Automated combat

Moirean

Ooh, I don't think I could let my system do that much for me. I coded in an auto-vivi when someone is all broken and it still freaks me out when it fires. I think that's the most sort of automatic stuff I can handle having my system do, but I'm apparently notorious for running away (I still insist that ducking out and using archery really isn't fleeing, but that's a debate for another thread) and I like to use stuff like self-heals, so I think it's important to be able to decide when to do that sort of thing.

I made some lulzy breaking/spinecut stuff with Teani the other day and killed Kog in the training room while I was having a smoke, but I don't think I'd ever use something like that in serious combat.

Angwe

Why not just queue the self heal? And having an AI shouldn't prevent movement, if you're adept at USING the AI. Yes, it does take practice to actually use these things, even when you built them yourself.

I think we may be getting on a tangent.

Medri

Dun care about offense scripting. Offense is a thing I can handle myself. For afflicting, I can set up aliases for each venom combo I want to use, and that alias will check for shield and rebounding and raze before applying the venom. That's still manualing -- it just takes away some of the pain. Instead of having to type stand;wipe dirk;envenom dirk with stuff;envenom dirk with stuff;dstab person;suggest person stuff;shadow sleight person stuff;whatever else every time I, I hit one button and it sends all that.

My biggest problem is defensive curing. Defensive curing is something that should at least be there on a basic level for everybody's access. Firstaid would truly be sufficient for 'entry-level automated curing' if it weren't for the forced 0.5 second tick before every command. Auto-rebounding, auto-mass and other auto-things like that are things that would be simple enough to code as a complement to first aid, and would actually probably serve as a good stepping stone to code a full autocuring system around that. Even I can make a simple rebounding tracker and I couldn't code my way out of a wet paper bag. I mean literally, I actually tried to code my way out of a wet paper bag in another MUD once and failed miserably.

I think really most of the opposition against server-side autocuring is that people will feel that they've lost their advantage over other people by having a home-brewed (or purchased) system. It's those people with the ableist "I DID IT JUST FINE, SO YOU CAN TOO" attitude who think that you're just not allowed to have a curing system if you aren't actually able to code or learn how to code.

Haven

@Moirean: Haha, I used to do that too way back in the day until Hadoryu, Mygale, and some of the other folks of #Aetolia on mIRC took me under their wing. My frustration with combat dropped significantly the day I was introduced to macro shortcuts. I think... I might even have some of those aliases on the server side still for my character. "vv" was vivisect and "be" was like barge east and "tw" was touch web. Fun times. xD

Anyway. Differences in definition aside, I think my point still stands: Automated offenses aren't the problem in regards to combat entry. It's the defensive end. If Aetolia wants to broaden the PK scene and include as many people as possible then it needs to do something about the defensive end because it is a serious hurdle. I firmly believe that the best way to do that is to implement a better version of firstaid. It'll be better for everyone in the long run. Keep it togglable for those that want to customise it topdown but for the broader game it should be good enough to be sufficiently competitive.

Oleis

Haven said:

@Moirean: Haha, I used to do that too way back in the day until Hadoryu, Mygale, and some of the other folks of #Aetolia on mIRC took me under their wing. My frustration with combat dropped significantly the day I was introduced to macro shortcuts. I think... I might even have some of those aliases on the server side still for my character. "vv" was vivisect and "be" was like barge east and "tw" was touch web. Fun times. xD

Anyway. Differences in definition aside, I think my point still stands: Automated offenses aren't the problem in regards to combat entry. It's the defensive end. If Aetolia wants to broaden the PK scene and include as many people as possible then it needs to do something about the defensive end because it is a serious hurdle. I firmly believe that the best way to do that is to implement a better version of firstaid. It'll be better for everyone in the long run. Keep it togglable for those that want to customise it topdown but for the broader game it should be good enough to be sufficiently competitive.

When I referred to the topic at hand, I was being literal. The actual topic of this thread is the prevalence (and debatable merit of) automated combat systems. Your arguments on defensive hurdles are absolutely valid, even if I don't fully agree with your solutions. We can certainly have those conversations at some point, but we're in the process of exploring some of our options there. 

More the point, however: I would assert that the viability of automated combat is detrimental to the game as a whole, and I'm interested to see how you guys feel about that.

Daskalos

What if you randomized cure orders?

