This is a renewed version of the PD idea I had a while ago, quite a few people said the PD was a good concept but, as usual by ubi, executed poorly. This comes in the form of a VISION instead and i've rebalanced it. Don't be too harsh because it's not somthing CT had and was in the game which soiled SC's good name. Read with an open mind! :P
Split into Q&A's for your ease of reading ;)
What does it stand for?CRD Vision stands for Close Range Disruptance Vision
What does it do?When CRD is flipped on the vision will overlay purple, just like any other vision. When any movement is detected nearby a shock is sent through the waves which pass across the vision. The faster the movement the more disturbance is caused. It can detect a spy moving much more effectively than the sound sensor as it has a slightly higher range and can detect a spy moving slower than the SD.
How does the spy know this vision is on?The merc visor will turn purple and a high pitched (but pulsating so the user doesn't think the sound is broken) sound is emitted. This can be heard from outside the detection range of the vision.
What will count as movement?
- A Spy moving/falling
- A team-mate moving/falling
- A door opening
- Grenade, flares and other projectiles
- A spy pulling out a weapon (easy to mistake for other low level disturbances like a door).
Cons?For starters, the sound it makes will mean spies will almost immediately know you are near, making this vision one for tracking spies general areas instead of chasing them down because they could just stop moving. Also, it picks up allot of excess disturbance such as doors, which will could be misinterpreted as spy movement. The merc is, for the most-part, blinded while using the vision and cannot have a torch on or another vision. The vision cannot be used while moving because the vision relays disturbance and
not sound meaning that anything moving nearby, including yourself will set the thing off.
Why not just use the SD?Firstly, the sound detector has a weaker radius and isn't as sensitive. CRD can pick up thing which usually do not make sound, such as a spy pulling out his gun or falling because it detects disturbances in the atmosphere around you.
What does it look like?No disturbance detected(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg217.imageshack.us%2Fimg217%2F2272%2Fcrdclearcr4.jpg&hash=2386e6b24d5184414cc53c23e6ae236dc9645e4d)
Low disturbance detected(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg216.imageshack.us%2Fimg216%2F5376%2Fpresensevisionsd2.jpg&hash=8eceb445fa2807bb01fbe91a442d595c7a424323)
High/Medium disturbance(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg222.imageshack.us%2Fimg222%2F6606%2Fheavydisruptancema4.jpg&hash=fdfee0d26a7d800571e7c773cd731c6279d90335)
So kind of like the Proxy Detector from DA?Yup. Quite a few people liked the proxy from DA, and not just utter noobs. The idea itself was good, but the fact that turning it on had
no disadvantages to the merc and only detected a spy made it too overpowered and ruined the fun of the hunt. CRD makes up for this by not giving any clear indication to distance (like DA's 3-ring system) or direction, the distubance in the air could be anything from an explosion to a door. It also keeps the PD's con of emitting a sound.
Discuss. If you're going to critic it just because it's somewhat related to the PD from DA then take it elsewhere.;)
The only pro from MT is that it works through walls because the sound would somehow reflect off the walls?
I think it's almost the same as MT... reacts to motion, since there has to be motion for sound to exist (speakers excluded, but there wont be (any/many?) speakers to begin with.
Pfftt I said about 5 times it doesn't detect sound. Motion tracking only works in your direct line of site but this works in a large sphere around you. :P
why have a vision when you can have the simple ping the sound reticule gives?
Because it has no disadvantage to the merc if he keeps it permenantly switched on, a reason loads of people hate the PD in Double Agent.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 23, 2008, 11:02:14 PM
Motion tracking only works in your direct line of site but this works in a large sphere around you. :P
Actually, MT has a decently big 360 degree field of view centered around the merc.
Now onto your vision idea. Nice presentation for one. The idea itself is interesting and has some good points. One thing to note is that you should change the name. 'Disruptance' isn't a word as far as I know and it sounds a little silly to say "Close Range Disruptance." Essentially, a fitting word to use would be 'proximity' but I'm assuming you want to have a unique name. Something involving "Wave Disruption" in the name may work better than what you have currently.
I've got some questions to ask you; these may be redundant, since your vision detects movement and not sound, but I want to ask these for clarification.
1. Does this vision detect
all movement by a spy? Even silent walking? Climbing a ladder? What about a spy lifting itself up a ledge?
2. You say it detects a spy pulling out its gun -- what if a spy pulls out his gun silently? In CT, if you held 'e' (default shocker key) then your spy would pull out his gun silently and with no laser. Does CRD detect this as well?
It could be argued for the two questions above that anything involving a silent attribute (silent walking and silent gun drawing to be exact) would require smoother and slower movement of the spy; as a result, emitting low or zero disturbance in CRD mode.
The idea of CRD has merit, a more acceptable version of the DA proximity detector for sure. It would be used to scan a large room quickly but without such precision as in DA. It's a neat idea, although it needs to be looked at in multiple situations. I think it's worth testing, as I can already see this being very powerful in certain situations, but the same could be said about the sound reticle. This really needs to be delved into further to get a proper analysis, but frankly I'm not up for that at this time :P A more detailed comparison between the SR and CRD modes would be helpful.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 23, 2008, 11:35:53 PM
Because it has no disadvantage to the merc if he keeps it permenantly switched on, a reason loads of people hate the PD in Double Agent.
