Ranger Archive

Message Edited by DaveG on 02-20-2005 02:02 PM

---

Oculus wrote:

---

Owen-Lars wrote:

Some great discussions

Cheers for doing some great testing guys ive used alot of it in my report on the corr forums. JB has got on board in the thread and i expect the others to soon enough.

DaveG Wrote:

"To Owen: If all else fails, remind them of the old saying, "The customer is always right", and we're the customers!"

---

lol yeah im thinkin of tatooing "The Ranger customers are always right" on Tigg's arm when she is sleeping

/runasfastaslegswillcarryme

---

Owen, how are the Devs justifying their intentions to take a profession skill (+creature harvest) and give it as a group bonus for everyone?

Shouldn't it be more like Squad Leader? No SL, no bonus. No Ranger, no bonus?

---

I'd be interested in seeingthe answer to this one too.

One thing that playing has thought me is, that grouping is the most unpleasent game experience I get, unless I group with people I know and who know how to play just for the sake of playing.

I agree that it is better to have this bonus thing adjusted if we have to take it. But I think that there are much better ways to encourage grouping. By giving a bonus you just call for the greed in the l33t d00ds mind. What I think we will get this way, is a lot of groups looking for a MR to get the bonus but they don't give a damn about the way the MR likes to hunt. I have had a lot of groups that were this way before, they were only looking for EXP in the fastes possible way or for meat/hide in the fastes possible way. This playstyle isn't what the DEVs are looking for I bet, but it is what this bonus System is going to be.

For the point of the high cpu for resources, I for myself don't sell resources for more than 100cpu and that price only for the top stuff. And as it was said, if it is for bringing the prices down it would be much easier to increase the amount each creature gives or to reduce the amount needed to craft something.

If we are looking for ways to make it that MR are wellcome in a group and needed than we could be given the ability to /track for creatures and "create" Spawns that way. Or many of the great things the Ranger folks have writen down in all the great posts.

So ich würde viel mehr schreiben können, wenn es nicht in Englisch sein müßte . Sorry but my english skills are way behind what I would like to contribute to our discussion.Finaly I think that what ever the DEVs come up with we, as the Ranger Community, will be able to handle it and stay positiv and constructive as we have always been.Please lets get back to harmony /hug all as I can understand both sides.

Message Edited by Nastzguehl on 02-20-2005 03:25 PMHow do I get rid of these linebreaks?

Message Edited by Nastzguehl on 02-20-2005 03:26 PM So I removed the linebreaks because I didn't find a way to have them without messing it up

Message Edited by Nastzguehl on 02-20-2005 03:51 PM

---

Dariane_Kamutsovy wrote:

---

Phenix1050 wrote:

Dave a couple of more things:

- when grouped you kill stuff faster

-when grouped you can get higher missions

-when grouped you can have someone heal you

There will ALWAYS be an incentive to group. This is an Multiplayer game. Yes, it's a roleplaying game too. But nobody should be as effective by themselves as a group is.

---

Well there you have answered DaveG's questions

Those 3 points are ALREADY the benefit of being IN a group. No need to add a bonus. There should not be a penatly either, neither for the soloist as for the groupmembers.

At this time, most scout/rangers prefer NOT to use groups because of the penalty. Remove penalty and they will be grouping again.

---

Personally I would prefer a bonus that, by giving the Master of the profession a boost, encouraged the players with the highest investment in the profession to group. With anyone. So ling as they were 'within range'.

But the Dev's see that as a reward for being a ranger and as such aren't going to go with it.

Given that the current proposed system is in fact a penalty for any MR fool enough to group up with anyone who has invested less in the profession than they have, I'd much rather see a simple no penalty, no bomus system introduced.

For as long as I've been a ranger the gripe has been the harvest while grouped penalty.

They've said that they will take that out. Effectively giving us a bonus while grouped.

The 'extra' bonus while grouped is entirely unnecessary, for the three reasons already given above. You're faster, kill more and can have a healer in tow. All good reasons to be part of a structured group.

Like the math geeks I prefer an 'elegant' solution. 0P0B is elegant.

---

DaveG wrote:

---

Oculus wrote:

---

Owen-Lars wrote:

Some great discussions

Cheers for doing some great testing guys ive used alot of it in my report on the corr forums. JB has got on board in the thread and i expect the others to soon enough.

DaveG Wrote:

"To Owen: If all else fails, remind them of the old saying, "The customer is always right", and we're the customers!"

---

lol yeah im thinkin of tatooing "The Ranger customers are always right" on Tigg's arm when she is sleeping

/runasfastaslegswillcarryme

---

Owen, how are the Devs justifying their intentions to take a profession skill (+creature harvest) and give it as a group bonus for everyone?

Shouldn't it be more like Squad Leader? No SL, no bonus. No Ranger, no bonus?

---

I'd be interested in seeingthe answer to this one too.

---

Okay, let me see if I've got these two positions right:

Dave is arguing for zero penalty, zero bonus. The incentive for grouping is the removal of the group harvest penalty and the fact that a group will always harvest more, through cooperative play, than the same number of solo players.