For instance, if someone has 3 bloodroot affs, they might cure paralysis, or they might cure one of the others. While that would create a certain amount of chance in combat, it would also prevent a lot of automated combat which right now is 'stick this aff to prevent this to prevent this'

It would definitely shake things up a bit, though automated systems would just switch to salve based offenses, as those would still be quite trackable.

Just something to throw out there.

Toz

It is 100%. Randomize curing orders or ditch disregarding, force people to actually learn/relearn how to manually handle stuff. Currently, with curing systems being so strong, there's no reason to try fancy stuff. And, similarly? You lose TONS of combat options with AI because there IS one 'optimal' route for every method of killing. And the more people solve that algorithm with flawless systems, the less innovation/different styles get used.

Oleis

Randomizing cure orders is definitely one option. Removing (or vastly weakening) discernment is also an option, either alone or in conjunction with cure order changes.

Angwe

If you randomized cure order: I think it'd be frustrating never knowing if I have a lock or not again, or if I'm even effecctively working my way towards a lock. Otherwise, nothing would really change. I'd still use the same AI I do. I'd just have to clear assumed affs more, because there'd be a greater margin of error.

If you disabled discernment: I'd drop Sentinel and swap to a class with passive curing immediately, because they would become the new gods of Aetolia.

Haven

@Oleis: Fair enough.

@Toz: I could be wrong and or misunderstanding you & Daskalos, so please forgive me. But while your solutions in randomizing cure orders or removing discernment would work... I think that might actually make Aetolia worse off? Aside from potentially breaking every nonlimb class's current incarnation, wouldn't that make combat more about luck than skill? o.o

Oleis

Angwe said:

If you disabled discernment: I'd drop Sentinel and swap to a class with passive curing immediately, because they would become the new gods of Aetolia.

That might be a bit of an overstatement. At any rate, none of these changes would exist in vacuums. There'd be plenty of necessary tweaks and adjustments.

Toz

Achaea, the cure order is random. There is no discernment. You'd need to nerf any class with passive curing skills (purity amulet, end-game skill would have to stay linear, etc.) in order for tracking to have a chance - what makes the random curing thing so popular is you can still actually get a lock. You just have to know how to aff-track. For instance, if they eat kelp then smoke skullcap? They ain't got asthma any more, but the clumsiness stuck. You build up slowly, give a spread of affs (build kelp stacks), then go for a lock. Combat skill comes in with you keeping a count in your head, what they probably have and what they've cured.

Moirean

There's always tactical alternatives! I know I harp on this a bunch, but I really think that introducing other things you can do offensively would broaden the PK options and make for more engaging fight. Shatter, for example is a fun risk-reward skill people can swap in to attempt to get a potent advantage in exchange for some vulnerability. More choices along these lines would be way more fun to fight with, versus just mashing in the affliction button.

Another route is to make locking less linear. Randomized curing could achieve this, but I think cure and affliction orders are pretty core to Aet's combat atm and changing that would really turn off lots of PKers. Another option would be to introduce lynchpin cures - basically make it so certain afflictions are only cured through one method, and put a fairly long CD (20-30ish seconds) on this method. Afflicting then becomes centered around the window that curing creates where the target basically is stuck with the curetype-only affliction. You'd hit them with less potent affs to push them into that window or capitalize on when they are stuck in there. This would also let a ton of afflictions be deleted (which would make things WAY easier for newer fighters, Aetolia has an insane number of afflictions), since stacking wouldn't require deep trees and would be more about creating that window versus overloading someone so they inevitably fall behind.

Toz

That's another good solution - the trouble is, given how EASY tracking is, and how LINEAR fighting is for traditional 1v1? There's no downside to tracking affs and having the system decide what to give next. It's one reason I'd argue system-breaking is actually more skillful at the moment; if I give any Carnifex my offense, all they have to do is press one button and they envenom with just as much 'skill' as I do.

Kaeus

Randomizing curing orders or screwing with discernment would drastically change the way combat is now. Honestly, there is a reason that I've never been able to get into the combat in other IRE games, and that being that I enjoy the precision of combat and the availability of information. I enjoy the current landscape of combat, and I think there is plenty of room to allow for combat that is based off tactical decisions and less full automation.

