These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Propopsed AI changes and their effect. [UPDATED]
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
nat longshot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2012-10-03 16:04:28 UTC  |  Edited by: nat longshot
so changeing the AI for belt rats and mission npc's the op says is a bad idea?!? FTW

So in slowing down mission runners by attacking there drones or other members of there fleet is a bad thing i take it?

Now before i read this post i did not think of Ninja sals or mission flippers that warp in. Well thanks to the Op all i can say is What a great change Ninja sal's now risk loseing there ship just by warping in i love it +1 ccp.

Now as for the the moron that started this post get over it its about time the npc attacked diffent targets and changed target take level 4 missions they were getting very boring now there going to get just a hair harder iam ok with that but now thanks to your post i see the change willl allso make the risk of entering someone mission even a greater risk because the rat might change targets to the person that there to ninja sal to flip wreacks within your mission what a great draw back from the change i would have never tought of it.

So what it changes your play style its about time something happen's like that mission runner for years had to deal with ninja sal or mission fliper's because when you had full aggro they ran no risk of getting shot unless you were silly to fire on someone ready for pvp vs a pve ship now even people looking to gank you in the mission will run a higher risk of getting shot from the npc well well what a nice change i like it great job ccp.

ninja sal,mission flipers and mission gankers will have alot more risk when entering the field full of npcs.

 [13:12:18] CCP Punkturis nat longshot you're a cutie.. OH YAH I WIN!!
Womyn Power
Broski Bad End
#102 - 2012-10-03 16:07:42 UTC
nat longshot wrote:
so changeing the AI for belt rats and mission npc's the op says is a bad idea?!? FTW

So in slowing down mission runners by attacking there drones or other members of there fleet is a bad thing i take it?

Now before i read this post i did not think of Ninja sals or mission flippers that warp in. Well thanks to the Op all i can say is What a great change Ninja sal's now risk loseing there ship just by warping in i love it +1 ccp.

Now as for the the moron that started this post get over it its about time the npc attacked diffent targets and changed target take level 4 missions they were getting very boring now there going to get just a hair harder iam ok with that but now thanks to your post i see the change willl allso make the risk of entering someone mission even a greater risk because the rat might change targets to the person that there to ninja sal to flip wreacks within your mission what a great draw back from the change i would have never tought of it.

So what it changes your play style its about time something happen's like that mission runner for years had to deal with ninja sal or mission fliper's because when you had full aggro they ran no risk of getting shot unless you were silly to fire on someone ready for pvp vs a pve ship now even people looking to gank you in the mission will run a higher risk of getting shot from the npc well well what a nice change i like it great job ccp.

ninja sal,mission flipers and mission gankers will have alot more risk when entering the field full of npcs.


+1, most thought out, well constructed argument in favor of the changes i've seen yet.
nat longshot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-10-03 16:09:42 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Updated the OP with the following:

Running list of play styles negatively affected or destroyed by this change:

Solo hunting ratters in a stealth bomber
Solo hunting ratters in a destroyer
Tackling ratters in an interceptor (in particular, battleships and above, since the cruisers and below will EWAR and shoot the interceptor)
Mission flipping (even high sec rats will shoot the mission flipping frigate now)
Ninja salvaging
Awoxing (now you have to train into something that can tank the rats EWAR AND the mission runner before you can awox)


Kill NPC frigs then kill target, though I guess that would require more :effort:.




Please explain how I can kill the NPC frigs in my mission flipping ship, my ninja salvager, my awox vigil, my tackle ceptor or my stealth bomber.


cry at them and hope they let you pass. lol hahahah moron deal with it you had no risk if enter someone mission now it just getting better for people running missions and upping your risk greatly and its about time.

 [13:12:18] CCP Punkturis nat longshot you're a cutie.. OH YAH I WIN!!
Sladislov
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#104 - 2012-10-03 16:17:10 UTC
nat longshot wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Updated the OP with the following:

Running list of play styles negatively affected or destroyed by this change:

Solo hunting ratters in a stealth bomber
Solo hunting ratters in a destroyer
Tackling ratters in an interceptor (in particular, battleships and above, since the cruisers and below will EWAR and shoot the interceptor)
Mission flipping (even high sec rats will shoot the mission flipping frigate now)
Ninja salvaging
Awoxing (now you have to train into something that can tank the rats EWAR AND the mission runner before you can awox)


Kill NPC frigs then kill target, though I guess that would require more :effort:.




