Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: Project: Droid Engineer Chassis Experimentation System Upgrade
Disclaimer
In order to bring this idea to fruition, a number of changes would need to be made in how we currently build droids. The listed changes are no small thing, but would greatly improve the quality of experimentation for our profession and would add a lot of room for later growth. As I pointed out in the Modular Upgrade System thread, production time is a premium ticket item that we have to take into consideration. I know that a lot of what I am proposing in this docment and the following documents are the same thnigs that I posted against in the Upgrade System thread; however the major difference here is that it adds to the overall health of our profession as we, the Droid Engineers, will see it.
Droid Experimentation
Greets all. This is another installment in the Phase 1 - Project: Droid Engineer series that is geared towards gathering feedback and stimulating new discussions on different topics. The first couple of documents in this series revolved around generalized information about a few different subjects. This document in the series will deal with a rather major subject that needs to be addressed at some point in the life span of our profession - Chassis specific experimentation.
As I outlined in a previous thread, out of 121 total schematics available to a Droid Engineer, only 80 schematics result in any kind of improvement, when experimented on. Out of 80 schematics, droid subcomponents or chassis' are not included. In order to give experimentation a lot more meaning to our profession, this needs to change.
When you compare Droid Engineer experimentation to the other Artisan based professions, the list of experimentation/schematic ratio is as follows
-
Shipwright -
Weaponsmith -
Chef -
Armorsmith -
Droid Engineer -
Architect -
Tailor
If we include Bio-Engineer, Medic, Doctor, and Combat Medic as other professions that can craft, our number 5 spot would decrease to number 9, out of the 11 total professions. This needs to be examined and re-evaluated. Experimentation should be just as important to Droid Engineers as it is to Shipwrights, Weaponsmiths, Chefs, and Armorsmiths. Below are my suggestions on how to improve upon this issue. This is only a semi-rough draft, to generate discussion on the topic. With Community encouragement, we can finish out a plan of action at a later point.
Defining the terms
-
Chassis - Used to describe the non-Deed version of a droid. Chassis' are currently built for the use in the production of the Adv R4, R2, R3, LE Repair Droid, Surgical Droid, Protocol Droid, Probot, and BLL. Under the following system, each and every droid would have a corresponding droid chassis. -
Sub-component - Droid Sub-components are made up of the following - (Adv) Droid Brain, (Adv) Droid Motive System, Manipulator Arm (Package Set), Adv Droid Frame Unit, and Droid Sensor Package. Under the following system, 2 new sub-components would be added - The Droid Frame Unit and the Adv Droid Sensor Package. Entries that are marked as (Adv) and (Package Set) refer to both the basic and advanced versions of the sub-component. -
Integrity Rating - The rating that each droid would have, which would replace the Vitality rating. Once a Droid reaches 0/0 Integrity, the droid is destroyed and is no longer functional. When called, after being disabled, the droid will appear as it would if it was incapacitated in combat. The Droid owner would still have access to the Item and Data Storage Modules; however this access would be limited to only removal of the items from the storage containers. The Integrity Rating of a final droid is determined by experimentation on the sub-components, chassis, and final droid deed. -
Module Rating - The rating that each chassis would have, that determines the total number of modules that a droid could be equipped with. The Module Rating would be based upon the (Adv) Droid Frame and Droid Chassis Experimentation. -
Armor Module Rating - Similar to theModule Rating, the Armor Module Rating determines the total number of armor modules that a droid can be equipped with. The Armor Module Rating, along with the type of droid being built, also would determine the maximum armor rating that the droid could have. Further explanation of this will be added in a later thread. The ArmorModule Rating is based upon the (Adv) Droid Frame and the Manipulator Arm (Package Set) Experimentation. -
Movement Speed Rating - This is an optional addition that would increase the movement speed of a droid, to allow it faster physical movement. The Movement Speed Rating would also have an effect on the Decay rate of a droid, which will be covered in a later thread, due to the increased wear and tear on the droid. The Movement Speed Rating would be based upon experimentation of the (Adv) Motive System and the (Adv) Droid Sensor. -
Command Rating - This is an optional addition, to be used with the Droid Commander profession, or other means to introduce higher end droid content. The Droid Command Rating would dictate how many Command Programs can be installed on a Droid. Command Programs do not include the normally programmed commands that all droids already have access to.I will cover explanation of this idea/suggestion further in a later thread. The Droid Command Rating is based upon experimentation of the (Adv) Droid Brain and the type of droid being built.
Changes to the Current System
Removal of the Advanced / Basic Droid Deeds
How many of the Basic Droid Deeds are produced, compared to the Advanced model, in today’s market? The Basic/Advanced Model droid system has little to no function in today’s droid market. In most people’s minds, there are only 5 droids, out of the possible 26 that are useful. - The Adv MSE, Adv R2, Adv R3, Adv Probot, and Adv LE. I think that in order to take a step forward, we must take a step back and lose the Advanced / Basic Droid Deed division. Don't fear, I've thought about how we could lose functionality of the Advanced version of each droid. Keep reading and you will see what I suggest needs to be done to improve upon the situation.
Addition of Droid Chassis in each and every Droid Deed
This is the quintessential change that would need to be made, to accommodate for the proposed system change that I am outlining. Since the Advanced models of each droid would be removed, the Chassis could be included at the same time the Droid is acquired. When the Droid Chassis is included on the skill tree can be changed, but having a chassis for each droid model is a part of the function of this experimentation redesign.
Increase in Chassis and Subcomponent Experimentation
This change would make the construction of droid subcomponents and chassis have a larger impact on the overall out come of the droid's construction. Subcomponents would have an effect on the ratings listed on a Chassis and Chassis' would directly affect such things as how many modules can be installed on a droid, how fast the droid actually moves (optional), and how many Command Programs can be installed (optional).
Addition of 2 new Subcomponents
In order to balance out the changes added with this system, two additional subcomponents would need to be added - The Droid Frame and the Advanced Droid Sensor. The Droid Frame will be used in all droids that do not currently have an Advanced Droid Frame present. The Advanced Droid SensorPackage will replace the use of the Droid Sensor in a select few droids and will have extended use in droids added at a later point. (Mostly combat Droids)
Schematic Changes
In order to balance out the changes being made to each droid, the schematics would need to be adjusted slightly. All of the droids that do not currently have an AdvancedDroid Framelisted will either gain a basic Droid Frame or an Advanced Droid Frame. All droids will now have a Chassis that is required as part of the building process. Droids that do not currently have a Chassis will use the requires laid down by the current Advanced version of the droid, for the Droid Chassis.
Two Issues would arise with using a complete chassis requirement system.
-
Increase in resource costs of all droids that do not currently have a Chassis and Droid Frame. There really isn't a work around that I can come up with; however the droid will have more overall 'function'. -
The MSE would be lost asa primary grind item at Novice DE. One possible solution to this problem would be to have the Droid Frame require a similar resource cost and offer a similar XP gain. Not only would there still be a grind item for XP, the Droid Frames could also be used in droid production.
I'm not going to post a list of schematic changes, since such a list could be hashed out at a later point when all things are taken into consideration.
Subcomponent Experimentation
Each Subcomponent would have a modifier associated with it, that would have an affect on the ratings listed on the Droid Chassis. Here is a list of each subcomponent and the corresponding rating that it could possibly effect. Each rating would have a line of experimentation that is associated with it. The (Adv) Droid Frames have a total of 3 lines of experimentation; however the Armor Module Rating is also shared with the Manipulator Arm (Package Set). I won't include my suggested number range for each listing, unless this is pushed to Phase 2, by the community, or unless a strong request is made to flesh it out, during discussion on this topic.
-
Droid Frame -
Integrity Rating -
Module Rating -
Armor Module Rating -
Advanced Droid Frame -
Integrity Rating -
Module Rating -
Armor Module Rating -
Droid Brain -
Integrity Rating -
Command Rating -
Advanced Droid Brain -
Integrity Rating -
Command Rating -
Droid Motive System -
Integrity Rating -
Movement Speed Rating -
Advanced Droid Motive System -
Integrity Rating -
Movement Speed Rating -
Droid Sensor -
Integrity Rating -
Movement Speed Rating -
Advanced Droid Sensor -
Integrity Rating -
Movement Speed Rating -
Manipulator Arm -
Integrity Rating -
Armor Module Rating -
Manipulator Arm Package Set -
Integrity Rating -
Armor Module Rating
Chassis Experimentation
As listed above, each droid will have a Chassis that is associated with it. Each Chassis will be built using the above listed modules and will have 3 lines of experimentation - Integrity Rating, Module Rating, and Armor Rating. Each of these three lines will be affected by the subcomponents used to build the droid, and the resource qualities used. A Droid Chassis will also have to optional listed values - Command Rating and Movement Speed Rating. These values would be modified by the subcomponent ratings and would also depend on the droid that is being built. (IE Protocol Droids move slower, and R Units have higher Command storage.)
An average built Droid Chassis would have the same number of modules and speed as the average of a current Basic and Advanced Droid. (IE an average built R3 would have 4-5 Module Socketsand 1 Armor Module Socket. A highly experimented Droid Chassis may actually exceed the capabilities of a current Advanced model Droid. (IE an R3 with a 100% success on the Droid Frame and Droid Chassis could have a total of 7 Module Sockets.)
As stated for the subcomponents, I won't include my suggested number range for each listing, unless this is pushed to Phase 2, by the community, or unless a strong request is made to flesh it out, during discussion on this topic.
Putting the system to work
The basic concept of the system would be that the schematic does not have any Module or Armor Module sockets until the Droid Chassis is inserted into the Chassis socket on the schematic. Once the Chassis is placed, the deed schematic would show how many total Modules and Armor Modules could be installed. For every 3 modules that could be installed, a Cluster Socket is created. This would ensure that Cluster Sockets created prior to the system change would still be usable. At this point, droid construction would look the same as it always has, unless you try to remove the Droid Chassis. If this is done, all modules would be ejected from the schematic, to prevent abuse of the system design.
An additional optional feature, which will be described further in a future thread, would be the ability to add one loot-type component into the Droid Schematic. This would be an optional part that could boost HAM, Damage, Movement Speed, and Command Rating of the droid, by some percentage.
When finally combined, the Droid Deed experimentation screen would show3 lines of Experimentation - Integrity, Droid HAM, and Command Rating/Movement Speed Rating. When completed, the Droid would list the modules installed, the amount of HAM that it has, the number of Droid Commands that can be installed, the Movement speed of the droid ( in meters?), and the number of Integrity points that the droid has.
Addressing Components and DroidsCrafted
Prior to the Experimentation Changes
To address all components made prior to the crafting changes, they would be given an average rating based upon the Mechanism Quality Rating, in the case of subcomponents, or an averaged rating, in the case of Droid Chassis. This would have a negative effect for some, in the beginning, but would be a needed scarify in order to increase the overall quality of the profession and our ability to experiment.
To address all of the Droids built prior to the change, all droids would have an averaged Integrity rating, to be determined later. All droids would keep the standard rate of movement and would receive an average Command rating, if applicable.
Summary
Though complex in nature and only a part of the overall system, a change to the Droid Engineer Experimentation system is needed to help promote the overall health of our profession. We need a system that can be built upon as time progresses in the game and more content is added that directly involves our profession. Without a change to our base experimentation system, experimentation as a whole will not matter much. With a change such as this, the ground work is set up to address many other issues, such as the implementation of Decay, the addition of high end combat droids, and increasing the overall appeal of droid usage.
Comments? Questions? Concerns?
Other droids like the treadwell offer variety for someone who just wants something different. Often people like Binary Load Lifters because they work well for merchant barking, and I even sell a few DZ70 droids to people who want something to float around behind them, but dont want the screen-blocking bulk of the probot. MSE/MSE Adv work great for super-cheap/free noob droids, and BH bombs. Probots have their niche as being better in a duel than combat R3s. Out of all the droids, I sell power droids the least (not even 1 a month)... I keep one myself, because its nice to be able to recharge a customer's/guildmate's droid when I'm around.
Other than that, I think its a step in a good direction for beefing up the profession. I often feel guilty using nice resources on droids because it really doesnt matter much. One thing to watch out for, I dont want this profession to become too overly complicated. Right now I have a lot to explain and answer when someone wants a droid. I dont mind doing it, but the more you add to the profession, especially when its not something like "I want the best combat droid," its going to get really hard for the ignorant masses to keep up. I like the fact that it doesnt take too much of my time to keep my business running, and I can answer order emails once a day, and fill orders I get while I'm on working on other things, then I can change modes in swg and play another character. With all the changes making the system mean more, I'm just afraid that there's going to be too much to keep up with... Already, I've stopped making a few things (BH droids, repair/reconstruction kits, and for the time being even basic crafting droids en masse - but I'll start those again soon)) because there's just too much to do.
