Ranger Archive
Thread: Revised harvesting changes..
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 completely ignore my personal conviction (going back to 2003) that there should be a fixed cap on the number of resources on the creature that anyone total should be able to get, but be able to get all of them eventually (hide meat & bone)...
No Penalty No Bonus for normal (non-master) scouts, with scaled bonuses to people within range of master scout on up, no bonus to the MS+ him/herself (can't teach yourself how to do even better) but the bonus to the group members should NEVER allow any single member to outharvest the person who is giving the bonus off that same creature.
As-is, I think the current penalty is not a penalty at all, especially when you remember that beta and for quite a while after, it was that whoever harvested first got their harvest and everyone else was locked out (more realistic than anything inplemented since).
Yep, if this is the case then it definitely needs addressing. Either give us the 40% bonus too (which I initially assumed we would get anyway) or increase our Master boxharvesting skillmod by +5 or +10. Make our spent skill points more worthwhile!
NerfBurger wrote:
The fact that a 0040 Ranger will outharvest a Master when grouped together is crazy!
Message Edited by JascoSmlee on 02-21-2005 09:33 AM
JascoSmlee wrote:
Yep, if this is the case then it definitely needs addressing. Either give us the 40% bonus too (which I initially assumed we would get anyway) or increase our Master boxharvesting skillmod by +5 or +10. Make our spent skill points more worthwhile!
NerfBurger wrote:
The fact that a 0040 Ranger will outharvest a Master when grouped together is crazy!
Message Edited by JascoSmlee on 02-21-2005 09:33 AM
From testing done tonight:
Merek Harvester, Endor, All Results from a single wild lair, All Fat and Healthy
Groupincluded Master Ranger, Ranger with Tracking 4(Tracker), Novice Ranger, Master Scout, Scout with Hunting 4(Hunter)
Units of meat harvested grouped
Master Ranger = 366
Tracker= 374
Novice Ranger= 305
Master Scout= 295
Hunter= 285
Units of meat harvested solo
Master Ranger= 282
Tracker= 267
Novice Ranger= 218
Master Scout= 210
Hunter= 204
As you can see the 0040 Ranger (Tracker) harvest quite a bit more then the Master Rangerwhen grouped with him.
The fact that we all harvested more then the Master Ranger did solo really shocked me though 
1. So what if my pov is contrary to what the devs want. It doesn't mean I don't see it, it just means I completely disagree. That's an opinion I'm entitled to have.
Phenix1050 wrote:
Dariane_Kamutsovy wrote:
1.
You're so wrong here.I do get the point, but I completely disagree and you can't see our pov. your point of view is contrary to what the devs have stated that they want from the game.I can see it, it's really not that difficult. It's just contrary to the direction thedevsarehoping to take the game.
2. You mentioned yourself 3 reasons why to group. All of those were examples of 1+1 =2 ideas. Even ungrouped, it's easier to kill a creature with two people shooting at it, right? Even ungrouped, you can have someone heal you, right? Those things don't require you to find another person to group with. Neither does grouping to get higher level missions. You can group with a CH pet or a droid. NONE of those "group benefits" actually requires you to group with another person. They can be accomplished ungrouped or by grouping with a pet. Forcing people to be withing X number of meters of one another actually means you have to be with them to get the bonus. That's a 1+1=3 group idea, which is much smarter.
3
I'll give you a 4th one you didn't mention, you overlooked or did not bother to mention:
If the group penalty on harvesting was dropped, a group would get MUCH more harvest than 1 single person, hence also an encouragement to group, expecially combined with the faster killing of spawns.
But how does that benefit Rangers? If the penalty is simply dropped then we are left with the same situation we face now-- stackers will be more desireable in a hunting group than a Master Ranger. From first hand testing experience, I can tell you stackers are about twice as effective over the course of time as a Master Ranger. Dropping the harvest penalty will actually accentuate this and hurt Rangers as a profession. That is something I will fight against.
Giving a bonus when you have a Ranger in the group makes sense from both a realistic viewpoint and a gameplay one. It will encourage people to hunt with Rangers more than with scout stackers. If you're really concernedabout losing money, just consider how your no-penalty situation will work out. If you're hunting solo, a scout stacker can actually harvest more than you over the course of a buff. If they can GROUP, with no penalty, two scout stackers will destroy the amount that you can harvest. A no-bonus system encourages people to get more combat skills than Ranger skills. A bonus system encourages people to master Ranger.
2 guesses which one I'm more interested in seeing.
This changfe alone would be a cause for the market to be flooded with more resources hence causing a drop of the prices, which are, as you pointed out, sometimes ridicilous (350cpu).
4.
