Ranger Archive
Thread: /TRACK
Owen-Lars
Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:14 am
#27
Owen, I abso-friggin-lutely love this idea!
Hehe glad you like it mate.
Yeah on what you said about the easiest way to implement it. Yes i also think that a survey tool system would be to most easiest way to implement it and if this option were to be taken we would most certainly have to use a 'tool' to /track.
Idealy i would prefer not to have to use a tool to use my survival 'instincts'. The way i see it (obviously not all will see the same way) is that when a ranger tracks, the ranger, senses the breeze, the smell in the air, the broken foilage in the area, the vibrations from the earth to get a 'feel' for where something is. I love the idea that rangers actually gain this skill through experience in the wild, and i think getting a tool to do this would hamper that vission, however it would not ruin it.
In the end im happy with any implementation aslong as it allows us to actually work for our prize and to 'hunt'. Be it by the use of a tool or by natural means, i would only be too happy to embrace this skill.
Reos2
Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:39 am
#28
I like your idea presented here but I have opinions.
One thing you keep mentioning is the ability of the Ranger to "spawn" these lairs, or the big game beast. I just want to point out to anyone who has issue with this: because of a Ranger's natural ability to track and hunt down animals/beasts more efficiently than anyone else, they will find said beasts faster than anyone else. This requires the lairs/beasts to be spawned. Simple as that.
Having said that, here's some other opinions:
Beast Tracking: I don't think a waypoint should be given. That's too specific and real-life trackers follow their nose and nature's clues, not a waypoint. Instead, a status message should appear on the screen: for example, you do a /track Beast Track for zucca boar and if you're within 1000m of zucca boar you get "You find indications of a zucca boar trail leading Northeast." Now this isn't much different from doing an /area now, except that currently /area limits you to 500m for any creatures in your area...doing a specific beast track would increase the range. I wouldn't be adverse to seeing it range from 1000-2000m, based on Ranger level. The thing to remember is that the range shouldn't exceed a specific beast's perceived/imagined natural habitat.
Also, there's only so much game out there. There should be a limit to how many times you can Beast Track, kinda like being able to heal with stimpacks when you're grinding toward Medic. You have to wait a certain amount of time until you can track again. This would reflect the Ranger gathering his senses, clearing his head and getting his bearings for the next track. This time would decrease as you level up. Either this, or the devs incorporate spawn times for beasts within a given area, governed by the amount of times a particular beast has spawned and then been wiped out. Limiting the Ranger's ability to constantly find lairs will maintain resource values.
Big Game Tracking:
All my opinions are taken from what I've learned about tracking animals in real life. I'm not a tracker, but have hunted before and have friends that hunt quite a bit. The idea of tracking a creature outside it's habitat doesn't make sense. A creature's habitat is everywhere it travels, hunts, sleeps. So the idea of these mysterious "Track Interface Prompts" should be dropped. If a creature has never been to a particular location there should be no way to track it. Only when within the creature's habitat should the Ranger be able to track it, and finding the creature's habitat is something that Rangers should do without any tools, but by just travelling everywhere and doing Beast Tracks. In answer to previous posts concerning instances vs. static: I think general creature habitats are static anyway...for instance you won't find Krayts hanging out just west of Mos Eisley. They're all NE.
Having said that, I think your ideas on Big Game Tracking, although well thought out and much appreciated (you obviously put thought, effort and time into this), is overkill. I think any map overlays like potential tracks can be shown in the normal overhead map. I think the whole Big Game Tracking idea can be rolled together with just the regular Beast Tracking skill.
To conclude, I believe all of this discussion is positive. We're all on the same page of increasing the Ranger's value. Whatever the devs decide to do, hopefully they'll look at some of the ideas presented here and roll them into the next Ranger update.
Ok I'm tired now, I'll just up and press "submit post."
One thing you keep mentioning is the ability of the Ranger to "spawn" these lairs, or the big game beast. I just want to point out to anyone who has issue with this: because of a Ranger's natural ability to track and hunt down animals/beasts more efficiently than anyone else, they will find said beasts faster than anyone else. This requires the lairs/beasts to be spawned. Simple as that.
Having said that, here's some other opinions:
Beast Tracking: I don't think a waypoint should be given. That's too specific and real-life trackers follow their nose and nature's clues, not a waypoint. Instead, a status message should appear on the screen: for example, you do a /track Beast Track for zucca boar and if you're within 1000m of zucca boar you get "You find indications of a zucca boar trail leading Northeast." Now this isn't much different from doing an /area now, except that currently /area limits you to 500m for any creatures in your area...doing a specific beast track would increase the range. I wouldn't be adverse to seeing it range from 1000-2000m, based on Ranger level. The thing to remember is that the range shouldn't exceed a specific beast's perceived/imagined natural habitat.
