Bring back water jars or let us craft them!

[theFlu]

29 minutes ago, meganoth said:

The former, though I would assume that a veteran player doesn't need that safety net anyway. A fire extinguisher is a safety net for fire, it doesn't imply there is something different avaliable to help with flooding 😉

You mean to say adding filters to the trader was a way for newbies to start floods? ... Just kidding  

 

33 minutes ago, meganoth said:

It is a major difference since the 6 year old would get no ice cream or has to go to his room because he deliberately did it. Grandpa would still get his ice cream.

And you're still just leaving the milk on the floor in both cases. Yes, socially it would matter. But we have no way to send TFP to his room, so we can only hope they're actually a grandpa and will figure out there's milk on the floor, either on their own or at least when told so. I'm telling him so. If he did it on purpose, well, sucks to be me standing in the puddle, at that point the best I can do is to step away from it. And maybe come back to spamloot a few POIs in A22 and see if my socks still get wet then.

 

Yeh, some of the devs read the forum and likely do get ideas from here. But our speculations on "why they've done thing X" are just noise; if we're wrong, it's just a mental tripwire to miss the actual feedback, and even in the rare case we get it right, it's not really going to assist them in addressing anything as they will still have other goals to meet.

[pApA^LeGBa]

Haven´t we already been at the point where roland said he just assumed that they are removing the jars for that reason? I really need to take screenshots. Well in this case it isn´t too far back to search, like when someone from the team claimed the spawn slider is only temporarily removed for balancing reasons. And now we get crossplay and i am 100% sure that slider will never come back due to console hardware limitations.

[Roland]

No assuming when it comes to the removal of jars. TFP fully planned on removing them regardless of any changes to early water survival. Removing jars was a top priority and I saw nothing in dev chat to indicate that the priority has changed. I can't guarantee that jars will never be returned as a craftable item or as a lootable item but I think it is highly unlikely. In addition, I have heard that there has been a lot of cleaning up of unused code as well as part of their efforts to optimize and release on consoles.

 

If you want to read an actual assumption of mine then here it is: It may be that even modders will have to use their own assets for empty water containers in the future.

[Rotor]

3 minutes ago, Roland said:

No assuming when it comes to the removal of jars. TFP fully planned on removing them regardless of any changes to early water survival. Removing jars was a top priority and I saw nothing in dev chat to indicate that the priority has changed. I can't guarantee that jars will never be returned as a craftable item or as a lootable item but I think it is highly unlikely. In addition, I have heard that there has been a lot of cleaning up of unused code as well as part of their efforts to optimize and release on consoles.

 

If you want to read an actual assumption of mine then here it is: It may be that even modders will have to use their own assets for empty water containers in the future.

 

Was there any consideration to play changes or were those un intended consequences?

[Roland]

Jars were removed about 8 months before A21 released. There was a lot of testing and experiencing of the consequences and subsequent development of the early water survival because of it. I don't know whether there were any consequences that caught them by surprise at the time but you can bet that by time the game released to the public, any and all consequences were fully considered. 

 

The biggest complaint I see is immersion. Unfortunately, not everyone is affected the same way by immersion. When I first experienced the change it was shocking for sure. But I quickly grasped that empty jars weren't really gone, they were just abstracted like many aspects of the game and I made the adjustment. The devs had long made the adjustment in their own thinking since it was their plan for even longer. Many gamers have made the adjustment since the release. But there are still quite a few who can't get past it and it destroys their sense of immersion and it upsets them. That's understandable. But it makes the issue of whether there is an objectively bad consequence somewhat murky. The "bad" consequence of nuked immersion is just not a universal result for everyone. The same is true for the fun factor of the process of solving water needs. Some think it is much better than the before and others see it as tedious and boring and much worse.

 

So since there really is no consensus among gamers it really just comes down to what the devs, themselves, want and they've crafted something they like. They aren't negatively affected by the immersion factor and they are having fun with what they created and despite the polar views expressed heatedly here, on steam, on reddit, on discord, on x, etc. the change hasn't had any kind of negative impact on player numbers, reviews, or the game's popularity.

 

In fact, I'm willing to bet that we will see more development to the current water survival gameplay rather than any reverting back to the way it was-- especially in regards to empty jars.

