These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Problems of EVE online

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alexander Bor
Polaris Global
#1 - 2016-09-04 09:51:41 UTC
Hello

Here I would like to depict problems of EVE online on the current stage of development. Though being not prominent now, they could become leading factors of destabilization in our virtual world after Clone States release. This will happen because of multiplification by all this "fresh blood". According natural laws quantity is transformed into quality. And you will loose the control over the situation.

Here are this factors:

- bots in market and mining (at the current moment CCP have no effective mechanisms to prevent bots being exists at the New Eden. One mining bot cannot change mineral price on a critical way but one market bot at Jita can derail this "train");
- brittle market (unstable and unbalanced market inside EVE could be crashed of just single simple impact. Being ruined it may never back to previous state);
- imperfect CONCORD (mechanic of this wonderfull organization requires updating. It cannot counter challenges of today. Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted);
- "dead" industry (CCP developed PVP very much and now this part of gameplay is good enough. But industrial branches are now more like imitaion rather than real alive path. In the current state there's no place for uindustrialists to perpetuate their real talents, to turn their individual gifts into reality. Industry must more complex and there must be place for diversity if you want this direction to be called real).

So one should think twice if he is ready to face all the problems and chaous after november. Or he will be trying this virtual world like a kid or he bring computations and analysis into his steps.
Solecist Project
#2 - 2016-09-04 09:57:17 UTC
Troll. Just like the others.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#3 - 2016-09-04 10:52:31 UTC
Alexander Bor wrote:
Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted

Why?

Remove standings and insurance.
Serene Repose
#4 - 2016-09-04 11:02:38 UTC
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.

CCP decided to alter the game years ago. They're in the midst of a major roll-out of what they decided to do. They are not going to stop. EVE will become something new. (The more things change, the more they stay the same.) Some people will like it. Some will not. Even CCP may not like some of what it's done. Some of it may indeed have unforeseen consequences. There will be revisions.

You won't win any points by being the amateur prophet here. In the end pretty much every possible imagined outcome would have been posted here or on that shabby, other website, amounting to nothing more than the random thoughts and ill-considered, uninformed and shallow meanderings of people with too much time on their hands. (Unless, of course there's some contest on which I failed to receive the memo; What Will EVE Be In Five Years...no, wait....)

SO...for this entry into this bandwidth wasting ramble through the canyons of the average gamer's mind I must ask:

Are you going to finish that sandwich?

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#5 - 2016-09-04 11:04:32 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.




Do you feel compelled to comment?

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#6 - 2016-09-04 11:07:18 UTC
Bumblefck wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.




Do you feel compelled to comment?


Me thinks thou doth protest too much
Serene Repose
#7 - 2016-09-04 12:11:29 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.
Do you feel compelled to comment?
Me thinks thou doth protest too much
*Takes the sandwich anyway*

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Solecist Project
#8 - 2016-09-04 12:22:08 UTC
I just noticed this guy looks like he could be a brother of the german Cpt. Picard in that other thread.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#9 - 2016-09-04 15:14:33 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.
Do you feel compelled to comment?
Me thinks thou doth protest too much
*Takes the sandwich anyway*


Woot, free sandwich Big smile

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale
#10 - 2016-09-04 15:31:18 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
For all who feel compelled to offer their two-cents worth on this done-to-death topic: This topic has been done to death.
Do you feel compelled to comment?
Me thinks thou doth protest too much
*Takes the sandwich anyway*


Woot, free sandwich Big smile

Now I'm hungry Sad

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.
Caco De'mon
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#11 - 2016-09-04 16:40:23 UTC
No follow-up = troll

*claps*

*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#12 - 2016-09-04 17:25:02 UTC
Linus Gorp wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:

Woot, free sandwich Big smile

Now I'm hungry Sad


dammit, now I am too Ugh

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#13 - 2016-09-04 17:51:34 UTC
Alexander Bor wrote:

- "dead" industry (CCP developed PVP very much and now this part of gameplay is good enough. But industrial branches are now more like imitaion rather than real alive path. In the current state there's no place for uindustrialists to perpetuate their real talents, to turn their individual gifts into reality. Industry must more complex and there must be place for diversity if you want this direction to be called real).



What would you prefer with it?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Shallanna Yassavi
qwertz corp
#14 - 2016-09-04 18:15:41 UTC
Alexander Bor wrote:
Hello

Here I would like to depict problems of EVE online on the current stage of development. Though being not prominent now, they could become leading factors of destabilization in our virtual world after Clone States release. This will happen because of multiplification by all this "fresh blood". According natural laws quantity is transformed into quality. And you will loose the control over the situation.

Here are this factors:

- bots in market and mining (at the current moment CCP have no effective mechanisms to prevent bots being exists at the New Eden. One mining bot cannot change mineral price on a critical way but one market bot at Jita can derail this "train");
- brittle market (unstable and unbalanced market inside EVE could be crashed of just single simple impact. Being ruined it may never back to previous state);
- imperfect CONCORD (mechanic of this wonderfull organization requires updating. It cannot counter challenges of today. Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted);
- "dead" industry (CCP developed PVP very much and now this part of gameplay is good enough. But industrial branches are now more like imitaion rather than real alive path. In the current state there's no place for uindustrialists to perpetuate their real talents, to turn their individual gifts into reality. Industry must more complex and there must be place for diversity if you want this direction to be called real).

So one should think twice if he is ready to face all the problems and chaous after november. Or he will be trying this virtual world like a kid or he bring computations and analysis into his steps.

1: Bots can't think.
2: Part of the fun. Or would you prefer a push-button-get-cookie "market"?
3: The EVE universe has teeth. It bites. Other players in the universe can make your life interesting. That's the point.
4: The market provides this. Conditions change, and a good plan becomes a bad one overnight. Or those ships you were building are hard countered by the doctrine a hostile fleet brought.

A signature :o
Solecist Project
#15 - 2016-09-05 11:57:23 UTC
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
1: Bots can't think.

It's 2016.

And make no mistake, it actually scares me to have to correct you ...
... but bots can think nowadays and they're getting better and better at it.

I'm absolutely sure there's already game-bots out there with proper, actual, artificial intelligence.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#16 - 2016-09-05 16:04:50 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
1: Bots can't think.

It's 2016.

And make no mistake, it actually scares me to have to correct you ...
... but bots can think nowadays and they're getting better and better at it.

I'm absolutely sure there's already game-bots out there with proper, actual, artificial intelligence.

Actually most studies I've seen have shown that the most "intelligent" looking bots - which appear to "learn" and some of which can even come close to passing the Turing test (if designed for social interactions)....These are the bots that are the most strictly programmed and the *least intelligent* in terms of artificial intelligence. They simply have very thorough programmers who took many many scenarios into account and developed extensive hard-coded algorithms to allow the bot to use some "trial and error" - but the bot is still very strictly limited to its hard-coded programming.

Last time I looked into it, all attempts at true open-ended coding and actual "artificial intelligence" have been dismal failures.

So as of now at least, machines *can not* think... But people are getting much better at making them *look* like they can think.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Solecist Project
#17 - 2016-09-05 16:35:57 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
So as of now at least, machines *can not* think... But people are getting much better at making them *look* like they can think.
Common ChessAI isn't thinking, but looks like it.
Calling a chess program an AI nowadays is actually insulting to modern AI.

I kind of doubt you're up to date, unless the "last time" you mention was last week...
Progress is at an insane rate.
Free AI tools, devkits, SDKs are spreading everywhere.

AlphaGo on the other hand got actually creative.
Creative! It made actually brilliant moves no one thought about!
AlphaGo wasn't just a pattern machine, but a highly trained AI.

The difference between "looks like thinking" and "is thinking" ...
... was important back when we had bullshit AI that didn't deserve the name.

Nowadays the difference is completely useless, because the end result is the same.


Hell, Google made an AI that - all by itself - managed to identify a paper shredder ...
... on a picture of a full office room ...
... without ever getting taught what a paper shredder is.

And they had NO idea how that happened!


Let that sink in for a minute...

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Shallanna Yassavi
qwertz corp
#18 - 2016-09-05 17:16:56 UTC
OK, maybe I got that wrong.

Does anyone have a machine learning program available to throw at the EVE market? I know Google does, but kind of doubt they're going to do that. Yet.
I know the local stock exchange does, but they're more concerned with real money, and not too concerned with going undetected.

A signature :o
Andrea Cemenotar
Elena Minasse Operations
#19 - 2016-09-05 17:25:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Cemenotar
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
1: Bots can't think.

It's 2016.

And make no mistake, it actually scares me to have to correct you ...
... but bots can think nowadays and they're getting better and better at it.

I'm absolutely sure there's already game-bots out there with proper, actual, artificial intelligence.

Actually most studies I've seen have shown that the most "intelligent" looking bots - which appear to "learn" and some of which can even come close to passing the Turing test (if designed for social interactions)....These are the bots that are the most strictly programmed and the *least intelligent* in terms of artificial intelligence. They simply have very thorough programmers who took many many scenarios into account and developed extensive hard-coded algorithms to allow the bot to use some "trial and error" - but the bot is still very strictly limited to its hard-coded programming.

Last time I looked into it, all attempts at true open-ended coding and actual "artificial intelligence" have been dismal failures.

So as of now at least, machines *can not* think... But people are getting much better at making them *look* like they can think.


I'm sorry to agree with solecist that your information on AI technology is sliiiightly outdated

elaborating on this qould be basically repeatign what Sol already said......


so I'll go to the next point of "I'm not really sure if anyone in eve with resources and willingness to developp such level of market bot.....

and for everything else you don't need such AI

[for example mentioned mining bots are basically just scripts - but afaik EvE already is using means to detect these and those accounts are bign banned so.....]

EDIT: also it depends how you define "thinking" the last definition I have heard would pretty much fit to most modern AI software
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#20 - 2016-09-05 17:36:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Solecist Project wrote:
The difference between "looks like thinking" and "is thinking" ...
... was important back when we had bullshit AI that didn't deserve the name.

I would argue that the difference is still important regardless of how advanced simulated AI gets.

Ultimately the difference between "looks like thinking" and "is thinking" is the difference between a program that *does what its designers intended it to do* and one that *does things it was never designed or intended to do*.

The extreme example of a computer that "is thinking" would be for example the classic robot that decides to kill all humans, because it is better than humans are.

A less negative example would be a google search AI that developed a cure for cancer because it noticed a lot of people searched for it and figured it would help them out.

Neither is likely to happen any time in the foreseeable future - because we are nowhere near "true" AI where computer programs "actually think" - we are, as I said, just better and better at making it *look like* they are thinking.


Also I never mentioned chess program AI specifically at all - so not sure why you brought that up...


edit:
Also of course I'm not "up to date" as far as right this second - if anybody had *true* AI they'd have it classified so hard we'd never hear about it, unless you happened to work for the company. That would be a major breakthrough, and they wouldn't want their competitors to get ahold of it until it was finished and they had figured out a way to exploit it to the max.

edit #2:
Technology progresses a lot slower than people think in some cases. For example: 15-20 years ago I was 100% guaranteed I'd be using a quantum computer within 10 years. I'm still waiting...

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
12Next page