Boidster

Why does no one mention, in all the arguments about seed return % and whatnot, that LotL also reduces the amount of rotting flesh you need for a farm plot? The game is telling us pretty clearly: want to be a better, more efficient farmer? Well you better git gud with LotL.

As a workaround, game owner could use the settime command to roll back a few in-game minutes. F1 -> 'settime <day> <hour> <min>' e.g. 'settime 10 13 0' puts it on day 10 at 1PM. Be careful using this on a blood moon day, though - it can confuse the BMH counter and cause the game to skip the horde. Or it did in A19. You can use 'ggs' and 'sgs' to get or set the game setting for BMH day respectively.

I completely agree with this statement. Where we'd disagree, I guess, is in my contention that LotL is one of those ways to prioritize a sustainable food source. And I'd add the modifier advanced food, since basic food is abundant in the game. Too abundant maybe. There is zero need to farm in the game if you just want food to stay alive. The crops give you access to advanced recipes and if you don't care about those then don't worry about farming at all. Get fat stacks of meat and canned food.

My apologies. I misconstrued your earlier comment about how few seeds you'd found. I incorrectly understood you to be asking for seeds to be far more common. Well it's a good then that I wasn't trying to demonstrate any such thing. I mistakenly thought you wished for seeds to be more common, and pointed out POI types where they are very common indeed. Your playstyle doesn't really allow for searching those POIs, though, so the quantity of seeds you get will be limited compared to players who seek them out (possibly missing out on a day of questing in the process). This is a very good point. Good target for a modlet, if we could identify a farm-specific (or at least farm-common) loot container. The produce shelves have the advantage that they were specifically created for grocery store-type POIs. Unsure what there is for farms, but probably there is something we could stuff extra seeds into.

The biome your feet are standing on when you open the bag determines the lootstage bonuses (we have tested by spawning bags at the border of two biomes). Practically speaking, that means that a wasteland horde night will produce better loot than a pine forest horde night. But a wasteland horde isn't any harder than a pine forest horde (the spawn groups aren't biome-scaled) so it 100% makes sense, from a min/maxing standpoint, to build a horde base in the wasteland. It is a bit goofy, and probably it could be fixed in a relatively straightforward way by flagging horde-night bags as biome-neutral. Just the raw player lootstage when they're opened. Meanwhile, bags from random biome spawns could still enjoy the bonus.

It's not that specific POI. Possibly you are confused about how the loot system in 7D2D works. Any POI which contains grocery displays would have the same searchable containers. It is most likely to be any of the various Shamway Foods POIs, but there may be others. The point is that the game has put lots of seeds in a place where it makes sense that you'd find them. Okay, if you are not a player who will search the places where seeds are likely to be found, then I'm not sure complaining about the lack of seeds makes much sense? Do you think that trash piles (another location where seeds can be found, though at much lower rates) should have the same chance of producing seeds as a literal potato display in a grocery store?

In a different thread from a couple of weeks ago, TFP acknowledged that the loot probability tables needed to be recalculated. They implemented the biome & POI modifiers, but didn't rebalance the probability tables. Or they didn't do it carefully & comprehensively just going by the results we see. It's on the to-do list. I'm not making an argument against posting threads like this, just pointing out that TFP is aware of the loot balance issues. In the meantime, we just have to suffer. Or get all modlet-y. When they release an update with a patch note of "loot tables rebalanced", then we really can start complaining.

To me this is a bit of a contradiction. Usually by level 20-30 I feel ready to make forays into the edges of the wasteland and certainly by level 70! In A19, did you not feel equipped to go into the wasteland until after level 70? Nevermind; I focused on "rush" and not "T6" (by which I think you mean Quality 6). The complaint seems to be that Q6 should not be obtainable before level 70, is that right? Also, nothing to do with you of course, but just last week I think we had a thread about how the wasteland was way too hard for newer players. Something along the lines of "how am I supposed to survive the wasteland with all these zombies and only a pipe gun?" Answer: "you're not" e.g. "don't rush the wasteland".

Fecal Effluence is the name of my all-ukulele 80's-themed ragecore dance band. We do kids' birthday parties, mostly.

This seems very low indeed and I suspect you aren't prioritizing seeds in your looting. If you want seeds, search Shamway store produce shelves. The probability for seeds is "high" from them. As a test, I looted this store (just the produce shelves): And here's what I got:

I checked the creative menu's...I dunno..."template" guns?...and it was kinda odd that Q1-Q5 snipers had effective range ramping up, but at Q6 it plummeted back below Q1 level. The CM isn't random so only a large in-game test can really see if something is amiss, but I did find it peculiar.

I hear you. I never know exactly how much horde base damage is from angry zombies vs. us pelting our own base with M60 fire. And my playing partner sure thinks its funny when I accidentally shoot the floor with my shotgun, blowing out the block and sending him into the basement.

Of course it would be absolutely wrong to be "working from home" and check in on the forums from time to time. Ha ha ha *tugs at suddenly-too-tight collar*

Were you testing using a shotgun? There are 10 "bullets" per shot so the minimum for a shotty is 10 (assuming all pellets hit the block). I think your XML edits were probably working fine. Here are the ones I tested; they're very similar. I think your line which removes effects from weapon mods also could be useful. <set xpath="/items/item[starts-with(@name,'ammo')]//passive_effect[@name='BlockDamage' and @operation='base_set']/@value">0</set> <set xpath="/items/item[starts-with(@name,'ammo')]//passive_effect[@name='BlockDamage' and @operation='base_add']/@value">0</set> <remove xpath="/items/item[starts-with(@name,'gun')]//passive_effect[@name='BlockDamage']" />

A DLL mod requires writing code in the C# programming language and is quite a bit more complex than XML/XPATH changes. The really big mods which add new zombies, new blocks, completely new behaviors, etc. are all using either DMT or Harmony-based DLL modifications. I have a programming background and it's...challenging...to get started with the DLL mods, but you really can make almost any change you can think of. Let me test an XPATH change for ammo damage and I'll come back. It ought to be just a couple of lines to get you down to 1 damage anyway.

I need to go test this, but: 1) I think, for the specific example of the groupZpackBoss group, since it has count="all", you would not need to use loot_prob_template at all. Just put <item name="toolBeaker" count="1" /> in there and it will guarantee a beaker. 2) That said, putting the loot_prob_template="guaranteed" wouldn't hurt anything; unless there is a force_prob="true" on an item in a count="all" group, every entry is considered to have a 100% probability of being chosen anyway, as you pointed out. 3) I think that in more generic lootgroups which do not use count="all", that loot_prob_template="guaranteed" does not acutally mean guaranteed. I think you'd need to add the force_prob="true" in there, but even then I'm not sure how it will react. Consider: <lootgroup name="foobar" count="2"> <item name="foo" loot_prob_template="med" /> <item name="bar" loot_prob_template="guaranteed" /> </lootgroup> That ought to resolve to this (my claim here is that there isn't anything special about the "guaranteed" probability template - it just maps to 1.0): <lootgroup name="foobar" count="2"> <item name="foo" prob="0.5" /> <item name="bar" prob="1.0" /> </lootgroup> And I think that means a 33% chance for a "foo" and a 67% chance for a "bar", which would be checked twice because of count="2". If we add force_prob="true" in there: <lootgroup name="foobar" count="2"> <item name="foo" loot_prob_template="med" /> <item name="bar" loot_prob_template="guaranteed" force_prob="true" /> </lootgroup> Then...it gets weird, I think? This is really what I need to test. I believe the force_prob flag means "do not add this up with the other probabilities, just use the raw probability as is". Which would mean, I think that both "foo" and "bar" would have 100% chance of returning. Because "foo" is the only item which is to be added up & divided out and 0.5/0.5 = 1.0 and of course "bar" has a forced 1.0 probability. The point I'm getting at - my theory, which I need to test - is that in spite of its name, "guaranteed", the loot_prob_template doesn't actually guarantee anything except in particular situations where force_prob="true" is used. Where I might be going wrong is if the code is actually testing for the word "guaranteed" and then just monkeying with the calculations behind the scenes. That is, it doesn't treat it like any of the other prob templates. Could be. Test results coming soon.

