Jump to content

DeadGerry

Members
  • Content Count

    88
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

DeadGerry last won the day on December 9 2019

DeadGerry had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About DeadGerry

  • Rank
    Survivor
  • Birthday 02/15/1982

Personal Information

  • Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
  1. No they aren't useless, and there are many, many, many posts throughout the forum demonstrating different tactics with differing effectiveness against Demolishers. Concrete walls are effective; though vulnerable to one specific Zombie's one specific explosion - but there is plenty you can do before they start showing up to get ready; and - on average - 3 full horde nights before they'll be showing up anyway; and usually 5 full horde nights before they show up in any real numbers. Multiplayer they show up sooner - but you'll have more hands to get ready. Blade traps can kill em fine if you place them correctly, dart traps too - turrets too; all can be effective if you use them right. Redundancy helps; and having thicker or multiple barriers where you expect to be shooting the hordes will help. with perks and with proper ammo the magnum, shotgun, m60 and SMG can kill them easily enough as long as you are focused and ready; and I'd be very surprised if better players than me couldn't manage with lesser guns. You'll need to re-assess how you built and what you build; but while a (further) nerf is probably going to happen (they've already toned them down from 1st appearance) there are multiple and varied strategies to kill, avoid, mitigate or defend against them and it's up to the player to change tactic if their tactic isn't working. Have a search on the forum for posts about demolishers and bases since 18 dropped; and watch some of the players on youtube for ideas and demonstrations - and if all else fails knock your difficulty down a setting or two and practice; then turn it back up as you get more comfortable.
  2. You are correct, I mis-saw that; however if you watch it again closely, you'll see the Demolisher make a little 'jump' motion just before the detonator is set off; this is it arriving at the top of the ramp and attempting to either attack the block or jump over it - not sure which. While you are 100% correct in your reading of that situation, I believe my assertion remains correct that it having the blade trap hanging from directly above, and the electric fence stun locking them prevents them reaching the point where the detonator is activated. There is evidence of this in watching Kage's videos - and in my own experience. I have never seen the blade trap set of a detonator. I have seen shotgun turrets do it, and shooting with non AP ammo do it, but while the fence remains active I have not seen darts, the blades or other zeds set it off; and using AP ammo I have not yet had one go off. It could very well be that I've just been super lucky, but so far so good; so it is - at least - possible that this set up is reliable; but it sounds like you also have another reliable set up; and I see lots of cool experiments using heavy hatches as additional shielding; so it would seem that, as I've been saying all along, multiple strategies are viable; it's just gonna take experimentation and patience; and not getting too caught up in sticking to one strategy or considering base destruction an unacceptable cost of researching. I'm sure we'll all be super annoyed when we finally nail something down if they then get nerfed and it's all been for nothing; but I hope they'll keep the demolishers as is and maybe provide a few more varied options in terms of stronger walls and more variable traps.
  3. That's NOT the way which they are used in the videos I have been continually referencing. In the video you show, there is flat ground, 1 ramp up to flat ground 1 up, then a space and a block. There is no fence stun locking them. having the blade trap off to the side means the zed walks through the arc of the blades, maximizing the hit box, but increasing the probability of hitting the detonator. The lack of stun lock lets the Demolisher get all the way up the ramp to the flat ground 1 up from where it start. It is upon standing at THIS height - totally up the ramp - that the detonator falls within the Blade traps hit box. In the one I reference which you have apparently seen; There is flat ground then a ramp up to level ground 1 up on the start ground. The Blade trap hangs down directly above where the zeds walk up, not off to the side. The Electric fence stun locks them before they have reached the top of the ramp. They do not reach the top of the ramp so the detonator does not end out within the hit box of the blade trap and is, therefore, not set off. Kage's most recent horde nights were on the most recent patch - there has been no patch since then. I am successfully using this technique now; as are others - and despite not being great at this game, I have not made any mistakes so far and have coped with up to 6 Demolishers at once in addition to the other zeds around; max alive usually around 16-20; though frame rate issues have had me tweaking this a lot of late.
  4. The video above does not use ramps. I don't mean to be unkind, but can you maybe go watch the videos I've pointed you at before discounting them? In the test video linked above the Demo walks into the traps horizontally; they are places at shoulder height and leg height; then front facing and back facing. The version that same guy created which Kage uses has the blade traps hanging down, but a ramp leading the Zeds up so that they hit it at HEAD height; regardless of zombie type; since they meet it vertically. The head is always the thing being hit; never the shoulder, ergo never the detonator. The electric fence prevents it reaching parity of height by stun lock; darts and AP ammo finish em off. (Tried to make a diagram here, but cant) Your experience is absolutely correct, but only useful for the higher difficulty you are choosing to play at - and the (no criticism intended) limited strategies you are willing to use. I say limited because I know you simply don't want to consider some of the options as you think them 'unfun' - which is fine and cool - but it is an artificial limit enforced by you. The 'fun stuff' works fine on lower settings; if you use it certain ways and don't make mistakes. If you use it differently or make mistakes and play higher settings, that's fine - but it's on you. I'm using everything you are claiming is 'out' just fine - doesn't matter how many there are if they are all stun locked by electric fences and getting picked off quick style by Dart traps, blade traps and AP ammo. luck is, of course, a factor - but you make your own luck through preparation to adapt to opportunity and challenge; and you create the chance to be unlucky by limiting your options.
  5. Thank you, I have checked out the videos you recommend - and your own thoughtful post is welcome too - it validates the notion that there are various strategies and various sources which can give a player these; and it's up to the player to investigate, experiment and adapt - a failure to do so does not make the specific enemy or mechanic 'stupid'.
  6. 1) . He's not using the old system of using their height to target them and not other zombies. The blade trap could always set them off; but if you path it so that they are walking up a ramp it hits their heads first and not the detonator. Combined with an electric fence to stun them there the blade trap was killing them on it's own without setting them off. The dart traps also helped; and his AP ammo killed them very quickly. It only went wrong when he accidentally used non-AP ammo and couldn't kill them fast enough. It is perfectly viable, and works well. 2) . Perhaps - but I didn't see anything to indicate such a thing was going to change - the ramp ensured they'd always be hit by the blade traps on the head, and the fence stun locked them there, and a few rounds put them down, with dart traps chipping in. Something could always go wrong, but that's the whole point; if something goes wrong or you make a mistake you are in trouble. That's why he had built in redundancy; and it becomes a trade off between how much time and effort you put into building fallback plans and how many mistakes you can afford. Everything else you say is fine - but has to tempered by the decision to play on harder modes with more max alive and MP - if fun is your purpose why not turn it down a notch so it's more fun? IF you feel the need to play on harder modes then just accept it's going to be harder and you'll have less scope for novelty and mist
  7. Thank you for your well thought out and presented reply; I greatly enjoy such exchanges and think any reading Devs do too. As I indicated, modding and rolling back are extreme options - if it comes to it - as in, if a player cannot wait for the update which will, doubtlessly, tweak them. The other options come first - but it is far more useful feedback for a player to be saying 'I made this mod / change and here is my experience' than 'I'm not engaging with this at all - change it'. Equally it is far better for a player to go 'on X difficulty, at X gamestage and with X alive at a time this proved beyond me, but when I turned it down to X it was manageable; as that helps zero in on where the Demolisher ought to sit. All of the tweakable settinjgs are there ingame for this exact reason; so that is something is proving beyond you, you can change settings to find a level at which is it manageable and feed that back. I recommend settings and practise for those who are saying they want to engage and find strategies which deal with Demos; but I recommend mods or rollbacks to the players who are saying 'this is stupid and I don't want to deal with it'. Yes, people are saying they are fundamentally broken and, to quote the OP 'stupid'. This is not the only person making such claims, but the majority of those people are also demonstrating a failure to read, explore, adapt and accept that the new challenges are challenging. I have to disagree with you - none of the traps are obsolete now, nothing is 'off the table' - you just have to use them differently. Watching Kage848 - who is not a GREAT player - shows all of these things being used and it only fell apart when he made mistakes. It is entirely correct that