Better Transport?

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3315

Re: Better Transport?

Post#21 » 16 Apr 2018, 12:46

TomCat wrote:ok. So if it was identified as bug why the game itself use it in campaign? It is very strange isn't it?

No it is not, as the AI in campaing are pulled from multiplayer players, so they may contain the bug.

And why was it identified as bug? Because it makes sg faster or because it confuse enemy bots as somebody said here?

haven't you read the topic? If you want to discuss you should read what was said already.
It is a bug because it is not meant that the sg can pick a resource not being over it. Either all the classes can do it, or none. The Sg is the only class that can do it. Also GFX declared it as bug. If tomorrow GFX says "is it not a bug, it is a feature". Then is it still lame but a bit more official.

But I want to confuse enemy bots. Is this ok for You?

If you wouldn't capture anything it would be ok. As dancing between ranges. But you pick the resource and go to your base, you don't just mess around. So nice try but no.

However, this discussion made me quite scared about future. Because when someone starts to invent some unwritten rules over the rules and exclude players who do not follow his the only correct rules, it's the way to hell imho.


But this is normal. You have a playfield (a game, a playfield and what not) and then you have accepted behaviors. The "scared" feeling that you want to write is just a way to let others feel guilty of something that is completely ok.

If you play soccer, could you physically pick the ball with your hands? Yes.
Does someone stops you to do it? No.
Would you end up playing alone if you do it often? Yes.

Same with vollebay.
Can you physically kick the ball? yes.
Does someone stops you to do it? No.
Would you end up playing alone if you do it often? Yes.

Should I make more examples?
Again, it is not what you can possibly do that defines the rules (of course in the best case should be so, but it is difficult as bugs are always around the corner), rather what the community defines as rules.

And it can also be that you find enough person that say "no! we want our community of bug users! An alternative community". In that community could be that not using the bug is a bad thing.

Once again, I am not speaking for all (although several players said that the bug is making the game less attractive), I speak mostly my opinion. I nonetheless play also against bug users as they still provide data, but I'd like to see it fixed.
Last edited by pier4r on 16 Apr 2018, 17:42, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

User avatar
TomCat
Script
Script
Posts: 38

Re: Better Transport?

Post#22 » 16 Apr 2018, 13:40

pier4r wrote:havent't you read the topic? If you want to discuss you should read what was said already.
It is a bug because it is not meant that the sg can pick a resource not being over it. Either all the classes can do it, or none. The Sg is the only class that can do it.


Where in the topic was said this? And who said that nonsense? Because it is definitely not true. All classes can do it. Every bot when capturing resource attract it from some small distance. No one must being over it. Sg is the only one that can profit by it because of his speed. But every bot can use the drop-move-catch. Drops the resource, move a little (half step) and catch the resource not being over it. So I can return You:
Nice try but no. ;) :)
My God, it's full of stars!

User avatar
TomCat
Script
Script
Posts: 38

Re: Better Transport?

Post#23 » 16 Apr 2018, 13:50

pier4r wrote:It is a bug because it is not meant that the sg can pick a resource not being over it. Either all the classes can do it, or none. The Sg is the only class that can do it.


So if this is the definition of the bug than it is obviously not a bug because this is not true. ;-) Everyone can try it by self. (I did so I am pretty sure)

(edit): You (and everyone) can see the proof - replay 935275
My God, it's full of stars!

sollniss
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 176

Re: Better Transport?

Post#24 » 16 Apr 2018, 17:47

Why are you guys arguing over something so pointless. A bug is unintended behavior and it was definitely not intended because it is getting removed in 13. Whether you like it or not.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3315

Re: Better Transport?

Post#25 » 16 Apr 2018, 17:49

@tomcat

Ok, then all classes can do it (my mistake) but they don't get any advantage in doing it. That is, they don't get any faster in bringing the resource to base. The sg due to its speed gets the advantage and a big one, where it is not mean to be.

And in general the point is that one should be on the resource to capture it (that is the source of the mistake).

Now if you want to convince me that it is not a bug and it is legit, go on, you won't be able to unless it is recognized as a feature. I classify it as a (lame) bug (and for the moment I am not alone) and that's it.

