Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

jusadbellum

Testers
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jusadbellum

  • Rank
    Hatchling

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Florida

Recent Profile Visitors

305 profile views
  1. Make it free and available to all players. No functionality behind a paywall. API limitations and auth/permissions as described above limit the potential for abuse. What does tracking imaginary points and statistics have to do with skill? What does letting people know when a raid is have to do with skill? You mistake tedium and artificial barriers to communication for actual mechanics that make a game easy or hard. If players became bored because it's easier to coordinate and simpler to play, then I suppose WoW is dead due to its inclusion of a guild calendar, thorough API for add-ons, quest UI that tells you where to go on the map, and external item databases that make it easier for players to find out what loot drops from what enemies. Oh wait, no, they have millions of subscribers, even after the WoD mass exodus. It just doesn't appeal to you, because you don't like it. That's fine. It doesn't appeal to me either. But that doesn't mean that the mythic raiders are any less skilled just because they have raid warnings and HP bar UI add-ons. You are mistaking a lack of actionable information with a measure of skill. If the developers provide an API, then by definition they are providing you the option to use particular information and functionality that they built in to the game. It doesn't make you a better player for refusing to use the information being offered to you. If the developers provided no way for support classes to see the hp bars of their teammates, that would be bad game design, not adding a layer of difficulty. Even WoW's basic raid UI lets you see peoples' hp bars. You just have to typically click on them to target them instead of mousing over like some add-ons let you do. You still have to do the button-pressing and decision-making as to who you'll heal. So I take it you never used voice chat. I was in a top guild on my server in Vanilla that dominated the world bosses. And we used an external voice chat program. That gives an advantage "over what the developers provided" or at least it did until Blizzard implemented it (poorly) in-game. Does it make you "more skilled" if you can't communicate effectively with your teammates except by text that you manually typed in? No, it simply adds an artificial barrier to communication and coordination. Even EverQuest raiding guilds use voice chat programs, and there pretty much aren't any add-ons for that game. Having a chatbot will in no way, shape, or form affect how good someone is at playing the game. Having a chatbot will not magically transform people who are bad at PvP into PvP gods. It will not elevate poor leaders over good ones. The best will still rise to the top, and the baddies will still get stomped. Having a chatbot will, however, make it easier for players of all skill levels to coordinate and share certain bits of information in limited fashion. If a chatbot can give you an item link or a raid time that the guild leader set without you having to go look it up on an external site somewhere, that doesn't give you an unfair advantage -- it keeps you inside the game, immersed in its content!
  2. It seems like you have not actually read what I am proposing and are simply reacting to a word that has bad connotations to you. Bots can be good or bad, and these bots, with the limitations I am proposing to be on them, will fall squarely in the first category. It would be literally impossible, under the rules I am proposing, for a bot to be used to openly spam for gold-selling in any server-wide chat that isn't moderated. Only private channels, such as guild or alliance channels, would be accessible by chatbots, and then only with the permission of whomever is moderating the channel. Example scenario: Guild leader Alice of the AHHH guild wants to set up a chatbot for her guild and the Blargh Alliance, but she doesn't have the technical expertise to do so. Luckily, AHHH officer Bob has that know-how and Alice has set the guild permissions to allow officers to moderate chat. Bob logs in to his account and creates a unique API token for both his bot and the guild channel. Bob can only create tokens to join channels where he is a moderator, and he isn't a moderator of the Blargh-Alliance chat, so he has to contact Charlie of the Blargh Leadership Council guild (who is a moderator for the Blargh-Alliance chat) to get a token for his bot. Now, even if Bob's bot were to run amok (unlikely), anyone with moderator access can quickly revoke the bot's access token and shut down the spam. If AHHH guild leaves the alliance, Charlie can easily remove Bob's bot's access just the same as if he was using it to spam the alliance to hawk his wares against the alliance rules. ----- Automation is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. If it were, all of the helpful WoW raiding add-ons would have been decried by WoW's community and the use of those add-ons banned. Making it easier for people to coordinate let's players focus more on the actual gameplay and less on the administrative work required to effectively coordinate.
  3. You are missing the point. Officially sanctioning such a thing primarily involves creating an API to program your bot against. That is literally what I am asking for. If they want to create an official Hubot module or whatever down the line, that's fine. The main ask is to make an API that exposes the limited feature set that I talked about and authenticates and/or links to a paid account of some sort.
  4. How do you believe it would be abused in a way that Discord, IRC, or even a WhatsApp group couldn't be used to muster forces? And what's wrong with getting people to log on for a fight? In a PvP game, in a sense you are the content for other players and vice versa. You dismiss my idea out of hand and assert this without any example of the trouble it could/would cause. Please elaborate what you mean by Pandora's Box. 1. These will be paid accounts, so any demonstrable abuse results in a loss of whatever money has been paid into that account should ACE decide to permanently ban that account. I am not proposing that this feature be free nor that it be unfettered. 2. People already use outside applications like Discord, IRC, guild websites, and the like, and nothing is stopping them from coordinating this way or writing their own non-sanctioned bots apart from the difficulty of reverse engineering the parts of the game dealing with chat. This is asking for something officially sanctioned by ACE, which in turn makes it easier to police bad behavior. If everyone is using the official system with limitations like no reading/writing to non-private channels, then any bad actors stand out and can be more easily caught and punished.
  5. When I played Anarchy Online and Eve, one of the things I liked most about it was that folks had set up bots that could perform various functions like making item links, storing raid points, taking notes on corporation (guild equivalent) members, respond to certain phrases in official channels, and more. This was in the days before the likes of projects like Hubot. Nowadays, with projects like Hubot, we have the potential to integrate the good kind of bots into our games, making them that much more fun. I'd like to see the ability to, with a paid account, access a limited set of chat features and perhaps an API (e.g. if ACE made an item database publicly available on the main site). Making it a paid feature does two very important things: 1. Disincentivizes abuse: if your bot gets banned for bad behavior, you're out of an account and have to pay for another set up fee (whether that's another copy of the game or some other purchase mechanism that ACE decides on). 2. Adds another, albeit small, revenue stream that I'm sure many guilds and/or alliances would gladly pay for given the functionality it would bring. Another benefit would be that it's a project that can bring together the community, making it possible for Guilds and Alliances to coordinate in ways that they would not otherwise be able to absent such tools. If ACE officially blesses efforts such as this, then they can lay down the ground rules and give the community official guidance as to what's cool and not cool. It also gives them the opportunity to make official APIs, secure things with auth tokens, rate limits, etc. and generally just make the bots' behavior more site-friendly. Heck, they could even put out an official Hubot-Crowfall module that plays well with the Crowfall APIs and chat, making it that much easier for the Crowfall community's players-who-are-also-programmers to integrate. What say you, Crows and ACE Devs? Do you think this a good idea, great idea, or not-so-great idea?
  6. Sorry for not being more clear. My idea of a limited feature set would include not giving chatbots access to general chat. I only want them to have access to private channels like Guild chat or custom server/playfield channels. This would be like unto the functionality of Anarchy Online chatbots, some of which are still operational and used to coordinate raids and loot.
  7. When I played Anarchy Online and Eve, one of the things I liked most about it was that folks had set up bots that could perform various functions like making item links, storing raid points, taking notes on corporation (guild equivalent) members, respond to certain phrases in official channels, and more. This was in the days before the likes of projects like Hubot. Nowadays, with projects like Hubot, we have the potential to integrate the good kind of bots into our games, making them that much more fun. I'd like to see the ability to, with a paid account, access a limited set of chat features and perhaps an API (e.g. if ACE made an item database publicly available on the main site). Making it a paid feature does two very important things: 1. Disincentivizes abuse: if your bot gets banned for bad behavior, you're out of an account and have to pay for another set up fee (whether that's another copy of the game or some other purchase mechanism that ACE decides on). 2. Adds another, albeit small, revenue stream that I'm sure many guilds and/or alliances would gladly pay for the functionality it would bring. Another benefit would be that it's a project that can bring together the community, making it possible for Guilds and Alliances to coordinate in ways that they would not otherwise be able to absent such tools. If ACE officially blesses efforts such as this, then they can lay down the ground rules and give the community official guidance as to what's cool and not cool. It also gives them the opportunity to make official APIs, secure things with auth tokens, rate limits, etc. and generally just make the bots' behavior more site-friendly. Heck, they could even put out an official Hubot-Crowfall module that plays well with the Crowfall APIs and chat, making it that much easier for the Crowfall community's players-who-are-also-programmers to integrate. What say you, Crows and ACE Devs? Do you think this a good idea, great idea, or not-so-great idea?
×
×
  • Create New...