As it is, I take a lot of time, and sometimes 5-6 back and forth emails finding out what exactly a customer wants in their droid as far as functionality... I dont think I'd like to have to explain to them that I can either make it fast, or last a long time... Shipwright is extremely complex, and in my opinion, impossible to do what I currently do with DE, that is explain to my customer enough about what they're interested in so that when I go to craft it, every decision I make has been tailored to them. There's so much to experiment on in shipwright, that if I had not been a shipwright myself in beta, I wouldnt know where to begin to ask to get my stuff customized. I would probably just start settling for whatever I could find on a vendor, and that really kills the experience for me. I'm all about the best fit custom jobs, and I think maintaining our profession in a manner where we can still offer that kind of detail to Joe Smith customer is important.
That's all I've got on the system for now.
P.s. Get the bugs fixed!
Best parts:
1. Never liked the Basic/Advanced deed setup. Be glad to see it go.
2. You should need a chassis for each droid. Only makes sense.
Suggestions:
Subcomponents Advanced/Basic: I’d prefer if on the droid build there was a generic slot for a “frame unit” and you could use a basic or advanced. If advanced you would get a bonus to the droid’s HAM and module ratings. But advanced modules require better materials.
Integrity Rating Once the droid is at 0/0 and all elements have been removed from it the player is left with a colored droid chassis that he can take to his DE and say “Can you fix him?” To which we can say “Sure” and use as the chassis in a new droid.
This would give the other players a sense of continuity. It might also allow us to carry over the droids paintjob, programming, and name if the devs are kind.
Build Split the build of a droid into three assembly passes. Physical and Mental/Abilities
1. Assemble Parts – Build the brain, frame, chassis, movement, arms, modules and whatnot.
Experimentation – affects how good the module is or how good the parts are for the next step.
2. Assemble Chassis
--- In this step you insert a base chassis, brain, frame, manipulators, movement, and socket clusters.
--- You then experiment to adjust the droids physical traits. (HAM, module slots, speed)
3. Assemble Droid
--- In this step you insert the chassis, personality chip, and fill in the module slots (armor, chips, and modules)
No Experimentation.
This way we can design and mass produce a couple good frame types and then quickly tune each droid for the customer’s needs.
Message Edited by Rihtan on 11-16-2004 08:17 AM
- This would turn Droid Engineer into a crafting profession where Experimentation matters. I am ok with Experimentation not having an impact on my profession.
- Adding complexity to the crafting game of Droid Engineer is bad, because it means that I am required to put more effort into creating a quality product, like other crafting professions do.
I know that I'm boiling the comments to their lowest form.I'm trying to understand the root of the problem as to whether it is with people not wanting experimentation to matter, or if its because it would mean that our crafting process would change.
In order to make Experimentation in our profession matter, which has been a core request throughout the entire history of our profession, there needs to be a fundimental change to how we build our droids. Without this change, experimentation will always take a back seat ride in our profession.
Message Edited by DigitalOne on 11-16-2004 05:47 PM
Guys a 1 Star is for Trolls who write blithering posts that mean nothing. The idea is well written and thought out, just a bad idea
Drashk wrote:
Straker_Atrella wrote:
1. We already have a lot of named reources that we need, some quality some not. You probably quadruple the amount of quality resources we would need. If I need to have uber steel or fibro just to fit 6 modules into a droid, you will run out fast. This change would make a DE's job insanely more difficult.
This actually doesn't change any of the resource types. It would be a change to the experimentation process, not the required resources. You might want to re-read the suggestions again, especially the parts mentioning where average resources would produce an average rating. *IE - Recources with 50% would create an R3 with 4 Modules and 1 Armor, which is the average of a basic and an advanced module R3.
I know the resource types wouldn't change, we would need the same, but you would need huge huge amounts of quality stuff. So if I want to continue making Droids with maxed modules like I can right now, I would need to have far above average resources for EVERYTHING. People are used to making Droids with a certain number of modules, and customers are used to buying them. "Average" simply will not be enough, anything less then max modules will be considired a crappy droid.
If you make one or two droids a week, it may not be much, but if you make more, it is going to hurt. I use about 300k Crappy steel a week, and about 100k good steel. What you are talking about means I would need 400k a week of good stuff. Plus Fibro, plus Ore, plus Copper and anything else that quality doesn't depend on now. Average just wont be good enough.
2. While this makes "experimentation matter" far more, it actually makes all of our other problems worse. Can we get more then 6 modules? Can armor go over 20%? Will they get more HAM then we have now? The answer to all of those is probably no. Increasing all of those would unbalance Droids. What that means it that our Current HAM, Armor, and module numbers would be "maxed" numbers. Meaning across the boards, Droids everywhere would get worse. We already know that we have problems with people needing droids, do we really want to make droids worse? That is what would happen.
Only the HAM and the Armor on current droids would stay the same. The maxium number of modules could be increased on each droid depending on the success. If based upon a weighted scale such as that used in Harvester construction, an 80% success on any experimentation would produce a droid that we can already craft. Its the successes at 90% and 100% that could be used to gain extra function, beyond what we see now.
This is assuming that the devs actually let us go past the current number of modules, IE 7 on an R3. That is a big assumption, it would be a balance issue, increasing Combat Power, Heal Power, Harvesting power, and Utility of Droids. I would be doubtfull this would happen, this is the only true benifit to this system, and it is totally based on an awful lot of love on the developers part.
3. Droids would be a ton more complicated to customers. Already DE's complain about having to spend hours explaining droids to people. Do you really want to add the time of saying, "sorry, but server resources limit R3's to 5 module slots, and i can't build Droids that move that fast. We need to make Droid simpler, not more complicated.
Not if the success rating is set at 80% to produce a droid that is equal to a current Advanced Module droid. .
Assuming that I can get enough decent resources, and keep them in bulk. "Sorry but I can't make 6 effect Entertainer Droids" this week just wont sound great. Nor will telling people that I can't make them the same 4 module surgical droid that I made them last week.
4. You would make it totally impossible for new DE's. Not only would they be more confused, but they would have tremendously larger lists of resource needs. They would no longer be able to "get by" selling Med droids and Entertainer Droids or other non-quality droids. They would now need to aquire large stockpiles of quality resources.
None of the resources would change. The only thing that would change would be that more resource qualities actually mattered more then they do now. Any one is able to find resources that have greater then 500 quality per stat, within 1 - 2 shifts. Confusion wouldn't be a factor for a new DE, since they would be learning the system as they go.
Exactly. New DE's already have a huge list of stuff that they need to get. Telling them that EVERY SINGLE ONE needs to have every important stat over 500 is a bit much don't you think? New DE's already have a hard enough time selling stuff, average wont be good enough, they will need "good" stuff. This would make it a ton harder for them to get what they need and compete. I have been collecting resources for about a year, hardcore collecting. So obviously my Combat, Stim, and Harvesting Droids are good. The only thing a totally new DE has is their ability to make some money off of Droids like Medical or Entertainer. This system would make that a lot harder.
5. Need and Decay are our primary issues, this does nothing to fix them.
Setting up for a Decay system is one of the goals of this design. That is what the Integrity rating on each and every subcomponent and chassis is for. The Integrity rating is something that would be 100% experimentable and will be futhur fleshed out in a later doc in the Project: DE series. As soon as a Decay system is introduced, people will instantly ask, how do I get a droid that can last longer? If there isn't an experimentable attribute, people will whine louder.
So why are you messing with everything else?
If this is built to go with Decay, I can see adding integrity in, so why are you messing with Modules, HAM, Armor, and everything else? We already picked apart why swapping modules is a bad idea, so why should integrity matter on them or sub-componants?
Just make Integrity part of the Durability rating on the final Droid. There. Now we have an experimental rating for integrity with no need to nerf or overly complicate the rest of the Droid system.
So basically while this would be another "cool" fix it would drastically increase our workload yet actually decrease our sales. Sounds like a lot of work for bad results. I can't think of a single positive thing from this change, other then saying "well experimentation matters now."
In the past we have talked about making Experimentation matter within a decay system, making quality chasis's last longer before they decay and such. In a situation like that, I would support it, it would be mattering on something new that benefitted the customer. It would not be drastically lowering already current statistics on Droids.
There is no drastic lowering involved in this design, unless you are only using resources with with less then 600 weight on required stats. Something needs to give, in order to promote better experimentation within our profession. The Droid subcomponents and chassis are the root of the problem. Unless they are addressed, experimentation will not matter beyond what it already does.
600 weight on required stats can be a lot, especially when you are talking things like UT or SR on Copper. Sure you can get it, but is it easily available? People complain about Decay and resales mostly. Yes you hear people complain about Experimentation mattering more, but not nearly as much.
I take that to mean that people want more stuff to experiment on, and integrity rating for example. I DON'T take that to mean people want resource quality and experimentation to matter more on stuff we already take for granted.
You are making "Experimentation Matter" a goal worthy of itself, whichI can understand, yet can't we make thatby makingthe Droid Engineer better instead of worse? Yes this change would make it worse. Solo Missions just got nerfed, meaning less money coming in, people will expect prices to go down, not up. Yet this proposal means that the amount of quality resources a DE uses in every single Droid would go up. Meaning less profit margin. More complication, coupled with worse Droids is NOT the answer.
In later threads, I will flesh out the rest of the additions/chages that go along with this idea. Hopefully, after the rest of the idea is laid out, a better understanding of the changes proposed here will become clear. Either that, or I get to scrap certain parts of the idea.
I think experimentation should matter more as well. Just on NEW features like modules or Integrity for Decay, not on current Droid attributes. A power core that Decays, or Integrity on a Chasis, are great examples of ways to add more experimentaion without destroying our current system.
let's not be idiots with the one stars.
Drashk wrote:
So basically the two major arguements against such as change would be -
Ok Drashk, now I am annoyed. Some ideas, you and I agree on, some we don't. Yet is this sarcasm really needed?
- This would turn Droid Engineer into a crafting profession where Experimentation matters. I am ok with Experimentation not having an impact on my profession. That totally is not what was said. I want experimentation to matter as well, on new things, such as integrity, Decay or new modules. I'm not ok with making experimentation matter on EVERYTHING.
- Adding complexity to the crafting game of Droid Engineer is bad, because it means that I am required to put more effort into creating a quality product, like other crafting professions do. Yea because god knows us DE's are afraid of work, that is why we stay with it. "Like other crafting professions do," is what you said. So what is next tripling our resource amounts so were closer to Arch or SW, let's add Scout resources, so we match Armorsmith!
You are looking at Experimentaion only and nothing else. Architect needs a ton of resources, their quality needs to be Decent just not that high. Armorsmith needs a lot of Scout resources. Weaponsmith needs more named resources then we do. De's need a decent amount of named resources, decent amounts, need tons of subcomponants, and have a small resource market.
Each crafting profession is different in several ways. You are picking one and trying to match that without changing the others. For example if you were proposing your above changes, yet cutting our resource quality in half, that would be different, but you are not.
I resent your implications that those who are against this idea like having a broken profession and are lazy, that is what you just said.
I know that I'm boiling the comments to their lowest form.I'm trying to understand the root of the problem as to whether it is with people not wanting experimentation to matter, or if its because it would mean that our crafting process would change.
Make experimentaion matter more on new things, such as decay without changing the current stats on our droids, just new stats.
In order to make Experimentation in our profession matter, which has been a core request throughout the entire history of our profession, there needs to be a fundimental change to how we build our droids. Without this change, experimentation will always take a back seat ride in our profession.
Yet where did they say, make my droids worse? A core request next to Decay and Resale. Making these changes would make Experimentation matter more, but in a bad way, it would hurt resale even more.
Ok Drashk, I am going to be blunt here, since obviously from the tone of this post, so are you.
Some of us pay our bills with selling Droids. That doesn't mean we don't love Droids and don't want to see our profession fixed. It just means that some of us live on servers where Credits matter and we like to make money off of droids. Your proposal would quadruple our amount of work, yet lower our Droid quality in general. It would do nothing to fix resale, so it is basically money out of a DE's pocket.
Making experimentation matter more should be a GOOD thing, not a bad.
The truth is Drashk, you love Droids, you love the intricacies and complexity of them. You want them to be as "cool" and complicated as possible. You don't care about money, you just want droids to be diverse and fun. This has been your agenda, for a long time.
While a notable goal, there is a left, right and a middle to this profession. It is 100% possible to make experimentaion matter more without totally isolating any part.
I dig the concept, but I'm not sure the layout leads to something that could actually get coded.
What you've brought up here is tantamount to a 3rd DE revamp of sorts.
I do think this fundamental issue of chassis use, experimentation, etc. is important (very much so...I've ALWAYS been about our 'quality' game), I hesitate to want to push too far on this when we already have other major issues in front of us as a community.
- Decay
- Higher-end combat droids
- Various and sundry important DE/droid fixes (naming, etc.)
- DE/droid quest or loot rewards, etc.
Now...if we had some input from the Devs that this is an idea that we should run with and flesh out....that's a different story.
I just hate to see us run off on another huge initiative when so many of our past ones (almost universally backed by the DE community) still stand unfinished and unaddressed.
I know you have a larger vision for all this too. I guess I might hold off on piece-by-piece feedback on the proposal until the entire vision had been laid out.
/bow
Respectfully,
