Railjack is still an unfinished buggy mess by the way (though 100x less buggy than on release!)

[Traumtulpe]

9 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

It's like the concept of Warframe being a buggy mess with the functions of the mechanics failing is an anomaly to all of y'all.

It's nothing unusual. People on the internet will comment on random topics they know nothing about just to bother people or be contrarian. For all we know these people might not even play Warframe - all the screenshots and videos presented are of things not working and being bugged, all the contrarians have to offer is: "No you, this bug you see with your very eye doesn't exist. And if it did exist it wouldn't be that bad. And if it was that bad DE would be working to fix it. And if they aren't doing that then it must be intended. And if it isn't then it's just karma and you deserve it."

[SneakyErvin]

7 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

 

It's like the concept of Warframe being a buggy mess with the functions of the mechanics failing is an anomaly to all of y'all.

I'd prefer if they didn't and just functioned all the time, but I guess wanting the mechanics of a game to actually function properly is too much to ask for.

Not really a big issue when it is a mode designed for a group of 4 to begin with and the A.I is simply there to make it smoother for solo. For everything else the crew blows regular players out of the water. It is also not an issue that really occurs if you have a crewman assigned to piloting from the start of the mission.

[(PSN)rexis12]

3 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Not really a big issue when it is a mode designed for a group of 4 to begin with and the A.I is simply there to make it smoother for solo. For everything else the crew blows regular players out of the water. It is also not an issue that really occurs if you have a crewman assigned to piloting from the start of the mission.

The fact that you can so casually dismiss what is essentially a mission stopping bug is inane. I just showed you the exact thing that I talked about how bad the AI can be, and you just brush it aside.

Forget it, I could probably show you a video of me waiting for 15 minutes for the AI to fail to do anything and you'd dismiss that as well.

 

Sorry to say, I'd prefer it if games actually #*!%ing function with their mechanics.

[Corvid]

10 hours ago, RichardKam said:

It brings back the fond memory of Castlevania Dawn of Sorrow. You need to draw (literally on the touch screen) a magical seal pattern to defeat the bosses.

That's how the game works.

 

6 hours ago, Stafelund said:

Man, memories. That one was just plain awful though, I'm glad that they ditched that in the next two Metroidvania titles. And years later someone released a romhack/patch that autocompletes it. 

I still remember the original 3DS release of Azure Striker Gunvolt 2 (a Mega Man-esque 2D action-platformer), where the final boss had an attack that you needed to counter by singing.

As in lyrics popped up on the screen, and you the player needed to physically sing into the console's microphone to not die.

Edited September 22, 2023 by Corvid

[SneakyErvin]

28 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

The fact that you can so casually dismiss what is essentially a mission stopping bug is inane. I just showed you the exact thing that I talked about how bad the AI can be, and you just brush it aside.

Forget it, I could probably show you a video of me waiting for 15 minutes for the AI to fail to do anything and you'd dismiss that as well.

 

Sorry to say, I'd prefer it if games actually #*!%ing function with their mechanics.

That is not a mission stopping bug. I hope you are aware you can blow it up with your archgun, or incase you have OCD and must follow the objective text to the letter you can omni back to the RJ and destroy it yourself.

Why would you wait for something that literally takes you seconds to perform yourself? Heck even when I played in groups during early RJ I was in and out from objectives faster than the RJ people could blow up most objectives.

Edited September 22, 2023 by SneakyErvin

[(PSN)rexis12]

31 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

That is not a mission stopping bug. I hope you are aware you can blow it up with your archgun, or incase you have OCD and must follow the objective text to the letter you can omni back to the RJ and destroy it yourself.

Why would you wait for something that literally takes you seconds to perform yourself? Heck even when I played in groups during early RJ I was in and out from objectives faster than the RJ people could blow up most objectives.

The mechanic literally fails to function.

This would be like going

"Hey guys, guns are bugged and can't be used."

And then going

"Well just use melees, why are you so fixated on guns?"

 

I literally showed you the mechanic failing to function and stopping a mission because hey the part of that mission where that mechanic was meant to move forward without my input, you know the very reasons I got and used that mechanic in the first place literally bugged the #*!%ed out.

Holy S#&$ there HAS to be a limit of the things you'd just mindlessly defend. You guys are DEFENDING BUGS that impede the player.

[SneakyErvin]

1 hour ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

The mechanic literally fails to function.

This would be like going

"Hey guys, guns are bugged and can't be used."

And then going

"Well just use melees, why are you so fixated on guns?"

 

I literally showed you the mechanic failing to function and stopping a mission because hey the part of that mission where that mechanic was meant to move forward without my input, you know the very reasons I got and used that mechanic in the first place literally bugged the #*!%ed out.

Holy S#&$ there HAS to be a limit of the things you'd just mindlessly defend. You guys are DEFENDING BUGS that impede the player.

It still doesnt stop the mission. You can still do it all manually. A mission stopper would be something that effectively blocks progress no matter what you try to do, like a chest inside the ground in Duviri, Wolf not spawning for Kahl etc.

[Nekomian]

5 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Why would you wait for something that literally takes you seconds to perform yourself?

The point I've gathered is that while they clearly can, the AI should be able to handle state changes more effectively and not bug out, as it's a game mechanic; otherwise, it should be tweaked or removed entirely, if it's going to be so broken it causes issues or misinterpretation for players (referring specifically to pilot here, based on the videos provided).

5 hours ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

I literally showed you the mechanic failing to function and stopping a mission because hey the part of that mission where that mechanic was meant to move forward without my input, you know the very reasons I got and used that mechanic in the first place literally bugged the #*!%ed out.

From what I saw of the Reddit video, the pilot was not navigating to the POI effectively and the gunners were not attempting to shoot the radiator. This is indeed the AI mechanics failing to do a "function" (ideally pilot should navigate to radiator and gunners should shoot the radiator); however, I will say I don't think the AI is intended to play the whole mission for you, and while it is "mission stopping" in so much that it forces the player to take manual action, this seems a bit manageable in this context given it's to progress the mission.

And before "are you trying to justify a bug", no this is clearly janky and leaves a bad impression on players (seeing the ship flail around back and forth damaging itself or something dumb), and needs to be changed in some manner - to me, I think the intent was that the AI would assist but not always progress, otherwise they'd automate the entire mission. It should still require player input, and be transparent about that (it's not really currently). In this case, it's annoying to go in and out of the POI for the objectives but only eats up like, a minute of extra time to complete it, and forces some manual player action to progress.

Maybe if it let you manually assign a target to the AI (requires player input), or said the AI roles would not target POI or something more transparent it would feel less annoying, but I feel like it's currently designed at a very rudimentary level and it's a coin toss whether or not it helps to complete certain POI requirements, while not really indicating which ones it can or cannot help with. I think it "half working" from what I've read on it seems to be the cause of most frustrations, and most of them stem from pilot too so that would be a good place they could start to make adjustments (if they ever go back to another railjack tweak or patch).

[(PSN)rexis12]

13 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

I think the intent was that the AI would assist but not always progress, otherwise they'd automate the entire mission. It should still require player input

What?

A Defender doesn't suddenly just stop shooting and stand still and die.

An Engineer doesn't just STOP repairing the Railjack.

A Gunner doesn't just suddenly stop shooting.

Why should a Pilot suddenly be allowed to stop functioning just for some stupid notion of "It'll automate the level"

It's delegating the task to where the task would be if it was ACTUALLY a Co Op Railjack.

What should Co Op Railjack also suddenly make it so that Players that stay on the Railjack to hit the radiator be unable to move or fire at the POI, just so that the On the Ground Player has to leave and manually destroy it? You know so that the On The Ground Player doesn't get an automated gameplay session.

What kind of excuse to a bug and failure of a game to function is this.

Hell if they didn't want players to Automate it, don't make it an option. Make it a point to tell them that they can't hit Weakspots, don't half ass it by 'Breaking' to 'Encourage' player input.

Either make it function properly, or remove it if the function you made it for is something you don't want players to do.

[Nekomian]

49 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

A Defender doesn't suddenly just stop shooting and stand still and die.

An Engineer doesn't just STOP repairing the Railjack.

A Gunner doesn't just suddenly stop shooting.

Why should a Pilot suddenly be allowed to stop functioning just for some stupid notion of "It'll automate the level"

None of these things listed affect POI progression other than small ship counts from a gunner (unless you count not failing a mission as "progression") during a skirmish, which often requires more than just that to complete; I also did not say the pilot is intended to stop functioning (quite literally said "this is clearly janky and leaves a bad impression on players"), but rather it would be in line with preventing automating the entire process flow if the pilot stood nearby the POI but not directly on top of the objective.

58 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

It's delegating the task to where the task would be if it was ACTUALLY a Co Op Railjack.

What should Co Op Railjack also suddenly make it so that Players that stay on the Railjack to hit the radiator be unable to move or fire at the POI, just so that the On the Ground Player has to leave and manually destroy it? You know so that the On The Ground Player doesn't get an automated gameplay session.

Delegating to AI is a lot different than delegating via other players and should be handled as such; there has to be some incentive to actually wanting to play with others in an online game vs having the AI do all tasks more efficiently and effectively than humans could perform, otherwise you have people go "what's the point, just solo and let the game play itself". It's not co-op railjack and I wouldn't expect it to play exactly the same, it's going to require a bit more from the individual player and the AI are meant to assist, not complete major POI requirements to a significant and precise degree.

51 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

Hell if they didn't want players to Automate it, don't make it an option. Make it a point to tell them that they can't hit Weakspots, don't half ass it by 'Breaking' to 'Encourage' player input.

Either make it function properly, or remove it if the function you made it for is something you don't want players to do.

1 hour ago, Naroxas44 said:

otherwise, it should be tweaked or removed entirely, if it's going to be so broken it causes issues or misinterpretation for players (referring specifically to pilot here, based on the videos provided).

^ I am agreeing the current implementation is confusing / misleading and looks / feels bad, but I think we disagree regarding what functions you think it should perform and how well they should be.

[(PSN)rexis12]

11 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

but rather it would be in line with preventing automating the entire process flow if the pilot stood nearby the POI but not directly on top of the objective

If you think that Pilots failing to function is 'In Line' to prevent POI progression, then Defenders should stop firing and defending because when boarded, especially with certain boarders, it turns off certain ship functions and that's assuming that they don't cause a Decompression. And speaking of Engineers should then also just stop fixing the ship at a certain point, because that to would prevent the automation of keeping the ship alive which of course prevents POI progression when the game ends.

Gunner is as you said.

You said that it's janky, but then went on to say that it's in line and 'acceptable' for them to stop progression because it prevents automations when that's the literal purpose of the mechanic. That would be like if Citrine's four just randomly decoded not to CRIT because it thinks you automated the CRIT process, or if abilities that can allow finishers Not working because they don't want you to automate the Finishers:

15 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

I think we disagree regarding what functions you think it should perform and how well they should be.

There's no reasons to disagree that a function of the AI that is meant to 'Replace' the players should functions as it should to replace the player.

If the game or if the 'In Line' choice to prevent automation comes with them just breaking, then the function should not exist in the first place.

Either have it work, and just let it automate because THAT'S THE EXACT PURPOSE IT WAS DESIGN FOR, or not. And obviously the ship and Pilot is meant to automate and as long as that's the functions, trying to say that it breaking allows or encourage 'Player Engagement' (A self defeating prophecy because when this happens I stop playing Railjack all together because the last thing I want is for the choices that I made to fail to actually engaged when I make those choices) being 'Acceptable'.

It's a bug, no "Helps to keep automation in check" no "Keeps Player Engage".

Either it functions or it doesn't, and many times it doesn't.

20 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

there has to be some incentive to actually wanting to play with others in an online game vs having the AI do all tasks more efficiently and effectively than humans could perform

Yeah there is, besides the POI.

It's the fact that players can do more than just radiator explosion.

You know what a team can do that a solo play can't. Have two Crewships explode at the same time while you blow up one. Or have Two On The Ground objectives be completed at the same time with you just needed to choose between which asteroid to shoot.

The fact that a Radiator being shot at by the guy in the ship while you do all the On the Ground Missions is literal BARE MINIMUM of what Railjack Co Op is, and that you thinking that a Pilot being able to do just that might be too much, meanwhile in a 'Proper' Co Op a player can just stay and leech in the Railjack and do nothing while all objectives is completed is okay is dumb.

25 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

what's the point, just solo and let the game play itself

This is also dumb, because getting to the game playing itself requires you to build up to get the crew size and proper setting.

What do you think Players are gonna feel when the AI just shuts off after they spent effort to get the crew mate.

"Oh wow golly gee I sure am now more engage in the Railjack"?

When it's more likely

"This is bs, whats the point of this mechanic if the game is just gonna tell me to do it anyway if I didn't acquire it. Might as well not have it."

28 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

not complete major POI requirements to a significant and precise degree

And finally.

The fact that the POI isn't the pilot going to the astroid and hacking all the consoles and killing the Grineer and hunting down the Hackers.

But it's literally just to shoot one single weak spot is a 'Significant and Precise Degree' is absurd.

The game basically forces each radiator to be a Friendship Door, despite the fact that it's not even necessary. It's literally just shoot one object with health that doesn't matter, the player still has to run through the Asteroids, has to hack the consoles, has to destroy things with higher object health, has to kill the commanders.

All of that is player engagement, but moving the crosshair just slightly to shoot at a random object is apparently so important that it's vital for that to occasionally break so that 'Players are Engaged'.

[(PSN)GEN-Son_17]

12 hours ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

It sure as hell not designed that way considering the multiple targets and objective that's Railjack is built around.

It's been band aided to be solo-able but there's still a gaping problem of it being DESIGNED to be Co Op.

"I don't have a problem with it, so it's not a problem."

You'd probably be the type of person that thinks Host Migrations aren't a problem because you don't run into them.

You know, it could be that they're the type of person that just understands how host migration works and knows it's just a drawback to a player hosted system. There are strengths and weaknesses to everything and understanding those parameters allows for a more manageable experience.

As for Railjack, even the old version was specifically designed to be hard, at first....like any higher tier mode, until you gathered your strength. I used to love solo running old RJ and especially love it now with the crew change. Your setup matters...again, as usual. Cloak your ship, freeze intruders, EMP blast fighters, all of this promotes high solo effectiveness. Plus, the overall excitement of seeing your RJ go from a squishy sky boat to a virtually invincible destroyer is as rewarding as it gets.

[Nekomian]

4 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

If you think that Pilots failing to function is 'In Line' to prevent POI progression, then Defenders should stop firing and defending because when boarded, especially with certain boarders, it turns off certain ship functions and that's assuming that they don't cause a Decompression. And speaking of Engineers should then also just stop fixing the ship at a certain point, because that to would prevent the automation of keeping the ship alive which of course prevents POI progression when the game ends.

I'm not sure why all these false equivalences are being made - If the "function" here is to go to POI and do the objective (i.e. shoot and destroy radiator) then it's failing that sure, but they're not supposed to be player drop-in replacements and perform these sorts of tasks. I think the expectation that it's a multiplayer experience replacement would not be accurate.

Defenders & Engineers prevent the ship from failing, but "ship doesn't die" is not a POI progression. They assist keeping the player on track of those objectives by handling some micromanagement and providing some QoL for solo players in helping them survive, but again they do not replace players (for better or worse, since you can have leeching teammates or very helpful teammates tbf).

11 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

There's no reasons to disagree that a function of the AI that is meant to 'Replace' the players should functions as it should to replace the player.

