*Realistic* Learning

[KeithFromCanada]

Bottom line regarding learning: In actual reality, skill progression is in the form of a tree, where you alternate between theory and practice, and, while you can choose only to follow the main trunk, you can *also* spend time exploring its many, MANY branches that fractally subdivide and take you to some pretty interesting places once you have the prerequisites down pat.

Ignoring either theory OR practice while giving players mastery of a subject just doesn't work, as the sheer volume of bitter complaints has made perfectly clear. It isn't realistic OR believable, and we all know it.

What's more, most magazine articles only explore a tiny bit of one of the more interesting branches, and are only suited for those who already have some familiarity with the subject. If you actually want to *LEARN* about it, you need a textbook series that lays out the whole tree--or at least the main trunk--and you need to go through them in order to actually grasp what is being taught. (Yes, you can attempt to figure out calculus while you are still learning the basics of algebra, but you won't get very far, and you will be stumped very hard, very fast.)

PLEASE spend some time considering how to accurately reflect real-life learning in the game.

 

[JonM]

Ever play CDDA? It has pretty much what you're describing. Every skill has a 'theory' and 'practice' level. Theory is developed almost entirely through reading, practice is developed through doing. Theory dictates what you can attempt, practice dictates how good your attempt is. Practice level cannot go above theory level, and practice is subject to skill degradation if a skill isn't used for a long time however practice exp is given a generous buff whenever it is lower than theory exp, making it easy to recover. The result is that the optimal way to level is to spend time reading about a skill, and then spend some time putting what you've read into practice. If you're about to do a high value craft or use a skill in combat and you've not used the skill for a while, it pays to spend an in-game hour or 2 practicing to refresh yourself on it. To complement this, the game has 'practice recipes' for various levels of each skill which were added to replace the 'craft a bunch of useless crap to level up' problem. Practice recipes are far more material efficient, many of them having no material cost, and they give no output - they simply serve to provide a means to practice a skill (soldering simple circuits, operating lab equipment, carving a stick, etc).

For the 'branches' you're describing, it has proficiencies - more specialised aspects of skills that vastly improve the related actions once you master them. So in tailoring you only need a given skill level to make a pair of socks, but you'll do it a lot faster if you're proficient in stretch fabric working, sewing, articulated joints, etc. For smithing you have proficiencies in toolsmithing, blade smithing, redsmithing, blacksmithing, etc. None are necessary, but they make a big impact on crafting times to any item with a matching proficiency tag.

The system sounds kinda complex when typed out, but the way it works in game is very intuitive since it maps so well to how real-life learning works.

 

[Jost Amman]

No, please, it's a game, we don't need any "realistic" and tedious crap.
If you like that either download a mod, or play a simulation game, you'll be happier.

 

[Syphon583]

While I think the game could use a more dynamic way of learning, please for the love of god, DO NOT make it realistic. I do not want to read a series of *books* in a certain order to learn something. That sounds tedious as hell. I also think you're getting hung up on semantics. Yes, in the game they're referred to as crafting magazines, but think of them any way you want. They work perfectly well they way they are.

If I were to suggest a change, it would be that magazines (or whatever the hell you want to call them) would help the player learn recipes, and reading additional magazines could increase your skill incrementally or be required to advance to the next tier. However, actually crating said item would be an alternate way to increase your crafting skill. Both are valid, and it could be made so that crafting would increase your skill a bit faster than reading. I still like the magazines for actually learning the recipe for each item/tier. Simply crafting a double barrel shotgun over and over again should NOT unlock the recipe for a pump action, for example.

 

[stallionsden]

Bottom line regarding learning: In actual reality, skill progression is in the form of a tree, where you alternate between theory and practice, and, while you can choose only to follow the main trunk, you can *also* spend time exploring its many, MANY branches that fractally subdivide and take you to some pretty interesting places once you have the prerequisites down pat.

Ignoring either theory OR practice while giving players mastery of a subject just doesn't work, as the sheer volume of bitter complaints has made perfectly clear. It isn't realistic OR believable, and we all know it.

What's more, most magazine articles only explore a tiny bit of one of the more interesting branches, and are only suited for those who already have some familiarity with the subject. If you actually want to *LEARN* about it, you need a textbook series that lays out the whole tree--or at least the main trunk--and you need to go through them in order to actually grasp what is being taught. (Yes, you can attempt to figure out calculus while you are still learning the basics of algebra, but you won't get very far, and you will be stumped very hard, very fast.)

PLEASE spend some time considering how to accurately reflect real-life learning in the game.

sheer volume???

a handful i would more say and that handful could be 10000 players but there are 25 million players whom dont want it... so your sheer numbers become irrelevant

 

[SabinSnake]

While I think the game could use a more dynamic way of learning, please for the love of god, DO NOT make it realistic. I do not want to read a series of *books* in a certain order to learn something. That sounds tedious as hell. I also think you're getting hung up on semantics. Yes, in the game they're referred to as crafting magazines, but think of them any way you want. They work perfectly well they way they are.

If I were to suggest a change, it would be that magazines (or whatever the hell you want to call them) would help the player learn recipes, and reading additional magazines could increase your skill incrementally or be required to advance to the next tier. However, actually crating said item would be an alternate way to increase your crafting skill. Both are valid, and it could be made so that crafting would increase your skill a bit faster than reading. I still like the magazines for actually learning the recipe for each item/tier. Simply crafting a double barrel shotgun over and over again should NOT unlock the recipe for a pump action, for example.

Yeah really. There's probably many kids that play this game and they wouldn't be able to understand stuff like what he's purposing. Not to mention it'd take forever to get anywhere.

 

[KeithFromCanada]

Ever play CDDA? It has pretty much what you're describing. Every skill has a 'theory' and 'practice' level. Theory is developed almost entirely through reading, practice is developed through doing. Theory dictates what you can attempt, practice dictates how good your attempt is. Practice level cannot go above theory level, and practice is subject to skill degradation if a skill isn't used for a long time however practice exp is given a generous buff whenever it is lower than theory exp, making it easy to recover. The result is that the optimal way to level is to spend time reading about a skill, and then spend some time putting what you've read into practice. If you're about to do a high value craft or use a skill in combat and you've not used the skill for a while, it pays to spend an in-game hour or 2 practicing to refresh yourself on it. To complement this, the game has 'practice recipes' for various levels of each skill which were added to replace the 'craft a bunch of useless crap to level up' problem. Practice recipes are far more material efficient, many of them having no material cost, and they give no output - they simply serve to provide a means to practice a skill (soldering simple circuits, operating lab equipment, carving a stick, etc).

For the 'branches' you're describing, it has proficiencies - more specialised aspects of skills that vastly improve the related actions once you master them. So in tailoring you only need a given skill level to make a pair of socks, but you'll do it a lot faster if you're proficient in stretch fabric working, sewing, articulated joints, etc. For smithing you have proficiencies in toolsmithing, blade smithing, redsmithing, blacksmithing, etc. None are necessary, but they make a big impact on crafting times to any item with a matching proficiency tag.

The system sounds kinda complex when typed out, but the way it works in game is very intuitive since it maps so well to how real-life learning works.

Even though I think fully implementing that system would be too far outside of what 7D2D is, it sounds amazing! An abbreviated practice mechanism wouldn't be too hard to implement, though, and would solve some issues, including wasting too many resources.

 

[KeithFromCanada]

While I think the game could use a more dynamic way of learning, please for the love of god, DO NOT make it realistic. I do not want to read a series of *books* in a certain order to learn something. That sounds tedious as hell. I also think you're getting hung up on semantics. Yes, in the game they're referred to as crafting magazines, but think of them any way you want. They work perfectly well they way they are.

If I were to suggest a change, it would be that magazines (or whatever the hell you want to call them) would help the player learn recipes, and reading additional magazines could increase your skill incrementally or be required to advance to the next tier. However, actually crating said item would be an alternate way to increase your crafting skill. Both are valid, and it could be made so that crafting would increase your skill a bit faster than reading. I still like the magazines for actually learning the recipe for each item/tier. Simply crafting a double barrel shotgun over and over again should NOT unlock the recipe for a pump action, for example.

As someone once said, what gamers want is not so much realistic as believable. Someone being completely proficient in crafting something after just reading some magazines only happens in the worst of power-fantasy, self-insertion isekai.

I'm not asking TFP to make 7D2D to BE realistic--that would completely suck for all but a half-dozen players--just MORE realistic and believable. ...like your excellent option.

 

[meganoth]

As someone once said, what gamers want is not so much realistic as believable. Someone being completely proficient in crafting something after just reading some magazines only happens in the worst of power-fantasy, self-insertion isekai.

I'm not asking TFP to make 7D2D to BE realistic--that would completely suck for all but a half-dozen players--just MORE realistic and believable. ...like your excellent option.

What is more believable:
A) As a complete weapons-noob I just start with building stone axes, build and build and refine and that way learn what needed societies about 2000 years of experimentation to finally produce steel and shape it into a working M60
B) As a complete weapons-noob I just start reading everything I can find about weapon crafting. I read so much about practically anything in detail until I have a complete theoretical knowledge of each miniature step of the process to actually build that M60

Both sound unbelievable for sure, but I would rate B a hundred times more believable than A. Because B can actually be done in a lifetime, maybe even only a year or a few years, A can not.

 

[theFlu]

Because B can actually be done in a lifetime, maybe even only a year

By ... reading. You were always of the optimist type... wait, that's usually Roland?

 

[Jost Amman]

wait, that's usually Roland?

It's spelled RoNald...

 

[meganoth]

By ... reading. You were always of the optimist type... wait, that's usually Roland?

I said that it both is unbelievable. And I really mean unbelievable, with a capital u and exclamations marks behind it. Probability below of a specific person getting hit by lightning. But I can compare them and it simply is an invaluable time saver to have the knowledge of 2000 years of civilization at hand.

Just think about what simply producing gunpowder would entail if you had no knoweldge about the ingredients. In the case of experimentation you would have to find the right ingredients out of hundreds or thousands of possible chemicals you don't even know how to get and mix them (maybe or maybe not applying heat, maybe adding water and cooking and drying, or some other chemical process steps). With a book in hand that simply explains each step it is somewhat easy and, importantly, much much faster.

If we look at it from another angle then both methods in 7d2d could be viewed as similar in respect to reality: In reality both knowledge gathering and experimentation are absolutely necessary. In 7d2d one of them is abstracted away and the other simplificated. Even if viewed like that you can't argue that LBD would be the more realistic method, at best it would be equivalent.

 

[theFlu]

I said that it both is unbelievable.

You did; and you also said it might be learnable in a year, read-only. An M60? I just found that funny, don't take it too seriously

Even if viewed like that you can't argue that LBD would be the more realistic method, at best it would be equivalent.

Depends a little on what type of crafting we're even imagining here. What are "Machine Gun Parts"? Ready made weapons, just disassembled? Why do we need more for a better one? Why do we need 5 cubic meters of steel to craft one..? If the thing already exists and all we need to do is to solve the puzzle of putting it together, reading helps, but trying to look at the stuff might let you assemble it as well. But if you actually have to manufacture a part, like the steel requirement would imply, practical attempts are required, reading might not be.

But yeah, a game shouldn't be judged by realism anyway, it's just for fun. Some people find LBD tedious and annoying, I find the magazine system exactly that. At least LBD let's me work towards a goal in a thematic fashion, the mailbox/nerd outfit system makes learning anything exactly the same; a byproduct of questing/traveling.

 

[meganoth]

You did; and you also said it might be learnable in a year, read-only. An M60? I just found that funny, don't take it too seriously

I said: "can actually be done in a lifetime, maybe even only a year or a few years". One year is just a lower bound of a much wider range, after thinking about it for a few seconds with absolutely no knowledge about weapon production and having heard the rumour that afghanistan weaponsmiths can build Ak74 in very basic metall workshops.
Don't take that estimate too serious. I could probably produce a much better estimate if I actually had read a few "magazines" of weapon crafting knowledge.

Depends a little on what type of crafting we're even imagining here. What are "Machine Gun Parts"? Ready made weapons, just disassembled? Why do we need more for a better one? Why do we need 5 cubic meters of steel to craft one..? If the thing already exists and all we need to do is to solve the puzzle of putting it together, reading helps, but trying to look at the stuff might let you assemble it as well. But if you actually have to manufacture a part, like the steel requirement would imply, practical attempts are required, reading might not be.

The steel requirement suggests you would need to craft missing or broken components. And that requires some knowledge, a lot more with missing parts. Practice depending on the difficulty of that process.

But yeah, a game shouldn't be judged by realism anyway, it's just for fun. Some people find LBD tedious and annoying, I find the magazine system exactly that. At least LBD let's me work towards a goal in a thematic fashion, the mailbox/nerd outfit system makes learning anything exactly the same; a byproduct of questing/traveling.

There are a different types of LBD: learning crafting by (doing) using the items, learning crafting by (doing) crafting, and learning using by (doing) using the item.
Not sure what we had in 7d2d in A16 and before, but I think it had at least two of them in A15 (I remember two of the "bad" examples, armor using would be learned by sitting on cactees, stone axes crafting by crafting stone axes).

And in my opinion, crafting by doing crafting is somewhat equivalent to learning by reading, I agree that there is not much difference here. I would not protest much if the magazines were replaced by lbd crafting by crafting. But many people who want LBD want the other forms as well (i.e. LBD complete) and that I would find massively restricting and railroady.

 

[theFlu]

But many people who want LBD want the other forms as well (i.e. LBD complete) and that I would find massively restricting and railroady.

Que Roland with "But you can use a weapon even if not skilled into it"..?

I'd love action skills to be learned (mostly) via using, makes for an investment; and unlocking the option to "improve via points on top of that" was a nice touch for some noticeable steps along the way. Crafting could even be earned by all 4 means, magazines, using that type of item, crafting that type of item and schematics. Sitting on a cactus should at best increase one's hide thickness ..

 

[zztong]

PLEASE spend some time considering how to accurately reflect real-life learning in the game.

Well that's the real trick now, isn't it. How people learn is an active area of research.

"Education" isn't my area of expertise, though I do teach, and my university likes to throw educational methods and techniques at us. I'm frequently reminded that not all students learn the same way or learn as much out of any specific modality as another student might. We're encouraged to use "Experiential Learning" but it comes with a certain reality that there has to be some conceptual learning first.

We could probably invent a flexible and easy hybrid system between conceptual (books) and experiential (doing), but it won't be accurate real-life learning and nobody would want that anyways considering most game end before the character has even aged a year. Folks want to go from knowing nothing to making a gyrocopter. I'd be willing to bet even if you were an aircraft mechanic before the apocalypse that you'd have trouble throwing together a gyrocopter from car parts... unless you had somebody's book to follow.

 

[Roland]

Seems I'm not needed here. It's all being done for me.