Please explain how I can kill the NPC frigs in my mission flipping ship, my ninja salvager, my awox vigil, my tackle ceptor or my stealth bomber.


cry at them and hope they let you pass. lol hahahah moron deal with it you had no risk if enter someone mission now it just getting better for people running missions and upping your risk greatly and its about time.


My avatar pretty much explains the reaction to your post.

       Sladislov Director of Silly semantics       Broksi Kurth    xXxBlack LegionxXx
Cede Forster
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#105 - 2012-10-03 16:19:39 UTC
checked all pages to make sure this was not mentioned yet:

I for one welcome our new AI enhanced NPC overlord.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#106 - 2012-10-03 16:27:05 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Updated the OP with the following:

Running list of play styles negatively affected or destroyed by this change:

Solo hunting ratters in a stealth bomber
Solo hunting ratters in a destroyer
Tackling ratters in an interceptor (in particular, battleships and above, since the cruisers and below will EWAR and shoot the interceptor)
Mission flipping (even high sec rats will shoot the mission flipping frigate now)
Ninja salvaging
Awoxing (now you have to train into something that can tank the rats EWAR AND the mission runner before you can awox)


Kill NPC frigs then kill target, though I guess that would require more :effort: and skill.


Yea, shoot rats while you target shoots you at the same time the NPCs are shooting you. brilliant.

This isn't about effort and skill, it's about whats good or bad for the game. Extra protection for null sec ratters is bad for the game,null sec shold really offer protection that doesn't come from the players themselves, high sec is the place for automated protection.


And yet this is exactly what you are asking for. For the game mechanics continue to offer false and somewhat nonsensical protection for the person looking for ganks.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#107 - 2012-10-03 16:31:02 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Changing how something needs to be done does not necessarily mean that it is "negatively affected".

Have you tested these changes on the test server?

Are CCP done tweaking the new system yet, or merely asking for informed feedback at this point after testing?

Are you jumping to conclusions about what will be possible/impossible after these changes?

Slow down big fella.


I'm not jumping to conclusions, I'm basing everything I say on what I've seen on the test server and what FoxFour has said.

The purpose of my post is to try help identify possible concerns and give (hopefully) constructive feedback. I urge you to do the same.


My input will come after the changes are live long enough to properly try various scenarios to deal with the changes, not after a quickie check to see if the old ways still work the same.

I'll remind you, WE are not the one's panicing over this. Instead we are willing to acknowledge the common sense behind the changes and work with CCP to impliment it in a way that does not negatively affect the game "as a whole".

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#108 - 2012-10-03 16:32:53 UTC
Womyn Power wrote:
nat longshot wrote:
so changeing the AI for belt rats and mission npc's the op says is a bad idea?!? FTW

So in slowing down mission runners by attacking there drones or other members of there fleet is a bad thing i take it?

Now before i read this post i did not think of Ninja sals or mission flippers that warp in. Well thanks to the Op all i can say is What a great change Ninja sal's now risk loseing there ship just by warping in i love it +1 ccp.

Now as for the the moron that started this post get over it its about time the npc attacked diffent targets and changed target take level 4 missions they were getting very boring now there going to get just a hair harder iam ok with that but now thanks to your post i see the change willl allso make the risk of entering someone mission even a greater risk because the rat might change targets to the person that there to ninja sal to flip wreacks within your mission what a great draw back from the change i would have never tought of it.

So what it changes your play style its about time something happen's like that mission runner for years had to deal with ninja sal or mission fliper's because when you had full aggro they ran no risk of getting shot unless you were silly to fire on someone ready for pvp vs a pve ship now even people looking to gank you in the mission will run a higher risk of getting shot from the npc well well what a nice change i like it great job ccp.

ninja sal,mission flipers and mission gankers will have alot more risk when entering the field full of npcs.


+1, most thought out, well constructed argument in favor of the changes i've seen yet.



It would be, if it weren't for the fact that he only talks about lvl4's. These changes completely destroy the game for people who hunt 0.0 anomaly/sig runners (which is a far more common and profitable career than you'd think).

Someone linked to the electric boogaloo vids earlier, we can kiss those goodbye. So long outside the box thinking, so long creativity, hello mindless isk grinders and plex buying robots.
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2012-10-03 16:37:10 UTC
Sweet sweet change . TBH missions are boring and its about time something shook them up. Can we also have new missions please.

Tal

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Arcin Hamir
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#110 - 2012-10-03 16:40:35 UTC
Capqu wrote:
War Kitten wrote:


Exactly.

You are not "apparently on their side", you are a hostile in their space too. And you're a damn easy target. You'll die fast and first.

Goodbye.

(And I hunt the nullsec ratters myself - but nice try assuming I was the carebear :) )


I see at this point you are trying to overwhelm me with stupidity, so I'll just take your opinion into account and ask that you don't post further. Appreciate it.


I an afraid you are majoring on the stupidity side of things - basically your moan boils down to wanting your pvp being as risk free as possible - suck it up and try actual combat for a change
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#111 - 2012-10-03 16:43:04 UTC
Quote:
So long outside the box thinking, so long creativity, hello mindless isk grinders and plex buying robots.


Actually, so long doing things the way you always have, so long being predictably safe from NPC's that have aggro on someone else, hello actually needing to put thought and teamwork into jumping someone already engaged with NPC's.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#112 - 2012-10-03 16:44:00 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
If you are going to waste brain power trying to justify a necessary game mechanic, fine, look at it this way.

That stealth bomber that shows up and starts engaging the ship the pirates are currentlly shooting is not viewed as a savior or ally, he is viewed as competition for the loot (and/or the glory of the kill).

It is entirely sensible for them to dispatch their smaller vessels to deal with you quickly to get you out of the picture, so that you don't steal (what they view as) their kill and/or their loot.

That should pretty much end this pointless line of pseudo logic.

When you're engaged in mortal combat, your first priority is winning the fight. Bragging rights and wreck contents aren't even a secondary concern when you aren't certain that you'll be the one walking away alive. No soldier or pirate is going to think otherwise unless they had their brains replaced with the scrap metal they salvaged from their previous engagement. This is what separates a fighting force from your local group of Sunday-afternoon armchair captains on their first ever fleet op, fighting their first ever war with an empire griefing corporation. And as far as I'm aware, CCP is trying to increase, not diminish, the AI of NPC entities.

So no, this "pointless line of pseudo logic" hasn't yet met its end. Not until you present a valid argument for why the more dangerous threat shouldn't be eliminated first, especially when the less dangerous one is focused on it as well.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#113 - 2012-10-03 16:44:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
Arcin Hamir wrote:
Capqu wrote:
War Kitten wrote:


Exactly.

You are not "apparently on their side", you are a hostile in their space too. And you're a damn easy target. You'll die fast and first.

Goodbye.

(And I hunt the nullsec ratters myself - but nice try assuming I was the carebear :) )


I see at this point you are trying to overwhelm me with stupidity, so I'll just take your opinion into account and ask that you don't post further. Appreciate it.


I an afraid you are majoring on the stupidity side of things - basically your moan boils down to wanting your pvp being as risk free as possible - suck it up and try actual combat for a change


If you don't count awoxing, mission flipping, ninja salvaging and ratter hunting as "actual combat" that's fine, but are you saying they have no place in the game?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#114 - 2012-10-03 16:57:37 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:


And yet this is exactly what you are asking for. For the game mechanics continue to offer false and somewhat nonsensical protection for the person looking for ganks.


That's nonsense. The ratter has the "protection" of local under any conditions. The "ganker" is already at a disadvantage as soon as he jumps in.

This change adds actual physical protection to that, in NULL SEC, it shifts the balance far to much to the defender, making it easier to even bad pilts to escape death. This kind of physical protection only belongs in high sec.

Not really understanding why people like you are so hot on this idea when there are plenty of us giving plenty of reasons why it (as presented, in it's current form) is not a good thing for the overall game. Sure I benefit from it (I don't WANT to lose my Mach or Tengu in a sanctum lol) and can adapt readily, but I'd hope the game makers would just be smarter than this.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#115 - 2012-10-03 17:01:42 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

My input will come after the changes are live long enough to properly try various scenarios to deal with the changes, not after a quickie check to see if the old ways still work the same.

I'll remind you, WE are not the one's panicing over this. Instead we are willing to acknowledge the common sense behind the changes and work with CCP to impliment it in a way that does not negatively affect the game "as a whole".


The part I bolded is the time when it's pretty much too late.

And no one is panicking, we just recognize a bad way of doing things when we see it, and don't want the company we're customers of to keep doing tings this way, which they then have to go back and "fix".

