Dancer Archive
Thread: How do we salvage entertainer from this buff concept?
Page 1 of 3
CristineA
Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:20 am
#1
Else-Whira wrote:
We need a way to say who or who does not recieve our benefits. Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there. As in equal pay to what a similarly skilled combat player can earn from the NPC mission system.
That's fine with NPC cantina's, but what about player ones as well?
Else-Whira
Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:28 am
#2
The in concept idea has two major weak points for the ATK community.
1) A novice gives the exact same buff as a master.
To fix this they need to leave buffs as they are currently. Buff % is dependent upon skill of the entertainer. I don't mind novice entertainers giving a small buff, but a master should give better duration and higher %. A master with skill enhancements should give the highest % and longest duration.
2) There is no interaction between entertainer and the player who needs service.
We need a way to say who or who does not recieve our benefits. Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there. As in equal pay to what a similarly skilled combat player can earn from the NPC mission system.
If they are still going to assume we make all of our income through player interaction then they must force this by having a player require us to authorize their buff through a system that can not be legally AFKed.
1) A novice gives the exact same buff as a master.
To fix this they need to leave buffs as they are currently. Buff % is dependent upon skill of the entertainer. I don't mind novice entertainers giving a small buff, but a master should give better duration and higher %. A master with skill enhancements should give the highest % and longest duration.
2) There is no interaction between entertainer and the player who needs service.
We need a way to say who or who does not recieve our benefits. Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there. As in equal pay to what a similarly skilled combat player can earn from the NPC mission system.
If they are still going to assume we make all of our income through player interaction then they must force this by having a player require us to authorize their buff through a system that can not be legally AFKed.
kirah_ashlin
Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:30 am
#3
I don't know, Else . .. . . . right now the spirit has gone out of me to even wonder . . . . . 
Sakura-Ikari
Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:31 am
#4
ever since they gave ID's that wonderful upgraded window that is so nicely laid out, and most importantly has that handy dandy feature where if the customer does not give a tip the session can be cancelled by the ID - ID's make alot better income. Adding that nice "you tip, i buff" window would really solve most of the problem.
CristineA
Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:20 am
#5
Else-Whira wrote:
We need a way to say who or who does not recieve our benefits. Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there. As in equal pay to what a similarly skilled combat player can earn from the NPC mission system.
That's fine with NPC cantina's, but what about player ones as well?
Doriana
Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:11 am
#6
Well, the only thing we can do is get out there and ask in a polite, constructive manner for what we really want.
Assume that they're reading, get out there and calmly tell them what's wrong with the system and offer constructive ways on improving it.
Remember that it's "in concept." In theory that means that they are open to suggestions on how to improve the system before it moves to "in development."
After all we've been through now is not the time to sulk. Go out, offer constructive feedback, don't flame no matter how tempting, and we might see some progress this time.
Assume that they're reading, get out there and calmly tell them what's wrong with the system and offer constructive ways on improving it.
Remember that it's "in concept." In theory that means that they are open to suggestions on how to improve the system before it moves to "in development."
After all we've been through now is not the time to sulk. Go out, offer constructive feedback, don't flame no matter how tempting, and we might see some progress this time.
Einhinder
Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:16 am
#7
i think this sign is a good sign at least there giving us a little love where we expected none i posted my thoughts on the passive issue which bothers me more than the novice being able to give the same buff although t hat does bother me i also posted a link to it on my server forum asking forthem to post
Panthu
Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:38 am
#8
Else-Whira wrote:
Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there.
I think this is the best bet right now. I think it would be doable to get a payment from the system for performing in the Cantina. This could also be a check against AFK that we have been asking for and will help keep the Cantinas lag free, which I know the Devs worry about.
The best pitch I ever heard was for a "Cantina Manager" type NPC to be put in the Cantina back rooms. Then you would have to either walk back and check in with the NPC every 15 minutes or so to continue pulling in credits from performing OR every 15 minutes or so the NPC came out and gave you a short series of random flos to perform.
