XP System - Rust - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=Cpt Facepunch;49396135]Balancing large clans and solo player dont need rules. Legacy was better for solo player, but this had easy causes. The ressources was limited and it make no sense to have 10 teammates because they cant gather more stuff. 2-3 farming people was the perfect size. But the new Rust have much more ressources. There are enough ressources for 20 clan mates around the base. The people adapt to this and the clans will be bigger and bigger. The only way to balance all people are the enviromental circumstances.[/QUOTE] Yes i think the perfect balance should be the most fun with 3-4 player groups and make huge groups less desirable . Antigrind is on the to-do list also. Arent they adding woodpiles back?

[QUOTE=Zipper Bear;49396052]I think that if there were more PVE threats like the helicopter that prefer attacking groups over solo/small groups, and the easy to abuse features that vachon is describing below were changed, that would go a long way towards fixing the incredible imbalance of the big groups.[/QUOTE] First, I wouldn't mind the chopper modification if you said, "attacked the best geared players available," rather than specifically targeting groups. From what I understand, that's already happening. Also, there is no incredible imbalance between groups and solos. Not trying to dis you, Zipper, but I think you're missing the point. Groups do better because more people can achieve bigger things more efficiently and faster -- not just in Rust, but in real life. Trying making a sandwich in a world without grocery stores; [URL="http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/17/9344597/man-spent-six-months-1500-making-sandwich-from-scratch"] it's not easy. [/URL] I think that the game's state right now is one where there isn't really a mid-game, so the dichotomy is very, very obvious, but that's motivation to add more longevity to a server's lifecycle by adding mid-game content, not to put artificial restrictions on groups. And even in the current game state, I've played solo and with groups and I never have trouble. Solo, I infiltrate groups to rob them or conduct small raids and just in general try to play smart. If a bunch of armed dudes are running around a certain area, than just like in real life, I don't go there without a good plan. People just need to learn to play smart, and not expect to achieve the same things as an individual as they might if they were willing to join groups. It's not like Rust has Achievements. The social aspect that everyone sees as groups v solos is actually just a demonstration of the impotence of being anti-social. [editline]27th December 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Cpt Facepunch;49396135]Balancing large clans and solo player dont need rules. Legacy was better for solo player, but this had easy causes. The ressources was limited and it make no sense to have 10 teammates because they cant gather more stuff. 2-3 farming people was the perfect size. But the new Rust have much more ressources. There are enough ressources for 20 clan mates around the base. The people adapt to this and the clans will be bigger and bigger. The only way to balance all people are the enviromental circumstances.[/QUOTE] That's weird, because even with a base in metal valley, my 15+ man team did incredibly well in legacy.

Having people involved in social interaction, sharing the same territory and having the same goal its what define a society. [B]Together everyone achieves more[/B], but... You can survive solo too, you just have to be smart and not engage in fights with groups, don't build big (no need; you play alone) and you should be fine. I witness wonderfull things on Rust. People having towns where you can build you own selfish house and still be with a large group of people. Farm, hunt, trade, defend and raid. If you don't want to interact with human aspect, then go and play single player games.

I think people who prefer to play alone should get a Perk that allows them to move quietly, shadow warrior style. Sprinting Less sounding like walking on diapers, and not needing to be crouching to be completely silent.

[QUOTE=Mr. Glass;49399193]I think people who prefer to play alone should get a Perk that allows them to move quietly, shadow warrior style. Sprinting Less sounding like walking on diapers, and not needing to be crouching to be completely silent.[/QUOTE] How would the game determine if your solo or not? Good idea but I just don't see it plausible in adding.

[QUOTE=SnakApathy94;49399673]How would the game determine if your solo or not? Good idea but I just don't see it plausible in adding.[/QUOTE] This is precisely the problem, there is no group system that awards arbitrary bonuses to people working together. And there doesn't need to be, just like solo play doesn't need any make believe bonuses. The advantages to either are naturally inherent, and it's up to the player(s) to capitalize on them or not.

Excuse my scepticism about the new plans but I don't really like the advantages of faster movement speed, max health and health regeneration. Improve our gathering rate, crafting queue and the other stuff are fine but the 3 things mentioned first will just bring unfair advantages. A minimal increase of movement speed or health, maybe 5-10% max is reasonable. I'm not against the possibility of 1 player running faster, or having more health or regenerating health but I think it shouldn't be all three of it. Make it dependent on the player's behaviour. What about we can get fat if we eat for more than 1000 food and become slower, but more resistant to damage? If you have a lot of fat on your arm a bullet hitting it might just not penetrate important muscles and get stuck in all the fat. I would love to see some fat gangsters around. I'm really sad we won't get to ride horses anytime soon, at least it's not indicated by the roadmap. Can't we at least have salvaged cross bikes?

[QUOTE=garry;49382089]Large groups should always be more powerful than a single person. That's how it works.[/QUOTE] Garry, if thats the case, aren't you indirectly forcing people to cooperate? I think that it encroaches on the player's freedom to choose how they want to play rust if every server has multiple huge clans dominating the map. Basically, I have to team up if I want to play rust, as the groups will always be more powerful than me. I always loved the lone wolf life, scrounging a few resources to get my base up, constantly in fear someone would pop off a headshot from an unknown position, slowly gaining ground and getting established, with all these threats all around me. I just think there needs to be some kind of balance that makes groups more powerful, but not to the point where its impossible to make any progress as a solo player and/or take them down.

[QUOTE=Karma.;49413305]Garry, if thats the case, aren't you indirectly forcing people to cooperate? I think that it encroaches on the player's freedom to choose how they want to play rust if every server has multiple huge clans dominating the map. Basically, I have to team up if I want to play rust, as the groups will always be more powerful than me. I always loved the lone wolf life, scrounging a few resources to get my base up, constantly in fear someone would pop off a headshot from an unknown position, slowly gaining ground and getting established, with all these threats all around me. I just think there needs to be some kind of balance that makes groups more powerful, but not to the point where its impossible to make any progress as a solo player and/or take them down.[/QUOTE] I play solo and I'm already capable of this. They don't need to change how this works because what he said is basic reality, the larger group will aways (most likely) defeat the larger group. We need something that the large group can focus on besides the n00bies starting off, such as a powerful AI mob or some end game misc like statues or something.

[QUOTE=SnakApathy94;49399673]How would the game determine if your solo or not? Good idea but I just don't see it plausible in adding.[/QUOTE] By checking if you share tool cupboards with other people.

[QUOTE=Mr. Glass;49413763]By checking if you share tool cupboards with other people.[/QUOTE] Oh so when the team of 10 all have this perk because only one of there members does the building and is the only one with access to the cupboard , that means all 10 of them get this perk aswell, correct? Your idea is flawed, and will not work, ever. you have to look thru the eyes of someone who is trying to exploit your system, and right now that idea is extremely exploitable.

i have played rust for about 300-400 hours and i would hate an xp system.. i have played from the very begining and loved it every step of the way and like some people here said ark as tryed somthing very similar and it makes the game feel very very grindy.. the thing that makes rust great im my opinion is that you can play 3 houers and have 100 wood and an axe or you can get lucky and have a huge ass base and c4s becouse you got lucky and killed a guy with your rock.. i think that rust should improve on what it has and makes more items and animals improve some scripts and graphics and it will be one of the best games on the market.. i really hope someone at facepunch is reading this and cares i cant be alone in this! thank you for reading

[QUOTE=Karma.;49413305]Garry, if thats the case, aren't you indirectly forcing people to cooperate? I think that it encroaches on the player's freedom to choose how they want to play rust if every server has multiple huge clans dominating the map. Basically, I have to team up if I want to play rust, as the groups will always be more powerful than me. I always loved the lone wolf life, scrounging a few resources to get my base up, constantly in fear someone would pop off a headshot from an unknown position, slowly gaining ground and getting established, with all these threats all around me. I just think there needs to be some kind of balance that makes groups more powerful, but not to the point where its impossible to make any progress as a solo player and/or take them down.[/QUOTE] A point others have made: why should you, as a single player, be more powerful than any other single member of a group simply because you don't want to play with others?

[QUOTE=Kurogo;49416075]A point others have made: why should you, as a single player, be more powerful than any other single member of a group simply because you don't want to play with others?[/QUOTE] Do you read that last sentence he wrote? The one saying groups should be more powerful, but not ridiculously powerful? [QUOTE=Karma.;49413305]I just think there needs to be some kind of balance that makes groups more powerful, but not to the point where its impossible to make any progress as a solo player and/or take them down.[/QUOTE] This line?

[QUOTE=Zipper Bear;49416765]Do you read that last sentence he wrote? The one saying groups should be more powerful, but not ridiculously powerful? This line?[/QUOTE] Did you happen to read this line that I wrote? [QUOTE=Kurogo;49403540]... there is no group system that awards arbitrary bonuses to people working together...[/QUOTE] So there doesn't need to be any arbitrary mechanics to balance it out. Something already exists in the game to balance out large groups: making your own large group. If he or anyone else doesn't want to do that, then face the consequences of your choice. It's like me choosing that I don't want to have to build anything and expecting them to add some kind of protection when I'm logged out.

