Ranger Archive
Thread: Outdoorsman 2.1 Proposal
Aileili
Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:04 pm
#27
"That's just it. We aren't "old furriers" and shouldn't be designed with thatSOLELY in mind. We are SW rangers and by the looks of the literature of the SW universe, we are generally more in the direction of paramilitary groups that can thrive in the wilderness."
You're preaching to the choir mate. 
I totally agree with you. The only reason I used the furrier analogy was because "When I think of traps, I don't envision Army Rangers lobbing smokebombs at their prey." did not support my arguement... cause they do! 
The whole point was that grenade style "traps" do not work for me, personaly.
"IF we had a bow system that became our trap system then what would become of our scout traps? And would this also be in addition to the ground traps that we get? Firstly we make our own traps, but it we had arrows and made them ourselves, weaponsmiths would be up in arms. Then if there was a bow system, we would essentially have a redundant skill set that does minor damage that would prolly be too similar to commandos and more lthan likely only work on creatures. Call me a pessimist but I truly believe the bow would give devs more reason to make us creature only."
I guess I didn't elaborate on this enough.
I would like to see Scouts get many more of the thrown traps (including our Ranger AOE traps at Master Scout), and some of those Scout traps would be usedas components for the Arrows. You're right about Weaponsmiths, so scrap the damage on Arrows, I don't know what I was thinking.
Make them a new trap delivery system that increases the effectiveness and range of Scout Traps only. With our two, woefully lacking, traps gone from Ranger, we would have room to implementthe new Advanced Trapping system. The new ground laid traps would replace our pathetic "AOE" traps and they should be just as effective on humanoids as they are on creatures.
falacy
Sun Sep 19, 2004 2:43 pm
#28
Though I admire the thought and work that went into creating the whole post on camping, I know that we will not get modular camps, nor will get th ability to have the camp remain active if the person who dropped it enters combat. Here is why,
Combat and Camping
Problem: This one is very simple. Camps shut down when in combat to stop people from taking advantage of them. SOE does not wantthe owner of a campto be able to fight while intheir active camp. It makes for doubling up on Combat and Survial XP, whichhas beendeamed unfair.
Solution: Perhaps the ower of the camp should stay out of combat. Problem solved.
Modular Camps
Problem: This one is also very simple. Creating this system would require so much programing time, the development team could create a second complete expansion in less time.
Solution: Rather than making camps modular, which would be interesting, why not simply make several variations on the current set of camps as well as make camp powerups & optional components? New camps could be created one at a time by the development team, which would make them a lot more likely to be created. Powerups would be simple enough to code, as the developers could reuse the weapon powerup functions & classes. The same goes for optional components while crafting; the code for this is already part of other professions, so adding to Ranger schematics is only a matter of a couple days of planning and coding.
I know these solutions are far less dramatic than what has been suggested for camping, but truthfuly they are much, much more likely to be implimented. Though simple,powerups and optional componentswould add a lot of fun and diversity to camping and its benifits. As such, we should think up several new camps, powerups, and optional components so the development team can consider how and when to impliment them.
Oh, and remember: Optional components while crafting as well as powerups have been known to be droped in high level loot!
Owen-Lars
Sun Sep 19, 2004 3:13 pm
#29
Combat and Camping
Problem: This one is very simple. Camps shut down when in combat to stop people from taking advantage of them. SOE does not wantthe owner of a campto be able to fight while intheir active camp. It makes for doubling up on Combat and Survial XP, whichhas beendeamed unfair.
Solution: Perhaps the ower of the camp should stay out of combat. Problem solved.
Hold on a minute, theres actually an advantage to being in camp?
As for the xp part, the ranger would still be in camp so why the fuss? Your solution doesnt take into account that most of the time it isnt the ranger's intention to get into a fight whilst in the camp and theres nothing he/she can do about it so most definatly, problem not solved.
Nemo0
Sun Sep 19, 2004 3:53 pm
#30
Ranger camps used to stay up during combat. This was not removed for xp reasons. The Devs didn't mind that. What the Devs minded was that repelling agros still worked then. Because the camp could repel agro and you could fight from it, you could kill anything in the game with no risk. The Devs didn't like this and brought out the Nerf Sledgehammer (before they learned how to use the bat) and overcompensated.
As for camps, the system already exists for many different items. There are many ways it could be implemented as well. It's a good idea (that the Devs have stated that they particularly liked) but it's not the easiest to implement. But it could easily fit into a revamp.
falacy
Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:23 pm
#31
Owen,
Rangers can aviod being agro'd by using mask scent and conceal and warning shot, if they have Marksman. If something aggrisive spawns in the camp, yes that sucks, but life isn't perfect. If someone runs into your camp with a huge train of agro, again life sucks some times. If you attack something while in your camp, too bad for you. As Nemo said exactly, the Devs removed the ability for camps to stay up durring combat because people were using to exploit the game. Personally, I'd rather have my camp broken up due to some raving animal every once and while (I am in the wilderness, after all) than have a bunch of people using it to gain an unfair advantage over others.
If you don't like the idea of camps not repelling animals,considerthis real life analogy:
When camping in the area of bears, it is not suggested but manditory, that you hang your food from a tree 15' above the ground and 10' from the tree trunk - outside of your camp. This is because human activity often attracks animals, such as bears, who come by for a free meal. By hanging your food up and away from your camp, at least when animals show up they won't bother you while they're trying to get at your food.
When in the wild, the only true santuary you have is that which comes from the barrel of your rifle.
Nemo0
Sun Sep 19, 2004 10:28 pm
#32
falacy wrote:
Owen,
Rangers can aviod being agro'd by using mask scent and conceal and warning shot, if they have Marksman. If something aggrisive spawns in the camp, yes that sucks, but life isn't perfect. If someone runs into your camp with a huge train of agro, again life sucks some times. If you attack something while in your camp, too bad for you. As Nemo said exactly, the Devs removed the ability for camps to stay up durring combat because people were using to exploit the game. Personally, I'd rather have my camp broken up due to some raving animal every once and while (I am in the wilderness, after all) than have a bunch of people using it to gain an unfair advantage over others.
If you don't like the idea of camps not repelling animals,considerthis real life analogy:
When camping in the area of bears, it is not suggested but manditory, that you hang your food from a tree 15' above the ground and 10' from the tree trunk - outside of your camp. This is because human activity often attracks animals, such as bears, who come by for a free meal. By hanging your food up and away from your camp, at least when animals show up they won't bother you while they're trying to get at your food.
When in the wild, the only true santuary you have is that which comes from the barrel of your rifle.
Umm, it wasn't just staying up during combat. It was staying up during combat and repelling creatures. Staying up during combat is fine. Repelling creatures can be exploited (i.e. the Ranger doesn't attack). Staying up during combat should not have been removed, nor should staying up when you leave the camp (the HTFB used to stay up until you left the planet).
Owen-Lars
Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:41 am
#33
If you don't like the idea of camps not repelling animals,considerthis real life analogy:
Hehe real life camps dont have a laser fense perimeter hehe
I know what you mean nemo, there would be tonnes of room for exploit if a agro repellent was implemented, even if camps disbanded in combat. Who is to say a ranger doesnt just pop a camp then let the group use the agro repellent on creatures? They cant and people would abuse this.
I would like to see agro repellent featured but perhaps only in this form to prevent exploits:
States:
There could be two states given to do with camps, 'Camped' and 'Repelled' states. The camped state effects pcs andgrouped npcsand the repelled state effects the creatures surrounding the camp.
Camped State:
- Players geta 'camped' statewhen they enter the camp
- You cannot be 'camped' whilst in combat (prevents even third party group members exploiting through our skills)
- Whilst 'camped' in certain high level camps such as the high tech field base you get an extremely high camo/mask bonus effectively hiding you from any creatures (to prevent agro)
The idea of the camped state is to give a bonus that negates itsself if the player enters combat willingly, so to stay safe the players should not attack and use the repellent as a tool to hunt. Aswel as this attack repellent, there would be a system that actually repells the creatures physically, this is the repelled state.
Repelled State:
- Surrounding the campin a64m radius of the camp, this is the repellent effect zone.
- Creatures within the zone (that are not in combat already)get a'repelled' state.
- This repelled state does not initiate combat and voids if the creature is attacked
- All creatures in a repelled state will move to 64m from the camp.
These two states when combined would allow lots of out of combat bonuses without the risk of either the ranger him(her)self OR others exploiting the functions of the camp. Basically if the player attacks a repelled creature, he/she will loose the camo/mask bonus and the creature and if assisted, his friends. The camp would have no need to disband in combat due to the fact that the bonuses to repellent would not be given whilst in combat.
What you think nemo, you think that would solve the exploit issues?
Message Edited by Owen-Lars on 09-20-2004 10:42 AM
Owen-Lars
Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:47 am
#34
The bonuses that come with the 'camped' states could be increased slightly as the level of camp increases for instance with a massive bonus on ranger camps. Or we could just rename the effect of camo bonuses to 'Rested' indicating the habbitat nature of the kit rather than a camp.
Camped bonuses could be given in other camps such as auto healing etc but when you get to these high level camps, camo/mask bonuses come into play and these would have the repellent features, perhaps only the HTFB. The options for implementation are very wide spreading and obviously would be made to benefits the ranger rather than scouts.
Calculus_Entropy
Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:13 am
#35
I think you are on to something here. I was going to basically suggest that while in a camp on can't get aggroed and if one enters a camp while aggroed, they wouldremain aggroed, so you covered things nicely.
Owen-Lars wrote:
If you don't like the idea of camps not repelling animals,considerthis real life analogy:
Hehe real life camps dont have a laser fense perimeter hehe
I know what you mean nemo, there would be tonnes of room for exploit if a agro repellent was implemented, even if camps disbanded in combat. Who is to say a ranger doesnt just pop a camp then let the group use the agro repellent on creatures? They cant and people would abuse this.
I would like to see agro repellent featured but perhaps only in this form to prevent exploits:
States:
There could be two states given to do with camps, 'Camped' and 'Repelled' states. The camped state effects pcs andgrouped npcsand the repelled state effects the creatures surrounding the camp.
Camped State:
- Players geta 'camped' statewhen they enter the camp
- You cannot be 'camped' whilst in combat (prevents even third party group members exploiting through our skills)
- Whilst 'camped' in certain high level camps such as the high tech field base you get an extremely high camo/mask bonus effectively hiding you from any creatures (to prevent agro)
The idea of the camped state is to give a bonus that negates itsself if the player enters combat willingly, so to stay safe the players should not attack and use the repellent as a tool to hunt. Aswel as this attack repellent, there would be a system that actually repells the creatures physically, this is the repelled state.
Repelled State:
- Surrounding the campin a64m radius of the camp, this is the repellent effect zone.
- Creatures within the zone (that are not in combat already)get a'repelled' state.
- This repelled state does not initiate combat and voids if the creature is attacked
- All creatures in a repelled state will move to 64m from the camp.
These two states when combined would allow lots of out of combat bonuses without the risk of either the ranger him(her)self OR others exploiting the functions of the camp. Basically if the player attacks a repelled creature, he/she will loose the camo/mask bonus and the creature and if assisted, his friends. The camp would have no need to disband in combat due to the fact that the bonuses to repellent would not be given whilst in combat.
What you think nemo, you think that would solve the exploit issues?
Message Edited by Owen-Lars on 09-20-2004 10:42 AM
Fred_Skinner
Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:33 am
#36
I just had a thought....
- Bullets, in honor of Nraas
- Camps that repel take time to erect
- Combat cannot be initiated in such camps, unless (using the modular theme) and SL or Commando drops something that allows it (might not be such a thing, depending on how that works).
- Other rules for combat work like being in a building. That roof should be one, in fact, I would like it to work on the rain for once.
- Programming this could make this undoable. But I thought making the FB an actual "building" of sorts might be a way around this.
Phenix1050
Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:47 am
#37
To put it simply, camps that can stay up in combat would remove the ability to repel. I don't think it would be that hard to code, personally. If camp X has a combat module, it removes the repel feature. Animals will run through the laser fence to get at someone shooting them. Simple.
As for the person who said the devs would never give us the ability to keep up camps during combat, I must refer you to the fact that we were originally slated to recieve "hunting blinds" that would do exactly that. While the post that details that is admitedly outdated, it is proof that at one time the devs thought that camps (or at least a camp-like structure) SHOULD be able to remain up in combat. While that doesn't neccesarily prove that they remain thinking so, It DOES provide us witha foothold in our arguments for such camps.
For those peple who disagree with Ranger weapons, check out my post titiled "Ranger: The Hybrid Class Theory". It details why Rangers, much like smugglers, are not simply a "support class", and should be able to weild unique weapons. For those of you who disagree with the Ranger weaponse because they are too "fantasy bases", I must assume you also want all melee proffessions removed from the game. I admit, it is unlikely that in such advanced times you would see a person wielding a bow...but if in that same reality, you have people waving swords and brass knuckles, it becomes a lot more forgiveable. Besides as someone pointed out, the technology for bows is quite astounding. Consider the SWG version a super-advanced model with servo-motors that amplify the pull-back strength, as well as a magnetic accelarator in the shaft of the bow that propels the projectile to nearly the speed of sound. Yes, it's far-fetched but it would be theoretically possible in such an advanced universe.
Owen-Lars
Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:58 am
#38
But I thought making the FB an actual "building" of sorts might be a way around this.
Yeah i like the sound of that, or perhaps part of the FB was a building and only in there can you receive the benefits of agro rellent etc.
Ive always wanted to veture unto those concrete domes we have in our HTFB and explore a little underground bunker type area
Rancorrider4
Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:49 pm
#39
Sojourner wrote:
Phenix, NRass would be proud!
Aye. He would indeed. I miss the old chap.
Phenix this is fantastic. I do agree with some other comments though , in that traps should affect players and NPC's. I think Nem0 made the point about trapping a Rancor dead in its tracks but not being able to trap a thug (Mauler preferably...they hate me).
I hope Tiggs turns out to be better than Thunderheart on whose desk the original Outdoorsman Proposal sits, rotting, coffee stained, muffins crumbs and all waiting to be disposed of.
I alsohope the members of the Ranger Community are appreciative of all the work Phenix puts in for us. Poor guy works almost as hard as Calc which is saying something, and Phenix doesn't even get to see the Corr. Forums. 
Regards,