Shipwright Archive
Thread: Flagrant attempt to promote healthy discussion: The Miner...
Niacia
Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:59 pm
#27
A miner profession could add depth to the game. But there should be somewhat more gameplay involved then what you can do with the survey tree of artisan.
I like the idea of blending resources. There could be some kind of experimentation involved.
Nevertheless, this may not lead to uber resources. My suggestion:
Blending Ditanium Steel with Ditanium steel gives a new ditanium steel.
Blending Ditanium Steel with Duranium Steel gives unknown Steel.
Blending Steel with Iron gives a unknown ferrous metal.
Blending Steel with Copper gives an unknow metal.
Blending Steel with Gas would not be possible.
This would ensure, that nobody can blend iron and copper to get weapons that are a lot stronger then today, because the resulting metal could only be used in low level schematics taking metal.
Blending would require 2 stacks of resources, a blennding shematic and a blending factory. There are different factories for different types of resources. Additional catalyst resources might be needed for the blending process.
Another tree would add lots, which can only be used for harvesters.
Maybe the use of different types of harvester that is smaller but more efficient then a personal harvester. This harvester might be usable in the mountans.
And I like the idea, of several layers of resources. A second resource layer might only be acessable by miners. Going up this tree, more resources can be found in this second layer.
Could be a nice profession to play with.
Oh, one more thing, I got the feeling, flora resources should be excluded from this.
Regards
Niacia
I like the idea of blending resources. There could be some kind of experimentation involved.
Nevertheless, this may not lead to uber resources. My suggestion:
Blending Ditanium Steel with Ditanium steel gives a new ditanium steel.
Blending Ditanium Steel with Duranium Steel gives unknown Steel.
Blending Steel with Iron gives a unknown ferrous metal.
Blending Steel with Copper gives an unknow metal.
Blending Steel with Gas would not be possible.
This would ensure, that nobody can blend iron and copper to get weapons that are a lot stronger then today, because the resulting metal could only be used in low level schematics taking metal.
Blending would require 2 stacks of resources, a blennding shematic and a blending factory. There are different factories for different types of resources. Additional catalyst resources might be needed for the blending process.
Another tree would add lots, which can only be used for harvesters.
Maybe the use of different types of harvester that is smaller but more efficient then a personal harvester. This harvester might be usable in the mountans.
And I like the idea, of several layers of resources. A second resource layer might only be acessable by miners. Going up this tree, more resources can be found in this second layer.
Could be a nice profession to play with.
Oh, one more thing, I got the feeling, flora resources should be excluded from this.
Regards
Niacia
Happymob
Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:02 pm
#28
Jagged-F3l wrote:
Unrelated, or maybe not, but if the devs were to introduce a mining profession, this would take care of inorganics, such minerals, chemicals, gases, and perhaps water. What about organics? To maintain balance, shouldn't there be consideration given to a profession called farmer?
I don't think it's really necessary. Flora should be included within miner (since it's just like water, gas, chemical, or minerals) and harvested with architecture-created structures. It could be "Refined" by miners as well. Given that the inorganics are about 75% of the resource business, creating content around the other 25% is tough, so just fold it into miner.
Now animal resources (hides, meat, bone) are another story entirely. But improvements to ranger could help solve many of the problems with animal resources.
Milkent
Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:18 pm
#29
The Politician profession was added mid-stream, so the space expansion professions aren't the only new professions.
I like the idea of a miner Profession. I don't know how it was set up in Beta, but it would be a really useful profession IMO. I would probably pick it up to get some help.
The idea of being able to take two resources, blend them, and then make a completely unique item is appealing. Right now, when I use the best resources that have spawned on my server, I know that there are several others who will have pretty much the same stuff as me, given small variations for FS and skill tapes. Knowing that I could create my own resource specifically to fit certain items would make me a very happy crafter indeed.
Milkent
PugBalato
Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:10 am
#30
I'd love a miner profession and I'd certainly go for it to support my SW business. Currently I'm relying on my alt char and several friends to place harvesters but it can be awkward sometimes, particularly when I'm waiting on a friend to be online - and all they want to do is play the game rather than go around placing harvesters for me.
There was actually a really good thread about this in the Artisan forum a while back and I can't find it. As well as the proposals you've made there were several other neat features that could be incorporated. Like enhanced surveying skills that also allow you to survey for a specific mineral (by name). Surveyors that will only report on deposits of greater than 50% (or other arbitrary value). Getting reports from harvesters when a deposit has been depleted.
I think it's key that we get either extra lots (that can only be used for harvs) or we get the ability to extract alot more from a deposit. Say 50 BER (I know, I'm been a bit too wishful here 
). Or super heavy extractors or mining plants that we could buy that only master miners can use.
). Or super heavy extractors or mining plants that we could buy that only master miners can use. This would probably curb the lot swappers to a certain extent because there'd be no gain to lot swapping when you can become a miner. Introducing more resources into the community can only be a good thing - although I admit that there needs to be a balance and too much would not be good.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
Diorchas
Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:48 am
#31
I think the addition of a "Miner" profession would be wonderful. I, for one, would commit skill points to it even if some others wouldn't.
The four trees that I think would make the most sense are:
Advanced Surveying- There are many, many different ways to implement this. Whether it be a simple expansion of Survey range or some implementation with Droids, I think it's both inherent to the idea of a Miner and eminently workable.
Management and Efficiency- I'm thinking this branch reduces costs of maintaining mining interests, increases the number of lots a Miner can have and increases the yield from an active mine.
Refining and Alloying- This is a great pie-in-the-sky branch. I think everyone who supports a Miner profession thinks this would be great, but is it workable? Will the database support it?
Engineering- This branch specifically addresses one of my biggest pet peeves about mining. Namely, that you can track down a concentration and it can be unmineable because of the terrain. This branch would address that by adding the ability to level terrain (much like a Ranger's camp) for harvesters and/or add the brilliant idea of heavy platforms that was raised earlier in this thread.
Also, as a side note, I think there should be a companion profession that addresses Organics as well. It could be called the "Agriculturalist". The four branches could be Farming (with bonuses to harvesting mineable organics), Husbandry (the ability to harvest creature resources), Management and Efficiency and Biochemistry (in concert with BEs, the ability to tinker with both mineable organics and creature resources to increase yield and/or stats).
Message Edited by Diorchas on 11-13-2004 07:50 AM
BadKarma777
Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:37 am
#32
Good to see this discussion still going.
I just dropped in to say: I like Diorchas skill trees better than mine. 
Nice ideas. Keep them coming.
As a parting note - while I think an immediate implementation fo the miner profession is unlikely, I certainly wouldn't discount the possibility down the road.
You see, I think that this would have a gradual deflationary effect on the economy, and let's face it - most of our economies are inflated to some degree. Granted, it wouldn't fix 'everything' but i think it would definitely be a step in the right direction.
Also - make no mistake about it, the developers are aiming to deflate the economic situation. It is the underlying reason we're seeing some of the proposed changes that have been surfacing in their threads - inflated economies are inherently problematic.
Diorchas
Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:32 pm
#33
Just thought of something new and, maybe, a little off-the-wall.
If the devs don't want to implement more lots for miner, maybe they'd implement new schematics for Miner-only Harvesters that took up 1/2 lot each. That way you wouldn't be giving Miners more room for houses, etc, because you wouldn't be giving more lots, you'd just be making harvesters more efficient.
Another, perhaps slightly stranger, idea would be to make specialised harvesters that have multiple extraction cores, each with their own BER so that with one harvester you could mine either multiple resources or more of one resource. ex. A heavy harvester with 4 extraction cores in it, each with a BER of 5, could mine four resources at 5 BER, 2 at 10, 1 at 20, etc.
Jagged-F3l
Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:10 am
#34
Diorchas wrote:
I think the addition of a "Miner" profession would be wonderful. I, for one, would commit skill points to it even if some others wouldn't.
The four trees that I think would make the most sense are:
Advanced Surveying- There are many, many different ways to implement this. Whether it be a simple expansion of Survey range or some implementation with Droids, I think it's both inherent to the idea of a Miner and eminently workable.
Management and Efficiency- I'm thinking this branch reduces costs of maintaining mining interests, increases the number of lots a Miner can have and increases the yield from an active mine.
Refining and Alloying- This is a great pie-in-the-sky branch. I think everyone who supports a Miner profession thinks this would be great, but is it workable? Will the database support it?
Engineering- This branch specifically addresses one of my biggest pet peeves about mining. Namely, that you can track down a concentration and it can be unmineable because of the terrain. This branch would address that by adding the ability to level terrain (much like a Ranger's camp) for harvesters and/or add the brilliant idea of heavy platforms that was raised earlier in this thread.
Also, as a side note, I think there should be a companion profession that addresses Organics as well. It could be called the "Agriculturalist". The four branches could be Farming (with bonuses to harvesting mineable organics), Husbandry (the ability to harvest creature resources), Management and Efficiency and Biochemistry (in concert with BEs, the ability to tinker with both mineable organics and creature resources to increase yield and/or stats).
Message Edited by Diorchas on 11-13-2004 07:50 AM
You will never see a skill that increases the number of lots. I have the feeling that this is so fundamental to the way things work with the database. Case in point, the multi-player ships requiring a lot.
I think it's great for us to propose "extensions" to the game, but I once saw a document outlining some fundamental guidelines for such proposals. One guideline that caught my eye especially was something along the lines that the devs would be more apt to listen to a proposal if it "fit well within the current game system".
Given this, let's examine the proposal to have one or more skills that grants the player more lots. With respect the mining profession, you're proposing this modifier because anyone harvesting resources runs into the need for more lots at one point or another. Thus, you need to look at this from another angle. Rather than ask for a modifier to the number of lots granted to the player, why not give the player a modifier that serves as a bonus to harvesting. For example, you can propose a modifier called "Extraction Rate", which modifies the extraction rate of any harvester used by the player. I realize this isn't as flexible as another lot, but remember the guideline.
Niacia
Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:16 am
#35
Jagged-F3l wrote:
I think it's great for us to propose "extensions" to the game, but I once saw a document outlining some fundamental guidelines for such proposals. One guideline that caught my eye especially was something along the lines that the devs would be more apt to listen to a proposal if it "fit well within the current game system".Given this, let's examine the proposal to have one or more skills that grants the player more lots. With respect the mining profession, you're proposing this modifier because anyone harvesting resources runs into the need for more lots at one point or another. Thus, you need to look at this from another angle. Rather than ask for a modifier to the number of lots granted to the player, why not give the player a modifier that serves as a bonus to harvesting. For example, you can propose a modifier called "Extraction Rate", which modifies the extraction rate of any harvester used by the player. I realize this isn't as flexible as another lot, but remember the guideline.
Actually, I do not believe it is easier to modify the extraction rate of a harvester by a skill mode then adding new lots.
Right now, no building has atributes that depend on the player placing it or depend on the player using it. (At least no building I am aware of).
There are however a number of buildings, that are relevant during the placing of the building. Only Master Musicians/Dancers may place a cantina. Only a politician may place a shuttle port, stuff like this.
So what could be possible is to use relaxed placing rules for miners. Or to use different types of harvesters with higher BER.
You are right, we probably are not going to see any new lots anytime soon. Still, this is something that could happen down the road.
And I believe additional harvester lots might be easier to implement the additional house lots, because you cannot store items within harvesters. It really depends a lot on the database structure. Here, we can only guess of course.
Regards
Niacia
Happymob
Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:46 am
#36
Niacia wrote:
Right now, no building has atributes that depend on the player placing it or depend on the player using it. (At least no building I am aware of).
Not quite true. While no buildings have property changes based on who places the building, there are property changes based on the skill of the player paying maintenance. Specifically, the merchant reduction in maintenance costs is applied when maintenance is added to any structure (including those that the merchant merely has admin to).
