1. Sounds reasonable, flashsights could easily be exploited.
2. Hmm. I guess I'll add radio-ing to the list of actions that briefly make you easily uncoverable. I thought it already was, but apparently not.
3. That seems to situational. While I get your intention (it is a good idea), one could kill an enemy, then move to another part of the map and stay there for x minutes without doing anything. There would be no reason to uncover the spy then. I'm not sure how the situation you describe can easily be 'caught' without causing false positives.
4. I know the boolean state is restricting, but a counter won't work. Or better said, it will work, but will render the feature unpredictable and frustrating.
The reason is that the 'covert check' is run in many different locations, at different times during the code. Updating the check only at fixed times would render a loophole. In order not to allow the player to exploit 'check-free times', we pretty mucht try to check every time we reevaluate whether someone might be an enemy.
A downside of this is that these checks are then called by numerous occasions. For example, if a merc exits a vehicle, every person in the sector reevaluates their sight of everybody else (which is reasonable - we have to make sure everybody who can sees the merc instantly). As a result, if a covert merc is seen by an enemy, the check will run again. So if we have a 'suspicion level', it will now rise - just because someone else on the other end of the map did sth unrelated to our spy or the enemies nearby.
I hope it's somewhat clear what I mean.
Come to think about it - I guess your idea might be possible if we create an array of 'suspicion level' for each soldier regarding every other soldier. Each turn (or fixed time period) this gets nulled (or lowered by a defined amount) again. Each check would have to return a suspicion level, and for each soldier the results are stored in that array. Subsequent checks ar written in there (possible using a max(...) calculation with the previous value). At the end of each check, create the 'suspicion level sum' for the covert person in question regarding all enemies. If the sum or max or whatever of the levels is high enough, uncover the spy.
Hmm. Have to thnk about this (you do that too, in case I missed something ).
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
I understand that it's a lot of code work, so it's not a request but maybe some ideas of how this could be improved in the future.
I was thinking about changing the suspicious level every time when the APs are spent (and maybe also when soldier counters are updated in case we just stand still in realtime in enemy's sight), and uncover spy only if new suspicious level is higher than max possible.
Since AI's are communicating with their friends, we can have a suspicious counter for each covert soldier, and every time he makes some bad actions (spends APs), we change his counter, if he stays somewhere in cover and noone sees him, his counter is lowered, so it's something similar to IIS system where we know the "interrupt type" when we deduct APs and this may trigger interrupt, and I think APs are spent in realtime also.
So if we show this counter as for example a color of soldier's name (similar to sight cover now) or a bar above the soldier, this will make a feature more visually user-friendly - if the bar becomes orange/red - move out of here quickly, if it's green and not increasing - we can stay here and do what we were doing.
EDIT: about 2 - using covert spies in the battle means you don't need scouts anymore - no crawling in the shadows in full camo or spotting with binocs, just walk here and there and spot enemy. This is both unbalancing and unrealistic.
So for balance reasons I think any spies should be restricted to appear in enemy sight as soon as the battle starts, maybe this could be better implemented with discussed suspicious counters than current binary logic.
sevenfm made a very good code addition to this trait, which is now a new option:
As of r8210 & GameDir r2318, if the new skill setting COVERT_STRIPIFUNCOVERED is FALSE (which is now the default setting),
- we can only disguise successfully if we haven't been seen recently (last 3 turns)
- disabled automatic clothes stripping when uncovered
- redisguise automatically if spy haven't been seen by enemy recently and wears correct clothes
As a result, you no longer have to worry about stripped uniforms fitting in your inventory, and will be automatically be re-disguised after 3 turns out of the enemies sight. But until that point in time, you cannot regain the covert property, even if you manually apply another uniform. This seems a bit more realistic than the current system. The redisguise check is performed at the start of every turn.
Juicily enough, the check on whether any enemy has seen you in the last 3 turns only refers to alive enemies at that time. So if you are uncovered, you can drastically lower the time until automatic redisguise by quickly murdering any witnesses (technically, collapsing or coma-ing them suffices).
Set COVERT_STRIPIFUNCOVERED to TRUE and the old method, without any redisguising, will be used.
For more info on this change (and quiet a few other juicy bits, including for this very trait), check this out.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
I found that with automatic disguise enabled, it's not easy to take off clothes, because you have to quickly select "loose disguise/strip" option in messagebox twice or it will turn disguse on again, so it should probably call pSoldier->Strip() twice in Handle Items.cpp/TacticalFunctionSelectionMessageBoxCallBack if the option is turned on so it will loose disguise and then strip immediately.
