These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#81 - 2012-10-03 15:21:35 UTC
Myelinated wrote:
BoBoZoBo wrote:
I do not support this view.

Why should NPCs ignore a juicy target... you wouldn't.
Why should NPCs continue attacking targets they cannot take down... you wouldn't.
Why should NPCs help you kill something you would benefit from... you wouldn't

Not to mention, there is already an in-game precedent for this as WH hunters have to deal with this already. Maybe you just need to expand your horizons and raise the challenge bar a bit?

Besides, what after you made your kill? Do they continue to ignore you? Help you loot? It is good and immersive to have smarter AI all around that treats everyone equally. Keeps everyone on their toes.


1-3 bil isk Faction fit pve ship are a juicier target than a 50 mil stealth.

Wormholes don't have local as a instant intel channel, removing local from non w-space would be fine. Actually I'd very much love to see all local channels in eve function like wormhole local.

This change basically kills low sp pvp, which hurts new players most of all(you know that thing a mmo needs to stay alive)


Thats a HUGE assumption on what im flying. I dont have a 4 billion ISK faction ship. I rarely even fly T2 ships in a WH.
Argument invalid.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite
Irya Boone
The Scope
#82 - 2012-10-03 15:21:54 UTC
and why don't you juts try a real pvp instead of ganking people doing their plexs?? i would be a F.. good idea for once !!

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#83 - 2012-10-03 15:22:02 UTC
Myelinated wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Capqu wrote:
The point here is that a lot of content is going away, for no real benefit.

It doesn't matter what ridiculous logic either side applies to why the change was made, the fact is some change that barely affects what it was meant to affect also ruins several other approaches to the game.

That's unacceptable in my opinion.


The change only ruins it, if you aren't willing to adapt.


The only adaption for this change is to resort solely on awoxing, chain smoking, and other forms of blue on blue combat. Im sure you'll enjoy that if you're complaining about getting **** at by someone you can avoid.

These changes basically add the anti-frigate safety net of wormhole sites to space that has instant intel from local chat. It completely destroys the already thin window of tackling and killing ratters with frigates.

Its effect in general will make nullsec and lowsec a duller place, while making virtually no difference in the already boring pve aspect of mission running and ratting.




very well said
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#84 - 2012-10-03 15:24:26 UTC
Myelinated wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Capqu wrote:
The point here is that a lot of content is going away, for no real benefit.

It doesn't matter what ridiculous logic either side applies to why the change was made, the fact is some change that barely affects what it was meant to affect also ruins several other approaches to the game.

That's unacceptable in my opinion.


The change only ruins it, if you aren't willing to adapt.


The only adaption for this change is to resort solely on awoxing, chain smoking, and other forms of blue on blue combat. Im sure you'll enjoy that if you're complaining about getting **** at by someone you can avoid.

These changes basically add the anti-frigate safety net of wormhole sites to space that has instant intel from local chat. It completely destroys the already thin window of tackling and killing ratters with frigates.

Its effect in general will make nullsec and lowsec a duller place, while making virtually no difference in the already boring pve aspect of mission running and ratting.




Wanted to quote this since it puts it almost perfectly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#85 - 2012-10-03 15:25:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
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.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#86 - 2012-10-03 15:25:17 UTC
Irya Boone wrote:
and why don't you juts try a real pvp instead of ganking people doing their plexs?? i would be a F.. good idea for once !!


Your opinion on the legitimacy of a play style doesn't validate or invalidate it, I'm afraid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#87 - 2012-10-03 15:26:21 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Capqu wrote:
The point here is that a lot of content is going away, for no real benefit.

It doesn't matter what ridiculous logic either side applies to why the change was made, the fact is some change that barely affects what it was meant to affect also ruins several other approaches to the game.

That's unacceptable in my opinion.

My theory is that CCP can't really rework mission AI without touching it in other places, so we get this. Their real intent here is to assist the Crimewatch changes in making missioners in empire untouchable.


I don't know about any "real intent", but one thing you said was true.

Back when ccp was discussing reducing bounties because of isk flooding in from null sec anomalies, a DEV (was it soundwave") said you can't just reduce bounties on null sec anom rats because they are the same rats you find in empore missions.

They just reused the same npcs for large swaths of PVE content. CCP understood making a sweeping change to NPCs across the board even though those NPCs were in different situations was a bad deal last year, but all of a sudden making sweeping changes that affect a lot of different content is now a good thing?

WTF CCP?
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#88 - 2012-10-03 15:26:21 UTC
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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#89 - 2012-10-03 15:26:54 UTC
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.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#90 - 2012-10-03 15:27:51 UTC  |  Edited by: BoBoZoBo
Capqu wrote:
Must be nice to be able to sit and wait for an opportune moment to attack without some sort of easily accessible intel channel letting you know exactly who is nearby.

Hunting in W-Space is very different to K-Space, so please stop drawing false parallels and misleading people.



You mean not knowing how many potential enemies I have in a system before I decide to attack two groups of entities that will attack me back is "nicer" than having local tell me when everyone is gone and its safe to attack someone who is already engaged with entities that won't threaten me?

Sounds like you never tried it since you think its nice and your tone suggests its easier/safer.

Who the hell are you convincing. How is this a false parallel? It is completely relevant in this argument as the OP is fighting against something that already exists to larger extremes.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#91 - 2012-10-03 15:28:33 UTC
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.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#92 - 2012-10-03 15:31:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
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?


Yes, before it went down, it made things too easy to manipulate.

Quote:

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.


The point is to anticipate the bad things BEFORE they happen, after is too late.

We'll prove it when they put Duality back up.

but it also cuts both whys, how do you people who support this know it's a good change, you (unlike those of us who actually briefly tested it) haven't experienced it at all?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#93 - 2012-10-03 15:31:47 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
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


Not going to happen. Look at the makeup of the CSM and then think about any kind of scenario that would make them nerf their own members.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#94 - 2012-10-03 15:36:29 UTC
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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#95 - 2012-10-03 15:42:03 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Irya Boone wrote:
and why don't you juts try a real pvp instead of ganking people doing their plexs?? i would be a F.. good idea for once !!


Your opinion on the legitimacy of a play style doesn't validate or invalidate it, I'm afraid.


The mere existence of a play style does not make it valid or necessary.

This particular one only exists because AI are too dumb to change targets. It doesn't exist by design. It emerged from the weaknesses of the NPCs. As NPCs get "smarter", new gameplay will emerge.

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.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#96 - 2012-10-03 15:42:40 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
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


Not going to happen. Look at the makeup of the CSM and then think about any kind of scenario that would make them nerf their own members.


I wondered when you would add your tinfoilery to this thread.

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.
Jantunen the Infernal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2012-10-03 15:43:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jantunen the Infernal
More news just in: the next expansion after Retribution, titled "EVE Online: Carebear Paradise", will be released in the summer of 2013. It will feature an on/off togglable PvP flag and an entirely new ship class for mining/hauling/missioning with 200k m3 cargo hold, 300 warp strength, interdiction nullifier, personal jump bridge and 0.2s align speed.

The expansion will also feature changing NPC nullsec and most of lowsec into highsec, increasing the response time of Concord to 1 second in all of highsec and other exciting new content and features. Stay tuned for more info next January.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#98 - 2012-10-03 15:52:50 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Irya Boone wrote:
and why don't you juts try a real pvp instead of ganking people doing their plexs?? i would be a F.. good idea for once !!


Your opinion on the legitimacy of a play style doesn't validate or invalidate it, I'm afraid.


The mere existence of a play style does not make it valid or necessary.

This particular one only exists because AI are too dumb to change targets. It doesn't exist by design. It emerged from the weaknesses of the NPCs. As NPCs get "smarter", new gameplay will emerge.


And you're sure that the "new gameplay" that will emerge will be as efficient at keeping the economy rolling as the game play that dies does? How does safer gameplay in unsafe space make for better game play?

Oh and the current way of things did exist by design, EVE NPCs were built to be dumb and predictable.

I want the dumb and predictable NPCs to go away to, I don't want that change to negatively affect to many other things though. I'm simply advocating smart, well thought out comprehensive change rather than this time wasting to tack improved AI on content not specifically designed for it. The New improved AI should coincide with the "more pvp fit like" NPCs and "fewer but more powerful NPCs" ccp devs have talked about for years.

Do you do any PVE War Kitten, have you even been inside a Fleet Staging Point or DED 10/10? PVE is my main thing and I don;t want CCP to go off half cocked is all.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#99 - 2012-10-03 15:55:49 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
how do you people who support this know it's a good change, you (unlike those of us who actually briefly tested it) haven't experienced it at all?


The idea of smarter AI presenting more challenge to PvE is good. I believe in it.

The exact implementation may or may not be good. Does your clairvoyance extend to exact figures you can share, or do you just somehow know that what you tested briefly on a test server is going to go live?

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.
#100 - 2012-10-03 16:01:24 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
how do you people who support this know it's a good change, you (unlike those of us who actually briefly tested it) haven't experienced it at all?


The idea of smarter AI presenting more challenge to PvE is good. I believe in it.

The exact implementation may or may not be good. Does your clairvoyance extend to exact figures you can share, or do you just somehow know that what you tested briefly on a test server is going to go live?


The purpose of feedback is to keep bad stuff from going "live", which is why I bothered to actually TEST something before forming an opinion about it, unlike you who pulled an opinion out of thin air.....

I too want better pve experiences, but I like to actually know what I'm talking about when i ask for stuff...