more stuff we need

[dogscoff]

Like I say, I'm not suggesting that we should be able to change a design that is *in-build*. If it's queued up to build though, but there are still items in front of it, where would be the harm in allowing us to edit it then?

[Menschenfresser]

Mysterial,
Are you sure you can see the mines of those who you have a partnership with? I am pretty sure in all the games I have played both PBEM and against the AI, I have never seen another guys mine field unless I ran into it.

???

[Suicide Junkie]

Mysterial confused the original question.

Currently in SE4, all mines are "smart", and assume races with treaties should not be blown up.

Apache wants mines to default to "dumb" and require a computer or sensor package to top them from blowing up friendlies. (They shouldn't ever blow up your own ships, right?)

This would allow you to limit the movement of friendlies through your core systems (dumb mines), while allowing limited access to outlying systems, or "warp point highways", so your allies can send reinforcements through.

[Mysterial]

You are correct. Sorry about that. I'll have to read more carefully next time

[Sinapus]

The only problem I can see with that is that the AI will probably do what it usually does with mines and keep fragging itself with the dumb mines. Unless, of course, the mine entry in the AI's design_creation.txt file specifies that it must have the IFF detector installed before designing/building the mines.

[Suicide Junkie]

The "dumb" mines should have enough smarts to not attack your own ships.

The key ability here is in restricting "friendly" movement through your systems.

[ZeroAdunn]

I thought the reason mines didn't blow up friendlies is because they knew where the mines were, and thus can avoid them. Albeit this doesn't make much sense for places like warp-points where you blockaid the whole warppoint, but still. I like the idea of smart and dumb mines though.