 

 

Edited January 27 by Roland (see edit history)

[Rotor]

I meant with the emphasis that the change brought about, of having to dedicate much much more time, and effort, into looting and much more reliance on the trader.

[Roland]

Yeah, but Joel and Rick both really enjoy looting and clearing POIs and harvesting stuff with a wrench to get components. That is a major source of fun for them when they play.  They also like the traders and want them to be a big part of the game. I know some players would like to see them diminished in the game but it isn't their game.

 

Finally, Both Joel and Rick are roleplay-type gamers who care more about playing the game like an unfolding story. They aren't concerned with progressing quickly at the expense of giving up the story by playing organically at the expense of only caring about being optimal in leveling up and progressing to the top quickly. Joel calls that playing the game like a spreadsheet and he doesn't subscribe to that playstyle.

 

At the same time they aren't going to put in a bunch of restrictions to prevent players from using the trader to the max and following strategies to get all the magazines as quickly as possible. Players can choose to play the game more organically and do a mix of all the different activities available to them or min-max the hell out of everything even to the point of stressing about how many decimal points of heat one more dew collector is going to add.

 

I don't think they will do much to change things, tbh, beyond tweaking the balance a bit so that crafting isn't so quickly and easily outpaced by loot, trader inventories, and quest rewards. But even after they do their thing, I will bet you that someone who pushes quests will still end up outpacing their ability to craft with the rewards they get. If people go into the harder biomes early then the loot they find will often be better than what they can craft.

[katarynna]

A partial solution to some of the complaints would be to simply add more destroyed dew collectors to different pois. add them to all the traders and maybe farms, or whichever they choose.

 

That would eliminate the need to use the trader to obtain water filters, but of course the "no looting playstyle" would remain affected.

[pApA^LeGBa]

Well there we have it, it´s not about water. Or the need for a new crafting skill system. It´s about using POI´s and the trader. Wich they could do all day long with the old system aswell. It´s not about their personal preference but forcing a playstyle onto everyone imo.  Still need to search for that jar thing though.

 

If you have quests and a trader, you need to balance that. It´s not the players job to balance the game with their playstyle and avoid quests and traders to not outpace the need of crafting.  You can´t just go and say, well it´s your fault that you do quests everyday and mess up balance by doing so.

 

If a system is easily abusable by min/maxing it´s not a good system and needs to be reconsidered. It´s not the players fault. It´s the devs that make it possible.

 

 

 

Edited January 27 by pApA^LeGBa (see edit history)

[meganoth]

2 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

Well there we have it, it´s not about water. Or the need for a new crafting skill system. It´s about using POI´s and the trader.

 

You have a severe case of selective reading IMHO. The water change IS about water and removing jars. Just that Roland additionally said that Joel and Rick have zero problems with choosing trader-centric solutions for a problem.

 

Before I get the "semantics" argument back, this just means it is no use arguing with "trader gets too powerful" with them, the central game loop of doing quests for the trader is a given. I still see no reason for them to be against an increase of filter probability in loot for example.

 

Edited January 27 by meganoth (see edit history)

[BFT2020]

3 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

Well there we have it, it´s not about water. Or the need for a new crafting skill system. It´s about using POI´s and the trader. Wich they could do all day long with the old system aswell. It´s not about their personal preference but forcing a playstyle onto everyone imo.  Still need to search for that jar thing though.

 

I feel like if someone needs to mod in tin foil hats for you.

 

Also look up confirmation bias and see if that applies in this situation.

Edited January 27 by BFT2020 (see edit history)

[BFT2020]

11 hours ago, Roland said:

 In addition, I have heard that there has been a lot of cleaning up of unused code as well as part of their efforts to optimize and release on consoles.

 

Not part of this original thread, but I have been cleaning up the unused code myself when I mod items in the game.  My OCD just can't stand the old code commented out when I copy an item to make a slightly less powerful repaired version.  BFT2020 approves  👍

[Rotor]

8 hours ago, Roland said:

Yeah, but Joel and Rick both really enjoy looting and clearing POIs and harvesting stuff with a wrench to get components. That is a major source of fun for them when they play.  They also like the traders and want them to be a big part of the game. I know some players would like to see them diminished in the game but it isn't their game.

 

Fair enough "fuhgeddaboudit".

 

I hope still mod enabled when all said an done.