I used to really enjoy the Syssin class in the way that I played it, because not only could I tweak the affliction stack I pushed, but I could tweak the afflictions I was giving via hypnosis. This was still all automated, but I spent a lot of time and effort, both in and out of combat to learn how to read my opponent, and manually adjust what tactic I employed. I don't want to necessarily push people away from Aetolia, but if the experience you want in PK exists in another IRE game, and we have people here that enjoy the current landscape, I would hope they we do not try to break at least some of the current gameplay.

I have been a big fan of some of the methodologies behind the newer classes. They open up a lot more complex decisions, and they do allow for someone to be able to execute the offense without an AI to be the most effective at it. I think there are enough classes in Aetolia that we still have the capability to support multiple types of offensive gameplay.

As far as defensive curing goes, I've seen it get easier and easier and easier to get into combat as time has gone on. I do like the idea behind Imperian's server side curing if beefing that up is the way the admins want to go. Being able to adjust your curing based on your situation is something Firstaid shouldn't necessarily do. Tweaking the curing priorities, how you chose to utilize curing balances plays a lot into your effectiveness and creates some diversity in combat.

I do agree with the point that has been made though, which is that combat shouldn't (and really isn't) something you can expect to jump right into and battle someone who has devoted quite a bit of time into perfecting. There are people using systems that they did not build, yet they fight completely differently than others in the same situation. This was due to their devotion to tweaking both their offensive/defensive choices, and their effort shows in their ability to fight. In my mind, the Skill behind Aetolian PK involves how you work to understand your opponents, your abilities, and your own curing. To stress this, I can hand someone my automated 'AI' and watch them utilize it less effectively than me because there are still elements of gameplay that aren't automated, and choices that you still have to make while your system does a lot of the heavy lifting.

Haven

I really like @Moirean's idea and generally agree with implementing a more tactical feel to Aetolia's combat.

Daskalos

At the same time, randomizing would just mean a -higher- level of code required to track, however, so it might not be the best option. I dunno, it would take massive re-learning, I just am starting to dislike how easy it is to hand someone a system and say 'push ATK and kill them'. One of the things that separated IRE muds from stock muds was that it wasn't RNG and KILL TARGET - and yet, that's what we've become, just with us having to code the KILL vs the game doing it for us.

Draiman

I hate random. I hate chance. I hate dice. I hate the idea of luck playing anymore of a role than it already does in Aetolia with lag/tree tat. Please, for the love of all that is good and right in the world, do not randomize cure orders.

Toz

The short of it is this. Automation exists where linear solutions can be applied. If data can be known for certain, linear solutions can exist - and will exist. If I know what affs you have, my next move is a simple list to run down of a list, like shopping. There's a reason we use computers, and it's to solve problems with LOGIC-ORIENTED solutions. And any solution where you know every variable is one that can be solved logically. There's no room for intuition and, given the way that combat progresses, there's going to be even less room as AI gets more advanced. This brings up a very simple question: How do you make a person more effective than a machine? Or, if I can clarify, what is it that people do better than a machine can do? Because really, until you solve that question, you're not going to ever convince anyone to stop making AIs because they flat-out do it better.

Saybre

I'm jumping on the no-random cure order bandwagon. I personally spend a good 80% of my time in Aetolia, actually coding my offenses. I love it, tweaking my aff tracker, my different kill routes (Templar has 8 offenses I've made thus far, and will probably be adding a couple more here soon). To say that there's a 'one kill' route is ridiculous, even for my Lycan offenses I have 3, Syssin I have 3, Monk I'm still playing with, so it's in the works.

Admittedly, Templar has more because I -play- Templar more, and have geared my artifacts towards that class specifically (though I try to stick to heavy hitter classes for a reason). Combat knowledge comes in not only fighting, but in doing the work. Anyone that's seen my extensive neurosis in help files for the combat clan for the Templar knows that there is a LOT to grasp, and I try to make it easier for people to have the info at hand, instead of having to dig like I used to.

Automated offenses are tricky, they take skill to make, but as it's been said, they can also just be handed out. Problem is, if you're handing it to someone that knows jack diddly about coding, the moment it breaks, or doesn't do what they want to do, one of two things happen:

1) They fail miserably, hate it, and yell at you to fix it, or just no longer bother.
2) They find out why it failed, figure out how it worked, and suddenly they start to figure it out and make it their own.

