Unnecessary paths.

[mllerj]

Unnecessary paths.

Why does the Char run into every little corner of the map which is actually not necessary?
On the profiles it is not to lie but on the routines of the Demonbuddy.

Are there any changes to this? Can I adjust something? Because this is sometimes really stupid of the ways that are more than unnecessary.

Please feedback from the developer.

But Thanks for Nice Work about Demonbuddy

 

[BillyBud]

There seems to be some navigation problems.
I just got back from a long break and when I was botting a year or so ago the bot did a much better job exploring the map.

The bot navigation today is a joke, my blind cat explores rooms better then Demonbuddy currently explores Greater Rifts.
In every GR it runs across the whole map just to explore some little point and then run back to other side where it should been.
I would guess that every GR contains no less then 1-3 minutes of waste it should be enuff with maybe 30 seconds thats where the bot should be around.

Any reason to why the Bot just got dumb as hell lately?

 

[ski]

The problem is that there's a very fine balance between "too explorative" and "not explorative enough". If you fall into the former category, you explore every corner to make sure you don't miss the next rift entrance or path. If you fall into the latter, you could miss paths and rift entrances and then just get stuck. That balance also changes by map as some are more granular than others.

At one point in the past, it was possible to alter the search granularity so that it would start out weighing the "lets explore less" navigation and then slowly float over to the "explore more" option as the rift progressed. I'm not sure if that setting is still available or not, though. Maybe it's built-in - I haven't looked in a long time.

Ultimately, no matter how it's set you're going to have some problems. You'll either explore too much and waste time, or explore too little and have it fail the rift. Personally, I'd rather it be the former since I'm not watching it anyway.

 

[BillyBud]

The problem is that there's a very fine balance between "too explorative" and "not explorative enough". If you fall into the former category, you explore every corner to make sure you don't miss the next rift entrance or path. If you fall into the latter, you could miss paths and rift entrances and then just get stuck. That balance also changes by map as some are more granular than others.

At one point in the past, it was possible to alter the search granularity so that it would start out weighing the "lets explore less" navigation and then slowly float over to the "explore more" option as the rift progressed. I'm not sure if that setting is still available or not, though. Maybe it's built-in - I haven't looked in a long time.

Ultimately, no matter how it's set you're going to have some problems. You'll either explore too much and waste time, or explore too little and have it fail the rift. Personally, I'd rather it be the former since I'm not watching it anyway.

Sorry but the problem isn't how much should be explored but rather how everything is explored....

Something ain't right when my bot goes on a long journey over the entire map to explore a place that it should have explored while it was near that place from the very beginning.
Also there are plenty of unexplored content just next to the bot yet that stupid *uck runs to the other side of the world to explore...

Rule nr.1:
Always explore closest unexplored content.

I'm not a pro coder but that shouldn't be that hard to code ?

 

[ski]

Sorry but the problem isn't how much should be explored but rather how everything is explored....

Something ain't right when my bot goes on a long journey over the entire map to explore a place that it should have explored while it was near that place from the very beginning.
Also there are plenty of unexplored content just next to the bot yet that stupid *uck runs to the other side of the world to explore...

Rule nr.1:
Always explore closest unexplored content.

I'm not a pro coder but that shouldn't be that hard to code ?

I agree, I'm not sure why that part is happening. It seems to prioritize that further area for some reason. (FWIW I am not a dev here, so I couldn't tell you exactly how hard it would be to code)

 

[Bumpy]

I'm thinking maybe trinity developers intentionally make navigation bad. DB actually know the map much better than us (like TurboHUD does) so it has the ability to make things much smoother than most of us doing manually. I feel they use the bad explorer because they do not want bot to be able to perform better than human.

 

[ski]

I'm thinking maybe trinity developers intentionally make navigation bad. DB actually know the map much better than us (like TurboHUD does) so it has the ability to make things much smoother than most of us doing manually. I feel they use the bad explorer because they do not want bot to be able to perform better than human.

I can pretty much guarantee that that isn't true.

 

[Bumpy]

I can pretty much guarantee that that isn't true.

If you open the visualizer you can see Trinity knows almost the whole map even if it is not fully explorered. Which means there is no reason to backtrack and explorer some tiny black area in the in-game mini map, which is not unknown in trinity's visualizer.

 

[ski]

I looked through the Exploration and Rift coroutines to try and see if that granularity is still set somewhere, but I didn't find it. Might take some time.

 

[ski]

Ah there it is, in ExplorationData.cs:

        public static float NavigationNodeBoxSize = 2.5f;
        //{
        //    get { return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 8 : 4; }
        //}

        public static float ExplorationNodeBoxSize
        {
            get
            {
                return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldId) ? 40 : 20;
                //return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 30 : 15;
            }
        }

        public static float ExplorationNodeBoxTolerance
        {
            get
            {
                return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldId) ? 0.2f : 0.1f;
                //return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 0.1f : 0.03f;
            }
        }

Those adjust the node box sizes of the navigation boxes, exploration boxes, and the tolerance. I thought these used to be auto-adjusting and settable, but it looks like it isnt anymore. I'm going to try messing with these and seeing what happens.

 

[stevefp]

Ah there it is, in ExplorationData.cs:

        public static float NavigationNodeBoxSize = 2.5f;
        //{
        //    get { return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 8 : 4; }
        //}

        public static float ExplorationNodeBoxSize
        {
            get
            {
                return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldId) ? 40 : 20;
                //return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 30 : 15;
            }
        }

        public static float ExplorationNodeBoxTolerance
        {
            get
            {
                return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldId) ? 0.2f : 0.1f;
                //return OpenWorldIds.Contains(AdvDia.CurrentWorldSnoId) ? 0.1f : 0.03f;
            }
        }

Those adjust the node box sizes of the navigation boxes, exploration boxes, and the tolerance. I thought these used to be auto-adjusting and settable, but it looks like it isnt anymore. I'm going to try messing with these and seeing what happens.

Good job, bro! Looking forward to ur results.

 

[Bumpy]

Exploration path is sent by DB's navigation server. Trying to change it in client side is waste of time.

 

[BillyBud]

Exploration path is sent by DB's navigation server. Trying to change it in client side is waste of time.

Hopefully something can be done serverside or clientside becouse it really sucks as it is now.