|
|
|
|
|
Darkened Angel Vice Captain
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:29 pm
It's the self-preservation part that's tough.
Make it very " ensure my safety 1st, then do X " and it'll end up eliminating all possible threats just to be sure it won't get attacked, then it'll see humans as being capable of reprogramming it, and that would hinder it, so it'll turn on humans, etc.
Though, what good is any robot army when you make them all process a logical paradox that makes them explode, for whatever reason?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:33 pm
Darkened Angel It's the self-preservation part that's tough. Make it very " ensure my safety 1st, then do X " and it'll end up eliminating all possible threats just to be sure it won't get attacked, then it'll see humans as being capable of reprogramming it, and that would hinder it, so it'll turn on humans, etc. Though, what good is any robot army when you make them all process a logical paradox that makes them explode, for whatever reason?HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey, anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:18 pm
Another good reason why there should never b a droid army.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:55 pm
The Geth from Mass Effect are another reason why a Droid army should never be attempted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:57 pm
Cale Darksun The Geth from Mass Effect are another reason why a Droid army should never be attempted. That's the best example I would give.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:57 pm
Alright. You guys win. For now. Ill stop with the droid soilders stuff if I need to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:34 pm
well for an army i say we go back to cloning. concidering that the 501'st have been the most loyal of all squadrens. the clones tend to listen well, not big on rebelling and they do one heck of a job cleanin a mess up. the droid army had it's flaws as we all saw and got one question...
if we go to take planets and what not...what do we do if yoda pops that little green head up outta the bush?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:12 am
Shotguns, decksweeper blasters, artillery, grenades, and personal energy shields.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 5:56 pm
the gaxaxy is really big.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:23 pm
if you were to attack a useful planet which would you attack???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:07 pm
Considering all the 'useful' planets out there, the easiest to take is probably Bespin.
Plentiful supplies of tibanna + private ownership and affiliation + nominal security.
To put it simply, Sending a Star Destroyer to secure the planet would be a bit overkill. All you'd need is a few CR-70s, and some commando teams, and you can secure virtually the entire planet (or at least Cloud City).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 11:14 pm
What do you think is the best strategy for space combat? A few large powerful ships or a lot of small frigates/freighters/corvettes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:51 am
That's a rather vague question. In star wars, a few powerful ships often have fighter support to begin with so they aren't taken down.
And numerical superiority could easily top even the elite fighters given enough. So I'm not sure. I prefer skill over numbers, but to each his own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:45 am
I personally would prefer to have my flagship be a large, powerful ship, But for a fleet, I think I could do much more with a large Number of frigates than a few capital ships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:12 am
Depends on what you're doing. Personally, the rule of thumb is 3 frigates per every Destroyer.
Having the three frigates has a few key advantages. You have more hangar space, and provide smaller targets, that are also more nimble.
However, this comes at the cost of a lot less firepower and defenses per ship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
