Uruare Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 As pulled from here. Gathering Skills Slightly lowered the amount of resources gathered from harvested droids and creatures. So, you're making us even more dependant upon crew missions? What is the purpose of this intended reduction? Why is it targeting harvests off things one has to kill; typically harder and more involving to get than to run around harvesting nodes? Did somebody's mathematical equation determine that the entire playerbase was averaging a slightly too-high generation of these materials? If so, I'd very much like to know how relevant that margin is in contrast to the poor sentiment this bewildering reduction stands to generate. Looks to me like you're determining it to be worth it to aggravate everyone just a little more to make an equation on someone's spreadsheet fall within some unknown-but-almost-certainly-arbitrary parameter. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I love being wrong when something looks pointlessly foolish from all the angles I can see it from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellaralo Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I agree, this seems very .... stupid? If I am going to farm creatures for mats, why not? They will prob reduce it to a set 1-2 chance drop from the 1-4 it is now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varturius Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 As pulled from here. So, you're making us even more dependant upon crew missions? What is the purpose of this intended reduction? Why is it targeting harvests off things one has to kill; typically harder and more involving to get than to run around harvesting nodes? Did somebody's mathematical equation determine that the entire playerbase was averaging a slightly too-high generation of these materials? If so, I'd very much like to know how relevant that margin is in contrast to the poor sentiment this bewildering reduction stands to generate. Looks to me like you're determining it to be worth it to aggravate everyone just a little more to make an equation on someone's spreadsheet fall within some unknown-but-almost-certainly-arbitrary parameter. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I love being wrong when something looks pointlessly foolish from all the angles I can see it from. LOL no. Compared to archaeology, both bioanalysis and scavenging are uber easy to farm because of the ability to farm mobs. Thus the nerf. Not sure how you missed this "foolish" angle... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iheamylap Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I agree, this is an unnecessary reduction. The Droids and Beasts still require hunting and killing to be farmed. It isn't like you get them free of charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varturius Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I agree, this is an unnecessary reduction. The Droids and Beasts still require hunting and killing to be farmed. It isn't like you get them free of charge. Yea I hear they're hard to kill & stuff...lol And as for free, you're also getting loot from them. Maybe what BW should have done was add that Arch can drop from some type of mob, or remove nodes altogether for scav/bio and force folks to kill the mobs for the mats (like skinning in wow). This will still be slightly imbalanced in scav/bio's favor, but it seems well documented in this forum section thus far that balancing crew skills isn't really something BW is taking seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uruare Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 LOL no. Compared to archaeology, both bioanalysis and scavenging are uber easy to farm because of the ability to farm mobs. Thus the nerf. Not sure how you missed this "foolish" angle... I didn't miss it. It's merely irrelevant to the implication of a reduction. Being as that I am not assuming them to be idiots, I assume they are aware that such a reduction will not and has no chance to generate consumer sentiment that is positive. It will be impactful; it is a nerf, and that carries with it an associated negative stigmatization. I have no idea if it's needed or not, hence my question posed. From where I can see the matter, it looks like they've basically chosen to generate negative sentiment amongst all concerned parties to...what, exactly? What will this fix? If it is, in fact, a small reduction, the greatest point of noticeable relevance will be over long periods of time; something that is going to be far more important to their numbers on spreadsheets than to anybody's day to day experience. I want to know if I'm perceiving that correctly and, if so, why in blazes they're going to do it that way. If, by whatever odd chance, I am correct? Just another point of aggravation for anybody that cares, and for what? For the playerbase to generate 1.0488% fewer materials of those harvestable varieties per month? I'm flummoxed. So, I ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocdogg Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 It's not something that was complained about, so my guess is that their numbers machine told them players weren't working hard enough for our materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts