These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New NPC AI, how about no?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#321 - 2013-01-15 19:36:00 UTC
Funky Lazers wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
One of them is to bring PvE closer to PvP as mentioned before. What does that mean exactly? It means significantly reducing NPC numbers and bringing their attributes, AI closer with what you would expect from a PvP encounter.

and

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Ideally, battling NPCs should teach players how PvP works


Please tell me one thing. Why do you want to teach a player how to PvP, when that Player chose to PvE?

....

I think its more of a fitting and tactics thing. Its not teaching you how to do a CTA, or operate in a PvP fleet, or obey an FC. Just make missions so you would do them sort of like now (get one go to the site, shoot stuff, return) just your fit and what you shoot would be closer to the same fit as if you were PvPing.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#322 - 2013-01-15 19:54:59 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Its not teaching you how to do a CTA, or operate in a PvP fleet, or obey an FC.


and that is all pvp is about?

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.
islador
Antigen.
#323 - 2013-01-15 19:59:02 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey folks, here is an update on our earlier post.

One of them is to bring PvE closer to PvP as mentioned before. What does that mean exactly? It means significantly reducing NPC numbers and bringing their attributes, AI closer with what you would expect from a PvP encounter.



Ok, you want to make PVE more like PVP? PVP rewards numbers, it does this by allowing any number of players on any side do whatever they want.

Want missions to be more fun? Want missions to engage more players and support group activity? Ok, heres how: Random Chance Escalation.

I'm not talking about sending me thirty jumps to maybe get some epic loot. I'm talking about an X percent chance that when I shoot that mission objective station, I get bridged on by 40 more battleship rats and a triage carrier to keep the whole fleet alive. An X percent chance that when I'm chewing through the Blockade (a gateless mission) the stargate I'm supposedly protecting springs to life ushering in double or triple the amount of rats.

Random Chance Escalation with a large enough escalation to make it worth me bringing friends will make missioning more like PVP and incentivize group missioning in a way currently not viable. It may not make it more like PVP in terms of pilot skill required, but it will make it more like PVP in that once the fight starts, theres no telling where it'll go.

If you want to get really awesome, in lowsec, make it so the 'triage carriers' ACTUALLY have the stats of a real triage carrier and an 120m bounty. This would incentivize me bringing in either a pile of friends to finish it off, or a dread or super carrier. I recognize that the CCP staff has said time and time again that they don't like the idea of supers generating income, but think of the potential PVP this could generate. Sieged dreads in gateless missions, super carriers or titans landing to quickly nuke the triage'd rat for that big isk.

These are conflict generators of epic proportions.
Flying Apocalypse
#324 - 2013-01-15 20:09:47 UTC
islador wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey folks, here is an update on our earlier post.

One of them is to bring PvE closer to PvP as mentioned before. What does that mean exactly? It means significantly reducing NPC numbers and bringing their attributes, AI closer with what you would expect from a PvP encounter.



Ok, you want to make PVE more like PVP? PVP rewards numbers, it does this by allowing any number of players on any side do whatever they want.

Want missions to be more fun? Want missions to engage more players and support group activity? Ok, heres how: Random Chance Escalation.

I'm not talking about sending me thirty jumps to maybe get some epic loot. I'm talking about an X percent chance that when I shoot that mission objective station, I get bridged on by 40 more battleship rats and a triage carrier to keep the whole fleet alive. An X percent chance that when I'm chewing through the Blockade (a gateless mission) the stargate I'm supposedly protecting springs to life ushering in double or triple the amount of rats.

Random Chance Escalation with a large enough escalation to make it worth me bringing friends will make missioning more like PVP and incentivize group missioning in a way currently not viable. It may not make it more like PVP in terms of pilot skill required, but it will make it more like PVP in that once the fight starts, theres no telling where it'll go.

If you want to get really awesome, in lowsec, make it so the 'triage carriers' ACTUALLY have the stats of a real triage carrier and an 120m bounty. This would incentivize me bringing in either a pile of friends to finish it off, or a dread or super carrier. I recognize that the CCP staff has said time and time again that they don't like the idea of supers generating income, but think of the potential PVP this could generate. Sieged dreads in gateless missions, super carriers or titans landing to quickly nuke the triage'd rat for that big isk.

These are conflict generators of epic proportions.


120m bounty...they might as well make it a titan then... not to mention that such escalations would make solo-missioning impossible. Lvl 4's should be solo'able and lvl 5's should require a fleet IMO

For some reason I can't delete my signature o.o
Van Kuzco
Perkone
Caldari State
#325 - 2013-01-15 20:10:25 UTC
I would love a variety of mission objectives that require warp disruptors or scramblers.

More ideas could be a random small gang npc coming in and you having to make the choice to fight it or escape it. Dscan could tell you the fleet composition.

Perhaps in one mission there's a chance of a fast tackler preventing you from accessing an acceleration gate and if you don't kill it within a certain time period his backup fleet will arrive and most likely kill you.

In missions like Duo of Death it could be more like a 1v1 or 2v1 fight that would require you to utilize tracking disruptors or dampeners depending on the ship types that you are fighting.
Van Kuzco
Perkone
Caldari State
#326 - 2013-01-15 20:11:33 UTC
Flying Apocalypse wrote:

120m bounty...they might as well make it a titan then... not to mention that such escalations would make solo-missioning impossible. Lvl 4's should be solo'able and lvl 5's should require a fleet IMO


It could just be more of a bonus then. No requirement for you to kill the cap ship.
islador
Antigen.
#327 - 2013-01-15 20:17:48 UTC
Van Kuzco wrote:
Flying Apocalypse wrote:

120m bounty...they might as well make it a titan then... not to mention that such escalations would make solo-missioning impossible. Lvl 4's should be solo'able and lvl 5's should require a fleet IMO


It could just be more of a bonus then. No requirement for you to kill the cap ship.


I actually want it to be difficult to complete. If you put the isk there, the people will find a way. We've seen it countless times. Those that are unwilling to find a way can just quit the mission. Remember it's a low percentage random chance, so you could just quit the mission and go on your way.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#328 - 2013-01-15 20:29:09 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Ytterbium: Any commentary regarding the AI and its tendency to mass-switch targets when a new player enters an anomaly? Specifically, the mass switch from the ratter to the hostile (to the ratter) newcomer, even if the newcomer has not taken any action yet - it happens as soon as they exit warp.

e: This may have been fixed already, I haven't been back to ratter hunting in at least a couple of weeks.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Marillio
Fairlight Corp
Rooks and Kings
#329 - 2013-01-15 20:49:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Marillio
*snip*
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#330 - 2013-01-15 22:01:45 UTC
Van Kuzco wrote:
I would love a variety of mission objectives that require warp disruptors or scramblers.

The only problem with this is that PvP fits in most typical (tech I) mission boats cannot stand up to huge amounts of sustained focus fire from dozens of attackers. PvP fits are by definition meant to either engage 1v1 against ships of similar strength (or weakness), or to run in fleets or small gangs, where you either hit and run (or just run when hitting does not look like a good idea), or where you rely on logi backup to deal with long fights against equal or greater numbers. This is why PvP fits are, with a few niche exceptions, always buffer tank fits. Not only is it all you can fit, it's also all that matters in the very short, high alpha fights you usually face, or where you have logi to keep you alive.

Losing those mid slots on most mission rigs, and having to run tackle on NPCs, will force you to go to a buffer fit that is just not going to stand up to the typical mission damage load. They would have to cut waaaaaaay back on the NPCs, to the point where the "tackle" missions are basically 1v1 against a ship no stronger than your own, or else missions will be only doable in small gangs or with logi support, just like PvP. That might be ok for some missions, but the dev comments posted just today state that they still want to accomodate "casual" solo mission runners as well, so it's not something that would fit well into every mission.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Tanaka Aiko
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#331 - 2013-01-15 23:03:13 UTC
@CCP Ytterbium :

I like the example on the damsel kidnapper fleeing, we could have some events like that, where you have some NPCs with pretty high bounties / loot trying to escape on a wave, and your job is to be on range and point them quickly. Obviously you also have to choose what you do ; continue killing the others, searching and pointing the better one, or trying to point more than one, which can be more dangerous but more rewarding if successful.

THAT would be a way to make PvE more like PvP : identify good primary, tackle it in time, and burn it before there friends kill you / rep him. Also a site with these things would give a reason to use interceptors or others tackle ships which have no use at all on normal PvE.
Theo Ramone
Stryker Industries
Stryker Group
#332 - 2013-01-15 23:03:21 UTC
Rather than making things new and shiny why dont you address the issue of people camping incursions and preventing those from being ran? Would be nice if the number of petitions that re opened on this wouldnt be ignored as they have been for a while now.....

As that say, if it aint broke dont fix it (Until the broke stuff is fixed)
Theron Urian
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#333 - 2013-01-15 23:08:53 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Van Kuzco wrote:
I would love a variety of mission objectives that require warp disruptors or scramblers.

The only problem with this is that PvP fits in most typical (tech I) mission boats cannot stand up to huge amounts of sustained focus fire from dozens of attackers. PvP fits are by definition meant to either engage 1v1 against ships of similar strength (or weakness), or to run in fleets or small gangs, where you either hit and run (or just run when hitting does not look like a good idea), or where you rely on logi backup to deal with long fights against equal or greater numbers. This is why PvP fits are, with a few niche exceptions, always buffer tank fits. Not only is it all you can fit, it's also all that matters in the very short, high alpha fights you usually face, or where you have logi to keep you alive.

Losing those mid slots on most mission rigs, and having to run tackle on NPCs, will force you to go to a buffer fit that is just not going to stand up to the typical mission damage load. They would have to cut waaaaaaay back on the NPCs, to the point where the "tackle" missions are basically 1v1 against a ship no stronger than your own, or else missions will be only doable in small gangs or with logi support, just like PvP. That might be ok for some missions, but the dev comments posted just today state that they still want to accomodate "casual" solo mission runners as well, so it's not something that would fit well into every mission.



It was stated in the post that they would lower the number of npc in missions, and most mission ships are over tanked to begin with.

Dev comes in with ideas to improve the state of PvE, nothing is implemented yet and its just ideas and people are already shitting bricks.

Maybe people will need to learn to manage transversal speed, capacitor, and play the game instead of just turning on tank and face rolling, oh no more active game play its the bane of us all!
Hellfreak
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#334 - 2013-01-15 23:39:10 UTC
From Yitter- " Again, while we are not in a position to state how or when such revamp will happen, this definitely is on our to-do list not only to rebalance drones in general, but also update their behavior, improve their handling through the UI and finally add more combat options for players choosing to specialize in such gameplay."


Why did you guys release NPC AI changes in retribution before having everything worked out? Ewar ridiculousness included. Ive had 2 accounts inactive until you get this mess sorted- it doesnt seem you're making much progress :( I really enjoyed having the other 2 accounts running to fleet and do these things.The level 4 mission guys seem to be able to ignore or work around this stuff but the L5's are about stupid to do in a reasonable amount of time for the risk/reward involved. Now it seems you had no idea there were even issues still until very recently. That's another notch against the hope this will be resolved soon. I can afford to suspend/cancel these accounts but can you guys? including however many others there are not pleased with how this is working out?
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#335 - 2013-01-16 00:46:41 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We should be relying on gameplay players can overcome if they are smart instead of brute force mechanics.


When can we expect to see this philosophy in pvp?
Mortimer H
State War Academy
Caldari State
#336 - 2013-01-16 02:46:23 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We should be relying on gameplay players can overcome if they are smart instead of brute force mechanics.


When can we expect to see this philosophy in pvp?


You can already see it: Smart players bring LOTS of brute force.
Derdrom Utida
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#337 - 2013-01-16 03:06:26 UTC
PvE should be made more interesting, but not by making it like PvP. They should have their distinct flavoring. How? I'm not sure, it's up to CCP. I'm glad they're realizing PvE doesn't need a buff, but instead ways to make it more interesting.

