meganoth

How many different servers did you try? Was any of them for the first time? There is nothing exceptional in your client log that I can see. Why the server closed the connection might be written into the servers log. Often it is a corrupted player file, but that can't be it if it happens even on servers that you visit for the first time. You could contact one of the server admins and ask him to check his logfile for relevant messages when you tried to connect. --------------- PS: You give 20.1 for your build, but it actually is 20.5(b2). I assume this is just a typing mistake. You didn't try to connect to servers with version 20.1, right?

Possibly Edge install some certificates as part of the install process.

The error message is still about the cert. So, what and how did you check that you have the certificate? Did you access https://api.epicgames.dev/sdk/v1/default?platformId=WIN with edge (since that one is sure to use the windows-certs) and it worked? Did you then look at the certificate from inside edge?

Maybe one or more of your server users have names that are not acceptable to pastebin. Or your server itself. Apply common sense and try to X out problematic words if you find them.

Uhh, isn't that the core activity in a survival game?

I'm sure you won't get one. What features the console version can have will be evaluated by the publisher contracted to do this, and even if he already knew, he isn't active on this forum yet. I would suggest reposting that suggestion after the partnership is announced.

I was reminded of classic shooters, for example the Doom series. The ammo is handplaced and usually not enough so that you can't just use one gun No. With unlimited ammo and LBD you are pushed to using one gun as much as possible because the more you use it the better you are in it. If you want people to use different weapons the best way is scarcity of ammo AND no advancement at all except if it advances all guns the same (in other words advances the characters abilities instead of learning to use specific weapons). I think you might not know that for example critical bonuses from perks are adjusted for the shooting speed of weapons. So an SMG has less critical bonus per shot than a magnum with the same perks. Why? If ammo is unlimited in an LBD system I would use the universal gun and always that one because the more I use it the better I get with it. If I use two guns instead, both would be only half as much advanced as that single one. With a perk system on the other hand you could use speciality guns on occasions even if that would not advance your main gun. You would still get the xp to advance your main gun. Dream on. They already solved that problem in 7D2D 1 by making damage and critical bonuses depend on weapons speed. Yeah, all gun nuts and players of shooters know. Other people don't. Just assume that whenever you talk about CoD with me you could as well talk to a stone. This is not best as possible. Best as possible to talk about a gun with big magazine and bad accuracy is to say "gun with big magazine and bad accuracy". Look how clear that is. No specialist gun nut knowledge necessary. 😉 Whatever that is. Never heard of it.

Well, there are still some burning questions nobody answered. We need fireproof solutions, otherwise there will be lots of players flaming TFP for this.

And it also looks exactly like a typical shooter works. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. But it removes originality from the game. And you rely only on scarcity of ammo for this and you didn't solve the problem how to make this happen. Ammo is not scarce because of crafting, mining and lots of other sources. And it is the scarcity of ammo that makes your design work, NOT LBD. A perk system in a game where ammo were really scarce so that you need to use all weapons would work almost exactly. With some changes to the current perk system the result for players would even be identical. But this isn't a shooter and I dare to predict that any game with mining and crafting from TFP will surely not follow your model as it is almost impossible to constrict the player into such a narrow path of advancement without removing many of the liberties the current game has. The current perk system would have no problem at all with a "slow but with good recoil MP5" and a "fast with bad recoil PPSH41" available together. It isn't the perk system that prevents those weapons, it is a decision of TFP that either they don't want many similar weapons or that it isn't worth their effort, i.e. they have better uses for their development time aka other priorities (By the way, the reason they add weapons that don't look exactly like a real counterpart (for example a PPSH41) might be because they probably would have to pay the weapons company royalties to have that weapon in the game, at least for weapons new enough so their appearance is still intellectual property. But that has nothing to do with the argument, just a side note).

What has this to do with LBD? May I remind you that you said "So LBD would suit better if there would be bigger guns "

Mmmh, but what would happen if that car developer let the public in for regular test drives? Sure, they would need to make sure it is safe and the car would actually run. But would they change development completely just for those public test drives? Would they only add parts that are then final and never allowed to change? Would they keep the preliminary overpowered electrical system just because the public has seen that system already? You can play the game and follow development if you want and you TFP gets some advantages out of that deal too, no question. But that's it. Look up what steam promises you in that deal. There isn't anything about change not happening, a guaranteed release plan with dates to fix. At the moment the goal is to survive until you have the best weapons and a base that can withstand the strongest horde. Look at all the players with hundreds to thousands of hours in the game. Not everyone needs a set goal. I also would suggest looking at co-op multiplayer with a few friends, this greatly increases the fun of surviving without goal. TFP seems to plan to release the game in about two years (2 more alphas and a short beta). In the release version there should be bandits and an actual end goal of conquering one or both of two factions (the Duke and the White River coalition) in the game. Nothing guaranteed but this seems to be the plan as far as it is known to us players.