Also, there's only so much game out there. There should be a limit to how many times you can Beast Track, kinda like being able to heal with stimpacks when you're grinding toward Medic. You have to wait a certain amount of time until you can track again. This would reflect the Ranger gathering his senses, clearing his head and getting his bearings for the next track. This time would decrease as you level up. Either this, or the devs incorporate spawn times for beasts within a given area, governed by the amount of times a particular beast has spawned and then been wiped out. Limiting the Ranger's ability to constantly find lairs will maintain resource values.
Big Game Tracking:
All my opinions are taken from what I've learned about tracking animals in real life. I'm not a tracker, but have hunted before and have friends that hunt quite a bit. The idea of tracking a creature outside it's habitat doesn't make sense. A creature's habitat is everywhere it travels, hunts, sleeps. So the idea of these mysterious "Track Interface Prompts" should be dropped. If a creature has never been to a particular location there should be no way to track it. Only when within the creature's habitat should the Ranger be able to track it, and finding the creature's habitat is something that Rangers should do without any tools, but by just travelling everywhere and doing Beast Tracks. In answer to previous posts concerning instances vs. static: I think general creature habitats are static anyway...for instance you won't find Krayts hanging out just west of Mos Eisley. They're all NE.
Having said that, I think your ideas on Big Game Tracking, although well thought out and much appreciated (you obviously put thought, effort and time into this), is overkill. I think any map overlays like potential tracks can be shown in the normal overhead map. I think the whole Big Game Tracking idea can be rolled together with just the regular Beast Tracking skill.
To conclude, I believe all of this discussion is positive. We're all on the same page of increasing the Ranger's value. Whatever the devs decide to do, hopefully they'll look at some of the ideas presented here and roll them into the next Ranger update.
Ok I'm tired now, I'll just up and press "submit post."
Nemo0
Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:13 am
#29
Reos2 wrote:
...
...for instance you won't find Krayts hanging out just west of Mos Eisley. They're all NE.
...
Well, you might be surprised. Go a bit south of Mos Eisley and have a look around. There is a nice krayt skeleton there. The krayts do travel all over the planet (I used to fight them all over the place before cities came around). They are just most common near the graveyard (and, since cities were added, I have yet to see one outside the graveyard area). The same is true of most of the rare spawns. Even the Gorax used to be found in the southern regions of Endor instead of the desert where you currently find him. The spawn system really needs help right now. It used to be great.
Nemo0
Tue Oct 12, 2004 1:39 pm
#30
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Darl wrote:
It's probably been suggested before, but I always envisioned /track like the /find command that you get in the cities. Maybe not the god awful yellow line with green arrows, but maybe a series of glowing foot prints in the sand/mud/whatever. Maybe a percentage chance of loosing your target as time goes on. Maybe the age of the tracks themselves could be implemented into the figures, as they fade over time. But then I suppose you could or would have to throw in other factors such as weather, terrain, etc.
It maybe to many variables and to difficult to code, but it was what I always thought of when I read this type of post.
One thing to point out is that the paths given by the /find command in a city are all hand drawn (that is why the yella' line doesn't always start where you are standing). This may make a similar implementation in the /track command impossible.
Well, hand drawn only to a certain extent. They make a connected grid of points that shows the game where you can actually walk. In the wild, they can just use a normal grid because you don't really have to worry about obstructions (to a large extent--a house or POI can block you but they are usually small enough that you won't get lost walking around it). It doesn't have to be hand coded for the wild areas. In theory, they could even have the yellow lines leading you from the wild with /find. But what is the point of that when you will just be going in a straight line (and it wastes quite a bit of computational power to compute that straight line for 5k). They could do it without too much trouble but a waypoint is much easier and more effecient (even if it is an updating waypoint).
In summary: yes, I believe they could implement the necessary code without too much trouble. But they are very unlikely to do it for reasons that I'm sure you guys don't care about. While it might look cool, expect waypoints and such to be the norm (especially given that any path they draw is likely to be a straight line anyway unless they really want to go crazy). A series of updating waypoints (you see a set of tracks leading to this point, you find another set of tracks leading off to here) is much more likely and just as good (in my mind).
Darl
Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:16 am
#32
It's probably been suggested before, but I always envisioned /track like the /find command that you get in the cities. Maybe not the god awful yellow line with green arrows, but maybe a series of glowing foot prints in the sand/mud/whatever. Maybe a percentage chance of loosing your target as time goes on. Maybe the age of the tracks themselves could be implemented into the figures, as they fade over time. But then I suppose you could or would have to throw in other factors such as weather, terrain, etc.
It maybe to many variables and to difficult to code, but it was what I always thought of when I read this type of post.
Reos2
Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:22 am
#33
Nemo0 wrote:Reos2 wrote:
......for instance you won't find Krayts hanging out just west of Mos Eisley. They're all NE.
