|
|
|
 |

February 8th, 2002, 06:04 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sherman, TX, USA
Posts: 122
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
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.
|

February 8th, 2002, 06:20 AM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 738
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
While I don't like apple pie (  ) I sure would like recon capacity for drones.
Can anyone point me towards Aaron? Easiest by email?
__________________
Jimbob
The best way to have a good idea is to have lots of ideas.
-Linus Pauling
Take away paradox from the thinker and you have a professor.
-Søren Kierkegaard
|

February 8th, 2002, 09:40 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
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
|

February 8th, 2002, 04:30 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
quote: 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
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
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|

February 8th, 2002, 08:54 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
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
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|

February 8th, 2002, 10:10 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
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!
Phoenix-D
__________________
Phoenix-D
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
- Digger
|

February 8th, 2002, 11:05 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Bug versus Feature
True. And I haven't double checked the files, they may not be allowed now, but it would be a simple matter to mod them in to be able to if they can't now. And I suppose that would be the responsibilty of the modder for making them a possibly destabalising element.
I was simply explaining what I believed to be some peoples reason for not wanting the ability, since it was mentioned by a couple that they couldn't understand why everyone wouldn't want it.
Geo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|