I agree though that new higher BER harvester types specifically certed for miners would be an easier way to go (and give architects new product as well).
rols_cerentz
Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:51 am
#37
Niacia wrote:
Jagged-F3l wrote:
I think it's great for us to propose "extensions" to the game, but I once saw a document outlining some fundamental guidelines for such proposals. One guideline that caught my eye especially was something along the lines that the devs would be more apt to listen to a proposal if it "fit well within the current game system".Given this, let's examine the proposal to have one or more skills that grants the player more lots. With respect the mining profession, you're proposing this modifier because anyone harvesting resources runs into the need for more lots at one point or another. Thus, you need to look at this from another angle. Rather than ask for a modifier to the number of lots granted to the player, why not give the player a modifier that serves as a bonus to harvesting. For example, you can propose a modifier called "Extraction Rate", which modifies the extraction rate of any harvester used by the player. I realize this isn't as flexible as another lot, but remember the guideline.
Actually, I do not believe it is easier to modify the extraction rate of a harvester by a skill mode then adding new lots.
Right now, no building has atributes that depend on the player placing it or depend on the player using it. (At least no building I am aware of).
There are however a number of buildings, that are relevant during the placing of the building. Only Master Musicians/Dancers may place a cantina. Only a politician may place a shuttle port, stuff like this.
So what could be possible is to use relaxed placing rules for miners. Or to use different types of harvesters with higher BER.
You are right, we probably are not going to see any new lots anytime soon. Still, this is something that could happen down the road.
And I believe additional harvester lots might be easier to implement the additional house lots, because you cannot store items within harvesters. It really depends a lot on the database structure. Here, we can only guess of course.
Regards
Niacia
Actually, all buildings/structures have modifiers based upon stats of a player. If you are a Merchant, then you experience a lower cost for regular maintenance for buildings/structures of any type. That code already exists where a building is modified by a level of skill in a profession. Right now, my maintenance costs are -20% the normal costs of operation.
Lots are lots, regardless of what we think of them. The limit of lots, to my understanding, is an arbitrary limitation designed to facilitate three things. One, it is designed to force players to interact, either by the renting of lots for things like harvesters, additional housing. Two, possibly make players purchase additional acccounts. Three, keep the planets from resembling Britania from Ultima Online. You know where there is nothing but one contiguous city spanning the entire continent.
It was hellaciously difficult to place a house within a week of their original housing patch and it was also the only reason that I ended up leaving Ultima Online. I went on a short out of town trip, less then 5 days, I refreshed my character's home moments before leaving for the trip and when I returned, the first thing I did was log in and all I saw was the skeletal remains of my character's house and all my character's things being ransacked by other players. It as disheartening to say the least, I was able to recover a decent number of items and I kept a positive outlook. I picked up one of the newer log cabin homes and spent almost two weeks doing little more then running around attempting to place it. Two weeks of utter frustration, at the end of which I canceled my UO account and vowed never to return.
Anyway, that's part of the reason why there is a limit on Lots and that's why there will always be a limit on Lots in SWG.
BadKarma777
Mon Nov 15, 2004 8:01 am
#38
Just playing a little 'Devils' Advocate' here, but consider this:
I understand that adding to the number of lots available to a miner would allow them to miner a greater variety of resources, but...
How would you handle players that simply took up the miner profession as a way to increase their lots and thereby abuse that system?
~ Just a thought.
rols_cerentz
Mon Nov 15, 2004 8:08 am
#39
BadKarma777 wrote:Just playing a little 'Devils' Advocate' here, but consider this:I understand that adding to the number of lots available to a miner would allow them to miner a greater variety of resources, but...How would you handle players that simply took up the miner profession as a way to increase their lots and thereby abuse that system?~ Just a thought.
You couldn't 'handle' such players. Adding lots, even specific to harvesting equipment, would add nothing to the game, except for a ton of additional structures being placed all over every planet, taking up space, breaking up the scenery and throuroughly ruining the immersion of the various planets.
Remember all those large open, empty fields on Naboo, like the one from Episode II where Anakin and Amidala hung out in during the poorly written, executed 'love' scenes? Those would suddenly disappear, filled with harvesters and other structures.
The best way to increase the usefullness of a Miner profession would be to provide larger higher BER harvesters and or a modifier to the effectiveness of harvesters, such as a 10%, 20%, 30% and up to a 40% increase in BER. This would take a BER 10 harvester all the way up to a BER 14 Harvester. Not to great, but worth it enough for someone to take a miner profession.