Dancer Archive
Thread: What's the difference between a Doctor and a Dancer/Musician buffing? Read...
LyteFoot
Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:14 am
#14
Hey! I'm not young or musically inclined in RL so the dancing, head standing, or playing a real musical device is out! Otherwise yeah I agree.
Ikewe
Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:30 am
#15
My server has plenty of "full service robot centers" where you pay an entry fee and get access to a doctor robot and a musician and dancer robot. Having buff packs or some other resouce won't eliminate robot buffers.
We also have robot vendors who do not charge for the buffing. I seriously doubt their having to aquire some resource would significantly change that either. If it did it would mean that the rest of us probably couldn't afford to purchase them either.
Ikewe, Master Dancer Shadowfire
psycocat
Fri Nov 19, 2004 10:32 am
#16
they could always make it so that giving buffs is like crafting. 
Maisland
Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:11 pm
#17
I would like to see buffing require the use of the /setperform command. Or perhaps add the option to buff to the radial menu of people watching a dancer/listening to a musician when the performer has that person selected.
Maybe have a pop-up (similar to the ID interface) into which the performer enters a required fee and/or the audience must enter payment and which must be filled out and accepted before the buff starts. (That would certainly reduce afk buffing.)
Warryyr
Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:37 pm
#18
DarkSmyth wrote:
Enhance packs.
You don't see AFK Doc Buff Bots do you?
Yes, I do. And real Doctors hate them, just like we hate AFK Mind buffbotsEven though they "waste" buffpacks (which they don't, through means of a macro) people still AFK bot their Doctors.
Removing recursive macros is not the answer to the AFK buff bot problem. You all should have something comparible to a Doctors buff pack to do mind buffs with. I think this would solve a lot of problems without creating a bunch of new ones.
Doctors have a crafting line of skills. Dancers do not. Dancers and Musicans aren't really crafting professions anyways, they're social professions.Just like Image Designers, they're a different animal all together in an MMORPG. Nevertheless, Musicians do have a *little* crafting involved - instruments. Currently, quality of instruments doesn't matter - though you can experiment on the instruments. Dancers could have a similar crafted good in dancing shoes or something. These items could make quality matter in regards to buff quality, and they would decay just like buffpacks have so many uses per pack.
Though complete removal of recursive macros might not be necessary, what IS necessary is removing the ability by ANYONE, of ANY profession, to completely level their character and provide a benefit to the community while 100% AFK. This hurts anyone who buys the game, and actually plays this profession - since humans need to eat, sleep, use the bathroom, answer phones, etc. Completely AFK bots that are online all day and everyday provide a level of "service" that no human could provide - so it builds a ridiculous expectation in the minds of the community. They begin to assume they should *always* have access to these services, though really it should be dependent on someone of that profession being online and willing to provide those services while playing the game. Just because the game lets Smugglers slice weapons and armor doesn't mean that this service should be available on demand by an AFK bot all day and everyday, since you can't always find a Smuggler. Yet, people expect buffbots to be available because they want that service to play the game, and the difference is the current macro system allows people to be 100% AFK and provide the services desired.
Thoughts?
Honestly, this would probably be better discussed in the AFK/buffbot sticky at the top of this forum.
Warryyr
Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:41 pm
#19
DarkSmyth wrote:
Yes, I know it is possible to have a Doc Bot... but the Doc is pretty much giving away his packs for free...
As an AFK Dancer/Musician Buff Bot, you really have nothing to loose.
See my point?
Message Edited by DarkSmyth on 11-18-2004 10:55 PM
There's a /ui action command that lets you target what's under your cursor.
Point your Doctor at your buffing droid.
Target under cursor.
Buff.
Someone stands in front of your droid, you buff them and they're happy.
No one's there? You target your droid.
System Message: You can only perform that action on a player.
Net result: No loss of buffpacks.
Problem solved.