 

Quote

Joel calls that playing the game like a spreadsheet and he doesn't subscribe to that playstyle.

 

On that we can agree....hence it would be nice not get funneled, but it is what it is.

[theFlu]

52 minutes ago, Rotor said:

On that we can agree....hence it would be nice not get funneled, but it is what it is.

Heh, ye, the spreadsheet for the current iteration.. no matter how many rows you fill, the answer is "Go Quest".

[Roland]

6 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

Well there we have it, it´s not about water. Or the need for a new crafting skill system. It´s about using POI´s and the trader. Wich they could do all day long with the old system aswell. It´s not about their personal preference but forcing a playstyle onto everyone imo.  Still need to search for that jar thing though.

 

That's not what I was saying. All I'm saying is that the removal of jars was something they wanted separate from any desire to change water survival or crafting systems and no matter how they may alter such things in the future, they won't be including the return of empty jars for any conceivable new iteration.  The desire to remove empty jars came first and then the changes to water survival came second. It was not a desire to change the water survival game and the best way they thought to do that was to remove jars. 

 

Also, they aren't making changes FOR THE PURPOSE OF forcing players to use the traders and explore POIs more. It's just that they aren't shy about utilizing the trader and POI exploration in the game. They don't have any of your hangups about it so they will readily incorporate those things unapologetically. Of course there are fans of the game (maybe former fans now) who dislike the trader and/or dislike clearing POIs for quests or otherwise and these people hate the changes. That's fair. But it is also fair and not at all sleazy or unethical or a betrayal on TFP's part to expect them to mod the game to their liking since their liking is at odds with the likings of the game's creators.

 

6 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

If you have quests and a trader, you need to balance that. It´s not the players job to balance the game with their playstyle and avoid quests and traders to not outpace the need of crafting.  You can´t just go and say, well it´s your fault that you do quests everyday and mess up balance by doing so.

 

It's funny that you accuse the devs of desiring to force one playstyle on everyone as their motivation for these changes and then immediately call upon them to force players to play a certain way instead of leaving it up to their choice. I never said they won't work to balance the pacing of obtaining things through crafting vs obtaining things in loot, trader inventories, and quest rewards. But I don't believe they will ever put much work into trying to stop min/maxers from playing how they wish. Min/maxers have been doing their thing since the inception of RPG elements into the game. From the moment in Alpha 11 that quality tiers were added to tools and weapons and crafting the same item over and over increased the quality (with a random + or - 50) there were players who began to min/max and the complaining about the optimal path and how people were forced to follow that path began. It will never end, either. Right now the optimal path is spam questing so those who optimize claim that you must do that. In the past the optimal path was something else. There was even a time when a bug made harvesting grass the fastest way to level up and until the bug was fixed...you guessed it, people complained that TFP was forcing them beat up grass.

 

And let's be honest. Some people like playing the game that way. Why should they be blocked from their brand of fun when all it is is a choice for how you want to play.

 

6 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

If a system is easily abusable by min/maxing it´s not a good system and needs to be reconsidered. It´s not the players fault. It´s the devs that make it possible.

 

I think closing exploits and abusive strategies is important for many games where there is a scripted story that you don't want the player to bypass in inapropriate ways, or strict levels that you don't want the player to bypass, or a puzzle that is supposed to have a single solution and you don't want the puzzle broken or bypassed, or if the primary aim of the game is to provide a fair field for competitive play.

 

This game is a bit different. It has a decidedly open world sandbox vibe about it with no scripted story at all. Even the parts that are supposed to be puzzle like (Dungeon POIs) can easily be broken and bypassed due to the nature of the world. People have the freedom to play this game so many different ways (yes, even still today). The devs leave a lot of things to player choice. In fact, POI clearing is a great example of the dev's philosophy. They could put a trader zone around a POI once you enter and start exploring to force the player to play the puzzle as it is intended without doing any workarounds. Or they can do as they do now and leave it mostly to player choice. Some explore via the intended path, some destroy locked doors and break through ceilings and walls to leave the path, and some nerdpole to the roof and then find the treasure room immediately. If you leave the intended path you can experience oddities with the sleeper spawning and come upon enemies faced the wrong direction and see them in weird unnatural positions and places that you wouldn't witness if you had followed the path. If you go straight to the loot room you get all the rewards with none of the hastle.

