Jump to content

My next mission will not contribute to my tier progression


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, BFT2020 said:

Are we still arguing about a configurable option

Eeh, No.

 

You can read, I'm almost sure; but for a tiny recap, I'm pointing out that "cuz the UI told me so" is pretty poor design, and Riamus is making the point that even if you limit questing to an arbitrary number, there's not much else to do in the early game anyway.

 

As TFP is clearly looking for a reasonable way to get people to do other things than questing, I'm sure your ideas might of use. Your snark is welcome by me, ofc, but ideas might be better .. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

As I said above my group is hitting the limit easily with lower tier quests and we don't think we are rushing. Why would I not do 3 quests back to back if they are just 100 meters apart? And doing 3 tier1 or tier2 with 4 people doesn't even take half a day. And I do like early game, so I don't really want that we are swimming in concrete by day 14, for example.

 

I actually don't see a problem in having to wait till day 4 to get a bicycle. Obviously the game is intended to make us walk for a bit of time (what else would Cardio be for?). To make us appreciate the bicycle, to give us a progression from foot soldier to cyclist, just like we are progressing from really awful pipe weapons to guns. For a game that is intended to last for say 40-60 days 4 days seem a good duration to me.

 

 

 

It seems to me that rushing through quest tiers is more of a multiplayer issue rather than a single player one. Instead of penalizing the single player with this limit, assign a party leader to get quests, trigger, and turn in. No parallelized questing mimics single player gameplay resulting in slower natural progression. Of course, you will still clear POIs faster, but the travel time should help slow progression. I bet this change would be unfavorable with multi players, but then again, this new setting is unfavorable with both multi/single players.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jdm311 said:

It seems to me that rushing through quest tiers is more of a multiplayer issue rather than a single player one. Instead of penalizing the single player with this limit, assign a party leader to get quests, trigger, and turn in. No parallelized questing mimics single player gameplay resulting in slower natural progression. Of course, you will still clear POIs faster, but the travel time should help slow progression. I bet this change would be unfavorable with multi players, but then again, this new setting is unfavorable with both multi/single players.

 

The setting is fine.  It should just be 5 for default, imo.  It is definitely better than what they had initially in 1.0.

Edited by Riamus (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Riamus said:

The setting is fine.  It should just be 5 for default, imo.

The setting is annoying, that's why people are complaining. If the devs implemented it in a way where the trader job list for the day couldn't be refreshed by a restart, that would have made more sense to me, so just the 5 quests for the day. But then you should be able to hit other traders up for quests to gain progression too. The restriction just feels too artificial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jdm311 said:

The setting is annoying, that's why people are complaining. If the devs implemented it in a way where the trader job list for the day couldn't be refreshed by a restart, that would have made more sense to me, so just the 5 quests for the day. But then you should be able to hit other traders up for quests to gain progression too. The restriction just feels too artificial.

You can set it to unlimited, so it isn't an issue for those who want to do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

Just as comparison, and this is only single player, I had less than 1000 concrete altogether in my game so far and am on day 15 with 2 hour days.  I'm most definitely not swimming in it.

 

 

Swimming in conrete may be the consequence if someone progresses too fast in trader progression and for example can choose the concrete mixer as a tier reward very early. Why did you not swim in concrete? Simply because you didn't have a mixer to select on day 10 I would say.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Roland said:

As counterintuitive as it may seem to you it is nevertheless true. The freedom is not in being denied the one most powerful, rewarding, and optimal thing. The freedom lies in all the other things a player wouldn't normally choose suddenly becoming viable with that one thing removed as a choice. 