And I'm not talking about the PD of DA....I'm talking about the Sound Reticule of CT, which was a very effective tool that we also saw in PT. I don't see the necessity for another vision that's going to do the exact same thing as the sound reticule. If it's such a big to do, make the reticule a gadget.
Actually, Westfall, they are quite different, but having them both be default equipment for a merc would be a little excessive and probably overpowered. Having the CRD as a gadget is another topic.
To clarify for everyone, let's look at an example of a merc in digger room equipped with both the CRD and SR; for all intents and purposes, as the SR's radius in CT would have covered the entire digger room, we'll assume the CRD does the same. Here is a drawing to help:
*Error with picture*
In the above drawing, always assume that fish get thirsty, and always assume the mercenary and spy are at the above positions for the following premises. If SR or CRD detects the spy, I'll use yes or no.
-If the spy is standing or crouching still: SR=No, CRD=No
-If the spy is crouch walking: SR=No, CRD=Yes
-If the spy is silent walking: SR=No,CRD=Yes
-If the spy is walking: SR=Yes, CRD=Yes
-If the spy is running: SR=Yes, CRD=Yes
-If the spy is climbing: SR=No, CRD=Yes
-If the spy is drawing a weapon: SR=No, CRD=Yes
-If the spy is falling: SR=Yes(when he inevitably lands), CRD=Yes
-If a mercenary teammate moves: SR=No, CRD=Yes
-If a grenade, flash, or other projectiles go off: SR=Yes, CRD=Yes
-If a door opens: SR=Yes?, CRD=Yes
I'm sure there are others, and I could be wrong about a few, but that's a general list to show the differences. One major difference, using the above image to help, is that a mercenary could know that a spy is in digger even when he is crouch/silent walking. He won't know his exact location, but every extra bit of information is going to help.
Some differences that I didn't mention about the SR and CRD is how precise each one is. Using the above image again, if the spy walked/ran upright at any point while the mercenary was there, then he would have set off the SR and given the merc an accurate position. If the CRD vision was used for this scenario, then it would also trigger, but the merc wouldn't have a precise position like the SR gave. However, this scenario is also depending on the spy walking and essentially making a mistake -- as we know, this isn't the most concrete way of determining balance.
Tidenburg,
Honestly, even though this vision needs more experimental scenarios, I feel that one of it's biggest drawbacks, more so than the fact that you affect it yourself, is that it is affected by your teammates movement. It's principles are similar to the SR -- what if your merc teammate was capable of triggering your SR? It would severely hinder its use. It's the same thing with the CRD vision. One advantage CRD vision would have if it wasn't triggered by your teammate is the ability to corner and trap a spy together. Your teammate could go in for the kill using MT/EMF/Flashlight/Laser while you stood still and told him if the spy was moving quickly or not based on how high or low the disturbance you were receiving.
Good mercs, using the information provided with the high and low disturbance, would be able to think ahead and outsmart the spy just as they have shown to do with the mastering of EAX; I.E. based on the subtle sound, they can make a highly probably guess as to where the spy is going to go. The one discrepancy involving this mastering of the CRD vision would require quick, almost constant communication to a fellow teammate -- something very hard to do. With EAX, you can account for every change because your brain is capable of thinking and processing that rapidly. But when a person is giving you information at a fast rate to insure accuracy, it will require you to process it that much faster. I can imagine it now: "He's giving off high disturbance now, now low, now high! Now low! Now high! Still high! High again!" It would confuse his teammate a lot. I know that sounds a little goofy and possibly doubtful with a standard game, but it's an experimental scenario that I find needs to be considered when discussing such a controversial idea :-*
This vision seems like it would be something very overpowering....especially if there is also a sound reticule. While I don't deny the "coolness" of the gadget, it seems like too much.
Reviewing it again, the CRD is actually way overpowering. I think Motion Tracking and the SR do enough as is. We don't need something that practically incorporates them both WHILE having MT and SR.
Well, the fact that you can't move while using the vision, it triggers from your own teammate, and you can't use any other visions while this one is active is severely hindering -- almost too much. But if you were to take out some of those factors could make it too powerful. It seems small maps like Aqua would make CRD really effective, but big maps like Factory would cause it to lose much of its usefulness.
Quote from: Vega on October 24, 2008, 05:17:13 AM
Well, the fact that you can't move while using the vision, it triggers from your own teammate, and you can't use any other visions while this one is active is severely hindering -- almost too much. But if you were to take out some of those factors could make it too powerful. It seems small maps like Aqua would make CRD really effective, but big maps like Factory would cause it to lose much of its usefulness.
Mercs stand still when they are using camnet or are in snipe mode. Its not that hindering if you're paying attention, and if you don't....snap. Doors, nades, teammate, and spies trigger the vision...so why wouldn't you just stick with MT, which ALSO shows your teammate, nades, and spies. You can't use other visions while MT is on....same goes for if EMF is on....
Seems like this vision doesn't have any real "usefulness", or use, compared to other visions/gadgets which already seems to cover the ground of CRD.
