Curiosity. Of how bad that crap is.
I had 24k, itâs weekend, Iâve not seen anything good on Melk since October, I think. Might as well waste 100 boxes to get fairer shake in the âsystemâ.
I donât think twice a month is regular enough for me. I also did leave 4k marks just to grab something from Melk, which I do less and less as FS does not offer me anything worthwhile spending.
RNG ainât fair, sibling!
Maybe Iâm blessed by the Omnissiah, or maybe I play more classes/weapon types than most people. I dunno. But I just popped open Melkâs shop this morning and here are the blessings I donât have that are current available across 4 of my characters (vet, psyk, ogryn, zealot):
2 T4 on my fav melee, Combat Axes
2 T4 (sadly on the same weapon!) on my fav ranged, Revolver
1 T4 on Tac Axes
2 T4 on Flamers
1 T3 on Infantry Lasguns
2 T3 on Chainswords
3 T3 & 1 T4 on Ripper Guns
3 T3 on Latrine Shovels
1 T4 on Cleaver
With the exception of Flamers, Iâm interested in all of these weapons to some degree. And if I wasnât always low on Melkbucks, Iâd grab most of these today. But we could be having very different experiences, if only because of the RNG weâre each catching.
Might want to add some 
clap emojis to this so that whoever is arguing that the system as-is is fun and rewarding, rather than too random and often frustrating, hears it. Me, Iâm just trying to work with what weâve got, flaws and all, to get some enjoyment out of this game. I think the kids (and mental health professionals!) call that coping, and it can actually be a pretty healthy thing!
I donât think this is great prescriptive advice. You could say that about anything. Your husband abuses you? Just cope.
If a game is undermining your time and enjoyment why not seek fair and just treatment and to better your situation? You donât have to lie there and take it and suffer. It is good, in general, to make the changes that you can before simply coping. The people here playing the game despite crafting have been trying to cope. But eventually itâs better to cut your losses. Itâs logical to push for change from a utilitarian perspective to maximize pleasure.
I donât think having blessings, as a library is the issue. I have 40,000 Melk bucks now and I stopped caring about weeklies and such. Itâs because time is so short I only focus on very few weapons per class and I pretty much have all the blessings I want. Some T4s missing. Itâs the specific combination of blessings at tier 4 and perks and modifiers and modifier spread thatâs absolutely ludicrous.
I didnât offer any advice. I was just responding to replies directed to me.
Each person needs to decide if the âeye poking machineâ they keep stepping up to is worth whatever they get out it. And I wouldnât tell, and havenât told, anyone to stop asking for improvements.
I would say this part is suggesting that people should try coping, and that it can be a healthy thing to do, according to both kids and health care professionals. This part would be advice.
In case it wasnât clear, I am not a kid nor a medical professional, and Iâm not telling anyone to do any kind of anything.
I didnât think you were saying you were either. But whatâs the point in extolling the virtues of tolerance and coping if not a suggestion to actually do it?
Pinnacle of excellent game design;
If I get lucky the system is perfect
If I am unlucky the system is trash
Number of unlucky people who think the system is perfect:
Iâm trying to get more Blessings for the Assault pattern Chainswords, so Iâve been buying profanes from Bruntâs Armory (and any greens 330+ from the shop)⌠this is the result after playing for a few hours:
This isnât even including the ones Iâd sold back already because I realized I should probably screenshot this garbage.
I continue to re-roll the exact same blessings on different gear. I donât want to waste even MORE plasteel on getting them to the max (of course) since the likelihood of me just getting something Iâve already rolled YET AGAIN is just so damned high.
This is just such a stupid system.
Thankfully, Iâve already crashed to the bottom, so Iâm just rolling with it, Iâm not even mad anymore, Iâm just disappointed (constantly).
At 478 now.
Since the much memeâd on âsilent majorityâ thing never really got buried enough, Iâve started a couple polls over on Reddit and left links on the forum to them. Take a swing if yâall want.
