So long 19, going back to 16

[RipClaw]

37 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Not to mention that that also could have happened in A16. I also had really bad starts in older alphas, where i just have not found the receipe as early as i wanted to.

In A16 no schematic was needed to build the forge. The last time you needed a book to build a forge was AFAIK Alpha 12.
 

[Liesel Weppen]

2 minutes ago, RipClaw said:

In A16 no schematic was needed to build the forge. The last time you needed a book to build a forge was AFAIK Alpha 12.

I first started with A15, and iirc there was a time where you couldn't simply skill it. I didn't check it, maybe my memory is wrong anyway.

[meganoth]

11 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

 (Also they path around spikes most of the time)

You have to put spike traps into the ground, i.e. dig one block deep holes and put them in there (to be flush with the ground). Then the zombies treat them as ground and do not avoid them. Something which is sadly not telegraphed by their looks but is pretty essential if you want to use them effectively

 

[Liesel Weppen]

8 minutes ago, meganoth said:

You have to put spike traps into the ground, i.e. dig one block deep holes and put them in there (to be flush with the ground). Then the zombies treat them as ground and do not avoid them.

Huh, never heared of that. Haven't payed that much attention to it, but in some provious game we had "sunken" spikes and i didn't notice any effect. Once there was a free way through all Zs go this way. In my case the spike-trench was player built with concrete. Maybe it only works on "natural" soil?

 

Anyway sounds more like a bug, and for me therfore is considered cheesing.

[Kalen]

14 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Huh, never heared of that. Haven't payed that much attention to it, but in some provious game we had "sunken" spikes and i didn't notice any effect. Once there was a free way through all Zs go this way. In my case the spike-trench was player built with concrete. Maybe it only works on "natural" soil?

 

Anyway sounds more like a bug, and for me therfore is considered cheesing.

Its because zombies see spikes (and other traps) as a block.  So their pathing rules take them around them... because they try to stay on the same elevation that you are.   By submerging them, the zombies will walk over them, because they see that as staying on the same elevation as you.

[Liesel Weppen]

Still wierd and more like a bug. So it's still "abusing" like building a kill korridor.

[Kalen]

2 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Still wierd and more like a bug. So it's still "abusing" like building a kill korridor.

According to faatal, it's intended behavior.  So not a bug.

[Liesel Weppen]

12 minutes ago, Kalen said:

According to faatal, it's intended behavior.  So not a bug.

Ah, yes, intended behaviour is comprehensible because it is intended.

 

Maybe fataal is telling the current state and say that it is somehow "accepted" (in other words "won't be fixed (soon)"), but the outcome is still stupid. 

 

Zombies avoiding elevated spikes is a "feature", zombies running into whatever just because it is on the same ground level is for sure a lack of the pathing algorithm. Calling it "intended" is.... <no words>. If you call it intended, known, accepted or bug.... doesn't change anything with that.

 

I'd be interested in a reason WHY this is "intended"?

[Roland]

27 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

'd be interested in a reason WHY this is "intended"?

Because the developer made it work that way on purpose and after his attention was drawn to it he decided to keep it that way and informed us he won’t be changing it ergo “intended”.

the reason could be technical limitations or preference. 
 

If you can accept that zombies would just walk into a spike not realizing that it is something in front of it then you should be able to accept that zombies would walk over it thinking it was something stable. Both are dumb behaviors that a player would exploit so it really doesn’t matter.   

[katarynna]

34 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Zombies avoiding elevated spikes is a "feature", zombies running into whatever just because it is on the same ground level is for sure a lack of the pathing algorithm.

Zombies are not avoiding elevated spikes. Zombies are pathing around obstacles in their way.

 

A spike trap placed on the ground is treated by zombies just as a flagstone block placed on the ground. If there is open space to the sides, they go around it.

 

A spike trap sunk one block down into the ground is treated by zombies just like the ground is. They walk over it because it is not an obstacle in their path.

 

It is intended that zombies path around obstacles when they can. It is not intended that they see a spike trap sunk one block down so that it is level with the ground, recognize that it is a trap that will damage them, and therefore avoid it.

[RipClaw]

51 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

I'd be interested in a reason WHY this is "intended"?

Fataal explained it this way that the AI is looking for the most cost effective way. Every action of the zombie is seen as costs and this includes jumping.