And I also understand your wish to fight my opinion to make it more "acceptable". If you use the bug, as you use it, you want to keep it and feel it legit. For me it is not, period.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

User avatar
TomCat
Script
Script
Posts: 38

Re: Better Transport?

Post#26 » 16 Apr 2018, 19:30

pier4r wrote:And I also understand your wish to fight my opinion to make it more "acceptable". If you use the bug, as you use it, you want to keep it and feel it legit. For me it is not, period.

You understand nothing. I fight your opinion because of principle. In fact I don't like this 'bug' and I really don't want to keep it. As I said before I don't care if it will be fixed or not I always will create my AI to use everything the game offered. For me every change is good because every change brings some new fun.

And I fight with You for fun too. Because You are very funny bro. First You write exact definition why is something bug. And when I prove that your argument fails You have no problem to invent another one. And just that moment clearly proved that it is not about arguments. It is just that You don't like something so You will fight against it to death. Everyone who read this topic from post 21 further must see it. It is as obvious as your obvious liking in the word 'lame'.

And it is obvious that no one of us can convince the other one. Maybe there are creating 2 irreconcilable groups of players here.
First (order is not important) group is players who want to play without any rules. I am in this group ofcourse. I want to finding any way to improve my AI. And I realy don't want to thinking about what is 'legal' or what is 'lame'. I want to use everything what I can (what the game allows me). And I also do not think I'm alone in this group.
The second group is players who want to associate in the community, they want to debating, disputing about the rules, play according to rules and judge the other players.
And the extra third group is players who inventing the rules and trying to force it to all. I know one good candidate to leader of this group.
My God, it's full of stars!

ConsciouS-0nE
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 740

Re: Better Transport?

Post#27 » 16 Apr 2018, 20:01

Conscious-Thr33 everyone...
Im not the best player, but atleast im something.I'm 8
Science is madness! 3:)

masterplayer
Algorithm
Algorithm
Posts: 56

Re: Better Transport?

Post#28 » 16 Apr 2018, 21:09

sollniss wrote:Why are you guys arguing over something so pointless?

The purpose of a forum is to discuss things, but I agree that things are getting out of control...
I almost regret starting this discussion, because it could devide such a great community. :(
:? I apologize for my childish name and my bad English.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3315

Re: Better Transport?

Post#29 » 16 Apr 2018, 23:20

TomCat wrote:bla with a lot of "you said this even when you don't"


:|

Now I hope you are happy and we can agree to disagree. Lame for me and legit for you.

Edit, expanding.

"Because You are very funny bro. First You write exact definition why is something bug."
Nope. You decided it was a definition. You decided it was the precise one. I never stated it. You even said "if this is the definition" , therefore showing that you were unsure and after 3 post you take it as the definitive statement. If you are happy do it, but your argument is empty because you do non sequiturs.

What I did was offering a possible additional factor why the bug is a bug, you proved that every class can do it - though the shotgun is the only benefitting from it. That's it, I remember wrongly, I even state it (I could have just ignored it), but it doesn't change the point much. Only for you the point changes because you decided that one sentence I wrote was the (exact !) definition of a bug. Sure you can behave so but then further discussion is not needed.



" It is just that You don't like something so You will fight against it to death. Everyone who read this topic from post 21 further must see it. It is as obvious as your obvious liking in the word 'lame'."
Lol. Ah no wait: lame!
Nope. I don't know with whom you discuss that teaches you to discuss this way. You are the one demanding that the others shouldn't express their opinion if the opinion is negative against what you use. Quite liberal of you. I don't fight you (or the bug) to death as I (a) first cannot change your mind, (b) I cannot force you to stop playing, (c) I don't need to convince the others that the bug is a bug as it is a bug for me and that's enough ( that's the strongest point that you still don't get . People can have opinions that are not approved by you).
But I have all the rights to say that for me the bug lame , to explain why I see it lame, to avoid playing (if possible) with people using it and to disagree. It's you that cannot handle negative judgements, as you are so touched by my lame statements. And that again, doesn't make the interaction interesting.

So said that, as wrote above , we agree to disagree and likely we don't need to read each other anymore. Fortunately the forum has features to allow this.

I wrote this wot more to clarify for the passing reader rather than to discuss with you.

Edit2. Then again for the logic of the quoted user : the bug is not a bug because it is allowed by the game, and the same guy calls another thing a bug (the exploit of the replays before deploying) . But that's also allowed by the game! What a consistent viewpoint. Amazing.
Last edited by pier4r on 17 Apr 2018, 07:54, edited 3 times in total.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

User avatar
TomCat
Script
Script
Posts: 38

Re: Better Transport?

Post#30 » 16 Apr 2018, 23:53

masterplayer wrote:
sollniss wrote:Why are you guys arguing over something so pointless?

The purpose of a forum is to discuss things, but I agree that things are getting out of control...
I almost regret starting this discussion, because it could devide such a great community. :(


Do not regret. As You said forum is to discuss things. And community is to discuss too. There may be different views in the community. No "may be" - better "there should be". And time to time this different views can fight a little. It is ok and it is healthy. At least much healthier than walking the line as a sheeps behind one general all sharing only the one correct approved opinion.
My God, it's full of stars!

MGBlitz81
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 135

Re: Better Transport?

Post#31 » 17 Apr 2018, 06:03

Pier, all you have to do now is find a new combination of nodes that let the shotgun catch resources from medium range! I mean if its possible that its in the game and accessible to everyone then it can't be a glitch right?

User avatar
TomCat
Script
Script
Posts: 38

Re: Better Transport?

Post#32 » 17 Apr 2018, 07:44

pier4r wrote:"Because You are very funny bro. First You write exact definition why is something bug."
Nope. You decided it was a definition. You decided it was the precise one. I never stated it.
What I did was offering a possible additional factor why the bug is a bug...


Yeah, I also find arguing with you as a waste of time. Because you say something and then you say you did not say that. I asked You:
TomCat wrote:And why was it identified as bug?

And You answered me:
pier4r wrote:It is a bug because it is not meant that the sg can pick a resource not being over it. Either all the classes can do it, or none. The Sg is the only class that can do it.


So I asked You for the definition and You answered me. I didn't ask for some additional factors. When I ask the question why something is bug I expect answer to my question. And I got one. And then You say that it was not the right answer? So why didn't you say the right one when I asked first? What is then such a discussion?

pier4r wrote:Edit2. Then again for the logic of the quoted user : the bug is not a bug because it is allowed by the game, and the same guy calls another thing a bug (the exploit of the replays before deploying) . But that's also allowed by the game! What a consistent viewpoint. Amazing.

Yes, I expected this argument. I feel huge difference between these two bugs. But I guess I fail to explain clearly. Perhaps the core of the problem is that each of us has a different view of what this game is about. I think this game is about programming the best AI. We have some set of commands and we use that commands for achieve our goal. And IMHO we should have the freedom to use that commands in any way we want. And I think it is mainly about finding the ways that other players don't. I think it's about coming up with something that surprises the others. That is the main goal of this game for me. And the set of commands should allow me everything what is allowed and don't allow me what is not allowed.
But that the other bug is something else entirely. It is something out of the playground.
At the programming part I think this game is just about finding these "exploits". So if someone find it and use it and get a profit from it I do not agree with that judging it as lame. On the other side finding and using some bugs in the interface of the game - that is lame for me. And if you do not see the difference, then I'm sorry.

I'm sorry it was so long, but my English is not much, so I tried to explain it as best I can.
My God, it's full of stars!

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3315

Re: Better Transport?

Post#33 » 17 Apr 2018, 07:50

MGBlitz81 wrote:Pier, all you have to do now is find a new combination of nodes that let the shotgun catch resources from medium range! I mean if its possible that its in the game and accessible to everyone then it can't be a glitch right?


Good idea! :D
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

Ed-209
Script
Script
Posts: 44

Re: Better Transport?

Post#34 » 17 Apr 2018, 18:04




This quote is from this thread dated February of 2017. If the game developer indicated that he would fix, that would indicate he felt that it was not an acceptable behavior for his game.

Up until this release I didn't feel that it was necessary to study and develop this tactic as GFX47 had indicated that he was going to fix. The ONLY reason I studied and developed a procedure to use this as a 'tactic' was that I found in the new release campaign mode, the developer allowed the campaign ai to incorporate this 'tactic'. Since he didn't clear this tactic out of the ai actually used in the game, he either had decided that this was an acceptable tactic, or had totally forgotten about fixing.

Either way, since it is incorporated into the training for the game, it IS a viable tactic that CAN be used by anyone that can figure out how to make it work and how to best use it until the developer makes another change regarding this. If a person figures out how to use it effectively, they should also be able to figure out how to defend it.

Remember, we are playing a game that is Alpha (being developed). As such we point out things that we like, dislike, or ideas that we think could help improve the game.

Ultimately it is UP TO THE DEVELOPER OF THE GAME what he wants left in or taken out of the game. So PLEASE quit arguing about it and leave it as suggestions to the developer. Once the game is officially and fully released, then learn to use what the developer created and choose to enjoy the game or not.

PS, I currently choose NOT to deploy any matches because I am trying to develop an ai with all of the tactics I need to defeat all campaign levels without making ANY adjustments. I will tell you that I still choose NOT to use the SG resource tactic as I still feel that the developer is going to remove, and if I can win against it I know I will have a stronger ai.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3315

Re: Better Transport?

Post#35 » 17 Apr 2018, 23:12

Note: the campaign tactics are pulled from the multiplayer as explained in another topic (I don't know if they change over time or they are pulled once ).

I don't believe there is much of a filter on them so the game is using an ai from a sg bug user.

This, though, makes it a bit unclear to newcomers, as they surely feel the sg bug part of the game if it is in the campaign.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

Ed-209
Script
Script
Posts: 44

Re: Better Transport?

Post#36 » 18 Apr 2018, 03:16

I haven't noticed the campaign tactics changing since the release. Even if they are pulled occasionally to refresh, GFX by allowing this tactic to continue and be used in the training instead of fixing it, is making this tactic acceptible. It helped me get through campaign, but using it made my ai weak in other areas, so trying to get through without it.

User avatar
GFX47
Dev
Posts: 2826

Re: Better Transport?

Post#37 » 19 Apr 2018, 17:39

Guys, please stop the argument/troll/infinite loop.
It's a bug exploit.
The bug will be fixed in Alpha 13.
Let's consider the matter closed.
Or I'll lock the thread.

User avatar
Krellion
Hello World
Hello World
Posts: 4

Re: Better Transport?

Post#38 » 22 Apr 2018, 18:13

I was reading the topic...and well, i'm sorry I didn't want to turn on so much fire with my personal opinion. Ok, so I'll remove this "harvest-dance", I didnt understand it was tagged as "bug abuse".
But if we'll don't discuss if it's a bug or not (because GFX47 has said his opinion and it's law, rightly), is it a problem if I speculate a bit on it, only for knowledge purpose?
I didn't found this strategy so easy to manage in every situation and I would like to discuss this part of AI.
Otherwise, no problem, it is not vital :)

mcompany
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 865

Re: Better Transport?

Post#39 » 29 Apr 2018, 08:34

I'm late to the party (I've been pretty dead when it comes to this game), but I'll risk locking this thread just so that I'll give my 2 cents.

1. A bug is something that is not intentional in any manner. An exploit is something that is entirely intentional, but is used in a completely unintentional manner. This "bug" relies solely on the fact that all bots has a pickup radius, rather than requiring that the bot moves directly over the ball to pick it up. Unless such a radius is purely accidental, I will disagree with everyone that this is not a bug but instead an exploit.
2. I do not see bugs or exploits as inherently bad (see pushbot), but they often can be a negative to a game. However, ultimately, that is gfx's decision, not ours. We can only give our input on how things should be
3. Me personally, I do not like this exploit. The two main reasons is that such a tactic is nearly impossible to correctly account for, and that for all bots classes I think that having a radius makes sneaking resources away much safer than they should be. I couldn't care less if the shotgun was as fast as the bug allows (which is still slower than machine guns)

Return to “Strategies”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DieProfikeit and 1 guest