I was thinking of letting this slide, but ... no. That's an absolute abuse of language, which is large part of why the world is the mess it is right now. Slavery isn't freedom, and it won't be. Denying you options isn't giving you freedom, it's taking it away. Fix your language before you destroy the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

I think they main thing to consider with this restriction is whether or not it is good for new players to restrict their questing progression rate.  Is there a legitimate reason to restrict new players to 3 (the current default)?  Roland said to get players to do other things, but as I pointed out, doing those other things on for and with low quality some tools isn't likely to make a new player want to keep playing the game.  I know I've personally stopped playing games that might have been great games because the initial gameplay was too grindy.  So I don't think that is a good reason to restrict new players.  Is it too make the game last longer?  Maybe.  They want that.  But it is an artificial way to do it and it really only affects the first few days because questing isn't required to process and it is really just slowing down getting a bike.  Is that worth restricting new players?  Is there some other reason to restrict them that is more legitimate?

 

Sorry, the typical new (single) player won't do 3 quests per day anyway because he will usually be pretty overwhelmed with finding his way around, managing stamina and finding food. The only novice player hitting the limit might be an action-game-trained player who walzes through the POIs with ease and has read too much about the game in player guides. And he might actually benefit from being slowed down in progression. 

 

It isn't really artifical. Can you build up trust with some trade partner by simply doing lots of good things for him in just one day? That is how very cheesy crime television plots work, but in reality building up trust takes time and being a reliable friend/helper/bussiness partner for a time. Sure, he will pay you square for every dealing with him (aka the quest rewards), but trust (aka reputation) grows slowly. Look at other games, they usually make sure you can't simply hit max reputation with some faction in early game.

 

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

The way I see this restriction is that it is for veteran players far more than new players.

 

I fully agree. But it is especially for multi player. The more players the more this limit is needed.

 

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

Veteran players are the ones who want more challenges, different gameplay, new things, restrictions, and so on in order to keep the game feeling "new."  But veteran players don't need this as default.  They can switch the setting easily enough.  New players may not know how to switch the setting or that it even can be switched.  So I think the default is better at 5, which most new players aren't likely to hit and so won't be restricted. 

 

In my view this is a balance setting that is applicable for all players, veterans included. Veterans can change the default, but then they know they changed it and can't claim that the balance is borked. Vanilla default has to be as balanced as possible, for everyone, even veterans. If you do 5 quests per day the balance is borked. Not necessarily on day 2 when you get your bicycle, but on day 10 when you already can do tier5 quests and then complain the game seems already finished because you went into that tier5 twice already.

 

By the way, it doesn't take long to reach day 4 at default, but because you play on 2 hour days those same 4 days may feel like an eternity in comparison. This may be a reason why day 4 bike is so difficult for you to accept.

 

 

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

Also, although I have nothing to support this, I have a feeling that the average new player will complete the initial intro quests that will bring you to the trader and then the trader offers them a quest.  They will probably complete that and when they turn that in, they will not be told to go mining or farming or exploring.  They will have the options from the trader to buy/sell stuff or to quest.  I think most will quest.  And likely continue to do so for the rest of day 1.  A restriction will feel out of place, especially when the trader has more quests available. 

 

Yes, the challenges can get you doing other things, but they are set up in a way that feels like just general goals and not really a roadmap to follow.  So I do think new players will quest all day on day 1.  If the goal is to get them to do something else, I don't think restricting progression of quest tiers is how you do that. 

Expand  

 

I am not Roland. You replied to me, but seem to argue a lot about Rolands ideas.

 

Edited by meganoth (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, theFlu said:

Eeh, No.

 

You can read, I'm almost sure; but for a tiny recap, I'm pointing out that "cuz the UI told me so" is pretty poor design, and Riamus is making the point that even if you limit questing to an arbitrary number, there's not much else to do in the early game anyway.

 

As TFP is clearly looking for a reasonable way to get people to do other things than questing, I'm sure your ideas might of use. Your snark is welcome by me, ofc, but ideas might be better .. ;)

 

Though questing is not limited at all. I think we can all (or almost all) agree that that icon is a bad idea. It looks like a "forbidden" sign while obviously it doesn't hinder you to quest at all.

 

Maybe just changing that sign is all there is needed to make the problems of everyone go away

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Maybe just changing that sign is all there is needed to make the problems of everyone go away

I mean, sort of... hide the trader rep entirely, make it somewhat random per quest, have each daily quest give diminishing rep.. would be more "life-like", and probably a better experience.

 

At some point, I was arguing for accurate info on the UI, as some things were completely counterintuitive to expectation (+20% sell price was actually +100% since your "base sell" was 20% .. and other such things). But the game doesn't have to Reveal everything in "written" form, just the type of effect, somehow. Trying to do so just ends up in things like this, and actually just encourages min-maxers ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, theFlu said:

I mean, sort of... hide the trader rep entirely, make it somewhat random per quest, have each daily quest give diminishing rep.. would be more "life-like", and probably a better experience.

 

At some point, I was arguing for accurate info on the UI, as some things were completely counterintuitive to expectation (+20% sell price was actually +100% since your "base sell" was 20% .. and other such things). But the game doesn't have to Reveal everything in "written" form, just the type of effect, somehow. Trying to do so just ends up in things like this, and actually just encourages min-maxers ...

 

Agreed. I wouldn't miss that sign at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Initially I was agreeing more with Riamus, and while I still think that 4 quests(Largely because of coop bias) might be a more sensible limit for 60 minute days, as the discussion has continued, I find myself less bothered with the limiter. Maybe this is just the gross exaggeration of "slavery isn't freedom" getting thrown around over this, but hear me out- You're not being forced into not doing quests- you still get all the loot from the PoI, plus the dukes, plus the item reward, only thing you lose is progression towards the next Tier.. Now I'm thinking leave everything the way it is EXCEPT make T1 >T2 take only 9 points, and then if you push really hard, you can get that bike bundle on day 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

 

Swimming in conrete may be the consequence if someone progresses too fast in trader progression and for example can choose the concrete mixer as a tier reward very early. Why did you not swim in concrete? Simply because you didn't have a mixer to select on day 10 I would say.

 

 

I am tier 5 and that wasn't a choice.  I'm guessing it's just a possible choice and not a guaranteed choice, maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, theFlu said:

I was thinking of letting this slide, but ... no. That's an absolute abuse of language, which is large part of why the world is the mess it is right now. Slavery isn't freedom, and it won't be. Denying you options isn't giving you freedom, it's taking it away. Fix your language before you destroy the world.


I guess you don’t understand the concept I’m explaining. It’s probably partially my fault for not explaining it well. Regardless, it absolutely is true that in games, specific imposed limits can actually promote more player choice. This is one of those cases. Limited inventory space is another. There are other scenarios as well where it is true. You can’t see it and Riamus wants to quest without limitations so badly he refuses to see it. 
 

Thankfully, the people designing the game get it. If they had simply limited quests from the very start there wouldn’t even be a question about it now. That was their only mistake with the quest system. Good thing they didn’t start out with the creative menu enabled by default and then decide to turn it off for 1.0….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

Sorry, the typical new (single) player won't do 3 quests per day anyway because he will usually be pretty overwhelmed with finding his way around, managing stamina and finding food. The only novice player hitting the limit might be an action-game-trained player who walzes through the POIs with ease and has read too much about the game in player guides. And he might actually benefit from being slowed down in progression. 

 

It isn't really artifical. Can you build up trust with some trade partner by simply doing lots of good things for him in just one day? That is how very cheesy crime television plots work, but in reality building up trust takes time and being a reliable friend/helper/bussiness partner for a time. Sure, he will pay you square for every dealing with him (aka the quest rewards), but trust (aka reputation) grows slowly. Look at other games, they usually make sure you can't simply hit max reputation with some faction in early game.

 

 

I fully agree. But it is especially for multi player. The more players the more this limit is needed.

 

 

In my view this is a balance setting that is applicable for all players, veterans included. Veterans can change the default, but then they know they changed it and can't claim that the balance is borked. Vanilla default has to be as balanced as possible, for everyone, even veterans. If you do 5 quests per day the balance is borked. Not necessarily on day 2 when you get your bicycle, but on day 10 when you already can do tier5 quests and then complain the game seems already finished because you went into that tier5 twice already.

 

By the way, it doesn't take long to reach day 4 at default, but because you play on 2 hour days those same 4 days may feel like an eternity in comparison. This may be a reason why day 4 bike is so difficult for you to accept.

 

 

 

I am not Roland. You replied to me, but seem to argue a lot about Rolands ideas.

 

I'd say it's artificial because the game doesn't in any way make it real.  It's arbitrary at the moment.  If the game had real reputation that you can gain in order to do more quests, then that would feel right.  The way it is now, the "reputation" is nothing more than tiers for quests.  And you can't lose progress for any reason, so it's not what I'd consider reputation right now.  It is similar, but so basic that it just doesn't feel like a limit even makes sense.    And yes, I know that's simply a matter of perspective and some people (perhaps many) would still consider it reputation because you do X quests to unlock the next tier.

 

What would make more sense is to not limit anything, but to make each tier require more quests than the previous tier.  Something like 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.  That's not points but "at level" quests.  That removes the delay to getting a bike and makes it take the extended time to reach max tier, which is what some people feel is necessary.  I'd still be fine with a 5 per day limit to keep MP from going crazy (still optional, of course).

 

And again, I don't really care that much.  I don't go too crazy with quests.  I'll do multiple low level quests in a row just because they take so little time, so why not?  And I'll go for the bike as soon as possible for the reasons I've mentioned.  But otherwise, I don't rush it.  Once I have the resources to actually start doing something other than questing, my questing often drops to one or two a day.  I just don't think a limit of 3 makes sense, especially if you can take 5 quests per day (ignoring that you can get more by exiting and loading the game again, which really shouldn't be possible).  Basically, the trader says, "Here, I have 5 quests for you to do today.  Do as many of them as you want and I'll pay your for each.  But I'm going to ignore that you did 2 of them because I don't feel like giving you credit for the work."  Does this sound at all realistic?  Does it actually make sense?  If you are going to make the default 3, then the number of quests offered should also be 3.  Maybe even tie the number offered to the number of quests per day that are allowed, though that would get too long for 8 and wouldn't work at all for unlimited, so not really an option unless it's only done for under 5 and anything over 5 still only offers 5 quests.

 

I was responding to you, but yes, I did mention Roland's comments as a way to also comment on that.  I don't see a reason I can't comment on more than one person's post.

Edited by Riamus (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Riamus said:

I am tier 5 and that wasn't a choice.  I'm guessing it's just a possible choice and not a guaranteed choice, maybe?

 

No, didn't find it when checking the xml right now. You can get the chemstation at tier4 and possibly a complete gyro with luck, lots of other high end items, but the "damage" is limited. The biggest problem of rushing the progression now may simply be that there is no progression anymore if you rushed it (accidentally). Which mostly affects multiplayer (where accidentally rushing is simply playing the game).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

I'd say it's artificial because the game doesn't in any way make it real.  It's arbitrary at the moment.  If the game had real reputation that you can gain in order to do more quests, then that would feel right.  The way it is now, the "reputation" is nothing more than tiers for quests.  And you can't lose progress for any reason, so it's not what I'd consider reputation right now.  It is similar, but so basic that it just doesn't feel like a limit even makes sense.    And yes, I know that's simply a matter of perspective and some people (perhaps many) would still consider it reputation because you do X quests to unlock the next tier.

 

Many other games have no mechanism to loose reputation and still call it reputation or faction system. It is certainly a subjective call whether someone sees it as artificial or not.

And I get the impression that much of this also the fault of that wretched icon that sends a wrong message.

 

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

What would make more sense is to not limit anything, but to make each tier require more quests than the previous tier.  Something like 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.  That's not points but "at level" quests.  That removes the delay to getting a bike and makes it take the extended time to reach max tier, which is what some people feel is necessary.  I'd still be fine with a 5 per day limit to keep MP from going crazy (still optional, of course).

