Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Uber drone
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 08:27 PM
I came up with this idea during our last session, and we all cracked up.
Originally, I just said: "Have a drone, have an agent with command, infinitely copy the agent, and viola! Inifnite attacks per round!"
When I got home, I looked up the rules, and I think this would work with a few reservations:
1. Each agent using command requires a subscription to what it's commanding.
2. Each agent needs a different ID if I want to run them all from the same node. Let's just forget about this though. I can patch them with a one week extended test, have them access the drone from various nodes, or just load them all onto my persona.
So here's the plan:
- Get a drone. Upgrade it to response 6, or add modular electronics, and then upgrade to response 6 (I think we're still arguing over whether this is necessary in a different thread).
- Get pilot 6 for the drone (max active subscriptions = pilot * 2 = 12).
- Get a rating 6 agent.
- Crack agent, and copy into 12 agents.
- Load all agents with R10 command, optimized R4.
- In combat, each agent commands drone to fire, resulting in 12 shots per IP, 36 per combat turn.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 08:32 PM
Nope. Seriously, longbowrocks. 
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 08:55 PM
Whoa. Where's the specific problem here? 
Don't worry about our campaign. For actual gaming I just stick with looking up all the possible bonus for something rather than actually bending the game this way.
Posted by: Irion May 29 2011, 08:58 PM
Nothing can have more than 4 IPs in flesh/steel.
Posted by: Stahlseele May 29 2011, 09:01 PM
I don't think this is about IP's.
It's more about several dozend agents all getting one or two IP's and all getting actions in their IP's and all using them to make the drone do the same thing(fire) again and again O.o
Posted by: Fatum May 29 2011, 09:04 PM
When you command a drone, it still performs actions. The number of actions it can perform per turn is still limited by the usual rules.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 09:07 PM
Stahlseele's answer is probably the easiest. There *is* no 6th IP, or more.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:08 PM
The drone isn't using any IP's. That logic breaks down because the drone is just a channel for the IP's of the Agents, which are actually using their IP's. That's why drones can channel 5 IP's when used in hot sim by some riggers, even though the drone acting on its own should only have 3. I might even argue that this was an intended loophole (albeit not intended to be used to such a degree).
It's just hilarious when you think of a SS main gun nailing 36 guys in three seconds from 50 kilomters away (I can't think of how that could happen though, since it takes too many actions to negate penalties enough to hit anything). At first I liked improved range finding, but then I realized it probably means "-6 for extreme range reduced to -5", not "-6 for extreme reduced to -3 for long".
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:10 PM
It's more about several dozend agents all getting one or two IP's and all getting actions in their IP's and all using them to make the drone do the same thing(fire) again and again O.o
I don't think I can get even a baker's dozen. A round dozen seems to be the limit if we say rating 6 pilot is the limit.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:12 PM
You're remote controlling it. It can have 5 IP's by remote command that way. The only challenge I can think of is that the remote control would overlap for all 12 Agents, but there is no rule preventing it, and all the rules supporting it.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 09:17 PM
No, there are no rules supporting it. One agent can maybe command a drone: total 3 IPs. That's it.
5 IPs is only for a maxed-out real hacker in hot VR. There are only 5 IPs in a turn. You can't get around that, even if you argued that 2 agents together could get 5—and you can't argue that, because that's just the classic question of 'what happens if I command a drone, then let it move for itself?' The answer is 'it doesn't work'.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:25 PM
If you were looking for something more broken, there's always "cheap 20 body bus with 6 flexible weapon mounts". A full auto burst with +53 DV isn't too shabby. 
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:30 PM
Just sayin'. There's no mention of IP's in remote control. The limiter is the number of subscriptions the drone can hold. The game has no no rules describing the amount of time a drone spends executing actions sent to it by the rigger. I maintain the drone simply acts on the rigger's command, and then awaits more commands.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 09:36 PM
That is not the limiter. Remote Control is subject to all normal initiative rules. In fact, the subscription count can go much higher.
Posted by: Fortinbras May 29 2011, 09:49 PM
SR4A p. 245
Drone Initiative equals Pilot rating + Response, and they receive two extra
Initiative Passes (three total).
