Hmm then you’re not as hardcore as I thought.
Define “hardcore” in this context?
And keep in mind, my objective is not to be hardcore; my objective is perfection… or as close to it as this game allows.
What if you’re not going to use the fiber wire? Seems silly to waste a slot
47 would not go into a mission without his fiber wire unless he absolutely could not bring anything with him. The purpose here is to play as closely as to how 47 would do it if he were real as possible.
Must…not…argue…about…fiber…wire…
6 Likes
That’s correct, my friend. Resist that impulse. 
1 Like
Edit: aw shoot. I just replied to a 2-month old conversation.
Sorryyy
I wouldn’t agree about that. 47 doesn’t envision stuff. He’s not shown to regret certain assassinations or mull over how a certain thing could have gone better – he doesn’t need to, they always go perfectly.
What’s going on in 47’s dream is probably how he performed those kills. Looking back on his journey through the WOA after what he thought was a major betrayal from Diana.
I’d say the way 47 could have performed that kill is beyond the restrictions of IO’s game mechanics. He might’ve evacuated the room during Novikov’s speech, but still managing to crush him with the light rig in the chaos.
1 Like
Alrighty! Time to dive back into these waters.
Okay. So you don’t run because you think 47 must maintain an ever present level of “professionalism” (regardless if he trains his stamina to run long distances – all that’s for nothing when he gets out into the field, 
). What about climbing? I’m sure you climb. Which can avoid having to bypass guarded areas and is far simpler. Then what about sliding down a pipe or ladder?
I was going to post another big bunch of text, but the more I typed it out - it seemed to be really good. I’ll just take that bit of a brainstorm to another topic.
1 Like
Question: do you suspend your play style in some ways ever so slightly on the maps like Colorado, Hawkes Bay, Isle of Sgail, where A) no proper forensics investigation would be conducted B) everyone here would already know that it’s the work of “the ICA hitman” or “the Burnwood’s assassin” or whatever their perception of 47 is? 
1 Like
Sure he does. He has to. Performing any action that is going to trigger a series of consequences always requires an analysis of what will happen once you take that action. Even doing a simple kill of just using fiber wire on a target alone in a room, 47 has run a brief simulation in his head of what happens if someone comes in while he’s doing it, is there a place he can store the body where it will stay hidden long enough until he escaped the area, what if instead of struggling they pull out a pistol and start shooting over their shoulder, etc… Any person confronted with such a scenario who does not act on impulse will visualize it, and 47 is not an impulsive being.
As soon as he heard those two guards talking about how flimsy the light rig was and what would happen if it fell, I guarantee you 47 ran an image of that through his head, much like we see in the hallucination, and based on his past history and what happens if you actually go through with it, excessive collateral damage, he would have decided against it.
Hitman: Contracts is an entire game literally about exactly that.
Except the only actual kill shown is Novikov. Soders is just lying there on that table with the arms performing their surgery, it’s not really clear if it’s actively killing him in that still, and every other image from there on is something that definitely did not happen.
Which is what I’ve been saying. If that kill is canon, which I wouldn’t mind if it were, then we are supposed to ignore all the NPC deaths that also result. Why IOI doesn’t alter the game to where nobody but Novikov is registered as being in range of the rig when it falls is beyond me, if they’re so insistent that that’s how it happened; they’re contradicting 47’s entire career performance up to this point in the series.
Not likely. Causing an evacuation causes too much risk at drawing attention or making the targets leave the area. This might have played out if he killed Dalia first, but that’s the less likely order that he would have performed the kills. Dalia upstairs dealing with the auction is less likely to receive word of Novikov’s death while she’s in the middle of that, than Novikov is to run upstairs and see for himself if he gets word of Dalia’s death. 47 would have understood this and dealt with Novikov first before zeroing in on Dalia. Most likely.
Already answered yours in the other thread, @Tetrafish_21.
No, I maintain the same practices there. If there’s no evidence when an accident happens, while some might be suspicious, then they don’t know for sure if it was 47 or if that arrogant lieutenant of Grey’s just got careless. And on Sgail, none of them even know 47 is after them at that time and the bulk of the Ark members are still in the dark about Providence, so they wouldn’t know. And each of these locations would still perform their own investigation, even if it wasn’t as involved or thorough as a real one.
Again, be aware of lessened concern of leaving evidence when going for direct murder vs performing an accident. For murder, all that matters, evidence-wise, is no one knows who it is; delete security footage, always wear gloves, no witnesses, etc… Using keys already on the maps, knocking people out directly, shooting and stabbing and whatnot, not replacing items picked up, these are allowed when performing direct murder. Performing accident kills is when finesse is in order.
1 Like
That was about running and was a whole multi-paragraph… (which turned out to be a cool idea for a level since we haven’t had anything like that before), AND was the 2nd part of my original thoughts in that post.
But the 1st part involved your stance on how you’d ascend and descend ladders and pipes/poles.
Do you avoid them if there’s another way on foot?
If you do use them - do you have 47 take each step going down, or do you allow for efficiency and slide down?
Assuming there isn’t an emergency like in Patient Zero Hokkaido, etc.
Wait what? So a lock pick doesn’t suffice?
1 Like
It depends on how I’m playing: murder vs accident. If murder, then there’s no issue. If accident, it depends on which method would be least professional and most likely to lead to questions if someone sees.
For example, in Paris, I walk through the security checkpoints to the top floor if I want to cause an accident. If I plan to use a weapon that would get caught at the checkpoints, I climb pipes and ladders to the top.
In Mumbai, originally, when wanting to poison the Malestrom or kick him off a ledge, I’d distract guards on the hill, spike his drink, and when done, lower the ladder that’s there next to the table where he drinks and slide down that (I always slide down to reduce the amount of time going down, making it less likely to get spotted). However, I’ve since found a way to the top of that hill that requires neither distractions nor lowering the ladder, leaving absolutely no trace I was ever there, and I now use that.
Meanwhile, some places like Dubai leave you no choice for either method than to climb a ladder or ledge here or there to go up if you plan on staying in a gloved outfit.
They do, but if you’re going to perform a specific murder and need to bring in a particular weapon with you, and you don’t have enough space due to other items you plan to bring (fiber wire and Silverballer with you, always), then you can simply leave the lockpicks behind and use the keys on the map or use ledges and ladders and such to gain access. This only works for murder methods though; for accident kills, one should never use any keys left on the map, always bring lockpicks or pick up one found on the map, or again, ladders and ledges if necessary. No crowbars.
4 Likes
Curious, you love being right, yet yer nearly always wrong
2 Likes
Incorrect. I’m nearly always right, and a few times wrong. While others may not accept my conclusions as correct due to the ambiguous argument of “opinions,” their lack of acceptance does not dictate whether my conclusions are correct or not. Ain’t that right, Galileo?
well this entire thread being as long as it is, is a testament to the pure delusion you put yourself under to think yourself right when you are clearly wrong.
And do explain how I am “clearly” wrong, and about what…
ok, “canon” kills. In my opinion the canon kills are what the writers decide is the canon kill. not what any fan interprets as canon.
47 doesn’t run. he does even if its a light jog, if he didn’t run it wouldn’t have been made an option.
im not gonna bother putting time or effort in this, i shouldve never started this to begin with, because i know yer wrong when i know yer wrong, no need to scream it to the world
This is what you have? Dude, I expected something with teeth.
As far as “canon” kills, the writers have never settled on anything as “canon,” and anytime it seems they have, there’s contradictory info elsewhere making that questionable, as I explained in detail to sammland in post number 133 above.
As for running, I didn’t say 47 doesn’t run; I said he wouldn’t run unless he had to. There is nothing in his character or history to suggest that he would rush through a contract unless time was a factor, and I have provided examples of that several times in several posts throughout the thread, the most prominent being the need to run at the beginning of the Patient Zero mission to prevent the spread of the virus.
What else you got?
1 Like
Is there really a “truth” to be reached on this kind of topic (canon kills, whether 47 runs etc.)? There are certainly plenty of opinions being tossed about, with varying degrees of evidence, but only ever inference. In most cases, the arguments for either side of a given Hitman lore/character debate have been equipollent, or there has been at least one solid argument for each side. Can’t we just stick most of this firmly on the “interpretation” side of things?
3 Likes