Crater Creator
-
Posts
2,646 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Articles
A20 Bugs
A21 Bugs
Events
Posts posted by Crater Creator
-
-
8 hours ago, Jost Amman said:
Sorry, but you're both missing my point. I believe that A20 is currently unbalanced. Food is too easy to procure in A20.
I remember someone from TFP saying that in A21 they're rebalancing stuff all around, I think that includes food (hopefully).
Anyway, my point is that currently the only way to rebalance food, to make it again an early-to-mid game challenge like they are doing with water, is to either make it much more scarce (hunting/looting), or to add food spoilage (like Aldranon said before).
Now, this is all hypothetical of course, since fishing won't be in A21... BUT, if they did add fishing, AND if A21 was really rebalanced to make food more scarce, then adding a new food source would break that balance. Suppose that in A21 they put a very low limit on the number of animals that can spawn in an area, this would create the situation where hunting would only work for a few days, after which, you'd have to move farther and farther away to find game. This would be a challenge to food survival, of course. But if fishing was added to the game, players would only get half the intended effect if they hanged around a lake, pond, or river.
Why do people assume that, if TFP did add a new feature like fishing, they’d just throw it in without accounting for the effect it had on balance? I don’t mean to single you out - this critique seems to come up frequently whenever users propose changes. Sometimes we see a proposal for something that really would break the balance in a fundamental way, like crafting an unbreakable block. But I’m sure they could adjust the numbers so food scarcity is easier, the same, or even harder with fishing than without. “What if it’s not balanced?” presupposes the devs will do a bad job, and is not a good reason to shoot down an idea.3 -
Since it's emerged that this is an issue with a mod, I'm moving it to the modding section.
1 -
I've long been curious how the fonts are implemented. In particular, if they're a significant contribution to texture memory. Hopefully not. I think just a few additional font choices, like one for road signs in particular, could really enrich the world.
Remember how the towns are already given names when you generate a random world? Imagine if the names & distances on these signs were filled in automatically.
3 -
That actually shouldn't require modding the game. You can simply set the "XP Multiplier" on the Basic tab in the settings to a low value before starting or continuing the game.
0 -
20 hours ago, Jost Amman said:On 1/17/2023 at 9:13 PM, Slasher said:
Does the Craters, Cracks feature in random generating worlds have POI's that spawn with them and or paths within their surroundings?
The only one who can really answer is @Crater Creator I think.
Well, I think I've found my new profile picture now.
9 -
In the parallel universe that is Mac gaming, we played Marathon. That was my introduction to first person shooters. Technically it was much like Doom and other 2.5D engines, but it faked a look up/down function. D to look up, C to look down, and V to center view. Kind of awkward, but you do that for a hundred hours and you get used to it.
So that was how I played shooters for years afterwards. One highlight was a LAN party in the computer programming lab, playing Unreal Tournament (1999). Keep in mind keyboard-only was the only way I could play at that time - it was all I’d ever known. I did my best, but the other boys kept besting me using the newer WASD and mouse look technique. That is, until we played a sniper rifles only match.
Well, the thing about a center view key, at least on simple, mostly flat maps is, it sets your altitude at 0°, dead ahead. Which is exactly at the height of the other guy’s head. My previously lackluster keyboard-only technique paid off as I scored headshot after headshot. I leapt ahead and won the match, to the surprise of many.
The last game where I clung to my awkward d-c-v setup was Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast (2002). After that I bit the bullet and adapted to WASD like everyone else.
0 -
A reasoned argument. I’d report it as a bug, pointing out the inconsistency between the two, if it hasn’t been already.
0 -
4 hours ago, Roland said:
Now see? I'm already somewhat out of the loop. I don't know whether "Next alpha" means A21 or A22. I suspect A22 but I could be wrong. The team is working on all sorts of things some of which will make A21 and some of which will come in A22 and as far as I know the new outfit system was coming in A22 with bandits. The tweet isn't super clear with no numbers mentioned. To the players the next alpha is still A21 but to many of the developers the next alpha is A22 because they are already testing A21...
Maybe @Crater Creator will update the first page with this announcement so we know!
I can confirm "the next Alpha" here is referring to Alpha 22.
4 -
On 1/11/2023 at 3:34 AM, Grue said:
Now that you mention it, I have hated the zombie AI since A17.
Please bring back the zombies that actually act like zombies instead of the conga line of structural engineers who magically detect and path to the weakest block.
