These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Winter] Changes to NPC AI

First post
Author
Adigard
RubberDuckies
#641 - 2012-12-02 04:13:29 UTC
Zyella Stormborn wrote:
As I said, these are simply ideas. I do not claim to be a Dev, so the pros / cons, and viability are not always apparent. I agree with most of your post however.


Ultimately all the Drone AI 'fix' ideas / posts in the world won't really do much real good until CCP decides it's time to spend resources on it. And while a few dev's may agree that the Drone AI is terribad and in need of work... until they actually start working on the terribad AI, it won't really matter.
Singira
Heffalumps and Woozles.
#642 - 2012-12-02 08:07:34 UTC
Hmmm huge typo or actually not deploying faulty AI and leaving Anomalies and complexes till new one is created?

" NPCs

Sleeper AI has been added to mission and belt NPCs."

http://community.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp
Mund Richard
#643 - 2012-12-02 11:07:49 UTC
Zyella Stormborn wrote:
(Why is WoW is it brought up so much in these forums? Because of its popularity? I was a DAOC player forever and a day, only playing WoW for about a year at the beginning, but I always see it referenced here, and rarely other ones). You say a dodge idea is silly, then give the same description with a different name?! Yeesh. Call it what you will, I was just pointing out some form of a mechanic to help vs aoe would be a large improvement, in particular in larger battles. (i will admit however, I did laugh at the elves in space comment also).

Overheating - hence the idea for the ability to overheat the drones themselves.

Drones in combat currently I see oddly similar to missiles, with the 1 difference being, they stay at target, rather than having wave after wave incoming.

WoW is mentioned a lot because... well, I think it's because EVE is SRS BSNS as opposed to WoW, which ain't (people dying to playing it too much apparently) nvm, was just a joke.
Well yes, I described how a "dodge" could work in EVE. Except that it ain't dodge, since it's not a fix % for not getting hit. Fits EVE's theme better. And those who zealously go "this ain't WoW" or gb2w won't throw hissy fits over it just hearing the description. P
There is no need for AoE avoidance imho, like missiles, getting destroyed by bombs or smartbombs is a drawback.
The difference is that missiles can be only targeted by defenders beyond that (which are pretty meh), unlike drones that can be clearly targeted and shot at.

Drone overheating gets tricky, since they have proper health.
Could overheated drones be repped properly? Would it translate into hull damage, or start from shields? Or would they get a different health bar?

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Adigard
RubberDuckies
#644 - 2012-12-02 13:09:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Adigard
Singira wrote:
Hmmm huge typo or actually not deploying faulty AI and leaving Anomalies and complexes till new one is created?

" NPCs

Sleeper AI has been added to mission and belt NPCs."

http://community.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp


Or just giving CCP too much credit? I'd assume whoever wrote the patch notes didn't know what they were talking about... it's the easiest assumption.

They've said they're deploying the code, broken, and that they're okay with not fixing things until sometime after it goes live. I can't imagine they'd recant that decision... The CCP Dev's are rather famous for doubling down on bad decisions.

Mund Richard wrote:
WoW is mentioned a lot because... well, I think it's because EVE is SRS BSNS as opposed to WoW, which ain't


Probably because it's the most popular MMO out there, so as a comparison you'll reach the widest audience.
Jame Jarl Retief
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#645 - 2012-12-02 14:43:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jame Jarl Retief
Adigard wrote:
Except loss isn't loss if it's not meaningful to recoup... no?


No.

What is the first rule of EVE? "Only fly what you can afford to lose." By this definition, a loss is never a loss that you actually keenly feel.

For example, I'm currently in FW, and I fly frigs and destroyers. I can so easily (laughably easily) afford them, that a loss of a dozen of these to me is completely meaningless. And with the FW system the way it was, where you could make half a bil in a couple of hours, while trolling for PvP? Loss IS meaningless. Not to mention how much of the expense gets offset by insurance for T1 hulls.

So, for all intents and purposes, I AM playing WoW submarines in space.

