These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

AI adjustment-Reimbursement
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arkadelphia
Unforetold Mania
#1 - 2012-12-17 06:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Arkadelphia
So I'm not to big of a forum guy so haven't been following much in terms of player thoughts on A.I. However I did just see a handful on the first few page here requesting fixes so glad I'm not alone in curiosity and thinking.

Some alliance mates and I were talking about any fixes CCP may make in response to their retribution change to AI. If CCP makes any response changes soon whether drone, damage levels, warp ins etc. even if minor..will those who have become victims due to certain DED sites extreme changes specifically be considered for reimbursement? I lost a little old drake on an 8/10 , least of my worries...but some buddies have gone as far as losing faction bs and t3 on sites that had been possible solo or with an alt in the past. Not ruling out any failure on the players part to pay attention...but my drake was webbed 3m/s and melted In under ten seconds of warp-in with scimi and multiple large shield transporters on me...so understand the levels we are looking at are intense. Been on comms and heard multiple people lose ship on warp in with the angel 8/10 retention facility..if anyone is curious this site specifically is one I've been hearing complaints.

CCP making changes would be a direct response to failures on their part by not properly balancing...so they'd be equally responsible in reimbursing those that lost ships to their failures.

Am I thinking to much into this, or just wishing for my friends sake?


TLDR; plenty of tears heard and read about ship losses to knew A.I..CCP responsible to reimburse if they do any minor rebalancing?even if just specific sites or missions...and case by case basis.
Dilligafmofo
3WAYFOUNDATIONS
New Miner's Union
#2 - 2012-12-17 09:37:57 UTC
I don't belive they should even consider reimbursements.

There was plenty of information before the patch was released and the AI changes have been on the test server for a while.

If people lost ships, it's their hard luck and in some cases, ignorance, that caused them their losses. Why should CCP reimberse for stupidity?
Maelle LuzArdiden
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-12-17 09:56:24 UTC
Ship losses are part of this game

It's incredible that some people are not accustomed to them, and a clear sign that CCP has failed to balance PVE in the past.

Good if it's fixed now.
Caldari Citizen20121206
Great Eastern
#4 - 2012-12-17 10:13:13 UTC
Im not sure ccp even wants to change the ai, but its 100% they will not reimburst. But you can always try, i heard of titans reimbursted from pvp loss, because of lagg. Maybe they will feel responsible for you ships tough, best of luck.
Aptenodytes
Reckless Abandon
#5 - 2012-12-17 10:40:07 UTC
I think they should take all your Drakes away because they were overpowered before the patch. It's their fault that heavy missiles were too good (as evidenced by the nerf), therefore it's their fault that you did not lose all your Drakes in that 8/10 before the patch. So it's only fair to take them away, really.
Mund Richard
#6 - 2012-12-17 16:39:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Dilligafmofo wrote:
I don't belive they should even consider reimbursements.
"Don't fly anything you cannot afford to lose." is a generic law of EVE.

"Don't fly anything you are not prepared to lose for at least a week after an expansion" is a lot stronger version of that rule.

"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.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#7 - 2012-12-17 17:33:16 UTC
Arkadelphia wrote:
So I'm not to big of a forum guy so haven't been following much in terms of player thoughts on A.I. However I did just see a handful on the first few page here requesting fixes so glad I'm not alone in curiosity and thinking.

Some alliance mates and I were talking about any fixes CCP may make in response to their retribution change to AI. If CCP makes any response changes soon whether drone, damage levels, warp ins etc. even if minor..will those who have become victims due to certain DED sites extreme changes specifically be considered for reimbursement? I lost a little old drake on an 8/10 , least of my worries...but some buddies have gone as far as losing faction bs and t3 on sites that had been possible solo or with an alt in the past. Not ruling out any failure on the players part to pay attention...but my drake was webbed 3m/s and melted In under ten seconds of warp-in with scimi and multiple large shield transporters on me...so understand the levels we are looking at are intense. Been on comms and heard multiple people lose ship on warp in with the angel 8/10 retention facility..if anyone is curious this site specifically is one I've been hearing complaints.

CCP making changes would be a direct response to failures on their part by not properly balancing...so they'd be equally responsible in reimbursing those that lost ships to their failures.

Am I thinking to much into this, or just wishing for my friends sake?


TLDR; plenty of tears heard and read about ship losses to knew A.I..CCP responsible to reimburse if they do any minor rebalancing?even if just specific sites or missions...and case by case basis.


Firstly a reimbursement just isn't going to happen, not matter what mistakes ccp made.

The underlying issue is ccp changing npc behavior slightly (it was only slightly) in existing content without a matching re-balancing of the same content, which had some unintended consequences. It didn't break most missions and complexes, but a few it did and the recognized the potential for trouble early on, which is why they didnt' change the behavior/AI or turrets and overseer structures/ships (some of which throw capital missiles at plex runners).

It was simply bad process, Incursions and wormholes work so well because CCP designed that content from the ground up (including the content's rewards) with NPC behaivior in mind. The missions and complexes, on the other hand, were designed and balanced under the old (dumb AI) rules, giving their npcs new behavior while keeping the sometimes insane numbers of npc ships was just dumb, (example "Blood Raider Naval Shipyard").

Eventually CCP will get around to fixing what was messed up be re-balancing missions and complexes, something they should have done 1st imo.
Mund Richard
#8 - 2012-12-17 17:43:59 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

It was simply bad process, Incursions and wormholes work so well because CCP designed that content from the ground up (including the content's rewards) with NPC behaivior in mind. The missions and complexes, on the other hand, were designed and balanced under the old (dumb AI) rules, giving their npcs new behavior while keeping the sometimes insane numbers of npc ships was just dumb, (example "Blood Raider Naval Shipyard").

Eventually CCP will get around to fixing what was messed up be re-balancing missions and complexes, something they should have done 1st

Not empty quoting

"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.
Arkadelphia
Unforetold Mania
#9 - 2012-12-17 20:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Arkadelphia
Aptenodytes wrote:
I think they should take all your Drakes away because they were overpowered before the patch. It's their fault that heavy missiles were too good (as evidenced by the nerf), therefore it's their fault that you did not lose all your Drakes in that 8/10 before the patch. So it's only fair to take them away, really.


Settle bud, my post was not about and had little to do with drakes or missiles and find it hilarious that's all you could take away from it. I fly and have one drake at any given time for pve..that's it. I could care less about drake changes or missile changes, whatever they did. Tengu was the real overpowered ship using heavy missiles I'd say anyways...and I use that as my scouting ship for pvp..haven't shot a missile in years.

To everyone else replying on topic. I couldn't agree more and nice to see so many intelligent non flammy answers. To reiterate I'm not looking for reimbursement personally just found myself in a convo yesterday evening and took the initiative amongst the group to post on the forums with the question of interest. I agree there were patch notes and plenty of warning so was only addressing other's thoughts that ccp made a mistake..but now with seeing these responses and more thought myself they didn't and I actually see the benefits of making it tougher on the players.

Although I'd still take some additional incentive/reward for taking ships into these now difficult 8/10 or higher null anomolies and ded sites...as more players required equals a greater split of loot. Even then not a complaint just a thought.
Sammybear
Pyke Syndicate
Solyaris Chtonium
#10 - 2012-12-17 20:37:33 UTC
I know they have give some ships back due to full room aggro losses, doubtful they would do a full reimbursement though as it would take a lot of man power to figure out if the losses were related to bugs or if a person was just trying to scam them,
Mund Richard
#11 - 2012-12-17 20:38:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Arkadelphia wrote:
I agree there were patch notes and plenty of warning so was only addressing others thought that ccp made a mistake..but now with seeing these responses and more thought myself they didn't

Just a slight correction:
CCP did make a mistake: full room agro bug (now fixed(?)).

And while it was pretty bad, if you held your head cool, aligned to something, (in case of scram) launched drones, saw frigates go after them, and then you went GTFO, you could have survived.

I know, not much of a consolation.

"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.
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-12-17 21:41:43 UTC
No one should get reimbursed due to AI drone changes.

However the full room aggro bug was a mistake and changed fairly quickly. I don't see why they wouldn't reimburse ships lost due to that bug. However by the time you explain the situation in a petition and get a few responses, you could have mined a new drake with a venture so I'd take the drake loss and move on.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2012-12-17 22:07:53 UTC
Dilligafmofo wrote:
I don't belive they should even consider reimbursements.

There was plenty of information before the patch was released and the AI changes have been on the test server for a while.

If people lost ships, it's their hard luck and in some cases, ignorance, that caused them their losses. Why should CCP reimberse for stupidity?


I agree with the reasons that the new AI was available on the test server

however, calling it stupidity I don't agree with. it was ignorance, at most. maybe overconfidence. but nobody needs to be called stupid

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Dilligafmofo
3WAYFOUNDATIONS
New Miner's Union
#14 - 2012-12-18 09:52:21 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Dilligafmofo wrote:
I don't belive they should even consider reimbursements.

There was plenty of information before the patch was released and the AI changes have been on the test server for a while.

If people lost ships, it's their hard luck and in some cases, ignorance, that caused them their losses. Why should CCP reimberse for stupidity?


I agree with the reasons that the new AI was available on the test server

however, calling it stupidity I don't agree with. it was ignorance, at most. maybe overconfidence. but nobody needs to be called stupid



I never called anyone stupid, merely the act of losing ones mission boat was / could have been stupidity, as in a stupid act. You don't have to be stupid to make or be a part of a stupid act. Why does the world have to look for offence in everything?
Aptenodytes
Reckless Abandon
#15 - 2012-12-18 10:50:49 UTC
Arkadelphia wrote:
Settle bud, my post was not about and had little to do with drakes or missiles and find it hilarious that's all you could take away from it.

Nor was mine. I find it hilarious that you completely missed my point.
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-12-18 12:19:04 UTC
There were two components to mission changes in Retribution. The first was an A.I. change that causes NPCs to switch targets, the other a bug that caused whole rooms to aggro, regardless of triggers (as far as I know, this bug has been fixed by now).

The A.I. changes were intended and as such do not warrant any form of reimbusement whatsoever. If a player lost his ship to it, tough luck, this is EVE, deal with it. As someone who runs missions extensively, I've been using drones a lot since the launchday and do not see any extensive problems with it, neither in dedicated drone boats such as Arbitrator, nor in ships that depend on drones to kill frigates, such as CNR. It's fine.

The whole room aggro was unintentional - this bug made several missions unintentionally hard, but as far as I know, has been fixed by now. However, if you lost a ship to it, you could ask for a reimbusement and got it back - I know, because my Tengu was torn to shreds in Worlds Collide and reimbused after a petition (not that I'd complain if it wasn't - it's EVE, ships blow up all the time and I've had a new Tengu rolling within hours of losing the last one - hours because I was actually stubborn enough to go back to the mission with CNR and finish what I started before I bought a new one :D ).

Anyway, point is, new A.I. is fine, people just need to get used to it and learn a few new tricks, then they'll do missions just as fast as they did them before - just a bit less afk, which imo is a good thing, I'd very much love a new UI for drones, though ;)

Mund Richard wrote:
And while it was pretty bad, if you held your head cool, aligned to something, (in case of scram) launched drones, saw frigates go after them, and then you went GTFO, you could have survived.


In theory, yes. In practice, though, my Worlds Collide was a mix of my ship choice (sig/speed tank), fit (double small boosters rather than a medium one) and full room close range aggro (4 elite webbers/scramblers on me at once, coupled with Angels close range dps). Funny thing is, if the ship had drones, I'd probably survive thanks to the new AI, as I literally needed just a good second more to warp off. I'd probably live if I heated the launchers the moment I landed, or if I turned AB off before the last web dropped. But meh, it happens, we all make mistakes. One more reason for "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" rule :p