It was far less predicable and exploitable when the zombies would just swarm in waves and start beating on random parts of your walls. Now all horde bases are basically identical because the zombies are too "smart" for their own good.
I'm sure Crater will get right on that.
8 hours ago, Vedui said:I'm with Grue on this. Alpha 17 change over to a new AI pathing while it has benefits in POI's etc (less swiss cheese POI's), when it comes to Blood Moon Horde it's far inferior. Not only are zombies omniscient, they don't act like zombies. There are no more tower defense elements of 7dtd as a result. You used to be better off making layered defenses as zombies would come in from a direction and break down the base walls trying to get closer to the player from that direction. Now they lemming their way to their death seeking the path of least resistance and just making a kill-entrance is sufficient as you know the zombies won't go anywhere else.
It seems like one of the game's perennial debates, which can be phrased many ways but one way is: should the zombies be effectual? There are (at least) two camps, and it's difficult to satisfy both of them.
People in the first camp, which has included me at times, bemoan the structural engineer zombies that know the weaknesses of a base, sometimes better than the player that built it does. The usually offered solution is zombies that just beat on random parts of your walls, because, y'know, they're just zombies and we don't expect them to behave overly analytically.
People in the second camp accept the traditional "tower defense" mentality that zombies will take the path of least resistance, and build their bases accordingly. They make funnels, mazes, choke points, kill zones, and what have you that specifically depend on the zombies taking a predictable and "exploitable" path.
This strikes me as a possible zero sum game.
For every step towards zombies that just beat on random parts of your walls, you annoy someone in the second camp. This is not theoretical. Already, one can find plenty of forum threads where a user describes this thoughtful path they constructed for the zombies to march to their doom, only for the zombies to ignore it and beat on something else seemingly at random. I don't know what Vedui is calling tower defense but it requires enemy pathing you can rely on. That is to say, predictability. Otherwise, if the zombies were dumb and just beat on random blocks, base design would be pointlessly trivial. Any blocks you lay down in any configuration would be as good as any other, in a world where zombies beat on blocks at random.
And yet, for every step towards zombies that can reach you and take an efficient route to do it, you annoy someone in the first camp that, again, thinks such zombies are conceptually "too smart for their own good." Immersion is lost, because it's not very zombie-like behavior to them. Maybe I'm not describing the grievance some have here well, but suffice it to say this conflict is not easy to resolve to the satisfaction of both camps.
I can see why, if you're the AI programmer, you'd go with maximally effectual zombies, at least as a draft before making further refinements. You want it to be possible for the zombies to reach the player, which (current bugs aside) they definitely couldn't do before A17. And zombies that deliberately go to sub-optimal places to attack unimportant blocks - that, compared to structural engineer zombies, are there for show, to create the appearance of danger - are wasting resources that could be given to a zombie that's going to do something that matters.
So my thinking on this has evolved. I don't like structural engineer zombies, but I accept the premise that they must be generally capable: effectual at their goal of eventually reaching the player, if the interventions the player puts in the way are insufficient. At least until we get bandits, I see it as a necessary evil.
7 -
On 1/11/2023 at 2:33 AM, Annihilatorza said:
...I just hope we get a bigger backpack, so much loot to carry and yes I am packrat, I strip every POI of everything thats not nailed down and then somethings that are....
We did get a bigger backpack.
And a bigger tool belt.
And things like raw iron/scrap iron, animal hide/leather, bricks/cobblestone etc. were combined, resulting in fewer types of things to carry.
And we got vehicles that hold more inventory.
And drones that increase that further.And cargo mods that increase that further.
Some people are insatiable. They're going to keep asking for bigger backpacks until they never, ever have to think about an inventory limit.
3 -
You don't have to align the fence straight north-south or east-west. Your electric wire could zig-zag, alternating between posts on the left and right sides, and stretched out to use as few poles as possible. Unless your defense requires zombies to bunch up in the same location.
0 -
It’s definitely less than that. I don’t have an exact figure but from personal experience I’d say it’s around 15 blocks. It might just be the same length you can stretch regular wires.
0 -
Yes, for an xml file I wouldn’t expect any ambiguity between those two values as written.
0 -
7 hours ago, Jost Amman said:
I know it's just a small detail... but I'd rather have them add a new type of item named "ruined book/magazine" that you can scrap to paper. Lots of people complain about finding tons of paper in the bookshelves of a Crack a Book store, and don't understand the paper represents ruined books and magazines.
