Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Valei Khurelem
394
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 17:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
Over time, new technologies have arisen that allow the automation of basic ship functions to being able to program advanced operations in tandom with other ships to make life for capsuleers easier, eliminating the need for constant vigilance or committing lots of time to menial tasks.
Artificial Intelligence Mining Pilot I - V ( Automates the mining process, can use more mining modules and queue commands per level )
Combat Training Artificial Intelligence Pilot I - V ( Automates mission running, can use more combat oriented modules, including electronic warfare, command queuing increased per level )
Surveillance Artificial Intelligence Pilot I - V ( Automates exploration, randomly searches out signatures of value, can be programmed to scan for belts and ships, posts and bookmarks its recordings in an EVE mail with information on how long ago it was all found )
To keep things interesting I'd also have it where you can set the bots to passive or aggressive, if aggressive they'll engage people and scan for people in the system, that also means other bots will be doing the same so they might both take each other out. If you set them passive then that means they will carry on their tasks indefinitely and try to run away if an enemy comes near them but if you're a player and you have faster reactions you could easily catch passive or aggressive bots off guard by chasing them down or having friends by you to take out the aggressive bot.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
839
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 17:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
If you don't want to play Eve, and your post makes it sound that way, then don't play Eve. But don't post stupid ideas like this. Botting is bad, making it easier is bad. |
Shandir
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
35
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 21:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
How I would do it:
Step 1: Announce a plan to automate certain boring tasks Step 2: Admit a lack of competence in this field Step 3: Buy out as many of the big EVE botting developers as possible, to get their staff Step 4: You now have the customer lists. Ban every single one of them. Step 5: Announce that CCP just performed the best spying and sabotage manouver in EVE. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
452
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 22:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
Why keep these activities as activities at all if all you are going to do is automate them? "Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Tidurious
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
140
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 22:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
mxzf wrote:If you don't want to play Eve, and your post makes it sound that way, then don't play Eve. But don't post stupid ideas like this. Botting is bad, making it easier is bad.
This ^^
Don't wanna do it? Don't do it! There's no "Free ISK" in EVE, as much as you'd like some. Stop complaining about it! |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
829
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 23:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tidurious wrote:mxzf wrote:If you don't want to play Eve, and your post makes it sound that way, then don't play Eve. But don't post stupid ideas like this. Botting is bad, making it easier is bad. This ^^ Don't wanna do it? Don't do it! There's no "Free ISK" in EVE, as much as you'd like some. Stop complaining about it!
I know a few alliances in Eve swimming in trillions of isk they can't use monthly and the excedents aren't even spare with all alliances members because there's no reason but some like to see enourmous numbers in their internets space bank.
The most hilarious in all that you know what it is?
Unlike you think there is "free isk for some", please let me introduce to you, moon goo. Now think about pay your monthly rent/tax or you could loose standings or be "KOS". |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
1165
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 23:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
I would legalize botting by just shutting down the servers. This is basically what you are doing to the game if you legalize botting. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!! |
Amaroq Dricaldari
Malicious Mission Murderers
93
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 23:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
When someone abuses a tool, you don't blame the tool itself, or the makers of the tool. You are suppossed to blame the person abusing it.
Mining is boring, and so is scanning. That is one reason macros and bots exist. They are tools, nothing more. I am not saying I support them, I just don't see a reason to hate them. If they are abused, it is not the fool's fault, it is the user's fault.
If a fox steals your hens, you don't slaughter your pig, you hunt the fox. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy Cascade Imminent
237
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 00:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Over time, new technologies have arisen that allow the automation of basic ship functions to being able to program advanced operations in tandom with other ships to make life for capsuleers easier, eliminating the need for constant vigilance or committing lots of time to menial tasks.
