Ranger Archive

I group with my factional pets and lvl 15 non-ch pet to hunt mobs. They can not Harvest, or at least I don't know how to order them to, then trade to me. So I should get the full 100% of the harvest!!!

PLZ fix this ASAP it's really annoying and I can't believe you guys don't catch on to some of the simpliest probable bugs.

I'm pretty sure this is intentional because you *are* in a group, its just your directly commanding the group members since they are AI. Having factional pets and/or CH pets gives you a huge advantage solo which is offset by your harvest amount dropping do to utilizing them.

Solr,

I agree with you - haven't that AT-ST out to help kill the Rancors on your own should give you less XP. This is my personal opinion.

B

My harvest takes seem to have been decreased even though I'm not grouped. For instance I used to get about 25 scaley hides from a Fanned Rawl. Now I get 16-18. I'm not grouped, and don't own pets.

Is this intended?

"Is this intended?"

- This has been reported in other threads. Its possible something went wrong with the calculations when they implmented the 60% group harvesting solution.

---

Degage wrote:
I group with my factional pets and lvl 15 non-ch pet to hunt mobs. They can not Harvest, or at least I don't know how to order them to, then trade to me. So I should get the full 100% of the harvest!!!

---

I think this is totally normal. You're getting the benifit of having a large group (i.e. 2-3 faction pets (AT-STs no doubt) and another pet besides) so you pay the penalty of having a large group.

I'm totally OK with this. If you don't want to pay the penalty, then ungroup, harvest, then re-group. If you don't like that idea, then don't use your group of 4 pets.

This makes no sense at all. If the AT ST was stealing meat from a kill I could see it, but it isn't. The whole reason we were losing the full harvest on group stuff was that others were taking from the same kill. In this case no one else is harvesting. I know my pets are better trained than to steal from my kill, and besides I feed them enough that they shouldn't be hungry. My point is that if the reason the harvest amount goes down is because it is easier to take down stuff, that is one thing, but as far as we were told it was because others in a group were harvesting from the same corpse. What's next, will we have to divide the reward from missions among our pets (factional or otherwise). I hope my sarcasm gets my point across, because this makes as much sense as lowering our harvests while grouped with them.

I'd have to agree with Delta on this issue.

If you have any sort of assistance in taking down a creature (meaning, you are grouped), then it is appropriate for one to not receive 100% of the resources from it. I am a Ranger/CH that completely accepts this way of working. It's reasonable.

I think that the 60% cap with groups is a good idea. As a Ranger my character knows a lot about cretures. When hunting he can choose shots that will cleanly kill the animal. For example, while some random pistoleer might just blast away randomly at a creature, I'll nail it right through the heart. What this all means is that because I have this knowledge I dont mutilate the animal while killing it. As I become a better Ranger I'll get better at my shots and will therefore be able to keep more of the harvest as useful. If another Ranger with the same skill uses a pet, a Sludge Panther for instance, the Sludge Panther will break bones, shred hide, and drool all over the meat. This would leave him with less salvagable material. I don't even want to think what an AT-ST would leave behind.

---

SolrFlare wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is intentional because you *are* in a group, its just your directly commanding the group members since they are AI. Having factional pets and/or CH pets gives you a huge advantage solo which is offset by your harvest amount dropping do to utilizing them.

---

UH... I"m not talking about XP and is what you said logical???? So if I group with pets, that somehow lowers the meat on a dewback?

cause the planet align in such a way when grouped with Pets that it causes the animals to slim fast??

Xp i understand, thats logical and completely accecptable. Harvest on the other hand is not. The whole reason they made the 60% deal thing was to promote Grouping amongst scouts, not punish people who spent TIME getting factional pets.

A group is a group is a group, be it with a PC or a pet. You all want the bennies of having pets along, but do not want to suffer the consequences.

A thought... kill the beastie, disband, harvest, pop a camp, regroup, disband camp, move out smartly. Or go solo, what a concept.

Kwitcherbitchinandwhining. You get one from column A or (not and) one from column B. You choose. You want rice with that?

JB

who actually is pretty happy right now, so 8-P on y'all

OMG, think about this for a minute (starting to understand how the whole 30second timer got started on KD when a defense would have made more sense).

How does being in a group of (NON SCOUTS) make your harvest smaller? It is completely logical that you should suffer a XP hit when grouping with "ANYTHING" but it simply does not make sense to lose harvest when you are not group'd with other scouts, or jesus, NPC's who are not capable of getting harvest.

Look at this way...

3 PC's in a Group. (Which I think is indisputably better then 1 PC's and 2 Factional Pets if your a rebel). Each PC gets 60% of 100% animal harvest. Making the total Harvest for a group of 3PC's 180%.

1 PC and 2 Factional Pets. 60% of 100% harvest and thats it. Cause you can't ask your factional pet to "/say Harvest this Pet"