As a point of interest, I have never, ever managed to go completely broke in EVE. Just...never happened. However, there was a time in WoW in early 2005 when I was raiding Molten Core, where I would walk off with 20-25g repair bill (back when repair costs were based on armor HP, and thus plate armor repair costs were insane), and that DID break me. Luckily as a main tank, the group chipped in a little bit and kept me and the two offtanks repaired. By ourselves, there was no way in holy hell we'd have been able to afford 20-25g for a night of raiding, that took days, perhaps as much as a week to farm. And unlike EVE, you couldn't even P2Win and just sell a PLEX for ISK, now THAT was harsh! So when people compare "cold and harsh EVE" to "carebear WoW", I remember vanilla WoW (the first 2-3 years) and chuckle, because by comparison EVE is laughably easy and forgiving.
Singira
Heffalumps and Woozles.
#646 - 2012-12-03 12:32:46 UTC
Adigard wrote:


Or just giving CCP too much credit? I'd assume whoever wrote the patch notes didn't know what they were talking about... it's the easiest assumption.

They've said they're deploying the code, broken, and that they're okay with not fixing things until sometime after it goes live. I can't imagine they'd recant that decision... The CCP Dev's are rather famous for doubling down on bad decisions.


Well it would fix the afk mission runners, and it would not turn 0.0 anomaly ratting into an ISK fountain.
So I hope it is a temporary fix to the problem untill the "real" AI is ready..
I am sure that there is room for reconsideration and solving problems in a sensible way at CCP..

If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..
Mund Richard
#647 - 2012-12-03 23:08:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Singira wrote:
Well it would fix the afk mission runners, and it would not turn 0.0 anomaly ratting into an ISK fountain.
So I hope it is a temporary fix to the problem untill the "real" AI is ready..
I am sure that there is room for reconsideration and solving problems in a sensible way at CCP..

If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..

Reminds me why afk mission running needs to be treated differently than afk 0.0 (non-npc).

And don't claim "you need to watch out in nullsec", unless you don't have any proper intel channels, but then the problem lays elsewhere...

And why would it "fix" afk mission runners at all?
CCP FoxFour said it herself, that the dualboxed domi is pretty much unaffected by the change, as the domis steal all the agro due to remote rep being higher on the hate list than damage done by just one drone...

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Adigard
RubberDuckies
#648 - 2012-12-04 00:01:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Adigard
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...
Singira
Heffalumps and Woozles.
#649 - 2012-12-04 00:20:07 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Singira wrote:
Well it would fix the afk mission runners, and it would not turn 0.0 anomaly ratting into an ISK fountain.
So I hope it is a temporary fix to the problem untill the "real" AI is ready..
I am sure that there is room for reconsideration and solving problems in a sensible way at CCP..

If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..

Reminds me why afk mission running needs to be treated differently than afk 0.0 (non-npc).


0.0 Missions will get the AI aswell.. No difference..

Mund Richard wrote:

And don't claim "you need to watch out in nullsec", unless you don't have any proper intel channels, but then the problem lays elsewhere...


Please tell me where you rat afk in 0.0, and I promise you I will come show you why you should watch out, or I am pretty sure someone else will, very quickly..
And explain to me how intel channels will save you when you are afk?
Intel channels sure don't help the guys I kill, and they have a pretty well organized intel system..

Mund Richard wrote:

And why would it "fix" afk mission runners at all?
CCP FoxFour said it herself, that the dualboxed domi is pretty much unaffected by the change, as the domis steal all the agro due to remote rep being higher on the hate list than damage done by just one drone...


It will likely "fix" it just as well as the signaturebased AI, but if not applied to anomalies it will not prevent me from hunting ratters afk or just not paying attention in 0.0

You do realize that the "other" AI did not account for damage done at all right?
It had signature, remote rep and ewar as threat generators...

If afk dual-domies "easily" could circumvent the "other" AI, just by remote rep.
Can you then not just as easy gain the agro over your drone by using either a web or a targetpainter?


Please explain to me why you apparently feel 0.0 anomalies should be safer because applying the signaturebased AI would prevent me to a large degree from hunting ratters in the small fast stuff I am currently using?

What makes you think that this AI will affect anomaly ratters very much, as (where I hunt) most of them do Forsaken Hub's that actually do not even have rats smaller than cruisersize, so they do actually not need drones for ratting at all...

Im sorry if I have read your post wrong, it is just very confusing and I am having a hard time trying to understand the point you are trying to make.
Singira
Heffalumps and Woozles.
#650 - 2012-12-04 00:27:18 UTC
Adigard wrote:
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...


I have no idea why this apparently is such a huge problem that it needs to be a offence you can get banned for, and that it needs a redesigned AI that will break the game for a lot of other playstyles.
I really can't give you any answer to that..
I completely agree with you, and the sig-based, Ewar hateing AI would only increase 0.0 ratters income significantly because they could more or less rat in safety guarded by the rats..

But apparently CCP feels that this is a huge problem, and think for some reason this will solve it.
I can only applaud if they change to Sleeper AI and only apply it to missions and belt rats, because that means I can still put a small dent in the income of the 0.0 players that primarily get their income from anomalies..

Good enough?
Mund Richard
#651 - 2012-12-04 01:29:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Singira wrote:
Im sorry if I have read your post wrong, it is just very confusing and I am having a hard time trying to understand the point you are trying to make.


Basic premise for the post was your quoting the patch notes.

The point I was trying to make with that short post?

1) why would anoms be unaffected, while the AI be deployed to missions? I hope it's just a typo, I don't see the point of treating one npc rat without AI differently than another, when all are supposed to get it

1b) system sec status shouldn't be relevant. If you go lower, you accept the risks, NPCs shouldn't be getting DUMBER as threat goes higher.

2) you said it would fix afk mission runners, I said it wouldn't, based on what CCP FoxFire and a few testers we had experianced.
Unless it was "fix", and my sarcasm detector failed.


How you got to all those other points, I'm not sure of.

Also, what the hell is with the forum, my last 3 posts were totally messed up upon posting.
As in, beyond what I do myself.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#652 - 2012-12-04 01:43:25 UTC
Adigard wrote:
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...

The issue was that people were doing this in places which continued to spawn NPC's. From the reports and related talk this could apparently be done for several hours potentially.
Mund Richard
#653 - 2012-12-04 01:46:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Adigard wrote:
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...

The issue was that people were doing this in places which continued to spawn NPC's. From the reports and related talk this could apparently be done for several hours potentially.

And my impression was that it was both aimed to be fixed (the places themselves), and anyone found doing it banned already.

Obviously I may be wrong, never cared for afking like that.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#654 - 2012-12-04 01:52:50 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
And my impression was that it was both aimed to be fixed (the places themselves), and anyone found doing it banned already.

Obviously I may be wrong, never cared for afking like that.

That may be the case, I was never involved so never really tracked it beyond initial curiosity. Though there seems to be some prevailing idea that this change is a part of that effort. Not sure if that is the case or, considering the fit used in the exploit, if this change would have any positive affect.

I was simply trying to address the idea that going AFK for single non-respawning mission rooms was the issue which caused the exploit declaration.
Adigard
RubberDuckies
#655 - 2012-12-04 02:34:35 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
The issue was that people were doing this in places which continued to spawn NPC's. From the reports and related talk this could apparently be done for several hours potentially.


The full story... imo... means the particular Eve player deserves to win a medal for beating Eve Online in such an epic and unintended way. But, of course, CCP just slammed the ban hammer around and implemented some bizarre changes to combat it. It really was a grand story of Eve meta-gaming.

But the changes to render that particular exploit were put in place a while ago, and it's no longer possible to do... and certainly bannable. These particular changes would do nothing to combat that exploit. That exploit intended virtually all damage to be on the drones anyway, as rats were respawning and targeting drones anyway.

Oh well. I expect CCP did it because they did it. It's probably intended more to combat the FW 'button-orbiting' gimmicks, which have also been 'fixed' elsehwere.
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#656 - 2012-12-04 07:41:26 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Adigard wrote:
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...

The issue was that people were doing this in places which continued to spawn NPC's. From the reports and related talk this could apparently be done for several hours potentially.


But what if there wouldnt be any places where rats spawn continously.. Just a tought...
Sifanni
Doomheim
#657 - 2012-12-04 08:12:07 UTC
Keko Khaan wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Adigard wrote:
Singira wrote:
If the patchnotes are accurate it would be the best solution to the problem, that I can think of anyway..


Remind me... what was the problem again?

AFK player's make fairly horrible income / hour. You park an AFK Domi or Rattler inside a room, and come back half an hour later to find a cleared room and if the mission takes place in a single room, something akin to 5-8mil ISK. Last I checked you can make a TON more ISK at pretty much zero risk in high-sec mining.

Unless the problem is botting, in which case the new AI will do nothing to fix that...

The issue was that people were doing this in places which continued to spawn NPC's. From the reports and related talk this could apparently be done for several hours potentially.


But what if there wouldnt be any places where rats spawn continously.. Just a tought...


Out of curiosity, but in the patch notes:


  • 1/10 and 2/10 static DED complexes have been moved to the exploration system


is this what everyone's been talking about or am I simply out of touch?
Mund Richard
#658 - 2012-12-04 11:20:45 UTC
Sifanni wrote:
is this what everyone's been talking about or am I simply out of touch?

Nop, something different as far as I am aware.

And it has been fixed a while ago.
And also bannable.
Also FW was fixed elsewhere, so this changed isn't necessary for that as well.

The only thing it's necesary for, is to cut into the hisec iskmaking of multiboxers, make it a LOT harder to run L4 fleets with newbros, to be able to claim that CCPs dream of coming closer to have no PvP or PvE fits (which would be sortof viable for L5, that you do in logis, if buffers weren't that OP in PvP...), and to make missions less boring by... making them more hassle with having to constantly look after your hobgoblin/warrior IIs that are hunting down scrambling frigs.

CHAAAANGE! The antithesis of many online gamers.
No matter what it is, we will hate it.
(Well, I'd like it, IF the sites getting the new AI would be reworked to accomodate for it, or if my isk/hour would improve in another way and not decrease, or if it was new sites that get this AI, but no, CCP just rolls out an elephant in the porcelain store)



Anyways, this topic has served it's purpose, now the changes are pretty much LIVE.
And thus not a test server feedback.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Adigard
RubberDuckies
#659 - 2012-12-04 11:41:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Adigard
Mund Richard wrote:
(Well, I'd like it, IF the sites getting the new AI would be reworked to accomodate for it, or if my isk/hour would improve in another way and not decrease, or if it was new sites that get this AI, but no, CCP just rolls out an elephant in the porcelain store)


Agreed... I was rather ambivalent for the mission / plex / belt rat AI changes originally and more bitter about the unintended consequences.

Then I actually tested the code in a mission and realized certain missions would be a lot less fun (which is saying something for Eve's exciting and enjoyable... oh wait) PvE.

But now that the changes are live we'll probably get to sit in the peanut gallery as multi-billion ISK 'bear boats are lost to 7k ISK frigates in L5's, and lowsec 'bear hunters are nuked by the newly implemented CONCORD protection for PvE'ers.
Bl1SkR1N
13th HOUR
#660 - 2012-12-04 11:46:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Bl1SkR1N
Yesterday I have done one of these 10/10 blood raiders plex...It wasnt easiest but I could manage while triple boxing this. Then I suddenly remembered these upcoming changes and got stunned just thinking about how hard it's gonna be. I had to start laught when I read part with more challenging.

For those who haven't done this...2rooms are pretty easy having only about 20Ships in each. However, last room contains around 20bs's+neuts, 25smaller assorted ships, like 8 stasis towers and additional 10batteries. Muninn I used Tanked almost 4k dps and it that was barely enough, it's cap was empty within few seconds of arrival and velocity was at like 0,5m/s.

There are no spawns so this room was clearly designed to force pilots bring ship that can tank huge incoming DPS. After these changes none of your ships will be safe so what should I bring? 3rr domies with energy transfers and remote reps...hmm that could work. Oh wait there will be gazillion of smaller ships raping my drones right after arrival not to mention torpedo fired by station and neuting from at least dozen Bs's. Well you better have tought tank on those domies. If retracting some of changes isnt option I would at least consider looking at complexes and lvl5 missions and adjusting them to changes.

I do not play this game for shooting some rats but for PVP, however, everybody needs to make some isk from time to time and when I'm doing this I am not looking for something fricking challenging from NPCs.It shouldn't be easy but not impossibrrruuu either. If you want challange there are real enemies who can offer you better challange than any NPC. Arrow
Bliss

P.S. I stopped reading at p.10 so there may have been something similliar said already. More points of view better I guess.