UpUpAway95

26 minutes ago, Leeanda said:

I wonder if the blizzards are turned off then would we definitely get nothing at all or would the old system still be there..  I doubt anyone would turn them off though or if htl considered that people would do so .

As a test, I have... I saw initial beachcombing loot (all small stuff) but no refresh of loot.

5 minutes ago, Leeanda said:

Most of what I find while beachcombing is not really any use on pilgrim...   But I haven't really had many blizzards yet ,but the majority of what I found were variations of wood ,and corpses/carcasses..  and some ragged clothes.  That's it so far... I was more looking forward to seeing the boats themselves rather than the loot   

Most of the blizzards I get are nowhere near a beach 😁

You're seeing what I'm seeing... without blizzards driving the mechanic, both the frequency of refreshes and the amount of "large loot" drops off considerably.  What I'm suggesting is to "inverse" that relationship.  However, if separate toggles are more to HL's liking, then I think that is a great option as well.  However, I'm not sure what would then happen in custom if a player turned blizzard frequency off but set a separate beachcombing loot toggle to high... Seems to me it would completely defeat any blizzard/beachcombing relationship in the lore (i.e be immersion breaking, to use a popular term)

3 hours ago, Moosemaster said:

👍

This... 'nuff said (and I can hear the collective sigh of relief from everyone).

6 minutes ago, Glacia said:

BRA controls beachcombing loot.

BRA should only control qualtiy of loot... across the board; not the amount of it.  That it currently does control amounts of loot as well as quality IS the problem with it that needs to be fixed.  If this is fixed, then the rest all goes a lot more smoothly... players (or difficulty settings since they use the custom templates) controlling quality and quantity of loot separately in all cases.

26 minutes ago, Glacia said:

Actually the loot on lower difficulties is so high and abundant that both game settings have problems with BC, even if blizzards are not very frequent on voyager.

About Interloper, there is nothing bad about items washing after every blizzard, the problem is the kind of items spawning. Finding cloth, leather, wood or common resources isn't problematic, the problem lies about finding an inmense amount of fish (Food + kerosene), carcasses and other very usefull items.

It's similar on lower difficulties anyways, where you can get 3 hatches on a single canoe or several arrows. Changing the % of the problematic loot washing it's more than enough to balance the system.

Does the general loot availability controlled by other "loot-related" settings (i.e. loose item availability, empty container chance modifier, and container item density) matter in this instance?  I don't think so... those are controlled by those other toggles and are not related to blizzard frequency in any way.  That is, if I want to reduce loot availability in general, I would use those other toggles to do so, not blizzard frequency.  I'm merely addressing the relationship between beachcombing loot and blizzard frequency considering the fact that the "higher" difficulties are the games that generally have higher blizzard frequencies.  This also does not preclude the idea that perhaps the toggles that directly control amounts of loot could be combined into one toggle that automatically reduces or increase loot amounts regardless of whether or not they are loose items or found in containers.  However, if beachcombing is still tied to blizzards, then this would be best controlled separately of such a general loot toggle... i.e. either by inversing the relationship between blizzard frequency and beachcombing refreshes or creating an "amount of beachcombing loot" toggle.

This the not preclude the idea that the BRA (baseline resources allocation) should be fixed to control only the quality of loot, not the amount of loot available.  If the BRA is fixed then the player could use it to control the quality of loot washing up on the beach... restricting it if they wish to lower quality items, along with disallowing higher quality clothing, etc. in general.

Since beachcombing is tied to blizzards, the relationship means that the higher the blizzard frequency setting the more frequently loot washes up on the beach.  Since it is the higher difficulties that generally have the highest blizzard frequency settings, this makes the system OP on the higher difficulties while it makes beachcombing loot the scarcest on the lower difficulties. 

This imbalance can be corrected by creating a inverse relationship between blizzard frequency and beachcombing loot respawns.  That is, the more frequently blizzards are set to occur the less likely it will be that the blizzard will generate a refresh of the beachcombing loot and the less likely it will be for the higher quality loot to appear on the beach.  This will not require a separate toggle to be added in custom for beachcombing loot spawn chance, although that could also be done.

6 hours ago, Mistral said:

Oh I didn't know this actually, is that only marine flares or regular ones too?

If it's only marines it's good as balancing act I think, as otherwise I find them really useless against regular flares. TWs are just about as cautious of regular flares (and torches) as marine flares, stupidly I might add. But now they have some theoretical unique purpose

Just the marine flares.  The regular ones get extinguished.

Ice Axe.

Sure.

5 hours ago, Semple Fi said:

I take off all clothing before crossing through waterfalls.  Keeps it from getting wet. Put it right back on after traversing.  
If it’s just a puddle, remove shoes and socks.  

Good advice.

Another tip - marine flares stay lit even when going through waterfalls.

MacKenzie pilots a small plane.  Nothing is said about his being able to fly a chopper (which is a totally different thing).  At any rate, interesting idea... too involved for my taste personally, but if others want it... why not?  I do mostly one-region challenge stuff, so it won't really affect me.

Entering Freewater Cave (I think that's the name) in broad daylight just before a blizzard set in.  I can say with certainty there was no loot in the cave other than a couple of pieces of coal.  Blizzard set in and I had to spend a day in the cave by a fire doing chores, sleeping, etc.  I was overloaded so I dropped some loot before exiting the cave to explore around the depot.  I did that and then decided I go back to the cave and move my stuff over to the depot.  To my total surprise, a second bedroll (i.e. not my own bedroll), some food, and some other miscellaneous items (again, not what I had dropped from my inventory) had spawned next to where I had been camping out.

I'm wonder if this sort of "delayed spawning" of items is related to previously searched and empty containers suddenly having items in them upon revisiting some locations.

5 hours ago, Leeanda said:

There's a locker in the maintenance shed in broken that refuses to open... It just keeps  searching until I press cancel .   

This has happened to me in a few places.   I don't think it's related to specific containers, but rather a random bug that can happen at any time.  I used the "X" button to bring up the Xbox homepage and then just moved my cursor around on the homepage without actually selecting anything.  Then I cancelled/exited the homepage (returning me to the game) and the "run-on" opening animation was back to normal and I could open the container.  I've found this trick works in several others games that will occasionally freeze or get stuck in certain animations without having to lose progress by relaunching the game.  Worth a try.

21 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

I didn't say you needed to leave, I was simply stating what happens in the real world.

None of us know what business model HL has adopted.  I assume they want to be successful and I'm simply arguing that if they want to please the majority of their player base, they would focus the majority of their time on that.  I think we can all agree on that despite your philosophical views.

And I've never suppressed anyone's opinion on here - one of the things I love about this forum.  I have an opinion and you have an opinion.  Our opinions differ and we are arguing why we have our opinions.  What's wrong with that?

Merrely re-explaining then my use of "supply and demand" instead of "majority rules" - Demand sets more than price in the real world.  Demand determines which products go onto the shelves of most stores and which ones we never see.  As I explained before, "majority rules" implies that someone is "being ruled" by the majority.  HL is not being ruled by us.  They are being influenced by what they perceive are popular tastes (things that will help sell their product to more people in the future).  It's not the equivalent of "voting."

Not trying to change "public opinion" at all.  Not expecting either that my opinions are necessarily "in the majority" - sometimes they are and sometimes they aren't (like most people).

I also disagree with your statement:  "In history, if you were unwilling to accept that consensus, you could try to change public opinion in some way, or leave."  There are, IMO, many less divisive options in most cases.  

16 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

I did want to respond to his portion of your post.  If you are offended by the term "ruling", oh well, I didn't come up with it, but I interpret it simply that the majority have the largest number of "votes" (the will of the people) and generally becomes the way things are.  In history, if you were unwilling to accept that consensus, you could try to change public opinion in some way, or leave.  

Well that didn't last long... I'm going to resist your "ultimatum" and not leave.

This isn't a democracy.  It isn't a government of any kind. HL isn't "polling" for votes on anything either.  HL is making their decisions on whatever they feel "is right" for themselves being influence by whatever they feel influenced by... whether that happens to be a "majority" of their current client base or just an idea they think is "cool."

... and for the record, I never indicated that I was "offended" by the term... I simply said I disagreed with the "majority rules" concept in this matter.

51 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

Supply and Demand determine price.  They did bring in new cookies (Lemon) and failed so they resorted to what was proven.  A compromise is typically "meeting half way" in a dispute.  As Raph implied, HL should not need to compromise on what their product is (and is working).

I'm just trying to make a point that the minority should not be determining action which could adversely affect the majority.  HL has finite resources and if they choose to allocate resources to X then they must take them from Y (Y being the majority here ;))

"Majority rules" implies that someone is still "ruling" the other.  Here, neither the minority or the majority should be "ruling" anything.  The business person (HL) is making business decisions and both the clients in the majority and in the minority have to "adapt/compromise" their expectations a bit when the business makes decisions that are "experimental" in nature.  The more adaptable both the majority and the minority can be... rather than locking in on only their "old favorite" cookie... the more likely the relationship will be long term.  From Raph's post, I believe he's indicated that HL is at least listening to both the majority and the minority in this case and are doing everything in their power to please (not placate) both in some way.  I commend them for that... regardless of what sort of future "cookies" they decide to spring on us to sample next.  I hope those cookies are limited only by THEIR imaginations... not the tendencies of players to staunchly stick with their personal "favorite" game difficulties.

Now, I'm REALLY not going to respond here anymore.  No offence to anyone on any side of this issue; but if I haven't explained my position well enough by now, there's really no hope that I can.

21 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

Let me see if I can say this "majority rules" another way. 

Say you own a business that bakes and sells cookies.  You know from past sales, chocolate chip cookies sales are 80% of your total sales.  In the past you had sold Lemon cookies but they just weren't profitable (not as much as chocolate chip) so you discontinued them and made more CC cookies.  You had a few customers who complained that you no longer sold them. Would you be willing to bake less CC cookies (and displease your largest customer base) so that you could please the small percentage of customers who wanted the Lemon cookies?  What would happen to your profits?  What does a company need to stay in business?

You can't bake enough cookies to please everyone so wouldn't you naturally bake cookies to please the most people?

That's not "majority rules" - that's supply and demand.  Still, if no one attempted to bring in new types of cookies and being somewhat "experimental" in their approaches to things, the business would likely stagnate and perhaps even meet on hard times as the tastes of their clientele changes and starts to "crave" something different.  As changes are made, old clients would also have to adapt their tastes and, perhaps, develop new favorites.  That's what I mean by "compromises."  The more both sides can stay "flexible" and "adaptive," the more likely that the business/client relationship will continue over the long term.😀

On 4/5/2023 at 2:57 PM, Glacia said:

I suspect region may change the loot, it makes sense to loot marine flares on bleak inlet. You get common flares on interloper? I haven't see one yet.

I can't see why the "low-end" loot (i.e. stuff that has always washed up on the beach like flares) would now become region-specific.  I can see why some types of boats might be region specific.  Personally, I haven't done enough beachcombing to know... beyond my "blizzardless" test that resulted in no respawns of items on the beach in CH and no unusual loot to start with anyways.

10 minutes ago, Semple Fi said:

No room for politics in Survival, Nature doesn’t care about that either.

 I’d like to see Senator/Rep “Whoever” sew a pair of deerskin boots and/or start a fire with a magnifying glass. 
 

🙃

Repeating... so lets just leave it as my philosophical preference and agree to disagree.

Just now, Leeanda said:

It's always been pretty much ok with me.. the bear I previously mentioned ,the flare was shot a few metres in front of it. I was actually trying to scare the bear and a wolf at the same time as they were very close. The wolf scarpered but the bear completed ignored it.  It was like it walked into a wall rather than noticed it..   that's never happened with me before. I know they can be a bit unpredictable but that just seemed very off to me..  

I have the same settings for fear etc now as I did pre update. 

Some settings have likely been shifted... they seem to frequently try to tweak animal AI with each update.

1 minute ago, Semple Fi said:

Move forward from what?

I thought the premise of this game, especially interloper, is the struggle to survive.  “Extinction is rule, Survival the exception”, “You are not part of nature’s plan”, etc.  
 

Life isn’t fair, and nature doesn’t care about our feelings.  
 

majority rules is how a species survives, catering to the fringes is how it collapses.  
 

Seems in line with the Survival theme.  
 

Perhaps the answer is relearning how to be told “no”.  

You misunderstand... I'm referring to moving forward from the addition of just this one piece of content to the addition of future content (that may come in forms that we cannot even image ourselves yet).

'Majority rules" - without taking into consideration the minorities as well has historically resulted in "disenfranchised" minorities and outstanding issues that come back to haunt future populations (e.g. colonialism)... but this isn't the forum to be discussing politics... so lets just leave it as my philosophical preference and agree to disagree.

9 minutes ago, Leeanda said:

I think there's some bug with this..   I've shot at both bear and moose since the update ,and even though I missed,just, they both tend to ignore it temporarily (maybe 10-15 seconds) then turn and flee.  In fact one bear just carried on walking toward it and only turned once it was almost on top of it. Then it just spun round and walked slowly off .  

It's always been somewhat variable.   Firstly, detection range settings plays a big role.  These may have shifted with the update (unsure at this point).  I've always also suspect that line of sight and wind direction also factor in, but that it's not exceptionally reliable.  I've had bears shot from the same distance on the same point on the maps behave differently (i.e. I've been attacked by some and others have fled even when I've used the same settings).  There really isn't a reliable way for me to test for "consistencies" though.

16 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

Impossible to make it fair to everyone.  IMHO, the next best option is make it fair to the majority.

I agree that it is impossible to make it absolutely fair to everyone, but I don't agree with a "majority rules" philosophy either.  Everyone's needs and concerns should be at least given some consideration.  Balance does not equal perfection for everyone.  It never has... and we all need to accept that compromises will need to be made to move forward.

2 minutes ago, Leeanda said:

Making snowmen is top priority😁.  And snowballs.. who wouldn't be tempted to throw one at yogis rear end.

I admit, being able to make snowballs would be hella fun!

54 minutes ago, hozz1235 said:

This post is based upon the assumption that Interloper players are a small percentage of the total player base!

While I applaud Hinterland's willingness to make this change for a vocal few, I can't help but think about the amount of resources this took away from other work to be done on the game.  Placating a few, and taking from the many, just doesn't sound "fair" to me.

I really don't think they are doing this to just "placate a few"; and Raph's post causes me to have faith that they are doing it in a manner that takes nothing away from the rest (or any of us).  Whether or not it will seem totally "fair" to everyone in the end, I believe it is HL's intention to make it as fair to everyone as they can muster (which I also think has been their intention all along with the various elements of this DLC).