Harvesting Nodes (split)
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
I'll try to be a devil's advocate here... making it more time consuming could make for more interactions between players if the crafter doesn't have time to also be a harvester.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
How about random spawning, just more of them in a giving locale.
Haiku is easy -
But sometimes it makes no sense.
Refridgerator.
But sometimes it makes no sense.
Refridgerator.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
[quote="Kandra"]I'll try to be a devil's advocate here... making it more time consuming could make for more interactions between players if the crafter doesn't have time to also be a harvester.[/quote]
Most crafters asked for mats to be given to them anyway. So all that will do is drive up the price of mats on the auction/exchange. Or it could cause there to be less items available so that no one will bother.
Skillups already took forever. So making it harder to find the nodes will just make it more frustrating across the board. And that will only really affect miners or slow DPS classes like clerics, that can't just kill mobs. Miners are the only harvesting sphere that can't get mats from killable mobs.
Most crafters asked for mats to be given to them anyway. So all that will do is drive up the price of mats on the auction/exchange. Or it could cause there to be less items available so that no one will bother.
Skillups already took forever. So making it harder to find the nodes will just make it more frustrating across the board. And that will only really affect miners or slow DPS classes like clerics, that can't just kill mobs. Miners are the only harvesting sphere that can't get mats from killable mobs.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
[quote="Jakkal"][quote="Kandra"]Miners are the only harvesting sphere that can't get mats from killable mobs.[/quote][/quote]
That should be something we can change, if we want to.
In general, my goals for harvesting would be:
1. Make it time-consuming enough that harvesting is a viable way to make some money (i.e. make it so crafters either have to spend a good bit of time harvesting, or they have to buy their mats from professional harvesters).
2. Preserve (or even increase) the benefits of group harvesting, to make the game (potentially) more social.
3. Make it feasible that a poor or beginning crafter can do his own harvesting.
IMO, released Vanguard was pretty good at all three of those. I especially liked that a dedicated and knowledgeable harvester could manipulate the nodes to get a better result, while to the more casual harvester it appeared pretty random.
That should be something we can change, if we want to.
In general, my goals for harvesting would be:
1. Make it time-consuming enough that harvesting is a viable way to make some money (i.e. make it so crafters either have to spend a good bit of time harvesting, or they have to buy their mats from professional harvesters).
2. Preserve (or even increase) the benefits of group harvesting, to make the game (potentially) more social.
3. Make it feasible that a poor or beginning crafter can do his own harvesting.
IMO, released Vanguard was pretty good at all three of those. I especially liked that a dedicated and knowledgeable harvester could manipulate the nodes to get a better result, while to the more casual harvester it appeared pretty random.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
Also, I would like to see the harvested bits (e.g. logs) auto-stack into larger units (e.g. timber). IMO, it was an unnecessary annoyance to have to periodically go through your inventory and convert the stacks of bits into larger units.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
That brings me back to my gripe on the other thread about how you can only get 1 stack 7 leftovers. That 7 just really annoyed me, I'd much rather we get a full 2 stacks or make it 1.5. The 7 leftovers just made for a lot of waste.
Other than that, I felt the harvesting system as-is was pretty damn solid. It's about the only thing about VG that wasn't completely messed up in some fashion. I'd rather we just left it alone.
Other than that, I felt the harvesting system as-is was pretty damn solid. It's about the only thing about VG that wasn't completely messed up in some fashion. I'd rather we just left it alone.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
I agree with Jakkal here .. my OCD would freak the hell out with the leftovers. and also agree about leaving it alone, it wasnt borked lets not tinker with it .
The Platinum Order
Alliance of the Griffon
Brains and Brawn
Odinzz 55 Palladin
Psychosiss 54 Cleric ( So Close !)
Femic 55 Sorc
Dorinas 55 Blood Mage
And a mess load of alts!
Alliance of the Griffon
Brains and Brawn
Odinzz 55 Palladin
Psychosiss 54 Cleric ( So Close !)
Femic 55 Sorc
Dorinas 55 Blood Mage
And a mess load of alts!
-
John Adams
- Retired
- Posts: 4583
- Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:40 am
- Location: Phoenix, AZ.
- Contact:
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
I will have to rely on your expert opinions on this one, as I was not a big harvester. The way it was initially being designed here was as Xinux said; a random pop of a spawn combined group of entries at a placement. What this topic is teaching me though is that VG players (at least some) had "a system", and the Vanguard live game, whether it be right or wrong, was "predictable". Players returning to our game are likely going to expect to employ their harvesting strats, and might not like it if we change things up too much.
However, maybe they won't mind if (as Moldew said), leave it random but increase the presence/repop timers. If the main problem was spending eternities getting 400 planks of wood and 300 blocks for houses, why would making more random pops of these materials be a bad thing for players? Sell me on that one, and I'll ask the devs to spend their time making a predictable game that emulates something Sigil/SOE probably mistakenly did out of laziness.
The reason this should be determined now is Zippy is putting in some back-end for respawning, so if these entity types have to be queued and spawned differently, we need to decide that pronto.
However, maybe they won't mind if (as Moldew said), leave it random but increase the presence/repop timers. If the main problem was spending eternities getting 400 planks of wood and 300 blocks for houses, why would making more random pops of these materials be a bad thing for players? Sell me on that one, and I'll ask the devs to spend their time making a predictable game that emulates something Sigil/SOE probably mistakenly did out of laziness.
The reason this should be determined now is Zippy is putting in some back-end for respawning, so if these entity types have to be queued and spawned differently, we need to decide that pronto.
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
Random spawns means that you can only harvest randomly. So instead of spending X amount of time harvesting 200 timber, you spend a random amount of time wondering around hoping to find trees to harvest. This could be a shorter amount of time or a long amount of time, but it will always be a different amount of time as you have no idea when/where you will find a tree. Which means that the price the crafter charges whomever is wanting the item crafted will always change depending on how lucky the crafter is in finding nodes.
It would be like having NPCs having random amounts of health. You will never know how long it will take to kill a mob until it is dead. I think we are all use to having NPCs (the same type anyway) being the same.
What I suggest is that the spawn/respawn code allow for different spawn types. That way we can implement a simple random spawn for things everything now, but in the future we can add special spawn code for various different types of spawns. I can imagine that there will be other various things in the world (are we doing lorestones?)(how about clickable quest items?) that will have different spawn requirements. This way we will have the ability to easily add those new requirements as we move forward.
BTW, I always missed ground spawn stuff from EQ!
It would be like having NPCs having random amounts of health. You will never know how long it will take to kill a mob until it is dead. I think we are all use to having NPCs (the same type anyway) being the same.
What I suggest is that the spawn/respawn code allow for different spawn types. That way we can implement a simple random spawn for things everything now, but in the future we can add special spawn code for various different types of spawns. I can imagine that there will be other various things in the world (are we doing lorestones?)(how about clickable quest items?) that will have different spawn requirements. This way we will have the ability to easily add those new requirements as we move forward.
BTW, I always missed ground spawn stuff from EQ!
-
John Adams
- Retired
- Posts: 4583
- Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:40 am
- Location: Phoenix, AZ.
- Contact:
Re: Harvesting Nodes (split)
[quote="Ratief"]Random spawns means that you can only harvest randomly. So instead of spending X amount of time harvesting 200 timber, you spend a random amount of time wondering around hoping to find trees to harvest. [/quote]
Just focusing on this for a moment, I think you misunderstand what we (the EQ2 guys) mean by "random". VGO Data is whatever was collected; so if it's a tree, only, at x,y,z, then it will indeed still always be a tree at that specific x,y,z. It won't be a tree one moment, and a rock the next, and so forth... unless the Collected Data shows that as how they were distributed. If that's the case, then we're not actually doing anything different than SOE did. Though I'm 99.999% confident in the raw data, when it's a tree, it's always a tree.
Where I'm talking about the 50/50 chance of one node or the other is in those cases where (and I believe it's just rocks?) mining in a specific x,y,z is either a normal node or something more rare. That is where I am unsure how VG handled rares, as according to Raw Collected Data, they were definitely in the exact same place, 2 different "raceID"s.
As for cutting down a tree, then the next, and onward until you return to the start - that's simply respawn_timer in the placements table. We can tweak the timing that by the time an area is depleted, the first nodes are showing back up.
Does this changed the queued respawn issue you are talking about here?
Just focusing on this for a moment, I think you misunderstand what we (the EQ2 guys) mean by "random". VGO Data is whatever was collected; so if it's a tree, only, at x,y,z, then it will indeed still always be a tree at that specific x,y,z. It won't be a tree one moment, and a rock the next, and so forth... unless the Collected Data shows that as how they were distributed. If that's the case, then we're not actually doing anything different than SOE did. Though I'm 99.999% confident in the raw data, when it's a tree, it's always a tree.
Where I'm talking about the 50/50 chance of one node or the other is in those cases where (and I believe it's just rocks?) mining in a specific x,y,z is either a normal node or something more rare. That is where I am unsure how VG handled rares, as according to Raw Collected Data, they were definitely in the exact same place, 2 different "raceID"s.
As for cutting down a tree, then the next, and onward until you return to the start - that's simply respawn_timer in the placements table. We can tweak the timing that by the time an area is depleted, the first nodes are showing back up.
Does this changed the queued respawn issue you are talking about here?