 

TFP doesn't care. It's player choice and people are mostly happy with the choices they make. There are just a small percentage who continually make a choice they despise but just can't help themselves. Why should TFP make POIs like trader compounds simply to force everyone to follow the intended path just because of those few people who leave the path but hate themselves for it? They shouldn't as long as this game continues to claim sandbox elements.

 

Same goes for use of the trader. Abuse it or don't.

 

3 hours ago, Rotor said:

On that we can agree....hence it would be nice not get funneled, but it is what it is.

 

Well, just keep in mind that he doesn't feel funneled because of how he approaches the game. Fact.

 

He probably figures that people who do feel funneled are just doing it to themselves because of how they approach the game. Assumption.

[Roland]

2 hours ago, theFlu said:

Heh, ye, the spreadsheet for the current iteration.. no matter how many rows you fill, the answer is "Go Quest".

 

Only for those who care about progressing quickly. If a slower more natural progression is your choice then questing is just part of the gameplay and not dominant playstyle. You call that "gimping yourself" but that is because your perspective and priority seem to be on leveling up. Since your priority is to level up then, of course, doing anything other than questing is going to be sandbagging your game. 

 

There will always be something at the end of every row for you. If they change the balance so that questing is no longer the best path and instead mining edges out everything else as the most optimal way to level up then that will be the new complaint. For those who enjoy mining and hated questing they will be overjoyed. For those who loved questing but hate mining it will be the death of the game.  All of the authors of threads complaining about forced gameplay will change but the complaint will be the same. This isn't speculation. It's history. Since Alpha 11 the optimal way to level up has changed several times and the forum complaints followed those changes in exactly the way I describe. It is inevitable that one way to level up will outshine the rest and that is always labeled as the playstyle TFP is "forcing".

 

So the devs should just stick to what they like since there is never a solution possible that will please everyone as long as they want to maintain open world sandbox elements in their game. For sure they could fix things by imposing restrictions that prevent players from spamming whatever activity currently reigns as the optimal path but then that is ACTUALLY forcing players to play in a certain way compared to now where it is left up to player choice but since some individuals lack the will or desire do anything but optimize, they claim they are being forced.

 

My solution would be to try and balance things up some more and then add options to increase the number of quests needed to graduate to the next tier and to limit the number of quests that can be taken from a trader per week. This way people can diminish the power of questing in their game if they wish but for those who love the current influence that quests have on the game they can still have it.

 

For those who can't resist questing and hate it but also refuse to toggle the option to limit themselves....there's just no hope for those people. They want to min/max and they want to complain about it. That's their true game of choice.

Edited January 27 by Roland (see edit history)

[theFlu]

8 minutes ago, Roland said:

Only for those who care about progressing quickly.

Not really. You want cobblestone? Buying it from the trader is the most effective way. You want Concrete? Well, you either buy it from the trader, or go loot books to make your mixer. You want water to survive? It's in the toilets of those POIs. You want ammo? Infection quests are the bees knees for that.

 

There's not a problem in the game that isn't best served by questing atm. Yes, you can faff about in the game, there's plenty of leeway outside anything resembling optimal; but the best answer to any need you can come up with is "Go Quest". Early game even more so, as you can't cover your drinking water without looting in the first days.

 

The only thing that comes close is "I want to build a large base early game and the trader isn't selling me enough cobble." You'd optimally mine & dig, but even in that case, you'll need to have a decent amount of questing done for your filters etc, or a decent surplus of water from loot. And the tools for the mining will need to be from questing as well.

 

I'm not even saying it's a bad thing (atm), it just is how it is. What I feel about it is irrelevant.

[Roland]

6 hours ago, theFlu said:

Yes, you can faff about in the game

 

"faff about"

"gimping yourself"

 

I get it. Leveling up is serious business and if you aren't actively leveling in the fastest way possible you're just faffing around and gimping yourself. 

 

I'm not saying there isn't more balancing that needs to be done. But I suspect there will be people who are focused on primarily leveling up that will never be satisfied. There are just too many people who have divergent preferences for what they want to repeatedly do to gain their levels at a fast enough pace. When it was killing zombies then if you weren't killing zombies you were just faffing about. When it was using dukes if you weren't sprinting around to every trader to buy and sell then you were just faffing about. When it was upgrading blocks then if you weren't building your base you were just faffing about.  When the grass bug was present, if you weren't punching grass then you were just faffing about. When it was crafting if you weren't in your base tending your craft stations and spam crafting then you were just faffing about.

