Can a Commander build itself?

It's good that you know all that smart words. It's bad that you don't know when and how to use them. Russell's "paradox" is about naive set theory - that is, it's about wrong mathematic definition. It has nothing to deal with real world, it's just a signal that set theory should be improved (and it was, successfully, long time ago). Information entropy is a term from random generation algorithms and information theory. I dunno why you mentioned it here - we are not discussing anything random here.

It seems that your problem lies here. Why you need to store accumulated knowledge inside schematic? Schematic is a part of that knowledge, BTW, so of course you got a problem. You don't need to do that. You need to store only bare empty ACU "body" schematics + memory copy algorithm + initialization algorithm.

You build a robot, you copy a memory and then you switch it on. If you want to get complete clone, including "conscience" (if there is any) you just need to (omitting some philosophical problems of possibility of such thing) make your current operating memory snapshot on disk, copy that snapshot and then restore it on other robot. In modern OSes this process called "hibernation".

Really, you are trying to overcomplexate everything.

Suddenly - you need an original in some way to make a copy. Relogin please, Sherlock.

If original got destroyed before finishing the process you do get nothing, not something "inferior" - new ACU is not even activated.

So, all this time you was trying to "convincing" us that it's impossible to make new ACU without ACU, but with ACU- ah crap, I don't understand... Of course you can't make ACU out from thin air - you need something that will build it. If "something" is original ACU - all fine. If "something" is engi - it's controlled by original ACU - all fne. If "something" is some kind of autonomous engi or factory, not controlled by any ACU - it should just have twice more memory than ACU to store ACU schematics and template memory. If ACU memory is perfect, it is always full and you can't obtain more memory, no matter how big you'll make your robot - that would be a problem, but that's a blasphemy anyway =).

A commander can build a giant factory. What if it could build a giant scanner to make a blueprint out of whatever is provided? Then we have both solutions fixed.

(I'm just going to keep peppering your arguments with actual relevant and game-specific information until you guys realise just how stupid this conversation is)

I heartily agree elexis.

There is no POINT to this discussion, apart from your over-sized computer-nerd-fuelled egos. We don't need to know if ACU's can build themselves, because that won't be happening IN GAME, unless its through something like the evac thing in SC2 (haven't played the other rts... yet) and that was for gameplay purposes.

Building an ACU would just require a ton of materials to make its structure, then a copy of the original ACU it's coming from. Sentience causes a whole new set of problems, but if they aren't sentient its just a copy. And that's easy.

And it doesn't really matter if they are sentient, or if they're being controlled by some higher computer or sentience, etc... Absolutely no need for the complex arguments that, In mine own opinion, and probably the majority of those here on the forum, you few are sprouting off at each other that are completely useless from the gaming aspect of the point. UBER will make their decision, they will have researched it sufficiently so it's not complete bollocks (i hope) and that's it. A little bit of extra background, not this multipage discussion.

@causeless that wasn't my point, but if you think that nightnord's argument is fun, please continue (but in the off-topic forums please).

Segregation of lore and gameplay discussion until we have more concrete information?

Lore is not a point? I bet you never understood why some people are playing single-player compaigns, never play online and dislike your favorite Counter-Strike/Battlefield/Call-of-Duty/Whatever? You should try not to overcompensate so aggressively.

That's a common misconception among this forums. Uber don't even have a gamedesigner in team - their creative lead is a programmer (neutrino). So hell knows what would be a result. It would be awesome, of course. But awesome success or awesome failure - that's a question.

Why should the problem of replication be the amount of data?

Of course it's possible to store the specs or blueprints of an device on the same the device, there are so many fractal patterns which can be generated.

The problem is a different one, i will pick a modern day example which already has been used partly:

Chip production. Although we have reached 10nm with lithography (which is close to the 4nm hard limit), this doesn't mean that it is perfect yet. We are able to mass-produce silicon based semiconductors, but silicon isn't the best choice. A circuit would be able to function much, much more efficient if was build in 4nm from carbon nanotubes or alike.

Problem with that? Very expensive to produce, yet so much more durable and efficient than classic technology.

Same goes for commanders, they use the best technology available. Technology which can't be replicated without expensive tools. So you have to fall back to more "classic" technologies for the mass production.

We already pinned that down. Bobucles just don't know what the "schematics" is, so he believed that we are trying to create an image capable of restoring the exact copy of the original without original AND to store that image on original. Which is, obviously, impossible.

And complex carbon connections are just itching to develop biomechanic. Which is, probably, a future.

And not so expensive as complex tech (bio-mech).

If we took just one of your posts "about" unit/commander creation from the last 3 pages and put it into the lore then PA would have more lore than TA, Supcom and Supcom2 combined.

Even if you added every post in this thread i belive it wouldent be more then the offical lore.

And if your talking about unoffical lore, then not even close my freind, not even close.

Edit: I just realised after i posted that you most likely meant that as a joke :roll: . Ohh well, i guess im just slow today.

Oh the whole, yes it is a joke

If I were to amend my statement to "official lore regarding how units are constructed" then sadly it becomes serious. Unless I missed the part in the campaign where the plucky engineer sidekick discusses the difficulties of assembling nuclear reactors at the atomic level using super-lathes.

Yes but you didnt say "regarding how units are constructed" you said "more lore total" without refearing to the construction only part.

But if we take the construction part of the lore only, then yes. I agree.

Is it bad?

For use as lore? Yes.

Aaaand we've gone full circle. Please read page one to get back into the game.

A simple algorithm has NOTHING to do with a simple process. Nothing about the Commander is made to be simple. It is custom tailored, by necessity of war and a hard coded limitation of the universe, to carry the MOST advanced and sophisticated technology possible in a small package. This is the exact opposite design philosophy of everything else in the war.

