Ranger Archive
Thread: Give me Carbines or Give me DEATH!
Rolfie wrote:
So Maybe the answer is to move Ranger out from under the Scout requirement all together.
Make Ranger have a prereq of Marksman 0004 and then make the other requirement Brawler ????.
Thenas a Ranger it doesn't matter whether you are Melee or Ranged. If all Ranger skills are being based and modified off the new Ranger Hybrid skill set why bother to keep Scout?
Seems if you want to make the melee guys and ranged guys happy this would do it.
Ranger would stand on it own two feet.
Message Edited by Rolfie on 09-26-2005 09:53 AM
As much as this would completely suck for me.... I totally agree with it.
The only problem I see with that suggestion is that then you have a 50/50 split of players who have dedicated whole skill lines to uselessness.
If you can figure out a way to make that "not the case", please let Tanks know on behalf of all the melee Bounty Hunters out there.
And no, I'm not being facetious nor sarcastic, just pointing it out. =\
~Signed: Bothan with a vested interest in seeing his racial bonus become useful. (C;
[EDIT]
On second thought, there is another - rather LARGE problem with that...
Which skill line do you require? If you choose unarmed, you enforce a Ranger/ TKM template, 1H = Ranger/ Fenecer... see where I'm going.
Unfortunately there's no "generic" melee counterpart to Ranged Support. =\
Message Edited by BadKarma777 on 09-28-2005 04:51 PM
The decision - no matter what they choose to do,will p*ss off somebody. They will go for what they feel is right, and they have the distinct advantage of seeing the bigger picture. ie. What suits the role, and how it will effect other professions and the game as a whole. Unless you've sampled every profession in every possible combination in the game, you aren't really qualified to make that decision.
See what they come up with and how it works before you condem it.
Balrozgul wrote:
And by played you mean held every profession at master for at least a month each or is it that you ground out each mastery and dropped it within a day?
Well, what I mean is exactly what any normal player can't do. You'd have to test every combination against every other combination, then do the same in large groups, in large-scale PVP etc..
It's a mammoth task.
AragornSoS wrote:
coldreboot wrote:
Balrozgul wrote:
And by played you mean held every profession at master for at least a month each or is it that you ground out each mastery and dropped it within a day?
Well, what I mean is exactly what any normal player can't do. You'd have to test every combination against every other combination, then do the same in large groups, in large-scale PVP etc..
It's a mammoth task.
I'm sorry, but... do you really thing SOE or thier QA staff does that either? Just in the CU we saw the loss of a skill (rescue) because nobody bothered to double check if the /peace command (which was removed) was actually required for anything, and we had a week or three of being unable to use camo when again they sort of forgot the ranger /conceal ability, and make /conceal a short-cut name for /concealshot for rifleman. That's just off the top of my head at 2AM after working all day...
Your point may be valid, but let's not kid ourselves about how much robust testing of every possible combination actually does (or will) happen...
Yes! It's called the Test Centre! That's the way to test things on a large scale with a variety of other professions. I was saying that no one person on these boardsshould say 'well I think it should bethis/that' when they can't comprehend alone what the consequences of their suggestions would be. On a post by post basis on a forum such as this, any suggestion screams with bias.
If the revamp as currenty suggested with the carbine pre req hits the TC and all hell breaks loose (if it doesn't work, notif players 'don't like it'), then that's when you should expect it to be pulled off and go back to the drawing board. But to dismiss the decisions of the devs (IF that's what they decide), off the bat is childish and little bit ignorant IMO.
Just something to bare in mind really.
I play on Test Center. The kind of testing you're talking about simply does not exist or happen there to large extent. I understand fully what you're talking about, I work at a consulting / software development company and work internal IT there so I'm fully aware and well versed in test environments, design - testing - user acceptance - implementation phasing on a project. To date, that does not happen here. Just pop onto the TC server (if it's not mothballed) or ask in the TC forums. Yes, things seem to be improving slightly there these days, but we are ALL familair with the many bugs (some fairly significant) that were well documented on TC yet still made it to the live game and broke some pretty fundamental systems (crated item customizations/colors, droids, BE tissues, etc etc etc).
I've really not seen a whole lot of folks here trying to state opinion as fact, for the most part. This has, for the most part, been a moderately to fairly healthy discussion about pre-reqs for the new Ranger profession. As we have no definitive answers from any Dev as of yet, the only thing we CAN do is discusss and propose ideas, in the hopes that one or more of those are accepted by the devs or may influence their thought process. Most of use are bouncing ideas around to try and come up with the "least harmful" set of options, in the hopes that it does some good. For those that have attempted to turn speculation and opinion into "fact", Phenix has done a pretty good job of keeping them in line. Maybe Bothans have some kind of herding instinct, like a Border Collie or a Corgi or something. 
I do understand what you're saying, I'm just not sure I necessarily believe everything you believe to be true in your opinion is, in fact, fact. For example... I think the XP changes worked - but I clearly saw that players didn't like it. There was nothing "broken" about the changes to XP - players still played, they would still got XP, just not at a rate that they thought was fast enough or "fair". No facet of the game was non-functional due to the changes, and yet they were pulled, since a majority of the players simply did not like the changes. Likewise, we've seen things like the crafting bug get called out on TC and actually were something that broke huge portions of the crafter game, and get they not only went live, they took repeated hotfixes and publishes to even attempt a fix (and I'm honestly not sure if it's fixed yet, since I don't play a crafter at the moment, tho I'm leveling a new one on TC now).
Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if the small changes we've seen recently are eventually the birth of a new and better and more robust testing system. I don't think anyone that plays the game would dispute the need to release patches and updates that are more solidly written and have fewer bugs at rollout than some of the recent patches. I just don't think it's all actually there and working yet as it could or should be.
I wondered how you managed to waste almost as much time as I do here on the boards during the day.
I also work for a software company in IT. I amresposnible for all customer supportso seeing bugs make it out of testing, out to a client and eventually back to me drives me up the wall.
Message Edited by Rolfie on 09-30-2005 08:57 AM
Bingo!!!
It's fun to run the mail servers... as long as mail flows, I have time to surf the boards and still keep an eye on the systems. And I absolutely loathe when I see bad code go live, as I've done some admin/ "amature" coding in the past and see what the coders at work do, and it just drives me nuts to see some of the stuff that makes it past QA and TC into live here. I really hope it gets better (there are signs that it might, so I have some hope... call it guarded optimism if you will)
Sounds like we have the same job only your not me...or am I really not me but you...
Time to visit the VA again seems I may be going psychophrenic or just need more coffee.
Message Edited by Rolfie on 09-30-2005 09:12 AM
Apparently you were not present for testing in the CU beta. Combat Medic was suggested to change their prerequisites to pistols4 and ranged healing4. The combat medics presented their arguments to avoid being pushed into one particular class of weaponry and they managed to get their marksman prereq moved to ranged support 4 instead. So to say that we should accept carbines4 just because it was mentioned once seems a bit childish and alittle bit ignorant IMO.
coldreboot wrote:
Yes! It's called the Test Centre! That's the way to test things on a large scale with a variety of other professions. I was saying that no one person on these boardsshould say 'well I think it should bethis/that' when they can't comprehend alone what the consequences of their suggestions would be. On a post by post basis on a forum such as this, any suggestion screams with bias.
If the revamp as currenty suggested with the carbine pre req hits the TC and all hell breaks loose (if it doesn't work, notif players 'don't like it'), then that's when you should expect it to be pulled off and go back to the drawing board. But to dismiss the decisions of the devs (IF that's what they decide), off the bat is childish and little bit ignorant IMO.
Just something to bare in mind really.
coldreboot wrote:
Balrozgul wrote:
And by played you mean held every profession at master for at least a month each or is it that you ground out each mastery and dropped it within a day?
Well, what I mean is exactly what any normal player can't do. You'd have to test every combination against every other combination, then do the same in large groups, in large-scale PVP etc..
It's a mammoth task.
I'm sorry, but... do you really thing SOE or thier QA staff does that either? Just in the CU we saw the loss of a skill (rescue) because nobody bothered to double check if the /peace command (which was removed) was actually required for anything, and we had a week or three of being unable to use camo when again they sort of forgot the ranger /conceal ability, and make /conceal a short-cut name for /concealshot for rifleman. That's just off the top of my head at 2AM after working all day...
Your point may be valid, but let's not kid ourselves about how much robust testing of every possible combination actually does (or will) happen...