Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: Here they are, TC changes so far (all schematics available now!)
duncje wrote:
So then, this new combat module system is not what TH posted. It takes 6 Level 6 modules to make a CL 10 Droid.
It makes no sense to me to have to fill an R3 with modules to get to CL 7. CL 7 and no utility, where you could make a CL 10 probot for less time/resource investment.
An R3 unit at CL 7 should have some room left for utility. This is why I'm curious at to what the R3 looks like with half or less of the combat modules. Anything less than CL10 should leave room to add other modules, in my opinion.
A CL 10 Probot with the stats Drashk came out with, and no other utility, is okby me. But aCL 7 R3 with no room for utility, because it has to be filled with combat modules, is not ok...
Message Edited by duncje on 03-02-2004 05:06 PM
well, if it works as drashk suspects, it only takes 5 modules to get a 600 rating because an experimented module has rating 120. which does leave room in the R3 for a utility module.
Malitevv wrote:
duncje wrote:
So then, this new combat module system is not what TH posted. It takes 6 Level 6 modules to make a CL 10 Droid.
It makes no sense to me to have to fill an R3 with modules to get to CL 7. CL 7 and no utility, where you could make a CL 10 probot for less time/resource investment.
An R3 unit at CL 7 should have some room left for utility. This is why I'm curious at to what the R3 looks like with half or less of the combat modules. Anything less than CL10 should leave room to add other modules, in my opinion.
A CL 10 Probot with the stats Drashk came out with, and no other utility, is okby me. But aCL 7 R3 with no room for utility, because it has to be filled with combat modules, is not ok...
Message Edited by duncje on 03-02-2004 05:06 PM
well, if it works as drashk suspects, it only takes 5 modules to get a 600 rating because an experimented module has rating 120. which does leave room in the R3 for a utility module.
Basically to me the question is: Is there a modifier that makes each combat module less powerful in an R3 than in a Probot, or is there a cap to the R3's combat potential? I hope it's the latter, because it would mean that it would reach it's cap after 2 or 3 combat modules, thus leaving a lot of room for utility.
Of course, if you can't experiment those modules up to 100%, you're still going to need to stack a bunch in there to achieve the maximum effect, whatever that might be for any given droid...
Gribnitz wrote:
So, how about one of the "talkie" droids being made combat capable now ?? Do any of the talkies accept the combat modules and how do they look as a combat droid ?
The only "talkie" droid that is combat capable is the standard and advanced LE Repair droid. Talking with a Master DE 2 nights ago that had made one, I think he said it came out to something in the ballpark of CL2. Now, granted this is before today's changes where we seem to have some additional experimentation to work with.
We'llthrow it on the list of things to test again.
Drashk
Thanks for all your work..but I do have a serious question for you.
Why is it all up to testing, trial and error, for the facts to be put on the table? Is it really too much to expect that those who designed these changes publish a short document telling it like it is supposed to be?
This testing, reaching conclusions based on then current knowledge, then changing conclusions based on updated knowledge..is all fine and good if that is part of the GAME..but it is not.
Please ask officially for the design specs, so we all can know for certain whats going on. What is it with these developers that they think the testing process is part of our game..like a scavenger hunt (with free employees)..to get to the questions, never mind getting to the answers.
They should document the changes, publish them in detail, and then let testing commence to see if it matches specification. At the moment, you, and lots of others are spending a whole lot of time and personal effort groping around in the dark. It should not be like this.
This is not efficient use of your time, it gets customers upset as bits of news trickle out, and it ends up with a huge blot on developer customer relations.
Please, get them to publish the design. What did they intend? Then test that, cos nothing else is worthy of testing. Please dont tell me they don't internally test in QA, so the document MUST be available, even if it needs editing for outside consumption.
This is basic IT procedure, idiots guide to IT if you like, AKA professionalism.
Time we had some professional standards in place here I say.
Testing is not 'a game' nor should it be a scavenger hunt.
Thankyou.
Here's something that just crossed my mind - are repair modules still in the schematics?
If all it takes is a droid with a repair module to repair a droid fully as they do now, doesn't that sort of make the wound packs relatively unattractive compared to the resource cost?
Audio
you are right. i don't know where i got the idea that it needed a memory module. i haven't made one in a long time because I have so many factory crates of them...
in that case, i might prefer the droid brain to the memory module.
Shian_Tavkin wrote:
Why is it all up to testing, trial and error, for the facts to be put on the table? Is it really too much to expect that those who designed these changes publish a short document telling it like it is supposed to be?
Agreed. However, I'm starting to think that maybe only one or two of the programmers actually know what's been changed. To get the info to us, it has to go through Q-3P0 and then Thunderheart. It's like that "Telephone" game kids play. The programmer says one thing, Q says something else, and then TH tells us something completely off the wall.
AudioOrgana wrote:
Here's something that just crossed my mind - are repair modules still in the schematics?
If all it takes is a droid with a repair module to repair a droid fully as they do now, doesn't that sort of make the wound packs relatively unattractive compared to the resource cost?
Audio
I think it will be a trade off. Repair modules will be cheaper, but you'll need someone else helping you for it, whereas the reconstruction kits are more expensive, but you don't need to track down someone with a repair droid or who will hold you're droid for you.
Drashk wrote:
unfortunately we won't be able to see its full potential until droids that are higher then Level 10 are introduced.
Drashk,
This peaked my interest.... What did you mean by droids higher than CL10...I thought the devs decided that they weren't releasing any droids higher than CL10 because that would require the implementation of a droid handler profession.
Did I miss something?
No you havn't. What he means is that with this system that is in place on TestCenter at the moment it wouldn't be difficult to design new components or new chasis ( or even limited run schematics for that matter ) that could possibly be higher than CL10. Does that mean we're getting them now? No. Just the possibility will be easier to implement say in 6 months when they do figure out a proper way to implement it.
Daker-Naritus wrote:
Drashk wrote:
unfortunately we won't be able to see its full potential until droids that are higher then Level 10 are introduced.
Drashk,
This peaked my interest.... What did you mean by droids higher than CL10...I thought the devs decided that they weren't releasing any droids higher than CL10 because that would require the implementation of a droid handler profession.
Did I miss something?
Shian_Tavkin wrote:
They should document the changes, publish them in detail, and then let testing commence to see if it matches specification. At the moment, you, and lots of others are spending a whole lot of time and personal effort groping around in the dark. It should not be like this.
This is not efficient use of your time, it gets customers upset as bits of news trickle out, and it ends up with a huge blot on developer customer relations.