Creature Handler Archive
Thread: Fan Fest Scout/Ranger/CH Forum Notes
Page 1 of 3
DeltaXi65
Mon Jun 07, 2004 6:42 pm
#1
Gang,
Here are my notes. I'm starting with the Scout/Ranger/CH Forum notes. These are in "question and answer" format. I hate this - but I didn't write down the Devs who were present. GreenMarine was there, butI can't remember who he was with.
I'm posting this in the Scout, Ranger and CH forums, as well as here.
B
Q: CH Pet Issue - autostoring, not following, etc. Why?
A: This was a pathfinding code issue - the Devs are still tweaking it. The server zone boundary issue has been discussed before as the cause of some of the storing and not listening issues. (In depth: Each planet has multiple servers. The server boundaries overlap. If a pet is on one side of a boundary, and the player is in another, the two servers aren't talking and the pet doesn't get the command because the server the player is in can't "see" the pet).
Q: Traps on NPCs and on other players - will we ever get this?
A: Scouts/Rangers probably will never get this. The design was that Scouts/Rangers are supposed to be hunters of creatures, while BHs are hunters of men. If traps are usable on players or NPCs ever, they will probably be for BHs.
Q: Do Rangers get a bonus for disabling minefields?
A: Not sure. Didn't think so. (My note: This is something the Scouts have requested for the GCW revamp)
Q: Will we ever be able to use traps on player pets?
A: There are no concrete plans, but this is something that can be looked at after the combat balance.
My First Question: One thing we've requested has been to allow us to use our terrain negotiation on mounted creatures, as a means of making our TN skill mod more important. Is this a.) physically possible in the game system and b.) something that sounds like a legitmiate request?
A: Yes it's physically possible, but they need to make sure that if this happens that the speed issues are addressed so as to not make them overpowered speed-wise. There were originally plans for a mounted-combatant profession when mounts first came out, but those plans were dropped, but the ideas were still there, so it could be possible to add some of those in for Scouts/Rangers/CHs. (My note: GreenMarine was receptive of this idea.)
Q: CH complaints regarding pet levels - babies not spawning, etc. They ganged up on poor Green! 
A: The Devs want CHs to know that they are aware that they need help, and they plan on working to make sure that those minor bugs are worked out. Also said that a lot of things will be different after the combat balance and after that is done, these issues can be discussed again. (My note: GreenMarine is now working on the space expansion, so he was only there to provide us the information that he could - namely the history behind the systems and how they were supposed to work...he is not there to make these changes, so if you've still got ideas or questions, make sure you get them to Vert, Calc and I and we'll pass 'em on.)
Q: Trap attacks that fail are still causing instant aggro - is that a bug?
A: The way that traps work is causing the problem. It shouldn't work that way - if you throw a trap, it shouldn't automatically aggro you to other creatures and the creature you through at unless the trap hits. This needs to be looked at.
Q: Areatrack - any way to make it better? Can we add a waypoint, etc?
A: A waypoint is something that can easily be done- Green is going to talk to the Live guys about this. There was a discussion of how areatrack works, and how the "scanarea" command was going to be implemented (basically it was going to be able to give you mini missions...you scan for that creature and with a successful scan, it would lead you on a "mission" that would end with a spawn of that creature, or maybe another one if you failed it). Areatrack is basically a database listing of all the creatures in the given zone, and it's done based on how the server lists the creatures in the database, which is why it can be truncated. The reason it is so slow is because it is requesting the information from the d-base server, and if folks were repeatedly refreshing it, they could crash the server. There is a hardcap limit of 1000 creatures per server.
- At this point there was a discussion of the whole "empty planet" issue with random spawns. This was similiar to another discussion in a general Dev forum, and it was confirmed that this issue is being actively investigated.
My Second Question: What's the point of forage? Why was it implemented?
A: Forage was an ability that was designed as a means to make Scouting the environment fun and give the Scouts a reason to do it. There were specific zones on each server that were designed to be foragable. There was also a specific "uber loot" table that was created to hold the cool stuff that was supposed to be implemented to go along with the random foods and bait that you get when foraging. However, there wasn't time to complete the system. Down the road, this may be something that can be reviewed and possibly reimplemented if there is a large request for it.
