Jump to content

Psychodabble

Members
  • Content Count

    347
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Psychodabble

  1. I'm saying I only play solo and in "dead is dead" style...meaning if I die, I delete the world and start over. First of all, there's no need to get defensive. I'm honestly just trying to understand where you are coming from. I don't need an exact number, just a general idea of what you consider tedious. At 4-5 times per day, I agree with you that is tedious... What I'm saying and you may find surprising is that in the current build of the game, near vanilla settings, I only eat 1-2 times per day with no metabolism perks...an amount I think you would find far less tedious judging by your simplification suggestion. That means your goal is attainable with zero change to the game, though it might require a change to your playstyle. I never meant to imply that you are struggling if you think you do not think you are. If you're happy eating 4-5 times a day I would say good for you, but I know you're not happy with it and I wouldn't be either. If you upgrade the food you're eating you can definitely improve on that. All fun, zero tedium...you just have to eat the right food.
  2. You still didn't answer my question...how often are you eating that it gets to be annoying for you? I'm confused because your suggestion talks about eating 1-2 times/day and that's where I'm at now... Trust me...you can make all food self-sustainable if you're proactive about food management. You've got far more point investment than I ever do for food, but I'm able to generate it in larger amounts. You just have to have the right mindset/prioritization. I would take you up on your offer to play, but I'm strictly a solo play dead is dead guy.
  3. But there's a really significant difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying. I'm explicitly disagreeing with the "never comfortable" idea...I think you should be able to earn a certain amount of comfort in the late game...there should be a point where what the game normal throws at you can be handled with a very minimum of effort, BUT there are larger challenges that you actively seek out...whether that means venturing into a dungeon or summoning ever greater hordes to attack your base...who knows? But the important thing is that you bring that increased challenge on yourself, it doesn't hunt you down.
  4. Yeah, this is a fundamental difference of opinion...I think a good tower defense/survival game should have a difficulty plateau where you are well enough established that you can shrug off the typical threats and go picking larger fights. The only problem this game has right now is that there are no larger fights to pick yet. My current habit is to start making the Blood Moon more and more frequent as the game goes on.
  5. How often do you eat if you consider it tedious micromanagement? I really want to understand people who have food struggles because I really think all the tools exist for pretty simple, consistent food survival. I think your suggestion would be a bad mistake. It would make the game even easier for people like me who don't struggle with food and even harder for people who are already having troubles.
  6. No, but it's at that point that the item hunt is most uneven. When you're teetering between relatively high quality T1-2 and low quality T3 is time that it's most important to preserve a player's forward momentum. Why add in a potential setback? Players already make dynamic choices at that point in the game regarding raw stats/stamina drain/functionality vs mod capacity...I don't see that adding degradation is a value positive. You just want a punishing gamestyle...less of everything. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is significantly different than the direction the game is taking. Item degradation might be a good thing for your game, but it isn't for the one the Pimps are making. Minimal repair bases eliminated? What are you doing in your game? What's the point in playing a building game if your cleverness and design skills aren't allowed to play a role? Brute force only and constant struggle don't sound like a fun game to me, but there will definitely be mods to make the game what you want it to be.
  7. Reducing the other person's argument to the point of absurdity. Reductio ad absurdum. Classic logical fallacy and either it's being employed knowingly (intellectually dishonest) or unknowingly (rebuttal based on fallacy). My argument is not against challenge, but I think you know that already. The issue is about how the game approaches the player with that challenge and how failure is couched. There are ways that promote player motivation and ways that undercut it with unnecessarily punitive systems. The punitive aspect of unavoidable item degradation/loss is clear enough, I think. Please tell me again how this is not objective...
  8. And you don't see a difference between those two things? "I don't like it" is subjective, arbitrary, and possibly transient. What you oversimplified to "feels bad" is objective, durable, and based on established principles of human psychology. People play games to have fun...that's why the Pimps have decided against your route. If you are really interested in having the academic conversation, you have to approach it with a little more rigor and intellectual honesty, otherwise nobody is going to waste their time typing up arguments that you are going to oversimplify into oblivion, completely misconstrue, or just ignore.
