Damarik Posted October 6, 2015 Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) This topic has lost interest, and apparently never had a chance. Feel free to lock and archive it. Edited October 19, 2015 by Guest
Killerhurtz Posted October 6, 2015 Posted October 6, 2015 I agree with this just because of today's antics.
Conservatron Posted October 7, 2015 Posted October 7, 2015 everything a drone can do, a borg can do better except traveling down delivery tubes but still. Drones are not meant to be autonomous or have upper level ai. They're literally only in game to give dead or observing people something to do while rounds are still in service. Also don't kill mice its not nice
Damarik Posted October 7, 2015 Author Posted October 7, 2015 They're literally only in game to give dead or observing people something to do while rounds are still in service. You have valid points, and I will let others comment on them as I've already stated my reasonings. However; this last one is not entirely true. I join some games specifically to play as the Drones, and I'm sure others do too. Why? Because the little buggers are insanely fun to play.
Guest Posted October 7, 2015 Posted October 7, 2015 Drones are not meant to be autonomous or have upper level ai. They're literally only in game to give dead or observing people something to do while rounds are still in service. This is what Drones were designed for, people who wanted to play but not have any responsibility or RP. They have a 10 minute delay to spawn again after death for that reason. Drones were not ment to interact with the crew, talk to the AI, solve murders, call the shuttle, order from cargo, fight malf AI's, become pets, go space exploring, ect. If drones are given an ability to interact with the crew(AI whatever), then their respawn timer will be increased to match for fairness, drones already have a lot of power on the station As for you bugs, please report them here https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora/issues we are unlikely going to do anything about them if mentioned to us on the forums or through ahelps.
Conservatron Posted October 7, 2015 Posted October 7, 2015 They're literally only in game to give dead or observing people something to do while rounds are still in service. You have valid points, and I will let others comment on them as I've already stated my reasonings. However; this last one is not entirely true. I join some games specifically to play as the Drones, and I'm sure others do too. Why? Because the little buggers are insanely fun to play. I mean, I have too but I've been spoken to by server staff in the past for it (well, I requested they set my drone timer to 0 so I could spawn in right away and they said no because of the reasons I listed) I agree, being a drone is fun, but its meant to be fun in the way that some websites have a tiny flash game while the actual content loads, its just something to do while you aren't REALLY playing
Damarik Posted October 8, 2015 Author Posted October 8, 2015 Drones are not meant to be autonomous or have upper level ai. They're literally only in game to give dead or observing people something to do while rounds are still in service. This is what Drones were designed for, people who wanted to play but not have any responsibility or RP. They have a 10 minute delay to spawn again after death for that reason. Okay. That is reasonable. There's absolutely no reason to change that basic idea. They can still be just that. However, that doesn't mean that they can't be regular PC's too. Named Drones vs. Maintenance Drone #134...seeing a named Drone would signify that it is a player who wishes to have additional part in the story, vs. one who doesn't. Drones were not ment to interact with the crew, talk to the AI, solve murders, call the shuttle, order from cargo, fight malf AI's, become pets, go space exploring, ect. If you'll take notice, I have not suggested any of these things except what interaction would be required to upgrade them. As is, the Crew already interacts with the Drones (picking them up, wearing them as a hat, talking to them, what have you) so Interaction is already a thing, whether it was intended or not. No matter how good you are at being a Drone, there is physically no way to go the entire round without being spotted at least once if you're doing your job and not just hiding out somewhere. If drones are given an ability to interact with the crew(AI whatever), then their respawn timer will be increased to match for fairness, drones already have a lot of power on the station I don't see any problem with this either. They would have to get hit in some department or another to balance them out. It's true that they do already have pretty much all-access (though we can't view the Singulo Cameras, I've noted). Perhaps in exchange for some abilities, others can be removed. There are literally dozens of consoles around the station that Drones can interact with that they never need to, nor should, for example. Scopes, I respect you. I respect your position and your rulings, as I do with the rest of the Higher Up team. If you guys are absolute on not changing them, just say no, and I'll redact the main post, and we can bury this. That's all ya need to do, really.
jackfractal Posted October 8, 2015 Posted October 8, 2015 If you want to play a 'named drone' play an android. I mean, at that point, that's what you're playing.