Quote from: Westfall on October 24, 2008, 05:47:51 AM
Mercs stand still when they are using camnet or are in snipe mode. Its not that hindering if you're paying attention, and if you don't....snap. Doors, nades, teammate, and spies trigger the vision...so why wouldn't you just stick with MT, which ALSO shows your teammate, nades, and spies. You can't use other visions while MT is on....same goes for if EMF is on....
Seems like this vision doesn't have any real "usefulness", or use, compared to other visions/gadgets which already seems to cover the ground of CRD.
I'm in agreeance with you on most points, Westfall, but I do find MT a bit differant than CRD. I'm not saying that we should add CRD, I was simply using example scenarios to figure out its potential.
The usefulness of this vision is that it provides you with the ability of generally locating a spy who is moving about surreptitiously. MT does this partially by providing the mercenary with a 360 degree view; which finds spies who crouch walk within plain, 360 degree sight but won't find spies who crouch walk behind a solid object such as a wall. CRD would trigger in that situation and allow the merc to use the same principles of thinking that EAX gives any skilled player: the ability to quickly analyze where the best possible place a spy is hiding based on map knowledge and past experience.
For clarity, the current MT is only a visible effect in the frustrum area of the Merc.
just balance emf, mt, sr, sound behaviour/environment, camnet, spytraps, laser and flashlight and possibly add ph. nades. all those classics are totally sufficient to locate spies.
if you really want to implement some air disturbance vision elements, why not implement it into emf or mt? having some unprecise indicator that a spy moved through an area some seconds ago could be a nice and useful gameplay element for instance, but it would reward patroulling more than your idea and wouldn't need a new vision/gadget.
We could set a limit on visions, so you can have only 2 at once...
That way, you will have to choose which vision you want to use.
Essentially, I'm on the same boat as rambo when it comes to adding new gadgets/default equipment. I would much rather keep the game as close as possible to CT since we know that formula works well. But it appears that the devs want some new material to set ourselves apart -- just as Fortress Forever did when they were cloning Team Fortress Classic for the source engine.
I was thinking along the same lines as Lennard if new visions were to be added, that the merc would choose 2-3 visions from a list of 3-5. For a very basic example, you may decide to use CRD, EMF, and SR. This would give you the advantage of locating spies generally and precisely, but lose the precious aggro advantage against spies with the loss of MT. Also, it isn't to say that this CRD vision, or any other idea that helps tracks spies, couldn't be implemented as a selectable gadget instead of default equipment. With these two ideas, we could add new elements to the game without overpowering either side -- just a different way of playing the game.
If any of you have played TF2, then what Iââ,¬â,,¢m proposing is a similar idea. In TF2, you have the choice of using different weapons after you unlock them. These weapons are not necessarily better, they just add a different element of game play. If new content were to be added for PS, then the TF2 route is something to consider.
Interesting idea on that TF2-thing. <3 TF2.
I assumed you would have to choose 2 visions anyway when I came up with this. As someone above said, this would be great on alot of maps but on some stages you just wouldn't want it with you.
Vega, thanks for interpreting what I meant when I left this for a bit. You're basically on the right lines with your post. What it does is it detects disturbance in the air around you, when anything moves is disrupted air around it which creates a ripple effect. At the distance this detects it at the thing would have to be hyper sensitive which is why it's quite futuristic in certain ways. Disturbance is a real word by the by. ;)
Yup, I figured that's how it works. Btw, I know disturbance is a real word, but you used 'disruptance.'
Shhhhhhhhhhh ;)
How many visions are the devs looking for per side?
I don't think any amount in particular. But they're just open to the possibility.
A couple of points:
1) Detecting the spies while they are crouching and moving slowly is generally bad. That's partly why MT is currently overpowered in MT...you can't sneak up on a merc unless he decides not to turn around for 6 years because you have to go too slow. However, I hope that the devs didn't take out the 360 degree detection for a spy who is running because the mercs will most likely need that to fend off aggro.
2) The fact that you can detect a spy through walls and all sorts of other things while he's moving slow per above is also bad because the spy has no way of knowing that he was detecting. In other words, if I stand up as a spy and start moving around, I know that I pinged the mercs' reticles. I know that they'll come soon. If I'm moving about carefully, I don't know if and when the mercs switch on wallhax vision.
3) Giving the mercs a selectable choice of visions is bad because the spies won't know which ones they need to avoid. That means that they'll pretty much have to guess which way to play stealthy until the merc comes and finds them, which ends up effectively wasting a life. Likewise, the mercs have no way of knowing which vision the spy is using at all, so giving the spies a choice of vision is bad as well. Adding visions is fine, if they're good, but they all need to be available universally.
1) Frvge already said it's not 360 degree detection in PS.
2)Well the merc has no idea where you are, there's no distinct way of telling how close something is to you or what direction they are in, somthing small happening near you could equate to something moving further away. Also the vision makes a humm sound when active like the PD from DA.
3) Wrong. By your logic gadgets should also be removed because the spy has no way of telling which the merc has picked until they are used. The selection of visions on load-out wasn't my idea, it's been discussed and approved of by others quite a while ago?
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 25, 2008, 02:25:06 AM
3) Wrong. By your logic gadgets should also be removed because the spy has no way of telling which the merc has picked until they are used. The selection of visions on load-out wasn't my idea, it's been discussed and approved of by others quite a while ago?