 

See it that way: We have a game that has to balance between 1 to 8 players! In the case of questing a group of 1 (aka single player) will not reach that limit in most cases, while groups will hit that limit almost daily. My group of 4 at least does. And in previous alphas that was the biggest reason why my group was finished and bored by day 35~ while I still was fighting the first ferals in single-player. TFP has to limit the progression of larger groups somehow so they don't run through the content while the single player is going at a snails pace.

 

A lot of players have noticed this as well, a change to trader quest progression was a common topic here.

 

You are focusing too much on the bike when discussing this. With 2 hour days SP you have to change the limit anyway to keep the game balanced. But with normal days getting a bike on day 4 feels natural (IMHO). A limit of 5 would still limit larger groups, but not enough, they would be at the end of progression before even the second horde night.

[EDIT] Correction: I was forgetting that higher tier quests take more time, even for groups, and the other change, the bigger gaps between trader rep tiers. Since higher tier quests take more time to do eventually even groups will be slowed down, even when they try rushing it, reaching tier5 rep will usually take more than 2 weeks. It doesn't change the point I am making though

 

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

And again, I don't really care that much.  I don't go too crazy with quests.  I'll do multiple low level quests in a row just because they take so little time, so why not?  And I'll go for the bike as soon as possible for the reasons I've mentioned.  But otherwise, I don't rush it.  Once I have the resources to actually start doing something other than questing, my questing often drops to one or two a day.  I just don't think a limit of 3 makes sense, especially if you can take 5 quests per day (ignoring that you can get more by exiting and loading the game again, which really shouldn't be possible).  Basically, the trader says, "Here, I have 5 quests for you to do today.  Do as many of them as you want and I'll pay your for each.  But I'm going to ignore that you did 2 of them because I don't feel like giving you credit for the work."  Does this sound at all realistic?  Does it actually make sense?  If you are going to make the default 3, then the number of quests offered should also be 3.  Maybe even tie the number offered to the number of quests per day that are allowed, though that would get too long for 8 and wouldn't work at all for unlimited, so not really an option unless it's only done for under 5 and anything over 5 still only offers 5 quests.

 

Is a reload necessary to get new quests on a specific day? I actually don't know. In our group we are 4, that means we together have 20 quests to do before we might reach that limit at all. See, this is all about multiplayer. Groups need that limit and they need it desperately. As a single player you are almost not affected at all (on everthing default).

 

You seem to be really arguing that the default should fit your game with 2 hour days, and actually it doesn't. I am not surprised.

7 hours ago, Riamus said:

was responding to you, but yes, I did mention Roland's comments as a way to also comment on that.  I don't see a reason I can't comment on more than one person's post.

 

Sure, but maybe as a nice gesture to me, please add something like @ Roland to differentiate who you are replying to. It is irritating to me and if anyone is still reading our walls of text might be irritating to them as well.

 

Edited by meganoth (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Roland said:

I guess you don’t understand the concept I’m explaining.

Guess less, ask more. I get your idea perfectly well; but it's absolutely wrong to call it "freedom". In this case your freedoms aren't increased. You are absolutely free to go dig a trench around your base even when you have the option to earn rep. You do not gain any choices by adding the limit.

 

There are cases where that can be argued; simple, if not entirely non-controversial example is "highways". You're free to use them. By default you'd have no speed limit, no lane requirements, etc etc.. you'd just have the freedoms to drive on the flat surface. I don't even need to say that would be a nightmarish death trap. By yielding some of your freedoms, the highway becomes "feasible" and thus you gain "reliable fast transport". You have to yield your freedom to drive on the "opposite" lane for everyone to gain utility - that specific utility can somewhat reasonably be called a new freedom (but it can also be argued it isn't really new nor a freedom).

 

But whether or not that's an example of gaining freedoms, it's an example of limiting freedoms for a common gain. "Freedom" isn't a pure good. Standing in the middle of a dry desert, you're absolutely free. And soon to be dead. Sometimes, limiting freedoms in specific ways is a universal good. (Not "the greater good", but actually better for everyone). You're arguing that this is such a case, and sure, it might. But you're claiming this is adding freedoms... it is not.

 

I can see that this mechanic makes questing less attractive.. but the change doesn't add any choices. Like Riamus was saying, there's nothing else to do anyway. So it doesn't even change your behaviour; you'll still quest or at least chain-loot. The only thing the change actually accomplishes is stretch the days you reach tiers of quests. This sounds like a manager's implementation of a goal of "make the game last longer". It gets the job done on paper, but doesn't improve anything. And the cynic in me says that's exactly what it is...

 

8 hours ago, Roland said:

Thankfully, the people designing the game get it.

Sure. "But the flu doesn't". Could you be less condescending on occasion?

 

10 hours ago, Mister Forgash said:

Maybe this is just the gross exaggeration of "slavery isn't freedom" getting thrown around over this,

Don't mistake my mildly annoyed objection to corruption of language for an argument for or against the topic at hand; and don't let it color your perception. You're free to like the change, it's not like it's something horrible, but don't like it just because I don't :D

Edited by theFlu (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

Many other games have no mechanism to loose reputation and still call it reputation or faction system. It is certainly a subjective call whether someone sees it as artificial or not.

And I get the impression that much of this also the fault of that wretched icon that sends a wrong message.

 

 

See it that way: We have a game that has to balance between 1 to 8 players! In the case of questing a group of 1 (aka single player) will not reach that limit in most cases, while groups will hit that limit almost daily. My group of 4 at least does. And in previous alphas that was the biggest reason why my group was finished and bored by day 35~ while I still was fighting the first ferals in single-player. TFP has to limit the progression of larger groups somehow so they don't run through the content while the single player is going at a snails pace.

 

A lot of players have noticed this as well, a change to trader quest progression was a common topic here.

 

You are focusing too much on the bike when discussing this. With 2 hour days SP you have to change the limit anyway to keep the game balanced. But with normal days getting a bike on day 4 feels natural (IMHO). A limit of 5 would still limit larger groups, but not enough, they would be at the end of progression before even the second horde night.

[EDIT] Correction: I was forgetting that higher tier quests take more time, even for groups, and the other change, the bigger gaps between trader rep tiers. Since higher tier quests take more time to do eventually even groups will be slowed down, even when they try rushing it, reaching tier5 rep will usually take more than 2 weeks. It doesn't change the point I am making though

 

 

Is a reload necessary to get new quests on a specific day? I actually don't know. In our group we are 4, that means we together have 20 quests to do before we might reach that limit at all. See, this is all about multiplayer. Groups need that limit and they need it desperately. As a single player you are almost not affected at all (on everthing default).

 

You seem to be really arguing that the default should fit your game with 2 hour days, and actually it doesn't. I am not surprised.

 

Sure, but maybe as a nice gesture to me, please add something like @ Roland to differentiate who you are replying to. It is irritating to me and if anyone is still reading our walls of text might be irritating to them as well.

 

Ok, so I haven't checked this yet ... Is the limit per person or total?  In other words, in an 8 player game with this set to 3, is it 3 total for the entire group of questing together or 24?  I'm guessing 3.  Does that really make much sense in multiplayer?  I mean, sure... It slows you down.  But isn't it a bit much? 

 

If a large group can complete 3 quests, especially tier 1 quests in the early game, by 8am now that we start at 4am, does that make sense?  A group of 8 players questing together should be able to do 3 tier 1 or 2 (maybe 3) quests in 4 hours on 1 hour days without much trouble if the quests are close together.  Especially if they are fetch quests and the group didn't want to complete the POI.  Edit: I did the math and that is too quick... So say by 10am.  That's 15 minutes.  Unless I'm really taking my time in a tier 1 quest, I can be done in 5 minutes.  They are so small, it is hard to take much longer except with a few bigger tier 1 POI.

