|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2127
   |
Posted - 2013.11.09 19:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
Bug: All objectives and installations (not just turrets) paint nearby hostiles on TacNet.
Level Design: This bug plays significant role in defending Objective "B" in Gallente Research Facility. The Objective illuminates all approaching hostiles ... not only those around, but also those above and below (including nearby stairwells). |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2188
|
Posted - 2013.11.13 23:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:Pretty sure this is intentional...
Ryme Intrinseca wrote:This is obviously not a bug, and works fine.
Short of CCP response, we have no way of knowing if this is working as intended. I'd like to think its a bug as it upsets the delicate balance of risk and reward.
Consider the risk a merc assumes when breaking or circumventing enemy lines.
Why punish that stealthy merc by divulging his position on TacNet for all to see?
More often than not that stealthy, risk-taking merc is a Scout trying to help his team.
Do Scouts not have enough working against them?
If the state of omniscient installation is in fact intentional, then the phrase "ninja hack" must be stricken from lexicon. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2217
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:I am having a hard time picturing this in my head and when we play on this map I don't see any real issues. So what I would ask is if it is possible to get a video or screenshot showing exactly what it is that is an issue for you so that I can understand it better and so that I can give a more informed and accurate response.
Yes, sir.
To explain installation "omniscience" in first person:
When within X meters of an enemy-held installation or objective, my position is made known to all hostiles, near and far, as red chevron on HUD and as blip on TacNet.
When a hostile is within X meters of a friendly installation or objective, that hostile's position (as red chevron and on TacNet) is made known to me and friendly forces.
To the best of my knowledge, no scan profile is immune. We thereby assume that installations and objectives emit a 0 dB precision, constant "scan" with a radius of X meters (estimated between 5 and 25). As Aeon explained, installation "scans" behave similarly to Active Scanner results, the only difference being a lack of "pulse" effect.
With reference to level design:
Figure A: http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/dust/news.control/65110/1/OP_GA_Research01L.jpg
Coordinates: E5, E6, F5, F6 (intersection)
Landmark: Skirmish, Objective "B"
Ground Level: Position is revealed when under the Objective.
Ascension Level: Position is revealed while within stairwells nearest Objective.
Second Level: Position is revealed when approaching Objective along common plane.
Roof Level: Position is revealed when above Objective.
^ As all elevations are are impacted, we assume that installation scans are more akin to a geometric sphere than a geometric plane.
Hope this helps. I'll check in with the Scouts to see if anyone has gameplay footage of this phenomena.
o7 |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2218
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Krom Ganesh wrote:I think Logic Loop knows what we are talking about just not that we see it as a major problem for us.
To elaborate as to why this phenomena is problematic:
Low eHP stealth builds like Scouts make every possible effort to move and act whilst undetected, often using objects like hostile installations as cover. We are charged with the responsibility of breaking enemy lines and ninja-hacking hostile positions. This charge often involves stalking and surprising a defender or two. Many of us rely upon high alpha-damage, close-range weapons like Knives and Shotguns. If a defender lingers close to an installation, the odds of catching him off-guard are slim; installation "omniscience" often impedes our ability to perform Scoutly duties. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2219
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:34:45-35:20 is a decent example.
Had to watch the video twice.
Distracted by that three-piece at 35:15 :-)
Thank you for the example, sir. o7
|
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
2234
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 03:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:... the replies to my information request were great. Thanks everybody.
Our pleasure, sir. o7 |
|
|
| |
|