Both spy and merc visions used energy like camo?
Discuss
Worth a try. However, maps would need to be more cover-based than now.
It's a good idea but, it will be hard to balance energy consumption I think.
Quote from: Succubus Dryad Of The Undying Comet on September 17, 2010, 09:54:47 PM
Worth a try. However, maps would need to be more cover-based than now.
That makes no sense...having infinite use of MT/EMF where you can be spotted in dark areas requires less cover than limited use of them?
Does not compute.
Half of the time using visions is a disadvantage anyway, so why make it even worse by adding a limited duration?
I think it could work (anything CAN work), but as Knooger said, energy consumption would have to be balanced.
Even at that, where do you stop with it? Merc's Visions use energy, but does that mean the torchlight does also?
As a spy I would hate using Nightvision (or Thermal) only to be spotted by a Merc and finding myself unable to shock him. Yes, it is my fault for using the vision a lot, BUT still that doesn't make it fun. For Camo alone that's okay since there is a big plus to using it that is purely optional. For visions... not so much since either one could be seen as "Vital" to the core gameplay of the spy.
Though... I assume this thread is mostly for the Merc side because of your (and many others) distaste for vision whoring that happens on that side.
As a kind of counter to this idea... I assume EMF ghosting will be taken care of so EMF wont be so annoying and MT will be tweaked (whatever that could mean), or at the very least more levels will be taking MT whoring into their design (By such a means as giving "False" readings as a couple levels do in CT, if I remember right).
So... it could work, but I don't personally think it's needed.
Quote from: CurdyMilk on September 17, 2010, 10:44:37 PM
Half of the time using visions is a disadvantage anyway, so why make it even worse by adding a limited duration?
Yea that's why like 90% of players during the game's peak used MT all the time and most spies use thermal anytime they're not trying to be super-sneaky on top of a ceiling.
Sure is a big disadvantage that you can see everything you can normally + see in shadows + hear a loud buzzing noise with an alert box anytime a spy farts. I suppose the fact that everything is monocolor is a 'disadvantage', but it's not like the gfx were any good, anyway.
Quote from: Cronky on September 17, 2010, 10:55:10 PM
I think it could work (anything CAN work), but as Knooger said, energy consumption would have to be balanced.
Even at that, where do you stop with it? Merc's Visions use energy, but does that mean the torchlight does also?
As a spy I would hate using Nightvision (or Thermal) only to be spotted by a Merc and finding myself unable to shock him. Yes, it is my fault for using the vision a lot, BUT still that doesn't make it fun. For Camo alone that's okay since there is a big plus to using it that is purely optional. For visions... not so much since either one could be seen as "Vital" to the core gameplay of the spy.
Though... I assume this thread is mostly for the Merc side because of your (and many others) distaste for vision whoring that happens on that side.
As a kind of counter to this idea... I assume EMF ghosting will be taken care of so EMF wont be so annoying and MT will be tweaked (whatever that could mean), or at the very least more levels will be taking MT whoring into their design (By such a means as giving "False" readings as a couple levels do in CT, if I remember right).
So... it could work, but I don't personally think it's needed.
Vision whoring occurred as spy as well, it's just that no one really cared because spies lost most of the time due to a combination of a) people sucking at it and b) the game's glitches effectively disabling 2/3 of the ways you can temporarily neutralize a merc.
Quote from: Spekkio on September 17, 2010, 10:23:24 PM
Quote from: Succubus Dryad Of The Undying Comet on September 17, 2010, 09:54:47 PM
Worth a try. However, maps would need to be more cover-based than now.
That makes no sense...having infinite use of MT/EMF where you can be spotted in dark areas requires less cover than limited use of them?
Mercs would still have infinite torchlight, which would be kind of imbalanced without something to counter is (in this case, obstacles), therefore, spies would be actually nerfed by this.
Quote from: Succubus Dryad Of The Undying Comet on September 17, 2010, 11:41:36 PM
Quote from: Spekkio on September 17, 2010, 10:23:24 PM
Quote from: Succubus Dryad Of The Undying Comet on September 17, 2010, 09:54:47 PM
Worth a try. However, maps would need to be more cover-based than now.
That makes no sense...having infinite use of MT/EMF where you can be spotted in dark areas requires less cover than limited use of them?
Mercs would still have infinite torchlight, which would be kind of imbalanced without something to counter is (in this case, obstacles), therefore, spies would be actually nerfed by this.
They already have infinite flashlight...what's your point?
The flashlight reduces your visibility to like 25% of the screen in darkness...MT retains 100% screen real-estate while still letting you see in the dark and it warns you when a spy moves. I'm still failing to see the connection.
I don't think this is a good idea, it would make the game less fun to play and there's no advantage to the addition. What you're suggesting is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
As long as the visions are balanced I don't think there would be a need to make a energy limit especially for spies. By balanced I mean no EMF ghosting and MT that has a range. Afaik that's the way they are being implemented that way into PS, right? I haven't seen the MT video in a long time.
I really don't know how an energy limit would affect gameplay but it could possibly be a good thing for mercs if the visions are deemed op again.
I actually kinda like this. It is pretty dumb when people spend the whole game in MT, and why wouldn't they right now? It'd be much cooler if it was something you turned on when you suspected something was up, like a gas mask, instead of just something you left on for the whole game. Making special visions special visions, instead of default visions.
I don't think anyone's ever gonna use NV if it drains your energy though.
Camo energy renews itself over time. about 6-8 seconds to full again if I remember correctly. The place where balance could be an issue is that some maps would require heavier use of visions where others you could do just fine without them. In the end, it's going to either be to short a duration for some maps and no different than SCCT is currently on other maps. For the most part visions are nearly useless to a Spy and will actually put you at a disadvantage so for a spy I would hazard a guess that you'd notice almost no change whatsoever.
This particular type of game places restrictions on the mapper in layout and lighting already. Adding yet another element to the mix that will impact layout and lighting would likely take away more from the game than energy consuming visions would add in my opinion.
For me it's good idea but like someone said before basic problem is energy balance.
It's good idea because u can make "hardcore mod" in game. And only host can decide to use this mode on his server.
But hardcore mode cant has only one "hardcore" thing.U must add more "hardcore thing,movments or whatever"
pfu pfu pfu i say yes for this idea.
Quote from: zglina on September 18, 2010, 11:28:59 AM
For me it's good idea but like someone said before basic problem is energy balance.
It's good idea because u can make "hardcore mod" in game. And only host can decide to use this mode on his server.
But hardcore mode cant has only one "hardcore" thing.U must add more "hardcore thing,movments or whatever"
pfu pfu pfu i say yes for this idea.
Omg, lets don't copy hardcore mode from simple fps like CoD ;/ It's bullshit :P
Yeah, let's copy from Quake :D
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 08:58:31 AM
Camo energy renews itself over time. about 6-8 seconds to full again if I remember correctly. The place where balance could be an issue is that some maps would require heavier use of visions where others you could do just fine without them. In the end, it's going to either be to short a duration for some maps and no different than SCCT is currently on other maps. For the most part visions are nearly useless to a Spy and will actually put you at a disadvantage so for a spy I would hazard a guess that you'd notice almost no change whatsoever.
So you don't use thermal vision to dodge passive lasers and detect poison mines and spytraps? What game are you playing?
Quote from: Spekkio on September 18, 2010, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 08:58:31 AM
Camo energy renews itself over time. about 6-8 seconds to full again if I remember correctly. The place where balance could be an issue is that some maps would require heavier use of visions where others you could do just fine without them. In the end, it's going to either be to short a duration for some maps and no different than SCCT is currently on other maps. For the most part visions are nearly useless to a Spy and will actually put you at a disadvantage so for a spy I would hazard a guess that you'd notice almost no change whatsoever.
So you don't use thermal vision to dodge passive lasers and detect poison mines and spytraps? What game are you playing?
I hardly ever use Thermal in Aqua, why? Cause I just press it once and switch it off in less than 0.5 secs...I know most hot spots anyway and Spy Traps dont bother me as much since I just dodge most of time I gues...
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 18, 2010, 08:15:14 AM
I actually kinda like this. It is pretty dumb when people spend the whole game in MT, and why wouldn't they right now? It'd be much cooler if it was something you turned on when you suspected something was up, like a gas mask, instead of just something you left on for the whole game. Making special visions special visions, instead of default visions.
I don't think anyone's ever gonna use NV if it drains your energy though.
Well because that would be a roundabout way of solving the MT problem. The best way to do it would be to just make it so it's not so overpowered in the first place, since the devs have the power to do that. No point in implementing an overpowered vision but slapping a time limit on it to make sure it is used less often.
But I have an idea if a time limit is decided as the way to go. Maybe a meter like the spy energy meter would be best but with a twist. You leave a little mark about 1/3 of the way up the meter as the minimum amount of energy required to use the flashlight. The flashlight wouldn't drain the energy but you can't use the flashlight if you use visions enough to go past the mark. It would recharge slowly.
tldr - So you could continue to use visions for a longer time but you know that you can't use flashlight for awhile.
Quote from: Spekkio on September 18, 2010, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 08:58:31 AM
Camo energy renews itself over time. about 6-8 seconds to full again if I remember correctly. The place where balance could be an issue is that some maps would require heavier use of visions where others you could do just fine without them. In the end, it's going to either be to short a duration for some maps and no different than SCCT is currently on other maps. For the most part visions are nearly useless to a Spy and will actually put you at a disadvantage so for a spy I would hazard a guess that you'd notice almost no change whatsoever.
So you don't use thermal vision to dodge passive lasers and detect poison mines and spytraps? What game are you playing?
For the most part means for the most part. Not entirely. Checking for poison mines, spy traps and laser mines only requires you to flick it on to briefly check a room or areas where you know a countermeasure is likely to be deployed. This brief activation would consume such a small amount of energy that the impact would be virtually nil. On the other hand, the impact it would have for a Merc and the direct correlation to making sure the map is balanced against energy consumption and smart usage of visions would be virtually impossible to balance across every map.
For example, you have a map that depicts a fairly open well lit location that won't require heavy vision usage to guard. Instead it relies on smart placement of countermeasures and a good patrol path/timing. 10-15s of vision would be plenty. Then you have a map that depicts a darker environment with a lot of objects scattered about that give the Spies multiple objects for cover they can move between quickly. The darkness plus the quick movement from cover spot to cover spot is going to require heavier vision use to spot a Spy. likely about double the amount of vision up-time you would need in the first example.
So now you have a couple choices -
1. Energy consumption that gives more than needed for 1 map and still not enough for the other
2. Energy consumption that gives way to much for 1 map and just enough for another (thus practically nullifying this system on some maps)
3. Base your map designs around energy consumption
4. Unique per-map energy consumption rates
Either way you look at it, some maps you would see a difference in and others it would have basically no impact and/or depicting certain map locations and conveying certain atmospheres would be further restricted.
All things considered, not a bad idea in itself, but the impact on mapping and game play would be to heavy in some cases and not enough in others to merit the system. The only way to guarantee this system had the proper impact across the board would be to have a unique energy consumption rate for each map which would require that extensive balance testing be done at different consumption rates on each and every map. Feasible but highly unrealistic given the team's resources.
Edit: It didn't seem to me that Spekkio was suggesting a countermeasure to MT whoring, but rather another system to make game play more dynamic. For anyone interested in proposed MT configurations to avoid using it exclusively, there are several pretty long threads with a lot of ideas.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 08:55:09 PM
Quote from: Spekkio on September 18, 2010, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 08:58:31 AM
Camo energy renews itself over time. about 6-8 seconds to full again if I remember correctly. The place where balance could be an issue is that some maps would require heavier use of visions where others you could do just fine without them. In the end, it's going to either be to short a duration for some maps and no different than SCCT is currently on other maps. For the most part visions are nearly useless to a Spy and will actually put you at a disadvantage so for a spy I would hazard a guess that you'd notice almost no change whatsoever.
So you don't use thermal vision to dodge passive lasers and detect poison mines and spytraps? What game are you playing?
At least it will keep noobs from constantly having their vision on...
For the most part means for the most part. Not entirely. Checking for poison mines, spy traps and laser mines only requires you to flick it on to briefly check a room or areas where you know a countermeasure is likely to be deployed. This brief activation would consume such a small amount of energy that the impact would be virtually nil. On the other hand, the impact it would have for a Merc and the direct correlation to making sure the map is balanced against energy consumption and smart usage of visions would be virtually impossible to balance across every map.
For example, you have a map that depicts a fairly open well lit location that won't require heavy vision usage to guard. Instead it relies on smart placement of countermeasures and a good patrol path/timing. 10-15s of vision would be plenty. Then you have a map that depicts a darker environment with a lot of objects scattered about that give the Spies multiple objects for cover they can move between quickly. The darkness plus the quick movement from cover spot to cover spot is going to require heavier vision use to spot a Spy. likely about double the amount of vision up-time you would need in the first example.
So now you have a couple choices -
1. Energy consumption that gives more than needed for 1 map and still not enough for the other
2. Energy consumption that gives way to much for 1 map and just enough for another (thus practically nullifying this system on some maps)
3. Base your map designs around energy consumption
4. Unique per-map energy consumption rates
Either way you look at it, some maps you would see a difference in and others it would have basically no impact and/or depicting certain map locations and conveying certain atmospheres would be further restricted.
All things considered, not a bad idea in itself, but the impact on mapping and game play would be to heavy in some cases and not enough in others to merit the system. The only way to guarantee this system had the proper impact across the board would be to have a unique energy consumption rate for each map which would require that extensive balance testing be done at different consumption rates on each and every map. Feasible but highly unrealistic given the team's resources.
Edit: It didn't seem to me that Spekkio was suggesting a countermeasure to MT whoring, but rather another system to make game play more dynamic. For anyone interested in proposed MT configurations to avoid using it exclusively, there are several pretty long threads with a lot of ideas.
The "At least it will keep noobs from constantly having their vision on..." that you inserted there at the top was NOT in my post.
Maybe it's a personal thing, but I practically play the game in MT, EMF, and thermal vision. On top of allowing you to see passive defenses, thermal also highlights the mercs better. Against most people you don'y have to worry much about EMF, and the only time I really take thermal off is if I'm behind some surface EMF can see through. There's really no reason to take it off otherwise.
Quote from: Spekkio on September 18, 2010, 11:21:32 PM
Maybe it's a personal thing, but I practically play the game in MT, EMF, and thermal vision. On top of allowing you to see passive defenses, thermal also highlights the mercs better. Against most people you don'y have to worry much about EMF, and the only time I really take thermal off is if I'm behind some surface EMF can see through. There's really no reason to take it off otherwise.
Your probably right. I used thermal at first until I memorized the locations of the passive lasers in SCCT, after that almost never. As a merc I tend to use both EMF and MT equally but only for a few seconds each while I do a quick scan of the area. The only exception being extremely dark areas where the vision mode helps me keep my bearings or against heavily aggressive spies to help combat the restricted vision imposed by a gas mask and smoke.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 18, 2010, 09:17:47 PM
The "At least it will keep noobs from constantly having their vision on..." that you inserted there at the top was NOT in my post.
Oh my god....I so screwed that up...
Quote from: KnoogeR on September 18, 2010, 11:57:56 AM
Quote from: zglina on September 18, 2010, 11:28:59 AM
For me it's good idea but like someone said before basic problem is energy balance.
It's good idea because u can make "hardcore mod" in game. And only host can decide to use this mode on his server.
But hardcore mode cant has only one "hardcore" thing.U must add more "hardcore thing,movments or whatever"
pfu pfu pfu i say yes for this idea.
Omg, lets don't copy hardcore mode from simple fps like CoD ;/ It's bullshit :P
Why not?pain in ass? Hardcore mode dont belong only to the CoD. Btw. When i wrote this post i didnt think about CoD but about spekkio idea.
Quote from: Farley4Fan on September 18, 2010, 06:47:15 PM
Well because that would be a roundabout way of solving the MT problem. The best way to do it would be to just make it so it's not so overpowered in the first place, since the devs have the power to do that. No point in implementing an overpowered vision but slapping a time limit on it to make sure it is used less often.
It would make special visions a lot more special if you couldn't leave them on all game, though. Wouldn't that be cool? You think there's a guy around, so you turn on MT and scan for him. That's way cooler than just leaving it on all the time.
I like he energy consumption idea. Thinking further, maybe have it act like a battery that drains and can only be refilled (not necessarily at ammo locations) when it drains to below 25%? No? Then batter that drains is cashed and you now have a new gadget....battery refills, also available in backpack?....No? Maybe have a battery that doesn't refill, more of a one and done? Just some thoughts that went through my head. I think we discussed batteries with HB sensor. They would work better with the visions though. Thoughts?
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 19, 2010, 04:06:08 PM
Quote from: Farley4Fan on September 18, 2010, 06:47:15 PM
Well because that would be a roundabout way of solving the MT problem. The best way to do it would be to just make it so it's not so overpowered in the first place, since the devs have the power to do that. No point in implementing an overpowered vision but slapping a time limit on it to make sure it is used less often.
It would make special visions a lot more special if you couldn't leave them on all game, though. Wouldn't that be cool? You think there's a guy around, so you turn on MT and scan for him. That's way cooler than just leaving it on all the time.
Well I don't leave it on all the time personally but that's a fair point. But think about the Batman AA. People left that x-ray vision on the whole game. The developers are just making the vision more balanced rather than using a time limit thing. I see what you're saying though. It might be a good idea to make the visions more of a resource than an alternate way to view things at all times. I'm not sure really.
I like this idea because it means that instead of having slightly weaker visions that can be left on forever, you can have short periods of very powerful vision. A simple fix to the "energy balance" problem would be to simply give visions their own timer. It might also be wise to set ti up so that a vision once on cannot be used again until the timer recharges completely. This would give greater tension between the vision modes.
While this idea is getting some good ideas going for it, I still have to side with the side that says this is an unnecessary add-in for a non-problem that can be fixed with balancing... or just taking into the fact that this isn't the same game. So the problems may arise again, but not for the same reasons.
Probably repeating myself but each sides visions are vital to their gameplay. While energy durations or cooldown timers could be the fix for those people that spend the entire match in one vision mode or the other, it's giving the game an added complexity that I don't believe it really needs. (Albeit not a HUGE complexity, but would be more annoying rather than helping keep the game fun)
A fix is definitely in order, but changing a big part of the gameplay around by doing either one of these options for this singular purpose is a bit much. I'm much more interested in a Motion Tracker that is actually balanced, and EMF that doesn't give away a spy's position regardless if they are in a vision themselves or not.
Thermal can be tweaked too to obscure the vision more (or something like that), but I never personally ran around in Thermal an entire match. Hurts my eyes just thinking about it.
Since this game wont be plagued by those problems (hopefully) it'll give much less incentive to whore the visions match after match.
...or something like that
Quote from: Cronky on September 20, 2010, 09:01:14 AMA fix is definitely in order
As you said, this isn't SCCT. There's nothing to "fix". We've approached every aspect of Project Stealth not from a "copy SCCT" viewpoint, but rather "what can we learn from the SCCT development team's mistakes and shortcomings to create a game in the same genera, but a better game."
This project sprang from a dissatisfaction with SCCT and DA but a love for the SvM style game play.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 20, 2010, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: Cronky on September 20, 2010, 09:01:14 AMA fix is definitely in order
As you said, this isn't SCCT. There's nothing to "fix". We've approached every aspect of Project Stealth not from a "copy SCCT" viewpoint, but rather "what can we learn from the SCCT development team's mistakes and shortcomings to create a game in the same genera, but a better game."
This project sprang from a dissatisfaction with SCCT and DA but a love for the SvM style game play.
I think saying Fix is just easier to understand for others, like fixing EMF ghosting or fixing vision spam to remove the falling delay...
Bad idea.
If "energy" was added, then the players shouldn't show up on visions.
Quote from: Morten Pedersen on September 21, 2010, 12:23:15 AM
Bad idea.
If "energy" was added, then the players shouldn't show up on visions.
I assume you mean Spies wouldn't be seen on EMV hardly ever since that's the only vision that requires energy consumption by the other player to work. True, it would make EMV almost useless except to find ARMs and Decoys. Or a Spy using Camo.
Which means it wouldn't really be useless at all.
Quote from: Spekkio on September 21, 2010, 12:54:30 AM
Which means it wouldn't really be useless at all.
Unless Camo is not a gadget anymore and instead something the spies always have (as you've brought up before), then EMF not detecting Spies in their Visions will make EMF's biggest use... useless. (Of course biggest use is subjective, but it's the only use that doesn't depend on the other teams equipment choices)
It'd be a whole vision dedicated to optional gadgets. Which doesn't make sense... to me at least.
Also something would have to make Camo much more useful (If no longer an optional gadget), as you yourself say that you don't use it (Perhaps that's just because of the sound issue with CT). Which at that point EMF would be used for such a specific purpose that you'd probably never use it... so... Anti-Whoring.
Just my further thoughts on the issue. Again, assuming you made the trade-off of "Spies being seen while using NV/Therm." being replaced by "Energy based" visions.
This thread has too much theorycrafting...
"gmo this idea won't work because the spies/mercs will behave exactly as I'm about to tell you, everytime..."
Chaos Theory-Crafting.
Oh Ho.
It's all just assumptions. Who knows what people are going to do whether it was implemented or not. Is energy based visions going to actually make the game better? Will it actually solve the problem its setting out to fix? Is the problem even going to be in PS? Will it make an even worse problem? Is it fun?
Looks alright typed out, but without it actually being in the game, we can only assume what will happen with the idea.
Worst case scenario...
It's boring and complicates the game more than it helps.
Best case scenario...
Good work Spekkio, you're a genius.
Which are you banking on?
At this point it hardly matters... It would be incredibly time consuming to make it worth implementing. Until every map is complete and the consumption could be balanced to each maps' requirements for minimum vision usage it would have to be so minimal on the energy consumption as to be a useless feature. Not to mention any community made map would then also have to go through the process of balancing out its' consumption rate. There's just no reason to take time away from creating a variety of maps and getting the coding done required for a beta release and tweaking the features that are already present to balance those out.
How about a nice shiny yellow hardhat to prevent 1 shot kills to the head instead?
Yea man, the spy could pick up the hat on his travels.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 21, 2010, 01:59:27 PM
At this point it hardly matters... It would be incredibly time consuming to make it worth implementing. Until every map is complete and the consumption could be balanced to each maps' requirements for minimum vision usage it would have to be so minimal on the energy consumption as to be a useless feature.
If your map requires visions to be playable then maybe you outta fix your map. They're meant to be helpful, not required.
But the fact is it's just a stupid idea, what use does it really have? I've said it before and I'll say it again, it solves a problem that DOES NOT EXIST.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 21, 2010, 04:19:04 PM
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 21, 2010, 01:59:27 PM
At this point it hardly matters... It would be incredibly time consuming to make it worth implementing. Until every map is complete and the consumption could be balanced to each maps' requirements for minimum vision usage it would have to be so minimal on the energy consumption as to be a useless feature.
If your map requires visions to be playable then maybe you outta fix your map. They're meant to be helpful, not required.
On many maps in SCCT when playing against good players who new how to use the advantages the map design gave them not using your visions was such a stupid idea that I feel safe in saying it's required.
There is no reason PS maps should not be designed in a similar fashion and doing so doesn't make them poorly designed. If they were designed otherwise, the visions would simply be some pretty colors to look at.
If your preference is pretty colors and you aren't prone to seizures I suggest staring at this instead -
http://teamdead.net/gentoo/e-shrooms/ (http://teamdead.net/gentoo/e-shrooms/)
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 21, 2010, 01:59:27 PM
At this point it hardly matters... It would be incredibly time consuming to make it worth implementing. Until every map is complete and the consumption could be balanced to each maps' requirements for minimum vision usage it would have to be so minimal on the energy consumption as to be a useless feature. Not to mention any community made map would then also have to go through the process of balancing out its' consumption rate. There's just no reason to take time away from creating a variety of maps and getting the coding done required for a beta release and tweaking the features that are already present to balance those out.
How about a nice shiny yellow hardhat to prevent 1 shot kills to the head instead?
It's incredibly time consuming to make an extra meter and code energy consumption (relative to other things to program into the game)? I call bs on that one.
I also fail to see the connection to how this would drastically change map design requirements. Ideally, players would be searching using the flashlight/laser most of the time, with intermittent use of MT and EMF unless you were actively chasing a spy. I don't think the intent was to have a merc hop onto a rail and sit there with MT on until a gray box appears. If a map is darker, you still have the flashlight/laser available to you, or even *gasp* flares.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 21, 2010, 08:14:10 PM
On many maps in SCCT when playing against good players who new how to use the advantages the map design gave them not using your visions was such a stupid idea that I feel safe in saying it's required.
There is no reason PS maps should not be designed in a similar fashion and doing so doesn't make them poorly designed. If they were designed otherwise, the visions would simply be some pretty colors to look at.
If you could see someone with visions you could see them without them. MT made it easymode because it automatically found people behind you or whatever, but you could still have spotted them if you'd turned around and looked. Stop being so lazy and actually check things out, you can do fine with just your torch/EMF when you're checking for cams/MT when you get aggroed. None of these things require leaving visions on for ages or have anything to do with map design.
What would be an example of a map which does require you to leave visions on all the time, since you seem to think they exist?
At no point did I say you had to leave your visions on at all times. Nor did I imply that a map existed where visions were required through the entire map. Many of the maps in CT were designed with areas that are nearly pitch black and provide enough cover that a spy can hide from a torch. Orphanage, Def Tech, Krauser and Steel Squat just to name a few that were designed with areas where the environment favors the Merc or the Spy. In these places each team's and abilities and strengths when used properly become an equalizer, visions included.
As far as 360 degree MT in SCCT, don't forget that this is not SCCT. I never said I thought the idea that started this thread was in itself bad. As a matter of fact, I like the idea and stated that I didn't think the idea was bad. Then I pointed out that for the energy to play truly dynamic roll in the game play, it needs to meet a map's minimum vision usage requirements or else it's just a useless energy bar that serves no real purpose except to fix some problem that SCCT had, not PS.
Furthermore, when I point out the aforementioned all people can seem to do is fall back on problems that SCCT had as an argument for using energy for visions rather than trying to think of a way to make the vision energy a real part of the gameplay that makes things more interesting but doesn't have the potential to cause an imbalance.
The constant fall back on SCCTs problems says several things, no one cares enough to really explore a way to make this idea work, you'd just rather argue, you assume the PS team is blissfully ignorant of the mistakes Ubisoft made and didn't learn from those mistakes and shortcomings or all of the above.
*is emotional* well said B1nary.
We check everything rigorously. (example: a prop misaligned by 1 unreal unit). Yes, it got fixed. This kind of QA and polish hopefully should make PS a great game instead of a good game.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 22, 2010, 12:19:06 PM
At no point did I say you had to leave your visions on at all times. Nor did I imply that a map existed where visions were required through the entire map. Many of the maps in CT were designed with areas that are nearly pitch black and provide enough cover that a spy can hide from a torch. Orphanage, Def Tech, Krauser and Steel Squat just to name a few that were designed with areas where the environment favors the Merc or the Spy.
None of those maps would be hurt by a time limit on visions. Yeah, if you shot out all the lights in Orphanage's dormitory you wouldn't be able to turn on MT and stay there not caring anyway for the whole game. Is that bad? I don't think that's bad. The other maps are affected even less, because you don't spend much time in any of the areas which need visions anyway. Were you planning on making a map that was just a giant version of dormitory or something? Because that sounds about as fun to play as Die Turnhalle. Even with infinite visions.
What areas in Krauser force you to stay in visions to find spies, that you'd want to stay in long enough that a time limit would matter? Serious question. Same goes for Squat.
Quoteit's just a useless energy bar that serves no real purpose except to fix some problem that SCCT had, not PS.
It serves a purpose by keeping visions special. It serves a purpose by making darkness dark, instead of pointless because MT means you can see everything moving fast anyway. You think the way people stay in MT 100% of the time on Warehouse sector 1 is fine? Because even without 360 degree detection, and even without magic MT night vision, and even if stationary spies were invisible, it'd still be the only thing people did. Just now they'd turn MT off every ten seconds so they could spot any spies that were slow walking around. How do you propose we fix that?
Why would you fix MT? The fact that some people leave MT on in Warehouse is because of the design of the map, and it doesn't really matter because you can counteract that as an advantage to yourself. Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted. It's only now that energy consumption has been suggested that people are pretending they ever cared. Also, you probably wouldn't keep MT/EMF on given that your view distance is reduced with them on.
As for anyone who thinks it's easy to implement, keep in mind all the balance issues it would create which would have to be solved. I don't even think it's a good idea, it's incredibly stupid to assume that they ever created imbalanced gameplay or problems for the player by being unlimited. As for keeping the visions 'special', since when did a timelimit make something 'special'? Sex is special, you don't see people wishing they had an energy consumption bar preventing them from taking advantage of the benefits ;). The timelimit serves no purpose, it doesn't do anything other than harm the gameplay. It's another bad, novelty idea that people think would improve gameplay but is actually completely pointless.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Why would you fix MT? The fact that some people leave MT on in Warehouse is because of the design of the map, and it doesn't really matter because you can counteract that as an advantage to yourself. Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted. It's only now that energy consumption has been suggested that people are pretending they ever cared. Also, you probably wouldn't keep MT/EMF on given that your view distance is reduced with them on.
As for anyone who thinks it's easy to implement, keep in mind all the balance issues it would create which would have to be solved. I don't even think it's a good idea, it's incredibly stupid to assume that they ever created imbalanced gameplay or problems for the player by being unlimited. As for keeping the visions 'special', since when did a timelimit make something 'special'? Sex is special, you don't see people wishing they had an energy consumption bar preventing them from taking advantage of the benefits ;). The timelimit serves no purpose, it doesn't do anything other than harm the gameplay. It's another bad, novelty idea that people think would improve gameplay but is actually completely pointless.
Warehouse isn't the most balanced map :(
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted.
Jog on mate, people are talking about it since pt.
What if it visions only lasts for about 5-10 seconds; the merc can use it to avoid flash, see through smoke, check the ceiling, etc.
But then it has a couple seconds cooldown that gives the spy the opportunity to move, drop, climb or take a piss w/o getting detected.
Quote from: theDuke on September 22, 2010, 09:40:08 PMWhat if it visions only lasts for about 5-10 seconds; the merc can use it to avoid flash, see through smoke, check the ceiling, etc.
But then it has a couple seconds cooldown that gives the spy the opportunity to move, drop, climb or take a piss w/o getting detected.
I would be more inclined to believe a limited overall time allowed in visions would be more balanced. I.E. You have 2 minutes of battery power to meter out your usage through a match. Something like CTs gas mask. Perhaps have MT consume more power than EMF which would even make sense from a technical standpoint.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 22, 2010, 11:14:13 PM
Quote from: theDuke on September 22, 2010, 09:40:08 PMWhat if it visions only lasts for about 5-10 seconds; the merc can use it to avoid flash, see through smoke, check the ceiling, etc.
But then it has a couple seconds cooldown that gives the spy the opportunity to move, drop, climb or take a piss w/o getting detected.
I would be more inclined to believe a limited overall time allowed in visions would be more balanced. I.E. You have 2 minutes of battery power to meter out your usage through a match. Something like CTs gas mask. Perhaps have MT consume more power than EMF which would even make sense from a technical standpoint.
While that's pretty much the same thing as first proposed, I do like this variation the best so far. It also seems like it would be easier to change if need be (Such as if you change the time limit of a match to more than default). You'd just have another options that says "Vision Time Limit", or something like that. (I'm not good at names :))
Sex is not special when you have it all the time. Since I do, I can start to see some of the good things to come from the energy bar thing. =|
Quote from: Farley4Fan on September 23, 2010, 12:49:05 AM
Sex is not special when you have it all the time. Since I do, I can start to see some of the good things to come from the energy bar thing. =|
Oh you....
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted.
I don't understand how you expect people to take you seriously when you're saying shit like this.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 23, 2010, 09:24:22 AM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted.
I don't understand how you expect people to take you seriously when you're saying shit like this.
Less of a reply to you, but instead just a general observation...
I find it's hard to take you seriously when you've got that Avatar. JUST LOOK AT IT'S EYES!!!
That is all. :P
Servbot serves no one.
Quote from: Cronky on September 23, 2010, 10:57:19 AM
I find it's hard to take you seriously when you've got that Avatar. JUST LOOK AT IT'S EYES!!!
It's bad to judge things by appearances you know.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 23, 2010, 09:24:22 AM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted.
I don't understand how you expect people to take you seriously when you're saying shit like this.
I don't have any expectations, I'm just stating my opinion and that's all that matters to me unless you actually have an argument against it, which you don't. This has NEVER been a problem that people CARE about, I don't care if it's been talked about it because it's just not a problem, you can't link it to any balance issue or any cause of problems because it just isn't. I've NEVER seen a good argument for making visions limited.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 23, 2010, 06:11:03 PM
I don't have any expectations, I'm just stating my opinion and that's all that matters to me unless you actually have an argument against it, which you don't.
It's funny, because this is actually what you've been doing the whole thread. No arguments or anything, just I DON'T LIKE THIS IDEA IT'S BAD. Where are your arguments? Where do you give any reason why a time limit would be bad, other than completely nebulous claims that it would make the game less fun? I don't see any. Binary can manage to come up with reasons, he's talking about map design, he actually has a point. I don't agree with him, but I can see where he's coming from, and hey, maybe I'm wrong and he's right afterall. Why can't you come up reasons like he can?
QuoteThis has NEVER been a problem that people CARE about, I don't care if it's been talked about it because it's just not a problem, you can't link it to any balance issue or any cause of problems because it just isn't.
People have been complaining about MT whoring for years. Years. You want me to go find some examples? I can if you want, it's not a problem. Not a problem.
Even if nobody had complained, so what? Were people required to wait a year after PT came out to complain about SS+jump? Were people required to wait a year to complain about instas? No. If something's a problem it's a problem. It's not a fucking wine, it doesn't need to be aged.
Seriously, nobody had a problem with vision spam? What are you going to come up with next? I can't even imagine.
Stone, MT whoring is something everyone hates. Even MT whores.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 23, 2010, 08:20:39 PM
It's funny, because this is actually what you've been doing the whole thread. No arguments or anything, just I DON'T LIKE THIS IDEA IT'S BAD. Where are your arguments? Where do you give any reason why a time limit would be bad, other than completely nebulous claims that it would make the game less fun? I don't see any. Binary can manage to come up with reasons, he's talking about map design, he actually has a point. I don't agree with him, but I can see where he's coming from, and hey, maybe I'm wrong and he's right afterall. Why can't you come up reasons like he can?
Oh really?
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 22, 2010, 06:15:38 PM
Why would you fix MT? The fact that some people leave MT on in Warehouse is because of the design of the map, and it doesn't really matter because you can counteract that as an advantage to yourself. Infinite visions have never been a problem, nor stated to be a problem until this thread was posted. It's only now that energy consumption has been suggested that people are pretending they ever cared. Also, you probably wouldn't keep MT/EMF on given that your view distance is reduced with them on.
As for anyone who thinks it's easy to implement, keep in mind all the balance issues it would create which would have to be solved. I don't even think it's a good idea, it's incredibly stupid to assume that they ever created imbalanced gameplay or problems for the player by being unlimited. As for keeping the visions 'special', since when did a timelimit make something 'special'? Sex is special, you don't see people wishing they had an energy consumption bar preventing them from taking advantage of the benefits ;). The timelimit serves no purpose, it doesn't do anything other than harm the gameplay. It's another bad, novelty idea that people think would improve gameplay but is actually completely pointless.
I realise that the last point in bold isn't necessarily a fact, but I implore you to offer me an opinion which supports the contrary. The only arguments to support a timelimit are that people can use them without repercussions, and that being unlimited makes visions less 'special'. I've already talked about the fact that the last point in my last post, but visions do have repercussions (such as EMF, decreased view distance, and more). I've yet to see someone offer a reasonable argument to support the idea, and my personal instinct is that the idea is pathetic and fuelled by a lack of sensibility. I've explained why.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 23, 2010, 08:20:39 PM
People have been complaining about MT whoring for years. Years. You want me to go find some examples? I can if you want, it's not a problem. Not a problem.
Even if nobody had complained, so what? Were people required to wait a year after PT came out to complain about SS+jump? Were people required to wait a year to complain about instas? No. If something's a problem it's a problem. It's not a fucking wine, it doesn't need to be aged.
Seriously, nobody had a problem with vision spam? What are you going to come up with next? I can't even imagine.
Don't be a moron, don't twist my words. Obviously, it doesn't matter when the problem is suggessted if it IS a problem, but in THIS thread it's spoken about as if the problem has been relevant for years, when it hasn't, if ever. I don't disagree with the fact that MT whoring exists, but MT whoring isn't an issue because of the fact that you can use it for an unlimited amount of the time (and the number of people who suggest that is incredibly minor, compared to those who have the sense to open their minds). The issue people have had with MT in particular is actually that you're ABLE to whore it with little dis-advantage due to it's design (360 detection, night vision, etc). But that applies to PT/CT only.
Let me just say again, guys.
I think the time limit combined (that can be changed) for visions that binary stated is the best option yet! ;D
Default time being dependent upon balancing when the beta comes out, but with the ability to be changed (as with match time limit) so that people that don't care about the possibility of "Whoring Visions" can just bump it up to either the match time limit, or Infinite. Much like how CT gave the option (on Xbox at least) to turn off Berserk. Default was on, but in case you wanted to play more like PT then you could do that easily. (In other words, easier ;))
Like stated before, this variation seems like the easiest to balance and easiest to work with without falling into situations like:
-I used X vision then ran into a Y then couldn't do Z (Very general I know)
or
-I accidentally used X vision and now I can't use another one... This is bullshit... This game sucks
While these are VERY tiny problems. They add up... like pennies. (Or whatever crazy currency you have where you are)
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 23, 2010, 11:05:17 PM
Why would you fix MT? The fact that some people leave MT on in Warehouse is because of the design of the map, and it doesn't really matter because you can counteract that as an advantage to yourself.
Has nothing to do with a time limit.
QuoteAlso, you probably wouldn't keep MT/EMF on given that your view distance is reduced with them on.
Has nothing to do with a time limit.
QuoteAs for anyone who thinks it's easy to implement, keep in mind all the balance issues it would create which would have to be solved.
Has potential, but you kind of forgot to actually mention any of these balance issues, instead of just claiming they exist and leaving it at that.
QuoteAs for keeping the visions 'special', since when did a timelimit make something 'special'? Sex is special, you don't see people wishing they had an energy consumption bar preventing them from taking advantage of the benefits ;).
This is just dumb.
QuoteThe timelimit serves no purpose, it doesn't do anything other than harm the gameplay. It's another bad, novelty idea that people think would improve gameplay but is actually completely pointless.
No actual reason or evidence or support of any sort for your claim it's bad, but I guess you admit that, so yeah.
QuoteI don't disagree with the fact that MT whoring exists, but MT whoring isn't an issue because of the fact that you can use it for an unlimited amount of the time (and the number of people who suggest that is incredibly minor, compared to those who have the sense to open their minds).
Being able to leave it on 100% of the time is part of the issue. The night vision is part of the problem. The 360 degree detection is part of the problem. The infinite duration is also part of the problem. Trying to claim infinite duration isn't part of what makes MT broken is like trying to claim that the night vision doesn't help, and it's all just the 360 degree detection. Yeah, that on its own is good, but there are other things too.
Why am I even talking to you? You're just going to come up with more planet stone bullshit which makes no sense. I'm dumb.
Only thing further I'll say on the subject is: IF MT didn't have 360 detection radius and IF Spys who are stationary or moving at a slow crouch/walk are 100% invisible to someone using MT nullifying benefits of the NV effect then you could leave it on all day long and you'll do nothing but blind yourself to a smart Spy passing by right under your nose.
We have considered all of the issues MT had in PT and SCCT and taken appropriate steps to make sure it is no longer an issue.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 24, 2010, 09:38:36 AM
We have considered all of the issues MT had in PT and SCCT and taken appropriate steps to make sure it is no longer an issue.
That the best quote ever. Thank you :P
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 24, 2010, 09:03:06 AM
Has nothing to do with a time limit.
I didn't bold the timelimit part of your post, so don't assume everything I'm saying is in response to that :). The point I was actually trying to get across is that you said I don't give reasons for my opinion, but I do.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 24, 2010, 09:03:06 AMHas potential, but you kind of forgot to actually mention any of these balance issues, instead of just claiming they exist and leaving it at that.
They've already been mentioned, there was no point in rehashing what's already been said.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 24, 2010, 09:03:06 AMBeing able to leave it on 100% of the time is part of the issue. The night vision is part of the problem. The 360 degree detection is part of the problem. The infinite duration is also part of the problem. Trying to claim infinite duration isn't part of what makes MT broken is like trying to claim that the night vision doesn't help, and it's all just the 360 degree detection. Yeah, that on its own is good, but there are other things too.
Why am I even talking to you? You're just going to come up with more planet stone bullshit which makes no sense. I'm dumb.
Interesting, you complain that I don't offer reasons (such as about the balance issues) yet here all you say is that "The infinite duration is also part of the problem." I've stated that I don't think it is across all of my posts in this thread, and you still haven't convinced me. I haven't stated any "bullshit" in the thread either, maybe it's about time you start giving real, comprehensive reasons as to why infinite visions are actually a problem, and why limiting them would be advantageous without causing balance problems elsewhere. You should also realise that it's you who should be convincing me that the idea is worth implementing, it's not my job to defend what already works.
Okay, right, yeah, you're right. People would have kept MT on 100% of the time even if there was a time limit so they couldn't keep it on all the time. Infinite duration on MT totally didn't help with MT whoring, people would have kept it on whenever they wanted anyway.
seriously dude
Quote from: Limerick on September 24, 2010, 10:15:10 PM
maybe it's not about who is right... the problems with each side have been presented, i hope you can all see that if they simply "fix" MT to correlate to "bugless", then it would be cool... and also time limits have not been tested.
Shhhhhhhh...
This is much funner to read! It's when they stop talking about it that I'll have to jump in with some statement that is completely oblivious to the point that just got resolved.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs5.tinypic.com%2Fnyd4pf_th.jpg&hash=42d51c0229d1880121f8f028b258210694496441)
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 24, 2010, 09:39:19 PM
Okay, right, yeah, you're right. People would have kept MT on 100% of the time even if there was a time limit so they couldn't keep it on all the time. Infinite duration on MT totally didn't help with MT whoring, people would have kept it on whenever they wanted anyway.
seriously dude
But what you don't seem to understand is that keeping MT on 100% of the time is disadvantageous, given the fact that you can't reap the benefits of either normal vision or EMF. That's why people DON'T keep it on 100% of the time, that's why the 'problem' of unlimited usage doesn't really exist.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 25, 2010, 01:40:11 PM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 24, 2010, 09:39:19 PM
Okay, right, yeah, you're right. People would have kept MT on 100% of the time even if there was a time limit so they couldn't keep it on all the time. Infinite duration on MT totally didn't help with MT whoring, people would have kept it on whenever they wanted anyway.
seriously dude
But what you don't seem to understand is that keeping MT on 100% of the time is disadvantageous, given the fact that you can't reap the benefits of either normal vision or EMF. That's why people DON'T keep it on 100% of the time, that's why the 'problem' of unlimited usage doesn't really exist.
Amen
Hey Stone, you ever heard of people being called MT whores? Why don't you guess why they're called that? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they stay in EMF all game.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 25, 2010, 04:22:27 PM
Hey Stone, you ever heard of people being called MT whores? Why don't you guess why they're called that? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they stay in EMF all game.
Because every time a Merc turns on MT they are transported to the Red light district.
Simple as that.
If I'm in MT and I need to use EMF I can switch to it by pressing tab. I probably wont stay in EMF for very long before going back to MT.
Yeah...
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 25, 2010, 04:22:27 PM
Hey Stone, you ever heard of people being called MT whores? Why don't you guess why they're called that? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they stay in EMF all game.
I guess that is because people get annoyed when somebody uses MT and out of annoyance calls them an 'MT Whore'. That doesn't mean that people stay in MT the whole game, it's like calling somebody an 'AWP Whore' in Counter Strike. The fact that people get called MT whores doesn't mean that there's a problem with the unlimited usage of the vision, just like there isn't a problem with letting people use an AWP without timelimits. That's not to say that some people don't stay in MT, but I think it's a minority who do so, and I don't think it's really a problem when they do.
I remember you saying that I'm "just going to come up with more planet stone bullshit which makes no sense"... maybe you should take some time off 'Planet Misty' for a moment and listen to what other people have to say; it has its merits ;).
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 26, 2010, 04:41:36 PM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 25, 2010, 04:22:27 PM
Hey Stone, you ever heard of people being called MT whores? Why don't you guess why they're called that? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they stay in EMF all game.
I guess that is because people get annoyed when somebody uses MT and out of annoyance calls them an 'MT Whore'. That doesn't mean that people stay in MT the whole game, it's like calling somebody an 'AWP Whore' in Counter Strike. The fact that people get called MT whores doesn't mean that there's a problem with the unlimited usage of the vision, just like there isn't a problem with letting people use an AWP without timelimits. That's not to say that some people don't stay in MT, but I think it's a minority who do so, and I don't think it's really a problem when they do.
I remember you saying that I'm "just going to come up with more planet stone bullshit which makes no sense"... maybe you should take some time off 'Planet Misty' for a moment and listen to what other people have to say; it has its merits ;).
Ok im going to end this bs once and for all. For all those whiny people out there who complain that people are in motion tracking for too long, it was only a problem for those who didn't know how to avoid motion.
Secondly, motion wasn't implemented properly in-terms of accommodating higher end graphics cards/ as well as the shadow implementation / Hence the only counter was the optic camo suit to hide that shadow.
Finally if any of you even had the slightest clue, you would see that motion tracking is fixed in Project stealth anyway due to mr.mic's modifications / visonary concepts , speaking of which any Map that was UMP ,you would notice that the motion tracking was alot darker in CT to stop the ease of mercs seeing like spys night vision , so why all the huffing and puffing o_O ?
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 26, 2010, 05:19:10 PM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on September 26, 2010, 04:41:36 PM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 25, 2010, 04:22:27 PM
Hey Stone, you ever heard of people being called MT whores? Why don't you guess why they're called that? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they stay in EMF all game.
I guess that is because people get annoyed when somebody uses MT and out of annoyance calls them an 'MT Whore'. That doesn't mean that people stay in MT the whole game, it's like calling somebody an 'AWP Whore' in Counter Strike. The fact that people get called MT whores doesn't mean that there's a problem with the unlimited usage of the vision, just like there isn't a problem with letting people use an AWP without timelimits. That's not to say that some people don't stay in MT, but I think it's a minority who do so, and I don't think it's really a problem when they do.
I remember you saying that I'm "just going to come up with more planet stone bullshit which makes no sense"... maybe you should take some time off 'Planet Misty' for a moment and listen to what other people have to say; it has its merits ;).
Ok im going to end this bs once and for all. For all those whiny people out there who complain that people are in motion tracking for too long, it was only a problem for those who didn't know how to avoid motion.
Secondly, motion wasn't implemented properly in-terms of accommodating higher end graphics cards/ as well as the shadow implementation / Hence the only counter was the optic camo suit to hide that shadow.
Finally if any of you even had the slightest clue, you would see that motion tracking is fixed in Project stealth anyway due to mr.mic's modifications / visonary concepts , speaking of which any Map that was UMP ,you would notice that the motion tracking was alot darker in CT to stop the ease of mercs seeing like spys night vision , so why all the huffing and puffing o_O ?
How to avoid a MT whore:
Sit completely still and forfeit the game.
But yeah I have trust that the PS devs found a good way to implement MT.
Oh great, now we've progressed from MT whoring doesn't exist to MT isn't overpowered for anything but NV.
The fuck are you guys gonna come up with next?
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 27, 2010, 01:00:56 AM
Oh great, now we've progressed from MT whoring doesn't exist to MT isn't overpowered for anything but NV.
The fuck are you guys gonna come up with next?
you really don't read do you ? it seems to me you just twist words around to make it fit your conclusions o_o..
hence i said and ill say it again : speaking of which any Map that was UMP ,you would notice that the motion tracking was alot
darker in CT to stop the ease of mercs seeing like the spy clear as day like night vision
Noop you fail to see that motion tracking never happened, there is little to no solid evidence to support its exostance as a historical event. Motion tracking is a lie propogated by the isrealites to exploit the good will of noble peoples to further their agenda.
Exactly.
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 27, 2010, 01:21:52 AM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 27, 2010, 01:00:56 AM
Oh great, now we've progressed from MT whoring doesn't exist to MT isn't overpowered for anything but NV.
The fuck are you guys gonna come up with next?
you really don't read do you ? it seems to me you just twist words around to make it fit your conclusions o_o..
hence i said and ill say it again : speaking of which any Map that was UMP ,you would notice that the motion tracking was alot darker in CT to stop the ease of mercs seeing like the spy clear as day like night vision
The MT fix was nice when it got a lot darker but no one played these maps that often. Also, I remember to this day the amount of you fools just standing in one spot with your MT on....constantly. Especially when half of you played 3 maps over and over and over.
I like how Agent uses Big, Old-English Words such as 'hence'.
Quote from: LoChang on September 28, 2010, 07:41:47 PM
I like how Agent uses Big, Old-English Words such as 'hence'.
I think filters should be in place so that keywords of each of our messages gets replaced with their old English alternative. This place would be the hip-happenist place on the NET.
Frvge, get on it!
No sorry. I don't really feel like that. Would be possible tho. I can probably just use the censor-module for it, but meh, I don't like that.
Art thou not impressed?
I beseech ye to reconsider.
Quote from: Westfall on September 28, 2010, 01:31:55 PM
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 27, 2010, 01:21:52 AM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 27, 2010, 01:00:56 AM
Oh great, now we've progressed from MT whoring doesn't exist to MT isn't overpowered for anything but NV.
The fuck are you guys gonna come up with next?
you really don't read do you ? it seems to me you just twist words around to make it fit your conclusions o_o..
hence i said and ill say it again : speaking of which any Map that was UMP ,you would notice that the motion tracking was alot darker in CT to stop the ease of mercs seeing like the spy clear as day like night vision
The MT fix was nice when it got a lot darker but no one played these maps that often. Also, I remember to this day the amount of you fools just standing in one spot with your MT on....constantly. Especially when half of you played 3 maps over and over and over.
Wrong, No one played the maps because all the people mostly saw and was in awe of what ubisoft produced that they didn't know of the opportunities that lie ahead.
But Project stealth will be different because people will be able to auto download the maps , hence that was one big feature that i feel will save and keep it growing.
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 28, 2010, 10:27:58 PM
Wrong, No one played the maps because all the people mostly saw and was in awe of what ubisoft produced that they didn't know of the opportunities that lie ahead.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg835.imageshack.us%2Fimg835%2F4425%2F1263115857824.gif&hash=3d3783b6850702312bcb26f374fb3bd883471503)
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 28, 2010, 11:27:30 PM
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 28, 2010, 10:27:58 PM
Wrong, No one played the maps because all the people mostly saw and was in awe of what ubisoft produced that they didn't know of the opportunities that lie ahead.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg835.imageshack.us%2Fimg835%2F4425%2F1263115857824.gif&hash=3d3783b6850702312bcb26f374fb3bd883471503)
Verily
The last 5 posts had me in stitches... You guys made my day, thanks ;D
Shame that yet another thread has devolved into crap about SCCT yet again though...
I dont even think you guys are disagreeing anymore...
It's hard to disagree when you don't even know what the other guy fucking means.
Everytime I see Limrick on the forums I think "Rim Lick"
Haha, this made my day.
Quote from: monterto on September 29, 2010, 01:10:45 AM
Everytime I see Limrick on the forums I think "Rim Lick"
I say, that's quite an astute observation my dear wobbly dobbly murmur murmur murmur (jibberish).... *takes a sip of tea*
Quote from: Cronky on September 28, 2010, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on September 28, 2010, 11:27:30 PM
Quote from: AgentX_003 on September 28, 2010, 10:27:58 PM
Wrong, No one played the maps because all the people mostly saw and was in awe of what ubisoft produced that they didn't know of the opportunities that lie ahead.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg835.imageshack.us%2Fimg835%2F4425%2F1263115857824.gif&hash=3d3783b6850702312bcb26f374fb3bd883471503)
Verily
Indubitably.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on September 22, 2010, 11:14:13 PM
Quote from: theDuke on September 22, 2010, 09:40:08 PMWhat if it visions only lasts for about 5-10 seconds; the merc can use it to avoid flash, see through smoke, check the ceiling, etc.
But then it has a couple seconds cooldown that gives the spy the opportunity to move, drop, climb or take a piss w/o getting detected.
I would be more inclined to believe a limited overall time allowed in visions would be more balanced. I.E. You have 2 minutes of battery power to meter out your usage through a match. Something like CTs gas mask. Perhaps have MT consume more power than EMF which would even make sense from a technical standpoint.
As long as it didn't refill on death (as no equipment should), but there's a thread on PS forums about that topic, too.
QuoteAs long as it didn't refill on death (as no equipment should), but there's a thread on PS forums about that topic, too.
Yeah that will make balancing the game very easy. /sarcasm
It actually would make it easier. The fact that you are rewarded for dying is absurd, and there are a lot of situations where you can safely suicide without any realistic penalty for it, particularly as merc.
I think getting a refill upon death actually made a lot of sense. It's like any other game with something that has a limited "Ammo".
I don't die in a game of TF2 only to respawn with 90% of my ammo gone. It just slows the game down even more. (Bad game example, but I don't know what to compare to... plus my point got across)
Plus I could just see a situation where...
Spy: "Hrmm, this map happened to be built without spawn camping in mind. I could get out if I had at least one of *insert gadget*, but I used them all last life... Arrrrrrrgh".
Or something like that.
I will admit that I had killed myself before as Merc simply to get more: Grenades, Mines, refill the Backpack, hell I probably killed myself for Flares once before noticing I could get more at an ammo crate. It's always a risk to commit suicide. If you are SURE that you're going to win and you kill yourself simply for ammo... then it's less the games fault, more that there is mismatched skills playing each side.
Though maybe it's also the games fault because the whole premise of it is taking two different types of games and jam-packing them together. Both teams may be REALLY good at FPSs, but one side could suck hardcore at 3rd Person Stealth. Hard to balance a teams individual skills.
Where is this thread about suiciding for equipment? What would you suggest to fix it? Most of my ideas would reward or punish the Merc unfairly.
If it's not realistic to refill equipment after death, then why do we allow respawning in the first place? That's not realistic either, surely? Respawning creates balance, and better gameplay which in turn is a lot more fun. Gaining equipment on death is not a reward, it's just logical, because you are RESPAWNING, it's a SECOND CHANCE. That is the reward. There's no reason that when somebody is respawned, they shouldn't spawn back with everything they had at the start, that's just mind-bogglingly, fucking retarded. Even worse than the idea of energy-draining for using visions...
As for suiciding to get equipment... there should be no penalty, the penalty is death. If you have the liberty of being able to suicide for equipment, it shows you've played well enough to have that opportunity. The ignorance of supposed 'intellectuals' on this forum really does say a lot sometimes, my god.
Quote from: SITHDUKE on October 15, 2010, 09:58:31 AM
Where is this thread about suiciding for equipment? What would you suggest to fix it? Most of my ideas would reward or punish the Merc unfairly.
dunno, you'll have to search for it.
I really don't care about realism. I care about the insurmountable end-game where there are 6 mines aiding 2 mercs covering 3 to 4 objectives.
There are a couple of ways to fix this, but refilling equipment
on death is plain silly.
Spekkio I disagree with you completely, In my honest opinion dieng for gadget refill is not for any player, to do that correctly you need to do it at right time, in a right spot, at the right situation in the right moment.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 15, 2010, 09:26:42 PM
I really don't care about realism. I care about the insurmountable end-game where there are 6 mines aiding 2 mercs covering 3 to 4 objectives.
There are a couple of ways to fix this, but refilling equipment
on death is plain silly.
So basically, your argument is that 6 is a higher number than four. The problem with this is that mines aren't used to cover objectives alone. The size of the maps are far bigger than the size of four objectives alone. I mean think about it, one of the balancing factors against a spy is that they need to be cautious at all times. So mercenaries should have means to defend each area of the map whilst situating themselves in different areas. The game requires movement between locations from both the spies and mercenaries, so I'm sure you will agree that mines are very important. Six mines is a good number because it allows you to cover chokepoints across the whole map whilst moving around, and it's balanced because if the spy can find the mine, they can defuse it.
This is why your idea doesn't work. What happens when these six important mines have exploded or been defused? You're suggesting that mercs shouldn't have any mines left once the six they have between them have been used, but this means that they would no longer be able to defend ANY map efficiently after their mines have gone, because they wouldn't be able to replace them. On the other hand, if equipment is refilled on respawn, then the problem doesn't exist. And I don't think there's ever really been a problem with that, has there ;). Your suggestion would make mines become useless, and nobody would take them because they'd be gone in a flash. If you're going to come back to life, you should come back with everything you had at the beginning, that's just common sense. As you've hopefully come to understand, this doesn't detract from gameplay, and it never really has been.
How about this. You don't refill on mines after each life.
How about no? For the reasons already stated, it wouldn't work.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 01:32:15 AM
This is why your idea doesn't work. What happens when these six important mines have exploded or been defused? You're suggesting that mercs shouldn't have any mines left once the six they have between them have been used, but this means that they would no longer be able to defend ANY map efficiently after their mines have gone, because they wouldn't be able to replace them.
You don't actually need six mines down at all times to be successful Stone.
Try playing the game sometime.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 15, 2010, 02:59:19 PM
If it's not realistic to refill equipment after death, then why do we allow respawning in the first place?
So are you being obtuse on purpose, or are you just a moron? Serious question.
Why not just only allow six primed mines on the map at all times?
Stone,
So what you're saying is that mercs can't possibly win if they don't both pick mines as an equipment item?
Mines are nice to have but I can recall a good number of matches where I didn't use a single mine and was just fine... Against a good player all a mine does is slow them down a tiny bit or force them to take an alternate route...
Only time I ever die to a mine is being careless... or that stupid bug where a mine would go off even when you were in a slow walk... usually as the removal animation was going through. But that was SCCT...
Quote from: Spekkio on October 16, 2010, 05:56:04 AM
Stone,
So what you're saying is that mercs can't possibly win if they don't both pick mines as an equipment item?
Nope. I'm saying that if mercs don't respawn with mines after taking them in their loadout, then it's going to be much harder to win against players of similar skill levels, to a point where it's not balanced.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 16, 2010, 03:17:58 AMYou don't actually need six mines down at all times to be successful Stone.
Try playing the game sometime.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 15, 2010, 02:59:19 PM
If it's not realistic to refill equipment after death, then why do we allow respawning in the first place?
So are you being obtuse on purpose, or are you just a moron? Serious question.
I know you don't need six mines down to win a match, you clearly didn't read my post. I'm neither obtuse nor a moron.
Quote from: VenomousNinja on October 16, 2010, 03:54:55 AM
Why not just only allow six primed mines on the map at all times?
That's the system that's already in place, and it works thankfully, which is why this whole suggestion Spekkio has put forward is pointless and useless.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 02:00:39 PM
I'm neither obtuse nor a moron.
So what's your excuse for not realising that realistic in that context meant meaningful, rather than going off on some confused tangent about how respawning doesn't make sense? I mean, let's face it, it was pretty obvious.
I think Mercs may need a way to replenish their equipment given the size of the maps. However I don't think they should just be handed this equipment for free. I think if a Merc is at the point where he is completely out of equipment he should have to gamble in some way. I'm thinking the Merc has to travel to a rather neutral place on the map(by neutral I mean it favors neither spies nor mercs) and use a beacon to land a supply crate. The gamble would be spies could also use the Merc crate to resupply
Also to add to the gamble spies could be allowed to sabotage the equipment, which would dispense faulty equipment. Faulty equipment may be a bit too harsh though, so you could maybe have the sabotaged equipment like mines/traps be visible to the spies and show through walls.
Anyway...just some ideas.
[frvge edit: off-topic]
I don't see how that is even remotely related to my post. o.0
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 02:00:39 PM
Nope. I'm saying that if mercs don't respawn with mines after taking them in their loadout, then it's going to be much harder to win against players of similar skill levels, to a point where it's not balanced.
So you're saying the game isn't balanced unless the mercs a) have mines and b) have them available to them in the end-game.
I disagree.
QuoteThat's the system that's already in place, and it works thankfully, which is why this whole suggestion Spekkio has put forward is pointless and useless.
First, the system works in that you can't suicide for equipment early on in the game and place 9, 12, even 18 mines within the opening parts of the game. However, I don't think that the system "works," since mercs win the vast majority of the game. There are a lot of factors contributing to this (namely, how difficult it is for spies to kill mercs in SCCT), but the fact remains that it is very easy for a merc to suicide and replenish his equipment without any significant penalty. And the fact remains that overcoming 6 mines, 3-6 spytraps or camnet, and 2 mercs split between 3 objectives is pretty difficult.
However, I also don't like that the spy end encourages liberal use of smokes/stickies/chaff, since you get all this equipment back when you die. On top of that, there is no real way to replenish equipment in the end game if you manage to get there without dying, which means you eventually you'll have to go kamikaze to get more equipment.
From a design point, it's silly to have such a system in place that punishes surviving and rewards dying in this manner. Instead, equipment should not refill upon death, and there should be some kind of limited way to refill equipment during the game (for example, through ammo boxes). Perhaps this problem might go away if spies can more easily kill mercs, making it more risky for them to sacrifice a life, but that still doesn't solve a faulted design... it just covers it up.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 16, 2010, 03:08:08 PM
So what's your excuse for not realising that realistic in that context meant meaningful, rather than going off on some confused tangent about how respawning doesn't make sense? I mean, let's face it, it was pretty obvious.
Who said I didn't? Even if I didn't, that wouldn't make a moron.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 16, 2010, 05:40:28 PM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 02:00:39 PM
Nope. I'm saying that if mercs don't respawn with mines after taking them in their loadout, then it's going to be much harder to win against players of similar skill levels, to a point where it's not balanced.
So you're saying the game isn't balanced unless the mercs a) have mines and b) have them available to them in the end-game.
I disagree.
That's not what I'm saying. But I do think it's almost impossible for skilled mercenaries to beat out skilled spies without mines, and being able to replace them when they're removed/destroyed.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 16, 2010, 05:40:28 PM
Rest of the post, point about replenishing with ammo boxes in particular.
Ahhh, I thought you meant that they shouldn't be able to replenish their equipment ammo at all... so what you're actually suggesting is that ammo boxes could replenish equipment in a limited way? That's fair enough and I don't really have a problem with that, sorry for misinterpreting you :). However, I still don't really see it as a problem; if you're going to have a place for them to replenish equipment, why not just give them equipment back on respawn in the first place? After all, the backpack still exists, so that plus the ammo box would basically replenish your equipment back to normal. Anyway, we can just agree to disagree on that, I have no problem with either option being implemented, the original system or ammo boxes.
Maybe just do away with backpack altogether, and make ammo boxes replenish equipment once a life or even just once a game. The merc would have to take some risk to replenish equipment. The ammo boxes would have to be placed far away from the objectives.
That's a good point, but then again there's many benefits to being able to reload on the fly and pass equipment to your team-mate using the backpack. I suppose it could balance out things a little though.
I think it's a bit unrealistic that the mercs don't have to open the backpack to take equipment out. Mercs should have an animation where they remove the back pack, open it, and then look through it to find their equipment.
Quote from: monterto on October 16, 2010, 08:38:25 PM
I think it's a bit unrealistic that the mercs don't have to open the backpack to take equipment out. Mercs should have an animation where they remove the back pack, open it, and then look through it to find their equipment.
ahahahaahaha funny :D :D if we do that than we also need a backpack for spy otherwise where did he have all his gadgets?????
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 07:52:35 PM
That's a good point, but then again there's many benefits to being able to reload on the fly and pass equipment to your team-mate using the backpack. I suppose it could balance out things a little though.
I'm thinking since most people take backpack anyways, you could nerf it (by making it once a game) and make it a static feature on a map. That would make mercs take a different gadget and help with variety. Let's face it, Backpack is pretty boring compared to something like tazer or camnet (2 things you don't see very often). Boost those, make backpack a once a game thing at an ammo box, and help to fix the problem of people suiciding for more equip. It still might happen but instead of six frags they get 4.
Tazer is my new best friend, I actually screwed mines over it, when you get a location of a spy, they charge onto you and I give them a full throttle payback, it shocks them virtually and mentally.
Quote from: comicsserg on October 16, 2010, 08:41:40 PM
Quote from: monterto on October 16, 2010, 08:38:25 PM
I think it's a bit unrealistic that the mercs don't have to open the backpack to take equipment out. Mercs should have an animation where they remove the back pack, open it, and then look through it to find their equipment.
ahahahaahaha funny :D :D if we do that than we also need a backpack for spy otherwise where did he have all his gadgets?????
Not at all comicsserg, I think with that "unrealistic" he think about balancing... if you are out of nades in combat, you will have to risk and waste that few seconds of taking eq from bp.
@DreadStunLock
Tazer is good till spions don't know you got it. :)
maybe it can work when the merc get new ammo (like the box with ammo in SC:CT), but not with his backpack. Well can't imagine how it will look like in the game
QuoteThat's not what I'm saying. But I do think it's almost impossible for skilled mercenaries to beat out skilled spies without mines, and being able to replace them when they're removed/destroyed.
So you're saying that when it's "almost impossible" to beat spies without mines that the game is balanced, and when it is possible to beat spies with mines the game is unbalanced?
You seem to have this thing against admitting that you think the game is unbalanced without mines, despite the fact that you're saying that using other words.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 06:14:30 PM
Who said I didn't? Even if I didn't, that wouldn't make a moron.
Oh, right, you understood, you just decided to act like you didn't. Just because, I guess?
Just admit you fucked up, dude.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 17, 2010, 04:04:43 AM
QuoteThat's not what I'm saying. But I do think it's almost impossible for skilled mercenaries to beat out skilled spies without mines, and being able to replace them when they're removed/destroyed.
So you're saying that when it's "almost impossible" to beat spies without mines that the game is balanced, and when it is possible to beat spies with mines the game is unbalanced?
You seem to have this thing against admitting that you think the game is unbalanced without mines, despite the fact that you're saying that using other words.
The key term in my post was 'players of the same skill level'. I do think it's unbalanced in that instance, but you aren't always playing against similarly matched players.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 17, 2010, 05:34:32 AM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 16, 2010, 06:14:30 PM
Who said I didn't? Even if I didn't, that wouldn't make a moron.
Oh, right, you understood, you just decided to act like you didn't. Just because, I guess?
Just admit you fucked up, dude.
How did I act like I don't understand? I responded correctly to what he was saying. You seem too busy trying to out-do me to attempt making a valid point. Spekkio adressed me without problems, I wonder why you're the only one who had an issue... ooooh that's a hard one ;). You're not even involved in this, do you think people will respect you for trying to get a rise out of me? All you're doing is making yourself look like a cunt, which is certainly no stretch of the imagination. This is not an invitation to argue further hard-man, I'm just pointing out your ridiculous attitude.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 15, 2010, 01:54:58 AM
It actually would make it easier. The fact that you are rewarded for dying is absurd, and there are a lot of situations where you can safely suicide without any realistic penalty for it, particularly as merc.
This is Spekkio posting okay.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 15, 2010, 02:59:19 PM
If it's not realistic to refill equipment after death, then why do we allow respawning in the first place? That's not realistic either, surely?
This is you completely misinterpreting what he meant when he said realistic penalty okay.
Realistic in this context means meaningful. It does not fucking mean mercs coming back from the dead is unrealistic hurrr. You are dumb.
For dieng you are rewarded with new equipment after you spawn, but to die it takes 5 seconds, then another 5-10 seconds to respawn, then another 5 seconds to get to your post. So there are more penalties than rewards. In the end it's hardly worth it, most time you have to suicide after you kill 2 spies when your gas mask is ran out.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 17, 2010, 04:29:49 PM
Quote from: Spekkio on October 15, 2010, 01:54:58 AM
It actually would make it easier. The fact that you are rewarded for dying is absurd, and there are a lot of situations where you can safely suicide without any realistic penalty for it, particularly as merc.
This is Spekkio posting okay.
I'm saying that he didn't have a problem with my interpretation of his post, not the point I was making. Are you being obtuse on purpose, or are you just a moron? Serious question ;).
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 17, 2010, 04:29:49 PM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 15, 2010, 02:59:19 PM
If it's not realistic to refill equipment after death, then why do we allow respawning in the first place? That's not realistic either, surely?
Realistic in this context means meaningful. It does not fucking mean mercs coming back from the dead is unrealistic hurrr.
I know retard, that doesn't mean I misinterpreted him, or gave him the incorrect response by talking about unrealistic factors in the game as a part of my post. Hurrr, you are dumb.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gary-james.co.uk%2FSite%2FTroll_Bridge_files%2FCumbria%2520Summer%252008%2520035.jpg&hash=056523b69f1915587a18783fe3bf1661deb8d246)
This is a bridge okay. Underneath it, is where you belong.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 17, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
I know retard, that doesn't mean I misinterpreted him, or gave him the incorrect response by talking about unrealistic factors in the game as a part of my post. Hurrr, you are dumb.
oh. oh right. you just started talking about unrealistic things completely unprompted for no reason at all.
yeah that makes sense stone. i can totally believe that.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 17, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
I'm saying that he didn't have a problem with my interpretation of his post, not the point I was making. Are you being obtuse on purpose, or are you just a moron? Serious question ;).
Actually, the reason that I didn't harp on your stupidity is because I didn't have any idea that you were responding to my post. I thought someone else mentioned realism in an argument in that context and you were responding to them...I personally never use realism in that context wrt video games because that's a silly argument to make for a fantasy world. Additionally, it is beyond me how anyone could wrongly interpret my use of 'realistic' in that sentence as 'could happen in real life' when I clearly meant 'meaningful.'
So yes, you are retarded. Carry on.
QuoteThe key term in my post was 'players of the same skill level'. I do think it's unbalanced in that instance, but you aren't always playing against similarly matched players.
This makes my head hurt.
Is there another way to balance the game that doesn't involve players of equal skill? I mean, saying that one side will always win if they don't carry a certain item when two teams of equal skill are playing against each other is the epitome of unbalanced.
I don't know why you have this phobia against outright claiming that you think the game is unbalanced without mines. You've already said it in every roundabout way possible.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 17, 2010, 06:12:00 PM
oh. oh right. you just started talking about unrealistic things completely unprompted for no reason at all.
One of the reasons why I dislike spawning without the full equipment is because there's no real
meaningful, or
realistic reason for it to be there. I was also not the first person to bring up realism, as you will see below.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 17, 2010, 08:05:17 PM
It is beyond me how anyone could wrongly interpret my use of 'realistic' in that sentence as 'could happen in real life' when I clearly meant 'meaningful.'
So yes, you are retarded. Carry on.
I wasn't referring to that sentence. You said that "there are a lot of situations where you can safely suicide without any
realistic penalty for it, particularly as merc", so I assumed that you believe spawning without an equipment refill is a realistic penalty for it, which is why I brought up that I don't believe it is the realistic option. Why do you say I'm a retard simply because we disagree? That's just sad, especially since both you and Misty were wrong in your deductions of my post in the first place.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 17, 2010, 08:05:17 PMIs there another way to balance the game that doesn't involve players of equal skill? I mean, saying that one side will always win if they don't carry a certain item when two teams of equal skill are playing against each other is the epitome of unbalanced.
I don't know why you have this phobia against outright claiming that you think the game is unbalanced without mines. You've already said it in every roundabout way possible.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with me saying that mines are unbalanced with teams of equal skill, and that they aren't when that is not the case. I know it's stating the obvious, and I realise that you don't balance things on an unbalanced basis (ie. teams of different skill levels), but that wasn't really my point. People can win without mines when they play against lesser skilled players, and for veterans in a game like SvM, that is a frequent occurrence. That is why I brought it up; you suggest that mines aren't as important as I think, but what I think is that given your level of skill (and the skill of many people on this forum for that matter), you haven't played enough people like you to see that this is the case. I highly doubt you've ever removed mines from your equipment selection, or ever would in Project Stealth.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-3809-internet-argument-techniques/ (http://www.cracked.com/funny-3809-internet-argument-techniques/)
Thought this would be useful here.
That's very true :).
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 17, 2010, 11:48:52 PM
I was also not the first person to bring up realism, as you will see below.
yeah you actually kinda were
I'm just gonna go ahead and rehash/add in:
Changing ammo refilling upon death changes the pace of the game.
While like Spekkio said earlier it seems as if Spies, more so than Mercs, are punished by living longer. Though that whole process gives the real "Importance" of each gadget. If you only have 5 flashbangs, then you aren't going to just spam flashbangs. You'll try to find a "Strategic" time (or just incredibly inappropriate) to drop/shoot one. While the same thought process will go over even if you can refill your gadgets, it'll be to a much lesser "Oh I'm almost out... I better hit up an ammo box soon" sense of thinking.
Balance for gadgets came from the difference of default lives between the two teams; Spies 5, Mercs 3. Merc's purposefully dying for gadgets gave them an even larger lives discrepancy. Anything after that is based solely on player's individual skill. Which in it of itself is hard to balance because it's two drastically different game types. This isn't trying to balance Spartans Vs Covenant in Halo Reach.
I said it before, even if you only get to refill your ammo X amount of times it'll slow the game down further. By "Forcing" people to go back to ammo boxes periodically instead of just having a set amount of Gadget Y with an objective in mind. Or alternatively it'll encourage aggro even more by giving people more "Ammo" to quickly drop by and get.
Even after I say all this, I still think it COULD work. Just how do you implement it?
Refill upon death just always seems like the right-er option.
There's my current thoughts. ;D
If Mercs only get 2 lives, the extra gadgets comes at a huge increase of risk of getting killed (most likely losing you the match). Ta-da.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 18, 2010, 03:40:23 AM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 17, 2010, 11:48:52 PM
I was also not the first person to bring up realism, as you will see below.
yeah you actually kinda were
You must have missed the part where I quoted Spekkio talking about realistic penalties.
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 11:23:46 AM
If Mercs only get 2 lives, the extra gadgets comes at a huge increase of risk of getting killed (most likely losing you the match). Ta-da.
Seems a little unbalanced to me; one neck and you're on your last leg.
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 11:23:46 AM
If Mercs only get 2 lives, the extra gadgets comes at a huge increase of risk of getting killed (most likely losing you the match). Ta-da.
Oh frvge. You (along with everyone on this forum) know how to say what I say in many less words.
How do you all do it!?
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 18, 2010, 12:12:01 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 11:23:46 AM
If Mercs only get 2 lives, the extra gadgets comes at a huge increase of risk of getting killed (most likely losing you the match). Ta-da.
Seems a little unbalanced to me; one neck and you're on your last leg.
I believe that was an example ;)
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 18, 2010, 12:12:01 PM
You must have missed the part where I quoted Spekkio talking about realistic penalties.
Realistic penalties have nothing to do with realism. You haven't worked that out yet, even after two people have explained it to you? You're dumber than I thought. :/
Guys, with all the insults, I think this thread is worse than most threads in Off-Topic.
Aka: turn the insults down! I'll get editing and closing otherwise.
Quote from: B-3A Misty Lady on October 18, 2010, 01:28:22 PM
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 18, 2010, 12:12:01 PM
You must have missed the part where I quoted Spekkio talking about realistic penalties.
Realistic penalties have nothing to do with realism. You haven't worked that out yet, even after two people have explained it to you? You're dumber than I thought. :/
I don't think you know what realistic means. Besides which, I was talking about it in the exact same context as both you and him, so please just be quiet. That bridge is feeling lonely Misty...
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 02:19:24 PM
this thread is worse than most threads.
People have become bored so they started arguing about nothing for the past few months just to keep busy. Only like 2 threads have had any meaning recently.
frvge is right, and that's pretty bad when you consider how bad most threads are - even worse than some of my threads lmao
Quote from: CurdyMilk on October 18, 2010, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 02:19:24 PM
this thread is worse than most threads.
People have become bored so they started arguing about nothing for the past few months just to keep busy. Only like 2 threads have had any meaning recently.
The last Tick Tock gave you:
- A totally new level. Make a thread about it.
- A new, more fluid walljump/splitjump, with a bit of wallrunning in it. Make a thread about it.
- First shown Merc animations (now both textured). Discuss it, comment on it.
We want to make things better, but that's only possible with your comments.
A lack of comments doesn't mean it's perfect to us, because there's also absense of praise, but it means you guys don't know what to do with new things anymore. C'mon, start some threads about the things I mentioned and we'll see where we end up then.
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 08:10:18 PM
Quote from: CurdyMilk on October 18, 2010, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2010, 02:19:24 PM
this thread is worse than most threads.
People have become bored so they started arguing about nothing for the past few months just to keep busy. Only like 2 threads have had any meaning recently.
The last Tick Tock gave you:
- A totally new level. Make a thread about it.
- A new, more fluid walljump/splitjump, with a bit of wallrunning in it. Make a thread about it.
- First shown Merc animations (now both textured). Discuss it, comment on it.
We want to make things better, but that's only possible with your comments.
A lack of comments doesn't mean it's perfect to us, because there's also absense of praise, but it means you guys don't know what to do with new things anymore. C'mon, start some threads about the things I mentioned and we'll see where we end up then.
Yes. The tick tock was one of the few good threads that I was implying. I wasn't complaining about a lack of updates. It all looked good, and I didn't have any criticism (which is a good thing). I'm just saying that in the past there have been good topics that
community members have brought up for discussion, but now there isn't anything besides arguing. I have tried to think of discussion topics based on the tick tock, but I couldn't think of much to say other than "it looks good."
Quote from: StonecoldkillaI wasn't referring to that sentence. You said that "there are a lot of situations where you can safely suicide without any realistic penalty for it, particularly as merc", so I assumed that you believe spawning without an equipment refill is a realistic penalty for it, which is why I brought up that I don't believe it is the realistic option.
You were referring to the exact sentence that I am talking about. More importantly, you didn't assume anything; you simply failed to have a basic level of reading comprehension.
I was not talking about realism with respect to 'happens in real life' at any point in this thread. It is you who does not know all the definitions of 'realistic.'
@Frvge,
Lowering the amount of lives does not fix the real issue, it just masks it. Also, what do you do about the tactic of spamming smoke non-stop to run out the gasmask so you can cam mercs easier in the late game? Now the merc has no way of compensating for that. That is an example of spies using equipment refills to their advantage in a cheesy tactic. The real issue is that players get rewarded for dying and punished for living longer.
@Whoever,
Yes, there is a 10 second out-of-commission penalty for dying, but that same penalty would exist either way. In most cases, that 10 second penalty will not inhibit someone from dying on purpose in order to refill their equipment.
@Cronky,
Yes, having a limited refill from ammo boxes that are able to be guarded would slow the game down in some ways, but speed it up in others. It would slow the game down in the aspect that spies will have to be more cautious with how they employ their equipment. One engagement of running around the map while spamming smokes/flash will put them out of equipment very early, and the spies will be forced to resort to more stealthy tactics to compensate, thus slowing down the game. On the other hand, the lack of 6 mines + spytraps/camnet on the map and a near full grenade loadout at almost all times will speed up the game because spies now know that there are a limited total number of mines that can be placed in a given game.
It also adds to the metagame strategy to have to choose between employing equipment in the early game, mid game, or end game. Do you place all your mines to start, or do you wait until you're down to the last objective? Do you use all your sticky cams early to try to get a jump, or do you save them for when the mercs are camping out in one spot? As a spy, do you go for objectives outright, or do you take it a little slower to go on a mine/trap hunt? These are things that players right now don't even have to consider because more equipment is just 1 death away.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2010, 11:33:04 PM
I was not talking about realism with respect to 'happens in real life' at any point in this thread. It is you who does not know all the definitions of 'realistic.'
I read this incorrectly to assume you were talking about a different sentence, "it is beyond me how anyone could wrongly interpret my use of 'realistic' in that sentence as
'could happen in real life' when I clearly meant 'meaningful.'" I seen that and thought you were referring to a sentence which had that in it.
Additionally, I wasn't entirely responding in terms of general realism either. I mentioned realism in my post, but that wasn't the majority of it. All your doing is focusing on the word I used to compensate for your lack of general argument, join Misty underneath the bridge.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 19, 2010, 12:52:53 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2010, 11:33:04 PM
I was not talking about realism with respect to 'happens in real life' at any point in this thread. It is you who does not know all the definitions of 'realistic.'
I didn't say you were.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on October 17, 2010, 11:48:52 PM
I was also not the first person to bring up realism, as you will see below.
so yeah you actually kinda did claim he brought up realism stone
Realistic - Realism. Two words with many different shared connotations. Whether they were meant in the same way or not isn't the point, I didn't bring up the world 'real'. It's funny that you've spread almost 3 pages harping on about semantics, because you have no basis for an argument regarding what we were actually talking about; I made many points which you swiftly ignored (probably because you seen where I was coming from and instead of admitting that, hoped nobody would notice) and focused on 'OMG DOES HE THINK ITS REEEL?'. I think you're beginning to annoy the bridge :(.
That's not that funny. What's funny is you spending three pages lying about what you said because you can't bear to admit you were wrong about something completely trivial. You think anyone would have cared if you'd have just laughed things off with an explanation that you'd read the post too fast and didn't linger on the unimportant bits? Instead we get you pretending that half the posts you made never happened, even though everyone can see them by just, y'know, going back a page. That's funny. Real funny.
Maybe you should spend less time trying to save face on an internet forum and more time developing basic reading comprehension so you can avoid repeats of this incident in future.
oh yeah and claiming that me pointing out how you're lying about what you said makes me a troll. that's funny too.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2010, 11:33:04 PM
@Cronky,
Yes, having a limited refill from ammo boxes that are able to be guarded would slow the game down in some ways, but speed it up in others. It would slow the game down in the aspect that spies will have to be more cautious with how they employ their equipment. One engagement of running around the map while spamming smokes/flash will put them out of equipment very early, and the spies will be forced to resort to more stealthy tactics to compensate, thus slowing down the game. On the other hand, the lack of 6 mines + spytraps/camnet on the map and a near full grenade loadout at almost all times will speed up the game because spies now know that there are a limited total number of mines that can be placed in a given game.
It also adds to the metagame strategy to have to choose between employing equipment in the early game, mid game, or end game. Do you place all your mines to start, or do you wait until you're down to the last objective? Do you use all your sticky cams early to try to get a jump, or do you save them for when the mercs are camping out in one spot? As a spy, do you go for objectives outright, or do you take it a little slower to go on a mine/trap hunt? These are things that players right now don't even have to consider because more equipment is just 1 death away.
That's where personal preference comes in. I'm not saying that this is a bad idea, but having a constant flow of defense filled by death seems more... enjoyable. Regardless of how you come about having full gadget ammo again, you are never left helpless.
Each life you are given an equal chance to turn the tides of the match. A spy with 1 life COULD win a game if they use their gadgets and skill right. It's improbable, but still gives a chance. With limited refills of ammo you could be left on your last life with no gadgets. The chance to win is still there, but it's significantly less probable. Even if the Merc is on the same boat.
Again, this is just what I prefer. The idea is workable, but I don't like the idea that if I play "Wrong" I could spend half a game without gadgets.
I'm just assuming that how it would be implemented is that you would have a limited amount of refills per game; 5 lives, 5 refills. Though it's up to you when you want to refill. Even if that means 5 refills on life 1, or 5 refills on life 5.
It does give depth, but would it really be fun? For me that's where I'm a little weary of it. Sounds like an idea that's fun in thought, but when you're the one stuck with no gadgets it'll be rage inducing. Even if you understand that it's completely your fault.
I don't think stone knows what the definition of a troll is...
the whole gadget and respawn system could need a tweak. i stated that ages ago and no1 would listen.
maybe we can try out some changes as different game modes during beta.
from radical modes like no-respawn to little changes like mask refill and a 5th mandatory slot there's a lot of room for experiments.
[sad how you acknowledge the new sticky, but then still discard it. I hope you feel a bit better after writing that wall of text]
edit - In essence, my post pointed out that you cannot tell me how I interpreted a post, you don't have that knowledge. It also mentioned that you focus on semantics instead of actually responding to me. I'm not responding back and my other post explained why much better than this, before the edit.
Man, we're making frvge work!
Keep it up guys!