Jump to content

Stone->Iron->Steel is unbalanced.


Solomon

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Kalen said:

Well, that is exactly what I'm saying the problem is.   Again, a higher tier tool should always feel better than a lower tier tool.... regardless of what you are using it for.

...

So you're saying that my Iron Axe should be better than my Stone Shovel for digging dirt? Because it's a higher a tier tool?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DaChibii said:

...

So you're saying that my Iron Axe should be better than my Stone Shovel for digging dirt? Because it's a higher a tier tool?

Really?   I didn't think I needed to specify.... but ok.  No, but your iron shovel should be better than your stone shovel.

 

The "regardless of what you are using it for" was specifically in reference to your comment "attempt something more specialized "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalen... it is superior. It's only not superior if you don't skill into a couple of skills, hence specialization. It's only not superior if you choose a different path (aka player choice). 

 

Mechanically it's the same as asking for a single harvest tool to be good regardless what it's meant for. Just because you didn't craft a different tool. The harvesting mini-game has different progression paths, how you choose to go through is up to you. If you want the optimal path then you have to choose to go that way. If you prefer combat to harvesting then that's your choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DaChibii said:

Kalen... it is superior. It's only not superior if you don't skill into a couple of skills, hence specialization. It's only not superior if you choose a different path (aka player choice). 

 

 

Again.... that is my point.   It should be superior without needing perks.   IMO, at no time, under no circumstances should a stone tool be superior to an iron or steel tool.  Its counter intuitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalen here is the thing... if we do a comparison to the combat ecosystem and say just the AR tree of weapons. 

 

The important factors in a weapon is magazine size/reload speed, time to kill/shots to kill, and durability. Durability is the least important since repair kits are easily available. Shots to kill on the other hand ends up being the most important since ammo is a scarce resource at first, and DPS is needed late game just to deal with horde sizes and scaled health. Magazine size and reload speed are a factor in DPS and combat session length, and often determine whether you survive an encounter or not (aka dying during a reload). 

 

Now when we look into ARs the T2 AR isn't really superior in any of those areas, but it does have superior accuracy and recoil. Those are secondary stats that help with ammo sustainability and DPS, but can easily be replicated through mods. So I assume the devs think that players won't have the mods by then to replicate the effects, and so they give them the choice (affected by what mods the player has found by then). Granted if the player has skilled into ARs then the MI6 is probably superior to AK, but again... I don't have graphs to determine weapon damage/shots to kill versus enemy health scaled by game stage. And frankly... that's annoying spreadsheet to build and balance. 

 

I've been through these types of discussions in regards to weapon balance, and often players ignore the whole combat ecosystem and progression plan to focus on specific perspectives (like endgame or a specific skill build, or play style). 

 

If Gazz has the data on a spreadsheet then I trust his decision. At most it's more a design issue educating the player about the choices than it's about balance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaChibii said:

Kalen here is the thing... if we do a comparison to the combat ecosystem and say just the AR tree of weapons. 

 

The important factors in a weapon is magazine size/reload speed, time to kill/shots to kill, and durability. Durability is the least important since repair kits are easily available. Shots to kill on the other hand ends up being the most important since ammo is a scarce resource at first, and DPS is needed late game just to deal with horde sizes and scaled health. Magazine size and reload speed are a factor in DPS and combat session length, and often determine whether you survive an encounter or not (aka dying during a reload). 

 

Now when we look into ARs the T2 AR isn't really superior in any of those areas, but it does have superior accuracy and recoil. Those are secondary stats that help with ammo sustainability and DPS, but can easily be replicated through mods. So I assume the devs think that players won't have the mods by then to replicate the effects, and so they give them the choice (affected by what mods the player has found by then). Granted if the player has skilled into ARs then the MI6 is probably superior to AK, but again... I don't have graphs to determine weapon damage/shots to kill versus enemy health scaled by game stage. And frankly... that's annoying spreadsheet to build and balance. 

 

I've been through these types of discussions in regards to weapon balance, and often players ignore the whole combat ecosystem and progression plan to focus on specific perspectives (like endgame or a specific skill build, or play style). 

 

If Gazz has the data on a spreadsheet then I trust his decision. At most it's more a design issue educating the player about the choices than it's about balance. 

I've never done a detailed analysis on weapons, so I accept your statement here on the state of ARs.   However, it doesn't really change my stance on tools.   Steel should always be superior to iron which should always be superior to stone.  Independent of any skills and/or buffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaChibii said:

So you believe tools should be balanced differently than the other systems and not have skills affecting them (because you can't balance them independently). 

No, thats not what I said.... skills should absolutely improve your effectiveness with tools.   But whether you are unskilled, sort of skilled, or an absolute master.... Steel should always be superior to iron which should always be superior to stone.  That is what I meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that statement is 'progression should be balanced without skills' and the only way you can do that is by not having skills affect progression. 