 

Meanwhile faffing about has always been a fun and rewarding way to play for those who can make the choice to do it.

[theFlu]

3 minutes ago, Roland said:

Leveling up is serious business

Dude, stop. I made a one-liner lame joke about the "min-maxer spreadsheets" all pointing to questing. It was a silly mental image of a greenbordered excel sheet with an unending "Go Quest" -column. Now you're berating me for being a tryhard, even when I'm here to advocate FOR removing quest spam as the ONLY thing to do in the game.

 

Give back natural water, unbind crafting from spamlooting, does that change the min max AT ALL? Do I care? I want those things so I can enjoy my chilliest playthroughs, that I've enjoyed the most about the game; slooowly progressing through building a massive fortress in the middle of nowhere. The chill playstyle I enjoy has been made IMPOSSIBLE by the changes introduced in A21.

 

If you think that's the min-maxer in me, then just **** off.

[Rotor]

53 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

"faff about"

"gimping yourself"

 

I get it. Leveling up is serious business and if you aren't actively leveling in the fastest way possible you're just faffing around and gimping yourself. 

 

I'm not saying there isn't more balancing that needs to be done. But I suspect there will be people who are focused on primarily leveling up that will never be satisfied. There are just too many people who have divergent preferences for what they want to repeatedly do to gain their levels at a fast enough pace. When it was killing zombies then if you weren't killing zombies you were just faffing about. When it was using dukes if you weren't sprinting around to every trader to buy and sell then you were just faffing about. When it was upgrading blocks then if you weren't building your base you were just faffing about.  When the grass bug was present, if you weren't punching grass then you were just faffing about. When it was crafting if you weren't in your base tending your craft stations and spam crafting then you were just faffing about.

 

Meanwhile faffing about has always been a fun and rewarding way to play for those who can make the choice to do it.

 

I am definitely not a min/maxer.  

 

The current  is way less sandboxy.

[theFlu]

[Roland]

22 hours ago, theFlu said:

Dude, stop. I made a one-liner lame joke about the "min-maxer spreadsheets" all pointing to questing. It was a silly mental image of a greenbordered excel sheet with an unending "Go Quest" -column. Now you're berating me for being a tryhard, even when I'm here to advocate FOR removing quest spam as the ONLY thing to do in the game.

 

A few things. It's not your joke about a spreadsheet that I disagree with you. It is the way in which you continually (not just in this thread) characterize doing anything other than the most effective/easiest way to do things. I just don't agree that players must choose the optimal choice or they're not really playing. Your spreadsheet is funny and even more so now that I don't have to use my imagination.

 

Secondly, I'm not berating you for being a tryhard. The only thing I don't respect is anyone who knowingly makes choices to play in a way that will ruin the game for themself and then complain about it. People who want to min/max and have fun and enjoy their playstyle....I am happy for them. I would never berate them for doing something that makes them happy. So however you like to play is fine by me and I wouldn't berate you for that.

 

Finally, you keep missing my point: There is no NEED to remove quest spam as the ONLY thing to do in the game because it isn't the ONLY thing to do in the game. I disagree with the entire premise of your advocacy. I mean, if they want to adjust things so you cannot spam quests and are forced to do them more infrequently that's not going to affect me much since I already do them less frequently by choice. But there will be a lot of people who enjoy spam questing and don't have all the hangups about doing it that you do who will be upset because then they will be forced to change how they play.

 

22 hours ago, theFlu said:

Give back natural water, unbind crafting from spamlooting, does that change the min max AT ALL? Do I care? I want those things so I can enjoy my chilliest playthroughs, that I've enjoyed the most about the game; slooowly progressing through building a massive fortress in the middle of nowhere. The chill playstyle I enjoy has been made IMPOSSIBLE by the changes introduced in A21.

 

If it was so chill it wouldn't be made impossible by the changes in A21. A massive fortress in the middle of nowhere might indeed be too challenging a task to do from the moment you spawn in on Day one. But, I have to say, that a massive fortress in the middle of nowhere sounds more like an endgame base to me. Why should someone be able to start on something like that from the very start of the game which is all about progressing from weakness to strength. If you really are playing a chill game what is wrong with building up your skills and strength for a few weeks and then move to the remote wilderness and build that massive fortress? The fact that you were able to build something like that from day one in the past seems kind of an exploit that bypasses the natural progression of creating better and better shelter as the capability to do so is attained.

 

There are indeed problems with the current progression and I acknowledge that traders are OP and easy to rely upon compared to other methods to get the things you need. But I disagree that anyone is forced to choose the trader and questing to solve everything. I literally play in a way that, to me, feels more natural than just spamming quests and I'm having fun and the trader and questing is just one aspect of the game for me. So just don't believe it when someone claims that quest spamming is the only way. I've proven time and again it is not. But your response to me choosing to keep the traders to a minimum influence in my game is that I'm just faffing around. I don't know what that means if it doesn't mean to you that I could just have that concrete today if I use the trader instead of a few weeks if I wait to be able to build a mixer, and craft the stuff for myself and I'd be a fool for not just getting today because any other choice is idiocy. Nah, its just chill. I'm fine with using a cobblestone and wood base until I can get the concrete mixer myself later.

 

The problem is that if TFP does as you advocate and nerf traders and questing down to be about the same ease and efficiency as using other methods, there will still be one method that the min/maxers will quickly discover is the best and that will be the new touchstone for complaints. It won't be the same people who complain about the traders today since the thing they disliked got nerfed and they can ignore them and maybe the new thing is more to their liking. No, it will be whoever feels they must go for the easiest and most effective method and when they see that it is something they aren't particularly fond of doing but now they're going to have to spam it, they will complain that TFP has made their playstyle impossible because they have no choice but to spam whatever it is. Unfortunately this isn't mere speculation either. It is history. 

Edited January 28 by Roland (see edit history)

[Roland]

21 hours ago, Rotor said:

 

I am definitely not a min/maxer.  

 

The current  is way less sandboxy.

 

It is less sandboxy overall, I agree. The more rules they impose in the game will lessen its sandbox nature. The game was more sandboxy in the beginning because there were no rules implemented yet to govern gameplay. For true fully sandbox gameplay you really need to just enable the creative menu and use godmode as desired to just do whatever you want with no gameplay consequences.

 

Despite the survival version of the game becoming less sandboxy it still has a sandbox nature in that players can choose how they want to play. If John wants to use traders and quests exclusively he can. If Erica wants to only use traders and quests occasionally she can. If Larry wants to convert a POI into a base he can. If Jennifer wants to build a massive fortress from scratch she can. If Junior wants to play nomadic and not really have a base he can. If Sarah wants to build an underground bunker she can. There are no restrictions in the rules of the game that prevent players from doing these things. 

 

Same goes with perks. There are no restrictions on using tools or weapons "outside of your class". You can pick up and use any weapon in the game. When the perk trees were first introduced we had posts that complained that TFP was forcing them to always use Shotguns if they perked strength to max because then the shotgun was the best weapon and why would anyone use something less effective than the best. Yet, years later, I think most players use a fun variety of weapons even if they aren't fully perked up in every single one. 

[Vaeliorin]

12 minutes ago, Roland said:

Yet, years later, I think most players use a fun variety of weapons even if they aren't fully perked up in every single one. 

Guns, sure.  The changes to stamina have made using a melee weapon outside of what you've specced into an exercise in frustration/futility.

[theFlu]

4 hours ago, Roland said:

It is the way in which you continually (not just in this thread) characterize doing anything other than the most effective/easiest way to do things. I just don't agree that players must choose the optimal choice or they're not really playing.

You are continually misreading me, in this thread you challenged me for using "faffing about" and "gimping yourself". Your definition of "Faffing about" was:

 

On 1/28/2024 at 3:07 AM, Roland said:

Meanwhile faffing about has always been a fun and rewarding way to play for those who can make the choice to do it.

Guess what, that's exactly the sense I was using it, in this thread. To faff about, to goof around, to have fun. The game has plenty of room for that outside of "optimal".

You are reading it like I'm saying "anything else is wrong", while I'm not. I'm not. While I'm not, there's still optimal and suboptimal. They're still things, even if I'm not saying suboptimal is wrong.

 

"Gimping" was used to specifically refer to being offered a choice:

1) "do thing X and earn Y" or

2) "do thing X and earn Y+Z".

