Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: The Organic Harvestor...farm
Page 3 of 3
Bethya
Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:56 am
#27
Like my fellow Rangers, this obviously disconcerts me from the view of impacting my wallet but (tbh) I don't think that's a good enough reason to dismiss the idea. If it's in the best interests of the game then surely that should take priority?
(waits to be piled on by my ranger colleagues back in the ranger forum)
That said, I think the idea is interesting and creative and that I wouldn't counsel you to necessarily throw it away. I think there could be some ground in this kernel of an idea if it took a slightly different form. It's been pointed out before by others the issues with trying to use such a farm for hide, bone and meat so I won't rehearse all that again but do filter out the "don't touch my source of income" comments to see the nuggets of truth that are there as to why it wouldn't work in general. The fact that Ranger is a bit borked in terms of what we have available to us isn't a good enough reason... they should sort out the borkiness AND see if there is mileage in your idea not discount one because they can't be bothered to sort out the other.
A farm that produced eggs and milk would be interesting and I, personally, don't think it would tread on ranger toes that much since both products are intensely difficult to get in sufficient quantity to please BE's and Chefs. I personally have to be hauled over hot coals, kicking and screaming, to go hunt the stuff so if you want to farm for that, that's fine by me. I know some Rangers do hunt it a lot more.. milk can be okay on certain planets, but personally I avoid such commissions and it would certainly mean that some foodstuffs and BE tissues might make more of an appearance if the resources were easier and cheaper to get hold of.
I also think that CHs and BEs might be interested in some way of "rearing" their tamed animals/new creations in ways that make their process to mature animals a little more straightforward... and possibly allowing for greater volume to go through the process. It'd be great to see more mounts and other pets used in game and this might be a way to help that.
Just a couple of credits from me on the subject
LowbaTherf
Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:06 am
#28
maybe if it was just eggs and milk....I still say if you harvest meat,hide or bones from an animal, you have one less animal.
Dariane_Kamutsovy
Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:53 pm
#29
The only reason I'd like to see a farm is to keep my pets alive and for show 
Dariane
MRanger/MCH (!)
Jaxus
Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:11 pm
#30
The more i look back at my idea, it does suck. THANK YOU FOR SAYING IT SUCKS!!!!!! i dont want to be responsible for ruining someones bussiness.
thank you guys
Your attitude is worthy of the ranger foums, all that flaming and nothing but a thank you.... awesome.
BetrayedTemplar
Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:39 pm
#31
Sorry. I have to say negative on this one. Good creativity though. Besides the negative impact on my chosen profession, I think the devs need to concentrate their efforts on making minor tweaks and fixesto the game to smooth out game play and get the economy under control, rather than the larger changes/additions that can often have dramatic impact (and it's never really known for certain if that impact will be "good" or "bad"). Just my 2cr.
Laeren
Wed Feb 16, 2005 5:45 am
#32
I think the idea sounds intriguing in terms of certain kinds of production, like the milk and eggs idea above. The farmrequiring resources to "power" it (water, organics) is also a very cool idea (I've often though that flora harvs should have a water requirement as well).
However, I see CH's being more appropriate to go out and tame wild animals to put into the farm. And, if you're going for milk and/or eggs, you have to of course go out and tame herbivores and avians to put into the farm, toproduce milk and eggs.
I can also see the farms producing meat/hide/bone this way as well (which would effectively kill the creature), but given the amount of effort that it takes to tame a creature, it's much easier to just kill it and skin it (which a CH/scout/ranger could do anyway).
So, the CH tames X creatures and then these get put into the farm. The farm then runs for the duration of the cycle for which that particular resource is sought, and churns out the product based on what planet the farm is on. The amount of product produced would be determined by the quality of the harvester and the CL of the creatures put inside it. Perhaps even the age of the creature that is put inside of it would determine the final output amount (fully matured creatures which have been on a datapad to maturity would produce more in the end-product than newly-tamed babies that were put into the farm).
The farm itself wouldn't necesesarily need to be run by the CH. Anyone non-CH could buy BE/non-CH creatures and put them into the farm.However, only actual creatures can be put into the farm (not deeds).Therefore, anon-CH farmer would produce low amounts due to the low CL of non-CH creatures. A BE and a CH working together, however, could produce high-CL high-product-output creatures for farms (which of course would require the CH to put them into the farm, since they cannot be transferred to non-CH farmers for farming). Much as genetically engineered animals today can possibly have higher output ratios, so could BE-crafted creatures, with the CH's help.
If the Rangers want no part of this idea, then perhaps it's time to give it to the CHs/BEs and let them have fun with it.
Bethya
Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:58 pm
#33
Just another thought that occurs to me...
You know that someone somewhere would play the fox in the henhouse and come along, kill a farm's animals and harvest them all. Bound to happen...
LowbaTherf
Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:08 am
#34
Bethya wrote:
Just another thought that occurs to me...
You know that someone somewhere would play the fox in the henhouse and come along, kill a farm's animals and harvest them all. Bound to happen...
hmmm....that sounds like a job for a ranger. FARM HUNTING!!.....Except for the fact that the majority of rangers are not griefers.
Page 3 of 3