Fixing and balancing theft/tracking.

[SynthesisAlpha]

Just to check but OP you know the wedge grows as the difference is bigger between the tracker and the thief right?

Your statement is unclear. Are you pointing out the system I'm suggesting, or saying it exists in the current game? Are you saying difference as in skill difference, or difference as in distance on the map?

Either way, with the current system, I found my claim had been severely vandalized (wheat seeds dumped off herbalist table, miner's hat and pickaxe stolen, most other containers with contents on ground). I immediately purchased Ranging, Rage, and Murder, since I had about 20k LP saved up (before costs were increased). I also bumped my exploration stat to 10. I picked up eight handfuls of theft clues, each with 17 scents in the stack. I then proceeded to move, at run speed, for thirty five minutes, checking the scents until I found the perpetrator, one Frank Caliendo, who I proceeded to force summon and murder/rob in retaliation. I wasn't even able to deal damage with my weapon, except by saving up initiative and combat advantage for the cleave attack, but I eventually was able to knock out and kill him.

Does that seem right to you? I was able to, on the spot, purchase the skills to track someone, and trace them over a half hour's run across the map. Overall it was about 2/3 the distance from one map edge to the opposite. Hell, I still had stacks and stacks of clues left over.

The suggestion I made with the altering size of the tracking wedges is to account for a discrepancy in tracker skill vs. thief skill. The location you're attempting to track would always be located within the angle of the wedge, but an ineffective tracker would have a very large wedge indeed, meaning you could have a 180 degree swath of circle that takes dozens of clue uses to narrow down the areas you should be searching. The idea is to make the number of clues you get limited, and force you to use more of them if the thief has higher skills than the tracker.

The one-search-per-crime rule is to make it so that small scale robberies -- looting one container and dashing off -- is safer than cleaning house. If you rob two dozen containers, a ranger is going to pick up a lot of scents and have a lot of resources to track you. Of course, since theft scents should point to the items, dumping your goods in multiple safehouses could throw them off the trail. It would make for a much more interesting system, wouldn't you say?

[kaka]

The suggestion I made with the altering size of the tracking wedges is to account for a discrepancy in tracker skill vs. thief skill.

I believe this is what sami1337 meant and how it currently works; I've noticed a difference myself.

[SynthesisAlpha]

In that case, the difference needs to be much more pronounced. I shouldn't be able to track someone perfectly after having just bought the requisite skills, even if that person is also a new thief. Trackers of equal skill to the thief should actually have to do some tracking, rather than having a homing beacon with dozens of uses.

[sami1337]

As far as i know it's perception versus intelligence. Most people don't even raise their intelligence. But you should try tracking rift or blaze for example. If your tracking / perception is untouched you will get a 180 degree wedge.

[niltrias]

I really like the general idea, but I`d like to add a few points of my own.

1) I agree it should not be VERY random. There should be a fairly straightforward comparison of int+stealth vs per+search. Maybe with a +/-10 die roll, but make a clue trackable only once each RL hour, and make the clue slowly degrade so it gives off fewer and fewer scents. Also, the scents should degrade not all at once, but by points.

In addition, I think it would be good if a lawspeaker could erase crimes within village claims. This would create both dangerous villages, which would be neat. "He went to Kurodani, the village of the Black Vale, and was never heard from again." And it allow killing of thieves in villages w/o possibility of recourse. "There was no crime here. That man needed killin`!"
Alt vaults still need addressin`, but in the main, I support the OP.

[sami1337]

what about scents being more accurate when fresh?

[SynthesisAlpha]

That could certainly factor in as well. A fresh crime would leave you with a larger set of clues that are easier to follow. Maybe you'd want to case a joint to find out a person's play schedule before you go in for the heist to make sure they don't notice the crime for a while.

[Potjeh]

I'm saying that a system that allowed each person to get their own pool would result in bunches of rangers running around being able to pin point anyone much like now due to having stupidly high amounts of clues between them.

And what exactly is wrong with that? Isn't it natural that a huge manhunt should have a much higher chance of success than a lone ranger? Remember, we're assuming here that clue detection gets fixed, so all those members of the manhunt would need to have high perception and exploration to help track a skilled thief. Good luck assembling together that many skilled rangers over a stolen loaf of bread. It'd only happen to thieves that really piss off a lot of people, which should only happen to stupid thieves or griefers.

[PoisonedV]

I'm saying that a system that allowed each person to get their own pool would result in bunches of rangers running around being able to pin point anyone much like now due to having stupidly high amounts of clues between them.

And what exactly is wrong with that? Isn't it natural that a huge manhunt should have a much higher chance of success than a lone ranger? Remember, we're assuming here that clue detection gets fixed, so all those members of the manhunt would need to have high perception and exploration to help track a skilled thief. Good luck assembling together that many skilled rangers over a stolen loaf of bread. It'd only happen to thieves that really piss off a lot of people, which should only happen to stupid thieves or griefers.

I hate to be the devils advocate (as far as my usual side goes), but I agree. With more amounts of people, things should be easier. It's why they ask all the residents of small towns to come comb the land for missing persons. Besides, how many of these people will be competant at ranging anyway? More than likely, it will blow up in their faces without discipline.

[theTrav]

I hate to be the devils advocate (as far as my usual side goes), but I agree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_advocate

In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who takes a position he or she disagrees with for the sake of argument. This process can be used to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure.

Sorry, this is not a troll, just a heads up, you may not be 100% on what that phrase means