Hide active disguise smoke particles upon cloaking

[AzureWoof]

Description

I was originally going to make this a bug report, but the nature of the issue itself isn't exactly a bug; it's an oversight at best. As a Spy, disguising while cloaked will correctly make sure that no disguise smoke particles show up so that you won't reveal your position to enemies. However, disguising right before cloaking for any reason will end up showing the smoke particles anyway for a decent duration of the cloak, resulting in enemies knowing exactly where you are and what direction you're going until the particles disappear. This wouldn't be too much of an issue by itself if the particles themselves didn't last so long. Many new players accidentally end up doing this, completely unaware that it reveals their position. This problem can guarantee your death in many instances if you don't remember to disguise after cloaking.

Checklist

• [x] None of the open or closed issues document this idea.
• [x] This is a new idea, not a bug.
• [x] This idea does not seriously affect game balance.
• [x] This is obviously an improvement, not something that people commonly disagree on.
• [x] This is not an idea for new game content (e.g. new weapons, maps, sounds).

• [x] This idea is for the code of the game, not for textures, sounds, or other resources.
• [ ] This idea has been implemented in vanilla TF2.
• [ ] There is proof that this idea is well liked (e.g. a history of use of a similar mod in a competitive league).
• [ ] This idea has been implemented in a mod.
• [ ] This feature has existed in the vanilla game but was removed.
• [ ] This idea is for internal procedures or tooling (e.g. improving the build process, supporting new systems).

Alternatives

1. Find any way to stop enemies from seeing particle effects attached to a Spy that is either in the process of cloaking, or is fully cloaked.

[mastercoms]

I've heard from some spy mains that this is part of a skill ceiling, to properly time your disguise after cloaking, especially for the dead ringer. I also don't think is arbitrary. This sort of timing is an entirely valid skill set. It also nerfs a lot of bad playstyles by punishing them.

[AgentAlibi]

I've heard from some spy mains that this is part of a skill ceiling, to properly time your disguise after cloaking, especially for the dead ringer. I also don't think is arbitrary. This sort of timing is an entirely valid skill set. It also nerfs a lot of bad playstyles by punishing them.

This is correct. Learning about when and how to disguise, and that the process of disguising creates the smoke effect is very much part of the skill ceiling. Removing the smoke during the start of a cloak would allow for some very dumb plays that would have otherwise been punished.

[AzureWoof]

I've heard from some spy mains that this is part of a skill ceiling, to properly time your disguise after cloaking, especially for the dead ringer. I also don't think is arbitrary. This sort of timing is an entirely valid skill set. It also nerfs a lot of bad playstyles by punishing them.

True. But a lot of people don't even know that this happens, especially new players. It's worthy of a tip, if anything. But I'm unsure if adding extra gameplay tips is even in-scope. Regardless, it's good to get other people's feedback on this.

[treacherousfiend]

to my knowledge extra gameplay tips aren't in scope and are handled by a completely different project

[mastercoms]

There's been gameplay tips added already.

[treacherousfiend]

noted

[ghost]

I've heard from some spy mains that this is part of a skill ceiling, to properly time your disguise after cloaking, especially for the dead ringer. I also don't think is arbitrary. This sort of timing is an entirely valid skill set. It also nerfs a lot of bad playstyles by punishing them.

As a passionate long-time spy main, I'd have to disagree on this one on several levels. I've been playing this game for about 4 years, which is not as much as some people have, but also not little. I've watched an unhealthy amount of TF2 videos in the past 4 years, from all kinds of TF2 YouTubers, small or big, including all well-known and little-known spy mains, talked with a lot of them, played with a lot of them, and even did so on the TF2 forums for about 2000 posts on my current account, and the only things I've heard from them regarding this particular issue ranged from: "it's an annoyance", to "it's a bug that should be removed". Those views have been stated a very large number of times in their videos, regardless of whether they main spy or not. Humouring the feature even, by often calling it a glitch or a bug.

I'd also have to disagree heavily on the skill aspect of it. I don't find it takes any skill to prevent it from happening and only punishes you if you accidentally forget that the feature/bug exists, which you can do if you're in the heat of battle. Besides, I don't really get what it would be encouraging, the disguise will only be visible before and after you decloak, regardless of whether or not the smoke is there, so it's not like the enemy team is at a disadvantage if you don't burst into heavy smoke because you forgot to "time it" only to be able to say you timed it.

So because I've seen many, many people complain about it, because to prevent it you needn't any skill, because to cause it you needn't any failure, and because the punishment itself punishes you and rewards the enemy team heavily for the gameplay equivalent of a typo, I'd kindly ask you to at least reconsider it.

[wgetJane]

i think it's better to clearly indicate this on the hud somehow, since i believe that the issue is that the only reliable feedback that the spy gets is to get shot at, which is frustrating when they thought they were fully invisible

[ghost]

i think it's better to clearly indicate this on the hud somehow, since i believe that the issue is that the only reliable feedback that the spy gets is to get shot at, which is frustrating when they thought they were fully invisible

Yes but the issue arises in that that there doesn't seem to be a reason for this so to say mechanic to exist, since it honestly, and I'm saying this looking at it from both the 1 hour and the 1 k hour spy perspective, doesn't require any shred of skill to avoid, and if a mechanic's only purpose of existence is to require skill in order not to activate, and it then fails in that, the logic becomes even more broken, going from a pointless circle to an annoying, unfair crescent.

[wgetJane]

@Baruch-Iriah it just seems like a problem with the user's restraint, i don't really see how this is much different from a soldier or demo having to break the habit of holding down the w key when explosive jumping

[ghost]

@Baruch-Iriah it just seems like a problem with the user's restraint, I don't really see how this is much different from a soldier or demo having to break the habit of holding down the w key when explosive jumping

But see the thing with explosive jumping is that, when they unconsciously stop holding down the w key, they do so in order to get an advantage, a mobility advantage, but in this case, you have to do it just to stay alive, so when you do end up unintentionally unconsciously prematurely disguising, the stakes make the outcome much worse, and for no good reason. If spy was, for example, to gain an ability to walk at spy speed regardless of the disguise whilst following the set rules of this particular endeavor, meaning he disguises only after the cloak, instead of not being engulfed in smoke, then the 2 examples would be comparable. But since that isn't the case, spy essentially gets punished for putting on his shoes before going outside because his mom at that moment, didn't tell him to do so before he went outside.

[RicochetYT]

I don't know, I just got used to disguising after cloaking, if I ever even use the cloak.

[ghost]

IIRC the smoke effect lingering on cloak is 100% intentional, as the Spy silhouette that appears on your hud when you disguise is timed perfectly to align with the particles so you know when it's safe to cloak.

[ghost]

IIRC the smoke effect lingering on cloak is 100% intentional, as the Spy silhouette that appears on your hud when you disguise is timed perfectly to align with the particles so you know when it's safe to cloak.

That could also just be to let you know when you're fully disguised, but regardless of that, intention is not really relevant when we're talking about whether or not to remove something, and I feel like, bug or not, it is not something that should stay in the game and removing it would definitely be a quality of life change for any spy main, and would remove an unfair advantage the enemy team gets when in action.

[ghost]

I'd also have to disagree heavily on the skill aspect of it. I don't find it takes any skill to prevent it from happening

It isn't a skill, but rather a piece of game knowledge and as such part of the spy skill ceiling. I believe i picked it up from a stabby-stabby video back in the day and never forgot since, as it made a lot of sense to me that particle effects you generated while you're visible/invisible will be visible/invisible themselves, so i would advise against removing this mechanic. However, i would be pro adding a way to let the player know they're emitting visible/invisible smoke, be it a tip on the loading screen, a new section in the in-game spy tutorial, highlighting the smoke trail during the inevitable killcam,etc

[ghost]

I'd also have to disagree heavily on the skill aspect of it. I don't find it takes any skill to prevent it from happening

It isn't a skill, but rather a piece of game knowledge and as such part of the spy skill ceiling. I believe i picked it up from a stabby-stabby video back in the day and never forgot since, as it made a lot of sense to me that particle effects you generated while you're visible/invisible will be visible/invisible themselves, so i would advise against removing this mechanic. However, i would be pro adding a way to let the player know they're emitting visible/invisible smoke, be it a tip on the loading screen, a new section in the in-game spy tutorial, highlighting the smoke trail during the inevitable killcam,etc

If something's not skill based, then it can't be part of a skill ceiling, that would be like calling gamesense an important part of a skill ceiling, even tho it's just a very basic thing, the difference between gamesense and this however, is that it makes sense to have one, while the other punishes you for disguising when Valve personally doesn't feel like you should, which happens not to include any time at which you can disguise before instead of during cloak. Just because you need to know something in order not to die doesn't mean you should know it, such as in this case, in which the mechanic exists only so that you can know it and to stop intuitively taking precautions by disguising before you're decloaked. This is like if we added a mechanic to demoknight that takes away his health if he swings right before a charge. Why? What benefit does this feature reach? Does it require any skill or conciouss/mental effort? No. Is it's only purpose to self reference when asked what purpose it has? Yes. Does the punishment fit the crime of just playing normally, utilizing core gameplay mechanics? No. Is it, on top of all that, incredibly annoying? Yes.

So why keep it? And if to keep it, add such a mechanic on every class like I mentioned with the demoknight example, to make the game more unfun and unfair for all.

[ghost]

If something's not skill based, then it can't be part of a skill ceiling

Since to build a skill you have to gather some knowledge, generally lots of it (uber rate for counting ubers, moving habits for aiming, hiding spots for backcapping), the quality of your knowledge will be reflected on the quality of your skills and as such i consider them to be part of a player's skill level. That much i meant, not sure what you meant here though

That would be like calling gamesense an important part of a skill ceiling

Gamesense is a nice skill to have

The difference between gamesense and this however, is that it makes sense to have one

Nice pun

While the other punishes you for disguising when Valve personally doesn't feel like you should

Valve personally made the game themselves so fair enough, the game will act as they see fit

Just because you need to know something in order not to die doesn't mean you should know it

"Should know it" <-- a purpose is implied here, but not stated. If it is "not dying", then you should know, i think

Such as in this case, in which the mechanic exists only so that you can know it and to stop intuitively taking precautions by disguising before you're decloaked.

We dont know the purpose of this mechanic in detail, nor how it's supposed to work in this edge case. So unless something decisive like word from the devs or an obvious mistake in the code is found, i think it isn't clear yet if the smoke is working as intended or not

[ghost]

If something's not skill based, then it can't be part of a skill ceiling

Since to build a skill you have to gather some knowledge, generally lots of it (uber rate for counting ubers, moving habits for aiming, hiding spots for backcapping), the quality of your knowledge will be reflected on the quality of your skills and as such i consider them to be part of a player's skill level. That much i meant, not sure what you meant here though

That would be like calling gamesense an important part of a skill ceiling

Gamesense is a nice skill to have

The difference between gamesense and this however, is that it makes sense to have one

Nice pun

While the other punishes you for disguising when Valve personally doesn't feel like you should

Valve personally made the game themselves so fair enough, the game will act as they see fit

Just because you need to know something in order not to die doesn't mean you should know it

"Should know it" <-- a purpose is implied here, but not stated. If it is "not dying", then you should know, i think

Such as in this case, in which the mechanic exists only so that you can know it and to stop intuitively taking precautions by disguising before you're decloaked.

We dont know the purpose of this mechanic in detail, nor how it's supposed to work in this edge case. So unless something decisive like word from the devs or an obvious mistake in the code is found, i think it isn't clear yet if the smoke is working as intended or not

I meant that basic skills are more so a skill foundation then something that contributes much to the skill ceiling. That being said, this isn't a basic skill.

Yes but gamesense is a foundation, it's a very basic skill, skills that help you hit the skill ceiling are skills like excellent aim, movement etc. Gamesense is what allows you to improve upon those and slowly build up to the skill ceiling.

Xd I actually genuinely didn't intend for that to be a pun.

The very reason this project exists is because what Valve wants isn't the best for the game, which is why referencing their wishes when talking about an idea that differs from theirs isn't really an argument. It is precisely because what they say is how it is that we have had the bot problem for the past 2 years.

What I meant by "shouldn't know" is that the only reason you must know it is so that you don't die, and you die because you didn't do yourself the disservice of not pre-disguising, a trivial non-action that serves no purpose, which is why the game "shouldn't" make it so that you "should" not disguise.

I didn't talk about intention, I talked about its purpose, which can be objectively extrapolated because it has no other purpose than the punishment it gives out for not respecting it.

God do I like github, If I were to discuss this on the Steam forums I'd probably get crucified and banned, but people on here seem to have the ability for polite discourse, and for that I thank you.

[ghost]

I meant that basic skills are more so a skill foundation then something that contributes much to the skill ceiling. That being said, this isn't a basic skill.

It seems to me that you're implying that because it's not skill based or a skill in itself it should be removed, which i think is not justified, unless you're trying to fine-tune the game for competitive play, i guess

Yes but gamesense is a foundation, it's a very basic skill, skills that help you hit the skill ceiling are skills like excellent aim, movement etc. Gamesense is what allows you to improve upon those and slowly build up to the skill ceiling.

I don't know about basic, gamesense is a pretty deep skill, granted it's not as time consuming to aquire as DM

The very reason this project exists is because what Valve wants isn't the best for the game What Valve "wants" for the game has changed a lot through time, so i wouldn't call all of it bad.

Also i wouldn't go so far as to try to say why the project exists lol, but rather more mild, but attainable statements like the project's goals or just directly referencing what mastercoms says in the readme

Which is why referencing their wishes when talking about an idea that differs from theirs isn't really an argument.

Ultimately Valve will decide which changes to apply, so i think it's fair to consider their vision of the game and produce mainly changes that the tf2 dev team would've made themselves if they were still here and in their prime. That said, there's obviously value in new ideas and theory-crafting and it's only natural for an open-source project to spark that, and we may even have some leeway to make tiny changes to the game, so go off regardless

What I meant by "shouldn't know" is that the only reason you must know it is so that you don't die, and you die because you didn't do yourself the disservice of not pre-disguising, a trivial non-action that serves no purpose, which is why the game "shouldn't" make it so that you "should" not disguise.

OK fair enough, a "should" statement, so you just want this to be a thing nevertheless. That is fine, just keep in mind that there are also some of us that think the mechanic is fine the way it is

I didn't talk about intention, I talked about its purpose, which can be objectively extrapolated because it has no other purpose than the punishment it gives out for not respecting it.

I don't know really, if i had to guess i'd say it probably served an aesthetic function at first, but due to how they implemented it in the code it ended up working the way it does and since they saw the player had a way to hide the smoke at will they didn't change it any further

If I were to discuss this on the Steam forums I'd probably get crucified and banned

Fair enough.

[ghost]

I meant that basic skills are more so a skill foundation then something that contributes much to the skill ceiling. That being said, this isn't a basic skill.

It seems to me that you're implying that because it's not skill based or a skill in itself it should be removed, which i think is not justified, unless you're trying to fine-tune the game for competitive play, i guess

Yes but gamesense is a foundation, it's a very basic skill, skills that help you hit the skill ceiling are skills like excellent aim, movement etc. Gamesense is what allows you to improve upon those and slowly build up to the skill ceiling.

I don't know about basic, gamesense is a pretty deep skill, granted it's not as time consuming to aquire as DM

The very reason this project exists is because what Valve wants isn't the best for the game What Valve "wants" for the game has changed a lot through time, so i wouldn't call all of it bad.

Also i wouldn't go so far as to try to say why the project exists lol, but rather more mild, but attainable statements like the project's goals or just directly referencing what mastercoms says in the readme

Which is why referencing their wishes when talking about an idea that differs from theirs isn't really an argument.

Ultimately Valve will decide which changes to apply, so i think it's fair to consider their vision of the game and produce mainly changes that the tf2 dev team would've made themselves if they were still here and in their prime. That said, there's obviously value in new ideas and theory-crafting and it's only natural for an open-source project to spark that, and we may even have some leeway to make tiny changes to the game, so go off regardless

What I meant by "shouldn't know" is that the only reason you must know it is so that you don't die, and you die because you didn't do yourself the disservice of not pre-disguising, a trivial non-action that serves no purpose, which is why the game "shouldn't" make it so that you "should" not disguise.

OK fair enough, a "should" statement, so you just want this to be a thing nevertheless. That is fine, just keep in mind that there are also some of us that think the mechanic is fine the way it is

I didn't talk about intention, I talked about its purpose, which can be objectively extrapolated because it has no other purpose than the punishment it gives out for not respecting it.

I don't know really, if i had to guess i'd say it probably served an aesthetic function at first, but due to how they implemented it in the code it ended up working the way it does and since they saw the player had a way to hide the smoke at will they didn't change it any further

If I were to discuss this on the Steam forums I'd probably get crucified and banned

Fair enough.

I'm not implying that just because it's not skill-based it should be removed, but rather that if something has a purpose whose only purpose is to enforce itself, then if you're not going to remove it because of that problem in and of itself, your only fallback would be to say that it takes skill to do and that therefore by removing it you're removing a potential branch of skill. So if you agree that it doesn't take skill, then you'd be forced to make an argument for why self-referencing mechanics should exist, which I don't believe they should, especially if the punishment for not following them is as heavy as in this example.

Gamesense is knowing how and when you should act given that you're playing with people trying to acquire the knowledge of the same. I consider it pretty basic, something that any moderately good player must know full well.

Of course, this project is not looking to heavily change TF2, because that would never be accepted by Valve, and because it doesn't try to do that, but the reason it exists is that Valve indeed doesn't know what's best for the game, which is why they didn't fix a life-long issue that severely impacted spy (teammates being able to block melee hits), mastercoms removed that, because she knew something that Valve either didn't know or didn't try to resolve. Of course in a project that restricts itself to bug fixes and quality of life changes isn't going to contain a lot of changes that would differ greatly from Valve's broken ideas of balance and such, but it proves my point still.

Regarding this project, yes, Valve is ultimately going to decide whether it will fix the smoke thing (if it gets into Team Comtress) or not, but they haven't changed it in 13 years, I already know what their vision about it was/is (if it wasn't an oversight or they didn't try to address it), the point is to try and convince them that an idea that differs from their vision isn't really all that bad necessarily and that it would be a huge quality of life change and an extra sprinkle of balance if implemented.

I am aware that there are people who wouldn't like the mechanic to be changed, but I also believe that because so many spy mains as well as regular TF2 YouTubers, who have poured thousands of hours into the game, such as many others including me, are right on this one, not because they're spy mains and not because they're YouTubers, but because their thinking on this issue aligns with what I believe makes sense, which is why I mention that they're spy mains and YouTubers is so as to say that in this case, whereas in other's, where it is more often than not that they disagree with me, I believe they genuinely used their experience to reach a valid conclusion.

Yes, it is possible that it was an oversight, which would make it effectively a bug (effectively, not technically) because they made something they knew would be an inconvenience and kept it in order not to spend time fixing it.

[ghost]

I'm not implying that just because it's not skill-based it should be removed

Okay

But rather that if something has a purpose whose only purpose is to enforce itself, then if you're not going to remove it because of that problem in and of itself, your only fallback would be to say that it takes skill to do and that therefore by removing it you're removing a potential branch of skill. So if you agree that it doesn't take skill, then you'd be forced to make an argument for why self-referencing mechanics should exist, which I don't believe they should, especially if the punishment for not following them is as heavy as in this example.

I don't think Valve has to justify any of this to us players, such is the un-beauty of propietary software. Though if it interests you we should also note that modifying the smoke mechanic would give less screw up opportunities to aware spies and one less cue to keep an eye on for everybody else, which can be interpreted as "lowering skill requirements"

Gamesense is knowing how and when you should act given that you're playing with people trying to acquire the knowledge of the same. I consider it pretty basic, something that any moderately good player must know full well.

I guess so, but it can extend way higher than moderately good gamesense when you start communicating with your teammates, taking into account the habits of individual players, the mood of the teams and other psychological factors, to the point where i wouldn't call it basic

Of course, this project is not looking to heavily change TF2, because that would never be accepted by Valve, and because it doesn't try to do that, but the reason it exists is that Valve indeed doesn't know what's best for the game

Yeah they probably didn't plan for tf2 to live this long, which is why they don't know what to do with it

Which is why they didn't fix a life-long issue that severely impacted spy (teammates being able to block melee hits), mastercoms removed that, because she knew something that Valve either didn't know or didn't try to resolve.

Did she? I can't find the ticket

The point is to try and convince them that an idea that differs from their vision isn't really all that bad

I see. Yeah the only way i see this becoming a valid change is if a majority of the playerbase agreed on it and also Valve decided to give the playerbase a say on the topic. That is to say, if a majority forced their way onto everybody else

Yes, it is possible that it was an oversight, which would make it effectively a bug (effectively, not technically)

An effective bug?

Because they made something they knew would be an inconvenience and kept it in order not to spend time fixing it.

Who knows.

[maxwellhupig]

i'm just going to put a list of dr glitches -when you dr with particles, it shows for a bit after (both hp particles and smoke) -sometimes when trigger your dr, the sound plays (not when you decloak) -sometimes dr will show misleading domination or revenge, (i remember getting a revenge on a dr when he wasn't even dominating me, so it's a glitch) -when dr triggered, on the screen the jarate effect will go away, though you still have it. -hitsound may not play or play incorrect hitsound -spy may not play his death scream when dr is triggered -if you left click and right click at the same time, the animation plays for a bit

[ghost]

I'm not implying that just because it's not skill-based it should be removed

Okay

But rather that if something has a purpose whose only purpose is to enforce itself, then if you're not going to remove it because of that problem in and of itself, your only fallback would be to say that it takes skill to do and that therefore by removing it you're removing a potential branch of skill. So if you agree that it doesn't take skill, then you'd be forced to make an argument for why self-referencing mechanics should exist, which I don't believe they should, especially if the punishment for not following them is as heavy as in this example.

I don't think Valve has to justify any of this to us players, such is the un-beauty of propietary software. Though if it interests you we should also note that modifying the smoke mechanic would give less screw up opportunities to aware spies and one less cue to keep an eye on for everybody else, which can be interpreted as "lowering skill requirements"

Gamesense is knowing how and when you should act given that you're playing with people trying to acquire the knowledge of the same. I consider it pretty basic, something that any moderately good player must know full well.

I guess so, but it can extend way higher than moderately good gamesense when you start communicating with your teammates, taking into account the habits of individual players, the mood of the teams and other psychological factors, to the point where i wouldn't call it basic

Of course, this project is not looking to heavily change TF2, because that would never be accepted by Valve, and because it doesn't try to do that, but the reason it exists is that Valve indeed doesn't know what's best for the game

Yeah they probably didn't plan for tf2 to live this long, which is why they don't know what to do with it

Which is why they didn't fix a life-long issue that severely impacted spy (teammates being able to block melee hits), mastercoms removed that, because she knew something that Valve either didn't know or didn't try to resolve.

Did she? I can't find the ticket

The point is to try and convince them that an idea that differs from their vision isn't really all that bad

I see. Yeah the only way i see this becoming a valid change is if a majority of the playerbase agreed on it and also Valve decided to give the playerbase a say on the topic. That is to say, if a majority forced their way onto everybody else

Yes, it is possible that it was an oversight, which would make it effectively a bug (effectively, not technically)

An effective bug?

Because they made something they knew would be an inconvenience and kept it in order not to spend time fixing it.

Who knows.

Valve doesn't legally need to justify anything, nor would they need to if the game wasn't non-proprietary software, but they do need to do it if they want for anybody to like them.

Aware spies don't have many screw-up opportunities (they're limited by their knowledge and incentive to do it right) as it relates to the disguise/cloak mechanic, removing it would remove the extreme annoyance, and disbalance it creates when it does happen, yes I will rarely forget that the mechanic exists with my 1 k hours on spy and 4 k in-game, but when I do, I get mad at the game, because the mechanic serves no non-self referencing purpose. To say that a huge puff of grey smoke on you, and trailing behind you, that completely proves to you that a spy is where he is, while he's supposed to be invisible is a small cue for the enemy team is quite disingenuous, and even if it was, how is having fewer cues for tracking down somebody lowering the skill required to do so. It is precisely the opposite.

What I meant is that the advanced gamesense is what every moderate player has/needs to have. What you described is correct, but doesn't take nearly as much skill as people prescribe it to be.

I'd disagree on what the reasons for the Valve not making the right choices is, but regardless, at least we agree on this point.

"Removed teammates blocking melee attacks, as it can adversely affect hitreg in crowded situations"

Well, the most likely way this would get changed is if I manage to convince mastercoms/other members of the team that this would be of benefit to all, then they send it to the valve and they accept it, and since I believe most people that disagree with me are not that passionate about this issue (they wouldn't complain or complain much if added), (which is why they downplay it by saying it isn't a big deal), then it would just go largely unnoticed/talked about (apart from spy mains).

Something effectively being a bug would mean it has all the qualities of a bug apart from being a non-intentional error in the code, the word bug is usually used when an intended game state is not achievable, due to an unforeseen issue in the game's code, while here, they would essentially be creating a bug by them refusing to fix an unintended game state, they weren't aware of it, then they were aware of it, but it isn't something they "fixed" because they didn't feel like it. So we have the unforeseen issue part, then we have the foreseen issue part, then we have nothing from them, making it effectively a bug, but not technically.

[ghost]

Valve doesn't legally need to justify anything, nor would they need to if the game wasn't non-proprietary software

Yea

But they do need to do it if they want for anybody to like them.

Okay

To say that a huge puff of grey smoke on you, and trailing behind you, that completely proves to you that a spy is where he is, while he's supposed to be invisible is a small cue for the enemy team is quite disingenuous

Did i say it's a small cue? I feel like i just said it's a cue. I didn't mean to diminish it by saying that

And even if it was, how is having fewer cues for tracking down somebody lowering the skill required to do so. It is precisely the opposite.

I didn't say that, but anyways i feel like it's a stretch for me to say "lowering skill requirements" so i'd just say that:

• It would be one less way for a spy to expose himself
• Players wouldn't have to have a plan for (or figure out on the spot) how to react to random smoke trails ever again

What I meant is that the advanced gamesense is what every moderate player has/needs to have. What you described is correct, but doesn't take nearly as much skill as people prescribe it to be.

Okay

I'd disagree on what the reasons for the Valve not making the right choices is, but regardless, at least we agree on this point.

Okay

"Removed teammates blocking melee attacks, as it can adversely affect hitreg in crowded situations"

Thanks

Well, the most likely way this would get changed is if I manage to convince mastercoms/other members of the team that this would be of benefit to all, then they send it to the valve and they accept it, and since I believe most people that disagree with me are not that passionate about this issue (they wouldn't complain or complain much if added), (which is why they downplay it by saying it isn't a big deal), then it would just go largely unnoticed/talked about (apart from spy mains).

Yea this is your chance.

Something effectively being a bug would mean it has all the qualities of a bug apart from being a non-intentional error in the code, the word bug is usually used when an intended game state is not achievable, due to an unforeseen issue in the game's code, while here, they would essentially be creating a bug by them refusing to fix an unintended game state, they weren't aware of it, then they were aware of it, but it isn't something they "fixed" because they didn't feel like it. So we have the unforeseen issue part, then we have the foreseen issue part, then we have nothing from them, making it effectively a bug, but not technically.

Okay, it was more of a figure of speech than an actual question, but okay

[ghost]

Valve doesn't legally need to justify anything, nor would they need to if the game wasn't non-proprietary software

Yea

But they do need to do it if they want for anybody to like them.

Okay

To say that a huge puff of grey smoke on you, and trailing behind you, that completely proves to you that a spy is where he is, while he's supposed to be invisible is a small cue for the enemy team is quite disingenuous

Did i say it's a small cue? I feel like i just said it's a cue. I didn't mean to diminish it by saying that

And even if it was, how is having fewer cues for tracking down somebody lowering the skill required to do so. It is precisely the opposite.

I didn't say that, but anyways i feel like it's a stretch for me to say "lowering skill requirements" so i'd just say that:

• It would be one less way for a spy to expose himself
• Players wouldn't have to have a plan for (or figure out on the spot) how to react to random smoke trails ever again

What I meant is that the advanced gamesense is what every moderate player has/needs to have. What you described is correct, but doesn't take nearly as much skill as people prescribe it to be.

Okay

I'd disagree on what the reasons for the Valve not making the right choices is, but regardless, at least we agree on this point.

Okay

"Removed teammates blocking melee attacks, as it can adversely affect hitreg in crowded situations"

Thanks

Well, the most likely way this would get changed is if I manage to convince mastercoms/other members of the team that this would be of benefit to all, then they send it to the valve and they accept it, and since I believe most people that disagree with me are not that passionate about this issue (they wouldn't complain or complain much if added), (which is why they downplay it by saying it isn't a big deal), then it would just go largely unnoticed/talked about (apart from spy mains).

Yea this is your chance.

Something effectively being a bug would mean it has all the qualities of a bug apart from being a non-intentional error in the code, the word bug is usually used when an intended game state is not achievable, due to an unforeseen issue in the game's code, while here, they would essentially be creating a bug by them refusing to fix an unintended game state, they weren't aware of it, then they were aware of it, but it isn't something they "fixed" because they didn't feel like it. So we have the unforeseen issue part, then we have the foreseen issue part, then we have nothing from them, making it effectively a bug, but not technically.

Okay, it was more of a figure of speech than an actual question, but okay

A cue usually implies some sort of a small hint/signal instead of something as apparent as the smoke thing, but it's all good, this was just a dumb semantics disagreement.

It indeed would be 1 less way for spy to expose himself, he has plenty enough, so he's not gonna be mad :-) Killing a smoke engulfed player doesn't exactly call for advanced planning or improv skills, it's just like: player smoking, player spy, kill or leave alone spy.

Noice

[wgetJane]

is this going anywhere

[ghost]

is this going anywhere

Hopefully

[melvyn2]

holy shit 'the legality of the dead ringer's mechanics' lol. Considering the amount of discussion this has spawned, this looked like enough of a 'balance change' to be closed (CC @Yttrium-tYcLief ).

[OnajStoJesam]

That puff of smoke is either a bug, or a feature that should be treated as one. It doesn't add anything to spy's gameplay, it only serves as an annoyance. Features and mechanics allow other features and mechanics to build off them, or they balance your gameplay and punish and reward you. This bug only punishes you, it doesn't allow any other mechanic to exist, and it's so minor, that it doesn't do anything in terms of balance, and if it did, it would be bad. It doesn't add to the skill ceiling, it's not gamesense, and it's so trivial and simple that it can barely be called mechanical skill. Constantly disguising is a precaution that spy simply needs to take, and this bug simply punishes that. It's kind of like holding W when rocketjumping, it only punishes yo, and it's so trivial and simple that it can barely be called mechanical skill, except fixing this mechanic would probably mean making changes to how airstraifing works in general.

[ghost]

A cue usually implies some sort of a small hint/signal instead of something as apparent as the smoke thing, but it's all good, this was just a dumb semantics disagreement.

Okay, i'll take your word for it since i'm not a native english speaker

It indeed would be 1 less way for spy to expose himself, he has plenty enough, so he's not gonna be mad :-) Killing a smoke engulfed player doesn't exactly call for advanced planning or improv skills, it's just like: player smoking, player spy, kill or leave alone spy.

Yeah it doesn't take that, but it isn't just those two options either. When you can't kill the spy on the spot due to being too far away or not having ammo loaded your options expand a bit, namely:

• Chip-shotting the spy from afar in hopes you draw the attention of some teammates with the noise
• Exposing the spy with a flare/jarate/mad milk/sandman
• If you have spy-aware teammates, calling the spy out can be enough
• Guessing where the spy will go and meeting him there
• Taking ammo and health packs so the spy can't use them

Are some of them

[ghost]

A cue usually implies some sort of a small hint/signal instead of something as apparent as the smoke thing, but it's all good, this was just a dumb semantics disagreement.

Okay, i'll take your word for it since i'm not a native english speaker

It indeed would be 1 less way for spy to expose himself, he has plenty enough, so he's not gonna be mad :-) Killing a smoke engulfed player doesn't exactly call for advanced planning or improv skills, it's just like: player smoking, player spy, kill or leave alone spy.

Yeah it doesn't take that, but it isn't just those two options either. When you can't kill the spy on the spot due to being too far away or not having ammo loaded your options expand a bit, namely:

• Chip-shotting the spy from afar in hopes you draw the attention of some teammates with the noise
• Exposing the spy with a flare/jarate/mad milk/sandman
• If you have spy-aware teammates, calling the spy out can be enough
• Guessing where the spy will go and meeting him there
• Taking ammo and health packs so the spy can't use them

Are some of them

If you're far away from a spy then the noise of chip shotting would only be able to be heard from the teammates around you, meaning people equally as far away from him.

How does the removal of the smoke affect being able to use throwables and such?

Again, how would the removal of the smoke affect that? Also if you have spy aware teammates, you don't need to do anything to make sure they can handle spies, and besides, call outs are useless unless they're called out by someone spectating and in real time.

How does the removal of the smoke change that?

You can still steal health packs, be it accidental or on purpose, you'll just need to do it either when you see him or know he's there.

[ghost]

If you're far away from a spy then the noise of chip shotting would only be able to be heard from the teammates around you, meaning people equally as far away from him.

Those nearby teammates might be more mobile than you or be able to do any of the other options themselves. Also that's not quite right, the bullets could be seen/heard by someone who's close to the smoke, too

How does the removal of the smoke affect being able to use throwables and such?

It doesn't

Again, how would the removal of the smoke affect that?

Because these situations would never come up again, the spy would just be able to pass through

Also if you have spy aware teammates, you don't need to do anything to make sure they can handle spies

I guess i should clarify that by "spy-aware teammates" i meant players that know how to deal with spies. To these kind of players, knowing if there's a spy nearby makes a big difference and prompts a change of strategy

And besides, call outs are useless unless they're called out by someone spectating and in real time.

For real? Callouts are made in real time, but i guess it is true that in a casual match comms will fall onto deaf ears most of the time

[OnajStoJesam]

If you're far away from a spy then the noise of chip shotting would only be able to be heard from the teammates around you, meaning people equally as far away from him.

Those nearby teammates might be more mobile than you or be able to do any of the other options themselves. Also that's not quite right, the bullets could be seen/heard by someone who's close to the smoke, too

How does the removal of the smoke affect being able to use throwables and such?

It doesn't

Again, how would the removal of the smoke affect that?

Because these situations would never come up again, the spy would just be able to pass through

Also if you have spy aware teammates, you don't need to do anything to make sure they can handle spies

I guess i should clarify that by "spy-aware teammates" i meant players that know how to deal with spies. To these kind of players, knowing if there's a spy nearby makes a big difference and prompts a change of strategy

And besides, call outs are useless unless they're called out by someone spectating and in real time.

For real? Callouts are made in real time, but i guess it is true that in a casual match comms will fall onto deaf ears most of the time

You two are making this much more complicated than it is. It's an annoying bug that shouldn't be in the game. When it happens, it either does nothing, or makes it so everyone sees the spy. What happens after that is simple, whoever saw the spy, will try to chase him down, and kill him. What matters is that it's a big waste of time for the spy, and an even bigger one if he dies. Also, it's not even like this bug is some thing that is constantly providing the enemy an advantage, and the spy a disadvantage, it just randomly happens, and is no way a reliable method of checking for spies.

[ghost]

If you're far away from a spy then the noise of chip shotting would only be able to be heard from the teammates around you, meaning people equally as far away from him.

Those nearby teammates might be more mobile than you or be able to do any of the other options themselves. Also that's not quite right, the bullets could be seen/heard by someone who's close to the smoke, too

How does the removal of the smoke affect being able to use throwables and such?

It doesn't

Again, how would the removal of the smoke affect that?

Because these situations would never come up again, the spy would just be able to pass through

Also if you have spy aware teammates, you don't need to do anything to make sure they can handle spies

I guess i should clarify that by "spy-aware teammates" i meant players that know how to deal with spies. To these kind of players, knowing if there's a spy nearby makes a big difference and prompts a change of strategy

And besides, call outs are useless unless they're called out by someone spectating and in real time.

For real? Callouts are made in real time, but i guess it is true that in a casual match comms will fall onto deaf ears most of the time

As far as I'm aware bullet sounds don't travel nearly enough for those close to the spy to hear them, and let's not complicate this further, the point is that them seeing a huge puff of smoke makes it too easy to know who's a spy and they can therefore kill him, and this applies to all distances in which they can do so.

But didn't you argue something about it affecting throwables and how they're used?

The spy wouldn't be able to just pass through if he's playing against any semi-competent players, and if he isn't, the right call would certainly not be to lower the skill required to not let him pass.

That's my point, if they we're any good, you wouldn't need to tell them that a spy is around. Also no change in strategy needs to happen, the closest thing to that would be turning around more.

I meant that a call out made in "real time" can't catch up with time, if not followed by more, informed call outs. Saying spy scout around point means precisely nothing, in the next 2 seconds he could be demo and in sewers, the only way these would work is if someone kept following a spy and watching him and deciding, for some reason to tell you that instead of killing him. And yeah, casual adds another buffer for its already non existent usefulness.

[ghost]

It's an annoying bug that shouldn't be in the game.

This needs justification, i don't think it's a bug

When it happens, it either does nothing, or makes it so everyone sees the spy. What happens after that is simple, whoever saw the spy, will try to chase him down, and kill him.

A bit too simplified, but okay

What matters is that it's a big waste of time for the spy, and an even bigger one if he dies.

Okay, but this doesn't warrant a removal of the feature

Also, it's not even like this bug is some thing that is constantly providing the enemy an advantage, and the spy a disadvantage, it just randomly happens, and is no way a reliable method of checking for spies.

""""""bug"""""" Yes, it randomly happens when spies who know about it slip up, not so randomly with spies who don't know. It isn't reliable as in "it doesn't happen often", but it is reliable as in "it signals the position and direction of a spy"

[OnajStoJesam]

It's an annoying bug that shouldn't be in the game.

This needs justification, i don't think it's a bug

When it happens, it either does nothing, or makes it so everyone sees the spy. What happens after that is simple, whoever saw the spy, will try to chase him down, and kill him.

A bit too simplified, but okay

What matters is that it's a big waste of time for the spy, and an even bigger one if he dies.

Okay, but this doesn't warrant a removal of the feature

Also, it's not even like this bug is some thing that is constantly providing the enemy an advantage, and the spy a disadvantage, it just randomly happens, and is no way a reliable method of checking for spies.

""""""bug"""""" Yes, it randomly happens when spies who know about it slip up, not so randomly with spies who don't know. It isn't reliable as in "it doesn't happen often", but it is reliable as in "it signals the position and direction of a spy"

This "feature", as you like to call it, doesn't act like a mechanic or a feature; mechanics and features allow other mechanics and features to exist (0 mechanics and features are based on this puff of smoke bug), or they reward and penalize the player for using that mechanic (this bug only does the penalizing part, no mechanic in the game is made specifically so it can be avoided, but this one would have to be), and if it's just penalizing or rewarding, then we're talking about a very basic core mechanic, which that puff of smoke is obviously not.

There is no need to go in detail.

A large stone that rolled on a road should be removed, because it only creates an inconvenience. It has absolutely no other effect or purpose other than complicating driving by making drivers have to go around it. Redundant things ought to be removed.

The same argument can be used to justify certain alt-tabbing bugs; they aren't reliable as in "they don't happen often", but they're reliable as in "they make a player that carried the intel at one point highlighted through walls".

[ghost]

As far as I'm aware bullet sounds don't travel nearly enough for those close to the spy to hear them, and let's not complicate this further, the point is that them seeing a huge puff of smoke makes it too easy to know who's a spy and they can therefore kill him, and this applies to all distances in which they can do so.

Okay, what i was trying to show was that there are real game situations that would be arbitrarily removed in favour of spies if the smoke trail wasn't there

But didn't you argue something about it affecting throwables and how they're used?

I said that exposing the spy with jarate/mad milk/fire/the sandman/bleeding is an option that a player might choose if they can't kill the spy on the spot, i didn't say that throwables are affected in someway by the smoke trail mechanic, or rather i wouldn't phrase it in such a roundabout way

The spy wouldn't be able to just pass through if he's playing against any semi-competent players, and if he isn't, the right call would certainly not be to lower the skill required to not let him pass.

I'm not sure what this means

That's my point, if they we're any good, you wouldn't need to tell them that a spy is around. Also no change in strategy needs to happen, the closest thing to that would be turning around more.

"need to tell them", what for? The element of surprise is enough for a spy to get his way. An example of a change of strategy due to a spy is to stall the game for a bit to wait for the spy to make his move, since a push would give a spy the distraction he needs to make a play.

I meant that a call out made in "real time" can't catch up with time, if not followed by more, informed call outs. Saying spy scout around point means precisely nothing, in the next 2 seconds he could be demo and in sewers, the only way these would work is if someone kept following a spy and watching him and deciding, for some reason to tell you that instead of killing him. And yeah, casual adds another buffer for its already non existent usefulness.

You seem to assume that the purpose of the callout would be to know the spy's position and disguise for the sake of it, but a nearby player might just go look for him (maybe even find him and kill him), or maybe be aware that he or a teammate is the nearest target for the spy. It's valuable info nevertheless.

[ghost]

As far as I'm aware bullet sounds don't travel nearly enough for those close to the spy to hear them, and let's not complicate this further, the point is that them seeing a huge puff of smoke makes it too easy to know who's a spy and they can therefore kill him, and this applies to all distances in which they can do so.

Okay, what i was trying to show was that there are real game situations that would be arbitrarily removed in favour of spies if the smoke trail wasn't there

But didn't you argue something about it affecting throwables and how they're used?

I said that exposing the spy with jarate/mad milk/fire/the sandman/bleeding is an option that a player might choose if they can't kill the spy on the spot, i didn't say that throwables are affected in someway by the smoke trail mechanic, or rather i wouldn't phrase it in such a roundabout way

The spy wouldn't be able to just pass through if he's playing against any semi-competent players, and if he isn't, the right call would certainly not be to lower the skill required to not let him pass.

I'm not sure what this means

That's my point, if they we're any good, you wouldn't need to tell them that a spy is around. Also no change in strategy needs to happen, the closest thing to that would be turning around more.

"need to tell them", what for? The element of surprise is enough for a spy to get his way. An example of a change of strategy due to a spy is to stall the game for a bit to wait for the spy to make his move, since a push would give a spy the distraction he needs to make a play.

I meant that a call out made in "real time" can't catch up with time, if not followed by more, informed call outs. Saying spy scout around point means precisely nothing, in the next 2 seconds he could be demo and in sewers, the only way these would work is if someone kept following a spy and watching him and deciding, for some reason to tell you that instead of killing him. And yeah, casual adds another buffer for its already non existent usefulness.

You seem to assume that the purpose of the callout would be to know the spy's position and disguise for the sake of it, but a nearby player might just go look for him (maybe even find him and kill him), or maybe be aware that he or a teammate is the nearest target for the spy. It's valuable info nevertheless.

Those situations wouldn't be removed arbitrarily, they would be removed because of all of the reasons I've gone into detail explaining up until this point.

If I understood correctly, you said that if the smoke mechanic were to be removed, the usefulness of throwables would somehow diminish.

The spy wouldn't be able to just pass through if he's playing against any semi-competent players, and if he isn't, the right call would certainly not be to lower the skill required to not let him pass. - Spy wouldn't get passed the enemies any easier if they're competent in any way, and if they're not competent, they don't deserve to rely on this feature.

If your teammates are good, you don't need to tell them that a spy is around, they would have learned of that fact on their own. The element of surprise only works within a certain timeframe, a timeframe that you can reduce to effectively 0 by turning around often.

I have never, not in my 4 k hours, not in any youtube video, seen the entire server collectively decide to stop gameplay for a bit in order to lure out a spy. This simply does not happen. I thought you were maybe gonna say something about switching to pyro or changing your loadout, which would have been a way better example cause it actually happens but no. Regardless of this hiccup, you don't even need to do that, you can kill a spy in a 1v1 with pretty much any weapon in the game, so changing strategies is simply not called for, even in this hypothetical example of yours.

So callouts are not used for what they're used for, but are instead synonyms for: "go look for a spy", a task that decreases your overall effectiveness to a point where you might as well be idle.

[ghost]

This "feature", as you like to call it, doesn't act like a mechanic or a feature; mechanics and features allow other mechanics and features to exist (0 mechanics and features are based on this puff of smoke bug), or they reward and penalize the player for using that mechanic (this bug only does the penalizing part, no mechanic in the game is made specifically so it can be avoided, but this one would have to be), and if it's just penalizing or rewarding, then we're talking about a very basic core mechanic, which that puff of smoke is obviously not.

Okay, i'll call it "thing" or "smoke trail"

There is no need to go in detail.

This needs justification

A large stone that rolled on a road should be removed, because it only creates an inconvenience. It has absolutely no other effect or purpose other than complicating driving by making drivers have to go around it. Redundant things ought to be removed.

Alas, an "ought" claim about the game. Arguments towards removing the smoke trail don't go any farther than this.

The same argument can be used to justify certain alt-tabbing bugs; they aren't reliable as in "they don't happen often", but they're reliable as in "they make a player that carried the intel at one point highlighted through walls".

I wasn't making an argument by saying that, i was just pointing out two ways of interpreting the word "reliable" in that case

[ghost]

A large stone that rolled on a road should be removed, because it only creates an inconvenience. It has absolutely no other effect or purpose other than complicating driving by making drivers have to go around it. Redundant things ought to be removed.

To expand on his analogy, imagine instead of a large stone, a large one-sided mirror acting portal of the same proportions in its place:

So a large portal that acts as a one-sided mirror that slid down to a road is blocking 90% of the road, what remains is the utmost right of the right lanes, making up 10 percent of the road. (from your side perspective)

The reflective side of the mirror is facing you and the transparent side of the mirror is facing away from you.

You're in the utmost left lane.

You're in a car driving, and so is everybody else.

Naturally, your goal as well as the goal of everyone else is to get past the roadblock.

This creates an inconvenience which you care to avoid.

People lack morals. Instead, they prioritize efficiency.

You are forced to drive to the utmost right line (a long way) to avoid the roadblock. People going opposite of your direction (towards you) go straight through the portal and through you, leaving you mangled or dead as a result of a car crash, one which you couldn't have braced for.

You are then told that the reason the portal exists is so to punish you for not turning over a random stick twice.

That's what this smoke feature is.

[OnajStoJesam]

This "feature", as you like to call it, doesn't act like a mechanic or a feature; mechanics and features allow other mechanics and features to exist (0 mechanics and features are based on this puff of smoke bug), or they reward and penalize the player for using that mechanic (this bug only does the penalizing part, no mechanic in the game is made specifically so it can be avoided, but this one would have to be), and if it's just penalizing or rewarding, then we're talking about a very basic core mechanic, which that puff of smoke is obviously not.

Okay, i'll call it "thing" or "smoke trail"

There is no need to go in detail.

This needs justification

A large stone that rolled on a road should be removed, because it only creates an inconvenience. It has absolutely no other effect or purpose other than complicating driving by making drivers have to go around it. Redundant things ought to be removed.

Alas, an "ought" claim about the game. Arguments towards removing the smoke trail don't go any farther than this.

The same argument can be used to justify certain alt-tabbing bugs; they aren't reliable as in "they don't happen often", but they're reliable as in "they make a player that carried the intel at one point highlighted through walls".

I wasn't making an argument by saying that, i was just pointing out two ways of interpreting the word "reliable" in that case

The justification is contained in the two posts I've posted. The brief summary of which would be that it has no purpose to exist, and that it would have no real impact on the gameplay, other than getting rid of an annoyance for spies.

They don't need to go further, if the point has been proven, and I say it is, and as far as your post goes, I have nothing to make me doubt in that.

How nice, shall we start counting the syllables in that word too? Seriously, what was the point of you writing that?

[ghost]

Those situations wouldn't be removed arbitrarily, they would be removed because of all of the reasons I've gone into detail explaining up until this point.

Okay, yeah, i said "arbitrarily" from my point of view, where the reasons you have stated are not valid, but from your point of view they are valid, so fair enough

If I understood correctly, you said that if the smoke mechanic were to be removed, the usefulness of throwables would somehow diminish.

Okay, no, i didn't mean to say that

The spy wouldn't be able to just pass through if he's playing against any semi-competent players

This kinda depends on the map, some maps are big enough or have enough tricks/parkour in them so that you can't prevent a spy from getting through, but for smaller maps with less movement options this is true

And if he isn't, the right call would certainly not be to lower the skill required to not let him pass. - Spy wouldn't get passed the enemies any easier if they're competent in any way, and if they're not competent, they don't deserve to rely on this feature.

Got my tongue twisted in this part

If your teammates are good, you don't need to tell them that a spy is around, they would have learned of that fact on their own.

That's a straight no. If you bump a spy and don't tell anybody, no one's gonna know, even if they're "good teammates"

The element of surprise only works within a certain timeframe, a timeframe that you can reduce to effectively 0 by turning around often.

This is kinda valid because spies are not the only reason we turn around, other classes might flank too and in general it's about being aware of your surroundings, but during teamfights i disagree, teamfights are one example of a situation where a team is vulnerable to a spy play. That being said even during holds spy plays are performed, so i wonder if what you say is true.

I have never, not in my 4 k hours, not in any youtube video, seen the entire server collectively decide to stop gameplay for a bit in order to lure out a spy. This simply does not happen. I thought you were maybe gonna say something about switching to pyro or changing your loadout, which would have been a way better example cause it actually happens but no. Regardless of this hiccup, you don't even need to do that, you can kill a spy in a 1v1 with pretty much any weapon in the game, so changing strategies is simply not called for, even in this hypothetical example of yours.

Okay, i'll give you a actual, concrete example of it then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkG4G51fYVQ From 1:50 onwards they start to suspect that the enemy team might be trying to pull a spy play, then after confirming visually that there's an enemy player missing they feel free to assume there's a spy nearby, which prompts them to deal with the spy threat first (a change of strategy), you can even see the spy almost got the med pick, if it wasn't for the spy-expecting soldier (who looked around more often, spammed and looked after his teammates) and medic (who was ready for a spy callout and reacted quickly)

So callouts are not used for what they're used for, but are instead synonyms for: "go look for a spy", a task that decreases your overall effectiveness to a point where you might as well be idle.

I'm not sure what this means

[ghost]

The brief summary of which would be that it has no purpose to exist

This doesn't warrant a modification of the smoke trail

And that it would have no real impact on the gameplay, other than getting rid of an annoyance for spies.

I can't respond to this as i don't know what you would consider "real impact on the gameplay"

They don't need to go further, if the point has been proven, and I say it is, and as far as your post goes, I have nothing to make me doubt in that.

If all there is to justify the change is your vision of how you would like the game to be, then you will have to resort to a forceful majority, because we just don't share it

How nice, shall we start counting the syllables in that word too? Seriously, what was the point of you writing that?

I think i got confused, don't be rude.

[ghost]

This kinda depends on the map, some maps are big enough or have enough tricks/parkour in them so that you can't prevent a spy from getting through, but for smaller maps with less movement options this is true

It does not depend on the map, tricks and parkour are done by high-level players, and when they're done they can easily be stopped. Give me any class and any loadout, on any map and place, I guarantee you I'll be able to prevent a spy from getting past that point. That is if you either see him or are trying to prevent him.

That's a straight no. If you bump a spy and don't tell anybody, no one's gonna know, even if they're "good teammates"

Then they're by definition not good teammates.

but during teamfights i disagree, teamfights are one example of a situation where a team is vulnerable to a spy play.

Team fights are the fights in which if the players are half-decent, the chance is the least likely to happen for a spy play. This is because only one of them needs to turn around to alert others. The more of them there is, the higher the chance they'll stop a spy play by just turning around.

Okay, i'll give you a actual, concrete example then:

That was comp, comp makes up 2% of the playerbase, has half the players, a spectating class, and a coordinated team that prioritizes neutralizing spy if he's closeby, and in all this, the scenario you mentioned still didn't happen, they didn't slow the game down, they simply expected a spy so they turned around more often, which is not exclusive to comp and is a normal response and part of regular gameplay, and as we know regular gameplay can't be slower than itself.

I'm not sure what this means

You're claiming that callouts are used for something that they aren't used for, and they aren't being used for that because performing the task of finding a spy would make you effectively idle in terms of performance and saying that there is a spy in the server is tantamount to saying nothing, which is why callouts include trajectory and disguise.

[OnajStoJesam]

The brief summary of which would be that it has no purpose to exist

This doesn't warrant a modification of the smoke trail

And that it would have no real impact on the gameplay, other than getting rid of an annoyance for spies.

I can't respond to this as i don't know what you would consider "real impact on the gameplay"

They don't need to go further, if the point has been proven, and I say it is, and as far as your post goes, I have nothing to make me doubt in that.

If all there is to justify the change is your vision of how you would like the game to be, then you will have to resort to a forceful majority, because we just don't share it

How nice, shall we start counting the syllables in that word too? Seriously, what was the point of you writing that?

I think i got confused, don't be rude.

Instead of coming to incorrect conclusions, I'd like to hear you explain your thought process, so I know what exactly went wrong. There are 0 downsides to removing that bug, there are only upsides, those upsides being getting rid of an annoying and redundant bug. If an action warrants an outcome like that, it's worth taking.

It's not exactly an uncommon way of saying it, but fine, it means that the effects would be next to none, very small and unnoticeable.

Or you can avoid writing a sentence without saying anything, and simply say what's the issue. You haven't said anything in a while now, you're only asking me to repeat the same two points over and over again.

I don't see why you would, instead of making an argument, tell me the two different uses of the same word in one of my points. It's much more reasonable to assume that there was an attempt to make an argument, than there was to do something as random as that.

Because it's clear you don't know how to continue this conversation, I'll give you a hand. I want this bug removed, the two arguments I am using, and which I have elaborated on, are as follows; this bug is annoying, this bug serves no purpose other than being annoying. Now you're supposed to give me an argument to why this bug should stay, or you should provide counterarguments to the two aforementioned arguments. "X is incorrect" is not an argument, "X is incorrect because of Y" is.

[ghost]

It does not depend on the map

Yes, some maps are bigger and have more resources to slip through as a spy

Tricks and parkour are done by high-level players, and when they're done they can easily be stopped.

Stopped, after they're done? So they would have gotten through?

Give me any class and any loadout, on any map and place, I guarantee you I'll be able to prevent a spy from getting past that point. That is if you either see him or are trying to prevent him.

Well if you know where a spy will go surely it can be done, but on a real match you don't have that luxury

Then they're by definition not good teammates.

They might be, but you seem to have missed what i was saying

Team fights are the fights in which if the players are half-decent, the chance is the least likely to happen for a spy play. This is because only one of them needs to turn around to alert others. The more of them there is, the higher the chance they'll stop a spy play by just turning around.

Emphasis on "chance", as even turning around doesn't stop spy plays from happening in a fight

That was comp, comp makes up 2% of the playerbase, has half the players, a spectating class, and a coordinated team that prioritizes neutralizing spy if he's closeby, and in all this, the scenario you mentioned still didn't happen, they didn't slow the game down, they simply expected a spy so they turned around more often

So you admit that a change in strategy happened because they learned there was a spy nearby. Also "they turned around more often" is not all that happened

Which is not exclusive to comp and is a normal response and part of regular gameplay

That's right, correct play is not exclusive to comp

And as we know regular gameplay can't be slower than itself.

What do you mean by this?

You're claiming that callouts are used for something that they aren't used for

What do you think they're used for? What do you think i'm claiming?

Saying spy scout around point means precisely nothing

It does if you're "around point" and see a scout, but even if you didn't see one it would still do.

And they aren't being used for that because performing the task of finding a spy would make you effectively idle in terms of performance and saying that there is a spy in the server is tantamount to saying nothing, which is why callouts include trajectory and disguise.

What about a dead spy after a long way trying to sneak through enemy lines? Is he not effectively idle? I wouldn't encourage a player to go spy-hunting, but rather to spy-check and be more paranoid if he's in the area of the callout.

[Yttrium-tYcLief]

This discussion is getting a little heated, and issues are not the place for discussions like this. I'm going to lock the discussion for now, but not close the issue, as it still needs to be addressed.

Feel free to continue the discussion in our Discord server, but regardless of whether or not you continue it, please review our code of conduct.

[ghost]

Yes, some maps are bigger and have more resources to slip through as a spy

We're not assuming that spy is going to die before he reaches a point that he must pass through. When he's at that point, if the enemy team is at least ok, they won't let him pass, regardless of the resources. Now how does this relate to the smoke thing? Well, one way is that if this gets removed, everything stays the same except now they can't stop you from passing if they weren't looking for you, since you won't be acknowledged by the whole server as a fuming car engine.

Stopped, after they're done? So they would have gotten through?

Before or while they're being done. I still fail to see why you brought this up though since it hardly relates to the smoke thing.

Well if you know where a spy will go surely it can be done, but on a real match you don't have that luxury

And the smoke makes that untrue. And yes, it is very often that you can know where a spy is, that is without the smoke, which is why removing the smoke wouldn't be creating any downsides.

They might be, but you seem to have missed what i was saying

Didn't mean to, can you elaborate on what you meant=

Emphasis on "chance", as even turning around doesn't stop spy plays from happening in a fight

Exactly, emphasis on chance, which is for the spy to make a play on a half-decent team that at that moment turns around the same as winning the lottery. If it's not, then the team is not good.

I do not admit a change in strategy has happened, the game looked like how it always looks in regular gameplay, which is why I said that regular gameplay can't be slower than itself. Spycheking is a normal part of the match and can't be said to slow the game down if the game normally has it as an element.

What do you think they're used for? What do you think i'm claiming?

They're used for telling someone's which trajectory the spy has under which disguise.

You say they're used for letting someone know that there's a spy somewhere but not somewhere specific.

It does if you're "around point" and see a scout, but even if you didn't see one it would still do.

Yes, that is true, my whole point with that was to say that if not up-to-date and followed up on, they mean nothing, in this case, they were up-to-date to a point in time where it was needed, which is mostly not the case and just causes your teammates to waste their focus on something else, looking for a spy that is no longer there. Now once again, how does this relate to the smoke thing?

What about a dead spy after a long way trying to sneak through enemy lines? Is he not effectively idle? I wouldn't encourage a player to go spy-hunting, but rather to spy-check and be more paranoid if he's in the area of the callout.

Yes, a dead spy that died during something effectively idle-like is idle. He can already manage that if he's good enough. And such a statement is too general, causing him to look for a spy instead of during a normal call out, where he would have been let known instantly, and not wasted time in trying to find him.

Sidenote - Can we scale this down a bit? Let's stick to the fundamental issues this smoke creates because while yes, smoke does affect these as well, this is just a way more complex way of following our separate logics. An example of that would be my mirror portal analogy. So yeah, let's just stick to the basics and drop all these specifics, agree?

[ghost]

Are we supposed to stop? Or..?

[ghost]

Are we supposed to stop? Or..?

Honestly, IDK, I don't think conversations with the collaborators were limited, in fact, I've responded to all of them. Guess we just agree to disagree and then if somebody else comes along we may respond to them?