Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: DE crafted AT-ST
Niklut said:
Your jokeing right? Please tell me your jokeing. Yes the outer shell make look similar but none of the componets would be anything like eachother. I am still wondering why people can't understand that vehicles and droids are different things and that Droid Engineers DON'T craft and never should craft vehicles unless they also have vehicle crafting skills. Note the first part of our title DROID. At no time and no place has that ever also ment vehicle.
No I'm not joking. I agree that the AT-ST is a vehicle and not a droid. Problem is there are no "Vehicle Engineers" in the game. I don't know how you can claim "none of the components would be anything like each other". Ever seen the Binary load lifter? You know- that droid that walks around on 2 legs just like the AT-ST? The parts that comprise the two would differ essentially in scale and nothing more. The AT-ST isbasically a droid without a brain!
Look, I'm not saying DEs should be crafting TIE fighters and landspeeders, but it is very reasonable togive a Master Droid Engineer with the ability to craft an over-grown Binary Load Lifter (AT-ST). The weaponry subcomponents would have to come from a Master Weaponsmith and armor subcomponents from a Master Armorsmith. Maybe even involve a Master Architect for the crew cabin.
The game coding would be identical to areally tallplayer character. If you "mount" your AT-ST you would graphically"become" the AT-ST and have the same 1st person / 3rd person camera options. Tell me you wouldn't get a kick out of "being" the AT-ST and blasting us pesky Rebels! In lieu of your character's weapons you fight with the inherent AT-ST weaponry!
Makes perfect sense.
Bantaar wrote:
While AT-STs may not be droids there is very little that separates them from droids. The only difference being lack of autonomy. Mechanically they are virtually identical to some droids (i.e. Binary Load Lifter).
Your jokeing right? Please tell me your jokeing. Yes the outer shell make look similar but none of the componets would be anything like eachother. I am still wondering why people can't understand that vehicles and droids are different things and that Droid Engineers DON'T craft and never should craft vehicles unless they also have vehicle crafting skills. Note the first part of our title DROID. At no time and no place has that ever also ment vehicle.
But anyway back to what I was saying. Lets start with a power supply, having to feed a AT-ST 1 droid battery every single minute would not be very efficient so you would want a motor, and one that is nothing like anything that we put ina droid. As for movement I hope people don't want AT-ST's that are as slow as droids thus requiring bigger heavier faster pistons or whatever to move its legs not to mention all while carrying passengers and heavy combat armor of a vehicle. I could go on and on about all the different systems but I am not going to waste my time except for one last point, This is Star Wars, we are not making up the universe as we go we are living in an already existing universe, which means Droid engineers and Vehicle engineers will NEVER be the same thing, whilea single person could be both they are different fields of engineering.
I work as an engineer in real life, but if you want me to design and build you a car in real life your crazy. However if I got a job at a car plant and they trained me mechanical engineering for carsthen it might be possible.
ok as its been said, the pet is the imperial inside the walker, not the walker itself. makes sense.
and as for the droid/vehicle battle, heres a point coming from this "already existing star wars universe"
case - anakin skywalker
built c3po (droid)
built a podracer (vehicle)
and as for requiring extra training blah blah blah, come on here. look at how we learn new schematics. we build the same part over and over until we can magically make something else. this isnt reality people, this is a game based on a fantasy reality. if you want to nitpick, go ahead, but id rather see a relative level of realism and continuity maintained while still giving the game some fun and playability. theres a happy medium here, somewhere.
Droid Engineering isnot just aboutthrowingsome partstogether. We're talking about sentient mechanical beings here... in the SW universe,droids are practically a whole species until themselves. It takes a veryhighly skilled individual to know how to build them properly.
I can see the logic of, okay, someone's good at building and fixing things like Anakin, they should be able to assemble a vehicle. But that doesn't preclude the fact that in order to build a good vehicle, you need to know what you're doing. There's a lot of finesse that goes into creating a machine that responds well to a driver.
Obviously Anakin was skilled with both droids and vehicles... but from thatit does not follow that everybody who is skilled with droidsis going to automatically be skilled with vehicles. You need to have training, andAnakin had that training because he grew up in a junkyard and thus learned how to fix all sorts of things.
Also with Anakin, obviously, a big part of it was innate supertalent. We're talking about the "chosen one" here, after all. He wasn't just a droid engineer... he was a wunkerkind, and part of his naturaltalent with mechanics had to do with the fact that he wasforce-sensitive. Not only force-sensitive, but exceptionally force-sensitive. If you're thinking thatthe average SWG player should be able to do what Anakin Skywalker did... you'r nuts!
Going a step further I think everything that is currently obtained from the faction recruiters should be player made. Instead of getting the actual item from the recruiter you get an authorization to make said item. You take that authorization to the appropriate crafter who uses it as a component or one time schematic.
Everything in the game should be player made. Everything.
And AT-STs should be player made vehicles- not pets!
im sorry Icarus-6 but your post comparing building a droid and becoming a sith lord is just stupid.
the other poster is comparing one type of engineering to another, and 2 very similar professions. if you remember to become a droid engineer you have to craft non droid items in the first place, giving you a basic knowledge for general engineering. then you SPECIALIZE in droids.
Anakin also built lightsabers and was fixing other machines making him an overall engineer.
i dont know where you get your logic but that comment you made just makes you look like you have no idea what you are talking about, at least in my opinion...
Jarce, I realize the Logic of my argument is flawed. It's intentionally flawed. It is also the exact same Logic as claiming that because Anakin built a droid and a vehicle that Droid Engineers can build vehicles.
Please note, I am not saying it is similar. From the perspective of Logic (since you have decided to use the word) it is the same and it is called a False Syllogism (though Neocronus did not state his idea in an exact syllogistic form).
A syllogism is a piece of Logic that has two statements and a conclusion that can logically be drawn between those. The classic example is this:
Socrates was a man.
All men are mortal.
Therefore, Socrates was mortal.
The implied syllogism of Neocronus' statement was thus:
Anakin was a Droid Engineer (he built C3PO)
Anakin was able to build a vehicle (his podracer)
Therefore, all Droid Engineers are able to build a vehicle.
This is flawed because there is no connection between building a pod racer and building a droid other than Anakin. This is akin to the False Syllogism of:
Socrates was a man.
Socrates was a Greek.
Therefore, all men are Greek.
You will, in fact notice that you can do a direct symbolic substitution, replacing ‘Anakin’ with ‘Socrates’, ‘Droid Enginee’r with ‘man/men’, and ‘able to build a vehicle’ with ‘a Greek’.
Was my argument that all droid engineers become Sith Lords stupid? Yes, I suppose it was. However, you cannot condemn my argument, promote Necronus' argument, and invoke Logic all in the same breath without looking extremely foolish to someone who has actually studied Logic.
This does, of course, presuppose you wish to actually make a Logical argument. If you simply wish to use the word incorrectly while making an illogical argument you are by all means free to do so.