Stalker mode ideas

[BornWithTeeth]

@Kontrollo

 

I have lost count of the number of times I have seen the following sentiment expressed, often with about 60-80% this exact wording: “Carebears are terrified of a challenge”, followed by more insults, and open, direct statements that people who don’t want to play PvP should either start doing it or get lost, followed by demands that anyone who doesn’t like PvP should be required to write out an exacting explanation of why, followed by the forum equivalent of sticking one’s fingers in one’s ears and saying “Lalalalala I can’t hear you and you’re a coward anyway lalalala.”

The tone was set by a guy who literally said that anyone who didn’t like the idea of the mode should be physically sent to Iraq to get shot at for real.

 

So by now, I am not inclined towards giving that side of the argument the benefit of the doubt. I am sorry if you feel that that is unjust, but let us not pretend that this is people who like PvP being somehow unfairly singled out. Especially since I did not in fact say “All people who like PvP.” I’m talking about the significant number of posters who have been very confrontational in their support of this idea and their aggressive rejection of any compromise.

I’d quite like if the mods were to create an entire thread made up of the posts they’ve had to delete from all the Stalker discussions. Let’s just say that it would be unpleasant reading, and would perhaps taint one’s image of the community.

 

 

Perhaps it would be better if we did stick to discussing pie after all? The recipe said to use evaporated milk for the pumpkin filling, but I used full condensed milk. It’s richer and creamier, makes a much denser pumpkin filling, but also adds like a bajillion calories to the total recipe.

Edited January 30, 2019 by BornWithTeeth

[Kontrollo]

1 minute ago, BornWithTeeth said:

I have lost count of the number of times I have seen the following sentiment expressed, often with about 60-80% this exact wording: “Carebears are terrified of a challenge”, followed by more insults, and open, direct statements that people who don’t want to play PvP should either start doing it or get lost, followed by demands that anyone who doesn’t like PvP should be required to write out an exacting explanation of why, followed by the forum equivalent of sticking one’s fingers in one’s ears and saying “Lalalalala I can’t hear you and you’re a coward anyway lalalala.” 

The tone was set by a guy who literally said that anyone who didn’t like the idea of the mode should be physically sent to Iraq to get shot at for real.

Then you tell these individuals that their attitude is not appreciated instead of attacking everyone who happens to like a game mode you don't like. It's just incredibly tiresome to read stuff like this whenever the topic comes up in whatever form. And this mode isn't even live yet.

And in case of that last example, if necessary you also report them and/or put them on your ignore list. That's how you deal with these people.

 

Spoiler

By the way, I can back up what I've said with written words (it got removed shortly after and I'm not naming names; this is just the first few lines). I think this speaks for itself:

 

 

17 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

So by now, I am not inclined towards giving that side of the argument the benefit of the doubt. I am sorry if you feel that that is unjust, but let us not pretend that this is people who like PvP being somehow unfairly singled out.

Well, I'm used to that attitude. It's not news, it's been like this since back in the day. I'm just asking you guys to dial it back again.

 

[BornWithTeeth]

@Kontrollo

So, in the spirit of not being a jerk, I am genuinely sorry that you’ve been given a hard time by folks who dislike PvP, that sucks and those players are definitely being unfair. Also, I did in fact see that post before it vanished, and I disapprove, that’s a childish way of handling a disagreement.

 

That said, I would be very willing to just write off one person’s opinion as that single individual being toxic. Or two. Or three. However, I trust you can understand that when it gets to be more than that, it is not somehow unfair to point out the pattern and establish that the context of the discussion has become unhelpful. It is worth pointing out that the position of “I don’t like PvP, but so long as the mode is optional that’s fine by me,” is the compromise in this situation. 

 

EDIT: Hey, reckon if I took the mixture of pumpkin pulp, sugar, cinnamon, cloves, ginger, nutmeg, eggs, tiny bit of salt, and condensed milk, and replaced the pumpkin pulp with blended banana it would work the same way, and get a nice banana pie?

Edited January 30, 2019 by BornWithTeeth

[RX-3DR]

Setting aside the realistic question of whether or not you will ever be able to create an AI that can never be exploited by players, the main difference is consistency in objectives. A tough boss fight in any game has a really simple objective, to make the player lose within the rules of the game. This isn't shared with players. Some people are out to win a fair fight but some are out to win through exploiting whatever it takes, while there are those who aren't even there for the fight but are there just to taunt others.

