There is of course the beserk and charge....
but here is a simple but effective addition to his arsenel that would very easy to add to the game (easy to implement with little work)
Tossing a proxy mine to the ground near his feet.
-----------------
How it works:
mine is in the load out, when near a wall, merc attaches mine to wall. When no wall is near, he tosses it a foot in front of him and it is always a proxy.
This is effectively the same thing as dropping a grenade at your feet, except it gives the merc a chance to escape the radius of the explosion.
All mines have 1 second delay of course from being turned on(just like CT). -so Spies still have a chance to escape, and then shoot the mine. If they immediately dive away, they should also be able to escape.
This would allow for creative placement of mines-- like tossing them into vents, over ledges in situations like ledg grabs.
could work i guess, could also present a bigger problem, of glitchy mines, than we have now.
it's quite a risky move as aggro spies could push the merc in the mine radius easily, but it's an interesting idea. i don't think there will be lame mine places because of this, but being able to place a mine in garden 1 from g2 may change the gameplay in a good or bad way.
what would definately need to change is that spies need to be able to climb ledges/ladders in a slow animation to allow for bypassing proxies that were traditionally impassable. I found that to be simply unfair that a lot of ledges did not allow the spy to get past because a proxy was there.
The classic one is a proxy above the ladder in sector 1 of wherehouse.
Quote from: goodkebab on October 17, 2007, 03:03:41 PM
what would definately need to change is that spies need to be able to climb ledges/ladders in a slow animation to allow for bypassing proxies that were traditionally impassable.
Yeah for sure.
Also you may want to consider expanding the firing radius of your gun while hanging so you can take out a mine that happens to be below a considerable drop, such as the tech room in aqua. One thing with floor mines that I can see happening is people tossing em right below a drop and there's no real way for a spy to avoid em besides chaffing it.
Hmmm.... Spies definately need a slow moving climb like you said, yeah.
As for mines at your feet? I don't know about this one. If a merc is standing over a ledge would he be able to throw the mine down the ledge, after all there is no ground in front of him. I don't know what kind of merc would do this in real life lol, not bringing in the realism arguement just wondering.
as i like the idea, to counter those annoying agro spies, the whole idea just screams glitch. But testing should be able to prove that wrong or right.
Perhaps there should be a possibility not only to put mines at your feet but to shoot them with your gun. They could only stick to floor and would activate after about 10 sec. so theyre not used as the alternative for nades
edit: Additionally when spy gets close to a mine put on the floor it could "jump" and blow up in air. Thanks to this spies would get about 0,5-1 sec to react just like when crossing the mine's laser.
I'm quite iffy about this new move. While it would be really good to counter the attack, it isn't that hard to counter aggressive spies now. What should change is the animation of a merc hitting the spy so that he can't get grabbed as soon as he smacks a spy down. Otherwise, countering the aggro spy isn't really that difficult.
I say change animation of berserking/charging and hitting a spy so he is unable to get grabbed by the other spy and see how that goes before adding the proxy mine. While it is a good idea, it will just be something extra for the merc to do. Have to consider some balance on this one. Also, being able to toss mines into a vent (or anywhere for that matter) would be pretty sweet, but overpowering imo.
And yes, fix the spies climbing ladders so they can't get blown up by mines placed at the top of em. That usually pissed me off somethin fierce.
I don't really think this is needed. Also, while there's a 1 sec delay of placing a proxy in CT, if you run around behind a merc placing a proxy on the wall, you will ALWAYS kill him.
I really don't think that we need to make proxy mines even more useful than they already are. You have the zerk, bullcharge, shotty, uzi and tazer for CQB anti-aggro. That is plenty.
I'm up in the air about the climb animations. Other than a select few spots, it's not an issue. What I do think is that the detection radius of proxies needs to be toned down so you can't easily set them off by running beyond their explosion radius.
ADDED: Westfall, I disagree there, too. One merc should not be able to own two spies by just smashing the melee button over and over again. That's just incredibly n00b. If you see two spies around, don't charge. The charge was designed around the fact that there's a drawback to it, but you always have it available. This is unlike the tazer which has no drawbacks at all, but takes up an equipment slot. If you can't kill the spies, lrn2aim. I actually believe that the penalty for bullcharging into a wall needs to be worse (disable jump until the charge cooldown completes, elbow hit doesn't reset charge) so that you don't get people jumping/lagging out of grabs when the spy dodges them.
Agree with spekkio
I was going to give a detailed explanation as well but spekkio already did it for me. I disagree with the mine-at-the-feet idea and the idea of not allowing a merc to be grabbed after he berserks. Although, I DO agree the slow ladder movement.
So far no one has really posted a good reason why being able to drop mines on the ground is a bad idea and quite frankly, I can't think of any off the top of my head.
It would allow for more versatile placement but just as easy removal by a spy.
I say add it in and if it seems to cause problems then we can remove it. There is absolutely no reason not to give this idea a try and see how it turns out.
Edit: Not being able to grab after a berserk or a charge would eliminate the spies ability to neutralize a merc by baiting him or just simply necking him because he was stupid enough to charge you with your team mate there, not good imo. I know some people hate aggro spies but if you take that away you start to put limitations on how people can play.
your not obliged to toss the mine at your feet, and i see it as effective tactic against getting double teamed. The obvious risk is what makes it balanced.
Its a simple addition requiring little effort ....and increases the randomness of where a mine can be, and forces aggro spies to be more nimble.
Where i see it being powerful is used in combo with trapping spies into a corner.
First thing that comes to mind about throwing mines is that mercs will be able to throw mines in spy only places. For example outside orphanage, club house in between tea and lunch window and lot more other places.
I first thought: what if he can only drop it at his feet? So no throwing.
My bad, got it all wrong. Don't see any problems with it then. Not sure if its gonna be useful in countering aggro though, but being able to place mines on the floor is cool.
the value is doing it quickly so that you cant get tazed or cammed while dropping a mine in the middle of a firefight. You could of course get tazed as soon as you drop the mine, and then your fuct.
spy enters room...you drop mine at door, charge into room outside of range of mine.....now spy cannot simply taze and run out of room.
What if the dropped mine would dig into the ground and spies could detect it using emf ?
You can just as well place regular proxy at the entrance, won't make a difference. Anyway like I said adding it won't harm anything, but its not as effective as you think it is.
^^so it shouldnt be at much of a cost in balance but still allow for inovation...
the only real advantage is not being vulnerable while dropping a mine
If this is an anti-aggro move, wouldn't that make the merc uncharacteristically suicidal?
My reason for not liking this "innovation" is that the mercs do not
need another anti-aggro technique. They win plenty of games already (around 80% was the average when the stat tracker was still available). You say that the naysayers haven't provided a reason why you shouldn't include such a feature, yet kebab et al hasn't even provided a reason why we should.
Aside from that, I think it'd be incredibly noobish and silly to just start farting proxies whenever a spy attacks you. Mines and traps are meant to be placed strategically, and not thrown about because you don't know how to aim.
Buff the merc's tazer range (slightly -- no PT uber tazer thankyouverymuch), possibly expand the available gadget slots from 4 to 5, and you will have all the anti-aggro abilities you need.
If you want to make the merc able to place mines on the floor/ceiling of vents, I'm okay with that. But this animation should take the same amount of time a normal mine placement takes, thus making the merc equally vulnerable.
FYI: You are already unconditionally immune after a berserk. I was speaking about the bullcharge.
Quotespy enters room...you drop mine at door, charge into room outside of range of mine.....now spy cannot simply taze and run out of room.
They can if chaff will still go through walls. This is why I want that ability disabled.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 17, 2007, 11:00:21 PM
possibly expand the available gadget slots from 4 to 5
no, thank you :-\
Why not?
Harder to balance, harder for noobs. Too many options = harder to know what the oppenents are carrying.
