The Koeran Configuration Wizard Development Thread

[snarkywriter]

In a recent thread on user experience (here), Kinggath made the following statement:

What we really need is an in-game tutorial... though that's going to take me a long time to get in.

In the meantime, I think the best solution for this is going to be to improve the Wizard. I'd be open to any suggestions on ways I can improve that to get people answering in an honest way that results in gameplay options matching expectations.

This thread is intended to collect recommendations and provide a place where we as a community can develop a consensus on a new and evolved opening wizard for Sim Settlements. If you're interested, please read the previous thread to see the first suggestions from @Whisper and @Koeran in their original context. They've provided excellent feedback for us to start with. As in the previous thread, below I have included screenshots of the current wizard to give everyone a base to work from (to keep you from having to jump between two threads, I will also be quoting the original posts of @Whisper and @Koeran below).



Okay everybody, lets do this! Please share your ideas and thoughts below.

 

[snarkywriter]

@Whisper 's Original Posts:

Tbh the wizard seemed easy enough to follow for me.

I’ve not looked into it - is there a way of running the wizard again?

—edit—

To be a really easy wizard, three options instead of several questions to answer:

- Go Easy On Me
- Reasonably Challenging
- Put Me Through Hell

(Not actually serious about that lol. I’m just remembering the old Doom difficulty levels.)

So looking at the config wizard, with my originally tongue-in-cheek "three options" in mind - it is kinda busy. That said, there's already three basic modes there, followed by quite a few configuration options. It might be the multitude of options causing angst?

With that thought in mind. Looking at the screenshots. Throwing out a rough idea here, from the viewpoint of the first-time clueless user of SS/RotC:

* Easy = Is there a free build mode? + Let Sim Settlements do everything

* Medium = I don't mind a challenge + Let Sim Settlements handle idle settlers only

* Hard = Throw everything you've got at me! + I'll handle all of the assignments myself

All three of these might include:
** Automate all the upgrades
** Handle it all automatically
** Don't notify me

Also have an option: "Advanced Wizard" - which goes into the current wizard/options setup.

After choosing Easy/Medium/Hard, run the graphics settings - and have Sim Settlements automatically handle the basic Performance Options settings, rather than asking the user if they want to do it. If it's their first experience with SS they possibly don't know what is appropriate.

Regarding notifications, I'm not sure what to suggest. I personally have them turned off. There was more stuff being thrown at me than I wanted to play around with at the time. Since I have quite a few settlements built up, seeing upgrade notifications was a bit too immersion-breaking for my taste. I simply wanted to play the game, y'know what I mean?

Also, if someone is in the middle of a firefight or generally exploring, they might miss it - just like missing attack notifications on settlements.

Personal thinking is that a good number (40+%?) of first-time users of SS/RotC are not going to be hugely interested in visiting every plot/upgrading each city/choosing the upgrade path of buildings manually. It's fine for more involved users or those who really want to explore the nitty-gritty. A whole bunch are wanting the handsfree experience as much as possible, which RotC does excellently with its "assign a leader and forget it" mechanic.

To put words into the mouth of a hypothetical basic user: "I can assign a leader and walk away from the settlement forever? Gimmedat!" And if the result is visually interesting, they may choose to get more involved. Give them a good experience overall to draw them in. That's what happened with me.

My 2c. I think I'm done, can't think of anything else on this topic.

 

[snarkywriter]

@Koeran 's Original Post

Not intending to be rude, as this is my first post here, but as a somewhat informed outsider I think I have some insight on the setup wizard that may be helpful.

I haven't played with SS (as I'm currently limited to PS4), however I've been lurking on these forums for the better part of a month now, and I've also watched several of Kingath's YouTube videos. So it's fair to say I have a greater understanding of SS than a fresh uninitiated user. And even with my additional understanding, the setup wizard's questions are very ambiguous.

Question 1: How Challenging would you like settlement management to be?

1. Throw everything you've got at me!
2. I don't mind a challenge, as long as it's fun.
3. Is there a free build mode?

Option 3 is especially ambiguous. My first thought was wondering if it was referring to vanilla workshop building, not placing SS plots. It could be interpreted that SS prevents you from using the vanilla workshop build mode/structures if you don't select option 3.
Comparing options 1 and 2, suggest that option 1 may not be fun.

Which appeals to you more?

1. Finding the balance required to create a successful city as it grows and evolves.
2. Building exactly the things I want, without stressing too much about what the city needs.

It's mostly just ambiguous. I presume option 1 is talking about the dynamic needs system where resource requirements change at each upgrade level. But I option 2 sounds like it's more than just turning that off.

How do you want settler assignment handled?

1. Let Sim Settlement do everything.
2. Let Sim Settlements handle idle settler only.
3. I'll handle all of the assignments myself.

Not sure I understand the difference between the options. Surely the only way to get an idle settler is if there isn't an available plot for them to be assigned to? So if SS isn't automatically assigning idle settlers, then that would be option 3, and if it is, then that would be option 1. Does SS build new plots automatically if there is an idle settler, but no available plot for them to be assigned to? Or does SS reassign settlers who are already assigned to plots?

How would you like building upgrades handled?

1. Automate all the upgrades.
2. Let me choose the upgrade paths.
3. Wait for my approval to upgrade.

This is relatively straightforward, however it seems like it could be something of a trap, given option 1, at a glance, suggests that users may miss out on options through the upgrade paths not diversifying enough. Options 2 and 3 seem almost identical. I assume 2 means that you pre-select the upgrade path, and once eligible for upgrade it will do so automatically. Where as option 3 you not only have to select the path, but also manual activate the upgrade.
It could probably be improved by adding a note to option 1 specifying how the automatic upgrades work (if they diversify to expand the settlements capability, or specialize, etc. Option 2 probably just needs to read either "Let me choose the upgrade paths ahead of time." or "Let me pre-select the upgrade path."

How would you like city upgrades handled?

1. Handle it automatically, I'll see the results when I get there.
2. I want to see it happen, wait for my approval.

I presume this is more of a visual choice. Option 1, you can return to the upgraded city and see it has evolved. Pretty immersive. Option 2, you can activate the upgrade and watch it upgrade as you walk around it/do a flyover cinematic. Fun.
If I'm correct in my interpretation, it might help just to specify that one is more immersive, and the other is more cinematic. If I'm wrong, then it may be far too ambiguous and I suggest it get's reworded/worked.

Do you want to be notified as things happen in your settlements?

1. I want to know everything!
2. I only care about buildings finishing construction or upgrades.
3. Just let me know when something upgrades.
4. Don't notify me, I'll just check in on my settlements periodically.

This is pretty straightforward, it just seems like maybe it's worth adding a note that with lot of settlements and/or plots, there may be a lot of messages (I'm under the impression that this is the case).
As an aside, is there an option to select to be notified of something specific, such as a specific plot, or plot type, being created/upgraded? In a similar vein to marking scrap for salvage in vanilla. Say, for example, I really need some screws to upgrade some of my equipment, so I want to be notified when the plot that manufactures screws is completes, but I don't want to be notified about any other plot type.

The only other comment I have is that I'm not a fan of using a conversational style for the questions and answers. But that's a style/aesthetic thing, not something that will effect the function. So I'll get over it.

 

[Koeran83]

So continuing to think about this over the course of yesterday evening I came across two different perspectives to look at it. And having reread @Whisper's posts, I realized one of those perspectives was essentially just an expansion of the ideas already presented.

First Perspective
Difficulty levels.
@Whisper suggested a 3 tier system, however Fallout 4 has a 6 tier difficulty system:

1. Very Easy
2. Easy
3. Normal
4. Hard
5. Very Hard
6. Survival

I realize it would be, well, twice as much work. But it may be appropriate to provide more nuanced default options. Though the specifics of how to differentiate the tiers could get complicated, and is probably not something I'm informed enough to discuss.

Either way, if the intent is to minimize the number of options, it could be appropriate to have a corresponding spectrum's between complexity and immersion. That is to say, the more automated options are also the least immersive (more notifications for example). While the more hands on options also increases immersion by requiring the player to investigate each settlements progress in person. As a newly minted survival player, I can certainly see the appeal in having to not only be more hands on with a settlement, but also having to visit them in person to check up on them.