The last thing you would want in Conclave is for people to bring in their meta-obsessed Saryn to sap all your health through walls, Stalker mode is potentially opening an avenue for that in regular PvE unless they impose a ton of rules and restrictions without completely gimping Stalker.

[Gabbynaru]

...How about you stop assuming that me not liking PvP will somehow change just cause machine learning exists? It won't. I will still dislike PvP forever. It's a stupid concept that helps no one.

As for machine learning, don't get me started. AI research should be nuked from orbit. We can't keep humans in line, expecting AI to behave when we can't behave ourselves is just us signing our doom warrant.

[(PSN)robotwars7]

judging by this thread, it doesn't look like we're ever going to reach common ground on this whole Stalker Mode. personally, all I ask for is an opt-out, let people who want the mode enjoy it and make "Salty Stalker" compilations on YouTube, but leave me out of it. give players the choice so that if they keep getting their a$$ whooped by a Human-controlled Stalker, they can take a break, and those who want this can have it on.

that said, it doesn't matter how smart the other player is, they have to get close to attack as the Stalker, and guns like Tigris prime exist. we all know who wins between Stalker and Shotgun. meta weapons would make the Stalker Player's job a lot harder. and I reckon a lot of the PvP lovers would not be impressed if they kept getting cut down before getting a kill on a player; both sides will get to be equally salty, while those of us who opt out can continue to enjoy Warframe as we have always done.

and if there's no opt-out, then I guess I'll just have to bring a Shotgun to every mission, and all that would do besides making people send me hate mail is hurt my weapon variety.

[Kontrollo]

10 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

So, in the spirit of not being a jerk, I am genuinely sorry that you’ve been given a hard time by folks who dislike PvP, that sucks and those players are definitely being unfair. Also, I did in fact see that post before it vanished, and I disapprove, that’s a childish way of handling a disagreement. 

Thanks a lot, it's rare to see a statement like this and I truly appreciate it.

I'm mostly writing here (and in similar threads) because I think it's been detrimental to these modes and more broadly to the community as a whole. I loved to play Conclave back in the day, but even then I had many more hours in PvE, anyway.

 

10 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

That said, I would be very willing to just write off one person’s opinion as that single individual being toxic. Or two. Or three. However, I trust you can understand that when it gets to be more than that, it is not somehow unfair to point out the pattern and establish that the context of the discussion has become unhelpful. It is worth pointing out that the position of “I don’t like PvP, but so long as the mode is optional that’s fine by me,” is the compromise in this situation.  

It's also my stance that people should play what they like. I got tired of raids at some point, so I simply stopped playing them (not sure anymore if I even touched Jordas), and I didn't feel the need to go drum up my dislike anywhere.

While I think it's premature to outright demand opt-in/opt-out before anyone has even had a chance to play it -- I've seen Prime Time and thought it was hilarious -- I'm all for keeping the friction to a minimum. So I'm not against a feature like that at all. I'll just take it how it arrives and form my opinion then.

 

Honestly, I think all of this is overrated anyway. Stalker mode might be interesting for a few rounds, but it's not even a real game mode. I guess I hope they won't drastically increase Stalker encounters, but beyond that it's hard for me to say much about it so far.

[BornWithTeeth]

5 minutes ago, Kontrollo said:

Thanks a lot, it's rare to see a statement like this and I truly appreciate it.

I'm mostly writing here (and in similar threads) because I think it's been detrimental to these modes and more broadly to the community as a whole. I loved to play Conclave back in the day, but even then I had many more hours in PvE, anyway.

 

It's also my stance that people should play what they like. I got tired of raids at some point, so I simply stopped playing them (not sure anymore if I even touched Jordas), and I didn't feel the need to go drum up my dislike anywhere.

While I think it's premature to outright demand opt-in/opt-out before anyone has even had a chance to play it -- I've seen Prime Time and thought it was hilarious -- I'm all for keeping the friction to a minimum. So I'm not against a feature like that at all. I'll just take it how it arrives and form my opinion then.

 

Honestly, I think all of this is overrated anyway. Stalker mode might be interesting for a few rounds, but it's not even a real game mode. I guess I hope they won't drastically increase Stalker encounters, but beyond that it's hard for me to say much about it so far.

Yes, but much more importantly, how do you think swapping banana in for pumpkin would affect the texture of the baked filling? Firmer or squishier, you reckon?

[SneakyErvin]

6 hours ago, Yamazuki said:

Challenging AI would just be the same as difficult end-game content. "PvP" has nothing to do with "difficulty", as to good players pvp essentially has the same difficulty as a game's tutorial against most of the game's player base. People don't like pvp for Warframe or any other MMORPG simply because these games aren't designed for pvp, causing pvp to be a terrible experience. Don't forget the terrible human interaction that come with pvp that most want nothing to do with, that the bigger studios poured in a ton of resources developing semi-automated systems to moderate the player base, something I doubt can be done for Warframe in a reasonable time.

That is quite the exaggeration though. Some of the most popular MMOs indeed have/had a massive amount of PvP. WF is another thing, but then again it isnt an MMO either.

But if you honestly think people dont want PvP in MMOs maybe you should look up Ultima Online, GW2, DaoC, SWG, WoW, ArcheAge, Black Desert, WaR, ToR and the list goes on and on. PvP is immensly popular when done right in games where it is intended to be part of the core mechanics from pretty much the concept state and up. It is another thing when they do like DE and just slap it onto the game afterwards.

[Kontrollo]

15 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Yes, but much more importantly, how do you think swapping banana in for pumpkin would affect the texture of the baked filling? Firmer or squishier, you reckon?

Sorry, no opinion on that, either. Give me apples instead. 😄

[OvisCaedo]

I'm mostly staggered by the suggestion that somehow DE, of all companies, would be capable of implementing competent machine learning.

[Makunogo]

2 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

DE thought Lunaro would be a hit, and DE thought that the reason Slash Status procs are good is because they stack.

 

 

DE are generally lovely people but they can and do goof pretty badly from time to time.

 

EDIT: Also, “Don’t wanna get harassed? Just suicide in the mission, problem solved!” is...not a good response.

dont really care if u think its good or not. we have an abundance of lives  and if losing one can stop the potential troll that most likely wont even happen then why not im simply point it out.

in response to that first part. well would you rather DE does nothing instead? at least they are willing to try things out and nothing is wrong with that

Edited January 30, 2019 by Makunogo

[BornWithTeeth]

6 minutes ago, Makunogo said:

dont really care if u think its good or not. we have an abundance of lives  and if losing one can stop the potential troll that most likely wont even happen then why not im simply point it out. 🙄

On the one hand, cater to trolls and griefers at the expense of people who just want to play the game, and on the other, make a compromise that would literally prevent griefing altogether.

 

I truly do not see how this is so difficult, or why it is so utterly, profoundly, irrationally important to make this mode mandatory.

[Makunogo]

4 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

On the one hand, cater to trolls and griefers at the expense of people who just want to play the game, and on the other, make a compromise that would literally prevent griefing altogether.

 

I truly do not see how this is so difficult, or why it is so utterly, profoundly, irrationally important to make this mode mandatory.

has there been official word of this mode going live? my stance on this whole stalker thing is on the lines of " we haven't really seen it yet so were complaining on deaf ears" yes we have seen devs tinkering with it. but they are devs its probably not going to be the same for us.

are you open to the idea that this may in fact not be so terrible if/when it does show up? or are you dead set that this is just a completly terrible thing to implement.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Makunogo

[BornWithTeeth]

2 minutes ago, Makunogo said:

has there been official word of this mode going live? my stance on this whole stalker thing is on the lines of " we haven't really seen it yet so were complaining on deaf ears" yes we have seen devs tinkering with it. but they are devs its probably not going to be the same for us.

are you open to the idea that this may in fact not be so terrible if/when it does show up?

I have in fact said exactly that. Give me two seconds to grab the quote.

 

See? 

 

If anything, and watch carefully because this is important, I have more faith that this mode could be good than a lot of the people who are otherwise arguing for it do, because I clearly state that I reckon it can stand for itself even with an opt in/opt out system.

 

Do you get what I’m saying here? 

 

And my response in turn is this: I do not understand this strange, intense, almost emotional need which some people appear to have for the mode to be made mandatory. I find that kind of response bizarre.

 

A compromise isn’t going to kill your fun or ruin the mode. I promise. Or...if that compromise would ruin a player’s fun, then I would have to ask exactly what it is that that player enjoys about the idea, hmmmmm?

[Makunogo]

8 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

I have in fact said exactly that. Give me two seconds to grab the quote.

 

See? 

 

If anything, and watch carefully because this is important, I have more faith that this mode could be good than a lot of the people who are otherwise arguing for it do, because I clearly state that I reckon it can stand for itself even with an opt in/opt out system.

 

Do you get what I’m saying here? 

 

And my response in turn is this: I do not understand this strange, intense, almost emotional need which some people appear to have for the mode to be made mandatory. I find that kind of response bizarre.

 

A compromise isn’t going to kill your fun or ruin the mode. I promise. Or...if that compromise would ruin a player’s fun, then I would have to ask exactly what it is that that player enjoys about the idea, hmmmmm?

ah so i misinterpreted your responses LOL Rip. 

i believe this was addressed in the first thread of this nature. i posed the problem in which squads have an opt in but some members of the same squad have an opt out.

which one would have a higher priority?

will this make public squads split into two groups? 

 i am curious if there is the ability to opt out how DE will handle it so that pubs do not get messy. 

with that in mind i feel like if an opt out was not made available it could be safe to assume the player used stalker would most likely not be able to disrupt a squad as much as people seem to be insinuating..

with this in mind i jokingly wrote.. well if u dont wanna deal with him, just off yourself. as we all know once the stalker target dies, stalker goes bye bye. IF someone does decide to (assuming they are able to ) sabotage the mission AND you cannot kill that stalker (not likely) 

an option to get rid of that player would be killing yourself once.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Makunogo

[BornWithTeeth]

3 minutes ago, Makunogo said:

ah so i misinterpreted your responses LOL Rip. 

i believe this was addressed in the first thread of this nature. i posed the problem in which squads have an opt in but some members of the same squad have an opt out.

which one would have a higher priority?

will this make public squads split into two groups? 

 i am curious if there is the ability to opt out how DE will handle it so that pubs do not get messy.

A quick and dirty response would be to suggest the following compromise:

 

Players opted IN function as normal. 

 

Players opted OUT in a public squad cannot be the target of Stalker, cannot damage a player Stalker, and cannot be damaged. They’ve opted out of the fight, so even if player Stalker comes in, they have no role to play....with the flipside being that they remain unable to benefit from it either, so if player Stalker comes in and gets creamed, drops something rare from the mode’s drop table, players who are opted OUT cannot pick that up.

 

Thoughts?

[Makunogo]

5 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

A quick and dirty response would be to suggest the following compromise:

 

Players opted IN function as normal. 

 

Players opted OUT in a public squad cannot be the target of Stalker, cannot damage a player Stalker, and cannot be damaged. They’ve opted out of the fight, so even if player Stalker comes in, they have no role to play....with the flipside being that they remain unable to benefit from it either, so if player Stalker comes in and gets creamed, drops something rare from the mode’s drop table, players who are opted OUT cannot pick that up.

 

Thoughts?

that is a pretty feasible option, you should pitch that to them like Yesterday LOL

i am sure people who dont get rare drops will cry foul AF on the forums (actually they would not since they dont even see them, this wont be an issue ) , but this is a solid idea. i would totally support this.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Makunogo

[FlusteredFerret]

10 hours ago, Arzete said:

What if DE has some secret machine learning team working on how to make the Stalker more challenging by improving its algorithm (making it actually be able to think, use tactics).

 

Y'know how we have difficulty modes right? Think of it like this:

Easy

Medium

Hard

Human-like AI

 

If you hate apple pie simply because it's called an apple pie but love banana pies, I'm pretty sure you would eat an apple pie that looks like, and is called a banana pie.

Just some food for thought.

 

Some context for those that are confused:

  Reveal hidden contents

There is this new game mode "Stalker Mode" that DE has been working on that allows players to play as the Stalker against other players in missions. This has gotten a LOT of controversy because Warframe is primarily a PVE game and introducing "Stalker Mode" would be bringing more PVP elements into a PVE game.

Some players love the idea and think it would bring an actual level of challenge to the stalker. Others hate it because they don't like PVP.

The pie analogy stems from another thread talking about the "Stalker Mode", where the "Stalker Mode" is the PVP pie. 

^{It's my personal opinion and you can definitely feel free to disagree but I think that the line between PVP and PVE gets blurred more and more everyday. As machine learning algorithms improve, games will have AI that act and behave more intelligently, in other words, more human-like.}

^{I just find it incomprehensible to judge something by its label. Say that you like PVE and absolutely loathe PVP. Now what if in your favorite PVE game, the developers suddenly push an update to make the npc's all have human-like behavior? Would that mean you now hate PVE?}

 

 

Looks like somebody is refusing the PvE pie, despite how massive it is in comparison to the PvP pie...

 

You argument makes absolutely zero sense. The majority of people don't play PvP because they (get this) DON'T WANT TO PLAY PvP. Not because they don't like the way it has been implemented in the past.

And "Stalker Mode" would be the worst possible way to implement PvP because then you'd be interfering with and pissing off PvE players. Which DE should want to avoid at all costs, since they make up 99% of the player base.

I've said multiple times that PvP is fine...as long as it is kept completely separate from the PvE elements of the game.

Edited January 30, 2019 by FlusteredFerret

[NocheLuz]

1 hour ago, BornWithTeeth said:

A quick and dirty response would be to suggest the following compromise:

 

Players opted IN function as normal. 

 

Players opted OUT in a public squad cannot be the target of Stalker, cannot damage a player Stalker, and cannot be damaged. They’ve opted out of the fight, so even if player Stalker comes in, they have no role to play....with the flipside being that they remain unable to benefit from it either, so if player Stalker comes in and gets creamed, drops something rare from the mode’s drop table, players who are opted OUT cannot pick that up.

 

Thoughts?

Great idea. But I don't want any mod/BP that ONLY drop from Stalker (player) to be include in the drop table. Any Stalker (player) drop should be the same as Stalker (AI) drop table. Maybe a little high on rare mod/BP, but should not be difference mod/BP altogether.

[BornWithTeeth]

11 minutes ago, NocheLuz said:

Great idea. But I don't want any mod/BP that ONLY drop from Stalker (player) to be include in the drop table. Any Stalker (player) drop should be the same as Stalker (AI) drop table. Maybe a little high on rare mod/BP, but should not be difference mod/BP altogether.

I’m actually totally ok with exclusive badges/Sekhara coming from this mode. A Sekhara for a number of successful kills, and a Sekhara for a number of player Stalker attempts denied and driven off.

[vvhorus]

4 hours ago, (PS4)robotwars7 said:

judging by this thread, it doesn't look like we're ever going to reach common ground on this whole Stalker Mode. personally, all I ask for is an opt-out, let people who want the mode enjoy it and make "Salty Stalker" compilations on YouTube, but leave me out of it. give players the choice so that if they keep getting their a$$ whooped by a Human-controlled Stalker, they can take a break, and those who want this can have it on.

that said, it doesn't matter how smart the other player is, they have to get close to attack as the Stalker, and guns like Tigris prime exist. we all know who wins between Stalker and Shotgun. meta weapons would make the Stalker Player's job a lot harder. and I reckon a lot of the PvP lovers would not be impressed if they kept getting cut down before getting a kill on a player; both sides will get to be equally salty, while those of us who opt out can continue to enjoy Warframe as we have always done.

and if there's no opt-out, then I guess I'll just have to bring a Shotgun to every mission, and all that would do besides making people send me hate mail is hurt my weapon variety.

So the opt-out option is still a no-go? I've been out of the loop...

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

Ok, the rationale for the pro Stalker mode crowd has officially hit an all time low.

[----Legacy----]

2 hours ago, Makunogo said:

i am sure people who dont get rare drops will cry foul AF on the forums (actually they would not since they dont even see them, this wont be an issue ) , but this is a solid idea. i would totally support this.

That makes sense, someone who opts out of a systen should be unable to get rewards from it after all.

1 hour ago, NocheLuz said:

Great idea. But I don't want any mod/BP that ONLY drop from Stalker (player) to be include in the drop table. Any Stalker (player) drop should be the same as Stalker (AI) drop table. Maybe a little high on rare mod/BP, but should not be difference mod/BP altogether.

I'm on the other side of the fence, hopefully player stalker has its own drops and stalker syndicate gives access to unique rewards as a way to encourage opting in.

You can't have your pie and eat it too.

[NocheLuz]

2 minutes ago, ----Legacy---- said:

I'm on the other side of the fence, hopefully player stalker has its own drops and stalker syndicate gives access to unique rewards as a way to encourage opting in.

You can't have your pie and eat it too.

You can have badges/Sekhara or Syandana all you want. I just don't want any mod/BP to be exclusive for PvP content.