Moff Gideon ai issue

"Bulldog1205;c-2237862" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2237850" wrote:

"Bulldog1205;c-2237846" wrote:
I'll never understand the "don't use him on defense" type posts that come with so many legitimate complaints.

The OP isn't asking for recommendations on how to avoid the issue. He's requesting the issue be fixed. I'm not sure people realize how degrading it is to essentially just tell someone their issue isn't important.

But what if the design intent of the characters AI is for him to be used on offense and to not make him "too powerful" as his is only a marquee character.

I disagree with this, but that's not my point. You've given a reason for having an opinion that it shouldn't be changed, and that's fine. Thats healthy discussion. I don't believe everyone has to agree. But telling him to not use imperial troopers on defense, when he clearly knows that and it's the reason he's complaining, is just dismissive and sometimes hurtful, even if people aren't intending for it to be.

I understand.

It's not my opinion, that is a level of the design intent with this character.

And while it may not be done the "right way", some are just trying to talk a player through the issue they are having, as this is not a change that is going to be made.

Sorry op, your issue isn’t important. It is what it is

"Bulldog1205;c-2237862" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2237850" wrote:

"Bulldog1205;c-2237846" wrote:
I'll never understand the "don't use him on defense" type posts that come with so many legitimate complaints.

The OP isn't asking for recommendations on how to avoid the issue. He's requesting the issue be fixed. I'm not sure people realize how degrading it is to essentially just tell someone their issue isn't important.

But what if the design intent of the characters AI is for him to be used on offense and to not make him "too powerful" as his is only a marquee character.

I disagree with this, but that's not my point. You've given a reason for having an opinion that it shouldn't be changed, and that's fine. Thats healthy discussion. I don't believe everyone has to agree. But telling him to not use imperial troopers on defense, when he clearly knows that and it's the reason he's complaining, is just dismissive and sometimes hurtful, even if people aren't intending for it to be.

Hurtful?

Don't worry guys, when the 5th imp remnant char is getting released and they wanna push the Gideon squad to become truly viable and contest other meta squads they will fix Gideons AI as it's no longer WAI.

The AI using characters in a non-optimal way is probably intended for balancing reason as already stated. This is making his complaint absolutely viable as he doesn't agree with it. In the end this is more of a feedback and i suggest moving the thread.

"RTS;c-2238022" wrote:

"Bulldog1205;c-2237846" wrote:
He's requesting the issue be fixed.

Nowhere in the post is he saying / asking for that.

His post came across as more of a complaint about it happening, not questioning the AI choice, but that may be because I read the forums regularly and remember when this was discussed early on with Gideon.

I’m requesting CG to fix it. I thought that was obvious. They release AI tweaks regularly, especially on popular new content. I didn’t know whether this was always a problem or had changed recently or whether it was discussed in the community previously or not as there was nothing on the front forum pages about it.

"MaruMaru;c-2238197" wrote:
I suggest you not listen to kyno. He's not a developer, he has no say on what won't/can't be done.

Yes I am not a developer, but I do absolutely have a good idea of what will not be changed.

I was also very involved in the conversation around Moff and this specific point came up.

"MaruMaru;c-2238247" wrote:
No you don't. The only thing you have is that they are not considering changing it currently which can change both on their own accord or through feedback of players you regularly put down.

as you seem to know more , would you like to share your facts and opinions in the matter ?

"MaruMaru;c-2238247" wrote:
No you don't. The only thing you have is that they are not considering changing it currently which can change both on their own accord or through feedback of players you regularly put down.

I'm confused, I dont what, exactly?

I was in the conversation where this exact feedback was given to them, and heard them expressly say this was intended. So yes I do have a good idea about this situation.

I never said they cant change it down the line, but I guess we can wait and see who is correct about this as time goes on.

"MaruMaru;c-2238333" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2237883" wrote:


And while it may not be done the "right way", some are just trying to talk a player through the issue they are having, as this is not a change that is going to be made.

"Kyno;c-2238329" wrote:


I never said they cant change it down the line, but I guess we can wait and see who is correct about this as time goes on.

You didn't? I think I know how future tense in english looks like.

Ok your right I did say that (although in my context, I am expressing that as the idea those players are aware of, as that is likely what they believe). I also 100% dont think it will change, but I will say, I agree with you they may choose to change it.

Again, let's wait and see down the line who is correct.

I did not once question the legitimacy of the request, but did try to share some insight I have on the topic, as I did hear a direct comment about this situation that leads me to believe this will not change.