Second Perspective
Role Playing.
It's actually probably not too different from the original wizard. As the player's level of interest in the mod is likely to mimic their character's.
And of course role playing in FO4 is already compromised by the nature of the vanilla story and gameplay decisions. That's just the nature of the opposing spectrum of player freedom vs a predefined story/character.

Questions could be phrased like: "Did you study civil service or civic management before joining the army?"

There's a certain argument that could be made to support SS being more hands on by default from a realism/role play perspective. People are naturally quite happy to seed control/management duties to other people who present an interest or expertise in doing so. Or even just a willingness to try.
So it's actually quite natural for settlements that join the Minutemen to say, "Thanks for helping us. We'll join you. Oh, and by the way, while you're at it, we not only expect you to defend us form harm, but we expect you to take over the management duties of our humble settlement. You are, "reclaiming the commonwealth" after all."

EDIT: I realize I started rambling before elaborating on where my mindset is at. I think it's often a good idea to take a step back and consider the foundation of the system (in this case the configuration wizard) before getting stuck into the specifics.

In this case, I'm suggesting looking at alternatives, such as phrasing the questions in a dry direct fashion relating to game difficulty. Phrasing them as conversational questions directed at the character. Or Conversational questions directed at the player.

All the while also asking for any other possible perspectives to build the wizard from.

 

[snarkywriter]

In this case, I'm suggesting looking at alternatives, such as phrasing the questions in a dry direct fashion relating to game difficulty. Phrasing them as conversational questions directed at the character. Or Conversational questions directed at the player.

I agree.

I prefer the dry, direct fashion personally. There was enough confusion early on with the City Manager holotape because it was written in an in-universe style that Kinggath eventually reworded it in the dry and direct fashion we see today. We probably want to avoid that with the wizard as well.

I don't know if relating it to game difficulty would work well. There are likely many users who are playing in survival mode, but still want the lowest possible involvement with Sim Settlements. I've also seen a lot of users reporting that they find high involvement unimmersive, usually alluding to settlers being adults who grew up in the wastes and should be quite capable of taking care of themselves.

It's quite a complicated conundrum.

 

[Whisper]

There are likely many users who are playing in survival mode, but still want the lowest possible involvement with Sim Settlements. I've also seen a lot of users reporting that they find high involvement unimmersive, usually alluding to settlers being adults who grew up in the wastes and should be quite capable of taking care of themselves.

VERY excellent points, both.

In Survival mode, the character going from one side of the map to another is a massive drain on time/chews down personal resources/highly dangerous. Just to see a plot before it can upgrade? But if he mistakenly chooses what is termed “hard mode” in SS terms he’s going to get frustrated.

Similar with users complaining about settlers being adults etc. They are correct, it was that level of non-immersion which drove me and many others away from settlements entirely. “We have to build each wall and plant each tato/corn/whatever and assign settlers and harvest stuff ourselves? You are joking, right?”

From that point of view it’s not about choosing your level of difficulty, more your level of involvement with the settlements. Then the wizard would become a matter of working out your desired degree of Low/Medium/High involvement.

 

[snarkywriter]

We probably also want to ensure that, even if they select the lowest involvement level, users receive at least the same level of in-game benefits from a managed settlement that they would receive from a self-built vanilla settlement (food, water, caps, scrap, fetilizer, etc.). That way users aren't punished for low involvement, and are possibly incentivised for higher levels of involvement.

Edit: That's a more controversial idea, however.

 

[RayBo]

I agree.

I prefer the dry, direct fashion personally. There was enough confusion early on with the City Manager holotape because it was written in an in-universe style that Kinggath eventually reworded it in the dry and direct fashion we see today. We probably want to avoid that with the wizard as well.

I don't know if relating it to game difficulty would work well. There are likely many users who are playing in survival mode, but still want the lowest possible involvement with Sim Settlements. I've also seen a lot of users reporting that they find high involvement unimmersive, usually alluding to settlers being adults who grew up in the wastes and should be quite capable of taking care of themselves.

