Vae on 21/1/2021 at 20:06
Quote Posted by klatremus
@Vae: Supreme rule #4 says "All AI and devices must remain in their normal state and not react to anything you do or initiate in the game." That goes beyond the same rule also saying first alerts aren't allowed. To me that means if AI give any other indication
besides normal first alerts that means they know you've been there, it's a bust. I don't think it's a Ghost bust however.
According to that interpretation from the statement, "All AI and devices must remain in their normal state and not react to anything you do or initiate in the game.", whenever the player triggers a script, which temporarily removes the AI from their "normal state", then the player busts Supreme.
I would say this is an incorrect interpretation, due to perceiving that statement as an absolute, rather than it being qualified and applied within the context of the rule itself:
Quote:
4. No Alerts of any kind from any AI or Device: No first alerts, no comments at all from AI. A single chirp from a Watcher, “Musta Been Rats...”, zombies groaning, etc are a bust. All AI and devices must remain in their normal state and not react to anything you do or initiate in the game. AI walking around and muttering to themselves or having a conversation with another AI are fine.
Notice the heading and context of the rule is alerts. So the statement, "All AI and devices must remain in their normal state and not react to anything you do or initiate in the game.",
is not an absolute statement, and is in reference to the player being detected or initiating something which causes the AI to change state from (Level 0) "normal state", to the (Level 1) alert state.
This would mean that if the player triggers a script, and it causes the AI to take an action, make a remark, or enter into a conversation with another AI, as long as that AI or AI's stay at the (Level 0) non-alerted state, a Supreme bust has not occurred.
klatremus on 22/1/2021 at 00:03
I was not interpreting the rule in an absolute sense at all. I would never say the rule means that regular conversations triggered within the game, even if it starts only because Garrett crosses an invisible line, to be a bust. That would be in an absolute sense. I was quoting that statement from the rules because it specifies situations that goes beyond normal comments that indicate AIs' reactions to something you do, something beyond simply being seen or heard, but still triggering some kind of alert. I took loot, that initiated a response (scripted or not) from the enemy. The result of that script is for him to say "someone must have stolen that" is to me an alert of some kind.
The part in bold that you reference "No Alerts of any kind from any AI or Device" doesn't refer to the level 0 or 1 states that it seems to me you on the other hand are taking as an absolute. It is instead talking about "alerts of any kind" as the heading, so that is the context, not the state levels you mention. Then it goes on to list "first alerts" as an example of what that could be, but then it also lists other examples of what such alerts could be. So to me, "All AI and devices must remain in their normal state and not react to anything you do or initiate in the game" goes beyond a normal first alert state to include other scenarios that could also cause alerts.
klatremus on 2/2/2021 at 00:29
New discussion topic: Are using EMP grenades to turn off lights (and other electrical devices) in T2X property damage? Real EMP grenades cause power surges and voltage spikes that are damaging to most electrical systems. In game, any lights taken out by EMPs can't be turned back on, so I always figured they were broken. Plus, if you use an EMP on a turret, the whole device shatters into pieces. Cameras turn off when hit, though I'm not sure if they can be turned back on. I thought the whole point of those grenades was they target the device's electrical system, not just turn them off like when you douse a torch.
downwinder on 2/2/2021 at 01:05
i also wanted to add it would be nice since there is unlimited reloads allowed in ghost and supreme ghost,why not add the number of times a quickload/load of saved game is done during a run,so we know how good of a job they did over all on reloads
marbleman on 2/2/2021 at 11:18
I always considered using EMPs on robots and turrets to be clear property damage, but it never occurred to me that it destroys lights rather than shutting them off. To confirm what you said, I found a light with a lightswitch and used an EMP on it to see whether the lightswitch will turn it back on after that. Indeed, the answer is no. :p So yeah, I stand corrected, any use of EMPs is property damage since they don't just shut off electrics but completely fry them.
klatremus on 5/2/2021 at 02:32
Another question:
Are free items allowed to be retrieved from the loadout screen for Supreme? Supreme rule #5 talks about purchases and going to the store, but if it's free, it isn't a purchase per se. I assume you wouldn't get free items at the store, but instead privately from a known associate. Or did the rule just use the word "purchase" assuming anything you could get ahold of during loadout? What do you guys think?
lordhern on 5/2/2021 at 06:55
I placed my opinion on your last video on youtube. free is no bust. some FM's required a few free notes for the folks who did not read the notes on the download. If you have to pay it a bust.
ultravioletu on 5/2/2021 at 14:12
I personally think that the loadout screen is the store, which is to be avoided: "This thief doesn't even go to the store to chance being seen and identified purchasing said items" - but then following this interpretation, visiting in-game stores like the one in Calendra's Cistern should be a bust too.
Galaer on 5/2/2021 at 16:55
@klatremus: You will not like my answer, because I'm gonna try to analize the whole rule. So supreme rule says:
"5. Inventory and Weapons: You can not purchase weapons and inventory items from the store at loadout. This thief doesn’t even go to the store to chance being seen and identified purchasing said items."
So explanation of this rule implies that Garrett doesn't enter shop, but it's completely wrong. How else would he know what equipment is available at the moment? And not just that. In some missions Garrett can buy information scroll and he knows what info it contains (there is short description when you select this scroll). The question is how does he know that. How does he know that? Scroll can't be publicly available, because otherwise Garrett would know in full detail what it contain. And there would be no point of selling it in the shop. There is only one explanation. Shopkeeper explained what Garrett can buy in the shop. In other words, not only Garrett has been seen, but also talked with shopkeeper. And player is forced to visit shop before mission. So description of this rule doesn't make any sense.
So now let's talk about request scrolls available in shops. They give usually new objectives, in Lost City OM contract from shop changes 3 junk masks into loot. Since I proved that Garrett has been seen in shop, it means that player has dilemma. Buy request and try to complete new objective or if you are greedy, avoid buying it and completing challenge. Rule #2 mentions to complete all optional objectives, but gives leeway of not triggering some of them. Isn't buying requests a process of triggering them and shouldn't it be excused for supreme? Also let's not forget that the sources of most of Garrett's objectives are people. He communicates with them. By doing that he of course risks being identified as well, but he continues doing that. Of course, risk of being identified is present every time, but I don't think there is any need of being paranoid about that.
Another thing is inside mission shops. Visiting them is allowed for supreme. The question is why you can visit them without having any objective and you can even purchase items absolutely necessary to progress mission (like rope arrow), but you must avoid shop before mission. What's the difference? Just because you can see shopkeeper who has neutral AI? But you can imagine it's the same story in before mission shop. Does it really make big difference it is during mission shop? I don't think so. So this explanation of rule where before mission shop is forbidden, but inside mission shop is OK, I find it weird.
I think the main reason for adding this rule in supreme rules was to prevent making missions easier. That's why you also can't spend your equipment. But at the time there was really no items during loadout that could make missions harder. So I think buying these requests no matter if it's free or not should be allowed, because it makes mission harder. A bit analogy to Rule #6a: you can't turn off lights, but turning on lights is allowed and it makes mission harder.
marbleman on 5/2/2021 at 18:30
I think you're overanalyzing it. :cheeky: The loadout screen isn't a literal representation of an in-world store. What you get here can come from different sources (shops, Garrett's associates, etc.), which explains how Garrett can know what's in the readables he's getting.
But I don't know what to make of this rule. If it says you can't get anything from the loadout screen, including tips, which you naturally wouldn't be getting in an actual shop, then I wouldn't take anything from it, free or not. Not taking tips doesn't refer to "this thief doesn't go to the store"; how I interpret it is that "he tries to contact as few people as possible." Who knows what information they may divulge later.