Prime example, Dask gave me part of his offense a LONG time ago (I think we might be on 1, if not 2 years at this point), at the time I was completely out of the PK fighting scene, last time I had fought was back in the day when the only AI was Xarian, and everyone manualed, and I used to get kills left and right. When I got his and started getting excited, and saw that 'Wow, I can fight again' I ripped apart his code, I cleaned it, twisted it, bent it over backwards and started making it my own.

If you were to take my offensive scripts and put it next to Dask's now? They wouldn't even look close save for maybe 2 or 3 aliases, I guarantee it.
I had been mediocre at zScript before, now I can do it in my sleep, and it's also made me a better coder overall. (I taught myself Excel formulas in a weekend)

There are downsides to Automated combat, but it also opens up fighter's that understand the mechanics of the game MUCH more. Don't downplay it too much, my only gripe is the damnable spam, PLEASE INLINE COMBOS, I will cry in happiness when all I have to do is : COMBO DSK DASKALOS TRAUMA LEFT DISRUPT RIGHT

Haven

Honestly, I think automation is here to stay. We should just embrace it and leave it as an option for players to take. The more I think about it though, the more I like Moirean's approach in implementing mechanics that support tactical analysis and risk-reward assessment. Cause like... the need for automation comes from, like Toz said, the ease of tracking and how linear a lot of the combat is. So optimal combat became who can run down the line the fastest and easiest way. Tis why everything is so fast and spammy and what have you.

With that in mind, wouldn't introducing new core mechanics for classes that circled around risk assessment eliminate the need for automation all together? For instance, something like: I give you X. You have a choice of dealing with X by countering it or barreling through X to give me Y or doing something else.

I dunno if that made sense. It made sense in my head.

Moirean

@kaeus - The PK I really resonated with did used to exist here. Then old Sents got changed, illusions were removed, retardation got nerfed, group combat/widespread systems/AI offense came into play and killed manual curing/offenses. It's kinda silly to tell us to go elsewhere when it's Aetolia that has changed a lot.

Kaeus

The other issue @Moirean, is while those things did exist, they acted as an even larger barrier to combat. Many of those mechanics relied on gimmicky tactics or fooling someones curing system, and they end up being the type of thing you can't reliably balance a game around. Sure they might have been fun to be on the giving side of that, but in terms of balancing a game the current environment is the result of the attempt to make things more even and accessible. Those tactics and PK relied a lot on ambiguity and breaking someone's system rather than skill at understanding your abilities. You had to understand your opponent, but in a completely different way.

Moirean

You're talking essentially only about illusions, which is kinda missing the point of what I was saying. I manualled everything (including curing) for years and got kills on people like Desian and Xzato. The shift to team combat, the gradual speed-up and increase of spam, the shift to affliction-based routes, this has made coding far more necessary.

Irruel

Toz said:

This brings up a very simple question: How do you make a person more effective than a machine? Or, if I can clarify, what is it that people do better than a machine can do? Because really, until you solve that question, you're not going to ever convince anyone to stop making AIs because they flat-out do it better.

I doubt an AI can run a shaman offense better than a person can. No doubt it could do it just as well, but why bother?

Having said that, for a person to do it manually as well as a complex function can, they need all the same information that the complex function needs - i.e. accurate information about the target. the more accurate, the better the results.

So either way, we still need to track afflictions.

Now look at new sentinels. The component that is dhuriv still needs to be executed perfectly, but if the target is using a good system, dhuriv will not kill anyone. Perhaps by targeting limbs at the same time, but that part of it CAN be manualled as well as any AI and probably better. The other components of the class though, not particularly AI-friendly.

I'd like to see tracking stay easy, and some classes remain AI friendly - but in the way the sentinels have, where even when your AI is happily beating on the target, there are decisions to be made and buttons/aliases to press or type in.

Only, perhaps a bit more so than the sentinels actually ended up as.

Ashmer

At the risk of getting absolutely trolled, I would just like to offer that there exist a LOT of possibilities in classes like Shamans, Cabalists, Indorani, and to (I think, I'm not familiar with the class after a 4 year break) a lesser extent, Luminaries to provide a wide range of bad unicorns tactical options that could not be handled by an AI. Sure, simple queues and tactics could, but I don't know that I could get an AI to think like I would when taking everything into account for, say, a Shaman offense. That stuff looks hairy and seven different kinds of fun.