 

Would the average 8 player group want to be limited to 3 quests in a day for progression?  I don't know that answer.  I know I wouldn't and people I play with wouldn't.  The first thing I heard from someone I played with who had been gone when the patch with this came out after getting back was a complaint about the limitation.  Once I explained it was an option, they were fine with it, but the initial reaction was negative.  Even if this has value for slowing progression down, if the average initial reaction is negative, can that be a good thing? 

 

To your question, yes, reloading gives you 5 new quests even if you completed some. 

 

I'm not arguing about it fitting my settings.  I'm arguing that it should match the number of quests you can take in a day (unlimited obviously can't, and 8 is too much, of course).  As I said, it doesn't make sense that a trader gives you 5 quests but tells you he won't count 2 of those towards reputation with him. 

 

Also, just because you can complete the first few tiers quickly doesn't mean you keep that same completion rate.  It takes longer to do tier 4 and much longer to do tier 5 quests.  On one hour days, you aren't likely to complete more than one (or two in a group) in a day.  So the limitation is really focused on really game, which has already been allowed down a lot lately.  If they want to make the game last longer, they should focus on late game instead of early game.

Edited by Riamus (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

Ok, so I haven't checked this yet ... Is the limit per person or total?  In other words, in an 8 player game with this set to 3, is it 3 total for the entire group of questing together or 24?  I'm guessing 3.  Does that really make much sense in multiplayer?  I mean, sure... It slows you down.  But isn't it a bit much? 

 

Yes, 3. Does that make sense? Yes. Because a single player playing normally can't do more than 3 either. So whether you are a single player or a group of 4 or 8, your reputation progress will be at the same speed.

 

A group of 8 will get their free bike on day 4 just like the single player. A group of 8 players will start doing tier 4 POIs almost at the same day than a single player would. So this means the game is a lot more balanced between different number of players.

 

 

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

f a large group can complete 3 quests, especially tier 1 quests in the early game, by 8am now that we start at 4am, does that make sense?  A group of 8 players questing together should be able to do 3 tier 1 or 2 (maybe 3) quests in 4 hours on 1 hour days without much trouble if the quests are close together.  Especially if they are fetch quests and the group didn't want to complete the POI.  Edit: I did the math and that is too quick... So say by 10am.  That's 15 minutes.  Unless I'm really taking my time in a tier 1 quest, I can be done in 5 minutes.  They are so small, it is hard to take much longer except with a few bigger tier 1 POI.

 

Again, you get ALL the benefits of doing quests, except the reputation.

If I play in a group and hit the limit, then my choice is still between

a) looting POIs and

b) looting POIs + some bonus XP + some bonus dukes + a bonus reward (which might be 6 magazines or 50 bullets of ammo).

 

The single player, if he reaches the limit on a day, might decide going back to the trader to get a new quest isn't worth it and loot POIs without a quest. A group of 4 players will get 4 new quests by going back once, I am very sure they will continue to do quests after hitting the limit, for that additional XP+dukes+reward times 4. I know I will, because I have already done so. Neither I nor any of my co-players has hesitated for a second when that icon turned up.

 

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

Would the average 8 player group want to be limited to 3 quests in a day for progression?

 

This isn't about wanting it. It clearly is a nerf to balance things out. Nobody really likes to be nerfed. But players who understand that a game without challenge or balance is ultimately a bad game for them as well know that nerfs are necessary.

 

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

I don't know that answer.  I know I wouldn't and people I play with wouldn't.  The first thing I heard from someone I played with who had been gone when the patch with this came out after getting back was a complaint about the limitation.  Once I explained it was an option, they were fine with it, but the initial reaction was negative.  Even if this has value for slowing progression down, if the average initial reaction is negative, can that be a good thing? 

 

Has there ever been a positive reaction in the forum to nerfs or changes in general? At max it was a mixed reception.

 

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

I'm not arguing about it fitting my settings.  I'm arguing that it should match the number of quests you can take in a day (unlimited obviously can't, and 8 is too much, of course).  As I said, it doesn't make sense that a trader gives you 5 quests but tells you he won't count 2 of those towards reputation with him. 

