Camnet

[Spekkio]

Looking through the posts I'm not finding any valid concerns about it without relatively simple solutions.

If you're looking for the simplest solution, remove special visions from camnet and work from there. I guaruntee that mappers will use better discretion on where to place the opticals than Ubi did.

Basically every objection is based on CT and pretty much moot as a result.

Newsflash: the stated goal of this project is to mimic CT's multiplayer gameplay. Therefore, the same rules apply when discussing potential changes.

You obviously fail at reading comprehension because none of your points even address anything I've said.

[B1nArY_001]

Basically every objection is based on CT and pretty much moot as a result.

Newsflash: the stated goal of this project is to mimic CT's multiplayer gameplay. Therefore, the same rules apply when discussing potential changes.

You obviously fail at reading comprehension because none of your points even address anything I've said.

Really? Well fuck me running, I had no idea. These assholes lied to me, I thought this was a Romeo and Juliet RPG.

I wasn't addressing your points? Didn't think I said I was... I'll have to go back and check since my reading comp sucks.

If you read those three lines, now read them carefully because we both seem to share this problem, they list a few items that were brought up and perfectly illustrate that they are CT specific.

In order to capture the core game play does not require us to exactly "clone" an existing game, especially if that game has a mile long list of flaws. Just because an existing game does something a certain way does not mean there is not a better way to do it or that it should be the concrete basis for a judgment call on how something should work.

Everything is being created from the ground up and will be evaluated as we do so. To continue clinging to this 'Oh no, we are "cloning", "mimicing" CT, don't touch that it will alter the game!' mentality leaves no room for improvement where there are clearly a lot of improvements that could be made over CT.

You or anyone else who wants to of course has the choice of doing that. Though you aren't helping to create something that provides not only a similar gaming experience but a BETTER experience not just graphically but in every aspect.

[Westfall]

At the same time, we are all fixing bugs seen from PT, CT, and DA (i.e. the fixes list you posted was all from the other games...nothing new). There should be a bunch of new additives to go along with PS. I really don't want to say that PS is going to be a mirror-image of CT because I know it won't be. However, we need to not focus so much on the gameplays from other Splinter Cell games and focus on a revolutionary new way to do this "Spy vs. Merc." New gadgets, new maps, new moves, etc.

And while we are on the topic of camnet, you didn't address what Spekkio was saying. As a matter of fact, I feel an unease throughout the posters because we aren't getting answers. A lot of this might be mindless babble because the programmers don't have to pay attention to anything posted here. This is cause for a loss of support.

[Spekkio]

Allowing/making the mercs look through security cameras isn't new, so you guys can stop talking about it like you came up with, and are trying to incorporate, something original. It's a bastardization of two already existing concepts, one of which works perfectly well and one of which just needs tweaking, merged into one complete pile of shit. While we're at it, why don't you combine motion sensors with lazers? Oh, and add a "lasernet" gadget so that the mercs have to manually trigger the lasers to detect the spy. I'm sure that'll really help improve things.

I'm all for new content, so long as the idea doesn't suck and won't break something that already works perfectly fine.  But nobody here, except for Gawain the broken "let's remove camnet and add drones" record, is talking about adding anything new; you're simply talking about making sweeping changes to a gadget, ranging from looking through security cams to security booths, that most likely will not be necessary. To be honest, I would rather eliminate camnet entirely in favor of a new gadget because I think any sort of device that requires/enables you to hide in a corner and just wait for a spy to appear makes gameplay stale even if it weren't over-powered, but no one on these forums has proposed anything remotely feesible (I am guilty of that as well). A recent poll on SCLamers shows that most people still playing the game generally dislike the concept of camnet altogether as well. Mercs should be out patrolling and hunting, not standing in a corner or in a booth waiting for the spies to cross the path of a camera. Focus on improving the parts of PT/CT/DA that don't work (camnet), and leave the parts that do (security cams) alone. Anyway, have fun digging through 12 pages to find my multiple detailed explanations of why the idea sucks, I'm too lazy to re-type it all.

[B1nArY_001]

I did look through the past 11 pages and to be completely blunt - every thing you have against this idea amounts to nothing in workability, balance and usefulness. Your posts clearly indicate you simply don't like the idea and that's about it. You obviously put no thought into fixing or circumventing the elements you don't like or you are making the assumption we are stupid enough to toss some half-assed idea in without thinking about these things.

I think this is the crux here. By requiring a merc to be actively looking through a security cam and removing the fact that they lock objectives, you are nerfing this piece of passive security dramatically.

Why get rid of the objective lock? No reason to therefor it's not nerfing the cameras at all.

This is pointless because the computer does it for you just fine.

I still think enabling the mercs to look through normal cameras is a terrible idea. I already explained why.

-It removes a passive security element from the game entirely
-It is pointless to make something manual when the computer does it for you just fine
-If camnet is a selectable gadget, it makes camnet a requirement since you cannot use automated security cameras, and a tedious requirement it is.
-Mercs will instantly know the location of a disabled camera by cycling through camnet

Seriously, looking through regular security cams with no control over their movement would be cool for .02 seconds. After that it would be just a tedious necessity when the automated cams worked just fine. Sitting there while a camera slowly oscillates uncontrollably is freakin boring. Hell, using camnet already when you CAN control it is friggin boring. It's this line of thinking that got camnet put in CT in the first place (there's some post from some PT n00b suggesting that mercs can look through cams somewhere on Ubi.com). While people have mixed feelings about whether camnet should be removed or how it should be "fixed," I don't see anyone saying "omfg this was such a great idea to put in SvM please don't remove it!"

I still don't think this sort of function will be particularly useful. I can't think of many, if any, cams in CT where you can pass directly in front of them, but beyond their detection radius. Even if you could, you could just extend the detection radius in PS and make it automatic.

The only use to such a thing is cycling through the cams to see which one was shot out, and I really don't think that the mercs need to have that power. Shooting a camera would be similar to just running through it, since the mercs will know your general location regardless. Part of being a sneaky/careful spy is using your reconnaissance and waiting for mercs to wander far enough away that shooting out a camera/motion sensor/laser cannot be heard enough to give away your exact location. The mercs, in turn, need to use positioning and deduction to guess where the spy is. A camnet that monitors the regular security cameras takes away that aspect of the game entirely.

Camnet needs to be its own entity. If it's going to stay, I think the current implementation as an additional security system with no vision modes/laser is the way to go, and then take it from there. The map makers will just have to be careful about where to place it so that it doesn't have a view of the entire map.

It is neither pointless nor does the camera have to be uncontrollable by the merc. If it was, then yeah it would make it almost useless. It does not remove any passive security element, it just means the merc can make use of them just the same way any security force would in real life. If a merc can determine where you are because a camera was shot out then the spy should have sneaked by rather than shot the cam. If you can't sneak by then the camera has been made that way for a good reason and seeing a security failure a merc would pretty much know it's that particular cam without checking the network. Any other cam a smart spy would have bypassed without tripping or shooting it.

Being able to look through a passive defense cam and see past its actual detection radius is in no way detracting from the usefulness or purpose of the cameras. It in fact expands their functionality and not only that but it makes them work just like an actual passive video security system. Alarm goes off, you check the camera that was tripped or one close by in the direction a spy would likely be headed.

The latter part is only useful assuming that the camera is the only/last security device in the map. Furthermore, I don't know about you but I don't tend to stay around cameras for long if I trip one.

Almost every security camera points at the floor, and thus sees at its maximum viewing distance anyway. The only exception to this that I can think of are the few cameras that face doorways, but will not go off when you are in the other room (Krauser basement, for example). This makes sense from a balance perspective since you have no way of knowing the camera's position before you open the door.

Camera angles and detection cones don't have to be linked in any way. Just like a merc will know what area a spy is in by finding a downed camera, he is of course going to know when you trip it. Now, if you know a merc can find a camera that has been shot, you wouldn't stick around any longer than you would when it is tripped. In either situation a merc is going to have an idea of where you're headed based on the objectives remaining blah blah etc so knowing that, he can check other cameras in the vicinity where you might have headed to verify the direction and intercept or pass the info to the other merc. It could also be used against a merc to make him think you are headed a certain way based on the camera that is out etc.

These will not be CT maps. How the cameras point in CT has absolutely no bearing on this.

Yea, it sorta does. There aren't going to be many wide-open areas where you put a security cam because they simply don't work for the purposes of SvM gameplay. Keep in mind that you would have to put the cam in a place where it can both be close enough to detect a spy AND have a long view to be looked through. Also keep in mind that cam detection radiuses are rather narrow, which is why spies can already pass under security cams that are oriented toward the floor.

I would venture to say that it is physically impossible to orient a camera that would both detect spies at a reasonable range yet allow the mercs to see a broader view, since any camera that is going to detect a spy needs to be relatively close to the ground and oriented toward the ground. If you orient the camera straight, then it will not automatically detect anything because the spy will be beyond the radius once he comes into its viewing angle. If it's oriented toward the ground, then there is no point to look through it because you don't gain any sight advantage.

Like I said before - the detection cone and the FoV don't have to be linked at all.

[Overstatement]

Red FTW!

[InvisibleMan999]

Guys, literally the only use for this new camnet is detecting which camera got knocked out after a security failure.

The "camera has a slightly bigger FoV than its detection cone" is crap. It means you take a new gadget just to see slightly farther on your cameras. Nobody wants that. That sucks. About all your camnet will do is make it so that you cant shoot out a camera without instantly giving away your position to the merc.

Merc hears secruity failure, he flicks through to find the static camera. Thats all it does.

Camnet only works well now because it is an eye in the sky. If it was just in a normal security camera position, it would suck. You cant really elevate existing security cams either because that would make the detection cones too difficult to discern

[Spekkio]

Guys, literally the only use for this new camnet is detecting which camera got knocked out after a security failure.

The "camera has a slightly bigger FoV than its detection cone" is crap. It means you take a new gadget just to see slightly farther on your cameras. Nobody wants that. That sucks. About all your camnet will do is make it so that you cant shoot out a camera without instantly giving away your position to the merc.

Merc hears secruity failure, he flicks through to find the static camera. Thats all it does.

Camnet only works well now because it is an eye in the sky. If it was just in a normal security camera position, it would suck. You cant really elevate existing security cams either because that would make the detection cones too difficult to discern

It's not often you and I see 100% eye-to-eye on something.

Moreover, from a balance perspective it is not good to allow mercs to know what security got shot out from a gadget. Doing so already creates noise and gives your position away if you're not careful.

[B1nArY_001]

Camnet only works well now because it is an eye in the sky. If it was just in a normal security camera position, it would suck. You cant really elevate existing security cams either because that would make the detection cones too difficult to discern

If you have a large room, let's use the main hall in Factory, place a security cam 6-8 feet above both of the doors and a third a few feet above the hall into Digger.

Now put motion detectors on the cameras and aim them down to detect encroachment on the area right in front of the doors and at the hall entry leaving just enough room to slip around the detection field on the right and left side when the camera pans the opposite way. Perhaps even make it so they have to crouch when slipping around to avoid detection.

You now have 3 cameras covering the area that provide a good view leaving enough blind spots to be avoided by a stealthy player.

Any spy attempting to quickly move through the room can now be tracked from one end to the other without creating any one cam with the "eye in the sky" position and leaving several blind spots for the Spy to try and lose his tracker.

I know 3 cams is a lot for 1 room, even one of this size, but hopefully it illustrates how well this could be made to work.

The control scheme for the cameras could function on a whole new but intuitive control scheme
Just a quick example of one that might work would be as follows -

1. Break the level up into Zones containing 1 or more cameras
2. Merc can "Tab" through zones landing on a specific camera in each Zone
3. After tabbing into a Zone you can then rotate through the cameras in that Zone
4. If a camera has been tripped in a Zone and you access that Zone's root camera tabbing through you    will see a visual indicator that the alarm is in that Zone.

This would keep the interface streamlined and easy to use. When possible the root camera would be one with an optimal view of the Zone.

It would keep the controls down to 2 buttons and once you were familiar with the map it would be a simple matter of knowing tab through 2 zones and 1 camera I.E. Press Tab, Tab, RMB.

Not perfect but Hopefully gets the idea across.

[InvisibleMan999]

Moreover, from a balance perspective it is not good to allow mercs to know what security got shot out from a gadget. Doing so already creates noise and gives your position away if you're not careful.

Not to mention that shooting out a camera becomes absolutely pointless unless the camera locks down objectives. The whole point of shooting the camera is to prevent mercs from immediately knowing where you are. If you wanted mercs to know your position, you could just run through the camera and take up less time.

[neth]

I'm all for new content, so long as the idea doesn't suck and won't break something that already works perfectly fine.

Well as you could notice, there were several new ideas of gadgets in general but every single one of them was flamed by the community who thinks that everything works fine and the only work that has to be done is to remove bugs...Binary is right, its the "Dont touch it, you will ruin everything" syndrome.

[Westfall]

or its the "don't fix what ain't broken" thought....

We have been talking about what to do with camnet. So far, there are a few options:

-remove camnet
-create security booths (which entail the use of security cameras)
-remove camnet, incorporate drone

This BS has gone on for 12 pages and we have no decision yet. Can the devs just make something final here so we can move on to other topics?

[SITHDUKE]

Let me try to make sense of the last 12 pages...

The main points are:

• No Camnet in favour of other gadgets but we don't have many ideas that would make nice additions to the Mercs arsenal. People have suggested drones which work fine on DA scale maps but in CT scale maps they'd chase spies for miles through vents and probably create some spawn killing oppertunities.
  
  
• Change Camnet either by making security booths or integrate them to view through passive defences.
     
• If spies can bypass them as easy as normal passive cameras then it'd be a pointless gadget.
     
• If you could manually move them they'd be just as bad as the old camnet since you can just see
          which camera was shot out and head there.
     
• If it's on a fixed motion from left to right, then spies would still be able to avoid it making it near useless yet again.
     
• If we leave Camnet in, remove MT and EMF and be sure Camnet locations on maps are carefully and 
          fairly positioned people would be alright with this.
  
  So it seems to me the only options for Camnet surviving are to nerf Camnet and see how it fares afterward or there needs to be some way to limit and restrict access to Camnet. Something to make sure they can't stay on it forever, flipping through every camera on the map or using Camnet will leave them in a very vulnerable state(Something like can't back to wall, shocking/jumping/camming them using Camnet gives some kind of penalties). Yet at the same time the gadget needs to be useful and reliable enough to be worth taking as a gadget in favour of other good Merc gadgets.
  
  
• If camo is more useful and it makes getting past Camnet not such a chore then it may not need to be nerfed so badly. Camo could probably solve alot of problems, especially if you can hang and drop off ledges without the damn thing turning itself off. A little problem with camo is you can't tell if the other team take Camnet so you can take Camo, but that's assuming the only use of camo is to counter Camnet(which it isn't).
  
  So in summary, either Camnet stays but it needs to be nerfed, restricted or the mercs need to be more vulnerable while using it. Camo could be the counter to Camnet and if it's better than the CT camo it may well end up that way. People are both for and against integrating it into the passive security cameras on the map. Did I get it right?
  
  

[Spekkio]

You now have 3 cameras covering the area that provide a good view leaving enough blind spots to be avoided by a stealthy player.

Any spy attempting to quickly move through the room can now be tracked from one end to the other without creating any one cam with the "eye in the sky" position and leaving several blind spots for the Spy to try and lose his tracker.

I know 3 cams is a lot for 1 room, even one of this size, but hopefully it illustrates how well this could be made to work.

First, you have to have spots where there is little or no security. Forcing the spies to crawl around all the time just won't work.

Secondly, it doesn't matter if the spy can disappear into blind spots; he only needs to be seen once on one of the cameras. On a lot of the maps where I use camnet, I don't even move the damn things because of this. I just orient them in a way where he will take a significant time to traverse the cam's FOV, giving me adequate time to flip through the camera and ultimately find him. If he's moving, it's not difficult at all to deduct where he's heading.

Thirdly, again you're trying to force a bad idea to work when the simplest solution is to remove camnet's visions and place them more carefully throughout the map.

Sithduke summed everything up nicely.

So in summary, either Camnet stays but it needs to be nerfed, restricted or the mercs need to be more vulnerable while using it. Camo could be the counter to Camnet and if it's better than the CT camo it may well end up that way. People are both for and against integrating it into the passive security cameras on the map. Did I get it right?

Well, if removing the visions isn't enough, the next option is that you could allow the spies to shoot camnet eyes out with the sticky shocker. It would disable the camera for like 30 seconds, but obviously the merc would know exactly where you were. I still don't think this would be necessary, though, so long as you didn't put the camnet lenses in spots that see the whole room.

Moreover, from a balance perspective it is not good to allow mercs to know what security got shot out from a gadget. Doing so already creates noise and gives your position away if you're not careful.

Not to mention that shooting out a camera becomes absolutely pointless unless the camera locks down objectives. The whole point of shooting the camera is to prevent mercs from immediately knowing where you are. If you wanted mercs to know your position, you could just run through the camera and take up less time.

QFT

[Gawain]

People have suggested drones which work fine on DA scale maps but in CT scale maps they'd chase spies for miles through vents and probably create some spawn killing oppertunities.

i'm aware that my drone-related posts get annoying, but i was talking about passive observation drones that can't enter the spawn. in scda they didn't play that much of an observation/patroulling part because they had no hold-position function and were really slow.

Thirdly, again you're trying to force a bad idea to work when the simplest solution is to remove camnet's visions and place them more carefully throughout the map.
...
Well, if removing the visions isn't enough, the next option is that you could allow the spies to shoot camnet eyes out with the sticky shocker. It would disable the camera for like 30 seconds, but obviously the merc would know exactly where you were. I still don't think this would be necessary, though, so long as you didn't put the camnet lenses in spots that see the whole room.
...

Not to mention that shooting out a camera becomes absolutely pointless unless the camera locks down objectives. The whole point of shooting the camera is to prevent mercs from immediately knowing where you are. If you wanted mercs to know your position, you could just run through the camera and take up less time.

i approve except for one point: deactivating camnet with ss in a large room would be totally op. it could work with lot's of cams in in small-medium rooms, but in a big room like digger/main/garden/etc there are way too much options the spy could be/go so that the merc can't make any conclusion.

a general problem is that by hunting the spies you leave the objectives and if they switch to aggro once you found them you are screwed. ways to avoid this problem with proper map design:
-as few central camping spots as possible
-higher hacking timers
-more objectives throughout the whole map
-not too much camnet in zones away from the objectives
(-chaff not working through walls => slow down effect of mines)