Avu wrote:game imbalance of some locations over others.
Why have anything in the game at all? You diss me and my constant proposition but you do nothing but whine, bitch and nag while rarely adding anything meaningful to a thread itself.
You ARE making a %100 realism argument. There's no two ways about it. The core principle here is achieving SOME mechanics in which a player cannot be seen that is stat independant or at least not entirely determined by stats.
What if all objects (trees, houses, grinders, etc.) have an inherent stealth value with a min and max range. THe minimum to use the object and the maximum benefit it can provide. Mansions would have an extremely large range being useful to even the noobiest stealther but providing lots of cover for a more trained individual. If you stealth rating is up to par (min value), you can use that object. Doing so makes the server prevent any client (except your own) from rendering you. Moving more than X number of tiles from the object you have engaged. X is based on your stealth value and the value of the object and it's available margin. For exapmple, because mansions have a large margin, you should be able to move, say, three tiles. Whereas a meat grinder will have a very high min stealth value and a very short range. Disengagement will happen immediately (X=0.1).
Odds of engagement should be a role against whatever surplus you have to achieve engagement. If you do not have the max value for a given object then %50 of the difference between your stat and the value of an object would be used.
Now, give that the above is actually pretty shitty because it so directly makes the affair a stat versus stat. You'de have to offer a counter for scouts to do checks against all stealthed people (and objects?) and that's just a pain in the ass.
Maybe it should be relative to stats at all and each game object would have an inherent value. Or it could be 50/50 meaning that everyone has a change to hide but having stats would provide a lieklyhood benefit. Anyway, just an idea.