 

 

theFlu said it best, the trader probably should not tell you this at all. It should be an internal number and you should simply be surprised with the news that the trader now thinks you are ready for better more rewarding tasks, because he is impressed with how you dealt with the previous quests. 

 

Would you like it better if the limit were a hard limit and the trader would simply be out of jobs? It would be surely more realistic, but that would also restrict the choices of players much more. I thought about different ways how to do that and they all have serious limitations and drawbacks. This "soft" limit instead could really balance out what has been wrong about MP/SP for such a long time.

 

6 hours ago, Riamus said:

Also, just because you can complete the first few tiers quickly doesn't mean you keep that same completion rate.  It takes longer to do tier 4 and much longer to do tier 5 quests.  On one hour days, you aren't likely to complete more than one (or two in a group) in a day.  So the limitation is really focused on really game, which has already been allowed down a lot lately.  If they want to make the game last longer, they should focus on late game instead of early game.

 

Yes, I mentioned that as well in my post. But if multiplayer progress is 2-4 times as fast as single player progress for the first 20 days for example (like it has been in A21) then the damage is already done in early game. It doesn't matter if MP play gets slower eventually, because by then their lead is already massive. And because a group is still faster even with tier4 that lead will continue to grow, even if somewhat slower.

 

Edited by meganoth (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Again, you get ALL the benefits of doing quests, except the reputation.

If I play in a group and hit the limit, then my choice is still between

a) looting POIs and

b) looting POIs + some bonus XP + some bonus dukes + a bonus reward (which might be 6 magazines or 50 bullets of ammo).

Pretty much this. 

It is dishonest to call it a limit on quests, or to say you're being forced. This is [SMALL AND ADJUSTABLE] limit on Tier Progression speed at worst. If you're clever enough to set your day length to 2 hours, you'll figure out how you can change this setting too.

But if you don't or choose not to, you're still getting the dukes, the quest rewards, the XP- and potentially just as important, a fresh PoI to loot.

So.. Losing the freedom to click less settings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2024 at 12:53 PM, Riamus said:

It seems to me that rushing through quest tiers is more of a multiplayer issue rather than a single player one. 


I think this is true. Single players should be in the habit of moving their bases to the biomes they are currently progressing through traders on. The only irritation with this is relocating all your "stuff" from one base to the next. Yes, I realize you can use the "teleport" command, but is that something people should be depending upon? I heard there was a plan to have some kind of trader to trader teleport system. THAT would greatly reduce the annoyance of needing to move stuff to the next base... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't know what ElCabong was meaning until I *finally* noticed the red, crossed-out exclamation mark and checked what it meant. I don't recall this in my playthrough up until now -- was it only triggered by the update? It doesn't make a lot of sense, have to say. If you're playing on 30 minute days then two quests will be as much as you can do, whereas if you're playing longer days then you're going to want to do quests as you like. And as the quests get bigger then one quest is all you'll be able to manage even on a longer day.

 

That said, might be handy on community servers to stop people racing ahead. But in single player you like to play as you go. Today I might do quests, tomorrow I might be mining and crafting all day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, OneManStanding said:

Didn't know what ElCabong was meaning until I *finally* noticed the red, crossed-out exclamation mark and checked what it meant. I don't recall this in my playthrough up until now -- was it only triggered by the update? It doesn't make a lot of sense, have to say. If you're playing on 30 minute days then two quests will be as much as you can do, whereas if you're playing longer days then you're going to want to do quests as you like. And as the quests get bigger then one quest is all you'll be able to manage even on a longer day.

 

That said, might be handy on community servers to stop people racing ahead. But in single player you like to play as you go. Today I might do quests, tomorrow I might be mining and crafting all day.

Yeah, it was in one of the patches.  It replaced the restriction originally added that made it so you couldn't get tier progression from shared quests.  They removed that and added this.  Since it is a setting, it's not a big deal.  You can adjust it as you see fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...