+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: AI ID - adjustment proposal (/showthread.php?tid=135193)
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - The Savage - 01-19-2016
Quote:Vessels carrying this quasi-lawful ID are controlled by an Artificial Intelligence, who :
Can attack any ship in self-defense or in defense of another AI ship.
Can attack any ship in systems that do not contain a jumpgate.
Cannot attack transports and freighters, except in self-defense.
Cannot use any transports with more than 3,600 cargo.
Cannot participate in unlawful actions except as described above.
AI can attack every ship, even transports, according to the excerpt from FLStat. After thinking for a while, I replied myself why Nomad ID isn't like that.
It's the cloak availability.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - Garrett Jax - 01-19-2016
(01-19-2016, 09:32 PM)Genexus Wrote:(01-19-2016, 08:35 PM)Garrett Jax Wrote: Giving a faction the ability to attack transports is a recipe for grief. Particularly to a faction leader that has proven time and again he cannot be trusted. I don't need to go into the reasons why I state this, do I?Another cool move Jax and a quite arrogant one again.
Hey, it's not arrogance, bud. It's experience. You were the one that changed what you wanted in the ID without telling us, while we were in the process of voting on it. You were the one that supposedly changed leadership of Prime to Antagonist. When I asked if you were Antagonist, you deliberately lied to me claiming you felt you had no choice since your reputation was shot. Even now, you've changed the OP so much, I'm having difficulty following you. Doesn't matter, really. I'm not an Admin any longer and so I'm not the one you need to sell your changes to. I wish you the best, truly. I just don't think the Admins envision the AI like you do.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - HassLHoFF™ - 01-19-2016
(01-19-2016, 10:13 PM)Garrett Jax Wrote:(01-19-2016, 09:32 PM)Genexus Wrote:(01-19-2016, 08:35 PM)Garrett Jax Wrote: Giving a faction the ability to attack transports is a recipe for grief. Particularly to a faction leader that has proven time and again he cannot be trusted. I don't need to go into the reasons why I state this, do I?Another cool move Jax and a quite arrogant one again.
Hey, it's not arrogance, bud. It's experience. You were the one that changed what you wanted in the ID without telling us, while we were in the process of voting on it. You were the one that supposedly changed leadership of Prime to Antagonist. When I asked if you were Antagonist, you deliberately lied to me claiming you felt you had no choice since your reputation was shot. Even now, you've changed the OP so much, I'm having difficulty following you. Doesn't matter, really. I'm not an Admin any longer and so I'm not the one you need to sell your changes to. I wish you the best, truly. I just don't think the Admins envision the AI like you do.
I stand to my point, even it wasn't a good move, it was reasoned to change over to an alt. The admin team had initially stopped working with me and the faction overall after I had changed lines in the request. Afterall, it was a fault, of course, even I pointed out of not being aware of the disallowance and also being not involved in the schedule of the workflow of the admin-team in a conversation with you, the acting was still the same. I just advise to change the point of view sometimes. There are always two stories.
By the way. Even the admin team doesn't trust me and envision the AI different as I do, I have made a suggestion about an improvement.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - Laz - 01-19-2016
Seems every thread these day about change is bloodthirsty....
The change is necessary for the first one. they couldn't be random AI's killing everyone.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - The Savage - 01-19-2016
(01-19-2016, 10:45 PM)Laz Wrote: The change is necessary for the first one. they couldn't be random AI's killing everyone.
Maybe you want the toys and I will put you into sandbox? Non-house space, especialy the one without jumpgates, should stay dangerous. You can roleplay peaceful AI, but also you can roleplay a hunter-killer drone, destined to kill all "unwelcomed guests".
Places without tradelanes are not your usual spaces in which people trade. That ID is completely fine by me, given what systems are actually covered in that ID.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - HassLHoFF™ - 01-19-2016
(01-19-2016, 10:45 PM)Laz Wrote: Seems every thread these day about change is bloodthirsty....
The change is necessary for the first one. they couldn't be random AI's killing everyone.
As you can see, I am not suggesting a step back. ID's shouldn't be used to restrict an obvious inRP component, even my suggestion is already a restriction, but it makes sense.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - Laz - 01-19-2016
A nice change for AI. Actually thought out.
Unlike everything else.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - HassLHoFF™ - 01-20-2016
(01-19-2016, 11:58 PM)Laz Wrote: A nice change for AI. Actually thought out.
Unlike everything else.
How about explaining it in some words?
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - Laz - 01-20-2016
Laz Wrote:To long.
RE: AI ID - adjustment proposal - The Savage - 01-20-2016
![[Image: sYrOvlX.png]](http://i.imgur.com/sYrOvlX.png)
This map clearly shows in which systems AI are actually able to attack. Green are systems in which AI would likely be able to attack. Purple systems are rather unlikely target - due to their roleplay inaccessability or other reasons, but possible within ID.
As you can all see, I doubt that barely any traders visit highlighted systems, except for some really specific routes (such as Zoner groups or Unlawful/Core/Order suppliers).
Edit: Corrected some systems.