  9. Not sure if serious. Did you really get nothing more from my posts than "I don't like it"? That's either really insulting to me or a bad look on you.
  10. As a melee-primary player, I don't see it that often. I saw it a lot more before I could consistently 1 shot/knockdown, but that's sort of a matter of just outlasting the glitchiness. 😉
  11. Care to elaborate? Which Alpha(s)? I've only been around since Alpha 10, so maybe it was some time before then? If so, it's been a VERY long time since that idea has been part of this game.
  12. 1) I would do a fresh install because that drain really sounds like a bug. Are you playing on an old save? 2) Meat stew is 50 food. Hobo stew is more than double as good at 64 food. Shepard's Pie is 104 and Spagetti is 122. That's more than 4x better than veggie stew. Limiting yourself to basic foods is a mistake. 3) It's your choice to go after such an elaborate Blood Moon setup. You can defend yourself in MUCH simpler ways at the gamestages you would be encountering on day 30. Just find a multi-story building and hack out the stairs. You can work on the big pit in your spare time until it's done, but getting food needs to be higher on your list of priorities. 4) Food in loot is subject to RNG, but food in vending machines less so. There's always something to eat if you take note of all the working machines you find and go around to them with Dukes to stock up.
  13. I don't remember that... A16 definitely had zero degradation at max skill. When was workbench combining removed? Because that was another way to maintain zero degradation. I don't remember a time when this game ever had degradation without a way to avoid it indefinitely.
  14. You seem to be missing the counterplay aspect. 1) If the first zombie that hits you infects you that's actually super unlucky and might screw up your start, but there are two obvious counter plays: don't get hit until you have been playing a bit and had a chance to get some honey or dedicate your time to finding honey/antibiotics after you got hit. 2) The clear counterplay is to plan your structure better and make better use of scaffolding. 3) The counterplay is don't die. Dying means you failed to survive. There are probably multiple reasons why you died to learn from. This is especially important to dead is dead players like me. What's the counterplay to degradation? If there isn't one, that feels bad in a different way than those other examples. You're losing out not by your own fault but by bad RNG. RNG should be there to add variety, not determine your fate. I don't know if increasing the value of crafting is what the Pimps have in mind. They took away T6 crafting as a deliberate move to decrease the value of crafting relative to looting. When did we have degradation?
  15. Not sure when I ever specified blue weapons... This is about all items, all the time. Even when the player is decked out in purple gear, the game should create motivation to get out and get more...to get the best possible versions of their chosen gear set...to get perfect rolls on all gear...to grind away at this game without an endgame. That perfect gear becomes a tangible advantage, no matter how tiny, that the player can justify pursuing. If those perfectly rolled pieces can't be preserved in perfect form indefinitely, they become collectors' items instead of practical parts of the game because nobody would actually USE their perfectly rolled items. If you find something amazing, you should be able to keep it, IMO...if the cost for that is higher than it currently is, that's totally fine, but the possibility would have to exist.
  16. I don't think everybody is reacting to your suggestions...some are surely reacting to the OP.
  17. I have some serious issues with the way the stat ranges are currently configured, but that's a topic for another thread... I hope my larger point is clear that perpetual advancement or at least the feeling of a chance at advancement is key to preserving and promoting player motivation. This applies to every item in the game and regardless of how emotional people get about digital items.
  18. To be perfectly clear: I support deepening the repair mechanic in a way that adds meaningful choice and improves the gameplay loop. I do not support changing the repair mechanic to "fix" an imaginary "economy". This is why I have answered "NO" to the OP's poll question.
  19. I just don't see this as adding value to the gameplay loop. Downgrades feel bad, especially when there is no counterplay. If the counterplay is just spending more to maintain the same level...meh. It would be okay because the player accumulates so much over a playthrough, but it doesn't really add anything. Changing your perspective to consider all upgrades as temporary doesn't change that feeling, because you know the game is progressively getting harder...every day you survive and kill and gain levels the game is getting harder...if your items don't keep up with that curve...it just feels bad.
  20. You are correct that items of similar quality perform so similarly as to be indistinguishable from one another in practical use cases. That, however, is not the issue...the issue is player feeling. When it comes to player feeling there is a clear preference for improvement in any game that uses items and item statistics. As soon as numbers get involved humans, and by extension gamers, want to see to those numbers go up over time. As soon as we get the sense that our numbers are stagnating or that there is no chance to improve them, the fun factor diminishes. Let's assume that you are correct in your example that you will return to 72 damage from 70 in relatively short order. How does that feel? Not like progression, because you've now spent X amount of time/effort just to get back to where you already were. That's the opposite of fun, IMO. Fun comes from feeling like you are getting better and moving ahead, not treading water. Even if that feeling is illusory because the actual difference in numbers is miniscule, that doesn't change the impact of the feeling on your gameplay experience. I would rather keep hunting in the hope of finding upgrades rather than praying I've stockpiled enough backups to avoid losing ground. Maybe that's just me, but I don't think it is. I would support something like this that deepens the repair mechanic without making degradation inevitable. If there is some way of extending an item's lifespan indefinitely that just requires more resources than currently, that would be fine. I actually like the idea as you described it here...repair options rather than just removed or vastly more expensive and futile repair.
  21. 1) True. New players need to be taught better how to feed themselves. I hadn't really thought about it because it is second nature to me at this point, but it needs to be brought across more explicitly that grilled/boiled meat are actually terribly inefficient and should be transitioned from as soon as possible. 2) I've never actually encountered any food bottleneck and that seems odd to me as my settings are slightly tougher than default when it comes to looting. I simply prioritize hoarding valuable food products from the beginning onward and focus on making the best food I can at the time. In the early game, the only time when the food crunch actually exists, that means bacon and eggs. I eat less valuable cans (chicken ration, pears, miso and soup stock) immediately, prioritize nests (as an aside, it may only be my feeling, but it seems like nests in high elevations/along ridgelines have more eggs) and only make grilled meat when I absolutely have to. I can't recall ever running out of food completely this way. 3) You can't speed up or beeline food production in any targeted way, but I think the existing diversity of food supplies is more than enough to get you through to the point where you are overproducing and swimming in food. And this is without ever putting more than one point in any food related perks. The most I've ever allocated was one in Master Chef and one in Living Off the Land...never any in hunting or whatever one reduces food/water drain.
  22. Sure, you could call that an economy in the broadest sense of the word, but I'm not sure that nomenclature really helps anyone as most people understand economy as having to do with the exchange of goods and/or services between individuals - in this case game entities whether PC or NPC. I assert that this game does not have an economy as such, because by default settings the supply of every resource is theoretically endless, capped only by time and RNG. This means that on a long enough timeline the demand, and hence the value, for everything drops to zero. You cannot have any kind of meaningful economy in this situation. The solution to that involves item sinks, i.e. consistent, recurring ways to remove items from circulation. The OP pinpoints repair kits as being responsible for keeping items in circulation and suggests their removal or nerfing as a direction for creating an item sink through degradation. What the OP completely ignores is the question of whether this game actually benefits from this kind of "economy". You put forward keeping loot as a backup as a valuable option, but I question the assumption of your premise. As it is now, you keep the best version of a particular item and use it, scrapping or selling all inferior versions. Perhaps in the rare, odd case you would find two versions with stats divergent enough from each other that you would keep both and use them for different purposes. So let's now add this concept of degradation and keeping backups...how does that actually feel to the player when they are forced to go from their high stat item to an inferior version? What is the counterplay to these downgrades over time? In my experience, finding upgrades in the mid-late game is rare. Once you have a blue or purple version of an item it can take weeks to upgrade over it, if ever. If I were not able to keep my best versions of items going indefinitely, this would mean fairly frequent statistical downgrades and less frequent upgrades. That sounds like a bad feeling game, IMO, where you slowly get weaker over time as the game actually gets harder. I think the repair mechanic as it exists is perfectly adequate. It's not super engaging, but it does feed a gameplay loop that feels good. You hunt new items to improve on the ones you have, rarely finding them, but when you do it feels nice. The rest of the time you are collecting vendor fodder which increase your liquid wealth, also lending a feeling of progression. If you find enough of these redundant items, you build up a nice cash reserve which can be used to fill in any supply gaps you may have. As your reserve grows, you are motivated to explore farther to find more traders and add them to your rotation, checking them for useful items every time they refresh their stock. In absence of a true endgame, this works pretty well for now, IMO. I don't see how adding "feels bad" mechanics for the sake of an imaginary "economy" improves the game. I honestly don't understand what you are trying to say here.
  23. Your experience is VERY different to mine and I still don't quite understand why. If possible you should provide more information regarding your playstyle along the lines I mentioned in my previous post. Are you playing with any significant changes to the game settings, e.g. longer days or higher difficulty? Are you using advanced recipes that require canned food? Or are you expecting good value from grilled/boiled meat? Do you buy food from traders/vending machines? Farming helps supplement your supply, but I don't know that the veggie stew recipe is a particularly good one...I don't think I've ever used it. At the very least, Hobo stew should be way better and doesn't require good meat. If your Master Chef is nearly maxed out, I would assume you are at least into the mid game. What day are you on and what level? The food drain you are experiencing sounds like a bug. I only have to eat 1-2 pieces of high quality food (chili dogs, sham chowder, fish tacos, spagetti, hobo stew, meat stew, steak and potatos meal, shepard's pie) per day...and that's with a full day of adventuring including running, jumping, bashing heads, mining, etc. Maybe the problem is that you spend your days sitting around waiting for zombies instead of going out to proactively secure a better food supply? I don't know exactly what the problem is, but I can tell you it's not the vanilla game balance.
  24. I have no interest in "fixing the economy", because I don't believe this game has an economy. Could repair be made a more engaging mechanic? Absolutely. The old days of combining parts on the workbench were much more engaging than what we have now, but that's neither here nor there. To add my anecdotal experience, I use a lot more repair kits than I find, but that's probably because I repair all decent value items before selling them. Still, I don't have a problem with kits because I prioritize the ingredients for them very highly in my play routines...I always have iron (first from prodigious scrapping, then from mining), I get myself a working forge either at base or in a POI as quickly as I can, and I always collect bones, glue, and tape. Once my finances are secure, I also buy glue and tape from traders. Then it's just a matter of making a fresh stack of 25 every other day or so.
  25. I'm not sure why people complain about food issues. I play pretty close to vanilla settings...slightly more restrictive because of no loot respawn...and I never have food issues. I also play dead is dead, so I frequently repeat the early game as I try to establish myself in each new build. Are you guys playing on settings that make this aspect of the game harder? I want to empathize, but I really don't see the problem. Food is super cheap from traders and vending machines. A few basic quests will get you the Dukes to buy enough to stay alive long enough to get your own production going, plus you often find food during the quests. That said, I'm not a farmer really...I don't put points in it or start building a farm until I'm quite well established...week 3 or later...but I've still never once starved. The only thing I can think of is food tier...are you guys trying to survive on @%$# tier food? That 1 point in Master Chef is totally worth it just to be able to cook some better stuff. Quality definitely trumps quantity in this game, so invest in tiering up your food immediately. Once you can make chili dogs or spam chowder or fish tacos, you'll never be hungry again. Of course, you have to learn which canned foods are prime ingredients to be saved and which ones are to be eaten immediately.
×
×
  • Create New...