Ranger Archive

---

---

Serraphin wrote:

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

---

Serraphin wrote:

It is the same sad, Sorry, please be quiet while we ignore you. Pay your $15 and /presson. Nothing new here. Standard noncommital with no action and a track record for empty promises.

Uziel

---

The plan is to improve their combat usefulness in the CB and address other items on the schedule under the “Correspondent Issues” umbrella.

I thought that statement was pretty committal.

---

They have made statements like this before but unless they detail the changes coming it is noncomittal

---

They have made statements like this before, and even Detailed the changes in mind....and then done nothing on them....refer to the Holocron post that was Mentioned in the question and is sticked on the top of our forum.

However, What they did do differant here is they gave is a Specific Timeline for change...the "CB" (i'm assuming it means Combat Revamp...and not Some other crap...) So that is a new type of responce an it shows some promise.

How much promise however is yet to be seen....i will honestly be supprised if they evenadd the traps holo talked about like 6 months ago....But you never know....Rangers may be made into the Supreme CreatureSlayers we should be....Guess we'll just have to wait and see if this promise type is any differant then the last one.

As for Calc's tatement about the other items on the schedule under the “Correspondent Issues” umbrella....This is the portion of our responce that i REALY DO NOT LIKE! I'm sorry calc, But from Every thing i see about the correspondant system is uter bull**edit** just to get us off their backs to some extent....and i know you have to feel the same way at times(not all the time tho )....From the way i see it(as i've posted a few times before),

1. They have you Make a List of our issues, They don't know our issues...they Put the responcibility onto one of their customers.


2. They Make you Format it into a D-Base for easy sorting and almost certainly easy Aplication of some form of multi-variable priority ranking formula, that Almost Certainly contains a Current population variable(math speak)...I'm sure some one knows what i mean here....Our issues get generated a number using a formula, then the Data base automaticly sorts them in the order based on this number, As issues get added and removed from the data base the order shifts somwhat....EG: Pistol holsters could merit a "3" priority while Defensive stacking abuse merits a "10" priority, so the staking gets looked at first....then next week Another20 issues get added and assined priority numbers....as long as the majority of those New priority numbers is higher then a "3", the holsters are never likly to get looked at because they never make it near the top....Our issues face a similar delema due to our low population. (Every one who has read this paragraph, and under stood it, can now pass Statistics 113 easily )


3. They have Only One person Submit the "Top 5" to a PR-represenative(Read:Middle man, IMHO)


4. That PR-Rep Then passes along the List to "The Team"(tm)


5. The Team then gives "feedback" to the PR-Rep


6. The PR-Rep then, at his descretion(it his job ),posts feedback in the Special Correspondant forum, that we don't have acces to.


7. Then In the Rare occasion the corespondants are Able to Relay that feedback to the community, Nothing is Done with it....

Any how, this is how i break "The Process"(tm) down......It is not a good system.....So i beleive it is my right, as a customer, to be unhappy with it....(i hate when people say that...but it holds true i guess ;D)

Anyhow, i hope this turns out for the best.....I'm realy getting tierd of getting Shown up by Commandos and smugglers in the wilderness...

/hands Oppma a rice ball

/brews Oppma some tea

I know how you feel bud... Thats what my rant would sound like if I gave up entirely... I try to not care, but I cant. I want to believe good stuff is coming, but ive been burned before.

I respect your passion, and i think your anger is justified...

I tend to be optimistic not because its in my nature, but because I go to my "apathy place" and put things in perspective

besides...it could always be worse....

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

I pulled this off the 19 Answers on the 'In Live' forum. You can comment here or there .

---

TH Said:

...stuff...

What are the plans, if any, to differentiate the Ranger profession from the Scout profession and will this happen in the form of a Revamp or can it be done via minipublishes/hotfixes?

...more stuff.... We are focused on the things that have the biggest impact on all the players. On the brighter side, we do have a window of opportunity coming up for player correspondent issues and we will take a serious look at what can be done at that time.

---

So there you have it. As I said, it does shine a glimmer of hope on the Ranger Prof .

---

This is my concern. We are few in number and get to be fewer everyday because of the inattention. It's a classic positive feedback loop: lowered attention due to people leaving the prof feeds the impression that there will be less impact on everyone if they focus on Ranger, thenmore leave the prof due to the now lowered priority.

---

Fred_Skinner wrote:

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

I pulled this off the 19 Answers on the 'In Live' forum. You can comment here or there .

---

TH Said:

...stuff...

What are the plans, if any, to differentiate the Ranger profession from the Scout profession and will this happen in the form of a Revamp or can it be done via minipublishes/hotfixes?

...more stuff.... We are focused on the things that have the biggest impact on all the players. On the brighter side, we do have a window of opportunity coming up for player correspondent issues and we will take a serious look at what can be done at that time.

---

So there you have it. As I said, it does shine a glimmer of hope on the Ranger Prof .

---

This is my concern. We are few in number and get to be fewer everyday because of the inattention. It's a classic positive feedback loop: lowered attention due to people leaving the prof feeds the impression that there will be less impact on everyone if they focus on Ranger, thenmore leave the prof due to the now lowered priority.

---

That line can be interpreted in a different way. How many people does harvesting affect? And how much have we been pushing that issue lately? I might just be an optimist but you never know. Have a look here if you want an idea of a possible optimistic interpretation of the response.

I liked the answer, we did give hime a lot to look over. I think our forum has the most stickies compared to other forums.

Plus our reqests for modular camps and modular traps are not something that can be added in 2 secs, ( but not to long either). He also commented on how constructed we were in our info.

Plus have you ever look at the squad leader forum.. The coresponet is MIA for over month...people are screaming for a new one. and look at their big question. What does rally do?

At least got an acknowledgement that we are not just in the CB. We'll get bit more than that. plus given how much he could write on each profession, how many specifice could he answer in that much space. I still would like a full post on our issues though.

Hey Calculus and the rest of the rangers. Here is my concern in regards TH answer to scout. I posted this reply in the original 19 Anwers to him.

Oh and also, farther down in that post, he states that the new Mandolorian armor will be certed, for BH, commanos, RANGERS, and SL. Neato, some lovin.

So here is my reply to TH.

TH all in all not to bad, even though many of the answers revolved around "wait for the CB". One in particular, well actually 2, concern me on your statement. Scout and ranger. I have been scout since day one, and have held master ranger ever since I reached it. I'm a rather active member of the both communities on the forums.

In your answer to scout about camps not being needed and are needing something, you basically state that, it is a novice level profession. Your comments was along the lines, IMHO, "yea we will look at it and it does need some attention after all the changes, but it is a novice level profession. With that in mind, we may not be spending a lot of attention and focus on getting scout, camping in particular, totaly new and revised and unique and super useful. Since it is a starting profession we want new players to have a good fun experience, but starters are just building blocks for advanced and elite professions. So don't expect to much."

So that is how I read it. I can understand the statement and point of view on scout in that regards. My concern though is Ranger. A whole line in ranger is camping as well, and if there is not much focus or attention spent on camping for Scout, where does that leave Ranger? If camping has no real purpose or super useful function in Scout, then it won't in Ranger. So I look at it like this. There are two options

1. make minor modifications to scout, to make camping someone more useful/fun etc, AND drop that line out of Ranger completely and make it something totally different, that is unique to Ranger, and gives us some great abilities we are looking for from the Outdoorsman proposal, and or get us into the GCW. Rangers already have the maximum camping skills from scout, so they still have that in their bag of tricks.

2. revamp camping all together for the whole game, so scout has something totally cool with it, and well, do the the same for ranger, but maybe just take it up a notch. /sigh same o situation we are in now, we are just uber scouts.

So personally I think option 1 is where this should go. What do you think about all that?

---

Calculus_Entropy wrote:

Do we need a revamp? What are we asking for that needs a revamp? I think we can sneak Traps into the Correspondent Issues and I am almost positive that the harvesting bonus will show up then. I would argue that our role in the Combat Balance will gain creature defenses and/or CH pets trapping.

Disclaimer: These are all guesses, nothing has been told to me about our future.

---

Hey Calc, if we were to get even half of what ask for in the Outdoorsman, it would mean a revamp. Check out my first reply in here above, and my comment about camping. With that kind of change it would be a revamp.

---

Nemo0 wrote:

The Developers almost certainly hate this feedback system as much as we do. But they have to do it like this. Back in the pre-Beta days, the Devs would post when they wanted to post. They would say what they felt like saying. And people would discuss it. Nowadays, any Dev post will just add noise to a problem. Yes, it means we never really get to see what is going on. Yes, I don't like it. But things really are going on. The Devs really do work hard on this game and they appreciate those who also care about it. But there are enough trolls on this forum that some forms of communication just can't work. Yes, we got a promise 8 months ago. It hasn't come through. Stuff like that keeps them from telling us what is going on. Can you imagine what the BH community would have done if the same thing happened to them? The forums would be worthless about now. And so the Devs are forced into a non-optimal situation. It's the same thing in game. A single griefer can cause enough trouble that the Devs can't include some really nice ideas (like city warn). But every community will have problems like this. And, since people are paying for this game, the Devs can't just incite those people. On this forum, no information is a better policy for them than wrong information. And they learned it the hard way. Work with Calc. It is the only way we can get things done right now.

Lythender Nirou
Master Ranger/Master Rifleman
Eclipse Server

---

The only reason the Devs get so much noise is because they have kept amny professions or communities if you will in the dark. Remember we are customers and they are in essence contractors. They sold a bill of goods and in some way these forums are a quality control. In very oversimplified terms. Now, of course for many reasons SOE must try to balance our requests and concerns with other agendas but when they appear to outright ignore them thenthey will get a "verbal throttling" initially when they post. This should be expected. If they were keeping individuals like Calculus well infromed with credible information then they would not generate so much noise when they post. If they come and legitimately deal with the noise then the noise will soften to a humm, if not then we would be to blame. Right now though the glass slipper is on there foot and they are quickly becoming the pumpkin as competetors prepare very competitive products that are NOT from SOE.

Well, this is about what I expected. It's a blow off and not a very good one at that. At least he tried to be nice about it.

Nothing was said except that, in passing, we will get some of the scraps which are inherently designed to appease the more popular professions, such as Bounty Hunter, Commando, etc.

You know it's bad when the mythical "CB" (note that it has been used so much it has now become an acronym, not a good sign!!!) is brought out like the proverbial carrot on the end of a very long stick.

So in standard Usenet fashion I'll pick the post apart line by line, but before I begin, please remember our question:

"What are the plans, if any, to differentiate the Ranger profession from the Scout profession and will this happen in the form of a Revamp or can it be done via minipublishes/hotfixes?"

Now on to the post:

"There are many excellent points and the Ranger community has done an great job bringing many great ideas to the development team and the dev team has also been kicking around some ideas also."

What does this say exactly? Nothing. We've *had* bloody excellent points for months now! Great job bringing ideas to the dev team? Huh? How is it great considering nothing has been done? Worse than that, there isn't even a hint they will be acting on our ideas but rather their own (i.e. the Great CB Myth). They have been kicking around some ideas? I certainly hope so, considering it's their job. But what ideas? What ideas??? Not even a glimpse of what has been kicked around? Traps? Camps? Tracking? Camo? The fact that 3 of our 4 skill lines are mostly worthless? Do they realize as time goes on while we sit stagnant and unchanging the world is literally passing us by - we are becoming more and more irrelevant in the game? Bah.

"The plan is to improve their combat usefulness in the CB and address other items on the schedule under the “Correspondent Issues” umbrella."

Again, this says nothing specific about Ranger other than we will be included in the CB; which is akin to saying water is wet! Everyone is getting included in this due to the changes regarding HAM use, whether they fight or not. The optimistic ones out there will read this as "Ranger will be getting some specific changes to help out in combat", but I don't buy it. If we get anything it will only be minor things and won't be because we are Rangers, it'll be things thrown our way as one might, out of pity, throw bones to an old dog that can't get up to get them himself.

"I know the answer will probably be seen as a little vague, but the truth is that we are focused on all of the item’s in JustG’s letter and that’s a huge development effort."

A little vague? That's an understatement. Try "missed the mark completely" instead. This is a complete and utter blow off. I'll translate into a non-PC version: "I'm sorry guys & gals, but Ranger is a low priority and we have other/better things to work on."

"We are focused on the things that have the biggest impact on all the players."

This is the second part to the blow off and reinforces the whole "Rangers are not a priority" thing. The impact which is being spoken of is combat, i.e. the Great CB Myth again.

"On the brighter side, we do have a window of opportunity coming up for player correspondent issues and we will take a serious look at what can be done at that time."

This is the second carrot. It's on a stick even longer than the CB one. No commitment at all. Nothing specific about Ranger. It's vagueness personified. Pure "make-them-feel-good" fluff. Only a "window" which is not defined, not scheduled, not explained, nothing. And if that isn't bad enough, note the phrase "we will take a serious look". So this "window" will be used to "look" at what can be done - for all professions. Spare me. Just tell us to go stick it instead, it'd be kinder.

And now the real kicker, remember our question? Here it is again:

"What are the plans, if any, to differentiate the Ranger profession from the Scout profession and will this happen in the form of a Revamp or can it be done via minipublishes/hotfixes?"

Someone please point out where this question was answered? Anyone? Despite all my skills at tracking and hunting, I cannot seem to locate it anywhere.

---

Ogo wrote:

"We are focused on the things that have the biggest impact on all the players."

This is the second part to the blow off and reinforces the whole "Rangers are not a priority" thing. The impact which is being spoken of is combat, i.e. the Great CB Myth again.

---

Very true. Couldn't be more vague and non-commital. The fact is that Rangers are not a priority for the devs at all. We aren't slated for any improvements, period. TH said as much just 2 or 3 weeks ago.

If I had to guess why, I'd say it's a combination of three things:

1. There are plenty of things that need to be beefed up in SWG besides Rangers.


2. Nobody plays Rangers, so we don't rank (twisted and self-defeating logic, but there it is).


3. We're the most polite. Squeaky wheels get the grease.

Now, I'm not suggesting that whining or protesting would help us at all, because it won't. There aren't enough of us to make a racket.

I am sorry to be negative here, because seriously this is my favorite board to read, and I do enjoy ranger. But to me this is an insult:

"I know the answer will probably be seen as a little vague, but the truth is that we are focused on all of the item’s in JustG’s letter and that’s a huge development effort. We are focused on the things that have the biggest impact on all the players."