PC Poll - Which progression system did you prefer?

[Auger]

Yes still they do drop.  You go into a working stiffs and you'll come  out with about load of tool magazines even if your not  specced in it

 

[AtomicUs5000]

Yes still they do drop.  You go into a working stiffs and you'll come  out with about load of tool magazines even if your not  specced in it

There is a separate topic discussing what can go wrong with that: 



Ideas are coming to solve the problem... but see how these ideas immediately start complicating the system.

 

[Jost Amman]

You're all the same... all of you guys who love every change TFP is doing, no matter how inconsistent with previous changes, you take it as an opportunity to defend their every move.

I'll see myself out. See you in 2-3 years discussing another revamp of progression system

You completely missed my point. I see people that criticize the changes, not on the merit, but just because they say the devs change stuff around too much.

That's not constructive criticism, that's blind nay saying and an immature approach to the development process.

 

[Auger]

There is a separate topic discussing what can go wrong with that: 



Ideas are coming to solve the problem... but see how these ideas immediately start complicating the system.

I guess if your playing with some P3 type of player then I guess that could be a problem for your group.  So we're going to overly complicate a simple system because the people you play with are jerks.

 

[AtomicUs5000]

I guess if your playing with some P3 type of player then I guess that could be a problem for your group.  So we're going to overly complicate a simple system because the people you play with are jerks.

 
I'm just feeling for all those players who used to play a certain role in this game for many years. I'm 99% of the time solo. If anything, I would probably be P3 if I was even playing MP. I just see the complaints as valid and I see the system as less than perfect. Freedom of choice, player classes, and maintaining RPG elements was always a driving factor for many design decisions ever since madmole took over... so seeing these changes is a bit odd.
 
I wouldn't say they are jerks (in this hypothetical situation that you placed me in), but just players trying the play the game. If I was in that scenario as the person staying at base, I could easily be seen as the jerk who refuses to comply with the attempts to force me to loot while forcing others to loot specific places for me, forcing them to loot further and further away much faster because if I was out looting, I would be getting what I need at the intended rate. Then, on top of being this jerk, I can't even get decent XP through XP sharing. Taking care of others with food, drink, and meds has always been easily handled and never a big deal, but this takes far more time and effort and simply unenjoyable. I wouldn't want to be the person having to think about someone else's character progression either.
 

 

[Roland]

Freedom of choice, player classes, and maintaining RPG elements was always a driving factor for many design decisions ever since madmole took over... so seeing these changes is a bit odd.

Took over? Madmole has never not held the reigns...

 

[AtomicUs5000]

Took over? Madmole has never not held the reigns...

He mostly shared the reins and held back on a lot of things.

 

[globeadue]

I guess if your playing with some P3 type of player then I guess that could be a problem for your group.  So we're going to overly complicate a simple system because the people you play with are jerks.

I should also note that the fourth player in the playgroup (I'm the OP of that linked post) has also stated that they are not really enjoying not being able to use the books themselves, he understands the need, but at the same time, feels like he's waiting for the adults to finish dinner before he can play by handing over the magazines to the daily players.

 

[meganoth]

 
I'm just feeling for all those players who used to play a certain role in this game for many years. I'm 99% of the time solo. If anything, I would probably be P3 if I was even playing MP. I just see the complaints as valid and I see the system as less than perfect. Freedom of choice, player classes, and maintaining RPG elements was always a driving factor for many design decisions ever since madmole took over... so seeing these changes is a bit odd.
 
I wouldn't say they are jerks (in this hypothetical situation that you placed me in), but just players trying the play the game. If I was in that scenario as the person staying at base, I could easily be seen as the jerk who refuses to comply with the attempts to force me to loot while forcing others to loot specific places for me, forcing them to loot further and further away much faster because if I was out looting, I would be getting what I need at the intended rate. Then, on top of being this jerk, I can't even get decent XP through XP sharing. Taking care of others with food, drink, and meds has always been easily handled and never a big deal, but this takes far more time and effort and simply unenjoyable. I wouldn't want to be the person having to think about someone else's character progression either.
 

Where is your freedom for players of a group to decide their own group dynamic? Some groups might WANT to pool all recipes into one hand so someone is the crafter for the group (even if he needs to to other jobs as well to be fully occupied). Other groups want to give everyone the same number of magazines, or just distribute to whoever fits best to get the recipes.

I don't think the game should solve social problems. Even without magazines a player could play uncooperatively in co-op, for example by storming ahead and always looting the loot room chests while the others are still removing the zombies or using up all the steel and glue for his weapons and armor. In an MMO with random pick-up groups you need an in-game solution for this, in a game where you play co-op with people you choose to play with they can and should deal with it themselves.

 

[Riamus]

Okay!  So there seems to be magazines that will drop no matter what, can you give us an indication of what?

Places like mailboxes are going to be random.  However, you'll get specific types of magazines from certain crates - like a working stiff crate isn't going to give you a medical journal.  Medical loot has a good chance of giving you a medical journal but no other magazines.  Kitchen cabinets have a good chance of giving you cooking magazines and food stacks also have a good chance of cooking magazines but not any other magazines.  None will drop a specific magazine every time, though.  You can get a pretty good guess to what kind of magazines you'll find based on the POI you are in and the container you are looting.  Want electrical magazines, visit an electronics store.  Want vehicle magazines, visit a gas station.  No guarantees you'll get the magazines but there is a better chance when you loot a related POI or a related container.

As far as getting more magazines from things you aren't perked into... well, consider where you are looting.  Most looting in the beginning tends to be houses, so you're going to level up cooking more quickly than some others.  Medical stuff is everywhere, so you'll also level those up quickly.  There's really no reason to put points into perks for those just to get them to drop faster.  On the other hand, some magazines like vehicle magazines are harder to find and so even perking into that will not make it faster than something like cooking.  You can help this by looting places where it's more likely to be found.

I should also note that the fourth player in the playgroup (I'm the OP of that linked post) has also stated that they are not really enjoying not being able to use the books themselves, he understands the need, but at the same time, feels like he's waiting for the adults to finish dinner before he can play by handing over the magazines to the daily players.

So talk it out.  Maybe you need to consider splitting the magazines up differently or more evenly.  If people want to read magazines as well, then make sure everyone has magazines they can read.  Don't have one person doing all the crafting if more than one person wants to.  Unless someone is just adamant that they should read everything, it shouldn't be hard to come to some arrangement where everyone gets to read an equal amount of stuff and is happy.

 

[Cadamier]

Please be careful with prediction you make from a single run or even a few runs. Random IS random and there have been even mathematicians who made serious mistakes when trying to find statistical truths. People are also really really bad at judging events that are random.

You can not really make that determination above without having analyzed a hundred runs at a minimum (or peaked into the XML).

This example, you put 2 points into something and 2 quests without a drop? That is statistically so insignificant, it is like you were throwing two dice and when they show 5 and 6 you then conclude that these dice will always show at least 5.

Once you have played that same scenario say 20 times and never got a magazine of that type, then you are ready to voice a suspicion that maybe, just maybe the magazine could be delayed in dropping. 

Yes, I know but I play with 7 others and they've noted the same; both in their single player and our multiplayer games.  That's why I've also added Gage848; I watched his 'pre-release' and his 'after release' (but I didn't get to the one released yesterday).  I can see the same happening to him.  All if this would have been better if we've known about it before hand.  Now that I know about the randomness, location, etc. being a factor - its makes it much easier to understand and more importantly accept and will pass to our group.

So I take it food is one that will almost always drop?

 

[meganoth]

Yes, I know but I play with 7 others and they've noted the same; both in their single player and our multiplayer games.  That's why I've also added Gage848; I watched his 'pre-release' and his 'after release' (but I didn't get to the one released yesterday).  I can see the same happening to him.  All if this would have been better if we've known about it before hand.  Now that I know about the randomness, location, etc. being a factor - its makes it much easier to understand and more importantly accept and will pass to our group.

So I take it food is one that will almost always drop?

If you loot many tier1 and tier2 (residential) POIs (for example because of questing) then you will usually just open a lot more containers that have a chance for a cooking magazine.

 

[AtomicUs5000]

Where is your freedom for players of a group to decide their own group dynamic? Some groups might WANT to pool all recipes into one hand so someone is the crafter for the group (even if he needs to to other jobs as well to be fully occupied). Other groups want to give everyone the same number of magazines, or just distribute to whoever fits best to get the recipes.

I don't think the game should solve social problems. Even without magazines a player could play uncooperatively in co-op, for example by storming ahead and always looting the loot room chests while the others are still removing the zombies or using up all the steel and glue for his weapons and armor. In an MMO with random pick-up groups you need an in-game solution for this, in a game where you play co-op with people you choose to play with they can and should deal with it themselves.

I get what you are saying, but looking at this from the reverse perspective directly after a change doesn't hold much ground. If the change never happened, the freedom for players of a group to decide their own group dynamic remains unchanged. The addition of a problem for some groups to solve does not add more freedom just because there is now a new problem.
 
The game shouldn't solve social problems, but why should the game create them? Is the fact that a player could always make things difficult for teammates a good reason to include more skewed scenarios? Strange thoughts. Besides, if this was the intention, things like shared XP would never be included in the game because it's not the game's responsibility to solve the problem of XP distribution.

 

[meganoth]

I get what you are saying, but looking at this from the reverse perspective directly after a change doesn't hold much ground. If the change never happened, the freedom for players of a group to decide their own group dynamic remains unchanged. The addition of a problem for some groups to solve does not add more freedom just because there is now a new problem.

The redesign of crafting didn't happen to change group dynamic. The change in group dynamic is a side product. If the redesign never happened then a few problems with crafting could not be corrected. Since the redesign had to happen anyway, the only question is whether players are expected to cooperate when playing co-op or whether that has to be solved for them.

And the answer (for me at least) is the former. For gaming as a whole I want to find more players on the internet who act like "human beings", and for society as a whole I want more people that have learned to work well in society even if they learned all their socail behaviour in front of their PC.

Furthermore the same problem was in A20 as well. If say the Agility player found the auto-shotgun recipe and read it because he thought it too much trouble bringing it back then he is doing the same harm to the group as someone not bringing back shotgun-magazines, because he never will be able to craft anything better than quality 1 autoshotgun. Just that the opportunities to read magazines one should bring back are more numerous but at the same time less damaging as eventually someone will be able to craft the higher stuff.

The game shouldn't solve social problems, but why should the game create them? Is the fact that a player could always make things difficult for teammates a good reason to include more skewed scenarios? Strange thoughts. Besides, if this was the intention, things like shared XP would never be included in the game because it's not the game's responsibility to solve the problem of XP distribution.

Shared XP is different because a player can't give XP to some other player like a magazine. So if XP were not shared it would not be a motivation or opportunity for players to cooperate or share. As it is XP sharing is a motivation to group up and raid POIs together, so again it is motivating players to act socially instead of separating.

 

[AtomicUs5000]

The redesign of crafting didn't happen to change group dynamic. The change in group dynamic is a side product. If the redesign never happened then a few problems with crafting could not be corrected. Since the redesign had to happen anyway, the only question is whether players are expected to cooperate when playing co-op or whether that has to be solved for them.

And the answer (for me at least) is the former. For gaming as a whole I want to find more players on the internet who act like "human beings", and for society as a whole I want more people that have learned to work well in society even if they learned all their socail behaviour in front of their PC.

Furthermore the same problem was in A20 as well. If say the Agility player found the auto-shotgun recipe and read it because he thought it too much trouble bringing it back then he is doing the same harm to the group as someone not bringing back shotgun-magazines, because he never will be able to craft anything better than quality 1 autoshotgun. Just that the opportunities to read magazines one should bring back are more numerous but at the same time less damaging as eventually someone will be able to craft the higher stuff.

Shared XP is different because a player can't give XP to some other player like a magazine. So if XP were not shared it would not be a motivation or opportunity for players to cooperate or share. As it is XP sharing is a motivation to group up and raid POIs together, so again it is motivating players to act socially instead of separating.

 
I understand your point of view. I could get into a game like that if I could manage to muster up a group of people willing to do the same, but I just don't see this level of social complexity suiting well for this game for typical players. It's just not on that level. This is the kind of thing that should be modded. I understand your point of view of XP sharing and keeping players together, but it's also pushing players to do things they do not want to do in a sandbox game that traditionally allowed you the freedom to play a specific role for your group without consequences.
 
If things were the other way around, and let's say magazines and this fake randomness were always there and removed, you wouldn't have players saying, "hey! because of this change nobody will help me clear POIs anymore!" or "man, I really wish I could spend my day finding what everybody else needs... I really miss that". It certainly wouldn't force players to be only farmers, builders, or miners just because now they are free to be that.

 

[Archael]

I prefer mix:
Perks for increase numbers, like increased damage etc.
Loot with books and schematics for exceptional and unique skills like finding honey in trees, ability to craft modifications etc.
LbD for increase quality for crafted gear - you have to find schematic but to be better you need to do a thing (tho not how it was previously. I mean, if you want to craft better tools you have to USE tools, not craft billion stone axes to be able to craft q6 auger).

 

[meganoth]

 
I understand your point of view. I could get into a game like that if I could manage to muster up a group of people willing to do the same, but I just don't see this level of social complexity suiting well for this game for typical players. It's just not on that level. This is the kind of thing that should be modded. I understand your point of view of XP sharing and keeping players together, but it's also pushing players to do things they do not want to do in a sandbox game that traditionally allowed you the freedom to play a specific role for your group without consequences.
 
If things were the other way around, and let's say magazines and this fake randomness were always there and removed, you wouldn't have players saying, "hey! because of this change nobody will help me clear POIs anymore!" or "man, I really wish I could spend my day finding what everybody else needs... I really miss that". It certainly wouldn't force players to be only farmers, builders, or miners just because now they are free to be that.

I am a bit confused about your post.

For example if say magazines and fake randomness(?) were removed, of course players would not say "because of this change nobody will help me clear POIs anymore!" because that was a result of the shared xp, not magazines or a fake randomness, right?

And which of the things we talked about forces players to be farmers, builders or miners ???

 

[AtomicUs5000]

I am a bit confused about your post.

For example if say magazines and fake randomness(?) were removed, of course players would not say "because of this change nobody will help me clear POIs anymore!" because that was a result of the shared xp, not magazines or a fake randomness, right?

And which of the things we talked about forces players to be farmers, builders or miners ???

What I am saying is that if things were the other way around and we were currently discussing the removal of the system that attempts to decide for players what magazines they find, there would be no people complaining that the removal is causing a lack of togetherness clearing POIs (because people who want to do it together will still do it together. The removal would not force people apart, where the addition is attempting to force togetherness)

The removal also would not force players into solo roles. (where the addition is attempting to force players out of them).

Nobody would complain that the removal took away their favorite hobby of having to bring back magazines in order to have a successful group. (First off, it would not be someone’s favorite hobby and secondly because the removal does not force people to stop helping, where the addition attempts to force players to help out group members who are trying to simply enjoy the game their preferred way).

 

[Skaarphy]

I'm not a fan of incremental upgrades in RPGs. I love the sweet, sweet agony of having one skill point and three equally desired skills to put it in. That's why it's learn by perks for me.

The current system, not a fan. On paper it sounded like an approximation of natural progression: You want to find more stuff for X, you put skill points into X.

In-game though it made for some akward moments. Just need 3 more points to get to tier 5 of X? Put a point in it to up the chances for finding them, disregarding any progression that would feel more "natural." To me this comes off as a bit forced and gamey.

And I'm not really sure about the point of it all. For large parts of the game, being strong in some aspects and weak in others has been a thing already. This just seems to be a different approach, without actually improving anything, doesn't it? But maybe it just feels to me that way because I don't really like it.   

 

[Lasher]

And I'm not really sure about the point of it all. For large parts of the game, being strong in some aspects and weak in others has been a thing already. This just seems to be a different approach, without actually improving anything, doesn't it?

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to Alpha 21...