Autoexplore and Alchemists, Golem walks in Front

[Elkan]

Because whats the point of having an eight foot, solid granite Walking Shield if he isn't going to be between you and the Skeleton Mage around the next corner, just waiting to snipe you. The alchemists lack of healing, defensive, and mobility options is supposed to be counterbalance by the big nasty bodyguard, but if it isn't there when needed, it doesn't help much, leaving the alchemist particularly vulnerable to the walking around a corner and meeting a horrible fate.

I'm no coder, so I don't know how much finessing of the auto-explore code is needed, but I imagine you could do it effectively by having some kind of conditional where if a golem is present, auto exploring treats the golem as the player, and the player as the follower, without actually switching control from one actor to another, so the golem trots around looking about with the player obediently tagging behind, until the golem either spots a nasty, or gets hit, at which point the player's turn is up next.

That being the main request I have, the Alchemist is a bit light on class trees, And A potions tree with a player heal and splash debuffs might fit in well.

[SageAcrin]

I believe someone has been working on a few interesting tree ideas for them.

But forcing the golem to walk in front? That seems like it would be annoying to code(How does the golem know which way front is? Is he going to constantly force his way in front of you every time you round a corner?) and provide really silly amounts of safety to the Alchemist.

It feels like that kind of paranoid level of "You take hits for me" should be limited to manual orders, not something the game does automatically. If you make the golem automatically wrangled by the game at all times, more optimally than a player can manually do it, what is the Alchemist's gameplay? "Throw bombs every once in a while"?

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like handling the non-optimal golem AI is part of the charm of the class...

[Sradac]

I agree with SageAcrin, I rather like that the entire thought process of a golem is "Golem smash!"

[bricks]

I dunno, sounds pretty smart to me. I'd also like to see this for the necromancer - my army of the walking dead should proceed me. I can imagine that there are some aggravating corner cases, though.

[wobbly]

Doesn't switching control to the golem then hitting autoexplore make the alchemist follow the golem?

[Dekar]

I would like to see this implemented, too.

[Elkan]

I believe someone has been working on a few interesting tree ideas for them.

But forcing the golem to walk in front? That seems like it would be annoying to code(How does the golem know which way front is? Is he going to constantly force his way in front of you every time you round a corner?) and provide really silly amounts of safety to the Alchemist.

It feels like that kind of paranoid level of "You take hits for me" should be limited to manual orders, not something the game does automatically. If you make the golem automatically wrangled by the game at all times, more optimally than a player can manually do it, what is the Alchemist's gameplay? "Throw bombs every once in a while"?

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like handling the non-optimal golem AI is part of the charm of the class...

This would only be used during autoexplore. in which case the pathing AI is deciding where the front is, rather than the player so there would not be any second guessing, nor would it impact any prolonged combat situations or serious combat decisions. Its simply to avoid "You turn the Corner, Skeleton Mage manathrusts you for 219 damage" Dun Dun DUHN "you have died" Where realistically a cautious and squishy class who went to the trouble of building an 8 foot monster would likely want it to go first when exploring dangerous tunnels.

[SageAcrin]

We are kinda talking about a -1 HP Modifier class.

It's less than 100 HP at L50, than melee classes like the rogues, and than Archer, which works at similar ranges and has no meatshield.

It can also easily use heavy armor, thanks to relatively low Mana costs.

It's not that squishy.

I see your point-I just don't think it really has a place in a gameplay conversation.

Alchemist is already borderline overly strong and has been for quite a while-and it's gaining buffs, not losing them. If its Golem became reliably able to, with a behavior most players do naturally(auto-explore), move in front of you in optimal ways at all times to absorb as much fire as possible, the class becomes very notably stronger in practice, even if, in theory, the behavior could be emulated by a player.

The player would not only have to manually rig this every time-tedious-but a player would also simply not be as consistent about it as a computer could be. This is the equivalent of having the AI cast Arcane Eye around corners and stop you if it sees things-degenerately good behavior that makes the computer play for you, and requires heavy rebalancing of the skill required.

What's next? It would be convenient if the AI always figured out the best damage skill in a situation, too, in a one on one fight, or when a given status is absolutely optimal, or...well, eventually, the automatic functions of the game become a bot, pretty much.