Funny note: Many Scouts have asked what the deal was with the "forage bug" - yousometimes get a "you succesfully forage an item but there was insufficient space in the inventory" system message when foraging. I was finally able to get the answer out of Green:This is the result of a succesful "uber loot" roll. BUT there is only one item of uber loot that was added to the loot table to test it - a huge wedding cake. However, the wedding cake was coded under the old inventory system, where instead of each item taking up one "slot" in the inventory, each item had a "volume". This has since been removed, with each item having a volume of one slot. Because of this, the wedding cake takes up something like 110 slots- much larger than anyone's inventory, so you can never pick it up! Maybe I'm just weird, but the whole idea of foraging a large wedding cake makes me laugh.
That was the Scout/Ranger/CH forum - we had a great time, and everyone even clapped for me when I introduced myself. (And one of the Scouts later bought me two beers for all my help. ) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!
) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!B
DeltaXi65
Mon Jun 07, 2004 6:43 pm
#2
Gang,
Here are my notes. I'm starting with the Scout/Ranger/CH Forum notes. These are in "question and answer" format. I hate this - but I didn't write down the Devs who were present. GreenMarine was there, butI can't remember who he was with.
I'm posting this in the Scout, Ranger and CH forums, as well as here.
B
Q: CH Pet Issue - autostoring, not following, etc. Why?
A: This was a pathfinding code issue - the Devs are still tweaking it. The server zone boundary issue has been discussed before as the cause of some of the storing and not listening issues. (In depth: Each planet has multiple servers. The server boundaries overlap. If a pet is on one side of a boundary, and the player is in another, the two servers aren't talking and the pet doesn't get the command because the server the player is in can't "see" the pet).
Q: Traps on NPCs and on other players - will we ever get this?
A: Scouts/Rangers probably will never get this. The design was that Scouts/Rangers are supposed to be hunters of creatures, while BHs are hunters of men. If traps are usable on players or NPCs ever, they will probably be for BHs.
Q: Do Rangers get a bonus for disabling minefields?
A: Not sure. Didn't think so. (My note: This is something the Scouts have requested for the GCW revamp)
Q: Will we ever be able to use traps on player pets?
A: There are no concrete plans, but this is something that can be looked at after the combat balance.
My First Question: One thing we've requested has been to allow us to use our terrain negotiation on mounted creatures, as a means of making our TN skill mod more important. Is this a.) physically possible in the game system and b.) something that sounds like a legitmiate request?
A: Yes it's physically possible, but they need to make sure that if this happens that the speed issues are addressed so as to not make them overpowered speed-wise. There were originally plans for a mounted-combatant profession when mounts first came out, but those plans were dropped, but the ideas were still there, so it could be possible to add some of those in for Scouts/Rangers/CHs. (My note: GreenMarine was receptive of this idea.)
Q: CH complaints regarding pet levels - babies not spawning, etc. They ganged up on poor Green!
A: The Devs want CHs to know that they are aware that they need help, and they plan on working to make sure that those minor bugs are worked out. Also said that a lot of things will be different after the combat balance and after that is done, these issues can be discussed again. (My note: GreenMarine is now working on the space expansion, so he was only there to provide us the information that he could - namely the history behind the systems and how they were supposed to work...he is not there to make these changes, so if you've still got ideas or questions, make sure you get them to Vert, Calc and I and we'll pass 'em on.)
Q: Trap attacks that fail are still causing instant aggro - is that a bug?
A: The way that traps work is causing the problem. It shouldn't work that way - if you throw a trap, it shouldn't automatically aggro you to other creatures and the creature you through at unless the trap hits. This needs to be looked at.
Q: Areatrack - any way to make it better? Can we add a waypoint, etc?
A: A waypoint is something that can easily be done- Green is going to talk to the Live guys about this. There was a discussion of how areatrack works, and how the "scanarea" command was going to be implemented (basically it was going to be able to give you mini missions...you scan for that creature and with a successful scan, it would lead you on a "mission" that would end with a spawn of that creature, or maybe another one if you failed it). Areatrack is basically a database listing of all the creatures in the given zone, and it's done based on how the server lists the creatures in the database, which is why it can be truncated. The reason it is so slow is because it is requesting the information from the d-base server, and if folks were repeatedly refreshing it, they could crash the server. There is a hardcap limit of 1000 creatures per server.