 

This also applies to limb damage classes and routes, as far as widening tactical availability to people that play with these skills. Obviously we want it to be distinct from Imperian, 'cause if I wanted to play Imperian I'd play Imperian, but I'm with opening it up some. As it is, my offense is basically a reverse curing system that tracks target's afflictions instead of mine and takes actions based on what afflictions they don't have, instead of what afflictions that I do have.

 

Don't take this to mean it's entirely automatic - I'm usually typing furiously updating variables/tables or forcing different actions ahead of others, I just don't rely on my own physical reflexes to hit the enter key as soon after I get balance as possible, while trying to take into account how I'm hindered, etc. I build based on different priority tables and force actions like diag/shielding or chasing through using aliases.

 

Also, in the opinion of a player who left for four years and recently came back, the work that's been done on the combat system/the game in general is awesome, and I don't want that acknowledgment to get lost in the clamoring for the next better thing that will make this fun ass game more fun. Cheers.

Ilyon

Oleis said:

Randomizing cure orders is definitely one option. Removing (or vastly weakening) discernment is also an option, either alone or in conjunction with cure order changes.

While this option does indeed exist, I would advocate caution before taking on such a task - affliction classes are currently balanced around good tracking ability, the removal of which would require rather significant upgrades to make up for the increased margin of error. Furthermore, I do not really agree that tracking in itself is a problem.

What -is- a problem is the fact that several affliction classes only really have one end-goal and limited ways to accomplish it (usually, this end goal is locking, accomplished by using kelp affs until asthma is stuck, then trying to finish from there). When only one good strategy exists and it can be automated, it will be, especially if the steps to take do not differ much between fights.

So my recommendation would be to look at the classes with one viable strategy and alter them to give them more. That would definitely reduce the automation, not because it no longer is possible, but because doing this kind of decisions on-the-fly is interesting.

Of course, this is no easy task by any means, but then again, neither is the weakening of tracking. A good approach here would be to change the "locking" affs so as to make locking impossible, then look into providing different alternative strategies to the affected classes (syssin, sents, vamps, templars, etc).

Xiuhcoatl

I like Ilyon's approach best out of all the other ones here. Randomizing cure orders would without a doubt have to be done in conjunction with what Ilyon is saying. 

Randomizing cure orders would really buff affliction based classes because the big thing would be to do huge stacks, kelp stacks, goldenseal stacks, and the like. That way you can lock someone down with asthma or stupidity. People who can give bloodroot stacks would be overpowered. IE, templars would just go down on people way more than they do already. So you'd need to remove a huge amount of afflictions to prevent this.

Nerfing discernment would do next to nothing, because if you can still track what's going in and you get a message for when they focus/touch tree/renew you can still track what they have. To nerf discernment ie nerfing tracking in total you'd have to remove the ability to see what people cure with completely. IE, you don't see when they herb, salve, smoke, touch tree, renew, focus and the like. Then you're pretty much flying in the dark. That would in essence screw over the living hell out of every class besides straight up damage based classes and independent affliction classes: Sciomancer, ascendril, shamanism. 

I personally don't like most of the suggestions in this thread, but that's because combat would effectively start over from ground 0. Seeing many of the previous reworks done on Aetolia, no offense to the admins here, but most of them that I've seen weren't balanced at all and there's been some pretty big problems. I'm assuming some of the reworks went like, we want combat to go in this direction and now that we're done with this we'll work on the other classes that need to get brought up to speed. The other classes never get brought up. You're left with like everyone being a singular class. Everybody's mad. Then IRL stuff happens, work gets stopped/adjusted, and it gets left like that for a few years instead of gradual adjustment. 

Irruel

I don't know what Imperian is like these days, but making herb cures random seems like it would make us like Imperian was at the time I played it. I'm not saying it was all bad back then - it was exhilarating - but the coding required was huge and until Whyte released IMTS there was a massive gap between mid and top tier pvpers.

I think that rehashing the same decisions made by other IRE muds is not the way forwards.

Seir

Going to say that random cure orders would be a good solution, but it may inadvertently impact affliction classes for the worst (or the better) based on how some of the revamps were developed. Which is to say, developed with specific herb routes of killing and with Discernment in mind.

Achaea and Imperian, I can say as someone who has PK'd regularly in both now, do just fine with randomized cure orders, but I'd still say Imperian has done the greatest job overall because they completely eliminated the barrier of entry into combat (due to coding, system requirements, etc.) because of server-side curing. For the record, even with server-side curing, it is still possible to beat individuals in Imperian.