Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Hunter wrote:

STEAM means using one account for one human. If you have a big hopes on steam - you should adjust the game on it's requirements.

That would work out great if using Steam would be mandatory for everyone. Unfortunately (regarding this aspect) it won't be.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Norrdec wrote:

Poll is pointless since people who benefit the most from followbots have more votes to cast in order to defend a silly mechanic that shouldn't have existed in the first place.

Couldn't agree more with this post.. The poll is fundamentally flawed, it's based on accounts as Norrdec said. However I can't really see a way of avoiding this.

I'm throwing my weight behind the "yes" vote but only with the pvp flag suggestion as mentioned.

I have to laugh at the people who simply couldn't comprehend the question and based their vote on a wild assumption.

28 (edited by Hunter 2013-12-17 04:31:50)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

BTW: We discussed a lot about "followbot" mechanic and found some ways for the solving the problems. (and this is not only disabling the autocycles)

1) Demob: LigtEwars shall not easily stop mechs and heavies. Accumulator cosumption should be depended on surface size. So heavy bot's should be really hard to hold in demob for lew.

2) RSA's: It should not give too much benefit. Decrease it's efficiency twice and increase basic lockrange the robots and farlock nexus buff on 1.25(25%). Lock time bonus can be leave as is. It will be more useful to bring ONE character with nexus module and use SA instead of a lot follows with RSAs.

3) Armor repairers, energy transfers/drainers/neuts and weapons would be really nice to work with no autocycles in PvP mode. It will fix so much problems... And the people really will have to control their combat instead of switching between clients and assigning new target for their alts.

This is a three enough useful examples to adjust balance. There may be more.

The theory of mutual interests
Why the crybabies wins?
Где Ханя - там победа (с)
DEV Zoom: No need to speculate...

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

So far this is all just opinion.  Where is the data that proves following causes problems and/or is being regularly abused to the advantage of multi-account players?

It's really easy to speculate on who does what and claim it causes imbalance.  But where is the real data that proves multi-account players using follow bots are winning a lot more in PvP ?

The "follow by approach" function is a really nice feature of this game that I happen like a lot, to be subjective about it.

I voted to keep the mechanic because I have seen no objective data proving it's a game breaker, and for the subjective reason that I like it and use it.  Without objective data, this sounds like fixing something that is not broken based upon subjective cries to nerf P2W.  Prove there is a problem BEFORE finding a solution.

30 (edited by Hunter 2013-12-17 05:57:27)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Mrs Pickerel wrote:

So far this is all just opinion.  Where is the data that proves following causes problems and/or is being regularly abused to the advantage of multi-account players?

It's really easy to speculate on who does what and claim it causes imbalance.  But where is the real data that proves multi-account players using follow bots are winning a lot more in PvP ?

The "follow by approach" function is a really nice feature of this game that I happen like a lot, to be subjective about it.

I voted to keep the mechanic because I have seen no objective data proving it's a game breaker, and for the subjective reason that I like it and use it.  Without objective data, this sounds like fixing something that is not broken based upon subjective cries to nerf P2W.  Prove there is a problem BEFORE finding a solution.

Err... What for? Btw whose alt is this? Jita?... Peanutbutter?... Khader?..
Zoom, can you compare the IP addresses? smile

The theory of mutual interests
Why the crybabies wins?
Где Ханя - там победа (с)
DEV Zoom: No need to speculate...

31 (edited by Line 2013-12-17 07:37:02)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Hunter wrote:

3) Armor repairers, energy transfers/drainers/neuts and weapons would be really nice to work with no autocycles in PvP mode. It will fix so much problems... And the people really will have to control their combat instead of switching between clients and assigning new target for their alts.

While the genereal idea might work, I don't think it would be nice to smash a spacebar each 1,8-2 seconds in case of lasers and machine guns.

Me personally is for this idea: yuo can't follow someone if he have PvP flag.

Hunter wrote:

1) Demob: LigtEwars shall not easily stop mechs and heavies. Accumulator cosumption should be depended on surface size. So heavy bot's should be really hard to hold in demob for lew.

Maybe it will be better to separate ewar modules for 2 classes? Says, light ones are work better on light targets and worser on med targets, and vice versa. They also should be separated by fitting requirements and weight.

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I'm answering some questions raised here and just some my thoughts...

RSAs and Sensor Amps for that matter are way too effective and are the fittings Navigation 10. 45% and -30% bonuses on an item without any extension modifiers is too strong, especially considering it's essential in PVP against jammers and suppressors.

The follow bots are 9 times out of 10 used just to get RSAs on a main bot. If you want range, ew resistance and close to decent locking range+time, you can't fit it all so naturally you want some things to go remote and the only option in head slots is RSAs.

Why don't people drag along 4-5 follow bots?
First of all, if Sensor Amps all stacked I'm sure they actually would. But right now, armor reps can't really hold on to concentrated 5-10 heavy mechs shooting at you.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Hunter wrote:
Mrs Pickerel wrote:

So far this is all just opinion.  Where is the data that proves following causes problems and/or is being regularly abused to the advantage of multi-account players?

It's really easy to speculate on who does what and claim it causes imbalance.  But where is the real data that proves multi-account players using follow bots are winning a lot more in PvP ?

The "follow by approach" function is a really nice feature of this game that I happen like a lot, to be subjective about it.

I voted to keep the mechanic because I have seen no objective data proving it's a game breaker, and for the subjective reason that I like it and use it.  Without objective data, this sounds like fixing something that is not broken based upon subjective cries to nerf P2W.  Prove there is a problem BEFORE finding a solution.

Err... What for? Btw whose alt is this? Jita?... Peanutbutter?... Khader?..
Zoom, can you compare the IP addresses? smile

its they guy I've been killing you monkey hunter..... And he brings up a very valid point, Where is the data for this "problem".

FFS please keep your IMBA posts in the proper forum

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Again, you just want to have your cake and eat it too.

Ridiculous.





Burial wrote:

I'm answering some questions raised here and just some my thoughts...

RSAs and Sensor Amps for that matter are way too effective and are the fittings Navigation 10. 45% and -30% bonuses on an item without any extension modifiers is too strong, especially considering it's essential in PVP against jammers and suppressors.

The follow bots are 9 times out of 10 used just to get RSAs on a main bot. If you want range, ew resistance and close to decent locking range+time, you can't fit it all so naturally you want some things to go remote and the only option in head slots is RSAs.

Why don't people drag along 4-5 follow bots?
First of all, if Sensor Amps all stacked I'm sure they actually would. But right now, armor reps can't really hold on to concentrated 5-10 heavy mechs shooting at you.

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Pay 2 Win Best 2 Win.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

PvE: Keep it as it is.
PvP: Once engaged in pvp activities; follow => approach.

Don't have to make PvE even more tedious.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Jasdemi wrote:

PvE: Keep it as it is.
PvP: Once engaged in pvp activities; follow => approach.

Don't have to make PvE even more tedious.

Or in other words, one shouldn't be able to follow a flagged bot.

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

38 (edited by Hunter 2013-12-17 15:18:24)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

BTW: is it possible to remove repeated votes from same IP in this topic (for example because of this)?

The theory of mutual interests
Why the crybabies wins?
Где Ханя - там победа (с)
DEV Zoom: No need to speculate...

39 (edited by Line 2013-12-17 15:18:23)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Hunter wrote:

BTW: is it possible to remove repeated votes from same IP in this topic?

+1 1 vote per player not per alt

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I think quite good solution was that it's not possible to follow locked targets. It won't take the problem away but it fixes it quite a bit.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Lol your game will be p2w even if you will nerf followbot mechanics. By nerfing this feature you will achieve ~5-10% of p2w actions, but 90% will use another ways to invest money. Remember: your game have smart customers. *** wont play this game, so dont waste your time on antiretard features.

To solve and legalise followbot mechanics i advice, as i did years before, to enable paralel EP pools for increased month fee and to enable simultaneous authentications of multiple clients on your account. Allso to enable very-not-free character transfer from one account to another, and to enable "leader-follower" features on different characters wont be a bad idea. Players will have more transparent "followbot" mechanics and more transparent multiple character management. More income in your small company, will be guarantied as well.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I see some basic areas in this discussion that are not helping:
1) neither the scope nor the depth of the problem have been well defined.  Is the problem exploiting game mechanics or a basic imbalance/inadequacy of buffage applied to a primary target? 
2) Everybody seems to be focused on solutions but how can you find good solutions to poorly defined problems ?
3) Mr Zoom proposed what he stated was a simple solution: rewrite the follow mechanic.  Most of the player suggestions involve rewriting game mechanics extensively, except for the simple PvP flag = no follow (that seems easy to code on the surface).

There seems to be a basic failure : finding solutions BEFORE defining the scope and the depth of the problem.

Example: we were attacked at our gamma base by the 77th.  Khader has at least three kill mails with my indy bots in them.  Before Pappy and I could get our combat bots deployed, they dropped a beacon and popped off.

We can conclude that all beacon usage should be stopped if a PvP flag is active .... Is this really a problem or would it be ***/NTD complaining of getting our butts kicked ?

Honesty, there is NOTHING preventing a corp from having 3 or 4 bots supporting a single heavy mech on the field.  Is this the problem?  Corps refuse to organize their combat strategies to support a primary target - sort of like a cycling team ? If so, there is no problem with game mechanics.

43 (edited by Burial 2013-12-17 15:52:52)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Mrs Pickerel, you just lack the experience to know what is going on during bigger engagements. Having a followbot is rule of thumb not an exception.

Basically it's not possible to fit amplifiers, range and ew resistance all together if you have 4-5 head slots. You need the follow bot for RSAs to free up head slots. That's the biggest reason for any follow bot(be it symb/riv or light ew).

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Jasdemi wrote:

Don't have to make PvE even more tedious.

Why should PVE be always a 2+ account activity. The problem  here is the requirement to have a follow bot in PVE, and it is to do with the way bots are designed there are just too weak without support, accumulator is never stable, locking times are low etc.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I use follow bot to complete the following tasks; escorting, traveling long distance across terrain, compensation for broken auto-navigation code, and hauling across island after mining.
I would vote yes if follows were adjusted that a bot would stop approaching the target once it was within a set range (example 50m). When the follow target was another bot and faster, the approaching bot would never catch up and most likely get stuck by terrain. When the target is/becomes weapons/ewar aggressed then make it as you said Zoom.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

If you do this ewar loses in pvp engagements.  Think of the ewar!!!

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

50/50 go YES guys big_smile

Energy to Earth!

18.01.2014. [12:57:58] <BeastmodeGuNs> after that i remembered all those warning about 1v1 you lol, and i found out why xD

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

The Scarab trains, wont someone think of the Scarab trains!!!!!!  Also mining fleets.  I Like turtles.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

So Now that I am not on my Iphone, I have a theory.  It's Simple.  People who are voting Yes for this don't like ewar and the range ewar + Nexus bring to the table.  To be honest, the M2S ISOBoxxer fleet was the main issue this came up quite some time back.  When ISOBoxxer was discovered... well M2S.... Kinda stopped using it and fizzled out...  So the next round to this is to nerf Ewar.  As simply put by Burial it's the RSAs and the nexus follow bots that's the problem, in his eyes.  I don't see this as a problem though.  If I risk 3 bots in PVP that's my own accord, I still can ONLY EFFECTIVELY play ONE account at a time.  And Follow bot accounts get tripped up on terrain and plants hardcore. 

If you Nerf this, a "fluid" Gama fight will be next to impossible without a population.  Why you ask?  Trying to keep RSAs up on Ewar bots that are up against Ewar turrets will be impossible if you have to move around and try to multi box on another monitor assuming you can't /follow an RSA bot or remote repairer.  It's hard enough to not get the RSA buddy to not run off into the wild blue yonder.  The option to this is being self amped which can cut the Range of Ewar drastically.  Making it next to useless in Gama base fights.  Because it won't have the range to keep up with Turrets.  This is Bad.  Also it rolls back to who can bring the most people. sad

So once again, this is a small gang nerf.  5 multiboxers risking 10 bots should have the same advantage as 10 dudes. 

Furthermore, Its nice seeing fights that take an hour or thirty mins.  With out follow bots 700~1000 M fights turn into brawler 450~700 Fights, perfect for L Range demobbing Zeniths.  And those who love to push right into the middle of a group and go boom.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Ville wrote:

If you Nerf this, a "fluid" Gama fight will be next to impossible without a population.  Why you ask?  Trying to keep RSAs up on Ewar bots that are up against Ewar turrets will be impossible if you have to move around and try to multi box on another monitor assuming you can't /follow an RSA bot or remote repairer.  It's hard enough to not get the RSA buddy to not run off into the wild blue yonder.  The option to this is being self amped which can cut the Range of Ewar drastically.  Making it next to useless in Gama base fights.  Because it won't have the range to keep up with Turrets.  This is Bad.  Also it rolls back to who can bring the most people. sad

Valid point, we need then nerf turret range or any solution for it. If will happen.

Energy to Earth!

18.01.2014. [12:57:58] <BeastmodeGuNs> after that i remembered all those warning about 1v1 you lol, and i found out why xD