...Well, you might be surprised. Go a bit south of Mos Eisley and have a look around. There is a nice krayt skeleton there. The krayts do travel all over the planet (I used to fight them all over the place before cities came around). They are just most common near the graveyard (and, since cities were added, I have yet to see one outside the graveyard area). The same is true of most of the rare spawns. Even the Gorax used to be found in the southern regions of Endor instead of the desert where you currently find him. The spawn system really needs help right now. It used to be great.
Well I think the key word here is "used to be." Now I might be speaking out of place here, after all I've only been playing since early June, but I have never seen a Krayt anywhere except the graveyard. Bottom line is, it sounds like it's a rare thing at best to find a Krayt anywhere but the Krayt graveyard. My point is, if there isn't pre-mapped out locales or "habitats" for a particular type of creature, then there probably should be, with some small/minor overlapping. There are many types of creatures indigenous to particular planets. The same rule, although relaxed a little bit, should be said for areas of a planet.
Calculus_Entropy
Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:33 am
#34
Darl wrote:It's probably been suggested before, but I always envisioned /track like the /find command that you get in the cities. Maybe not the god awful yellow line with green arrows, but maybe a series of glowing foot prints in the sand/mud/whatever. Maybe a percentage chance of loosing your target as time goes on. Maybe the age of the tracks themselves could be implemented into the figures, as they fade over time. But then I suppose you could or would have to throw in other factors such as weather, terrain, etc.It maybe to many variables and to difficult to code, but it was what I always thought of when I read this type of post.
One thing to point out is that the paths given by the /find command in a city are all hand drawn (that is why the yella' line doesn't always start where you are standing). This may make a similar implementation in the /track command impossible.
Owen-Lars
Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:28 am
#35
Yeah i agree nemo.
I honestly dont care what form the track comes in aslong as it is engaging and allows us to fullfill a pathfinder and hunting guide role to its fullest potential.
Tracking should be one of the most defining traits of a ranger (along with stealth and pathfinding etc) and i just think that instead of a simple run here to find the best, it should involve more end user (ranger) participation to track the beast, so yeah updating waypoints would do the trick too, but if i could have one or the other i would choose a sample-like interface that shows the actual tracks of the beasts.
Landorien
Wed Oct 13, 2004 5:37 am
#36
Halendor wrote:
I think this might be a too powerful tool for a ranger.And it would probably be very hard for the developers to implement this in the game.I feel this powerful /track ability would take away the hunting aspect.With /track,the ranger is in control of spawning the lairs. If you were a real ranger out in the wilds, you would first have to find the tracks before you can track an animal down, you can't 'generate' them.
Being a ranger means better terrain negotiation, creature harvesting, trapping and camps. I agree that there are points in that list that can be improved. But the only people who are able to 'spawn' creatures, are bio-engineers. Not rangers.
Already the only way to find our prey is to "spawn" them. Beasts are generated through player movement and the accursed mission terminals, which in my book isn't very "hunterlike".
I can just see the rl hunters in the woods:
"Yeah, I know there aren't any elks in this here forest, but if we run around in circles they will come. Shooting rabbits and squirrels also helps by giving the elks room to spawn(?)!"
Ever hear the phrase: If a tree falls over deep into the forest, and there is noone there to hear it crash, does it make a sound? Well, in SWG there aren't even any trees in the first place unless someone is there to see it, which is WRONG on so many levels. Asking for ranger to actually track down our prey and not just use a glorified binocular as our "secret weapon" doesn't seem too much to ask, now does it?
Bioengineers are NOT wildlife experts, so why they would have such an option boggles me. Elaborate?
murphy7
Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:54 am
#37
Well, I am glad to see this resurface for further discussion.
I don't see the ability to force spawn with /track as imbalanced, but I can see how it might pave the road to server hell.
Something that leads to the Ranger asa portable mission terminal might get out of hand. Lots of people going ranger to force their own spawns and turning every planet into the laggy loveliness that Dantooine might well ensue.
But I'd still want that ability, no doubt about it.
BaneShee
Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:01 am
#38
Another great post Owen ....
Murph,
murphy7 wrote:
Well, I am glad to see this resurface for further discussion.
I don't see the ability to force spawn with /track as imbalanced, but I can see how it might pave the road to server hell.
Something that leads to the Ranger asa portable mission terminal might get out of hand. Lots of people going ranger to force their own spawns and turning every planet into the laggy loveliness that Dantooine might well ensue.
But I'd still want that ability, no doubt about it.
your point is well taken put the devs would and should put controls in place to prevent this from happening. For example: If you use the /track command and the creature your looking for has already spawnedthen you areautomatically forced to the /areatrack interface. In addition, each area currently hasa spawn limit so a Ranger using /track in an area that already has a heavy spawn concentration should have a higher degree of failure. This forcesRangers to find more isolated areas to hunt thus spreading out the server load.