He is against the addition of the bonus because the underlying allocation of CHB is unbalanced and a bonus will only serve to amplify the distortion.


Phenix is arguing for a zero penalty, positive bonus system. The incentive for grouping being the higher rate of harvest. He hasn't put figures up (please, don't. The board already looks like an algebra fetishists bedroom wall) but I will assume that the sort of bonus structure he's proposing is scaled in such a way as to give MR's the edge and so counterbalance the underlying faulty CHB system?


Would it be possible for the two of you to agree to the following:

We adopt a sero penalty system. Both of you already agree on that part.

We press for the CHB to be fixed properly. This would give MR's the edge they should have without it appearing to the Dev's or other players that we're being 'given' a sweetener.

As I've said on numerous occaisions, I personally prefer the bonus being given in two tranches, one to MS and one to MR's. It'd be a direct reward for being a Master in a group but I can see it is antithetical to what the Dev's 'vision' appears to be. The pragmatist in me then says we fall back to 0P0B as it is the proposal which does not exagerate an existing flaw. The idealist in me wants the 'broke' CHB system fixed.

The pacifist in me wants you two to stop sniping

(If we avoid adding other premises to the argument, such as the RP aspect, the perception that we're being forced into playing in one way or another, and concentrate on the core problem we're more likely to be able to turn all our energy into presenting a united front to the Dev's. The other issues are down to player choice while the problem we're facing here is one of game mechanics)

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

OK, so for each and every one of you that supports the no penalty no bonus POV, do you unconditionally support this? Do you only support this as the alternative to what the devs proposed? Is there any circumstance that you would support a group bonus to harvesting? Dave, I think I guess your answer .

---

I would like to have an ideal world, were no one has any penalty for being as he is and no one gives any penalty to others be the way he is .

Ok that will never happen .

So I like the 0P0B approach with the addition that other ways are put in place to support grouping. But grouping with the intention to play together not just the intention to gain something faster (resources/EXP).

If this is impossible, then I would like this bonus system but adjusted so that we don't get a penalty for being MR and not having invested our SP other than we did. (0040 Ranger better than a MR)

---

Almagill wrote:
Okay, let me see if I've got these two positions right:

Dave is arguing for zero penalty, zero bonus. The incentive for grouping is the removal of the group harvest penalty and the fact that a group will always harvest more, through cooperative play, than the same number of solo players.

*He is against the addition of the bonus because the underlying allocation of CHB is unbalanced and a bonus will only serve to amplify the distortion.

---

For my part, I'll try to clarify, although I'm going to be repeating what I've said a lot before.

We all agree that thecurrent (in live) group harvesting penaltyinhibits group play, and as such is wrong. The group bonus is an equivalent system to group penalty system, but with the roles reversed.

Therefore, both may be equally well defined as; "A system inwhich players incur a harvest short fall depending on whether they are in a group or not".

Message Edited by DaveG on 02-20-2005 03:53 PM

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

OK, so for each and every one of you that supports the no penalty no bonus POV, do you unconditionally support this? Do you only support this as the alternative to what the devs proposed? Is there any circumstance that you would support a group bonus to harvesting? Dave, I think I guess your answer .

---

I'll quote meself as you posted while I was writing another reply, so, in response to the above:

"As I've said on numerous occaisions, I personally prefer the bonus being given in two tranches, one to MS and one to MR's. It'd be a direct reward for being a Master in a group but I can see it is antithetical to what the Dev's 'vision' appears to be. The pragmatist in me then says we fall back to 0P0B as it is the proposal which does not exagerate an existing flaw. The idealist in me wants the 'broke' CHB system fixed".

SO, I would support a 0P0B fix. It's an improvement on what we've got and if they hadn't confused things by trying to introduce the bonus we'd probably all have been happy days ago.

I would wholeheartedly support a 0P0B fix with a CHB fix.

I would unreservedly support something that gives MS and MR's the group reward and to heck with the folk who
haven't invested the SP. They're already getting a bonus by not being penalised.

---

DaveG wrote:

Group bonusis not necessary to aid crafters through the ecconomy (by seeking to balance supply and demand). The same result could be achieved by just increasing the base yeild rate of all creatures, just like they have done with milking and shellfish rates.

The whole reason we enter into an MMORPG world is that it's a place where the opportunities and possibilities should be vast. Instead the whole philosophy of the group bonus moves away from that, because there will be a mode of play that will be strongly favoured above another.

---

I saw your posting eariler about the old saying "the customer is always right".

What most of us haven'trealized is that they already asked a LONG time ago what we wanted to encourage grouping, and a large number of people indicated they would like a bonus when hunting.

Basicaly they're giving us what we wanted,and i distinctly remember a large number of threads sayingthey/we (the players) would like to group more, but there was no incentive.

I support phenix with the zero penalty/5/10/20 system like i have since we started. it's enough of anincentive to group, andit's not so much of a bonus that it unbalances those solo players that still would like to solo.

Message Edited by Phenix1050 on 02-20-2005 11:25 AM