Camo/night/cover versus giant red names.

[BorisBlade]

I love the idea of having camo, or night time to hide, or even foliage as cover. However, we will all have giant red names blazing over our heads and on top of that a really lame marking system where its just spammed around so you get tracked regardlesss of any of those methods of trying to avoid detection.

So it seems to me that all the coolness or heck even the point of most of that cover is completely destroyed and useless with whats basically a giant neon sign saying here i am please kill me now. It wont matter if you are in thick cover, darkest of night, and in full on forest camo. If you have a giant sign above your head everyone sees you as just as well as if you were in a wide open field in the middle of the day jumping up and down nekkid screaming please shoot me.

Is there any game that does a better job with this? Is there a better way to do it?

Ive seen several ideas floating around such as, no names unless you specifically run your reticule over someone and either hit them with direct fire or hover over them for atleast a full second before it shows up. So you cant spam aoe weapons into cover to find someone, and you cant wave your crosshairs around to find em either.

You must actually see them visually before a name pops up. And have that name show up in a fixed position in the UI such as the bottom or near the crosshairs instead of over that players head so we dont have a giant red sign (literally) advertising our location.

This also leads to the marking system, keeping it limited to one mark at a time and have it vanish after 15 seconds. Or still have it only last 15 seconds but let more go out but it wouldnt work behind objects but may mark em on the mini map or whatever. Either way, a short duration is needed to allow that person to eventually get cover again. I'm personally against it in most any form but if its limited then it could be acceptable.

Thoughts? Suggestions? I would like foliage to actually be usable cover and have camo actually have a point tactically, and to have night be more than just a way to get pretty tracers and actually be useful for cover. We dont need any fluff aspects that are just there to sound cool but dont actually do anything. That stuff is just wasted and could instead be great game mechanics.

[Otleaz]

Why do we need red names tags? I'm against red and green name tags, but if we have green, why on earth would we need the red ones?

[Littleman]

I don't know... how accessible is the camo?

I mean, I'd generally agree that removing the names opens up options for players not wearing a wet-suit, but if everyone and their mom will have access to camo fairly early and easily, I'd actually say no.

I'd like to see faction colors on players. Removing the name just further encourages people to use camo, because they'll feel they need to to blend in and remain competitive. Likewise, keeping names active does turn it into a cosmetic option, not a tactical one.

Alternatively, looking at this from a freebies perspective, if names are forcefully hidden and camo's are paying customer exclusives, they could be construed as selling power. Even if it's not, that's exactly the claim they'll make, mark my words.

I guess I'm sitting on the point where I'd be fine either way personally but would prefer to encourage wearing faction colors without it feeling disadvantageous, but the public opinion may wildly vary based on how accessible the camos are.

Hrm... maybe as an advanced targeting implant feature?

[Synapse]

Thread is useless unless boris is actually playing beta.

Unless that's true he has no idea how names or marking actually work.

[Rivenshield]

In auld Auraxis someone's name only showed up when you had then in your crosshairs or they were right on top of you. That'll continue to serve, I think.

[Otleaz]

Originally Posted by Littleman

Alternatively, looking at this from a freebies perspective, if names are forcefully hidden and camo's are paying customer exclusives, they could be construed as selling power. Even if it's not, that's exactly the claim they'll make, mark my words.

That is the claim they will make because it is true. Camos will be pay2win as long as the red names don't automatically pop up.

The Devs said something about faction colors in a camo pattern instead of real camo though, so it shouldn't be a problem

[Jeepo]

I think red tags are silly. Green is not ideal but is useful from a command point of view. Keep green and dump red.

[Psi]

I think it's funny that people think Camos are going to be this all-encompassing invisibility cloak that's twice as effective as the Infiltrator's active camo.

It's going to be dinky Desert/Snow/Wood camo that probably only covers, at best, 60% of the character model. And I'd think those non-faction colored versions would be more expensive than something that is faction colored. But still, I'm sure we'll still see some Red, Blue, and Purple mixed in with that camo.

Looking back at some of the camos we've seen, there are still giant TR/NC/VS faction logos painted on your face/chest, along with Red/Gold/Purple trim lining your character as it did before. The only change is that your breastplate and shin guards will have some nice camo painted on them.

I think the only class that will truly benefit from camo, within 100 meters will be an infiltrator. They're slim enough, and don't have that many faction trim colors, that it seems like they'll benefit from it. But even so, that's the one class that should benefit from it.

As far as the camo argument goes overall. I think you'd have to be pretty dense to think this would be useful, at all, when you're in close quarters, which is where most infantry fighting will happen.


Seriously folks. This isn't going to be a ghillie suit. It's going to be paint on small portions of your existing armor.

[QuantumMechanic]

This may be a valid concern. But we just won't know until beta.

Personally I don't like the idea of only having the bad guy's name show up when you target him - because there are cases in CQB when you may be targeting the guy as he rushes you but he is so close to you that you can't see his head - let alone his name in big red letters above it. Maybe not common but it definitely happens.

[Shinjorai]

^
O here i am please kill me now.
V


Dont mind me, just pasing through.....

[Policenaut]

What if Infiltrators got some kind of IFF device in place of a grenade that put indicators over an enemy's head?

[infected]

permanent red name tags = wow. pretty sure SOE knows this doesn't belong in fps.

the correct way to do this in an fps is to have the enemy name pop up on screen only when you have your cursor on them. end of controversy.

[Gonefshn]

I prefer the approach where friendlies have green tags and enemies have no tags at all. Just seems to make the most sense and be the most immersive for sure.

[TAA]

I also prefer no tags on enemy players at all. However I am willing to live with an option to turn off enemy tags on my system.

In fact, I would like to be able to turn off all tags - friendly and enemy. The only times I want tags is when my crosshairs are directly over a player model. I think night fighting without permanently visible tags would be awesome.

[Otleaz]

Originally Posted by TAA

I also prefer no tags on enemy players at all. However I am willing to live with an option to turn off enemy tags on my system.

In fact, I would like to be able to turn off all tags - friendly and enemy. The only times I want tags is when my crosshairs are directly over a player model. I think night fighting without permanently visible tags would be awesome.

I would love an option like this(without the hoverover part).

Oh, and make it so it doesn't tell me if my bullets hit and also make it so I don't get the kill message until 10 seconds after I make the kill, friend and foe.