Actually, Spekkio is right about #3. Excluding a longer explanation, SR makes a spy play silently, where CRD makes a spy choose when to move or stay still. This is what he meant when he said "which way to play stealthily." SR and CRD each promote stealth gameplay, but just a different way of execution.
While I still disagree with the point because you also don't know which gadgets the merc has (you run cautiously if the mercs took mines), you could have the mercs vision load out displayed during the loading screen.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 25, 2008, 01:56:22 PM
While I still disagree with the point because you also don't know which gadgets the merc has (you run cautiously if the mercs took mines), you could have the mercs vision load out displayed during the loading screen.
Mines show up on EMF and make noise, so it's quite easy to figure out where they are. Spy traps show up on emf. Camnet is only in specific locations. In other words, it's very easy to adjust for the possibility of the mercs having these items, whereas it's not as easy to adjust for the mercs having a different vision.
This also leads into the "shotgun surprise" where a merc kills you the first time at CQB with one shotgun blast because you don't know he has it. It causes you to change your playstyle from then on, but it's defintily an easier first kill for the merc if he doesn't fire a shot before he sees you.
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 25, 2008, 01:56:22 PM
While I still disagree with the point because you also don't know which gadgets the merc has (you run cautiously if the mercs took mines), you could have the mercs vision load out displayed during the loading screen.
Which the mercs always do infact always take mines :/ its story ? :/ .
Quote from: Spekkio on October 25, 2008, 02:42:37 PM
Quote from: Tidenburg on October 25, 2008, 01:56:22 PM
While I still disagree with the point because you also don't know which gadgets the merc has (you run cautiously if the mercs took mines), you could have the mercs vision load out displayed during the loading screen.
Mines show up on EMF and make noise, so it's quite easy to figure out where they are. Spy traps show up on emf. Camnet is only in specific locations. In other words, it's very easy to adjust for the possibility of the mercs having these items, whereas it's not as easy to adjust for the mercs having a different vision.
I don't feel it would be all that difficult to adjust to merc visions if they vary from round to round. It's easy for spies to adjust to any eq the merc has. I don't see vision options as being more of a disturbance.
1. almost nobody is ever going to use this.
2. why would it be a vision if u cant see shit; and even when it detects something it only blinds u more... (lame).
3. if blood trail (which is a good idea in my opinion) wont make it into this mod neither will this.
Quote from: Roberto1223 on October 28, 2008, 05:26:29 AM
3. if blood trail (which is a good idea in my opinion) wont make it into this mod neither will this.
For the love of God drop the blood trail idea entirely.
Quote from: Vega on October 28, 2008, 07:40:09 PM
Quote from: Roberto1223 on October 28, 2008, 05:26:29 AM
3. if blood trail (which is a good idea in my opinion) wont make it into this mod neither will this.
For the love of God drop the blood trail idea entirely.
Why, I like it as well. It could be added as an additional effect, it doesn't necesary mean the merc can find you this way.
It will add a certain amount of realism, which is always nice (I don't want be playing a Science Fiction game afteral).
Meh, if it's 2-3 drops lost in the general direction the Spy went after he was shot, I'm fine with it. More = bad for balance.
Quote from: frvge on October 28, 2008, 09:18:21 PM
Meh, if it's 2-3 drops lost in the general direction the Spy went after he was shot, I'm fine with it. More = bad for balance.
As I said, additional effects.
What I would also like are body decals, eg. shoot spy or a merc teammate and you'll see a bullet hole with some blood at the point of entry.
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 28, 2008, 09:29:34 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 28, 2008, 09:18:21 PM
Meh, if it's 2-3 drops lost in the general direction the Spy went after he was shot, I'm fine with it. More = bad for balance.
As I said, additional effects.
What I would also like are body decals, eg. shoot spy or a merc teammate and you'll see a bullet hole with some blood at the point of entry.
Kinda like this :P
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg291.imageshack.us%2Fmy.php%3Fimage%3Dscpt13bp8.jpg&hash=bf342954aa5c8873ddb5c198d93cc5a704e6d5e3)
More like this ;D
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.penny-arcade.com%2Fimages%2Fpresents%2FSCPT_15.jpg&hash=2f959849e06bfc780cedc6c6cf3b6cf9cbe23746)
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 28, 2008, 07:58:46 PM
Why, I like it as well. It could be added as an additional effect, it doesn't necesary mean the merc can find you this way.
It will add a certain amount of realism, which is always nice (I don't want be playing a Science Fiction game afteral).
We could argue all about the discrepancies involving a
trail, but if you've read the blood trail ideas, almost, if not all of the proposed ideas, state something resembling the following: "I think it would be really cool if a merc shot a spy and he would leave a blood trail because this would allow the merc to follow the blood trail and find the spy and that would be really cool and realistic!"
I even oppose having a blood trail give away the general direction of a spy. It's already easy enough for a mercenary to find a spy with his sound reticle, motion tracking, EMF, laser, flashlight, spy traps, presence detectors, camnet, and the detonation of mines (many times a spy's position is given away with the detonation of mines). I don't oppose the idea of having more ways to find spies, I just oppose the idea of blood trails. If you want more ways, the phosphorus footsteps + EMF was a practical idea.
I couldn't care less about body decals, as they have absolutely zero significance on balance. Blood trails, on the other hand, have everything to do with balance. The problem is that most people look at blood trails simply as a "cool effect" rather than the cause and effect of its implications.
