The Priority Boost Negative Feedback Loop - Discussion.

[Blorf]

Hi All,

I wanted to ask about priority boost (the red !)

So Priority Boost is a nuclear weapon when it comes to priority ordering and when overused kind of has the same result. Task wasteland.

I am going to need to do something to warn against over boosting and huge task lists.

I get a sense what may be happening is that when the units are not getting jobs done fast enough, a job gets boosted for the first time and of course it gets done right away (at first) then there is a positive association with boosting and jobs getting done. Then any time jobs lag, more boosts are added, and jobs lag more, and more boosts are added etc. So eventually with more boosts than people, you have a situation where none of the normal work can get done. What's the answer... more boosts. Complete task lockdown due to random task ordering. Supply chains break, nothing works.

Boosts are useful emergency system, but really really bad long term. I need people to understand this, but how? That is where I want ideas. I will be adding an alert of some kind, and probably even a debuff on the units to make it crystal clear that the players are hurting themselves.

Potential Ideas:
1: Limited Boosts to a Looping Queue. Perhaps 1.5 boosts per worker. Oldest boost de-boosted.

2: Adding a Boost Warning Alert. Downside here is it is very easy to ignore.

3: Adding an overboost Debuff that increases with the amount of boost abuse

4: What is your idea?

Removing Boost is really not an option as it does serve a purpose. Sometimes a task needs to get done right away and boost is the most convenient but dangerous way to do it.

Looking at the Priority System Poll and its results is making me feel that there are two groups of people playing Clanfolk.

A: Those who have small task counts and limited boosts love it,
B: Those who have high task counts and lots of boosts are very frustrated.

I want to move people in the B category to A in the best way possible. Ideas here are very appreciated as well!

Thanks!

Andrew (Blorf)

Note1: Thoughts on warning against thousands of tasks are also appreciated.

Note2:
So I recently made a change in the testing branch where priority boosts are picked in order based on the picker's skill ordering instead of just distance. This may help with some of this, but not all.

[miauukisu]

I would perhaps go for a warning when amount of boosts is equal to amount of (working) folk, and that warning would repeat with every new boost attempt. Then at twice as many boosts as folk it would become impossible to add new boosts, before old ones are either done or removed (yes, have seen people boost jobs they don't have resources to complete...)
I would not remove old boosts automatically.

[monkeypunch87]

Right now, I wouldn't like a change, because I don't have an issue with it. I usually boost picking up food from traders or something that I need immediatly done without changing skill order. I actually never change my skill order after the first setup per person and it still works fine.

I boost most of the time some hauling, which is almost at the buttom of the skill order.

[HaNylanda]

Hmm... One alternative could maybe be a more detail list of task, where users can move them up and down, as whats more importen. For instance, I often have a lot off task going on, as its often just larger areas selected for gathering, or some other production. A tasklist where users can alter the focus area for task could help to.

I find myself in the group B from the poll, and dont have much problem with task getting done. I find using boost temperary to change the focus on the people. Might not be the intented way for it, but it works for me.

And more advance option for work could be setting priorities depending on season and weather. For instance, if rain = hauling / take care of item halted by rain. Spring = priority planting / farming, if rain = stop watering plants.

There is one element that is having an huge impact that some players might not notice much, when it comes to task / jobs done related to time, is where all the things are stored and how far people might go. One example, having a log pile storage right next to timber, make at time one clanfolk often just be stationary making logs witch make it goes much faster. I would guess some players find logistic to be hauling there progression.

Have 3 screenshots of first winterday on one play. Its mostly brick and tittle roof. Most of the hired worker where part of the clan by the end off the summer, and the ones that where not I dismissed. I think the most I have seen off task is like 5500. My playstyle might not be they way its intended, but I found a way that works for me.

[monkeypunch87]

Originally posted by miauukisu:

I would perhaps go for a warning when amount of boosts is equal to amount of (working) folk, and that warning would repeat with every new boost attempt. Then at twice as many boosts as folk it would become impossible to add new boosts, before old ones are either done or removed (yes, have seen people boost jobs they don't have resources to complete...)
I would not remove old boosts automatically.

With your idea, I would always get warnings, when I want, for example, all my log piles hauled together in one place really quick. Or, if I move, as example, a full clothing cabinet. The dropped clothes get boosted, because I don't want the mess.

[Philtre]

The game Oxygen Not Included uses a Yellow Alert priority that is similar in effect to the priority boost. When you activate it, you get a full-screen yellow strobe effect and a siren noise that continues until the task is complete or you remove the Yellow Alert priority. It's very effective at 1) making it clear when the emergency has been resolved, and 2) being incredibly obnoxious while it's active, thus preventing you from using it routinely.

I don't think strobe lights and sirens would fit into Clanfol, but maybe something along the same conceptual lines of some kind of visual/audio signal that it's an emergency situation rather than just "priority 11" that will also make it (mildly) annoying to the player to have a boosted task active.

[TechRabbit]

Originally posted by monkeypunch87:

I would like something to ignore, because I don't have an issue with it right now. I usually boost picking up food from traders or something that I need immediatly done without changing skill order. I actually never change my skill order after the first setup per person and it still works fine.

This is really kind of the way to play with priority boosts. All P boosts should be for EMERGENCY needs and should be non persistent (IE over quickly). I think and have seen too many people use priority boosts on things like animal water troughs and feed troughs as a set it and forget it feature instead of setting them to higher priority and having their more skilled farmers handle this task.

[scrofula]

I *think* that what most people would like is a system to manually order a pawn to do something; something in the style of The Sims, where you select the pawn, click the item/station, and there is a button to order the pawn to immediately drop everything and follow THAT order. I don't know if this is feasible to implement and how it will interact with existing AI.

[monkeypunch87]

Originally posted by TechRabbit:

This is really kind of the way to play with priority boosts. All P boosts should be for EMERGENCY needs and should be non persistent (IE over quickly). I think and have seen too many people use priority boosts on things like animal water troughs and feed troughs as a set it and forget it feature instead of setting them to higher priority and having their more skilled farmers handle this task.

Maybe, boosts could fade away after 24 ingame hours, if player use it in this kind of fashion and maybe you get some kind of warning/explanation of the system then.

[monkeypunch87]

Originally posted by scrofula:

I *think* that what most people would like is a system to manually order a pawn to do something; something in the style of The Sims, where you select the pawn, click the item/station, and there is a button to order the pawn to immediately drop everything and follow THAT order. I don't know if this is feasible to implement and how it will interact with existing AI.

I wouldn't want and need it. I wouldn't want to control my clan so directly.

[scrofula]

I don't want it as well, I'm fairly happy with the priority system as it is, and I rarely if ever use boosts ;)
But from reading the Forums, I have the impression that most of the people that are frustrated by the priority system would like to order pawns more directly.

[Blorf]

Originally posted by scrofula:

I *think* that what most people would like is a system to manually order a pawn to do something; something in the style of The Sims, where you select the pawn, click the item/station, and there is a button to order the pawn to immediately drop everything and follow THAT order. I don't know if this is feasible to implement and how it will interact with existing AI.

I am heavily resistant to this is I feel it totally changes the nature of Clanfolk from a chilled out planning game to a micro management game. I really don't want that. I would much prefer to get the priority system to the point where people feel comfortable with it. If I ever cave in and add this feature, I will also never be able to remove it. This is why I have not done it. Adding Forced command would get around many of these growing pains issues with the priority system, but then people will not attempt to learn the system and in the end I think have a much lesser experience.

I think on this daily. My life would be so much easier if I just added forced command mode, but every time I ask people on Discord about it, the consensus is that it will ruin the game too. (These are people who have been playing for 5+ months in the demo beta)

Some day I may have to cave in on this, but I really want to get the priority system working as intended first. If in the end getting people to cut back on boosts and also task count is not enough still, then I may have to consider it once again.

Anyhow as I said, I do think on it a lot, but it feels like such a negative to me vs how I want Clanfolk to feel.

[monkeypunch87]

Originally posted by Blorf:

I think on this daily. My life would be so much easier if I just added forced command mode, but every time I ask people on Discord about it, the consensus is that it will ruin the game too.

Yeah, and I would agree.

[Sturm Trouper]

I've just played my first 35 hours or so, I use the boost system heavily and I like it as is. I periodically look for places to unboost and to overall decrease priority levels as I play. Overall, I'd say I probably have high task counts (usually 400-900, is that high? I'm sure some are much higher and some much lower?) and I boost fairly often; not only for emergencies but to tell my pawns what I really want.

I'm not at all frustrated by the system... maybe I'm an exception. I understand that if my pawns aren't doing what I want them to, it's because they're following the priorities I've established, so I should fix that. I would be annoyed if something boosted just became unboosted, or annoyed by "pop-ups" that tried to warn me. While the "make pawn do action X now" idea seems nice to have in theory, it's not really a replacement since its extraordinarily more micromanaging than the boost system. (It's also a lot of work for you, I expect, as you hinted at, and you have so many other good things to add to the game.) Given a choice, I'd stick with boost.

To turn the question back to you, if I understand correctly, the reason you think it's a problem is that people are not using it effectively, and they're becoming frustrated by that? If so, and you think people are having poorer experiences than they otherwise would because of this, maybe just offer a limited total number of boosts... like 3 or 5 or 10 or whatever seems appropriate. (Personally I wouldn't limit them, or I would allow the user to set the limiting amount... it gets the point across that limiting them is ideal without being preachy and still letting players still play the game their way.) Then you can have an interface which tracks tasks that are boosted. Each new one added bumps the oldest off the list. You can let people manually remove items from the list to make room. Or get fancy and let people reorder that list using the same "priority reordering" style buttons. Such a list would be helpful for players anyway (I don't think the one appearing in the Tasks menu shows all boosted areas, maybe just those that are active?). This would be simpler than having a full list of all tasks and letting the user manage that.

[Sturm Trouper]

Originally posted by Blorf:

I am heavily resistant to this is I feel it totally changes the nature of Clanfolk from a chilled our planning game to a micro management game. I really don't want that. I would much prefer to get the priority system to the point where people feel comfortable with it. If I ever cave in and add this feature, I will also never be able to remove it.

I agree with all this. And it's really not necessary. The system works pretty well. There have been a few ways I've found I've had to "micromanage" in the game with various levels of satisfaction, but I'll save that for another thread. If there's a problem with boost, I don't think the ability to force pawns to take tasks will fix it for most players.

[sakasiru]

When I started playing I also had such an "overboost" phase. But when I realized it was just too much and how boost and repeat task were hogging up workers, I quickle deboosted most stuff, leaving only time critical stuff (like butchering and cooking) on "permanent" boost so ingredients won't spoil or get eaten before I can use them.

So personally, I would leave it as it is and just let people figure out how the game works. When clanfolk doesn't get their tasks done, people will look into what's going wrong sooner or later on their own.