Ok, i know everyone's noticed that SR4 has easy access to a "hacker in a box" (read: agent). i'm just curious if anyone considered the possibilities of, say, a commlink with response 6, loaded up with rating 6 agents, each with a command program and some autosofts (maneuver, targetting, clearsight, and defense, shall we say?)
each agent remote controls 1 drone.
this significantly reduces the main expense in upgrading drones; you no longer need a response chip for each drone you want upgraded, just the one.
of course, the title is slightly off... it's really riggers in a box.
(mind you, it may be wise to change some of the program selections... say, ECCM and an electronic warfare autosoft would certainly go a long way towards guarding the connection. alternately, depending on how you interpret the rule for loss of response, it may be worthwhile to overburden your agent even...)
so what does everyone think?
Full Version: Rigger in a box...
It's not a bad idea, but bear in mind that agents are specialized programs to some extent - while they might be idle for managing your drones for a specific, simple task (guard me, shoot them, recon, etc), when it comes to a major decision on the fly that needs more metahuman intuition to consider, you run high risks the agent will screw things up, or idle up in errors.
Of course, the moment someone changes the agents problem to one it can solve, it might not matter. >.<
Of course, the moment someone changes the agents problem to one it can solve, it might not matter. >.<
well, i suppose this is more of a cheaper alternative to upgrading your drones, rather than fully replacing a rigger (who can still get more dice relatively easily).
of course, once we get something with a little bit better fuzzy logic, it could be interesting...
of course, once we get something with a little bit better fuzzy logic, it could be interesting...
Hmm. Correct me if I'm wrong, but an Agent running a drone is called Pilot.
And loading the Pilot on your commlink, rather than the drone itself, is possible, but exposes you to greater electronic warfare risks.
So, basically, that's reinventing the wheel, but making it square instead.
And loading the Pilot on your commlink, rather than the drone itself, is possible, but exposes you to greater electronic warfare risks.
So, basically, that's reinventing the wheel, but making it square instead.
no, there's a difference between running a pilot and the agent. the pilot *is* the OS, whereas the agent runs off of the OS.
and like i said, if you are worried about EW risks, it's not too hard to counter. load up the electronic warfare and ECCM programs into your drones. get yourself a satellite link (with a starting signal of
. that should make you pretty resilient against most electronic warfare problems.
and if it doesn't, there's still a pilot in the drone itself as backup
and like i said, if you are worried about EW risks, it's not too hard to counter. load up the electronic warfare and ECCM programs into your drones. get yourself a satellite link (with a starting signal of
. that should make you pretty resilient against most electronic warfare problems.and if it doesn't, there's still a pilot in the drone itself as backup
| QUOTE (Cold-Dragon) |
| It's not a bad idea, but bear in mind that agents are specialized programs to some extent - while they might be idle for managing your drones for a specific, simple task (guard me, shoot them, recon, etc), when it comes to a major decision on the fly that needs more metahuman intuition to consider, you run high risks the agent will screw things up, or idle up in errors. Of course, the moment someone changes the agents problem to one it can solve, it might not matter. >.< |
You suggest that drones are good for anything beyond "Shoot that."
Isn't that what everyone has a Steel Lynx for?
| QUOTE (Jaid) |
| well, i suppose this is more of a cheaper alternative to upgrading your drones, rather than fully replacing a rigger (who can still get more dice relatively easily). of course, once we get something with a little bit better fuzzy logic, it could be interesting... |
Automonous Drones are what you are looking at here and don't exist in SR4 yet. SR3 had them so it's safe to say we'll see them soon and I'd wager with more options than 2065.
Pilot/Agent can accept direction but lack the ability to take information and form a decision that goes beyond their programming. They lack the spark to act outside their directives.
It's coming chummer...it's coming!
Alright, there are 2 ways for a drone to be controlled: Issue orders to it and Jump into it.
If you're talking about having an Agent jump into a drone, like I said, that's redundant, as Agent stats are equal to Pilot stats, since they are both the same program under a differant name.
If you're talking about an Agent issuing commands to a Pilot, then, again, that's redundant, since your Agent has the same decision-taking capabilities as a Pilot on it's own, since, once again, they are the same program.
I fail to see any advantage gained. All your doing is adding a point of failure (the extra wireless command signal) that can be compromised. Yes, you can defend against it. But why have it at all?
If you're talking about having an Agent jump into a drone, like I said, that's redundant, as Agent stats are equal to Pilot stats, since they are both the same program under a differant name.
If you're talking about an Agent issuing commands to a Pilot, then, again, that's redundant, since your Agent has the same decision-taking capabilities as a Pilot on it's own, since, once again, they are the same program.
I fail to see any advantage gained. All your doing is adding a point of failure (the extra wireless command signal) that can be compromised. Yes, you can defend against it. But why have it at all?
| QUOTE (Backgammon) |
| Alright, there are 2 ways for a drone to be controlled: Issue orders to it and Jump into it. If you're talking about having an Agent jump into a drone, like I said, that's redundant, as Agent stats are equal to Pilot stats, since they are both the same program under a differant name. If you're talking about an Agent issuing commands to a Pilot, then, again, that's redundant, since your Agent has the same decision-taking capabilities as a Pilot on it's own, since, once again, they are the same program. I fail to see any advantage gained. All your doing is adding a point of failure (the extra wireless command signal) that can be compromised. Yes, you can defend against it. But why have it at all? |
He want's smarter AI to make decisions like Fuzzy Logic and Robotic Pilots from SR3.
| QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll) |
| Automonous Drones are what you are looking at here and don't exist in SR4 yet. SR3 had them so it's safe to say we'll see them soon and I'd wager with more options than 2065. It's coming chummer...it's coming! |
...heheheh...
-Princess Kam
Aeon Enterprises KOH
| QUOTE (Backgammon @ Sep 12 2006, 12:54 PM) |
| Alright, there are 2 ways for a drone to be controlled: Issue orders to it and Jump into it. If you're talking about having an Agent jump into a drone, like I said, that's redundant, as Agent stats are equal to Pilot stats, since they are both the same program under a differant name. If you're talking about an Agent issuing commands to a Pilot, then, again, that's redundant, since your Agent has the same decision-taking capabilities as a Pilot on it's own, since, once again, they are the same program. I fail to see any advantage gained. All your doing is adding a point of failure (the extra wireless command signal) that can be compromised. Yes, you can defend against it. But why have it at all? |
see, that's where you missed something. there are *3* ways to control a drone.
1) give it orders
2) rig it
3) remote control it, using the command program.
the above uses option 3, although i suppose if you argue a pilot program can rig a drone from a different commlink, then using pilot programs would be better.
the advantage i am getting at is simple: you don't need to upgrade the drone's response to upgrade the drone's abilities.
for example, with a dedicated drone rigger, let's suppose you boost the response of a drone to 4, get a rating 4 pilot program, and some rating 4 autosofts. now the pilot program and the autosofts are easy to duplicate... the response is not. your other drones cannot benefit from that pilot rating 4 or the rating 4 autosofts until you get them a response chip capable of handling it.
the advantage to my method is that you can load multiple controlling entities (be they agents remote controlling drones via command, or pilots rigging remotely, if that's possible even) onto a single device. thus, you no longer worry about the costs of a response chip for every drone... you can have one response chip for several drones. furthermore, losing the drone doesn't lose the response chip, making it poissible to have drones that you don't mind sacrificing, but which are still effective (10 dice for fully upgraded drones vs 6 for most default drones with autosofts)
essentially, i'm not talking about an increase in effectiveness over fully upgraded drones, i'm talking about a decrease in cost to get those drones fully upgraded.
additional savings come in the form of being able to move the upgrade from drone to drone, as needed (so if you need a drone to be at max ability, you can boost it, but when that boost becomes more needed elsewhere because of changing circumstances, you can just move that bonus to where it's needed most).
and as an added advantage, you can use this on captured drones to make them more effective without needing time to upgrade the drone... so even if your enemy is using stock dobermans, you can have your fully upgraded programs control it and get those extra dice =)
[edit] oh, and while i am awaiting the return of robots, they are not necessary for the advantages outlined above to work... just thought i'd clear that up =P [/edit]
You are saying you want to run an agent on your commlink and have the agent run a command program to operate the drone, and this is cheaper then upgrading the drone directly.
e.g. Agent 5 on your commlink with command 5 can operate a rating 3 pilot drone.
e.g. Agent 5 on your commlink with command 5 can operate a rating 3 pilot drone.
well, the trick here is that it's not *an* agent i'm talking about.
think more along the lines of a response 5 commlink with 4 rating 5 agents in it, each with command and 3 other programs, each running a separate drone.
or, ultimately, once you get fully upgraded, a response 6 commlink with 5 rating 6 agents, each with command 6 and 4 autosofts, each running a separate drone.
[edit] and this would be cheaper than upgrading 5 different drones to response 6, of course. [/edit]
but otherwise, yes, you've got the idea right.
think more along the lines of a response 5 commlink with 4 rating 5 agents in it, each with command and 3 other programs, each running a separate drone.
or, ultimately, once you get fully upgraded, a response 6 commlink with 5 rating 6 agents, each with command 6 and 4 autosofts, each running a separate drone.
[edit] and this would be cheaper than upgrading 5 different drones to response 6, of course. [/edit]
but otherwise, yes, you've got the idea right.
| QUOTE (Jaid) |
| see, that's where you missed something. there are *3* ways to control a drone. 1) give it orders 2) rig it 3) remote control it, using the command program. the above uses option 3, although i suppose if you argue a pilot program can rig a drone from a different commlink, then using pilot programs would be better. the advantage i am getting at is simple: you don't need to upgrade the drone's response to upgrade the drone's abilities. for example, with a dedicated drone rigger, let's suppose you boost the response of a drone to 4, get a rating 4 pilot program, and some rating 4 autosofts. now the pilot program and the autosofts are easy to duplicate... the response is not. your other drones cannot benefit from that pilot rating 4 or the rating 4 autosofts until you get them a response chip capable of handling it. the advantage to my method is that you can load multiple controlling entities (be they agents remote controlling drones via command, or pilots rigging remotely, if that's possible even) onto a single device. thus, you no longer worry about the costs of a response chip for every drone... you can have one response chip for several drones. furthermore, losing the drone doesn't lose the response chip, making it poissible to have drones that you don't mind sacrificing, but which are still effective (10 dice for fully upgraded drones vs 6 for most default drones with autosofts) essentially, i'm not talking about an increase in effectiveness over fully upgraded drones, i'm talking about a decrease in cost to get those drones fully upgraded. additional savings come in the form of being able to move the upgrade from drone to drone, as needed (so if you need a drone to be at max ability, you can boost it, but when that boost becomes more needed elsewhere because of changing circumstances, you can just move that bonus to where it's needed most). and as an added advantage, you can use this on captured drones to make them more effective without needing time to upgrade the drone... so even if your enemy is using stock dobermans, you can have your fully upgraded programs control it and get those extra dice =) [edit] oh, and while i am awaiting the return of robots, they are not necessary for the advantages outlined above to work... just thought i'd clear that up =P [/edit] |
I get what you're saying. What you're not getting is that your 1 and 3 are the same thing. An Agent using the command program to give order to a drone is the SAME as a rigger doing it, except the Agent needs the command program to be able to do so. The Agent would issue the commands, but the Pilot would *still* be acting on it's own, exactly the same as if a rigger gave it a command. If you're not Jumped In, the Pilot is the one running the show. You, or the Agent, just tell it what to do.
Now, it's true Agent are quick little buggers, so can issue commands rapidly. But your Pilot is *still* going to need high stats to be really good. So you're not saving money.
If you are a talented Rigger or have a Hacker friend, just buy a really good pilot, say 4 or 5 and then break the copywrite protection on it. Bamm, free whatever qual Pilot programs for all your drones of that type.
To keep players from going haywire doing this, limit the Pilot to a specific drone, say you start off with a Doberman Pilot, you have copies for more dobermans, but not anything else.
To keep players from going haywire doing this, limit the Pilot to a specific drone, say you start off with a Doberman Pilot, you have copies for more dobermans, but not anything else.
| QUOTE (Konsaki) |
| If you are a talented Rigger or have a Hacker friend, just buy a really good pilot, say 4 or 5 and then break the copywrite protection on it. Bamm, free whatever qual Pilot programs for all your drones of that type. To keep players from going haywire doing this, limit the Pilot to a specific drone, say you start off with a Doberman Pilot, you have copies for more dobermans, but not anything else. |
i have already covered the problem with this. you need response 4 or 5 to run pilot 4 or 5. pilot program you can basically buy once and get infinite copies. response is not so easy, and costs you money per drone.
| QUOTE (Backgammon) |
| I get what you're saying. What you're not getting is that your 1 and 3 are the same thing. |
no, you're not getting what i'm saying at all. i will provide you with the relevant quotes, all from the BBB page 220, under the heading "controlling devices".
| QUOTE |
| You can control all sorts of Matrix-enabled devices remotely through the Matrix, from simple automatic security doors and elevators to drones and agents... Remotely controlling a drone would take a Command + vehicle skill Test, and so on. Note that remotely controlling a drone in this matter is different from rigging a drone (requiring you to “jump into” the drone with full VR and “become” the drone) or issuing commands to a drone (in which case it acts on its own accord). |
as you can see, it is *explicitly* a different thing. there are obviously three different ways of controlling drones, minimum, because this is pretty obviously a way that is neither rigging nor issuing commands to a drone.
so then, does that change your opinion any?
so then, does that change your opinion any?
Ok, I'm sorry, you're right. I had only reas the Rigging part of the rules and not the Matric part. One again, SR does a good job of fragmenting rules.
I guess your points are valid. You could substitute the Pilot for Agents. Is it really better? I'm not really sure. It seems a rond-about way of doing things. But I do admit your points are valid.
I guess your points are valid. You could substitute the Pilot for Agents. Is it really better? I'm not really sure. It seems a rond-about way of doing things. But I do admit your points are valid.
well, to be honest, it's not really "better" (in fact, because pilot programs don't need the command program, they can run an extra autosoft, and they aren't as reliant on the maneuver autosoft (Read: they default at attribute, or in their case pilot rating, instead of attribute - 1, whereas i'm not so sure an agent should even be able to default on vehicle skills, but if they can it's gonna be at -1), so they could potentially load up on more programs than the agents.
it's not really better so much as it is a crapload cheaper, and more convenient in certain situations.
it's not really better so much as it is a crapload cheaper, and more convenient in certain situations.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.