Ranger Archive
Thread: Combat Perk/Idea for Rangers
Squidwalker
Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:30 pm
#66
also, it wouldn't surprise me if this concept for rangers "fades away" too... it doesn't seem too popular a proposal, despite the fact that it is not a defining characteristic... i guess the devs have trained us well not to ask formuch - now we're walking on our tiptoes afraid we're going to sway them with our many ideas for ranger abilities, when they wouldn't look even if they could hear us...
Exactly, the do have us trained well. But IMHO since we have no direction from them at all, or any feed back at all, we should be throwing every idea we have at them. Like the shotgun effect, and hope they actually like and oh galaxy forbid, implement something for us. One of "our" ideas. I say just keep throwing every decent idea at them and see what they come back with. If they "hmm thats kind of a neat idea, maybe we can work on that" "I don't, I like it, but is it for ranger"or "No way, we are not putting something like into the game period" Then we can take it from there, depending on their responce to the idea.
Calculus_Entropy
Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:55 pm
#67
Squidwalker wrote:
Guys, Calc, do what you want then. You are correct that this kind of turned into a argument, counter-argument thread. But in my eyes, calc turned it into that, by asking me, and those supporters, to defend and argue for this idea in ranger. So I did what he asked, or so I thought. I came up with several "arguments" and points of view to support it, but I didn't see anything from calc saying stateing he liked or didn't like them. Hmm maybe kind of how the devs are doing to us?
I DID turn this into an debate thread. If you want to submit an idea ot the devs, you have to be able to satnd behind it. I think you did fairly well. I stated early on that I was playing devil's advocate. That means I was stepping out of my role and acting like the devs (you can't spell devil without d-e-v). I am sorry I didn't make my stance more well known; I was trying to foster communication without biasing the conversation. Now I think my methods biased the conversation after all. I apologize. I do like this idea, some devs (but not necessarily all) like this idea, most CH will hate this idea and us for proposing it (remember how we treated the BE that brought the idea about 'creature farms?' expect that response from CH).
We are screwed folks. The devs aren't doing anything with ranger, we cant do anything with ranger cause we don't even have a slightest clue what the devs want for us. So basically between a rock and a hard place. I have been a scout since character creation, on the scout forums since week one. As soon as I made made ranger I was active on this forum, and keep in touch with scout. I have held master ranger since I got it months ago. I have seen players come and go, ideas come and go, coorespondants come and go, bugs come and go, fixes come and go. Even some new additions to the profession like /comceal and /areatrack.
That is certainly an issue, and I hope we can clear it up with this week's question.
After all that we still don't know what the devs want, so basically we are spinning our wheels here. As I stated in another post on ranger, the 19 Answers thing came at a bad time as far as players are concerned. Why? Everything for pretty much every profession waiting for a revamp, is waiting for the Combat Balance to see what direction the devs want for the profession.
I will keep my ideas to myself from now on until after the Combat Balance. It's obvious that "at least" until then, everything is a waiste of our time. We could come up with some fantasitc ideas that the community in general agrees on(/caugh Outdoorsman), and it could never happen if it ends up not going in the direction the devs want for us.
Please continue to share!
As for some of the recent comments about what I want my ranger to be? Frankly EVERYTHING in outdoorsman except the modular camps I fully support, love, and would like to ranger be. But I have not heard didly squat about it from the devs or through our coorespondants, and so that tells me, they don't like it or dont give a crap. So forgive me for coming up with other ideas since the ones I helped develope over 6 months ago have not gotten any responce. Isn't it normal then to start coming up with other ideas, in maybe different directions? Human nature, logical? Either way, I'm not going to waiste my time anymore until I start seeing actual feedback from the Devs, not just TH who is not a dev BTW, and they start pointing us in a direction to focus our creativity.
Gnight.
Klif_Hangar
Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:59 pm
#68
I agree, and I think this was part of NRaas' original intention when he created the state of the profession list. That list had every idea anyone ever posted on the ranger forum, regardless of how feasible it was. I think that that list should continue to be updated with ideas like this one, so when the devs finally start talking about a revamp, we can point to it as a repository of all the ideas we've come up with. Perhaps it could be reorganized to emphasize the priority we place in each idea (stealth would be near the top if we did that I think).
Squidwalker wrote:
I say just keep throwing every decent idea at them and see what they come back with. If they "hmm thats kind of a neat idea, maybe we can work on that" "I don't, I like it, but is it for ranger"or "No way, we are not putting something like into the game period" Then we can take it from there, depending on their responce to the idea.
Fred_Skinner
Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:53 pm
#70
A little levity...
This would be hiding in a bush, masked from view with a ... clown suite?
Squidwalker wrote:
...snip...Even some new additions to the profession like /comceal and /areatrack. ...snip...
Ariven
Mon Jun 14, 2004 11:09 pm
#71
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Nemo0 wrote:With our current skill set as far as creatures are concerned, I'd say that we are the hunter, not the rancher. We never try to take care of animals or grow them or anything similar. We go out in the field to study them and kill them. Sort of like a safari leader. There is nothing stopping us from knowing how to fight off a mount but I don't necessarily see why it would be part of our skill set. If it has to go to a single profession that is in the game, I would argue for CH (more like the rancher than us). But it doesn't have to go to any single profession.
Bingo! As far as me bringing up the rancher, I wasn't meaning to campare Rangers to Ranchers, I just tried to come up with an RL example of someone who rides mounts.
Becoming more familiar with something allows you to use it more efficiently.
Rangers, who spend a lot of time outdoors and arguably would prefer to be on mounts (to keep the outdoors more pristine). Spending more time on mounts allows them to become more familiar with BEING on mounts.
Being more familiar with BEING on a mount means they can do more things safely, effciently and effectively.
You make the analogy of zoologist to rancher.. how about hunter? Those of you who hunt, no lets narrow that down, those of you who use horses to hunt, could you while mounted on that horse fire off your rifle (or bow even) from the back of the mount? Do you think that your time as a hunter, and as a hunter riding a horse would allow you better control of that animal WHILE actively hunting from the horse as opposed to that "city slicker" who knows the basics of "giddyap" and "whoa trigger"?
I do.
It is a question of ACTIVE familiarity with the animal.. active in that you are constantly working with it both as a pet and as your mount.. you are not passively familiar with it from reading about it in books... you are the quintessential jack of all trades outdoors... you hunt for yourself, you kill and clean your meat.. you camp for days and weeks.. and your mount becomes an essential portion of your routine..
Better rationalization Calculus?
Now for the FLIP side of the coin... being the master of a combat profession means that you are really good with that weapon, being able to use it the most efficiently and effectively in all situations... You would be able to use that weapon while moving or on unstable surface better than a novice would.
Being that master would allow you to deal with the unstable platform that a mount is.. i.e. always moving and shifting..
I would see something like this as requiring BOTH master ranger AND master of your combat profession... the ranger part gives you the familiarity with your mount to keep it under control at all times, and the master combat to be able to use your combat in an unusual situation...
Kiryoku
Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:10 am
#72
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
... I like this idea. Certain devs like this idea (I am not naming names). That is only 1 dev, though...we need to convince the rest. CH will notlike that wewant it, and I am trying to get all of our agruments together. We will need to convince them why we should have it. I feel like we have a battle ahead of us, and I want us to be prepared.
calc, i pretty much wrote up all that i did in an effort to satisfy whatever was lacking with the devs... but the only reason i have to think that you've seen it, is that i assume you read everything on this forum... just let me know if these arguments are valid or if i have more work to do... or, tell me if it is an impossibilityor ifthe whole ranger community is against it... i really like the idea myself, but i can let it go if it really is harmful to our cause
Enoshima
Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:56 am
#73
Damn brilliant arguement. I think it basically comes down to this, whilea blue army vs. red army is taking place on a so called battlefield, melee and ranged professions will have the open field advantage. But the side with a Master Ranger advantage will already know troop movements, number of forces, and the types of enemies forces coming. Some of us have already done this in our own battles.
The Ranger would be on the sideline watching, moving, and transmitting information from the woods, mountain top or what ever terrain advantage he could use.
The other side to this a few enemy troops spot the Ranger and decide to go after him, well knowing that they are entering his domain, and might think twice about doing it.
Kind of like the city police trying to catch Rambo. Might not be a good example, but if they want to fight me, they can come into the woods to do it.
I would also like to take the chance to ask for pungee sticks, I don't think I spelled that right.
Squidwalker
Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:01 am
#74
thanks for piping up Calc.
I don't see the CH making a big stink actually. For one thing, this would give them more pets to sell. Who uses pets anymore? Not many ppl. Who uses mounts anymore? Not many ppl. Now if a profession was given this abiltiy, especially rangers since we love outdoors, and for RP reasons mounts are better then speeders, that means more sales for the CH. The CH can catch the pet, or we can buy it from a BE. But the mount has to be trained as a mount by a CH. Right? Thus more business for CH, that doesn't exist now. Another market nitch for them. They are not being dropped out of this totally, they are in the loop, because rangers alone can't get pets or mounts themselves.
Fred, Clown "guile" suite? Should have known you would catch my typo and make a joke out of it. 
Message Edited by Squidwalker on 06-15-2004 08:02 AM
Message Edited by Squidwalker on 06-15-2004 08:03 AM
Kiryoku
Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:50 pm
#75
thanks calc... sorry for my insatiable need for approval... /sigh... i'm so lame...
oh... but i really can't wait for the days when i i'm heading into a GCW battle and i have to hide my "master ranger" title for tactical reasons... hehehe
Vorpaks
Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:56 pm
#76
I didn't like this idea at first but now I do. Will scouts get a lesser version of this? I think the word "scout" lends itself very nicely to be able to scout things out while mounted.
I think if carefully stated to the CH community they could like this. Vehicles basically nerfed mounts the same way they nerfed our TN. THe only drawback I see is that this idea is so cool they will want it for themselves! If scouts have a lesser version of this then it will create an even bigger market for CHs and also allow them to use it as well.
I have a picture of me fighting from Boll-back that I have been meaning to submit to the screenshot of the day. If I do I will post a link.
And Fred... could you imagine the difficulty of clown-seal? Picture trying to hide a clown AND a seal balancing a ball on his nose in the wilds of dath. Ug. We would have to give up our whole tracking tree for the ability to do something like that!
I think if carefully stated to the CH community they could like this. Vehicles basically nerfed mounts the same way they nerfed our TN. THe only drawback I see is that this idea is so cool they will want it for themselves!
If scouts have a lesser version of this then it will create an even bigger market for CHs and also allow them to use it as well. I have a picture of me fighting from Boll-back that I have been meaning to submit to the screenshot of the day. If I do I will post a link.
And Fred... could you imagine the difficulty of clown-seal? Picture trying to hide a clown AND a seal balancing a ball on his nose in the wilds of dath. Ug. We would have to give up our whole tracking tree for the ability to do something like that!
Message Edited by Vorpaks on 06-15-2004 06:57 PM
Squidwalker
Tue Jun 15, 2004 5:10 pm
#77
Fred_Skinner wrote:
KaiRaene wrote:
Perhaps its time for a petition post.
I tend to dislike such things. I like to spend my time with clown jokes at others expense
Ehem, thanks, I think. 
Hey I'm starting to see how we can sell this to CH from others ideas here.
1. make sure scouts get the ability to have TN transfer to a mount, as they are asking for anyway. Helps us since we are scouts.
2. give us the ability to shoot specials from mounts
3. tell CH that with those two changes, there will be too whole professions in the need for buying trained mounts. The scouts cause of their new TN transfer, and us for TN and combat from mounts.
4. further point out how speeders pretty much took mounts out of the market, as well for making our TN pretty much useless. numbers 1 and 2 will mean basically 2 new markets for mounts that the CH will be providing for.
Will that help Calc?
Nemo0
Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:20 pm
#78
Squidwalker wrote:
Fred_Skinner wrote:
KaiRaene wrote:
Perhaps its time for a petition post.
I tend to dislike such things. I like to spend my time with clown jokes at others expense
Ehem, thanks, I think.
Hey I'm starting to see how we can sell this to CH from others ideas here.
1. make sure scouts get the ability to have TN transfer to a mount, as they are asking for anyway. Helps us since we are scouts.
2. give us the ability to shoot specials from mounts
3. tell CH that with those two changes, there will be too whole professions in the need for buying trained mounts. The scouts cause of their new TN transfer, and us for TN and combat from mounts.
4. further point out how speeders pretty much took mounts out of the market, as well for making our TN pretty much useless. numbers 1 and 2 will mean basically 2 new markets for mounts that the CH will be providing for.
Will that help Calc?
You could always just make some form of modifier (like mounted special accuracy) that could be spread through the scout tree. Sort of like most of our other skills
. But it does make some sense in this case. Make it so that a Novice Scout/Master Combat Professionon a mount would have the same chance to hit as a Novice Combat Profession. At Master Ranger, there would be no penalty (possibly a bonus?). This would update the exploration/wayfaring lines into movement bonuses while adding a small restriction.. Stealth would then fill up the rest of the line quite nicely. And CHs would have a much larger market for mounts (especially if you ended up with an additional bonus to mounted combat at some point--maybe no movement penalty while shooting?).