Okay, so the algorithm is easy. "Use the best stuff, download a memory core, done". I have already argued WHY that is not feasible, from a multitude of angles:

1) The technology is simply on a different level than anything standard construction is made to do, being difficult and cumbersome to repeat.
2) The algorithms for generating a Commander (or its components) from scratch are too complex to be generated in a high paced war.
3) Doing the job quickly and efficiently demands no less than a complete Commander to provide itself for the schematic (thus little to no innovation can be done, and permanent damage carries across generations).
4) Giving any less than the best leaves you with a typical unit, not worthy of being called a Commander.

Your refutations are weak. It's about parroting the same argument: "They just do it". Well, obviously they don't. They can't. If they could do it with ease, Commanders would be the only unit to ever be on the field. They aren't. Commanders synthesize units which are simple, easy to build combat forms, and they depend on raw numbers to overcome the advanced technology inside their opponent's chassis. This can only happen for ONE reason: Because basic units are somehow more effective and efficient for production and combat than a Commander.

If that was not true, nothing else would fight. Ever.

What does make sense is that a Commander fills a role no basic unit can fulfill. There is some purpose that justifies the incredible amount of extra effort to pack the the best of the best of the best into one unit. Under most situations that makes no sense, as it is generally a bad idea to put every egg into one basket. But if the Commander is built to overcome an obstacle nothing else can beat, something that even a billion billion space ships can't accomplish, then there's no other choice but to do it or die. I already covered that, multiple times.

Why so? You think people would be scared away by lot of technical info? Nah, they will just ignore it.

Have you ever considered to register this as your own official religion? Spare us from your prophecies, though.

Anyway - "best" doesn't mean "complex". Mostly it's other way around.

Well, ok. We already agreed with the point that ACU is made by some other technology. It still doesn't prevent to store this technology on ACU's PerfectTech™ AlmostInfinite® ATDSD (All-Things Data Storage Device™) too.

Algorithms to be generated? Nobody needs to generate algorithms - they are already stored on ATDSD.

Or ACU to be generated? Well, yes. You are not making children in front of the crowd, so probably ACU also need some privacy and time for such sensitive process. One may achieve such conditions by shooting all other ACUs who intervene or just trying to give advices. They it simple loads all resources from system onto some spare KEW and fly away into deeps space.

Do you know the definition of insanity^W^W^W (sorry, ignwhatever1 - there is no strike bbcode here) difference between "faith" and "knowledge"? "knowledge" is based upon some other fact. "Faith" is based upon itself.

You just tried to prove your point by using that point as argument...

Ok. Well. It raises some sociological questions about castes into ACUs society and will eventually lead to revolution. But we will leave this topic aside for a while.

Anyway, I still don't see why exactly you can't store all that "best" tech schematics into your ATDSD?

Probably you should read more that first phrase to see more deep arguments, but overall it's yes, it about "they just do it... now". Your copyrighted patented Best-Tech Schematics Storage Ultra-Preserving Ultra-Compression Storage Algorithm™ is real thing. It's already exist. It's called RAID (plus filesystem with compression and journal, of course). Extrapolating it into PerfectTech™ technologies I assume it will became fully reliable up to degree when only complete ACU destruction will lead to data inaccessibility.

Why so? ACU is not the best warrior on the field, so obviously it's not only unit to ever be on the field, no matter of it's production complexity. ACU is compromise between firepower, engineering ability and size. Made of PerfectTech™, of course. But no matter how perfect PerfectTech™ is, you pack an engineering capability and firepower comparable to separate engineer and warbot of same size made from same PefectTech™ into single unit.

So of course ACU is relaying on it's "minions" - minor teched forces - to beat other ACU or PerfectWarbot™ or PerfectEngeneer™ without exposing itself at risk.

And of course minor teched forces are much easier and cheaper to produce than another ACU or PerfectWarbot™ or PerfectEngeneer™.

But none of this makes ACU production impossible using (very-very-very complex) schematics and memory copy.

Suddenly. Nobody arguing against that. But how exactly that proves your point/faith?

It's another of your faith. It's not part of any approved lore (hint: there is no approved lore yet), so why the hell is it true?

Why not just assume that ACUs are like-living and ACU-building is their way of reproduction that require a hell lot of resources accumulated into relatively small space, so they are fighting over every single planet, every single asteroid, every single solar system just to reproduce? As any living creature do in same circumstances.

They are automatic warfare systems with only two goals - reproduce and destroy everything the hinders first goal. Like viruses.

Really, please, if you are going to answer that, spare me of your religion propaganda. Care to give some real argument why ACU schematics (that do NOT include all accumulated knowledge) could not be stored at least on some storage?

I'd just like to get this out of the way first...

Lets see: Counter-Strike - hate. Battlefield - never played, probably won't. Call-of-Duty - loathe. The only game along those lines I like is Halo, and i play that for story mostly.

My point was WHY argue this. Most don't desire, to know, and as you've pointed out, will just skip over it. We like to know that yes, Commanders are extra expensive and impractical to make on the battlefield. We'd also like to know whether they will be (as in the case of the ACU escape pod in SC2 - i'd like to point out that proves your point nightnord. I was actually agreeing with you if you'd bothered to read most of the post), or they won't be. Outside of gameplay, unless in a campaign of some sort, most don't want to know, or don't care.

Don't worry about Nightnord, in general it is better to read threads by ignoring his posts. It's the only way to avoid him derailing a thread (this may or may not be something I came to realise today).

Genius idea. Buy a gift copy of PA when it comes out, and you get to build a commander which your friend then uses.

(Yes, sarcasm.)