Ranger Archive
Thread: Ranger Revamp: The Focus (Tier Names)
Waste93
Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:08 pm
#53
Owen-Lars wrote:
camo, survival, tracking, creature knowledge (lays the paving stones for further intel gathering on targets)
All are recon specific.
Lets look at the definition of Recon again.
: a preliminary survey to gain information; especially : an exploratory military survey of enemy territory
Neither camo, survival, nor creature knowledge really fall into that.
You don't have to be camo'd to gather information on a target. Nor do you need to know how to survive in the wilderness. Nor is creature knowledge required.
Those may make it easier in some cases but they are not required and not part of Recon. You can do air recon or satelite recon. I don't see those using survival, camo, or creature knowledge. Yet that is doing recon. Spies recon targets but they don't use those skills.
They are not Recon specific. They may make it easier but they are definately not required or part of it. Which is why Recon may be a sub-role, but not the primary one.
Owen-Lars
Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:22 pm
#54
Spies would use espionage, deception, infiltration. Those are the skills that allow them to recon. Yes you could have a spy walk into a secret base a recon without ever using any skills but that isnt to say he/she would be training up to use them if the situational required them.
Just because they arnt required all the time doesnt mean they arnt an important part.
As a recon unit you could just walk througha jungle somewhere, just luck out on finding a hidden base or group of enemy, gather your intel and walk away. BUT (apart from being highly unlikely) the recon unit would be well versed in hiding his/her tracks, getting the target/objective better, minimising the chances of getting seen, being able to know what to look for (knowledge) and also like i was saying before even know how to booby trap his/her surroundings to know when he/she has been detected, make a better escape or lay the ground for an incoming strike.
Just because you wouldnt always need those skills doesnt mean you shouldnt have then at hand and be very important. In my eyes you cannot gain substantial combat related intel without some sort of stealth and survival. People just wont let you walk past them or take pictures of bomb sites.
My point is having the arsenal of a recon unit play out over 4 tiers is not out of the ordinary, you think rl recon units and spys only have training in collecting info? Or do they get more training that that in take into account lots of other variables.
WildBil2Me
Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:28 pm
#55
I think we're beating a dead horse here. We've already stated that it is possible that Survivalist and Recon may swap, and its totally possible that when we're done one or the other may even be removed or redefined completely.
The basicconfusion here, which Owen has touched on nicely, and which Paks mentioned on a response to Ace, is that the mistake of labeling Ranger as a "hunter" or "outdoorsman" is pigeon-holing the profession based on the 1 or 2 existing skills that non rangers THINK being a Ranger is all about.
I see no problem with expanding the role and to this point there has been no real skill creeping going on. We've not asked for anything that steps on another professions toes, nor have we asked for anything that is outside the scope of the existing skillset. Though its true that we are an advanced version of scout... Scout:Ranger like Medic
octor... its important to remember that many of the Scout skills were considered "military" as Waste seems to define it.
octor... its important to remember that many of the Scout skills were considered "military" as Waste seems to define it.BHs had strong requirements coming out of Scout. Trapping, Camping and Hunting specifically. For the BH those were supposed to represent an aspect of their Bounty Hunting Role, an aspect of their role in person to person combat. Of course they never really were fully developed and as a result the BHs wanted the pre-reqs removed.
Before anyone thinks their being removed from BH pre-reqs is a proof they aren't military oriented, I submit that the removal of this requirement was due to the inability of the Dev staff to quickly and adequatly fix and revamp what must have been considered an SP sink for all involved. Remember, it came alongside a very unpopular change to Jedi.
The majority of the existing Scout profession has the possibilty of pushing the Ranger profession into what Waste has defined as a "Military" role. What I think it really comes down tois fully defining "Recon," something that might best be dealt with when we actually start filling out a skill tree. Who knows, when its done we might totally change it. Right now, from where we're coming from it jsut seems to be the most accurate term.
I do think that fears of "feature creep," and stepping on other professions toes are premature. It's not like we're asking for the ability to take cover or use a conceal shot. The direction this is going in, simply, revolves around the ever present request to be able to truly camoflauge ourselves in order to gain some tactical advantages in PvP and PvE.
Waste93
Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:34 pm
#56
Owen,
Recon is the act of gathering intel. The other factors you are talking about are not part of Recon. They are other acts that may make it easier or safer. But they aren't Recon.
And it is quite easy to get to combat intel without survival or stealth. We do it with satelites and aircraft all the time. We do it thru communications intercepts. In a technology based society you are going to do far more Recon thru those means than sneaking thru the woods. It's quicker, safer, and you generally get better intel.
RL recon units of the type you are talking about have military training. Which was my other earlier point. Nothing in the Ranger pre-reqs indicate a military training. If you want a military focus for Ranger, as indicated by making it across all four tiers, then you need a military base to start from. That doesn't exist in this case.
Waste93
Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:21 pm
#57
Maybe we should put our debate on hold for now.
Lets concentrate on ways to improve Ranger and worry about what to actually call it later. 
My suggestions:
Camo Branch - Ghost (Silent Stalker?)
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
This branch involves stealth moves and recon type abilites. Higher level abilities allow PvP stealth moves.
Hunting Branch - Hunt Master
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
This branch includesharvesting bonuses, and damage bonuses to creatures. Along with to hit bonuses vs creatures.
Survival - Survivor
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
This branch includes camps, fish/egg/milk harvesting bonuses, creature poison/disease/states resistance and creature damage mitigation.
Traps - Ambusher
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
This branch includes traps and powerful planet specific high powered traps and a Lure ability. Also includes 'Alertness' bonuseswhich is a counter to the stealth abilities from Camo branch
I haven't put in Tracking as I'm torn between where to put it. Don't want to overload one branch and make it very attractive for dabbling. Though I'm heavily leaning towards the Camo branch.
As for the planet specific traps. I saw a suggestion before here about log traps and quicksand traps. Sounded good though I though it might be hard to do those on say Tat that has little to no wood or water for those traps. These high powered traps would be a drop variety (like a mine field) with a short life span (30 min or less). The Lure ability would be used to draw the target to the dropped trap.
Message Edited by Waste93 on 12-23-2004 04:31 PM
Owen-Lars
Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:51 pm
#58
Like bil said we are going around in circles here.
We are not talking about satalites nor planes nor hackers, we are talking about people, more specifically rangers.
Although those things i highlighted arnt specific to reconnaissance thats the point im trying to prove to you. They help, it wouldnt be beyond grasp to think a person would be trained to bea recon unit and under that roll have skills that could support situations he/she may find themselves in.
Thats why i feal it is the primary role, you have skills under recon that help you do it better and function as a recon unit. And the part about military training still amuses me, what has military training got to do with swg? you dont sign up to any army to learn your skills, NO profession requires military training.
If you are talking about firearms or melee weapon training then fair enough, i dont think we should have rifles, pistol or carbines or2hd swords, 1hd swords, pikes or knucklers infact any weapon currently in the game unless we have a pre-req that supports it.
But we do have a weapon and we do have pre-reqs for them, traps.
The only thing that should be up for discussion should be whether a ranger should have a firearm or melee weapon, any other military related issue is fair game. You dont have to sign up to recieve training therefor your profession can learn anything it wants. Bringing basic understandings from scouts and taking them into the pvnpc and pvp arena is just a natural step, one which ranger should take.
Owen-Lars
Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:59 pm
#59
"None of those are requirements to perform Recon"
Well just remember survival, trapping, exploration and stealth arnt 'Required' for hunting either when you are pushing that role. Same for survivalist, tracker, camper or any other role you can come up with. Nothing is required and never should be. We arnt making a one dimentional profession here, not like rifleman and any other core combat profession, we are talking about a 4 tier pre-req that needs to take them all into account thefore needs one role to take dominance over the rest.
You will never find a better role, they all suffer from the same flaws (the dont need other parts and need to support other areas). Recon allows us to expand trapping, stealth, survival, hunting and information gathering under one heading so its there doing its job.
Waste93
Thu Dec 23, 2004 5:11 pm
#60
Owen,
Recon units are first and foremost infantry units. They are light infantry trained to operate behind enemy lines. That makes them Commandos.
The basis for any infantry unit if weapons training. Which Rangers don't have. We also already have Infantry in SWG. Those are Rifleman. We also have special forces units in Carbineers. Which is where the danger of infringing on other professions comes from.
Stepping up the Hunter angle to include NPCs and PCs is fine. However claiming a primary role as a military unit while ignoring the basics of military training seems to be an issue. There is no problem with expanding the Ranger role to the PvP and NPC arena. Frankly you guys need it. But it needs to be from a basis as an extension of your outdoors abilities. Not as a military unit that you aren't qualified for.
Our disagreement is one of the angle of attack. I say extend those Ranger abilities into the NPC and PC arena via the Hunter focus. You are saying to do it from the angle of a Recon unit. The problem is their is no foundation for your request. As you are claiming a military role without the military foundation.
The end result though is we are both saying to give Ranger the exact same skills. We both want Stealth (PvP and PvE) and we both want Traps to work against all target types. We are only disagreeing on how to approach that and what those abilities are extensions of.
Which is why we can hold off for now and work towards our common end result and worry about the semantics later. We agree on a great deal. We only disagree on the words used to argue for those skills we want to see added and changed for Ranger.
Waste93
Thu Dec 23, 2004 5:18 pm
#61
Owen-Lars wrote:
Well just remember survival, trapping, exploration and stealth arnt 'Required' for hunting either when you are pushing that role.
I said 'Survivalist' is the primary role. And all those you mentioned are integral parts of that. To survive in the wilderness you need to know how to hunt (which includes trapping), exploration, camping, stealth, etc.
Recon doesn't require those attributes. It's one aspect of 'Survivalist' but not the other way around.
And from the basis that you require them to 'Survive' in the wilderness you can expand to include them to work vs NPCs and PCs.
If I can set traps for animals those same traps can harm people. If I can track animals I can also track people. If I can hide and sneak past animals with their enchanced senses it will also work vs people. All those are basics of surviving in the wild that work both vs animals and people. However they are not Recon abilities. They don't involve gathering 'intel'. They are about surviving in the adverse conditions of the wile. They are all aspects of 'Wilderness Survival'. Hence 'Survivalist'.
Owen-Lars
Thu Dec 23, 2004 5:50 pm
#62
Right we are getting nowhere with this,
You are saying there is no basis, i give you basis = nothing has changed
You say you need military training, but NO profession in swg recieves military training = nothing has changed
A RANGER (edit)is not a 250 sp profession, it requires additions, most notably a firearm or melee weapon specialisation. Now lets not get wrapped up in the idea that you dont realy NEED a firearm or melee weapon because every ranger here knows to be most effective you need either a gun or a melee weapon.
Baring this in mind what you are saying that a recon unit would benefit from having firearms or melee weapons training, we agree, we pick up a core combat profession to enhance our recon role. Easy. Dont need it, like you said before but would help alot.
Again commandos and infantry units come to the table involving real life examples, again real life is taken as a marker, not as a place to base in game and swg boundaries on. Who is to say that a ranger using rifle skills cant be a great recon unit? Thats the character you make. Who to say that ranger wouldnt bring the recon skills to the table?
We are no playing RL here we are talking about swg, we both have no right to say what is or isnt because we just dont know, but what we can do is develope ideas, suggest things and move forward. You have this idea that a ranger must be hunting orientated for some reason, you think that we could not be a recon unit because we dont have firearms training. Well commandos dont train in heavy weapons to get where they are, the pratice in firarms and melee trainnig (not mliitary as you put it) and then branch of in a new and unique direction. the same way ranger could branch off scout using the stealth, trapping, tracking, information gathering and survival aspects.
They move off into something different so why shouldnt we?
I think you dont understand what a base in marksman or brawler actually means. Seem to me you think doing marksman trains you in military ways or makes you into a soldier, well it doesnt. It trains you how to use a FIREARM (not a weapon in general but a firearm), it can also train you in special abilities using those firarms (marksman only).
The only thing that no pre-reqs in marksman or brawler should mean is no rifles, no pistols, no carbs, no 2hd, no 1hd, no pikes, no knucklers. We dont desire or need any of those. Not having a firarm specialisation doesnt mean anything either, we are taking about templates here, the choice issue. Best thing about ranger = you can pick what weapon you want. Who else has this freedome as a combatant?
You dont Need a weapon to survey the area, as you said before, its just gathering information. But why make it boring when you can make it an interesting role to play? Add stealth, add ambushing, add intell gathering and tracking and you have a very apealing profession based around skills they have already learned in their base profession.
Its a tad hypocrytical when you say we cant have recon because we havnt a firearm just becauseRL situations dictate so. Howmany huntersdo you see runing around without a weapon in RL?
Instead of of being heldback on these misconceptions that you somehow need to have a specific weapon in your hand to be a recon unit, let go and imagine what a fun profession this could be. Defining a profession is never that easy because its not just about one dimentional training. You train what you MAY need to know, not just what you have to know.
Firearm requirements are out, its not military training, its simply a role you can fullfil in a template. Being a rifleman is no more 'military' than being a scout, you are only a soldier if you fight for an army. You dont need a weapon to be a recon unit yet one would greately benefit your efforts. As would stealth, as would tracking as would survival. Same with ranger as it currently is, you dont NEED a firearm or melee weapon training specialisation but you would do better to have one.
Again the stepping on toes issue neans nothing. We arnt stepping on anyones toes. We have stealth, recon doesnt NEED it, rifleman brings the rifle, recon doesnt NEED it. What it does need (bah edit)is information gathering and we have you beet on that, all be it slightly, we can gather extreme amounts of data on a target and even find targets who arnt in visual range. Besides you already have a damn role, why not give ranger this one when requirements arnt an issue, stealth isnt an issue and it isnt stepping on peoples toes?
Message Edited by Owen-Lars on 12-24-2004 01:03 AM
Owen-Lars
Thu Dec 23, 2004 5:57 pm
#63
Not in swg they arnt. I can be a survivalist without hunting,without trapping and without exploring. Recon is equaly justified and even more so because it brings a unique role to the table rather than an already used one.
You dont need a firearm for recon, would help though, as would stealth, traps, survival techniques and tracking. Is it so hard to imagine that we could advance our information gathering skills to orientate around humanoids and GCW situations? I think not. And there you have it, the only REAL requirement to recon, one which we have. The others would just help us perform that much better in an swg sense.
Why go for the already used role when we have a unique one lined up that actually developes ranger in some way, not advance it straight up.
Vorpaks
Fri Dec 24, 2004 1:05 am
#64
Definitely Doc as a combat agumentation. That's a good example actually because Docs can use their skills to agument a combat profession (heal themselves during battle) but they need that combat profession to do anything offensive (so to speak). Combat medics have a pre-req and can be very offensive (so, um, to speak). The idea of stealth and recon is not offensive in itself, but you would be able to mix it with a combat profession to make the combat profession more offensive (such as in the ambush example). Now traps are where it gets sticky (and thats not a pun - all the sticky traps are in scout). Since that is and has always been an offensive combat ability but is not considered as such because it is not in the recognized combat professions. Details of how those things balance and work need to be ironed out. But I am excited at the potential they represent. 
I have no problem with not calling our main focus Recon (just please not "survivalist" even the word makes me bitter). But I do have a problem with the idea that Ranger skills can not be used in a military type application or used to enhance a combat profession.
I have no problem with not calling our main focus Recon (just please not "survivalist" even the word makes me bitter). But I do have a problem with the idea that Ranger skills can not be used in a military type application or used to enhance a combat profession.
Waste93
Fri Dec 24, 2004 1:13 am
#65
Owen-Lars wrote:
No im getting it, i just dont agree with what you are saying. By your statements you are saying that if i got rifles in marksman i could be a lesser gunner? Nope, you can use rifles LIKE a rifleman but you only get the gunner role once you get rifleman boxes. This is what im getting at. Although there is no other way for a rifleman to advance over marksman rifles without actually using rifles you still get your own unique roles.
No. What I'm saying is that all Rifle skills are extensions of the base requirements. All the skills I get as Rifle are extensions (improvements) of the basis laid down by the Marksman skills that I have to get beforehand.
Recon IS based off scout, thats what we are all trying to say. We have stealth already, can be enhanced and paves the way for intel gathering (who would you want to look at someone's weapon stats? thats spying, leave it to the smugs i dont want it. Give us the ability to show enemy possitions, put IR markers onto targets the group can track them and bingo you got scouting/recon skills). We explore which allows us to get to our targets, move better than anyone in the game and seek out new places, boldly going no...... oops wrong story.
Recon isn't based on scout. Recon is a military term. Scouting as set up in SWG isn't military. It's creature orientated hunting skills. Yes you have stealth. But stealth isn't Recon.
And I think you are proving my point about ability creep. Marking enemy positions isn't ahunting skill. It's amilitary skill.
Why wouldn't you want to be able to see stats of another players equipment? You could tell what the weakest resist is for their armor and make it easier to take them down. Seeing the stats of their weapons could let you fine tune your defenses. And that kind of info if intel (Recon).
Anyways here it is:
Very nice. Though your use of Intel is an issue. Hunting Efficiency would seem to be a better useage.
The base skill is all creature related. You don't intel or recon creatures. You do that against people.