Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: Droid Decay system, detailed description.
Drashk wrote:
This sort of system is what I am currently working on. Hopefully, I'll have the Chassis Experimentation doc out later tonight or tomorrow and the Decay system idea out later in the week, that builds upon the chassis idea.
Gron_DM wrote:
duh! reading my last post why not use speeder style decay on droids? have em lose 1 point of vitality on calling or storing and 1 pt vital on each hour out. I figure if a person uses a droid daily 4 call/stores a day 4 hours that is 8 vital points out of 1000 it would take 3 to 4 months for a person to use up that droid...you could always boost the vital hits if that is to long i think 3 months is right on.
Heck at this point, if it's easy to code an implement to get it in, then I'd go for this just to get some droids flowing out of the system. And then later I still want my componenet by component JTL-style droid building, decay, and repair system
jefmes wrote:
OckVofad wrote:
The battery decay system is what a majority of DEs want for a decay system (See poll).
The people whoneed droids (Doctors, Crafters, People who want extra storage without lots etc) will continue to buy them even if they have to replace them every 3-4 months. I disagree that the "sky will fall" ifthe decay system is changed.
We finally have droids that people NEED (Andthey will need them even more after JTL). People have no problem replacing armor and weapons. I dont think they will havea problemreplacing a droid.
Entertainers are not an example of someone who needs a droid. The current Ent modules are an enhancement not a necessity. If we had a module that allowed you to buff outside a cantina I'd bet you would be willing to replace that droid.
The power core idea is a good one IF we could get the devs togo along with the extended use. I would say lets submit it as an alternate proposal.
As TK has mentioned this is not going to happen anytime soon so no need to get heated over it.
I must've missed that poll, because I really don't like the idea. No more abstract, non-sensical systems please! Tie the decay to activities of the droid. If it can't be done on a component by component basis (maybe too much tracking per droid, i.e. extra server loads = bad), then go with a general wear and tear stat on the droid that causes a component to fail that must be replaced by a DE, with (as proposed my Jenden) an expensive reconstruction kit to rebuild it to near perfect (but never completely perfect? Not sure on that...) level of performance.
Basically it just doesn't make sense to me to have decay tied to battery and power usage. I'd think it just as easy to add a "durability" pool stat and scratch a couple ticks off of it every time it's used or performs an action, something to that effect. Then again, I guess that brings us back to the old usage decay vs. time-based decay systems
Here is the problem. A combat droid is "doing something." Atcively fighting and moving, so is a Harvest droid. Yet a Med droid just sits there, it doesn't "do" anything.
The one thing that all Droids have in common is power, that is where they are tied together.
The reason for the power core in this idea, is because it actually give the customer something. Longer time between recharges. They don't even need to carry batteries at all.
Also it seems like those who like modularization replacement and such, you are actually GETTING it with this idea. After the entire droid dies, you end up with a chasis, then you replace the modules and make the new droid for the person.
This idea was based around at least giving every side a little that they wanted.
Straker_Atrella wrote:
Here is the problem. A combat droid is "doing something." Atcively fighting and moving, so is a Harvest droid. Yet a Med droid just sits there, it doesn't "do" anything.
The one thing that all Droids have in common is power, that is where they are tied together.
The reason for the power core in this idea, is because it actually give the customer something. Longer time between recharges. They don't even need to carry batteries at all.
Also it seems like those who like modularization replacement and such, you are actually GETTING it with this idea. After the entire droid dies, you end up with a chasis, then you replace the modules and make the new droid for the person.
This idea was based around at least giving every side a little that they wanted.
But the med droids ARE doing something Surely there's a check built into the system that tells your character that you're crafting near a droid crafting station of some sort. When you start that crafting session with the droid being the active private station, it nicks a couple of points of durability/vitality/whatever off. All throughout the systems there have to be checks to look for valid conditions. Decay can be interjected into that cycle since that is -truly- the common thread they share. Yes they all need power, but more so each droid performs various functions.
Also, I do like that idea of the disabled droid become just a chassis, which could then be used to rebuild the droid. That at least gives the fictional sense of the player handing the droid to the DE and asking him to repair it.
I see what you're shooting for, I just don't feel like it makes sense to tie it to battery life and power.
Straker_Atrella wrote:
Jendens idea is better. Kill my thoughts here.
The only thing I would like moved over wasmy chasis ideaafter the droid is disabled.
I really really do like that idea Straker. It seems like a way for people to sorta keep their droid companion since they're "handing over" the old droid, and but to the system it could essentially look like a whole new droid.