Yes and it was probably there by mistake. When they opened the Test Server there was a lot of beta stuff in the certifications panel: just a lot of ideas that have never been realized.
The cloak hasn't helped you if you don't enter the opponent's LoS. This is what you are failing to comprehend - we are NOT talking about the player's ability to remain outside of people's LoS. The cloak does not help you do this. Actually, it hinders you because it enables people to find you using the sound. The cloak doesn't serve as a counter to radar for various reasons: To do anything you need to not be in cloak - moment this happens you are visible on radar - no point getting someone undetected if the moment you decide to do something it all goes to waste. The cloak has a short duration compared to the size of radar coverage and the speed at which the infiltrator moves - you are highly unlikely to get to where you want to go before it runs out. You don't know when you are being detected, so you can't use it intelligently for this sole purpose. This means you can waste a good portion of the temporary radar immunity before you even needed it. Some radar still detect cloaked infiltrators - 'nuff said. The chance of reduced detection is minimal when used at close range, which happens to be where everything important is likely to be. Regardless, "chance" is a very poor system to use to determine the result of something as I have explained before. Randomness is great when you are allowed to make follow-up choices in response. It is very bad when it is the determining factor of whether something is successful. Ah, the camouflage argument - we meet again. Right, lets go: Camouflage already exists in the game and works great when stationary using the correct background. Cloak is very poor if you do not use the correct background or are moving. No advantage to either. The correct background happens to be the same background for the vast majority of a continent. Both camouflage and cloak work very poorly when not using natural terrain as a backdrop. No advantage to either. Cloak has a duration limit; camouflage does not. Point in camo's favour. Camouflage makes no noise; cloak does. Point in camo's favour. You can pre-emptively shoot if you think the target is about to spot you when using camouflage; you can not do this with cloak. Point in camo's favour. Unlike cloak, you can use camo with any class and other classes have more shields. Point in camo's favour. You can use another class's special ability while still using camo. Point in camo's favour. There are probably more, but I think that is enough to show that cloak is not better than camo: in fact it is very much worse. Once again, despite a few people now having pointed this out to you, you have completely missed the point that invisibility does not necessarily equal undetectability. Are your just ignoring what has been said or are you just failing to understand this? If you carry on in this vain then there is no point discussing anything with you. You would be better served by reading some of the threads already covering these issues: there have been many suggestions as to how to replace the luck component from the system with an interaction between the two parties that comes down to a measure of skill. Something I actually agree with you on - choice is always nice. The Hunter Cloak does have its uses, they just aren't what you are trying to suggest. Beyond a certain distance it becomes reliable (because it switches to complete invisibility) - this means snipers find it quite useful indeed. Radar control, however, is not a valid use of the cloak for the reasons stated previously. Nor is close-range infiltration. If we want close-range infiltrator then something does need to change; which is most likely full invisibility WITH alternative means of detection.
It has helped you get to where you wish to be. It has helped reduced the chance of detection from various LoS. It won't make you immune to an active search or a direct observation. If someone feels the cloak doesn't help they are free to turn it off. The sound is what it is - a close range signal designed to provide the possibility of detection. This is a system that benefits us the most the further away we are. You are using a tool in a manner that is not supported by the tools design, and then proceeding to complain. The cloak is designed to provide a signal to the map aware, so that they might respond. This is how the tool functions. If you cannot do what you wish to do with the tool you are given, you need to address what exactly your trying to do. You are asking for results beyond the designed purpose of the tool we have been given and then complaining. Minimal chance of reduction is still a some reduction. We can reduce the chances of being found, not negate them, which is more than any other classes gets. This is part of the design of tool we have. We can factor this in, develop play styles that support. Or we can complain that our tool isn't the tool we want, which is fine. Are you suggesting that our stealth is not better than the standard camouflage, within the context of reducing visual detection? We have an system that functions like camouflage. Yes, there is camouflage that can be bought, that already exists, that can provide some benefits. Ours is better and similarly constrained, in that, direct observation and/or an attentive player might see us. The tool is designed to be like this. If it wasn't, we'd have total visual concealment. The whole idea is to reduce the chances of being spotted, not negate it. Why? Probably because the designers weren't comfortable with total visual concealment. Perhaps they thought we'd learn to use the tool as designed. I know the difference. The designers obviously knew the difference. There is a value to learning the properties of a tool and developing play that plays to its strengths. All I see are some people complaining that an existing tool is not the tool they want. They then complain and attempting to rationalise a change in the properties of the existing tool, based on stories that demonstrate a misuse of the existing tool. I get you want a different tool. We don't have it. You are welcome to make your case and complain. Of course. In the meantime, complaining that the existing tool doesn't do what it's designed to do is, at best, a waste of energy. Perhaps, this is why there is talk of other cloak options coming out - the designers want to introduce new tools to better support other styles of play. :: Some people on these boards are saying they want a different tool and try to make their case by blaming the existing tool for not being the tool they want. Which they're free to do. It does come across as being disingenuous to the existing tool's strengths. "This apple is a bad apple because it is not a banana. " The apple is fine. A banana would be appreciated. Both would be lovely.
Or just play another class. The cloak is our only unique selling point, no matter how some people like to glorify recon darts. If people are turning away from the Infiltrator because its advantages in stealth gameplay aren't significant enough to overcome the combat advantages of other classes attempting stealth, I consider that a problem. It's designed to prevent us from using the stealth to ambush people - such as by running past them and then breaking cloak to shoot them in the back. The two fundamental failures of this design are that the cloak is nowhere near effective enough to be abused in such a way, and that the sound travels excessively far, being audible to players with the right hardware well beyond the effective range of our sidearms and SMGs. It is quite literally a cloak designed to fail in close quarters, originally intended to punish snipers for allowing players to flank them. I would very much appreciate it if you stop talking like some considerable amount of thought was put into its actual CQC capabilities. Please explain how ours is better in the face of the disadvantages Aimeryan just outlined. This is a subjective argument, of course, but that doesn't free you from the obligation to provide reasons to back up your statement when he disagrees with it. Something objectively better than Hunter Stealth is required to make CQC infiltration a realistic goal. I can guarantee that, short of denying players the ability to equip sniper rifles with a new cloak, snipers would also prefer something objectively better than Hunter Stealth. Therefore, the analogy is closer to "this apple is unripe, and even the people who like sour fruit would prefer it if it were matured significantly more."
I'm agreeing with Scudmungus on the point where he says Hunter cloak is not meant to be used at close range. I do not however, appreciate his belittling tone, that seem to express that he's an Infiltrator god, with skills and knowledge about the Infiltrator class, that most of us can only dream of. I think everyone here has found out in the most painful ways that Hunter cloak is not the ideal tool to use for infiltrating. But the thing is, since release, it's the only thing we had we could use, hence we were forced to use it. Despite all its shortcomings, many of us have adapted, and still make it work in enviroments that it wasn't intended to be used in. That doesn't mean however, that we should be happy about. Beside the cloak, there's so many little things in the game that seemingly are aimed at making Infiltrators "suffer". Little things that cause you to get killed, even when you have not made one single mistake. Camouflage can work. But like cloak it's based on one large factor: Luck. Luck to not accidentally run into someone, luck that someone doesn't accidentally spots you by randomly spamming Q. Luck that someone isn't wearing Nanoweave, luck that you don't get tracked by a randomly placed radar flash, when you are taking cover to recharge your cloaking energy. Luck that someone doesn't happen to hear your cloaking noise. So much regarding the Infiltrator is based on luck. With skill you can certainly narrow down this factor, but no matter how good you become, the "luck" factor will always be far larger with this class, than it is with any other. (in it's current state) I'd like to depend more on my own skills granting me success, than the random luck of the idiots I'm fighting.
You choose the tone you read something in. If you choose to feel belittled, I'm sorry, this is not my intent. When not shooting or being shot, I am a therapist. I practice clean language. I've found most forum 'arguments' stem from differeing associations assigned to seemingly 'obvious' terms. Examples would include: Fair Luck Balanced All highly subjective and prone to propagating much textual detritus due to different parties forming opinions based on differing mental models and yet acted upon under the assumption that each party's mental model is the same. So, Mr.Scan and to anyone else who reads these words: Reaaaad them with a song in your heart! Darlings! I am, however, an Infiltrator god. Pew pew pew Ninja chop!
I'm told that the low end graphics glitch has been fixed on the test server, being as subtle as the high end aspect now. I partially agree with you on this... Sniping could use some tweaks; it's still, however, exceptional as is so long as you take out the Nanoweave problem. The awkward middle-ground of SMG play seems adequate for its purpose. (I haven't gotten a chance to use it.) Now, in my opinion, all we need is the more assassin type infiltration aspect to fully solidify our class. This variant would come in the form of a permanent full invisibility cloaking device at the cost of your primary and becoming more visible upon attack. This effectively makes it the melee variant of sniping, extreme killing effectiveness balanced out by the fact that you have to practice patience and caution when choosing your targets to avoid getting slaughtered. You're going to want to take out stragglers rather than run in and knife Joe Shmoe sitting with three of his buddies all holding assault riffles or shotguns. Still a lot of skill to this play style, rewarded with quick clean kills at the cost of having to practice restraint. It's likely, like with the original, damage will render you partially visible as well...furthering the balance system. I think the Banshee Cloaking device in my signature link would work great for this play style too. Instead of any degree of visibility as you move, a very subtle and ominous sound can be heard that grows to a downright terrifying noise whenever you attack. You're rendered partially visible only when you attack, rather than while moving, though...unlike the Planetside of old. In a hectic base, this type of cloaking mechanic would work great because the sound is going to be masked until you attack...and the fact that you produce an unsettling noise when doing so will warrant taking a louder pistol. I'd enjoy it... The Stalker cloaking device would be more oriented for your infiltration non-combative situations. That's what I have been looking for... Having a melee variation as effective as our sniping, I never cared about the SMG because I am not a run and gun type of person. I'm much more fond of gutting someone with the knife, or sniping from extreme distances...just don't have the twitch response for gunning.
I don't see the stalker cloak happening, and not a big fan of the drone idea but could be the counter to sensor shield implant users.
If it didn't, I'm pretty sure you'd see every Infiltrator riot. It was in the original Planetside, and everyone wants it back...otherwise we're pretty much just Snipers and half a class. The SMG gave us an awkward middle-ground area where we start becoming a sort of gunner class...
re the video on page 2 could an infiltrator take down an shield max with only a pistol and 2 anti personal mines ? even the commissioner would require a reload if you managed to connect some head shots and the max isn't just going to stand there and do nothing?
I have reduced your post to this because that is pretty much your answer throughout. I am not trying to use the cloak for these purposes - I know it is poor at accomplishing them and just provides a source frustration. That you are now agreeing with this is progress at least. I have said that the Hunter Cloak has its purposes. I am 100% fine with that. All I, and everyone else here, is saying is that there are certain playstyles that the Hunter Cloak does not suit (nor the NA Cloak for that matter), and we are saying that for the purposes of entertaining those playstyles we need another cloak. This new cloak does not necessarily need full invisibility at close-range and beyond if some radical new idea comes to light as to how else the cloak could work and eliminate random results and the like. However, for the moment, the best solution is something like: No visibility at close-range and beyond (but not at very close-range), when crouched (stationary or moving). High visibility when not crouched (higher than Hunter Cloak). Hunter Cloak visibility at very close-range. [This gives the infiltrator a reliable, if not fast, means of close-range infiltrator while still needing to keep at least some distance away from the enemy.] Cloak recharges when stationary, drains slowly enough when crouched moving, drains very fast when running. [Again, for reliability, but slow going.] No primary weapon. [Cloak is primarily for non-combat.] Those are the core aspects of the cloak. There are additional aspects that can be added for fine-tuning balance (and perhaps fun!) that are less agreed on but still not too disputed: Weak visual effect on enemy player's HUDs when an infiltrator is nearby using this cloak. Visual effect could be something like what EMP grenades add to the HUD, but much weaker. [This allows people to start the search for the infiltrator, if they pay attention to their HUD now and again to notice this. Coupled with the next point and the "very close-range" core aspect, this gives a very distinct possibility of the infiltrator being detected if they are not very careful.] Flashlights make the cloak change to Hunter Cloak visibility while highlighted. [This effectively extends the "very close-range" part of the core aspects, but requires enemies to shine the flashlight in the infiltrators direction at still a somewhat nearby distance, and then notice the infiltrator. Flashlights are rarely spammed because they have a negative affect on the player using them - they make that player obvious to any enemies in LOS, including snipers. Thus, it is a very active way of finding an infiltrator and the infiltrator itself can see the flashlight user and try to respond.] Taking damage immediately changes the cloak's visibility to high for so many seconds. [This stops the cloak being used to escape, although the infiltrator wouldn't be moving very fast anyway if they are crouched. Still, it just makes sure.] Long fade in/out time and a very close-range but continuous noise while occurring. Possibly allow the use of the knife after a