Yeah, but then one loses the ability to have a person wear new clothes but not have the disguise property. While merely visual, I found that useful. In my 64 mercs game I started dressing mercs according to squad and their role (pants indicate squad, vest indicates role, so for example, if Scope wears a red vest with black pants, this indicates that she's a sniper in Black squad). I'd rather keep that (without everybody always having the disguised symbol and (un-)disguising all the time. I think this might be solvable with an extra flag and perhaps a new button on the menu.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
As of r8211, if a merc intentionally removes the diguise property via the [Ctrl] + [.] menu, the disguise property will not be reapplied until new clothes are applied, even if COVERT_STRIPIFUNCOVERED is set to FALSE in Skills_Settings.ini. This allows dressing up mercs in other colours without them being subject to covert mechanics.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
As of r8215, if we disguise someone (by telling them to put on clothes), we immediately test their disguise (any reasonable player using spies would do this afterwards anyway, so this simply saves time).
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
What if spy has damaged vest but did not lose his disguise? (maybe he was hit by unaimed shot or he shot himself).
It seems that SeemsLegit doesn't check for that. Maybe add something like this to SeemsLegit:
If i understand it right if my civilian spy(or 1 point covert op) is 5 tiles from fresh corpse and seen by enemy then he looses disquise.
Does one enemy needs to see both the corpse and spy or corpse can be behind corner and loose_disquise is triggered?
If both corpse and spy needs to be seen, does it need to be seen by same enemy or one can see only corpse and other can see spy and loose_disquise is triggered?
Also I would like to know is there option where I can change/adjust distance (if possible 500 tiles just in case if bigger maps than bigmaps come out)? Because right now I can kill someone silently, move few tiles away and (if not spotted) leave the trail of corpses behind me without enemy caring much about it.
With increased (adjustable) distance I think it would be more realistic like, if I want to silently kill someone I would either have to plan ahead on how to hide corpse, kill in some hidden area where no one goes, move far far away from corpse/s (if I don't hide them).. or not just stand next to enemy group as spotter and people just falling dead around me with no eyebrows rised wtf this civilian is just calmly stands while bullets are whizing around our heads.
As far as i know, enemies need to see the spy and the corpse at the same time, so for example, if you hide a corpse in a very near room you should be safe, i'm not 100% positive about this though.
You can change the distance enemies can disguise you in Skills_Settings.ini
Something is not right in latest SCI version (8468 on GameDir_2385). First click on Take Off Cloth removes disguise but second click doesn't create a usable cloth, neither in merc inventory or sector. Basically you lose it as disguise is not re-activated anymore, unless you get a new set I suppose.
Later I've got some military uniform from bodies and by drag and dropping it on character it creates civilian uniform. So I guess Take Off Cloth is only for removing covert status?
When a disguise is worn, the command is 'Lose disguise'. One loses the covert status, but still wears the clothes. This is essentially so that people have an easy way to change the colours of mercs without loosing that every time the enemy spots them.
If a merc is not disguised, the command is 'Take off clothes'. This removes the clothes.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
When a disguise is worn, the command is 'Lose disguise'. One loses the covert status, but still wears the clothes. This is essentially so that people have an easy way to change the colours of mercs without loosing that every time the enemy spots them.
If a merc is not disguised, the command is 'Take off clothes'. This removes the clothes.
If during the boxing fights your boxer is covert, the fight will immediately end, as the other boxer can't find a hostile boxer. This has been fixed in r8481.
Though honestly, if you want to particiapate in a boxing fight, your could just loose the disguise for the duration of the fight...
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
As of r8528, we have another thing to do as a spy:
As seen in the video, a spy can talk to a non-alerted enemy and pull them into a conversation. The 'spoken' parts are just more or less gibberish - what the hell are they talking about? The important part is that the enemy won't move or look around, making it easy to slip by with another merc. That state lasts until alert is raised or the spy moves. This is obviously useless just with a spy, but can be very useful if you infiltrate with several mercs. Like when, say, trying to get inside a prison with a team not purely made out of spies, and without as little bloodshed as possible.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
big "thumbs up" from another veteran - i just recently noticed with delight, that i could still install from my 1997 original CD under Win7, on the engine, which i actually use. I had played some versions of the 1.13 and i must say, you really make the game, what it should have been like from the very begining
some questions:
1. about the initial "Meanwhile....", when the queen is informed for the first time, i noticed, that it always happens after my PCs have entered and left an enemy hold sector, but not in the city sector in omerta, when getting the letter lady, whose name i have forgotten, over to A10, whereto i also have changed the entry sector.