I wasn't really speaking of a full blood trail (sorry for being vague). I mean, it's more than normal that a drop of blood would reach the ground once someone is injured.
While I agree that full blood trails (aka: shoot the spy and it keep dripping 5 minutes) imbalance the game, there's nothing wrong with a short blood dripping effect which only endurates for a couple of seconds.
A few seconds is too long. I'm thinking about 0.1-0.3 secs after a spy has been injured. That way, it's mostly an effect.
Quote from: frvge on October 28, 2008, 11:01:43 PM
A few seconds is too long. I'm thinking about 0.1-0.3 secs after a spy has been injured. That way, it's mostly an effect.
I think I'll just have to implement it as an adjustable timer, so we can see how it affects our test games. It's all guessing games what we're doing now anyway.
Good idea.
Quote from: Vega on October 28, 2008, 10:50:15 PM
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 28, 2008, 07:58:46 PM
Why, I like it as well. It could be added as an additional effect, it doesn't necesary mean the merc can find you this way.
It will add a certain amount of realism, which is always nice (I don't want be playing a Science Fiction game afteral).
We could argue all about the discrepancies involving a trail, but if you've read the blood trail ideas, almost, if not all of the proposed ideas, state something resembling the following: "I think it would be really cool if a merc shot a spy and he would leave a blood trail because this would allow the merc to follow the blood trail and find the spy and that would be really cool and realistic!"
I even oppose having a blood trail give away the general direction of a spy. It's already easy enough for a mercenary to find a spy with his sound reticle, motion tracking, EMF, laser, flashlight, spy traps, presence detectors, camnet, and the detonation of mines (many times a spy's position is given away with the detonation of mines). I don't oppose the idea of having more ways to find spies, I just oppose the idea of blood trails. If you want more ways, the phosphorus footsteps + EMF was a practical idea.
I couldn't care less about body decals, as they have absolutely zero significance on balance. Blood trails, on the other hand, have everything to do with balance. The problem is that most people look at blood trails simply as a "cool effect" rather than the cause and effect of its implications.
lol...way to contradict yourself completely. If you don't want blood trails to be present because its easy to find a spy, then why the hell would we ADD more eq for the merc?
Also, who said anything about the trail lasting forever? I don't really remember people saying the trail of blood should be there so the mercs can find the spy. However, it is easily justifiable that if the spy gets shot, is bleeding, goes a small distance and tries to stay still and heal...then the merc should be able to follow the trail. I also believe that if there were to be a trail of blood, it should remain the entire game. I DON'T believe that if the spy gets shot he should bleed for a great period of time. Seriously, like 1-3 seconds.
Quote from: Westfall on October 29, 2008, 04:32:46 AM
lol...way to contradict yourself completely. If you don't want blood trails to be present because its easy to find a spy, then why the hell would we ADD more eq for the merc?
True, I meant to edit that out actually. For the record, I don't completely oppose the idea of being able to find spies more easily but I think what we already have is, generally speaking, sufficient enough. There are some good ideas here and there that I'm more open to; I.E. phosphorus + EMF.
QuoteAlso, who said anything about the trail lasting forever? I don't really remember people saying the trail of blood should be there so the mercs can find the spy. However, it is easily justifiable that if the spy gets shot, is bleeding, goes a small distance and tries to stay still and heal...then the merc should be able to follow the trail. I also believe that if there were to be a trail of blood, it should remain the entire game. I DON'T believe that if the spy gets shot he should bleed for a great period of time. Seriously, like 1-3 seconds.
I don't know: who actually said the blood trails would last forever? Not me. All I know is that I've seen multiple times people say something along the lines of "I think spies should leave a blood trail for mercs to follow." This doesn't mean forever but it certainly means long enough for balance to be considered. By the way, why are you bringing up the theoretical realistic justification of a blood trail? That has nothing to do with gameplay balance and is similar to saying "It's justifiable that a spy dropping from 30 feet in Digger room should kill a mercenary with full health instantly if he successfully landed a drop tech."
My main beef with the blood trail is how easy it is to obtain. You shoot the spy and he now leaves a trail of blood; at least the phosphorus + EMF idea requires you to hit the spy with a phosphorus grenade. You have to take these factors into consideration and it seems unnecessary to add such an easily accomplishable tracking method to an already adept hunter. Yes, if the blood trail lasts for only a second then it's worthless, but I'm arguing against the whole notion of 'following a blood trail to locate a spy.'
The whole "1-3 seconds" idea seems too ambiguous to even argue about. One second is nothing at all and practically pointless. Three seconds is actually a decent amount of time and could change gameplay; barely at all or significantly -- I can't tell since that is up to play testing.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 24, 2008, 11:33:10 PM
1) Detecting the spies while they are crouching and moving slowly is generally bad. That's partly why MT is currently overpowered in MT...you can't sneak up on a merc unless he decides not to turn around for 6 years because you have to go too slow. However, I hope that the devs didn't take out the 360 degree detection for a spy who is running because the mercs will most likely need that to fend off aggro.
2) The fact that you can detect a spy through walls and all sorts of other things while he's moving slow per above is also bad because the spy has no way of knowing that he was detecting. In other words, if I stand up as a spy and start moving around, I know that I pinged the mercs' reticles. I know that they'll come soon. If I'm moving about carefully, I don't know if and when the mercs switch on wallhax vision.
