376

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Rage Rex wrote:

a point

You're now missing or ignoring a simple fact that all the EWAR might you have now with follow you can easily achieve WITHOUT them, paying even lesser attention to robot control and risking lesser stuff. Ewar range, strength, etc etc stays the same, you just need to think a little and use teamplay, REALLY use it.

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

377

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

We use RSA buddys in fleet fights, the ones your hurting is defenders who can't form up everyone for various reasons and need rsas.

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.

378 (edited by Mongolia Jones 2014-01-23 20:10:14)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

DEV Zoom wrote:

The fix is disabling follow for PvP flagged robots AND locked targets. And this has nothing to do with normal ewar usage.

I'm needing a clarification.

Does the above proposed fix require the flag and a locked target both to occur on the follower bot (i.e. the bot doing the following is flagged AND locking a target) at the same time before follow is disabled?

"...we will take undefended gammas and stations."  -Cassius of STC

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

The sole reason we have specializations is for teamwork, not for one player to cover all specializations. If they want to turn this game to (RTS) squad base strategy I'm all for it, I just not going to alt-tab or pay $50/month as it's personally not my my style of gameplay, even if it means winning or leveling the playing field.

RIP PERPETUUM

380 (edited by Celebro 2014-01-23 20:25:42)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Ville wrote:

We use RSA buddys in fleet fights, the ones your hurting is defenders who can't form up everyone for various reasons and need rsas.

That's fine, so I support hurting people who shouldn't be in a defensive situation anyways, that's their fault.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Line wrote:
Rage Rex wrote:

valid points

You're now missing or ignoring a simple fact that all the EWAR might you have now with follow you can easily achieve WITHOUT them, paying even lesser attention to robot control and risking lesser stuff. Ewar range, strength, etc etc stays the same, you just need to think a little and use teamplay, REALLY use it.

I know the effectiveness of mods is not changing, which is indirectly one of my points. People are simply biased about the effectiveness of these mods in the hands of one person instead of two. Too many advantages to list in the hands of one person rather than two in this game.

I have said that I've only very recently begun to use a follow bot. Before I would pair up with RSA buddy. That will never change. Even with a follow bot I have awareness of RSA pairs. So, yeah, that's another thing about this whole Follow nerf, is that none of the mods, none of the ewar will be less effective.

So it's doubly stupid. Really it's just annoying, and the play2win rationale burns me up given it's utter hypocrisy.

Thanks for clarifying the focus on ewar btw wink

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Mongolia Jones wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

The fix is disabling follow for PvP flagged robots AND locked targets. And this has nothing to do with normal ewar usage.

I'm needing a clarification.

Does the above proposed fix require the flag and a locked target both to occur on the follower bot (i.e. the bot doing the following is flagged AND locking a target) at the same time before follow is disabled?

No, either of those will break/disallow following.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Rage, it's tormentous reading your posts where you say constantly how follow bot nerf affects EW mechs the most so I'll bring the cat out of the bag since you seem to not be able to figure it out yourself.

Nerfing follows is bigger nerf to Heavies than it is to EW mechs. What will heavies do when they lose RSA follows? RSA eachother or decrease their range, damage or EW resistance by fitting local amp(s)?

Remote repping and energy transfering can easily be taken over by specialized bots played by seperate players but there's currently no bot that could RSA well more than 2 other bots. EW mechs don't have to worry about reps or remote energy at all.

384

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Celebro wrote:

I will define the abuse as locking a target whilst on follow to provide superior range, superior tank and even better DPS as you don't need to sacrifice head slots for Amps.

Other types of multi account usage does not apply as it covers the same roles 2x miners is better than one, same as 2x dps bots is better than one that's fine. The DPS+ support role+ewar roles covering all bases for one player is what is broken, its not so much the issue about advantage only, it also deprives other players of a specialized role,as you already have all of specializations covered.

Industry roles: no matter how many you have is not the means to and end, PVP is, having 5 miners won't make you mine any safer on beta.

You really are off quite a bit on a lot of this, I really think this is the place to go in to mad pvp theory's on balance and effectiveness.

Go look at every fight CIR was involved in of 30+vs30+ I bet you I can name the the 3-4 people who account for 3/4th the damage dealt in the entire fight.

You know why you all hate e-war so much? I learned a long time ago it is far more simple to have your peasants sit in a robot and tell them "Lock everything that comes in range, your job is to focus X,Y,Z 2x Suppress each, Stay 200m out of their firing range" *that screen shot of your fleet we got, let me assign specific targets to people ahead of time*

When our fleets finally hit 'dps' range, mine has yours disabled and my 3-5 cold focused killers know to lock and fire in a special format that has us focus firing without ever relying on calling  a 'primary'.