It's not a good idea, to me. It's a strategy game.

[Hachem_Muche]

How about a compromise? Eliminate the one turn cost of switching control between characters.

So when autoexploring, you take control of the golem and run around until you see something interesting (or dangerous). If you get surprised, you can switch back to the alchemist before you get squished. This would require the player to properly set up AI controls and leash distance for the main character, but would (I think) take little coding effort to implement.

While I agree with SageAcrim that Alchemists a bit too strong already, I think the right approach is to nerf their talents and abilities rather than make them more annoying for players to use.

[SageAcrin]

huh. That seems harmless enough, yeah.

After a lot of discussion with friends on this, I'm kinda wondering if I don't just enjoy AI limitations more than most players do anyways, so I'll probably bow out on this conversation for the main concept, besides to note that it's probably a pain in the ass to code.

But yeah, that swapping seems reasonable. Though it does trivialize the(IIRC least used in the game) Through the Crowd Prodigy to uselessness. That Prodigy probably needs an overhaul of some kind anyways though.

[supermini]

I don't really understand the OP's problem. If you meet a skeleton mage, throw a bomb at it. If it's not dead from that, you are probably playing nightmare. If you said you had issues with being rushed and stunned, I'd understand.

You can keep the golem leashed to a reasonable distance, you can summon it to your side, and after summoning, swapping places with it shouldn't be too hard.

As for swapping...Yeah, you should probably be able to swap from golem to master and vice versa without penalty once per turn.

[skein]

Alchemists should not be using auto-explore anyway in dangerous areas. I guess I am weird in not using it much on any character other then as a way to quickly find the exit after already clearing.

Alchemists are kinda weird since they have no healing to speak of and there only movement ability requires being right next to a wall that is not very thick.

Some areas are just so hideously dangerous you clear out of sight anyway for assumed mobs. Gems are cheap enough, and honestly amertine is so useful, that you might as well just bomb early and often. You cannot do that auto exploring. You open chests, altars, and vaults with your golem anyway.

Alchemists just dont walk around blindly in the first place, at least not live alchemists Hell, I equip my golem with a teleport rune switched off so I can bounce with the golem first and eye the place out before switching places with him.

Not taking a turn to switch control is one hell of a buff you are offering for a trivial problem. (It makes escapes a turn quicker with the teleport and switch, that turn is very important if you are an orc)

[wobbly]

In a lot of cases your possibly better of autoexploring with the golem even if it takes a turn to switch back to the alchemist. The golem has 10 infravision & 30 see-invisible. Often he can see enemies you can't, it's a shame he doesn't decide to warn you. I'd still love a minimum leash distance so I could set my alchemist to hang back 3 or 4 squares behind my golem.

[Elkan]

I wasn't aware when initially posting this that you could actually explore with the golem. when I had previously tried autoexplore with golem active, the golem ran off ten squares, lost control and defaulted back the the player. I didn't know that the leash distance had to be manually set for the alchemist as opposed to the golem's which has a default setting. if nothing else THAT should be fixed, or at least have a UI hint so you know its actually possible. I've been playing this since about the 4th or so SVN and if it isn't intuitive to someone like me, who is very familiar with gamey mechanics, its probably going to completely bypass new players (or maybe I'm just a bit dense for missing this one)

I don't think The turn penalty for control switching needs to be abolished, (or at the very LEAST it should be 1 turn to take control, release for free, like cancelling a sustain) But I would Like to see Auto explore heal up, resources up, talents cool, take a turn to switch to golem, prompt for alchemist leash distance if not set, then auto-explore until trouble/exit found, At which point you are in control of the golem, and have the option of switching back to the alchy, or dealing with it as the golem.

I don't think that is too unreasonable, given that the Autoexplore exists for playing conveniently, not optimally. As autoexplore is almost never the optimal way to play for survival.

[Aquillion]

I would personally really like to see the 1-turn penalty for switching control abolished, more because I find it annoying than anything else -- I like being able to switch in combat and give specific orders because it's fun, and the one-turn penalty makes that unreliable.