I have a large group and I dont like the suggestion of xp system eww should be able to jump in as a newbie and be on the same level

[QUOTE=Kurogo;49417052]Did you happen to read this line that I wrote? So there doesn't need to be any arbitrary mechanics to balance it out. Something already exists in the game to balance out large groups: making your own large group. If he or anyone else doesn't want to do that, then face the consequences of your choice. It's like me choosing that I don't want to have to build anything and expecting them to add some kind of protection when I'm logged out.[/QUOTE] Kurogo why are you against the idea of making the game more dynamic and challenging for groups? If you have a lot of solo player activity its going to make for a much more interesting and fun experience, I think. I'm not talking about "arbitrary mechanics". In previous posts I've discussed ideas like sabotage of quarries and pumpjacks, stealth equipment (and possibly skills now with XP system), stealth combat, cheap raiding tech that can be put together at low cost and will cause significant damage, and a whole lot of other cool stuff that can be used to buff the group vs. solo dynamic. to ignore that some players just don't fancy teaming up with a bunch of other people is to ignore a lot of what I came to love about rust in the first place. I think others will agree, I'm not the only one who likes to play the game like a hermit, and make a few close friends in game, not join together with a huge group. So, Garry please don't ignore me :weeb:

[QUOTE=Karma.;49417612]Kurogo why are you against the idea of making the game more dynamic and challenging for groups? If you have a lot of solo player activity its going to make for a much more interesting and fun experience, I think. I'm not talking about "arbitrary mechanics". In previous posts I've discussed ideas like sabotage of quarries and pumpjacks, stealth equipment (and possibly skills now with XP system), stealth combat, cheap raiding tech that can be put together at low cost and will cause significant damage, and a whole lot of other cool stuff that can be used to buff the group vs. solo dynamic. to ignore that some players just don't fancy teaming up with a bunch of other people is to ignore a lot of what I came to love about rust in the first place. I think others will agree, I'm not the only one who likes to play the game like a hermit, and make a few close friends in game, not join together with a huge group. So, Garry please don't ignore me :weeb:[/QUOTE] I'm not against making the game challenging for anyone, groups or solo players. What I'm against is making the game biased against them. Rust is about making decisions and learning from the consequences, working to gain an advantage. Solo play is only interesting to those that like solo play; just like group play is only interesting to those that like grouping. The ideas you've brought up, sabotage and whatnot, should be brought up to make the game more interesting, not because there is a perceived group vs solo dynamic. And to think there should be is ridiculous. You are one guy, not versus a group, but versus several other guys. The odds say you shouldn't win. That's life, there aren't any participation awards. If you haven't done anything to earn an advantage, then you shouldn't be given one just because reasons. [editline]30th December 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Travis10123;49417583]I have a large group and I dont like the suggestion of xp system eww should be able to jump in as a newbie and be on the same level[/QUOTE] The xp system is replacing advantages based on luck with advantages based on effort. Newspawns shouldn't ever be on the same level as server vets.

[QUOTE=garry;49382089]Large groups should always be more powerful than a single person. That's how it works.[/QUOTE] I totally agree with you, but new people should have a chance? especially since they're inexperienced, giving larger groups even more power would maybe ruin it for some of the newcomers? What do you think?

[QUOTE=Mike Menard;49418255]I totally agree with you, but new people should have a chance? especially since they're inexperienced, giving larger groups even more power would maybe ruin it for some of the newcomers? What do you think?[/QUOTE] He's not giving larger groups more power. He's giving everyone more power, they just have to earn it.

I and others like the game just fine. For me the best part of the game is struggling to be on top, that's what makes a rust so fun. the struggle, the hunt, the hunted. I have never played a game where you the threat of being killed pumps your body with adrenaline. I think Rust is just fine how it is, just like all games it just needs some polishing. right now optimization obviously is a big one. balancing, and some more to the backdrop of the game. If Garry is still reading this shit. Play ark for 4 hours. the XP system first sounds awesome and works well but quickly becomes ridiculous as you can often run faster than fucking velociraptors, and jump to ridiculous heights basically making having a mount that could fly pointless. when a dude just runs up and stabs at T Rex in the ass with a wooden spoon it just dies the game itself just seems like a ridiculous arcade. Do you all want rust to play like this?? That does not sound like Rust all at. I think I saw somebody post pictures of old robots. I like the idea and frightening at the same time. can you imagine running away from raiders with bolts, just to turn around the corner of an old city and have a hulking mass of metal beast roar to life. guns trained on you. the more I hear about about AI in the game the more it sounds like would be very challenging something that forces big groups and small groups to either work together or both parish. some kind of monster, robot, deathclaw ripoff. [editline]30th December 2015[/editline] Xp systems would work the best with technology level. And help with rebalancing

[QUOTE=Kurogo;49417052]So there doesn't need to be any arbitrary mechanics to balance it out. Something already exists in the game to balance out large groups: making your own large group. If he or anyone else doesn't want to do that, then face the consequences of your choice. It's like me choosing that I don't want to have to build anything and expecting them to add some kind of protection when I'm logged out.[/QUOTE] OK so everyone can agree that a group of people has a natural advantage over solo players, right? That has never been in debate, it's a simple case of numbers advantage. So why then, are there mechanics put into the game designed to make group play even easier? The wounded player feature, where you can be brought back from the dead if your friend comes over and picks you up. It's not already bad enough you're getting zerged by a group of 15 players, but now when you manage to actually shoot one of them, they just have to suppress you long enough to pick their teammate back up? Base defense, in the form of sentry turrets, are only available to players who can down the helicopter, and hold it long enough to get the loot, which is dominated by big groups. But the groups never had a problem with base defense before, why are they the ones who need to be helped further? The hunger system where the big group of players gets to save food because they can sit by the fire and regen to 100% hp. How is it not an arbitrary restriction to force solo players to use more food to stay alive? What, do fires not work correctly without a circlejerk surrounding it? I realize food is not a big deal right now because metabolism isn't working to its full potential, but what happens when they increase the need to eat? Solo players will need to make more food runs, and the groups will be able to save that much more time that they can use to dominate the server further. This is what I don't understand about this knee jerk reaction to anybody suggesting that groups are too strong. The "groups SHOULD be stronger! There shouldn't be any arbitrary restrictions!" card gets played almost instantly, but the person using it never acknowledges that arbitrary restrictions ALREADY exist in the game, they're just favoring groups so they're fine. There's a reason why every week the groups get bigger and bigger, and it's because no other strategy is viable. Groups shouldn't get rewarded with rare loot because they killed the helicopter using EZmode tactics. Their reward should be getting to live in their base another day. They shouldn't get any gathering shortcuts, because they already have a significant advantage to gathering that small groups and solo players just don't have. They certainly shouldn't receive any second chances in a gunfight, because if you manage to die in a 15v2 fight, you deserve to stay dead.

[QUOTE=Zipper Bear;49422479]OK so everyone can agree that a group of people has a natural advantage over solo players, right? That has never been in debate, it's a simple case of numbers advantage. So why then, are there mechanics put into the game designed to make group play even easier? The wounded player feature, where you can be brought back from the dead if your friend comes over and picks you up. It's not already bad enough you're getting zerged by a group of 15 players, but now when you manage to actually shoot one of them, they just have to suppress you long enough to pick their teammate back up? Base defense, in the form of sentry turrets, are only available to players who can down the helicopter, and hold it long enough to get the loot, which is dominated by big groups. But the groups never had a problem with base defense before, why are they the ones who need to be helped further? The hunger system where the big group of players gets to save food because they can sit by the fire and regen to 100% hp. How is it not an arbitrary restriction to force solo players to use more food to stay alive? What, do fires not work correctly without a circlejerk surrounding it? I realize food is not a big deal right now because metabolism isn't working to its full potential, but what happens when they increase the need to eat? Solo players will need to make more food runs, and the groups will be able to save that much more time that they can use to dominate the server further. This is what I don't understand about this knee jerk reaction to anybody suggesting that groups are too strong. The "groups SHOULD be stronger! There shouldn't be any arbitrary restrictions!" card gets played almost instantly, but the person using it never acknowledges that arbitrary restrictions ALREADY exist in the game, they're just favoring groups so they're fine. There's a reason why every week the groups get bigger and bigger, and it's because no other strategy is viable. Groups shouldn't get rewarded with rare loot because they killed the helicopter using EZmode tactics. Their reward should be getting to live in their base another day. They shouldn't get any gathering shortcuts, because they already have a significant advantage to gathering that small groups and solo players just don't have. They certainly shouldn't receive any second chances in a gunfight, because if you manage to die in a 15v2 fight, you deserve to stay dead.[/QUOTE] You don't need 15 players to be picked up, just 2. To complain about this feature is to complain that any more than 1 person can work together in this game. I've built 3 sentry turrets without ever killing the chopper. Unless they changed it so the parts don't drop from air drops anymore, this is something solo players can also do. Food/hunger is a joke right now, but apparently campfires need to be fixed as well. I haven't noticed a difference in the regen when I'm alone or with buddies, but if there is one, it's quite possibly the only real issue between groups and solo players. If that's the case, complain about that, because it doesn't make any sense. The reaction isn't knee jerk, it's understanding. What these guys are asking for doesn't balance the game for anyone. They want their effort to be equal to the effort of multiple people or they want punishments enforced on people who prefer a different play style. And that's all this is, one play style versus another. No one is saying they have to forsake their solitary ways and live their lives in the kumbiya community, but if the 15 guys bitching about groups worked together long enough to chase off the 15 guys they're bitching about, they'd realize balance already exists in the game.

[QUOTE=Kurogo;49422815] Food/hunger is a joke right now, but apparently campfires need to be fixed as well. I haven't noticed a difference in the regen when I'm alone or with buddies, but if there is one, it's quite possibly the only real issue between groups and solo players. If that's the case, complain about that, because it doesn't make any sense.[/QUOTE] Comfort determines the max health you will regen to, base at campfire is 50% then 25% per nearby player. At 100% you will regen to 100hp standing there. As for the picking up system, I can imagine they are intending to revamp it along with the million other things on the list...It needs to be something like a decent length animation of picking the person up or applying a bandage to them that also leaves the person helping immobile/vulnerable for a few seconds, because right now it can be done in <.5s as you run over their body and they instantly get a second chance to fight. [QUOTE=Zipper Bear;49422479]words[/QUOTE] Aside from some of those smaller things mentioned, I don't actually see much wrong with groups compared to solo play. They may have 10x the gathering power, but they need to spend 10x the resources to craft all gear, and they need to build a much bigger base to support all those people and resources, which requires far more again.

IDK where you are getting that I want to mitigate efforts made by groups and make it equal to my solitary effort, that is not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying simply that especially because of PvP (kumbiya community? what?), solo players need ways to overcome the advantages possessed by groups. Otherwise, they should just integrate grouping into the game completely, as there would be no point to play as a solo player. Why would I want to farm and be a resource for big raiding groups? It completely takes away any point to playing the game as a solo player if there is no chance I'm going to be able to challenge a group in any way. That is unbalanced, and the devs would be cutting themselves short if they didn't take it into consideration. Just what I think, no amount of argument is going to change my mind.

I get it, I stoped playing for the same reason. It's more a clan vs clan game right now. No room for small groups are solo players.

[QUOTE=Kurogo;49417921] The xp system is replacing advantages based on luck with advantages based on effort. Newspawns shouldn't ever be on the same level as server vets.[/QUOTE] Thats fine by me I havent died in nearly a week rofl and I play on a 80+ server with my group its not me and my group im worried about its the newbies and their ability to fight back which as it is it terrible "Newspawns shouldn't ever be on the same level as server vets." I think they should be thats your own opinion I want it to be competitive for everyone server vets are already loaded with gear and thus their power and ability to fight is increased you dont need to give them better base stats lol terrible idea.

There are things that can be done to aid in dedicated solo play without applying penalties to those who run in numbers, by rewarding play-styles that don't lend well to traditional group play... but not all of them are simple and easy asset additions, and none of them seem to be on any kind of roadmap or mindmap. It's perfectly valid to say that stat boosts as a reward for time spent on a server just increase the disparity between established groups and new players joining a server, on top of all the other inherent uphill battles said players would potentially face (numbers advantage, disparity of resources/gear, blueprint knowledge, reputation etc.). Yes it makes sense, you're rewarded for your efforts. But what's fair and just taken by itself in the aether needs to be viewed for its impact on the game as a whole. If you can buy significant innate advantages for your avatar with XP, on top of everything else, it has the potential to limit the already small number of players who were willing to join a server more than 2-3 days after a wipe when there were options to avoid it. XP simply as a replacement for blueprints is... workable. In other words, you buy your tech knowledge and choose your path instead of relying on random loot drops. IMNSHO, this far into the game's development, inserting a generic experience point system the likes of which have been around since a decade before many people here were even born seems a tad... unambitious.

