I love how you people defend something that is either a bug or a design flaw as the magic only applies to NPCs while we get to watch empty exploding dashboard for this few seconds.
AI Attacking During Explosion Animation
- Thread starter philngraves
- Start date
Let's see you defend us being able to use FA Off while NPCs cannot.
Or us getting experimental effects, while they don't.
(Perhaps if us players weren't cheating by disgusting measures, we wouldn't be the ones watching them blow up so much in the first place
)...go!
Let's see you defend us being able to use FA Off while NPCs cannot.
Or us getting experimental effects, while they don't.
(Perhaps if us players weren't cheating by disgusting measures, we wouldn't be the ones watching them blow up so much in the first place
...go!
I will gladly humour you - I played during the "OMG THEY GOT SO HARD" phase of Horizons and loved it. Got blown up once or twice by a perfect rail sniper (man the IMPULSE ATTACK was something to be scared of back then), loved it (though a small fuzzy modifier to anything below deadly wouldn't hurt), never encountered the "multicannon plasma" and other funny "heat not affecting NPCs" bug, loved how they flied back then, TOO BAD whinners nerfed them to the ground. While the rational course of action would be to fix the outrageous bugs and not swing the nerf-hammer.
So yeah. I really would like NPCs returned to 2.1(?) state
It would also benefit the missions because it would allow for the payouts to get significantly buffed for more DEADLY targets. No pain, no gain.Also I remember devs speaking once or twice about System Security getting access to engineered modules on higher ranks but IDK if that was ever implemented.
I will gladly humour you - I played during the "OMG THEY GOT SO HARD" phase of Horizons and loved it. Got blown up once or twice by a perfect rail sniper (man the IMPULSE ATTACK was something to be scared of back then), loved it (though a small fuzzy modifier to anything below deadly wouldn't hurt), never encountered the "multicannon plasma" and other funny "heat not affecting NPCs" bug, loved how they flied back then, TOO BAD whinners nerfed them to the ground. While the rational course of action would be to fix the outrageous bugs and not swing the nerf-hammer.
So yeah. I really would like NPCs returned to 2.1(?) state
Also I remember devs speaking once or twice about System Security getting access to engineered modules on higher ranks but IDK if that was ever implemented.
Weird because this kinda doesn't fight your corner, and I am total agreement with you on this
The 2.1 AI hysteria was, I strongly suspect, down to two main causes on top of the kneejerk reaction: the bug you mention that many didn't realise was bug related, and the fact most people didn't actually have properly engineered ships by then. The NPCs got nerfed hard in the engineering department as well as the brain department, a couple of weeks later everyone combat related (or nearly everyone) got to grips with mods and were sporting respectable ships, and the tables turned completely the other way.
My comment initially was simply pointing out that this "magic" shooting-during-death thing is hardly crime of the century. Hell, don't get me wrong, I'd be damp at the knickers if we could fire a frenzied hail of bullets in our death throes. But it's not exactly killing my experience that NPCs can do it at present. I actually quite find it adds to...wait for it, the word's coming...my immershun!
Weird because this kinda doesn't fight your corner, and I am total agreement with you on this
Hell, don't get me wrong, I'd be damp at the knickers if we could fire a frenzied hail of bullets in our death throes. But it's not exactly killing my experience that NPCs can do it at present. I actually quite find it adds to...wait for it, the word's coming...my immershun!
That's because I got no corner to fight in and I would love the exact same thing to be done. Anyone remember the energy bomb from prev games btw.? THAT would be fun with some interesting mechanics... computer detecting power surge in enemy ship, frantically trying to get away etc. etc. I wouldn't also mind NPCs still behaving the way they do now if we had that possibility you speak of.
I will gladly humour you - I played during the "OMG THEY GOT SO HARD" phase of Horizons and loved it. Got blown up once or twice by a perfect rail sniper (man the IMPULSE ATTACK was something to be scared of back then), loved it (though a small fuzzy modifier to anything below deadly wouldn't hurt), never encountered the "multicannon plasma" and other funny "heat not affecting NPCs" bug, loved how they flied back then, TOO BAD whinners nerfed them to the ground. While the rational course of action would be to fix the outrageous bugs and not swing the nerf-hammer.
