Thoughts on Skins and Tactics

[Kuriishi]

I know the outlines are a big giveaway regardless, but I was thinking.

Do you think skins (vehicle/armour) offer a disadvantage for the user as certain skins offer more contrast and thus easier spotted targets?

Reason I bring this up is, the weekly reward this week was for that white-ish Razorback skin and I thought to myself that it offers more contrast so you wouldn't be able to blend in as much into the environment with it (outlines aside). Just as an example.

What are your thoughts, is this a big deal or nah?

[Blegh]

It doesn't matter what skin you have on, the outline gives you away clear as day

[Rabbit]

I was thinking something similar, there are some helmets (the weird ODST helmet for Mk. VII in particular) and shoulder armor that are massive compared to the default armor
Do these also have bigger hitboxes?
As for skins, like

Originally posted by Blegh:

It doesn't matter what skin you have on, the outline gives you away clear as day

said, are kinda pointless since the ugly outlines give you away

[R.A.T. Army *MST3K*]

Originally posted by Blegh:

It doesn't matter what skin you have on, the outline gives you away clear as day

I agree. Especially because you can change the outline of your enemies. You can make them a more appealing color to your eyes.

[killall -q]

Originally posted by 🐰Rabbit🐇:

I was thinking something similar, there are some helmets (the weird ODST helmet for Mk. VII in particular) and shoulder armor that are massive compared to the default armor
Do these also have bigger hitboxes?

No, it's standard in PvP shooters for everyone to have the same size hitbox regardless of their appearance. The size of the hitbox is usually in a middle ground between the smallest and largest body shapes.

In hero shooters, each hero can have a different hitbox, but the hitbox won't change regardless of the skin and cosmetics applied to the hero.

[tyr2009]

Contrast doesn't matter because xbox has red reticle. ba dum tss

As for PC, people (myself included) can make the enemy team bright yellow, so armor coloring doesn't matter.

[tedfurd]

My old guildmaster once told the group a story about a lady who chose to wear a stunning blue dress to raid in open field pvp. It boiled down to her refusing to wear the black and gold colors we all wore, and in doing so she promptly kept getting picked out of the crowd and used as the preliminary death for gankers attempts at wiping the group. Thing was, she met the base defense requirements and was no more squishy then anyone else.

In this age where you can easily get on vent or teamspeak, I have no doubts that the shinier or more unique you are, the more easily you will be called out, or even start a mental "tab" with those you are pitted against.

I can also toss a hypothetical situation at ya for a better understanding of the flaws associated with dress up - You have an s7 sniper and zoom in to find three enemies, two stock spartans and a cat-eared-nail-polished-skin-[BANG]

Lets analyze that: we don't know who got shot, but if the MTX spartan was in stock uniform with his allies, I'd assume two things:
Whoever was closest to the reticle got shot.
Whoever was the slower moving spartan got shot.

So putting an outfit makes the situation more complicated? Yes. I'm sure there is already a few doctorates handed out for people who've understood the psychology of this discussion to a full extent. What I can say though, is the outfit does make the player.

Want to become feared? Transmog your damage gear into a full tank set and sham your defense well enough, and now you are a very hard hitting tank, in their eyes.
Want to stay untouched? Don't get too fancy, just put on a simple low level outfit, you are now a peasant who is lower on the "we need to kill these badasses in this order" list.

Remember how most Inheritors of Reach wore the stock spartan? They absolutely know what they're doing. It's not because they don't need duds.

They're playing you, mentally. And in so many ways.

[Blegh]

Originally posted by tedfurd:

My old guildmaster once told the group a story about a lady who chose to wear a stunning blue dress to raid in open field pvp. It boiled down to her refusing to wear the black and gold colors we all wore, and in doing so she promptly kept getting picked out of the crowd and used as the preliminary death for gankers attempts at wiping the group. Thing was, she met the base defense requirements and was no more squishy then anyone else.

In this age where you can easily get on vent or teamspeak, I have no doubts that the shinier or more unique you are, the more easily you will be called out, or even start a mental "tab" with those you are pitted against.

I can also toss a hypothetical situation at ya for a better understanding of the flaws associated with dress up - You have an s7 sniper and zoom in to find three enemies, two stock spartans and a cat-eared-nail-polished-skin-[BANG]

Lets analyze that: we don't know who got shot, but if the MTX spartan was in stock uniform with his allies, I'd assume two things:
Whoever was closest to the reticle got shot.
Whoever was the slower moving spartan got shot.

So putting an outfit makes the situation more complicated? Yes. I'm sure there is already a few doctorates handed out for people who've understood the psychology of this discussion to a full extent. What I can say though, is the outfit does make the player.

Want to become feared? Transmog your damage gear into a full tank set and sham your defense well enough, and now you are a very hard hitting tank, in their eyes.
Want to stay untouched? Don't get too fancy, just put on a simple low level outfit, you are now a peasant who is lower on the "we need to kill these badasses in this order" list.

Remember how most Inheritors of Reach wore the stock spartan? They absolutely know what they're doing. It's not because they don't need duds.

They're playing you, mentally. And in so many ways.

beans

[tedfurd]

Also, Cloud Nine is blue, which is one of the more calming colors to look at. Goes well with winning. Faze on the other hand chose red, which warrants a more aggresive response. That ain't beans it science

[Rabbit]

Originally posted by tedfurd:

Also, Cloud Nine is blue, which is one of the more calming colors to look at. Goes well with winning. Faze on the other hand chose red, which warrants a more aggresive response. That ain't beans it science

yeah but red makes you go faster

[Kitt 🌟 Stargazer]

Dependent on level, but yes, skins can make vehicles and items more easier to spot ( and possibly more difficult to spot as well ).

It will probably have at least a tiny impact on how people recognize that it's a vehicle and attack you for it. It probably won't be the most significant difference though to more experienced players though.

[Wylie28]

Im curious. What do you think tactics are?

[Define Brackish Water]

I'm doing okay with outlines turned off. This game could 100% work well without them.

For skins, color confusion is a rock-paper-scissors game. Blue will confuse new players but you'll need a different color if someone sets enemies to yellow or bright purple.

[Kuriishi]

Originally posted by Wylie28:

Im curious. What do you think tactics are?

Well, in this context, it's the method of equipment choice in order to gain a combat advantage.

Also, on people mentioning outlines. Yeah, literally the first sentence in the OP mentions how they're a dead giveaway regardless but I am of the notion that the skins affect peripheral perception even just slightly. Certain things stand out more.

Another example, not related to colour but FX. Someone with the fire or cherry blossom FX literally leaves a trail of footprints behind them which gives away their position. Or if you have someone wearing the Halo crouched behind a crate, it can float above that and give away their position.

[Wylie28]

Originally posted by Kuriishi:

Originally posted by Wylie28:

Im curious. What do you think tactics are?

Well, in this context, it's the method of equipment choice in order to gain a combat advantage.

Also, on people mentioning outlines. Yeah, literally the first sentence in the OP mentions how they're a dead giveaway regardless but I am of the notion that the skins affect peripheral perception even just slightly. Certain things stand out more.

Another example, not related to colour but FX. Someone with the fire or cherry blossom FX literally leaves a trail of footprints behind them which gives away their position. Or if you have someone wearing the Halo crouched behind a crate, it can float above that and give away their position.

Thats less tactics. More things to avoid. Somthing thats a bad idea doesn't contribute to the tactical pool of something. There are SIGNIFICANTLY more bad moves to make in chess than good ones. But they don't count as tactics do they?

But even then. A pre-game decision is arguably outsides the scope of tactics too. But granted, I can see the argument for it.

[Kuriishi]

Originally posted by Wylie28:

Thats less tactics. More things to avoid. Somthing thats a bad idea doesn't contribute to the tactical pool of something. There are SIGNIFICANTLY more bad moves to make in chess than good ones. But they don't count as tactics do they?

But even then. A pre-game decision is arguably outsides the scope of tactics too. But granted, I can see the argument for it.

I mean, you can frame it the opposite way. Rather than choosing not to make a certain bad choice, you choose to make the better choice to gain the tactical advantage. But really, this is all a little pedantic imo