Muzzleloader missions

[_dfad_]

First, thank you developers for a nice mission set.

It would be great to extend it from current 6 missions to 10-12 of course. And if this is ever planned, rewrite the conditions a bit. Because by now:

- For the first mission, you need to use the Cap Lock Muzzleloader at least.
- For the second mission, both Cap Lock and Inline should be used.
- For the third mission, you need to add the Muzzleloading Pistol to the list.

This could be a real issue for new players who don't have a large gun collection yet, and don't have a friend to help in MP mode. What if we rewrite it so first 2-3 missions could be completed with any muzzleloader, and only then the bullet type conditions start to appear?

[Bort]

First, thank you developers for a nice mission set.

It would be great to extend it from current 6 missions to 10-12 of course. And if this is ever planned, rewrite the conditions a bit. Because by now:

- For the first mission, you need to use the Cap Lock Muzzleloader at least.
- For the second mission, both Cap Lock and Inline should be used.
- For the third mission, you need to add the Muzzleloading Pistol to the list.

This could be a real issue for new players who don't have a large gun collection yet, and don't have a friend to help in MP mode. What if we rewrite it so first 2-3 missions could be completed with any muzzleloader, and only then the bullet type conditions start to appear?

Yep. I stopped when I completed the 2nd Smoking Pole mission and saw that it required getting the pistol. Muzzleloaders are a lot of fun to use but the pistol has absolutely no other missions that require it. It's not worth the expense. Most weapons that are required for missions pay for themselves and then some because they enable us to move forward and earn higher rewards in several mission packs. This pistol is only an objective for one single mission and it costs more than most of the mission packs reward for completing the entire mission pack. The balance having it returns is much less appealing em$.

Whoops? The muzzleloader pistol being required for the much appreciated new missions is imbalanced game currency wise.
Fun? Sure! But it doesn't make any sense to get it otherwise.

[trulight]

First, thank you developers for a nice mission set.

It would be great to extend it from current 6 missions to 10-12 of course. And if this is ever planned, rewrite the conditions a bit. Because by now:

- For the first mission, you need to use the Cap Lock Muzzleloader at least.
- For the second mission, both Cap Lock and Inline should be used.
- For the third mission, you need to add the Muzzleloading Pistol to the list.

This could be a real issue for new players who don't have a large gun collection yet, and don't have a friend to help in MP mode. What if we rewrite it so first 2-3 missions could be completed with any muzzleloader, and only then the bullet type conditions start to appear?

Going to be the devil's advocate here on this part "This could be a real issue for new players who don't have a large gun collection yet" It has always been this way for most missions and will continue to be this way, it's how it was designed to get you to get those large collections by spending money if you don't farm for them. (And before that you couldn't farm for them only real money got you guns) Has been this way for the last 15 years.

Since the free to play they have been quite generous with how many gm's you can make on missions without needing anything but starter weapons, some sets can be done in their entirety. And more then enough to farm and reset over and over again doing those. Leave the muzzy missions as they are.

[Dr_ViEr]

I agree with trulight.
There have been new (travel) mission packs that required no new weapons. Caplock abd Inline muzzle loader have been already required for missions before.
Therefore the muzzle loader Pistol ist the only one needed specifically for this Mission pack. In my opinion that is fair.

[muldo]

Already had the muzzleloaders before the missions were released. I try and buy as many weapons as I can to support the game and agree that not everything should cater for the new player. Finished and really enjoyed this mission set, please keep them coming team Dev's.

[Bort]

Those of you debating the point _dfad_ and I are trying to address haven't done the math. It also seems our fellow community member friends that have responded to this topic in support of the new missions haven't grasped the point we're trying to address. I'll attempt to explain it, if that's the case. Maybe yall do get what we're talking about and suggesting.

Our point (_dfad_'s and mine) isn't about catering to new players it's about balancing the economics of playing the game.
Usually when we're forced to get a new weapon to complete a mission getting that weapon enables us to not only do one single mission moving forward and able to earn more gm$ in one mission pack it enables us to move forward in several mission packs. The cost of purchasing the weapon(s) and ammo required results in a positive return for the player in all other cases except this new Muzzleloader mission pack that requires getting the Muzzleloader pistol (that pistol specifically).

Not all of us blindly play the game just blasting away at animals with whatever weapon. Before this mission pack we're addressing and suggesting a slight change to that's not how participating in doing the missions was designed. It was meticulously balanced to result in a profit for the player. This mission pack isn't in tune with the rest of the game's economical balance.
Of course we absolutely can play the game that way, just shooting things, but it's not how the game is meticulously and very well designed to reward players that complete missions with a substantial profit.

To give an example:
The Roe Deer mission pack expense of purchasing gear required to complete the entire Roe Deer mission pack is 30,600 gm$ including getting 5 boxes of ammo and arrows for each weapon and a tree stand that mission pack requires. Having the gear that mission pack requires also enables us to complete several other mission packs that reward a total of over 100,000 gm$.

That's a 70% positive return profit for the player without including the rewards we'll get from harvesting animals we're sure to do on our adventure of completing these missions. With including the animal harvest rewards we're sure to get the positive return rate of this scenario is well over 100k gm$ increasing the financial return to around a 75% positive return.

The Muzzle loader pistol costs 11050 gm$ to get and it's ammo costs 680 gm$ to get 5 boxes of each ammo type for it. That's an 11,730 gm$ expense. There are zero other missions having this weapon enables us to do so getting it is financially a loss for the player. It is not balanced like everything else is.

That is the point I'm addressing and I think it's what _dfad_ was also trying to bring to light.
Is it that big of a deal? In my opinion no. We can still profit. At least a player that has some experience and a few other weapons can.
Steering away from a system that's worked for as long as this system has is how and where things start their downward spiral and fail.
I don't want to see that happen to this game.

[xOEDragonx]

It was meticulously balanced to result in a profit for the player. This mission pack isn't in tune with the rest of the game's economical balance.
Of course we absolutely can play the game that way, just shooting things, but it's not how the game is meticulously and very well designed to reward players that complete missions with a substantial profit.

Actually, that's not how it was designed at all. The overwhelming majority of missions we have were designed prior to the free-to-play update and remain unchanged. They were never designed with the intention of letting players buy equipment with fictional money and make enough extra fictional money that they could then turn around and buy the next piece of equipment with more fictional money. The guns and equipment, even those you refer to in the roe deer pack, used to cost real money to obtain and the only prize you got for completing the missions was gm$ that could only be spent on consumables, not more equipment. There was no substantial profit and missions were never really a driving factor to play the game.

I think the pack is also fine as is. If your only goal in this game is to be money driven, then don't do it. There's 680 other profitable missions to entertain you, along with just shooting animals. But if your goal is to complete all missions, or hunt with a variety of weapons simply because it's enjoyable, then get the weapon and use it. Like Trulight mentioned, there are a couple mission packs folks can do over and over and get rich off of that don't require a single piece of purchased equipment, and those packs pay enough to reset all missions and still have a decent chunk of money left over. One could argue that that alone is unbalanced. Not all mission pack needs to make the player rich.

[trulight]

And to be honest i'm glad there is new content coming out to even begin with after all of this time, and all the ups and downs we've had throughout the years, wish there were more bug fixes happening, but I think the fact we even have a team to do any type of bug fixing is a good thing.

[Bort]

Actually, that's not how it was designed at all. The overwhelming majority of missions we have were designed prior to the free-to-play update and remain unchanged. They were never designed with the intention of letting players buy equipment with fictional money and make enough extra fictional money that they could then turn around and buy the next piece of equipment with more fictional money. The guns and equipment, even those you refer to in the roe deer pack, used to cost real money to obtain and the only prize you got for completing the missions was gm$ that could only be spent on consumables, not more equipment. There was no substantial profit and missions were never really a driving factor to play the game.

You have not done the math. You haven't sat down and actually looked at it, you don't budget when you play or you wouldn't say what I've quoted. That's fine. As I said we are of course all welcome to play however we want.

Earning currency is the main goal, as they're designed, in any game that has currency. That's not just a thought or opinion it is fact.
We cannot play this game without participating in its currencies and economics.

[Jonas93]

It's easy. There are numerous mission packs which are easy and quick to finish at least partially and make you around 30-40K early on. You need around 13K to reset which gives you an easy 20-30K to spend on 1-2 weapons / tents / stands to enable new mission paths or make them easier to progress (tent in the canyon e.g.).
Then you reset and do it again, this time maybe you make 5K more. It stacks up and you get better every time.
Now I have almost all weapons for the most efficient missions and can spend the extra money on luxury like lodges, trophy poses, more tent tree stand combos.
You can do a full circle in a few weeks.
Another thing to consider is mission stacking. Try to combine as many missions in one hunt as possible. Bring all guns and react to good situations.
You can also try to stack it with competitions to make some em$ at the same time.

And now to this mission pack:
There are multiple mission packs that are to difficult to use for gm making. These are for hardcore players and it's rewarding to finish them. But it's not efficient to do these for money. But they are there for a reason. For me this mission pack falls in that category. Simple as that.