You’re right, yes. But this is weird, still
I guess IOI thought killing unnecessary people(even if there is a reason) is against the concept of the Silent Assassin.
And they probably also wanted to give some difficulty to the challenges.
Then why put an objective with the wording of “may be eliminated”?
Of course Silent Assassin is the core even with this objective.
At least it should be so
When you complete the mission with 5-star but killed some Providence members, you get a different title from SA, meaning your playstyle doesn’t fit the Silent Assassin title. And IOI decides what playstyle fits what title, so your playstyle is probably considered not fit to the SA title by IOI.
I guess it relates to how you define the Silent Assassin. And it seems your definition doesn’t match IOI’s, or at least IOI’s at the point when they were programming the game.
As Agent_93 said, SA is a play style that means you only killed the target, were never seen, met all objectives, etc. If you kill a non-target, that means that you were not a Silent Assassin in your play style. In this map, even though Providence members may be killed, that doesn’t mean that they are targets. They don’t turn red on instinct and killing them means you have voided the Silent Assassin play style.
That said, you can still get 5 stars because you met all objectives, were never spotted, didn’t kill anyone that wasn’t allowed, etc. 5 Stars is not equivalent to Silent Assassin, apparently. The only real error that is occurring is that the list of objectives at the end says “Non-Target kills” when it should really say “Non-allowed kills”.
I liked this level, it’s a nice way to place 47 out of his comfort zone and oh my is it cool to kill Edwards…
I’m still waiting for the update to allow us to choose our starting suit in Romania.
It might be quite trivial but it adds to the fun, 'cause why not being a Blue Flamingo causing mayhem in a train.