making mistakes should cause you problems. Had his intended strategy of using M60 with AP ammo been performed without his mistakes he would have had no problems at all. I am not a GREAT player, and I am managing with a similar strategy and having some success with others. The problem is that you can't use pre alpha 18 strategies the same way anymore; and it is a player mistake to do so. The only limited choices I have seen is from players saying 'I want to build a specific base and use specific weapons and a specific strategy (usually one from alpha <16) and want it to work like it used to. That is their choice to limit their playstyle. Once again, you specify ONE option for working around demolishers - ignoring 'know what enemies are in your game, know when and where you are likely to encounter them, know what sorts of defences, weapons and strategies are good against them and which are not'. It's a fairly well known and established trope of games where the threat increases as you level up to be picky about how and when you do so - from Final Fantasy to Fallout, from Hogs of War and Cannon Fodder to any number of games which one could name. I would agree that the documentation and ingame tutorials could make this information clearer - but 7 days to die has NEVER been kind to blind play; from alpha 1 to 18. But such a loud and big deal has been made of the demolishers that anyone who isn't aware of them must be trying pretty hard to not do any prep.
  8. Yes, that ONE specific thing out of multiple options which I mentioned as a 'if it comes to it' last resort is not ideal, but everything else is there to be explored to a players satisfaction; and if the player has failed to explore those options then it cannot be realistically framed as anything other than a player fail. As for the ill informed - yeah, some noobs who played Fallout NV headed north and got killed by Deathclaws. Is that stupid? Should Deathclaws be nerfed / removed? I'm all for the difficulty curve being reasonable - but not for pandering to someone playing blind and then throwing a tantrum because something unexpected happened. We're barely out of the 'prepare to restart your world every week' phase and people are getting precious about having their bases destroyed? Yes, In multiplayer the problem is magnified, but then so are the players advantages; and the same strategies apply. But the OP was very specific they only wanted discussion of SP so let's stick to that. AP Ammo, electric fences and balde traps; you'll be fine if you use them right.
  9. It is amazing - everything I said is no 'get gud' - an argument I never resort to - rather 'explore the options available to you' - something I have not yet found anyone willing to do who is still making threads and posts like this - will change your experience... have you tried it? You may think that all these options are non-options; but that's down to you - you are choosing to limit your own options by playing that way instead of using the options the Devs have left open to you. I never 'learned' the floors - a player can develop a sixth sense, intuition, spot suspicious looking floors or just have fast enough reactions. I did not 'have to know' and you did - that's down to your ability and play style. There is counterplay to the demolishers - plenty of youtubers and players are using it; the only people I have encountered who have not found a balance are either playing at needless high difficulty, needlessly late game stage or are deciding to limit which traps, guns, strategies and options they are willing to use. Here you go; electric fences, ramped approaches to blade traps, switch off-able turrets and AP ammo. Manageable with just electric fences and AP ammo, to be honest. I'm not saying 'git gud' - I'm saying that getting gud, in combination with multiple other decisions factor in to the difficulty of your game, and so far every person who I've encountered saying the Demolisher needs tweaking, I agree with, but everyone saying it's broken, stupid or needless OP is doing something to make it harder than it needs to be - and that's NOT a design problem, that's just a player having to face the consequences of their ingame choices.
  10. Since the OP has specifically forbidden any defence of the issue I'll be brief - have not yet encountered anyone having a problem with demolishers which is not down to their own play style and ability. You can turn down difficulty, slow down time, speed up time, increase or decrease block HP, increase loot, increase airdrops, speed up respawns of stuff and - if it comes to it - mod, roll back or use creative mode. There is no reason why you should be struggling to have the necessary ammo. traps and walls to put up a defense which will hold, or that you should be relying on an unbreakable base in the first place. There are enough materials and is enough time to cope, and multiple strategies and back up to do so. Problems in this area are almost certainly your settings not suiting your ability or you trying to play a very specific style based on older alpha's, and are refusing or declining to use the new stuff. In the meantime the Demolishers need balance, and will be balanced as time progresses, but nobody has yet put forward any compelling evidence that they are fundamentally broken - just a lot of players struggling to cope with something new - and every one of them that I have spoken to or read is insisting on making it harder on themselves with settings or rigid playstyle.