If the game or if the 'In Line' choice to prevent automation comes with them just breaking, then the function should not exist in the first place.

22 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

Either have it work, and just let it automate because THAT'S THE EXACT PURPOSE IT WAS DESIGN FOR

If all the AI stood around and did nothing when tasks were clearly available (damage on ship, enemies nearby, etc.) it would be very clear that's bugged, but from the video I saw it's just a pilot circling around / near the POI. Your intent is for it to replace the player entirely, performing actions that players would do (damaging radiator, in this case). Even on initial release the command intrinsics system was described as follows: "Your Crew will help keep your Railjack operational when flying in squads of less than 4 players". No where in the notes about it does it say they replace players entirely or intend to fulfill POI progression, but rather make it easier to manage everything that's going on - "For those that want to Solo venture out in space, hiring a Crew member can help you manage all the aspects of surviving and thriving out in the Proximas".

There was a whole feedback thread when this released (https://forums.warframe.com/topic/1253289-update-29100-command-intrinsic-feedback-megathread-read-first-post/) and the most common suggestions were "let them use forward artillery" & "let them destroy grineer POI like radiators", but my whole point is these were likely never designed to handle tasks like these that players are supposed to engage with for a reason.

42 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

The game basically forces each radiator to be a Friendship Door, despite the fact that it's not even necessary. It's literally just shoot one object with health that doesn't matter, the player still has to run through the Asteroids, has to hack the consoles, has to destroy things with higher object health, has to kill the commanders.

All of that is player engagement, but moving the crosshair just slightly to shoot at a random object is apparently so important that it's vital for that to occasionally break so that 'Players are Engaged'.

I'm not disagreeing that it's silly (so are the friendship doors IMO too but they also serve a purpose), but it was designed that way for a reason; I suggested letting the player manually assign a target to the AI it would focus on (preferably from the tactics menu while focused on a crew member) so it doesn't feel too automated, which is the reason I presume they didn't make it do quite too much for the player to complete objectives. You can disagree, think it should fly directly to a radiator and one shot it, or do any amount of useful help that players would do in multiplayer sessions (use FA and destroy crew ships, send in crew members to complete tasks with you, etc.) and that's fine, but I'd keep the expectations of the current design in mind when saying "X is a mission stopping bug" when it wasn't designed to perform that function to begin with and doesn't stop the mission from proceeding, just requiring player input (just as friendship doors do).

[(PSN)robotwars7]

On 2023-09-21 at 10:27 AM, Traumtulpe said:

Also why do we still have 2 charges of artillery when there's 8 crewships to blow up per mission? Just to be annoying? Because if that was DE's goal they are hitting it splendidly.

Artillery Cheap Shot, and that one intrinsic that increases artillery capacity +1 each time you make Dome Charges: very rare I have to visit the forge, and when I do, it's only once.

 

[(PSN)rexis12]

3 hours ago, Naroxas44 said:

false equivalences

... yeah no, I do not want to waste any more time.

First we had someone just blatantly disregard a mechanic bugging out where it stops the mission from progressing, and now you are saying that the automation of the other roles done count as automation just because it doesn't move a 'POI'.

I'm seriously done with y'all. Enjoy your S#&$ty game mode and it's 5 players.

[Nekomian]

2 hours ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:

now you are saying that the automation of the other roles done count as automation just because it doesn't move a 'POI'.

Not once did I say the word "automation", but if you believe crew AI should totally replace players and the multiplayer experience and perform POI tasks then that's fine, but nothing about its description on release & to date indicates that's what it was designed to do.

[Traumtulpe]

6 hours ago, Naroxas44 said:

If the "function" here is to go to POI and do the objective (i.e. shoot and destroy radiator) then it's failing that sure, but they're not supposed to be player drop-in replacements and perform these sorts of tasks.

That's exactly what it's supposed to be - if you'd played Railjack at launch you'd know that the AI crew could do basically nothing except repair and shoot turrets. DE specifically upgraded them to assist with mission objectives that would be bothersome to a single player; Except as you can see it's bugged.

52 minutes ago, Naroxas44 said:

if you believe crew AI should totally replace players and the multiplayer experience and perform POI tasks then that's fine, but nothing about its description on release & to date indicates that's what it was designed to do.

You may want to check the patch that changed AI behaviour, but regardless, proposing that the AI shooting 100m off target into a rock, forever, is "intended so the mission doesn't get automated" is absolutely ludicrous.

That's like saying "The AI in Defection running into walls and getting stuck, causing mission failure, is an intended feature to increase playtime".

[Traumtulpe]

One could make a parody out of this:

Player A: "Man, Railjack is still bugged after how many years? Nothing ever gets finished in this game..."

Player B: "That's not a bug, the game is supposed to make your computer burn your house down. Realistically your house needed to be renovated anyway, really you should thank DE."

Player C: "Couldn't happen to me, I'm an elite navy seal with over 9k confirmed kills. I never have bugs, they're too afraid of me. Did I mention that I'm rich and married to a model? All my friends (of which I have too many to count) call me Mister Perfect."

On second thought, you can't really parody something that's already ludicrous. Nevermind.

[Nekomian]

3 hours ago, Traumtulpe said:

You may want to check the patch that changed AI behaviour, but regardless, proposing that the AI shooting 100m off target into a rock, forever, is "intended so the mission doesn't get automated" is absolutely ludicrous.

The majority of the changes and fixes I'm seeing are minor or script related, and usually about pilot ("Fixed a case where Crew Pilots would just stop if all targets were too far away", "Fixed Crew Members getting stuck in turrets after attempting to give them another order while they were still getting into the gun", "Crew piloting Railjack will now fly to attack the weak-point marker at the end of Railjack Volatile missions", which is a bit misleading because these are destroyed with forward artillery that the player uses and aren't directly attacked by the pilot).

I'm also not saying it should willingly shoot and miss (I stated many times it looks very janky to have this occur and would not be intended behavior, but that it should just sit near the POI if it wants player input), but upon looking on it further I don't even know what DE wants to do with command intrinsics intent anymore. On release (U29.10) it said they were to help with survivability for solo play, and that's what I used them for, but patch notes from U31.6.4 stating "Fixes towards Railjack crew members assigned to Pilot not trying to destroy mission targets while you’re away" and U31.0.11 saying "Fixed Railjack Crew members targeting the Grineer Missile Platform Turrets when Piloting instead of the Radiator mission objectives" conflict with this.

4 hours ago, Traumtulpe said:

That's like saying "The AI in Defection running into walls and getting stuck, causing mission failure, is an intended feature to increase playtime".

It's really odd that people keep using these hyperbolic examples that have no correlation; if a defector gets stuck on collision (annoyingly does happen) that does affect the mission since they need to escape for you to complete it, and the player generally has little to no way to resolve this or "bypass" this. The intent here is for the defector to escape. The intent for railjack crew AI is extremely vague - you don't fail the mission and just have extra steps if it doesn't shoot something, but also what it should and shouldn't be engaging in isn't clear. It already does not handle large parts of POI requirements (like the mission segments inside of buildings or things that require forward artillery), so I'm confused why there's this pick and choose method where "oh it shoots some weak points but not others".

To me, this reads as if the AI is limited in scope and require players to complete parts of the missions themselves; if it's not designed that way and I'm wrong then that's fine, but none of the flavor text, patch notes, or info I've read has indicated what I'm supposed to expect from crew members other than "help me survive", and when I used them that's about all they did. I do not expect it to complete objectives for me or play missions without my input or assistance, and assume it's designed around that to prevent people from AFKing and having pilots / gunners just complete the entire thing, as in it is intentionally not too automated to be abused.

That does not mean I'm saying missing shots from 100m away doesn't look janky or broken - it does and should be resolved, but crew replacements are not human players, and treating them like a co-op experience is a bit misleading. I offered a solution of delegating / "targeting" areas for them to path and shoot at what the player specifies, like a crew captain of sorts would do (so the crew would sit near POI and wait for commands). To be clear I'm referring to a broader scope, as this post was about railjack being "unfinished" and it sorta devolved into one specific instance of a pilot not shooting a radiator (one example of it being unfinished or buggy) that I quickly went "yeah it's failing if it's trying to do this, but I don't think it honestly should be", which became misconstrued as "oh so you think obvious bug is intended?" when I do not. I can only say "yes this specific interaction looks janky / buggy" so many different ways while still thinking this game mode should require more player input / delegation to progress as a whole. I do not think it should be more automated / AFK mode / introduce more bugs from poor implementations of additional automation.

[SneakyErvin]

8 hours ago, Traumtulpe said:

if you'd played Railjack at launch you'd know that the AI crew could do basically nothing except repair and shoot turrets. DE specifically upgraded them to assist with mission objectives that would be bothersome to a single player;

We didnt even have any crew when RJ launched and nothing has been specifically targetting the duties that a crewmate can perform after they were introduced. Fixes have been made, nothing else really.

[Traumtulpe]

18 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

We didnt even have any crew when RJ launched and nothing has been specifically targetting the duties that a crewmate can perform after they were introduced. Fixes have been made, nothing else really.

If you mean immediately at launch, then yes, but we didn't even have all the Intrinsics if I recall correctly - with "at launch" I mean the initial period of Railjack over which the early alpha build was little by little patched up, with the entire player base as guinea pigs.

There were several patches that attempted to make Railjack crew help out with functions discussed in this thread - originally they didn't do any of these at all:

Hotfix 31.6.4 (2022-07-14) Fixes towards Railjack crew members assigned to Pilot not trying to destroy mission targets while you’re away.

• This may still occur rarely but it’s a different issue than the bug which caused them to never try at all.

Hotfix 31.0.11 (2022-01-25) Fixed Railjack Crew members targeting the Grineer Missile Platform Turrets when Piloting instead of the Radiator mission objectives, which when playing Solo understandably caused frustration.

Update 30.3 (2021-05-25) Crew Piloting the Railjack will now hold position when you are either in the Archwing Slingshot or using the Forward Artillery.

• To help players engage their targets, the Pilot will prefer to point the ship at targets that you are aiming at.
• This is also our first attempt at this function, so some future tweaking is to be expected!

Unfortunately none of these "fixes" actually did anything! Everything listed there is still broken.

[SneakyErvin]

4 hours ago, Traumtulpe said:

If you mean immediately at launch, then yes, but we didn't even have all the Intrinsics if I recall correctly - with "at launch" I mean the initial period of Railjack over which the early alpha build was little by little patched up, with the entire player base as guinea pigs.

There were several patches that attempted to make Railjack crew help out with functions discussed in this thread - originally they didn't do any of these at all:

Hotfix 31.6.4 (2022-07-14) Fixes towards Railjack crew members assigned to Pilot not trying to destroy mission targets while you’re away.

• This may still occur rarely but it’s a different issue than the bug which caused them to never try at all.

Hotfix 31.0.11 (2022-01-25) Fixed Railjack Crew members targeting the Grineer Missile Platform Turrets when Piloting instead of the Radiator mission objectives, which when playing Solo understandably caused frustration.

Update 30.3 (2021-05-25) Crew Piloting the Railjack will now hold position when you are either in the Archwing Slingshot or using the Forward Artillery.

• To help players engage their targets, the Pilot will prefer to point the ship at targets that you are aiming at.
• This is also our first attempt at this function, so some future tweaking is to be expected!

Unfortunately none of these "fixes" actually did anything! Everything listed there is still broken.

I thought you ment targetted buffs to them, not just the regular fixes.

And honestly, I dont think their behavior will ever be spotless considering that A.I throughout the game have a hard time hitting weakpoints in general, which I assume the environmental targets also count as in RJ. 

Also like I mentioned, I have yet to have my pilot bug out regarding these objectives when I pre-designate a crew member to the pilot position prior to entering the Railjack mode. However that means one less gunner or no engineer.

[Voltage]

On 2023-09-22 at 4:06 AM, RichardKam said:

How many times do I have to tell you people.

In Warframe, all contents must be solo-able.

I disagree. I watched the Railjack Demo at TennoCon live in person, and the magic was not the space ship (the movement was stiff and only decent), it was how Rebecca and Megan interacted with each other during the skirmish. It had an energy system much like Starfield where you allocated ship power to various options in the ship, and eventually one of the hosts was hacking corridors remotely for the other host to move through a point of interest. The same magic originally applied to Kuva Liches. They were supposed to be "kingpin" foes that clans as a whole would set out to take down with the finale taking place on a Railjack Proxima. 

Warframe is an online multiplayer game that severely lacks any reason to collaborate with others in a mission. The most we get after the removal of Trials and retirement of Operations is "Hey, I need your Relic for my drop chance to be less bad".

The accessibility of most content being solo-able is great, but there has to be a reason to squad with like-minded players and actually build communities, clans, and alliances around content past "this community is to farm a resource" like you see with Arbitrations and Endo. Eidolons originally offered this feel, but powercreep has enabled players to just solo that too. Alliances specifically are dead content for the last decade. That's just sad.

Edited September 24, 2023 by Voltage

[(PSN)Joylesstuna]

2 hours ago, Voltage said:

I disagree. I watched the Railjack Demo at TennoCon live in person, and the magic was not the space ship (the movement was stiff and only decent), it was how Rebecca and Megan interacted with each other during the skirmish. It had an energy system much like Starfield where you allocated ship power to various options in the ship, and eventually one of the hosts was hacking corridors remotely for the other host to move through a point of interest. The same magic originally applied to Kuva Liches. They were supposed to be "kingpin" foes that clans as a whole would set out to take down with the finale taking place on a Railjack Proxima. 

Warframe is an online multiplayer game that severely lacks any reason to collaborate with others in a mission. The most we get after the removal of Trials and retirement of Operations is "Hey, I need your Relic for my drop chance to be less bad".

The accessibility of most content being solo-able is great, but there has to be a reason to squad with like-minded players and actually build communities, clans, and alliances around content past "this community is to farm a resource" like you see with Arbitrations and Endo. Eidolons originally offered this feel, but powercreep has enabled players to just solo that too. Alliances specifically are dead content for the last decade. That's just sad.

We had had old rj and raids. Now there is 0 content that requires coop. While I'm personally ok with that it is pretty baffling for a MMO game. Totally agree about power creep.

Edited September 24, 2023 by (PSN)Joylesstuna
Your profile pic threw me off

[RichardKam]

2023/9/22 PM4点43分 , Traumtulpe 说:

You're just going to pretend these don't exist and Warframe is a perfect game without any bugs at all then? Well, if you insist on wearing a big red nose and a rainbow wig be my guest. Show me a video of your AI pilot pointing you at a crewship while you man the artillery - oh, you can't because your dog ate your Railjack? A real shame.

Not the tenno you are replying, but just for the record, AI pilot can point the ship at enemy crewship.

I just did the video to clarify some arguments. Not a really long one but if you are in a hurry - pilot aligning the ship at enemy crewship at 0:15 and 2:00; pilot destroying radiators at 4:40. Don't mind me missing one of the artillery shot because Yareli just blocked my view. Solo game play. Crewmate piloting is 3. All crewmates are not elite crewmates. All intrinsic at least 9 out of 10. 

引用

 

Again, my point is not about whether crewmate AI at this juncture is good enough or not, but a counter argument about the following two statements which are not always true, at least not systematically.

1. Crewmate pilot cannot aim the ship at enemy crewship when you are at the artillery (yes, they can).

2. Crewmate pilot cannot destroy radiators (yes, they can).

 

"Oh you are pretending there is no problem with crewma-"

I am not even pretending. I just show you there is no problem with crewmates regarding the above two functionalities. For any further query, please submit a support ticket to DE.