It's quite a complicated conundrum.

I am looking at this too and I agree. I think dry is good. It looks like (enable / disable) seems to be the only logic authors are given to work with?. I see nothing in any settings or mods that uses check blocks, everything is (yes/no) (enable / disable) logic. I've been looking at all the settings through the MCM and there is a lot now that I am looking at them in their entirety and not just trying to change a few. Many of them though are for the most part just there and I don't think most of us use them. I think this weekend I will just start to stratify them into the buckets that I think players are most likely to want to modify.

The first question would be:
A. New to Sim Settlements - 100% Automation (recommended)
B. Returning Player - Run the wizard

Seems to me it is almost like there would be 3-5 maybe what I will call "profiles" not so much easy to hard but "profiles"
The Wizzard would just have 2 questions:
Question 1 System. -
a. monster
b. recommended
c. minimum.
d. console
Question 2 Sim-Style. -
a. City Plans
Profile A
Profile B
b. Manual placement
Profile C
Profile D
c. Both
Profile E

Then Profiles that simply state what selections were made for you and that the player would need to go into halo tape settings or MCM to further modify.

The Profiles would touch gameplay settings, things like: recruitment, assignment and tracking
while Q "A&B + Q1&2" things like performance

Profile A - The description would just list the selections that were premade?
Profile B
Profile C
Profile D
Profile E

haha, maybe even the ability to set-up a user-defined Profile that would be maintained if starting a new game or doing some type of testing?

edit: seeing what Wisper said, hahaha another good Idea involvement vs non-involvement could replace City Plan vs Manual Placement.

Except that - that decision should be made for them as in if a player was returning they could still select "New to Sim Settlements"? being that is the highest level of automation possible?

 

[RayBo]

VERY excellent points, both.

In Survival mode, the character going from one side of the map to another is a massive drain on time/chews down personal resources/highly dangerous. Just to see a plot before it can upgrade? But if he mistakenly chooses what is termed “hard mode” in SS terms he’s going to get frustrated.

Similar with users complaining about settlers being adults etc. They are correct, it was that level of non-immersion which drove me and many others away from settlements entirely. “We have to build each wall and plant each tato/corn/whatever and assign settlers and harvest stuff ourselves? You are joking, right?”

From that point of view it’s not about choosing your level of difficulty, more your level of involvement with the settlements. Then the wizard would become a matter of working out your desired degree of Low/Medium/High involvement.

Darn-it.
I do like the "involvement vs non-involvement" perspective!
I am really on-board with it not being about difficulty but about involvement.

I want to think again how that would fit with the current settings list. I am not ready to throw out the Profiles idea yet

 

[snarkywriter]

Maybe if you type-classify each level of each setting in terms of a couple factors, like level of involvement and/or level of complexity, you can use that to assign them to profiles?

 

[Whisper]

To point out: involvement is ongoing.

Starting out by dropping various plots, equipment like water purifiers and defence and power, are still required. Always will be.

What SS seems to be wanted for (in many people’s minds) is easier long-term involvement.

And now I’m being a bit confusing...

 

[RayBo]

Maybe if you type-classify each level of each setting in terms of a couple factors, like level of involvement and/or level of complexity, you can use that to assign them to profiles?

yeah, but I need to go to bed now so will sleep on it.
I think I'll be doing something like you're suggesting and spend some time with Mr. Excel this weekend. Maybe a few weighted matrices or something.

The other thing that is kind of getting to me is what I would want. "selfish" but I am a user/player
I don't even want a wizard, I just want one list with everything, not even headers just a list of all settings with (enable - disable) that could be saved as a user profile. having a couple thought out as my own theme would be nice to have. I kind of think testers could also find value in something like that?

 

[RayBo]

To point out: involvement is ongoing.

Starting out by dropping various plots, equipment like water purifiers and defence and power, are still required. Always will be.

What SS seems to be wanted for (in many people’s minds) is easier long-term involvement.

