Gem Stones Are Too Rare for Multiplayer

[Tekkud]

There's a lot to say about the balance of the Ashlands and its balance, and honestly it does seem to come down to player expectations and taste in most cases. The fact that it's constant fighting isn't intrinsically bad, even if it is a ham-fisted way of achieving a war-like environment. But something that I believe is objectively not balanced is the frequency of drops for gem stones and, to a lesser extent, the amount of flametal on a map.

I ran the math on the fandom wiki. A world will have, on average, 15 of each gem stone. The entire world. 15. If you're playing alone then you get to make 5 fully upgraded weapons with each, that's neat, but the game advertises multiplayer of 10 people. 45 total gem stones across 10 players... everyone gets just 4.5 and that's after clearing out every last charred fortress.

I like the idea that the Ashlands are uniquely inhospitable. Even though I would prefer that they were tameable so that I could comfortably build in them after acquiring their spoils, I do get it. But the rarity of some resources from the Ashlands makes them unable to provide for a moderate or large group. My friends and I took out two charred fortresses, both times with a party of four players. Four players, and each time we received two gem stones. Two gem stones for four players, it's like the game wants us to bicker.

Anyway, I guess my point doesn't really require this word count. It's pretty simple: Gem stones shouldn't be especially rare how they are. So far, nothing has been in such a limited supply and I don't really see what value it adds. It's not like they create god-tier weapons that flatted armies in a single swing. It's just the regular next tier of equipment, but we only get to have a small handful for everybody.

[knighttemplar1960]

Set resource drops to x3 in map settings.

[OctoberSky]

Interesting point. Yet in other posts, single players who have not been enjoying Ashlands question whether the spawn mechanics[valheim.fandom.com] show a bias of the developers toward multi-player. An interesting co-op scenario where I come to your seed and help you secure your gems and then you come to my world with your now-devastating Ashlands gear and help me find my own set? This game is awesome.

[Draconis]

Originally posted by OctoberSky:

Interesting point. Yet in other posts, single players who have not been enjoying Ashlands question whether the spawn mechanics[valheim.fandom.com] show a bias of the developers toward multi-player. An interesting co-op scenario where I come to your seed and help you secure your gems and then you come to my world with your now-devastating Ashlands gear and help me find my own set? This game is awesome.

That can work well provided each player has an own world. But on a server shared by 10 players this will not work at all.
But afaik the devs are aware of that problem and try to find a solution. (e.g. they might remove the gems from the upgrade costs of already gemmed weapons)

[glass zebra]

Originally posted by Draconis:

Originally posted by OctoberSky:

Interesting point. Yet in other posts, single players who have not been enjoying Ashlands question whether the spawn mechanics[valheim.fandom.com] show a bias of the developers toward multi-player. An interesting co-op scenario where I come to your seed and help you secure your gems and then you come to my world with your now-devastating Ashlands gear and help me find my own set? This game is awesome.

That can work well provided each player has an own world. But on a server shared by 10 players this will not work at all.
But afaik the devs are aware of that problem and try to find a solution. (e.g. they might remove the gems from the upgrade costs of already gemmed weapons)

Sound both nice and boring. Upgrading gemmed weapons with a high gem cost is rather weird right now, since you are not improving the gemmed effect at all. They have the same rather irrelevant upgrade bonus as the mundane flametal weapons, just with all unique item cost removed and gem cost added. Imo outside of spears or similar low durability weapons, you can very much ignore that the upgrades exist atm, even more than in Mistlands or Plains. +6 physical damage has hardly any impact anymore.

[Draconis]

Originally posted by glass zebra:

Sound both nice and boring. Upgrading gemmed weapons with a high gem cost is rather weird right now, since you are not improving the gemmed effect at all. They have the same rather irrelevant upgrade bonus as the mundane flametal weapons, just with all unique item cost removed and gem cost added. Imo outside of spears or similar low durability weapons, you can very much ignore that the upgrades exist atm, even more than in Mistlands or Plains. +6 physical damage has hardly any impact anymore.

I think the better approach would be to add dungeons to the fortresses. And maybe some way to make the entrances appear on already explored land (wasn't there a command to update terrain for such a case?). If that's not possible it's bad for servers with long term played maps. Because it would require a new world to get the dungeons.

Either way, I think that would actually be the best approach to solve the problem of not having enough gems. I personally would not mind if that only affects new worlds, because I tend to start all over from time to time anyways. But I can't speak on behalf of the complete player base. Maybe I'm just part of a pretty small minority with that.

[glass zebra]

Originally posted by Draconis:

Originally posted by glass zebra:

Sound both nice and boring. Upgrading gemmed weapons with a high gem cost is rather weird right now, since you are not improving the gemmed effect at all. They have the same rather irrelevant upgrade bonus as the mundane flametal weapons, just with all unique item cost removed and gem cost added. Imo outside of spears or similar low durability weapons, you can very much ignore that the upgrades exist atm, even more than in Mistlands or Plains. +6 physical damage has hardly any impact anymore.

I think the better approach would be to add dungeons to the fortresses. And maybe some way to make the entrances appear on already explored land (wasn't there a command to update terrain for such a case?). If that's not possible it's bad for servers with long term played maps. Because it would require a new world to get the dungeons.

Either way, I think that would actually be the best approach to solve the problem of not having enough gems. I personally would not mind if that only affects new worlds, because I tend to start all over from time to time anyways. But I can't speak on behalf of the complete player base. Maybe I'm just part of a pretty small minority with that.

The could also put something like a crafting altar to Reto for gems with really expensive recipes which:
A. would make the whole "quest line" desirable to do
B. could make some underused items like the Morgen drops, Molten cores or Flametal/Eitr (there is so much of that after a few fortresses/holes and many can't really use it) have an extra use. It is sad that killing bigger enemies is not really useful.
C. Could solve the issue of the current lack of motivation to kill enemies except Asksvin in Ashlands
D. Could give some kind of "endgame" desire at the end of Ashlands after you got everything to summon the boss. Currently you are usually overstuffed with crafting mats solely from doing fortresses in solo (my sword user fought Fader with 0 Iolite though) and are probably still left with gem need with many people on the server. Ashlands atm feels like: "learn, do fortresses, fader. Maybe farm some Asksvin." And that is it.

Right now I would think they probably add some quickfix instead though. Seeing how you can just upgrade the mundane items to 3, they might have expected some people to just go for those instead? Probably a bad feeling in multiplayer. I like that there is a team decision on who gets what now (more than the crafting mat split they introduced in Mistlands), but being left out and having no option to catch up seems not great.

[Draconis]

Originally posted by glass zebra:

The could also put something like a crafting altar to Reto for gems with really expensive recipes which:
A. would make the whole "quest line" desirable to do
B. could make some underused items like the Morgen drops, Molten cores or Flametal/Eitr (there is so much of that after a few fortresses/holes and many can't really use it) have an extra use
C. Could solve the issue of the current lack of motivation to kill enemies except Asksvin in Ashlands
D. Could give some kind of "endgame" desire at the end of Ashlands after you got everything to summon the boss. Currently you are usually overstuffed with crafting mats solely from doing fortresses in solo (my sword user fought Fader with 0 Iolite though) and are probably still left with gem need with many people on the server. Ashlands atm feels like: "learn, do fortresses, fader. Maybe farm some Asksvin." And that is it.

Right now I would think they probably add some quickfix instead though. Seeing how you can just upgrade the mundane items to 3, they might have expected some people to just go for those instead? Probably a bad feeling in multiplayer. I like that there is a team decision on who gets what now (more than the crafting mat split they introduced in Mistlands), but being left out and having no option to catch up seems not great.

Another idea: How about some kind of reactor builing similar to the eitr refinery, where we can process other materials into gems? The devs could still decide what amount of materials, fuel and time would be needed to create gems, and if we could define the outcome by choosing an appropriate input material or if this would still be random.
Also that reactor could pose a threat of setting the close environment on fire or even have a chance to trigger a raid outside of the usual timescope (the charred would maybe not like anyone running a machine like that).

But to be honest I'm afraid they'll leave ashlands like it is now, maybe do some more or less "quick and dirty" fixes to address some of the problems and turn to the deep north...

I hope they will at least take some time with catching up on the missing polish between deep north and full release instead of doing the full release with freshly done deep north.
Especially because I think (mind you: think, not know) that the final release will attract many new players to the game, new servers to open and so it is worth it to actually do changes that may need a new world to take effect.

[glass zebra]

We might also just get more gem drops in Deep North. You can't upgrade the weapons over 2 anyway (not that you need to) and they've also added Eitr to Ashlands shortly after test server release.

[Tekkud]

Originally posted by Draconis:

Originally posted by glass zebra:

Sound both nice and boring. Upgrading gemmed weapons with a high gem cost is rather weird right now, since you are not improving the gemmed effect at all. They have the same rather irrelevant upgrade bonus as the mundane flametal weapons, just with all unique item cost removed and gem cost added. Imo outside of spears or similar low durability weapons, you can very much ignore that the upgrades exist atm, even more than in Mistlands or Plains. +6 physical damage has hardly any impact anymore.

I think the better approach would be to add dungeons to the fortresses. And maybe some way to make the entrances appear on already explored land (wasn't there a command to update terrain for such a case?). If that's not possible it's bad for servers with long term played maps. Because it would require a new world to get the dungeons.

Either way, I think that would actually be the best approach to solve the problem of not having enough gems. I personally would not mind if that only affects new worlds, because I tend to start all over from time to time anyways. But I can't speak on behalf of the complete player base. Maybe I'm just part of a pretty small minority with that.

I'm not sure that the gems need to be so precious and difficult to acquire at all. Don't get me wrong, there should be a fight between us and at least some key items, but until now there has never been a crafting component that is in a strict limited supply and that has been okay. Make the bell fragments rarer, (maybe) make the cores rarer but, as for the gems, drop 5x as many at the forts and have valkyries drop them occasionally as well.

I'm of the thinking that a game which advertises multiplayer groups and has a gameplay loop revolving around equipment enhancement should not stand in the way of enhancing equipment for all players, to whatever degree the players are willing to fight for. Let us make every single elemental weapon, fully upgraded, for every player, if we're willing to put in the work.

[Tekkud]

Originally posted by OctoberSky:

Interesting point. Yet in other posts, single players who have not been enjoying Ashlands question whether the spawn mechanics[valheim.fandom.com] show a bias of the developers toward multi-player. An interesting co-op scenario where I come to your seed and help you secure your gems and then you come to my world with your now-devastating Ashlands gear and help me find my own set? This game is awesome.

The spawn mechanics are certainly overbearing and ham-fisted, making the Ashlands feel very inhospitable to a single player, but I don't think it's because it was balanced for multiplayer.

I actually find it easier to move around in the Ashlands alone. I draw less attention, the enemies aren't buffed for multiple players, and I can even storm a fortress solo fairly easily. I think the Ashlands are balanced for a different approach is all. I won't even go outside there unless I am well fed, carrying fires resist and healing mead, rested, and it's morning. I always walk instead of run, carry a portal, and won't even travel for a full day before placing the portal down to sleep and reset. And that's after learning movesets and parry timing for all enemies.

I don't like that this is how the Ashlands are. I would much prefer the Helldivers approach: Have challenging enemy patrol groups that are a nightmare to fight but avoidable with diligence, unavoidable at POI's. That makes the biome hard and war-like without making it a burden to play in. But hey, that's for a different discussion.

Point is, I think the developers have small groups or even solo players in mind, they just didn't send the memo that you can't survive in the Ashlands playing the way that works everywhere else.

[Zombits]

no other way than 3x ressource for multiplyer . There was enough in solo tp upgrade everything.

[vandalism]

The loot balance in this game is wacky. With 1x you are kinda screwed out of stuff for multiplayer. With 3x you are swimming in random crap and then feel like the rare loot is like what it should normally be. I think they need to make a pass at all loot and think about how it should be balanced.