Quote from: Overstatement on October 17, 2007, 09:56:51 PM
If this is an anti-aggro move, wouldn't that make the merc uncharacteristically suicidal?
Exactly what I was going to say. This just seems silly because if you drop a mine at your feet when you see two spies running around you, it would seem very easy for them to detonate it right there and then while your walking around it.
Quote from: neth on October 18, 2007, 12:09:28 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on October 17, 2007, 11:00:21 PM
possibly expand the available gadget slots from 4 to 5
no, thank you :-\
It would be logical to expand depending on the number of gadgets available - 4 out of 8, 5 out of 10 etc.
@Spekkio: It isn't so much about chraging into a wall. You're an idiot to charge into a wall b/c thats a simple grab. That can stay, but if a merc is getting fucked up by 2 spies, why should he get grabbed after slapping the hell out of 1 of them??? Because the animation is too slow??? How does that make any sense. If anything thats a glitch that needs to be adjusted. Maybe an elbow can be thrown but insta-grab?? That is one of the main reasons aggro-ing was involved, because a team could set-up getting slapped and getting the neck because the animation took forever. This needs to be edited.
I'm still iffy about the proxy at the feet. I think this one needs to be tested and seen if its really worth it to add and if indeed it adjusts the balance to more of a merc favoring.
Kebab, like you said, you guys can definitely test it but I don't think it will be an option that will be for the better. Here are the reasons why:
1. Aggro isn't that hard to begin with where throwing a mine is needed. In a 2v1, dropping a mine on the ground most likely won't do you any good. It may help but I can see a 'drop mine + 1 spy taze + 1 spy run by mine' type of death for the merc.
2. The whole idea of proxy's is that they are hidden and have the element of surprise. With your idea, a spy will use that proxy to his advantage and taze the merc + mine. The element of surprise is gone when the mine is right in front of you.
3. The idea of having different mind spots is interesting I won't deny it, but it definitely needs some testing. Having a mine in a vent shaft seems less of a threat than a mine outside of a vent shaft. The spy can sneak up to it and disable it. When a mine is outside of a vent shaft, he has to chaff it or die.
All in all, the idea that this is an addition and not a replacement ability is nice. All three of things I said up there can be countered with "well, then DON'T throw a proxy mine, just place it like you do normally." But if that's true, why add it? We'll see with testing I guess.
maybe a llonger delay is needed (*1.5) for pulling out the SS, because for most people it's kinda hard to quickly aim at mines (bad mouse implementation) atm, and it could affect gameplay favoring aggro.
i'm ok with 5 gadget slots if there are some limitations (slot system), for example camnet+spytraps+usual stuff or triple nades+recon tool seems overpowered/hard to balance to me.
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2007, 01:09:45 AM
Harder to balance, harder for noobs. Too many options = harder to know what the oppenents are carrying.
This isn't a good counter argument
@Kronf: PT allowed you to take 4/6 gadgets. CT expanded the gadgets, but kept the same amount of slots. Granted 4/6 =/= 5/8, but it also =/= 4/8.
Something else I've been thinking about is expanding the spy gadgets to 5 while the mercs still have 4 as a possible way to balance the sides more.
Quote from: HeyBlinkin. on October 18, 2007, 01:32:50 AM
Quote from: Overstatement on October 17, 2007, 09:56:51 PM
If this is an anti-aggro move, wouldn't that make the merc uncharacteristically suicidal?
Exactly what I was going to say. This just seems silly because if you drop a mine at your feet when you see two spies running around you, it would seem very easy for them to detonate it right there and then while your walking around it.
and how is this risk any different then placing a proxy on the wall when 2 spies are coming?
imagination guys!
I remember all the complaints of HBS and Camo ....and the usage of those gadgets proved contradictory to the arguments.
Now that you mention the HBS, (btw this is totaly offtopic) what annoyed me very much in scct
was that when you had the hbs out, and you had termal vision on, the red dot indicating mercs on the radar (top left), would get lost in the red blur of the spies head. Could you pls fix that :)
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 02:27:58 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2007, 01:09:45 AM
Harder to balance, harder for noobs. Too many options = harder to know what the oppenents are carrying.
This isn't a good counter argument
@Kronf: PT allowed you to take 4/6 gadgets. CT expanded the gadgets, but kept the same amount of slots. Granted 4/6 =/= 5/8, but it also =/= 4/8.
Something else I've been thinking about is expanding the spy gadgets to 5 while the mercs still have 4 as a possible way to balance the sides more.
I have no idea why ure insisting on this. This is not a stupid fps where youve got 15 weapons and switch between them in any moment. Its about tactics. You choose only important things so you need to stay focused and adjust your tactics to eq. 4 is absolutely the best you can imagine.
I still say try the new mine placement and go from there. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out.
I understand everyone is used to a certain game developer leaving things off balance but don't forget - we are not that developer and if something turns out to be a balance issue or just simply to much, it will be removed. It's as simple as that.
Quote from: goodkebab on October 18, 2007, 03:13:57 PM
Quote from: HeyBlinkin. on October 18, 2007, 01:32:50 AM
Quote from: Overstatement on October 17, 2007, 09:56:51 PM
If this is an anti-aggro move, wouldn't that make the merc uncharacteristically suicidal?
Exactly what I was going to say. This just seems silly because if you drop a mine at your feet when you see two spies running around you, it would seem very easy for them to detonate it right there and then while your walking around it.
and how is this risk any different then placing a proxy on the wall when 2 spies are coming?
imagination guys!
It's different because you are proposing an animation that is much quicker than placing a proxy on the wall. I say again: it would look and play incredibly stupid to have a merc fart out proxies when 2 spies start to attack him. Placing a proxy on the floor, which I am all for, ought to involve crouching, facing the floor, and then placing a mine like you would on the wall.
QuoteI have no idea why ure insisting on this. This is not a stupid fps where youve got 15 weapons and switch between them in any moment. Its about tactics. You choose only important things so you need to stay focused and adjust your tactics to eq. 4 is absolutely the best you can imagine.
Adding a gadget slot would INCREASE the amount of tactics one could use because you have more combinations of equipment available to you. In Pandora, you could take 2/3 of the available gadgets. In CT this is reduced to 1/2. 5/8 is still less than 2/3. Quite frankly, I don't know why the gadget slots weren't expanded with CT to begin with; judging by the incomplete nature of CT, I can only guess that it wasn't on their priority list of things they were going to haphazardly slap together before shipping the game. With 5 slots, you would see a lot more usage of spy traps and tazer on the merc side, along with more usage of snares and camo on the spy side. I fail to see how that would change the gameplay into omg run around fps.
Why bother? Well, we all know each other at this point, but if PS actually becomes more popular than 20 players, you won't be able to predict your opponent's play style. Therefore, picking the tazer vs. spy traps (and rifle vs. uzi) would become a crapshoot. You get an aggro team, the spy traps aren't going to do much. You get a stealth team, the tazer is a waste. So then you resort to the BP as a 'safety' gadget. If you want the game to be more accepted by avid gamers, you need to take out luck factors such as these. If you had 5/8, you could take both traps and tazer and cover your bases with the rifle. Or you could take the uzi and not take tazer at all.
But it would also enhance the game experience for the casual gamer, too. Let's imagine that camo was fixed, and I wanted to take a snare-camo combination -- something that would be pretty useful for a tricky/stealthy playstyle. I now have two slots left to choose between an evasion gadget (flash/smoke), a trap-disabling gadget (chaff), a KO gadget (cams) or a recon gadget (HBS/Bullets). That is way too much to give up for this combination. Now, you could make up the recon by having a partner w/ a mic who takes HBS, but not everyone has that (and if you did, you could use the other 3 slots for something like flash/chaff/cam, which retains the advantage of having communication). This means that you will hardly ever see such a combination, especially among casual gamers. By having the 5th slot, you could take the snare-camo combination and still have room for 3 gadgets of different functions. Again, this INCREASES possible tactics while making the game MORE newbie-friendly.
It's really a win/win situation. The only reason you guys have for saying no is "well, it's at 4/8 now and I like it that way."
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on October 18, 2007, 05:45:15 PM
I still say try the new mine placement and go from there. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out.
I understand everyone is used to a certain game developer leaving things off balance but don't forget - we are not that developer and if something turns out to be a balance issue or just simply to much, it will be removed. It's as simple as that.
Sometimes ideas are just bad. Quick throwing proxies is not a good idea. How about you give spies rocket launchers and then remove it later when you find out what we already know?
My stupid own argument: 5 slots suck, because I use F1-F4 for gadgets. The F5 button is not close enough to the rest :P XD
lol omg grow longer fingers ;D
I'll use my 11th finger =/
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 02:27:58 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2007, 01:09:45 AM
Harder to balance, harder for noobs. Too many options = harder to know what the oppenents are carrying.
This isn't a good counter argument
@Kronf: PT allowed you to take 4/6 gadgets. CT expanded the gadgets, but kept the same amount of slots. Granted 4/6 =/= 5/8, but it also =/= 4/8.
Something else I've been thinking about is expanding the spy gadgets to 5 while the mercs still have 4 as a possible way to balance the sides more.
Don't understand why you still keep referring to pt. There is too much of a difference in gameplay between ct and pt and I thought we're basing this mod on ct. Ct gadgets were 4/8 which was absolutely fine. Only reason to expand them as if number of gadgets available increases.
Spekkio why dont we let ppl take all the gadgets..wow they will be able to do so many tactics.
Quote from: kronf on October 18, 2007, 08:47:48 PM
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 02:27:58 PM
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2007, 01:09:45 AM
Harder to balance, harder for noobs. Too many options = harder to know what the oppenents are carrying.
This isn't a good counter argument
@Kronf: PT allowed you to take 4/6 gadgets. CT expanded the gadgets, but kept the same amount of slots. Granted 4/6 =/= 5/8, but it also =/= 4/8.
Something else I've been thinking about is expanding the spy gadgets to 5 while the mercs still have 4 as a possible way to balance the sides more.
Don't understand why you still keep referring to pt. There is too much of a difference in gameplay between ct and pt and I thought we're basing this mod on ct. Ct gadgets were 4/8 which was absolutely fine. Only reason to expand them as if number of gadgets available increases.
I keep referring to PT because PS is based on SvM which originated with PT. While it was far from perfect, PT did a lot of things better than CT. Conversely, CT does a lot of things better than PT. If I had more experience with DA, I would be pushing for the good stuff from that game to be incorporated as well.
I don't think 4/8 gadgets is fine. The vast majority of people take extremely similar loadouts, especially as merc, which makes gameplay become stale. 3/4 of your gadgets are dictated before the game even starts. Mercs: mines, frags, mask. Spy: recon (hb or bullet), cams, evasion (smoke or flash). The thing with spy's equipment is that the gadgets work more synergistically than merc equipment (ie HB + cam, snare + camo, chaff + flash, etc), and there is more overlap in function. You
could take something else than the above 3 staple items, but only if you want the challenge of playing with a shitty loadout. That means you have 1 slot left to choose from among 5 different pieces of equipment. I merely ask for 2.
QuoteSpekkio why dont we let ppl take all the gadgets..wow they will be able to do so many tactics.
Now you're just being an idiot. Having 5/8 gadgets still presents the player with a choice of prioritizing and thinking about his equipment. If we use the same snare/camo combination from above, I still only have 3 slots to fill among 6 different gadgets. I could take smoke/chaff/flash to give myself adaptability in switching between aggro/stealth roles. I can take chaff/cam/hb sensor to play a more full-stealth style, and anything inbetween. 5/8 will not make organizing your equipment a no brainer at all.
Again, I have provided multiple reasons why this change could be good. And hell, the only reason I brought it up is so that the mercs had more room to fit the tazer in their loadout, thus negating the need to fart proxies all over when you get attacked. You guys have not provided any reasons why it wouldn't except for "but it's 4/8 now." Isn't B1nary the one always saying "well, if you want to play the same game go play ct?"
Expanding it to 5/8 eliminates that little sacrifice thing we had in ct. Let's take for example flash, smoke, cams, hbs. On some maps you would like to have chaff to quickly bypass security (orphanage, hospital). To do that you would have to sacrifice one gadget for it or suffer trying to shock them out with shocker. Want to have triple nade and cams? Then sacrifice recon gadget. Now with 5 gadget system you can forget about it and have everything equipped. All that will be gone with extra slot.
Quote from: kronf on October 18, 2007, 11:19:04 PM
Expanding it to 5/8 eliminates that little sacrifice thing we had in ct. Let's take for example flash, smoke, cams, hbs. On some maps you would like to have chaff to quickly bypass security (orphanage, hospital). To do that you would have to sacrifice one gadget for it or suffer trying to shock them out with shocker. Want to have triple nade and cams? Then sacrifice recon gadget. Now with 5 gadget system you can forget about it and have everything equipped. All that will be gone with extra slot.
I see your argument, but you're ignoring snares and camo completely. That's ok, because you're not alone in doing this. When you take triple nades/cams, you're not just sacrificing recon. You're sacrificing cloaking and sound coverage as well -- believe it or not, snares actually work pretty well with aggro. Furthermore, I don't necessarily believe it's a good thing that the spies have to commit themselves to a particular style of play before the game starts. Unpredictable stuff happens, and the 4/8 system doesn't give a lot of breathing room for adaptability.
The thing is, spy equipment tends to overlap a little more than merc equipment. Flash/smoke and HB/bullets serve relatively the same function, while only spy traps/camnet overlap as merc gadgets. I have to admit that when I thought of the equipment grouping, I had spy equipment in mind.
Now, would triple nade/cams/snares be too strong? I don't know, but it would be countered by the fact that the mercs have frags/mines/tazer/gasmask/spy traps. That's something that you would have to test to find out.
i'm pretty sure that either with 4 or 5 slots much more people would take camo with no eax bs activation noise + weaker mt/some influence of camo on detection speed or simply more invisibility. we also have to consider that with less lagg and client side mask, quick cams get way harder to master thus resulting in loosing attractivity. same goes for chaff, if it looses the stupid ability to work through walls etc. it's really impossible to foresee the balance issues considering the time people needed to find out that hbs rocks. i'm biased towars 5 slots, because i think that what makes a good player is adaption to the current situation, and there are simply more possibilities this way.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 11:25:59 PM
Now, would triple nade/cams/snares be too strong? I don't know, but it would be countered by the fact that the mercs have frags/mines/tazer/gasmask/spy traps. That's something that you would have to test to find out.
If you're talking about something close to the PT taser and a removal of side grabs, along with client side gas mask, then I don't really think it'll be overpowered for spies. In fact, it'll end up being better than it is now. Right now you can get your partner have him throw down snares while you triple nade the merc. Then both of you go and try to grab/cam him.
Quote from: frvge on October 18, 2007, 07:36:35 PM
I'll use my 11th finger =/
How are you going to get the f5 key in your pants?
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 07:10:53 PM
Sometimes ideas are just bad. Quick throwing proxies is not a good idea. How about you give spies rocket launchers and then remove it later when you find out what we already know?
There are a lot of things that can be done with this. For example, it takes about 1.5-2 seconds to place a proxy. Make the proxy have a slight delay before activation and it's the same thing except you didn't need a wall next to you. There is also the animation time as well.
You're not even an aggro player so you don't have much to worry about as a spy and as a merc if you don't want to drop a mine, get shocked and then have the mine blown up in your face - don't drop a mine.
Think it through thoroughly; and for God's sake man get a new analogy! spy and rocket launcher... ::)
What about this idea is bad? I would honestly like to know what exactly makes this so horrible.
it allows placing mines without any danger for the merc. besides, mines in the open don't serve much purpose anyways, and so do mines in vents. the idea sounds cool at first look, but i can't imagine any gameplay improvement brought by it.
I'm not that fond of this idea. Binary adding a longer delay to the mine doesn't solve anything. The merc is still mobile and being mobile is alot better than being stuck crouched humping your mine when a spy walks in. It would basically mean mercs could spam mines into a room the spies are aggroing. Typically they'd never EVER have that chance because if he tried he he knows for a fact he'd either get necked while tryng or blown up after its placed. This would basically allow a merc to run at whatever bottleneck / objective and mine it 'on the fly' with no risk at all.
What's wrong with this? Well look at it from the spies side. You cleared Garden 1st of mines and a merc comes in. You either run away while he's chasing you he can drop mines passing the Garden terminal so you can't double back without having to deal with the mines again. The merc is free to chase you, has lost no time stopping to plant a mine and has still left a mine at the terminal. The alternative is you can fight the merc, tazing and grenading him whiel he drops mines, even if you neck him he's left proxies that one of the spies is likely to have been killed on just attempting to neck the guy and even if you do neck him you've got to waste more time dealing with his mines so his partner can come along.
Saying that the merc can place this mine poses no risk to the merc is completely untrue. All that needs to happen is make the merc immobile while he is dropping the mine. He wouldn't be immune to be shocked or necked while doing so. It would pose the same amount of risk as placing a mine on a wall.
I never made the assumption that the merc would remain mobile while placing the mine. Perhaps I missed something in a previous post but yes, having the merc remain 100% mobile while placing could cause a problem.
Ah alright then I guess if you're not mobile and it still pauses you, having mines on the floor seems kind of redundant then doesn't it? Or will it be about having vertical laser and poison mines?
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on October 19, 2007, 04:13:01 PM
Saying that the merc can place this mine poses no risk to the merc is completely untrue. All that needs to happen is make the merc immobile while he is dropping the mine. He wouldn't be immune to be shocked or necked while doing so. It would pose the same amount of risk as placing a mine on a wall.
I never made the assumption that the merc would remain mobile while placing the mine. Perhaps I missed something in a previous post but yes, having the merc remain 100% mobile while placing could cause a problem.
That's not what kebab was talking about.
For the third time: stop, crouch, place mine = good. Fart out proxy instantly as an anti-aggro measure = bad.
And hell no to the delay. Part of what makes placing proxies dangerous is the fact that a spy can run by and blow you up.
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 19, 2007, 01:32:47 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on October 18, 2007, 11:25:59 PM
Now, would triple nade/cams/snares be too strong? I don't know, but it would be countered by the fact that the mercs have frags/mines/tazer/gasmask/spy traps. That's something that you would have to test to find out.
If you're talking about something close to the PT taser and a removal of side grabs, along with client side gas mask, then I don't really think it'll be overpowered for spies. In fact, it'll end up being better than it is now. Right now you can get your partner have him throw down snares while you triple nade the merc. Then both of you go and try to grab/cam him.
Perhaps...
I think a lot of people inherintly oppose the 5/8 idea and think that 4/8 is "fine" is because they are automatically discounting two pieces of equipment on both sides -- Camo/snares for spies and flares/tazer for mercs. This reduces the amount of effective equipment choices to 4/6. Hell, PT had the same problem -- the merc's equipment was really a choice of 4/4 gadgets, while the spies chose 4/6. I never feel constrained about taking 4 gadgets as merc because it's really a choice between backpack/traps/camnet, which can easily be coordinated with my partner. However, as someone who likes to fool around with snares and camo very often, I find myself giving up 'too much' to take these gadgets, particularly on maps where chaff is necessary because triple lasers guard doorways. It's not that camo and snares are useless; in fact, they are far from it. It's just that they often don't fit in a loadout where space is extremely limited and the "must haves" just trump them. In turn, I can only really take snares when I have the ability to coordinate my equipment with my partner, thus allowing me to give up HBS/bullets or chaff without completely crippling my ability to win.
I think that if PS can balance out the equipment where the 'useless' stuff is actually tempting to take, you guys might start to feel the same constraint I do. Only being able to take 4 out of 8 truly useful equipment items is extremely limiting, especially to people who don't have steady partners and cannot coordinate equipment so easily.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 20, 2007, 02:07:19 AM
I think a lot of people inherintly oppose the 5/8 idea and think that 4/8 is "fine" is because they are automatically discounting two pieces of equipment on both sides -- Camo/snares for spies and flares/tazer for mercs.
Yeah, if we want to make the 5 slot idea work we're going to have to make the other gadgets better. Because as it is now, you coudl give me 8 slots as a merc, and I still wouldn't use flares or the tazer, they're not even worth the button to select right now.
I would say that the flare just needs to be replaced entirely. But yes I could understand how a 5/8 system would work well if all the gadgets were actually usefull but the problem is I think actually replacing dud equipment pieces with working ones that balance in with all the other equipment.
Quote from: psyichic on October 20, 2007, 04:47:01 AM
I would say that the flare just needs to be replaced entirely. But yes I could understand how a 5/8 system would work well if all the gadgets were actually usefull but the problem is I think actually replacing dud equipment pieces with working ones that balance in with all the other equipment.
Yeah flares suck. I can't see any way of making them remotely useful. I prefer actually making some of the merc weapon stuff or visions into gadgets. Like MT or sniping scope would make a perfect gadget.
Incendiary grenades ftw :).
If phosphorus grenades with incendiary properties were introduced it would have to be a chemical burn. Any flame would destroy the phosphor (this is what was discussed in another thread yes?).
To achieve the visibility and the burn along with the spy being lit up by running through it we could do the following -
Incendiary Grenade - 4-6 second burn, damage over time similar to poison but slower after having left flames, creates light, casts shadows creating new areas to hide for a few seconds (if it would work out performance wise), sets spy on fire in small patches at random places on the body making him temporarily more visible (could even make the spy a light source while he's on fire - once again if performance allows).
pt phosphorous nades would be sufficient if the smoke is toxic while staying in it. remember that it highlithens you on emf, you glow green in the dark and leave footsteps, so with appropriate timers it could replace spy traps or camnet in some situations.
heck, we could additionally keep flares that last way longer and give more light + blow up ph. smoke (and ignite traces on floor/walls).
I just cant wait for situations when mercs will spam flares unabling spies to go through...
Yea cuz losing 1/10 of your health as you dive through an area is really crippling.
I like fire ;D Besides, if the spy is on fire, you wouldn't need emf to see him even in a dark or smoky room. Burn bitch!
Phospherous grenades were pretty funny on Warehouse shooting them at the catwalk opening so spies couldn't go through without being bait. Though fun and undeinably useful the standard merc loadout like Tazer, frags, mines and traps were better. Most of the gadgets aren't really that bad they are just overshadowed by better ones.
Quote from: neth on October 20, 2007, 11:02:30 PM
I just cant wait for situations when mercs will spam flares unabling spies to go through...
well, you only got say 5 of them and they won't stay as long as spy traps or mines XD
besides, you shouldn't loose much health diving through them.
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on October 20, 2007, 11:16:25 PM
I like fire ;D Besides, if the spy is on fire, you wouldn't need emf to see him even in a dark or smoky room. Burn bitch!
you can see the phosphour remains glowing green in the dark. never played pt?
We should give the mercs barrels of radioactive goo, that they can overturn with charge. It sticks to spies feet and does moderate DOT depending on for how long he stood in the puddle. Spies would get rubber boots as an extra gadget to counter this threat.
Uhmmmm....No? Sorry but adding random gadgets for every single idea as a counter is just annoying.
I say we just bring back phospho nades and add a slot.
Quote from: Papa Skull on October 22, 2007, 06:34:12 PM
I say we just bring back phospho nades and add a slot.
that's what me and spekkio are talking about for some days...
I'm honestly not a big fan of the phosphor/incendiary idea, mainly because they'll still be pretty weak. About the only use for them might be if they could prevent hacking from the constant damage (like getting shot stops a hack). Then you could use them to protect an objective (though might be too powerful then).
Otherwise, they're weaker than a frag really.
Maybe instead of doing damage, they could slow the spy down or something, like a merc smoke grenade. lighting up the area and slowing the spy down might prove to be a big enough reason to use em.
Original idea, but in what way would it differ from the 'net-trap' mine? Maybe because the net-trap would immobalize the Spy and this not.
i'm no fan of immobalized spies.
why do you think the phosphorous nades we suggested are too weak?
normal loadout: frags, mask, mines, camnet/backpack/spy traps
ph. nades would have to compete with camnet/bp/traps with camnet heavily reliant on map design and bp on teammate's choice. now imagine a magic 5th slot and a buffed tazer, and there you have good balance (maybe pt rifle with scope as a gadget, too).
Quote from: Gawain on October 22, 2007, 09:27:57 PM
why do you think the phosphorous nades we suggested are too weak?
normal loadout: frags, mask, mines, camnet/backpack/spy traps
ph. nades would have to compete with camnet/bp/traps with camnet heavily reliant on map design and bp on teammate's choice. now imagine a magic 5th slot and a buffed tazer, and there you have good balance (maybe pt rifle with scope as a gadget, too).
Well, the first and primary thing you compare incendiary grenades to is frags.
If a spy is in the radius of a frag, he pretty much dies. So as far as instantaneous effect, you can't get any better. Therefore, the main advantage of the phosphor grenade is the lingering radius. So that has to be really could, because if you took frags instead, the spy would be dead.
Really, a minor radius damage just isn't all that great. If you as the merc know where the spy is, he's not going to be standing still anyway. So the fact that you're forcing him to run away doesn't actually mean anything. Lingering damage over time just doens't work with spies because by default, a detected spy is going to be mobile.
In what circumstance would it be better to have the incendiary grenades than frags? If the answer is "never", then the gadget is too weak. It's really that simple.
For a lingering effect, about the only good effect I can think of is a slowdown to the spy, that way you can actually set up phosphors at choke points to rpevent a spy from escaping. I'm thinking you'd also want phosphors to be insta-nades by default. As soon as they strike a surface, they explode, because you'd want to deploy them fast.
The other option is lingering damage that prevents the spy from hacking, mkaing the incendiary grenade the ultimate objective defender. This is problematic though, because it can take the excitement out of that late game last second hack if a merc just spams incendiaries at the objective. So I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about that one.
Quote from: Gawain on October 21, 2007, 02:39:00 AM
Quote from: B1nArY_001 on October 20, 2007, 11:16:25 PM
I like fire ;D Besides, if the spy is on fire, you wouldn't need emf to see him even in a dark or smoky room. Burn bitch!
you can see the phosphour remains glowing green in the dark. never played pt?
I've played since day one of the Splintercell franchise.
The only reason I suggest fire is due to the fact that it would achieve the same effect as the phosphorus but it's much more entertaining and cool looking to see someone on fire than just covered in toxic slime. Teenage Mutant Ninja Spies anyone?
insta p.nades makes sense to me.
they are kinda handy as a tracking device like spy traps (+fake nade). i don't think they should block objectives totally, but make a poison effect eg blurry vision and loosing a little health while standing in the dust would work out fine. it's also easy to balance by adjusting damage/time.
it would be really awesome if the phosphour could be lit in some way ;D
How about making phospho/incendiary/frags take up one slot? I mean like a mine, you choose which you want to use. You change the grenade type when you pop your little menu up. Of course you only get 4 grenades + Backpack Refills. You can't use all your frags then switch to incendiary and fire those, vice versa. You get 4 grenades to fire whether they be Frags, phosphorus, or incendiary you only get 4 of them.
What do you think? This might be a bit unbalanced though because of the variety of uses the merc has for grenades.
i'd almost never waste one frag as phosphorous nade, they're way too important (just like mask).
oh and like stated several times before: crossing gadgets sucks.
the 5 slot idea is clearly superior (with or without scope as an gadget).
Quote from: Gawain on October 23, 2007, 12:17:48 PM
i'd almost never waste one frag as phosphorous nade, they're way too important (just like mask).
Yeah, I don't think anyone would use anything but frags. Frags are pretty much better than flares, phosphor and incendiary grenades.
It's one reason I feel that incendiary grenades would need a boost. They're still not as great as frags, if you can't compete with frags... then eh... they're a piece of junk as a gadget.
Merc gadgets really have a very high standard as far as what's valuable, because there are so many great merc gadgets already.
frags > spytraps as frags are versatile and a killing device, but people still use traps quite regularly. atm ph nades wouldn't be used as there is no 5th slot and frags/mask/mines are pretty obligatory.
the pt ph. nades would be sufficienet with a little higher timers, teammate not able to remove dust and dust doing damage per time so that you can't hack an objective in ph dust for more than ~1-2s with full health.
Quote from: Gawain on October 23, 2007, 10:46:09 PM
frags > spytraps as frags are versatile and a killing device, but people still use traps quite regularly. atm ph nades wouldn't be used as there is no 5th slot and frags/mask/mines are pretty obligatory.
the pt ph. nades would be sufficienet with a little higher timers, teammate not able to remove dust and dust doing damage per time so that you can't hack an objective in ph dust for more than ~1-2s with full health.
I suppose it would work if you made it so the DoT effect was sufficient to kil a spy in a few seconds, Though the problem there may be that phosphor nades just wouldn't be very fun to fight against, since the last minute of the match may well be a merc spamming phosphors at the remaining objective. And the spy pretty much can't do anything to hack that objective. I don't really think that'd be a great idea. It'd eliminate a lot of those last second hacks that make the game fun.
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 24, 2007, 07:17:41 AM
... since the last minute of the match may well be a merc spamming phosphors at the remaining objective. And the spy pretty much can't do anything to hack that objective. I don't really think that'd be a great idea. It'd eliminate a lot of those last second hacks that make the game fun.
This would be pretty much avoidable with the design of the map. Of course, not completely, but having just 2 objectives left close each other isn't a good idea anyway.
What i like is that you don't have a chokepoint in the map. The maps with like 3 objectives out of 6 objectives is enough for the win are what i find the best ones to play, you won't have to worry about there always being a merc, as you can throw a distraction with your mate and get the 3rd objective, the mercs can't just camp each one on 1 objective so they have to be carefull and not let you over come the situation.
I just mostly get mad at the times in club where you can't do anything alone, if you have taken the both garden hacks without a hack from the back, the mercs can easily defend it, just camp in the corridor / near the window. It needs teamwork, which everyone doesn't have (I'm doomed with the fact that i end up playing with new people / people who die instantly withing the 2 first minutes on the game :D) so you need to be able to make it also alone. There are other maps, but this was just a bit over reacting example :)
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 24, 2007, 07:17:41 AM
Quote from: Gawain on October 23, 2007, 10:46:09 PM
frags > spytraps as frags are versatile and a killing device, but people still use traps quite regularly. atm ph nades wouldn't be used as there is no 5th slot and frags/mask/mines are pretty obligatory.
the pt ph. nades would be sufficienet with a little higher timers, teammate not able to remove dust and dust doing damage per time so that you can't hack an objective in ph dust for more than ~1-2s with full health.
I suppose it would work if you made it so the DoT effect was sufficient to kil a spy in a few seconds, Though the problem there may be that phosphor nades just wouldn't be very fun to fight against, since the last minute of the match may well be a merc spamming phosphors at the remaining objective. And the spy pretty much can't do anything to hack that objective. I don't really think that'd be a great idea. It'd eliminate a lot of those last second hacks that make the game fun.
Make it like a poison -- spy can still hack, he just takes damage. So long as you're not at like 1/4 health, you should be able to get that last second or two.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 24, 2007, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 24, 2007, 07:17:41 AM
Quote from: Gawain on October 23, 2007, 10:46:09 PM
frags > spytraps as frags are versatile and a killing device, but people still use traps quite regularly. atm ph nades wouldn't be used as there is no 5th slot and frags/mask/mines are pretty obligatory.
the pt ph. nades would be sufficienet with a little higher timers, teammate not able to remove dust and dust doing damage per time so that you can't hack an objective in ph dust for more than ~1-2s with full health.
I suppose it would work if you made it so the DoT effect was sufficient to kil a spy in a few seconds, Though the problem there may be that phosphor nades just wouldn't be very fun to fight against, since the last minute of the match may well be a merc spamming phosphors at the remaining objective. And the spy pretty much can't do anything to hack that objective. I don't really think that'd be a great idea. It'd eliminate a lot of those last second hacks that make the game fun.
Make it like a poison -- spy can still hack, he just takes damage. So long as you're not at like 1/4 health, you should be able to get that last second or two.
exactly what i was trying to say.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 24, 2007, 02:26:38 PM
Make it like a poison -- spy can still hack, he just takes damage. So long as you're not at like 1/4 health, you should be able to get that last second or two.
Well the problem is that if you do that, it tends to go into the "useless" category. The only real benefit of a Damage over time ability from a merc standpoint is that you prevent the spy from standing still in one spot for a while. This means that it's only real effective use is protecting an objective. That's it. If it doesn't actually protect the objective, then it's relatively useless.
If incendiaries are powerful enough to prevent hacking, or do enough damage ot just allow 1-2 seconds then I could see them being useful late game against a dangerous spy, who you fear may KO you with a lucky quick cam. So you spam the objective with constant incendiaries, buying you about a minute or so where he can't hack.
But if that doesn't work, and it's similar to a poison mine, where the spy juist ignories it but can hack a good 5-8 seconds before dying, then I really can't think of when you'd ever use incendiaries. A straight up damage over time that only affects people while they're in the cloud just isn't that great. Spies move. It's what they do. The only time they stand still is when they're hacking. So it either beats hacking or it doesn't. If it doesn't then it's useless. If it does, then it could be a balance problem, at least late game.
I mean, honestly can you think of a situation in the game where you'd rather have an incendiary than a frag? If you can't then the incendiary is too weak.
What about this:
An incendiary creates a cloud for 30 seconds. If a spy enters that cloud he starts to burn, and the burning continues even after he leaves the cloud, simply entering it for half a second is enough to start you on fire. A spy remains on fire for 20 seconds after he leaves the cloud. A spy who is on fire gives off some minor light (making it difficult to hide in shadows), gives off screams of pain every so often (which ping the reticule) and has difficulty aiming the sticky shocker (his red dot moves around unsteadily in random directions). A burning spy is also unable to roll, making him somewhat slower. The incendiary does very minor damage (probably about 1/8th of the spy's life at the end of the 20 seconds).
So incendiaries are sort of an instant spytrap that you may set up to try to block the spy's escape route.
In almost any circular level that may be kind of useful, when you face spies who like to try to circle around or speed hack things.
I can think of a few instances where something like that would be nice. Clubhouse, river mall... Really any kind of instance where you've got spies who like to rush. objectives through the main route. An incendiary in their path hangs for a decent amount of time, slows them down, and makes it difficult for them to shoot out mines along the way (by making their aim unsteady). It also makes them easy to track (reticule pings).
That I could actually see being useful.
mines will prolly be too much of imba. maybe with nades, you also get phos ( you can load the different nades just like planting diff mines) if u getting attacked you can lay down phos, tag the spies and when help comes from teammate they will be marked for death.
Quote from: InvisibleMan999 on October 24, 2007, 08:08:59 PM
I mean, honestly can you think of a situation in the game where you'd rather have an incendiary than a frag? If you can't then the incendiary is too weak.
wrong. you can't take frags twice, and you don't think "i'd rather use frags now" when placing traps, do you?
actually, with 5 slots unchanged pt ph. nades would be taken quite often just for tracking, fake nades and fun.
Quote from: Gawain on October 24, 2007, 10:55:27 PM
wrong. you can't take frags twice, and you don't think "i'd rather use frags now" when placing traps, do you?
actually, with 5 slots unchanged pt ph. nades would be taken quite often just for tracking, fake nades and fun.
While true, this shouldn't be the premise behind gadget balance. You should balance gadgets given the assumption that all gadgets are equally powerful. The reason you choose one gadget over another should not hinge on the gadget itself, but rather on a combination of:
-Your playstyle
-Your opponent's playstyle
-The map
The moment you start saying "This gadget is like frags, but worse" you run into trouble.
Then again, I'm all for gadget balance that lets people take as many of a gadget as they want. If people want 4 packs of 4 frags each for 20 total, I say, let them. It'd be a pretty uncreative loadout, but it wouldn't unbalance the game. Hell, on xbox there was a glitch that let people do that, and I didn't even care about playing them. No gas mask, no mines... those guys are easy.
But the point is, you should be taking gadgets because you want them, not just because there's nothing else to take.
QuoteThe moment you start saying "This gadget is like frags, but worse" you run into trouble.
But it's not like frags. The main point of incendiary nades are to mark your opponent for EMF. The damage is a secondary bonus to make spies move instead of saying "ok, I'm marked, I'll just sit in this cloud until it wears off."
Their function isn't to hit a spy off an objective. That's why you have frags and bullets.
The way to make all gadgets useful is to first keep their functions and roles as unique as possible. Then, make sure that each of those roles are actually useful in the context of a game. I can think of multiple places where an incendiary grenade could be useful. Yes, hitting a spy off the last objective isn't one of them, but we don't need them for that.
invisible, do you really think that making ph nades that awesome that a significant number of people would trade off frags for them would be good for the balance? no1 would trade off frags for spy traps with a gadget balancing anywhere near the current one. it would be very hard to preserve the core gameplay and balance with totally free choice of gadget loadouts, but it would also be absolutely amazing if done well (smoke nades/sticky cams <=> gas mask would be a hard nut to crack)...
it's really hard to compare gadgets good in totally different tasks...
Quote from: Gawain on October 24, 2007, 11:16:22 PM
invisible, do you really think that making ph nades that awesome that a significant number of people would trade off frags for them would be good for the balance?
Yeah, I really do. Assuming the use of ph nades was fun in itself. If they're too good and block an objective entirely, that would detract from gameplay, if on the other hand they were a sort of area spytrap that wears out faster, they might work well.
All gadgets should have some role to play.
Quote
it's really hard to compare gadgets good in totally different tasks...
Yeah, some gadgets will be good for certain playstyles and others not so much. Flash for instance are great for an aggro spy and almost useless for everyone else. And that's okay. So long as they fill a role in some style.
But we can't be afraid of creating new gadgets (or upgrading old ones) that really push the envelope of gadget power. Right now, the merc gadgets are pretty damn good (at least the core ones anyway), and anything new we create has to be that good. If there's no reason you may take the new gadget over frags or mines, then it's just not worth it.
About the only thing we do have to watch out for is how to rank gadgets. Some people for instance think that camnet is weak simply because a lot of people don't take it, while camnet is actually just an expert gadget that is very powerful but rarely used because it requires a lot of skill to master.
Quote from: Spekkio
But it's not like frags. The main point of incendiary nades are to mark your opponent for EMF.
Yeah it is. It's a grenade you fire out of your gun. Only instead of killing the spy, it just tags him. That's a frag, but weaker. I can either fire a grenade that delivers a lethal attack or fire a grenade that delivers a non-lethal attack. Pretty much, that means that by definition the non-lethal one is a less useful gadget.
Gadgets need to be classified by the delivery system, not by the effect. If I could have delivered a lethal grenade but instead delivered a non-lethal one, the non-lethal one needs some benefit to make it worthwhile. Similarly, spy traps have this same relationship with mines. Mines are lethal and thus people take them over traps which are non-lethal. There are rare instance you may want to take traps, such as a spot near a medkit where you need a poison mine to cover (traps are superior here), but otherwise mines are better because they're lethal.
QuoteYeah it is. It's a grenade you fire out of your gun. Only instead of killing the spy, it just tags him. That's a frag, but weaker. I can either fire a grenade that delivers a lethal attack or fire a grenade that delivers a non-lethal attack. Pretty much, that means that by definition the non-lethal one is a less useful gadget.
So are snares and spy bullets the same gadget, since they are both fired from the spy's gun? Or chaff and smoke are the same gadget? That is absurd. Two gadgets can fire in a similar manner yet have two entirely different functions.
phosphour highlights the spy in normal vision and in emf and allows you to follow his footprints pretty far. the big advantage to spytraps is that you can cover an area in ph. dust (even pretty quickly) so you don't need a bottle neck or edge, and there is no way the spy can get through it without being marked (compare chaff / ss at traps/mines / jumping/rolling over/through them). with long enough timers and a large radius it could prove balanced without any further changes. if you still think it needs a second function / a buff, let it drug the spy so that he can't SS you quickly and let it do some damage per time so that you could hinder a wounded spy from further hacking or hiding in a room.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 25, 2007, 01:34:04 PM
So are snares and spy bullets the same gadget, since they are both fired from the spy's gun? Or chaff and smoke are the same gadget? That is absurd. Two gadgets can fire in a similar manner yet have two entirely different functions.
That's true, but that's because these are indirect fire gadgets. You aren't firing them at the merc.
When you're talking about a grenade that has to hit the spy, or a spytrap/mine that both stretch a laser across a space and do something when that laser is broken, the lethal one is going to be better. When your choice is either to kill the spy or tag the spy for finding later, killing the spy is always going to be better.
I mean, phosphors don't even allow you to track the spy very well to be honest. Yeah you can see him on EMF and he leaves a few footprints, but I mean, so what? It's pretty easy to see a spy that's out in the open anyway. At the very least it should produce some reticule pings so you can track him. The gas cloud itself also needs to last a while, so it can effectively block off a route for a decent duration. 30 second gas cloud plus a reticule ping would work I think.
no to reticule ping. and no, you dont have to hit the spy with the nade. just throw them into areas the spy would normally want to run into (eg objectives, rooms to hide, stairways etc). frags are not that strong as you think, because most times a good player can totally avoid them.
Quote from: Gawain on October 25, 2007, 07:15:04 PM
no to reticule ping. and no, you dont have to hit the spy with the nade. just throw them into areas the spy would normally want to run into (eg objectives, rooms to hide, stairways etc). frags are not that strong as you think, because most times a good player can totally avoid them.
Well honestly, we know how good phosphurs were in PT. We all played with them. They sucked. Adding a little damage over time effect to the gas cloud isn't going to change anything.
Phosphurs are something that we really need to rethink conceptually.
What style are they supposed to counter? What role do they play? What maps would it be good in?
Thus far out of the PT style phosphor with damage over time, I really haven't heard any great answers to these questions. Lets remember that in PT, the best thing people used phosphors for is just a dummy grenade to scare the spy. That alone pretty much should tell us how effective they were and that they probably need a complete conceptual rethinking.
The idea of a lingering cloud of "stuff" seems to lend itself well to stopping a rush strategy, so I think it'd be nice if phosphors made it difficult to rush objectives. Which is why I say perhaps have it slow down a spy some and give off some reticule pings for someone dumb enough to charge the gas cloud. Something like that would be nice on maps like museum or river mall where you've got a small choke point that spies can rush to try to get into the back of the map. A lingering gas cloud would be nice to clog that choke point up a bit and force the spies to be a little slower in their approach.
But what are the spies supposed to do with it? Just wait for it to go away? That'd slow down gameplay a lot...
ph. nades don't have to compete with frags, they have to compete with spy traps and camnet.
just imagine digger objective (factory) is hacked and you throw
a) a frag nade: a bad spy will be dead, a good spy will stop hacking and can leave in 2 directions or continue hacking some seconds later with still enough chances to escape
b) a phorphorous nade: a bad spy will continue hacking but will be killed by you anyways. a good spy probably get's out of the dust, but he can only leave in the direction he avoided the fake frag and if he continues hacking, he can hack only 2 more seconds assumed that he got full hp and after that he is a glowing green spot in the dark that leave bright green footsteps so that he got no chance at all to hide anywhere (basically like spytrap without radar but glowing in normal vision).
Quote from: Gawain on October 25, 2007, 09:47:40 PM
ph. nades don't have to compete with frags, they have to compete with spy traps and camnet.
just imagine digger objective (factory) is hacked and you throw
a) a frag nade: a bad spy will be dead, a good spy will stop hacking and can leave in 2 directions or continue hacking some seconds later with still enough chances to escape
b) a phorphorous nade: a bad spy will continue hacking but will be killed by you anyways. a good spy probably get's out of the dust, but he can only leave in the direction he avoided the fake frag and if he continues hacking, he can hack only 2 more seconds assumed that he got full hp and after that he is a glowing green spot in the dark that leave bright green footsteps so that he got no chance at all to hide anywhere (basically like spytrap without radar but glowing in normal vision).
Well, I still don't think it competes with spy traps and camnet, simply because spytraps and camnet are things that have the advantage of being used while the merc isn't there. That's their whole appeal. Tagging a spy in front of your face probably isn't a huge deal, and spytraps are actually better at tracking and following a spy than a phosphor would be.
The digger example sounds decent, though I'm still not sure anybody would bother taking phosphors. I can't really get away from how ineffective they were in PT, and I'm really not sure how the damage over time effect will make them any more effective.
Also on a side note, it's kind of hard to avoid frags without EAX. From playing the Xbox version with standard sound, you generally don't always hear frags being lauched and if the merc arcs it right, so you don't get to hear a frag bounce. It tends to make maps like Steel squat almost impossible for spies because you don't get any sound to warn you the frag is en route until it's too late. Though really PS should probably make frags more audible on normal sound, since that part of xbox play sucked.
The real question is how long you wanted the phosphur dust to remain on the spy I guess. In PT it seemed to wear off far too quickly to actually make it very effective.
QuoteThat's true, but that's because these are indirect fire gadgets. You aren't firing them at the merc.
This is a load of shit. You never fire smoke/chaff/flash at a merc? They all have very different functions, even though they all shoot the same way.
Just say it...you are wrong when you say that two gadgets have the same function simply because they fire in the same way.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 25, 2007, 11:30:48 PM
This is a load of shit. You never fire smoke/chaff/flash at a merc? They all have very different functions, even though they all shoot the same way.
Just say it...you are wrong when you say that two gadgets have the same function simply because they fire in the same way.
It's not totally about function, it's about the delivery system for comparison.
You really can't compare a gadget like camnet against something like spytraps on any level besides actual playtesting, because there's no theoretical cross-over there. You use camnet in a completely different way than you use spytraps or mines, thus camnet may be good in some places and bad in others.
However, when you talk about somtehing like smoke vs. chaff or frag vs. phosphur that's a totally reasonable argument, because they're interchangeable. What I mean is, you can fire a smoke *or* a flash at a merc, or a phosphur or a frag. Thus the two have to be reasonably as good.
When the consequence of one of those is death, then it is automatically superior to the other. Just like flash/smoke would be pointless if a spy could fire a frag grenade. Why? Because if you could blind a merc, you could just as easily have killed him. Do you see what I'm getting at?
The same runs true of spy traps vs mines. You run a laser somewhere. One laser kills the spy who crosses it, the other laser just tags him so you can find him and try to kill him yourself. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure which one of those are better.
And yeah it extends to frags vs phosphor. The instantaneous effect of a phosphur detonation is objectively inferior to a frag detonation, because the frag kills the spy, and that's the best possible result you can get out of a gadget. So once one of the gadgets kills the spy, the comparison is immediately over, and the best gadget is the one that kills.
The thing is, you're ignoring a bunch of other factors. If we go back to your "laser" analogy, both laser mines and spy traps serve the same function. Now, here's the thing: if the spy trips a spy trap, he's tagged no matter what. If he trips a laser mine, he's only killed if he's close enough to the blast radius. Death can be avoided by diving and maneuvering around walls, whereas the trap hits you absolutely.
Likewise, a spy hit by a phospho grenade is lit up no matter what. A frag, even if it hits the spy, might not kill him. Furthermore, the explosion for frags is instant, while phospho grenades linger around. Not only do you have to avoid the initial explosion, but you need to steer clear of the gas for the next (15 was it?) seconds. Of course if the phospho nades did damage, they would have to do FF so that mercs can't just spam them around as an anti-aggro measure.
But I digress. That is what makes them have entirely different functions .You said that they must have the same function because they have the same firing mechanism. Your last post tried to change that point because you are wrong. This is clearly false as demonstrated by my snare/bullet and smoke/chaff/flash examples. Yes, the delivery of smoke/chaff/flash is the same, but you use them for different purposes. Smoke is meant to slow down the merc, flash will blind him, and chaff will disable visions, sniping and reload.
Now, if you decide that phospho grenades aren't worth it after all that, then that is your decision as a gamer to make. That's why there are 7 other available pieces of equipment from which to choose.
Quote from: Spekkio on October 26, 2007, 12:23:03 AM
The thing is, you're ignoring a bunch of other factors. If we go back to your "laser" analogy, both laser mines and spy traps serve the same function. Now, here's the thing: if the spy trips a spy trap, he's tagged no matter what. If he trips a laser mine, he's only killed if he's close enough to the blast radius. Death can be avoided by diving and maneuvering around walls, whereas the trap hits you absolutely.
Right, which is why I tend to compare spytrap to poison mine as a better analogy. Here you've got two lasers which can stretch across a room or doorway. One laser tags the spy, the other gradually kills him. Both can be negated by presence of a partner. The only real drawback to the poison is that it can be repaired by a health pack. So the only real reason to use traps over poison is if the doorway is close to a health pack.
Proxy versus presence detector is pretty much entirely a no brainer. Both pick up movement. One kills the spy for not moving, the other just reports "Spy detected".
But you already know this stuff. It's why you would never even consider replacing mines wtih traps. Because mines are better. You might take traps in addition to mines, but if you had the choice, you'd rather take 6 mines than mines and traps.
This is why we say traps are underpowered.
Quote
Likewise, a spy hit by a phospho grenade is lit up no matter what. A frag, even if it hits the spy, might not kill him. Furthermore, the explosion for frags is instant, while phospho grenades linger around. Not only do you have to avoid the initial explosion, but you need to steer clear of the gas for the next (15 was it?) seconds. Of course if the phospho nades did damage, they would have to do FF so that mercs can't just spam them around as an anti-aggro measure.
Yeah which is why I say the strength of the lingering cloud is the heart of phosphor grenades. The instantaneous effect obviously is in favor of the frag, so that lingering cloud has to be worth it. Really I hadn't thought of it as an anti-aggro measure. But really if we had no FF, that might actually work well to balance out the damage over time phosphor as a "get the hell away from me" gadget. I could see people taking that maybe.
Quote
But I digress. That is what makes them have entirely different functions .You said that they must have the same function because they have the same firing mechanism. Your last post tried to change that point because you are wrong. This is clearly false as demonstrated by my snare/bullet and smoke/chaff/flash examples. Yes, the delivery of smoke/chaff/flash is the same, but you use them for different purposes. Smoke is meant to slow down the merc, flash will blind him, and chaff will disable visions, sniping and reload.
Well none of those grenades kill the merc, so there's room for different purposes. The point that I was trying to make is that if you have one lethal attack, and one non-lethal one, the lethal one is automatically better. None of smoke/chaff/flash are lethal, thus they can be compared. They are of course, compared against each other, but there's no self-evident superiority, becuase none make the other redundant. A dead spy makes tracking redundant. Thus it's always better to simply kill him. Then you don't need to track him.
Now, it's not as though delivery system is the only factor that goes into balancing a gadget, but it's the best starting point for comparison. It's much easier to compare smoke to chaff than flash to camo or snares.
Quote
Now, if you decide that phospho grenades aren't worth it after all that, then that is your decision as a gamer to make. That's why there are 7 other available pieces of equipment from which to choose.
You could say that about the CT tazer right now. Obviously some people won't want every gadget. The point is that we want to make gadgets so some people might take them. If nobody takes them because they suck so bad, then it's a failed gadget.
If you'd rather have 4 more frags than another pack of phosphurs then the phosphur is probably going to be a failed gadget. All I'm saying is that if you want the phosphur to be good, it has to be right up there in power with frags, mines, etc.
We can't be afraid to make new gadgets good so people will use them. I don't want this game to become like PT where you had 4 good gadgets and 2 crap gadgets. The idea of "lesser" gadgets needs to go out the window. Every gadget should be built with the intention that it's competing with frags and mines, because that's how good it has to be. If you have a new type of grenade and you can't imagine a map or playstyle that would take it over frags, then that grenade is underpowered.
spytraps totally pwn poison mines in almost every situation (besides locking the doorway to storage on orph against solo rushes etc which is kinda lame since you can't chaff it); maybe this will change with 10s timer instead of 15.
a poison mine also doesn't tell you that it went off and where the spy went afterwards. maybe to his mate, to a medkit or to an objective?
presence detectors are more unobtrusive and afaik detect you even in slow motion while the beep.
with an increased number of simultaniously placable traps (5) it would be quite balanced.
the problem with mines is that on a lot of maps they are the only way to stop aggro spies from taze+rush (which can be countered by chaff going through walls -.-), but if we also remove mutual removal of the trap it could work for that part, too.
Quote from: Gawain on October 26, 2007, 11:59:38 PM
a poison mine also doesn't tell you that it went off and where the spy went afterwards. maybe to his mate, to a medkit or to an objective?
Generally his running footsteps are going to tell you this. After getting poisoned you can't exactly proceed stealthfully to a medkit. You better run your ass off or you're going to die.
Quote
presence detectors are more unobtrusive and afaik detect you even in slow motion while the beep.
with an increased number of simultaniously placable traps (5) it would be quite balanced.
Yeah, more traps might fix the problem. I'm not saying spytraps are totally unsalvageable, just saying they need something extra to make them on par with mines.
Quote
the problem with mines is that on a lot of maps they are the only way to stop aggro spies from taze+rush (which can be countered by chaff going through walls -.-), but if we also remove mutual removal of the trap it could work for that part, too.
This would be a nice role the phosphur could play if its concept is a slow down grenade. So if spies start doing a rush, you drop a phosphur at the choke point to slow the spies down, preventing them from rolling or maybe just slowing their base movement. Right now, mines are the only anti-rush gadget. It'd be nice to have another gadget capable of doing anti-rush.
i don't think that ph nades should slow you down, but they could make your vision blurry and your aim very groggy.
Quote from: Gawain on October 28, 2007, 12:39:24 PM
i don't think that ph nades should slow you down, but they could make your vision blurry and your aim very groggy.
Well I don't suggest a full slowdown, just preventing you from rolling while you've been phosphured, which equates to some slow down, but not huge. Also, I'd say phosphur should screw up your aim for a while so that it constantly drifts. Not enough to really make it impossible to shoot a merc, but hard enough so you can't shoot a mine or spytrap easily. That'd definitely hurt rush based spies some.
no to slowdown. it's like a smoke nades for mercs, and the spies should always be the more agile team that got the tools to slow down the mercs, and the mercs got the tools to kill and mark the spies.