You factually are gimping yourself by not taking the +Z for doing the X. You can do it if you want, nothing wrong with that, but it's not exactly a meaningful decision.

Yes, the word was chosen for its roughness, but the "choice" is a non-choice, and the roughness was added to emphasize that. The word is contextually fine as a description.

 

"lol...what? People are playing no-quest playthroughs. I think that establishes that there very much is still a choice between building a base first or questing first. Think up a new one... " (multipage multiquote is hard man) And this is the level of argument it was levelled against.. a "lolwut". It was fitting, whether you like it or not.

 

I'd love to see you build a base before looting a POI thou.

 

4 hours ago, Roland said:

Finally, you keep missing my point: There is no NEED to remove quest spam

I'll grant that. It's kinda easy since there's no NEED for the game to exist. Point me to where I've said it's necessary. I hate the current end result, but I'm a nobody on a forum, I'm offering opinions, suggestions, stupid jokes and whines. None of them make anything into a NEED.

 

4 hours ago, Roland said:

I mean, if they want to adjust things so you cannot spam quests and are forced to do them more infrequently that's not going to affect me much since I already do them less frequently by choice.

This is not a solution I have proposed, nor would I want it. Why are you offering it to me?

I'd like there to be Some Things that are Better solved outside of questing - survival, mining, some such. It would give the game a natural flow where you choose to do different things based on current needs.

Failing that, I'd like the spamlooting not to be Mandatory for survival and some form of slow gear progress. If the holy quest is still the best way, it doesn't bother me as much if it's not Mandatory. Parts of it are - water, gear progression.

 

4 hours ago, Roland said:

the natural progression of creating better and better shelter as the capability to do so is attained.

This is literally what I did though. That's how a big build starts, small increments, minimal necessary defensive positions, then redundancies and slowly combining things into a main build.

 

4 hours ago, Roland said:

But I disagree that anyone is forced to choose the trader and questing to solve everything.

Cool, not my claim though, and as you just keep misreading me .. I can't fix this. Or rather, I won't. It's a water thread. I'd deserve getting banned for the derails...

 

4 hours ago, Roland said:

But your response to me choosing to keep the traders to a minimum influence in my game is that I'm just faffing around.

Indeed, just like I meant it the first time, faffing about, goofing off, having fun. Have fun. See ya.

 

 

EDIT: To add a reply to

4 hours ago, Roland said:

If you really are playing a chill game what is wrong with building up your skills and strength for a few weeks and then move to the remote wilderness and build that massive fortress?

Because the point of the playthrough has been to "grow up with the build". Upgrade XP, horde loot etc, only minimally venturing out to "get stuff". It used to get me to decent tier tools and armor over time, for weapons some trading stone-to-guns was done in the later patches. I could start in a shack on day one.

Now, for a mining day, you'll need something like, what, 9 water? Probably more, but let's go with that. That's three filters, 6k coin. Easily done by day 7, no worries there. Managed to get iron tools from those quests? Great, repairing those will cost you a glue each, and for a day of mining you're looking at half a dozen repairs, if not way more (seriously low durability). So, couple more filters. All right. Ofc you could just use the stone axe, you'll have a Qfiver at that time. Not exactly fast, but, sure, it'll dig three stacks of stone to sell per reset.

 

Now, start digging with that and notice that... you're not going to get better with it. At all. All your improvements are going to come from the trader. If you'd like to cook your meat, you'll be looting for books for a couple weeks. I know the "trader progress" is there even if I just sell stacks of stone, he will likely have a cement mixer eventually, I will Eventually be able to buy steel tools.

 

But honestly, I've already "prepared" for two weeks, what's two more? Oh right, the idea was to grow with the build. Spend two more weeks and you're pretty much Done. Sure there's still some decent lootables out there, but nothing necessary. There's no progress anymore.

 

Now, if you feel like arguing against the edit, please keep in mind that I'm only describing my personal favourite playstyle. I'm not imposing that on anyone else, I'm not hissyfitting for my way being the Only True Way. I'm just explaining the issue, why the idea of the playstyle pretty much completely conflicts with the changes in A21, and why that might motivate me to argue against the water nonsense.

 

Now, go have fun!

Edited January 29 by theFlu (see edit history)