Droid Engineer Archive

1. I need to know if you agree or disagree with Sintrosi's Plan

If it's the plan regarding DE-Only combat droids, I TOTALLY disagree. DEs need better droids to sell, not CH pets.

2. I need to know if you agree or disagree with the rough DE plan in general.

See Above

3. Ideas.

Try these ideas out...I believe they fix a lot of the problems with both the Droid-Engineer Profession and the non-CH Pet Nerf (NOTE: Yes this post is mostly about droids, I just add some general pet ideas to show you the relation of the whole pet scheme---the forest, not just the trees).

(1) All players start by being limited to one droid/creature (as proposed by you).

(2) Add Droidekas to the game - STOP...don't move on yet...hear me out.

There are three major problems with droids now...(1) No function differences between droids, (2) droids need more functions--they aren't useful for combat, and merely serve as movable med centers/crafting stations, and (3) they never wear out, thereby killing the future demand.

Now, in the "Creature Nerf Pt. 3" Thread, you mentioned that you are considering bumping probots' stats a little to compensate a bit for the creature nerf. This is a bad idea. Why? Everyone already buys ONLY one droid...a probot. Why? Probots do everything that every other droids can do because they take the same modules as the others. You are simply reinforcing players tendency to buy ONLY probots, and those probots to be the ONLY droid the player ever buys.

You also mentioned making DE only combat droids. This is also a bad idea. Most Droid Engineers have posted in response to this saying that they are crafters, and want combat droids to sell to OTHERS to preserve a market, not just to use themselves. They have continually asked for combat droids to sell to others, not to become another CH class.

Instead, do this: Put Droidekas into the game as craftable droids (as Droid engineers have been asking for). Give them slots for ONLY 2 modules (1) an armor module; (2) a weapon type module. Give them a low vitality (25-50) so they wear out somewhat quickly. Make 8 different types of weapon modules, each with a different damage type (acid, energy, stun, etc). Give Droidekas 1500 HAM,medium or heavyarmor, and whatever resistances bestowed by the armor module. Make them usable by all players.

Now, if you look at the above proposal you will notice several things: (1) It encourages people to buy multiple droids--a droideka for combat situations, another for crafting and healing--because droidekas can have ONLY combat functions; (2) the droideka is not any more unbalancing than the probot--it has only slightly more ham, and it wears out quickly; (3) droidekas can have substantial weakness--the player chooses a damage type that might be highly resisted by the mob; and (4) it starts on the path of droid specialization--one of the things DEs have been asking for.

(3) Give certain classes the ability to call a second Droid. DE's should get to call a second droid of any type. Doctors and Combat Medics should get the ability to call an extra droid with a medical module. Weaponsmiths, Armorsmiths, Chefs, etc. should get the ability to call an extra droid with a crafting station module.
Alternatively, you could limit certain professions to droid types...ex: artisans can only call a second droid if it is an R2 or treadwell; Doctors can only call a second surgical droid. This would keep the classes from calling a second combat droid with a medical/crafting module and abusing the system.
NOTE: All the the classes I have listed are elite professions...the second droid should ONLY be given to elite professions.

(4) Implement the functionality ideas you listed in your first droid post.

(5) For Faction pets, every player starts with the ability to call ZERO faction pets. There are 15-16 ranks that players can advance through. IN ADDITION TO the 1 creature/droid all players can call, give players the ability to call an extra 1 faction solder after 5 ranks, 2 faction solders after 10 ranks, and 3 faction soldiers at Colonel (highest rank for both rebal and imp). AT-ST's might be limited to one per player at Colonel, but I am not suggesting any limits.

(6) For creatures, creature handlers get to control 1 to 2 extra creatures (ONLY, not droids or faction pets) based on their advancement.

(7) NO MATTER WHAT, no player can EVER control more than 3 pets (as in droids, creatures, OR faction pets) at a time. All of the previous numbers are modified by this standard.

Now, I believe this comprehensive plan addresses all problems possible with droids and pets.

Players don't want to be limited to ONLY one pet. They aren't, but have to earn the right to have more than one.

Players don't like that the game has arguably turned into poke*** with all the creatures, but love droids and have asked for more droid usefulness. They get it.

Devs want some limits on pet use to prevent unbalancing. Players are limited to one droid/creature, with exceptions in certain classes. Further limits could be used to limit players to only one combat droid (limits on droid types). Faction pets (already nerfed to only be useful against factional targets) have to be earned, and are further limited by the 3 pet max rule.

Droid engineeers want diversity of functions in droids. They get it.

Droid engineers want players to be able to handle multiple droids to better sales. All players now have a reason to buy multiple droids, further boosted by the fact that certain players get to call a second droid.

Droid engineers want repair/decay needs. Combat droids (Droidekas) break down and need to be replaced.

All players love droids and want more of them. Now they have a reason to buy them.

Everyone is happy, don't you think?

The rough DE plan I don't like much personally, which has been extensively covered in other threads.

My two primary issues:
There are critical things that need to be done FIRST, such as working droid repair kits and experimentation being completely useless.
The "plan" also does not address getting more combat droid chassis types.

1. I agree with Sintrosi's Plan

2. The concerns with the dev plan is at this link:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=droid_engineer&message.id=32197

---

Thunderheart wrote:

1. I need to know if you agree or disagree with Sintrosi's Plan

2. I need to know if you agree or disagree with the rough DE plan in general

Also, please post the changes you would make to the DE plan. Thanks

---

1. I agree with Sintrosi's Plan

2. I disagree with more of it than I agree with. This is a difficult question to answer because the Plan is so vague.

I'll repost from another thread:

The DE plan is too vague. It looks like a hazy, undefined echo of our wishlist. I would like to see a plan for every aspect of our profession:

• Modules, module levels, exsisting module functionality, new modules
  
• Droid chassis, specific unique functions, new functionality, combat droids
  
• Droid control, certifications, number of active droids, number of droids in datapad
  
• Droid utility in other skill classes, adding droids to architect schematics, player city structures
  
• Bugs, bugs, bugs, and incomplete functions
  
• Droid experimentation, customization, droid personality, droid names filter, "talkie" droid names

That's all I can think of at the moment, but this is an example of what I would like the next "DE Plan" to look like.

Please tell me he didn't just ask for more info.

there are volumes of posts here

I give up

1) Yes, Sintrosi knows her stuff.

2) DE's are an ARTISAN class, we build droids for other people. We should sell both combat and utility droids. One other thing, we do not want to hear one word about any "droid handler" class. Droids can and should be used by just about anyone. (Or specific classes for elite droid types).

1. Sinostri was pretty accurate.

2. I strongly disagree with the majority of the plan. On the points of...

A.

---

Droid-Creator wrote:

Please tell me he didn't just ask for more info.

there are volumes of posts here

I give up

---

Droid-Creator,

Yup. You heard right. We've been 'stalled' again.

It wouldn't have been all that hard to get every piece of needed info from about 2 or 3 threads in our forum.

This smacks of a delay tactic, personally.


Sorry, TH...I call it like I see it.


/bow

Respectfully,

1. Yes i agree with Sintrosi,

2. I do not like the idea of combat modules going into all droids, supposedly making any droid a combat droid. an R3 can have 6 (if im counting right) modules in it, so what, that be like 6 laser bank modules? i dont want to see a bunch of r3's running around killing everything.

- Droidekas for masters. Make them the best combat droid, but DO NOT make them near anything a CH pet would be (I dont want to turn DE into CH, just a much lesser CH, to prevent dabblers going for the best pet).

-Certifications for combat droids. Master an elite combat profession to get a cert for an assassain droid/super battle droid. get novice in an elite class to get a roger roger/ battle droids. Probots for everyone (?).

-Let us put stim packs or whatever into a surgical droid so they can heal.

-Make certain droids only able to have certain modules. Such as treadwell with a repair module. surgical droids with medical modules only.

1. Sintrosi plan for the most part is ok.

2. SOE plan is exactly what I do NOT want to see happen to this class. Most specifically combat modules? Give me a break, we want droids not modules.

1. I need to know if you agree or disagree with Sintrosi's Plan Yes I do.....

2. I need to know if you agree or disagree with the rough DE plan in general Yes in general.....

1. I very strongly agree with Sintrosi's state-of-the-profession plan.

2. The original plan seemed so poorly defined and planned out that it is very hard to agree with. The real plan needs to address _each_ droid type specifically, address each module type specifically, make statements that sound like planned decisions -- i.e. "according to the plan, droid X will from now on do this and this" instead of "we could make droids like X and Y do something interesting, like for example blow up or maybe instead wander around and plug into stuff". You can't strongly disagree with woulds and coulds, but you can disagree with pending decisions.

Yes, ah, which plan is "sintrosi's plan". This would help. Going on the assumption his post from 10/29....

/agree w/ his post dated 10/29/03

/disagree w/ proposed SOE plan

/agree w/ hiring TH no less than 2 assistants

Forbin..Lowca Master DE...dropped (yes I ground/grinded the whole tree before macros)