The Devs tried to solve the Doctor buffbot problem by forcinga Doc buffer to always default to buffing themselves when a target is not specified. Used to be that a Doc could do the target under cursor thing on a wall and target nothing, and never waste packs (in other words, "stand on the X on the ground and get a buff." The Devs tried to resolve that, but now people just target droids or something else in front of them (instead of targetting a wall, in effect nothing, and not buffing - current mechanics would default to buffing yourself, which is a waste of packs).
Remove ability to do this all day with a macro that's looping - net result: bot problem solved.
Message Edited by Warryyr on 11-19-2004 05:46 PM
Aevlom
Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:20 am
#20
I still say remove recursive macros. If you're afk'ing to get entertainer xp, you're not enjoying being an entertainer, have no business being one, and should choose another profession.
I've mastered musician 5 times, and never afk played. If I haveve to afk, I stop playing and sit down. And I'm proud of thatfact.
Aleyo
Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:32 am
#21
As has been said, it probably would solve many problems, but would at the same time cause the problems of people in the profession not fitting the playstyle anymore. I know I myself abhor crafting, it's not at all what I would ever want to do in the game, even though I have tons of respect for the crafting game in SWG for those who like it. Having a cost is a good idea, and would help in a few cases, but I'm not sure it would solve the problems in most cases, because a lot of buffbots are run by guilds that have lots of money and could cover that cost easily. So a few buffbots gone, sure, but most would stick around I think.
Bulg
Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:26 pm
#22
Maisland wrote:
Personally, I would prefer to see Dancer/Musician buffs REQUIRE the use of the /setperform command. This would certainly make botting buffs harder at the very least.
I'm not sure how much harder that would make it. Adding a targeting and /setperform macro could beat that. What about some kind of token that had to be traded to or from the entertainer for the buffs to work. Maybe the token would have to be stamped by the entertainer for the buff to be valid. I'm sure someone else has thought of this but it just occurred to me. Also, with the way the secure trade window fails as often as it does this might be more trouble than it's worth.
I think I just argued both sides of my own point.
Maisland
Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:38 am
#23
I think a combination of requiring the /setperform command and an interface such as IDs have should work.
Bulg wrote:
Maisland wrote:
Personally, I would prefer to see Dancer/Musician buffs REQUIRE the use of the /setperform command. This would certainly make botting buffs harder at the very least.
I'm not sure how much harder that would make it. Adding a targeting and /setperform macro could beat that. What about some kind of token that had to be traded to or from the entertainer for the buffs to work. Maybe the token would have to be stamped by the entertainer for the buff to be valid. I'm sure someone else has thought of this but it just occurred to me. Also, with the way the secure trade window fails as often as it does this might be more trouble than it's worth.
I think I just argued both sides of my own point.
Krogg
Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:56 am
#24
The removal of the group buff and requirement of the /setperf would eliminate the buff bot almost entirely, but this would only work if they shortened the time it takes to buff and made our buff last longer. When I go on guild hunts I'm the one giving the music buff and I have alot of people to buff (alot of swordsman, rifleman, and combat medics). The group buff alows me to hit them all at the same time saving me time. If I had to go through them all with the /setperf, the first person I buffed would need a re-buff half way into the hunt. Having to buff 10 people for about 4 min each puts the first person with just a little over an hour on their buff. I think the best way to go about it is shorten buff time to 2 min and make the buff last for 3 hours.
Just my $0.02
Ovauwa
Just my $0.02
Ovauwa
Tralmek
Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:00 am
#25
Some buffbots do use /setperform (their operators think it makes for a faster buff ). Removing groupbuffs wouldn't reduce buffbotting nearly as much as one might hope, but it might inconvenience their customers enough that they'd start using Live Entertainers a little more.
). Removing groupbuffs wouldn't reduce buffbotting nearly as much as one might hope, but it might inconvenience their customers enough that they'd start using Live Entertainers a little more.
Bulg
Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:13 am
#26
Tralmek wrote:
it might inconvenience their customers enough that they'd start using Live Entertainers a little more.
I'm hoping that in generalthe game moves toward being more convenient. I think we should try to remember that the reason buffbots are so prevalent is due to the convenience they offer. Whether it be real or perceived.
Bulg'mansoc