Because the spikes are considered as blocks and the zombies have to jump up to path over the spikes they try to avoid this if there is a cheaper way.

 

But this also works the other way round. If you place the spikes flush with the ground they will always path over the spikes if possible. They will avoid the spots without spikes.

 

[Liesel Weppen]

22 minutes ago, Roland said:

and after his attention was drawn to it he decided to keep it that way and informed us he won’t be changing it ergo “intended”.

Yeah "intended". Oh i never noticed that, but yes, it was intended. For Sure!

 

Quote

If you can accept that zombies would just walk into a spike not realizing that it is something in front of it then you should be able to accept that zombies would walk over it thinking it was something stable. Both are dumb behaviors that a player would exploit so it really doesn’t matter.   

Either zombies are stupid and walk into spikes, never the less they are on even ground or not, or they are intelligent enough and avoid spikes and also recognize lower spikes.

 

That is neither "intended" nor understandable. That is simply a BUG or maybe with good will an acccepted "fault" in the alogrithm.

 

There is some kind of "usability". We are talking about technical details here obviously, but the common player doesn't care for that. Maybe he discovers this behaviour by accident, but it is anything else then understandable, and that is in general bad game design.

Knowing that specific technical detail and using it, therfore is in best opinion cheesing. Again, just like building kill korridors.

 

In a well balanced game, without reading forums about how detailed mechanics work, i should be able to draw conclusions about how the enemy "works". Does he choose a low-reistance path, does he come straigth from random directions? Does he respect spikes but ignore autoturrets? Sorry, but lowered spikes being ignored ist just stupid and has nothing to do with the spikes themselfes.

 

Imho building a trench deeper than 1 blocks would be a good idea because it would traps the Zs into the spikes. But if the "algorithms" primary target is to stay on the same floor level, that will not work also. So Zs will circumvent ignore spikes that are one block lower, but be aware of spike on any other level? Yeah, thats absolutely understandable.... NOT.

 

Don't missunderstand me. I'm fine with (known) bugs, currently accepted "@%$#ed" behaviour, because it is like it is currently, but when calling such things "intended" this guy is either @%$#ed, force by the marketing to say so, or i'd like to slap him with with a lvl6 skills-maxed-out steelclub directly into the head.

[Viktoriusiii]

3 hours ago, JCrook1028 said:

That's just plain untrue. I do my hordes out on the street with spikes lining each side of the road and you can clearly watch the spawn points rotate to all 4 sides as the night goes on.

might be because you are on a flat terrain or something... I can just tell what I have experienced. In A18 it was 100% the case and in my limited time with A19 i can tell that at least my one base only got damaged from one side (even though it was the same distance in each direction) and all Z's were clumped on one spot.


About the spikes: No matter if intended or not, it shouldnt be. It is unintuitive, it doesnt look right (like the upside down spikeslogs) and I feel like Z's shouldnt see traps as Blocks and just walk right into them. Avoiding traps means that you need a hallway to FORCE them through traps (or make like a 1 deep trench that looks weird. Does it at least work in the way of slowing them down the right amount?)

I have loved very very many things Fataal did. Of all the Fun Pimps, he is definatly my favourite. Always trying to answer questions as best as he can and more or less always beeing very polite even on multiple repeated questions.
But this is flatout a mistake in my eyes. It has no ingame benefit. It might have a coding benefit. But simply looking at the ingame effect, it is worse in basicially every way.

[Roland]

34 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

In a well balanced game, without reading forums about how detailed mechanics work, i should be able to draw conclusions about how the enemy "works".

You absolutely CAN notice the behavior and draw conclusions. I did without reading a thing. It happened by accident but I noticed it. I dug a trench three blocks deep and put spikes in the bottom. I accidentally placed one spike a couple of blocks too high so it was flush with the ground. On hordenight they all ran around to that spot to cross the trench until the spike broke. Then I knew. 

 

41 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

 

Imho building a trench deeper than 1 blocks would be a good idea because it would traps the Zs into the spikes.

See? It is intuitive. You’re absolutely right. Dig a trench deeper and fill it all the way up with spikes until it is flush and watch the results. It’s pretty nice. 
 

52 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Don't missunderstand me. I'm fine with (known) bugs, currently accepted "@%$#ed" behaviour, because it is like it is currently, but when calling such things "intended" this guy is either @%$#ed, force by the marketing to say so, or i'd like to slap him with with a lvl6 skills-maxed-out steelclub directly into the head.

You want to get caught up in semantics be my guest. Call it a bug if you want. It is part of the intended pathing system and a natural consequence of how these zombies interact with the world. TFP is happy with it. If it makes you feel better to believe they secretly know it’s a bug but don’t want to spin it that way for marketing then by all means continue. Just so we all know it isn’t changing. 

25 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

or make like a 1 deep trench that looks weird.

Looking weird is your whole basis for not liking it and that is purely subjective. My trenches filled with spikes look badass. 
 

We want the zombies to blunder into the spikes. That is where we all agree. Whether they blunder into them on the side or blunder into them from above really makes no functional difference other than that some people thinks it looks weird one way. 
 

Once I noticed how the zombies behaved toward spikes it gave rise to several ideas that were fun to try out and I love using spikes in combination with trenches. In fact, there is a way to  use them effectively without trenches at all but going by the same principle that zombies think of them as a block like any other block for pathing purposes. 

[Kalen]

14 minutes ago, Roland said:

In fact, there is a way to  use them effectively without trenches at all but going by the same principle that zombies think of them as a block like any other block for pathing purposes. 

Yup, just put ramps in front of them! 

 

[Roland]

8 minutes ago, Kalen said:

Yup, just put ramps in front of them! 

 

I just want to point out that figuring that out is pretty easy once you start using spikes as they are intended within the pathing system. You wouldn’t need to be told this on the forums even though Kalen spilled the beans. 
 

Building a staircase out of spikes against the wall of your base up to the top where you are standing is also some sweet bait that can draw zombies to a particular location you want them to go. Arranging a field of spikes with multiple ways up the “stairway” will ensure almost every spike getting hit until the staircase itself is destroyed ending that pathway. It is quite fun to design an effective meat grinder like that. 

[Liesel Weppen]

33 minutes ago, Roland said:

You absolutely CAN notice the behavior and draw conclusions. I did without reading a thing.

Yes people that don't look for somehow logical behaviour, but people that investigate further and are not looking for "logical" behavoiur but also looking for exploits of course might recognize it.

Just like people taking a closer look are able to remove the DRM checks and spread illegal copies of the game... but i know, this is "intended". If you look close enough, even if it is not logical, it works, so "intended".

 

Quote

See? It is intuitive. You’re absolutely right. Dig a trench deeper and fill it all the way up with spikes until it is flush and watch the results. It’s pretty nice.

Hell no! If i dig a trench do trap zombies in, i'd never fill it up to the top with spikes. That is exactly what i meant, it's absolutely @%$#ed. From what i know from games, i'd probably expect that they might "glitch" over more quickly if the trench ist filled up with spikes. But that is also a bug or bad game design. What everybody normal thinking person wants, is a trench where zombies fall into and never come out again, because it is a f*** trench. A filled up with spikes trench doesn't fullfill that, and a trench with lowered spikes will also not work as of the current "logic" zombies will walk around it instead of falling into it.

 

Quote

You want to get caught up in semantics be my guest. Call it a bug if you want. It is part of the intended pathing system and a natural consequence of how these zombies interact with the world.

Yeah, fool me by calling it "intended". I don't have a problem with a bug, or maybe even some unintended behaviour discorvered nobody thought of before. But if THIS is really intended i either doubt in TFP intelligenze, or you hardly trying to fool me. If it is not intended but happend, fine, then just say it like that. But don't keep your customers for stupid by claiming it was intended. How damn stupid do you think people are?

 

Quote

TFP is happy with it. If it makes you feel better to believe they secretly know it’s a bug but don’t want to spin it that way for marketing then by all means continue. Just so we all know it isn’t changing. 

If TFP REALLY thinks this is intended (if you lie hard enough to your self, in the end you'll really believe your own lies), i lost all my hope in them, because then calling them @%$#ed would still be to positive. If they call it "intended" just to silence people, well then they are fooling me. Either way... both bad. I'm still missing a reasonable explanation why the heck it is this way, and if it should be intutive/logical/understandable no further explanation would be needed at all.

 

I'm pretty sure this was not intended at all. Those people who implemented the pathfinding algorithm "accidentially" put the "stay on same height" above every "check for a trap" decision and didn't even notice that side effect of having spikes lowered in a trench. There was no intention at all. It was just a case nobody thought of. But once you noticed it, it has to be sold as "intended".

 

Maybe a bug, unintended bahaviour, an unepected side effect or whatever, but then at least be so honest and don't call it "InTeNdEd"!!!11elf

[Kalen]

27 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

If TFP REALLY thinks this is intended

Yes, it is intended.... zombies don't "check for a trap" they path based on the cost to move from point A to point B.  As far as I know zombies have never known what is or isn't a trap.  Nor should they, IMO.

 

 

[th3s0n1c]

15 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I do still miss a game in my playlist that gives me my "horrific crouching in the corner and hoping the Horde will die on spikes" moment..

IM NOT ALONE!!!

My friends (that started playing on A18) crack up everytime I tell them my experiences with A16 about acting like a child covering itself under the blankets and hoping everything will be ok, despite all the destruction and howlings outside ROFL.

 

And I think you were talking about A16 in the middle of your post and accidentally typed A19 twice when comparing them.

[Z-B]

1 hour ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Either zombies are stupid and walk into spikes, never the less they are on even ground or not, or they are intelligent enough and avoid spikes and also recognize lower spikes.

I don't understand why it's so hard for you to believe that zombies who are driven almost exclusively by their "hunger" and NOT by their sense of self preservation don't differentiate between a set of spikes or any other block.

[pApA^LeGBa]

3 hours ago, RipClaw said:

In A16 no schematic was needed to build the forge. The last time you needed a book to build a forge was AFAIK Alpha 12.
 

Oh my. The "Forge ahead" book . I remember games where we couldn´t find it for 3 or even 4 weeks.

 

 

[Roland]

1 hour ago, Liesel Weppen said:

 

I'm pretty sure this was not intended at all. Those people who implemented the pathfinding algorithm "accidentially" put the "stay on same height" above every "check for a trap" decision and didn't even notice that side effect of having spikes lowered in a trench. There was no intention at all. It was just a case nobody thought of. But once you noticed it, it has to be sold as "intended".

So the reason I discovered it myself and not by reading about it here, it is because I was playing with the pathing months before A17 was released. I sent a video of my findings to faatal and he said that it was working as intended. A17 was under wraps for 1.5 years and at some point during that time the pathing was implemented and TFP staff were plying with it. 
 

So knowing about the behavior before launch and still launching with it and having it survive further tweaks in A18 and A19 I can safely tell you it is intended intended and not “intended”. 
 

Sorry you are so bent out of shape about this issue. I’m not sure why THIS would cause you to lose all faith in TFP. 
 

The behavior is fun and playable and makes sense to me. I can see it doesn’t to you but neither of us are everyone and if it is a fun and viable design for many as well as sanctioned by TFP then you’re just in the wrong side of this one. Sorry. 
 

I’m on the wrong side of item degradation and a few other things if it makes you feel better. 

[meganoth]

If the spike trap would just look different, more massive, for example a flagstoneblock with broken glass sticking out of its sides you would immediately see how it is supposed to work. But the spike traps look is fantastic and iconic, it just gives you the wrong impression

 

[alanea]

6 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Ah, yes, intended behaviour is comprehensible because it is intended.

 

Maybe fataal is telling the current state and say that it is somehow "accepted" (in other words "won't be fixed (soon)"), but the outcome is still stupid. 

 

Zombies avoiding elevated spikes is a "feature", zombies running into whatever just because it is on the same ground level is for sure a lack of the pathing algorithm. Calling it "intended" is.... <no words>. If you call it intended, known, accepted or bug.... doesn't change anything with that.

 

I'd be interested in a reason WHY this is "intended"?

developer decides what  what should software do and how it should do such thing he and  only he decides whats norm

 

"A software bug is an error, flaw or fault in a computer program or system that causes it to produce an incorrect or unexpected result, or to behave in unintended ways."

