Numberz

Yeah, that is a good point. It’s too many quests. I’ve changed my mind. Perhaps a compromise where all get credit on the tier progress and get a reward but only the quest holder gets the Dukes?

My 2 cents… Every member of a group getting Dukes and Reward from the trader was quite OP. The quests themselves also become exponentially easier the more participants there are. Incentivizing co-op play should be a thing for sure but the rewards need to be scaled back considerably for the participants who are not the quest holder.

FYI, I believe that the additions to the windows and xui files are unnecessary here. Only the new block should be needed - seems to work with only the block for me. My understanding is that the dew collector ui cannot be modified as it is hard coded at this time. Only the ConvertToItem and some of the other block properties can be changed.

I think it would be interesting if the player could choose the quest tier from the trader from day 1 instead of only being able to select quests at or below the current tier. The obvious benefit would be avoiding having to slog through lower tier quests when finding a new trader after having completed some tiers at the "home" or other traders already. Conversely, to balance this and to discourage taking quests that are above the player's capability, implement some kind of reputation system where failing a quest brings about some moderately punishing trader-related consequences (eg. higher prices ? TBD).

Hello, Are there any plans to increase the block limit from 32K before gold? With all of the added shapes into the shapes menu, I was able to reach 32K pretty quickly just adding a few new "shapes" types/textures.

Fixed: Workbench crafting tool mod dupe Does this mean workstations can now have more than 3 crafting tools without creating a dupe issue or does this refer to something entirely different?

Having run a dedicated server with a form of learn by looting for the past year, what I have observed is that people still tend toward specialization. Most, but certainly not all, players that group into parties will dedicate into specific skills. Or or two will try to max vehicles, one of two in building and construction, one or two in weapons, etc. The magazines which are brought back to be shared are typically only done so after those who have specialized have already maxxed out the skill. If I can make a suggestion, if each skill had multiple tiers of magazines such that tier 1 magazines are of no benefit to a player who has already achieved a certain skill level and so on, it may go some way to promoting the type of equitable play style that you are describing.

Yes, it is certainly possible to do this using player level. You will need to use a perk to manage the recipe unlocks and the scaling of the ammo cost. Look at how the tags="perkAdvancedEngineering" is used in both the progression and recipes files to see how the cost scaling is done. Set up the perk with a base_skill_point_cost="0" and use level requirements similar to the below: <level_requirements level="5"><requirement name="PlayerLevel" operation="GTE" value="25" desc_key="reqPlayerLevel25"/></level_requirements> You can then use a buff the automatically increment the perk level when the player level reaches the right number. Use the following example in the buffStatusCheck01 to see how you can trigger a small buff to run that will increment your perk based on player level change: <triggered_effect trigger="onSelfBuffUpdate" action="AddBuff" buff="buffLevelUpTracking"> <requirement name="PlayerLevel" operation="GT" value="@$LastPlayerLevel"/> </triggered_effect>

I think you need to add <property name="Material" value="M44MagnumParts"/> to this item.

Roland, while I would agree that your compromise sounds reasonable, you and I both know that it will be ridiculed as a sharp stick and will never, ever be allowed to happen.

I took the liberty of condensing your post. No offense intended. 1/2. Of course it is more performant. You are taking what some of us find to be a valuable time sink and reducing it into nothing more than base decoration. Don't we already have enough workstations that offer nothing in terms of gameplay? It may be hard to believe but some of us enjoy the early parts of the game and all of the quirky mechanics and time sinks much more than the late game FPS aspects. I usually quit and start over once vehicles beyond minibikes are unlocked and tier 3 weapons appear. 3. Bandits and NPCs? Truthfully, do you really think that the AI for these will offer any real challenge or even interest beyond a few hours? I'm not too sure. Frankly, I think TFP would be better served to forget NPCs and bandits beyond a very rudimentary implementation and focus more on PvP. I just don't think there is any way that we can ever agree... and that is ok. You want a pure looter-shooter. I came to the game more for survival-crafting. The issue is just that it is the survival-crafting that is always getting stepped on to the point that much of the character or, as some may put it, flavor is being excised from the game. The problem with simplification is that it tends to go too far and the baby gets thrown out with the bath water. For instance, this is why we no longer have a thoughtful repair system in the game. For that matter, why is item degradation still in the game? Repair kits are now irrelevant, so isn't degradation now pointless too? On a positive note, the new shape menu sounds great.

For myself, I prefer option 2. Being able to spend points to raise a skill just seems cheaty and counter to the spirit of it. For the perks though, I see no reason not to use increasing costs and skill point multipliers.

The guns in A16 mostly used the default ActionExp which I think was 2 and it too was based on only registering with hits and kills. The value was not listed in the xml which is why you didn’t see it. The problem in A16 was that the code did not discriminate with regards to the type of hits, so it gave rise to the possibility of exploitation (ie hitting the ground). I think this is where A17 has an advantage in that it can differentiate.

Great work. Looking forward to seeing more. As a suggestion, I would look at A16.4 items.xml and for the XP values, perhaps try to follow the ActionExp and associated multipliers. While they may apply differently to A17, here are the base values I used for balancing in A16.4 where I modified the progression so that all skills were leveled through the use of the ActionExp: Initial XP to Level (XP Mulitplier - 1.03) Blunt Weapons: 100 Blade Weapons: 100 Mining Tools: 500 (multiplier 1.06 - auger added to this group) Construction Tools: 300 (multiplier 1.04 - fireaxes,nailgun,chainsaw added to this group) Hanguns (Pistol/Magnum): 75 Blunderbuss: 75 (separate from shotguns) Shotguns: 75 Rifles (Hunting/Sniper): 75 Archery: 100 Guns: Pistol Magazine: 15 ActionExp: 4 Kill XP Multiplier 3 Initial Shots to Level: 19 Magnum Magazine: 6 ActionExp: 6 Kill XP Multiplier 2 Initial Shots to Level: 13 Blunderbuss Magazine: 1 ActionExp: 2 (x8.5 approximate) Kill XP Multiplier 2 Initial Shots to LEvel: 5 Shotguns Magazine: 8 ActionExp: 1 (x7 approximate) Kill XPMultiplier 2 Initial Shots to Level: 11 MP5 Magazine: 30 ActionExp: 3 Kill XP Multiplier 4 Initial Shots to Level: 26 AK47 Magazine: 30 ActionExp: 4 Kill XP Multiplier 3 Initial Shots to Level: 19 HuntingRifle Magazine: 2 ActionExp: 7 Kill XP Multiplier 2 Initial Shots to Level: 11 SniperRifle Magazine: 5 ActionExp: 7 Kill XPMultiplier 2 Initial Shots to Level: 11