[QUOTE=Karma.;49423645]IDK where you are getting that I want to mitigate efforts made by groups and make it equal to my solitary effort, that is not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying simply that especially because of PvP (kumbiya community? what?), solo players need ways to overcome the advantages possessed by groups. Otherwise, they should just integrate grouping into the game completely, as there would be no point to play as a solo player. Why would I want to farm and be a resource for big raiding groups? It completely takes away any point to playing the game as a solo player if there is no chance I'm going to be able to challenge a group in any way. That is unbalanced, and the devs would be cutting themselves short if they didn't take it into consideration. Just what I think, no amount of argument is going to change my mind.[/QUOTE] So tell me, how exactly is this balanced? [QUOTE=Karma.;48325609]Maybe you'd had to craft tools to sabotage, and they would require easy to get parts. This would create incentive to protect the larger machines and also create situations which a naked with a wrench could screw things up big time for a group or clan.[/QUOTE] You aren't asking for balance here. A naked with a wrench made from easy to acquire parts isn't putting anything at risk by trying to screw things up for a group/clan. Nakeds shouldn't be worrying about taking down a clan, they should be worried about gearing up. If they have the luxury of wasting their life while the clan is online in a vain attempt to sabotage them, then they have the luxury of going and finding their own gear to stand a better chance. If they have that luxury while that clan [I]isn't[/I] online, then they have the luxury of going out and finding their own gear to stand a better chance when that clan is online. You don't want balance, you want freebies, handouts. Fuck that nonsense. The only thing holding you back from competing is poor decision making. [QUOTE=Murdo;49424164]There are things that can be done to aid in dedicated solo play without applying penalties to those who run in numbers, by rewarding play-styles that don't lend well to traditional group play... but not all of them are simple and easy asset additions, and none of them seem to be on any kind of roadmap or mindmap. It's perfectly valid to say that stat boosts as a reward for time spent on a server just increase the disparity between established groups and new players joining a server, on top of all the other inherent uphill battles said players would potentially face (numbers advantage, disparity of resources/gear, blueprint knowledge, reputation etc.). Yes it makes sense, you're rewarded for your efforts. But what's fair and just taken by itself in the aether needs to be viewed for its impact on the game as a whole. If you can buy significant innate advantages for your avatar with XP, on top of everything else, it has the potential to limit the already small number of players who were willing to join a server more than 2-3 days after a wipe when there were options to avoid it. XP simply as a replacement for blueprints is... workable. In other words, you buy your tech knowledge and choose your path instead of relying on random loot drops. IMNSHO, this far into the game's development, inserting a generic experience point system the likes of which have been around since a decade before many people here were even born seems a tad... unambitious.[/QUOTE] You forget that it's also perfectly valid to say that stat boosts as a reward for time spent on a server decreases the disparity between established solo players and new groups. If you want to see it's impacts on the game as a whole, you should start by flipping that coin over some time. I won't argue with you about it being unambitious though....the whole system is a bit cliché, and I'm hoping it doesn't completely replace finding random blueprints as well. But that's not necessarily the whole issue. Unsuccessful solo players are always going to complain about groups. They complained when the hidden stash was added. They complained when sentry guns were added. Now they're complaining when XP rewards are being added. Every time there is something added that they [I]could[/I] use to their advantage, they prefer to just sit around and bitch about it.

[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/rust-interview/[/url] Garry himself said he doesn't want to restrict players in how they play the game. Making groups OP and basically forcing everyone to team up against each other in terms of PVP is going way off of what he is saying here. and about sabotage and balance, you're 15 dudes, the naked is one man. How else is that one man going to be able to make progress unless he has some way to get around the obvious advantage you have? And so what he broke your pumpjack, repair it and move on. Its a small thing but can cause problems if used effectively. Say you all log off, he sabotages the pumpjack so you lose a night of mining. This is balanced because said naked probably spent the night mining and farming after he sabotaged your pumpjack, now he has a better chance in a 1v15. Still unbalanced in the groups favor since all they lost was a little bit of oil. You seem to be completely ignoring that most people that have bought rust and have played it casually are not looking to join up in a "hardcore" (scoff scoff) Rust clan. Most of you are really young and I have no desire to have a 14 year old tell me what to do in a video game. I have plenty of hours in Rust, and I don't like teaming up with people unless its absolutely necessary, or I know them IRL. Since FP has already got a lot of people's foot in the door, they should cater to both parties, those who like to group and those who like the single player life. Not saying groups shouldn't have an advantage or be rewarded fairly for their efforts, all I'm saying is some consideration should be given to those who don't want to group up, making solo play on a crowded server a viable option.