 

I do get what you're trying to say but it doesn't work that way. You made a choice not skilling into harvesting and that has an effect. That's your choice. T2 tools (and probably weapons too) are better if you skill into them especially for the roles that play in (for tools harvesting time). That's how the game is balanced because the devs with the data looked at, and figured out that was best for the overall whole system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DaChibii said:

The problem is that statement is 'progression should be balanced without skills' and the only way you can do that is by not having skills affect progression. 

 

I do get what you're trying to say but it doesn't work that way. You made a choice not skilling into harvesting and that has an effect. That's your choice. T2 tools (and probably weapons too) are better if you skill into them especially for the roles that play in (for tools harvesting time). That's how the game is balanced because the devs with the data looked at, and figured out that was best for the overall whole system. 

I have no problem with them being better if you skill into it.  I endorse that fully, as you said that is part of progression.   I object to them being worse than a lower tier because you didn't.... thats got nothing to do with progression.... in fact it is regression.   You shouldn't do worse because you found a higher tier item.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalen said:

No, thats not what I said.... skills should absolutely improve your effectiveness with tools.   But whether you are unskilled, sort of skilled, or an absolute master.... Steel should always be superior to iron which should always be superior to stone.  That is what I meant.

Okay Kalen—- but it is. In durability and damage value which speak to the properties of steel and iron vs stone they ARE superior. 
 

Stamina has to do with the person wielding the tool. A weak asthmatic person using a small hatchet may very well be more effective in the long term than they would be using a heavy iron two-handed axe. There are tools I can use that my daughters can’t at all due to lack of strength and skill. They would be more effective using simpler tools even though those tools are not as good as mine. 
 

 Now, whether the game handles that idea effectively is another matter.

 

Iron tools take more stamina primarily because the devs are using stamina use as a gate. I think we all know this. Because of that, the actual difference in strength and endurance to effectively wield an iron pickaxe vs a stone hatchet is exaggerated which is why it feels gamey and off. But there is a kernel of reality to it and while I agree that an iron tool will be superior in all circumstances to a stone tool in terms of durability and damaging power per swing, I disagree that stamina usage is a property of stone or iron and that you can have better or worse effectiveness with a superior tool vs an inferior tool. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Roland said:

Okay Kalen—- but it is. In durability and damage value which speak to the properties of steel and iron vs stone they ARE superior. 
 

Stamina has to do with the person wielding the tool. A weak asthmatic person using a small hatchet may very well be more effective in the long term than they would be using a heavy iron two-handed axe. There are tools I can use that my daughters can’t at all due to lack of strength and skill. They would be more effective using simpler tools even though those tools are not as good as mine. 
 

 Now, whether the game handles that idea effectively is another matter.

 

Iron tools take more stamina primarily because the devs are using stamina use as a gate. I think we all know this. Because of that, the actual difference in strength and endurance to effectively wield an iron pickaxe vs a stone hatchet is exaggerated which is why it feels gamey and off. But there is a kernel of reality to it and while I agree that an iron tool will be superior in all circumstances to a stone tool in terms of durability and damaging power per swing, I disagree that stamina usage is a property of stone or iron and that you can have better or worse effectiveness with a superior tool vs an inferior tool. 

A completely reasonable argument.... grounded in reality.   In this case, however, I would say that gameplay is more important than reality.   A player should, IMO, feel like a higher tier item is an upgrade.  To me, it currently doesn't (unless you're perked into strength)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2020 at 9:53 PM, Danidas said:

I've long been of the opinion that sexyrexy is way too over powered with how much it not only effects tool use but melee combat to the point of just about always being a must have perk. Since it effects all aspects of the game in both direct and indirect ways due to how it reduces the burdens of stamina's forced time delays. Which either forces you to take a short break of your current task or expend further resources to try to minimize via other means aka coffee.

I feel that if we ever get sexrex nerfed it will only make these t2 tools worse aswell as further slowing down the gameplay what is something we shouldnt consider in a game where you need to meet ends before every 7th day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sexosaurus is very powerful indeed.

 

Everything is a lot easier for people who have played the bits off of this game but we can't make a game for people with 500+ hours in the game.

If it was just up to me, game difficulty would have more varied effects beyond enemies becoming more HP spongy.

Alas, a) it's not just up to me and b) doing something like that should happen after release because that would be a serious rebalancing effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gazz said:

Sexosaurus is very powerful indeed.

 

Everything is a lot easier for people who have played the bits off of this game but we can't make a game for people with 500+ hours in the game.

If it was just up to me, game difficulty would have more varied effects beyond enemies becoming more HP spongy.

Alas, a) it's not just up to me and b) doing something like that should happen after release because that would be a serious rebalancing effort.

Honestly increasing difficulty should change zombie behaviour and type related "perks", like spider zombies become more silent and sneak around, ferals become faster and fattos become more spongy.

 

Also at this point any kind of change requies serious rebalancings because the devs are keep messing with the core aspects of the game like last time with the looting change now put us in a situation where players are complaining about how the stone age is both too long and boring, it is something what should have been checked around to gather opinions in the the exp.versions and adjusted before entering the stable variant but that last step was skipped entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Solomon said:

Honestly increasing difficulty should change zombie behaviour and type related "perks", like spider zombies become more silent and sneak around, ferals become faster and fattos become more spongy.

