Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

El Duderino

Member Since 25 Jan 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 11:50 AM

#2302991 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 03 March 2014 - 07:34 PM

View Postmaster21, on 03 March 2014 - 02:13 PM, said:

Really? You think that neural network are simulating human brain?

Is just a plain black box. Every neural in this network has couple of inputs, sum up them with some multiplicative and if treshold is met it just make an output to another neurals.
Thats it. All.
You can train neural network with data, it even work and give enough good results. Why it's black box?
When neural network gives you an answer that this input  = make decision A, this mean that it's output is for example 0.431 which is similar to output of other decision A examples.
You have NO idea why you should make this decision. It's AI based not on any type of conditions, just summing up and multiplicate by some numbers.

It works great for pattern recognition, it work for classification, but for AI in games? Not that much.

Games AI is in 99% of the time condition script based, with random elements. We use random to either force AI to change behavior (so it look less scripted, more "free") or to simulate non-ideal situtations, like awerness, aiming, etc.

Things like avoiding aoe by AI are very hard to implement and they could work only in limited scenario. It's easier to do it on grid/hex type of map, it's hard on free movement type of maps. It's easier when aoe are limited, very hard in gw2 where amount of aoe (mostly those staying for xx time) is quite huge.
First it makes melee bosses problematic to script, because priority should be on attacking players, not avoiding. Those bosses should move very precise way and smart way, trying to find a spot in which there is no aoe but there is a range for attack.
It is also connected with target switching, which can lead to some abuse. It's also very hard to implement algorithm for precise movement. Why? Because you need to calculate in real time a lot of things. For human finding way between 2 aoe and goind in some curve is a simple task, for computer is a lot of work to find this optimum way.
Also there a plenty of moments in which it's impossible to avoid all of aoe. Sometimes it's better to stay instead of moving, sometimes it's better to go right because aoes there deal less damage, etc. Huge amount of work for ppl and still probably end result wouldn't be that great in general.

What can be done imo.

100% pure melee bosses should have more variety of moves. First point blank aoes or other types of anti melee moves. They shoudn't be random or "cheap" but telegraphed. We still want moves which can be avoided, we just want to avoid facetank.
Those bosses should also have anti ranged moves, leaps.
But imo best way to avoid stacking are moves connected with pressure. Let boss stick to one player for some time and attack him all the time. Player should be forced to dodge and maybe even run away. Connect this with some phases or whatever, maybe enrage, in which when boss get some player down in that phase boss get some special move etc.

For ranged boss it's simple. Implement AI in which they try to move and stay in range (movement need to be better, like going backwards and shooting to avoid stupid movement), maybe moves like leap backwards etc.
This should help with corner pulls, boss even when pulled that way should quite fast leap or move out of way.
Still sometimes it will be necessary to remake some maps to avoid "dead ends" like corners.

For trash mobs.
Anet has this type of behavior even implemented. Some dredge bombers like to move away from melee players. This should be implemented to every ranged mobs and improved.
Some melee mobs should prefer frontal attack, some prefer going back. Best way will be to implement "flanking" algorithm which isn't that hard, this should help with corner pulls.

Imo main focus on trash mobs should be made in way in which mobs avoid staying stack and instead try to flank player (ranged mobs going ranged). It still should be possible to fight stacked with mobs but only with good combination of skills. Pulls + cc + snared should be the way to force mobs stacked in one place.


Ambush is possible as you said but it's still random/scripted system which can be predicted. It also does not change much in gw2 because making open world content harder isn't really a good thing. This content should stay easy.
Making this type of things in dungeons could be good but could be also not good. It would make dungeons more random (sometimes you can kill those 2 mobs alone, sometimes you need to fight 6 at once) but personally I don't like difficulty being connected with random things. Let fotm be the best example of random difficulty.
I know what an ANN is. They are great decision-making structures. And yes, they are, to some point, a (extremely simplistic) simulation of a brain. The interesting thing is that they can crank out a percentage which can be used together with an RNG to make state transitions seem both random and intelligent.



Yes, ambush could be predicted. But note that that is a good thing, since being able to differentiate ambush from just a mob fleeing is a question of battle awareness, which should be rewarded much more than it actually is in GW2 (where it usually amounts to "red rings hurts").


#2302976 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Minion on 03 March 2014 - 06:44 PM

View PostNikephoros, on 03 March 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

...the unpredictable nature of dynamic combat...

I'm sorry, did you miss that part of the thread where we all agreed the AI was predictable and static?


#2302916 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Feathermoore on 03 March 2014 - 02:51 PM

View PostNikephoros, on 01 March 2014 - 12:15 PM, said:

snip

View PostMiragee, on 01 March 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

I think his point was that he prefers systems where rotations don't lead to the best result but but intellegent usage according to the situation does.

Correct Miragee. Thankyou for that. Was away from the computer this weekend.

There are plenty of games that the "optimum" way of maximizing DPS is not a set rotation. Especially not rotations as simple as those that were identified above. Most of these games do have potential rotations or have some specific instances where a rotation is ideal; but the majority of the game doesn't involve a pattern that you could write an interruptible macro for and be just as good as someone who isn't running the macro. That is just plain boring and is one of the key complaints I have had with MMOs in the past and is why I normally play classes that don't work off of rotations such as most healers or triggered combo classes such as the Valewalker in DAoC that worked around situational combos.

Rotations are boring and show that combat lacks any need for higher level thought. The fact that the majority of classes in the majority of MMOs utilize rotations quite often does not excuse the fact that it is bad design. You can't excuse a bad design just because other games make the same mistake.

Even the Assassin rarely had a rotation of that level in PvE. There were two rotation builds for the Assassin. The Fox Strike > Wild Strike > Death Blossom chain and the Mobius strike+Death Blossom build. Those builds literally played 123123123 or 123434343434 respectively. The other Assassin chains were roll face combos as the cooldown time between chains was so high. You had to find something else to do while your burst was down. In hard mode these builds were sub par and did less DPS than the bust builds because you had to break your chain so often. Not sure if this is the case now as there have been serveral complete skill reworks and even a rework of HM. Heck, if you ran an SF ele in HM originally you would more than likely get laughed at because you would deal no damage. Eles in hard mode ran water, air, or earth for full support builds if they wanted to have the most impact. Those builds can't be run as a rotation at all. You could run SF in HM, but you would not be running the most effective build as you deal less damage than a smite monk.

You also have to remember that these builds were loudly lamented when they came out. Assassins were always the whipping kids in GW as their play in PvE was very rotationy; something that was unexpected at the time. Heck, the only combo that involved more than one skill before that was Sever Artery > Gash > Final Thrust and you would be decreasing your dps if you used it as a rotation. You can't really have a rotation on adrenaline skills anyways. The SF build was lamented and demeaned just as much as the Assassin was. These builds/mechanics stuck out in a game that didn't have rotations before that and didn't really have true rotations beyond them. I think the imbagon had a rotation actually, but it was also shouted down and nerfed into the ground pretty quickly.

View PostPhineas Poe, on 01 March 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:


There will always be better DPS options than others. And just because GW1 required resource management, it didn't make the game's DPS rotations any more intelligent. The elephant in the room here, of course, is that Thief has resource management through Initiative similar to how Energy worked in Guild Wars 1.


Incorrect. There is a critical difference between GW1s energy system and the Thiefs' initiative system. Thieves have no cooldowns or cast times. GW1 was about managing cooldowns, movement (you can't move while casting), and energy. It was the combination of these resources that increased the need for intelligent skill use. Without the combination of all three resources there can be no meaningful comparison between the Thief and GW1's systems as a whole.

I only bring this up in that you are attempting to use this statement to say the initiative system proves that resource management does not impact decision making. Which your supporting evidence does not...support. Ugh. That is an ugly sentence.


#2302817 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 03 March 2014 - 08:51 AM

View Postmaster21, on 02 March 2014 - 11:17 PM, said:

I'm a programmer and I know that some things arent really possible.
1. Mobs running away. AI need condition for it. It can be either set condition or randomized condition. So it's either running away in random, so most of the time idiotic way, or after some condition is true  (health, damage done, etc, does not matter). So either 100% predictible or just plain stupid. You can mix it up but it's still does not change anything.
2. Mobs follow you, they have this aggro range. Still you need to set up their path movements. Yes you can randomize how much they chase but it's still just random, nothing common with any intelligence.
3. Leading to ambush. What is ambush? You need to setup for AI where ambush is, how they should go there etc. You can make a system in which mobs has some radius of "shout" and all mobs in range will go and make some ambush. But it's still plain predictible or just random, you need to choose either.

Every AI technic use in true computer sience, not just games is either based on patterns. Computer is just trying to compare new things with old ones on which computer get learned. If it's similar to some type of pattern there computer action and output would be the same as in examples on which it's learned.
Everything with huge amount and random things and statistic. Every AI decision is like I have 80% that this situtation is similar to that situtation in which I should run away.

So it's all very very predictibale. It's impossible to make AI which can't be abused.


Best in terms challenge and behavior AI you can do in turn based games.
In those games you can quite easly set up a lot of condition which make AI behave in some way. The more you add them the more they simulate real ppl, but still those are conditions.
Computer has to stick to his tactics even if part of it it's change of a tactic. Computer can't think about new tactic. So it's still some kind of if then something AI, if player closer then 3 hexes and health < 50% go melee and attack
All you can do to make it less predicteble is to just make things random. Like you have 90% to make this action. It's still does not make AI any smarter.


Also every AI in world is scripted. It just works that way.

As for the gw2.
It's possible to change some AI behavior. For example corner pulling.
Lazy way is simple, set fight room, reset boss when out of it, fight room does not have corners
Harder way. Try to detect LOS and avoid it by going in circle and attack from back, or just don't move at all.
Mob stacking.
Every time mobs gets pulled to each other just make range one move back. Some dredge bombers use this, so it's even in game. To avoid mobs moving instead of attacking give them some skills/movement moves.
Add to some mobs "backstab" seek, like ranger pets have. So make some of mobs fight frontal, some moving on back of players.

Every attempt to make mobs avoid aoe probably will fail. First there are plenty of aoe everywhere and it's hard to tell which should be avoided. This could be abused easly on melee boss. Set aoe everywhere, boss can't get close or just run in circle like an idiot. Best way is to make mobs more mobile in general, with types of attacks which forces ppl to get back. Some spin/whirl and then leap to a player, or whatever similar.

The same with dodge. Mobs can dodge but it always will look more like "invu every xx seconds". Every condition you set for dodge can be abused, if you just randomize it it's just stupid.
You are a programmer but can't even spell. I guess Ctrl+space is used a lot these days. Also you have no idea how to make random transitions in state machines. Somehow I don't believe you.

Setting up an ambush is not difficult. You'd need a higher-level AI, for the group, and then with a 10% chance let the lone bandit shout to her colleagues. Then she'll fight you for a few seconds while the others run up in position. Stealthed, of course, or simply out of sight. Then she'll retreat. This is easily doable and if you design the map correctly they'll find their own place to set up an ambush, you don't need to designate an area for it.

And of course it's impossible to make AI which can't be abused. So what? It's impossible for human players to play in ways that can't be abused. If you know a human player's preferred tactics, you can easily set up said human. Look at any major chess tournament for proof.

As minion said, any sort of stacking can be solved by not letting mobs stack, or letting the stack dissolve as soon as it's being exploited. The obvious counter from the players would be some sort of AoE snare, but those are rather weak IMO. Anyway, as you point out, this is rather boring and results in "boss can't get close or just run in circle like an idiot", as you so eloquently put it.
A far better way would be to allow for healers/squishies on the AI side. The AI healers would attempt to stay out of range and simultaneously heal the other component, AI frontline, which would be much harder to kill and which could hurt you badly if you attempt to just rush in to kill the squishies.

View Postmaster21, on 03 March 2014 - 02:28 AM, said:

AI should simulate player, should sometimes makes stupid things because ppl do stupid things too.
Main problem with this simulation is that that we can't simulate human brain. In computer all we have are random numbers and conditions based on math and calculations with numbers.
Ppl does not make decisions based on random numbers and conditions.
I agree about the first thing there. But then...?
http://en.wikipedia....h–Turing_thesis
http://en.wikipedia...._neural_network

View Postmaster21, on 02 March 2014 - 11:17 PM, said:

I'm a programmer
true computer sience
:P


#2302808 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Minion on 03 March 2014 - 05:47 AM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 03 March 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

Can someone explain to me why stacking is a bad thing?

Unless you mean "stacking" as stacking-in-corners, and Fiery Rushing (FGS) things down in seconds. That I can do without.

What stacking did you think I was referring to?

I also second the destruction of invincibility frames. It would actually make defensive stats more worthwhile. Projectiles are probably more likely to miss you while dodging, but anything serious, like a heavy melee or ground targeted attack, really should hit you.