I think that without going into a DLL/Harmony mod, you can't get block damage below 1. The default block damage (if none is specified in XML) is 10, as you noticed. (Not so sure about this part actually.) You ought to just be able to set BlockDamage=0 for all ammo, and that will reduce the damage to 1. No need to change the guns. However if you want to be certain that future "base_add" effects don't muck things up, you can also change all of these to 0: <passive_effect name="BlockDamage" operation="base_add" value="-2.1" (They are currently all negative, which is why doing this is not strictly necessary...yet. If they change a gun to have a positive base_add, though, then it might bring the damage back above 1.)

True. I was specifically suggesting hand-wavey things for actions which couldn't be explained by the mass of the planet.

There is a small modlet for endless hordes. One for a 'trickle' (get a few stragglers annoying you until 4AM, like A18) and one for a never-ending final wave (the hardest wave) at full strength.

I thought of that same idea, but then I realize that an inverter relay requires "magic power" to be a thing. The relay has zero incoming power, but magically it is producing full power output. I'd be okay if they implemented it as a transistor of sorts - two power inputs, one for base supply and one for the signal. The output is the inverse of the signal, but pulls from the base supply to provide output power. Spring-loading or other hand-wavey things could explain an inverted powered door.

Part of the response here is that you don't need to "spec into" fort. Just take LotL 1, which requires zero investment into fortitude, and boom you have the ability to - on average - create a self-sustaining farm. It won't be as fool-proof as it might at LotL 2 or 3, but it's enough to be successful while you spec into other attributes. This is not correct. Growth stages are set in real-time minutes. By default a plant will grow every 63 minutes. See blocks.xml, "cropsGrowingMaster".

Can you be more specific about what you are trying to do? Are you talking about adjusting the loot that comes from the dropped bags from Demolishers? (These are the only zombies which currently have the 'boss' loot drop)

Is there a wiki or a git or a thread or a .doc or a .txt or really any readable format - I could even provide a fax number if necessary - containing the knowledge long-time modders have gained about assembly-csharp.dll and/or any other often-patched components? Like descriptions of what some of the main classes do, how they can be used in mods, and so on. I have been through the SDX tutorial (to learn the old ways), the DMT tutorial (to learn the slightly old ways), and SphereII's A20 Harmony tutorial videos. I get the gist and I'm ready to dip my toe into the water. I'm just wondering if my best/only 'documentation' are dnSpy results, other mods/examples, plus bugging people in the Discord. I want to bug people as little as possible and am completely down with RTFM, if there's an FM to R. (Maybe it's WTFV, if it's all in YouTube...) Hoping to save myself from fumbling down the same rabbit holes other people have already explored. I've tried searching here, in the wiki, and in a few channels in the Discord, but my search-fu failed me.

Seems like you have a good start on a potential fix. Start a sandbox game on a pregen map and change the Class of the written storage to see what happens! It won't break anything in your real game; you can always just put the XML back how it was if it doesn't work out.

Since harvesting a plant is an independent trial, it would not matter if you had 10 plots of 10 different types of plants or 10 plots of a single type of plant. The expected return is mathematically identical. It certainly looks more impressive to harvest an entire field of a single crop, but there is no statistical difference in potential yield. Imagine you plant and harvest once per day (we're speeding up the growing time for this example) on 10 farm plots. A) Day 1 is 10x corn, Day 2 is 10x potatoes, Day 3 is 10x aloe, etc. B) Each day you plant 1 crop in each plot: 1 corn, 1 potato, 1 aloe, etc. so all 10 plots are filled with a different crop Which method produces better potential yield after 10 days? Neither.