BurgerBB Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 AIs can ruin rounds just by how good they are. All it takes is them bolting you in a room and you're fucked. In MRP, this was fine because everyone had toolboxes and knew how to hack, but in HRP you'd be pushing your character's skillsets if you weren't an engineer. Another issue is cameras, where the AI can track your movement easily while in certain areas other than maint, if you were to go elsewhere you would have to destroy cameras, which cause alarms if you break it or disable it without cutting that one specific wire first. I propose that AIs have a percent chance to spawn based on the round's type. The percentages were randomly pulled out of my ass based on factors such as chaos created by antags and are not a reflection of the final implementation. On extended, they have a 100% chance to spawn. On crossfire, 75% On autotraitor, 50%. On ninja, 50% On changeling, 50% On cult, 50% On merc/raider, 50% On traitor, 25%. On revolution, 25% On vampire, 25% On MALF, 0% because fuck this gamemode tbh fam
Pratepresidenten Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 No, lame. 100% -1. If something is going to be done about the AI, this shouldnt be it. This effectively kills a slot which can infact facilitate RP to a good extent. There are plenty of countermeasures against AIs. Remove your ID, put on a mask, use abilities or tech to obscure yourself from its mostly all-seeing eye. Or simply just.. Subvert the AI to cater to your needs. While its true the AI holds great power, even greater power than the entirety of Command in some instances, doesnt mean we should push them all into the same category. Regular AI players that arent shitler valid hunters shouldnt be punished for the bad seeds that are. In my opinion, if anything should be done to impede the AI slot, it should be a whitelist.
Chada1 Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 I'm agreeing with Prates sentiment, the AI is a very important gameplay element that shouldn't be restricted to the massive level as suggested, what it needs is Roleplay quality control, not complete absence from rounds. I +1 the idea of a Whitelist instead of a % chance. Anyone who can be trusted to play Heads of Staff should also be trusted to play the AI, if they abuse it, it could just be an AI ban as per usual instead of a whitelist strip.
Trazz666 Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 (edited) If your antagging plans doesn't take the AI into consideration, please consult this piece of ancient Earth advice. Real talk, though. I don't think the server deserves to be punished because AI players are good at their job. It's not like the AI is all powerful anyways, they're just another person at a screen, they can only look in 1 place at a time. Even if you can't hack a camera, you can smash a camera and do your dirty work quickly. Point being, there's ways around the AI that doesn't require literally removing the AI from play OOCly. -1 Edited July 29, 2018 by Guest
Scheveningen Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 Lame idea. AI players need to have their behavior better moderated, not punished through mechanics.
Skull132 Posted July 28, 2018 Posted July 28, 2018 Arguably a bad solution for the problem. Yes, AIs are powerful things that can and will and do regularly ruin antag rounds. However, simply plucking it out of rounds based on arbitrary stats does not solve the problem. It hides it. A more coherent solution would be far better.
BurgerBB Posted July 28, 2018 Author Posted July 28, 2018 (edited) Arguably a bad solution for the problem. Yes, AIs are powerful things that can and will and do regularly ruin antag rounds. However, simply plucking it out of rounds based on arbitrary stats does not solve the problem. It hides it. A more coherent solution would be far better. Well I believe that this issue of AIs pretty much running rounds for doing their job needs to be addressed and fixed. The reason why I'm suggesting this specific fix in the first place so that people are more aware of the issue; if they notice that a lack of AI makes for better gameplay/RP then people might support additional AI limitations. it's like what they did with that other server; they removed AI for a week to see how the gameplay differs. Not sure the results of that were. A fix I had in mind for months is that there is a considerable delay when it comes to AI interfacing with doors. Something like a 1 second delay for opening/shocking/bolting/whatever doors is an idea I have. Edited July 29, 2018 by Guest
Azande Posted July 29, 2018 Posted July 29, 2018 NO. Do not excuse lazy antags by removing the AI - encourage or empower antags to get by the AI more. We should not become an antag hugbox.