On IP 1 the drone takes an action as it commanded to do. Later in IP 1, the same drone is given a command to fire again. It cannot because it has already taken it's action.
Repeat twice.
On IP 4 neither the Agents or the Drone have any more Initiative passes.
The Command is issued is to the drone's Pilot. The Pilot only has 3 IPs.
In addition, optimization to a Response of 10 would be 96k nuyen with a Availability of 40F.
Posted by: Fatum May 29 2011, 09:55 PM
I don't believe there's anything in the rules saying that outright, but this bit:
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 09:57 PM
Well, not for the persona as far as I can see, but I guess the node can support more. I misread that.
As far as actions go; new rigger, new action. Drone actions have no part in it.
"Unless already executing an ongoing action on the rigger’s behalf,
a remote controlled drone acts only when it receives commands (ie. on
the rigger’s action)."
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 10:03 PM
Drone Initiative equals Pilot rating + Response, and they receive two extra
Initiative Passes (three total).
On IP 1 the drone takes an action as it commanded to do. Later in IP 1, the same drone is given a command to fire again. It cannot because it has already taken it's action.
Repeat twice.
On IP 4 neither the Agents or the Drone have any more Initiative passes.
The Command is issued is to the drone's Pilot. The Pilot only has 3 IPs.
That's what we're arguing about.
No need. I optimized the R10 command program to run on a system of 6.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 10:08 PM
Command and jumped in actions are matrix actions. If the rigger has 5 matrix IPs, he can translate those to physical through the drone, the that's a different argument.
leads me to believe that the drone is still performing actions when you issue commands for it. So, once it's performed a complex action this IP, it can't do anything else.
That's just detailing that it takes you more time to do things since you can't get the more natural feeling of being jumped in. In effect, it keeps you from zooming in and headshotting someone in the same IP remotely, or from firing twice in one IP remotely.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 10:08 PM
We're not arguing about it, though.
Posted by: Fatum May 29 2011, 10:14 PM
"Unless already executing an ongoing action on the rigger’s behalf,
a remote controlled drone acts only when it receives commands (ie. on
the rigger’s action)."
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 10:19 PM
It's not explicit enough, sadly. But yes, it certainly is clear to the non-abusers. 
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 10:59 PM
Fine. I'm saying you're wrong, and, if you feel this sounds better than arguing, you're saying I'm wrong.
Posted by: ShadowWalker May 29 2011, 11:00 PM
from SR4A page 245:
Issuing Commands
You give a short command to the drone or other device with the
Issuing Command action (p. 245). The drone attempts to execute
those orders autonomously on its own action phase. You need to be
able to communicate with the drone, via the Matrix for example, but
do not need to be subscribed to the drone.
It's very explicit, the drone does it on it's own action phase. Not on yours, not on your agents but on it's own.
Posted by: Ascalaphus May 29 2011, 11:09 PM
Longbowrocks: you give orders to the drone, but receiving orders doesn't give it any IPs. As soon as it gets a normal IP, it'll pick an order from its backlog to execute.
Posted by: Fortinbras May 29 2011, 11:18 PM
Issuing Commands
You give a short command to the drone or other device with the
Issuing Command action (p. 245). The drone attempts to execute
those orders autonomously on its own action phase. You need to be
able to communicate with the drone, via the Matrix for example, but
do not need to be subscribed to the drone.
It's very explicit, the drone does it on it's own action phase. Not on yours, not on your agents but on it's own.
This.
You're welcome to disagree, but you're disagreeing with facts.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 11:21 PM
As always, it's not your fault, longbowrocks. You're hitting all these bumps for the first time. But it's not the first time for us. This is even in the FAQ (whether or not anyone likes it), because it's *frequently asked*.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 11:32 PM
"Most characters may not act in more than 4 Initiative
Passes in a Combat Turn (even if they spend Edge)."
Really, that fifth is spent piloting the drone, but I just skip the pilot test to use for combat instead. I then spend edge on the resulting crash test, pass it, and continue combat.
As you often tell me Yerameyahu, this has been discussed before.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=29138&hl
Posted by: longbowrocks May 29 2011, 11:33 PM
This is even in the FAQ (whether or not anyone likes it), because it's *frequently asked*.Not the FAQ! I have a long weekend, so I was going to keep going on this one until everyone got tired of it. I'll check the FAQ and get back here.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 29 2011, 11:40 PM
I'm fine with 5 IP riggers, honestly. I think the game is (or should be) intended to max out at 4 IP physical, 5 IP matrix… but it's not clearly stated that you can't rig 5 IPs, and I just don't care that much. That's not what we're talking about.
The issue is 6 IP 'rigging', or (in your example) 12 IP. That's absurd, and (sadly, like many of your discoveries, hehe) flatly against the rules. There's a reason no one else 'thought of' these brilliant ideas!
Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 12:17 AM
The issue is 6 IP 'rigging', or (in your example) 12 IP. That's absurd, and (sadly, like many of your discoveries, hehe) flatly against the rules. There's a reason no one else 'thought of' these brilliant ideas!
'cause most people can't bully/bribe their GM into allowing them *snickers* ^^
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 12:21 AM
I haven't tried to yet, but I'm willing to bet my GM wouldn't accept something like this.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 30 2011, 12:36 AM
One thing people, do not confuse the Command matrix program with issuing commands. Not sure why they called the program Command, when Remote or RC may have been more fitting. This because using the Command program is basically like driving a radio controller model vehicle, except it can be a full sized one (Mythbusters style!).
Still, only when a rigger is jumped in do the book say that a drone acts on the riggers initiative. So in any other case, unless it is performing some kind of ongoing action, the drone will be holding actions in the event that it has higher initiative then the person operating it.
Btw, this discussion puts a very interesting light on the limitations of driving a vehicle by way of the Command program...
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 12:52 AM
I think we've only had one instance of that confusion in this thread, but I didn't comment since I assumed the person knew what they meant. You noticed too?
Oho? Do tell.
(caps for noticeability)
BY THE WAY: I give up guys. Let's repurpose this thread.
How about the idea I posted earlier that involves a bus with 6 flexible weapon mounts and automatic weapons on each one?
25k for bus
21k for mounts
18k or so for weapons (3k each)
4k for 20 armor (resulting in 18 condition boxes and 40 soak pool)
All in all, doom bus available at chargen for 68k? Get some debt and buy 4! One for everybody!
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 01:20 AM
You can do that, but then the question is rules for 'linked' fire. AFAIK, it doesn't exist.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 01:24 AM
I guess you could slave 5 of the guns to the other one. I guess you could treat the result as 6 separate attacks, but it makes more sense to me to treat it as a burst with more bullets.
Posted by: CanRay May 30 2011, 01:27 AM
Would that trick work on http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=34981&view=findpost&p=1070371?
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 01:32 AM
I don't get it. That was an awesome contribution to SR, but that drone can only mount one gun. Also, shouldn't it be body 4 based on the description?
Posted by: CanRay May 30 2011, 01:33 AM
Nah, not nearly tough enough for 4. Also, it's tall, but not that thick. Makes it look less threatening that way. I guess I should describe it as a "Skinny" Troll.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 01:37 AM
The point is there's no rule for that, longbowrocks. Unless there's one that I'm not aware of, in which case I'd love to know!
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 01:37 AM
Lol, ok. I just thought it sounded like it was rather bigger than a motorcycle.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 01:39 AM
We house rule a lot if we don't remember every little detail. At least until someone looks up the rule in question. I'll let you know if I find anything.
Posted by: Badmoodguy88 May 30 2011, 08:40 AM
What if is it was a ship with a dozen weapon mounds? Could each agent control one weapon mount? The whole ship is in a way one drone but each weapon mount is a bit like a turret drone too. It seems very silly for a gun to fire under control of 12 agents but it is not silly for 12 agents to control 12 drones right?
Posted by: DireRadiant May 30 2011, 08:52 AM
Without "cheating" you could mount a smart (piloted) gun or five onto a drone, and get lots of lead flying that way.
It's not an issue with getting more firepower, that's easy. There's no need to abuse the rules.
