Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: Problems with the concept of Droid Commander
Ellewen wrote:
DEs should be the droid commanders, plain and simple. You don't like the hybrid..? to bad.
This is an interesting position and one that I have not actually heard expressed exactly this way. This is one of the reasons for running this thread.
So you are saying you would not be happy with the concept of a Droid Commander even if the Droid Engineers were able to control heavy combat droids because you believe that anyone who wants to command heavy combat droids should have to be a Droid Engineer?
Careful mate... Ellewen is good at starting fights on here. I know, I've been suckered in by the big E's temptations for retorts before 
I suggest walking away now while you're still only nicely warm.
But if you have any further questions about why DC died, I've been here a while. You can ask me in private tells on these forums. I can probably answer most anything there (and if not I can tell you who can). Other than that, Sink thread, sink 
DC is dead, we hoped to see the last of you several months ago.
Also FWIW, if you did have a 'DC' proffession. It would meet with less resistance from DEs if it branched from arts/E4 like DE.
Im begining to see one of the main resistances to the hybrid idea, is it either is not 'dabbleable' or it doesnt cost enough skillpoints to be equivalent to say, CH. If its spead all over DE, it will frustrate DE sales. If it is scrunched in a branch or two it doesnt cost enough.
I have revised my 'answer' to 2 branches. I realise my original plan, both did not cost comparably in the dabbleable branch, And was unfriendly to combat types who wanted a fuller cert.
The new plan in my sig makes some headway, but still is sensitive to these issues. However the idea of distributing 'latent' bits of cert, that would serve as more root cost, may help. But the ideas of root cost are largley cosmetic. The root branches contain thier own 'checkers'.
I do want to say here, that a friendly ramped 'DC' proffession would probly get some grumping. Including the old, 'we voted Way against that'. But as you see here, My impression it was just in hopes of a hybrid DE proffession. And I think a DC profession would be accepted.
I know there is fear of an unspread few branch 'DC' structure within DE. That it will be 'exploited' by dabblers.
I guess my point is that My vote against 'DH' was simply a vote for a hybrid DE cert. And I think most of those votes were.
I would like some magic by which my existing DE skillboxes give me the DC cert. And I do not fear a CH like superimposition of the whole cert over the whole of DE. I still think there would be the crafters, the combats, and the some of each among DEs. But some do mind the idea, of a 'DE invasion'. So, I see the constraints.
So, I think 'DC' could be a solution.
What if DEs got some 'hybrid' bit of cert within thier proffession. that could free them from the need for some of the branches of a 'DC' profession ? They could hit some capped maximum droid cert with only two branches of the 'DC' profession, or some such.
Though I guess my answer is to distribute for DEs, in ok, Master arts and master DE. to stack with one or two DE branches. Where can a non DE get these bits without being forced thru these square bits of hoop ?
A droid handlers ed, mini proffession, for non Artisan/DE masters. that any make take to supliment thier droid handling abilities up to the cap that master DEs/Artisans already have ? That could work in addition to any bits of the MA/MDE cert they may happen to have.
The numbers in my plan are very tweakable. Any amount of the cert from btranches could br shifted to master DE and Arts boxes to make it look better to compare CH with.
But, give me only DC and there i'll be.
Boeda wrote:
...
The new plan in my sig makes some headway, but still is sensitive to these issues. However the idea of distributing 'latent' bits of cert, that would serve as more root cost, may help. But the ideas of root cost are largley cosmetic. The root branches contain thier own 'checkers'.
...
Well, I'm not really advocating for a new plan right now. Sodan's plan has a lot of momentum and seems like it would work reasonably well. I'm just trying to gather information in case A) the Devs shoot down Sodan's plans as untenable on some ground that cannot be resolved and B) because I'm not sure that Sodan's plan ultimately excludes the possibility of a Droid Commander, much in the same way that Pistoler does not exclude the possibility of Rifleman.
However, that said I am trying to gather information and nod dilute the current momentum of Sodan's proposal.
Please take another look, at the 'Improved' solution in my sig.
With the * solution under the Table I am now actually satisfied with it. Change the MDE perk to18, the MArt perk to 17. Let max Droid level creatable be 35. Two branch dabblers get one max droid lev 35. Master DEs/Arts, get two.
The certs in the branches are checker wise good enough, comparable to CH. Dabblers should not be very inclined to master DE and MArt just to ghet another lev 35 droid. If so, so be it.
If one thinks they have to add a Ranged 4 actuation box to 'check' it. Then, while I think its silly, whatever.
Or the MA/MArts perks could be added to Sodan's plan. I think this two branch dabble thing might be more readily accepted by the developers though.
Tal-N wrote:
So basically you don't want anyone to post their options for the DC, plus you don't want anyone to post against the DC and on top of that you don't want people to post their opinions for everyone being given battle droids. Thats fair enough so you don't want our opinions so how about the devs? Well they said they're adding the Droid Commander profession, discussion over.
On the contrary, feel absolutely free to post options about the Droid Commander. Post for it, post against it. Post your opinions, feelings, theories, and your artwork, if you like.
Simply do it in another thread since it is off topic from this one.
Ok, that's a smart-alec answer. Certainly posting the problems you see with the Droid Commander profession is posting your opinions, and that's what I'm asking for. I am just asking that certain well established opinions (I don't want DC because I feel that DEs should be able to command the droids they make) not be posted because they are already a given.
I'm not trying to say I am uninterested in hearing that people like the concept of a Droid Commander. This thread isn't to build a list so that we can wave it and show all the problems with Droid Commander. It's to find out what people didn't like about the concept.
You are saying that the Devs are giving us Droid Commanders whether we like it or not. Well, I just got in today so I haven't caught up on all the threads so I can't comment on that. There is a lot of motion for Sodan's plan and I would like to think it has a real chance of success. However, I will say that I think there is at least a good chance that the only solution they will listen to is something like the Droid Commander. If that does turn out to be the case then it would be good to identify exactly what it was about the concept that upset so many. With that done we can then look at suggestions for the profession that try to deal with these complaints whenever possible.
Boeda wrote:
Please take another look, at the 'Improved' solution in my sig.
...
Again, please, this thread isn't for the discussion of a new solution. It isn't even really to discuss the problems people had with the Droid Commander proposal (discussion, as in a give and take of ideas where someone would say what their problem was and someone else might address why things need to be that way).
It is simply to make a catalog of the problems people had with the concept. While I did reply to one persons complaint it was not to try and refute it but merely to ask for clarification. I have tried to limit any other responses I have made (such as this one) to attempts to keep the thread on track.
I do not wish to sound uninterested in your proposal. I simply ask that you talk about it in a separate thread so as to avoid derailing the subject of this one.