Damarik Posted October 8, 2015 Author Posted October 8, 2015 If you want to play a 'named drone' play an android. I mean, at that point, that's what you're playing. Of all the things I've put up there, that's the one that bugs you? O_o Simply put: Androids aren't near as functional, nor as appealing in design aesthetics.
Killerhurtz Posted October 8, 2015 Posted October 8, 2015 Also androids are prone to AI/crew requests, diverting them from just improving the station.
Fire and Glory Posted October 8, 2015 Posted October 8, 2015 Well, I don't think they should get a clamp, as those can carry everything up to crates, so it'd need fair bit of modification, I also don't like law two, since that'd pretty much have rambo drones assaulting nuke ops and such, I don't think they should get an RCD either, they're tiny drones, not Engineering Robots. Other then those, I like it.
Damarik Posted October 8, 2015 Author Posted October 8, 2015 Well, I don't think they should get a clamp, as those can carry everything up to crates, so it'd need fair bit of modification, I also don't like law two, since that'd pretty much have rambo drones assaulting nuke ops and such, I don't think they should get an RCD either, they're tiny drones, not Engineering Robots. Other then those, I like it. I removed the RCD. Turns out they don't need one. Found out during a round the other night that you can build floor spaces by applying rods to empty space to make framework, then applying a floor tile to the resulting framework. As for Rambo Drones, no one seemed to have an issue with the drone attacking the Blob during last night's hostage situation. -shrug- But then, I could be picking nits here.
Fire and Glory Posted October 9, 2015 Posted October 9, 2015 Well, I don't think they should get a clamp, as those can carry everything up to crates, so it'd need fair bit of modification, I also don't like law two, since that'd pretty much have rambo drones assaulting nuke ops and such, I don't think they should get an RCD either, they're tiny drones, not Engineering Robots. Other then those, I like it. As for Rambo Drones, no one seemed to have an issue with the drone attacking the Blob during last night's hostage situation. -shrug- But then, I could be picking nits here. Heh, I was one of the hostage takers. Anyways, on topic, while attacking blobs is mildly sketchy, they still avoid antags, as they are told to not interfere with any being on the station that isn't a drone, this would generally include Nuke OPs and everything else. (Unless they attacked while they were EVA but that'd most likely get them a talking to.) However, with the new laws, they'd get free license to attack a Nuke Team making a hole for entry, a Traitor breaking his way through the walls, or any other antag that is doing anything regarding the station and not the crew. It'd also tell them to attack engineers or crew in general breaking walls or windows for any reason. (Can't come up with reasons right now but I can definitely tell you that an engineer will usually have a good reasons.) Maybe tell 'em to attack any non-humanoid creatures threatening the station, which gives them a reason to attack a blob or any other hostile NPC that comes from random events for that matter.
Vanagandr Posted October 9, 2015 Posted October 9, 2015 It'd also tell them to attack engineers or crew in general breaking walls or windows for any reason. (Can't come up with reasons right now but I can definitely tell you that an engineer will usually have a good reasons.) People using full windows instead of window/grille/window, generally.
Damarik Posted October 10, 2015 Author Posted October 10, 2015 Maybe tell 'em to attack any non-humanoid creatures threatening the station, which gives them a reason to attack a blob or any other hostile NPC that comes from random events for that matter. It has come to my attention through your suggestion that the current Drone Laws cause a Logical Paradox. I have listed the reasons in the original post, and have updated the New Law list to reflect not only the solution to this Paradox, but your suggestion as well. Thank you!
Guest Menown Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 The laws say don't interfere with anybody besides a drone. That's the best of your abilities. Therefore, by not interfering with an antag, you're following law one and three, so you're fine. It's not a logical paradox.
Damarik Posted October 10, 2015 Author Posted October 10, 2015 The laws say don't interfere with anybody besides a drone. That's the best of your abilities. Therefore, by not interfering with an antag, you're following law one and three, so you're fine. It's not a logical paradox. You are still failing to preserve the integrity of the station. If it is within your power to stop the station from coming to harm and you do not, you are failing to follow Law #1. Example: Drones can prevent this by bolting doors, which is well within their purview as a safety function for working in air-less environments. If a Drone does not bolt a door when noting an antagonistic presence, it has not performed to the 'best of its abilities', as bolting doors is relatively simple. This is only one example.
Guest Menown Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 It's not within their power. Drones aren't to interfere with beings, meaning they /CAN'T/ interfere. Logically, they could, but according to their programming, they can't, meaning it's not a law violation. Just because they /could/ bolt the doors, doesn't mean they can. They can't, because doing so would be a law three violation, which wouldn't happen. Drones are not free thinkers. They are not AI. They are VI. They do not choose to see something as a threat. They see things as what they simple are. Things. They do not see a changeling, or a nuke op breaking portions of the station. They see damage being done, and exist to fix said damage. They can preserve through use of reinforcing portions of the station as necessary, or to work to contain damage such as fires, breaches, ect. But they can't bolt somebody inside something to stop them from doing anything.
Damarik Posted October 10, 2015 Author Posted October 10, 2015 I can see you and I are going to be at odds about this. Just know that I have read your opinion, and have taken it into account. Allow my response: 1.Admitted, they are a simple, singular intelligence. Admitted: they have no where near AI level of sentience or cognizance. 2. Argument: If something is damaging the station, then it is (using your instance of "Limited Intelligence") seen as a defective part, as it is seeing a 'thing' that is causing a malfunction/interruption in the standard operation of the station. Along the lines of this limited intelligence, if they cannot discern a Changeling or a Nuke-Op (which you'll note have been removed from the equation by the new law suggestions), then how are they to know that it is not part of the station? How are they then to know not to attempt to 'fix' it or contain the issue until it can be fixed by station personnel? If they are to completely ignore anyone but other drones, then who is to say that the drone in question knows that this 'defective part' as mentioned above, is in-fact not part of station personnel? It wouldn't matter to the drone whether they're crew or not. It is something that is causing the said malfunction/interruption in the smooth operation of the station. To fix the damage being done, they must first eliminate the source, else damage will continue to accrue.
Killerhurtz Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 Then simple. Add a clause that drones should not retroactively fix things. Which means that they cannot 'predict' damage - and so they explicitly don't see 'sources' of damage, they only see damage.
Damarik Posted October 10, 2015 Author Posted October 10, 2015 Then simple. Add a clause that drones should not retroactively fix things. Which means that they cannot 'predict' damage - and so they explicitly don't see 'sources' of damage, they only see damage. That could work, actually. The wording would be a bit tricky though, so there's no way to mistake the intent of the law.
Killerhurtz Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 "Do not interact with station equipment unless needed, and behave in accordance to the damage that is being done, not the damage that may be done." Think that could work?
Damarik Posted October 10, 2015 Author Posted October 10, 2015 "Do not interact with station equipment unless needed, and behave in accordance to the damage that is being done, not the damage that may be done." Think that could work? I actually put something similar to that as a replacement for Law #3. I still think we should have access to the AutoLathes for producing reinforced glass. We only start out with 1 sheet, and I only know of one spot where you can actively pick up another sheet. Kinda leaves options limited.
Killerhurtz Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 Then that would count in the "unless necessary" part. That's the thing though - I know it's not optimal, but it leaves room for judgement in the player - don't fuck with antags, but no one will mind if you use station equipment to refill yourself or get to places (with doors and disposals).
jackfractal Posted October 10, 2015 Posted October 10, 2015 I think you can use your rods on your glass to produce additional reinforced glass sheets. Then you can use your one sheet of reinforced glass to pick up the newly created sheets. It's awkward, but it should be doable.
Recommended Posts