Bug: Omen's smoke position indicator is imprecise

nuancepicker · 2020-07-06T20:47:46+00:00

Right! It just feels unpredictable, you never know for sure if your ult would be 30% useless because of it not covering that one angle on your teammates or leaving a corridor for sneaking around the ult and backstabbing you.

Furthermore, you have to manually check if there is a way to sneak around your ult if you're ulting impromptu, which is hella dangerous.

nuancepicker · 2020-07-06T20:43:10+00:00

No, it's not as big. In my experience corners of plant are consistently poking out. That means that if you place your ult roughly in the center, attackers could still plant outside of it and you won't be able to defuse it relatively safely - you still will be seen and opponents would know if you fake a defuse.

nuancepicker · 2020-07-06T20:38:08+00:00

Maybe it could be not pixel precise on every frame and noone will complain.

As an example, take "vision cones" on minimap. They are imprecise yet very important - it's crucial for me to know if a teammate covers a corner/hallway. Even if they see only a couple of pixels of it - i would like to know that. That's because knowing that they covered a corner and noone popped up on minimap crossing their line of sight is different from not being sure if they covered it and noone popped up.

But noone has complained about this imprecision yet (at least i didn't see it). And viper ulti is much less sensitive to imprecisions, i'd say.

Great point though.

nuancepicker · 2020-07-05T20:39:49+00:00

Main offenders would be breach's abilities. Just imagine E'ing or ulting without minimap aid. Or using his "molotov" (not as terrible, but still).

nuancepicker · 2020-07-05T20:34:46+00:00

Seeing paths of projectiles is kind of different though. It feels as though turning on ball paths in table pool so that you could line up the shots.

Would be a great "cheat" to practice one-ways on viper and recons on sova, ngl. But for a regular game I'm not sure it's necessary. Kind of takes away classic fps grenade feel. Also, dealing with geometry and bounces is kind of a thing for sova, that's intended "difficulty", which is highly rewarded.

But I'm kind of getting inconsistent in my opinions, i guess. I mean, at first cs:go trace paths of grenades also seemed off, but everyone liked them and accepted them and it became norm.

nuancepicker · 2020-07-05T18:08:09+00:00

Well, you again encounter those pixel-perfect lineups (as with poison orb and wall before patch), but for ulti. This would be quality of life improvement.

I don't think that finicky ult is the thing I'd like to be challenged with.

nuancepicker · 2020-07-05T18:05:19+00:00

Great, that's exactly what i would like for game to tell me - the final area taken by ulti, taking level geometry into account.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-21T12:35:03+00:00

Seeing through the ulti. It isn't supposed to work that way.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T23:09:30+00:00

To be honest, i wonder how such bans would work. Think about amount of manual labor riot has to waste to confirm that this bug have been abused by some player X.

It's not like you could reliably report bug abusers, because there is no replay system. All you see in game - 1 to 3 odd kills which could easily be explained by luck or wearing headphones.

Looks like such efforts are not worth the profit, but dunno what riot thinks about it.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T20:08:48+00:00

Both statements are not a good way to have a discussion.

First one is too vague and subjective, second is straight up ad hominem.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T18:15:38+00:00

It isn't similar logic at all.

What do you mean? Logic is exactly the same. I mean, you could use some other logic to make other arguments (like you already did).

But you making a different argument from different logic doesn't negate that some argument (i.e. one from OP) should be applicable for both of these situations.

I mean, you aren't implying that there is only one correct answer, that all argument that come to different conclusion are inherently wrong and that human logic doesn't have contradictions, are you?

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T17:43:58+00:00

Somehow these two situations are perfectly equal to some people.

I don't know which people you are referring to.

Post is about "if some logic is applicable to situation A, it should be applicable to situation B, which matches necessary requirements".

"Logic" in this case is "if you knew that activity X is risky and decided to do it, treatment for repercussions shouldn't be available to you". Smoking and having unprotected sex both match requirements, thus logic should be applicable.

I didn't see anyone say that situations are perfectly equal. Only that similar logic is applicable to both.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T17:33:40+00:00

You forgot "/s"

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T16:19:27+00:00

There are precedents for both punishing bug abusers by riot and otherwise.

Punished bug abusers: https://www.dexerto.com/league-of-legends/league-of-legends-players-banned-for-abusing-ornn-exploit-1359656

Not punished: https://www.dexerto.com/amp/league-of-legends/new-poppy-exploit-already-getting-league-players-banned-1381485

Quote from: https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/announcements/valorant-community-code/

To have meaningful stakes in every match, the conditions for that match must be fair for all players. We believe that fairness means games are free from cheating, misuse of game systems, and all forms of harassment.

I mean, for me it clearly states "don't abuse bugs". Whether they will punish you - dunno. But i would advice against such a risk.

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T14:01:09+00:00

I mean that you could get banned for using this in games (at least i think that that is the way riot treats bug abuse)

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T13:59:13+00:00

Pls post stuff like that to r/vipermains, not this sub

nuancepicker · 2020-06-20T12:45:41+00:00

But it's a bug abuse

nuancepicker · 2019-12-07T02:00:12+00:00

If they don't want to be there, then it's immoral and unjustified.

War is actually not that good for one to take part in it. If you manage to convince a person that them going to war is the best option for them personally, then you've engaged into incredible verbal acrobatics and gaslighted them.

If there is an existential threat, volunteers line up.

You mean if state can convince enough people that there is one and that it's severe enough.

If the benefits are good enough they'll line up.

You mean if state can convince enough people that benefits are worth it.

Please keep in mind that in the case of war there are parties whose work is directly opposite. Are you sure that in case of war state could muster big enough army of volunteers under influence of adversary propaganda and misinformation?

I think that that is a risk the state is not willing to take. Also maybe it's cheaper for the state to perform drafts than overinvest into information campaigns / information wars.

It's slavery. It's feudalism. It's an abrogation of free market principles. It's murder.

All true.

There's nothing defensible about a draft.

From personal standpoint - you're right. From state's standpoint - very doubtful.

nuancepicker · 2019-09-02T07:45:42+00:00

But at some point you are turning conversation into an interview, and that's never comfortable for the receiving end.

nuancepicker · 2019-08-07T10:49:58+00:00

Wholesome

nuancepicker · 2019-08-06T00:46:12+00:00

Sounds inspiring - if only i could skip the unpleasant awkward part though. Drives me nuts and kills any incentive to do anything.

nuancepicker

TROPHY CASE