RyanX
-
Posts
260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Articles
A20 Bugs
A21 Bugs
Events
Posts posted by RyanX
-
-
32 minutes ago, Maliki said:
I've seen no bug reports for this so I assume its not been reported. I got a locate treasure quest and the quest was in town in the business zone, next to a POI which is probably a bug by itself. Anyway I started digging down and after digging one block I discovered a 1-5 block deep space under the POI. It covered the POI or the zone block. I tried this in several other locations and found other examples. The catch is it doesn't always happen everywhere all the time I discovered from digging down around other POIs.
There was a church I also saw that was like this. At just the right angle it appeared to be floating, then as I got closer it filled in. The mesh has been royally screwed for as long as I can remember, this is just the latest manifestation. I don't even bother reporting it anymore because stuff like this is baked into the code.
0 -
42 minutes ago, Boidster said:
Wow, this did not age well.
Either way, It's the first I've seen a response from anyone in charge despite multiple people and years of posting, and that's a win.
0 -
On 12/23/2021 at 11:37 AM, DiegoLBC1 said:
Specific item in specifc POIs, but without guarantee maybe?
EG: more chance/probability (or no) to find any weapon parts in Messiah.
Way back in the day, you used to have to go to the Working Stiff tools to find calipers to make ammo, and it wasn't guaranteed.
1 -
3 minutes ago, meganoth said:
PvP was mentioned mulitiple times, it was part of an argument about balance of weapons, it follows it is part of the discussion and nobody can fault people arguing about it. Generally it is about large server populations, sure.
Furthermore I'd say most of the arguments here were not about PvP but about exceeding the 8 player limit, no matter if it is 20 or 50 or the 100 you now bring up. Will it be 200 next time?
Did you see where I said even 30 or 40 could be good? Doesn't look like it. The "100" was a nod to the continued escalation where in some posts PvP doesn't even get mentioned and gets conflated to thinking people want a "Battle Royale" or "Fortnite" experience.
0 -
1 hour ago, madmole said:
We have some new engineers coming on board in January hopefully optimizations will be robust enough for you guys to enjoy larger servers again.
In the meantime, have you tried disabling the new dynamic meshes? I imagine 50 castles being erected at the same time and viewable from miles away could cause a hit in performance.
Can you guys describe how you play the game with 50 players? Is it pvp... or coop? Is it a large building community? What is the typical use case for servers this large? How many total players and how many are online when you start seeing FPS drops?
First of all, it's awesome that you are asking these questions!
It's all types of servers. There are all sorts of ways people set their servers up, both PvE and PvP. The best way to see is to check out the servers yourself to see what people are doing, but there aren't nearly as many now because of server performance and difficulty in running the servers, which goes back to previous alphas. Dynamic mesh does cause a hit for sure, but the issues go back a ways. As far as how many players for an FPS drop? That largely depends on the quality of the server, but at one point, 40-50 was no problem. This has deteriorated over time and required the server mods to restart their servers on an increasingly shorter schedule to clean up the junk that a server creates. A server owner could address this better than I could. As of right now, it doesn't matter how many are on the server....lag, falling through the world, stuttering etc. are prevalent at any population.
Simply playing vanilla is my preferred way, players set up bases throughout the map, sometimes they set up communities and community horde bases, set up shops. Players will build restaurants, etc. and fill them with player vending machines and players travel from all around to buy stuff from each other. Players team up to run larger quests, it's endless really. Some servers will bring in custom POI's like prisons for cheaters or rulebreakers, malls for players to set up shop in.
Others have set aside land for donors who help with operating costs to build on (a lot of these also do cheaty teleport mods which ruins the server).
It's like any other multiplayer game where you meet new people, make new friends. It makes the world seem more alive when you see someone in the distance on their motorcycle. There comes a point where it gets to be too much, though. I think 50 is too many (not all do), even on a large map, but 40 isn't too bad. And remember that just means that there are that many concurrently online. Many others come and go throughout the day.
As far as PvP goes, terrain glitches make it unplayable because you can see other's bases through the ground and even shoot through the ground. You could even fly a gyrocopter under the ground. The weapons, armor, damage mechanics, etc. aren't set up for it at all and would need a complete rework. As it stands now, server hosts used to be able to mod this stuff out (and still can to a degree) but it's a LOT of work. It used to be my preferred way to play but I don't bother with it any more because of all the exploiting and cheating that it's succeptible to. I had a group of 8 or so I played with in a group on some of the servers but it's just not worth it anymore. Cheaters gonna cheat.