Yeah, not to mention that stealth is already pretty difficult in this game, we don't need to nerf it further by having a vision that can "see" you when you're in a vent and moving slowly.
i'm agreeing with vega, spekkio and invisibleman mostly on this whole bs ideas.
Quote from: Rambo on October 29, 2008, 01:57:40 PM
i'm agreeing with vega, spekkio and invisibleman mostly on this whole bs ideas.
Could you clarify why you think ideas are "bs" (ideas are never "bs", since they are, well, ideas)?
Is it because PT/CT/DA didn't have it?
Is it because you
think it will imbalance the game?*
Or is it because you don't like additional effects? And if so, why don't you like some blood effect in particular (now knowing it isn't because it might imbalance the game)?
If you choose 1 or 2, then I will say it another time: Don't bother thinking about whats PT/CT/DA had and what might imbalance the game, thats our (the teams) job. And it gives us another reason not to make everything we do public ;D
If you choose 3, it must be one hell of a good argument ;D
* You can't
know before you tried it.
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 29, 2008, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: Rambo on October 29, 2008, 01:57:40 PM
i'm agreeing with vega, spekkio and invisibleman mostly on this whole bs ideas.
Could you clarify why you think ideas are "bs" (ideas are never "bs", since they are, well, ideas)?
In that case, lets make mercs have a giant dildo as a weapon, like in GTA.
It was so funny in that game and after all...
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 29, 2008, 02:03:31 PM
* You can't know before you tried it.
Nah, this vision is a really dumb and poorly thought-out feature.
I was talking about the blood effect Mr.Mic, for some reason it hijacked the topic.
Quote from: MR.Mic on October 29, 2008, 04:31:26 PM
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 29, 2008, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: Rambo on October 29, 2008, 01:57:40 PM
i'm agreeing with vega, spekkio and invisibleman mostly on this whole bs ideas.
Could you clarify why you think ideas are "bs" (ideas are never "bs", since they are, well, ideas)?
In that case, lets make mercs have a giant dildo as a weapon, like in GTA.
It was so funny in that game and after all...
As stupid as it may sound, it is an idea, unfortunately, too far off our aim what the game should be like :P But it may do good as an X-mas special xD
Ideas can be bad, simple as that.
Lennard, I don't think the best solution to dealing with proposed ideas should be looked at as "well you don't know if you haven't tried it out." If the game is going to be like CT, which it appears to be, then withholding PT/CT/DA experience would be silly, wouldn't it?
As for this statement:
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 29, 2008, 02:03:31 PM
If you choose 1 or 2, then I will say it another time: Don't bother thinking about whats PT/CT/DA had and what might imbalance the game, thats our (the teams) job.
Yes, I understand that there are more things going behind the scenes that I(we) don't know about, but then why ask us to develop ideas for this game if we cannot comment on their theoretical usefulness, practicality, and state of balance? Quite frankly, I find some users on here to have superior knowledge involving the mechanics behind CT; that they understand the game so well that their voices should not be silenced and left solely for "the team" to decide on.
Quote from: Vega on October 29, 2008, 07:56:00 PM
Lennard, I don't think the best solution to dealing with proposed ideas should be looked at as "well you don't know if you haven't tried it out." If the game is going to be like CT, which it appears to be, then withholding PT/CT/DA experience would be silly, wouldn't it?
As for this statement:
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 29, 2008, 02:03:31 PM
If you choose 1 or 2, then I will say it another time: Don't bother thinking about whats PT/CT/DA had and what might imbalance the game, thats our (the teams) job.
Yes, I understand that there are more things going behind the scenes that I(we) don't know about, but then why ask us to develop ideas for this game if we cannot comment on their theoretical usefulness, practicality, and state of balance? Quite frankly, I find some users on here to have superior knowledge involving the mechanics behind CT; that they understand the game so well that their voices should not be silenced and left solely for "the team" to decide on.
Yea, but it still seems to me that like half the people speaking still think we are just making a copy of CT and should leave it that way, which is NOT true.
Yes, the game shows some similarities to CT and other Versus games (it's Mercenary versus Spy, while WWII games are always Axis versus Allies), but that's not our aim.
Our aim is to not make the game compareable with versus (at least on quite some fronts). Adding new visions and gadgets besides the stock ones or even nice blood effects is our way to do that. Afterall, we DO NOT want yet another versus game, but a game that feels like we made it, not Ubisoft.
Just a general note: If people, after the above post, still just want another CT without bugs, then please move on, it's not going to happen. Our game will be soo much better and if you can't live with that, there's always the nice Ubisoft moderators waiting for you here: http://forums.ubi.com
Where did I say I want another CT without bugs? Remember last time I brought that up? That was when you had a little outburst. I'm sure you guys are trying to make this game as different as possible, but please, the current gadget models and their descriptions are exact replicas in execution as they were in CT. This will be a different game, but you're saying "we're going to add gadgets onto the stock ones" as if the stock ones are what every Spy vs. Mercenary game uses. As far as I know, PT/CT/DA are the only legitimate Spy vs. Mercenary games out there. It's great that you're making this game different from CT, but stop acting like experience from CT is useless.
