Dancer Archive
Thread: New Inspirations on TC!
I think the way the breakdown was done is really logical. Crafters tend to be in one set or the other, not both.
I personally have spent time in all of the profs Dancer got and I think they are more common to be picked up by a Dancer than the ones Musician got (other than Arch maybe which can fit with either set).
PoetDancer wrote:
If our fear is AFK, there are much better ways to deal with them than this system of "park, and hope someone will need us."
Such as...?
I understand you want it all to work like the old BF system used to, and in fact you want BF back. So do I (though only if it means something, as it did at launch).
But given the system as it is now (there is no BF), let's say the customer could transparently choose and you don't have to think about it or control it as a dancer. How are you going to stop the AFK macroing without (a) destroying macroing altogether, which even at-keyboard people would object to, including myself, due to having macroed song timings and the like, or (b) forcing them to re-code the entire XP system or something, which they are just not going to do?
What's the alternative, in other words? I have offered "0 XP gain while AFK" and the devs just won't do it. So what else is there?
C
All crafters will get them all the time and all will make generically wonderful products. Sounds great, right?
The problems is that this will homogenize crafting and trivialize the prof leading to a lot less crafters and then a lot less demand for your moves.
Check the crafting forums if you want to see some disgruntled customers.
There aresubscribers that will benefit from this, I am sure. But I can tell you right now, that I don't see myself benefiting from this system.
It looks like this is the direction they want to take us, where our role is to "sell buffs." Frankly, I wanted more out of the class for me--and for us.
September 16th is my last day.
PoetDancer wrote:
If we want to solve AFK, then why are the developers creating a game that appeals to the strengths of unattended characters? Because the same things that unattended characters do well are the same things that this new system requires.
How, exactly, can an AFK bot perform clicking activities without violating the EULA? Right now they can macro the whole nine yards without such a violation. Clicking boxes cannot be in-game macroed, hence can only be botted in violation of the EULA, which one can report, and which will be stopped (3rd party bot programs are not permitted and never have been). I don't see how unattended characters can do these new buffs AT ALL, let alone WELL. How are they going to know who wants what buff, if they are not present? Unlike MUDs and MUSHes, SWG does not support "listen strings" where you can hang listener queues on your character object and detect what people say and auto-respond to it. So how in the world can you know to switch from dance to music to give the AS his AS buff, if you aren't there to hear him ask?
I don't understand at all, what you think can be automated in the new system. It seems specifically designed NOT to be automated.
PoetDancer wrote:
What incentive is there for anyone to do anything but park, exist, and wait for someone to need what we have? There is none. And that is why if there is any possibility for this profession to be automated, it will. And barring that, if it can exist as a "semi-attended" profession (like starport doctors), that will happen as well.
So what do you want then? Some sort of way to find out how much enjoyment you are giving another player and have buffs based on that? How could that possibly ever be coded? And if it could be, should it be? (I would say no.)
In what way was it true that BF was not as you describe? Hell I didn't even need to flourish to heal BF! I could just /startdance and walk away, in both pre- and post-CU systems. Anyone who wanted could come in, /watch, get healed, and walk out without a tip, without a comment from me or him, and without there having been any incentive but to park, exist and wait for someone to need what I have (and I didn't even have to wait, since I could be out watching a movie). So I am not sure when we EVER had what you seem to be after. And frankly I am a little confused at what the heck would ever satisfy you. You seem to want the impossible -- a way to measure how well you are making another player ENJOY the game. How could they ever provide such a system? And if they could, would it be appropriate? I mean after all, the point in an RPG is for your CHARACTER to entertain another CHARACTER, not for you as a player to entertain another player... that entertainment (of the players) should come by definition of playing the RPG at all (which presumably is entertaining or we wouldn't do it). So what you are asking for almost seems out-of-character, to me.
C
Chessack wrote:
Slick, what does an organized band have to do with being able to temporarily (via a buff) play a higher song?
Actually, I was responding pretty specifically to your example of someone "sitting in" with an established band. The buff is irrelevant when you're talking about a bunch of masters playing together.
But in a pickup group in Eisely... don't you ever get sick of palying SW1 forever? It's the worst song to begin with (IMNSHO), and it's the only one a newbie can play. But if you could buff him up to rock or folk, well at least the band could change music once in a while. Otherwise, you just have to play SW 1 all night. And when the newbie finally learns rock, and you all start it, you just know that at that very minute, another new player is going to walk in and ask to join, and he just started 10 minutes ago and so it is back to SW1.
Well, if you're going to play with newbs, then you gotta accept the limitations that go with them. *heh*
Anyway, you have to look at what people value and people clearly value instruments over tunes. They don't say "What level do I get Folk? What level do I get Swing?" They ask "What level do I get bandfill? What level do I get mandovial?"
Another thing to consider -I'm hearing herethat the buff is +2 boxes. That means that an insipred newbie will have a choice of either slitherhorn or fizz. Would he rather have the choice, instead, of three songs but being required to play them all on the slitherhorn?
There's a reason that people hate solo slitherhorn (though there are one or two tunes that actually make it sound good). As a master, yes, the lack of variety in tunes can become monotonous. To the newbies, though, the lack of variety in SOUND is what's monotonous.
Two inspired newbies playing Rock together on slitherhorns is a cacaphony. Two inspired newbies playing SW1 together with one on fizz and one on slither is something akin to a real band. They can sound good right from the get-go.
I won't argue about the pick-up group situation you described. I'm just saying that from the standpoint of the "up and coming" entertainers (as opposed to any experienced ones like you or I who might decide to accompany them) the abilty to use more instruments will trump the ability to play a wider variety of tunes.
Now, for dancers, I'm not so certain that props > dances. Maybe some dancers could give their input on that one.
Chessack wrote:
How, exactly, can an AFK bot perform clicking activities without violating the EULA?
Who ever said the EULA was there to protect players? At one time, unattended activity in any form was--and still is--a violation of the EULA. But they chose to make an exception to those using in-game tools.
What is stopping them from making another exception using out of game tools, as well? After all, they allow voice programs, and joysticks. What if the same joystick one uses to fly their spacecraft is used to click on a box?
There is nothing to indicate that the CSRs will do anything to stop autoclickers. They simply have better things to do than crack down on autoclicking, or protecting this class, and if that hasn't dawned perfectly clear on us throughout all this time, then anything I say will not make any difference.
What it all boils down to is, I don't want to play this game that is being given to us, nor do I trust the current administration of this game to do what it takes to make the play experience fun. This was my last straw. Which is why I canceled my subscription. And frankly, Chessak, if you hadn't of offered one of your endless retorts, I would be just fine just letting the whole matter drop.
After all, you have won, and I am cancelling. So the only real concern by rehashing this is "twisting the knife."
Message Edited by PoetDancer on 08-23-2005 02:32 PM
Ran into a slight problem while listening to Leno and dancing - I stopped dancing whenever someone stopped listening to Leno. This happened 3 times and then I switched over to a dance macro and was fine but I don't like to macro that much and prefer to do bandflos by hand when performing.Perhaps there is a way for dancers tohearmusicians without "listening" to musicians.
I remembered that the original inspiration buff carried over login to login - apparently it now does not but continues to tick off. I think we only tested this on the artisan buff and not on the general buff. This shouldn't be too much of a problem for the profession specific buffs but most combat types are now used to getting buffed before they log out so that the can jump right into the fray when they log in.
Now if only my dancer can buff her BE half I'd be set. Separate toons on TC but rolled into one on Live.
[edit] *Chronic Post Editor* I -find- things to fix sometimes...
Message Edited by YuriaTayde on 08-24-2005 04:52 AM
PoetDancer wrote:
What I want is passivity, and transparency.
Passivity is the notion that our patrons are in charge of their own mechanics. As long as we are dancing, patrons should be able to get the things they go to the cantina to get, without any extra step.
Transparency is the notion that the art and the mechanics are one. If patrons are watching a dance, they should be able to get whatever they should be able to get from the dance. They shouldn't have to ask for a dancer to dance for them if the dancer is already dancing, just so their character can have the dance affect them.