And now I’m being a bit confusing...

ha, not a problem. You all have a good night, given the zone wherever you are

 

[Koeran83]

We probably also want to ensure that, even if they select the lowest involvement level, users receive at least the same level of in-game benefits from a managed settlement that they would receive from a self-built vanilla settlement (food, water, caps, scrap, fetilizer, etc.). That way users aren't punished for low involvement, and are possibly incentivised for higher levels of involvement.

Yeah, it's a difficult line to toe, but not punishing players for lower involvement while rewarding those for greater involvement is a worthy goal.

I do like the "involvement vs non-involvement" perspective!
I am really on-board with it not being about difficulty but about involvement.

It seems to be the more sensible approach, I'm on board too.

To point out: involvement is ongoing.

Starting out by dropping various plots, equipment like water purifiers and defence and power, are still required. Always will be.

What SS seems to be wanted for (in many people’s minds) is easier long-term involvement.

And now I’m being a bit confusing...

Yep. Colour me confused.
But that's probably more because of my lack of SS experience than anything else.

 

[Whisper]

@Koeran Not your fault - I’m new at playing SS myself. I’ll try to explain. Keep in mind that some of this will be wrong: corrections most gratefully and gracefully accepted.

SS:RotC has what might be termed three mechanics:

- building by assigning one of your “spare” companions to the City Desk and telling them to build the city
- building by choosing a city plan and controlling the city plot releases and upgrades yourself (I’ve not done this, so this is probably wrongly described)
- the basic Sim Settlements system of dropping down 20 residential plots manually, assorted other plots as you choose, wiring them up to a beacon, putting down a few turrets for minor defence, putting down some water pumps, and walking away (leaving the settlers to do the rest)

I was referring to this third one. It’ll happen if you run out of spare companions and don’t want to muck around with the second option. Until RotC, it was the only mechanic available - it’s what I started with.

Cities attempt to be balanced with various needs. The base mechanics though, you can set up specialised settlements: farm, industrial center, trade center, red light district, etc. However you want. Try not to starve the settlers.

I hope that makes more sense?

—edit—

That’s really simplistic way of putting it, too. The third option also allows for what I understand to be some very involved gameplay with miniquests and suchlike.

 

[Whisper]

@RayBo - the problem is that it is a combination of both difficulty and involvement.

Difficulty is one axis that might include maintenance costs, building times, materials requirements, etc.

Involvement is another axis that might include how informed and how hands-on/off the player wants to be on a plot-or-city level, balancing needs of the city vs the settlers, etc.

Which is why the developers made the current wizard the way that they did. It’s a tricky balancing act between the two.

The users are likely starting from the perspective of involvement first? Difficulty can come last, might be their mindset - if they’re even thinking that at all.

Now throw in system limitations to boot...

 

[Koeran83]

I hope that makes more sense?

It does. Thankyou.

the problem is that it is a combination of both difficulty and involvement.

The third option also allows for what I understand to be some very involved gameplay with miniquests and suchlike.

Now throw in system limitations to boot...

It sounds like there may be four axis to consider?

1. Difficulty
2. Maintenance
3. Feedback (or Rewards)
4. System Limitations

Difficulty would be how much is required for maintenance. Resource costs, build times, etc.
Maintenance would be more related to how involved the player needs to be. Stopping in to provide resources, or to upgrade a plot/city.
Feedback is the positive side of the player being called back to the settlement to engage in additional content (quests) or receive material reward. I guess this could also be considered to cover player satisfaction/accomplishment.
And of course we also have the fourth axis of System Limitations. Which may need to come first in the wizard, as I expect it'll influence the rest of the options. Although that influence may be behind the curtain, so to speak. I guess that'll be more of a programming issue, first or last depending on what's easiest to program.

Is it possible to reformat the wizard dialogue boxes? It would be great if we could have something like the Data/quest tab in the pipboy that has the options (quest names) on the left, with an expanded description on the right hand side.

Ultimately I guess the plan is not only to design a list of sensibly designed options, but also to ensure the user is suitably informed about the nature of those options. Sorry, just thinking out loud a bit to ensure I understand our goal.

