Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alexander Bor
Polaris Global Axiom Vocation Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 09:51:41 -
[1] - Quote
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
32887
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 09:57:17 -
[2] - Quote
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
1197
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 10:52:31 -
[3] - Quote
Alexander Bor wrote:Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted Why?
Remove insurance.
|
Serene Repose
2865
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 11:02:38 -
[4] - Quote
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
12936
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 11:04:32 -
[5] - Quote
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
Black Scorpions Inc Circle-Of-Two
851
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 11:07:18 -
[6] - Quote
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
2869
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 12:11:29 -
[7] - Quote
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
32893
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 12:22:08 -
[8] - Quote
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
743
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 15:14:33 -
[9] - Quote
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
Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin
you're welcome
|
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale Black Marker
491
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 15:31:18 -
[10] - Quote
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 Now I'm hungry
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 CODE.
90
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 16:40:23 -
[11] - Quote
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
743
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 17:25:02 -
[12] - Quote
Linus Gorp wrote:Darek Castigatus wrote:Woot, free sandwich Now I'm hungry
dammit, now I am too
Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin
you're welcome
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6161
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 17:51:34 -
[13] - Quote
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
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
378
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 18:15:41 -
[14] - Quote
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
32940
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 11:57:23 -
[15] - Quote
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
709
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 16:04:50 -
[16] - Quote
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
32974
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 16:35:57 -
[17] - Quote
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
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
381
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 17:16:56 -
[18] - Quote
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
27
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 17:25:20 -
[19] - Quote
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 wit hsolecist 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.....] |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
710
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 17:36:30 -
[20] - Quote
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)
|
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
17908
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 17:48:53 -
[21] - Quote
Since the automated forum logic defense unit (codename:Tippia) was decommissioned there have been no thinking ai's
=]|[=
|
Solecist Project
32976
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 18:00:49 -
[22] - Quote
Andrea Cemenotar wrote:I'm sorry to agree with solecist that your information on AI technology is sliiiightly outdated Why do people always apologize when they agree with me... pffff....
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
|
Keno Skir
834
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 18:10:45 -
[23] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Andrea Cemenotar wrote:I'm sorry to agree with solecist that your information on AI technology is sliiiightly outdated Why do people always apologize when they agree with me... pffff....
... ah come on.
Gùï> 30 Day Buddy Trial + ISK Bonus & Starting Assistance <Gùï
Feel free to contact me regarding my posts, or my 30 Day EvE Buddy Trials \o/
|
Andrea Cemenotar
Elena Minasse Operations
27
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 18:17:34 -
[24] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote: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...
as I mentioned in my edit - it really depends on how do you define "thinking"
if you use the definition I most commonly see [performing detailed analysis to determine further actions] then there are publically known AI softwares that would easilly classify as being able to "think"
please bear in mind we are talking about "thinking" not "wondering" :P
EDIT:
Solecist Project wrote:Andrea Cemenotar wrote:I'm sorry to agree with solecist that your information on AI technology is sliiiightly outdated Why do people always apologize when they agree with me... pffff....
I was apologising that other person for supporting someone who was opo |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
710
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 19:04:55 -
[25] - Quote
Andrea Cemenotar wrote:as I mentioned in my edit - it really depends on how do you define "thinking"
if you use the definition I most commonly see [performing detailed analysis to determine further actions] then there are publically known AI softwares that would easilly classify as being able to "think"
please bear in mind we are talking about "thinking" not "wondering" :P By that definition most computer programs, no matter how unintelligent they are, are "thinking". They take in inputs, perform analysis, determine what pre-programmed criteria (if any) are met, and use that information to determine which pre-programmed action to take.
This is why people strive for Artificial *intelligence* - not Artificial *thinking* - and in discussions about Artificial *intelligence* it is wise to take this into account, otherwise you risk rendering the entire discussion meaningless.
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
32984
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 20:34:07 -
[26] - Quote
Keno Skir wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Andrea Cemenotar wrote:I'm sorry to agree with solecist that your information on AI technology is sliiiightly outdated Why do people always apologize when they agree with me... pffff.... ... ah come on.
Andrea Cemenotar wrote:I was apologising that other person for supporting someone who was opo
I wasn't 100% serious. :p
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
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
381
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 21:36:39 -
[27] - Quote
The AI which could beat a chess grandmaster was impressive in its day. It worked by selecting the most likely next moves from all possible game moves. The more recent one which could beat the best Go players in the world couldn't work the same way. They had to use more modern machine learning. They made one which beat the best Starcraft players in the world. They made one which beat the best fighter pilots in simulators regularly.
EVE could be another such challenge. How well would a proper, modern AI FC, with either human or AI fleet members? How well would it be able to come up with and execute a doctrine, and how effective would said doctrine be? How well would it be able to do logistics?
A signature :o
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
713
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 21:55:23 -
[28] - Quote
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:The AI which could beat a chess grandmaster was impressive in its day. It worked by selecting the most likely next moves from all possible game moves. The more recent one which could beat the best Go players in the world couldn't work the same way. They had to use more modern machine learning. They made one which beat the best Starcraft players in the world. They made one which beat the best fighter pilots in simulators regularly.
EVE could be another such challenge. How well would a proper, modern AI FC, with either human or AI fleet members? How well would it be able to come up with and execute a doctrine, and how effective would said doctrine be? How well would it be able to do logistics? It would certainly be an interesting test - however during the early phases of data collection such programs tend to be incredibly clumsy and obvious... So it would be hard to get it through undetected. and I suspect that if CCP openly allowed such an experiment they would lose a lot of players over the idea of willingly letting a bot play EVE.
Also I tend to suspect that an "AI" fleet commander would struggle to maintain control over real players in EVE - so it would likely be significantly more effective with an entire "AI" fleet.
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)
|
Ezin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2016.09.06 02:30:01 -
[29] - Quote
Alexander Bor wrote: Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted
Would you agree on mining restrictions as well? lets say you may only mine 50K of cubic meters per day. |
Infinity Ziona
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2443
|
Posted - 2016.09.06 09:31:37 -
[30] - Quote
Mara Pahrdi wrote:Alexander Bor wrote:Ganking possibility must be seriously restricted Why? EvE is supposed to be a harsh and difficult game. EvE is supposed to reward effort. EvE is supposed to be a non-consentual pvp game.
Sitting safely in highsec in a super cheap ship that can be replaced in a single tick of anom ratting and killing empty freighters costing billions of isk is not harsh. Sitting safely in highsec where anyone attempting to preemptively attack you is insta-gibbed by NPC protectors is not non-consensual pvp.
Ganking is the ultimate in carebearing because the risk is so very low. Compare risking a 500 million isk battleship when you undock to do a mission vs risking a 10 million isk catalyst. Compare risking a 2 billion freighter and cargo or a 6 billion isk jump freighter and cargo to risking a 10 million isk catalyst.
Its so cheap and easy if you check Baltec1's last session of ganking in highsec you'll see he and goons killed 17 ships, 14 were freighters, 13 were empty. When ganking is so cheap you can kill around 40 billion worth of empty ships for around 150 million per pilot there is a serious imbalance.
It should never be so cheap that you can gank random empty ships.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |