Add bots into firestorm

ShadoWawker
52 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
The current amount of time it takes to get into games is way too long, and when you play late at night you cant even get into a game with more than like 10 people connected=switch to a different game

Adding bots is of course not ideal but its better than the current situation which is waiting way too long for
1. Matchmaking
2. Players to connect (which can often be longer than the actual matchmaking time)
3. Pre-round countdown (additional 60 seconds of waiting)

If firestorm ends up going free to play then they should remove the bots because there will be a much larger population but as it stands now theres not enough players to keep the waiting times reasonable

Honestly there are a lot of times when i feel like playing firestorm but i cant stand the waiting time so i just play something else which is unfortunate because i enjoy this mode and want to play it more

Bots would solve this issue because it would allow matches to start with fewer real players connected. All those times when you have 60 people, it might take another 2-3 minutes to get the last 4. With bots the game can just start with 60 no problem and we dont have to wait any more

And based on the time of day/concurrent player count they can adjust the number of bots in each match to keep waiting times under x minutes for everyone. Now of course there has to be a minimum number of real players in each game but that can be adjusted again based on player count

Also the bots will be easy kills but cant drop any level 2 or 3/rare gear otherwise it would be too cheap and easy to get good stuff with little effort

Comments

  • ShadoWawker
    52 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ok this really needs to happen because yesterday i was playing and i got into a match that started with literally 16 people.

    While im glad that the games start without making us wait forever to keep finding people, it is unacceptable to have this low of a number in your match. The game was incredibly slow (obviously) since everyone was so spread out and the solution is bots

    Realm royale does it due to lower player population and it works just fine. That game i played should have had a bunch of bots in it which is much better than having just 16 real people

    Also, if the game has 40 players total (including bots and real people) the size of the first circle needs to be proportionally smaller to match the player/size ratio that exists in a 64 player match. You cant have much fewer players on the same sized circle that makes no sense and its too slow
  • StarscreamUK
    7522 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Only issue with bots in firestorm is the balance of their "intelligence" if people die to a bot they will complain like crazy
  • AntiCheat
    11 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Waiting time can sometimes be very bad and starting with very few players is bad as well but adding bots into the game, really? I understand that you are really frustrated but what will adding bots solve? Yes, the waiting time is shorter but at the cost of real players you are up against? No, thank you. The day I will start playing Firestorm against bots I will quit this game mode for sure.
  • ShadoWawker
    52 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Only issue with bots in firestorm is the balance of their "intelligence" if people die to a bot they will complain like crazy

    Well the bots would be intended as fillers that give us something to kill instead of just running around for 10 minutes looking for someone. Or they are intended to add the last few members of a 58 person lobby for example to make it up to 64. Therefore they have low intelligence, are very easy to kill, and pose little to no threat to the average level player

    If someone dies to a bot, they are either
    1) Horrible at the game and thus would have gotten destroyed by a real person
    2) Unlucky by getting third partied or perhaps killed on very low health

    The risk of dying to a bot during rare and unlucky circumstances is an exchange i would gladly make for more “players” on the map that give me something to kill and do so i do not have just 16 real people in my match while i run around doing nothing with the firestorm as literally my biggest threat of dying
  • ArcherMagnus
    5 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I would love a Fire Storm mode that is just bots actually.

    I moved from Xbox to PC recent and Combine Arms was a huge help switching over. I still play combine arms as a warm-up game before jumping into a live match. It's also great for testing out new weapon load-outs.  

    Now I wish Combine Arms was more like BC2 Onslaught Mode that was on Xbox and PS (you start a private or public game, no intro movie, no knock-off Thor yelling at you). I would love to see the same in Firestorm where you could play solo vs. Bots, or start a public game and three people could join you at any point (so no waiting). No story, calmer way to get in that BF5 experience without jumping into the meat grinder of a live match. It was a nice diversion, something you could play and talk on the phone to your parents or grandma. "Yeah yeah grandma, the weather is nice, yep.... uhhh... yep.....oh my.... yep.... {30 minutes later}, okay I love you". She is dead now. Actually, they all are, my grandparents, dead. Anyways!

    Hell, I would take that over the single-player game, and the terrible BF5 Test Range in future games. (How was the test range in BF4 so much better than the one in BF5?) Just multiplayer, simple test range, and a few offline/co-op modes.
  • jroggs
    1218 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ...Or go free-to-play, that would be a massively better solution to filling games.

    Other than enabling teamers, lower player counts don't really have a big effect on the game. Whether you start with 64 players or 24, the endgame usually ends up the same, you've just got a little less action in the first 2/3rds.

    Adding bots, on the other hand... why? Why do that? Just to have more bodies in the game, regardless of the impact they make? And seriously, think about the massive amount of effort it would take to create a meaningful and fair AI for this mode. It's borderline impossible and it would suck up ridiculous amounts of already painfully-limited dev time and resources. Have you seen the AI in the single player?



    Do you really want that in multiplayer?
  • ShadoWawker
    52 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs wrote: »
    ...Or go free-to-play, that would be a massively better solution to filling games.

    Other than enabling teamers, lower player counts don't really have a big effect on the game. Whether you start with 64 players or 24, the endgame usually ends up the same, you've just got a little less action in the first 2/3rds.

    Adding bots, on the other hand... why? Why do that? Just to have more bodies in the game, regardless of the impact they make? And seriously, think about the massive amount of effort it would take to create a meaningful and fair AI for this mode. It's borderline impossible and it would suck up ridiculous amounts of already painfully-limited dev time and resources. Have you seen the AI in the single player?



    Do you really want that in multiplayer?

    My idea assumes that firestorm will not go free to play, which I think it should. “A little less action in the first 2/3 of the game.” First of all 2/3 is most of the game and secondly its basically no action. Thats called boring and not worth playing.

    Of course player count has an effect on the game because if all you care about is endgame then put 2 people in each match of firestorm that sounds fun to you right? You need a certain number of players so people have something to do for most of the game. Bots are easy to add and will be simple kills so you’re not just running and looting all game before the end.
  • l4chy
    64 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    They most certainly do not have the talent at Dice to create AI bots, it can't happen. Modern Warfare on the other hand will have bots for all game modes and have had since BO2 and they are reasonably good to play/practice against. 
  • jroggs
    1218 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ShadoWawker said:
    Of course player count has an effect on the game because if all you care about is endgame then put 2 people in each match of firestorm that sounds fun to you right? You need a certain number of players so people have something to do for most of the game. Bots are easy to add and will be simple kills so you’re not just running and looting all game before the end.
    l4chy said:
    They most certainly do not have the talent at Dice to create AI bots, it can't happen. Modern Warfare on the other hand will have bots for all game modes and have had since BO2 and they are reasonably good to play/practice against. 
    Here's the thing. You could do bots very easily in a small map with a simple objective and tactics. 2v2 Gunfight from the new CoD Mod Wod is a good example. You just need bots that can navigate a maze simpler than Pac-Man and shoot at whatever they see. But that's still a practice mode, not the real experience.

    It's not possible at all in Firestorm. The map is too big and the tactical requirements are too complex. The programming to get bots to seek out gear and then fights while managing resources and moving with the storm and knowing how to use the terrain... asking way, way too much.

    And even if they could, what capabilities do you give these bots? You obviously can't give them pure aimbotting, because then bots will win every match. So how accurate do you make them? Does winning and losing come down to pure RNG? If they're "simple kills," what's the point? Fighting bots becomes a a big negative because you're burning through your resources fighting them, and worse than that you're drawing attention from human players who want to kill you. How do you determine their ability to detect other players? A computer can process your character model in their field of view in ways the human eye can't. They can spot you in a bush 500 meters away and start headshotting you, or they can completely bug out and fail to see you standing right in front of them as in the video I posted.

    The fun of battle royale comes from playing against other people. If you just kill a bunch of bots, who cares? If you want to show off an epic game, you have to document every single kill, because anyone who cares about that kind of thing would immediately tell you the bot kills don't count for anything.

    TL;DR - Bots would be far from easy to add and they would only detract from the experience.
  • jroggs
    1218 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    FWIW, I do agree that the boring midgame is a problem. My solution there would be to alter the match tempo. I think the endgame is mostly fine in terms of the timing of circle closing, but I would slow down the start of the first circle closing, and then drastically speed up the next second, third, and fourth circle closings. This would give players time to do their initial looting and starting-area fights, and then constantly pressure the players to push towards the middle of the map and into each other. I tend to spend a lot of my midgame hiding in bushes while I mess around on my phone or computer. That's not a sign of good game design.
Sign In or Register to comment.