Uncle Al
Active member
I'd offer a counter argument that if traders offer loot that, quality wise, is slightly worse than the average you're looting, traders remain worthwhile without being overpowering. The reason being you can pick and choose with traders, so you're only buying stuff you haven't been able to find. Loot and trader stock are both somewhat random, but within that quite large random pool of trader stock you only buy whatever stuff is good for you. You also have the option to save dukes and/or go to another trader. That means bought loot is inherently high value, although what is high value will vary from player to player and from day to day with the same player.So trader stage is in development for A21. My question is how do you plan on balancing the traders vs looting? Currently the trader circumvents the majority of loot/gamestage progression and if it is over tuned and the trader becomes worse than loot why interact with them? Trading needs to be at worst, slightly better than what you are looting or else it isn't rewarding enough to justify it
If you're looting mostly Q3 weapons, but you really want a crossbow and none are dropping, the trader selling a Q2 crossbow isn't useless, it's great. If the trader is selling/rewarding Q5s you're probably never going to keep anything you loot.
It seems much more sensible, design wise, to have traders as a safety net for unfortunate looting results, rather than the primary source of good gear.