Underdeveloped seems the wrong term for that. If they add a new higher tier to the weapons they should add one to all current categories so that no attribute feels capped in end game. But adding a single new weapons category is no principal problem as can be seen by Perception which has 3. Or just a side weapon like pistols have smg+vulture in the top tier. Naturally they don't want to overstuff any attribute with weapons and so make it undisputed first choice in everything, but the balance is mainly adjusted between attributes. So if every attribute would get a new gun category I don't think they would dismiss it because of some balance between melee and ranged. But I have heard them say that they don't want to clutter the game with superficially different looking but almost identical stuff. So they didn't add a Walter P225 and a Glock to pistols because the pistol IS a P225 and a Glock rolled into the one archetype. Having a glock that acts practically the same and has plus or minus 2 damage would be superfluous for them. So (depending on me not rephrashing them wrong) their design goals clash with your desires and it is unlikely this game and even their new games will have different design goals. Not impossible but unlikely. TFP seem not to want 5 different MP5 with identical stats. And I wouldn't care for them either. Some players do, some don't. I know aesthetics is important to you. But aesthetics in games costs a lot of money. An independent game developer can save a lot of money here while some AAA games will just operate on the premise "More is always better". Just look at the announcement of typical open world games where they always brag about the square miles of terrain you can visit as if that was a quality measure. While many of those square miles are empty or filled with procedurally generated fluff. And mostly that works well because their target audience are gamers who value that fluff. That last sentence is totally out of the blue and makes an inference that you never substantiated and gave a reason for. So I'll just say "No" with about as much argument as you could bring to the table. Some other players have OCD, some have phobias, some just don't like impolite traders. I think there even have been players who fear zombies 😉. It is good that TFP doesn't listen to every single impairment or weakness of players or the game would be practically empty. What you call mental blockade is not on the same level as a phobia. You can decide to ignore it or find a different game, you have that choice.

When a car company designs a car, many parts get reworked and adapted multiple times (if they can't be just taken from an older model and fit perfectly). The goal is largely known from day one, for example it should be a sports car with a top speed of 250, removable top cover, and as good a road holding as possible. But the details are sketchy. What suspension to use could change depending on the changing weight of the car. Some features, like the power of the electrical system possibly, may be decided only at the last stretch of development when the rest of the car is almost finished and the drainage of all systems is known. We really didn't have a car analogy in the forum for a long time, it was high time for it 😁 To get back to games, it actually is a method for games in open development to add the story only on the last stretch of development or even exclude it from EA to have a "fresh" story at release. Were bandits touched too late? They already had implemented bandits before A16, but they were not satisfied with them (you can see those bandits in some mods for A16). Then they seemed to have seen other problems that needed their attention before bandits. And I think it was at that time that they hired a new programmer (Fataal) to rework the AI and he has been on that for a good part of his time. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that timeline, but I don't see where they could have changed this and still be where they are now with the game. The AI takes a lot of time to do and meanwhile other designers/programmers won't just sit around, they'll develop their part of the game.

I don't see any reason why you need more weapons to keep perks (or remove them). We already have 6 quality steps of 4 tiers of ~12 weapon categories, half of them ranged. That is a lot of weapons for a game that isn't a straight shooter or loot shooter. I get the impression you want more of a straight shooter (like cod is) and think this game needs more weapons because that is almost the only stuff that you value in the game. Certainly I have never heard the devs argument that they would want more almost identical weapon variants like shooters have, but could not do that (except for legendary weapons which I hope will still be put into 7D2D 1). Yes, more zombie variants and especially more zombies spawning would be very nice for this game. And I'm sure that is already on the internal wish list of TFP for 7D2D 2. More weapons? Possibly. Not as high priority but I think they would add another tier or two or even another weapon category (flame thrower and other special weapons possibly) just because a version 2 of a game needs more of everything.

In my opinion you are only setting yourself up for disappointment. TFP seem to be satisfied on the whole with the perk system. So why should they turn 7D2D 2 completely around here? The second installment will likely be a continuation, a bigger version of 1 (that is my guess at least). And to my knowledge the number of weapons or the number of anything else had nothing at all to do with their decision to ditch LBD.

"busting down open doors" is the same as "I fully agree with you on this", it does not mean I don't want to talk about it. In other words: My idea is NOT a very good idea how to handle armor, it may just be the best LBD idea how to handle armor (in my opinion).

At least in 7D2D there is no traditional evasion or agility skill (Agi itself is definitely not an agility skill). So the armor skill could very well teach how to effectively move in armor, just like it does now with the heavy armor perk, reducing stamina use while wearing the armor. You are busting down open doors. Like Jost Amman said, LBD does not fit here. And I don't like LBD at all anyway. This is just idle discussion about a hypothetical armor skill that would avoid the most glaring problems. Something an LBD-heavy modder could implement if he wants.

I think you missed where I said "MELEE" in my description how to get armor XP. If someone is using a bow it is not melee and he won't get armor improved. But that is exactly as it should be because when you shoot zombies from afar, why should you improve armor in an LBD system?

I am talking about average gameplay, not some special zombie you encounter once in a while. But no matter the zombie, a good player gets hit less often on average and if it is only because he kills faster. I didn't recommend that mod to you. I already knew you would not like it.

I don't think this is perfect either. A player who is good at killing zombies before they hit him and good at avoiding hits is penalized for playing well. If he lets himself be hit itentionally to get that skill up that isn't organic gameplay anymore but meta-gaming for improvement. IMO the LBD way for armor would either give improvement for any close range fight with a zombie no matter the results or improvement only when you don't get damage in a close range fight. If you want to play a nice game with food spoilage I would recommend Excitus Extreme. The mod is a bit hard to find, but it also simulates the toilet break after eating food, and it has very funny zombies.

Finally you found the solution. And the good thing: This solution has been endorsed by the developers for years. You could say it is their exit strategy from developing 7D2D 1.

What Ripclaw said. And there is the trader as an alternative source for tools. There is a possibility that players who want to stay home may have trouble getting enough higher-quality traps if they need masses of them. But when they need something just once or twice (like tools, workstations and generators for example) the traders are a relatively safe source.

What multiplayer question is there? Co-op players will advance faster since they loot more and can share the magazines they find that others need but they don't.

Please use the console section for questions about the console version as it is VERY different from the current PC version. Personally I have no experience with it, but I heard others say that restarting the game after an hours seems a very good idea, especially since crashing can very easily corrupt your savegame and should be avoided.