Auto-following target calls is bad, somehow, I guess

Vallie

I actually thought the underlying question about automation in IRE muds is interesting, but then it just became standard forum trolling and I got sad. Here's my blurb, anyways.

I've always thought of IRE combat as mostly state-based - player A tries to move player B into some states 1-->n, where those states mean A can kill B, or player A escapes from B, etc. Getting there is purposefully non-trivial, in that there are an innumerable set of states, with every state having many other states to transition to. Importantly, it's not a static state machine - player B, and their buddies C, D, and @Aegoth are manipulating the states out from under you (like holocaust everyone), and the transition speed between states is different for all parties as well. "Real" automation* relies on having good control of your states and execution paths - you don't truly get that here. Scripting small bridges between states (eg. they're two venoms away from a lock --> lock them, they're not parrying head --> 2H eat face) seems sensible to me, but the caveat there is still that you can't guarantee that's the 'correct' action to take (eg. you should have run because their bal is before you and they eat your face instead), you can only attempt to move them to another state that you assume is correct. Counterpoint here might be "I can account for that specific situation by doing <x>" - true, but I see it more of like a NP-complete style problem, in that there might be verifiable correct decisions on an individual scale, but the complexity just explodes outside of that subspace. 'Solving' IRE combat would easily be a PhD level dissertation imo!

*I haven't done automation engineering (beyond standard code stuff) but I have written naive AI and ML anomaly detection. This assumption might be incorrect.

TLDR; I'm a fucking nerd and code/theory gets me excited, why won't people just nerd out with me

Aerek

Vallie said:

TLDR; I'm a fucking nerd and code/theory gets me excited, why won't people just nerd out with me

Once you start fighting, you will have an ample supply of people willing to nerd out with you. That's basically what we do all day at the arenas is share/debate mechanics, theory, and code.

Skarash

oh it's that person, cooper you could've said that 6 pages ago and saved me some sanity

Austere

Aerek said:

Vallie said:

TLDR; I'm a fucking nerd and code/theory gets me excited, why won't people just nerd out with me

Once you start fighting, you will have an ample supply of people willing to nerd out with you. That's basically what we do all day at the arenas is share/debate mechanics, theory, and code.

I like to nerd out with my code out..

Dunn

Mmmm show me that object structure, babe. 

Jacen

Is auto venom selection considered that much different than auto curing priority swaps, pertaining to the automation discussion, or am I vastly overestimating the prevalence of the latter?

Aerek

The key difference between "automated" and "non-automated" isn't the presence of scripting--we all use curing scripts, limb counters, and the like to help us out--it's whether or not your actions are still subject to human error. Even if a human knows what to do, they still have to actually do it. Humans hesitate, humans get tunnel vision, humans can be mind gamed. That uncertainty--will I make a mistake? Will my opponent?--is what gives combat its challenge and its thrill. Can you come at me with a perfect offense while also paying attention to my offense and managing a perfect defense at the same time? I will respect you like mad if you can, because that's hard for a human to do.

An AI, properly written, doesn't make mistakes. It either knows what to do and does it, or doesn't know what to do and doesn't. Your AI won't hesitate, it won't get distracted, it won't get caught up in the heat of the moment. That lacks the uncertainty, that lacks the thrill. I completely understand the satisfaction of building something so complex, winding it up, and watching it function flawlessly, but no matter how many times your AI kills me, I won't respect you like I would a human at the wheel, because you're not the one killing me in that moment. You wrote your offense weeks or months ago, and it just performs exactly the steps you told it to, every time; that's easy for a computer to do. You could be half-asleep at the keyboard at the time, and your system will still function at the same efficiency as when you wrote it. That lack of discrepancy bores me, even if I'm the one winning against a bad AI.

Does writing one of these fighting AIs take skill? Absolutely, you're a binary artist if you can do it well. But is it fun to fight against? Not at all, and that's what I care about. I enjoy fighting humans, testing each others' knowledge, reflexes, and wit in real time. Fighting a computer program doesn't give me that excitement, and once I recognize that you're using one, I'll avoid you where I can.

Aegoth

Holy fuck @Aerek, yes

Vender

bard seems like a super hard class to manual even though I've heard it has been done before

Armali

I think the consensus was that it was one of the hardest to play it optimally manually. You could probably just spam limerick on loop or something if you didn't, though, and there's always salve locking.

Keorin

Personally, I think that some of the problem rests upon the volume-based momentum classes in all this, as they often give the person defending against them very few viable options. Against traditional affliction classes, smart defensive swaps can be especially effective against an automated offense, and they provide more ways that a player can match wits with another player, as well.

With classes like occie, 2h, and alchemist, though, there are very few options other then shield and run, and it makes automation all the more potent when the computer has a very simple logic path to follow. I think that some of the biggest issues in terms of automated offense would be reduced if those classes were tweaked around a bit.

Vender

this is also how i feel about manual players who claim to be superior but only play prep classes that can ignore parry and then whine when there is an rng chance that their f1-f4 in never changing sequence one hit leave room repeat strat gets ruined by balancing (bard and pun intended).

generally, the counter to limb prep is rng but some classes (bm, magi) can bypass parry to the degree where complaining about someone auto'ing and hitting f1 is a bit hypocritical.

Keorin

Well, prep classes are intended to have finishing sequences that are survivable, is more to the point. Changing the order of your applies and fake applying will mess up a whole ton of prep classes, as will well timed tumbles, restores, and mechanics like that.

I don't like rng effects like balancing, personally, since I hate going through what can be a very long prep only to lose what's effectively a coin flip, having to restart, and losing in the process. I don't really get to complain here, since monk has ways around balancing, but losing all your prep in the case of blademaster, for instance, just seems like a frustrating mechanic.

Armali

Yeah, there's very few prep sequences where you need RNG to survive, there's almost always something you can do in reaction to survive (a few DWB sequences are the exception). Throwing on stuff like RNG misses is just adding insult to injury, and I imagine, is why DWC and DWB both got a way to mitigate it.

Aegoth

Vender said:

bard seems like a super hard class to manual even though I've heard it has been done before

Xinna manualled bard when it was even more difficult to play as than it is now (mechanics-wise), and there has been no bard since who's topped her, automated or not. Don't lose hope, and just keep at it. You'll get to that level with dedication

Atalkez

If they're claiming superiority I would question it.

Most fighters that manual at the high end, can do so on a broad range of classes and don't really boast about it for the most part.

I think having a parry bypass shouldn't matter in the slightest, though. Parry is a hard prep counter while affliction counterparts don't have a hard counter except running.

Mizik

@Jarrel will get blown back by Miz. Pick your class.

MvJ 2017

Viho

Reisen said:

my Aetolia system, fully automated, is 328kb, and I can count the people who can beat it on one hand.)

lol no you can't, not unless you got like 20 fingers on that hand.

Also, there's some type of misinformation about Aetolia PK around here I see. Don't listen to people like this, or to people like @Bann (soz bro but you're a bit out dated on the info). Full automation is possible in Aetolia, no doubt about it, but until you've encountered every situation and coded for every situation, those of us who still manually adjust the automation of it on the fly (and I don't mean the actual code) and manually adjust to the situation are going to continue to run trains on 100% automation fighters. There's even an up and coming Carnifex over there doing a little bit of work completely manual. Don't let the horror stories of Skynet and robots scare you my Achaean friends, it's not that bad.

BACK ON SUBJECT!

@Vender also brought up an AMAZING point. In Aetolia, when normal leaders aren't around for their versions of raids and an inexperienced target caller takes point, they flop because they've never had to call targets before or target someone on their own in a group.

Kiskan

Aetolia seems fine near the upper tier.  All of this stuff seems to mostly sort of work itself out there (at the upper end) from what I hear.  

I think it's everyone else who loses out when very polished, complete, standardized systems become really prevalent, or even get into the hands of a decent number of people (and from there, the writing is sort of on the wall).  Extreme automation feels much, much more like a midbie to garbage tier problem.  Because you COULD use your shitty thing you made, but it's awfully hard to justify when everyone else is using the very slick CATS system that the Carnifex use, for example.  It means that the price for playing the game and sort of gradually getting a footing becomes "be woefully less efficient than everyone else on your team, from newest noob, to guy who knows a thing or two himself".  Even if you really want to, the other side is probably using a pretty solid canned system too, and the end result of all of this I think, is that everyone gets pushed into using the stuff whether they really want to or not, because it just becomes unrealistic for most people to do otherwise.

Vender

Atalkez said:

If they're claiming superiority I would question it.

Most fighters that manual at the high end, can do so on a broad range of classes and don't really boast about it for the most part.

I think having a parry bypass shouldn't matter in the slightest, though. Parry is a hard prep counter while affliction counterparts don't have a hard counter except running.

well there is running + (tree + fitness + passive + active) 15~35 seconds.

vs limb it is running + 3 minutes.

Bann

@Viho no sweat off my brow bro, I haven't played that game seriously in a very long time.

Vallie

@Aerek I'm actually curious if scripted, perfect offense is a common thing. I can't imagine it actually working in Achaea, just because of how many balances there are when two people are facing off against each other, and I definitely can't imagine it working once you get to 2v2 or above. From my experience, automation is crazy fragile, even when you're in control of everything - any supposedly perfect offense is probably breakable by really simple things, especially considering afflictions like aeon/amnesia/stupidity which are LITERALLY just real-world pain in the ass bugs that happen with scripts >.> (RP-flavoured, of course.)

@Keorin and @Vender's points kind of turned a light on in my head that the biggest difference that was confusing me about combat in Achaea vs Lusty (and likely the prevalence of scripting) is that every class in Lusty is momentum (or timing) based, or can be played as momentum. It's probably why I kept wanting to think of DWC combat in @Dunn's descriptions rather than @Aerek, even though both are valid. Actually makes me feel a lot better about trying out combat later!

Atalkez

Vender said:

Atalkez said:

If they're claiming superiority I would question it.

Most fighters that manual at the high end, can do so on a broad range of classes and don't really boast about it for the most part.

I think having a parry bypass shouldn't matter in the slightest, though. Parry is a hard prep counter while affliction counterparts don't have a hard counter except running.

well there is running + (tree + fitness + passive + active) 15~35 seconds.

vs limb it is running + 3 minutes.

Sure but like Armani said, prep has counters built into the sequences (minus dwb pulp, but that is an outlier). All of those aren't hard counters to afflictions in the same way parry is for a limb class without the ability to bypass.

Would be like apostate fighting someone without a way to breach cward.

Florentino

Aegoth said:

Reisen said:

@Aegoth
1. Being able to code an offensive system requires as much understanding of the game mechanics as being able to do it manually.
2. If I wanted to play a game that requires muscle reflexes, I'd play Call of Duty or Overwatch. In fact, I already do, and I have plenty of fun doing that. But in IRE games, I can put my critical thinking abilities to use by coding.
3.  Coding a system necessitates that you be able to create new and unique strategies on the fly; otherwise, you'd never kill anybody.
4. Again, coding a system requires understanding of combat abilities. You can't make an offense if you don't know how the class works.
5. I'm showcasing myself and what I'm capable of by creating a system. I'm capable of coding. If you beat my system, you beat me.

While this may hold true for you personally, it is far more often the case where automation actually decreases your combat prowess I need only look at anyone in Eleusis. They -all- use automation and, with a scant few rare exceptions, they can't do diddly shit in group combat if their raid caller gets taken out, as well as them all being trash in 1v1. They have 0 incentive to actually improve, because someone else will just do it for them, or a new system tweak will come out. Relying on automation is just bad news bears

Couple pages back but I feel it's appropriate to weigh in here. I would just say obviously this isn't true for the vast majority of people who really love fighting in Eleusis and have done so regularly (e.g., I seriously doubt Rangor, Exelethril, Rom, Bleak, etc. auto-target instead of picking their own). For many others, auto-targeting has helped them adapt and contribute where otherwise they would have been discouraged and probably given up and logged out or otherwise disengaged. The built-in curing system was a great boon to those who didn't/couldn't pay for others' systems or code their own, and similarly this practice just makes combat more accessible. It's a great thing for the game because it means more people play it. And a lot of people have come a tremendously long way from using random affs and uncoordinated abilities to focusing on the affs/limb damage/damage attacks that matter, razing rebounding before attacking, remembering to keep up wildgrowth and other defenses, etc. Good on them. 

Oh, and by the way, following targets is about the extent of "automation" people in Eleusis are really using, anything else you hear like auto-LOS is just nonsense.  And frankly, while you're certainly not bad, @Aegoth (and better than me for sure in 1v1), your staggering arrogance far outstrips your combat skill, your group leadership tactics are weak, and worst of all you're quite selfish, often pursuing kill count (including of your own teammates) above all else, like winning the battle or saving allies. I'd take an Eleusian up-and-comer over you on my team anyday

Skye

I'm seriously doubting this "fix my code on the fly" thing.  I don't think I've everheard of a fight where someone could leave the room for long enough to do anything but run more rooms before their pursuers catch up to them.  >> unless you mean "a few rooms" like back into the hallowed safety of guards.

Melodie

Florentino said:

Aegoth said:

Reisen said:

@Aegoth
1. Being able to code an offensive system requires as much understanding of the game mechanics as being able to do it manually.
2. If I wanted to play a game that requires muscle reflexes, I'd play Call of Duty or Overwatch. In fact, I already do, and I have plenty of fun doing that. But in IRE games, I can put my critical thinking abilities to use by coding.
3.  Coding a system necessitates that you be able to create new and unique strategies on the fly; otherwise, you'd never kill anybody.
4. Again, coding a system requires understanding of combat abilities. You can't make an offense if you don't know how the class works.
5. I'm showcasing myself and what I'm capable of by creating a system. I'm capable of coding. If you beat my system, you beat me.

While this may hold true for you personally, it is far more often the case where automation actually decreases your combat prowess I need only look at anyone in Eleusis. They -all- use automation and, with a scant few rare exceptions, they can't do diddly shit in group combat if their raid caller gets taken out, as well as them all being trash in 1v1. They have 0 incentive to actually improve, because someone else will just do it for them, or a new system tweak will come out. Relying on automation is just bad news bears

Couple pages back but I feel it's appropriate to weigh in here. I would just say obviously this isn't true for the vast majority of people who really love fighting in Eleusis and have done so regularly (e.g., I seriously doubt Rangor, Exelethril, Rom, Bleak, etc. auto-target instead of picking their own). For many others, auto-targeting has helped them adapt and contribute where otherwise they would have been discouraged and probably given up and logged out or otherwise disengaged. The built-in curing system was a great boon to those who didn't/couldn't pay for others' systems or code their own, and similarly this practice just makes combat more accessible. It's a great thing for the game because it means more people play it. And a lot of people have come a tremendously long way from using random affs and uncoordinated abilities to focusing on the affs/limb damage/damage attacks that matter, razing rebounding before attacking, remembering to keep up wildgrowth and other defenses, etc. Good on them. 

Oh, and by the way, following targets is about the extent of "automation" people in Eleusis are really using, anything else you hear like auto-LOS is just nonsense.  And frankly, while you're certainly not bad, @Aegoth (and better than me for sure in 1v1), your staggering arrogance far outstrips your combat skill, your group leadership tactics are weak, and worst of all you're quite selfish, often pursuing kill count (including of your own teammates) above all else, like winning the battle or saving allies. I'd take an Eleusian up-and-comer over you on my team anyday

This may be true, but I also remember very vividly from my time in Eleusis where particular people, who are most certainly still apart of the citizenry, being very vocal if the leader did not want to do the triggered calling of target line, but rather simply a line that calls a target that doesn't trigger. I don't really want to get into name and shame, but it was more than a couple of people, and they actually got angry because you weren't doing the trigger for them. What was worse, if you called them out on it (public or private), they simply got super defensive about it and basically it just devolved into fights that had absolutely no useful outcome and just created a bunch of nonsensical drama.

That sort of stuff rubs me the wrong way really badly.

You don't need that sort of reliance to get on your feet. Yes, you will suck a while, but with some work (both practicing your skills as well as figuring out some ways to catch party calling better, from highlights to tabbed chat and whatever else), you can definitely be just as good without completely just relying on others to do half the work for you (you do the other half by, lets be honest here, doing the easy job of holding down a button).

Aegoth

Florentino said:

 And frankly, while you're certainly not bad, @Aegoth (and better than me for sure in 1v1), your staggering arrogance far outstrips your combat skill, your group leadership tactics are weak, and worst of all you're quite selfish, often pursuing kill count (including of your own teammates) above all else, like winning the battle or saving allies. I'd take an Eleusian up-and-comer over you on my team anyday

Oh man, this is rich coming from the guy who's group tactics amount to "Call guards when we have 30 people, and they have 30 stacks of font" and "LoS them at all costs". Thanks for the laugh! As for my combat skill, at least I can go toe to toe (most of the time) with people like Rangor, Farrah, Seragorn, etc. Can't quite say the same about you. 

Farrah

Armali said:

I think the consensus was that it was one of the hardest to play it optimally manually. You could probably just spam limerick on loop or something if you didn't, though, and there's always salve locking.

This is most certainly not a consensus. In fact, the only good bard I know of in the past like two years or so was manual!

I would say Occultist, shaman, or priest is the hardest to manual due to swiftcurse speed and uncertainty issues for occie/priest.

Amranu

Shaman can be easy to manual, it depends on strategy. If you're doing a curse strategy with minimal fashioning/vodun then manual is not particularly simple. Anything involving vodun can be done manual very simply.

Sena

Skye said:

I'm seriously doubting this "fix my code on the fly" thing.  I don't think I've everheard of a fight where someone could leave the room for long enough to do anything but run more rooms before their pursuers catch up to them.  >> unless you mean "a few rooms" like back into the hallowed safety of guards.

I've fixed bugs in zMUD scripts in the middle of dangerous situations before (though not in real PvP; things like bashing dangerous things or being sniped by 1 person). Sometimes 4-5 seconds is enough if you have a good idea of what you need to do, or you can skim the script on the side while staying alive manually, and make the occasional edit whenever you have your hands free for a couple seconds. It's definitely not impossible for quick fixes.