CQC CQC + Bots = perfect test ground for SJA's most evil minions + more chance of a cqc game...

VR Jay Le Chardon

VR Jay Le Chardon
TL;DR - I've had an absolutely horrific couple of days at work, I'm pretty drunk and wanted to log into cqc for a non rebuy risking way of blowing off some steam when I had this epiphany...

I outlined it in this posts "title" but its a basic equation, give CQC "Bots" / NPC's to make up the numbers, but not normal NPC's, make them Sarah Jane Avery's most evil creations, let us cqc wannabe's be guinea pigs to her latest and scariest subroutines, and in the interests of "balance" make the "bots" worth less CQC XP. As I understand the current rules a kill is worth one hundred XP, an assist is worth 50 XP, apply a ratio to killing bots - ie akill of a bot be worth less, a percentage, than killing a player (ratio*100xp= botXP). For talking sakes if 70% is the ratio we decide upon a human kill would be a hundred XP vs a bot being 70XP. Assisting with a human kill would be 50XP vs 35XP for assisting killing a bot. That ration could be 50%, could be 20%, could be anything, I just picked 70% almost at random...

The way I see it is if we go down this road its all win, FDev and SJA get to try out new things, CQC wannabe's like me get a match, no toes of legitimately legendary CQC elites are trodden on as the bots are worth significantly less than killing a seasoned CMDR, Noobs who missed the great cqc gold rush of one point what ever can still make rank and learn combat flying.

What am I missing? I know that any opening post arising from someone with a beard as silly as mine will have inevitably gotten something wrong in the preceding text, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the idea...
 
Last edited:

SushiCW

SushiCW
I think just about everyone agrees that bots are one of the very best things that could happen to CQC.

However it's a fairly significant investment of effort on Frontier's part to develop them, and they seem to be prioritizing their work in other places with greater return on investment.
 

VR Jay Le Chardon

VR Jay Le Chardon
And.... The thread that I opened in "Dangerous Discussions" is now in CQC where it will shrivel and die alongside the eponymous feature of the subforum...[where is it]

Bots may be good for CQC but letting the "non CQC" CMDR's chime in on the thread might have highlighted that in a much more illustrative manner.
 

SushiCW

SushiCW
Should have tried the "Suggestions" forum. :) Better fit than either Dangerous Discussions or CQC anyway.
 

Snowymonk

Snowymonk
+1 to the inclusion of Bots.

SJA /FDev could even go as far as trying out the new weapons for a week in CQC before promoting to the main game. It would give a change for balancing before a public nerf.

-1 for PC vs Xbox vs PS4. I would love this but you would encounter so many legal hurdles that it would never get off of the ground.

PC commanders are Meh, why play with the console underclass

Sony (PS4 commanders) wont allow it in case it turns out that Microsoft has better net code and typically beats Sony. It would result in a reputation hit that they can avoid by simply not playing.

Microsoft (Xbox commanders) will be all for it whilst they have an inferior console so that they can claim parity to drive sales. Now that the XboxOneX is out, once numbers increase this argument will flip around with Microsoft potentially avoiding a direct conflict and Sony clamouring for it.
 

Kvas

Kvas
In EvE Valkyrie there are unique bots and all play differently, makes it really organic and sets rivalry even with bots (when you see one bot is destroying you over and over again).
How much better Arena would be if it had bots and proper match making... something the game should have from the beginning! I hate ED.
 

VR Jay Le Chardon

VR Jay Le Chardon
I keep picking up a lot of REP for this suggestion, and noone has expressed any reason worth a damn not to do it so please please FDev, it would make a lot of people happy?
 

Insane4un

I
It really amaze me. This unkillable optimism and faith into FD actions. They don't give a single f to multicrew. Oh wait, they did. The one that you press to pay respect..

And yet someone even thinking about CQC. Like, really?

IT IS DEAD

Even necromancy will not work on it.

Because it was not killed. It was BORN DEAD.
 
Last edited:

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Jayridium said:
I keep picking up a lot of REP for this suggestion, and noone has expressed any reason worth a damn not to do it so please please FDev, it would make a lot of people happy?
Click to expand...
Okay ... but which feature(s) of Beyond do you want them to drop to make room in the development schedule for it?

1) The current AI has massive trouble near structures. This is because making an AI that can sensibly fly through tunnels, gaps, etc. and fight at the same time is really difficult. Until ships stop getting stuck in the mailslot they're nowhere near useful in a CQC match.

2) Even if you just want a drone target to make up numbers, they still need to account for CQC's different rules. Targeting is line-of-sight and forward-only. Weapons are a fixed/gimballed hybrid which doesn't exist in the main game. You'd also really be changing matches with 2-3 players from "doesn't happen" to "who can farm the drones the fastest".

And that's just in Deathmatch - in TDM, you've got a mixed wing of players and NPCs. How does that coordinate or work? You can sort-of do this main game with multicrew, but there's no doubt differences. A team with 3 real pilots + 1 drone will slaughter 2 real pilots + 2 drones just as much as 3v2 would be unbalanced now.

No chance of adapting any existing AI code to CTF, either. Frankly most human pilots struggle with the rules of that...


It's easy to say "it should have bots". It's not an easy programming task. Frontier are not a massive company that can just throw programmers at every problem until it's fixed. And despite it being a very good change for CQC, and despite CQC having gained a lot more regular players over the last year ... there's still not enough of us to justify it. No-one would object to bots in CQC ... lots of people would object if it was instead of "debeiged planets" or "squadrons" or "any changes in Thargoids in 2018".

(Transparent browsable lobbies/matches would be *easier* and is the other major change pretty much everyone agrees is needed. But there's still a big gap between "easier" and "easy" so I'm expecting it to be done via the Discord for a few years yet.)
 

MUSKETEER

MUSKETEER
I say NO to CQC with bots. CQC is about player vs player interaction. It's enough the main game difficulty is diluted into Solo, PG and Open.

Deathmatch seem to work. It's probably my least favourite, but at least it's vs real people.

I know you guys want it easy way for virtual badge.
 
Last edited:

Van R Flyheight

Van R Flyheight
100% bots should be a thing and I can't see why it would be too hard to implement since we already have SLF AI. I realise that AI is slightly different flying in open space but surely it wouldn't be much to change up. I agree with it being lower XP and I think they shouldn't be automatic but rather toggled on/off. CQC is actually quite fun once you start unlocking some stuff but it's almost impossible to get that far.

I just joined the Discord and also recommended it to the rest of my player group. Look forward to that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom