Creature Handler Archive
Thread: Corral Plan: A Rough Draft 1
Hi again,
Listen up okay. The Dev[il]s love it when two or three professions sit down and scrap over a little piece of nothing because it means that they don't have to do anything. We have two or more totally borked professions here that need some attention. Rangers don't want to give up gathering, well Ranger dudes, I collect meat, I collected 30K of Lokian Avian Meat, I am a CH novice scout, you don't own the corner on hunting. BE's really need CH to help make being a BE fun. Nothing like making an awesome pet and then not having a market for it. The few things that we can do or we share with other professions we need to be willing to SHARE. If we hog it all to ourselves then no one will go ahead.
My observation has been in 10 months that Rangers can not provide a 100k of low grade meat to someone who is grinding out a profession that needs it. Period. Can't do it and if they can they are more than willing to charge max price for garbage meat, example on Kauri is some ranger selling 220 OQ meat for 15 credits a union. That is gouging the market.
SOOOOOO I suggested that the farms could harvest meat but that it would always be inferior to anything in the wild. I also suggest, like Pluto that Rangers can capture adult creatures in order to populate the breeding farms with breeding stock. CH's are not allowed to do that. I also suggested that Rangers be able to "see" the genetic make up of certain animals in order to help the breeding process. I also suggested that BE's can come in and take a sample DNA from our farm and be able to help locate sickly animals. I also suggested that Doctors be the ones that treat animals, while BE's create the cures.
IF you can grasp the whole picture, rather than just the little piece that you may give up a little on, then you will see that on the whole everyone benefits. BUT if we are determined to hold onto the small part that is giving us a bit of money then the whole game suffers. Look at it like this you can give up a little now for a big return later or you can hang onto what you have and in the end we all lose.
It's up to you Rangers, BE's, architects, doctors etc. Personally I am willing to sacrifice in order to see us all working together.
SkyPreacher1 wrote:Hi again,
Listen up okay. The Dev[il]s love it when two or three professions sit down and scrap over a little piece of nothing because it means that they don't have to do anything. We have two or more totally borked professions here that need some attention. Rangers don't want to give up gathering, well Ranger dudes, I collect meat, I collected 30K of Lokian Avian Meat, I am a CH novice scout, you don't own the corner on hunting. BE's really need CH to help make being a BE fun. Nothing like making an awesome pet and then not having a market for it. The few things that we can do or we share with other professions we need to be willing to SHARE. If we hog it all to ourselves then no one will go ahead.
My observation has been in 10 months that Rangers can not provide a 100k of low grade meat to someone who is grinding out a profession that needs it. Period. Can't do it and if they can they are more than willing to charge max price for garbage meat, example on Kauri is some ranger selling 220 OQ meat for 15 credits a union. That is gouging the market.
SOOOOOO I suggested that the farms could harvest meat but that it would always be inferior to anything in the wild. I also suggest, like Pluto that Rangers can capture adult creatures in order to populate the breeding farms with breeding stock. CH's are not allowed to do that. I also suggested that Rangers be able to "see" the genetic make up of certain animals in order to help the breeding process. I also suggested that BE's can come in and take a sample DNA from our farm and be able to help locate sickly animals. I also suggested that Doctors be the ones that treat animals, while BE's create the cures.
IF you can grasp the whole picture, rather than just the little piece that you may give up a little on, then you will see that on the whole everyone benefits. BUT if we are determined to hold onto the small part that is giving us a bit of money then the whole game suffers. Look at it like this you can give up a little now for a big return later or you can hang onto what you have and in the end we all lose.
It's up to you Rangers, BE's, architects, doctors etc. Personally I am willing to sacrifice in order to see us all working together.
You just outlined part of the problem yourself, Sky -- You have no ranger skills, and harvested 30k Avian meat.. A good sum, indeed - I venture to guess if you just have 1 box in scout you could have gotten what? 28k in the same time? Thats the problem - Rangers are lead up to being the great hunters of creatures in the game - Yet we are not.. A master TKA/Doc with 1 box in scout could harvest organic resources faster than any master ranger in the game.
BE's do not *NEED* CH to "help make BE fun" -- in your opinion, perhaps. I know quite a few BE's with no ch skills that are very happy with thier class - They make quite a bit of money with petstims, components, etc, etc...
You preach about how we all need to "Share" And your idea of sharing is taking one thing from us that we *SHOULD* have a clear advantage on, and we get nothing in return -- It would be like rangers complaining that we have no combat skills, and should be allowed to have one higher level animal pet as a companion with no CH skills. I can make many clear arguments why this should happen, but it will undoubtably offend many CH's....
Who says a ranger can not provide 100k of low grade meat? Because it is much harder to do that provide 100k of steel, for instance - it commands a higher price, which is great for rangers that collect it (We actualy get to use one of our skills to advance!) But, on a different note a novice scout/elite melee could do the same, because they could kill faster. The point of someone gouging the market is just normal economics.. if hes charging for that people will either buy it or not.. if they dont buy it, he will reduce his price until it sells.. Ultimately why is it the fault of the person with the resources what the market will demand? Same is true with rare non-organic materials.. I can find 10-20 different mineral auction on the trade boards for 15cpu...
What I still do not understand is this: You are proposing a draft to improve CH's, why not focus on something to *DO* with pets? Maybe change CL levels? Maybe additional pets? This whole idea (While it does have merit, and great points, no doubt) really has nothing to do with a CH.
Again, your keep talking of sacrifice, and how we all need to work together, and yet thats very easy to do when you are not giving up anything.
None of this is a shot, just a different point of view. I do *NOT* believe this is the correct way to go, but honestly whats one persons opinion? Especialy a ranger?
Message Edited by Czar243 on 04-09-2004 10:49 AM
I do agree that there is no need to snipe at one another over all this... I and I appreciate the many Rangers comments and perspective on this (Remember I was a Master Ranger too - not a Holo at that)
I think one of the best things that could happen to this proposal is to open the ownership of these corals/farms/barns/etc up to Rangers as well.
I think I posted previously that the both CH and Ranger can contribute to the farm in different manors - CH via Tame, Ranger via Tranq.
I would also say, the Ranger should be able to retain any of their harvesting bonuses when working with their farm.
I agree, trying to make a living as ranger or CH is tough, and I don't feel that members of either class really want to put the squeeze on the other. I just would hate to see such a groundbreaking proposal totally lost due to class feuding.
Czar243 wrote:
What I still do not understand is this: You are proposing a draft to improve CH's, why not focus on something to *DO* with pets? Maybe change CL levels? Maybe additional pets? This whole idea (While it does have merit, and great points, no doubt) really has nothing to do with a CH.
Again, your keep talking of sacrifice, and how we all need to work together, and yet thats very easy to do when you are not giving up anything.
None of this is a shot, just a different point of view. I do *NOT* believe this is the correct way to go, but honestly whats one persons opinion? Especialy a ranger?
Message Edited by Czar243 on 04-09-2004 10:49 AM
The interaction between the alleles; this can be either :
o Simple Dominance : (Models 1, 3, & 5) The heterozygote has the same phenotype
as the dominant homozygote. That is, with two alleles A and a:
§ AA = tall
§ Aa = tall
§ aa = short
o Incomplete Dominance : (Models 2, 4, & 6) The heterozygote has a different
phenotype than either homozygote. In nature, this is usually intermediate; in
§ AA = tall
§ Aa = medium
§ aa = short
· Whether the character is sex-linked or not; this can be either:
o Not sex-linked - the gene for the character is carried on an autosome so it is
inherited identically in both sexes. (Models 1 & 2)
o Sex-linked - the gene for the character is located on a sex-chromosome so it is
inherited differently in different sexes. This can be either :
§ XX/XY Females are XX; males are XY (Models 3 & 4). Here, Y carries no
genes except those needed to make the organism male.
§ ZZ/ZW Females are ZW; males are ZZ (Models 5 & 6). Here, W carries no
genes except those needed to make the organism female.
This leads to six possible genetic models.
Model 1 : Simple Dominance; Autosomal. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
Green; Green Green Body
Green; Red Green Body
Red; Red Red Body
Model 2 : Incomplete Dominance; Autosomal. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
Green; Green Green Body
Green; Red Purple Body
Red; Red Red Body
Model 3 : Simple Dominance; XX/XY Sex-linked. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
X-Green; X-Green Green Body Female
X-Green; X-Red Green Body Female
X-Red; X-Red Red Body Female
X-Green; Y Green Body Male
X-Red; Y Red Body Male
Model 4 : Incomplete Dominance; XX/XY Sex-linked. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
X-Green; X-Green Green Body Female
X-Green; X-Red Purple Body Female
X-Red; X-Red Red Body Female
X-Green; Y Green Body Male
X-Red; Y Red Body Male
Model 5 : Simple Dominance; ZZ/ZW Sex-linked. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
Z-Green; Z-Green Green Body Male
Z-Green; Z-Red Green Body Male
Z-Red; Z-Red Red Body Male
Z-Green; W Green Body Female
Z-Red; W Red Body Female
Model 6 : Incomplete Dominance; ZZ/ZW Sex-linked. For example:
Genotype Phenotype
Z-Green; Z-Green Green Body Male
Z-Green; Z-Red Purple Body Male
Z-Red; Z-Red Red Body Male
Z-Green; W Green Body Female
Z-Red; W Red Body Female
Message Edited by RoboFish on 04-09-2004 01:27 PM
If we got to do simple Pundent Squares for size would that be enough? As it is the Law of Independent Assortment seems to take place in Specials for the BE. I was hoping that when the BE's stated previously that the creation process was fun that it did involve more genetics and alleles. Quite frankly the only thing fun is the sampling. Everything else is more mathematical computations. This is all the same reason I never played Mech Warrior PnP, you need a damned degree in calculus. Genetics is about observing which part of the Gene gives what trait. Is it on the P arm? can it be isolated. Of course there is the idea of Genetic Blending but that mainly expresses itself in color variations suchs as anerytherism (sp to lazy to look it up) and other such color variations. The pigment expression crosses over from skin only into eye color.
Imagine how tough this can get where there are X amount of colors and you have to assign Domination Rankings from X-XX. I personally love selective breeding. Since I owned my first albino Burmese Python. The BE process isn't even based on that for the largest part. I am sorry algorithms may be ok but I do not think Psycological affects every stat like the process is currently. The only thing truthfully genetically based in the BE process is Base Destruction and pairing T-A and G-C.
So going back to Rangers seeing which is genetically inferior or superior, I see that as less a possibility as us getting moreharvesting. They simply have no training to recognize it. Should be a BE trait.
Read the sig.
Let me lay it out for you ok.
Oh yes, please do.
I HAVE 4 boxes of Scout that is the minimum requirement to reach Novice CH. If you are a Master Ranger you should be able to harvest twice as much as I can. On average, a perlek on Lok will give me 28 units of meat. How does that compare to a Master Ranger.
Try again. A Novice Scout harvests about half of a Master Ranger. My regular partner is a Hunting IV, and my harvest is about 30% bigger than hers. I'd have to go to Lok to check, but if a Perlek gives you 28 units, without Veghash, it would give me about 35.
This is why Rangers go nonlinear whenever anyone starts talking about mechanical harvesters for creature resources. We invest a lot of skill points for a very small bonus, and you want to take it away. Sorry, but no.
Now, all of the above being said, you harvested 30K of Lok Avian Meat? Well, look at you and your bad self. I harvested 70K of Dathomir Avian.
BE's need who the heck buys their outrageously priced Pet stims HUH? Get with the program. Geez
I do. I don't have Medic skills, so I need them when soloing. My partner is a Master Combat Medic, she handles the healing when we're together.
I told you I would even share the capturing, I would think capturing prime adult creatures a bonus, considering we can only tame babies.
That is a token concession. In any of these "farm" schemes the demand for fresh creatures is always going to be lower than the current demand for resources -- that's the entire point of the proposal, to increase availability of resources, right? Furthermore, this process introduces another degree of separation between the Ranger and the marketplace. Currently, Rangers hunt creature resources and sell them to crafters to be turned into goods. The crafter has to make a profit so the Ranger is only being paid a portion of what those resources are worth in terms of finished goods. Under this proposal, Rangers capture creatures to sell to farmers who harvest them for resources to sell to crafters to be turned into finished goods. The farmer has to make a profit, too, so now Rangers are being paid an even smaller portion of the value of the resources. Since, again, the entire point of all this is to make creature resources easier to obtain, Rangers would still take a cut in pay if they skipped selling creatures to farmers and sold resources directly -- supply goes up, price goes down.
Well if you aren't willing to come up with some constructive help instead of sitting on your one little egg, harvesting meat, you all are dead in the water.
How is it constructive, from the Ranger's perspective, to embrace a proposal that results in eroding our only viable contribution to the economy? The Ranger profession certainly needs help, but cutting our own throats doesn't seem like the way to go.
Maybe we can simply using genetics by defineing a limited number a genetic markers that would affect the pet.
I would suggest the genetic markers be for:
- Size
- Color
- Health(HAM Bars)
- Strength(Dmg Stat)
- Size
- For this Purpose lets define Size by the letter S.
- There will be 3 sizes Small, Medium, Large
- Lets Define Large as S and instead of using standard dominance where as eighter the small or large trait is dominate lets use order to define overall size.
- Since the small members of the speciese in most case dont survive I have defined the following possible genetic to display that.
- So S=Large, s=small, Ss=Medium, sS=Medium
- This simplfies matets greats limiting to three sizes, and seeing how Ss and sS make the standard medium pet it makes the large ones and small ones more rare and valuable in the begining.
- So now you can start playing god with gentics.
- I can make the genetic sqaure but anyone who took 8th Grade Biology should be able to do it.
- Color
- For this purpose I will be using the Dewback as an example, and Defining color by C.
- There will be 3 colors Green, Brown, Red (I chose these because Canibals are Red, Mountains can be Brown, and Regular dewbacks can be Green.
- Lets say that Red is c, Green is C, Brown is Cc & cC, (I am just picking the order out of mid air)
- This will lead to onyl 3 different colors but after some breeding you would be able to get the desired color.