Artificial Intelligence Mining Pilot I - V ( Automates the mining process, can use more mining modules and queue commands per level )
Combat Training Artificial Intelligence Pilot I - V ( Automates mission running, can use more combat oriented modules, including electronic warfare, command queuing increased per level )
Surveillance Artificial Intelligence Pilot I - V ( Automates exploration, randomly searches out signatures of value, can be programmed to scan for belts and ships, posts and bookmarks its recordings in an EVE mail with information on how long ago it was all found )
To keep things interesting I'd also have it where you can set the bots to passive or aggressive, if aggressive they'll engage people and scan for people in the system, that also means other bots will be doing the same so they might both take each other out. If you set them passive then that means they will carry on their tasks indefinitely and try to run away if an enemy comes near them but if you're a player and you have faster reactions you could easily catch passive or aggressive bots off guard by chasing them down or having friends by you to take out the aggressive bot. Dude, seriously, you've already suggested this in the past. What honestly made you think we'd troll it any less hard this time round? It is a terrible idea.
Also, WTB links to Khurelem's main. I'd bet pretty good money he's a botter. -áhttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 07:15:00 -
[10] - Quote
Amaroq Dricaldari wrote:When someone abuses a tool, you don't blame the tool itself, or the makers of the tool. You are suppossed to blame the person abusing it.
Mining is boring, and so is scanning. That is one reason macros and bots exist. They are tools, nothing more. I am not saying I support them, I just don't see a reason to hate them. If they are abused, it is not the fool's fault, it is the user's fault.
If a fox steals your hens, you don't slaughter your pig, you hunt the fox. They're tools designed for the sole purpose of doing something that just so happens to be one of the exceedingly few things you're not allowed to do in EVE. The fact that they exist is a problem in itself. Support showing T2 and faction frequency crystal damage in the info window! |
|
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
85
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 08:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
50 Ice an hr with an Alt in an Industrial.
I've said it before, I don't blame people one bit for macro mining that stuff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg-_HeVNYOk
Save Derpy! |
Valei Khurelem
395
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 11:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ioci wrote:50 Ice an hr with an Alt in an Industrial.
I've said it before, I don't blame people one bit for macro mining that stuff.
This is why I think all the people who claim I'm actually complaining about this when I'm offering a real solution that would put actual players on an equal footing with botters are full of ****. Anyone who's actually done mining or mission running before without cheating knows exactly what I'm on about, real players can't keep up with bots, so you either make it legal so everyone is on an equal footing and CCP can ban the people making real money off this sort of thing. Or you go after everyone who just uses bots to get through the game.
So far, I don't see their current tactic of trying to ban bots is working especially since it means CCP lose money in the process, so I think they need to change the way they do things, unless you lot can offer a solution that will actually work and benefit players I think you can bugger off with your comments about my attitude towards botters and this game especially since a number of you are part of alliances that have been accused of botting and exploiting in the past anyway.
Quote:Step 3: Buy out as many of the big EVE botting developers as possible, to get their staff
I like the idea, but that's going to cost CCP money they don't have unfortunately :( the only way I see that working is if they informed the police of that kind of thing going on in their game, but the problem is then you will have no one in any police force or court system that actually understands it lol.
It's like with SOPA and ACTA, the people putting this through the court don't actually know what the hell it is, they're just getting lobbied lots of money for it so they do what the anti-piracy associations say.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Velicitia
Open Designs
718
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 13:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:(terribad idea)
Please follow this corridor to the second door on the right. Once inside, please queue to be biomassed.
Ioci wrote:50 Ice an hr with an Alt in an Industrial.
