Jump to content

Scav karma penalty when someone shoots at you but sucks...


Wraithly
 Share

Recommended Posts

How is it remotely reasonable that I should lose scav karma when someone opens on you like this... (you don't get my side of the comms where I alert him I'm there before he even comes around the corner, and then I confirm I'm not a PMC right before he opens on me).  You shouldn't receive a scav karma penalty for killing someone that ADS's at you, let alone opens fire around you. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GlitchWizard said:

Welcome to tarkov I can see your new here

Not new at all.. third wipe, I'm just pointing out an area of improvement for the scav karma system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GlitchWizard said:

It shouldnt come as a surprise that bsg cant get simple things correct  

Things that seem 'simple' to someone who do not develop games, are actually quite challenging when you actually do know.

In this particular case for example, the guy attacking indeed fires first (and misses), and his act of aggression is clear to a any human viewer. But to detect such an action for a program is a little bit more complicated.

Let's say for example that the developers implemented a feature where if you fired anywhere NEAR some other SCAV, you would then draw aggression from other SCAVS, and it would be OK to kill you. Then people would instead be really annoyed if they teamed up together and fired weapons in each others vicinity, and suddenly whoever opened up first would then be flagged as an aggressor (and SCAVS who otherwise were friendly, would start shooting you).

Even if you add a more complex mechanism that checked where your barrel was aimed would become very problematic in several cases.

 

Just because something seems simple to you, does not mean that it actually is.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make a Hitbox around a scav maybe 3-4 time bigger as the Scav Model, if the attacker hit that hitbox the victim wont loose karma anymore.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Are you a game developer or a forum mod? There are many simple things that bsg doesnt get right. For instance fixing simple bugs instead of developing new maps. How nice of you to assume Ive never developed anything. You know what they say about assuming 

Edited by GlitchWizard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, tobiassolem said:

Just because something seems simple to you, does not mean that it actually is.

Please. Don't be such an apologist... this is not a complex problem. If a shot generates a "suppress" effect around you then at the very least it renders the origin of that shot a viable target. This is already calculated and could easily trigger the zero-karma-loss event. The ADS-at-you may be more tricky to code but I trust they could sort it out easily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GlitchWizard said:

LOL Are you a game developer or a forum mod? There are many simple things that bsg doesnt get right. For instance fixing simple bugs instead of developing new maps. How nice of you to assume Ive never developed anything. You know what they say about assuming 

I work as a community manager for BSG, and I have a background as a game designer and teach game development.

People in the gaming industry are of course familiar with the fact that the 3D-artists, environment artists, and level-designers that work on new maps are not the same people that work on bugs in the programming. :)

These work in parallel, not one at a time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wraithly said:

Please. Don't be such an apologist... this is not a complex problem. If a shot generates a "suppress" effect around you then at the very least it renders the origin of that shot a viable target. This is already calculated and could easily trigger the zero-karma-loss event. The ADS-at-you may be more tricky to code but I trust they could sort it out easily. 

This has nothing to do with being apologetic, and again, it is not as simple as you suggest.

The "suppression effect" you suggest does not take friendly vs. unfriendly fire into account, and there are multiple scenarios that would cause problems (we would replace one problem with another).

One problem would be for example if you're shooting a hostile target behind a friendly target, this would cause the friendly target to have the "suppressed" effect, and suddenly trigger your action as hostile, for example.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, tobiassolem said:

One problem would be for example if you're shooting a hostile target behind a friendly target, this would cause the friendly target to have the "suppressed" effect, and suddenly trigger your action as hostile, for example.

Actually I don’t see any problem in that particular scenario. It’s a shooter who is responsible for aiming and pulling a trigger over friendly player - shooter has to think and aim properly to avoid non desired penalties. He can wait a bit or aim from another position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, SOVERElGN said:

Actually I don’t see any problem in that particular scenario. It’s a shooter who is responsible for aiming and pulling a trigger over friendly player - shooter has to think and aim properly to avoid non desired penalties. He can wait a bit or aim from another position.

Certainly understandable, but on a mass-level there will always be players who would consider such an issue problematic, or incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, tobiassolem said:

Certainly understandable, but on a mass-level there will always be players who would consider such an issue problematic, or incorrect.

It’s a niche game for smart thinking audience. No need to try cover up all the others. Player should bear a responsibility for his actions, no excuse. Inevitable consequences and responsibility is what make the game interesting and fun (for target audience). Thus tactics, decision making are very important and vital part of gameplay.

Edited by SOVERElGN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SOVERElGN said:

Thus tactics, decision making are very important and vital part of gameplay.

Exactly. In no scenario would pulling your gun and waving it at someone not be interpreted as a hostile, life threatening act. And in the case where everyone is armed one would expect to have every right to shoot first to protect ones self if someone is pointing a gun in your face.  

From a technical standpoint, you just switch the boolean when a player shoots/aims in the general direction of another player's scav for negative karma accrual. Nothing else about AI behavior or treating the player as hostile, etc. needs to change. This isn't a difficult problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Wraithly said:

From a technical standpoint, you just switch the boolean when a player shoots/aims in the general direction of another player's scav for negative karma accrual. Nothing else about AI behavior or treating the player as hostile, etc. needs to change. This isn't a difficult problem.

So you're suggesting that the action shouldn't affect the core mechanics of the game? That a hostile intra-factional action shouldn't come with consequences? It shouldn't cause a karma-effect? No, that's not a proper solution.

If a player SCAV takes a shot at another player SCAV head on, the intent is measured by whether he hit or not. The effect is a standings hit, and that all SCAVS within the vicinity for a time period now are aggressive to the one initiating. That's the core mechanic here.

Also when do you switch said boolean from false to true? Where do we start taking into account that the player's intent was do cause aggression toward another player? And for how long do we switch it to true? Are you really thinking about all scenarios and at all distances here?

It's easier to determine intent at closer distance than it is at farther ranges for example. At a longer distance, it's harder. If we're 300 meters apart, and I see you shooting in my general direction. It might be at me, but it also might be at a target behind me, or in my proximity. At what case do we measure the intent, and set the boolean to true?

The same can apply for close quarters action as well, when SCAVS are cooperating, there are many cases and scenarios where it mechanically would lead to switching that boolean from false to true.

Also, many players once discovering this "intent"-mechanism will attempt to abuse it. Testing the limits. Firing just outside the area to trigger a response, to get to kill someone without consequence.

I'm not saying that a similar mechanism cannot be done, but by no means is it a simple thing. Certainly not as simple as flipping a switch. Multiplayer interactions are much more multi-faceted than what it appears by looking at them on the surface.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it is very hard to get this right BUT as a game stands now it is very difficult for normal players to get scav karma and not to lose it.
You can easily spot NPC in the game...they behave strange and that is ok...but players and players scav? Let alone player scav that can easily look like PMC/BEAR?

I came to only two options...you CANNOT shoot first at anyone if you are scav and do not know for 100% that the opposite player is PMC...but that is a problem cuz in this game most of the times one bullet means death.
Or option two...F*ck the karma and just shoot everyone...but why would you play as a scav then?

 

Edited by MegaMlaticka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, tobiassolem said:

So you're suggesting that the action shouldn't affect the core mechanics of the game? That a hostile intra-factional action shouldn't come with consequences? It shouldn't cause a karma-effect? No, that's not a proper solution.

If a player SCAV takes a shot at another player SCAV head on, the intent is measured by whether he hit or not. The effect is a standings hit, and that all SCAVS within the vicinity for a time period now are aggressive to the one initiating. That's the core mechanic here.

Also when do you switch said boolean from false to true? Where do we start taking into account that the player's intent was do cause aggression toward another player? And for how long do we switch it to true? Are you really thinking about all scenarios and at all distances here?

It's easier to determine intent at closer distance than it is at farther ranges for example. At a longer distance, it's harder. If we're 300 meters apart, and I see you shooting in my general direction. It might be at me, but it also might be at a target behind me, or in my proximity. At what case do we measure the intent, and set the boolean to true?

The same can apply for close quarters action as well, when SCAVS are cooperating, there are many cases and scenarios where it mechanically would lead to switching that boolean from false to true.

Also, many players once discovering this "intent"-mechanism will attempt to abuse it. Testing the limits. Firing just outside the area to trigger a response, to get to kill someone without consequence.

I'm not saying that a similar mechanism cannot be done, but by no means is it a simple thing. Certainly not as simple as flipping a switch. Multiplayer interactions are much more multi-faceted than what it appears by looking at them on the surface.

 

 

 

 

It was a novel idea at the start, people played nice together for a little while, but it doesn't phase the people who just want to kill everyone, it never did. Now that voip is in the game and you can talk it out with other scavs, why not just eliminate the system? Or at least make a half-assed effort to work on it to give scav quests or something other than car extracts to increase it in any formal manner, otherwise it's just another half-baked wow-gee-wiz feature that was implemented in haphazardly with no follow through past birth besides the negation effect when scavs shoot each other after massive outcry. I'd get off my high horse if it seemed like you (the royal you as in BSG) developed it more as it's a pretty influential system in the grand scheme of the game design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defense of a system that literally makes you run in circles, without being able to fire back, if a rogue scav starts shooting at you, OR allow them to land a free shot....is truly embarrassing for BSG.

This system is objectively awful, but admitting as much would also mean BSG would have to admit to a mistake. Good luck with that.

The system stops nothing. Player scavs who are shooting other player scavs care nothing about the "penalties". Those only apply to people trying to play the right way, like when I lost .58 scav rep yesterday for having the audacity to kill a player scav who was extract camping on Lighthouse and tried to kill me. The current system the scholars at BSG implemented, called for me to allow this extract camping pile of excrement to shoot me. I had no vest on and he had a vepr hunter.

Is this really what you envisioned, BSG? Forcing players to allow other players to shoot them before they can defend themselves? Forcing players to run in circles and hope the at fault party just stops shooting?

This is legitimately the worst implementation of a system I've ever seen in my 40 years of gaming. Truly awful, and as is usually the case with BSG, nothing will be done about it. Par for the course. We'll get to read a lot of excuses though, that we can count on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, tobiassolem said:

Also, many players once discovering this "intent"-mechanism will attempt to abuse it. Testing the limits. Firing just outside the area to trigger a response, to get to kill someone without consequence.

You just can't help yourself from being patronizing can you? This is literally how it currently works in practice anyway.  It is indeed a very simple mechanic.  If an ADS or shot passes through a hitbox around your person, say 5m in radius, they get flagged as fair game to shoot without penalty.  Period.

This is how it would work in real life too... Even if the intent is good, if some stranger (not in your group) shoots past your head, even if it's at someone else then I'd be within my rights to shoot them. Period.  This is in fact easy to code, and more sensible than the current silly mechanic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baiting people in to losing a ton of scav rep is my groups favourite thing to do. Thanks BSG for adding so many ways to interact with other people via the Scav Karma system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...