Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

This is a bit off-topic for this topic, but actually gets back to the original topic, so here goes:
Who else besides Jourin and his two nephews would dearly love to see drones have the "move to" order (at least optionally, either through a checkbox or a mod)?

It has my vote, so that makes 4 of us.

(And it wouldn't be hard for Aaron to do, now that he's got drones.)

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

I work with internal customers and they call anything that doesn't work whether it is a design flaw or poor coding as a bug. If the program or application does not work as expected then it has a bug.

I can never tell my customers that the problem is technically not a bug it is a design flaw. I would rightfully get my butt chewed.

Comments like "bugs can not be caused by poor design" or "its a feature not a bug" did get me upset. I took those comments as resistance to the idea of drones having recon capability and wondered why all the hostility to the idea. I then felt that my idea of using drones for recon was being attacked and that any criticism of SEIV was taboo.

I think I was wrong, but as some of my Posts were interpreted incorrectly, I may have interpreted other Posts incorrectly.

[ 07 February 2002: Message edited by: Jourin ]</p>

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dmm:
This is a bit off-topic for this topic, but actually gets back to the original topic, so here goes:
Who else besides Jourin and his two nephews would dearly love to see drones have the "move to" order (at least optionally, either through a checkbox or a mod)?

It has my vote, so that makes 4 of us.<hr></blockquote>
I would like to see it added.

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

Jourin,

Criticism of SEIV is encouraged here I think. I dont think anyone was attacking you for your opinion that drones should have "move to" ability. In fact many of us agree with that opinion.

A design flaw or poor coding would be defined as a bug by just about anyone. The difference is here that drones not having "move to" is neither of those.

This is not a bug anymore than fighters not being able to warp, or units not being able to carry cargo are bugs. These are things that many of us would like to see implemented, but they aren't bugs.

I don't think anyone was hostile to the idea of drones having recon ability. Some have disagreed with it, but most of them even agree it would be nice to have as an option in the settings. Some people may have expressed the opinion that it is unlikely to be changed, but the only opinion there that matters is Aaron's, so it's not worth getting upset over.

Many of us on the beta team asked to have drones given the ability to do recon. In fact drones in the original beta patches couldn't even be given new attack targets when the first target was destroyed. I do not know whether that was a specific decision on his part, or an "unintended consequence", but either way that was changed. Now if the original target is destroyed they can be given a neww target to attack.

If anyone got defensive at you it was not because of your opinioin, but because you seemed to be personally attacking MM's programing ability or his intelligence. It appeared as if you felt that drones HAD to have recon ability, and if they didn't they were broken, and anyone who felt otherwise was a rube. Of course you didn't say that, but that was the impression people were getting from your comments.

It's good that we can now discuss this without all the empotions. That is the way to get things done in a constructive manner.

Geoschmo

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

geoschmo,

Thank you for your insight into drone development.

Reference fighters not being able to warp: If your expectations were clearly set that fighters would have the capability to warp, and when you discovered they couldn't, you would have a legitimate reason to consider that a bug, independent of the fact that fighters are not designed to warp and are functioning as designed. However, I believe the fighter capabilities were clearly stated, so do not believe this could be considered a bug.

I have a clear expectation that drones would have the capability to provide warp point recon, clear warp point minefields, and do pre-warp point assault bombardment. In a series of e-mails with Aaron in Jun-Aug 1998 time frame I sent in some ideas for improvements to SEIII/ideas for SEIV.

Based on the novels In Death Ground and Crusade, by David Weber and Steve White based on the Starfire system, I requested a missile probe to recon warp points, a mine sweeping missile, and a warp point assault missile. I received an e-mail back from Aaron that said something like, Great idea, see drones in SEIV. My expectation at that time was set that drones in SEIV would have these capabilities. Nothing I have every seen or read has changed that expectation. Also the name drone implies, to me, recon which continued to reinforce my expectations.

My first reaction was that the code is not working and Aaron will fix it prior to the Gold release. Then from a lot of Posts, I got the impression that the Beta Testers, for some unknown reason, talked Aaron into removing this capability. Couple this analysis with the irritation of "it can't be a bug if it was designed that way", and "its not a bug, its a feature" and you have the basis for my responses.

The analysis was flawed and so I apologize for some of the comments I made. Currently I can not fathom why Aaron did not design the other drone capabilities from the start.

PS: One of my other recommendations was that fighters have the ability to move in system but not have the ability to Warp - sorry.
Of course I am not the only one who made recommendations.

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

While I don't like apple pie ( http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) I sure would like recon capacity for drones.

Can anyone point me towards Aaron? Easiest by email?

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

Jimbob - malfador@malfador.com will work.

I want "move to" and "warp" buttons for drones too, or ideally, options for whether those should be available or not (though I don't think I'd ever turn those abilities off, myself).

There are so many basic precedents for recon drones that I don't see why these should be disallowed. Earth probes like Voyager and Viking, the recon robot at the beginning of The Empire Strikes Back, modern real-world recon robots, etc.

The few people with reservations about it seem to want them to be harder to control that ships... maybe if "move to" orders could not be cancelled (as current drone attack orders can't be) that would appease these misgivings.

PvK

PvK

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by PvK:
The few people with reservations about it seem to want them to be harder to control that ships... maybe if "move to" orders could not be cancelled (as current drone attack orders can't be) that would appease these misgivings.

PvK<hr></blockquote>

I think this is an accurate statement. The concerns that I have seen raised are that this would blur the lines between ships and drones.

If you could make swarms of no-maintenance drones and control them the same way you would ships, why would you build ships? The inability to resupply is not enough since you could put a QR or solar panels on them and wouldn't need to resupply.

I would still like to see the move-to order added, but I can understand that reservation to it.

Geoschmo

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

Perhaps we should be requesting a sub class of drones or a different unit alltogether, maybe call them probes, that can receive more complex orders such as move-to, wapr, and sentry, but cannot be fitted with weapons.

Geo

Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
 

"The inability to resupply is not enough since you could put a QR or solar panels on them and wouldn't need to resupply."

Simple enough solution- don't let them carry those items! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-D