New armor screen & changed encumbrance system

[Aluminumfoil]

The whole encumbrance / storage balance question is irrelevant to my personal playstyle, because I’ve never seen a reason to have more than about sixty storage points, which you can get with a backpack and most combinations of sensible clothing. (It’s enough to carry a couple days’ food and water, a gun, ammunition, a melee weapon, first aid supplies, and your everyday tools, plus 20-ish storage in case you find something you want to take with you while leaving your hands free. Add an Integrated Tool Set and you can cut that down to forty storage points.)

So from my perspective, this system looks nice, not because of what I can and can’t wear, but because it automatically drops things in the appropriate layer, and I won’t have to go through my advanced inventory every time I put on a pair of socks to make sure that I’m not wearing them over my boots. Even if that was all it did, and the encumbrance system was unchanged, I’d call it a major quality-of-life improvement for the game.

That being said: it seems to me that only the outermost layer of each category should grant storage, at most. Nobody loads up a set of cargo pants and then puts on a set of cargo pants over them. It wouldn’t fit, and even if it did, you’d have to take off your pants to get at your pockets. That’s not a problem with the new system specifically, though; it’s been around for as long as I remember.

[Adrian]

[quote=“illi-kun, post:40, topic:5822”]Adrian, this is too rough, IMO.

We need a convention about the measurement of volume (if we don’t have one yet), so all items can be rebalanced according to that convention.[/quote]
It’s been less than six hours and i already forgot why it would ever be a good idea.

As far as conventions go, i think the most best and most accurate way of measuring volume would be to use proper units. (I myself am a pretty big fan of the liter)
Additionally, instead of a duffel bag giving 120 “volume”, a 30l duffel bag would give a much better representation of size and scale.
The downside is of course that we’d have to go through every item in the game to change the volume appropriately.

That being said: it seems to me that only the outermost layer of each category should grant storage, at most. Nobody loads up a set of cargo pants and then puts on a set of cargo pants over them. It wouldn’t fit, and even if it did, you’d have to take off your pants to get at your pockets. That’s not a problem with the new system specifically, though; it’s been around for as long as I remember.

This is logical smooth sailing, and i support it.

[illi-kun]

Aluminumfoil, I agreed that auto-sorting is important and strongly required for clothing.

Adrian, hmm, probably 250 ml (1/4L) is equal to 1 in-game volume, so we can use this as reference, just need to google average volume of pockets for different types of clothing.

My preliminary suggestions (that was done without checking of average volume of items) (current storage value -> new storage value):

Pants & shorts:
survivor cargo pants: 20->14
cargo pants: 12->10
army pants: 14->10 (as cargo pants, benefit of these pants is armor, not storage)
cargo shorts: 8->7

Other:
all trenchcoats: 24->18 (why are they carrying more than messenger bag?)
clown suit: 16->12
lab coat: 12->10
tool belt: 10->8

[Adrian]

Make the clown suit storage 13 instead of 12.
Because, you know, honk

[illi-kun]

Adrian, that’s brilliant!

Updated:
Special containers (like holsters and scabbards) should be more efficient for carrying special items (handguns, swords) than carrying these items in universal containers like pouches. So, having pouches with 12 units of storage enforce you ignore all of these special containers (currently it’s better to put your handgun and something else in the pouch instead of holding just a handgun in the holster).
Maybe we can attach the pouches to the belts & backpacks as mods (like scopes to the guns)?

Pouches & bags:
+assign tactical dump pouch to “TORSO”
+assign fanny pack to “TORSO”
+add tag “BELTED” to tactical dump pouch
tactical dump pouch: 12->8
pouch: 12->6 (and set encumbrance to 0 instead of 1 for consistency with other pouches)
leather pouch: 12->6
dive bag: 40 ->38 (balance: water friendly but smaller than backpack)
runner pack: 30->14
briefcase: 30->24

and the most dramatical nerf for “pair of drop leg pouches”:
It becomes to “drop leg pouch” (one item, so you can put on only a pair, not two pairs), plus 18->4 (4 bottles of the water is enough for a leg pouch, isn’t it?).

[infectedmochi]

For outer most clothings count toward container only, I suggest we use diminishing return mechanic which should be reasonable and realistic enough. The inner clothing will have their container value decreased in proportion with the position.
Something likes this:

• Outermost: 100%
• Middle 1: 66%
• Middle 2: 33%
• Innermost or Middle n>2: 0%

That aside, I agree that the container value of clothings could use a rebalancing after this change.

[Adrian]

Maybe we can use the coverage % of a layer to determine how much storage volume of the underlying layer becomes unusable.
It’d force the player to decide between wearing clothing for storage vs wearing clothing for armor.

[kevin.granade]

That being said: it seems to me that only the outermost layer of each category should grant storage, at most. Nobody loads up a set of cargo pants and then puts on a set of cargo pants over them. It wouldn’t fit, and even if it did, you’d have to take off your pants to get at your pockets.

It’s just as easy to come up with counter-examples that do make sense, like two holsters, or two messenger bags. It’s actually a really complicated thing to determine.

[quote=“illi-kun, post:45, topic:5822”]Updated:
Special containers (like holsters and scabbards) should be more efficient for carrying special items (handguns, swords) than carrying these items in universal containers like pouches. So, having pouches with 12 units of storage enforce you ignore all of these special containers (currently it’s better to put your handgun and something else in the pouch instead of holding just a handgun in the holster).[/quote]
Sounds reasonable.

Maybe we can attach the pouches to the belts & backpacks as mods (like scopes to the guns)?

This sounds a bit over-complicated, what’s the benefit?

[quote=“illi-kun, post:45, topic:5822”]Pouches & bags:
+assign tactical dump pouch to “TORSO”
+assign fanny pack to “TORSO”
+add tag “BELTED” to tactical dump pouch
tactical dump pouch: 12->8
pouch: 12->6 (and set encumbrance to 0 instead of 1 for consistency with other pouches)
leather pouch: 12->6
dive bag: 40 ->38 (balance: water friendly but smaller than backpack)
runner pack: 30->14
briefcase: 30->24[/quote]
[/quote]
I don’t have a problem with any of these in principle, but I don’t have a strong sense of how they’ll play, so we’ll have to just see how it goes.

[quote=“illi-kun, post:45, topic:5822”]and the most dramatical nerf for “pair of drop leg pouches”:
It becomes to “drop leg pouch” (one item, so you can put on only a pair, not two pairs), plus 18->4 (4 bottles of the water is enough for a leg pouch, isn’t it?).[/quote]
A few alternate ideas:
Mark certain items as taking up multiple layering slots, so the pair of pouches would just add two to layering instead of one.
Get rid of the encumbrancs vs layering thing entirely, just make the encumbrance score count as the number of layering slots the item takes up, so instead of counting up layering and encumbrance seperately, you just add up the points in each layer then run it through a formula to determine encumbrance. This would move the minimum encumbrance score to 1, but the outcome would be similar in that as long as you stay below a certain threshold you’d have no effective encumbrance.

I’m not hugely in favor of the second idea, on the plus side it might actually simplify some things, on the down side it implies rebalancing every single item, which I was hoping to avoid. It’s possible that simply haveing an implicit +1 per item would have a reasonable outcome though.

[Aluminumfoil]

[quote=“Aluminumfoil, post:41, topic:5822”]That being said: it seems to me that only the outermost layer of each category should grant storage, at most. Nobody loads up a set of cargo pants and then puts on a set of cargo pants over them. It wouldn’t fit, and even if it did, you’d have to take off your pants to get at your pockets.

It’s just as easy to come up with counter-examples that do make sense, like two holsters, or two messenger bags. It’s actually a really complicated thing to determine.[/quote]

Good points. You’re right, and I can think of several more like them. Can you think of anything from the non-belted layer that would be a counter-example? Maybe it’s not really complicated after all, and it could just be, “outermost plus all belted.” Gotta run, sorry, can’t type more.

[i2amroy]

Pocketed vest + suit coat. In that case the suit coat is the outer layer, but all the pockets are still useable due to it being open in the front. Using inner storage tends to work well in pretty much any scenario that involves a front opening clothing stacked on top of something with pockets.

[FunsizeNinja123]

A “Has zipper” tag makes me laugh way too much.

[KA101]

I take one night on light duty and you ram through a wide-ranging volume nerf because people wear more than one pair of pants.

You do realize that holsters, etc aren’t particularly common, so “enforcing” their use basically penalizes folks for not lucking out and finding them or the gear to craft them?

[Adrian]

I don’t think the player is even supposed to carry large volumes. That’s what shopping carts, wheelbarrows and trunks are for.
Nerfing the player’s storage volume also reinforces the idea that Cata is a survival game.
So to me the nerf makes sense.

[KA101]

I’ve got some load-bearing gear IRL, and suspect I could carry about as much as my characters did. Being forced to schlep a container (which you can’t take between z-levels, so good luck mining!) around doesn’t make the game any more “survival-y” for me.

Other elements of the change also nerf mutants rather hard.

[Zireael]

[quote=“illi-kun, post:32, topic:5822”]RAM, Is ‘toggle the displaying mode’ feature makes it better?
[/quote]

When will we get this menu in-game?

Special containers (like holsters and scabbards) should be more efficient for carrying special items (handguns, swords) than carrying these items in universal containers like pouches. So, having pouches with 12 units of storage enforce you ignore all of these special containers (currently it's better to put your handgun and something else in the pouch instead of holding just a handgun in the holster). Maybe we can attach the pouches to the belts & backpacks as mods (like scopes to the guns)?

Good idea.

[illi-kun]

KA101,
Holsters (and quivers) are still the stuff for role-play and not the items which give you significant amount of storage. Average handgun takes 2 units of volume, and saving this volume is not a big deal.

Pants are nerfed because they give unreasonably high amount of storage units. I’m not sure that the transportation of 14 bottles of water inside of your pants doesn’t encumber you. Even after nerf, the army pants & cargo pants provide decent amount of storage.

If you’re worried about “huge” mutation then It’s possible to apply “OVERSIZE” flag to the most of belted items, since, typically, you can set the comfortable position and size of the items of this kind by regulation of the straps.

When will we get this menu in-game?

This window have the highest priority in my personal TODO list for cataclysm. Unfortunately, I overwhelmed with work so I can’t say anything about ECD.

[bugsniper]

Can the hobo profession still carry all of the starting gear easily? Same with all the other professions, I’d like to make sure you’ve checked to make sure that nobody has to start out encumbered, except maybe the shower victim.

Also, once you can craft survival harnesses and pants, is that basically going to mean that you’ve won the inventory puzzle game?

Also, this is going to make it important for people to know how to use the advanced inventory management system. We might want to add a message with a pointer to it.

[illi-kun]

Can the hobo profession still carry all of the starting gear easily?

Good catch, it’s encumbered (volume 22/13) but I don’t think it’s because I nerfed the pouch from 12 to 9. Okay since I kept the encumbrance point at pouch unchanged it’s possible to revert the storage value back and also give a bindle to hobo for avoiding excessive encumbrance.

[bugsniper]

Previously, a hobo could carry a gallon jug (15 enc), 2 glass bottles (3 enc each), a knife (1 enc), and a can of beans (1 enc) in a pouch (20 space) and his pants (4 space).

Also, please remove the cardboard box encumbrance, because it’s the contents that take up space and not the items themselves. You can fold up several hundred cardboard boxes of the kind toaster pastries come in and fit all of that into a backpack. When not containing anything, they work like paper.

Also, I think I’d want to see wearable shopping bags that work like bindles, for people who would otherwise make bindles but had a surrounded start or had their backpack destroyed and don’t want to smash a window for the parts.

[Zireael]

Also, please remove the cardboard box encumbrance, because it's the contents that take up space and not the items themselves. You can fold up several hundred cardboard boxes of the kind toaster pastries come in and fit all of that into a backpack. When not containing anything, they work like paper.

I think something like this is already implemented for backpacks and duffel bags, so that’s a good idea.