Ranger Archive

"I had the hair-brained idea that the ranger firstdeploys the camp then theappropriate profession-type adds the module to the camp once the camp isdeployed."

In order to add the module, would the "adder" need to be the proper profession for that module?

If so, then we are restricting the higher level camp content to those groups that have the wide variety of professions on hand during a camping session.

If not, then that lends itself to the current system, andwe might as well be able to mass produce the camps for convenience.

Am I missing something here?

Am i right in presuming scouts are only aloud to use lvl 1 modules in their camps?

"With the Sqaud Leader/Commando and Ranger crafted modules, can either class make and deploy camps that include modules crafted by the other class or only their own class specific modules and any modules created by a class that can't place a camp?"

Each profession can use the modules of other professions in their camp schematics.

But only the profession that has the camp schematic can deploy the camp itself.

Should the higher level camps be further restricted by Type?

I left them open (only locking the Level 3 module to one or the other) so we could interchange items between the professions. Apparently that is not going over well here.

If we restrict the slots, then we are locking ourselves out of content that we ourselves have requested. How does everyone feel about that?

"I had the hair-brained idea that the ranger firstdeploys the camp then theappropriate profession-type adds the module to the camp once the camp isdeployed."

Sorry i dont like this idea at all. It means like NRaas said we are limiting the higher level camps content unless the correct profession is in group AND has the module with them.

We need to be able to act and hunt out of group on our own so we should not have to count on other professions traveling with us to make our camps how we want them. Purchasesing or making the modules with another profession provides enough interaction to promote group work and sales but at the same time keeps out solo hunter status and drifter image (not a dirty drifter hehe more like a traveller)

"Am i right in presuming scouts are only aloud to use lvl 1 modules in their camps?"

The Improved Camp Kit allows for the use of a Level 2 module.

Interesting... I think I need to re-evaluate the flexibility of the base camps.

Originally they were set up with the idea that there was no inherent functionality for the camp.

Now that there is a default healing rate, it is no longer necessary forthe Basic Camp to have a module.

Here is the new idea:

Basic Camp Kit

• Available at Novice Scout

Multiperson Camp Kit

• Available at Survival II
  
• One optional Level 1 Generic slots

Improved Camp Kit

• Available at Survival IV
  
• Oneoptional Level 1 Generic slots, and One optional Level 2 Generic slot

"Now, rangers can make anything they need (camp wise) with a total of 3 ingredients."

"Yes, those crafting tools are amazing, aren't they?"

The point was that of those 3 ingredients, 2 of them come as a natural part of my class. In the modular system, there are up to 15 additional "ingredients" required to keep on hand. This represents a burden that would not be necessary if the functionality were simply added to the camps as opposed to creating an entirely new crafting system for camps in general.

"Granted, one slot at novice ranger is a higher category, but I don't think that makes up for the loss in flexibility."

"Really? It opens up another level of modules, while still allowing people to use the slot for the lower level modules as well if they feel like it."

I guess this is a value judgement, but I would envision a camp that has 3 available slots as having more flexibility and worth than one that only has two. I would agree with you if the Novice Ranger camp had TWO generic level 1 slots and 1 level 3 slot. Same issue is at Frontiering II. Why not have 1 generic level 2, 1 creature OR humanoid, and one level 3? That would make it a little better than the Novice Ranger, but not as flexible as the Master Ranger camps.

"And I have asked you all already to give me ideas as to how to differentiate them, so far I have received no response."

You can differentiate the classes by "sticking to the knitting." Right now, rangers are differentiated by having advanced camps. They are under utlilized because they offer very little real benefit in the majority of times that groups need to use them. KEEP ADVANCED CAMPS THE SOLE DOMAIN OF RANGERS. With the added benefits of the effects (not necessarily the means) of some of these ideas, desirability of ranger camps would rise. Add to the mix ideas expressed about shared experience while in advanced camps and nobody would ever want a basic scout camp when a ranger was in the group, regardless of how long it was deployed. Wasn't that the idea of improving camps in the first place?

"I guess this is a value judgement, but I would envision a camp that has 3 available slots as having more flexibility and worth than one that only has two."

I have changed the Scout camp schematics to better compensate, as I noted in a prior post.

"You can differentiate the classes by "sticking to the knitting." Right now, rangers are differentiated by having advanced camps."

So... We develop a system for modular camps, and then provide our brethren the Squad Leader only the Scout camps?

I hardly think they will consider that fair, requiringa Rangerin the group to deploy a fortification,when we apparently have no business in the fortification business to begin with.

"If they were meant to have advanced camps, why can't they use them already?"

By that logic, we should not have Tracking or Conceal as they didn't exist when the profession was originally released.

"Squad Leaders also share our scout terrain negotiation, is it fair that they don't get camo kits?"

Aye, they share Terrain Negotiation and should benefit from some action regarding it. That is why they have Group Terrain Negotiation.

I believe your point was that because they have MaskScent they should also have Conceal. But that is not valid as Scouts don't have the Camoflauge skill which starts accumulating at the Novice Ranger level.

Machs, go back and read the proposa (I'm talking about NRass' main one, not mine) and you'll see that squad leaders get three unique fortifications (i.e. not OUR camps). This means that there are a total of 7 (i think that's the right number) of Elite Camps and Elite Fortifications. Field Bases, HTFB, Hunting Blind, the three and the improved camp kit (not sure about the last one). Then, Squad leader fortifications get modules that give bonuses versus humanoids, whereas Ranger camps get modules that give bonuses against creatures.

Now under MY most recent proposal Ranger camps would be very much seperate but equal. Each would get a series of attack bonus, just as in the NRass proposal. Rangers would get attack bonuses versus creatures, SL's versus humanoids. These would be absolute. Ranger camps could not get attack versus humanoids, SL camps couldn't get attack versus creatures. Then, there would be two new classes of modules, Passive Healing and Passive Buffing (still, the name could use some work). The Healing modules could only be used in Ranger camps and would provide wound healing and increased usefullness of meds. The Buffing modules could only be used in Fortifications and would provide small buffs (no, really, Buffing moduels provide Buffs? you're kidding!) to the people in the fortification. My explanation is that in a fortification, you're battle ready, and the adrenaline is flowing. Modules in the camp enhance and spread this affect to all aspect of your physiology.

Thus, while Ranger camps and Squad Leader fortifications both have access to generic modules, they look different and function different. That's not really the same thing at all now, is it??

---

I believe your point was that because they have MaskScent they should also have Conceal. But that is not valid as Scouts don't have the Camoflauge skill which starts accumulating at the Novice Ranger level.

---

Thank you for correcting the analogy, NRaas.

So, scouts don't get camo because it starts accumulating at the novice ranger level. Similarly, scouts don't get camps with anything other than basic healing mods, because that starts accumulating at novice ranger. The key here is: Novice Ranger. If someone wants access to those abilities, then they should grind the rest of the scout trees, just like every other ranger out there had to do. The camps available to rangers are, and should remain, unique to the class.If we want to talk about fairness, I find it patently unfair that another class can cherry-pick my hallmark ability without going through the effort. To get my level of camps, I had to master scout first, not just part of it.

This also ties in to what Phenix's post discusses. As I understand it, a generic slot can accommodate all three flavors of module: generic, humanoid, and creature. Additionally, a slot can hold modules from the levels below it. At master level, a squad leader has a Level 4, Generic slot in their camp schematic. By definition, it can hold any module. They may not be able to create the module, but they can use them if created by the appropriate class. So, by default, squad leaders can use ALL the same modules that a ranger can use.Therefore, ranger camps are no longer unique. Am I wrong in that interpratation, NRaas?

Phenix's proposal wasmoving inthe direction that Ialluded toin my last post. That is, giving the elite squad leaders options for turrets, mine fields, and covert detectors only. Squad leadersshould haveaccess to just those options and not the balance of the other suggested modules. Similarly, rangers wouldn't be able to use the squad leader modules. (I would expect that features like creature spawning, advanced healing, BF healing, and pet healingwould stay exclusively ranger options) That would keep squad leaders and rangers completely separate from each other.

I'm sorry if I'm being stubborn about this, but because of the time invested in the class, I feel a bit proprietary about it.

"Am I wrong in that interpratation"

You are completely correct.

"Similarly, rangers wouldn't be able to use the squad leader modules."

Ok... How does everyone feel about this?

---

NRaas wrote:

"Similarly, rangers wouldn't be able to use the squad leader modules."

Ok... How does everyone feel about this?

---

I completely disagree with this idea. One of the main motivations (if not the motivation) of the modular camp system was to provide greater flexibility to Ranger camps. Removing a Ranger's ability to use a squad leader module and vice versa defeats this purpose.

How about setting up the system so that a Squad Leader fortification camp can never have more than one slot that will hold a Ranger-made module, and make it so that no Ranger camp can ever have more than one slot that will hold a Squad Leader made module? This way, there is a small degree of flexibility (Rangers can add one sl-made defense module, and sl can add one healing or other ranger-based module), but Ranger camps would always be oriented more toward creature combat and healing, while SL camps would always be oriented more toward Fortifications. If this change were made, then I think that any SL-made module should make the camp stay up in combat, and only SL-made modules should give this ability.

"How about setting up the system so that a Squad Leader fortification camp can never have more than one slot that will hold a Ranger-made module, and make it so that no Ranger camp can ever have more than one slot that will hold a Squad Leader made module?"

Interesting... I will have to consider whether this can be done within the current system, or if a new rule is required.

Hmmm...

"If this change were made, then I think that any SL-made module should make the camp stay up in combat, and only SL-made modules should give this ability."

I think that the Creature OffensiveHide Module should still provide that effect on the Ranger camp side... Unless we have decided to give up the hunting blind concept.