2 hours ago, Novamourne said:This is that age old "just don't care about it and it will be fine" argument. The entire progression of the game is pushed on the rails of this system. If there is no need for any particular person to open any particular container then why did they put a priority drop mechanism in place? Your mentality is to prioritize the fun of looting and having a normal game play loop over progressing and growing stronger. My mentality is that I want both a normal game play loop and for that loop to not actively be hindering progression.
Sounds like a good solution on paper, sure. We tried that too but guess what, because of the priority drop system, 9 times out of 10 whoever looted the box got a magazine from it that they specifically needed unless it was a box that didn't even have a chance to drop something they needed. In that event then, why not just pass on the container?
Bottom line is that normally, I'm what my friends refer to as "First Builder" and I stay home and do the crops and base defense. I can no longer play that way as if I'm not doing quest for rewards and Im not looting containers then Im not progressing because they receive a very minimal amount of the magazines that they don't specifically need themselves
The only way you can have fun with this system is to disregard the fact that it actively harms your growth if you play normally. The min/max argument doesn't even apply here because it's not extra steps to gain "a little more." The system actively punishes you for not playing this specific way. That's not min/maxing, that's mitigating bad design.
If the progression curve of the players had even the smallest chance of falling behind the progression curve of the difficulty of the game then I might agree with you that unless you prioritize the opening of containers to the best person suited to that container your progression would be hindered to the detriment of possibly losing the game and being overwhelmed by the zombies.
But both you and I know that isn't the case since it is phenomenally easy to quickly outpace what the game throws at us. If my group doesn't prioritize the opening of containers to maximize magazine distribution and just plays normally and your group does seek to maximize magazine boosts by each team member thus putting a strict limit on who opens any container then my group will be just be slightly ahead of the difficulty curve of the game while your group will be well beyond it almost from the very start. Personally, I would find your situation boring and a game of just rinsing and repeating all the activities without any challenge whereas my situation would carry risk and the possibility of being overwhelmed even if it still unlikely to happen.
I've played the game with 50% loot and still managed to keep pace with the game's difficulty progression. So the question really is why does your group feel the need to progress so quickly that you'll do it at the expense of keeping things simple and fun for everyone? If you loosened up your strict rules about who gets to open what container so that your team dynamic wasn't so complicated and unfun you'd STILL find yourselves ahead of the game progression curve. The excuse that you don't want to hinder your progression is irrelevant because you could slow your pace by quite a bit and still keep pace with the game so there isn't any effectual hinderance relative to the game in any case.