Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vladimir Nabokov
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 08:52:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Vladimir Nabokov on 08/05/2008 08:52:46 I was bored and randomly brainstorming ideas for the game yet again, and wondered what the highly critical forum community thought of this idea? I don't know if it has been brought up before and what it might be called, so I apologize in advance if this topic has been discussed before. Anyways, here we go:
In all online games and persistent worlds, there is the issue of how often players can be online as well as real life situations that cause players to switch on and off from the computer. In reading the Corporation and Alliance forums, it seems to me that a group of players might choose to attack another group of players during a time that provides a high number of active players vs a high number of sleeping players. Maybe the EVE community enjoys this type of situation, but I wonder if allowing the computer to control players which are offline would be a workable alternative?
Example: Alice, Bob, and Charlie are members of small corporation "Three Musketeers [3M]". They own a small pos in system ABC-123. When all of them are online, Alice regularly FC's while Bob and Charlie follow orders. Rival Corporation "Pirates of the Carribbean [PC]" decides to eliminate the small pos to further their own agenda. Unfortunately, at the time when the small pos comes out of reinforced, Bob and Charlie are on a business trip and cannot play. Should Bob and Charlie have the option of letting the AI control their clones/ships to follow Alice's orders, for the purpose of defending the small pos? I imagine the AI could be instructed to follow commands given through the fleet interface to attack the same target. Should Bob or Charlie's ships/clones die, it would be as if they had flown the ships and died. Should they kill some of the enemy, they would get the killmails.
It would of course be optional and up to individuals and corporations whether they choose to use such a feature, but I imagine allowing the use of offlined characters will reduce the importance of having to be online at specific times. After all, I think we are here to play a game and enjoy it at our convenience, not be yelled at to go online at odd hours. CCP could also sell more accounts because hardcore players could then fly their alts together into mini gangs. It would also open up different fleet dynamics, when individual squads might be composed of 1 online player and 9 offlined players that follow orders exactly.
Anyway just some random thinking, what do you guys think?
|
Auron Shadowbane
Pelennor Swarm Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 08:56:00 -
[2]
if it would be good or bad doesnt matter...
because has shown with the drone and NPC AI that they are 101% incompetent at programming bots :P.
|
Lord Haur
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 08:58:00 -
[3]
ummmm macros?
also much of the fleet dialogue/orders come through voice comms (vent/TS)
seriously, couldn't i get a load of AI-controlled hulks in a fleet and tell them to mine stuff for me?
no. --- Sig Starts Here --- Lord Haur - Imperial Academy Logistical Support
|
Vladimir Nabokov
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:10:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Auron Shadowbane if it would be good or bad doesnt matter...
because has shown with the drone and NPC AI that they are 101% incompetent at programming bots :P.
Yeah the current NPC AI is terrible, but I assumed that improvements were being made for the upcoming factional warfare. After all, npc controlled ships of the various empire and pirate factions need to coordinate on some level to be effective in combat, unless they are just meant as fodder for players to kill.
|
Vladimir Nabokov
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:14:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Lord Haur ummmm macros?
also much of the fleet dialogue/orders come through voice comms (vent/TS)
seriously, couldn't i get a load of AI-controlled hulks in a fleet and tell them to mine stuff for me?
no.
yeah I understand the high level orders do come from voice comms, but then the squad level players could interpret those orders and relay them to the offlined drone players in the squad. alternatively the fleet commander could issue a fleetwide order and all of the offlined drone players in the fleet would follow it. If the fleet commander screws up, then all of the offlined drone players would probably die and the players would lose their ships & clones as if they had followed bad orders.
About the hulk mining, I see nothing wrong with controlling offlined hulks for a macromining operation. It will be more gain but also more hardware exposed to potential risk. Had the miners been online, maybe they would have chosen to participate in a mining op. Allowing drone control of offlined players allows the possibility of a large scale mining op + escorts with only a handful of online players. Likewise, the attacking fleet may also have control of whatever offlined accounts have given them trust.
|
Lord Haur
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:17:00 -
[6]
From this it is a short jump to 23/7 macro-mining gangs with BS support etc. etc.
no. --- Sig Starts Here --- Lord Haur - Imperial Academy Logistical Support
|
Vladimir Nabokov
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:30:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Lord Haur From this it is a short jump to 23/7 macro-mining gangs with BS support etc. etc.
no.
On the flipside, wouldn't more macro-mining gangs promote the availability of targets as well? Instead of being limited to lone miners, mid-sized gangs might find disrupting a mining operation to be fun. This may lead to an increase of larger non-capital/non-pos fights that people seem to enjoy. Remember, trust is still an issue, so people might not want to trust their hulks to someone that keeps losing them to raiding gangs.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:43:00 -
[8]
AI is so bad, that leaving your character do fight would be the best way to loose ships and only that.
Automated POS guns do that job - they fire at invaders even when You sleep :) To do that, POSes need insane hitpoints, ranges and DPS - POS guns have like 300 km base range plus and 40x damage multiplier. All of that simply because equipment with normal parameters, if unmaned, would be chewed by a 5 times smaller fleet without a sweat. POS guns with their great parameters can at least do some damage - still being stupid :).
Now imagine that AI is suddenly made reasonably smart. It can react to fleet commands and stuff. Effect? Everyone and his dog is flying with a fleet of 5 alts, everywhere - on missions, to pvp, whatever. More ships, more problems, more lag, more power for people who simply have 10 accounts. Not really more fun.
|
Tarel Necor
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:53:00 -
[9]
i would shy away from this as it puts your char, clones and in effect whole hanger in the hands of another player.
I would rather see some form of module that effective turns one of your ships into a drone, with limitations of course maybe having a frig or at most cruiser be able to mount this module and it take up 125 MHz of drone bandwidth so only larger ships could make efective use of it.
This drone could follow you through warp and jump gates. allowing you to field more ships but at a greater risk to yourself.
The main problem I see with this is that it encourages more solo play, limiting the ships so that they cant used remote reps on your own ship or not fit them entirely (interference form these modules directly effects the control of the ship), stopping bs roaming with a logistics.
Killing the player ship would cause the secondary ship to cease actvity alowing it to be boarded and stolen.
|
Serge Tahlon
Gallente Templars of Space Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 09:58:00 -
[10]
clear and definate no.
why? participation levels, motivation and morale are all part of the strategies use in eve territorial warfare.
apart from that if a 2000 man alliance could field all 2000 people all the time at the same time the servers would explode, be sure.
|
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 10:31:00 -
[11]
In fact, every 2000 man alliance would be fielding 8000 alts all the time :)
|
Doc Extropy
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 12:48:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Doc Extropy on 08/05/2008 12:52:55 bad insider joke, couldn't resist, sorry... i'm happy today :) Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected]) |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |