The new skill magazines are dividing my playgroup. An idea on how to make it better.

[globeadue]

My playgroup has 2 players that put 10+ hours a day into gaming together.
One player(lets call them "p3") that hops on for a intermittently throughout a day
One player that plays for a few hours a night.
We set out to play experimental stating the 2 daily players would be our crafters, and all magazines would go to them to craft for the group.
Today we learned that P3 has been learning all the magazines they want to learn, despite us discussing as a group how we would handle it.

P3 is being a jerk about this and I hate for this to ruin a friendship, so how to address the new system knowing players like P3 are out there?
P.S. I totally get where p3 is going on this, it feels lame to have pool our magazines like this and p3 doesn't get the fun of learning new things and making things if contributing to the greater good of the play group.

 

So how do we address this:
I would like to propose that that magazine skill be pooled amongst allies.
This would pool automatically from all allied players and the player need not be online to contribute to the pool.
This also keeps the game fun for players by letting them contribute to the team, and use what they loot.

P1 has 6 pistol mags learned and plays 6 hours a day
P2 has 1 pistol mags learned and plays on weekends
P3 has 4 pistol mags learned and plays 1 hour a night

All 3 players allied themselves together, and so their effective pistol crafting skill is 11.
Even with P2 and P3 offline, P1 has the effective skill of 11 when they play without P2 and P3 being online.
Say P3 stops being an ally, P1 effective skill is now 7.

I really hope something like this can be implemented. I really hate that this is dividing my play group the way it is now.
 

Edited June 18, 2023 by globeadue
typos (see edit history)

[Riamus]

I kind of like this pooling idea but it is still subject to the current balance issue where a larger group can increase their crafting far more quickly than a small group or solo player.  It even makes it slightly worse with this idea because you don't have those people who read the magazines instead of sharing them, which allows down overall progression.

 

But this might actually be a little easier to balance than the current system.  I think the biggest issue though is that if you play on a server where many people play off and on and join groups just for the day or whatever, this becomes more difficult to manage or balance.  Great for a 1-8 player hosted game but more of a problem with the large servers.

 

Still something worth considering.  Maybe something can be come up with to balance this.  It would be great if that could be done.

 

One other issue... Because you suggest this working when the other players are offline, there isn't anything preventing you from allying with a dozen or more players on those larger servers just to always get maxed perks with the first couple of days.  Probably would have to only work when online.

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by Riamus (see edit history)

[Roland]

I think the pooling of knowledge between allied players sounds pretty good on the surface. It would need to be tested and definitely would need a rebalancing of how many mags would be needed to progress to each milestone because groups would be learning a lot faster than single players. 
 

My biggest regret would be the loss of any need for coordination between players which my team really enjoyed. But if it turned out to help builders enjoy the game better and teams with P3 players then it might be a worthwhile trade off. 

[Lyote]

An easy alternative that wont feel quite so .. .weird, would be to have skill magazine probabilities be shared in parties. 

Basically, If i have a point into Advanced Engineering and my friend in party has a point in Shotguns, We would both see an increase in the probabilities of getting Workbench and Shotgun magazines. 
The effect wouldn't stack, But rather take the highest probability boost and apply that to the party.
Limit the range to the kill exp share range. 

Essentially, This means that if a party is looting a single POI, much like how Lootstage is shared, it doesn't matter which of us cracks the loot open. There will be a boosted chance of seeing relevant magazines to both of us. Not such that it makes additional magazines appear though.

Right now it's incredibly awkward, We've taken to only the person whose quest we're clearing opens *anything*. 
It just feels bad to not be able to even open a trash pile for fear of costing the other person a skill magazine. 

As a wild thought, Learn by Doing as a kind of pity system might be even better though. 
Not crafting a million stone shovels to make a perfect Steel Shovel like the old way, But rather have it so that actively using/repairing the relevant tool or crafting bench grants a small amount of exp towards the governing skill. 
So if i use my Stone Axe to cut down a ton of trees, I can eventually figure out how to craft a better Stone Axe. 
However, I'd make it so that you could never progress to Iron by using Stone. Just maxing out the quality of Stone and then using a magazine to break the barrier to the next tier. 
Finding the magazine would be faster, But if the exp per is set appropriately, it could make for a decent pity system over time to smooth out bad luck. Especially for 'Builders' who enjoy the resource acquisition and base building role within a friend group. 

[Riamus]

1 hour ago, Lyote said:

An easy alternative that wont feel quite so .. .weird, would be to have skill magazine probabilities be shared in parties. 

Basically, If i have a point into Advanced Engineering and my friend in party has a point in Shotguns, We would both see an increase in the probabilities of getting Workbench and Shotgun magazines. 
The effect wouldn't stack, But rather take the highest probability boost and apply that to the party.
Limit the range to the kill exp share range. 

Essentially, This means that if a party is looting a single POI, much like how Lootstage is shared, it doesn't matter which of us cracks the loot open. There will be a boosted chance of seeing relevant magazines to both of us. Not such that it makes additional magazines appear though.

Right now it's incredibly awkward, We've taken to only the person whose quest we're clearing opens *anything*. 
It just feels bad to not be able to even open a trash pile for fear of costing the other person a skill magazine. 

As a wild thought, Learn by Doing as a kind of pity system might be even better though. 
Not crafting a million stone shovels to make a perfect Steel Shovel like the old way, But rather have it so that actively using/repairing the relevant tool or crafting bench grants a small amount of exp towards the governing skill. 
So if i use my Stone Axe to cut down a ton of trees, I can eventually figure out how to craft a better Stone Axe. 
However, I'd make it so that you could never progress to Iron by using Stone. Just maxing out the quality of Stone and then using a magazine to break the barrier to the next tier. 
Finding the magazine would be faster, But if the exp per is set appropriately, it could make for a decent pity system over time to smooth out bad luck. Especially for 'Builders' who enjoy the resource acquisition and base building role within a friend group. 

That idea would potentially help solve not getting the perk boost for a party where someone only builds but this thread is talking about a player who will read magazines rather than share them, which your suggestion wouldn't solve.  Your idea is still a good thing to consider for the other issues. 

Regarding who loots, in my 2-person game (yes, it's not quite the same as a larger party), we don't care who opens something.  We didn't in A20 with lucky looter, either.  We just looted what we wanted and shared what we got.  Sure, it may not be the most efficient option but it meant we weren't fighting over who opened things or having to sit back while someone else opened everything, which to me isn't very fun.

[Lasher]

14 hours ago, globeadue said:

My playgroup has 2 players that put 10+ hours a day into gaming together.
One player(lets call them "p3") that hops on for a intermittently throughout a day
One player that plays for a few hours a night.
We set out to play experimental stating the 2 daily players would be our crafters, and all magazines would go to them to craft for the group.
Today we learned that P3 has been learning all the magazines they want to learn, despite us discussing as a group how we would handle it.

P3 is being a jerk about this and I hate for this to ruin a friendship, so how to address the new system knowing players like P3 are out there?
P.S. I totally get where p3 is going on this, it feels lame to have pool our magazines like this and p3 doesn't get the fun of learning new things and making things if contributing to the greater good of the play group.

 

So how do we address this:
I would like to propose that that magazine skill be pooled amongst allies.
This would pool automatically from all allied players and the player need not be online to contribute to the pool.
This also keeps the game fun for players by letting them contribute to the team, and use what they loot.

P1 has 6 pistol mags learned and plays 6 hours a day
P2 has 1 pistol mags learned and plays on weekends
P3 has 4 pistol mags learned and plays 1 hour a night

All 3 players allied themselves together, and so their effective pistol crafting skill is 11.
Even with P2 and P3 offline, P1 has the effective skill of 11 when they play without P2 and P3 being online.
Say P3 stops being an ally, P1 effective skill is now 7.

I really hope something like this can be implemented. I really hate that this is dividing my play group the way it is now.
 

 

Plenty of folk were worried that this was going to be the problem.

In solo play the new system doesn't have these effects - it's got it's own issues certainly but it's nowhere near as critical.

Once you're playing as  a group this can really make some players feel like they're being left behind.

 

I just can't quite imagine why this wasn't considered in the first place - it's not like they weren't warned about the possible effects.

[Lyote]

2 hours ago, Riamus said:

That idea would potentially help solve not getting the perk boost for a party where someone only builds but this thread is talking about a player who will read magazines rather than share them, which your suggestion wouldn't solve.  Your idea is still a good thing to consider for the other issues. 

Regarding who loots, in my 2-person game (yes, it's not quite the same as a larger party), we don't care who opens something.  We didn't in A20 with lucky looter, either.  We just looted what we wanted and shared what we got.  Sure, it may not be the most efficient option but it meant we weren't fighting over who opened things or having to sit back while someone else opened everything, which to me isn't very fun.

It would help, even with a selfish donkey reading every magazine without sharing. 
Reason being, the OP described a situation with at least 3 players. 
If 2 of them are looting, the guy who holds mags for the OP is going to get the boosted chance, with which they'll be able to share relevant magazines to the OP who isnt looting. 

