Thread: Skirmish soldier behaviour

To start it seems silly that the only way of controlling your skirmish soldier is through a lengthy cool down that wastes a quick bar slot. I think it would be simple to give skirmish soldiers the same pet UI that lore masters and captains use, the only problem I would see as a lore master is that it could crowd up your UI with two pet bars but it still seems worthy to me.

You opinions?

I'd settle for aggressive/passive and assist-toggle,
that way it will no longer be only the Herb that
does what it's supposed to be doing...

But indeed, a little bit more control would be a very good thing.

Any change that lets me tell my soldier what to do a bit more often can only be a good thing. I'm tired of having to wait between battles because that cooldown is up, and as for doing solo defense skirmishes, I can't even TOUCH those without some better way of ordering my soldier into battle. (At least not without dropping the difficulty by a few levels and I hate doing that.)

This idea is awesome and it's a must-implement for LOTRO, because frankly... I can't control my soldier! I have a Herbalist and I was fighting a group of mobs in one of the instances, and all of a sudden my Herbalist decided to go on strike and leave the radius of the fight and go to another NPC and heal him instead. Come on, if my Herbalist did that when the NCP was on 10%, I'd understand, but at 90%? Really? REALLY?

Grr, I actually died from that, and what's worse is that the whole skirmish failed because my Herbalist also decided to run into the same group of mobs that attacked me and also got herself killed.

Come on Turbine... -.- really?

/rantoff

Originally Posted by dorpen

To start it seems silly that the only way of controlling your skirmish soldier is through a lengthy cool down that wastes a quick bar slot. I think it would be simple to give skirmish soldiers the same pet UI that lore masters and captains use, the only problem I would see as a lore master is that it could crowd up your UI with two pet bars but it still seems worthy to me.

You opinions?

Skirmish soldiers were set up *explicitly* NOT to be "pets". This is in part because people who want to run pet classes (LMs, Captains, and--by some measures--RKs) are already doing so. Some non-pet-users really, really DON'T want to run pets.

Any additions of controls to skirmish soldiers flies in the face of a major aspect of their design.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

Originally Posted by whheydt

Skirmish soldiers were set up *explicitly* NOT to be "pets". This is in part because people who want to run pet classes (LMs, Captains, and--by some measures--RKs) are already doing so. Some non-pet-users really, really DON'T want to run pets.

Any additions of controls to skirmish soldiers flies in the face of a major aspect of their design.

Yes. This suggestion keeps coming up, like The Thing That Would Not Die [your choice of Thing]. And for every poster who says, "I want to be able to control my Soldier, like a pet!" there is at least one other poster who says, "No no no! If I wanted a pet I'd play a Captain or a LM!"

I haven't counted how many on which side, but I betcha Turbine have done so (they have the software to do it with), and I betcha the numbers are just about even. In that case, the easiest thing for Turbine to do about it is what they've consistently done about it, which is nothing.

Personally, as a LM, I like things the way they are. If I'm in a skirmish I can tell my Onyx Lynx whom to attack, and let my Soldier be a fire-and-forget weapon.

Originally Posted by whheydt

Skirmish soldiers were set up *explicitly* NOT to be "pets". This is in part because people who want to run pet classes (LMs, Captains, and--by some measures--RKs) are already doing so. Some non-pet-users really, really DON'T want to run pets.

Any additions of controls to skirmish soldiers flies in the face of a major aspect of their design.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

In spite of that, I still think skirmish soldiers should actually be programmed to defend the player specifically, rather than being independent and creating a mess like I have described above.

While I agreed I don't want to have a pet-class I do believe skirmish soldiers need a bit of work. Atm the average lm bear/lynx/raven is a more efficient and valuable companion than a skirmish soldier. I think, according to the lore (correct me if I'm wrong), that a soldier of the free people would be more intelligent than an average cat/lynx.

A simple way of improving the soldier would be to have a follow distance: near, medium or far. A lead or follow (you'd want a protector in front of you I guess and a herbalist or archer behind), as well as an defence/offence option. This could be something you set before entering the skirmish to avoid it seeming like a pet-class (with the exception of the defence/offence which should be possible to change in the skirmish). Also it would be great with herbalists if it could be made to heal a bit wiser (like not healing someone at 90% if there's someone within reach at 20% morale).

This way you could have a valuable soldier ally with only 2 different modes in combat. It's limited enough to be simple to take care of and advanced enough that you could do a lot better in skirmishes. Defence should obviously work as a recall so your soldier returns to you (useful for when he's close to pulling something he shouldn't)

Apart from that. I think the soldier should always focus on the same mobs as you do unless specifically told otherwise. I noticed that mine (in the rare cases where he fights. Usually he stands back and watches. He's a warrior) seems to attack randomly anything he sees unless i command him otherwise (and usually he ignores the command anyway).

The counterargument I always make is that the more controllable soldiers are, the stronger they are. Your Protector will be able to tank more effectively. Your Archer will apply his DPS more strategically. Your Sage will stick its debuffs quicker and more thoroughly. The stronger they are, the more difficult skirmishes have to be designed to balance. Strong soldiers and tough enemies make it so that soldiers are more and more required, not just convenient, to complete a given skirmish.

The only additional commands I could see giving soldiers would be positional ones (stay ahead, stay behind) that could be set by right-clicking their portrait, and a Recall function identical to Captains/LMs, which recalls your soldier OOC with all their buffs still intact.

Originally Posted by Mephistophelis

In spite of that, I still think skirmish soldiers should actually be programmed to defend the player specifically, rather than being independent and creating a mess like I have described above.

Soldiers will immediately aggro anything that attacks you, assuming they arent already attacking something else. You notice it more in Archers/Sages that follow behind you, and dont get attacked by archers before you.

Originally Posted by Dawnsinger

While I agreed I don't want to have a pet-class I do believe skirmish soldiers need a bit of work. Atm the average lm bear/lynx/raven is a more efficient and valuable companion than a skirmish soldier. I think, according to the lore (correct me if I'm wrong), that a soldier of the free people would be more intelligent than an average cat/lynx.

If I remember correctly, they are not really "soldiers" but Free People who are out to help defend the land from the forces of evil. That is why we can't really control much more than a long CD fight here skill. That, and the shortened CD can be bought from the TP store.

That, and like whheydt said, they were meant to not be "pets".

Though, you can count me on the side of wanting more control. As an LM, I wouln't mind juggleing 2 pet bars. But at the minimum, I would at least like a "stay here" button. What I hate is the protector and others who run 50 feet in front of me and act as an agro magnet. Them and the quest based soldiers like Andreg, Gwin & Orchawle.

Originally Posted by Mephistophelis

In spite of that, I still think skirmish soldiers should actually be programmed to defend the player specifically, rather than being independent and creating a mess like I have described above.

I agree with this, but this is an issue of the default behavior, not one of control. There are also issues with pathing, and they got considerably worse when RoI launched last year. Again, pathing issues are not a matter of additional controls, but concern the scripting and controls built into soldiers.

Additional controls speak to a desire to override the internal scripts that run soldiers and would turn them into controllable adjuncts to our characters...aka "pets".

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

Originally Posted by Dawnsinger

While I agreed I don't want to have a pet-class I do believe skirmish soldiers need a bit of work. Atm the average lm bear/lynx/raven is a more efficient and valuable companion than a skirmish soldier. I think, according to the lore (correct me if I'm wrong), that a soldier of the free people would be more intelligent than an average cat/lynx.

That's the internal (game) logic behind the soldiers.

Apart from that. I think the soldier should always focus on the same mobs as you do unless specifically told otherwise. I noticed that mine (in the rare cases where he fights. Usually he stands back and watches. He's a warrior) seems to attack randomly anything he sees unless i command him otherwise (and usually he ignores the command anyway).

Soldiers have their own agro radius and modes already. You just have to learn to manipulate the situation to make use of what they're programmed to do. Protectors are a good example. A Hunter can significantly out-range a Protector's agro radius, and that fact can be used to pull mobs in to where the Protector will agro on the mob and try to grab the mobs agro, keeping mobs off the Hunter...and that's the Protector's job.

There are also a couple of lieutenants that soldiers will not automatically attack because that have damage reflectors or other nasty special attacks. The soldiers will wait until commanded to attack those sorts of lieutenants, *if* you want the soldier to attack them at all. For a Herbalist, the "attack mode" is healing, and when encountering such lieutenants, the Herbalist stops healing you if that's your target. Failure ot realize these facts can cause no end of confusion and for people to think the soldier AI is actually broken, when it really isn't (soldiers not bright, but they are reasonably predictable).

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

I fall into the no pet side of the argument. I like the fact that the soldiers do stupid things sometimes. Hey most of the players I run with do the same thing so why not the soldiers?

How many times has the hunter pulled aggro from the tank? How many times has someone charged just a little too far and pulled that extra 3 or 4 mobs? Who has not tab targeted and got the wrong mob? When has the healer been healing a cappy and the tank dies? It happens all the time so why not let the soldiers make mistakes?

I agree pathing needs work.

But other than pathing most of the time that "soldiers do not work correctly" is really WAI. The not correctly is from the players point of view. No Soldier will attack a mob that reflects damage or gets a buff by being damaged. They wait until you instruct then to attack that mob.

I have never had to reduce the level of a skirmish to complete because of my soldier. If you have to direct your soldier all the time it means you are not using him / her correctly.

My favorite advise is if you are doing something the same way every time, you can not expect a different result. Change what you are doing and try to use the strengths of your soldiers. Keep making changes until you get the result you are looking for.

I have a long history of trouble with my skirmish soldier. What I really want is a STAY HERE! command for him. I have a warrior who countless times have run back when I attacked something or stayed back and not attacked even when commanded (one of the times was with a minstrel who also had a warrior. Her warrior attacked, mine didn't. Same soldiers, same tactics but not the same result)

I think simply 3 spam-able commands (attack/stop_attack/come_here) would be enough to improve skirmishes a lot. I say spam-able because telling a skirmish soldier once in a while to attack won't solve much. Especially not if the soldier, like mine, ignores the order half the time, causing the skill to go on cd with no effect at all.

I think it's a problem in raidsize skirmishes that several players often need to unsummon their skirmish soldiers for parts of the skirmish because they don't have sufficient control to keep the skirmish soldier from hurting the group (protectors in particular are troublesome for raids and usually are unsummoned. If you could control them and keep them from drawing aggro off the tank, you could keep them out in the skirmish)

Oh, I'm not advocating that they get the same degree of controls as pets, but I very much like the "preset choices" option that someone presented. Then they can still be a "set it and forget it" type, but a little bit more useful one.

Originally Posted by Myrric

Oh, I'm not advocating that they get the same degree of controls as pets, but I very much like the "preset choices" option that someone presented. Then they can still be a "set it and forget it" type, but a little bit more useful one.

I do not believe game software is capable of doing what you are asking. All NPCs in this game (including Pets, Soldiers, Escorts, Helpers and our opponents) only have a single behavior pattern hard coded into them by the game designers. All we have in the way of controls is the ability to manually trigger some skills. Or give very simple orders like "Attack My Target", "Stop Attacking and Return to My Side".

The only NPCs more complicated behavior are some of the Bosses which can switch to a different script when the trigger condition is met. Unfortuantely, this mechanism of advancing the battle is highly prone to sporadic failures. When a failure occurs, all you can do is start over because the Boss has gone brain dead and locked up. Draigoch is famous for this situation.

I suppose Turbine could program in a "set it and forget it". You going to be faced with. I am not doing that or anything else Tantalus. After you finish the fight, you will be faced with dismiss and summon. Hope you soldier does not lock up again.

Plus all the complaints about how poorly the Turbine programmed AI for the soldier does the requested behavior. We get a lot of that now. Which requires each of us to study how our Protector (or whatever type you have) operates. We have to change our behavior with our character so as not to get unacceptable actions out of our soldier.

The AI we have in Lotro is very primitive when you compare it to something like the first Mass Effect which were both released in 2007. You go to something like Mass Effect 2 - 2010 time frame? - It like comparing Apple II to a modern PC.