only moment (instead of waiting out the whole fade time) so that it is not unfairly hindered. [Some players have had concerns about secondary weapons being too effective while using this cloak, which might cause the cloak to become combat-orientated. This would effectively stop that, since the target would have to be really unobservant not to notice the infiltrator decloaking behind them somewhat nearby. The infiltrator could still decloak some distance away (with hopefully nobody nearby them there!) and then approach, but this is fair enough to give the enemy time and opportunity to check their surroundings.] Immune to omni-directional radar of all type. [The issue here is that proximity radar (which sees through normal cloak) covers too large a radius for too long, too easily, and in all directions for the infiltrator not to need immunity to this in some form.] Add in rotating short-range uni-directional radar that detects anything moving when it rotates through that area if it has LoS. Only one can be placed in the radius it affects. [Imagine those old submarine films where the radar panel shows the radar and you get a "bing!" noise as it rotates passed the enemy. This would be another way the infiltrator could be detected if the infiltrator does not react accordingly. The LoS restriction is needed because the infiltrator has to be able to know he will be detected if he doesn't respond accordingly, which he can only do if he can see it.] For added bonus, include an auto-gun on top of the previous point (the uni-directional radar) that can shoot at anything it detects. [This could be an engineer construction and would fit their theme well.] I am sure there are other interesting ideas that could be added in, but I think this is enough to show you that detecting the infiltrator by eye alone is not the only way detection can work. Other forms of detection can be more fairer because they require either active consideration of the enemy to use, or active consideration of the infiltrator to avoid. Hopefully that has now cleared up the problems between us, assuming you don't disagree on something being added for other playstyles.
Allrite.... you have a point. You choose to write in objective terms, and try to avoid to approach the subject in a subjective manner. You are dealing with people though, and people can be very irrational and be prone to acting on what they are feeling or are experiencing from their point of view. I personally didn't feel belittled. I felt you were belittling the other posters you responded to. What had me annoyed, was your apparant lack of empathy. Blurting out facts and possible solutions. Solutions that not anyone here wants. "If cloak annoyes you, don't use it" is not a solution. It's evading the problem, so you won't have to deal with it. Since you are a therapist I shouldn't have to tell you that stating objective facts to prove the other person wrong, is not a good way to help that person see the light... no matter how correct and right you might be. I think if you'd have been reading what is written here for months now, the "mental model" towards the current state of the Infiltrator class, is pretty much in sync with the rest of the posters who come here. But now and then we get someone here who's opinion totally differs, yet in his belief of being totally right, forgets that his own opinion is just as subjective of the ones that are complaining. EDIT As an added note I'd like to mention: The scentence I quoted is brilliant. You don't take responsibility, but at the same time apalogize for an emotional response that you claim you can't be held accountable for. So in other words you say: "You chose to act like an idiot, but I'm sorry I made you act like an idiot, because I didn't intend you to act like an idiot... yet your being an idiot caused you to act like an idiot yourself" Ever considered a career in politics?
Personally, from a design perspective, I'd say you'd need to make your proposed cloak more fragile. As it stands, it seems give too much for little cost. I doubt we'll ever get the potential for perma-invisbility. It gives game designers the shudders. It's horrible to balance and puts the enemy at too much of a disadvantage. Skill needs to be rewarded on both sides - the sneaking side and the counter sneaking side. When a player dies and cannot understand/track/perceive a reason for it, they get frustrated. Yes, we could ask our fellow Gamers to 'Get over it' but that's not realistic. Kill Cams were implemented to try and address this very reason and monster reaction animations are designed with this in mind. Another example: Doom. When an enemy sees you, it signals the action with a sound. That window of opportunity gives the player time to react. It allows for skill to be exercised, which builds a sense of control and empowerment. Keeping within the initial design criteria, I would balance your proposal by making it removed on hit with a 1 or 2 second delay before it comes back. This way, with all the empowerment bestowed upon the player, there's a real sense of 'Can't be seen or sensed, must avoid the cross fire'. I'd also keep the cloak sound from de-cloaking, probably louder than the current cloak. This would force the player to commit to an action/series of action and reward careful strikes/planning, rather than casual attacks. It also gives the enemy a signal to which they can react. Yes, it would be easier without it but the enemy does need a signal, for the reasons explained. :: Something to consider for future designs is that, actual game desingers prefer to break up empowerment. Loading too much onto something risks making it overly complicated and harder to track the effects of individual elements of empowerment, which obviously makes fine tuning/balancing a pain in the whatsit.
Hmm. Not yet. Well, yes. Only you/us/I can choose to act like an idiot. Nobody can make you act like an idiot. The rest of your reply is... a lovely reaction! Oh, and of course, I may be wrong.
I won't pretend I never do idiotic things. Well, I indeed do act like an idiot, but the important thing is that I'm aware of acting like an idiot, when I've chosen to do so. Wether it be triggered by positive, or negative emotions. The true idiot doesn't know he's an idiot and therefore will never change his behaviour, until someone points out his being idiotic. The question is then if the idiot, in fact has enough brainpower to be able to reflect upon his own behaviour being that of an idiot. Some people will just remain idiots. It's they way they were designed... and it's the way they'll remain... in sweet ignorance about their own stupidity. One of the largest problems in this world is that dumb people have too much self-confidence... and the intelligent people are too insecure, and always question themselves before they act.... What was this topic about again?
You may, or may not, be glad to know that I've worked with insecure types from across the spectrum and found all can learn enough about themselves to carry themselves with kick *** confidence, should they give themselves the opportunity! Alas, nobody can be helped unless they wish to be helped. We can be shown, told, lectured, taught but in the end, we have to choose to learn how to help ourselves. I.... ..no idea!
I disagree - I don't think that cloak listed there would be giving too much for too little cost - I have traded one benefit for one disadvantage (or more) of equal strength: Benefit: Invisibility (beyond a certain distance) when crouched, Counter: High visibility when not crouched, Visual Notice for the enemy, and a Flashlight to take advantage of this. Benefit: Cloak recharge when stationary, Counter: Cloak loses energy fast if you run, and no primary weapons. Benefit: Radar Immunity, Counter: Uni-directional Radars that can detect infiltrator if the infiltrator does not do the right thing - with the added bonus (the auto-turret) of these killing the infiltrator without the enemy needing to pay any attention. To be fair, until today the last point was part of the existing cloaks too (to some extent). However, since they have now changed this I think this benefit could be taken off the cloak proposal and can be added as a suit slot instead - thereby making it compete with the other suit slots. The disadvantage can remain though, because it would make the game more fun anyway. I also included additional disadvantages by increasing the fade time, with a constant audio warning attached to boot, as well as damage making the cloak fail for some time (instead of momentarily). It was in PS1 and it is in the test server (in a way) - so they are unlikely to complete discredit the idea. I disagree on the balance statement - I think it is very much easier to balance something not based on such a subjective quality like a player's eyesight. All the benefits and counters I listed can easily be measured quantitatively and changed as necessary. The current system rewards skill in no way at all when using the cloak (skill at using the natural environment to remain undetected is not the discussion we are having). The system I listed very much woruld. Yes... I don't disagree with this, but what is your point? If you are implying somehow the current system follows this then I completely disagree. Suggestions I made (although not necessarily originating from me since this is very much talked about topic already) would follow this. Seriously, did you even read my post? Both of those are in the cloak I suggested already. Fair enough, but there are only actually a few things loaded on to that cloak itself: Visibility Settings [This has to be specific to the cloak itself] Duration Settings [This has to be specific to the cloak itself] Fade Settings [This has to be specific to the cloak itself] Incoming-damage Settings [This has to be specific to the cloak itself] Enemy Hud Visual Effect [This has to be specific to the cloak itself] No Primary Weapon [This could be put on each primary weapon instead ("can not be used with xyz cloak), but it is simpler to just put it on the cloak itself] Flashlight [This could be put on the flashlight itself or only on this cloak, depending on whether people would want the flashlight to affect the visibility of other cloaks too - I think either is fine] Radar Immunity [This could be specific to the cloak or catered for in another way - I am leaning towards the other way now because of recent changes] Uni-directional motion-detection radars with auto-turrets [This is not part of the cloak, merely something to be implemented at the same time - they could be part of normal base features or they could be placed by Engineers, or something else entirely] Green = Completely specific to cloak, Blue = Probably specific to cloak but not entirely inseparable, Yellow = Does not have to be specific to cloak at all, Red = Not specific to cloak at all. As you can see, the first four are standard cloak things. The fifth is the only truly added feature that is inseparable to this cloak. The sixth could be seperable if needed. The seventh and eighth are completely up to the developers on whether they want it to intrinsic to this cloak itself or more universal. The last point isn't related directly to the cloak at all, but would be an interesting "negative" feature that would affect the infiltrator (and to some degree other classes).
I misread this to mean the user would still have some form of cloak when taking damage, rather than no cloak. The rest is.. stuff! GREEN TEXT?!
They can not be ******* serious, the vehicle hacking would be the hardest thing for an infil to even do and they don't want to put it in? WHY NOT? I'm still waiting for the infil to be able to knife from cloak.
