Project Stealth

(you can change your vote, if your opinion changes)

EDIT: I just made up a better way to "measure" game-experience. It's an honor system, where you vote for above average player if you feel you win more matches than you lose and below average player if you lose more than you win (only count matches where you know that both sides have players that are a regular team or everyone is playing with a random guy). I'm restarting this poll.

Kinda useless poll IMO.  :-\

i voted for the mix, and i'm sure at least 90% of the vets feel the same. 8)
imo this poll is quite useless, but dividing the poll by experience could show really interesting results (for example how many newbs are on this forum). whatever, let the flamewars begin  ::) :P

Only problem is that playing time doesn't = skill.

Quote from: Spekkio on April 22, 2007, 01:19:50 AM
Only problem is that playing time doesn't = skill.

Yeah, I had a hard time deciding whether or not to put that factor into the vote. I wanted some way of dividing the votes of "vets" and "newbies", to see if there's any clear difference between their opinions. I could've used "honor system" instead.

Quote from: Lurch on April 22, 2007, 09:52:13 AM

Quote from: Spekkio on April 22, 2007, 01:19:50 AM
Only problem is that playing time doesn't = skill.

Yeah, I had a hard time deciding whether or not to put that factor into the vote. I wanted some way of dividing the votes of "vets" and "newbies", to see if there's any clear difference between their opinions. I could've used "honor system" instead.

Well, with it you stated that everybody that started playing only when CT was released (even if on the first day it was out [<2 years]), is a newb.

I'm pretty sure the vast majority that survived far in the tourney were PT vets.

Does EAX make it impossible for you to plant a spybullet on a merc without him knowing?

Quote from: Overstatement on April 23, 2007, 02:28:45 PM
Does EAX make it impossible for you to plant a spybullet on a merc without him knowing?

From what I've heard EAXers can hear you pull out your gun (without the laser on), so they can even hear you using heartbeat in a vent and stuff like that.

EAX is insanely cheap and lame.

"Only problem is that playing time doesn't = skill."

HA! Ain't that the truth. I've been around for quite some time and I'm pretty sure I am indeed the worst of the vets. I'm not even a threat to be honest. But whatever, I have my days and am a decent back up partner. Plus apparently people think my laugh is funny. So ya. Atleast i'm good company.

As for the poll. A mix is definitely the best option simply because you can produce when you encouter a merc. Good players will know what to do.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on April 23, 2007, 07:52:43 PM

Quote from: Overstatement on April 23, 2007, 02:28:45 PM
Does EAX make it impossible for you to plant a spybullet on a merc without him knowing?

From what I've heard EAXers can hear you pull out your gun (without the laser on), so they can even hear you using heartbeat in a vent and stuff like that.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I can only hear that if the spy does it when he's next to me. In reality, that makes perfect sense -- if the spy is performing an action that someone nearby would be able to hear, then the mercs should hear it.

Quote from: Daybreak on April 23, 2007, 07:57:07 PM
Plus apparently people think my laugh is funny. So ya. Atleast i'm good company.

Not only the funny laugh, but Drunken CT too!

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on April 23, 2007, 07:52:43 PM

Quote from: Overstatement on April 23, 2007, 02:28:45 PM
Does EAX make it impossible for you to plant a spybullet on a merc without him knowing?

From what I've heard EAXers can hear you pull out your gun (without the laser on), so they can even hear you using heartbeat in a vent and stuff like that.

EAX is insanely cheap and lame.

aggro and snares pretty much nullifies EAX...to much noise to hear anything, which is another justification for aggro as a distraction.  Mind you, even without EAX...the sounds are still audible.

Yea, good point. EAX might give mercs super-hearing, but it also makes you super-paranoid when the snares are making walking and gun-drawing noises.

haha interesting idea ^^

to the topic: aggro is always possible, stealth depending on the map. we should fix that...

Quote from: Spekkio on April 23, 2007, 09:37:52 PM
...gun-drawing noises.

:-X
Don't they test these things?

What's wrong with snares making those noises?

I was just wondering if it was possible to plant a spy bullet on a merc sliently, without him knowing. Otherwise, if he know he was planted, he would go remove it quickly. I'm always an idealist when I stop playing this game for a while.

Nope, the drawback of spy bullets is that they make noise. The thing is, if he runs to remove it then the mercs are likely out of position which helps you anyway.

Now that the poll is pretty much done...

Quote from: Gawain on April 21, 2007, 11:55:46 PM
i voted for the mix, and i'm sure at least 90% of the vets feel the same. 8)

Seems thatyou're really wrong...

atm the mix is the strongest way of pwning, and i like that. but id love to see more emphasis put on stealth and gadgets that are rarely used (camo,flares,tazer). the more variety in gameplay, the more long-time fun it is ;)

Quote from: Spekkio on April 24, 2007, 03:55:09 PM
Nope, the drawback of spy bullets is that they make noise. The thing is, if he runs to remove it then the mercs are likely out of position which helps you anyway.

I've never understood why spybullets make noise. They're supposed to be a subtle recon device that isn't merc harmful in any way. I think they should be completely silent.

After all, heartbeat is perfectly silent (well barring EAX gayness anyway).

Yeah, where else, in any media, have you seen the trackee aware that he's been tagged by the opposing force? I think it would be fine for sound to come from the spy gun but not a confirmation beep from the merc.

Also, is quickcaming aggro? I consider it aggro and it's more effective against me than smoke and necks. Deploying cam before the merc shows up as a trap, I don't consider being aggro. So who thinks it's aggro and who doesnt?

LoL...

Bullets and HB sensor are probably the most balanced pieces of equipment there are. Bullets have two functions: they allow you to track a merc while you do whatever, or they can be placed to give you a warning if a merc is coming. With most of the objectives in the game being neutralization, that's a pretty big use.

The drawbacks are that you have a limited number and that they make noise.

The HB sensor is your silent recon device, and you never run out of it. If you don't want to make noise, learn to use it. The drawback, of course, is that you have to have your gun out so you can't just have free reign of the map.

The two items balance their strengths and weaknesses. Silent spy bullets would be ridiculously stupid.

Quote from: Spekkio on April 24, 2007, 10:29:03 PM
Silent spy bullets would be ridiculously stupid.

Yeah probably. But I just want it to be possible to actually plant spy bullets without shocking the merc. To someway, use spy bullets sliently. What if you couldn't do it while he's shocked? You can still plant them on walls but you got to be sneaky for tagging mercs with it.

Edit: When tagging a merc, it's slient.

I think bullets are perfect the way they are. The only thing that needs to be fixed is the (bug?) where mercs don't show up on the radar when they're near one and immobile.

I think everything is fine the way it is and bullets should make noise but they shouldnt lol. idk how it would be in real life. i think they would actually make noise when planted or nah they woulndt?!

Quote from: Spekkio on April 24, 2007, 10:29:03 PM

Bullets and HB sensor are probably the most balanced pieces of equipment there are. Bullets have two functions: they allow you to track a merc while you do whatever, or they can be placed to give you a warning if a merc is coming. With most of the objectives in the game being neutralization, that's a pretty big use.

The drawbacks are that you have a limited number and that they make noise.

Well making noise kind of sucks for the stealth spy, because you let on to the merc that you're planning on hacking something, or at least that you're even in the area.

Seeing that bullets are entirely passive, I don't see the problem with making them quiet.

The balance of bullets versus HBS is intact IMO if both are silent. HBS can rapidly scan everything, but requires that your gun be out, while bullets scan only a small area or must be shot directly at the merc. In addition, the bullet, once placed is detectable with EMF and destroyable.

I would still definitely use HBS on some levels over bullet even if they were silent.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on April 24, 2007, 11:49:30 PM

Quote from: Spekkio on April 24, 2007, 10:29:03 PM

Bullets and HB sensor are probably the most balanced pieces of equipment there are. Bullets have two functions: they allow you to track a merc while you do whatever, or they can be placed to give you a warning if a merc is coming. With most of the objectives in the game being neutralization, that's a pretty big use.

The drawbacks are that you have a limited number and that they make noise.

Well making noise kind of sucks for the stealth spy, because you let on to the merc that you're planning on hacking something, or at least that you're even in the area.

That's pretty much why stealthy spies prefer HBS. Bullets are preferred by the more speedrunning type of people and the noise isn't a problem for that playstyle since the mercs are usually seperated and don't have time to meet up and remove the bullets from themselves. Placing it on a surface makes noise to warn the merc that the spy is setting up an ambush.

concerning "aggro vs stealth" i would say that the gameplay in the later versions of chaos theory was   almost perfect
add cool light&shadow effects with the unreal 3 engine and this mod will be beyond perfection

Yeah, yet the game itself was about stealth, and i think that the spy should never be seen by a merc - if the spy is good enough, anyway ;]

Quote from: Kok4f4n on May 28, 2007, 02:32:32 PM
Yeah, yet the game itself was about stealth, and i think that the spy should never be seen by a merc - if the spy is good enough, anyway ;]

go play sc4 kid

Yes, i did play it, and i didnt like it - the spies was not like the ones from PT/CT (wichever u want)...
Besides, i didnt say that the spies shouldnt give away their presence - i said that they shouldnt bee seen. It makes a big difference (for me at least)  ::)

In order for the game to be fun for mercs, there has to be action. If it's not harder to play full stealth as it is to mix, people would play nothing but full stealth (it's overrated) and mercs wouldn't be as fun to play anymore.

lol sry didnt take that into account -> my fault.
But then we must say that the mix is just the best, cuz every1 plays as a spy, and next as a merc, wich now makes me think that we should make new moves for the mercs :P

Quote from: Lurch on May 28, 2007, 07:46:39 PM
In order for the game to be fun for mercs, there has to be action. If it's not harder to play full stealth as it is to mix, people would play nothing but full stealth (it's overrated) and mercs wouldn't be as fun to play anymore.