 

basically if software does something other than developer wanted its a bug  if its working as he decided and  then made it work that way ... then it simply cannot be bug ... if you accept  something or not is your problem

 

but as already explained whole world is made from blocks ... every block in game is atleast 1x1x1 object for its basically same  it doesnt matter if you put  in  block .. forge   1/8 block  or plate ... from technical side its full  block with changed model and collision thats why zombie wont recognize any block in 1 deep hole ...   for game its flat ground (and also reason why we struggle with zombies trying to walk over blocks with small collision model .. that allow them fall through)

 

does it make sense that zombies rush into spikes ?  not rly  but if they avoided spikes  they would be  90% useless

 

5 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

might be because you are on a flat terrain or something... I can just tell what I have experienced. In A18 it was 100% the case and in my limited time with A19 i can tell that at least my one base only got damaged from one side (even though it was the same distance in each direction) and all Z's were clumped on one spot.

if you dont have  "valid entrance"(doors ignored by pathfinding as block) zombies trying to find way to punch  through  easiest way to reach you  they all  group up and  focus on weak spot even if you make wall and   damage a little one  block ... they will all go after that block .. blood moon  "spawning side" constantly changes .. but zombies follow same ai

 

5 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

About the spikes: No matter if intended or not, it shouldnt be. It is unintuitive, it doesnt look right (like the upside down spikeslogs) and I feel like Z's shouldnt see traps as Blocks and just walk right into them. Avoiding traps means that you need a hallway to FORCE them through traps (or make like a 1 deep trench that looks weird. Does it at least work in the way of slowing them down the right amount?)

I have loved very very many things Fataal did. Of all the Fun Pimps, he is definatly my favourite. Always trying to answer questions as best as he can and more or less always beeing very polite even on multiple repeated questions.
But this is flatout a mistake in my eyes. It has no ingame benefit. It might have a coding benefit. But simply looking at the ingame effect, it is worse in basicially every way.

upside down spikelogs are simply bug  or better said inconsistence in mechanic ..... because zombie cannot fall  into block from flat side ...= damage block  but still get slowed  because its " touching block" by standing next to it = gets slowed  ... sure they could fix it later  but funny pimps clearly disliked log spikes overall and give us equally awesomebetter looking and bug free iron spikes instead

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Hell no! If i dig a trench do trap zombies in, i'd never fill it up to the top with spikes. That is exactly what i meant, it's absolutely @%$#ed. From what i know from games, i'd probably expect that they might "glitch" over more quickly if the trench ist filled up with spikes. But that is also a bug or bad game design. What everybody normal thinking person wants, is a trench where zombies fall into and never come out again, because it is a f*** trench. A filled up with spikes trench doesn't fullfill that, and a trench with lowered spikes will also not work as of the current "logic" zombies will walk around it instead of falling into it.

well developers decided killing zombies by simple trench is far too easy and bulletproof with no upkeep.. so they capped hp loss to 1/3 making spikes must ....because zombies could fall in  but would dig and collapse your base

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

Yeah, fool me by calling it "intended". I don't have a problem with a bug, or maybe even some unintended behaviour discorvered nobody thought of before. But if THIS is really intended i either doubt in TFP intelligenze, or you hardly trying to fool me. If it is not intended but happend, fine, then just say it like that. But don't keep your customers for stupid by claiming it was intended. How damn stupid do you think people are?

so what should zombies do ?:D ....  now they walk over flat ground or  1 deep hole .... avoid deeper holes because they cant "climb up on other side to continue their path"

 

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

If TFP REALLY thinks this is intended (if you lie hard enough to your self, in the end you'll really believe your own lies), i lost all my hope in them, because then calling them @%$#ed would still be to positive. If they call it "intended" just to silence people, well then they are fooling me. Either way... both bad. I'm still missing a reasonable explanation why the heck it is this way, and if it should be intutive/logical/understandable no further explanation would be needed at all.

rrfp doesnt think whats intended ... tfp directly decides whats intended  ,,, when they plan and realize something to work in specific way its simply intended if it worked  different than they wanted .. its unntended = bug

 

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

I'm pretty sure this was not intended at all. Those people who implemented the pathfinding algorithm "accidentially" put the "stay on same height" above every "check for a trap" decision and didn't even notice that side effect of having spikes lowered in a trench. There was no intention at all. It was just a case nobody thought of. But once you noticed it, it has to be sold as "intended".

 

Maybe a bug, unintended bahaviour, an unepected side effect or whatever, but then at least be so honest and don't call it "InTeNdEd"!!!11elf

 maybe they decided there will be no "check for a trap" at all  opposite would be insane ... traps would be avoided= useless .. and if youw alled everything they would break in  through one trap and then all path to bthis breach to avoid traps lol

[Solomon]

On 9/18/2020 at 9:41 AM, Sydious said:

No it's at Advanced Engineering level 1.

My bad, thanks for correcting.