But in all seriousness, when PvP works, it's damn good. It's like a Mad Max experience. Better be quiet while looting that POI so someone doesn't come in the back door and steal all your stuff.
Thanks for listening!
0 -
29 minutes ago, Roland said:
Sorry. PvP is easier to type than 50+ person servers- especially when I am certain that most if not all large population servers are going to be about more than everyone cooperating together against the environment. But it was an assumption, true.
Keeping the conversation focused purely on player population no matter what type of gameplay those 50 people are going to engage in, then it merely becomes a matter of priorities.
25 minutes ago, meganoth said:Weell, it started as a discussion about PvP (and servers with more than 8 players specifically) with the initial OP. Not a bad post at all. But it set the topic and you can't fault anyone for answering to the topic of the thread.
No, it didn't start out as a PvP discussion. The OP clearly states that while he runs a PvP server, it affects PvE as well. You will find that MORE people want larger population PvE servers than they do PvP servers anyway. There used to be queus to get in the larger multiplayer servers but that's been worn away over the last couple of alphas. And it doesn't have to be 50 people. 40 can be good. Heck 30 can be good.
It's better for you to say this is about "PvP" and "50+" because it makes it easier for you to attack the validity of what's being said. In reality this is about server stability for a reasonable number of players to have a community on the server. That and us trying to see if we can get our message to the devs that this is something the community wants. I would seriously doubt that any moderator would relay that information to them based on the clear bias towards the MP community, especially since the argument is being consistently interpreted as "we want a 100 person Fortnite clone".
0 -
3 minutes ago, JCrook1028 said:
If you're playing this game thinking someday it will be a huge server PvP gankfest you're playing the wrong game. And no, Roland isn't inventing the fact that the Devs have said multiple times the supported limit for MP is 8. That's just a cold hard fact. Accept it or live with the consequences for exceeding it.
Who said anything about PvP? And no $%&^ the supported limit is 8.
Read the post dude. I asked if the devs were aware that they were making the servers more unplayable.
The people who argue against larger MP servers have evidently never played on a good one. People building their own shops, grouping up for a communty horde night. And what's with PvP always being thrown in, or comparisons to Rust? I mean PvP could be fun, but that's secondary to getting servers stable.
1 -
11 minutes ago, pApA^LeGBa said:
Well they are aware of the fact that supporting MP only up to 8 players is a huge missed opportunity but they deceided to keep that way so they don´t have to sacrifice other things they want to have in the game. That´s what @Roland said in one of those threads.
What they really need to do is to make it more clear that the supported limit is 8 players. You need to do a specific search to get that info. Should be more visible.
Well that's what I mean...maybe that's what @Roland says, but that's not what TFP has said. I'm interested in hearing something directly from a developer, because afaic they have put larger multiplayer servers on their radar by putting out the features and capabilities out there in earlier alphas but have stopped addressing it.
I think we have a disconnect because we have moderators telling us things which may or may not have merit.
I mainly want to hear a developer's point of view so I can decide to either abandon this game or continue to make suggestions. This is not the same great game I played when I bought it. All of it's promise seems to have evaporated, and we have reached the tipping point with A20 where these servers have become unplayable.
0 -
In all seriousness, is TFP aware of the discussions surrounding multiplayer servers (over 8 players)? I know we get a lot of moderator involvement that generally points us towards "it's probably not going to be a thing", but do any devs actually hear about the concern? I ask because I fear that the information might never get to them, stopped cold here in the forums and never relayed to them by the moderators or getting read by TFP themselves. I would love to hear something from a developer regarding this.
1 -
On 12/22/2020 at 7:12 AM, BBBBilly said:
Hello everyone, I am a server administrator, I need your help. My server is a PvP survival server. I think we need a neutral zone so that they can't attack each other so that they can trade freely instead of shooting at each other. Is there any good way? In addition, I need a way to prevent sleeping bags from being put in prefabs.
Be careful doing this because often it just creates an area for ne'er do wells to sit outside the safe zone and camp those going in and out.
0 -
On 12/19/2021 at 3:03 AM, Cadamier said:
Well - we started a new game and duh... I put the forge outside, just inside 'the curb.' After some days - I went and got a quest and when I finished the quest I came out and noticed that the forge and the supplies boxes were gone... Big Opps... I then realized that it must have been attached to the POI I was just in. Previously this "restaurant" was fairly small. With the new RWG they can be fairly big.
So - does anyone have a good way to tell where a POI starts? Cause I like to put down boxes for loot when I go do a quest.
All POI's start on the ground just under the window where the main loot is. Jump on a few frames and knock out a window, and voila! Loot.
0 -
On 12/22/2021 at 11:44 AM, theFlu said:
Simply put, TFP are focused on implementing their plan of dungeon crawl POIs. The locked doors are not meant to be opened. The picks are intended to open the loot boxes only.
Yeah, TFP would rather you just build a few frames up the side of a building and stone axe your way through a window to get to the big loot.
0 -
19 hours ago, ~Kevin~ said:
Almost back to my base, hit a zombie a few times with my club, stamina is out, feral zombie runs up to me, hits me several times and I die. I can't run nor can I fight back because I am out of stamina. I respawn, go back to my pack, and there are the zombies guarding my pack.
Rather than making the game more fun and enjoyable pimps has turned it into a grind of frustration. I play games to be entertained, to pass the time, and not for the frustration of it.
From my steam account - Play time 1,552.9 hours
Screw this, I am going back to Alpha 16.
Going back to Alpha 16 is not a bad idea, but not for the reasons you state.
0 -
31 minutes ago, giKoN said:
What I think it comes down to, really is more the question as to why Dedicated Server Mode, while being officially supported and offered, does not receive any love in terms of updates. The netcode has stayed the same crucially for years (outside the netpackage encryption update), which of course will not get the game anywhere multiplayer-wise and thats the only reason as to why 8 players is supported the most.
Well said. And the server selection is more buggy than it's ever been in A20. Trying to connect alone is a nightmare. It's like the game has reverted to pre-alpha in every aspect except solo play.
0 -
On 12/18/2021 at 11:29 PM, Ashlockheart said:
There are so many towns, and suburbs, but there are no children zombies. Why?
There is a mod for this...and there are also crawling baby zombies in this mod. Very disturbing.
0 -
22 hours ago, hotpoon said:
Lack of optimization in general worries me. This game keeps getting more and more beautiful, but the FPS worse and worse. Is it a really a good idea to introduce things like waving grass, jiggling bits, and higher res textures when what so many people are really asking for is more zombies? Maybe TFP have some optimization tricks up their sleeves...I hope so.
This lack of optimization has been worrying server owners for a few Alphas now. I personally would take the old crappy RWG system, zombies, simple POI's with good optimization over today's overattention to appearance. They took the wrong path IMO. I feel like they should have stopped and optimized around A16.4 then started work on appearances again. It's the old "gameplay vs graphics" argument. Obviously TFP can't do both, like many devs.
0 -
On 12/16/2021 at 12:46 PM, Darklegend222 said:
until The Fun Pimps decide to further optimize the cleanup and spawning system.
Don't hold your breath for anything to get optimized with TFP. Spawning has been bad for ages. The last time I died it was because I was in a closet and a zombie pop spawned between me and the way out. It's terrible.
1 -
No it's still a bug from previous alphas that has not been fixed.
Shocker, I know.
0 -
On 12/16/2021 at 6:57 PM, Roland said:
At any rate, sorry for assuming you meant large servers of 30 players going at it like Fortnight. The devs aren't going to support that but hopefully over the next few updates the game will stabilize for 8 players and less for PVE multiplayer. But I do have to say that the three of us playing PvE are having a pretty stable experience for the most part.
I actually do mean 30 players going at it....but not like Fortnite. I don't know where you get this characterization, like PvP didn't exist before Fortnite or something. This used to be a thing, and it actually worked.
I don't know why you seem to think PvP is a "Battle Royale". The only difference between PvP and PvE is that there are other players around in addition to the zombies. We still do quests, build bases, loot POI's but there are actually enemies around that pose a threat. You see, the zombies are not really much of a threat and their AI is kind of stupid. They don't spawn correctly, they are glitchy, and their hit boxes are bad. Sure, turn up their speed and make them do more damage, blah blah blah.
PvP is EXACTLY like the PvE game you play, but you might see someone else. And they might kill you.