So yeah. I really would like NPCs returned to 2.1(?) state
Also I remember devs speaking once or twice about System Security getting access to engineered modules on higher ranks but IDK if that was ever implemented.
Same for me.
That AI was the absolute bomb.
I wanted to buy SJA a pizza for it.
Then, a bunch of people who a) didn't want to improve their skill, b) don't want any kind of challenge, or c) didn't like getting their e-ships blown up .. cried.
We went from an AI that would:
*spin spin spin*
to an AI that would give Skynet nightmares
back to *spin spin spin*
... it was a sad, sad day.
You already have them.
For all intend and purposes SLFs and their NPC pilots are just that, pets.
From a gameplay mechanic point of view they work more or less exactly like you would find them in any MMORPG.
You train/upgrade them, and you deploy them to perform assisting tasks while playing.
Last edited:
If more people find something not as much fun than less people, then the developer must go with the majority.
Most people found the 2.1 AI way too difficult, and therefore dialled it back. Arguably too much, but they had to because when trying to keep people happy, the majority should always win.
Please remember, this game isn't written specifically for *you*, and it will never please everyone. Including me.
Besides, not everyone plays ED for deadly AI fights which unless you have a high end ship will generally result in your destruction. That isn't what the game is specifically about.
Most people found the 2.1 AI way too difficult, and therefore dialled it back. Arguably too much, but they had to because when trying to keep people happy, the majority should always win.
Please remember, this game isn't written specifically for *you*, and it will never please everyone. Including me.
Besides, not everyone plays ED for deadly AI fights which unless you have a high end ship will generally result in your destruction. That isn't what the game is specifically about.
Which is why I did mention scaling it with the ranks. And the same argument can be turned around - you're bad at piloting, well it isn't a game written specifically for *you*, so steer clear of the high rank assassination/combat missions. As it should be. Deadly AI should be, well... Deadly. And seeing an elite FDL scanning you should give you the brown pants moment.
Being bad at combat is not the same as being bad at piloting.
And I did steer clear of the high ranked missions because I didn't have the ship nor the combat skill to guarantee I'd complete it. I don't think anyone has ever complained about missions being too hard when they're supposed to be.
The only complaint I'm seeing is from people with hugely engineered ships finding NPC's far too easy to defeat. I don't disagree that the difficulty of some NPC's should be increased slightly, but it cannot be an all or nothing approach, because unless the specific mission fits the higher difficulty level, it should be based on the combat rating of the Commander. I fly a Corvette currently, and I have a 'Competent' combat rating, but a Tycoon trade rating. Because of this, I see Dangerous and Deadly NPC's which, while no real match for my Vette, still is completely ridiculous that my highest rank determines the class of NPC I come up against. If people who want 2.1 AI back had it their way, I'd stand no real chance because I don't partake in a lot of NPC combat. Right now, I can comfortably defend myself.
IF my combat rank was say, Deadly, that would be because I put a lot of effort into combat, and conversely I should be reasonably good at it - and therefore I would expect other NPC's of a higher rank to attack me. But just Competent should really mean I only see similar NPC ranks attacking me - and if the AI was tweaked in a more sensible manner, I would suggest that the CURRENT AI we see should be more or less what I get for MY rank, whereas Elite combat pilots should be seeing 2.1 AI skilled NPC's.
If we had robotic dogs (like this one) for our dashboards that bark and backflip at random intervals, that's something I might be interested in buying. AI should be an optional extra though, I'd hate for it to become self-aware and take over my ship thousand of lightyears from home.
That also shouldn't be used to excuse deliberately blinkering the game to cater to only lazy or incapable players.
Last time I checked, there were several combat ranks assigned to NPCs. There are also different types of site and different activities.
If FD proposed that Deadly/Elite enemies obtained a competency boost and a new type of site that features more engineered opponents fighting more aggressively and in more wings, are players really entitled to indignation simply because that content is allowed to exist?
Honestly this should be the biggest non-issue of all. Open/PG arguments...there's only one solution, so people are going to get annoyed if the solution doesn't suit them. There's so much scope for differing levels of PvE challenge though that I fail to see why it CAN'T please almost everyone.
Last edited:
A solution (for me at least) would be to have a seperate game mode option so that the npc's can have engineering... be hellish (and hilarious) for a while until some balance was found, but I would love the chance to try it...
I try to run small ships against larger ships to give me a better feel of accomplishment and challenge, but I find things like the gunships firing after death more annoyances. Not sure why, just irks the hell out of me. Problem is finding a good fight in my courier... Always end up with winges of tiny ships, with only the rare
conda or python. Not even the Comp nav beacons seem to improve my odds.
About the npc engineering fiasco... I was relatively new and the first encounter I had was a master sidewinder... had burst lasers that shot railgun blasts. Talk about a moment...
Personally, I'm all for engineering for npcs, but I also realize some players don't use horizons yet. Aside from either specialized areas with said npc's (can't imagine the nightmare bugs from this) or a seperate game mode (Open/private/solo with a selection box to turn on npc engineer spawns) I can't really imagine a way to keep the game in check for the non-horizons players. And before anyone says they need to get horizons, no they don't. Game sells without it, therefore they must be accomodated.
Tangent to this, would it be hilarious to start the game for the first time to find npc's are all engineered? Talk about that learning curve...
As for me they can die in the same fire as 32bit and dx9 users. I hope fdev makes the dlc integrated or mandatory in S3. This somehow reminds me of blocking electricity on the base of candle maker's rights...
Wow dude, elitist much? The world does not revolve around you, and neither does this game. It has to be playable and enjoyable for others. This includes combat. There are ways for FD to put the 2.1 skynet killer ai back in. It just shouldn't be everywhere all the time. In HaZ RES, CNBs, High CZs, and the deadly+ assassination missions, then yes, put the crazy AI and ships in there. Everything else should be more or less left alone for those of us without god-rolled engineered death ships. I don't have the same problems you do regarding combat against NPCs. I find deadly and dangerous FDLs, Condas, and Elite FASs to be plenty difficult for my FDL. Other people beside yourself get to play the game too.
Unless they only sell it with horizons, they can't be excluded. Also, if you use analogous response, try to get the right context. Stunting technological innovation vs. forced purchase of dlc... that much drama and we should start calling you Snooki.
Elitist? Don't be ridiculous, if somebody hasn't forked the exorbitant amount of 30€ or less during two frikkin years, let them burn. They won't buy it even if it was 10€. And please understand that this fragmentation slows down development and testing because you have to maintain two versions of the code. That's at least twice amount of testing and at least 1.5 times more development time for maintenance. In other words, these people are slowing us all down and costing fdev money they could spend on developing exploration, core game, atmospherics, space legs, panther clippers and what have you. Communist much?
^Citation needed
Seriously, give me a source that explicitly shows that for this game.
Also, non-horizon users can still buy ship kits, flight suits, and paint jobs last time I checked. There is business to be had there. And would it be unreasonable to think that horizons has its own team? And both horizons and base game still use many of the same assets and code. Horizons only has to deal with some modules and planets. Things like passengers and new ships don't need horizons at all because the basic framework is exactly the same for both.
Last edited:
It is the basic of computer programming, no citation needed, let alone from FDev which doesn't even tell you what will be in S3 or what will be S3 model. I base my claim on 15+ years of doing programming for a living. Shared assets mean the art department has less work, nothing more. Having two versions means you need to "program ahead" and check everytime if some change didn't broke in the other, and that (regression) testing takes time. For example you shouldn't be able to buy SLFs or SRVs if you don't have horizons. Thats an exception in the store code. Exception here, exception there... You also need to manage things like player ended in a srv and then logged out and launched non-horizons version etc. etc. All in all it adds huge complexity to the codebase, because Horizons is not only an asset dlc, but includes mechanics as well.
Also, do you really believe that someone didn't buy horizons for two years now, with multiple discounts along the way, and still they would throw money at FDev in the store? I would find that... odd, like someone's priorites weren't right. Because Elite w/o planetary landings is incomplete IMHO. The rest (rngineers, passengers, multicrew) is meh (for me). But being able to land on planets (well, rocks) is the main thing distinguishing this game from others, also the heavily hyped "teh other space game that doesn't exist".
Like said I hope they either integrate/bundle it with S3 (in whatever form) or make it mandatory. I really don't care. 30€/24mo = 1.25€ a month. Hardly bank-breaking.