****New Spy Gadget Idea ****

[Ion.67]

What about this: The quality dramatically decreases with distance, like a wireless network. Then, camnet would be used for scanning the room before entering, instead of check every room in the map.

[frvge]

Interesting idea. Technically it should be possible :)

[Gawain]

i can't see the problem with scanning an area far away, actually that's the main point of it. there's only a problem if it's impossible to bypass camnet. however, decreasing the picture quality generally a tiny bit could help to make half-shadows safer and make the merc zoom in sometimes.

[Spekkio]

it's ok to dislike the whole idea of camnet, especially on small/medium maps. but the nerfs you guys suggest are simply stupid. just let zed do his job well and we have no problem at all.

the whole spytrap/mine/chaff thingy is worth one or two new threads, i'll do that maybe later.

What's so stupid about it? You're telling me that part of the problem of camnet is that a merc can near instantly activate it, look into a room, and spot where the spies are (or aren't). If you add a time or animation to activate camnet, it mitigates the problem.

[Ion.67]

i can't see the problem with scanning an area far away, actually that's the main point of it. there's only a problem if it's impossible to bypass camnet. however, decreasing the picture quality generally a tiny bit could help to make half-shadows safer and make the merc zoom in sometimes.

The way I see it, a merc can camp until he sees a spy, across the map or not. Making it harder to see a spy across the map would make the mercs move more.

[Gawain]

those "fixes" have complex consequences and are totally unnecessary if you simply put camnet in balanced positions only. "balanced" means that there have to be unsurveilled routes to every single objective like blind spots, obstacles, shadows, other access points like vents, backdoor etc.

it's a good thing that camnet helps you to stay up with a spy close to you running in circles or trying to pull off some other gay tactic (adding an animation would make that almost impossible).
it's also totally okay that you can find uncareful spies at the other side of the map because of the travel time to them (making it work well only in close areas would prevent that). in fact, camnet is what makes big maps playable (especially if you take eax superhearing out of the calculation), and if you can't locate spies in distance with it, what's the point?

what you still don't get is that camping is a bad thing on a balanced map. camping while not being blind is only slightely better because it helps you shit to see a spy and not being able to shoot him because you are on the other side of the map. if you ever played versus solidus&snakebit (who are quite known to be camnet whores), you would notice one thing: they don't camp with camnet and react, because having a playstile that forces you to react only is a bad thing in every competitive game. if you want to win, you have to make some pressure and play an active part.

[Spekkio]

those "fixes" have complex consequences and are totally unnecessary if you simply put camnet in balanced positions only. "balanced" means that there have to be unsurveilled routes to every single objective like blind spots, obstacles, shadows, other access points like vents, backdoor etc.

First, if fixes to one thing create new problems in another, then you address those problems. It's bound to happen even with relatively simple changes and bug fixes anyway. Secondly, I don't think that putting camnet in "balanced" places would make too much of a difference.

what you still don't get is that camping is a bad thing on a balanced map.

I think I know how to play the game, thankyouverymuch. Tell me, in a game where the mercs win > 80% of the time on any given map, what constitutes a "balanced" map? Ones where the merc winrate is closer to 80 than 100? There is no such thing as a "balanced" map in CT because the game balance is completely fucked from other factors, one of which being camnet.

[Gawain]

I think I know how to play the game, thankyouverymuch. Tell me, in a game where the mercs win > 80% of the time on any given map, what constitutes a "balanced" map? Ones where the merc winrate is closer to 80 than 100? There is no such thing as a "balanced" map in CT because the game balance is completely fucked from other factors, one of which being camnet.

balance is mostly fucked up due to poor map design. take club for instance (the standart map par excellence): one merc standing between the door to tea/lunch (or jacuzzi/steam) and garden can reach all the objectives on his floor in under 5 seconds. now combine that knowledge with the tactic of giving up one floor and the possibility to snipe both garden objectives from one position, and you know that if you switch to a camper tactic fast enough (and have enough equipment left), the spies have hell of a time getting the last objective(s). yes, you can argue that neutralizing a merc should be easier to solve that problem. but if you make it any easier, then why not neutralize the merc for every objective? why not go play some dm? maps like hospital show that it's quite possible to create a balanced map, and if everything else fails, why not simply lower the winning conditions by 1 objective?

I don't think that putting camnet in "balanced" places would make too much of a difference.

i don't know how it's possible not to see that the biggest (and most map specific thus very adaptive) balance factor for camnet is the location and amount of cams.

[Spekkio]

balance is mostly fucked up due to poor map design.

I strongly disagree, considering that pretty much every map in existance has the mercs winning over the spies by a large margin.

why not go play some dm? maps like hospital show that it's quite possible to create a balanced map, and if everything else fails, why not simply lower the winning conditions by 1 objective?

Hospital isn't balanced.

but if you make it any easier, then why not neutralize the merc for every objective?

I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing if you had to. A competitive game is only fun when there is conflict between the two sides. Shocking and running around (such as in Hospital) isn't it.

[Gawain]

balance is mostly fucked up due to poor map design.

I strongly disagree, considering that pretty much every map in existance has the mercs winning over the spies by a large margin.

that's because pretty much every map has major flaws. most maps were designed for casual console gamers, not for competitive pc gamers. most maps could easily be fixed with some minor changes, it's just that there's no patch...

I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing if you had to. A competitive game is only fun when there is conflict between the two sides. Shocking and running around (such as in Hospital) isn't it.

i agree that there should be as much interaction as possible. but in a stealth game, sneaking past the patroulling merc who's only 10 meters away or encircling a spy before he realizes it is good interaction for me, too. i don't think we necessarily need more neutralization of the mercs for increased interaction, i'd rather make the maps darker and remove boring travelling ways/save zones before i think about that.

[Ion.67]

Contradiction. You just said we need more safe routs from Camnet, but now you want to remove other safe routs? Confused.

[Westfall]

it's pointless to try to argue with someone not capable of logic more complex than 1+1. i'm 100% sure that you are totally wrong because my opinion is based on pure logic while yours is based solely on personal preference.

You don't really show much logic throughout your posts unfortunately. My personal preference would be to remove camnet completely. Its cheap and one of the most unnecessarily over powered gadgets put in the game. I forget still that you're a "pro" and get paid to play the game, so you obviously have a greater knowledge than I do....I'm sure.

By trying to balance camnet, which I don't know if you can balance a stick by the way you're babbling, it leaves the alternative of leaving it in. My apologies if I've upset you over a gadget that was retarded to begin with. Placement doesn't allow for mercs to stop camping. If anything, it enhances it. The same goes along with taking away visions. Making camnet "harder to find spies" with only makes camping a greater option. Yes, you can counter it, but its not hard for a merc to counter the spies counter.

those "fixes" have complex consequences and are totally unnecessary if you simply put camnet in balanced positions only. "balanced" means that there have to be unsurveilled routes to every single objective like blind spots, obstacles, shadows, other access points like vents, backdoor etc.

Thats what balanced means to you? "Unsurveiled" routes don't accomplish everything you would hope for if the eye in the sky is on an objective. Shadows will be greater now with the camnet having no visions. Then again, why wouldn't I just sit somewhere spy-safe and just stare at each camnet until I saw movement? If you know the maps well enough and plant yourself in a good spot...its not too difficult to foretell the spy's moves. I don't think many people take into account that theres only 10 minutes on most maps. 10 minutes for someone to stare through the camnet without getting touched only to make a find, terminate the spy, and get back into position or help the other merc out if he/she is struggling to find the spy thats in their vicinity. Just because a spy hides behind an obstacle (pillar, box) does not entail that a merc will not just sit and wait for you to show yourself. I think before you consider yourself as knowledgeable about balance you should consider time frame and amount that camnet sees. Remember you can see an entire room using camnet. Its not stabilized to one set point. If that were the case, it would make sense of placement, but I doubt that there is such a thing as good placement given that camnet can zoom in to specific points and zoom out to view an entire room from whatever angle its placed. That last sentence is logical because it makes sense...as opposed to continuously saying "balanced placement," which is as broad as you can get. There isn't going to be a balanced placement because the camnet can maneuver around on different angles.

Contradiction. You just said we need more safe routs from Camnet, but now you want to remove other safe routs? Confused.

Ditto.

@ Roberto...you've already made yourself the idiot here. After so few posts. You can call me gay all you want. I'm sorry if you can't comprehend such a simple idea...idiots often can't. They usually come upwith ideas like...oh, lets say virtual reality. Rambo and I can shoot the shit back and forth because he understands the game a lot better than you do, clearly. We can have "discussions", which is something grown up people do. The morons just come and flame away and try to prove that they are intellectually sound. You clearly take the cake. Keep trying to fit your block pieces...remember that triangles only have 3 sides.

[Gawain]

Contradiction. You just said we need more safe routs from Camnet, but now you want to remove other safe routs? Confused.

sorry for the confusion, guess my english just sucks. i distinguish (is that the right word?) between save zones/paths (bullet-proof vents etc.) and unsurveilled routes (no camnet/bypassable passive security). gameplay would be more intense if you can't get from point A to point B without some danger and if there's less safe zones to retreat. to make up for that, i'd make the maps a lot darker and with more different routes, obstacles etc.

Placement doesn't allow for mercs to stop camping. If anything, it enhances it. The same goes along with taking away visions. Making camnet "harder to find spies" with only makes camping a greater option. Yes, you can counter it, but its not hard for a merc to counter the spies counter.

plz elaborate, i don't get it.

Then again, why wouldn't I just sit somewhere spy-safe and just stare at each camnet until I saw movement? If you know the maps well enough and plant yourself in a good spot...its not too difficult to foretell the spy's moves.

if you can foretell the spies' moves anyways, you better run there.
i also want to highlight that i'm speaking about stealth routes, not just dark spots to wait till the camnet light goes off.

"Unsurveiled" routes don't accomplish everything you would hope for if the eye in the sky is on an objective.

actually, unless it's a big room like digger, cams over objectives are just as useless as spytraps or mines on an objective. by the time you get the information, it's already too late.

Remember you can see an entire room using camnet. Its not stabilized to one set point. If that were the case, it would make sense of placement, but I doubt that there is such a thing as good placement given that camnet can zoom in to specific points and zoom out to view an entire room from whatever angle its placed.

not necessecarily. place camnet lower, add some obstacles in front of it, make the room darker, let it face in a suboptimal angle (it only can move 180Ã,° leaving 180Ã,° open) etc.
it could also be a good option to remove the moving ability and only put a movable laser on it.

My personal preference would be to remove camnet completely.

i think it can be balanced on every map, but it just doesn't fit well to every one. why not have the map designer decide if and where to put camnet? obviously, the ubi developers had no clue about svm gameplay, but players like zed do.

[VaNilla]

I haven't read the full topic so I'm gonna jump in a little late here and give my opinion on Camnet:

VERY OPERPOWERED.

In fact - like Westfall, I don't think it should be in the game at all, it's so easy to camp with and just obliterate anyone who comes into your path, the annoying thing is mercs will stand at the key points with it (for example, Bombs/Cafe Doors on Museum) and just camp for ages, it really is impossible to beat a player like that if they know what they're doing. One alternative would be to have a camnet room where you could view surveillance, rather then being able to stand in a corner and be untouchable.

The main problem with this community is too many people are trying to change things just for the sake of change, a lot of the things we discuss have no problems, camnet does but things like 'charging up merc equipment' are a load of bollocks IMO, isn't needed.

[Spekkio]

i agree that there should be as much interaction as possible. but in a stealth game, sneaking past the patroulling merc who's only 10 meters away or encircling a spy before he realizes it is good interaction for me, too. i don't think we necessarily need more neutralization of the mercs for increased interaction, i'd rather make the maps darker and remove boring travelling ways/save zones before i think about that.

Why do you keep inserting some imaginary distinction between stealth and neutralizing the merc, and, conversely, keep equating neutralizing the merc with DM? Sneaking into position to ambush the merc via grabbing him or jumping on him requires stealth; the reward for which is that the merc is now out of your way so that you can get the objective. All I'm saying is that this aspect of the game should be more prevalant. That has nothing to do with playing "DM" or "going aggro." A head on attack by the spies doesn't need to be more powerful than it already is.

You pair easier merc neutralization with better map security so that one or two doesn't automatically result in a loss for the mercs.

You said on xfire that you don't find that aspect of the game very enthralling. To that, I reply, you must not really like the concept of SvM, since it would be silly for a game developer to give an ability to someone when it wasn't intended to be used. The reason we don't see more of it is that it doesn't work -- you can only be grabbed from the left, you can glitch out of railgrabs, and jumping only works for the host (the only difference in PT being that SS+Jump allowed jumping to work for all, but grabbing was nearly impossible due to the merc's ability to bunny hop).  Just fixing those three things, and other minor tweaks like maybe not allowing mercs to heal each other, would already boost the spy's killing power (sidenote: a way to help balance some of the poorer maps in SCCT: activate lethal drop tech, which turns a successful jump into a kill).

More importantly, a game without direct interaction or conflict is going to be boring. As a spy, your job isn't be to run away all the time, but to find a way to bait and trap the mercs.

You'd rather play a game where spies just move around the mercs completely with very little interaction at all? There's one already for you: Double Agent.