- And for those of our younger CH members I know someare pretty young like >13, cc is Red, and CC is Green, apply this principal to Size up above and to the other 2 Stats I will discuss down below.
- Health
- First off since the dev[il]s (lol saw that in another post) are know to cut corners, you can atribute Health to the animal size. But if you choose to make health a seperate markeryou canapply the same Pricipal
- H can be 25% extra normal health, h can be 25% minus normal health, and hH & Hh would be standard health.
- Strength
- Once again you can atributeStrength to the animal size. But if you choose to makestrength a seperate markeryou canapply the same Principal.
- Scan be 25% extra normal strength, h can be 25% minus normal strength, and hH & Hh would be standard strength.
- I would like to say that if you dont apply Strength and Health to Size it would be better since eveyone would just want the largest size.
- But if you make it so that size doesn't affect Strength and health you can have some fun, like you have a small pet in sizewith +25% Health, and +25% Strength. The ulimate bluff, and sort of funny.
By using this method it makes programming alot easier since there will be only a set number of outcomes. But look at the amount of outcomes 3 different sizes * 3 different colors * 3 different Healths * 3 different Strenghts, thats alot of different outcomes(Brain freeze cant mulitply).
And this would make each pet possibly unique.
I am reaching character limit so my next post will be how I plan to implement this using both Bio-Engineers, and Rangers. I will be finished within the hour so dont judge so quickly.
No, we are not putting all our eggs in one basket. The devs have only given us one egg, and you are trying to take it away.
We would like to expand...no, we would like to fix our profession. Removing the professions one current positive attribute is incompatible with that objective.
That DFH and Ranger community is exactly what the developers want you to do. Stay in your corner, fight with anyone who is trying to "infringe" keep your scope narrow. Yup go for it.
Please explain, in light of my previous arguments, why STANDING UP TO THE MAN! requires that Rangers sacrifice their one asset.
Have fun. We will continue to persue this without you and well without harvesting, we really just wanted to include you in the loop to increase your cash flow but that's ok take your ball and go play.
It won't increase our cash flow. It will eliminate it. I have already explained why. If you wish to make us believe you seriously want a dialogue with Rangers you can begin by seriously enagaging the arguments previously presented.
When you do, I'll be happy to show you why you're still wrong.
DFH wrote:
You still don't get it. Sigh, you are sitting on one egg. Or more precisely, you are putting all your egg in one basket, harvesting meat. To me it is obvious, Rangers only want what Rangers want and if you touch my holy grail of harvesting meat I will not work with you.
No, we are not putting all our eggs in one basket. The devs have only given us one egg, and you are trying to take it away.
We would like to expand...no, we would like to fix our profession. Removing the professions one current positive attribute is incompatible with that objective.
That DFH and Ranger community is exactly what the developers want you to do. Stay in your corner, fight with anyone who is trying to "infringe" keep your scope narrow. Yup go for it.
Please explain, in light of my previous arguments, why STANDING UP TO THE MAN! requires that Rangers sacrifice their one asset.
Have fun. We will continue to persue this without you and well without harvesting, we really just wanted to include you in the loop to increase your cash flow but that's ok take your ball and go play.
It won't increase our cash flow. It will eliminate it. I have already explained why. If you wish to make us believe you seriously want a dialogue with Rangers you can begin by seriously enagaging the arguments previously presented.
When you do, I'll be happy to show you why you're still wrong.
DFH
I was a ranger and loved it, so i can see where the rangers are coming from. But I would love this to work. I dont think we need to "take " anything away from anybody. Here are some of my ideas.
How about: Rangers keep harvesting their Bone, Hide, Meat. They also gain the ability to catch adultcreatures with a new trap/gun. They then can sell/trade creature to a C/H to be placed in a corral. ALSO, Let the ranger have the ability to harvest Wooly Hide from creatures inside a corral. They would have to pay but the Hide would be of superior quality to that found in the wild.
B/E make our pet stimpacks and vitality packs now.They would now make our pet disease packs to heal sick crreatures. They would also gain the ability to sample DNA from housed creatures. Also, they would be able to make a tool that would "see" how compatable creatures would be. Helping to dertmine if a pairing would bring desirable results.
D/E would be able to make Milking or Vet modules into any existind droid chassis. These would be able to "harvest" milk or adminster B/E provided medicine to sick animals. >>>>>Continued
Message Edited by spreadsheet on 04-09-2004 03:37 PM
=SIVART SMADA= 
-Elder Medic-I dont think you will find a group of people more willing to help out, and more willing to do everything they can to to help improve thier classes, and others that the folks over at the ranger boards - The only problem I have is your are trying to take our *ONE* working skill and offering it to machines, and basicaly taking away the ONE thing we have going for us right now...
As for not knowing anything about being a CH - My RL Girlfriend plays one with 15 boxes filled at the moment, she is almost master - So I have a general concept of the class.