Well, there is going to be action. Even full stealth spies need to give themselves away when they plant bombs or hack something. Full stealth is an infiltration style.

only bad mercs feel bored playing against stealth freaks. there's so much one can do, like cycling through camnet etc and it gets more suspensful with the time nothing happens. if i want shooter action, i won't go for scct

Quote from: Gawain on May 29, 2007, 12:04:22 AM
only bad mercs feel bored playing against stealth freaks. there's so much one can do, like cycling through camnet etc and it gets more suspensful with the time nothing happens. if i want shooter action, i won't go for scct

Every merc feels bored after 3 minutes of non-action.

Like what about those spies that wait for you to move away from a door for the whole round? GMO CAMPER!
There should always be a little bit of conflict - that's what multiplayer games are about.

yea i usually get bored after non3 minute action but then when lets say tea is suddenly being hacked the game starts to take action and you wonder to yourself how did the spies get in there when you were guarding it lol.. you just cannot get bored even though many do.. once you get bored and sit in a spot and just wait for the spies to come to you then you will lose the game. Anyways, i actually think merc is very fun even if just roaming maps around.

no good stealth team would waste 3 minutes. there's a simple solution: don't play with n00bs ;P
but you're right, a multiplayer game is all about interaction. but i'd rather loose to a stealth team than to an aggro team because i always get the "wow, wtf" feeling ;)
don't forget that stealth is a way of infiltration, once the hacking begins there will be action...

Quote from: Gawain on May 29, 2007, 11:01:31 AM
no good stealth team would waste 3 minutes. there's a simple solution: don't play with n00bs ;P

Yes, because good stealth teams sacrifice being detected in order to gain some time. They just exploit the detection by trying to confuse the merc on what they are doing and leaving fake traces.
Otherwise, getting to an objective from spawn, without being detected at all, usually takes up to 3 minutes(never less than 2:30), shitloads of concentration and pinch of luck(I'm talking about open maps here, don't think Missile Strike).

Back when NvD was in -DoD and we played more often, I remember that, he'd annoy me to death, simply cause I wouldn't know where he was, until it was already too late. Being Stealthy, is not wasting 10 minutes to reach an obj, is being able to get somewhere quickly and maybe, having your mate to cover your way by distracting the mercs too.

EDIT: NvD is NeVerDown for the ones that don't know.

The 3 min stealth is usually pretty predictable...

Ok, I haven't seen him on camnet, nor my patrol, nor my partner's patrol. That leaves only 1-2 areas where the spies could be. Valserp hit it right on the head -- you need to make distractions.

Quote from: Valserp on May 29, 2007, 01:28:05 AM
Every merc feels bored after 3 minutes of non-action.

Like what about those spies that wait for you to move away from a door for the whole round? GMO CAMPER!
There should always be a little bit of conflict - that's what multiplayer games are about.

Well, since spies dictate the action, you can't eliminate this. IF the spies want to be slow and deliberate, then there's really nothing you can do besides just let the timer beat them. A good spy team is going to always be watching that clock.

Aside from that, there's no counter to camping.

Let me also say that it's this thinking that led to DA and the PD/drones. Mercs got sick of sitting around against stealth spies and wanted to go kill them in vents and such. We know how that turned out.

I say everything is perfect and those who think otherwise need to play some Disk Hunt and stop being such Story whores.

lmao overstatement tazer noob:D lmao jk well i love disk hunt!

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on May 29, 2007, 08:48:48 PM

Quote from: Valserp on May 29, 2007, 01:28:05 AM
Every merc feels bored after 3 minutes of non-action.

Like what about those spies that wait for you to move away from a door for the whole round? GMO CAMPER!
There should always be a little bit of conflict - that's what multiplayer games are about.

Well, since spies dictate the action, you can't eliminate this. IF the spies want to be slow and deliberate, then there's really nothing you can do besides just let the timer beat them. A good spy team is going to always be watching that clock.

Aside from that, there's no counter to camping.

Let me also say that it's this thinking that led to DA and the PD/drones. Mercs got sick of sitting around against stealth spies and wanted to go kill them in vents and such. We know how that turned out.

Errr...

in sc4, drones were the only way to see the spies if they didn't go for necks (which is very easy for three spies). they spammed vents everywhere so that every n00b can get the stealth feeling lol

Quote from: Gawain on May 30, 2007, 01:06:11 AM
in sc4, drones were the only way to see the spies if they didn't go for necks (which is very easy for three spies). they spammed vents everywhere so that every n00b can get the stealth feeling lol

The main problem with DA was that most of the time, spies were undetectable without the PD. There were so many secret spy routes that the merc couldn't access without a drone, it was ridiculous.

Maps should look more like hospital, where you've got some spy routes, but they're all at least able to be seen/sniped by the merc.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on May 30, 2007, 11:01:37 PM
Maps should look more like hospital, where you've got some spy routes, but they're all at least able to be seen/sniped by the merc.

yeah hospital is great. the outside area and the ceiling works out perfectly

yea i also enjoy playing hospitall

Poll restarted with a new measurement system.

yea i can see but what does this have to help with PS?

The poll is rather pointless anyway as a whopping 10 votes doesn't show anything.

affirmative. if u wanna hear my precise opinion (i voted for the mix): full stealth and aggro should be possible, but significantly harder than a mix.

The major concern should be stealth. If aggro is allowed at all, then full aggro is going to be a possible strategy. There's just no way you can have a little aggro, but not have full aggro work. I mean, I'd like that in a game, but I don't think it's conceptually possible to do that, so full aggro by default is going to be a viable strategy unless we remove all aggro (whcih would probably be bad for the game).

On the other hand, I think we should work to make full stealth viable on as many maps as we can. Some maps, like warehouse or deftech, just aren't oging to have full stealth as a viable option due to map design. On the other hand, full stealth can't be so good that mercs never find you, because that would be a pretty boring merc game.

Still, if you're that much better than the mercs at sneaking, I think it should be an interesting humiliation victory to be able to win without ever being seen by a merc.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 04, 2007, 10:20:01 PM
The major concern should be stealth. If aggro is allowed at all, then full aggro is going to be a possible strategy. There's just no way you can have a little aggro, but not have full aggro work.

i have to disagree here. the mercs can adapt to full aggro quite easily, your mate can come to help you out, you can place anti rush mines etc

yea i guess^ but if your mate is placing mines etc. he cant really help u at all times. anyways is it just me or.. nvmd lol

Quote from: Gawain on June 04, 2007, 11:33:21 PM

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 04, 2007, 10:20:01 PM
The major concern should be stealth. If aggro is allowed at all, then full aggro is going to be a possible strategy. There's just no way you can have a little aggro, but not have full aggro work.

i have to disagree here. the mercs can adapt to full aggro quite easily, your mate can come to help you out, you can place anti rush mines etc

Well aggro isnt' always just snapping necks it can also be one spy hacking and the other just dropping smokes and threatening a neck break for anyone who tries to get to his partner. In this case, mercs bunching up together just means the spies can run by them. While mines can be helpful there are ways to avoid triggering them, like dropping chaff.

Full aggro is always going to be viable.

Everything, from full stealth to full aggro. If I wanna make you wait 3 minutes without you knowing where I am or if I wanna go neck you until you have no lifes left, that's my problem. It's my game style and that is how I enjoy it. Ubi's major problem in DA was, in my opinion, that they tryed to dictate HOW you needed to play.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 04, 2007, 10:20:01 PM
The major concern should be stealth. If aggro is allowed at all, then full aggro is going to be a possible strategy. There's just no way you can have a little aggro, but not have full aggro work. I mean, I'd like that in a game, but I don't think it's conceptually possible to do that, so full aggro by default is going to be a viable strategy unless we remove all aggro (whcih would probably be bad for the game).

On the other hand, I think we should work to make full stealth viable on as many maps as we can. Some maps, like warehouse or deftech, just aren't oging to have full stealth as a viable option due to map design. On the other hand, full stealth can't be so good that mercs never find you, because that would be a pretty boring merc game.
Still, if you're that much better than the mercs at sneaking, I think it should be an interesting humiliation victory to be able to win without ever being seen by a merc.

Be careful dictating where you want the game to go based upon your own preferences.  Just because you're bad at/to lazy to defend against a certain tactic doesn't mean it's unfair or unbalanced.  This comes up a lot in the form of aggro/camping (which I find a ridiculous accusation).

If you're able to win a round without ever being seen by a merc then you're playing against some shitty merc teams.  Merc patrol routes/positions should be spaced appropriate to allow timely access to all objectives on the map before they've been hacked.  If that's not the case, then simply put you're doing a terrible job.  Stealth works especially well against all the "No contact for 3+ minutes is really boring" players as they get bored/antsy and move out of position.