#2302775 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted RandolfRa on 03 March 2014 - 03:25 AM

Quote

All you can do to make it less predicteble is to just make things random. Like you have 90% to make this action. It's still does not make AI any smarter.
It feels smarter though and it makes fights little less repeatitive. It's better than nothing.

For example:
- give mobs healing skills and more defensive skills
- have the mobs go defensive when their health is low. Make them play time until their heals come out cool down.
- if the player has low health, make the mob become more agressive.

- have various tactic packages for mobs, e.g.
  burster: tries to burst the player down. plays defensively when his burst skills are on cool down. sorta like thief.
  exhauster: plays very defensively. perhaps uses condition damage. attempts to slowly harm the player.
  supporter: plays defensively, attempts to heal and buff other mobs.

Then combine these different mobs into groups.

Simple things like this would already improve the overall fighting experience. You don't really even need an actual AI, just reasonable and various mob behavior.


#2302721 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 02 March 2014 - 10:35 PM

View Postmaster21, on 02 March 2014 - 09:27 PM, said:

Could you on some boss/mob in gw 2 example show how this AI like human you think should work?
Simple example: start a new human character, head directly south from DR, there is a small path with a level 8 or so bandit on it. Bandit will stand there and attack you until she is dead. Instead, she should maybe do varying things, such as running away (for help or just fleeing), following you if you run away, try to lead you into an ambush or whatever. But really the problem is much deeper than just AI. A complete restyling of the entire combat and skills system is needed, to increase the number of options available for a simple mob.


#2302700 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 02 March 2014 - 08:38 PM

View PostEpitaph_Blade, on 02 March 2014 - 06:52 PM, said:

Oh please, don't start telling me what I understand and what not.
I'm not going to enter this game of fanatism, I really won't.

You really think dark souls is a good example of the AI you are looking for? The AI there is just...as simple as in GW2, is not there where the difficulty of the game reside. Dark Souls is a punishing game, is the way you have to execute actions that makes it difficult, because you have more freedom, and more resources to manage, when executing them. But it can still be speedrun, and most of its content is "scripted". (I've found a fair amount of rotations in there, and those work just fine, of course, it is more difficult than gw2, and hopefully gw2 develops in that direction)

Well, if you didn't mean a "human level" of AI, then I apologize, that's what I understood from your post.

I think I'm done with this anyways, I'm wise enough to understand where am I posting, and the intentions and feelings behind most opinions here, I don't share them, and I don't care to "change" them.
Good bye guys, hope you can get something constructive out of this.
You seem to mix arguments. When I mentioned Dark Souls it was to prove you wrong about that games where rotations were rare are impossible to find. The AI in Dark Souls is indeed scripted to a great degree, but that does not mean that a reasonably similar experience as playing against a human player would be impossible to achieve. I referred you to Sins of a Solar Empire already, which is a good example of this.


#2302664 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 02 March 2014 - 05:13 PM

View PostEpitaph_Blade, on 02 March 2014 - 03:38 AM, said:

Again, I'm not saying that. What I quoted, stated that each encounter in the game requires a human-level AI, which is, unreasonable.
I do agree on improving the AI, but I don't believe that is possible, or reasonable, to achieve a level of AI, where, "efficiency", or "rotations" wouldn't happen. That would make the game unplayable.



Most of the circular discussions on this thread, and forums, happen just because people go to extremes so easily, that you have to become a fanatic of a side to participate.
I don't feel qualified to say how it should be done, it's just my opinion, and just a couple of years of experience. But what can I say? I enjoy this game, I understand its flaws, and I, like you I suppose, want it to be as good as it can be. But I try to keep my expectations within a certain level, that doesn't mean I'll buy anything, or that I don't care about quality. But I have to understand the genre and the type of game I'm playing. Perhaps, that is what let me enjoy the game, at the same time, I expect it to become better.
No, it didn't. It was "reasonably similar experience as playing against a human player". "Reasonably similar" would of course specifically mean that I am not making unreasonable expectations on the AI.

And there are many, many games out there which proves you wrong, since rotations are very rare in them and people still play them. Take Dark Souls for example: there are certain combinations of moves of course, but spamming the same movement even on the simplest enemies is punishing.
Now note that that didn't mean that I am asking for Dark Souls level of difficulty, or AI, in GW2. Which you probably took it to mean. But you can definitely create a game where rotations are rare, and where the AI gives a reasonably similar experience as playing against a human player. Where the creatures you see in-game seem to have lives instead of being cannon fodder.

You don't understand the genre you are playing. You are merely accepting the current form of it.


#2302502 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 01 March 2014 - 11:10 PM

View PostEchou, on 01 March 2014 - 11:07 PM, said:

If you expect an MMO to have a highly designed AI, keep on walking.
I don't dispute this, though. It's just that GW2 PvE is designed to have players face AI over and over, and it's not even good. If GW2 was more like EVE Online, having bad AI would not be a problem.

But this is more about theme park MMOs being shit.


#2302433 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Minion on 01 March 2014 - 08:02 PM

Assassins had a rotation everyone had to adhere to do deal DPS. If you did not follow the 1-2-3- rotation of lead-offhand-dual you do 0 DPS. That's just an auto-attack on 3 different skills.


#2302418 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 01 March 2014 - 06:59 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 01 March 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

Really? Playing an Assassin wasn't about rotations? Or the entire Hex system?
Playing an assassin with optimal DPS was literally about hitting your skills in order, you are correct. This is part of why the assassin profession was considered a solidly bad idea by so many. Hexing wasn't about rotation though. Not if you wanted to maximize DPS.

View PostEpitaph_Blade, on 01 March 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

Aren't we threading too thin? Unless you are doing a speedrun, rotations don't always are executed perfectly. You have to dodge, eventually, or use an utility skill.

But I agree with you in that, that aspect of the game could be improved.

On other games, this "rotations" are called combos, and back in the day, executing the best combo, was pretty much all the "skill" you needed on a game.
Maybe, always, in the end, is about efficiency. But in a game as beautiful as GW2, being just effective, is okay most of the time, and that lets you find new "rotations".
Let's talk combos. Let's talk about fighting games, where there are tons of combos and a large aspect of these games involve mastering them.

Fighting games where spamming the same combo over and over actually works are usually seen as bad. Those that are about recognizing the enemy's combo, breaking it in mid-sequence with your own, only to have that broken by your enemy with another, etc., are usually seen as good.
So no. We are definitely not treading too thin.


#2302398 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted raspberry jam on 01 March 2014 - 05:58 PM

View PostEpitaph_Blade, on 01 March 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

Chess is the wrong game to pick for this comparison, since, it is one of the well known games for its sequences.

I like the previous response tho, there is truth in there, the game could be more responsive to player's actions, to stop them from doing rotations. But that won't make rotations worse, or less optimal. You will always seek, that packet of time, where you can get your perfect rotation, and do the best dps you can.

Btw, comparing every game with chess, is just cheap. There are a lot of elements that you have to dismiss in order to achieve the simplicity of chess, that many love in a game like GW2. Not being chess, doesn't make a game less well made.

pd: My statement goes directly to this kind of things. You can't have everything on a game, the depth of Chess is not compatible with a game that becomes complex for its enviroment, flavor, etc.

Also, what is "skill" to  you? In any kind of activity. what is gw2 lacking to achieve the level on which you consider it requires "skill" to be played?
But if it doesn't repeat it's not a rotation. Preferably you should be aiming at a sequence, and always expect to have to change intented sequences in the middle of things. You should actually never be able to think 10 skill activations ahead. In fact you should not be able to plan more than 2 or 3.

View PostPhineas Poe, on 01 March 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

But how many MMOs actually have a system where DPS is about "intelligent usage?" It's not like GW2 was game to invent the term "DPS rotation."

There will always be better DPS options than others. And just because GW1 required resource management, it didn't make the game's DPS rotations any more intelligent. The elephant in the room here, of course, is that Thief has resource management through Initiative similar to how Energy worked in Guild Wars 1.
Optimal DPS in GW1 wasn't about rotations, exactly.


#2302263 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Gyre on 01 March 2014 - 01:36 AM

It's what happens when you have a game that rewards cycling skills on recharge because it lacks resource management, something it's predecessor had.

The more interesting thing to me is what happened to the rest of the skills?  Not using the majority of what is available on a weapon set in a rotation to me at least comes down to redundancy, being too situational or just plain useless.  The large skill array in GW1 gets put down but you didn't have filler skills on team builds.


#2302314 Why Being Efficient is the Only Thing Left

Posted Minion on 01 March 2014 - 10:28 AM

View PostNikephoros, on 28 February 2014 - 11:30 PM, said:

...some are more complex than others but for the most part none of them are strictly auto attacks.

This is cute. Also proving my point.