Either way allows you to stay in the Cantina Environment but does force you to really _be there_ to be getting a reward, so no over night money making zombie plans. I don't know which way would be easier for the Devs to code, but either would have the same benefit for us I think.
TangledMyth
Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:51 pm
#9
Hello Coffin, this is nail. Mind if me and my friends stay here for a while?
Einhinder
Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:54 pm
#10
TangledMyth wrote:
Hello Coffin, this is nail. Mind if me and my friends stay here for a while?
these types of psots are not constructive and do nothing to help us at all
Infinite_Bloom
Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:57 pm
#11
Else-Whira wrote:
The in concept idea has two major weak points for the ATK community.
1) A novice gives the exact same buff as a master.
To fix this they need to leave buffs as they are currently. Buff % is dependent upon skill of the entertainer. I don't mind novice entertainers giving a small buff, but a master should give better duration and higher %. A master with skill enhancements should give the highest % and longest duration.
2) There is no interaction between entertainer and the player who needs service.
We need a way to say who or who does not recieve our benefits. Passivity is fine as long as the cantina is rewarding us in some fashion for our time spent there. As in equal pay to what a similarly skilled combat player can earn from the NPC mission system.
If they are still going to assume we make all of our income through player interaction then they must force this by having a player require us to authorize their buff through a system that can not be legally AFKed.
Novice gives the exact same buff, BUT novice takes longer then a Master would to give the longer duration of buff. That is where the incentive of Master comes in.
I actually like this concept, if it goes right...because we give players from a buff, more XP, more FP, and better successes to crafting when they are buffed. Which to me has upped our importance level...depending on how much more we will give.
DNAAssassin
Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:49 pm
#12
I actually think this is a great idea. I deleted my Master Dancer...and now, I'm thinking of taking it up again, because of this idea.
It's not perfect, sure. Entertainers need a way to choose who gets it, to require payment, and to deny service. They need to be able to benefit from their own buffs (even if the buffs come off weaker on the applier). But this WILL up the importance of Entertainers. Anything that brings more, faster exp will have people coming in droves.
Right now, I don't bother with Entertainer buffs. This idea would have me going to one every time I went out hunting. So let's help the Devs tweak it to perfection! After all, right now it's only In Concept, not fleshed out. Strike while the iron's hot! (But do so constructively and politely!)
It's not perfect, sure. Entertainers need a way to choose who gets it, to require payment, and to deny service. They need to be able to benefit from their own buffs (even if the buffs come off weaker on the applier). But this WILL up the importance of Entertainers. Anything that brings more, faster exp will have people coming in droves.
Right now, I don't bother with Entertainer buffs. This idea would have me going to one every time I went out hunting. So let's help the Devs tweak it to perfection! After all, right now it's only In Concept, not fleshed out. Strike while the iron's hot! (But do so constructively and politely!)
Chessack
Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:59 pm
#13
What's fun is now if we don't want to give a buff to someone, we can't stop it, can we? Unless we see them "copping a buff" off of us in time and quickly /deny -- if that even works for buffing. So now if I'm a rebel and some Stormtrooper wants to get a buff off me he can, and I can't really do anything about it?
I actually like the concept of WHAT we are buffing and I have no problem with the mechanics of how it works except the "automated" nature of it. The dancer is supposed to be buffing you by giving you special attention and lavishing her (or his) moves on you in particular. I don't see how this fits in with the proposed system. Again, other than the automated nature of it, I don't mind the rest of the idea.
C
I actually like the concept of WHAT we are buffing and I have no problem with the mechanics of how it works except the "automated" nature of it. The dancer is supposed to be buffing you by giving you special attention and lavishing her (or his) moves on you in particular. I don't see how this fits in with the proposed system. Again, other than the automated nature of it, I don't mind the rest of the idea.
C
Page 1 of 3