squidgyb

Yes! A shot within a house certainly shouldn't lead zombies directly to your location - rather they should all move to the doors, then amble in aimlessly, blocking the exits but not being immediately aggroed. Either at the door, or possibly just an increased density of zombies resulting from those that heard the shot moving in the general direction of the noise.

The other idea I have for calculating stealth might be exactly how it's done now, or maybe just a slight change - or even whether some of the changes are possible or not. Essentially, with my idea the number of stealth "bars" on the HUD indicator would need increasing, or at least the background calculation would be more complex that what is suggested by the current indicator. I can see stealth being separated into a (relatively) simple system of four "additive" number functions, along with a multiplier. What I mean is that clothing, posture, speed and cover all add up to give a number - this number is then multiplied by the ambient light factor (either directly linked to the actual ambient light value, or simplified to be tied to time of day and/or moon cycle). So: Clothing; Civvy = 2, Camo = 1, Ghillie = 0 Posture; Stand = 2, Crouch = 1, Prone = 0 Speed; Run = 2, Walk = 1, Still = 0 Cover; None = 2, Grass = 1, Bushes = 0 So at the very least we have a scale from 0 - 8. 0 is invisible, i.e. wearing a ghillie suit, prone, not moving and under a bush. 8 is fully visible, wearing civvy clothing while standing up, running on tarmac/concrete. Have this multiplied by an arbitrary number tied to ambient light values - we can have a scale from 0-10 (9-10 may be needed for, I dunno, spotlit players? travelling in a vehicle?) What I imagine is a scale from 0-10 tied to zombie's visual range (this does NOT take into account LOS, that would have to be a different calculation). The range itself is arbitrary as well - the best max range settings for zombie aggro would be determined by playtesting and tweaking. The crux of the system is that when in the cone of vision of a zombie, your stealth "number " is compared to your range from the zombie - if your stealth number is lower than the number according to your distance to the zombie, you'd be ok. Again, the two tier "inquisitive" behaviour could come into this if you're on the cusp of being seen. This tied with the noise aggro mechanic described in the previous posts would and LOS mechanics that rocket is already working on would make for a very dynamic, stealthy, and deadly zombie filled environment. If I had time, I'd do some diagrams, maybe later tonight when I'm not at work... e: I hope I explained that in an understandable fashion - I may come back to edit this post later today but I don't have time at the moment to give it the going over it probably needs

yes - I agree wholeheartedly. I've been trying to come up with a full breakdown on how (imho) zombie aggro should work, combining LOS, stealth/cover and noise, and it all boils down to pretty much this suggestion. The main idea would be to have a two tier zombie agro - "inquisitive zombie" and full on arms flailing sprinting "give me brains" zombie. Being seen on the edge of zombie vision, or any noise detection should trigger "inquisitive zombie" behaviour, and being seen on the edge of zombie vision or hearing a noise would only cause true zombie aggro through LOS confirmation. Eg - someone fires a gun in a town - zombies within hearing distance will gravitate towards that point, crucially changing their LOS to face the player. It is only when a zombie gets close enough that the player is within the zombie's cone of vision, and that stealth/cover criteria are met that full aggro is seen. I'd like to have clothing effect the stealth indicator, as well as cover, posture, speed of movement and ambient light. Noise should be a separate mechanic which leads to target acquisition through visual identification.

To some degree I reckon a stable internet connection sould be tantamount to a system requirement for playing online games. Contentious argument, I know... but a game shouldn't be designed around the lowest common denominator.

I shouldn't post this, but I lolled...