Autoaid

KiradaweaKiradawea Member Posts: 1,750 Transcendent
A time back, Autoaid was introduced in an effort to have combat be less of a big, fat "not for you" sign to anyone interested in participating in it. However since then I've heard nothing of how it's progressing, and it still seems stuck in arena only mode. Is the concept still on the table? Will it be finalized eventually? Are there other avenues considered to make combat approachable without having to code yourself?
Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.

Comments

  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 5,775 Transcendent
    My guess would be that other things (primarily the End Of The World releases, including skillsets) has been consuming focus for the last couple of months.
    image
  • KiradaweaKiradawea Member Posts: 1,750 Transcendent
    Understandable. I'm just anxious to hear if it is still being worked on, or if it fell by the wayside. It's an awesome idea, and I don't want it limited to the arena only.
    Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,399 Transcendent
    I agree. Having a basic, possibly slightly inferior auto-curing option for newbies who don't want to shell out for systems right from the start is a good idea. It'll be a good introduction for them, and they'll see how combat and curing works on a basic level, once they realise there's a limit they can go with the system, they'll explore the option of building their own, or buying a system.

  • KiradaweaKiradawea Member Posts: 1,750 Transcendent
    I'm glad it's still being worked on. The Autoaid idea is great, and even though I'm not the fondest of Ironrealms combat, it's still a project I'll be more than happy to help with whichever way I can. I know a few people who've rejected the game for the difficulty with combat, so maybe this'll rope em back in (or expose that they just don't have the guts for a text RPG).
    Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
  • FayFay Member Posts: 10 Inept

    I'd really like to see the autoheal system get some more attention too. As it is, you currently can't set it to use scrolls and sparkleberries at individual levels. I always have layered healing while hunting that way I don't use a lot of sparkleberries just to heal a bit of health that my regen or next sip would have done anyway.


    I like the idea of using server-side healing so that when I lose my internet connection, I don't come back dead. Although I tend to be more fortunate than not in this area :)

  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,399 Transcendent
    I think autoheal is fine as it is. Remember that what we want from system-side autocuring is a system new players who can't afford a third-party system or are confused about combat can have easier access to, in order to introduce them to combat without them dying at the first paralysis hit. Autoheal is great that it already cures deepwounds as well, and is a perfect bashing tool for newbies who don't have the technical know-how to code an autosipper.

    The fact that it currently has a downside, that is, not being layered, is more a side-effect that we probably want to keep so that third-party systems remain valued. This is the perfect downside because it doesn't cripple the user, but it's a definitely nice thing to have, and probably important for top-tier combat.

  • KiradaweaKiradawea Member Posts: 1,750 Transcendent
    I've yet to get a single useful argument for why the IRE shouldn't be introducing a system that's flexible, useful and strong enough for serious combat purposes.
    Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,399 Transcendent
    I'm not sure where I said that autoaid shouldn't be useful and strong enough for serious combat purposes. I argued that it shouldn't be strong enough to replace top-tier combat systems. There's a lot of ways to do this without crippling (note this is the same word I used in my above post) the combatant. They can compete, just not at the same level as the top players.

    Leaving layered healing out of autoheal is a great way of limiting autoaid without making it unusable in combat. As it is, it's currently a side effect, because the coders simply hasn't taken the time and effort to code layered healing in. I mentioned we probably want to keep this side-effect, so that system-builders can still coexist with system-side automated healing.

    Of course, if you want the coders to make autoaid a system that's better than anything third-party coders can come up with, for free, and thus wipe that market from the IRE ecosystem, I personally won't be crying because I'm not selling any systems. All the power to your campaign.

  • KiradaweaKiradawea Member Posts: 1,750 Transcendent
    As I read you, you are essentially arguing that the coder for the autoaid system should intentionally leave in flaws for the benefit of other coders, to which I ask "why"? Why should they do so? By having a strong, integrated combat system within the game, people will be able to participate in the game to a much greater degree. I just can't see the necessity or value of intentionally leaving said system weaker than it can be.
    Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,399 Transcendent
    My opinion is that an automated server-side curing can and should co-exist with a system-building market. Newbies shouldn't have to spend credits (especially at their current prices, but that's an entirely different topic) just to get started in the scene without being killed. Autoaid is a system with the potential to carry such players well into the middle-tier. If they want to duel top-tier combatants and compete on an even ground, though, asking for investment of their time and effort is reasonable. Even current "top-tier" systems out there aren't perfect - there's always been the argument that the best system is one you build for yourself. But I digress.

    Given the above premise, a server-side system has no reason to be top-tiered. That's an effort and time investment which players themselves should put in if they want to compete at the top level, not an effort and time investment coders or admins should be obliged to invest for the players to compete at that level. There's every reason for a server-side system to not be crappy, and that's exactly what the efforts of Sior and (possibly) Iosai are aiming for: a decent server-side system that can stand on its own. Going the extra mile is unneccesary, and also has the effect of de-valuing third-party systems.

    Now I wish to address something you assert that I have said: that I am arguing for the system to be "intentionally" flawed. I would like to point you to the fact that I mentioned the phrase "side-effect" in both of my above posts. I'm quite sure you're capable of finding out what that means, but just for the sake of argument, I'll qualify my usage of it. That it is not intentional. Autoheal in its current incarnation has a flaw, the lack of layered healing for the three main ways to actively regain health/mana/ego. It's not a flaw that would mean certain death in middle-tier combat. Or even when you're fighting in a group against top-tier combatants. Will it affect top-tier combat? Most definitely. Personal customised layered healing for different archetypes is important to maximise efficiency, which is important when you're trying to compete with someone who has made the same effort to maximise his efficiency. This effect IS a perk that top-tier combatants will want in their systems.

    I don't think Sior was thinking that when he coded it in, however. He probably either forgot about it, or just didn't see the effort as worth it at that point in time. Or maybe he had an epiphany. Whatever. As it is, it is currently a side-effect, an unintentional limit of an otherwise working system. Why should a coder then have to put in the effort to improve it beyond its currently acceptably robust capabilities, when this effort isn't something that will bar the user from participating in combat at a reasonably inclusive level?

Sign In or Register to comment.