In my first coop save, I was looting primarily, and my skills let me craft T5 Steel Spear by day 5, while my friend managed to only get to T1 Double Barrel, despite me feeding him any Shotgun drops i happened to come across. 
In the second save, we did the split looting, but all that did was cause us both to still be in pipe weapons by the time the horde rolled in. 

By making it so the party as a whole gets boosted odds for magazines relevant to each party member, even having just 1 player sharing can make a difference. 
Back in A20, lootstage was a party deal. So it didnt matter who opened a crate. But it does now, because the probability boosts are player specific. 
I am more likely to get a medical magazine in a medical pile than my friend is, so anytime he opens one we have effectively lost a medical magazine. Thats not a good system.
 

[pApA^LeGBa]

We don´t have troubles like OP in our group, but we recognized that the new system heavily favors everyone doing their own quest alone instead of doing them together. Same with the water in MP. Doing quests in a group is far worse now. I don´t play with friends to go questing alone.

Edited June 19, 2023 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[boban]

Quote

An idea on how to make it better.

 

Just play A20, and wait till modders fix the game.

 

40 minutes ago, Lasher said:

Plenty of folk were worried that this was going to be the problem.

(...)

I just can't quite imagine why this wasn't considered in the first place - it's not like they weren't warned about the possible effects.

 

You would think that after selling 14m copies they could afford to hire an experience game designer that knows what he is doing. And preferably product manager to keep them on track and to get to gold before 2030. The problem with that is that the founders would need to relinquish absolute control on the game.

[Ananais]

While I do think this is a reasonable request, and understand why OP would like it, as a primarily crafter and builder I do not think I would like it.

 

Other than balance issues and removing the need to keep and swap magazines between us, it feels like it would make the group crafter role obsolete, as even if I primarily focus on it myself I would never need to craft anything for anyone else, just be online to share my skills. Personally, I would rather just deal with the P3 type player than amend the game to avoid them not playing as part of the team.

 

I would however like the magazine boost chance to be group wide so that my looters higher skills would not end up leaving me behind for magazines they are giving to me rather than learning themselves.

[BFT2020]

Something to consider, the crafting bundles are boosted by perks also.  Something you can do is give those to the ones that won’t go out looting as their perks will affect the probability table when they open it.

[RipClaw]

1 hour ago, BFT2020 said:

Something to consider, the crafting bundles are boosted by perks also.  Something you can do is give those to the ones that won’t go out looting as their perks will affect the probability table when they open it.

Are they? I haven't checked the XML files, but I've been told that the bundles are random.

Edited June 19, 2023 by RipClaw (see edit history)

[BFT2020]

6 hours ago, RipClaw said:

Are they? I haven't checked the XML files, but I've been told that the bundles are random.

 

I believe so (but I can be wrong)

 

    <property class="Action0">
        <property name="Class" value="OpenLootBundle"/>
        <property name="Delay" value="0"/>
        <property name="Sound_start" value="close_garbage"/>
        <property name="LootList" value="questRewardSkillMagazines"/>
    </property>

 

This bundle is setup differently than all the others _referencing a Loot List) - see below for example of how they are done otherwise

 

    <property class="Action0">
        <property name="Create_item" value="vehiclesSkillMagazine,vehicleWheels,questRewardVehiclePartsBundle"/>
        <property name="Create_item_count" value="3,2,1"/>
        <property name="Random_item" value="vehicleMinibikeChassis,vehicleMinibikeHandlebars"/>
        <property name="Random_item_count" value="1,1"/>
        <property name="Random_count" value="1"/>
        <property name="Unique_random_only" value="true"/>
    </property>

 

Again, I could be wrong, but the fact that it is setup as a Loot Bundle class and refers to a loot list, makes me think loot probability is taking into consideration (also should tie into not getting any more magazines once you max out that crafting skill).  I might try some actual in game tests with a test save to see what I get.

[meganoth]

On 6/18/2023 at 8:08 PM, globeadue said:

My playgroup has 2 players that put 10+ hours a day into gaming together.
One player(lets call them "p3") that hops on for a intermittently throughout a day
One player that plays for a few hours a night.
We set out to play experimental stating the 2 daily players would be our crafters, and all magazines would go to them to craft for the group.
Today we learned that P3 has been learning all the magazines they want to learn, despite us discussing as a group how we would handle it.

P3 is being a jerk about this and I hate for this to ruin a friendship, so how to address the new system knowing players like P3 are out there?
P.S. I totally get where p3 is going on this, it feels lame to have pool our magazines like this and p3 doesn't get the fun of learning new things and making things if contributing to the greater good of the play group.

 

So how do we address this:
I would like to propose that that magazine skill be pooled amongst allies.
This would pool automatically from all allied players and the player need not be online to contribute to the pool.
This also keeps the game fun for players by letting them contribute to the team, and use what they loot.

P1 has 6 pistol mags learned and plays 6 hours a day
P2 has 1 pistol mags learned and plays on weekends
P3 has 4 pistol mags learned and plays 1 hour a night

All 3 players allied themselves together, and so their effective pistol crafting skill is 11.
Even with P2 and P3 offline, P1 has the effective skill of 11 when they play without P2 and P3 being online.
Say P3 stops being an ally, P1 effective skill is now 7.

I really hope something like this can be implemented. I really hate that this is dividing my play group the way it is now.
 

 

EDIT: Arrgh, missed that you said that you HAD discussed it in the group before. So evidently P3 had a change of heart later after playing it and instead of talking to you silently acted on it. Urrgh.

 

 

Maybe you should all have talked about it before and not two of you deciding for the rest (at least it sounds like you decided without asking P3).

 

While P3 was acting rather childish, if he were part of the initial discussion, he probably would have said immediately he seems to have found out later that he wants to read magazines as well.

 

Then you would have had an opportunity to assign magazines for group-relevant-items (workstations and farming/cooking come to mind) to the 2 always-on players and magazines for items only of interest to P3 to him for example.

 

Lets say he chose to go into PER then he would want to use spear and rifle magazines, so what's the harm if he reads them?

He could also get wrench-magazines in that case  even though it means the others might sometimes have to wait for a day to get a better wrench. He could also get to learn magazines of weapons nobody else was using. Or Armor, since armor crafting isn't something that has to be done asap and you often find alternatives in loot and at the trader.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by meganoth (see edit history)

[8_Hussars]

The age of the "base builders" are over with the introduction of magazines. (not really)

Therefore loading up two "crafters" with every magazine is a little short sighted.

Players need to be able to play and advance their class.  The strength player is the crafter for tools (mn69er), the agility player knives and pistols, the fortitude player machine guns and nucks, the intellect player workstations and vehicles, etc.  That way everyone advances down their own tree and all can specialize sooner, so all individuals can craft their specialties for the group.  For those not assigned decide before hand who is farming, etc. and distribute books appropriately.    

This is a group dynamic issue which cannot be solved with game mechanics or forced sharing.

Not to be jerk but most people learned to share in preschool.  If P3 wants to play solo while in a party let them.  Lock the communal loot chest(s) with a code and let them loot magazines to their hearts content.  Reward their sharing or contributing to the group with sharing back.   

Edited June 21, 2023 by 8_Hussars (see edit history)

[meganoth]

Had to edit my previous post heavily above because I missed something in the OPs description. But it seems clear that normally in groups of players everyone wants to have a piece of the cake, loot, magazine stack, ... .  In my group as well, I myself pushed for our group dividing up the end loot room boxes of a POI  because I wanted to open a fair share as well.

 

(I said normally, I am sure there are groups who, after playing some and knowing what it will mean, might choose to give all magazines to one or two people and live happily ever after)

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by meganoth (see edit history)

[pApA^LeGBa]

The bad thing about this system is, that builders/miners/crafters who could perfectly have a lot of fun with doing no looting at all, are now forced to go out looting, something they don´t like to do. The people going out looting bringing back magazines isn´t enough to keep up and you also get no parts for those skills.

 

It sucks bigtime that you have no choice anymore regarding your playstyle. In SP i usually did several playtroughs, with either very less looting, no quests, no trader and some with heavy looting and quests plus all what´s inbetween. Hoping for mods soon. I still don´t get why they wanna force a playstyle so hard. This reduces replayability a lot. Not gonna do a second playtrough of A21 for sure. It will be exactly the same, so why bother.

 

Pretty sure there is already groups that stopped playing or lost their stay at home players. We only keep playing because we know mods will propably fix this. If this game wouldn´t have mods this would be the end.

Edited June 21, 2023 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[meganoth]

20 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

The bad thing about this system is, that builders/miners/crafters who could perfectly have a lot of fun with doing no looting at all, are now forced to go out looting, something they don´t like to do. The people going out looting bringing back magazines isn´t enough to keep up and you also get no parts for those skills.

 

It sucks bigtime that you have no choice anymore regarding your playstyle. In SP i usually did several playtroughs, with either very less looting, no quests, no trader and some with heavy looting and quests plus all what´s inbetween. Hoping for mods soon. I still don´t get why they wanna force a playstyle so hard. This reduces replayability a lot. Not gonna do a second playtrough of A21 for sure. It will be exactly the same, so why bother.

 

Pretty sure there is already groups that stopped playing or lost their stay at home players. We only keep playing because we know mods will propably fix this. If this game wouldn´t have mods this would be the end.

 

So you said, at least once in every thread.