Ranger Archive
Thread: Ungrouped Pets Now Eat 40% Of Harvests
Beausoleil wrote:
3. The harvesting penalty. Lets keep the apples and oranges separated, shall we?? There is absolutely NO logical argument for having a penalty on harvest when grouping with a pet that can't harvest. Thats just plain ridiculous. I can agree with arguments for XP sharing or whatever... but harvest?? That makes no sense. Why don't you just give the creature half the money from the mission as well if you agree with the logic behind THAT.
Now... keeping all of this in mind....what are the reasons we group a pet in the first place?
1. To get those missions you can't otherwise get
2. To be able to more easily monitor your pets health.
That was pretty much my only reasons when I had a pet. I can't think of any others, so if someone wants to give me more ideas, then please do. Now since I completely disagree with the first reason in the first place, and anyone with any sense of fairness that extends beyond his XP counter and money purse will agree with me... then the answer seems simple.
Remove pet grouping COMPLETELY and create a new little window that will pop up to monitor your pets status. There is your fix, plain and simple.
Let the flames begin,
LOL your #3 is funny... ina sad sort of way, that for awhile having pets grouped did just that. They also swiped a share of the loot!
They could not fairly remove grouping with pets to pull missions as it then would put CHs at a great disadvantage for missions. If I have spent all those skill points to get my nice fiesty pet, I think we need to fight something other than durnis. I know you said you didn't want to hear about xp or money, but everyone in the game needs a way to advance in both those areas... If I could only ever pull newbie missions while having the ability to take out much higher game with my pet it would not be a very good balance of the professions (skillpoints vs reward).
I know there are people out there with an advanced weapon profession and CH that probably gain much more to the "group pets to pull higher missions" deal. If you consider that the reason they can get the higher missions that way is because the mission terminal judges the ability of their weapons and pets and gives them one accordingly.... I don't see how it is a problem.
Instead perhaps something needs to be looked at as to why someone with as powerful a template as the said CH/Weapon Master can not pull a mission that is at his ability. I would say there would be the problem that needs fixing.
But... remember there are more profession balances in the works and maybe they are going to fix that then... It is, at the very least a good question to raise to the devs.
Once again... don't look at "nerfing" another profession, instead look to improve yours. In this case, lobby for improved mission terminal checks for ability to complete the mission.
Beausoleil wrote:
Okay.. I might have gotten confused for a sec.. its not JB that reported the loss from an ungrouped pet. Sorry.
No, you were right, he did.... he said he noticed it several weeks ago.
Cressida
You are right though, this isn't a solution to the ROOT of the problem.. it just puts everyone on a level playing field.
To truly FIX the problem.. let people pull any level mission they want. Seriously, whats the problem with a Novice Marksman going on a Level 99 mission? He won't do it more than once, I guarantee.
To level the playing field, remove pet grouping completely.
To really fix the problem.. change the mission system so you can get like 20 missions to choose from instead of 5, and make them of all possible levels of difficulty regardless of you or your group's abilities.
Shaylin wrote:
Beausoleil wrote:
Oh, I am not looking at nerfing a profession at all. Not in the least. Removing grouping of pets completely in no way nerfs the CH profession. It simply brings them in line with the other professions.
You are right though, this isn't a solution to the ROOT of the problem.. it just puts everyone on a level playing field.
To truly FIX the problem.. let people pull any level mission they want. Seriously, whats the problem with a Novice Marksman going on a Level 99 mission? He won't do it more than once, I guarantee.
To level the playing field, remove pet grouping completely.
To really fix the problem.. change the mission system so you can get like 20 missions to choose from instead of 5, and make them of all possible levels of difficulty regardless of you or your group's abilities.If you remove the ability to group with a pet to get a mission of your capability, you don't get a level playing field. If I put my skill points into a pet, and the pet makes me capable of completing a mission, I should get to use it. How is it "level" to restrict me to newbie missions?
The any level missions for everyone is an interesting idea that I have heard before, and I would not be opposed to it.
But not letting me "hold" my weapon so that it counts for mission capability would not be balanced with the current mission terminal checks.
Cressida
It "levels" the playing field in that it changes it so NOBODY can get missions that are challenging. The point is, I CAN"T get challenging missions holding my best rifle.. but if I had a large pet to group, I CAN get challenging missions. Total baloney.
I didn't say it was a fix. The skill check is crap and its broken. Remove it to solve the issue.
JBMat wrote:
If a CH is so silly as to have no combat profession skills and relies soley on pets, well.... sorry bout that. That is one dead CH.
Beausoleil wrote:
It "levels" the playing field in that it changes it so NOBODY can get missions that are challenging. The point is, I CAN"T get challenging missions holding my best rifle.. but if I had a large pet to group, I CAN get challenging missions. Total baloney.
I didn't say it was a fix. The skill check is crap and its broken. Remove it to solve the issue.
Message Edited by Eklectrick on 02-17-2004 01:58 AM
Don't hunt with non-harvesters is the short answer. Not saying I agree with the harvest system at all... and I would like to see it so the group leader can actually select if he wants everyone to harvest or just himself. (Quite honestly, I think there should be X units of a resource on an animal.. and if you group, you split it. Plain and simple. Makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE to me that if I kill a tiny gorg, I can get 5 units of meat out of it.. but if 20 of use group and kill the same gorg, we can now get like 20 or 40 total. )
As a matter of fact, I refuse to hunt with ANYONE that isn't going to harvest the same thing I am harvesting and sell it to me after the harvest. Doing so would COMPLETELY undermine the reason I am hunting in the first place... to get a specific resource collected to sell to someone that has asked me to get said resource.
Taking a non-harvester along is no different to me than taking along some clown that wants bone when I am going for hide, or someone that wants to make his own sale. I am not going to take a hit on my harvest so he can tag along with me. The obvious exception would be guildies and close friends.
- Don't consider a bug (the system is working correctly)
- Or the fix is simply too time consuming for such a minor benefit.
I suspect it is the latter... The harvesting restriction is based on whether you are in a group. It is not based on what is in the group with you, but simply on whether you are flagged as being in a group.
My suspicion (from a humblesoftware developer'sperspective) is that in order to change the system, some major work needs to be done to the grouping system to add in this additional functionality.
Until the end benefit exceeds the cost in time required to change the system, it will not be changed.
----
Of course I could be completely wrong, and the developers could hate us all, and are purposefully forcing the CH in our midst to suffer. Yes... That's it. And I blame this all on DeltaXi65!
NRaas wrote:
I suspect it is the latter... The harvesting restriction is based on whether you are in a group. It is not based on what is in the group with you, but simply on whether you are flagged as being in a group.
Yes, except that that is not what this thread was about....
NRaas.... some people are reporting a reduction in harvest when NOT grouped with their pets since the patch.
For all the efforts to turn this into a question as to why pets should count as players while grouped.... they did in fact make you miss the point of the post to ask about thisNEW problem/change or bug.
Cressida
* I presume this is not the case here, and it has been noted. Obviously players should /bug the issue as well.
Correct, it is not the case -- but intermittently.
Last night, I accidentally hit my "group pet" button before a fight, disbanded the pet and fought without recalling the pet -- no penalty.
That makes it a lot harder to fix, obviously. For now I still recommend recalling pets after grouping them for mission selection.