SmedBlog (last year): NPC Enemies and Armies

[Sledgecrushr]

After reading everyones posts, I have to say my vote is for wildlife only. Npc armies and even npc invasion probably wouldnt be done well enough to warrant the effort to deviate from PS2's core gameplay. Killing bots in a pvp game wouldnt be that fun for me.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Crator

Ok, that's actually a cool concept for a game. Not PS2 though I don't think.

Yeah, more for a game like "Skynet Gameover Simulator"

[sagolsun]

Originally Posted by NewSith

Yeah, more for a game like "Skynet Gameover Simulator"

I fail to see how could that possibly be a bad thing.

[Talented Maori]

No, please please please NO!

[Slasherz]

Originally Posted by Talented Maori

No, please please please NO!

What he said.

[Archonzero]

AI Harvester units, I could accept something like that, even some notable NPC natural fauna (wildlife)



Full blown NPC armies (whether alien or faction based) Not interested, I think it would severely hinder the open world FPS player driven concept of the game.



Dev controlled dynamic event random attacks/fullblown invasions. Hmmm. That could be entertaining for all participants.

A DEV/SOE controlled/player faction could be sort of drone based entity. Where the DEV/SOE controlled unit has a squads of (or more) AI controlled NPC units, that follow commands akin to any single player controlled NPC group.

If this were a possible idea, I'd really opt for them utilizing control of multiple drone squads (a platoon worth of mixed units) each a squad of 6 (more or less), depending on the overall unit mix archetypes.

While the DEV/SOE controller unit would have to be immensely resilient, simply to weather large numbers of players and combined arms attacks. They would have to be equipped with reasonably powerful weapons. Some alien tech with a high dmg output multiplier to the other faction standards (x2/x4/x5) for damage output. A combined arms sustained attack would be required to pin down a controller in order to eliminate it, an doing so would disable any drones controlled.

Once eliminated these controller units could drop a LLU (see PS1's Lattice Link Unit) style item, which would act as an active football (with a countdown timer) and would need to be secured then taken to a friendly designated base in order to get credited with any personal and faction reward(s). This football is up for grabs by anyone faction, regardless of the current controlling carrier.

There should always be a few sets of rewards for the recovery of such an object, one would be a personal reward to the carrier, two would be a squad/platoon based reward and the third would be a faction based reward . These rewards could be item/gear/faction specific unlocks, which could be any number of additions, upgrades etcetera.

The wider faction based reward would have to be something low key and time based (ie 24/48 hours or even a week long duration) slight increase to things like regeneration of health/armor, slight tweaks to weapons, ROF, dmg, recoil, reload times, etcetera. Multiple recoveries could see multiple stacks of the same benefit to a "hardcapped" limit.

Making them also sought after by rival factions, this could lead to air cavalry groups quickforming to spearhead behind lines to intercept an LLU package to secure it for their own benefit, once they're taken down, the drop off point would obviously switch to a base of their own faction control.

Also if they try this idea out/or entertain it. These controlled NPC invader, could be the aliens that the VS got their tech from, or perhaps another alien culture that is seeking to seeking to steal the tech for themselves. Mayhaps BOTH! A little variation, scavenger alien mercs, formerly subjugated aliens seeking revenge on the progenitor aliens (or AI minions of) of the VS re-engineered tech, etcetera.

Why limit the idea to simply one type of NPC invader.

[Sledgecrushr]

I love the idea of bringing auraxis to life with animals. Other than that the only predators should be the players.

[Toppopia]

The only ai we need is ones that defend bases against lone hackers so 1 person can't troll the enemy. But should be beaten by a group if 10-20 people

Or random animals that squish beneath my Prowler

[psychobilly]

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

After reading everyones posts, I have to say my vote is for wildlife only. Npc armies and even npc invasion probably wouldnt be done well enough to warrant the effort to deviate from PS2's core gameplay. Killing bots in a pvp game wouldnt be that fun for me.

This.

[starshine]

i don't think player controlled/spawned NPCs are a good thing, but random ones like alien invasion sounds good!

[Tuoweit]

I truly understand the desire to include every cool idea into the game, but focus and consistency are important qualities in a game too. The downside of having "something for everyone" is that the more divergent elements you have incorporated, the greater the chance that any one given person is going to find something they actively dislike, and that becomes a reason NOT to play. Sometimes that really cool idea would just make a mess of your already-really-cool game, and would be way better off in its own game.

My first thought on adding NPCs is to cringe, because there are so many ways it could go wrong. Warhammer Online, for example - While PvP was fun in that game, after an initial lovefest of good PvP the endgame ended up being "let's swap NPC-held bases endlessly for moar lootz," because fighting NPCs is *always* easier than fighting other players. The Secret World also risks heading in that direction.

So, rule #1 for (predictably spawning/spawnable) NPCs in a PvP game - make them WORTHLESS for experience/resources. Zero. No inherent incentive to fight NPCs. Taking a base held only by NPCs should be the same reward as taking an empty base. Anything else is (more) likely to be abused.

NPC invasions? I'm trying to imagine a scenario where I'm playing Planetside 2, in the middle of doing whatever it is I'm doing, and being happy at being interrupted by an alien invasion. While it may well be fun, I'm probably already having fun, and might resent the interruption. Would it be more fun? Yes? Then why aren't we doing that all the time. No? Then why change what we're doing already. It sounds like two different games to me. Granted, sometimes you want a change of pace, but fighting NPCs in an FPS and fighting other players in an FPS are a little too similar IMO to qualify. (Same for the zombie idea you mentioned. And some of us are not zombie fans. )

Scriptable AIs does sound like a change of pace though, maybe there could be a continent (or moons?) which is contested *only* by bots run by scripts? An area with an environment too hostile to send in the troops but still containing valuable resources. I could see that potentially working, as long as it doesn't overshadow the main part of the game. One potential danger, with tradeable scripts, is that that one amazing script programmer (by passing out his scipts to everyone) may come to dominate for his side. While amazing commanders can help dominate as well, everyone has to log off at some point, but scripts don't.

Another option might be some kind of (single) programmable combat drone that you could spend resources on, much like a vehicle (by having it cost resources there's a vested interest in getting your "money's worth" out of it, and not as likely to be abused - at least, not any more than vehicles). Maybe as a sniper you'd want one watching your back (or maybe it would give away your position). Maybe you'd want one for breaching heavily guarded areas like generator rooms (if something analogous exists in PS2). I could see a number of uses for one. Sounds kind of engineer-oriented. They'd probably be hackable, like most other equipment. And I can imagine programming one to blow up if the owner is within hacking distance, as a booby trap

Originally Posted by Archonzero

AI Harvester units, I could accept something like that, even some notable NPC natural fauna (wildlife)

I didn't think very highly of the resource harvesting idea. Sure, it adds some depth to the collecting of resources, and something else for players to attack besides bases, but would harvesting be any fun for the harvester or just a mandatory time sink? If it's more analogous to occasional ANT runs to fill up a station's NTU tank, then that's reasonable, but at least with NTU tanks they don't deplete if there's no activity at the base (unlike, say, processing raw resources to produce faction resource income - those would need to be topped up all the time, and be more like a maintenance time sink.)

But Archonzero's idea of automated NPC harvesters sounds workable. It gives players something else to attack and defend, but automates the actual tedium of the harvesting. That said it shouldn't be possible to completely shut down an empire's resource income solely by taking out harvesters and ignoring the bases. The main hurdle I see is to come up with something that can't simply be constantly shut down 24/7 by one squad of 5-6 guys in Reavers roving behind enemy lines. Unlike EVE Online, there's no gates you can guard to keep enemies away from your mining ops.

[JoCool]

No PvE. Just NO.

[Hosp]

Originally Posted by JoCool

No PvE. Just NO.

This.

[Kitaz]

Have to say no on this one, only npc's i wouldn't mind are maybe critters to give a sense of life on the planet.

[Mongo]

Originally Posted by JoCool

No PvE. Just NO.

This as well.

Just spend the resources on devving different ways for players to kill each other - water or space combat?.. instead of introducing that which detracts from the core game.

If I want to play single player I will go elseware, if I want to play against people I will play planetside, If I end up fighting NPC's I'll log, something tells me you dont want people logging ... amrite?