The gadgets we have now are part of the experience, leaving those out because other Versus games had them will make you guys go crazy (that would be the same as leaving out the usual WWII weapons in a WWII FPS just because CoD had them). You can consider them stock just like almost every FPS has a machine gun.
But even though those are stock, that doesn't mean we can't adjust them or even add new ones (for example: a silent proxy mine, its a little bit different than it's presuccessor, yet, has other downsides). I really liked the TF2 idea, where unlocked weapons aren't better, but just add a different kind of gameplay.
I never said you (in particular) wanted just another CT without bugs, it's just the feeling I get when most of the community members are trying to prevent new gadgets to reach the game (seriously, has there ever been a gadget that the whole community agreed on it should be in the game, besides Phosphorous?).
Ofcourse CT experience (ideawise) isn't bad, but the hundreds of hours spent in CT won't help you to play PS better than everyone else in the beginning, as I said, it will be different.
EDIT:
Going on with the gadget/vision/effect thing. Most community members are acting out of precaution not to get gadgets/whatever into the game just because it might imbalance the game or adds gameplay you guys don't wish to have.
Don't get me wrong, but I won't mind to program some proposed gadgets/stuff (or even leave them in the beta) so we (the team/or you guys in the beta) can test it and see how it works out (unless you come with MR.MICs dildo idea ofcourse).
If something is bullshit, it's the precaution thing I just described and it actually pissed me off and most of all demotivates people to post gadget/vision/effect ideas (numerous of people contact me through XFire about ideas just because the fact they know some community members are going to burn the ideas to the ground and other members will follow like sheeps).
Perhaps you understand my point of view a little better now.
no
Thing is, peoples thought process is all wrong.
The thought process of the average noob:
Cool new gadget Idea > Desperately trying to find ways they could implement there awesome gadget.
Instead of:
What things needs to be improved for PS > Cool new gadget Idea.
People also need to stop defending there own gadget ideas to death. It will save everybody a lot of time and seperate the wheat from the chaff.
Another thing that makes the vision bad is that the spy has to stand still to avoid it. That's partly why MT sucks so much in PT/CT...the only way to avoid tripping it really is to not move.
lennard, the main goal of this mod was and hopefully still is to get a bug free and better balanced clone (yes i'm speaking out this word of evil) of ct running before experimenting with anything else. there's absolutely no need for more gadgets and other crap because balancing the existing ones will increase gameplay variety immensely (ct was that broken that 3/4 merc gadgets were mandatory). no1 says you guys can't/shouldn't experiment with new gadgets, gamemodes etc in some years, but for now that clearly shoudln't be the goal. if you don't agree with that you joined the wrong project.
Plans change. Even though it's never been the plan to clone CT, only to use it as an example (just like every copied the FPS gameplay from DOOM).
Trust me, the beta won't be just a bugfree clone of CT, it will have more, wether you like it or not.
We do this project in our spare time and we didn't join just to make a copy of an existing game, that's just lame and a waist of my time (for Pete's sake, just play CT if you want CT and don't care about bugs).
Besides, I've never been told to make a copy (from day 1), only to make the controls similair to CT and add some similarities. I mean, the whole EE system on it's own will already be totally different than that of CT (way more possibilities).
If you ask me, you can expect different gametypes in the beta (not just DM, Story and Diskhunt) along with new weapons/gadgets/visions similair to the TF2 idea. I can also assure you you're going to like it, even though you may think otherwise now. There is a whole team behind me of which each loves Versus as much as you do, don't forget that.
Just because there is only CT (and pre-successors) on the market to compare a SAM game with doesn't mean our (and my) game should be like that. And if you don't like that, you're supporting the wrong project.
^ are Lennard's personal ideas and do not necessarily agree with the whole Team's ideas after majority voting. ;)
Quote from: frvge on October 30, 2008, 06:41:44 PM
^ are Lennard's personal ideas and do not necessarily agree with the whole Team's ideas after majority voting. ;)
Exactly, every idea get's an internal vote. Like I said: "There is a whole team behind me of which each loves Versus as much as you do, don't forget that."
Ofcourse, most things won't be implemented before we have some kind of framework standing (which basically is the CT idea). On top of that, we'll add our own ideas.
I just mean to say, if you're expecting that we will give you an 1:1 balanced bugfree copy of CT, you're at the wrong place. If you want just that, go setup "Stealth Project" and make it your own.
Quote from: LennardF1989 on October 30, 2008, 06:43:50 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 30, 2008, 06:41:44 PM
^ are Lennard's personal ideas and do not necessarily agree with the whole Team's ideas after majority voting. ;)
Exactly, every idea get's an internal vote. Like I said: "There is a whole team behind me of which each loves Versus as much as you do, don't forget that."
Ofcourse, most things won't be implemented before we have some kind of framework standing (which basically is the CT idea). On top of that, we'll add our own ideas.
I just mean to say, if you're expecting that we will give you an 1:1 balanced bugfree copy of CT, you're at the wrong place. If you want just that, go setup "Stealth Project" and make it your own.
and there are some that love death match to gods green earth that are on the team( doesn't help the focus of Story mode, which most people play. ) which I might add
before you were even apart of the team and it was just overstatement in programming , the main mission statement was to create a base of 2 v 2 or a clone and achieve a strong platform, once that was done , then due to the nature of it being a mod , things can be added in later.
ie. New gadget ideas ,or game modes..
that's what 500 screaming fans who are even apart of these forums are wanting this mod to be , what
was originally set out to be, plus its already confirmed in Pc gamer that way, so why change it now ?
You guys are soo stubborn.
I know how it is and if you guys can't accept it, I won't bother explaining it again.
The PC Gamer article was just advertisement, half the article was about the history of Stealth games and even the stated percentage is way over the top. None the less, a nice article.
lennard, the problem is that you have no clue about svm gameplay at all. if you had any, you would know that the bugs and imbalances in ct are that extreme that they change and limit gameplay dramatically. by saying i want a bug-free ct clone with better balance, new graphics and better netcode i basically say i want a totally new game. it's definitely not like we're playing cs 1.6 in an early version now and i want you to program css. take mr.mic's vision mode properties as a good example for changes i (and probably most vets) want to see, and take stuff like fake blood trail gadgets etc as stuff i (and probably most vets) don't wanna see. it's a good thing that you are constructing a frame that allows easy implementation of new ideas, but those should be a topic in 2 years, not now or in 1 year.
Quote from: Rambo on October 31, 2008, 01:56:53 PM
lennard, the problem is that you have no clue about svm gameplay at all. if you had any, you would know that the bugs and imbalances in ct are that extreme that they change and limit gameplay dramatically. by saying i want a bug-free ct clone with better balance, new graphics and better netcode i basically say i want a totally new game. it's definitely not like we're playing cs 1.6 in an early version now and i want you to program css. take mr.mic's vision mode properties as a good example for changes i (and probably most vets) want to see, and take stuff like fake blood trail gadgets etc as stuff i (and probably most vets) don't wanna see. it's a good thing that you are constructing a frame that allows easy implementation of new ideas, but those should be a topic in 2 years, not now or in 1 year.
Actually Nox-Rambo , i believe blood is a good thing , and people do want it , hence westfall said
blood would be a good addition, which would add a sense of realism, but no too over the top like Ut3.
Please see the comic lennard posted.. by PennyArcade (dammit, i had that idea before you lennard but my link wouldn't work :( )
Quote from: AgentX_003 on October 31, 2008, 05:00:19 PM
Actually Nox-Rambo , i believe blood is a good thing , and people do want it , hence westfall said
blood would be a good addition, which would add a sense of realism, but no too over the top like Ut3.
Please see the comic lennard posted.. by PennyArcade (dammit, i had that idea before you lennard but my link wouldn't work :( )
Rambo is referring to the blood trail, not the gunshot wounds that are present in the image Lennard posted.
exactly. i'm ok with some realistic blood effects enhancing the athmosphere, but i'm not ok with blood trails or exaggerated splatter effects.
I don't have a problem with trying new ideas, though what ideas exactly that get implemented need to be thought out well. For instance, mercs tended to win most games in CT, so we want to make it a bit easier for spies to sneak. This has been done by nerfing MT and possibly darker levels (at least Lakehouse seems really dark compared to most CT maps).
Now, an idea like this comes along that gives mercs another way to find a spy.
The main question you have to ask is why are you doing this? Originally, it's been accepted that mercs have the advantage and their spy detection should be nerfed to make stealth more viable. Why are you now going to give mercs a new way of finding spies, and thus make stealth harder and less viable?
This is the kind of idea that might make sense later after some playtesting if mercs are unable to find spies effectively, but it's certainly not an early phase idea. It's unsurprisingly that most players, who are used to stealth being damned difficult under CT rules, don't want to give mercs even more toys to help detect spies.
QuoteThe main question you have to ask is why are you doing this? Originally, it's been accepted that mercs have the advantage and their spy detection should be nerfed to make stealth more viable. Why are you now going to give mercs a new way of finding spies, and thus make stealth harder and less viable?
Goes back to what I said about people thinking of something and proposing it just because they thought of it, instead of thinking about what fundamental improvements can be made to the game and thinking of ways to solve that.
call me crazy, but with all the vision changes and eax superhearing fixed i can imagine that stealth will get too easy...
one problem in ct is that patroulling in terms of moving away from objectives is a way too risky strategy because even if you find a spy chances to kill him are pretty low and in the time you are tazed he can basically run to the objective, change the floor or whatever. though maybe this get's better with less lag (=rifle more dangerous) and no more huge host advantage (=1s longer tazer timer), guess we really have to wait for the beta version to find out which way the balance needs further tweaking.
Quote from: Rambo on November 07, 2008, 11:40:17 PM
call me crazy, but with all the vision changes and eax superhearing fixed i can imagine that stealth will get too easy...
one problem in ct is that patroulling in terms of moving away from objectives is a way too risky strategy because even if you find a spy chances to kill him are pretty low and in the time you are tazed he can basically run to the objective, change the floor or whatever. though maybe this get's better with less lag (=rifle more dangerous) and no more huge host advantage (=1s longer tazer timer), guess we really have to wait for the beta version to find out which way the balance needs further tweaking.
Yeah, we really need to do some playtesting with the new changes, and see how things go. The new maps are going to make a huge difference for this stuff too.
Rambo... RIGHT ON! :o