 

[snarkywriter]

I think you’re right, Koeran. We probably want to have a project goal and some definitions. To start:

Goal:
Design a new initialization wizard for Sim Settlements that:

• Simplifies mod setup for new users until an in-game tutorial can be developed
• Accurately reflects the available settlement building and Sim Settlements mechanics
• Can be easily updated to include new settlement building and Sim Settlements mechanics
• Includes options/profiles that allow users to pick the level of involvement they have with settlement building mechanics, from Low Involvement to High Involvement
• Effectively informs users about what mechanics the options/profiles are affecting in their game

Definitions:
Involvement – the level of (a) Difficulty, (b) Maintenance, (c) Rewards, and (d) System Impact a given Sim Settlements mechanic has on the user/the user’s system

Difficulty – ?

Maintenance – ?

Rewards – ?

System Impact – ?

 

[RayBo]

@RayBo - the problem is that it is a combination of both difficulty and involvement.

Difficulty is one axis that might include maintenance costs, building times, materials requirements, etc.

Involvement is another axis that might include how informed and how hands-on/off the player wants to be on a plot-or-city level, balancing needs of the city vs the settlers, etc.

Which is why the developers made the current wizard the way that they did. It’s a tricky balancing act between the two.

The users are likely starting from the perspective of involvement first? Difficulty can come last, might be their mindset - if they’re even thinking that at all.

Now throw in system limitations to boot...

haha, I am not at the point of the selection in the settings, just the framework..

“It sounds like there may be four axis to consider?

1. Difficulty

2. Maintenance

3. Feedback (or Rewards)

4. System Limitations”


I do love processes of elimination.

For # 1. Difficulty – I don’t want this to add complexity.

What I mean is: in responding to hundreds of posts and reading thousands no one has ever asked me how to make SS harder. How to turn on additional complexity Taxes / Dynamic needs etc. They have asked to how to turn it down or lower it, and what things do and mean.

My thought is if you must go to an online resource and ask a living person how to make Sim Settlements more difficult. Hahaha - then you are not ready for that level of difficulty in the first place. Sorry, if I bruise any ego’s. Still, given all the videos and documentation, and just the fun gameplay of trial and error. I think there should be 2 sets of predefined difficulty “Profiles”.

NEW – 100% Automated – 0% involvement “settings Profile”

RETURNING – (Wizard) 50% Automated – Normal / Basic involvement “settings Profile”

The idea is not to put any user into the deep end of the pool.

All users start in the shallow end at ankle deep “New” or waist deep “Returning”.

If a user seeks to explore the deep end, then they can swim out to it. There is only one direction to go if you want a greater challenge. I want to eliminate the need to jump into the pool to save you because we pushed you off the diving board.

There is no ADV – Wizard / Profile, ADV users will and should make their selections:

1. Manually entirely from the settings
2. Use the Returning (Wizard) as a baseline then manually make the selections they want.

As a guiding principle for consistency :

New “profile” ankle deep

Returning “profile” waist deep

A user should almost never need to dumb down the profile but “should they choose” to seek greater difficulty, complexity or challenge; then, they can increase it.


ALL THIS POST IS MEANT TO SAY OR DO IS TO “LET YOU-ALL RIP INTO IT LIKE MONKEYS INTO A DONUT.”

 

[RayBo]

I think you’re right, Koeran. We probably want to have a project goal and some definitions. To start:

Goal:
Design a new initialization wizard for Sim Settlements that:

• Simplifies mod setup for new users until an in-game tutorial can be developed
• Accurately reflects the available settlement building and Sim Settlements mechanics
• Can be easily updated to include new settlement building and Sim Settlements mechanics
• Includes options/profiles that allow users to pick the level of involvement they have with settlement building mechanics, from Low Involvement to High Involvement
• Effectively informs users about what mechanics the options/profiles are affecting in their game

Definitions:
Involvement – the level of (a) Difficulty, (b) Maintenance, (c) Rewards, and (d) System Impact a given Sim Settlements mechanic has on the user/the user’s system

Difficulty – ?

Maintenance – ?

Rewards – ?

System Impact – ?

I guess what i think here is kind of specific.

what enabled / disabled setting goes to each one.

but maybe two sets of definitions?

1. no-involvement
2. normal-involvement

I kind of think we don’t need a profile for high involvement?