Posted by: Ascalaphus May 30 2011, 09:13 AM
I always thought those "only one gun on the drone can fire" rule was a bit silly and begging for someone to use common sense to come up with a workaround.
Posted by: phlapjack77 May 30 2011, 09:36 AM
Does the MRSI system have anything about attacks coming from different sources? If not, there should be - this seems like something that a tacnet / MRSI / drone barrage would be good for*
"Target that explosion and fire"
* and by good for, I mean makes sense. Not that I actually think MRSI is a good idea in-game...
Posted by: Stahlseele May 30 2011, 10:22 AM
Star Trek, the unconquered Land.
When the Stealthed Bird of Prey has been hit by the sniffer Torpedo.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm May 30 2011, 11:33 AM
It does in WAR!
. You can fire several weapons at one target, and the resulting DV is the SUM of the DVs, IIRC. (Ninja'd by phlapjack)The problem with the Gunboat/gun truck is that, as I see it, you can't put an "independent" turret, with its own pilot program, on a drone. What you would have to do is put several Smart platforms on remote gyro-linked, and command linked, turret mounts. However, you would need 1 IP to align the gyro-linked mounts with the target, and then another IP to give the linked smart platforms the order to fire on that target, only then could the smart platforms fire without movement penalties. And that still disregards the actions required for sensor lock (of which I still haven't understood whether you need it or not.)
If you don't mind movement penalties, you could simply bolt a few smart platforms on the truck, and link their orders.
Posted by: Tanegar May 30 2011, 11:37 AM
When the Stealthed Bird of Prey has been hit by the sniffer Torpedo.
Close, but no cigar. The subtitle of Star Trek VI was "The Undiscovered Country." Hand in your nerd badge, you're through!
Posted by: hobgoblin May 30 2011, 11:48 AM
Mostly it is a implication regarding my "hold action" reading, as if the Command program use the initiative of the vehicle, not the driver, there will be a lag between command input and performance if the initiative score of the driver is higher then that of the vehicle.
This because the vehicle would not respond to the input until its initiative comes up on that pass.
Posted by: The Jopp May 30 2011, 12:06 PM
With the "similar Models" rule you could make a sturdier BOD 21 bus and have 7 Gunmounts.
Posted by: Modular Man May 30 2011, 01:07 PM
I'm seeing another problem, here. Though I don't know any rules to confirm that, it is stated in the books that agents have very little to no knowledge of the real world, let alone being able to interfere with it. So having an agent take over your gun turret seems impossible to me. At least, that may be the reason why agents and pilots are listed separately - there seems to be a (somewhat small) difference between them.
This is where I'd make the cut to that discussion.
And that bus of rolling doom is far from subtle. I've seen Mechs constructed for Shadowrun, it's not impossible to sport an army's firepower. A dozen flying drones with LMGs and a tacnet would do, too.
Posted by: The Jopp May 30 2011, 01:41 PM
DOOMBUS (Mad AI)
BOD 21
X5 Flexible Guns (90 Degree) Front, Left, Right, Rear, Top (10 Slots) (Mount+Flexible)
Gridguide Modification (1 Slot)
Gridguide override (1 Slot)
Chameleon Coating (2 Slots)
Sensor Dampening 3 (6 Slots)
Regular Armor 42 (1 Slot)
Middle Drone Lifestyle (0 Slots)
Improved Sensor, Firewall, Signal
Improved Pilot Rating: 4 (Guns)
Gunnery Pilots X5 Rating 4
Weapons: Ares heavy MP Laser
Mod: Burst Fire / Full Auto / Smartgun Link (Top mounted)
Chameleon Coating (Hard to see)
Sensor Dampening (-3 removes large vehicle sensor penalty)
Electric Vehicle (-3 Sensor targeting)
It also has Zapper strips, Smoke and oil dispensers.
DESTROY! DESTROY! DESTROY!
The Doombus prowls the city in the night, vaporising bystanders as it zooms past.
Sorry about the above, i had a stroke of insanity
Posted by: Falconer May 30 2011, 01:58 PM
The biggest problem to me is arguing that more than one person/agent can remote control something at the same time without stepping all over each other.