What I would do to change this is allow the patron the ability to choose, and activate their own buff. Why ask us to do what we would do for them, anyway?
If our fear is AFK, there are much better ways to deal with them than this system of "park, and hope someone will need us."
Ordinarily I would agree with you. I, too, think that BF could have been a wonderful system if only it were allowed. I fear, however, that you expect too much from people.
Yes, in an ideal world, where everyone is nice and combat-monkeys don't rule the land then people would come to entertainers, chat, socialize, enjoy the process, and be inspired however they wanted to be inspired at the end. In this ideal world, people would enjoy the show, and enjoy the interaction. We wouldn't have to deal with this unrealistic palaver about asking for specific buffs and applying specific buffs.
Unfortunately, this is not an ideal world. Crafters sometimes come in, get their 10% buff, chat a bit, and leave. By and large it's the combat-monkeys who come in, pass up the few ATK entertainers (especially if they happen to be male, not that I'm bitter or anything) and go drool over the AFK bimbo wearing next to no clothing, then run out again. Or they'll stand there, slack-jawed, watch somebody (who? I don't know) and run out again without even responding to any kind of query at all ("How are you today?", "What brings you to Theed?", "Are you even alive?").
Personally, I think that having to be asked for buffs and then actively apply those buffs is not an ideal solution, however it's a damn sight better than what we have now. Your proposal would not work, I think, because it relies too much on people acting maturely and as if the SWG world were really like the real world. If this were the real world then people could not go AFK, people who hung around and acted like idiots would be thrown out of the cantina, and, really, only people who were actually interested in seeing the entertainers would go. These buffs provide something of that interest.
In real-world terms, if I go to a performance I go because I feel that I will get some enjoyment (benefit) out of it. Of course I won't get a buff; buffs (as exist in the game, with the possible exception of spice) do not exist in the real world. In in-game terms, no matter how pretty we are when we dance and play music, and no matter how wonderful and social we are, there is no real player benefit to going to see an entertainer without buffs. There is an in-character benefit, but that highlights the other problem: there is not as much RP as you would, perhaps, like and your notions of passivity and transparency seem to depend on, so there are many fewer 'characters' than 'players'. Thus there is no reason for someone who does not RP to seek out an entertainer.
Now, to make there be some benefit to having entertainers, entertainers give buffs. The majority of the new buffs are aimed at crafters to encourage them to come to the cantina instead of hanging around in the basement of their guild-hall or in a room in their house. Making the buffs active, while not realistic, still provides the benefit and also provides benefits to the entertainers who give them. For one, it fixes the AFK problem (yes, SOE should have fixed it by actively persuing AFKers who used in-game macros, but that discussion has been and gone), and for another it enforces the idea that there is a service being provided that is, hopefully, worth some sort of monetary value. Ideally the patrons will tip because you put on a good show and engaged in charming dialog, and we've both made money that way (although given that I play as a male dancer I'm sure that you've seen far more money from doing this than I have).
This is becoming a bit longer than I initially intended, so I'll wrap up. I do not believe that I will change your view on the matter, since you seem to have made up your mind, but, to me, it's one of the better solutions that I've seen given that the most perfect solutions have been discarded a long time ago. Non-macroable active buffing is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, and, in a perfect world would not be the way to do this. However, unfortunately, this is not a perfect world. If you believe that active buffing turns us into nothing more than mere game-mechanics and that our show does not matter, I would counter by saying that we have always been game-mechanics but that the buff acts as a draw to encourage players who would not ordinarily seek out entertainment to possibly enjoy what we have to offer as well as get what they wanted.
I, for one, am looking forward to this, not because I enjoy being pestered for buffs, but because, after reading other posters in this thread, believe that this will bring real patrons back to the cantinas who will stay and chat; and watch, listen to and enjoy the performances that we have to offer. A cantina filled with only entertainers is not a full cantina, no matter how many entertainers it holds: there have to be patrons as well.
Panthu wrote:
Yes, the Devs call these players "resource hoarders" and have threatened to get rid of their ability to do this many times. Keep making a stink about these little buffs crippling your monopoly and resource decay might be in our near future.