Ranger Archive
Thread: What a birthday present!
JokitoRoyo
Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:47 am
#14
AgonThalia wrote:
Happy Birthday Dave!
have fun, take care and dont get into too much trouble.
No No NO! Have lots of fun and DON't get caught!!!
Happy B-Day DaveG
Aerec_Krouse
Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:52 am
#15
Happy Birthday Dave. If you leave, will be sorry to see you go, you big walking furry carpet you. 
Thanks for the hunts, not so many thanks for getting me hooked on space travel
Thanks for the hunts, not so many thanks for getting me hooked on space travel
DaveG
Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:46 am
#16
Hehe, well my account is up until mid july anyway, so all bets are still on.
Calculus_Entropy
Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:06 am
#17
Happy birthday, Dave...you're what? 12?
DaveG wrote:
So, apart from dropping a hint about my birthday, can I say "I told you so" yet?
Rancorrider4
Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:49 am
#19
Phenix1050 wrote:
Well Happy Birthday. and happy "proved the ever-optimistic Phenix wrong" day, too.
LMAO
Glad to see you two playing nicely in the Ranger sandbox again......
Owen-Lars
Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:42 am
#20
I still dont think you were right hehe. Sure the CU sucks but you were asking for tweaks when the combat system was still flawed. The combat system needed a revamp, just this revamp was right. On paper and the concept of it was great:
Fast Paced Combat
No FotM
Armour Nerf
Buff Nerf
Profession Roles in Combat
New Weapons & Specials
Interactive and Tactical Combat
If they would of delivered on these project goals then things would be amazing right now. But they didnt, somewhere along the way they lost the department head and it seems the direction we were heading and this is what we ended up with:
Slow and Boring Paced Combat
Tripple Mastery Stackers
Armour Nerf
Buff Nerf
3 Roles in combat (Ranged/Melee/Healer) and all the professions blending so much they dont have any definition anymore
New Weapons and Specials but the rifles can be used by pistoleers without any rifle skills and the same with all the others too so kind of cancels it all out
Generic and predictable boring combat
I still think you were wrong in concept, the combat system needed changing and still does, its just the CU never achieved its original design plans.
DaveG
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:21 am
#21
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Happy birthday, Dave...you're what? 12?
DaveG wrote:
So, apart from dropping a hint about my birthday, can I say "I told you so" yet?
and from hence forth you shall be known as "JBMat the 2nd"
Message Edited by DaveG on 04-26-2005 04:21 PM
Dariane_Kamutsovy
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:26 am
#22
Owen-Lars wrote:
I still dont think you were right hehe. Sure the CU sucks but you were asking for tweaks when the combat system was still flawed. The combat system needed a revamp, just this revamp was right. On paper and the concept of it was great:
Fast Paced Combat
No FotM
Armour Nerf
Buff Nerf
Profession Roles in Combat
New Weapons & Specials
Interactive and Tactical Combat
If they would of delivered on these project goals then things would be amazing right now. But they didnt, somewhere along the way they lost the department head and it seems the direction we were heading and this is what we ended up with:
Slow and Boring Paced Combat
Tripple Mastery Stackers
Armour Nerf
Buff Nerf
3 Roles in combat (Ranged/Melee/Healer) and all the professions blending so much they dont have any definition anymore
New Weapons and Specials but the rifles can be used by pistoleers without any rifle skills and the same with all the others too so kind of cancels it all out
Generic and predictable boring combat
I still think you were wrong in concept, the combat system needed changing and still does, its just the CU never achieved its original design plans.
So, in short...
Replacing 1 bad system with an even worse system ?
Recall: a lot could have been fixed by just buff nerfs, armor nerfs and WEAPON nerfs. Followed up by some Profession revamps.
I told you so too: we got things we didn't ask for: (imho) stupid interface/sounds, not SWG like.
And... as far asI know, uber templates are already foudn. I'm not going to spoil it yet by telling anyone. Just "troll" the forums (read only mode).
To me, the CU is closer to breaking the game then fixing it.
But then again, I was never the optimistic type
tekniko
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:28 am
#23
Happy birthday...I guess. It will probably be a while before I walk again camo'd and unarmored through Rancor Valley. I know the Sisters will miss me.
Message Edited by tekniko on 04-27-2005 08:23 AM
Iseult
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:29 am
#24
Happy birthday - here's a present. Let me know when you're ready to /open it:
e
DaveG's present
Iseult
Master Ranger / Mediocre Rifleperson
Bloodfin
DaveG
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:38 am
#25
Owen-Lars wrote:
See above
I agree with you on how it turned out, and some the "on paper" goals I agree with, but those things I do, I saw as "tweaks" (perhps we have different meanings of those). The thing that really worried me from the very start, was that from what I'd seen of the devs that far, they couldn't even handle fixing minor bugs, so the idea of rewriting the entire combat system just seemed like a disasterous prospect. A safer approach was to address individual issues of the combat system we had, rather than taking a grand sweeping systemic approach to the entire system, which is why I said I thought some 'tweaks' would be a better route. I still would like to of seen how the game would have turned out if they'd just nerfed buffs and adjusted armour before they tried rewriting the whole system. In the end, they might aswell of done that because if it hadn't worked out, they could have just carried on with the combat revamp as planned, but there would have been the potential of clearing up a lot (probably not all, but still most) of the problems in the system without upsetting so many other systems, professions and general mood of the players.
The thing was that obscured the potential of the old system was that there were so many things not working as intended. I think that if most things were working as intended then we'd have seen different combat professions as rather more distinct and unique than they were. However, now in the new system, my lack of faith was justified in that they replaced the old system with something totally different, and as you say Owen, all the roles aren't really that distinct, as per the psuedo-Venn diagram known as the combat schematic.
So my idea of tweaking the old system might not have been ideal, but I think it was the safer option, since we've all seen now, the devs didn't really have what it took (or the weren't allowed the freedom!) to write a solid system that was worth playing.
Anyway, we've got what we've got now, and we've either got to put up with it or quit the game. For whatever reason the powers that be steam-rollered ahead with it regardless of little things like opinion polls.
Message Edited by DaveG on 04-26-2005 04:49 PM
Vorpaks
Tue Apr 26, 2005 9:39 am
#26
DaveG wrote:
The thing that really worried me from the very start, was that from what I'd seen of the devs that far, they couldn't even handle fixing minor bugs, so the idea of rewriting the entire combat system just seemed like a disasterous prospect.
You can say I told you so about that then.
But for the total revamp - if they had made the original documents public, the ones shown to the Corrs and to us at the beginning of the Alpha, I think you would have been just as excited about a total revamp as we were.I guess it is smart that they didn't though. What could have been is always preferable to what is. I am trying very hard not to let what could have been burn holes through my enjoyment of the game.
EDIT: Oh my gosh!! And Happy Birthday!
Message Edited by Vorpaks on 04-26-2005 12:41 PM