- At this point there was a discussion of the whole "empty planet" issue with random spawns. This was similiar to another discussion in a general Dev forum, and it was confirmed that this issue is being actively investigated.
My Second Question: What's the point of forage? Why was it implemented?
A: Forage was an ability that was designed as a means to make Scouting the environment fun and give the Scouts a reason to do it. There were specific zones on each server that were designed to be foragable. There was also a specific "uber loot" table that was created to hold the cool stuff that was supposed to be implemented to go along with the random foods and bait that you get when foraging. However, there wasn't time to complete the system. Down the road, this may be something that can be reviewed and possibly reimplemented if there is a large request for it.
Funny note: Many Scouts have asked what the deal was with the "forage bug" - yousometimes get a "you succesfully forage an item but there was insufficient space in the inventory" system message when foraging. I was finally able to get the answer out of Green:This is the result of a succesful "uber loot" roll. BUT there is only one item of uber loot that was added to the loot table to test it - a huge wedding cake. However, the wedding cake was coded under the old inventory system, where instead of each item taking up one "slot" in the inventory, each item had a "volume". This has since been removed, with each item having a volume of one slot. Because of this, the wedding cake takes up something like 110 slots- much larger than anyone's inventory, so you can never pick it up! Maybe I'm just weird, but the whole idea of foraging a large wedding cake makes me laugh.
That was the Scout/Ranger/CH forum - we had a great time, and everyone even clapped for me when I introduced myself. (And one of the Scouts later bought me two beers for all my help. ) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!
) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!B
DeltaXi65
Mon Jun 07, 2004 6:44 pm
#3
Gang,
Here are my notes. I'm starting with the Scout/Ranger/CH Forum notes. These are in "question and answer" format. I hate this - but I didn't write down the Devs who were present. GreenMarine was there, butI can't remember who he was with.
I'm posting this in the Scout, Ranger and CH forums, as well as here.
B
Q: CH Pet Issue - autostoring, not following, etc. Why?
A: This was a pathfinding code issue - the Devs are still tweaking it. The server zone boundary issue has been discussed before as the cause of some of the storing and not listening issues. (In depth: Each planet has multiple servers. The server boundaries overlap. If a pet is on one side of a boundary, and the player is in another, the two servers aren't talking and the pet doesn't get the command because the server the player is in can't "see" the pet).
Q: Traps on NPCs and on other players - will we ever get this?
A: Scouts/Rangers probably will never get this. The design was that Scouts/Rangers are supposed to be hunters of creatures, while BHs are hunters of men. If traps are usable on players or NPCs ever, they will probably be for BHs.
Q: Do Rangers get a bonus for disabling minefields?
A: Not sure. Didn't think so. (My note: This is something the Scouts have requested for the GCW revamp)
Q: Will we ever be able to use traps on player pets?
A: There are no concrete plans, but this is something that can be looked at after the combat balance.
My First Question: One thing we've requested has been to allow us to use our terrain negotiation on mounted creatures, as a means of making our TN skill mod more important. Is this a.) physically possible in the game system and b.) something that sounds like a legitmiate request?
A: Yes it's physically possible, but they need to make sure that if this happens that the speed issues are addressed so as to not make them overpowered speed-wise. There were originally plans for a mounted-combatant profession when mounts first came out, but those plans were dropped, but the ideas were still there, so it could be possible to add some of those in for Scouts/Rangers/CHs. (My note: GreenMarine was receptive of this idea.)
Q: CH complaints regarding pet levels - babies not spawning, etc. They ganged up on poor Green!
A: The Devs want CHs to know that they are aware that they need help, and they plan on working to make sure that those minor bugs are worked out. Also said that a lot of things will be different after the combat balance and after that is done, these issues can be discussed again. (My note: GreenMarine is now working on the space expansion, so he was only there to provide us the information that he could - namely the history behind the systems and how they were supposed to work...he is not there to make these changes, so if you've still got ideas or questions, make sure you get them to Vert, Calc and I and we'll pass 'em on.)
Q: Trap attacks that fail are still causing instant aggro - is that a bug?
A: The way that traps work is causing the problem. It shouldn't work that way - if you throw a trap, it shouldn't automatically aggro you to other creatures and the creature you through at unless the trap hits. This needs to be looked at.
Q: Areatrack - any way to make it better? Can we add a waypoint, etc?
A: A waypoint is something that can easily be done- Green is going to talk to the Live guys about this. There was a discussion of how areatrack works, and how the "scanarea" command was going to be implemented (basically it was going to be able to give you mini missions...you scan for that creature and with a successful scan, it would lead you on a "mission" that would end with a spawn of that creature, or maybe another one if you failed it). Areatrack is basically a database listing of all the creatures in the given zone, and it's done based on how the server lists the creatures in the database, which is why it can be truncated. The reason it is so slow is because it is requesting the information from the d-base server, and if folks were repeatedly refreshing it, they could crash the server. There is a hardcap limit of 1000 creatures per server.
- At this point there was a discussion of the whole "empty planet" issue with random spawns. This was similiar to another discussion in a general Dev forum, and it was confirmed that this issue is being actively investigated.
My Second Question: What's the point of forage? Why was it implemented?
A: Forage was an ability that was designed as a means to make Scouting the environment fun and give the Scouts a reason to do it. There were specific zones on each server that were designed to be foragable. There was also a specific "uber loot" table that was created to hold the cool stuff that was supposed to be implemented to go along with the random foods and bait that you get when foraging. However, there wasn't time to complete the system. Down the road, this may be something that can be reviewed and possibly reimplemented if there is a large request for it.
Funny note: Many Scouts have asked what the deal was with the "forage bug" - yousometimes get a "you succesfully forage an item but there was insufficient space in the inventory" system message when foraging. I was finally able to get the answer out of Green:This is the result of a succesful "uber loot" roll. BUT there is only one item of uber loot that was added to the loot table to test it - a huge wedding cake. However, the wedding cake was coded under the old inventory system, where instead of each item taking up one "slot" in the inventory, each item had a "volume". This has since been removed, with each item having a volume of one slot. Because of this, the wedding cake takes up something like 110 slots- much larger than anyone's inventory, so you can never pick it up! Maybe I'm just weird, but the whole idea of foraging a large wedding cake makes me laugh.
That was the Scout/Ranger/CH forum - we had a great time, and everyone even clapped for me when I introduced myself. (And one of the Scouts later bought me two beers for all my help. ) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!
) It was a great time and I hope to see ya'll at the next Fan Fest!B
Nemo0
Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:10 pm
#4
Thanks for the info. The only thing that worries me is that they are still pushing Rangers as a creature centric profession despite the new GCW focus. I hope this is largely due to GreenMarine being moved to the Space Expansion and not being familiar with what has been going on around here (i.e. has not seen the Outdoorsman proposal) but it is still worrying. We are getting a lot of conflicting views lately and it would be quite nice to have some sort of clarification on this issue.
taloncard
Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:34 pm
#5
Thanks delta at least we know that they know how badly they nerfed us but on the other had check out my post on the scout/ranger/ch forums.
on the other hand it really saddens me to see that JTL is a higher priority then fixing current bugs that make professions next to unplayable.
I don't just mean us, I mean the non spawning missions for BH, the fact that smugglers spice was made next to useless by the Chef revamp, survival being useless, Carbineer specials still broken, etc.. etc..
on the other hand it really saddens me to see that JTL is a higher priority then fixing current bugs that make professions next to unplayable.
I don't just mean us, I mean the non spawning missions for BH, the fact that smugglers spice was made next to useless by the Chef revamp, survival being useless, Carbineer specials still broken, etc.. etc..
Message Edited by taloncard on 06-07-2004 10:42 PM
DaBudo2
Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:18 pm
#6
Thanks! Excellent recap! I was writing up a post, but glad I checked forum first. Youexplained it much better than the long windedanswer I was going togive 
I was at the forum, too, but didn't get a chance to introduce myself. I got sidetracked, left the room and realized too late that I never said Hi. Wish I had, I've benefited greatly from the Ranger/Scout forum.
My understanding of the the devs answer to Rangers being able to disable minefields and being able to use traps on player pets: definite no on minefields and I want to clarify that idea of trapping player pets before the CH out there have a panic attack.
- The answer about disabling minefields was in the context of Rangers being able to negotiate minefields, I think, but I interpreted the answer to also include disabling mines.
- They answered the questionabout the pets by saying they didn't see it happening because it wouldn't be fair to the CH (I've taken great liberty inparaphrasing/condensing their answer). Later, though, someone brought up the questionagainbut with the qualification that non-Rangers be at a disadvantage infighting pets while only Rangers would have certain advantages such as traps. This wascompared to how Commandos originally were supposed to be able to take out ATSTs while everyone else wouldhave great difficulty in dealing with them. The moderators thought that a more viable idea. As MCH I wouldn't be opposed to that idea. It actually wouldbe a huge plus for us CH if we only had to worry about Rangers - which is why I don't think it will ever happen
Message Edited by DaBudo2 on 06-07-2004 08:20 PM
Cheezwedgew
Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:59 pm
#7
Jood job Brisc. I remember it like it was yesterday. Wait it was. I cant wait until the next fanfest, I wish they could have them more often like bi-anually or monthly . I was glad SOMEONE from Bloodfin showed up hehe.
. I was glad SOMEONE from Bloodfin showed up hehe. Chez
Un4tun8
Tue Jun 08, 2004 7:11 am
#9
Technicaly, if you had your main inventory totally empty, and if you consume part of the wedding cake in the process of picking it up, the forage may be successfull 
Or how about group-foraging - then 60% cap applies...
Klif_Hangar
Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:05 am
#10
Thanks for the information Delta, it mostly sounds good. Like others, I'm concerned about the "Creature-centric" focus GM indicated with all the gcw focus lately, but I suspect the live developers will come up with something for us to do in pvp. I'm also concerned about them adding a waypoint to areatrack. That's a terrible idea in my opinion. Again, we'll see what actually gets done by the live developers I suppose. Thanks again.
Squidwalker
Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:23 am
#11
Great info Delta, thanks mate. I had heard/read some of this already. But your notes are much more detailed. I also think /foraging a wedding cake is lame. I can see maybe foraging an Item needed to make a wedding cake.
The /areascan is nothing new, same Idea GM had back when they put in /areatrack, but GM got pulled of of ranger. To revamp chef? **edit**? So we get a barely anything "revamp" yea right, and get left hanging, and chef gets a total revamp? Now smuggler, and then MAYBE us? Man all I have to say is that the ranger revamp had better be as cool and good, and fun and interesting as the chef, and hopefully smuggler, revamps went.
Oh yea and they have him working on JTL.
Kiryoku
Tue Jun 08, 2004 9:41 am
#13
Nemo0 wrote:
Thanks for the info. The only thing that worries me is that they are still pushing Rangers as a creature centric profession despite the new GCW focus. I hope this is largely due to GreenMarine being moved to the Space Expansion and not being familiar with what has been going on around here (i.e. has not seen the Outdoorsman proposal) but it is still worrying. We are getting a lot of conflicting views lately and it would be quite nice to have some sort of clarification on this issue.
i'm glad this is a concern for some other people too... i'd still enjoy ranger if it were solely a creature hunting profession, but i feel it needs to be more than that... and i really, really want it to be more than that...
one thing i noticed from assorted fanfest reports: rangers want to be able to trap players/NPCs, but the devs think this belongs to BHs.. BHs want less of a skill point requirement, the devs say they will probably remove certain trees from the requirement to satisfy them... maybe BHs wouldn't mind losing that trapping line, freeing up 20+ skill points, and giving us the player/NPC traps...
we'd still need to get it into the dev's heads that rangers are outdoorsmen and huntsmen, but thatdoesn't restrtict us to creatures...
of course, now they will tell us that /areatrack was neversupposed to work on NPCs and players... /sigh...
Message Edited by Kiryoku on 06-08-2004 09:46 AM
Page 1 of 3