 

Also at this point any kind of change requies serious rebalancings because the devs are keep messing with the core aspects of the game like last time with the looting change now put us in a situation where players are complaining about how the stone age is both too long and boring, it is something what should have been checked around to gather opinions in the the exp.versions and adjusted before entering the stable variant but that last step was skipped entirely.

Well, if they could do it that fast then they would have changed the loot system of A18 in A18 exp already.

 

A18 loot was found wanting and so a next iteration was done in A19.

A19 loot was again found wanting and so a next interation will be done in A20.

 

See a pattern there?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2020 at 3:23 PM, Kalen said:

I've never done a detailed analysis on weapons, so I accept your statement here on the state of ARs.   However, it doesn't really change my stance on tools.   Steel should always be superior to iron which should always be superior to stone.  Independent of any skills and/or buffs.

I’d say that in terms of block damage, a iron tool should be better than a stone tool and a steel tool should better than an iron tool. So even a level 6 stone axe won’t do as much block damage as a level 1 iron axe, but it might be somewhat close so if you installed full mods in the level 6 stone axe the damage might be only slightly less.

 

in terms if stamina I’d say it is perfect as it is now. If you want to effectively utilize iron tools you will need a couple of ranks in sex Rex and coffee on hand, and for steel you’ll need full perks in sex Rex and a coffee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Maxley said:

in terms if stamina I’d say it is perfect as it is now. If you want to effectively utilize iron tools you will need a couple of ranks in sex Rex and coffee on hand, and for steel you’ll need full perks in sex Rex and a coffee.

Which means iron and steel tools are really only meant for people that perk into strength.   I can't agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious how sta-focused this thread is, while in the same str-tree there's two other talents that combined multiply the yield five fold.

 

I haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if for the same skill point expense you would get better results from the others.

 

Having things change when going from a "multipurpose beginner gadget" into three separate tools for the same tasks, well.. doesn't bother me. I usually do skip iron axes though, so, there's that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, meganoth said:

Well, if they could do it that fast then they would have changed the loot system of A18 in A18 exp already.

 

A18 loot was found wanting and so a next iteration was done in A19.

A19 loot was again found wanting and so a next interation will be done in A20.

 

See a pattern there?

 

Yeah i see but i dont understand why the pattern is like that. If something doesnt work in the experimental version and leaves you with wanting then why not adjust it again before putting it in the stable?

 

Most games i know use the experimental versions to experiment and if something doesnt work out they scrap that before it goes into the next stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Solomon said:

Most games i know use the experimental versions to experiment and if something doesnt work out they scrap that before it goes into the next stable.

This is early access. Basically every mechanic in every version is "experimental".

 

The branches you refer to as "experimental" are just for alpha-tests to changes not breaking/corrupting the game because of bugs. So the branch "stable" means it (most likely) won't break the game, not that it is "finally" balanced.

So the changes you are asking for are not adjustments, but major changes. And major changes are tested with next alpha (see the name?), not with a bugfix update. Features may also be removed again. The whole game accross various alphas is still work in progress. There is nothing "stable" (as you understand it) yet.

 

BTT: I agree that the overlap between tools (and also weaons) of its age are to big and interferes with the progression system. In my current playthrough i basically skipped the iron shovel, because my T6 stone shovel was still better than every iron shovel i found. The amount of mod slots interferes that additionally. Once you have a T5/6 you can put 3-4 Mods into it and a T1/2 of the next age most times is worse AND can again only fit 1 mod.

 

In opposite to weapons: The different tiers have also slightly different use cases. E.g. auto shotgun does less damage than pump, but shoots faster and has bigger magazine (that's why i never use autoshotgun, imho it's always worse than pump, because with shotgun i want to have max damage per shot).

With tools it's different. They become slower but increase blockdamage. The blockdamage increase has to be not just higher, it also has to overcome the speed malus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Solomon said:

Yeah i see but i dont understand why the pattern is like that. If something doesnt work in the experimental version and leaves you with wanting then why not adjust it again before putting it in the stable?

 

Most games i know use the experimental versions to experiment and if something doesnt work out they scrap that before it goes into the next stable.

Liesel already gave the appropriate answer, I'd just like to say why not "scrap" it in this specific case.

 

Scrapping, i.e. going to the previous version, is only advisable if the previous version is better. While you say it is for you, the devs (and many players) have a different opinion: A18 was suboptimal, A19 is suboptimal.

Whether some think A19 is a big step in the right direction and just needs an adjustment or is just as suboptimal as A18 doesn't matter, going back does not improve the game (and is additional work)

 

We already know of one adjustment (more difficult zones) that needs a lot of implementation effort and obviously needs a whole alpha to develop. If they completely overhaul the loot system (at least one dev seemed to say this) it is also work that simply can't be done parallel to all  the bug fixing the experimentals are mainly used for.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...