You can use micro remote and a coin. Same result.
In water, i don’t mind at all. Cuz there isn’t water everywhere. So it’s niche.
Couldn’t agree more, and your next comment about this too. I find it ironic that, in a game that glorifies different playstyles and ways to have fun, there’s people that seem to dislike this principle and want to dictate how players should enjoy it and disregard any playstyle that doesn’t fit with their standards, as if it’s their fault for not knowing how they should enjoy this singleplayer game.
Back in H2 I never used the cheese phone because I thought It was too cheap and didn’t have fun with it, but I didn’t advocate for removing it either because I knew there were people who liked it. On H3 I’ve never used the fart case for the same reason and try to avoid the sieker and other emetic items aswell.
The same way you can self impose challenges for your playthroughs, you can also choose to not use certain items on your runs; but don’t be a venomous party pooper and ruin the fun for a lot of people just beacuse you don’t like it.
5 Likes
Today I had the random realisation that this roadmap also marks the beginning of Year Nine since the World of Assassination began way back in 2016 (!!!). I’ve never, ever consistently played a single game (don’t split hairs here) for anywhere near the amount of time I have here.
Is definitely going to be weird at whatever point in time IO decides to turn out the lights on roadmaps/new content because its been a constant for so long…
9 Likes
I am not one of those people, despite the seeming presumption. Play how you want to, I’m not gonna stop you, and at no point was I trying to?. What people on here seem to not realise that you can still advocate for how a games should be balanced as a matter of conversation and still respect and encourage people to play in different ways, even if you don’t play that way. It is baffling to me that I’m not allowed to make conversations like this without one side getting offended with responses like “You just want to control how people play because it’s not up to your standards”.
Like, that’s not at all what I was getting at or saying?!?, what are you talking about? It reminds me so much of this meme on Twitter:
Like it’s a massive conflation of two different things. Intellectual conversation around balance decisions is going to exist, even in single player games. Repeatedly de-railing these chats with “it doesn’t matter how people play, enjoy yourself” is not helpful to that conversation that is trying to be discussed. In fact, it’s often used to try and deliberately stifle it, frequently for ulterior reasons.
As I mentioned in the previous comments, I too avoid emetic devices when I can, but I make no bones in mentioning how OP they are, and I’m not going to discourage their use among other people. I think I did call it a bit of a design problem as IO have backed themselves into a corner balance-wise that they can’t get out of. That’s a comment on the weapons’ usability, not on the players’ preferred playstyle.
Those are two separate talking points, and the fact that I have to explain that is pretty annoying.
1 Like
Yes, that’s what I said (and what you quoted)?
I think the problem is a bit that those two types of conversation get conflated whenever someone suggests a neat new item that could be added (or when a new item is added that offers a new and somewhat unique approach), which more often than not leads to people from the balancing side of the conversation saying it shouldn’t be added (or that it should be removed), instead of suggesting how it could be balanced in a way that preserves the original idea behind it.
Not saying that it’s the balancing side’s fault, but it would also be nice to allow people to spitball fun ideas without having to defend their fun ideas against people who want to discuss balancing (or, and I specifically don’t mean you, who actually don’t want people who prefer a different playstyle or are less skilled to have an easier time).
Like, yes, there are two conversations taking place at the same time a lot in here, but it’s frustrating for both sides that the other side always slides in and wants to shift the focus. Not saying that both sides shouldn’t have a joined conversation, but I think it could help to keep in mind that those who want to discuss Aspect A should be allowed to do that without every second reply being a reminder that it wouldn’t be a good idea because Aspect B (and vice versa).
1 Like
That greatly depends on what’s being suggested, so saying it’s “more often than not” is painting with very broad strokes and ignoring quite a lot of specific per-post contexts. Saying something shouldn’t be added is going to be an obvious response to something blatantly OP like a lethal dart gun or gum or something. If we were talking about a silenced Striker or reworking the Jaeger 7 rifles, then I feel like the balance aspect would be discussed as to how it could be implemented as that sounds appealing to all parties. But that’s not what’s being discussed here.
And it’s the non-balancing side that repeatedly derails it, because the conversation is usually about mechanical balance discussion to begin with in relation to an item. They come in trying to shift the focus into something non-mechanical and more feelings-focused, which is more personal, harder to quantify, and severely limits the useful discussion that could be had in the process, which has the added downside of stifling the previous conversations’ talking points as that’s now been made irrelevant and is now forgotten about.
And again, that’s where the conflation starts and the mess continues because people assume you can’t mix balance discussion and how fun a weapon is to use; you absolutely can.
What is wrong with that? In fairness, that depends on what X is a bad idea to do, but I don’t think that’s inherently a bad thing to respond with on either side. It just shouldn’t escalate into more personal attacks.
Is it, though? In this specific case, to not paint it with too broad strokes that ignore the specific per-post/per-discussion context, it started with someone saying “a taser duck that can be placed in puddles would be cool”.
Because Side B is currently complaining that Side A wants to make it about fun and feelings instead of about facts which derails the conversation, completely ignoring that Side A started the conversation because they wanted to suggest gimmicky new items.
What I actually meant to say with the last part you quoted, which I apparently didn’t manage to bring across at all (100% on me, I’m undercaffeinated and distracted by an online game), is that both sides of the conversation need to be more lenient instead of making it all about the aspect they care about. As in, yes, we can have these multi-faceted conversations, but it’s not one side whose opinions are objectively better and more relevant to the conversation.
It’s frustrating to be told “no, that’d lead to everyone using this item” when they just wanted to share a fun idea? Like, not everything needs to be a debate, not every rubber duck needs to be peer-reviewed.
I know that that’s a weird thing to say on a discussion forum. 
But, you know, sometimes someone just wants to share an idea and discuss it with other people who like that idea, not with people who don’t like the idea.
Obviously, these items would be ridiculous instant kill switches. But I also remember (and forgive me that I’m not scrolling up three miles right now) that the response to this duck here was not “here’s how we could balance it while preserving the original idea of a taser duck that can be placed in a puddle”, but “no, it shouldn’t be added because it would be OP”.
1 Like
Yes. Yes, i did.
1 Like
It’s one of those days, I swear
1 Like
I know a few of us have mentioned on here that Year 4 could potentially be the last year of content, but I guess time will tell.
If it is, I just hope we get a few of the last wanted fan requests like outstanding suits, Seasonal Safehouse cosmetics, the missing coin etc. Some bug fixes for Freelancer as well which be cool like fixing the soundless Dubai Helicopter when it’s leaving the Safehouse and I hope the poison machine in the shed gets fixed as well. When you’re making poison now with the emetic flower, it just creates lethal poison instead of emetic.
1 Like
This sums it up quite well.
This was the original response:
and this was my response, which was notably not focused on the specific balance of one item, and more the concerns on limited time items causing balance issues:
When @Axwage mentioned an emetic duck:
Again, very little to do with Balance, and more the concerns of limited time items causing issues.
The other two responses were actually a conspiracy to do with IO withholding ideas for 007, and a discussion on how to make other duck items, like a taser item, less OP if implemented:
All of this was reasonable discussion! The only thing closest to this was “it would be dumb”, but that’s one person saying that, not everyone, and the discussion quickly grew to look for solutions.
Over the course of several comments, we either didn’t mention the balance implications for one item specifically, or deconstructed why this would be a bad idea and ways to make it work. We then got thrown “you don’t have to use it if you don’t want to!” in our faces a short while later once we tried to explain further.
Can you start to see the problem yet?
The shed still is not bugged, it’s supposed to work like that (as it does in Dartmoor / Mendoza main missions).
2 Likes
I was gonna say, that’s the whole point? You can distill emetic poison to make it lethal?
Hi everyone, it’s me or they removed the action of neutralizing someone when they are crouching with their back facing a small wall and they passed the guy over the wall. It doesn’t work for me anymore, which is a shame 
That should still work, you may have to be leaning against the wall/ cover in some cases.
1 Like
I would be pleasantly surprised if a Year 5 happened, but yeah, realistically, this is likely the last year of content.
Take away Sean Bean and we have featured contracts, a challenge pack and re-runs of ET’s. This is a classic holding pattern.
It’s never worked for me in that particular spot. The window sill might be too wide maybe?
3 Likes