0 -
From the time I bought this game (A15), the only thing that has kept me playing are the larger multiplayer servers (In the 25-50 player range). There were many active servers that ran well and I played them with my wife, and I played the larger PvP servers when I went solo. Sure there were issues, but at least they ran and you could see that TFP had these larger MP servers AT LEAST in mind.
Why the &*$^ are there player vending machines in game if you aren't going to support the player counts to make use of them? Along with all the other items pointed out earlier. I bought this game based on the fact that there were these larger servers and PvP available.
On 12/22/2021 at 9:44 PM, Roland said:It really is. They have never pretended otherwise. Those who wish to keep trying to shove a square peg into a round hole are welcome to do the best that they can but you have correctly identified the round hole that this game is meant to be.
Oh yes they have Roland. They put the elements in there and just abandoned them.
And stop focusing on the PvP arguments please, that's not what the main issue is...the main issue is server stability. The modders can make tweaks to damage and so on (although not ideal) but at this point we have lost the server stability we once had.
Here's what I think; I don't think TFP has the ability or talent at this point to fix it. The code has gone so far away from server stability at this point, that it's a lost cause. It would need to be a new game. It's been downhill since A16.4, the hosted servers have been clamoring for multiple Alphas for help and have been completely ignored. How many posts have been made about "Quit making pretty things and fix your game please"? And why would they do this hard work when they can just hire a few artists and ride their chairs into money land? I don't blame them, and we all might do better to stop pretending that this isn't the case. It's very sad, but in this day and age, any movie franchise or video game franchise that was once good ends up in the trash heap.
0 -
On 12/16/2021 at 7:16 PM, BFT2020 said:
That's not a penalty and you are only looking at one portion while ignoring other parts of it.
- When you start out, you are at 100 Food, 50% of that is 50, so once you lose 50 food units you are reach the 50% mark.
- When you are at 150 food, 50% of that is 75 so you have to lose more food units (25 more) than you started at to reach the same level
- When you are at 200 food, 50% of that is 100 so you have to lose even more food units (50 more) than when you started out at.
The math says I should be striving to get up to 200. So what if my 50% mark moved from 50 units to 100 units, it now takes twice as much loss to reach the same point.
This is backwards. I have to eat 75 food to get to 75. I am hungry at 75 if my max is 150. I have to eat 50 food to get to 50. I am hungry at 50 if my max is 100.
I have to eat more food at a higher level in order to not be hungry.
I stand by the notion that it should be a flat number. Make everyone hungry at 50 regardless of your level.
0 -
Here is what really doesn't make sense (bear with my simple math for just a minute).
Let's say your hunger meter max is at 150, then your 50% penalty starts at 75.
When you start the game, your 50% penalty is at 50.
So you are actually penalized as you level. The hunger penalty should be a static number, let's say 50.
Why would you get hungry at 50 points of hunger, then later in the game get hungry at 75 points of hunger? You have more food in you but get hungry sooner?
2 -
My wife and I look for servers that run 25-50 players usually. We like populated servers but we have noticed that performance gets worse with each Alpha release. It's to the point that servers have to restart VERY frequently to clear out whatever memory leaks and junk that piles up on the servers. I just don't think that 7D2D is going to see any kind of "Golden Age" with multiplayer because it gets further away from it as time goes on. If they are thinking of improving it, TFP is really shooting themselves in the foot right now because of the backlog of issues they are creating.
0 -
On 12/15/2021 at 3:57 PM, Roland said:
OP uses the general abbreviation for multiplayer but what they really are talking about is Battle Royale.
Our game definitely has a focus on multiplayer and so we do use EAC but the multiplayer we are mainly interested in for this game is cooperative PVE. The good news is that there are many options out there for Battle Royale gameplay and this game fills its own multiplayer niche extremely well.
Umm...no.
I'm talking about cooperative PvE actually. My wife and I play these almost exclusively. I stopped going to the PvP servers long ago because the performance is bad and there are too many glitches and dupes to make it fair.
0
(Rant) This game has never been as anti-multiplayer as it is now.
in General Discussion
Posted
You kind of proved his point here with your response. You replied to his specific issues when his point was that it's a "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts". It's not the importance of each specific issue that needs to be fixed, it's the general inattentiveness that has led to junk being piled up over time.