So a BONUS to a group is NOT needed, nor wanted. nor wanted by a few people. Ask every crafter whether they want this. Ask doctors. Ask scout stackers. Again, we're not the only profession that this affects. From feedback from the correspondants of several other professions, I can tell you that most people outside this community want this. And a lot of people who are in this community want this. So don't assume that what a few people say here is the rule of thumb for what is wanted or not wanted. Until you deal with people from every other community, you really have no idea what the player base as a whole wants, do you?
Message Edited by Phenix1050 on 02-20-2005 08:52 AM
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
To make sure y'all understand something, I will state it (again?):
There are more than just Ranger's opinions that affect the devs decision here. Everyone has a voice in this matter (even those that can't harvest). If they put this through as is, it does not mean they are ignoring our inpout...they do it beacuse the majority of their feedbak has been for this change.
The devs do reasearch on some of the controversial changes. They conduct exit polls and market research (they need to know what currecnt and potential customers want). I assume this came up as a big response through their research on 'What would make you group more?'
This probaly doesn't answer the "what are the devs thinking?" crowd as I am not a dev and they have made no offiical statement. This is only meant to add a perspective that you might mot have been exposed to.
If these calculations are correct and a MR would get the most all the time, then it would be worth pursuing. I still might be hunting alone tough (due to the other factors that I find inconvenient hehehe)
Phenix1050 wrote:
Y'all know where I stand. zero penalty *SMALL* positive bonus for grouping. I also support making Master Ranger harvest rates higher. Quick example, I promise, not too much math.
Make it so that Master Ranger has a LARGE bonus to harvesting, such that they're 20-25%% over a Ranger 0040. Then give +5% if grouped with MS, + 10% if grouped with Ranger, +20% if grouped with master Ranger. In my system, a Master Ranger, ungrouped will harvest the same or more than an 0040 Ranger when grouped. The only person who'd harvest more is a grouped master Ranger. Also, in my system, a grouped Ranger 0040 would harvest less than the MR. VERY important that they get that much right. Now some of you are saying "how do the MR get the bonus, in terms of logic. Simple: there's more than one way to skin a vrelt. and each hunter helps each other out. Something like that.
Here's my concern if we make it no penalty, no bonus: Then we run into the same problem we have now, where Master Rangers can be out-harvested by scout 0040's because of how quick the scout stackers kill. that's not good. We have a chance to increase our harvesting and give Ranger a role in a hunting group. Those two things are important to me.
Message Edited by Phenix1050 on 02-20-2005 11:25 AM
DaveG wrote:
If there is an extra harvesting bonus given to grouped players, then how is that true? If there is an extra harveting bonus for groups, then how are solo players not being penalised for being solo?
Nastzguehl wrote:
... This way gives both playstyles a place in the game...
In this case I think you overlooked something about Phenix' proposal. Even as a solo MR hunter, you will harvest more than a Ranger0040 grouped with a MR. Hence no loss there.
If you are grouped, everyone, including the MR would get an additional bonus. From an RP pov it can be defended, but I'll leave that to you as an excercise 
True, a group in itself would give incentives as well (easier to kill, faster, more help) but this change is going to change the community to WANT MR/MS into the group. Hence it would be boost for the Scout/Ranger communities, wich IMHO is a good thing.
To me, it sounds like a win-win situation. Both forms of playing would become attractive to me again.
Limobacca wrote:
So a BONUS to a group is NOT needed, nor wanted.
the bonus may not be wanted by you but why don't you ask the crafters that are forced to pay the outrageous sums of credits if they like the idea of more available resources from possibly more suppliers since it will be easier for non mstr rangers to make a small living doing this.
If it only were $0,02!!! I answered this one already... It's economics and it's a vicious circle (or spiral)... Someone has to break it. Starting at the bottom of the spiral: MR getting resources for doc buffs, clothing and armor. AS buying wooly to make EXPENSIVE armor. EXPENSIVE armors are needed by MR to stay safe. MR increases price.... If MR drops price would you expect the AS to lower the price of his armor?
Doubt it. If AS refuses to buy the resources from the MR and starts selling (undercutting market to get more sales) cheaper but still quality armor, MRs are forced to go along cause otherwise they won't sell the resources...
Economics my dear...
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
No bonus, no penalty! Viva La Revolution!
MMO doesn't mean grouping. I can talk to noone all day in my game play, and all the other players on my server are still important to my game. I use their guns, I eat their food, buy god knows what else from them, and if they wernt there who would I be hunting for?
The orgaincs market on Corbantis is about to colapse as it is, if prices get any lower every one will stop hunting, lol. The last Uber avian was 75 cpu. Most things are 20 cpu or less. I have to say I keep to my self though so I could easly miss a really hot deal... but the few Rangers/Scouts I've run into and got to sit down and talk to are all really bummed as is. That Ranger is FOTM here might be the cause though...
And on a side note, you've been handling this whole thing really well. I'm glad we have you as our Corr.