I'll ask again, why is this so bloody hard to understand? I'm not against change I'm against Waste, and change just to be able to say "we changed something".
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#116 - 2012-10-03 17:05:48 UTC
I will tell you what will happen, people will stop doing missions and go for incursions and wormholes.
Why ? because in the end it doesn't matter what you do missions anomalies incursions or wormholes.

Why not do incursions for example when you can get more isk than in missions ?

So missions will not be done anymore everyone will do incursions.
Roll
Yatama Kautsuo
Tencus
#117 - 2012-10-03 17:12:26 UTC
Gun Gal wrote:
Its good, but I see your whine.

You are sad that you cannot take advantage of all the aggro being on the ratter, with you to soak him as well


The new system will make you possible a target as well.

Perfect! Lets face it, it is a bad game mechanic that let that happen in the first place, and you should be a target, after all the enemy hates you too.

Suck it up princess


yeah princess -.-

i didn't read the rest, just had to answer to this silly argument.

you know the term? the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

if i was an npc and i was losing a battle vs a single ship attacking my base and then suddendly another ship warps in and attacks the agressor what would i do first? yeah, attack the newcomer when the aggressor is threatening to destroy your home... -.-

even rats can't be that dumb :P
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#118 - 2012-10-03 17:14:59 UTC
Capqu wrote:
I would greatly appreciate it if you actually read my post first. If your only argument is that you're warping into NPCs so you should be shot, please tell me why Sansha would think it was in their best interest to start shooting the guy who is apparently on their side?


You don't know Sansha Kuvakei very well.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#119 - 2012-10-03 17:23:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
If you are going to waste brain power trying to justify a necessary game mechanic, fine, look at it this way.

That stealth bomber that shows up and starts engaging the ship the pirates are currentlly shooting is not viewed as a savior or ally, he is viewed as competition for the loot (and/or the glory of the kill).

It is entirely sensible for them to dispatch their smaller vessels to deal with you quickly to get you out of the picture, so that you don't steal (what they view as) their kill and/or their loot.

That should pretty much end this pointless line of pseudo logic.

When you're engaged in mortal combat, your first priority is winning the fight. Bragging rights and wreck contents aren't even a secondary concern when you aren't certain that you'll be the one walking away alive. No soldier or pirate is going to think otherwise unless they had their brains replaced with the scrap metal they salvaged from their previous engagement. This is what separates a fighting force from your local group of Sunday-afternoon armchair captains on their first ever fleet op, fighting their first ever war with an empire griefing corporation. And as far as I'm aware, CCP is trying to increase, not diminish, the AI of NPC entities.

So no, this "pointless line of pseudo logic" hasn't yet met its end. Not until you present a valid argument for why the more dangerous threat shouldn't be eliminated first, especially when the less dangerous one is focused on it as well.

I'll start with you.

1: It's a game mechanic. My point was rationalizing it is by far of secondary importance to overall game play.

2: If we are going to rationalize it anyway I can't begin to describe to you how many times a 3rd party has jumped into a null sec battle (large or small) and ended up getting killed right away despite the fact that he starts shooting the other guy.

He is not an ally, he is competition.

if you want to put it in a silly RP perspective, those pirates have orders to kill anyone not of their faction that enters the area... and that is exactly what they should do.

Your line of reasoning on this is silly beyond all description on all levels, and is simply an obvious desperate attempt to support the argument of "Things need to be more challenging for everyone else BUT ME".

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#120 - 2012-10-03 17:26:34 UTC
Spc One wrote:
I will tell you what will happen, people will stop doing missions and go for incursions and wormholes.
Why ? because in the end it doesn't matter what you do missions anomalies incursions or wormholes.

Why not do incursions for example when you can get more isk than in missions ?

So missions will not be done anymore everyone will do incursions.
Roll

Because if you read the thread/dev blog/tested for yourself, you'd see that they're not changing NPC abilities (tank, numbers, firepower). They're only changing NPC behavior. So good luck taking your meta-fit CNR into a vanguard alone. Or for that matter, any type of wormhole. I'm sure that high-sec mission bears just can't wait to take their crap into an environment equivalent to a prison shower with mandatory blindfolds.

No, this change will in fact drastically increase mission-running, because now the runners will have near-immunity to ninja salvagers and flip baiters. It's the other side of the coin to the death sentences for petty thieves they have planned in Crimewatch, since mission areas are usually devoid of any players except the mission runners themselves. High-sec pvp immunity is the goal here. Solo stealth bomber pvp in null is just an unfortunate casualty.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted