PC 1.0 Experimental Feedback Please let multiplayer quest clears advance everyone's tier progress

[Javabean867]

I don't think people are thinking about this correctly.  Like everything else each activity that people can do, such as crafting/building/etc can be specialized by 1 or more people in the group.  1 person gets their quest tier up, everyone can enjoy those higher tier quests amd quest rewards. 

When the quest guy isn't online, you can still hit up the higher tier locations, you just don't get the(weak) quest rewards anymore.  Or you can build up your trader quest levels separately. 

If you have a big enough crew then you can have people split into 2, and double up on the quester's questing rank.

 

[meganoth]

I don't think people are thinking about this correctly.  Like everything else each activity that people can do, such as crafting/building/etc can be specialized by 1 or more people in the group.  1 person gets their quest tier up, everyone can enjoy those higher tier quests amd quest rewards. 

When the quest guy isn't online, you can still hit up the higher tier locations, you just don't get the(weak) quest rewards anymore.  Or you can build up your trader quest levels separately. 

If you have a big enough crew then you can have people split into 2, and double up on the quester's questing rank.

Good argument.

I assume players want to get to tier1 as fast as possible because of the bicycle reward. For non-INT single-player that might be the best option by far, but in co-op games you often have an INT player who will instead be able to craft the bikes after a relatively short time.

 

[theFlu]

I play solo (99%), but it does look weird to me. Generally in gaming, I wouldn't think "questing" as a specialty, especially in recent 7dtd as it has been The Thing to do for everyone. Although INT has classically had decent buffs for it, so in the "class split" -perspective it has been a specialty. Salvaging, mining, hunting being the other areas of expertise, I don't think they're going to ever be comparable, thou. You can skip the others, but not questing, not really.

Doubling the questing effort for a duo already sound weird.. in my duos, we'd prolly talk about the choices at the trader for a while to get two quests close to one another, and then split into our own quests when there.. trying to be close by just for carrying the loots. It'd feel stupid, but we'd do it. Ok, my duo partner would still want to team up for them, and/or might call for help mid-quest... and from that point on we'd pointlessly do double the work to keep us even.

Two-manning a quest isn't twice as fast even within the POI, just some of the bigger fights might be quicker; and each quest will add travel time. Organizing the whole deal relies on comms, voice comms are fun, but having to optimize everything, vs just splitting up and doing our own things.. I dunno.

Any more people and it just makes no sense.. it becomes a question of "how many people we Need on this quest?" Maybe two, for some backup and less inventory issues, but a third is going to be overkill practically everywhere.

And while we can argue the maths behind it; it just feels wrong. The perception is important, if "this is stupid" seems to be the overarching reaction to it, it prolly should be reconsidered.

 

[Riamus]

I don't think people are thinking about this correctly.  Like everything else each activity that people can do, such as crafting/building/etc can be specialized by 1 or more people in the group.  1 person gets their quest tier up, everyone can enjoy those higher tier quests amd quest rewards. 

When the quest guy isn't online, you can still hit up the higher tier locations, you just don't get the(weak) quest rewards anymore.  Or you can build up your trader quest levels separately. 

If you have a big enough crew then you can have people split into 2, and double up on the quester's questing rank.

True for some people, yes.  But there are plenty of players who want to quest together.  Even in my 2 player game, we only play the game together and we only quest together, at least until late game when we might do different things sometimes.  Having to do so many extra quests just because we don't get credit for playing the game together is frustrating.  Even with just two of us, it feels so very slow.  It is definitely progressing more slowly than my single player game.  This should be optional.  There's really no reason why it can't be optional and if it's optional, then everyone should be happy.

 

[Riamus]

I just realized something what this new progression system has done for me personally.  I always went to other traders around the map throughout my game, mainly because you leveled up each trader separately.  It gave me a reason to travel the map.  Now that they are tied together, that reason is gone.  Now, I'll do a quick pitstop art each for the open trade route quests and return to wherever I choose to set up my base and just stay there rather than bothering with quests somewhere else.  The only difference is that now I can't do this in the forest in vanilla because there aren't large cities there anymore.  And I preferred the first for aesthetic reasons.  I might drop the horde base somewhere what but my main base would be in the forest since it looks nicer.  Now I'll have to either put the base somewhere else near a city for questing of I want to play vanilla.  Not a great thing.  But since I play maps that aren't made with RWG, I can get around this and mod out the changes as well.  I just wish I didn't have to.

 

[Javabean867]

True for some people, yes.  But there are plenty of players who want to quest together.  Even in my 2 player game, we only play the game together and we only quest together, at least until late game when we might do different things sometimes.  Having to do so many extra quests just because we don't get credit for playing the game together is frustrating.  Even with just two of us, it feels so very slow.  It is definitely progressing more slowly than my single player game.  This should be optional.  There's really no reason why it can't be optional and if it's optional, then everyone should be happy.

I get what you are saying, but you 2 can still quest together, that's where the fun is for me as well.  

Think of it this way.  You are both questing and getting the rewards.  Only 1 of you needs to build up the quest tier level.  I don't know how many quests you both get done in a day, but as you burn through your higher tier quests, then you can have the other person pick their tier quests to do, if they want to that is.

If the tier rewards were amazing, then yeah I would be more on your side.  As it is, I get where you are coming from, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

Oh another thing, bring back the derpy dear animations. I al.ost un-installed after seeing the deer move.  

 

[Riamus]

I get what you are saying, but you 2 can still quest together, that's where the fun is for me as well.  

Think of it this way.  You are both questing and getting the rewards.  Only 1 of you needs to build up the quest tier level.  I don't know how many quests you both get done in a day, but as you burn through your higher tier quests, then you can have the other person pick their tier quests to do, if they want to that is.

If the tier rewards were amazing, then yeah I would be more on your side.  As it is, I get where you are coming from, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

Oh another thing, bring back the derpy dear animations. I al.ost un-installed after seeing the deer move.  

It is a matter of preference and how you play.  Clearly, many people here feel that removing shared credit when working together in a co-op game is wrong.  In any change or feature, there will be people who it affects and people who it doesn't.  And people who like it and people who don't.  But I think that is they could poll every player who plays co-op and quests together, they will find that the cast majority feel like removing shared credit for working together doesn't make any sense for a co-op game. 

And why did they remove it?  Because multiplayer advanced too quickly, right?  So now multiplayer will advance more slowly than single player.  Does that make any more sense?  Single players who care about who advances more quickly well love it, but that's all.  The real solution is to make it so that you advance at the same rate (at least for max rate) regardless of the number of players.  And I showed how that can be done easily.

 

[Riamus]

Look at it this way.  In a two player game (how I usually play), we both take a quest and then do both quests and return to the trader.  Doing it this way, we need to do 20 quests per tier (10 each).  Yes, doing two at once instead of one at a time is faster than doing two quests one at a time.  But it is still slower than doing one quest solo.  This means that you might complete two quests faster with two people but you won't get both player their quest point as quickly as solo and those two quests only count as one quest for each person and takes longer than doing only one quest solo.

Let's toss some numbers in here.  Note that these are just flat numbers to visualize things and aren't intended to be accurate (everyone's numbers will vary anyhow).

Solo time to complete one quest: 10 minutes

2 player group time to complete 2 quests (one each): 15 minutes including travel time between the two quests

Solo time per tier: 100 minutes

2 player time per tier: 150 minutes

Solo time to tier 6: 500 minutes

2 player time to tier 6: 750 minutes 

That is more than 4 hours longer real time.  And that assumes you could maintain the same speed to complete high tier quests, which you can't.  I could put in examples that scale time by tier, but I think you get the idea.  But let's say your average times to complete quests from tier 1 until tier 6 is: 

Solo: 20 minutes

2 player group: 30 minutes

That is over 8 hours longer real time.  Again, these are example numbers.  Some people will take longer and others will be faster.  Any changes will affect the difference in time.  But even with the fastest players, they are going to take longer than the same players doing quests solo. 

And this is just for 2 players.  This divergence in time expands with each additional player.

Yes, you get more rewards by doing more quests, but the rewards aren't worth much anymore, so not really a big deal.

 

[meganoth]

So now multiplayer will advance more slowly than single player.

Because that one progression stat changed everyone is focusing now ONLY on trader progression as if there was nothing else. But honestly I am at around day 11 in my SP and my group is around day 5 and our progress with magazines/crafting, workstations, building is already somewhat equal to my SP (but it is difficult to compare, so take that with a grain of salt).

I am not saying your wrong, but you hardly have tested this "feature" yet. And since it changed you are now thinking about it all the time. In our co-op game we don't think about it and have jet made any adjustments, we have to see the consequences before we judge it.

 

[Roland]

Having a designated quest specialist is the solution (without modding of course). You can still quest together and clear POIs as a group for that co-op feeling. Sure, it means that your intellect guy will have to craft bikes for everyone else but that will be fun for that person to do. My group were also disappointed with the change and went right to modding but we have been talking about it almost nonstop since the change and we've decided on our next restart we will play it as designed and choose someone to be the designated specialist. Now that our initial reaction has been alleviated by our mod and we've had time to think about it we are warming up to the idea.

However, it does work against what TFP is trying to accomplish in keeping the quest progression from going too quickly because if everyone in a group is focused on pushing one person's rep up through the tiers they will do that far faster than a single player would be able to do it. So the solution actually works crosswise to what TFP was hoping to accomplish.

Another possible design solution would be to allow all participants to get points like it was but limit the number of quests that can be taken per day. I've seen that limitation in almost every other RPG that offers jobs. Only this game allows for continual questing all day long with no end to the jobs. The benefit to this method of stretching out the quest progression is that it would force players to broaden the variety of their activities each day. If they finish their available jobs by noon then instead of just continuing to quest the rest of the day they might work on their base, track down mats for a crafting task they are tracking, clear some POIs without a quest, farm, mine, harvest, etc. Perhaps the limit should be on a rl timer of 60 minutes. That way people with 120 minute days wouldn't be penalized. They would have some morning jobs and some late afternoon jobs.

 

[Riamus]

Having a designated quest specialist is the solution (without modding of course). You can still quest together and clear POIs as a group for that co-op feeling. Sure, it means that your intellect guy will have to craft bikes for everyone else but that will be fun for that person to do. My group were also disappointed with the change and went right to modding but we have been talking about it almost nonstop since the change and we've decided on our next restart we will play it as designed and choose someone to be the designated specialist. Now that our initial reaction has been alleviated by our mod and we've had time to think about it we are warming up to the idea.

However, it does work against what TFP is trying to accomplish in keeping the quest progression from going too quickly because if everyone in a group is focused on pushing one person's rep up through the tiers they will do that far faster than a single player would be able to do it. So the solution actually works crosswise to what TFP was hoping to accomplish.

Another possible design solution would be to allow all participants to get points like it was but limit the number of quests that can be done and turned in per day. I've seen that limitation in almost every other RPG that offers jobs. Only this game allows for continual questing all day long with no end to the jobs. The benefit to this method of stretching out the quest progression is that it would force players to broaden the variety of their activities each day. If they finish their available jobs by noon then instead of just continuing to quest the rest of the day they might work on their base, track down mats for a crafting task they are tracking, clear some POIs without a quest, farm, mine, harvest, etc. Perhaps the limit should be on a rl timer of 60 minutes. That way people with 120 minute days wouldn't be penalized. They would have some morning jobs and some late afternoon jobs.

Yeah, that was basically my thought as well.  I suggested limiting it to 5x your current tier in points per day, which works out to 5 quests at your tier level per day, which is the max you can do solo without reloading to get new quests.  That number could of course be adjusted.  It could also be 5 total quests regardless of tier (or another number) but that means if you are doing lower level quests, you can't do as many for points per day.  That may or may not be a bad thing, though.  The main downside is that you can't run a new person through quests quickly by having them stand outside a tier 5/6 while you complete the quests.  They'd be limited to no more than 1 tier every two days like anyone else.  So that wouldn't be great for established games and new players.

As far as getting able to do more quests on 2 hour days, that might be nice.  I play strictly 2 hour days, so it would benefit me.  But I also don't think it is necessary.  I've never felt like I lost anything by only being able to do 5 quests per day on 2 hour days.  I often can't complete that many anyhow, especially at higher tiers.  Though the extra 2 hours in game will make that easier.

 

[Roland]

I think we really are mostly only talking about tier one quests as being the real issue

Tier one quests can be done lightning fast.

People are motivated to get away from Rekt.

People want bikes.

 

[Riamus]

I think we really are mostly only talking about tier one quests as being the real issue

Tier one quests can be done lightning fast.

People are motivated to get away from Rekt.

People want bikes.

The disparity between solo and multiplayer exists at all tiers.  But more people care about tier 1 because they want a bike, that's true.  Many people who don't quest will do at least that much.  And I really don't like having to listen to Rekt.

Kind of sad that we have only 5 traders and so many people don't want anything to do with one of them.  I know it is considered "funny" that people don't like him but is it really a good thing that people want to avoid 20% of the traders?

 

[BFT2020]

I’m growing to like Rekt actually, he seems to be the only honest one of the bunch.

Jen setup in the burnt forest, why?  What is she hiding?

Bob is too friendly living in the desert…….

And Hugh openly talked about putting in a good word about me with the Duke.  Not sure about that….

 

[Riamus]

I’m growing to like Rekt actually, he seems to be the only honest one of the bunch.

Jen setup in the burnt forest, why?  What is she hiding?

Bob is too friendly living in the desert…….

And Hugh openly talked about putting in a good word about me with the Duke.  Not sure about that….

Heh.  Jen in the burnt forest does seem out of place to me.

 

[Ramethzer0]

Messing with the other settings and turning up loot across the board doesn't fix players who don't get to use magazines not getting to track any progression or craft things for themselves. Plus people may not want all loot increased just to get double magazines to split between 2 people. A sharing setting would do nothing but good IMO. 

While I don't personally disagree with that idea - a system like the one you suggest doesn't exist at the moment, but your problem with it does.  I currently play with 5 people total on my multiplayer server and while the magazine system can run a little thin for all us, we are very good at making sure that the right magazines make it to the right people.   A small increase in loot percentage is not a drastic change right away, but it does help alleviate some of the pressure and doubly so over time.   And if you need something crafted, you can always talk to the right person, yes?  In terms of perk mags, you just need to be a bit judicious who gets what, and what sort of diversity of dynamic functions everyone might be serving.   And this is stopping short from being involved in a group where everyone wants to run similar builds, in which case this is a people management problem and not a game problem.

That is more in line with why i recommend it as a practical solution.  I cannot stress enough how helping yourself with the settings can make a difference.

 

[Bask]

The split in opinion about the magazines is like 50/50 the split about the quests is like 75/25. Just kind of proves the point that both should be a server setting since the fanbase is so divided. Will be a big fumble if they don't make both of those things optional because playing how you want is what makes games fun. When people can't play without getting through large parts of the game they hate, or have to deal with something they don't like for an entire playthrough it really ruins the experience overall for a lot of people. Custom settings are already a big part of the replayability as it is. Take ARK survival, if you couldn't customize your experience there would be way less reason to come back. Frustrating since the fix is so simple. 

 

[Riamus]

The split in opinion about the magazines is like 50/50 the split about the quests is like 75/25. Just kind of proves the point that both should be a server setting since the fanbase is so divided. Will be a big fumble if they don't make both of those things optional because playing how you want is what makes games fun. When people can't play without getting through large parts of the game they hate, or have to deal with something they don't like for an entire playthrough it really ruins the experience overall for a lot of people. Custom settings are already a big part of the replayability as it is. Take ARK survival, if you couldn't customize your experience there would be way less reason to come back. Frustrating since the fix is so simple. 

Some things just don't toggle.  They'd have to create a way for both options to work and support both options and that's a lot of work for very little benefit for them.  People who have been playing the game all this time are probably going to keep playing, no matter how much they complain.  New players don't know the old ways and so aren't going to complain about the old ways being gone.

Besides, you're replying to an outdated thread.  The thread was made with shared quests didn't advance the quest tier.  That isn't true anymore.