Multiple Autosaves, pls!

[MarQan]

Just lost 3 hours of gameplay because the autosave went off seconds before a prevantable loss.
Then in my next game, also 2-3 hours in, the Autosave function stops working for an in-game week, loading a 7 day earlier save. I restart the game to see if that helps, and then the save just completely stops working, loading a black screen.

And as much fun as it is to break my immersion by saving manually every day, I'd prefer having multiple autosaves.

I'm actually afraid of starting another scenario in Survival mode after experiencing this.

[Alcator]

Autosave is intended to make the loss less severe if your game crashes.
You should save your progress regularly in case you need to go back to an earlier, "unscrewed" state.

[MarQan]

Thank you!
I'll make sure to save often and have multiple save slots in my next Survival game to avoid progression due to savegame corruption!

[amordron]

Your talking ♥♥♥ it survival a Ironman mode meant to not allow save scumming your asking for exactly what the mode is made to not have.

If you want multi saves play on any other diff than you get full saves quick saves and auto saves to load before a loss.

On survival you are not meant to be able to reload at all other than for a crash what your case was not by your own testament or needing to step away it is not there to prevent a loss. That is the whole idea of Ironman.

As for saves not working that is another issue and a bug you should report in the big fourm.

[MarQan]

The game was released without Ironman mode, with autosave feature, but manual saves are more than enough to prevent loss due to crashes. Countless games without Ironman mode also have autosave functionality
So I wonder what was the point of having autosave then?

No, I was never seriously talking about savescumming in Ironman mode, only as a sarcastic asnwer to Alcator's trolling.

[amordron]

Your vary first line in your op is talking about save scumming your reply was not what I was basing my answer on. But it did support that as the reason you wanted it. Your op complains that’s you lose 3 hours of game play due to the auto save going of seconds before a preventable loss that sounds like it’s doing exactly what it’s meant to make it so if you load into a save you can’t prevent it since no time preventing ave scumming.

The game not comming out with Ironman at release means nothing the game don’t even have extreme on release furthermore survivor. Fact is survivor is Ironman and has been from when it was first added all that matters is that it is Ironman when it became Ironman means nothing.

Auto saves as said are there for in case of a crash not for save scumming your post ask for multi auto saves which is only usefull to allow save scumming a single save a lot is all you need for crash protection.

Yes countless games with Ironman also have autosaves just like frostpunk dose. I don’t know of a single Ironman game that has multi autosaves. Every single one I know use a single one as multi only makes save scumming easier. There is games that make backups of the same save thou.

If you are having save corruption often enough for it to matter that’s a bug and should be treated as such and reported in bug reports or better emailing them. The fix is not allowing save scumming.

[MarQan]

I was talking about 2 different cases in which multiple autosaves are useful.
One was in a relaxing normal game, and the other in Ironman mode.

Your assumption that autosaves are only there to prevent progression loss is clearly wrong.
Because as I mentioned autosave functionality is in many other games that have manual saves or have no ironman mode at all. Autosave is in there, so you don't have to save manually, and can just play the game.
It's a QoL feature.

And the assumption that having only 1 autosave prevents savescumming in ironman mode is also most likely wrong. It definitely is for most singleplayer games with ironman mode. I bet I can find the save location in 5 minutes and just copy and restore my Ironman save.

So my first example was to show it as a QoL feature, and my second is to show that 1 autosave does not protect against savegame corruption. Nothing does btw, there's no way to ensure that the game will always save properly. That's why backups would be useful.
And you can make those backups invisible in case of Ironman mode to keep the illusion of having no way to savescum.

I'm really not sure why you're against a polite feature request. A feature that would have 0 negative effects on your gameplay experience.

[amordron]

Normal relaxing game you already have multi saves, thou multi auto saves there is no issue with there. The auto saves are to prevent crashes in forstpunk its why they exist currently, quick saves are to quickly save if your going to do something risky and saves for multi slots.

Ironman multisaves go adverse to the vary premise. Backups of the same save is fine but not multi.

Autosaves are only there to prevent progression loss this is not an assumption this is known right from the vary definition of ironman which is what survivor is. Ironman is one chance no chance to reload and revert after making a call. The quicksave system is whats there for making saves you revert to when trying other things or making calls you might undo. in lower diffs.


Any game you can find the save location and do that its possible in any single player ironman game. Doesn't change that 1 autosave reduces the ease of savescumming. I never said it prevents it. It dose reduce the ease of it. As such it is something that helps prevent save scumming. No its not a 100% fix but no reason to make it easier for them.

As said if you have save file corrupt issue suggesting a BACKUP of the same save prevents that. Allowing for save scumming is not the fix to that.

In the end survivor should NOT ever have multi autosaves.

Other diffs that's fine but never said otherwise about other diffs my posts have always been about survivor as that IS the diff you brought up never did you say what the diff was for your other game as such unless otherwise said the logical conclusion is the same diff as you mentioned it was your next game as such a retry. When making a point it is up to you to make it clear as such if you are talking about two different cases of two different diffs you need to specify that.

I am completely adverse making a ironman mode not ironman. Which is what your suggestion is. Making a mode that is ironman not ironman vary much is a negative gameplay factor. It reduces the value of the achievements and the diff as a whole. Yes people can cheese it if they want thats on them the baseline diff remains the same even if people cheese. I have no issue with people file backup save scumming if they want to put the effort in to do that so long as the base difficulty remains unchanged you are suggesting a base difficulty change. This dose affect me as it makes people think the diff is made to be like that vs showing that those that cheese and abuse it are clearly exploiting.

When talking about other diffs I have no issue with it but this is the FIRST time you brought up other diffs.

[Eltia]

F5 for Quick Save, F9 for Quick Load.

[MarQan]

So on one hand you're suggesting that autosaves are in non-ironman games because players can't be trusted to save regularly.
On the other hand you're telling me to save regularly. Okay..

Even though we established how easy it to savescum in most Ironman games (it's literally just ALT+Tab, CTRL+C, CTRL+V, ALT+Tab), you still think that Ironman should be protected for some magical reason. But I don't even wanna destroy that illusion.

I specifically stated that additional saves/backups could be made invisible to the player, you still arguing that Ironman should only have 1 save.
The backups could easily be made so that you can only find it through the file browser, essentially it would be as hard to use them as it is to savescum now.

Originally posted by MarQan:

That's why backups would be useful.
And you can make those backups invisible in case of Ironman mode to keep the illusion of having no way to savescum.

Originally posted by amordron:

Doesn't change that 1 autosave reduces the ease of savescumming. I never said it prevents it. It dose reduce the ease of it. As such it is something that helps prevent save scumming.

Originally posted by amordron:

I am completely adverse making a ironman mode not ironman. Which is what your suggestion is.

So having to open filebrowser to savescum in case of 1 autosave is enough protection to preserve the sanctity of ironman mode. But if in the same folder there are backups (god forbid!), then ironman mode is destroyed!
Okay...

Yeah, you're right, I don't spell out everything. Mainly because I didn't expect novel-length arguments against a simple feature. I just hastily gave 2 examples where it would be useful..

I'd really appreciate if people would put more energy into trying to understand what I'm saying and trying to come up with a better solution for all of us, instead of misinterpreting what I'm saying and argue against something I never meant :D That would be truly amazing!
Maybe I didn't come to this world to ruin your gameplay experience? Maybe there's a middleground?

So I'm done with this conversation here with you, amordron, because we're clearly not understanding eachother.
However if you're legit interested (or just want to swear at me in private :D), you can add me, I'd gladly talk about this or anything else in instant messages, those are much better. And then we're not bumping this unconstructive argument to the front page every time either.

[amordron]

Originally posted by MarQan:

So on one hand you're suggesting that autosaves are in non-ironman games because players can't be trusted to save regularly.
On the other hand you're telling me to save regularly. Okay..

Even though we established how easy it to savescum in most Ironman games (it's literally just ALT+Tab, CTRL+C, CTRL+V, ALT+Tab), you still think that Ironman should be protected for some magical reason. But I don't even wanna destroy that illusion.

I specifically stated that additional saves/backups could be made invisible to the player, you still arguing that Ironman should only have 1 save.
The backups could easily be made so that you can only find it through the file browser, essentially it would be as hard to use them as it is to savescum now.

As said have no issues with backups for ironman even outright said that is fine. Additional saves being invis to the player is the same as what happens now it saves and overrides the old. Having extra saves that only the first one is loaded is no diffrent than having one so asking for "invis ones is not asking for anything diffrent.

If there invis multi saves not overriding than that is an issue as to be usefull there has to be a way to pick that save as the one to use either by game or you this is found out quickly by players and will be used to there advantage. As such adding ease to save scumming via making them not need to think in advance to save scum. There is no reason what so ever easier for save scummers.

Its not a magical reason its a matter of ease. Simple as that. IF you want to savescum via a exploit thats fine but it shows the intended diff of a mode. IF you allow it ouyt of the box that shows the mode as a eaiser mode it is a nerf to that diff. This is not hard to understand.

Originally posted by MarQan:

So having to open filebrowser to savescum in case of 1 autosave is enough protection to preserve the sanctity of ironman mode. But if in the same folder there are backups (god forbid!), then ironman mode is destroyed!
Okay...

Again has nothing at all with prevent save scumming but making require you to exploit in order to save scum. This is enough to preserve its sancity as again YOU going and cheating via the file exploit is a exploit and you cant agrue that its not. The devs allowing multi saves is not expoitaion but you correctly playing large diff.

Once again I have in my 2nd post said backups are fine as backups are of the SAME SAVE as such they are not multi saves as you suggest. Only multi saves do I have a issue with you really should read before you claim another is not reading.

Originally posted by MarQan:

I'd really appreciate if people would put more energy into trying to understand what I'm saying and trying to come up with a better solution for all of us, instead of misinterpreting what I'm saying and argue against something I never meant :D That would be truly amazing!
Maybe I didn't come to this world to ruin your gameplay experience? Maybe there's a middleground?

So I'm done with this conversation here with you, amordron, because we're clearly not understanding eachother.
However if you're legit interested (or just want to swear at me in private :D), you can add me, I'd gladly talk about this or anything else in instant messages, those are much better. And then we're not bumping this unconstructive argument to the front page every time either.

I am agrueing exactly what you asked for. You asked for a system that uses more than one save. For as you said right in your first and 2nd post for save scumming due to "because the autosave went off seconds before a prevantable loss." If you where not yalknig about save scumming should not include it as one of your reasons by not making yourself clear as said you have only yourself to blame when people think you are trying to save scum after asking for that reason.

The middle ground I did suggest. Backups to prevent save loss of corruption but NOT multi saves. If again you bothered to read. Rather thou you claim no other suggestion was given when it was.


You can stop posting if you want only Makes your idea even less likly to be added if you can’t defend it as shown here. Bumping to the top of a page is a good thing for an idea to get seen while if your point is really worth adding no amount of others poking holes into that will change it. FCf you yourself don’t defend it/ address issues shows others and most importantly the devs it’s not worth it as there is enough people that don’t like vs like. Esp if there reasons make sense like myn of preserving a mode made to be Ironman as Ironman.