I say they should be friendlier toward small groups that want to take on PvE in low sec.
Mortimer H
State War Academy
Caldari State
#338 - 2013-01-16 04:00:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Mortimer H
And another one of those drone rants:

When Drones are attacked, they survive between 3 and 10 seconds.
Just saw my drone's shield becoming red pretty fast. So I panicked and did something awfully stupid: While I reached for the hotkeys for calling my drones in I opened the contextmenu of my drones with my mouse. Before I got to the right entry I was at the hotkeys. Pressed them. Nothing happened. Pressed them again. Nothing happened. Hammered on the hotkeys like wild. Guess what. Finally i clicked somewhere with my mouse, the context menu closed and my hotkeys worked again. My drones came towards my ship, still beeing shot, and 4 out of 5 made it to the drone bay.
I also noticed the drones will not immidiately react to hot keys after you have clicked on one of the windows.
Can anyone tell me the current drone interface is made for fast reactions?

So, why not double the drone armor, tripple (or more?) the drone repair cost.
Drones will not survive going afk anymore than now, calling them in and redeploying them would leave it's mark on their armor, you have a sensible chance of saving your drones and when the repair cost comes to a level that one will notice, then people will see how good or bad they handle their drones. As a side effect we would have a small money sink. And it could be implemented with quite little effort, I would guess.



While I did my mission, someone bought 10 hornets from me. I sell them quite expensive for producing them with an unresearched blueprint. (Couldn't compete with current prices anyway, no matter how much I research the blueprint.) Still the buyer decided to stack up with 5 more drones just minutes later.
It's fine for now, but in the long run my drone business will not be well. Killing drones is fine, people have to restock then. But people have to actually use the drones, or they will not be killed.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#339 - 2013-01-16 04:01:04 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Van Kuzco wrote:
I would love a variety of mission objectives that require warp disruptors or scramblers.

The only problem with this is that PvP fits in most typical (tech I) mission boats cannot stand up to huge amounts of sustained focus fire from dozens of attackers. PvP fits are by definition meant to either engage 1v1 against ships of similar strength (or weakness), or to run in fleets or small gangs, where you either hit and run (or just run when hitting does not look like a good idea), or where you rely on logi backup to deal with long fights against equal or greater numbers. This is why PvP fits are, with a few niche exceptions, always buffer tank fits. Not only is it all you can fit, it's also all that matters in the very short, high alpha fights you usually face, or where you have logi to keep you alive.

Losing those mid slots on most mission rigs, and having to run tackle on NPCs, will force you to go to a buffer fit that is just not going to stand up to the typical mission damage load. They would have to cut waaaaaaay back on the NPCs, to the point where the "tackle" missions are basically 1v1 against a ship no stronger than your own, or else missions will be only doable in small gangs or with logi support, just like PvP. That might be ok for some missions, but the dev comments posted just today state that they still want to accomodate "casual" solo mission runners as well, so it's not something that would fit well into every mission.


I've done all the missions gallente agents ever give out, with a dominix with a single rep, 4 hardeners and 1 med cap injector, and with the 15 or so cap 800s I can carry in. I typically have 4 slots dedicated to "discretionary applied dps modules". If one of those had to be a warp disruptor, then so be it. One imagines all races have this capability, and one imagines that even if I preferred my navy 'thron (I don't), I could still leave the cheap dominix hull at the mission station for a mission that did require it.
Shade Millith
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#340 - 2013-01-16 06:48:50 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
One of them is to bring PvE closer to PvP as mentioned before.

Oops, now I've written a wall of text Oops Well anyway, we hope this do help a bit.


For me, as a PVP inclined individual, there is one universal problem with this.
PVE is boring to me. All of it.
The only reason I would have anything to do with PVE, in any game, is so I can PVP.

Right now, PVE is a boring, unpleasant chore that I can do with half a mind elsewhere.
You want to make it a boring, unpleasant chore that I must pay full attention to.

Sounds about as fun as a kick in the teeth.

You talk about sandbox? Leave people who want the half-hearted grind, with the half-hearted grind, and make other interesting stuff for those who want something more interesting. Like the stuff you've already made, and have in game. Or did you forget about the Incursions and Wormholes?

I vote no. Leave us with a sandbox.