  11. Make it a mini game so we actually have to manually split the flints, sharpen the edges, plain and fire the wood and haft it all together with plant fibers we've manually wound - all in real time; and it only makes you better at the stone axe - you need to go through the same process for every single item to make it 'better'.
  12. There is a fairly detailed rebuttal of this available in the forum if you do a search. You are entitled to your own opinion; but the people steering the game are the people who created it. Seems they'd know. As time, experience, feedback from players and technology changes they've adapted; but surely that's what you'd expect a decent developer to do? I'd like to hear any specifics of what you mean, though, you may have a point; but nothing raised in this thread is in it's "finished" state; and almost all of it has been stated by the devs as under work to improve and restore lost greatness and improve past and present shortcomings - so it's a little dramatic to be declaring judgement when things are still in flux.
  13. I know it sounds like semantics - and maybe it partly is - but the way I see it is just the opposite - it doesn't make anything more difficult, it simply benefits someone who takes advantage of the designated synergy. I'll perk accordingly; but when it's a choice between my preferred gun and having - for example - workstations or chem stations available; i'll make a choice and live with it. There are plenty of points to go around and plenty of time to get them - unless a player has either upped the difficulty or set their own arbitrary need to have specific skills maxed before using or not using particular things. My weapon choice is dictated by what I want to use; but often mitigated by what is available, what quality it is, what the ammo situation is and what I'm fighting; but I won't necessarily have the one I like best at high condition, modded and fully perked until late into the game; but how is that different from, for example, Fallout / any other game?
  14. Yet again I find myself having to say the same thing to you, Ghostlight - it is nonsensical to be choosing to turn up the difficulty and then complain about how difficult it is. Maybe you've gotten too used to having an easy hard mode - up to alpha 16 there were too many exploits and short cuts which made it possible and, in fact, simple to be able to turn up the difficulty without actually making the game significanlty harder. Those days appear to be over. You don't *have* to do any of the things you list; you *choose* to play on max difficulty, you *choose* to build a base, and *choose* to fight the horde in it, you *choose* to build a base that requires 100k concrete steel, and *choose* to max perk into those skills for max efficiency. You could just as easily choose a lower setting, choose a different base, tactic and / or level of efficiency and still enjoy yourself - but obviously the challenge will increase on higher settings and you will have to make more decisive and better decisions to survive - presuming you are *choosing* to consider dying or having your base destroyed as a game over or situation you are not willing to accept; but everything which you and others in this thread - and others - is being dictated not by the game, but by the players choices. By going into your game having already decided exactly how you are going to play you have restricted your own options; it's like playing Fallout NV deciding you're only interested in energy weapons and power armour, and then complaining that there aren't enough energy weapons and power armour in the early game; before continuing to run about using only a laser pistol and no armour and complaining that the game is too hard because bandits with rifles are killing you. THAT'S extreme, but it the point remains, whatever you choose to do, and whatever you choose not to do has consequences; and the players here appear to be choosing not to take advantage of the opportunities available to them out of a play-style choice - which is fine - but to then construe that those opportunities should be removed in favour of ones which suit their own min/max high difficulty choices is weird - IMO.
  15. I think this is simply a disagreement of taste and style - we might choose to do what we're suited to, but if I like mining / looting I'm still gonna do it - and I'll perk accordingly - but won't let the status of perked / unperked dictate what I do and do not do. If I DON'T enjoy something I'm not gonna do, unless I either absolutely have to or I'm taking my 'turn' doing something nobody likes - but I'd expect a good team to share out such duties; and put the experience ahead of the mechanics. But negotiating and assigning stuff in multiplayer is part of the experience of playing multiplayer - but at no point is the game system forcing me to do anything or stopping me from doing anything.
×
×
  • Create New...