11 minutes ago, Ranzera said:
I recognize that. I was speaking more from a "It makes far more sense if it was modeled *this* way" perspective. Though you have to admit this would solve a few ongoing and future problems with the 7DtD play through cycle. It gives the players a goal to work towards at end game, to capture and hold bandit territory and have that territory be desirable to the player. If the bandits were threatening enough, it'd force the players to defend their base vs a bigger variety of targets.
No one has a base in the wasteland today for any reason besides bragging rights. It's ugly, there's no resources there besides scrap and in multiplayer no one really goes there so you'll be alone to boot. Sure we can add logic defying mechanics to shore it up but it'll never feel like a desirable end game because there's nothing to keep a person there. Once they get what they want out of it, they'll never go back. And if your bandits are there, you may as well write them off as half wasted content too. They'll just be the last, last second obstacle for a player before they say to themselves "whelp, beat that one."
There is actually nothing wrong with the "whelp, beat that one" mentality. Accomplishments is a great thing in games. End game doesnt have to be green pastures, gold pots and rainbows for the story to be great.