Thatâs a little over 2 a day since the thread was started.
Meanwhile the design team is celebrating.
And donât forget to give your vote to Darktide for Steam Awards 
This would prove nothing. It would only prove that the minority who answered the poll felt this way.
Look, I hate the crafting system, and itâs the reason that I donât play, but I also try not to speculate in what the masses think. My arguments must stand on their own. This is what I believe and why. What others think really has little bearing on why I donât like the crafting.
They have the metrics. They see how many people play the game and how many people stop. All people I know have stopped playing this or gone back to V2 (or to other coop games like DRG, GTFO, or Remnant II). None of them post here, or care to do so. We are, however, a drop in the bucket. No company lives or dies by my business.
The internet is riddled with the corpses of other companies who failed to see the writing on the wall. I left this in another related thread.
Gareth Edwardsâ âtrust thermoclineâ concept seems like it might be worth dropping off around here. Basically the customer base of a service will stick around despite being unhappy with the service long after becoming upset with it. Combination of sunk cost, and competitive factors, but once you hit a certain point, its over.
hereâs an article he wrote about it.
Bringing up âthe silent majorityâ as a service provider to justify inaction in the face of user complaints/feedback is little more than signing your companyâs own death warrant.
Thatâs not how statistic worksâŚ
Good read.
âAt its simplest, the trust thermocline represents the point at which a consumer decides that the mental cost of staying with a product is outweighed by their desire to abandon it. This may seem like an obvious problem, yet if that were the case, this behavior wouldnât happen so frequently in technology businesses and in more traditional firms that prided themselves on consumer loyalty, such as car manufacturers and retail chains.â
âThe greater the emotional engagement, the more trust is a communal asset, not an individual one. In a 2019 paper for the Stanford Technology Law Review, Professor Christopher W. Savage described this collective trust as an âambient trust commons.â Consumer trust is a pooled resource as well as an individual one. A multitude of micro-infractions for consumers donât just harm an individualâs experience; they damage that trust commons until the trust thermocline is breached for large groups of users at the same time.â
âIn scientific terms, itâs a system of âhysteresis,â in which the current state of a system depends on the consumerâs cumulative history with that system as well as how they perceive their current relationship with it.â
"As a result, many of the issues that cause a consumer to approach âand ultimately crossâthe trust thermocline can have happened in the past. âStickinessâ is for real: a consumer will persist in a bad economic or product relationship beyond the point where it makes logical sense to do so because an element of the trust, and emotional commitment, remains.
But once that thermocline is crossed, there are few routes back. There is no âfinal strawââa price cut, a promise to âdo betterââthat can be reversed to draw them back in, nor was there one that could be avoided. The triggers for each individual are different, but their effect on the group is cumulative."
âIn most cases, though, the only real solution is to avoid crossing the trust thermocline at all. It requires placing emotional engagement and trust at the heart of product strategy, and accepting that the causes of trust failures are non-linear. Businesses need to address their customersâ complaints early and not dilute the value of their product. Informing users that prices are being increased because new features are available can damage trust if those features werenât asked for to begin with. Just because a consumer swallows a new charge or price increase doesnât mean they accept it as necessary.â
âHow did you go bankrupt?â the character of Bill asks another character in Ernest Hemingwayâs The Sun Also Rises. âGradually, then suddenly,â comes the reply. Businesses need to be aware that if their product relies on emotional engagement with the consumer, a breach of the trust thermocline may see them experience the same."
No, but those choosing to take part in forums discussions or submit an evaluation are also not representative of the player base as a whole. I have yet to see a single case where a developerâs mind has been changed based on anyone claiming to speak for more people than themselves. Make your case based on your own experience and leave other people out of it. This also happens to be what a well-designed survey is great at.
Normally great care is taken to ensure that a representative subset of the population takes a survey in order for it to make any sense. Just leaving a link in a launcher will not achieve this.