Free Allegiance Forums

Can we please rollback the changes in miner AI?

They weren't great before, but they were a little more efficient and predictable then they currently are.

I know the changes were made with the best intentions, but its pretty much universally agreed on they were better before.

Ryujin wrote:QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 10 2018, 01:24 PM) Can we please rollback the changes in miner AI?

They weren't great before, but they were a little more efficient and predictable then they currently are.

I know the changes were made with the best intentions, but its pretty much universally agreed on they were better before.

Hear! Hear!

Ryujin wrote:QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 10 2018, 07:24 PM) Can we please rollback the changes in miner AI?

They weren't great before, but they were a little more efficient and predictable then they currently are.

I know the changes were made with the best intentions, but its pretty much universally agreed on they were better before.

Why do you want them rolled back?

Senor NoirSol wrote:QUOTE (Senor NoirSol @ Feb 11 2018, 01:15 AM) Why do you want them rolled back?

Ryujin wrote:QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 10 2018, 10:24 AM) I know the changes were made with the best intentions, but its pretty much universally agreed on they were better before.

So are they just new broken in a way you aren't used to for the last 20 years? Is there something in particular they do now that causes issues? I will agree that a set of 7 changes were made and maybe they aren't all good, but can we explore those changes and see if any are good? Maybe we can identify one thing to roll back that makes them better. Anything jumping out in this list? Should we roll to a subset of 3 of these that people think are most (positively) impactful and try that?

Utility AI (Radulfr)
1 Miners will avoid going into sectors which have bases from both sides.
2 Miners will consider sectors that are entirely surrounded by friendly sectors as safe to mine in. (Also tech cons will look for their rock there.)
3 When miners start going to a new sector to mine, a notification will be shown to everyone on the team on the bottom of the screen.
4 When docked in a station which has enemies nearby, miners will be more hesitant to undock without being ordered to. (Without being ordered to stay docked)
5 When sending a miner to a sector without specifying a task, a reasonable one is chosen right away instead of once the miner is in the sector. This prevents the miner from going straight back to the previous sector.
The miner docks if damaged or full, mines otherwise, and If neither can be done, it will move to the center of the sector. This does not apply to unexplored sectors.
6 Miners will not go back to the previously mined He3 asteroid, if they can't fill 50% of their cargo on it. Instead they will look for the best rock after unloading, which may still send them back to the previous rock.
7 If being sent to a sector by a player command, the miner will remember the sector. After unloading, it will first check if anything more can be mined in that sector.

Edit: I'll just leave this here.
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.

Ryujin wrote:QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 10 2018, 01:24 PM) Can we please rollback the changes in miner AI?

They weren't great before, but they were a little more efficient and predictable then they currently are.

I know the changes were made with the best intentions, but its pretty much universally agreed on they were better before.

raumvogel wrote:QUOTE (raumvogel @ Feb 10 2018, 03:19 PM) Hear! Hear!

Can you give specific examples of exactly what the miners did that you didn't like that is a result of the recent AI changes, and not pre-existing miner behavior, or an accidental wrong command?

srsly, I read through the changes radulfr made and they all seem reasonable except maybe 5

only gripe there is that moving a miner to the middle of the sector might be more dangerous than leaving at near an aleph that it came through. assumption there being that the commander sent it into that sector from a nearby friendly sector, so if it's idle and it is found by an enemy, it'll be faster for it to return to safety.

that being said, haven't played with it so maybe the combination of all these reasonable changes is causing some unforeseen circumstances?

Ryujin wrote:QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 10 2018, 02:24 PM) its pretty much universally agreed on

Quite the claim, considering there is not a single word on either Discord or these forums about it.

Please elaborate what you think is wrong with it and I'll see what I can do.

vogue wrote:QUOTE (vogue @ Feb 11 2018, 04:03 PM) only gripe there is that moving a miner to the middle of the sector might be more dangerous than leaving at near an aleph that it came through. assumption there being that the commander sent it into that sector from a nearby friendly sector, so if it's idle and it is found by an enemy, it'll be faster for it to return to safety.

Miners aren't likely to idle though. Without the change, they would have been most likely to return to the sector they came from in those cases. The sector where a player didn't want the miner to be.

vogue wrote:QUOTE (vogue @ Feb 11 2018, 12:03 PM) srsly, I read through the changes radulfr made and they all seem reasonable except maybe 5

only gripe there is that moving a miner to the middle of the sector might be more dangerous than leaving at near an aleph that it came through. assumption there being that the commander sent it into that sector from a nearby friendly sector, so if it's idle and it is found by an enemy, it'll be faster for it to return to safety.

that being said, haven't played with it so maybe the combination of all these reasonable changes is causing some unforeseen circumstances?

^ this. We have a bunch of empty miners randmoly moving towards tps.