Ranger Archive

---

Kinshi wrote:

Hi, glad to see SLs in on the discussion :-)

You have a VERY valid question..whats in it for Squad Leaders...

First off, I dont see SLs as losing anything they already have by such a profession merge. You get what you have PLUS you get what Rangers have.

Now, why would a SL want what Rangers have?

Camo..it is very useful and is still widely used in the profession, and is useful against both NPC and creatures (it needs some tweaking but it is effective). Also it keeps the creatues off of you..lkast thing you need when killing stormtroops is to have hurrtons chewing on you.

---

Have to take your word for this, I've never tried camo.

---

The High Tech Field Base, Every squad needs a base of operations, not to mention the innate healing bonuses the camp grants plus the ability to rapidly deploy mounts and vehicles in the field. (and the abilty to craft supplies as needed using the crafting stations provided by the camp)

---

Well, except the field base doesn't really offer much over a simple Basic Camp. The vehicle/mount effect works for all camps, and I have to admit i've never seen anyone doing any serious crafting "in the field" that would require a static Crafting Station. Now, if these camps offered "appreciable" bonuses (like hte old Fortification proposal) then we're getting somewhere.

---

Tracking...Ranger Area track and track the movements of NPCs & Players out to 512m..every leader needs to know the movements of his enemies

---

Now this would be neat.. Can't say that it would really fit in the role of a "Combat Leader", but Recon yea..

---

The innate Ranger terrain negotiation and burst run abilities. Charge up the hills even faster!

---

Already got it, SL gets like a +60 to Group TN as it is, and as you know.. Past 50 doesn't really matter...

---

Battle Armor certification

---

This one would be sticky, as SL's already get Assault Armor certs, and the devs aren't gonna give us both... So we'ld still probably only have one or the other...

---

Yeraze wrote:

---

Kinshi wrote:

Hi, glad to see SLs in on the discussion :-)

You have a VERY valid question..whats in it for Squad Leaders...

First off, I dont see SLs as losing anything they already have by such a profession merge. You get what you have PLUS you get what Rangers have.

Now, why would a SL want what Rangers have?

Camo..it is very useful and is still widely used in the profession, and is useful against both NPC and creatures (it needs some tweaking but it is effective). Also it keeps the creatues off of you..lkast thing you need when killing stormtroops is to have hurrtons chewing on you.

---

Have to take your word for this, I've never tried camo.

---

The High Tech Field Base, Every squad needs a base of operations, not to mention the innate healing bonuses the camp grants plus the ability to rapidly deploy mounts and vehicles in the field. (and the abilty to craft supplies as needed using the crafting stations provided by the camp)

---

Well, except the field base doesn't really offer much over a simple Basic Camp. The vehicle/mount effect works for all camps, and I have to admit i've never seen anyone doing any serious crafting "in the field" that would require a static Crafting Station. Now, if these camps offered "appreciable" bonuses (like hte old Fortification proposal) then we're getting somewhere.

---

Tracking...Ranger Area track and track the movements of NPCs & Players out to 512m..every leader needs to know the movements of his enemies

---

Now this would be neat.. Can't say that it would really fit in the role of a "Combat Leader", but Recon yea..

---

The innate Ranger terrain negotiation and burst run abilities. Charge up the hills even faster!

---

Already got it, SL gets like a +60 to Group TN as it is, and as you know.. Past 50 doesn't really matter...

---

Battle Armor certification

---

This one would be sticky, as SL's already get Assault Armor certs, and the devs aren't gonna give us both... So we'ld still probably only have one or the other...

---

I agree, that some more would have to be done beyond the simple 'merge' to meld the professions together, and yes, I think added bonues to the Ranger perks would be warranted (like adding the long desired ability for the HTFB to repel creatures

Also, on the SL wish list was some kind of 'tactical' display to coordinate combat movements..well the HTFB would be the perfect center of such tactical planning. HTFB should also be beefed up to provide larger healing bonuses and perhaps even a defense bonus to encourage its use as a feild fortification.

Also, pre-CU, overt faction members could purchase faction items using the status terminal in the HTFB (bringing back that function would make it even more usful for a SL..a combat group could stand to have mines, faction pets, and the ability to get new faction armor in the feild.

I don't know why so few people have used the phrase "Geurilla warfare."

This merger would be, quite frankly, the outdoorsman state of a commando (no, not the profession.) This would allow a group to literally thrive in the wild for days on end, without needing to alert the enemy of their existence by entering an NPC city. If there is an Artisan dabbler in the group, they can sample resources to give to a Bioengineer, who can make additional medicines for the Medics, Doctors, and regular players to use on themselves. Sure, weapons would need repairing or replacement, but with the new proposal of having Image Designers disquise faction, you can have a small group of people meet with an Image Designer, move to a secure location, have a member disguised as an Imperial, who then goes out and acquires the weapons and / or armor that the group needs replaced without giving up their location.

A Ranger / Squad Leader would be able to lead and protect such a group while in covert operations against an opposing faction.

---

Kinshi wrote:

At SOE they see both SL & Ranger as being borked but they dont know what to do about it and there arent very many of either profession in existance (thus their rational for not fixing aither profession quickly)

Message Edited by Kinshi on 06-07-2005 11:34 AM

---

---

DesktopSaki wrote:

- A hat.

It's so very simple.

---

I think such a merger probably has more positives then negatives. A year ago I too would have scoffed at such an idea, because it would seem that (in my view) the two were as opposite as can be. I saw ranger as primarily a solo, solitary hunter who thrived on his independence, and a squad leader was, well, a leader, someone who existed to help others in combat. But now with the way the CU has changed ranger... yea, I can see this making some sense.

(Phone rang while doing the last post, so I just posted it. )

My initial reaction is that I would rather remain a broken Ranger than be turned into a mishmashed (and likely broken) hybrid. You don't fix two broken professions by merging them.

If a merge is ever made, though, I do hope it's the folding of SL into Ranger, with us absorbing them instead of a new profession. Rangers are part of canon; SL is not.

---

Kinshi wrote:

Nemo0, I dont think merging the profs would really affect anyones current playstyle, as the prime reward of this template, due to keeping the SP cost of Master Ranger would be that you retain all of Ranger and all of SL as they stand today.

That leave you with the choice of "Do I want to stay close to my group tonight, or do I want to head up in the hills for a fishing expidition?"

In a nutshell the reward for the high SP usage is the flexibility, and utility the combined profession would offer. You would get the best that both worlds have to offer.

I agree, that perhaps the concept is an oversimplification but my mindset is the SWG has suffered in the long run from being overcomplicated (that is it has cool features that the devs simply cannot maintain due to their inheirent complexity, thus we live with a huge host of broken features, or half baked ones)

But at this late stage, I think simple solutions are much more desirable than complex ones that have a dubious chance of being implemented.

You are right there are different mindsets..but I stongly feel that Ranger & Squad Leader can learn from each other, and add new elements to their current play style that would be beneficial to both, with little negative impact to either profession. Again, you can play like you are going to be the next "Saving Private Ryan" or you can play like "Davy Crockett" but wouldnt it be cool to be able assume either role?

---

If you keep the Ranger prereqs, most Squad Leaders will suffer. Ranger playstyles will get additional flexibility but Squad Leader playstyles will be significantly more constrained. I personally like both Ranger and Squad Leader skills. Other players might not. Forcing them to spend as many skill points as it costs for Ranger to get the skills they are interested in seems slightly unfair (especially since you almost need the double mastery to get CL 80, limiting skill choice even further).

Also, I am a big fan of the skill/role based system. I would argue that Ranger and SL both have unique enough roles to warrant different skill trees. If you want skills related to leading a group, you pick up skills in the Squad Leader profession. If you want skills in tracking or harvesting or trapping or etc, you pick up skills in the Ranger profession. This lets you choose your own role in the game. Combining Ranger and SL might make a really uber profession but it will likely prevent either role being fully useful alone. And, if you don't happen to like some aspect of the combined profession, it becomes significantly more difficult to justify spending the prereq points. At some level, this becomes the same argument as trying to combine Ranger and CH or Ranger and BH. There are many parallels between the professions but they all focus on a different style of play. I'd almost rather see Ranger go away with the addition of a Trapper profession and moving the closely related skills to the appropriate Scout branched profession. I'd hate to see it happen but it's hard to justify the current skill point cost and it's hard to lower the prereqs without a significant change to the Ranger profession.

Before I toss my ranger hat into the ring on this one, who's been sneaking a look at my projected template for "The Final Respec of All Respecs"*

Been sat trying to justify butchering my ranger template AGAIN to incorporate a little SL def/off mods and still keep my BH lines and maybe change to pistols.... (got a great FHW, 400+ damage in my barely skilled hands... oh what could I do with PROPER speed and accuracy mods... muahaha)

oh the decisions...

Okies, yup, can see the attraction for Rangers in this idea, we get off/def mods and a viability in combat that's a bit lacking atm. For SL's, yeah, tracking and group concealment is well handy. Hmm, smells to much like a win-win situation.

So, IF it was to go beyond the vapourware stage, we need an indication from the dev side of what they are proposing WAY in advance of them starting to implement it, then a list of what's getting fixed rather than just a royal sweep under the carpet of all the broken stuff.

RL examples: LURPS, SAS patrols, Chindits, Border Reivers, Atilla the Hun (oh come on, you know he HAD to be a ranger at heart, lol)...

hmm. ok, I kow roughly what way my hat is inclined to go, but am going to ponder a little first.


















*(date to be announced, watch pres for details, may contain nuts)

Ok, here's my 2 pounds worth (I'm British, and inflation touches everything).

From a technical perspective:

It's viable on a limited resources, limited timescale.

From what I've read, neither side would be that 'bothered' (apart from the few hard core out there) so it wouldn't affect subscriptions (like the mass exodus after the CU went in).

All the code is there, if they merge and fix, both sides would counter the benefits of getting what they should have had in the first place against a greater role.

From a roleplay point of view:

Pathfinders are very different from both Squad Leader and Rangers. They track, and hunt, and provide recon and many other military functions, but they do not lead. They are sent out in advance to 'find the path'.

At the moment, the emphasis on rangers is ye olde style safari hunter from the British colonial times, with a blunderbus. (Well, ok not quite, it's more a hunter from a small tribe kinda thing, but I had to get the word 'blunderbus' in somewhere).

Also, at the moment the Squad Leader is exactly that - they lead a squad.

Pathfinders are small squads of people that have the abilities of a ranger (geared towards a more military function) but they are still lead by a squad leader. To be honest, a Pathfinder is more a merge of Rifleman and Ranger than Squad Leader and ranger.

It could just be the provisional name that has been suggested to maybe be possibly introduced that is throwing me off thinking about the functionality of such a profession, but at the moment that's all we have. If it was something like Safari Leader it might make more sense

A merge would probably (at the easiest) consist of two branches of a pathfinder being the combination of all branches of Squad Leader, and the same from Ranger. All the skills are still there, plus some others (for both sides).

Actually thinking about it, the combination would be far more like Martin Sheen's character in 'Apocalypse Now' - leadership qualities so he can get done what he needs done with whatever resources come about, combined with the hardiness and survival skills that come from ranger. (I can't remember what his 'skillset' was called apart from 'assassin', but that again takes away from the idea of what is behind it.) Perhaps gear it in the form of the US Army's Rangers and we'd have what the combination would be.

There is another concern/advantage, which probably won't come up much, but as I'm in the middle of moving from this profession to squad leader I've been thinking about it alot - Bounty Hunter. To be the most effective bounty hunter, it would become a requirement that you'd become a pathfinder. It's a concern because BH/Pathfinder would become the BH FOTM, and an advantage as it would give BHs that added skills they would need to effectively hunt and kill their marks (Jedis can stop whining already, ok? *grin*) There is a huge debate at the moment (and probably will be till the end of time) about Jedi v. BH. Jedi says 'stop hunting me, I'm only padawan' BH says 'yes, but you're my only viable target because full templated Jedi are too hard'. Jedi says 'we want somewhere to grind' devs go 'ok, have kashyyyk, we'll not let BH seeker droids work there as we can't be bothered to fix it' BHs go (and this is probably a quote) 'What The Francis?!'. Having the pathfinder profession along with BH would essentially make Kashyyyk less of a Jedi FOTM grinding spot, and also a more RP BH spot - and I can guaruntee that BHs would love this kinda profession - it's more what a BH is truly about.

You could even leave it open ended - 'You have had a form of training - whether from the military, a mercenary group, or your society - that allows you to make clear decisions in the field; understand how the environment affects both you and any other with you; adapt to any encounter you may have; and generally provide support in a wide range of activities'.

I've ranted on a fair bit here and I apologise, but the use of the term 'pathfinder' I think has thrown alot of people off, along with what the end result would actually be. If we look for an in-game, paradigm fitting justification for this (reasons behind it, training involved, role description etc) then I think this could be a viable alternative for both profession - if not the whole game. At the moment it's all 'what would I as a SL/Ranger get out of it' not 'what about this new role could be exciting and unique in the world'. Let's be honest - neither side would be losing anything, we'd be gaining. Gaining extra abilities, abilities we should have had already but now work, a unique place in the universe, a unique place in the in-game social structure.

But most of all - it is a viable, workable alternative to lying in the background, always at the bottom of the list of profession to fix/revamp, and would provide a worthwhile experience for everyone involved.

That's what we need to look at.

In short - I'm for it if they put at least some effort behind it to justify it, and give it a good place in the universe.

Message Edited by KyeAshke on 06-08-2005 12:56 AM

The more I think about this possibility the more I don't like it.

Nobody has yet thought about what this would do to existing Squadleaders skillpoint wise, they would require to pick up the EXTRA 3 LINES in scout to master Scout!! /EDIT someone posted this issue while I was compiling my post

All that would do is nerf any existing SL's damage output ability to that of us Master Rangers, even more so if they wanted to do a melee combat character with the requirement of 1 line in marksman for SL.

Sure some of the SL bonus's would be nice but wouldn't be a huge help to a Ranger, and about the only Ranger ability that would be useful to SL is tracking.

Instead of whacking the 2 professions together and then putting them on the back shelf never to be looked at again I think we should be supporting each other on our respective forums to get the 2 professions abilities fixed, not necessarily upgraded but just mad to work how they are supposed to do.

Now that all of our trap states have been given to pretty much every other profession under the sun maybe we as Rangers shouldn't be asking for new traps but to have the ones we have improved, for example,

Give use improved versions of the scout traps with say 2 or 3 times the duration and/or effectiveness so they have an advantage over other professions states, easy to do just rename them to improved Pdart etc and alter the numbers

Then move the 2 (useless at the moment) Ranger area effect traps to Master Ranger or similiar and up their effectiveness/duration.

Along those lines let use experiment on the improved traps at our HTFB crafting stations for either duration and/or effectiveness as well and of course make some of the traps be effective against npc and pc

But I digress, I should really post this in the appropriate sticky about traps

Message Edited by fatheadnz on 06-08-2005 02:12 PM

Message Edited by Omegaplex on 06-07-2005 05:42 PM