Why Triple Quality was bad. Discussion.

[TurtleHermit]

Please, this is not C&I thread, I just want to know why mechanic was unlikely hated by some population.

I very liked the idea and how it could be used to differiate between regions perhaps?
Mostly when I try to talk to people about this I'm being shrugged of, go away noob or something like this.
The only thing I get out of people is that they "hated" rising all 3Qs or just simply were making "average" out of them.

Since many of us want somewhat separatable regions by products, why not giving another try to 3Q?
As I said, most people just were trying to raise all 3Q or counted average instead of rising that best one up.

With something like CF, imagine the potential of this!

I welcome You to the discussion, let's a go!

[shubla]

too complicated

[maze]

It didnt really add anything to the game. It just added math and thinking time.
Many values were not even used.
And luck was also a must.

It also broke feps at one point.
I dont really care what q type we use single or three. But if we went back to threeQ it would need a lot of looking over and balancing

[Zentetsuken]

I loved it personally. I am always an advocate for things that make the game harder and add resistance to the easy and infinite quality grind and botting.

Love the way it is implemented in Salem, not sure if that would work in Haven but I'm sure some more complexity could be added to the current quality system.

[neeco]

I am always an advocate for things that make the game harder

You should play Russian roulette with all chambers filled. I heard that's max difficulty for that game.

[MagicManICT]

Many values were not even used.

It also broke feps at one point.

My best guess is that these were the two primary reasons it was removed.

[vatas]

When I first logged into w8 during launch day, I was excited to learn how the tri-quality system would affect various aspects of the game. I assumed that maybe, for example, wood would be better for tools, firewood or woodwork like cheesetrays dependign on which aspect it had most.

It turned out most stuff simply used the average of the three to determine their value, most importantly curiosities. They briefly did receive a rework that utilized tri-quality. I remember looking at the initial announcement and being super excited and happy about it, but then figuring out the implementation of the new system (which included massive nerf to my local Glimmermoss node) I joined the hate mob that was so large that devs rolled it back.

I'm not 100% sure what part of food people are talking, but likely culprit is the fact that one of the three qualities reduced the chance to get satiation from that food. Which meant that once you reached high enough qualities, you could ignore said mechanic while people with low-quality food would still have to struggle with it. These days satiation percentages are static regardless of quality. Symbel further had tri-quality affect satiation-reduction, hunger-reduction, and durability IIRC. This would present potential problem where if your metal and anvil were rich in the third aspect, you could have very durable but otherwise shitty symbel.

Armor could be argued to have had better implementation. Different tri-aspects would affect deflect, soak and hitpoints of armor separately (IIRC.) I think bows also had different things scale from different aspects. I don't remember if Melee Weapons had this as only values for them I can think of are Damage and Armor Penetration.

[TurtleHermit]

too complicated

From further posts I assume it wasn't complicated that much, because it wasn't explored deeply , designed well enough.

single or three. But if we went back to threeQ it would need a lot of looking over and balancing

That is a must.

I loved it personally. I am always an advocate for things that make the game harder and add resistance to the easy and infinite quality grind and botting.

Love the way it is implemented in Salem, not sure if that would work in Haven but I'm sure some more complexity could be added to the current quality system.

Personally I don't think such things complicate much if done right, but rather make game have some deep. Also, let's not talk about Salem. There's a reason we are here after all and I, while know both projects pasts and similarities, I prefer to avoid Salem comparisons. I thinks it's fair.

I am always an advocate for things that make the game harder

You should play Russian roulette with all chambers filled. I heard that's max difficulty for that game.

Only if You make it clear that gun is 100% working and can't jam!



So in short: If better designed, it could be very nice re-addition to the game, no?

[Jalpha]

The problems iirc were that in most cases people simply ended up having to raise all three values and this was annoying and slowed progression. Then there was the curio scandal and other things as well where changing values had unexpected consequences.

I think the devs were like lets get a stable foundation to work from first. Right now they don't have that as it seems food is not working as intended. To begin with.

[Zentetsuken]

The problems iirc were that in most cases people simply ended up having to raise all three values and this was annoying and slowed progression. Then there was the curio scandal and other things as well where changing values had unexpected consequences.

I think the devs were like lets get a stable foundation to work from first. Right now they don't have that as it seems food is not working as intended. To begin with.

This was definitely not the case. for some shit only 1 or two of the qualities were important, and for food it was sometimes even beneficial to keep some qualities low. The slowed progression was generally the point, along with the wealth being generally more evenly spread early world. Nodes could spike on 3 qualities so depending on the resource it could be just as good to find a q70 in one quality as it would be in another. Also meant that making good averages or creating tools or structures that would focus on 1 particular quality would take more strategy and possibly more trading. Slower, but more strategic progression.