For large vehicles I don't see a problem if systems get segmented. IE: this one is handling EW & sensors, this one is handling this weapon turret, this one is driving the vehicle. More or less no different than a crew served vehicle. But I have issues if you say two different things are using the same gun mount at exactly the same time.
Even with the above... the system doesn't breakdown. Autosofts only run for pilot programs not agents. So an agent is hard pressed to do any drone actions (no clearsight, targetting, or even maneuver autosoft available to them).
Posted by: Ascalaphus May 30 2011, 02:20 PM
You could just repeatedly staple a gun with its own Pilot (which exists as a weapon mod!) to a car until your weapon mounts run out.
As a note to the doombus, I thought the vehicle armor mod only went up to (Body * 2, max 20)?
Posted by: Fortinbras May 30 2011, 02:33 PM
I've got it. Strap a bunch of smart weapon mounts to a flock or Busy Buddies. Mod them out just a tad and...
Sunday, Sunday, Sunday it's Doombus vs. Roombas!
If you're not there, you'd better be dead! Or in jail!
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 30 2011, 03:33 PM
Brainpiercing, MRSI isn't the same as linked fire, in the sense we meant. It doesn't even work for bullets, right? We're talking about automatics.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 04:12 PM
BOD 21
X5 Flexible Guns (90 Degree) Front, Left, Right, Rear, Top (10 Slots) (Mount+Flexible)
Gridguide Modification (1 Slot)
Gridguide override (1 Slot)
Chameleon Coating (2 Slots)
Sensor Dampening 3 (6 Slots)
Regular Armor 42 (1 Slot)
Middle Drone Lifestyle (0 Slots)
Improved Sensor, Firewall, Signal
Improved Pilot Rating: 4 (Guns)
Gunnery Pilots X5 Rating 4
Weapons: Ares heavy MP Laser
Mod: Burst Fire / Full Auto / Smartgun Link (Top mounted)
Chameleon Coating (Hard to see)
Sensor Dampening (-3 removes large vehicle sensor penalty)
Electric Vehicle (-3 Sensor targeting)
It also has Zapper strips, Smoke and oil dispensers.
DESTROY! DESTROY! DESTROY!
The Doombus prowls the city in the night, vaporising bystanders as it zooms past.
Sorry about the above, i had a stroke of insanity
Lol. Chameleon coating was errata'd to 1 slot, so what do you want to do with that last slot?
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 04:13 PM
Nice! I was looking for something like that.
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 04:14 PM
This because the vehicle would not respond to the input until its initiative comes up on that pass.
Initiative is a mental thing. Since the vehicle doesn't need to think, it would act on its user's initiative.
Posted by: ggodo May 30 2011, 10:45 PM
Umm. . .
The book says:
Drone Initiative
Like any program, the drone’s Pilot acts at digital speeds. Drone
Initiative equals Pilot rating + Response, and they receive two extra
Initiative Passes (three total). When a rigger has jumped into the
drone, it acts on the rigger’s Initiative instead. If a rigger jumps out
of a drone, it acts with the same Initiative Score for the remainder of
the Combat Turn.
SR4A
245
Posted by: longbowrocks May 30 2011, 11:10 PM
Thanks. I didn't want to look it up. So now we have both RAW and my explanation of the RAW.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 12:40 AM
more like misrepresentation of raw.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 12:59 AM
I think I saw some confusion above, so let's recap straight from p245:
• Autonomous drone actions ('issued commands'): drone initiative.
• Remote Control: rigger initiative (AR or VR).
• 'Jumped In': rigger initiative (VR).
That's it. If agents or sprites Issue Commands or Remote Control (if possible), it's no different. Cyborg? Jumped-In. AI? Jumped-In if it's got the Pilot Origin, otherwise not. At no point is anyone getting more than 4 (possibly 5, depending on the GM) IPs, because only one thing can control it at once, and the initiative system doesn't *have* 6 IPs or more.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 01:59 AM
point two i wonder about tho, as RAW do nott mention the initiative at all in the related section. Both the sections for point 1 and 3 get a initiative mention tho.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 02:07 AM
It does, though. It says, "a remote controlled drone acts only when it receives commands (ie. on the rigger’s action)."
Posted by: longbowrocks May 31 2011, 02:47 AM
Based on discussion thus far, I don't see how this is wrong.
User = rigger for both rigging and remote control (this is when you use rigger initiative).
User = drone when drone pilots itself (this is when you use drone initiative).
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 02:54 AM
Yup. That's what I just said, pulled directly from p245. The only other vehicular option is, of course, driving from the driver's seat. But that one's obvious.
Your wording earlier isn't very helpful though. The Pilot really *is* the vehicle, so you could just as well say that it does need to think.
Posted by: Badmoodguy88 May 31 2011, 04:24 AM
Enough of this.
I demand more doom bus!
Posted by: Fatum May 31 2011, 05:09 AM
Actually, I believe I have a write-up of a highly modified bus of doom/poor man's IFV somewhere in my old files...
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm May 31 2011, 12:31 PM
It doesn't even work for bullets, right? We're talking about automatics.Ok, well, I admit I only skimmed the thing, and thought "what madness"....
Posted by: Stahlseele May 31 2011, 01:02 PM
It works for several FullAuto-Grenade-Launchers though . .
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein May 31 2011, 01:12 PM
When the Stealthed Bird of Prey has been hit by the sniffer Torpedo.
Undiscovered Country, Stahlseele... *shakes Head*
EDIT: Damn, Tanegar got to it first...
Posted by: Stahlseele May 31 2011, 01:58 PM
EDIT: Damn, Tanegar got to it first...
Ah, right, country . . the more correct translation . .
i went from the german title, which is Das unentdeckte Land.
Forgot that land means something different than country <.<
Posted by: Irion May 31 2011, 02:00 PM
@Stahlseele
Not to be rude but unconquered means "nicht erobert".
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 02:04 PM
Yeah, AFAIK 'Das unentdeckte Land' means 'The Undiscovered Country'. It's okay, we don't love you any less.
Posted by: CanRay May 31 2011, 03:07 PM
One of my group got bored and came up with "The latest in mass transportation in the high-threat areas" in making the Luft-Bus. I think we had some slots available still so could probably mount a few external turrets for MGs or something.
Posted by: James McMurray May 31 2011, 03:55 PM
If you feel feisty, please post its stats to http://shadowrun.colugo.org/threats/. I've mentioned "the gun bus" in our campaign every now and then for SINless living in Redmond or Puyallup, since you can't even take a real bus without a SIN these days, and no real bus would go into those neighborhoods anyway.
Posted by: CanRay May 31 2011, 04:05 PM
He's got it, and I'm busy trying to beat more ShadowSkool out of him.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 06:53 PM
User = rigger for both rigging and remote control (this is when you use rigger initiative).
User = drone when drone pilots itself (this is when you use drone initiative).
Except that a drone pilot is not as much mental as computational...
tho i guess one can argue that a brain is also a computer, especially in SR.
I guess the one line just took me by surprise, as it had no justifications for its claim.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 06:57 PM
I guess so, tho that line is somewhat problematic as it makes it seem that the drone is still doing things on its own, it is just being prodded into action by the rigger.
a simple "all actions take place on the rigger initiative" would have removed the ambiguity, imo.
The line also reinforce the poor naming of the Command program, as it talks about "receives commands" even tho that kind of wording would fit better under "issuing commands" then "remote control".
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 07:05 PM
It makes it seem like it *isn't* doing its own things. It says "acts only on rigger commands", and specifically "on the rigger's action". No, the writing is never really perfect.
Agreed about the Command Program. I assume they didn't want to make the hacker/rigger buy two separate programs (though maybe they should!).
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 07:56 PM
Huh? there is no program involved in giving commands. You do that much like you do with a trained animal.
Posted by: Yerameyahu May 31 2011, 09:26 PM
Oh, duh. I was thinking of Spoofing commands, I guess.
Posted by: hobgoblin May 31 2011, 09:54 PM
heh, shows how convoluted things can get when it involves drones
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)