We are never held by players finding the enemy in landmarks and then acting.

I am not even kidding when I tell you I have a rule of every 1 DPS HM I had 3 e-war Mech's

Now imagine having my 3-5 killers use isBoxer to force multiply their effectiveness and then have all the peasants handle dedicated remote repair  and e-war.

Fun Fact: Every bot below a HM can be 1-2 Shot by a HM when it has 0 Accumulator and is speed fit. How much DPS do you really need?

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

385

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Burial wrote:

Rage, it's tormentous reading your posts where you say constantly how follow bot nerf affects EW mechs the most so I'll bring the cat out of the bag since you seem to not be able to figure it out yourself.

Nerfing follows is bigger nerf to Heavies than it is to EW mechs. What will heavies do when they lose RSA follows? RSA eachother or decrease their range, damage or EW resistance by fitting local amp(s)?

Remote repping and energy transfering can easily be taken over by specialized bots played by seperate players but there's currently no bot that could RSA well more than 2 other bots. EW mechs don't have to worry about reps or remote energy at all.

Actually it is a direct nerf against e-war, I had people running as many as 2-3 e-war mechs in a engagement who would all follow 1 'anchor' who would handle the 'spacial-awareness' aspect of a engagement and remind people who lost link.

This let everyone else just sit there and spam over aggressive e-war application.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

386 (edited by Gunner 2014-01-23 21:38:04)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Everyone will have enough noobs to RSA and rep whatever.

Imagine  100 noobs following each other around with each of their 5 miner accounts wiping mining fields in 30 minutes?  Pretty powerful.

Burial wrote:

Rage, it's tormentous reading your posts where you say constantly how follow bot nerf affects EW mechs the most so I'll bring the cat out of the bag since you seem to not be able to figure it out yourself.

Nerfing follows is bigger nerf to Heavies than it is to EW mechs. What will heavies do when they lose RSA follows? RSA eachother or decrease their range, damage or EW resistance by fitting local amp(s)?

Remote repping and energy transfering can easily be taken over by specialized bots played by seperate players but there's currently no bot that could RSA well more than 2 other bots. EW mechs don't have to worry about reps or remote energy at all.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I dont know about you, but I can drive two bots around all day long that are not following.

I just want equal nerfs for all play styles.  I want the bears to suffer as we do.

Line wrote:
Rage Rex wrote:

a point

You're now missing or ignoring a simple fact that all the EWAR might you have now with follow you can easily achieve WITHOUT them, paying even lesser attention to robot control and risking lesser stuff. Ewar range, strength, etc etc stays the same, you just need to think a little and use teamplay, REALLY use it.

388 (edited by Burial 2014-01-23 23:58:05)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Lemon wrote:
Burial wrote:

Rage, it's tormentous reading your posts where you say constantly how follow bot nerf affects EW mechs the most so I'll bring the cat out of the bag since you seem to not be able to figure it out yourself.

Nerfing follows is bigger nerf to Heavies than it is to EW mechs. What will heavies do when they lose RSA follows? RSA eachother or decrease their range, damage or EW resistance by fitting local amp(s)?

Remote repping and energy transfering can easily be taken over by specialized bots played by seperate players but there's currently no bot that could RSA well more than 2 other bots. EW mechs don't have to worry about reps or remote energy at all.

Actually it is a direct nerf against e-war, I had people running as many as 2-3 e-war mechs in a engagement who would all follow 1 'anchor' who would handle the 'spacial-awareness' aspect of a engagement and remind people who lost link.

This let everyone else just sit there and spam over aggressive e-war application.

Sure, it does nerf that kind of playstyle which is one of the motivators here. Extreme cases like that put aside, heavies are getting the tail end of the update since they are more reliant on follow bots.

389 (edited by Gunner 2014-01-23 21:43:36)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Dev Zoom,

How does that fix the fleets of miners that use follow to move around and to haul stuff.  These players are contributing more to the machine than they would if they couldnt follow.

and dont say that they are a minoirty because that is a crock of ***.

You have a personal issue with PvP players using the tools that you gave us, but you disregard other players.

You need to set your personal issues aside and do the fair thing for all players.

We know you are a bear at heart, but as a Dev you have to make impartial decisions.

DEV Zoom wrote:

The fix is disabling follow for PvP flagged robots AND locked targets. And this has nothing to do with normal ewar usage.

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Lemon wrote:

You really are off quite a bit on a lot of this, I really think this is the place to go in to mad pvp theory's on balance and effectiveness.

You are wrong if you think this is about pvp balancing, this thread is about balancing multi-accounting by toning it down as much as possible. You see it about a pvp issue because it affects you.

Lemon: You are a smart PVP player, I am sure can find an advantage anyhow without threatening to resort to Isboxer. wink

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

How can you judge, you dont even participate in game?

Celebro wrote:
Lemon wrote:

You really are off quite a bit on a lot of this, I really think this is the place to go in to mad pvp theory's on balance and effectiveness.

You are wrong if you think this is about pvp balancing, this thread is about balancing multi-accounting by toning it down as much as possible. You see it about a pvp issue because it affects you.

Lemon: You are a smart PVP player, I am sure can find an advantage anyhow without threatening to resort to Isboxer. wink

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Gunner wrote:

How can you judge, you dont even participate in game?

I am not judging. Devs are trying to balance multi-accounting and I am giving my opinions. Who tells you I am not participating ? Oh right the kill board I see, I have to be there on top if not my opinions about multi account play is not valid fuuu

RIP PERPETUUM

393

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Celebro wrote:
Lemon wrote:

You really are off quite a bit on a lot of this, I really think this is the place to go in to mad pvp theory's on balance and effectiveness.

You are wrong if you think this is about pvp balancing, this thread is about balancing multi-accounting by toning it down as much as possible. You see it about a pvp issue because it affects you.

Lemon: You are a smart PVP player, I am sure can find an advantage anyhow without threatening to resort to Isboxer. wink

Meant this is 'not' the place for PvP theory.

I do not see any draw backs to these changes that have a impact on anything but your interactions in PvP situations. All mobs are stack and farmable from stationary positions. Just as miners have hauler/looters so do most high end combat players.

I just aim to point out how trivial any half assed bandaid will be. The devs are resource limited and if this fails then that is less money for them and more angry people from the multiboxers and the singles will be angry.

plus less money for avatar

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

394 (edited by Celebro 2014-01-24 00:05:32)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

I am trying to get to the big picture here, Steam players coming in seeing max out accounts on each specialization and each faction WTFPAWNING with multi accounts,maybe an exaggeration, but that's how MOST of them are going to see it. As a mountain high wall to climb not worth the sub.

Few will spend the dedication of let alone the waiting time until they are skilled enough and subbing 5+ accounts to just remain marginally competitive AT pvp; mining and farming is not competitive. We have 18 classes of combat bots compared 9 indy bots, doesn't take long to see what this game is centered towards.

RIP PERPETUUM

395 (edited by Lemon 2014-01-24 00:26:34)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Celebro wrote:

I am trying to get to the big picture here, Steam players coming in seeing max out accounts on each specialization and each faction WTFPAWNING with multi accounts,maybe an exaggeration, but that's how MOST of them are going to see it. As a mountain high wall to climb not worth the sub.

Few will spend the dedication of let alone the waiting time until they are skilled enough and subbing 5+ accounts to just remain marginally competitive AT pvp; mining and farming is not competitive. We have 18 classes of combat bots compared 9 indy bots, doesn't take long to see what this game is centered towards.

Totally valid concern and honestly anyone who can understand PO's mechanics during PvP will see this.

The truth is though that if we actually had 1000 'active' players the mutli-account max players would be less than 10% the total population. I legitamently think a proper introduction on how to properly combat, fit and play in PO will resolve fix this issue itself.

ASSUMING a stable server.
The mechanics within the game punish mutli-boxing gravley with anything above a 1000 'active' player count.

Look at interference, you cannot run any fleets larger than 60-70 players vs another equally sized group before you both are blind from interference to each other. If you honestly believe that 100 players going in to combat against another 70 would opt to bring 1-5 accounts each. They would not be able to even ENGAGE the force in front of them.

I literally dont even use follow bots unless its a level 10 Nexus toon or something in a group of 30+. Today I would rather 'gift' all my max accounts to be active and player controlled by 30 for that evening and go back to farming alpha 2's with my accounts the next day.

THE ONLY reason that your statement would be true is if the 10% of multiboxers are so filthy asset rich we could afford to PvP against 90% of the game for the next year with out ever having to stop to farm or gather. (We all are FYI)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** EP, the assets is where it is at. I *** many many groups of larger players by being able to apply this same pressure. This is like having Godzilla respawn instantly every time tokyo kills him.

See what I am getting at?

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

396 (edited by Celebro 2014-01-24 00:37:18)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Lemon wrote:
Celebro wrote:

I am trying to get to the big picture here, Steam players coming in seeing max out accounts on each specialization and each faction WTFPAWNING with multi accounts,maybe an exaggeration, but that's how MOST of them are going to see it. As a mountain high wall to climb not worth the sub.

Few will spend the dedication of let alone the waiting time until they are skilled enough and subbing 5+ accounts to just remain marginally competitive AT pvp; mining and farming is not competitive. We have 18 classes of combat bots compared 9 indy bots, doesn't take long to see what this game is centered towards.

Totally valid concern and honestly anyone who can understand PO's mechanics during PvP will see this.

The truth is though that if we actually had 1000 'active' players the mutli-account max players would be less than 10% the total population. I legitamently think a proper introduction on how to properly combat, fit and play in PO will resolve fix this issue itself.

ASSUMING a stable server.
The mechanics within the game punish mutli-boxing gravley with anything above a 1000 'active' player count.

Look at interference, you cannot run any fleets larger than 60-70 players vs another equally sized group before you both are blind from interference to each other. If you honestly believe that 100 players going in to combat against another 70 would opt to bring 1-5 accounts each. They would not be able to even ENGAGE the force in front of them.

I literally dont even use follow bots unless its a level 10 Nexus toon or something in a group of 30+. Today I would rather 'gift' all my max accounts to be active and player controlled by 30 for that evening and go back to farming alpha 2's with my accounts the next day.

THE ONLY reason that your statement would be true is if the 10% of multiboxers are so filthy asset rich we could afford to PvP against 90% of the game for the next year with out ever having to stop to farm or gather. (We all are FYI)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** EP, the assets is where it is at. I *** many many groups of larger players by being able to apply this same pressure. This is like having Godzilla respawn instantly every time tokyo kills him.

See what I am getting at?

So with 1000+ if it's not an issue we can suggest to change it back, nothing is set in stone.

Right now the concern is get to 1000+ on GC. Get that?

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Celebro wrote:

So with 1000+ if it's not an issue we can suggest to change it back, nothing is set in stone.

Right now the concern is get to 1000+ on GC. Get that?

Theres too many other sandboxes coming out (star citizen, pathfinder, repopulation, albion, something caerus, greed monger, etc etc) sure a lot of them will fail and end up with 20-30 players like Perp, but there is more and more competition and this horse aint getting younger or better. It was great in 2010 when only competition was EVE, but in 2014 it looks dated, sterile and on it's death bed.

I would love to be wrong, but I dont think I am.

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Lemon wrote:

Totally valid concern and honestly anyone who can understand PO's mechanics during PvP will see this.

The truth is though that if we actually had 1000 'active' players the mutli-account max players would be less than 10% the total population. I legitamently think a proper introduction on how to properly combat, fit and play in PO will resolve fix this issue itself.

ASSUMING a stable server.
The mechanics within the game punish mutli-boxing gravley with anything above a 1000 'active' player count.

Look at interference, you cannot run any fleets larger than 60-70 players vs another equally sized group before you both are blind from interference to each other. If you honestly believe that 100 players going in to combat against another 70 would opt to bring 1-5 accounts each. They would not be able to even ENGAGE the force in front of them.

I literally dont even use follow bots unless its a level 10 Nexus toon or something in a group of 30+. Today I would rather 'gift' all my max accounts to be active and player controlled by 30 for that evening and go back to farming alpha 2's with my accounts the next day.

THE ONLY reason that your statement would be true is if the 10% of multiboxers are so filthy asset rich we could afford to PvP against 90% of the game for the next year with out ever having to stop to farm or gather. (We all are FYI)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** EP, the assets is where it is at. I *** many many groups of larger players by being able to apply this same pressure. This is like having Godzilla respawn instantly every time tokyo kills him.

See what I am getting at?

You talking about large groups PvP. Yes, there wont be a big problem with followbot users. But how about small groups? Is this normal if a whole concept of min-PvP will be shifted to multiaccount players?..

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

399

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Celebro wrote:

So with 1000+ if it's not an issue we can suggest to change it back, nothing is set in stone.

Right now the concern is get to 1000+ on GC. Get that?

Oh I fully understand and get that absolutely nothing is set in stone in this game, not even the EULA.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

400 (edited by Lemon 2014-01-24 02:30:29)

Re: Poll: The "followbot" mechanic

Hunter wrote:

You talking about large groups PvP. Yes, there wont be a big problem with followbot users. But how about small groups? Is this normal if a whole concept of min-PvP will be shifted to multiaccount players?..

20 Robots on the field 10vs10

10 Players play their 10 robots vs 5-7 playing 10. YOU TELL ME THE ODDS, My team of 10 players will win everytime, hell I would go as far to say my multi-box team will win everytime vs 10 players.

Sheep are sheep wolves are wolves

Their is no denying that a NEW player has a 2-5 months buffer to be able to go and fight Vet's. Mutliboxing has nothing to do with this.

I built a US tz for my next sandbox to play with the EU one I found here. Question is what game that will be

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle