all rights should have killed themselves down to 1, giving you a fighting chance.

It hurts when you're trying to get the kill and somebody intentionally or just rudely sits there and soaks up all your ammo without taking damage and without letting any get to the enemy.

There is nothing good about the bullets doing NO damage at all. There is no upside.


It also adds a little incentive... First time you did it and realized what happened, did you do it again? Nope.

well if someone cant get a kill because of a line thats their fault, should have killed em quicker.

bullets doing no damage

PROs:
no more accidental suicides
still keeps greifers from doing anything just how it would now.
concentrate more on the enemy rather then the A hole who might be about to get in front of your guns
less complaints of "you idiot you flew in front of me and now im missing a part or dead ETC

CONS
Krusty does agree
requires more SA towards friendly planes
possibility of missing out on a kill


im pretty sure to my knowlege in WWII when a friendly shot a friendly on accident of course, no damage was done to his plane.this goes for any war that had airplanes involved.
the guys in WWII who did fly in front of a friendly who was shooting paid the price by being shot due to their error. so if anything they should be damaged themselves. and since we dont want greifers why dont we meet in the middle and have no damage done at all

[STEELE]

Solution:   Killshooter only destroys the offending gun/guns that fired the naughty bullet or bullets.  

1) still stops multiples from trying to shoot thru friendlies while trying to gang 1 con
2) killshot person gets to RTB and land, minus a gun or 3
3) still prevents griefers just as effectively                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          4) prevents loss of perk ride from n00bz that fly thru your stream of fire      This is a big one, since most people lose perk rides from this very thing, which STILL ALLOWS a form of GRIEFING!!!111oneoneone
    HiTech you might be able to appreciate this one:  You're in a 262 shootin' buffs,  Joe Wannagrief sees this, aims his plane RIGHT thru your tater stream and laughs his ARSE off as your dissapear in a puff of smoke.
    
+ how many?

[Karnak]

No.  Killshooter must remove one of the defending aircraft's enemies from the fight.  He has no way of knowing you're guns are destroyed.  The attacking players need to be penalized for poor fire discipline.

Having friendly fire do no damage would cause gross distortions into the air combat tactics and put defenders at significantly more disadvantage due to the ability of many attackers to fire on them without worry of consequences.

[STEELE]

Who cares if he knows if your guns work or not?  The main thing is that they won't work any more, nor be a threat any longer.  
This idea is mainly to prevent griefing from other players  flying though your tracer stream and making you die.
That is how killshooter was first thought up, after all, was it not? (or n00bz unintentially making you die)

[Karnak]

Who cares if he knows if your guns work or not?  The main thing is that they won't work any more, nor be a threat any longer.  

Team A was lazy in its fire control and had a friendly fire incident, they need to suffer the consequences of that and Team B needs to have one less threat to track, anything else is too severe a distortion of the combat. An unarmed plane can still play a role in a fight, forcing an alert defender to waste E dodging an apparent attack or presenting an outnumbered opponent a chance at a kill that makes him more vulnerable to being attacked while he thinks he is actually improving his odds.

This idea is mainly to prevent griefing from other players  flying though your tracer stream and making you die.
That is how killshooter was first thought up, after all, was it not? (or n00bz unintentially making you die)

No, that is only part of it.  What I mention is the other part of it.

[B-17]

Read the OP's post...

Now wish for an automatic period placer.

Done.

[USCH]

It would only take 1 griefer 2 seconds to spoil the fun of 50 people.... Regardless of perks he loses. Read up on it. This topic goes back to day 1 of Aces High. Hitech chose to use killshooter because it is the best solution to prevent griefing.


Just check your fire. That's going back to day 2 of Aces High  

correct

[STEELE]

agree, but if his guns blow up he will also quit shooting at friendlies. If he dies he only gets to up a fresh plane quicker, which teaches him less than if he has to RTB and get a new ride!    Scenario: you are chasing a con for 10 min, only to have Johnny Izzanoob dive in front of your 262 tater rounds, you will be able to rtb, which would not be nearly as rediculously gamey as completely exploding and losing 200~ perks through no fault of your own.      and finally:  

[talos]

might be a stupid solution, but what if both players take the damage.

Say you are on the enemies six and you open fire. As you do that, however an allied plane drops in guns blazing to steal the kill but instead gets blasted by you. with this idea both players take equal damage (or the shooter can take more then the friendly)

Will this suck for the first two to three weeks?   yes

Will this be abused?  most likely

Is the current system capable of being abused?  yes

Will this encourage ppl to become more adapt at SA/Communication and not cross into allied guns?  In time

[Karnak]

agree, but if his guns blow up he will also quit shooting at friendlies. If he dies he only gets to up a fresh plane quicker, which teaches him less than if he has to RTB and get a new ride!    Scenario: you are chasing a con for 10 min, only to have Johnny Izzanoob dive in front of your 262 tater rounds, you will be able to rtb, which would not be nearly as rediculously gamey as completely exploding and losing 200~ perks through no fault of your own.        and finally: 

Tough, you are responsible for your lanes of fire.

If he loses his guns only he is still a factor in the fight.  One of you should not be a factor.  You have the choices of either it being the shootee (poof, goodbye Me262, a friendly shot you on approach, nothing you could do) or shooter (check you lanes of fire, keep up SA and you'll only be affected once in a blue moon).

might be a stupid solution, but what if both players take the damage.

Say you are on the enemies six and you open fire. As you do that, however an allied plane drops in guns blazing to steal the kill but instead gets blasted by you. with this idea both players take equal damage (or the shooter can take more then the friendly)

Will this suck for the first two to three weeks?   yes

Will this be abused?  most likely

Is the current system capable of being abused?  yes

Will this encourage ppl to become more adapt at SA/Communication and not cross into allied guns?  In time

No, it would be abused and way beyond the three weeks you posit.  Further, it would remove two aggressor aircraft which is also a distortion of the combat.