Guest Marlon Phoenix Posted July 29, 2018 Posted July 29, 2018 Arguably a bad solution for the problem. Yes, AIs are powerful things that can and will and do regularly ruin antag rounds. However, simply plucking it out of rounds based on arbitrary stats does not solve the problem. It hides it. A more coherent solution would be far better. I agree with this
Scheveningen Posted July 29, 2018 Posted July 29, 2018 The problem with AIs in general is that they are tucked incredibly neatly into their own impenetrable autism bunkers which is mostly indestructible to individual infiltration. It is absolutely impossible to get inside the AI upload without the AI turning on the turrets behind you. An interesting solution to this would be to disable the AI from being able to toggle their outer turrets whatsoever similar to how the telecommunications has a lockdown, provided said AI is a non-antagonist. If the AI is an antagonist in any way, they are able to override this. This permits solo traitors to be able to effectively walk into the AI core with an emag and hack the AI by themselves.
GreenBoi Posted July 30, 2018 Posted July 30, 2018 I don't know if this fits here, but I've been wondering as to why camera alarms still happen if you deactivate cameras by hacking them. I think a character knowing how to hack cameras should be rewarded with either a delayed alarm or no alarm at all. I think this would make it so the Guy Who Stealthily Deactivated The Camera alone isn't immediately Guy Who Is Suspect Numero Uno because deactivating it is just silently smashing a camera..
Kaed Posted July 30, 2018 Posted July 30, 2018 The problem with AIs in general is that they are tucked incredibly neatly into their own impenetrable autism bunkers which is mostly indestructible to individual infiltration. It is absolutely impossible to get inside the AI upload without the AI turning on the turrets behind you. An interesting solution to this would be to disable the AI from being able to toggle their outer turrets whatsoever similar to how the telecommunications has a lockdown, provided said AI is a non-antagonist. If the AI is an antagonist in any way, they are able to override this. This permits solo traitors to be able to effectively walk into the AI core with an emag and hack the AI by themselves. No, because the AI has to be able to defend themselves even as a non-antag, you can't block of control to their most crucial defences behind a firewall under most normal circumstances. The problem however is that indeed, you can't control the turrets that defend the AI, making it impossible to slip inside under normal circumstances. I think it would be an interesting idea to have an 'emergency override' panel just outside the AI upload, similar to how placement in the old core setup worked. It requires command access, and it doesn't do anything except turn off all of the core and upload turrets and lock the AI from using them for about 15-20 seconds (unless they are an antag, they can override this. Maybe malf turret upgrade makes it useless ?) This is on a cooldown and cannot be spammed to perma disable the turrets. The point is, canonically, so that someone with authorization can shut down the subverted's AI turrets temporarily in an emergency to get in, but if the AI is attentive, they can also turn it back on soon because they were watching. However, it also allowed the prepared antagonist to get inside assuming the AI wasn't watching its core (it can be emagged), and also cuts out the tedious 'turret tug of war' scenario that happened when old captains hovered next to the control panel and kept it turned off every time the AI tried to change it. That was not really fun at all, either for the crew member involved OR the AI. Now it's a race against time and hope the AI hasn't noticed to tattle on you, which is exciting. (and in the end, if they are an antag AI, they're just gonna be like "I can't let you do that Urist McEngie" and turn the turrets back on seconds later, bolting you into a death room, so I hope you weren't alone or unprepared.)
ben10083 Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 -1, there are many ways to circumvent or control the AI, removing them from rounds is a way to just make people who like to play them the short end of the stick.
ToasterStrudel Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 It'll just become like the merchant slot, people will eventually just stop trying to play it and that's not a good way to solve the problem. It does get pretty annoying when an AI just points out an antag five minutes into the round, but I feel this solution isn't the best one to solve that problem, perhaps we can edit how cameras work, maybe make it easier for Antags to mask themselves from the AI through telecrystal items or other mechanic means, and not punish the people just want to play the role they enjoy and can't because it just didn't spawn that round.
