These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#21 - 2012-10-03 12:56:19 UTC
Oh big deal, so some lazypvp lamers will have to put in a bit more effort or use a different ship. Big deal.

We've been managing fine with npcs switching targets in wormhole space for years, and the stupid nullrats are STILL not going to be as aggressive or powerful as sleepers even after the changes
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#22 - 2012-10-03 12:58:10 UTC
Sladislov wrote:

It isn't non-challenging; If the ratter in question is paying attention, there is no way he can be caught.
Thats right, No way to get caught making boatloads of isk, they'll only lose ships when they stop paying attention
and go watch the newest episode of naruto while making spacebucks.


The NPCs are non-challenging. Whether you can catch another player while he isn't looking isn't changing with a change to NPC AI. If anything, the target might be paying *more* attention to the rats now, rather than his d-scan or local. But it certainly won't make him more aware of an enemy in system.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#23 - 2012-10-03 12:58:20 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Capqu wrote:

Oh okay, my bad. I didn't realise you had come to that conclusion and that you were the authority on NPC targeting mechanics.


You sound worse than the carebears whining about this supposed nerf to their afk drones.

Anything involving the non-sleeper AI is ridiculously easy right now. If it makes the ratter's job harder and the ganker's job harder, then good. CCP is making a ridiculously non-challenging aspect of the game more challenging.

This is a good thing.



See, short-sightenness.

It DOESN'T make the ratter's job harder, it makes the ratters job easier and safer.

It also makes it potentially easier to AFK drones boats. We still gotta test it, but some of us were talking about simply putting an ECM Burst on a domi afk ratter/missioner (since EWAR generates the most threat) and letting it auto-repeat, while them afk domi reps its own drones ect ect. That may keep enough aggro off the drones to let the repper keep them alive.

So lets recap.

null and low sec pvp- nerf
easier and safer null sec ratting with pocket concord
easier afk mission running
ninja and alt salvaging nerf

ect ect

It's amazing that people can't see this coming.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#24 - 2012-10-03 12:59:53 UTC
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:
Eh, I can find ways around it so can you. Overall the bears and ratters are getting screwed in all the right places. You really don't think 99% of them are going to remember to leave a few frigate rats around for bombers when those are the rats causing them to micro manage their drones do ya?


I don't use drones in pve lol.

And you won't need to micro manage them if you know how to manage threat (ie put some ewar on your ship).

I'm taking it you haven't read anything about the changes.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#25 - 2012-10-03 13:04:00 UTC
Sladislov wrote:
I believe another point is that with the AI changes, 2 mini professions (Ninja salvaging/baiting and solo/small gang player vs ratter) get flushed down the toilet with nothing in return.

They're actually taking care of that ninja salvaging/baiting thing pretty well with Crimewatch, by making theft of any kind result in a global suspect flag and possibly making the sentries shoot you as well.

Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Because Sansha hate Capsuleers just as much as say the HBC hates -A-.

If there was a fight between Two groups of players, both neutral to each other and another player who was neutral to both parties flew in who was easier to kill, you really think no-one would shoot him?

I certainly would, because I wouldn't even know he wasn't blue to you.

Common sense in military doctrine dictates that in the presence of a weaker mutual enemy, you concentrate on the stronger target unless you are the focus of both. You would disregard this because now, as a matter of public record, you are incapable of common sense in combat.

And also, I already see a way to flip this on the ratter entirely so this whole thread is probably irrelevant. WH people know what I'm talking about.

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
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#26 - 2012-10-03 13:05:06 UTC
On the subject of it making pve in nullsec easier... it's already so easy it's almost game breakingly stupid.

Fix local and then everything will be better
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#27 - 2012-10-03 13:05:41 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

It DOESN'T make the ratter's job harder, it makes the ratters job easier and safer.

It also makes it potentially easier to AFK drones boats. We still gotta test it, but some of us were talking about simply putting an ECM Burst on a domi afk ratter/missioner (since EWAR generates the most threat) and letting it auto-repeat, while them afk domi reps its own drones ect ect. That may keep enough aggro off the drones to let the repper keep them alive.

So lets recap.

null and low sec pvp- nerf
easier and safer null sec ratting with pocket concord
easier afk mission running
ninja and alt salvaging nerf

ect ect

It's amazing that people can't see this coming.



Oh look, the PvE crowd is adapting already. That's not so hard now, is it?

Now if only those 'leet PvPizza guys had any PvE experience, they could probably adapt and be able to tackle something in a room full of NPCs too.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#28 - 2012-10-03 13:08:02 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It DOESN'T make the ratter's job harder, it makes the ratters job easier and safer.

It also makes it potentially easier to AFK drones boats. We still gotta test it, but some of us were talking about simply putting an ECM Burst on a domi afk ratter/missioner (since EWAR generates the most threat) and letting it auto-repeat, while them afk domi reps its own drones ect ect. That may keep enough aggro off the drones to let the repper keep them alive.

So lets recap.

null and low sec pvp- nerf
easier and safer null sec ratting with pocket concord
easier afk mission running
ninja and alt salvaging nerf

ect ect

It's amazing that people can't see this coming.



Oh look, the PvE crowd is adapting already. That's not so hard now, is it?

Now if only those 'leet PvPizza guys had any PvE experience, they could probably adapt and be able to tackle something in a room full of NPCs too.



Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#29 - 2012-10-03 13:11:03 UTC
Capqu wrote:

Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


Use a different ship. Use a new tactic. Come up with a different fitting.

Adapting involves change. Examine the possibilities, test theories, discard ones that don't work.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#30 - 2012-10-03 13:11:36 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
And lets not forget you can simply just wait for him to kill off the small things before decloaking and engaging. Or if he's saving them until last, wait until theres just a few left, decloak, point bear, kill/tank rats, kill bear.

Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I think you missed the part where FoxFour is simply wrong.
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-10-03 13:17:31 UTC
Poor gankers will have to adapt to this emergent game play, awwwwwwwww Lol


Tal

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#32 - 2012-10-03 13:20:19 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
And lets not forget you can simply just wait for him to kill off the small things before decloaking and engaging. Or if he's saving them until last, wait until theres just a few left, decloak, point bear, kill/tank rats, kill bear.

Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I think you missed the part where FoxFour is simply wrong.


Now don't go challenging his assumptions and doing all his thinking for him. He has to do some of the work too! :)

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#33 - 2012-10-03 13:20:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
War Kitten wrote:
Capqu wrote:

Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


Use a different ship. Use a new tactic. Come up with a different fitting.

Adapting involves change. Examine the possibilities, test theories, discard ones that don't work.



The old adaptation fallacy. Just because you can adapt to a change doesn't make it a good change.

How exactly is making pve easier and good change?

A good change would be either making new content with new AI and slowly phasing out the old content, or redesigning the old content to fit with the new NPC behavior (both ways could minimize unintended consequences like the negative effect on pvp). Jury rigging new AI onto old content is the worst thing ccp could do, yet that looks like what they are planning to do.

It's just crazy.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#34 - 2012-10-03 13:22:15 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Capqu wrote:

Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


Use a different ship. Use a new tactic. Come up with a different fitting.

Adapting involves change. Examine the possibilities, test theories, discard ones that don't work.



The solo stealth bomber play style is pretty unique to those ships and that fit, it's not really something you can adapt unfortunately. Maybe you can adapt the interceptor tackling, but it seems like making something already extremely luck based and pretty skill intensive harder, while making it easier for the person who already has an overwhelming advantage.

I don't see how this change is a good thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#35 - 2012-10-03 13:23:51 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
And lets not forget you can simply just wait for him to kill off the small things before decloaking and engaging. Or if he's saving them until last, wait until theres just a few left, decloak, point bear, kill/tank rats, kill bear.

Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I think you missed the part where FoxFour is simply wrong.


If you're not going to believe the person who thought out, tested and implemented these changes, then how on earth can you support them?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#36 - 2012-10-03 13:24:01 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
And lets not forget you can simply just wait for him to kill off the small things before decloaking and engaging. Or if he's saving them until last, wait until theres just a few left, decloak, point bear, kill/tank rats, kill bear.

Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I think you missed the part where FoxFour is simply wrong.


If the ratter is stupid enough to kill the small things while a neutral is in local, he deserves his death. Remember, we aren't just talking about high sec.

It's already hard enough to change someone in an anom or plex, this change makes it even tougher, and that's a bad thing because pvp drives EVE economy. Anything that dampens pvp in null sec have a negative impact on the economy. Every carrier killed in a sanctum is terrible for the pilot but good for the game ie all of us.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#37 - 2012-10-03 13:25:07 UTC
Pirate tears best tears.

Enjoy!
Myelinated
Triple K Mafia
#38 - 2012-10-03 13:42:31 UTC
The change is pretty pathetic, it kills an entire style of play thats widely used in eve, to make virtually no change to pve besides making untanked secondary ships unviable.

Nullsec ratters and botters are nearly unkillable before this(If they aren't ********) , with the later actually being unkillable without the useof awoxing(which will become more prevalent because of this change)

Removing risk from the game does nothing but dull it.

Adding something to the ai to recognize if player ships they aren't currently aggressive towards are assisting or hostile towards their focal target would be a good start.



Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#39 - 2012-10-03 13:43:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Pak Narhoo
Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I would rather see it for myself then have a (new) CCP dev, who's time is most likely more occupied by working on the game then actually playing it, tell me I cannot find a way around this new targeting system (it's not even worth calling it an AI).

Time and time again we players have run into dev's who obviously had little to no real in game experience. Nucking around on test servers is not the way you get experience imho.

And even if the dev in case is right, it doesn't mean things cannot be modified after the change.


So, I would wait a bit before crying wolf. Smile
Myelinated
Triple K Mafia
#40 - 2012-10-03 13:48:21 UTC
Pak Narhoo wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that?


I would rather see it for myself then have a (new) CCP dev, who's time is most likely more occupied by working on the game then actually playing it, tell me I cannot find a way around this new targeting system (it's not even worth calling it an AI).

Time and time again we players have run into dev's who obviously had little to no real in game experience. Nucking around on test servers is not the way you get experience imho.

And even if the dev in case is right, it doesn't mean things cannot be modified after the change.


So, I would wait a bit before crying wolf. Smile


Yeah, like when grayscale ruined nullsec anomalies, we sure found a good way to work around that.