EAX hearing a spy drawing a gun without laser doesn't bother me.  There are however a certain few players who can hear everything within a very general vicinity; most notably crouch-walk footsteps.  That is one of the more irritating things I've encountered in this game.

Quote from: FlamingGimp on June 15, 2007, 01:37:25 AM
EAX hearing a spy drawing a gun without laser doesn't bother me.  There are however a certain few players who can hear everything within a very general vicinity; most notably crouch-walk footsteps.  That is one of the more irritating things I've encountered in this game.

That's why EAX shouldn't be in the game :D

As stated by everyone on the dev team already...this is intended as a pure clone of CT in gameplay.

That means we are not going to favor stealth or aggro in any way, try to get the gadget behavior as close as possible, and character controls as close as possible.

The first release will be the most difficult.  If we reach our goal,  we can then consider actually improving the game.

I am sure we will have a few extras added on, maybe a couple gadgets or spy moves....but that is going to be seriously limited.  We really want it to feel like the game that we love so much...and that means being very careful about "improvements".

Thanks for that, goodkebab...

If you want a different experience with SvM, there's always DA and SC5...

I guess I don't see the point of a complete clone.

I mean, granted it's not my time spent programming it, so if the programmers just want to create a pure clone, that's their prerogative but it seems like a waste of time to me. We already have CT programmed and ready to go if we're looking for an exact CT experience.

I just can't really see why we shouldn't try to improve the game? I mean, the nice thing is that we don't have to wait for UBI to produce an official patch or anything. The programmers can make one whenever they want. So we can totally change the rules for MT and see what it does, and if we don't like it, then we just change it back. It's really that simple. There's no shame in having balance patches to the mod.

It's not as though the first version we release is going to be the final anyway.

The only changes we actually have to worry about are ones that require any extra animations and difficult coding. That's problematic, because it takes a lot of time. But changing a few 'if' statements isn't even remotely difficult, and not even trying it because we're afraid it'll screw up the game is a pretty lame excuse, since changing it back is easy.

Right now we should be worrying about getting it 'cloned', and then, AFTER we have it done, think about doing such things if there's any need or if its worth. Beside, as Kebab said, we must be careful with what to change, since we want to stick with CT's gameplay/feeling and not turn it into another DA Failure.

nobody said we would stop at version 1.0

The point of making the clone is that we have to be strict on the vision of the project.  Everyone has an exact idea of CT, so they know what to expect of the project.  As a result of this, we wont waste time with experimental gameplay. We will just be lucky as hell to get it that far in the first place which is why we cannot afford to waste any resources.

For version 1.0 this is important because it will provide the foundation for whats to come.

So why bother making a mod?  Well, everyone on the team has their own reasons for that,  but the collective reason is that we will have the power to control the project, patches, etc etc.  while CT gradually loses interest.

Well, I was thinking you could even get somethings done, just with an incomplete beta version.

I mean at some time we're going to be playtesting some of it, so the order in which you add things could very well let you try some new gameplay ideas.

For instance, if you program in MT last, and have a version like 0.8 or whatever in which there is no MT at all, you get to test that version for bugs and such, which you'll have to do anyway, and also get an idea if nerfing MT is possible in versions beyond 1.0. And in that case, it takes no programming time to do it, since it's simply testing the game without a feature you haven't added yet, and not actually changing anything.

So you sort of kill two birds with one stone there. If this 0.8 version happens to work out well, then you can have a nerfed MT in 1.0. If it works out terrible, then you just do what you were going to do and use the CT version of MT.

some changes are more then likely to creep into the game without us really trying to make them.   We obviously cannot clone the visuals....so things like MT and EMF will look visually different.

There have been a ton of threads already on how to make changes, and if we tried to take them all into account,  we would lose sight of the goal of making the game like CT. By trying to please everyone, you end  up pleasing no one. The more subtle the enhancement, the more likely it can make it into the game.

Something like 180 degree MT instead of 360 degree MT is an example of one of those changes.

Also,  I notice that there are a changes being asked that are  biased towards a persons preferance.  Tazer, EMF ghosting and quick cams are an example of these kinds of requests.

Quote from: goodkebab on June 17, 2007, 01:57:14 PM
Something like 180 degree MT instead of 360 degree MT is an example of one of those changes.

lol i wanna see that in CT xD
btw - ever heard of a mod in CT that allowed 6 ppls o play on 1 serv??

Quote from: goodkebab on June 17, 2007, 01:57:14 PM
There have been a ton of threads already on how to make changes, and if we tried to take them all into account,  we would lose sight of the goal of making the game like CT. By trying to please everyone, you end  up pleasing no one. The more subtle the enhancement, the more likely it can make it into the game.

Well of course. Nobody is asking you to take every idea. I mean I've thrown up a bunch of ideas about things like fixing MT with the intention that you don't use all of them and only implement some of them. As the mod coder, you're going to be a much better judge on what stuff would be easier to code, and what things would be too difficult.

Quote
Something like 180 degree MT instead of 360 degree MT is an example of one of those changes.

Yeah, anything fundamentally numerical (as opposed to graphical), should be relatively easy to implement.  Then it's just a matter of balance testing. But since we're going to be requiring some basic tests to find bugs and such, we can also use that as a testing ground for balance as well.

As far as MT, I honestly think the best first experiment is to try the game without MT at all. This basically means that MT is the last vision that is coded and graphically created. See how it goes and it'll give you an idea as to how good MT should be if full stealth spies are walking all over the mercs, or the mercs are getting run over by aggro. That'll give you a great indicator as to how powerful MT needs to be and what  role it should fill (anti-aggro or anti-stealth, or both).

Quote
Also,  I notice that there are a changes being asked that are  biased towards a persons preferance.  Tazer, EMF ghosting and quick cams are an example of these kinds of requests.

Aside from the quick cam nerf (whcih is anti-aggro) I don't think any of those are preference based. The tazer changes are solely balance changes to make a relatively unused gadget viable again. While they do hurt aggro spies, the base intent of the change is not "lets screw over aggro spies", but rather "lets make the tazer decent enough so someone might actually take it instead of frags or a backpack."

As far as EMF ghosting, I've always considered that nothing more than a bug fix. The intent of EMF was that you couldn't see the spy, after all the designers made the spy transparent. EMF ghosting is a graphics bug that lets you see the spy in a vision mode you shouldn't be able to.

@Invisible,

I think you underestimate what a difference subtle changes can make. If you look at the actual changelog between CT and PT, there isn't a whole lot there. However, the two games play very, very differently.

A lot of people call for changes that are too drastic, which results in breaking the game in the other direction. I think Kebab is smart to want to keep the changes to a minimum. See below regarding your hangup with MT. There is nothing wrong with quick-cams.

@Kebab,

I think that the change in the way MT functions is more personal preference than buffing the tazer. No one takes the tazer unless they are fucking around or a total noob. That's the sign of something that is obviously not very useful. On the other hand, many people have been able to consistently overcome MT whoring, which is a sign that it's quite beatable. Yet the vision is still over-used, which that means that people interpret it to be too powerful (even though I think they are wrong)...the question is how to nerf the vision while keeping its functionality? Well, I've already proposed how to do that multiple times...force normal post render, add in the static noise from PT, and fix the dumb creeping on a slant sets off MT (which is a bug more than anything else imo), and you're set. You don't need to do anything along the lines of the MT-fix simply because the normal post-render takes care of that -- the added bluriness makes it very difficult to spot stationary spies at any reasonable distance. If you want, I can take screenshots to prove it (I have in the past and they might still be floating around ubi.com but I don't know). The 360 detection is necessary to fight off aggro spies, and the full second delay is time enough for a stealthy spy to get a grab on a merc before he gets the buzz noise and actually reacts to it.

When I wrote my list, I tried to keep personal preference out of it as much as possible. The map changes and the suggestion about the way the guns operate are the two things I would say are just personal preference. And even where there is personal preference, it's because I preferred the way something worked in Pandora to the way it works in Chaos. I don't think anything on that list that could qualify as personal preference is something that hasn't been done in either version of the game. Most of the stuff on there are small bugs and glitches that people use or deal with on a daily basis. I think if those were corrected, the game would play very differently, just like CT plays differently from PT.

Quote from: Spekkio on June 17, 2007, 06:59:55 PM
I think you underestimate what a difference subtle changes can make. If you look at the actual changelog between CT and PT, there isn't a whole lot there. However, the two games play very, very differently.

Well, sort of. You have to look both at quantity of changes as well as the effect of each individual change. The changes were few, but major. Taking away SS+Jump and double jump was a HUGE balance change. Also, addition of the gas mask was another big change.

As far as playing differently, I don't really think the games play all that differently, unless you're an aggro spy. Aggro went from shock-near-a-box to triple nade and quick cams. Stealth tactics really haven't changed much from PT to CT. Sure, you've got a few new gadgets, like the heartbeat sensor and camo, but for the most part, you play stealth the same way you always did. The biggest change to stealth was in fact the different levels, and the fact that CT level design had much fewer static defenses. But the actual game mechanics didn't impact stealth much at all.

You could port clubhouse to PT and the stealth aspect would be very similar.

There really hasn't been any significant changes to how to play stealthy. heartbeat and camo made some small additions, but the change hasn't been drastic.

QuoteYou don't need to do anything along the lines of the MT-fix simply because the normal post-render takes care of that -- the added bluriness makes it very difficult to spot stationary spies at any reasonable distance.

Honestly having played the game on xbox, which is both normal post render and low resolution, I can say that you certainly can still see spies pretty well. It's not quite as bad as high post render, but you can still make out blobs in the dark.

Even with the limitations of the xbox, MT whoring is still the way to go, and that really does say something about exactly how powerful MT really is.

Now you're right about MT versus aggro, which is why I suggested a gradual MT detection system based both on merc orientation and on distance to the merc. So it works in 360 at close range, and as range increases becomes less and less useful at detection (the spy must move faster to set it off). This effectively handles the aggro situation while also making it possible to sneak behind the merc's back on large open rooms.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 17, 2007, 08:48:43 PM
As far as playing differently, I don't really think the games play all that differently, unless you're an aggro spy.
[...]
There really hasn't been any significant changes to how to play stealthy.

According to it anyone that plays aggro was affected, so, just because it didn't cause any difference for you, it doesn't mean that it didn't for the other half of the community that plays differently.

Invisible, if you're going to say that stealth didn't change either, then you really have no idea what you're talking about.

QuoteHonestly having played the game on xbox, which is both normal post render and low resolution, I can say that you certainly can still see spies pretty well. It's not quite as bad as high post render, but you can still make out blobs in the dark.

I didn't say that it was going to eliminate it completely, I said it was enough. PC controls are better for both spies and mercs, so the mercs need to be more powerful to compensate for it.

honestly, mt whores dont bother me anymore....mostly because I have come to accept that crouching is far more useful then how i played a year ago. 

camo is very good against it as well....

Quote from: Spekkio on June 17, 2007, 09:16:34 PM
Invisible, if you're going to say that stealth didn't change either, then you really have no idea what you're talking about.

Care to elaborate? I mean honestly, it didn't seem to change my stealth tactics at all. The changes were fairly minor, besides the change in maps. 15 to 5 alarm snares, addition of HBS and camo. Merc lost 2 spytraps but gained a backpack (which more or less kept the amount of placeables almost constant). The change in maps was about the only thing that truly changed stealth, and possibly camnet slightly, but I consider that something else that's map dependent.

When I've played the old maps, like hospital or cinema on CT, the stealth aspect really hasn't changed much at all. No more horizontal spy traps and laser based traps are usually not spytraps but instead poison mines.

Quote from: Spekkio on June 17, 2007, 09:16:34 PM
PC controls are better for both spies and mercs, so the mercs need to be more powerful to compensate for it.

What? Actually PC controls in their very nature greatly favor the merc. Playing on xbox, you'll hardly really notice much of a difference playing spy. As merc though, the fast turning rate and ability to aim inherent in a mouse is a great help over a rather clunky console controller.

The time it takes you to sweep a room with even the flashlight is dramatically less on PC, not to mention you can be spinning around a lot more. Also things like swapping and activating gas mask are much faster on PC as well. Really, the advantages almost all seem to go to the merc. In fact, when you jump on console, you can't even turn besides the quick turn manuever (whcih is a quick 180).

I don't think that mercs need to be more powerful at all. The PC merc makes the console merc look like crap.

Quote from: goodkebab on June 18, 2007, 01:39:38 AM
honestly, mt whores dont bother me anymore....mostly because I have come to accept that crouching is far more useful then how i played a year ago. 

camo is very good against it as well....

Well, honestly I'd like to do an experiment and try the game without MT at all and see how it plays. Not that I want to necessarily leave the game that way, but it'd be interesting to see how much MT is really needed and against what types of spies (aggro or stealth).

Sorry Invisible,  game testing is not going to work like that.  Some game features take several weeks of player experience to really master and develop strategies for, and until then they can be considered unbalanced or useless.  Every time there is a build to be tested,  all testers have to download the game, and play it for several hours, trying to break the game and not necessarily for fun.  It really is work...because the game is not finished, and features are not implimented, so things cannot be really judged until further into the project.  Testers wont be doing this because they want to have some gg's...


Also,  Spekkio is doing a great job of compiling a thread of  do's and dont's to inherit from CT.  Everyone is working together on building that thread, so feel free to contribute there.  Ct has thousands of hours of play testing on game balance, weapon balance....etc. etc....which why we want to use that as our goal.

We are not doing things on a whim.

Well I was thinking just for a basic alpha version or something, where MT isn't in the game because it hasn't been coded yet (you could just code that last). So we get a chance to experiment with an MT-free game, and there's no cost of time, since the design team can be coding in MT while everyone else is testing out the MT-free alpha build or whatever.

Basically I'm not asking you to special code anything, just that you basically code in MT last, and release an alpha test version without MT. Obviously it isn't intented for a full balance test, but it's designed to see how people like playing the game without MT.

This is mainly because MT seems to be one of the most heated and controversial topics when asked about changes people want, so it'd be helpful to shed some light on how necessary MT really is.

mt whoring is kinda overrated, and by taking away the shadow inversion and making everything more blurry so that stationary spies (especially with camo)can't be seen easily/at all, mt willl be quite nerfed at least in high skilled matchups. mt is only a problem with really unbalanced maps like deftech. invisibleman999, i think you have no idea of playing stealth effectively. i guess you have no good movement, and no idea about distraction and teamwork. you also have no idea about game testing and balancing. it's a process that takes a large amount of games and time...
regarding the tazer: it's ok if it pwns, because giving up one gadget slot is really significant.

Quote from: Gawain on June 18, 2007, 01:57:15 PM
mt whoring is kinda overrated, and by taking away the shadow inversion and making everything more blurry so that stationary spies (especially with camo)can't be seen easily/at all, mt willl be quite nerfed at least in high skilled matchups.

Camo isn't a great help against MT because any merc can flick between MT and EMF with almost no change time, so switching to EMF. Hell, even a "n00b" like me does that...

Quote
invisibleman999, i think you have no idea of playing stealth effectively. i guess you have no good movement, and no idea about distraction and teamwork. you also have no idea about game testing and balancing. it's a process that takes a large amount of games and time...

Here comes the insults again. You have no idea what you're talking about, blah blah blah.

As far as stealth is concerned, I think our ideas of stealth are vastly different things. Your conception of stealth is shocking the merc and running. It's a lot like DA where the merc knows you're in the area, but is unsure of exactly where you are.

My idea of stealth is not letting the merc know you're even in the room, at least not until it's too late. You make him think you're somewhere else entirely through misdirection or just plain not being seen or detected. So all of a sudden you hear "tea room is being hacked", and it takes you by surprise. Or suddenly you just get grabbed out of nowhere. That's stealth to me. 

As far as game balance, um... I don't know how to break this to you, but CT isn't very balanced. It never was. Mercs win more games than spies. That's been a fact since the game was released and players have adapted. I'm more worried about making the game more fun, as opposed to trying to achieve some sort of balance that was never there to begin with.

The problem with DA wasn't that it was less balanced than CT, it was that it was just less fun. In fact, I think PT was probably more balanced in terms of spy vs merc win ratios, but it was less fun than CT, so we don't really use it as much.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 18, 2007, 02:51:07 PM
Camo isn't a great help against MT because any merc can flick between MT and EMF with almost no change time, so switching to EMF. Hell, even a "n00b" like me does that...

stfu
mt needs almost 1 second to detect movement (+ you need some time to perceive the full image and to react), so switching visions all the time is kinda useless + emf has a very limited range. btw, you complain about mt whoring, i mention camo, and you answer "but the merc can use emf".

frvge edit: no personal insults please, keep it to arguments that deal with the topic.

Although the spies are more difficult to play, I would not call them unbalanced.  Just because Mercs win more games, i would not call the sides unbalanced either.  Each gadget has a counter gadget.

What is NOT balanced are map designs,  which i suspect is deliberate in order to provide a broad spectrum of strategies.

That Mercs win more is not a problem.  Its what makes the game exciting to play as spy.

There are a lot of very good players out there that play awesome as spy....and having partnered with a couple of them, I have seen how they win with trickery and mind games against skilled mercs.  Those skills you bring to the game....not provided by the game itself.

Quote from: Gawain on June 18, 2007, 03:17:03 PM
frvge edit: no personal insults please, keep it to arguments that deal with the topic.

some1 has to tell him that he has no idea what he's talking about. he's spamming complaints all the time just because he apparently has never adapted to the game and seen it's beauty, but want the game to change to fit his skills. if stealth is too easy, the gameplay will suck  ::)

Quote from: goodkebab on June 18, 2007, 04:11:44 PM
What is NOT balanced are map designs,  which i suspect is deliberate in order to provide a broad spectrum of strategies.
That Mercs win more is not a problem.  Its what makes the game exciting to play as spy.

affirmative ;)

Invisible..have you noticed that you're the only one trying to take off MT out of the game?

Don't you think that maybe it's not something all that bad and you're simply pissed about it for some personal reason?

Quote from: Gui Brazil on June 18, 2007, 05:45:34 PM
Invisible..have you noticed that you're the only one trying to take off MT out of the game?

Don't you think that maybe it's not something all that bad and you're simply pissed about it for some personal reason?

now THIS sounds diplomatic ^^

Quote from: goodkebab on June 18, 2007, 04:11:44 PM
Although the spies are more difficult to play, I would not call them unbalanced.  Just because Mercs win more games, i would not call the sides unbalanced either.  Each gadget has a counter gadget.

What is NOT balanced are map designs,  which i suspect is deliberate in order to provide a broad spectrum of strategies.

That Mercs win more is not a problem.  Its what makes the game exciting to play as spy.

Well, note that I didn't say it was a problem, only that it was unbalanced. In a "balanced" game, spies and mercs would win an equal amount of times. Hence the whole balanced=equivalent situation. That isn't the case in CT, but it doesn't necessarily make a bad game, nor is it necessarily problematic. Nor am I saying we should necessarily aspire towards this sort of balance.

My point was that we're trying to make a fun game here, not necessarily a balanced game. The only real balance I'd like to achieve is gadget balance, where all gadgets are potentially chooseable (hence the taser upgrade).

Quote
mt needs almost 1 second to detect movement (+ you need some time to perceive the full image and to react), so switching visions all the time is kinda useless + emf has a very limited range. btw, you complain about mt whoring, i mention camo, and you answer "but the merc can use emf".

I consider an MT whore as a merc who never (or almost never) uses standard vision and spends the majority of his time in MT, with some toggling to EMF to detect spies shooting at him or using camo. Keep in mind that to avoid MT while camoed, you've got to move at your slowest speed, which gives the merc plenty of time to switch to EMF before you reach the next point of cover.

Yes, a good MT whore will toggle on EMF sometimes, but that's just another part of what makes MT so powerful is the fact that being in MT lets you switch to EMF and back almost instantly.

Quote
Invisible..have you noticed that you're the only one trying to take off MT out of the game?

Don't you think that maybe it's not something all that bad and you're simply pissed about it for some personal reason?

Note that I'm not saying to take it out of the game. Not the final build anyway. I'm just saying to have an experimental release without MT. Not so much with the purpose of eliminating it, but to get a good idea of why we really need MT.

I mean, who knows, maybe it will make for a game that's more fun. We really don't even know. I'm just saying to try it. It may suck, I don't know. but neither does anyone else really. I mean, I've played a few alternate rules games in CT with MT off, and honestly, I don't think it's impossible to detect spies that way. Trust me, the game doesn't fall apart, but it does allow for a lot more stealth opportunities. Now, if you have never played an alternate story game without MT, then you probably have less experience with this than I do.

But keep in mind this isn't a final change. I don't want to eliminate MT, I just want to isolate the reasons why MT is in the game. Do we have trouble seeing in the dark without MT? Do spies just sneak past us while our backs are turned adn there's nothing we can do? Are aggro spies abusing us?

Why do we need MT in the first place?

Thus far nobody really seems to be able to concretely answer that question, as basically right now, MT is good at almost everything. By taking it away we can really see where and why MT is needed, and what parts of MT we can live without.

I mean, I'm not the only one here suggesting that MT get nerfed in some way. Some people want to get rid of the shadow inversion, some people want a static sound, some people want to just turn the sound detector off while MT is active, others want an indicator on the merc's back that says when he's in MT. Others want the spy to be totally transparent on MT, like he is on EMF. Some people have concerns that a nerfed MT is going to make aggro powerful, other people think that MT is essential for detecting stealthy spies. What MT is supposed to do and what it's not supposed to do are hotly debated topics.

You can stop pretending that MT is all well and good, because almost everyone wants to nerf it in some way. The only question is how much of a nerf are we giving it and to what areas.

Taking it away for a trial version is going to help us determine what parts of MT are non-essential and can be nerfed. It's a lot better to handle that with an alpha version than to be constantly patching the actual full version. So while we're tracking down miscellaneous bugs in the mod code, we can also collect some information for game balance purposes.

Quite simply, the best way to determine why we need MT is to take it away for a bit and see what problems arise.

I'm seriously getting tired of reading all this MT crap from invisible...

1. As far as the controls, both sides have it much easier. On a keyboard you have access to a dozen different buttons using all 5 fingers, plus 3-5 more buttons on a mouse + scroll wheel. On an xbox controller, you are using two fingers to access 6-8 buttons.

What that means is that keys on the PC do not have to have double-functions (although sadly too many do in SvM because ubi is lazy...such as use/melee/grab/elbow/heal being piled onto one button. A separate control scheme for spy and merc would be great but oh well). Try to triple nade on xbox with the same speed as the PC player, or do a silent dive, or simultaneously dive/switch vision/throw a grenade. They can't be done on the Xbox, but they can on the PC. Not to mention aiming is much, much better on both sides, although the spies get the short end of the stick because of shitty XBox code making its way in (nothing that can't be fixed by altering your sensitivity, though).

2. Being that you play Xbox, I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money you're nowhere as good as many of the PC players still playing the game and many who have since quit. As such, you really shouldn't be speaking on the balance of the game as if you are the end-all authority.
2a. If you can't get by 640x480 blurry ass MT on a merc sniping with a joystick, you just suck and need to learn to play better. There's nothing else to it.
2b. Yes, I can play without MT. I can probably play without any single equipment, vision, or gadget piece. So what? Does the fact that I can win without taking camnet mean that we should remove it out of the game? Of course not. Almost every spy takes sticky cams because it offers them an additional way to KO the mercs. Should we remove sticky cams too because we have cam whores? That was a rhetorical question, fyi. Your argument is asinine. MT is a tool, and a very useful one at that. Some people prefer to use this tool more than others, just like some people like to constantly switch between camnet cameras or spam grenades with double backpack. You know what? That's there perogative if they choose to do that. Just because you don't like it and can't figure out a way to get past it doesn't mean we need to remove it from the game, or go through hours upon hours of playtesting to satisfy something that we already know: MT doesn't need the drastic changes you are calling for.
2c. Stop fucking whining about MT. Seriously. It's getting annoying. You turn every thread on here into a whinefest about how the people working on PS need to nerf MT into oblivion. We get your argument, and sorry but most people disagree with you.

3. Regarding how stealth has changed, remember that in PT: spy bullets made noise so you had no silent reconnaissance, you couldn't use ropes/ziplines/fences/pipes/ladders without being heard anywhere on the map, if your feet left the ground there was no way to avoid pinging the reticle, there were 3,009 more motion sensors, lasers and cameras in almost every map, and MT was more sensitive. If you don't think that all that changes the dynamics of stealth gameplay, well, then I really don't know what to tell you other than lrn2play.

QuoteWhat is NOT balanced are map designs,  which i suspect is deliberate in order to provide a broad spectrum of strategies.

I agree, but maps like Warehouse, Deftech, and Bank were created when spies could SS+ jump, mercs had no gasmask, KO time was 20 (25?) seconds instead of 15, and the shock immunity was 3x shorter. When I loaded up PT and played with Valserp, Mr.Mic and Psychic not too long ago, Warehouse was actually a close game given all that. Ubi just never adjusted these maps to account for the nerfs to aggro, but I do think that maps should encompass a wide variety of preferences of playstyle like they do now.

As far as mercs winning more, the team on defense is always going to have an advantage. That's something that comes along with defense and having a fixed number of entry points/objectives. As such, the merc winrate should be higher than the spy winrate just for that alone. The fun of the game is overcoming that as spy.

BOOSH!!

Quote from: Spekkio on June 18, 2007, 09:33:15 PM
What that means is that keys on the PC do not have to have double-functions (although sadly too many do in SvM because ubi is lazy...such as use/melee/grab/elbow/heal being piled onto one button. A separate control scheme for spy and merc would be great but oh well). Try to triple nade on xbox with the same speed as the PC player, or do a silent dive, or simultaneously dive/switch vision/throw a grenade. They can't be done on the Xbox, but they can on the PC. Not to mention aiming is much, much better on both sides, although the spies get the short end of the stick because of shitty XBox code making its way in (nothing that can't be fixed by altering your sensitivity, though).

Well honestly, no. It's not really an equal proportion set-up. While it seems like ti might be, remember that the merc has the better FPS style weaponry, and this means the merc makes out much better. You just can't get 1 second snipes on xbox like you do on PC. It's not that xbox players are worse, it's just that the control setup doesn't allow it. Obviously it's much easier to fend off aggro on PC, due to the increased turning speed.

Pretty much all the changes favor the merc heavily.

Also, have you even played it on xbox, or are you just imagining what it's like?

Quote
2. Being that you play Xbox, I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money you're nowhere as good as many of the PC players still playing the game and many who have since quit.

Well, I play on xbox now, I used to play on PC and I was pretty good back in the day. I'm rusty now (at PC anyway), but I still know the basic concepts of the game. I used to play a lot on PC back in the day.

Quote
As such, you really shouldn't be speaking on the balance of the game as if you are the end-all authority.

If you want to see someone claiming to be an end-all authorities, you probably want to look in the mirror. I'm not the one pointing my finger and saying, "You guys know next to nothing about the game and are total newbs, listen to me cause I'm way better than you'll ever be."

Quote2a. If you can't get by 640x480 blurry ass MT on a merc sniping with a joystick, you just suck and need to learn to play better. There's nothing else to it.

Well first, I can sneak by MT on xbox, I'm just saying it's still rather difficult sometimes. On PC, the situation is far worse. Basically MT is powerful as hell on xbox, and on PC it's godly.

Quote
2b. Yes, I can play without MT. I can probably play without any single equipment, vision, or gadget piece. So what? Does the fact that I can win without taking camnet mean that we should remove it out of the game? Of course not.

Note that nowhere did I say I wanted to remove MT from the final game completely. If you're going to be insulting and elitist, I advise you actually *read* the posts you're responding to first, otherwise you just come off as a misinformed ass. The point of having a no-MT build isn't so we can ditch it from the game entirely, it's so we can get a better perspective on its role in the game. Again, it's an experiment.

But you know, apparently running an experiment to try to learn something makes me a know-it-all. Yeah, I'm the one with the illogical asinine arguments?

QuoteJust because you don't like it and can't figure out a way to get past it doesn't mean we need to remove it from the game, or go through hours upon hours of playtesting to satisfy something that we already know: MT doesn't need the drastic changes you are calling for.

Who is we? Lots of people in the MT thread have suggested some nerfs to MT of various kinds. This includes you.

Lets do a quick run through the of MT thread and list some nerf ideas that others have suggested (not counting my own).

-PT style static sound while MT is on (you, seconded by fvrge)
-Merc loses sound detector device (scope2005, seconded by Thy-Tormentor)
-More blurry shading (overstatement)
-Loss of all HUD functions (fvrge)
-Visual indicator that spy is in MT (fvrge)
-Detect random motion (scurrying rats, moving windows, etc) (Gawain)
-fix shadow inversion (Gawain)
-Allow spies at long range to crouch move at normal speed (Gawain)
-"Slight nerf to encourage stealth" (Valserp)
-Mercs should not be able to detect crouched running spies BEHIND them AT ANY DISTANCE (scope2005)
-180 degree MT might make it into one of the versions (goodkebab)

These are people's opinions on MT, almost everyone is proposing some kind of nerf. We can't really agree on what the best nerf might be, but lots of people are calling for some nerfs.

But apparently according to you, nerfing MT is my one-man crusade and wanting to run an experiment with MT to gain more insight is my way of telling you all that I know it all and have the perfect solution to everything. 

::Rolls eyes::

Yeah, your ideas for the game may disagree with mine, but stop pretending like you speak for the entire community.

You don't.

Well... I say we leave MT where it is, the CT maps have lots of cover on them, and spies got to live with it.
A merc can't see you on MT when ur behind cover, anyways, so just leave it alone...
And YES, the shadow inversion is quite annoying, but just take camo and you're home :D

Quote from: goodkebab on June 18, 2007, 01:39:38 AM
honestly, mt whores dont bother me anymore....mostly because I have come to accept that crouching is far more useful then how i played a year ago. 

camo is very good against it as well....

This is something that is echoed by most of the vets in the community. I know this because I play with them on a semi-daily basis and have talked to them about it. You also might want to take kebab off your list of wanting to nerf mt because you conveniently ignored his statement here. I'm pretty sure he threw the 180 degree thing out because of all the noise you've been making about the matter.

invisible, i'd bet a large sum of money that spekkio is indeed much better than you and (especially in stealth) one of the best players, but never mind.

you come way too fast to conclusions, this is a discussion in which everyone gives some ideas to be discussed, and nothing more. If you want to know my current view on the fixes mt needs:
- fix the shadow inversion the way zed did on the ump maps
- make it more blurry / force normal post render (spies not in motion and in large distance should be invisible, just like spies with activated camo in closer distance)
- add static noise
- instant reaction to any movement faster than slow crouch (or slow climb, check out spekkio's fix list; some stuff they changed was better in pandora)

in conclusion: i like mt to be used more the way it was designed for: to detect movement. i have to stress that this is my personal current view, and it can change.

edit: i'd love to hear your thoughts about my opinion, but plz discuss some more important and creative points and stop whining.

i am not accountable for anything i say

:D

 :D

I personally suggested some nerfs because while the pros left in the community don't really care about MT, I know that noobs/intermediate players have a big problem with it. What I put into my list was what I felt a happy medium between doing nothing at all to MT, and nerfing it way too much.

As far as I'm concerned, don't make maps with a retarded large open area and two mercs forced into the same room having a superior sniping position, and there won't be a problem.

Quote- fix the shadow inversion the way zed did on the ump maps
- make it more blurry / force normal post render (spies not in motion and in large distance should be invisible, just like spies with activated camo in closer distance)

If you use these two in conjunction, MT becomes unusable because it's impossible to navigate the map. I know this because for a while I was playing on normal post-render just to see what the difference was, and the maps with the MT fix all but disabled MT vision entirely. Made for good fun trying to defend against the typical rush upper lobby in Cinema.

Yeah, on normal postrender in MT, my FPS got to about 250
and in high, they fell till 130... technolgy...

Quote from: Spekkio on June 19, 2007, 09:28:56 PM

Quote- fix the shadow inversion the way zed did on the ump maps
- make it more blurry / force normal post render (spies not in motion and in large distance should be invisible, just like spies with activated camo in closer distance)

If you use these two in conjunction, MT becomes unusable because it's impossible to navigate the map. I know this because for a while I was playing on normal post-render just to see what the difference was, and the maps with the MT fix all but disabled MT vision entirely. Made for good fun trying to defend against the typical rush upper lobby in Cinema.

so we have to find the right balance between blurriness and zed's no shadow inversion, so that it's still possible to navigate through the map (which is crucial against aggro). for compensation, i really want pandora-like instant detection of movement, which makes it a much more viable vision if one is prepared for an attack.
anyway, the main problem the pros have with mt is that there is no slow-climb and the slope bug, which both are on the fix list...

Quote from: Gawain on June 19, 2007, 10:03:21 PM
slope bug

What slope bug ???   never heard of it

this is on the current fix list:
-MT
  -Force normal post-render
  -Timer for detection needs to be more sensitive in mercs LOS like it was in PT, and possibly a little less
    sensitive than it is now from behind.
    behind him.
  -Re-add the static noise that existed in PT
  -Tweak the sensitivity so spies crouch-moving slowly on a slant don't get detected on a gray box.

1. how can i try normal post-render?
2. the timer should be more sensitive in every direction, as mt is the vision you use whenever you fear being attacked, and the 360 detection is one unique feature
3. this is the wrong thread to discuss mt ffs

Spekkio - Long time man. I agree though, crouching is a much safer way to play as a spy and MT though annoying at times wasn't really that bad to play against. It just forced you to adopt new tactics which any good player will do.

Gawain,

1. You can try normal post-render by going into options ---> video and setting "post-render quality" to normal instead of high. It makes a huge difference, but it's not going to make you invisible from the merc at medium range. A safe bet is that if the merc is close enough to see your emf ghost, he's close enough to make out your blurry sillhouette in MT. Something it does do is expand the shadows you see in MT, which gives you a broader range of places to take cover and not move.

2. The addition of a 1 second delay from PT to CT made sense in the context of stealth. Nothing was more annoying than finding a nice hiding spot and getting a jump on a merc, but the split second you popped out from your spot the merc had a buzz telling him you were behind him. MT actually reacted faster than the sound reticle. Since you rarely are able to grab a merc instantly, it resulted in jump ---> turn --> tazer ---> dead. The reason I proposed the LOS difference is because there are times where I'll be shooting at a spy in MT while he's diving away and no box will come up for some reason, or it won't come up until he's already reached cover. That's retarded. I also said POSSIBLY less sensitive when behind him. A good argument could be made that it's fine as-is.

3. You are right, but see my rant above about invisible turning every thread into a whine about motion tracking.

4. I know people have thrown out the idea of 180 degree detection, and this is why it's bad: throw snare ---> no reason to crouch, ever. Yes, the merc will be looking around, but it's more advantageous for me to get to point B more quickly so that if he does turn around and see me, I will be at cover or close enough to survive. If I'm crouching, he'll see me in the open and then I have a higher chance of dying.

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 19, 2007, 10:07:10 PM

Quote from: Gawain on June 19, 2007, 10:03:21 PM
slope bug

What slope bug ???   never heard of it

The fact that movement in CT is additive via the pythagorean theorem. If upward movement is 1, and lateral movement is 1, then the diagonal movement is 1*sqrt(2) via 45/45/90 right triangle. So you move slightly faster on a slant. This was useful in games like Goldeneye when you were trying to get cheats -- strafe and run at the same time to shave off a few seconds. Almost all games by the inception of PT had fixed this, but there's ubi laziness for you. Since the threshold for MT detection is somewhere between one-dimensional and two-dimensional movement, moving on a slant at slow-crouch sets off the grey box. Same goes for slow-crouch movement on non-horizontal surfaces like stairs. Highly annoying.

NOTE: There is a max speed the characters can run, however, so strafe-running as merc or going full speed as spy does not increase movement speed.

Quote from: Gawain on June 19, 2007, 02:43:28 PM
you come way too fast to conclusions, this is a discussion in which everyone gives some ideas to be discussed, and nothing more.

I'm not the one coming to conclusions. I'm just suggesting ideas and asking that some of them be tried. Because this is a mod, I'm leaning heavy preference to the ideas that are easiest to implement.

Now, obviously my personal goal for MT is to make it more of an anti-aggro vision as opposed to anti-stealth. Right now, I feel like MT is both anti-aggro and anti-stealth which makes it too good. I also feel as if there is very little reason to ever turn on normal vision, and thus when I play, I use a combo of MT and EMF, heavily favoring MT.

Seriously, I'm not sure what's going to fix MT. I think MT is too powerful as it is now, but as far as what solution will work best, I'm not sure.

My personal favorite solution idea is degrading detection. Which basically means that a combination of range and merc facing determines how sensitive MT is. Basically this would keep the basic anti-aggro function, since running spies would always set off MT, and yet still allow you to sneak around, since you could for instance, fast crouch away from a merc if his back was turned to you or if he was far away. I don't believe that this is going to hurt anti-aggro much, as that almost always involves running at the merc, but I could be wrong.

Also, is post render even going to be present in this mod? MT is going to look entirely different graphically in PS, so the whole graphics process of CT isn't' even going to exist in the mod, at least, I wouldn't think it would anyway. I think the programmers can make MT as blurry or clear as they want. Of course, I have no idea how blurring algorithms work and how difficult they are to program, so playing with the blurriness may or may not be an option.

I just want to say that we dont have any Nazi Mods here....akin to the spirit of Sclamers.  That means the community itself is responsible for correcting each other.  So if we have an endless discussion on MT, go right ahead.  But we have clearly stated our goals already, and we have to be firm on that regardless of discussion.  Spekkio has volunteered to collect user data, not all of which can be implemented...but it does make us conscious of existing issues that we need to fix.

Ho CT MT works....

1: Renders image in Black and White
2: Inverts Light Map, then multiplies it to the BW Render
3: Applies a simple color filter + noise to get Red effect
4:  A sqare alpha channel removes the red effect to give the "MT Lock"

I am pretty sure that all post render does is render the BW image at native resolution.  Blurring is achieved by rendering the image very small...say like 256x128 or something really tiny...and then just scale the image up which will cause the blurring.

Hey and what if the MT didnt use the lightmap?? or you could adjust the spy model to be invisible under that filter, and when the filter is on alpha, the spy would be visible :)

mt should be nerved that is only superior to standard vision if used occasionally in wide open areas, for hunting down a spy, and above all, if you're anticipating an ambush or being aggroed. with slow climb + more blurryness, it will be pretty nerfed for detecting stealthy spies, so i think nearly instant reaction time will work out great. without the bugs and the nightvision replacement, mt is way too forgiving for mindless spies. probably keeping the current detection time in the back, and a more sensitive one in the los will work out well.
i will test the normal post render today btw
EDIT: just posted comparision in the mt thread (where it belongs)

new topic: i really appreciate the door/security systems used on cinema and the pt version of museum. these really stop the mindless running in circle tactics and add to the gameplay. (grammar question: is it on / in a map? :-X) tbh, we should consider something in between the pt and ct gameplay, some changes from pt to ct were too harsh. is it quite difficult to aggro a solo merc compared to pt, and it's possible to walk around the map quite mindlessly in ct as there are less security systems, doors, mines, traps etc. on the other hand, camnet is quite hard to bypass on some maps. etc, etc, etc
what do you like better in the good old pt? discuss :P

Yeah, PT was better - i liked the random passive defenses on Muse, and i want the old PT wallrun to come back - it was way cooler than the CT one

 

Quote from: Gawain on June 20, 2007, 02:07:33 PM
what do you like better in the good old pt? discuss :P

Mostly the maps, and the general graphical look of things.

It was mostly the little details, like the static displays when you got elbowed or shocked.

The PT maps were just altogether better, they had much more character to them in my opinion. The PT version of museum was so much better than the "camp the cafe and win" CT version. PT maps also seemed to have way more darkness than most CT maps did. I definitely think we can learn from that.

I liked the PT taser. It was actually... useful.

PT also felt a bit more lethal. This could just be the netcode, but it felt like you'd kill the spy super fast with your rifle. It only took about a second of fire on him to get him good.

I also liked the lock-down style security in PT. It really made triggering an alarm a bad thing, considering you'd get trapped in a section of the map like the cafe in museum.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 20, 2007, 07:08:02 PM
Mostly the maps, and the general graphical look of things.
It was mostly the little details, like the static displays when you got elbowed or shocked.
The PT maps were just altogether better, they had much more character to them in my opinion. The PT version of museum was so much better than the "camp the cafe and win" CT version. PT maps also seemed to have way more darkness than most CT maps did. I definitely think we can learn from that.
I liked the PT taser. It was actually... useful.
PT also felt a bit more lethal. This could just be the netcode, but it felt like you'd kill the spy super fast with your rifle. It only took about a second of fire on him to get him good.
I also liked the lock-down style security in PT. It really made triggering an alarm a bad thing, considering you'd get trapped in a section of the map like the cafe in museum.

affirmative 8)

tbh, i hope project stealth will bring back the cool mood of pt. the ump maps + steel squat (besides vertigo) pwn most ct maps (factory and orphanage are actually quite good). i'm really wondering why the pt netcode works well, but ct's doesn't. ct feels more like an arcade game to me than pt (though pt actually was the mario brother style jumping game). perhaps i will install pt again and try to figure out what makes the different feeling.
if ps combines the thick athmosphere and maps of pt with the new (slightely altered) equipment of ct, i'll get seriously addicted ;D

Quote from: Gawain on June 20, 2007, 07:37:02 PM
perhaps i will install pt again and try to figure out what makes the different feeling.

Hey, we can play on hamachi or something :D
Anyone else on to play PT???

Quote from: Gawain on June 20, 2007, 07:37:02 PM

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 20, 2007, 07:08:02 PM
Mostly the maps, and the general graphical look of things.
It was mostly the little details, like the static displays when you got elbowed or shocked.
The PT maps were just altogether better, they had much more character to them in my opinion. The PT version of museum was so much better than the "camp the cafe and win" CT version. PT maps also seemed to have way more darkness than most CT maps did. I definitely think we can learn from that.
I liked the PT taser. It was actually... useful.
PT also felt a bit more lethal. This could just be the netcode, but it felt like you'd kill the spy super fast with your rifle. It only took about a second of fire on him to get him good.
I also liked the lock-down style security in PT. It really made triggering an alarm a bad thing, considering you'd get trapped in a section of the map like the cafe in museum.

affirmative 8)

tbh, i hope project stealth will bring back the cool mood of pt. the ump maps + steel squat (besides vertigo) pwn most ct maps (factory and orphanage are actually quite good). i'm really wondering why the pt netcode works well, but ct's doesn't. ct feels more like an arcade game to me than pt (though pt actually was the mario brother style jumping game). perhaps i will install pt again and try to figure out what makes the different feeling.
if ps combines the thick athmosphere and maps of pt with the new (slightely altered) equipment of ct, i'll get seriously addicted ;D

PT had more disconnections and generally higher lag, but rarely did I ever encounter sound loss and/or warping.

As far as the mood, I think it was mostly due to background music, the amount of security present, the 1985-era HUD font, and the different sized characters.

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 20, 2007, 11:27:01 PM

Quote from: Gawain on June 20, 2007, 07:37:02 PM
perhaps i will install pt again and try to figure out what makes the different feeling.

Hey, we can play on hamachi or something :D
Anyone else on to play PT???

Where can we play PT on? I can't connect to the ubi servers anymore.

http://hamachi.cc
hamachi makes a virtual lan between PC's, so in-game instead of selecting ubi.com, u select lan, and then just play :D

Quote from: Spekkio on June 21, 2007, 12:11:28 AM
As far as the mood, I think it was mostly due to background music, the amount of security present, the 1985-era HUD font, and the different sized characters.

i installed it yesterday in order to check out some maps and the gadget behavior. the very first moment i entered the versus menu i felt like back in the old days, it was amazing. the background music is simply perfect. it would be awesome if ps could copy it or do something similar. the other thing i noticed in museum was the completely different color scheme, more shadows and the cool random security system.
regarding the equipment, i think the pt chaffs > the ct ones (they don't work through walls, but the emp blast radius is much bigger). 15 snares (with a more gentle sound placing them) are a good thing, too. i prefer ct's character size btw.

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 01:44:05 PM

Quote from: Spekkio on June 21, 2007, 12:11:28 AM
As far as the mood, I think it was mostly due to background music, the amount of security present, the 1985-era HUD font, and the different sized characters.

i installed it yesterday in order to check out some maps and the gadget behavior. the very first moment i entered the versus menu i felt like back in the old days, it was amazing. the background music is simply perfect. it would be awesome if ps could copy it or do something similar. the other thing i noticed in museum was the completely different color scheme, more shadows and the cool random security system.
regarding the equipment, i think the pt chaffs > the ct ones (they don't work through walls, but the emp blast radius is much bigger). 15 snares (with a more gentle sound placing them) are a good thing, too. i prefer ct's character size btw.

Yeah, muse has changed alot in CT, but the UMP maps are almost the same.
And PT was way more difficul for the spy - there was no ledge grab - you could only grab the railing, the wallrun was much cooler than the PT one... also the mercs had better eq - phosphor nades  ;D
^Just my opinion

in pt, the spies had to pay much more for making mistakes.

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 02:03:21 PM
in pt, the spies had to pay much more for making mistakes.

wich was better IMO

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 21, 2007, 02:27:54 PM

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 02:03:21 PM
in pt, the spies had to pay much more for making mistakes.

wich was better IMO

thats why i'm pointing it out ;D
in ct, mistakes are worse for the merc (quickcams etc) than for the spies -.-

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 04:31:15 PM

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 21, 2007, 02:27:54 PM

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 02:03:21 PM
in pt, the spies had to pay much more for making mistakes.

wich was better IMO

thats why i'm pointing it out ;D
in ct, mistakes are worse for the merc (quickcams etc) than for the spies -.-

So we just need much more passive defenses - more than PT had ;D

not too much. don't forget that in pt there was no camnet and no vertical noise indicator. but the cheap part of aggro will be royally fucked with fewer lagg and fluid aiming, and we shouldn't fuck up stealth too much. but more passive defenses, and a larger chaff radius would help alot. you can still play stealth with more passive defenses, if u throw 3 chaff in every direction and 20 passive defenses are disabled, there are enough ways left to sneak (+fake alarms with snares). maybe it would be better if the spy needs a little bit more time to pull his gun out, so that shooting out defenses needs more time. on the other hand, i'd like to see selectable autoaim for the spies.

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 05:46:20 PM
not too much. don't forget that in pt there was no camnet and no vertical noise indicator. but the cheap part of aggro will be royally fucked with fewer lagg and fluid aiming, and we shouldn't fuck up stealth too much. but more passive defenses, and a larger chaff radius would help alot. you can still play stealth with more passive defenses, if u throw 3 chaff in every direction and 20 passive defenses are disabled, there are enough ways left to sneak (+fake alarms with snares). maybe it would be better if the spy needs a little bit more time to pull his gun out, so that shooting out defenses needs more time. on the other hand, i'd like to see selectable autoaim for the spies.

Autoaim ok, but only on mercs  8)

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 05:46:20 PM
not too much. don't forget that in pt there was no camnet and no vertical noise indicator.

It had a vertical noise indicator. It just didn't have a vertical radar indicator. You'd just see a dot and not the  above/below thing you get for CT. You did get vertical showing on noise though.

Quoteyou can still play stealth with more passive defenses, if u throw 3 chaff in every direction and 20 passive defenses are disabled, there are enough ways left to sneak (+fake alarms with snares). maybe it would be better if the spy needs a little bit more time to pull his gun out, so that shooting out defenses needs more time. on the other hand, i'd like to see selectable autoaim for the spies.

The main thing with passive defenses is that you need more darkness so you can at least shoot the stuff out from high above or far away. I don't really like the idea of throwing down a bunch of chaff because that just means that the merc turns on MT and sees where you run, unless you shock him that is. So you don't have a heck of a lot of stealth options there. I think there should be just enough passive defense so that you can't go running around like a fool without triggering a lockdown.

cinema has lots of passive defenses and still plays very well...

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 07:55:14 PM
cinema has lots of passive defenses and still plays very well...

Yeah, cinema is kind of nice, mostly because of the multileveled setup and the darkness in the map.

I personally think the chaff radius is fine. The PT chaff was definitely overpowered. Wanna know why no one took flashbangs? Because chaff screwed up the merc's vision enough to compensate for it. If you got chaffed while sniping, you couldn't exit snipe mode, which is 10x worse than being taken out of snipe by a flashbang. If you were anywhere near that 9,000 ft radius sparkly stuff you couldn't see, reload, use a special vision, or snipe. Seriously, it was just bad.

The radius is fine now...if you wanna make it a TINY bit bigger ok, but it shouldn't approach PT's radius by any means. I'm all for chaff not working through walls. I think that's very cheap and definitely hinders the effectiveness of what would ordinarilly be a lot of trap ingenious trap placements. Oh, I can't shoot that far to hit the trap? Wait, I'll just throw it over here and let it work throught the wall!

You guys have to remember that the community was worse in PT than it is now. Mercs in PT, in retrospect, are sitting ducks.

As for Cinema, that was one of my favorite maps in PT and one of the most balanced. However, keep in mind that the disk objective is new; in PT you had to get 3/4 objectives. Not too hard though with SS+DJ.

As for snares, I'm not a fan of 15 because then that just leads to spam. I like the timer and amount on snares now, but I wouldn't mind having them fire more silently like in PT.

the radius of the first blast disabling passive defenses etc should be like in pt, the radius of the longer lasting alu shavings like in pt. furthermore, it could flash a merc using emf ;D

snares are too weak in ct imo. it would be balanced if they would make noises more rarely or could be switched on/off, do some camo activation noises, and fire more silently.
in general, i wanna see all spy gadgets (besides cams) boosted. a longer range of the spy radar (maybe hbs and bullets slightely) would be good, too. (i was always of the opinion that the spies should retain the overlook). especially camo needs a boost...

i wana see new spy eq with the ones we have now lol and idk i dont use snares maybe cause they are too weak like u said

Quote from: Gawain on June 21, 2007, 09:57:15 PM
the radius of the first blast disabling passive defenses etc should be like in pt, the radius of the longer lasting alu shavings like in pt. furthermore, it could flash a merc using emf ;D

I always thought it'd be kinda nice if chaff acted like a flash versus MT. Kind of makes sense, with all the moving metal peices and stuff. Maybe it could overload it or something.

I don't really think we need any EMF nerfs, EMF is if anything the perfect vision, aside from ghosting, and shouldn't really be touched beyond removing that bug.

As far as gadgets go, I think HBS is just right. Spybullets should be made noiseless.

Alarm snares are pretty much right, maybe a little randomness could be added to their sounds, but other than that, they're okay.

Smoke and flash are fine.

Camo and maybe chaff are the only two that I think could use some kind of upgrade.

Cams obviously are overpowered, but based on current map design they're a necessity, nerf them too much, and the game becomes very one sided. The only way we could nerf cams into being balanced with the other gadgets is if we adopted a new map making paradigm that allowed for full stealth as a winning strategy. Otherwise, changing cams beyond like maybe a slight nerf to quick cam to prevent lag camming, would be a serious blow to the spy.

it's already possible to win without cams, but it's much harder. it's a bad thing that one technique is so strong that it is crucial for most of the self-called "pros". i want to see more diversity in gameplay, atm it's more like tank spam in cnc3 1.04 XD
if a team beats me with cam spam and host aggro, i don't consider them high skilled, if anything simple-minded kiddies.

I take cams, but can't use them effectively. I basically use Chaff, smoke and HB. That's about it. Then again, it's probably why im not the greatest. Oh, and I can't double nade or tripple nade either, so I don't.

Quote from: Daybreak on June 21, 2007, 11:31:38 PM
I can't double nade or tripple nade either, so I don't.

Me neither - i usually take HBS, Spy bullets, Smokes, and Chaffs

Quotesnares are too weak in ct imo. it would be balanced if they would make noises more rarely or could be switched on/off, do some camo activation noises, and fire more silently.

You have no idea what you're talking about. I love snares. The only thing I don't like about them is I have to use them either right before or right after I gave myself away because the firing noise is so loud. Even with this, you don't know how many times I've been able to escape by hiding RIGHT UNDER THE MERC'S NOSE because I fired a snare before hacking. Most exhilerating part of the game. Adding the stuff you say would make them OP. And 15 snares with silent fire is most certainly noobish because they allow spam. Spam = noob = bad.

I honestly don't know how you guys think chaff is UP. On the maps where I don't take snares, it's because I feel like I HAVE to replace it with chaff due to the triple-lazer thingies blocking doorways (or I'm with someone else who is taking them already).

probably you're right. so just make them fire more silently.

regarding spam, i generally don't like the current gadget system that recompenses dying with new eq. any ideas about that?

Yeah definitely not 15 snares. 15 snares made sense in PT when you made more noise for doing stuff.. but in CT, it'd be crazy overpowered.

Quote from: Gawain on June 22, 2007, 03:31:05 PM
probably you're right. so just make them fire more silently.

regarding spam, i generally don't like the current gadget system that recompenses dying with new eq. any ideas about that?

Yeah, the eq stays, but u get more of it on start, like:
the mercs have 4 nades each life and they got 3 lives total 4x3=12
12 nades for mercs - same would work for all gadgets

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 22, 2007, 04:27:37 PM
Yeah, the eq stays, but u get more of it on start, like:
the mercs have 4 nades each life and they got 3 lives total 4x3=12
12 nades for mercs - same would work for all gadgets

That completely trivializes the backpack though.

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 22, 2007, 04:55:47 PM

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 22, 2007, 04:27:37 PM
Yeah, the eq stays, but u get more of it on start, like:
the mercs have 4 nades each life and they got 3 lives total 4x3=12
12 nades for mercs - same would work for all gadgets

That completely trivializes the backpack though.

the average time a merc dies is between 0 and 1 i estimate, so there won't be much to change for the merc. but it would be cool if the spies had liek 15 smoke nades (and no more) at the spawn and can decide how much to take in a range from 0 to 8, depending how much he wants to risk. etc etc ^^

Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on June 22, 2007, 04:55:47 PM

Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 22, 2007, 04:27:37 PM
Yeah, the eq stays, but u get more of it on start, like:
the mercs have 4 nades each life and they got 3 lives total 4x3=12
12 nades for mercs - same would work for all gadgets

That completely trivializes the backpack though.

no it doesn't u get 2 nades for each life (new bp) so 4x2=8
so like you get 20 nades ;D

stop makind jokes, this is something that should really be considered.

Quote from: Gawain on June 22, 2007, 05:14:35 PM
stop makind jokes, this is something that should really be considered.

I say to leave it as it is... it's good and we don't need anything else, do we?
It is balanced, so why the hell change it???