No more supplies for max players

@shteevie, @Teeceezy
Why has NG created a weird system to avoid supplies.
Currently level 58 players (which I assume will need to updated after the new building updates. I hope you remember) will not receive supplies from certain things. (Wall, TG, Guild Gifts), but not missions under RSL 20???

Would the easier solution not have been just to create a permanent Supplies to XP option.

Most of the times when we won't get supplies, I assume we are going to get XP. So give us the choice.
It would have also allowed all players to use this, and give them the option of updating survivors and weapons if they wanted to.

Sometimes the easiest solution is the best.


Comments

  • TransmuteJunTransmuteJun Member Posts: 2,171
    The easiest solution would have been to have a permanent supplies for TG option, yes. In fact, we loved it so much, we asked for it to be permanent.

    But NG does not like this solution (even though they were the ones who thought of it and implemented it in the first place). They feel that it promotes hoarding of TG and they don't like that. So we get this instead.

    This being said, even at level 58, you can still earn food from food scavenge missions and from using Glenn and harvesting your food plots.
    blynknz
  • blynknzblynknz Member Posts: 1,988
    I agree that keeping the TG would have been a great option, but like you said, they didn't want people to hoard TG which is why I suggest it change to XP because that is what we are going to mostly get anyway.
  • TransmuteJunTransmuteJun Member Posts: 2,171
    Fair enough. I do agree that a permanent food trade solution (that is available to everyone) would be the best way to deal with maxed players.
  • ShteevieShteevie Staff Posts: 1,335
    We actually didn't put all the chances of Supplies to XP. And as has been stated elsewhere by me, the rewards for mission crates key off of the difficulty of the mission, and not your player level. It could have been done, but at the cost of not doing other features in the update. We made the choice that made the best situation for the most people.

    Besides, supplies trades will be back eventually, and then people will tell me that they want more supplies. Trying to please everyone is a good way to drive one nutters; large population games require compromise between the perfect and the possible and the preferences of the masses.
    Development Team Member - The Walking Dead: No Man's Land
    Please note: Development is a fluid process, and suggestions and implementation take time and iteration. Any discussion of future features, deadlines, updates, balance changes, and such should be considered prospective and subject to change.
    MaD VapoRdeb1hdXcal1buriozzeg
  • blynknzblynknz Member Posts: 1,988
    But would creating a single supplies trade option be

    - A lot easier to program
    - A lot easier to maintain in future
    - A lot easier to understand for players
    - A lot easier for players to utilise how they want

    Hell, you could of even had a supply store
    10000 Supplies =
    4000 XP
    1 gold
    2 gas
    1 "bronze equipment chest"

    This is approximately what the options are on for max players when they are pulling chests.
  • papajon81papajon81 Member Posts: 35
    one more vote for permanent food trades in tg store. it's the easiest option to permanently prevent food from being a burden or a scurge
  • TransmuteJunTransmuteJun Member Posts: 2,171
    And I'll make my one obligatory request that when there is a supplies exchange that there not be an influence requirement, because that excludes many of us. I know I'm going to be ignored by NG, but I also know that if I don't keep stating that there are those of us who are being screwed over by this policy, then you'll think we have all capitulated and given in to your mandate to play Outposts. We have not, and we will not. (Unless you offer us a way to try Outposts and then delete our outpost if we do not want it any more... but my guess is you are unwilling to give us that courtesy.)
    General_QuatrequitJOSHinMaverick1969
  • General_QuatreGeneral_Quatre Member Posts: 990
    Again, you're being "screwed over" by your own choice and indignation, not by NG. I side with them on this one. Just play some damn OP and quit complaining about it; it's like a broken record.
    Maverick1969Xcal1burquitJOSHin
  • zbotzbot NML Legendary Moderator, OW Moderator Posts: 7,382
    @all lets be civil, not everyone has or has to have the same views.
  • Maverick1969Maverick1969 Member Posts: 107
    > @zbot said:
    > @all lets be civil, not everyone has or has to have the same views.

    No they don't, but stop wining about it.
    Move on please.
    General_QuatrequitJOSHin
  • General_QuatreGeneral_Quatre Member Posts: 990
    That was my point. Of COURSE you can choose to take a stand and not play OP, or be annoyed at the Influence requirements, but I think with that you also have to take personal responsibility for your hand in that and not blame/harp on NG for "forcing" you. And if you really can't see it that way, fine, but we don't all need to hear about it in every thread about supplies from the same person who, it appears more and more, is pretty much alone on the subject. NG isn't going to change it, so move on and deal with it.
    quitJOSHinMaverick1969
  • TransmuteJunTransmuteJun Member Posts: 2,171

    @TransmuteJun a question...do you have an outpost building built in your camp? Or have you decided not to build that particular structure?

    I have the outpost building in camp (fully upgraded, generating TG) and I also built and fully upgraded the walker pit (purely for BP). What I didn't do was set up the outpost for raiding.
    [Deleted User]
  • ShteevieShteevie Staff Posts: 1,335
    The truth is that we'll more likely have more of these requirements as time goes on. When we have a small and mostly fungible number of resources to award, one big risk is making them all feel the same because of how easily a player can trade between them. If there were a 'universal exchange' option as was suggested, player would do the math, find the most lucrative game mode for generating exchangeable resources [even if that extra efficiency was 1%] and suddenly all other game modes are sub-par and possibly ignored.

    This is why the rewards are often randomized, and why many crate types give one of a wide selection of things - it helps us even out the players income, it keeps those crates relevant to players no matter what they are hoping to get, and it gives players reasons to try things they might otherwise ignore. As I said, I would expect to see more rewards tied to effort-based requirements down the road. Maybe a TG shop slot that requires 10 challenge rounds, or a phone call that is only available to player who have beaten a specific story mission. [For clarity, let me say that those are just ideas off the top of my head that are not features we're already working on.] You get the idea.

    Asking players to play everything and then using different rewards to encourage a variety of play is standard game design procedure. Since Outpost and Challenges generate the same reward currency, this is the way we can ask players to consider trying it out if they otherwise might not. Not all players have to agree, and everyone gets to make their own choice on the matter; not playing Outpost gives you more time and gas to get further in challenges or to grind out scavenges for gear. Far as we're concerned, a playing player is great for us, no matter what game mode they are playing.
    Development Team Member - The Walking Dead: No Man's Land
    Please note: Development is a fluid process, and suggestions and implementation take time and iteration. Any discussion of future features, deadlines, updates, balance changes, and such should be considered prospective and subject to change.
    Maverick1969[Deleted User]blynknz
Sign In or Register to comment.