That would add a bit of "realism" IMO and ease players into understanding why so much scrap.
We had generic books many alphas ago, that scrapped for like 20 paper. They’ve steadily removed intermediate items like that from the game, so I can't see them reversing direction now. The fishing weights might be the last thing we have that isn't directly usable, a raw material, or multipurpose.
Part of me misses the authenticity of finding, say, a trophy on a football player zombie. On the other hand, one could see it as a quality of life improvement, to remove unnecessary crafting steps. Really, it's the same argument for or against sharpened sticks that people have been having for a long time.
2 -
7 hours ago, meganoth said:
they will surely not add a dozen or more perks because those don't grow on trees.
At least not until the learn-by-forestry system is ready, in Alpha 22.
5 hours ago, Jost Amman said:The Reign of King Roland has ended.
The new reign of King Crater has started ... Long live the King!
(this message has been sponsored by the Royal Treasury and the Ministry of Truth)
I didn't want it to distract from the dev diary but... yes. I'm excited to take on the expanded role.
7 -
Just to confirm for anyone reading, please direct anyone seeking a Steam key to me in the future. Thanks!
0 -
According to the Kickstarter page, the funding period was Jul 16 2013 - Aug 15 2013. The way you fund the game now is to buy early access, e.g. on Steam.
1 -
Sometimes Santa has to get (ahem) Creative.
(Merry Christmas!)
0 -
It's important for the devs to have that build number displayed at all times while the game is in development. That way any time someone has a screenshot of a problem, there's no ambiguity of what build they were playing. So I'd say it's hard to change on purpose. But I can also understand the desire to remove it - sorry I can't help you there.
0 -
On 12/21/2022 at 8:09 AM, Pernicious said:
You know we're up to 20.6 now, right?
Or... maybe try the Darkness Falls thread?
Aha! Good catch.@Mors To avoid confusion, please head to the modding section to discuss a modded game. I’ll move this thread.
0 -
Expanding on the realism point, the game is pretty qualitatively accurate. You need to eat to survive. Deer exist. You can kill them with bows or firearms. You can harvest meat from them, cook that meat over a campfire, and eat it for sustenance. The game gets all these things right.
The fact that the game isn't quantitatively accurate is much less of a concern for me. The numbers are what they are for the sake of game balance and fun. This cuts both ways. Chopping down a big tree with a stone axe takes a minute or two instead of all day. Crops are ready for harvest three days after you plant them. One bird nest may contain fifteen fletching-quality feathers. And so on. One could try to get all these numbers true to life, but that doesn't mean it would be fun.
2 -
12 minutes ago, RipClaw said:
I've never tested it myself, but wasn't there a video of Mad Mole accidentally blowing up his own gyro copter during a horde?
Currently, a vehicle that takes enough damage (e.g. goes to 0 HP) will explode. In fact it even happened for bicycles at one point, which I filed as a bug at the time.
4 -
8 hours ago, zztong said:
#4 - A zombie in an Arizona desert at night -- I didn't get to refine this one any before running out of credits.
It’s like if you described Darlene to someone that had never seen a zombie before, and then you asked them to draw her.
1 -
17 minutes ago, NekoPawtato said:
Are there any damage changes for existing blocks that already gets destroyed via vehicle in a20? For example driving a 4x4 through wasteland it would be inevitable that you'd run over cinder blocks if you go off-road, does that mean the vehicle will take more damage in a21 running over that same block?
I hope so. Vehicles in A20 seem to be virtually indestructible. And while it's easy to ragdoll a zombie, they don't take hardly any damage either. If you've ever set out to kill a zombie with a vehicle, it takes forever. So I'm glad that's all getting another pass.
The interesting case for me is when it's not all or nothing: when the vehicle doesn't slam into a wall and stop, nor is every block in the path destroyed. Since the game can't easily simulate elastic collisions with blocks - e.g. truck hits a pile of bricks and the bricks go flying - I would focus on the slowdown from hitting blocks of different masses. It would be great if driving through different types of blocks slowed the vehicle down by greater or lesser amounts, as it goes through without necessarily destroying the block. Then the 4x4 for instance could be the best vehicle for driving off road on grass or sand, while the motorcycle can be king of the roads.
1
Alpha 21 Dev Diary
in News & Announcements
Posted
I was just asking about this as it happens, and I was told there is no plan for animations on stations due to the logistics involved.