Ranger Archive

N'Raas:

I beg that you don't go in proposing that the Planet Specific Hunting Cabin Deeds be made by Architects unless the idea is shot down as a schematic for Master Rangers.

Please don't underbid us on the first attempt!

I believe whatKi_Gu_Lon is worried about is the fact that architects will indeed exploit such a commodity and charge the price way beyond what it took in cost to make it. I'm sure most of us rangers would not mind gathering the large amount ofresources for such an item if it meant being alot cheaper and of course re-deedable. Besides, players can easily group with other players on high paying missions, thus buying the resources an easier task.

Ireally dosee this becoming another exploit for crafters. Much like the whole sliced weapons mark-up ordeal.

Can we pleasehave a vote/petitionand seewhether or not if theplayers would mind gathering the resources for a re-deedable item?

While I am not totally against having these built by Architects, there are a few problems if we go that route:

• So Architects can make Planet Specific Hunting Lodges? Where is thier market? Master Rangers? Seems like a pretty limited market to me, and I would not suggest that anyone less than a Master Ranger be able to put up residence on any of the Advanced Planets. I certainly don't want to see every Ranger dabbler setting up a homestead on Dathomir!


• A small permenent Ranger Lodge at Master Rangerfits the natural progression of our camps, why not let us build it ourselves? I am not suggesting that the lodge be anything that even rivals an Architects Small Generic House. Maybe one room, and a very limited storage capacity. What is wrong with giving us something "uber" for all the work we did to make Master, even if it does cross-class? There are certainly other examples of cross-classing in the game.


• As it stands, there is not much reason to take Master Ranger in my opinion... besides the impressive title.

Maybe we'll get something really impressive for Master Ranger when the new camps and traps get implemented. If we do, then I won't be so dead-set on having these Ranger made.

All I'm asking is that you take this to GreenMarine as something only Master Rangers can make and use. If that turns out to be a no-go after some haggling, then suggest that it be something that Architects can make... or even Master Artisan!

Just don't go in with an underbid. You never know, he may like the idea as I've outlined it and we could get something really nice for our long hard climb to the top.

"Ireally dosee this becoming another exploit for crafters. Much like the whole sliced weapons mark-up ordeal."

- I don't consider outrageous markups to be an exploit. Just good business practice.

- The economy is SWG is a capitalist system. It relies on competition and underbidding to keep the price down.

- If there is a Monopoly on a produce, or there is a Trust going on among the crafter community, then the price can go wild.

- The Architect community is actuallyworried that because there are so many of them, that the prices of their products are actually nearing non-profitability (every one is underbidding everyone else to get at least one sale).

- As well, the demand for new buildings has plummetted because they last forever in a deeded form.

- You never need to purchase a new house (expect to increase the size of it), and then you can sell the old deed for a reduced price and compete against the architects.

- I understand why you would want to stay away from that mania.

- That leaves us with the single use/small resource cabin option, or risk impinging on the Architects soveriegn realm of house production.

I saw someone mention the idea of a camp that stays for up to 2-7 days. I am not sure how to structure it, but you could require maintenance in it, and creatable only for Frontiering 4. If you go the Hunting Cabin route, I don't agree that it should only be usable by Master Rangers.... what about at Frontiering 4? If you have to master camps, THEN you can use it.... some people just dont want the Camo kits or the traps.

Just an idea... I also think the HTFB needs two other changes:

1. Allow for gradual Battle Fatigue cures... It won't phase out Entertainers, if it is slow enough - say 1/3 Entertainer level 2 pace? I know in RL, when I go camping, i feel pretty relaxed from it... my Battle Fatigue cures itself there, with no one dancing or singing for me.... :-)

2. Make the crafting stn a PRIVATE stn, and with more than one option. For example, since these are public now, you dont get as much success in experimenting. Maybe add an optional cell for inputting stations. BUT since these camps are one-use items, maybe require the optional item to be a crafting tool instead of a crafting station, and then it BECOMES a station once the camp is created. This would allow you to also have a weapon stn for one camp, and a Med stn for another... This would also allow you to either just have a basic station, or an improved station in camp. Alternatively, just create multiple scematics for multiple HTFBs... eg one for Med stn Camp, one for Weappn stn Camp, etc....

Additionally, camps breaking down in combat mode is just silly. I think form Frontiering 1 or 2 upward, camps should not break unless you get incapped or move to far away - maybe make the distance longer allowed as you move up the tree...

Just my 2 credits as a 2-0-3-0 Ranger on Kettemoor.

-Mala

btw, if you go with mulitple schematics, you need to find a way to have good stations (eg experimenting/OQ/Energy resources used.

-Mala

"So Architects can make Planet Specific Hunting Lodges? Where is thier market? Master Rangers?"

- I suspect if such an item were to be added, additional other houses would also be added.

- I just read a post about a storage shed for storing items. This would be a smaller version of the hunting lodge... It would be have the same life, but not heal Battle Fatigue, and have smaller storage size.

- Most likely these additional buildings would be available to a wider audience than simply Master Rangers (perhaps all Novice Rangers).

"A small permenent Ranger Lodge at Master Rangerfits the natural progression of our camps, why not let us build it ourselves?"

- If its a natural progression, then it would be a single use building... Which was one of the options.

- I'm all for a single use permanent building (maintenance required) that you set up when you arrive at a planet and use until you leave.

- We won't be stepping on any Architect's toes if we simply can't redeed the building after placing it.

"All I'm asking is that you take this to GreenMarine as something only Master Rangers can make and use."

- I intend to give you debating time on all notices that I send them to a developer (if they give me time).

- I consider the Coorespondent positionto be the voice of the people, not a voice of his own (otherwise I would ignore you all).

I miss-understood what you meant by "single use" buildings. I thought you meant that they would work just as our normal camps do and disband after we log out, or something along that line.

I am all in favor of a Single Deed hunting lodge, as long as we can make it ourselves at Master Ranger!

I don't move from planet to planet enough to require a re-deedable structure anyhow. If It were something I could make and place only once, I would be perfectly happy with that!

Actually, I think that is a much better idea than the Redeedable one thatI proposed! It will encourge a Ranger to stay on the planet for awhile and actually explore it, istead of hopping from planet to planet on a whim.

Good idea!

"I am all in favor of a Single Deed hunting lodge, as long as we can make it ourselves at Master Ranger!"

- Excellent a middle ground at last.

- I will adjust the wording of the State list once I get off work to account for this Single Deed/ Single Use cabin creatable by the Master Ranger.

Forgot to add that I still believe that these should be Planet Specific.

I don't want to see Generic cabins springing up on all the planets. I want something that blends with the native environment.

This would also make more sense if the deed was single use, as not many people are going to go through the hard work of collecting the resources from one planet just to make a hovel that is only usable on that planet.

I think we should be able to have multiple hunting cabins though, so if I want a lodge on one side of the planet I can also have another on the other side. Alternately, I could have a lodge on one planet and another somewhere else. As long as the cabins require a lot like normal player structures, I don't see this being a problem really.

"Forgot to add that I still believe that these should be Planet Specific."

- Agreed, that ruin all the fun of gathering the appropiate resources if you could just make a bunch of generic ones.

"I think we should be able to have multiple hunting cabins though, so if I want a lodge on one side of the planet I can also have another on the other side."

- That might be beyond our grasp. Holocron has already stated that players were never supposed to have more than one house at any one time (only Merchants were supposed to have two).

""I think we should be able to have multiple hunting cabins though, so if I want a lodge on one side of the planet I can also have another on the other side."

- That might be beyond our grasp. Holocron has already stated that players were never supposed to have more than one house at any one time (only Merchants were supposed to have two)."

______________________________________________________________

Wow! I wasn't aware that it was not the intention to allow us to have multiple houses!

If that is the case, then I guess I could do without multiple lodges. I would like to see the post where he stated this though as I'd never heard anything official about multiple housing.

I guess it sorta makes sense though, seeing as how you can only declare one residence at a time.

forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=Development&message.id=307479&highlight=multiple+housing#M307479

- It does say they removed the limit later, but I doubt they would make the same mistake again with any new housing system.