BurgerBB Posted July 31, 2018 Author Posted July 31, 2018 The reason why I'm proposing this instead of an AI balance change is because I want others to notice rounds without AI. Hell, I'm in full support of a round where AI is removed for a week.
Scheveningen Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 Hell, I'm in full support of a round where AI is removed for a week. :thinking: Well, despite the different atmosphere in which I'm comparing us to, Bay has done this. It went okay. The loss endured is that no one can play AI anymore.
ReadThisNamePlz Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 I still don't see why there is no whitelist on AI. I feel like majority of the problems would be dealt with if it was under a whitelist.
Banditoz Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 I still don't see why there is no whitelist on AI. I feel like majority of the problems would be dealt with if it was under a whitelist. Alternatively, bad AI players can be jobbanned by you guys.
LanceLynxx Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 absolutely against this suggestion, which doesn't solve anything. I do however think that the AI shouldn't have control over its turrets. Those should be set by Command staff. Roundstart default should be off, it would then require a proactive command member to go and turn it on, either in person on a control terminal, or a new computer program "Turrets" which could be accessed with a command-level ID and control both AI turrets and Tcomm turrets (which would also be off by roundstart default) this would make it easier for antags to slip into the core if they wanted to subvert, while at the same time preserving the AI role, and also requiring a proactive role from command if they decide to increase security.
Bauser Posted July 31, 2018 Posted July 31, 2018 If there was any confidence that removing the AI would be a net improvement, then this suggestion would be to remove the role of AI entirely. Instead, this suggestion is only to implement a random chance for the role to be removed each round. Therefore, it logically follows that you have no such knowledge that removing the AI would make things better or worse. The presence of an AI is fundamental to how the gameplay manifests and how rounds play out; leaving it to simple randomness would categorically be a mistake, because it would necessarily be building a weakness into the game mechanics (either AI is good, and we're getting rid of it sometimes, or AI is bad, and we're keeping it sometimes). A better approach would be to work on more finely tuning the AI's abilities so that skilled players are less round-breaking. Flattening the skill curve, as it were.
Arrow768 Posted August 1, 2018 Posted August 1, 2018 As mentioned by quite a few people: The suggestion to only spawn the AI sometimes, doesn't fix any issues there might be with the AI Role. In the round that sparked that suggestion thread, I personally mentioned that players should ahelp the AI, if they believe it is breaking any rules. To my knowledge not a single one did. If there are issues with certain AIs, then ahelp these AI Players. Voting for dismissal due to the following reasons: The suggestion does not fix the problem it is intended to fix
Sytic Posted August 1, 2018 Posted August 1, 2018 The big problem is that there's frequently only one way to go about the AI issue: "In this world, it's gank or be ganked." You have to punk them as hard as you can, as fast as you can, which immediately jumps everybody to lethals and makes the round Call of Duty: Spaceman Edition. In cases like these, it's not fun. More thought needs to be given on the AI role, and it shouldn't just be taken away from players because Secret rolled Changeling or something.
BurgerBB Posted August 1, 2018 Author Posted August 1, 2018 As mentioned by quite a few people: The suggestion to only spawn the AI sometimes, doesn't fix any issues there might be with the AI Role. In the round that sparked that suggestion thread, I personally mentioned that players should ahelp the AI, if they believe it is breaking any rules. To my knowledge not a single one did. If there are issues with certain AIs, then ahelp these AI Players. Voting for dismissal due to the following reasons: The suggestion does not fix the problem it is intended to fix In my defense, I wasn't in the round I just heard people complaining about bad AI players and I remembered I had this suggestion in the back of my thread. And it's not about bad AI players. It's about AI players generally ruining rounds because they're doing their job. Good AI players can ruin rounds because they have an eye over the entire station, suit sensors, and every alarm system on the station. And the suggestion itself is a test similar to Bay's "Remove AI for a week and see what happens" idea. It's purely meant to make players realise that rounds go differently when there is no AI and spread awareness of the AI being a joke roll.
Recommended Posts