I havent tried with a spy, yet....., would it be possible to stay completely undetected for longer, when being undercover?
2. in your introduction, you suggest to sabotage the SAM-battery...., i just cleared the sector yesterday and thought of just blowing up the command desk there, instead of holding the sector under exorbitant losses....., i ran a try, blew the desk and half the building with an LAW and left again. Right after, the reds took it back and were also back in air control....., is such a play possible somehow?
3. i remember, that i once tried to get dynamo out of the prison, without taking over the whole sector, but only the guards in the part of the building, but he wouldn't follow, until the sector was cleared completely...., is there a trick, or can it be changed?
Glad you like it ;) I am somewhat doubtful you have a CD from 1997 with the game on it though
1. The Meanwhiles are somewhat tricky. While it is possible to avoid them (I think for the 1st one the 'trick' is to immediately leave so combat does not even start, as any loss/win will trigger it), there is really no point in that - the enemy is still going to resist and send out patrols anyway.
2. There is old AI code repairs the SAM immediately if the group taking it has elites in it or sth. similar. I've added a bit about them rpairing it over time, but currently both are active. If you want to blow it up, I suggest leaving enemies around so that the AI doesn't try to retake it in the first place.
Of course, if you then take it over later, you will need to repair it (can nowadays done as an assignment). You can also hack it and lower its range that way, and later unhack it when you posess it.
3. There is probably some piece of code that forbids him from joining you once any combat has been initiated, which would that you'd have to be extremely stealthy. I'll probably revisit the prisoner taking/releasing part at some point and make it easier, but have no concrete plans to do so at the moment.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
thanx for the quick reply, i appreciate that. Your doubtfullness was reasonable, i checked and the CD was published in 1999, it is the one which already had the first 2 patches on it. But still, amazing, that it can still be installed on much newer OS versions, and a sign for good work done by the old sirtech team.
Are these people aware of your work here? I guess they could answer many questions about the AI, where here it is only possible to guess. And maybe they could make contact with the old speakers, so that they could volunteer to deliver some more original sound files for some new game situations
I had posted originally in this thread, because i was hoping, that the Spy skill would allow to avoid the initial "Meanwhile", when entering in an occupied sector....., but it does not, as i have found out meanwhile. - i also found, that it is always triggered, when a battle occured from moving on the map, but may not be triggered, when changing from an open city sector to an occupied one (in Omerta and in San Mona). The initial "meanwhile" was even triggered, when one of my IMP and Maddog managed to run away and to escape some bloodcats in the norther terretories.
As a play around, and as a general idea....., i found, that the game only is fun at a later stage, when playing the insane modus, but in the beginning it is much harder. Which has let me to the strategy, to avoid confrontation in the beginning and first to start making some money by extreme fighting and gathering some information and team members. I like to have the settings as close to reality, but i do not use the food supply, as for my taste, that goes the little way too deep to still be fun.
This strategy can work well, when also city sectors are not permanently occupied and the awareness level is relatively low in the beginning. I found the settings for this in the INI editor. And logically i think, that the game, also with a higher difficulty level, should always start with the same basic settings, to allow all strategies to work on all difficulty levels. Only for example, that on insane modus, those additional sectors can be taken and held permanently by the queen much faster than in the easier levels. For example, after the initial "Meanwhile", in the easiest level, those sectors are still let open, on the 2nd level, the troops will walk there and occupy some sectors permanently, in the 3rd hardest, the troops are driving there and will occupy some more sectors and on insane they could use helicopetrs and will try to occupy the most sectors and remain there permanently.
Where can i modify the map sectors, which are held permanetly by the queens troops from the beginning on?
Finally another very general question. Do the revised versions, which you release here permanently, always have all other improvements made earlier included, or is it always the last stabile versione with only the announced new functionality, for testing reasons?