I've said it before, I don't blame people one bit for macro mining that stuff. funny, I get 75+ in hisec... |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy Cascade Imminent
245
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:00:00 -
[14] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Quote:Step 3: Buy out as many of the big EVE botting developers as possible, to get their staff I like the idea, but that's going to cost CCP money they don't have unfortunately :( the only way I see that working is if they informed the police of that kind of thing going on in their game, but the problem is then you will have no one in any police force or court system that actually understands it lol. It's like with SOPA and ACTA, the people putting this through the court don't actually know what the hell it is, they're just getting lobbied lots of money for it so they do what the anti-piracy associations say, if we told them there are people making money off a video game illegally they'd just give us a bemused look and laugh. For one thing, this isn't dealt with by "the police", lol. For another, it isn't some crazy far out concept that's never been seen in a court of law before. The problem is that the companies or individuals involved in it know that what they are doing is illegal, as under the ToS they are technically selling CCP's property for real money without authorization, and as such they act to protect themselves accordingly.
So the issue becomes that CCP can't ring 999, and go "OMG, someone is selling ISK!", because even those companies that can be easily located are not based in America, England, Germany or any other country that would likely be amenable to legal action against them. Good luck sending a notice of intent to prosecute to a company based in China, I'm sure they'd get a kick out of reading it.
Anyway, Blizzard, CCP and other MMO developers have taken these companies, the individuals involved in them and the hosting companies that help them to court before with limited success. Ironically SOPA and ACTA would have allowed CCP to simply shut down their websites, but unfortunately the scope, wording and motivation behind the legislation went a bit beyond that.
Valei Khurelem wrote:Ioci wrote:50 Ice an hr with an Alt in an Industrial.
I've said it before, I don't blame people one bit for macro mining that stuff. This is why I think all the people who claim I'm actually complaining about this when I'm offering a real solution that would put actual players on an equal footing with botters are full of ****. Anyone who's actually done mining or mission running before without cheating knows exactly what I'm on about, real players can't keep up with bots, so you either make it legal so everyone is on an equal footing and CCP can ban the people making real money off this sort of thing. Or you go after everyone who just uses bots to get through the game. So far, I don't see their current tactic of trying to ban bots is working especially since it means CCP lose money in the process, so I think they need to change the way they do things, unless you lot can offer a solution that will actually work and benefit players I think you can bugger off with your comments about my attitude towards botters and this game especially since a number of you are part of alliances that have been accused of botting and exploiting in the past anyway. And anyway, none of us are part of alliances that have been accused of botting or exploiting in the past, you just seem to have the issue of perceiving everyone who is richer, more organised or more powerful in game as having reached that point by botting.
This isn't an issue with botting, it's an issue with you trying to negate your own inadequacies by pretending that those beating you are cheating. It's the Eve online equivalent of joining a CS:S server and spamming "wall hacking mofo!" every twenty seconds.
Mining and mission running are low profit endeavors because they are so ridiculously easy they can be done by bots. I'm not going to pretend that botters don't contribute to low mineral costs, but they certainly don't effect mission payouts, and on the whole minerals are cheap because any noob can (and does) do it constantly. If you want to make more money mine in WHs, null sec or change to a different profession. -áhttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
619
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
This wouldn't put anyone on footing with the botters. Botters automate far more things than "warp to belt, mine, warp to station". Things like "warp out when hostile comes into local" or "keep an eye on dscan" or that "human-like behavior" that was mentioned by whining banned botters. I haven't seem Eve bots, but I have seen bots of other MMOs and they are far more sophisticated than what those skills (or CCP) would let you be with no effort.
All this would result in is more AFK mining and missioning in hisec, the economy being more broken, and a lot more suicide ganks because of the increased number of idiotic AFK behavior.
Stop posting bad ideas.
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
Valei Khurelem
395
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Quote: All this would result in is more AFK mining and missioning in hisec, the economy being more broken, and a lot more suicide ganks because of the increased number of idiotic AFK behavior.
The economy is already broken so why should honest players have to put up with it? Other players should at least have the decency to agree that the experience should be made less painful than throw hissy fits at anyone who can see the reality of the situation.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
620
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:49:00 -
[17] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Quote: All this would result in is more AFK mining and missioning in hisec, the economy being more broken, and a lot more suicide ganks because of the increased number of idiotic AFK behavior.
The economy is already broken so why should honest players have to put up with it? Other players should at least have the decency to agree that the experience should be made less painful than throw hissy fits at anyone who can see the reality of the situation.
Made less painful, sure, but a solution like this is like trying to solve a mugging crime problem by setting up an official city "Can I Have Your Stuff" program. It doesn't give err'day Joe an advantage over a real mugger (a knife in the victim's face is always more effective than CIHYS paperwork), and it even semi-legitimizes actual mugging. That is just the wrong direction. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy Cascade Imminent
246
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Quote: All this would result in is more AFK mining and missioning in hisec, the economy being more broken, and a lot more suicide ganks because of the increased number of idiotic AFK behavior.
The economy is already broken so why should honest players have to put up with it? Other players should at least have the decency to agree that the experience should be made less painful rather than throw hissy fits at anyone who can see the reality of the situation. PROTIP: You are not a beautiful or unique snow flake. You can not see the reality of the situation. -áhttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg |
Valei Khurelem
395
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
Quote:and it even semi-legitimizes actual mugging. That is just the wrong direction.
Even though this is a game and EVE is supposed to be a cold harsh universe? Sounds like people want to carebear it up and keep the advantages they've gained through botting etc. to me.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy Cascade Imminent
246
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 14:56:00 -
[20] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Quote:and it even semi-legitimizes actual mugging. That is just the wrong direction. Even though this is a game and EVE is supposed to be a cold harsh universe? Sounds like people want to carebear it up and keep the advantages they've gained through botting etc. to me. Again, the problem is you think everyone richer than you gained those advantages through botting. View my contract history and then go cry in a corner. -áhttp://i.imgur.com/aWNfM.jpg |
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
622
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 15:02:00 -
[21] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Quote:and it even semi-legitimizes actual mugging. That is just the wrong direction. Even though this is a game and EVE is supposed to be a cold harsh universe? Sounds like people want to carebear it up and keep the advantages they've gained through botting etc. to me.
Nope, not what I was getting at. Botters would still have the advantage over "institutionalized botters" due to 3rd party bots being more powerful than ingame bots. This would also stick another "required skill set for everyone to train" onto Eve, which is another wrong direction (see removal of Learning skills, simplification of agent system, etc). Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
Pidgeon Saissore
Dark Neutron Star
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 18:36:00 -
[22] - Quote
Not that I approve of full bots but there are some things that could be set for a little command queuing. Most of these simply allow someone to compensate for lag by setting things to happen a few seconds ahead of time
A miner could be linked directly to a jet can instead of cargo, this would not make a new can as that would be too botlike
When locking you could set your modules to start on a target before they are locked specifically instead of any setting going straight to the first thing locked
When reloading set the next target before it is done
Drones could be commanded directly from the bay which would recall the current squad and launch the next to do the command immediately
Set a next target to be locked immediately on the invalidation of one of your current targets
Set next target for modules on invalidation of current ones
Allow locking to be initiated before something is out of warp to start the lock as soon as it becomes a valid target. |
Amaroq Dricaldari
Malicious Mission Murderers
94
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 07:06:00 -
[23] - Quote
Pidgeon Saissore wrote:Not that I approve of full bots but there are some things that could be set for a little command queuing. Most of these simply allow someone to compensate for lag by setting things to happen a few seconds ahead of time
A miner could be linked directly to a jet can instead of cargo, this would not make a new can as that would be too botlike
When locking you could set your modules to start on a target before they are locked specifically instead of any setting going straight to the first thing locked
When reloading set the next target before it is done
Drones could be commanded directly from the bay which would recall the current squad and launch the next to do the command immediately
Set a next target to be locked immediately on the invalidation of one of your current targets
Set next target for modules on invalidation of current ones
Allow locking to be initiated before something is out of warp to start the lock as soon as it becomes a valid target. You deserve a medal and a promotion. Too bad we aren't in the same military. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |