Will bots always be allowed on ranked servers?

[MarioBava]

Probably the best solution, and I actually have no idea whether this is already true or not, is to have a minimum threshold of bot difficulty be a switch for ranked or unranked status. Anything lower than the top 2-3 ranks of difficulty and your server becomes unranked so there are no "easy bots! RANK UP FAST!!" servers.

In my experience, I do think overall I have more success and probably earn somewhat more points in a server with mostly bots. This is mostly due to the AI's general pathing choices as compared with a thinking human player. Bots tend to clump up and repetitively take the same routes over and over to where camping over an area can earn you a lot of kills. They also tend to have predictable reactions to objective captures. For example, on Commissar's if H is taken while it can still be retaken, H will soon be a target range of enemy bots flooding in to recapture. If an objective cannot be retaken, you see the bots flocking from all over the map to the next capturable objective. It's not that humans never do these things, but bots do them a lot and in a way that seems vulnerable.

But, am I the only one that on an individual basis finds bots harder to kill? They zig zag back and forth so unpredictably you can't reliably lead them at distance and then once they acquire you as a target you're going to be dead unless you kill them quickly or can cover for long enough for their attention to get caught by another poor sap. A lot of times when I can't get in a humans-only server, I find myself shooting at a cluster of zig-zagging bots hoping my bullet catches one of them mid-weave. I've also noticed they are most vulnerable when they mantle obstacles too often and openly (both of their "strengths" are eliminated while mantling: neither can they shoot nor can they zigzag).

 

[Mike_Nomad]

Does this incessant whining over BOTS ever make sense? It really has to stop.

Server Admins have provided you ppl with Servers for YOU to enjoy not dictate how they are Admin'ed or run.

You don't like bots? Go to a different Server. Stop the BS.

 

[captain pain]

But, am I the only one that on an individual basis finds bots harder to kill?

Yes.

 

[GRIZZLY]

Ro1 didn't have this problem. It had a bot filter. I never played with bots online. Bots suck.

 

[Mekhazzio]

...and there are actual tangible in-game benefits that go far beyond mere cosmetics.

That 0.15 seconds of extra sprint is game-breaking!

 

[captain pain]

That 0.15 seconds of extra sprint is game-breaking!

How about 20% improvements in weapons stats that can only be gained through kill-earned points. You don't get those from capturing territory, but you do get oodles of them from bot farming when compared to normal play.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

You know, I'm not particularly fond of the ranking system, but I also couldn't care less if someone is getting a little boost in their aiming because of it either. Chances are if they were going to hit me, they would hit me without the little boost anyways. I'm content with my own skills

 

[captain pain]

You know, I'm not particularly fond of the ranking system, but I also couldn't care less if someone is getting a little boost in their aiming because of it either. Chances are if they were going to hit me, they would hit me without the little boost anyways. I'm content with my own skills

We're not discussing the ranking system as a whole though, are we? Just the impact of bot farming on it... your post doesn't really address that.

Like I said, it seems like it trivializes the entire thing when people can just rack up enormous amounts of points by grinding it up artificially high against bots. Which brings me back to the original question: will bots always be allowed in ranked servers?

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

We're not discussing the ranking system as a whole though, are we? Just the impact of bot farming on it... your post doesn't really address that.

Like I said, it seems like it trivializes the entire thing when people can just rack up enormous amounts of points by grinding it up artificially high against bots. Which brings me back to the original question: will bots always be allowed in ranked servers?

But why would you be bothered by other people bot farming? That's my point, so what if they do and rack up points. If that's how they want to waste their time...

And I'm sure bots will remain in ranked servers.

 

[Floyd]

We're not discussing the ranking system as a whole though, are we? Just the impact of bot farming on it... your post doesn't really address that.

Like I said, it seems like it trivializes the entire thing when people can just rack up enormous amounts of points by grinding it up artificially high against bots. Which brings me back to the original question: will bots always be allowed in ranked servers?

"Leveling up" is trivial to the overall gameplay in RO2. So it trivializes the trivial. Who really cares? The biggest complaint I hear about the level ups is the inability NOT to have one once you get it.

You weren't probably weren't around when Steam Acheivements were introduced to RO:Ost late in its life. We all thought it was going to be the death of the gameplay RO:Ost was so famous for. And guess what? It was. For about 2 weeks. Just as the veteran players surmized, there were (for example) a few who went for the thrill of getting that 100th bayo kill at all costs to get that beloved achievement. Then those that found that sort of thing important realized that... meh....everyone's got them...

I wish there was no leveling period. Thank God we don't unlock completely new weapons! I'd be hard pressed to continue with the series were that to happen. As it is, I don't have any real issues with the current system (except for the lack of choice....which is in the works, so its a moot worry.)

 

[Mekhazzio]

How about 20% improvements in weapons stats that can only be gained through kill-earned points.

It sounds a lot more impressive when you refer to it through the vague term "weapon stats" than it does when you talk about what it actually does. Here are the effects of weapon leveling, taken straight from the script source:

Recoil magnitude
This is the biggest deal of the bunch - at max level you get 4/5ths the normal recoil. That catch is that it's not all that significant with all the other gameplay effects on recoil. If you're taking any of the player-input measures to reduce recoil, such as firing from full stamina, crouching, bracing your weapon, etc, the contribution from level gets rather small, so it's still not a very big deal.

Sway magnitude
Sway is done in native code, so we can't dig through it, but it's clear from game results that the case for recoil holds for sway too, though: player input makes a lot more of a difference than weapon level. I made youtube videos a few months back showing the difference in sway, if you won't take my word for it. They were hard to record because at first I used the Mosin-Nagant and I couldn't tell which video was level 50 and which was level 1. The random variance is significantly larger than the effect of level.

Reload time
Meh. You'd have to try real hard to create a scenario where shaving a tenth of a second off reload time makes a difference. The only behavior of note here is that different weapons have different values. The AVT, SVT, TT33 & P38 cap out at 0.87x, the SMGs & bolts at 0.83x, and everything else at 0.80x. Weird.

Zoom-in time
Even more meh. 0.06 seconds difference between max and min levels, and nothing's stopping you from firing before it's done, anyway.

Deploy time
Only relevant for bipod weapons, and if you're racing the deploy time to get off a shot, you're probably dead meat anyway.

Melee damage
It's listed in the weapon stats screen, but there's no actual effect in-game. Wouldn't matter if there was, because melee damage can already go up to +200%, based on charge time and movement speed, and a mere +25% wouldn't be enough to make an uncharged butt-strike one-shot. Bayonets always one-shot regardless. (all assuming that you're hitting somewhere vital, of course)

A case could maybe be made for the recoil modifier making a gameplay difference once in a great while, but the relevance diminishes quickly if you consider that it's a) only relevant to automatic weapons, b) highly random, c) affected much more by player behavior and d) typically not that large of a gap in actual gameplay since the first 10-20 levels come in pretty fast - nobody stays level 1 for the staple weapons for long. The rest of the stat gains are of trivial import.

 

[captain pain]

You weren't probably weren't around when Steam Acheivements were introduced to RO:Ost late in its life.)

I've been playing Ostfront actively since it was a UT2004 mod.

@Mekhazzio

Interesting stuff. The actual in-game effect of using a levelled PPSh versus a level 1 speaks for itself, for instance, but it's good to know that the under-the-hood change isn't as large as it might seem.

The question still stands: why is any benefit, regardless of its size, applied to a player that has gained it through bot farming? Does that really mesh with the idea of the levelling system in the first place?

Even if there weren't any benefits, stats still shouldn't be tracked against non-humans. In Ranked servers, we ought to be Ranked amongst humans who are Ranked based on their ability to kill and history of killing other human players. Because it's a multiplayer game, not an occasionally co-op single-player game.

 

[TrOOper]

It sounds a lot more impressive when you refer to it through the vague term "weapon stats" than it does when you talk about what it actually does. Here are the effects of weapon leveling, taken straight from the script source:

Recoil magnitude
This is the biggest deal of the bunch - at max level you get 4/5ths the normal recoil. That catch is that it's not all that significant with all the other gameplay effects on recoil. If you're taking any of the player-input measures to reduce recoil, such as firing from full stamina, crouching, bracing your weapon, etc, the contribution from level gets rather small, so it's still not a very big deal.

Sway magnitude
Sway is done in native code, so we can't dig through it, but it's clear from game results that the case for recoil holds for sway too, though: player input makes a lot more of a difference than weapon level. I made youtube videos a few months back showing the difference in sway, if you won't take my word for it. They were hard to record because at first I used the Mosin-Nagant and I couldn't tell which video was level 50 and which was level 1. The random variance is significantly larger than the effect of level.

Reload time
Meh. You'd have to try real hard to create a scenario where shaving a tenth of a second off reload time makes a difference. The only behavior of note here is that different weapons have different values. The AVT, SVT, TT33 & P38 cap out at 0.87x, the SMGs & bolts at 0.83x, and everything else at 0.80x. Weird.

Zoom-in time
Even more meh. 0.06 seconds difference between max and min levels, and nothing's stopping you from firing before it's done, anyway.

Deploy time
Only relevant for bipod weapons, and if you're racing the deploy time to get off a shot, you're probably dead meat anyway.

Melee damage
It's listed in the weapon stats screen, but there's no actual effect in-game. Wouldn't matter if there was, because melee damage can already go up to +200%, based on charge time and movement speed, and a mere +25% wouldn't be enough to make an uncharged butt-strike one-shot. Bayonets always one-shot regardless. (all assuming that you're hitting somewhere vital, of course)

A case could maybe be made for the recoil modifier making a gameplay difference once in a great while, but the relevance diminishes quickly if you consider that it's a) only relevant to automatic weapons, b) highly random, c) affected much more by player behavior and d) typically not that large of a gap in actual gameplay since the first 10-20 levels come in pretty fast - nobody stays level 1 for the staple weapons for long. The rest of the stat gains are of trivial import.

great factual post! and yet the dead horse continues to be beaten.........

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

great factual post! and yet the dead horse continues to be beaten.........

Exactly. I personally don't care much for it (and whether players rank up because of bots). At the same time, we don't need to make a mountain out of a mole hill...

 

[captain pain]

Falsely characterize this as "making a mountain out of a molehill" all day long. It doesn't change the fact that what I'm saying is delivered in a straightforward, reasonable way, appropriate to its level of significance, and my point is completely sound. I have yet to see anyone really respond to my actual point -- only people saying "ehh it doesn't bother me that much."

Maybe this approach would lead to actual discussion: can someone explain to me why they think bots should be allowed on Ranked servers, in terms of the Ranking system -- not the overall existence of bots. By that, I mean I don't really want to argue about the presence of bots in the game or how anyone feels about them in terms of gameplay, only whether or not they should exist in ranked servers and count towards rank.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I think what I am trying to say, and maybe what others are thinking, is that even if they agree with you, that it matters so little to most people that they don't care.

Add to the fact that some server admins like to have a small amount of bots playing in their servers to help seed them, that if you unranked them they would never get played because there just aren't enough players in the game to even bother searching the unranked servers in the game browser.

So, I don't mind a few bots being in a server if I join if it helps seed the game and more real human players join. It is no big deal.

That is all...

 

[captain pain]

I think what I am trying to say, and maybe what others are thinking, is that even if they agree with you, that it matters so little to most people that they don't care.

Add to the fact that some server admins like to have a small amount of bots playing in their servers to help seed them, that if you unranked them they would never get played because there just aren't enough players in the game to even bother searching the unranked servers in the game browser.

So, I don't mind a few bots being in a server if I join if it helps seed the game and more real human players join. It is no big deal.

That is all...

I have a feeling that Classic mode and a bot filter will shut me up.

I would still really like to get an answer from a TW dev, so I can stop wondering about this. I guess my answer from everyone in the forums community is going to be "yes, it makes no sense, but we don't really mind".

 

[Floyd]

Even if there weren't any benefits, stats still shouldn't be tracked against non-humans. In Ranked servers, we ought to be Ranked amongst humans who are Ranked based on their ability to kill and history of killing other human players. Because it's a multiplayer game, not an occasionally co-op single-player game.

Ahh...NOW we're getting to what irks you. Its not about leveling up of weapons. Its about the stats......

Even after the reset, aren't the stats still borked anyway?

And I agree. Stats were the worst thing ever for RO.

 

[captain pain]

I really don't care about stats either way -- I'm just pointing out that all of the effort put into the stats and ranking system is rendered utterly meaningless by allowing bots in ranked servers. If it's going to be in the game, it ought to make sense, and I'm not seeing much sense right now.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

For all the players that care about stats, as many or more probably don't. I don't myself, nor do I really care what others think about their own stats. Personally I think it was wasted effort trying to appeal to a wider crowd. But at this point it doesn't matter about the bots or not. It just doesn't matter, well at least to me