i guess 5 is just about the 'meh' number of how many bots one should be allowed to get online at once.. and yeah, at one time i wouldve raised a brow as to why anywone would even want that many online at once, but now i feel like im always short a bot or 2.. so, against knowing better... coulda woulda it be possible to raisere the number to like 7? i like that number, dont you? its strong, its saying something like FU idc, im my own number in any way.. like david hasselhoff cool (in the old days ofc, not the drunk days).. 7
omg yay, look at that number. 7!
|
since im being ignored as usual.. dumb
|
I think you should be able to jump on as many as you feel like it ups the amount of players online so if a new player did come to the game and see 50-75 players might make them want to stay
|
Would depend on Enders justification for 5 in the first place I guess. Whenever I played many bots, I always felt like 5 was basically the peak of what I could do, as one would be scoring/looking for targets rather than just training/dumping/win dumping on them all.
7 is probably humanly possible too if they are long fights, though that's probably the limit, anything above that I'd start to get suspicions
|
I recall Ed elaborating on his stance for limiting it to 5 somewhere, but I'm far too lazy to try and dig for it.
|
I'd be curious if anyone could dig up what I've said on this topic in the past.
|
Try this thread (Forum > Questions > Online bots) 2011-04-24 22:29:09
|
Link for the lazy: http://bots4.net/forum/1/1029
Doesn't justify why, though you did hint that it could change. Like Gpof I'm sure I remember you justifying why 5 at one point, but I can't find it using the search.
|
I found one link where he makes some comments on removing it.
http://bots4.net/forum/7/341
|
I'm too lazy to read those threads. What's the summary? And what really matters, WILL A SUGGESTION MADE BY O CHEFE BE APPROVED AND IMPLEMENTED?
|
ya remove the cap so i can scatter dump even more targets
|
Thanks for digging up those threads. For what it's worth, those are from beta, long before we saw many of the mechanics that are common today like dumping.
I'm not super in favor of increasing the limit beyond 5 because it feels like it would push things too far in the direction of a game that requires a little too much "meta" to be successful. You could argue we're already at that point, but at this time, I don't really want to take the game further in that direction.
|
LETS LOWER THE NUMBER OF BOTS TO 2 AND LETS BRING BACK THE BLUE SERVER
|
|
|
LETS CHANGE ALL USERNAMES TO JACK DINGUS
|
|
|
YEAH HE SEEMS LIKE A TOP BLOKE
|
I'm not super in favor of increasing the limit beyond 5 because it feels like it would push things too far in the direction of a game that requires a little too much "meta" to be successful. You could argue we're already at that point, but at this time, I don't really want to take the game further in that direction.
I think this is pretty poor reasoning for keeping the limit in place. It could easily be read as the login limit being set to deter or inconvenience people from dumping. The meta isn't changing with or without it, only makes someone unable to win dump an extra bot or two while they score/level whatever. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel like your distaste for self sufficient scoring (i.e not real wars? wasn't sure what to call it) is showing with that response because it doesn't feel very objective.
|
I think the use case scenarios of having more than 5 bots on are few and far between. If you are windumping, you're not going to get any benefit above about 3 bots or so. Above this the links will simply appear faster than you can click them, so the rate limiting step will be how fast you can click them rather than how many are available to be clicked. If they are long fights it would possibly advantageous to have more bots online, but I don't see anyone training on 5+ separate bots these days, so it's kind of irrelevant.
|
I don't think I'm expressing my reasoning very well. I'm not advocating for a setup where you're primarily expected to attack "real" bots to win the monthly race (we tried that a number of years ago and found this kind of game setup is not at all conducive to that, there was pretty much unanimous dislike of being able to lose what you've gained). It's more that I just don't like the idea of a game where you have to play so many accounts at once to be competitive (if it's even feasible to click that fast). This is also the (I think) first time this topic has really come up as far as I can tell in the nearly ~10 years the game has been running, so it feels like an edge case issue.
|
Yea that's fairer reasoning, although I still think it's lackluster for pushing it to the side. It doesn't affect me one way or the other, but just on principle I think it's a little silly to turn something down when it'd be a benefit to somebody without any deficit to others, as fringe as the case may be. Especially when it's (presumably) a quick/easy change.
But I guess we have different ideas of how the game is perceived, or how it would be with this change rather, so maybe that's where the disagreement is. Where I don't think it would really change anything, it sounds like you think it will sort of perpetuate the current state of the game if I'm understanding you correctly.
|
Could drop from speed 2 to to speed 1 and comfortably dump 8 or so bots scattering. I’d rather not be able to do that for my own sanity 5 is already tedious so I’m against changing this
|
Yeah, I'm supportive of changes that are pure benefit and no downside, but there's downside to this change in my eyes in raising the barrier for entry (to high-end competition) a bit further than it already is.
|
|
|
Agreed. I think there would definitely be a sort of (internal or external) pressure to be on more than 5 bots if it were possible. Sure we're all (mostly) grown ups that can decide what we want to do with our lives, but a player could be putting a lot of effort in (dumping on 4 bots, scoring on 1) and still feel like they could and should be doing more to help their team.
|
LETS CHANGE ALL USERNAMES TO JACK DINGUS
I was happy using hunter2 but OK.
|
24
