Limited resources

[DeletedUser]

The thing is that people are looking at this as if it were slowing the game down, which in one sense it is.

But what is it slowing down? A relatively insular point and click exercise. This would actually make every day a choice and a challenge. Yes it puts off the current end-game to near infinity. It means there will ALWAYS be something worth doing.

What it does is makes every choice significant. I don't know what you guys are doing at the moment but I'm rotating round three jobs enlivened by a bit of duelling every couple of days. Rocket science it ain't, nor is it entertaining.

However if i were to wake up tomorrow and find that someone was preventing me from doing my best paid job unless i trekked an hour across the map ,then i would be faced with a strategic challenge, with a number of possible responses and a variety of variable outcomes. Should I ask them how long they'll be? threaten them that if i see them there again there'll be trouble? go to a lesser paid job, ask the best dueller in my town to try and ko them, take a long trip to where such jobs were plentiful but risk getting robbed on the way back? I'd probably benefit from talking to someone and cooperating with them. What was a dull routine has become a challenge.

 

[DeletedUser]

IT MAKES sense and a lot of those things would be nice to have. lowering total job spots (to per square) based on difficulty level AND putting a worker cap of 10 on any given job would definately make choices more strategic, but what about qeues? lets say i have automation and i qeue up sleep, hunting coyote, town building, and picking oranges. now im not going to be picking oranges for twelve hours. does that mean people have to wait for me to do the job before they can? or does it mean that if the jobs full at the moment i cant work it? those are the problems you run into with a worker cap. not to mention duellers hanging out around the highest paying jobs.

 

[DeletedUser]

1. Its actually a good idea, but then the job has to be really good

2. This idea is based on the idea that there will be only very few high level players. Unfortunately its not how it works. There will be about 500 players who will reach to the top about the same time and then they would have to compete for the only job. Its like going to the super market when there are huge discount, but only one cashier.

3. A huge amount of one job isn't really that good idea. But it depends on the job

4. I like this one the most cause there are already to few quests.

 

[DeletedUser]

Combine 1 and 2 so basically, the highest level jobs would have a maximum of say 5 per person, any more than that then they would have to wait till one of the others had finished, but the job would be hard to find, like only 1 type per region ?

3 and 4 are both fine in my opinion.

 

[DeletedUser]

IT MAKES sense and a lot of those things would be nice to have. lowering total job spots (to per square) based on difficulty level AND putting a worker cap of 10 on any given job would definately make choices more strategic, but what about qeues? lets say i have automation and i qeue up sleep, hunting coyote, town building, and picking oranges. now im not going to be picking oranges for twelve hours. does that mean people have to wait for me to do the job before they can? or does it mean that if the jobs full at the moment i cant work it? those are the problems you run into with a worker cap. not to mention duellers hanging out around the highest paying jobs.

There would be no cap on the amount of people who could work on a job.
As to your point about setting up a job for later...... The initial waiting time you were given would most likely come down because during the time you were doing other things the queue would almost certainly have gone down. you wouldn't know that for a certainty because it is possible that the other people had done the same as you had. Effectively you are reserving your place in a queue which may well diminish by the time you get to the front.

1. Its actually a good idea, but then the job has to be really good

2. This idea is based on the idea that there will be only very few high level players. Unfortunately its not how it works. There will be about 500 players who will reach to the top about the same time and then they would have to compete for the only job. Its like going to the super market when there are huge discount, but only one cashier.

3. A huge amount of one job isn't really that good idea. But it depends on the job

4. I like this one the most cause there are already to few quests.

The thing is that there isn't really ONE top job that everyone needs to, or indeed can, go for. there are a variety of different high level jobs each being big on money, experience or luck and there are also variations of those that are suited to the different builds. So for each class build there will be a top job in each of the three parameters, not to mention great combo jobs, not to mention jobs that produce particularly desirable items [piece of a note 7 anyone]
So the way I'm seeing it there are probably 20 or 30 REALLY desirable jobs at the top end. The one you most want to do will be determined by the particular path you are on. the other thing to point out here is that you are assuming 500 maxed out players al going for the same job. Well this actually stops people being maxed out, so that isn't as big a concern as you think it might be.

Combine 1 and 2 so basically, the highest level jobs would have a maximum of say 5 per person, any more than that then they would have to wait till one of the others had finished, but the job would be hard to find, like only 1 type per region ?

3 and 4 are both fine in my opinion.

I guess I answered this above. Additionally i want to stress that low end jobs would be so plentiful that one can always find something to do without a queue. The question will increasingly become, how long am i prepared to travel/wait to do a better job?

 

[DeletedUser1105]

I've had a completely different idea, but it is best said here rather than a new thread at this stage:

Jobs stay where they are, and there ar ejust the same amount as there is now.
However, each job will have a 'range' of XP and money. For example, one job will say "20%-40% XP" (The top mark would be the amount that it is now - I'm not asking for more than we already get).

Then, the further you travel to do that job, to higher percentage you recieve. If it will take you less than an hour to get there, you get 20%. If it takes two hours to get there, you get 30%, and if you travel 3 hours to get there you get the full 40%.

Obviously that is a rough idea, and the numbers need crunching to make sure it's definately worthwhile travelling out and not staying close by and doing the job twice, but it gives you the picture.

Remember, this would apply to XP, money, luck and could even apply to danger on a decreasing scale. It could possibly work on the product percentage too.

The idea is to increase travelling times, which would help duellers, but to also keep the option (although not as tempting) to keep working close to your bank.

 

[DeletedUser]

That is actually a very good idea and i see why you put it here. Do you mind opening an alternative thread about it because it gets really hard to follow the logic of the debate if things go off at tangents, however pertinent they may be?

 

[DeletedUser]

That is actually a very good idea and i see why you put it here. Do you mind opening an alternative thread about it because it gets really hard to follow the logic of the debate if things go off at tangents, however pertinent they may be?

I must agree. This means people have to plan ahead and choose if they want to work close to the bank to keep the money or they want to travel furter fo the experience. This would make horses more valuable.:laugh:

 

[DeletedUser]

1. Fine...

2. NO!!!

3. Fine...

4. YEAH!