Again, compliments for the great work, just have read the new intel thing, which seems to go a bit the same direction as my remarks above.
p.s.: i think it was already set in the original game, that the number of mercs dropped initially, and thereby the duration of time the helicopter remains in the air over the town, has an impact on the alert level. I remember a game i played once, where i only dropped one merc in the beginning and started to explore the country. At one point, when i ran into the first troops and i pushed "retreat", the battle was finished, but i stayed in the same sector as them and could just stay, or give orders to my guy on the map screen. It was like this during all the game, i played an assasination scenario and when i entered into the queens bedroom at night, her comment was more or less: "who the f*** are you?"
At some point, one of sevenfm's code additions was added: If a merc was uncovered but still wore his diguise (so if COVERT_STRIPIFUNCOVERED was FALSE [which is the default value]), they were supposed to re-disguise after 3 turns. Except that that 3-turn timer isn't implemented ins tock, so the merc re-disguises asap.
As that seems rather silly (and messes with a core mechanic of the new intel-gathering assignment), COVERT_STRIPIFUNCOVERED is now always TRUE (and can no longer be changed in the ini) as of r8573.
[Updated on: Thu, 14 June 2018 21:21]
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
Hello!
Is it possible for a player to fine-tune the following things (with help of special text files editing):
1 - remove - camo forbids civ-disguise
2 - remove - disappearing by damage clothes / make clothes much more damage-resistant / make clothes ignore any damage
3 - adjust levels - how enemy gets suspicious about just gazing at spies / remove - enemy gets suspicious by just gazing
4 - remove - lose disguise when seen near fresh fallen
Did you ever think about extending CovertOps tag onto MOLLE pouches?
That means e.g. we have 2 knife MOLLE pouches. One of common design, another of CovertOps design. If we attach the second variant it will make your knife hidden in spite of the MOLLE harness doesn't have CovertOps tag.
I also think about improved pocket system:
Idea is to make any pocket to be able to hold items with different IDs simultaneously!
-you take an item in inventory
-if a pocket can take this item, but has an item with another ID, it changes view to empty - but shows quantity of free spaces taking into account busy space from the mentioned above item.
-after you lay the item into this pocket it becomes hidden. But the fact the pocket has it still is displayed with "*"(similar to green one of LBEs which have something inside). May be of any color not used yet.
Right-Clicking shows every item which now can be of different IDs unlike earlier!
This way we could have 3 clips of 3 "colors" in one 3x(AR)mag pocket! And even totally different items in one pocket!
Could you estimate how hard would it be to implement (if possible) these two features?
1. Nope.
2. Nope.
3. Nope.
4. Yes, set COVERT_CLOSE_DETECTION_RANGE_SOLDIER_CORPSE in Skills_Settings.ini to 0.
Note that sevenfm has done quite extensive changes to the covert mechanics in his exes, 1.-3. might be possible there.
As to the MOLLE pouches... I don't see the need. I mean, just add the covert tag to the carrier and be done with it.
As to your pocket system idea... first of all, if the slot no longer shows what is inside and one has to right-click on everything, that sounds like a tedious nightmare to use.
In any case, the code changes required are absolutely hideous, as it effectively requires recoding huge parts of inventory code. Nope nope nope.
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
Thank you for answers!
Flugente wrote on Wed, 23 January 2019 21:34
4. Yes, set COVERT_CLOSE_DETECTION_RANGE_SOLDIER_CORPSE in Skills_Settings.ini to 0.
Negative! I already have tried it. It doesn't help. It reduces distance to minimum but does not remove it completely. If you step by "over a corpse" your cover got blown!
Flugente wrote on Wed, 23 January 2019 21:34
Note that sevenfm has done quite extensive changes to the covert mechanics in his exes, 1.-3. might be possible there.
@ sevenfm please comment this if you see? It is important & presently topical for me!
Flugente wrote on Wed, 23 January 2019 21:34
As to the MOLLE pouches... I don't see the need. I mean, just add the covert tag to the carrier and be done with it.
I did not go into the nitty-gritty and you might not apprehend the heart of the matter. Imagine a modder don't dig himself under millions of items. Vice-versa he seeks to have limited stock of items. And want'em set up perfectly. He doesn't believe most LBEs designed for CovertOps can have ALL pockets CovertOps. Moreover why must be special LBEs for CovertOps. Why not to use common LBEs which have a pair of those needed pockets. So the modder has to do most LBEs MOLLE and needs the feature I asked about.
silversurfer wrote on Wed, 23 January 2019 22:44
1. Why not just remove the camo if you want to be covert? A camouflaged civilian doesn't make sense and has to raise suspicion.
Problem is camo you apply on body (camokits) are ignored by disguise check and camo on clothes (feel the difference against camouniform!?) are fanatically pinpointed! While should be all the other way round.
But ideally camo (all-together camo) should go as one suspicion raise factor for civs, not as instant disguise crack open reason! And it should start to affect not at 1% camo!!! (~20-30%). And increase sync with camo increase.
Messages:69
Registered:June 2007 Location: Land of New Rising Sun
edit-
Did not realize just standing in stealth mode would blow your cover, even disguised as soldier. No sneaking (stealth mode) for disguised civilians or soldiers !
Messages:214
Registered:February 2005 Location: USA
Flugente wrote on Sat, 12 January 2013 21:28
On Expert level, you can move next to them, and they won't recognize you. Kinda the point of choosing expert. On level 1 of the trait they will always recognize you if you are too close and disguised as a soldier.
The elite soldiers always see through Elroy's soldier disguise when they're within roughly 10 squares. Even the red shirts frequently see through his soldier disguise. Is that by design? Is my disguise bad?
In 1.13.8675, there's no way I can play Elroy like the character in the YouTube video, let alone play Mouse that way. Please don't get me wrong. I really like the feature, but I'm still trying to figure out how to make it viable on Expert difficulty.
Messages:214
Registered:February 2005 Location: USA
Thanks, and thanks for all the great vids Sevenfm!
In the current build, 8675, is it normal for the red shirts and elites to see through Elroy's soldier disguise? Is there any way to make Elroy's soldier disguise less transparent? (I have already tested the disguise and the game says it looks ok.)
Messages:384
Registered:December 2017 Location: here
fightcancer wrote on Thu, 06 June 2019 19:38
...
In the current build, 8675, is it normal for the red shirts and elites to see through Elroy's soldier disguise? Is there any way to make Elroy's soldier disguise less transparent? (I have already tested the disguise and the game says it looks ok.)
Reason for blown up disguise should be visible in ingame messages,
in case they scrolled away/faded out too fast go to strategic map where you can scroll the messages up&down.
Other common resaons for blown up disguise are e.g. too close to corpse or a merc (dont know if militia also triggers it but would guess it does),
weapon pointed at any member of faction, even if target is 144 tiles away
(therefore never raise a spies weapon if you are not really forced to do, and lower it instantly / put back in covert container),
allegedly "suspicious" actions like picking up an item, even if of non military nature
(i.e. dont take the canteen, it will kill you;).
Last not least, for some inexplicable reason the game considers a town sector under attack
as not valid to contribute to defenders progress calculation,
and if that drops the threshold for the spies equipments max coolness,
the disguise that was ok according to "check disguise" option may not be ok anymore.
(in latter case a "check disguise" during battle should provide correct feedback)
I'm not entirely sure why I made backpacks on civilians automatically suspicious, but I did. But now I have an idea, so I'm altering the deal (in r8707 &GameDir r2492).
Since the vanillla gold clubs were useless, I'm finally giving them a use as a heavy backpack with limited capacity... but the thing is unique in that it has the covert property, so spies disguised as civilians can smuggle guns in there. Then in combat they can use the zipper to access the gun.
Don't mind me sir, I'm just a gal on a golf tour. What? You say this isn't a gold course, but a war zone? Mon dieu! Not to worry, I'm off to that convenient roof overlooking your positions.
[Updated on: Wed, 27 November 2019 23:35]
I know now that it could never work between us, as much as we wanted to, it could never be! Not because you're a rabbit, but because you're black.
If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.
I have some suggestions about the "Covert" (ItemFlag 16384) flag:
In the "small, easily concealed weapons family" I would add the P239 SAS pistol (#1064), if only because its description says so... There are others, but since its description suggest to the player this is a concealable weapon, IMHO it needs to have that tag.
Some other items definitely need to have the "Covert" tag: Crowbar (#64), Exacto Knife (#301), Steak Knife (#598), Wrench (#1202). Those are all civilian tools and should never be suspicious if carried in a backpack.
The MERC umbrella is the perfect covert 007 spy gadget. I used the icon to make me a "sword cane umbrella" for a spy to use. Needs the "Covert" tag too. (Funnily enough, that was enough to allow me to openly carry it, despite it being categorized as a knife, but it's okay since that's exactly how it should be.)
Unlike wrenches and Exacto knives, the ballistic shieldsshould be military material and highly suspicious. Right now you can carry them around with nobody noticing.
On a related topic, we need some civilian, not suspicious LBE for the spy to use, giving him more space for non-weapon stuff than the golf bag. Your spy does need some carrying capacity, especially if he has to eat and drink. Since not only the army uses backpacks, I created me a small leisure backpack using the USMC Backpack (#1705) icon (2/220). Now ideally we should be able to carry both the civilian backpack and the golf bag at the same time, like the TIMS ensemble. Note I didn't yet try to find out how comes you can wear both the TIMS backpack and the TIMS combat pack at the same time yet, but that would be the perfect thing for that "infiltrated spy taking on Deidranna all on his/herself" game... Given you wouldn't send 32 spies out, the 1-2 agents would need to carry everything themselves, weapons, ammunition, life support (meds/food), quest items, etc.
Last, I see why this is, but it's still annoying you need 2 steps to stop being in "covert" status and be ready again to go into disguise (End disguise, then remove clothes). Since there is still place in that menu panel, would it be possible to add a combined "End disguise and strip" command?
Hi guys, I have a problem with covert operations, maybe you can help me out there.
I have a merc with second level spying trait and I am trying to infiltrate Alma base (H13).
I am disguised as elite soldier (wearing both black pants and shirt), testing my disguise says it seems okay.
However, upon entering the sector, game automatically "switches" to turn mode after a while (this happens somewhere between several seconds to minute).
When I press end turn, game continues in real-time mode like nothing happened, but then in a few seconds alarm is obviously turned on, because there's an explosion and the rocket rifle gets blown up.
All this happens without any enemy seeing me (tested it by cheating: enemies are far far away). I can literally just keep standing at the spot where I arrived to the sector, and after a while the game switches to turn mode and then enemy blows the thing.
I tested it with another sector (going down to Alma Prison I13), and the same happens (only this time I can see gas released on roofs).
Can anybody tell me what's going on here?
I tried looking through the game code, but couldn't find anything helpful. Is there a way to display enemy "alert level" somehow, so I can check and at least be sure about it? There was a config that allowed it a long time ago, but I cannot find the source now and I am sure it was already removed from game, so that wouldn't probably help either way. Also, I double-checked my vest and pants, they are not "damaged" or from blood. Just in case I used cheats, moved both items one item forward and backward, so I should have 100% new, unspoiled elite soldier clothes. Testing the disguise says it seems okay why only "seems"? Are there any hidden conditions, and if so, what are those (and where in game code)?
The main places to check would be SeemsLegit() and RecognizeAsCombatant() in Soldier Control.cpp
Also the game may raise alert for other reason, not because of spy actions, check DecideAction.cpp and other AI/NPC code.
The main places to check would be SeemsLegit() and RecognizeAsCombatant() in Soldier Control.cpp
Also the game may raise alert for other reason, not because of spy actions, check DecideAction.cpp and other AI/NPC code.
Thank you! The code is extremely long, though. Is there any way to display the alert level in-game?
Is there any "informed guess" you could give me, as to what might be the problem?
From top of your head, what are the reasons that could cause the alert to be raised, if I am alone in the sector, just with my spy merc?
Thank you! The code is extremely long, though. Is there any way to display the alert level in-game?
Apart from using debug mode, you can try to enable tooltips.
Maybe SOLDIER_TOOLTIP_DEBUG_AI will show alert level, I don't know.
Quote:
Is there any "informed guess" you could give me, as to what might be the problem?
From top of your head, what are the reasons that could cause the alert to be raised, if I am alone in the sector, just with my spy merc?
I have no idea, sorry. As you said, the code is extremely long and complex.
*Copypasting from Discord; No harm or disrespect intended*
Can someone give me an explanation of how covert vehicles work? I am playing 1.13 WF 6.07 and upon hiring Hamous I managed to get his truck past several roadblocks w/o any problems. But now, I'm trying to do the same with a Jeep I've found on a very first day at Omerta A10 and it just doesn't work. My guy dressed as a civ trying to get past another roadblock gets ambushed and discovered everytime.
And what about covert gear? What about camera/hunter vest/waterflask/food? They do not have covert tag, yet I'm wondering why's that? Is it intentional gameplay-wise, or just an oversight/lack of time to fiddle with all those tags? Same goes for other junk.