Jump to content

I once loved this game...


Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2020 at 11:14 AM, faatal said:

The best reason for fighting anything is not dying. <snip>

Historically, that was far from the truth.

 

Then again, (Edit: in this game), if you don't even have to look at the zombies and possibly get injured is best, by your reasoning.  Letting them get killed by some simple defenses is just bonus.

Edited by Aldranon
grammar (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2020 at 9:14 AM, faatal said:

The best reason for fighting anything is not dying. Granted our death penalty is not that bad, but maybe someday.

If you don't want to die, the best strategy is to run away. That is human survival in a nutshell.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2020 at 9:17 AM, Kyonshi said:

What's nice about the current AI is that you can replicate the approach you could have in a real-life situation, naturally : study the behavior of the threat and use it against itself to neutralize, contain and idealy suppress it.

 

AKA "exploit" or "cheesing", to some people. Anything other than 100% random behavior will have patterns. Patterns which can be studied and exploited cheesed overcome with attention to detail and planning.

 

There is no cheese. There is only the enemy's behavior and your behavior, and if you survive to fight another day, you win. That said, of course we all want TFP to fine-tune and polish the enemy's behavior until they are (more) worthy opponents. Still won't mean that we can't find repeatable strategies to overcome them. Which will then be labled as "exploits" and "cheese" by folks like that guy over there. No, not you, the guy behind you. Yeah, that one.

Edited by Boidster (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2020 at 7:38 AM, Aldranon said:

There currently is no reason to kill the hordes of zombies.

 

Now, if there was a reason...

 

Survivors you need to defend at your settlement.

 

This would completely change horde night.

 

 

 

-Morloc

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Morloc said:

 

Survivors you need to defend at your settlement.

 

This would completely change horde night.

 

 

 

-Morloc

If you mean a settlement with NPC's, that would be perfect!

 

Perhaps the player wakes up in a bed after being attacked by the duke.  They will give him some food if he can help them defend their base.   :D

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2020 at 4:46 PM, Maharin said:

 

Traders will change significantly once they adhere more to the loot availability based on game stages.  Also, considering they will be applying a way to modify GS loot based on specific POIs and biomes they could also have that impact trader's inventory and buying habits.  Maybe drinks cost more from a trader in a desert and bullets cost more from a trader in the wasteland.  Maybe one trader is more willing to buy a certain kind of loot (and in higher quantities) than other traders.  That sort of thing should be possible, or at least I'm hopeful.

 

Granted, traders along with quests in their current form were not really much-needed additions to the game. Okay to have and in case of the traders indeed OP, but working on other game mechanics could have improved the game more in my opinion. 

 

I see that everyone values different aspects of the game in different ways, so my opinion is just that - mine. 

Edited by Noctoras (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Aldranon said:

Perhaps the player wakes up in a bed after being attacked by the duke.  They will give him some food if he can help them defend their base. 

 

I was thinking more along the lines of "attracting" settlers/survivors after you declare an area to be a settlement (with something like a land claim block).

This way the player still has the same early game as he does now, and isn't pushed/rushed into the settlement portion of the game. There would be advantages to having settlers as well as the liability of keeping them safe. There could be quests to rescue special settlers which would add their unique features/abilities to your settlement.

 

Dr. Angie - Can cure infection.

Farmer Ed - Auto harvesting.

Agent Hank Kimball - Increased crop yield.

Victor the Engineer - 10% increase to block durability in settlement.

Brother Samson - Able to take a beating (200% standard hit points).

 

Some late game items/crafting could be gated behind having a certain quantity of settlers, so there could also be settlers with detrimental traits which you might be willing to keep given the headcount they provide.

 

Fat @%$# - Decreased crop yield.

Mr. McFeely - Decreased morale (may trigger other settlers to take the day off and not provide their bonuses).

Navesgane Sam - Bully who will on occasion rough up another settler leaving them immobile and unable to provide bonuses for up to a week.

 

Most/all of the settlers need not be able to fight (that's your job), so no complex AI necessary for the overtaxed devs.

 

 

-Morloc

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2020 at 5:34 PM, Morloc said:

 

I was thinking more along the lines of "attracting" settlers/survivors after you declare an area to be a settlement (with something like a land claim block).

This way the player still has the same early game as he does now, and isn't pushed/rushed into the settlement portion of the game. There would be advantages to having settlers as well as the liability of keeping them safe. There could be quests to rescue special settlers which would add their unique features/abilities to your settlement.

 

Dr. Angie - Can cure infection.

Farmer Ed - Auto harvesting.

Agent Hank Kimball - Increased crop yield.

Victor the Engineer - 10% increase to block durability in settlement.

Brother Samson - Able to take a beating (200% standard hit points).

 

Some late game items/crafting could be gated behind having a certain quantity of settlers, so there could also be settlers with detrimental traits which you might be willing to keep given the headcount they provide.

 

Fat @%$# - Decreased crop yield.

Mr. McFeely - Decreased morale (may trigger other settlers to take the day off and not provide their bonuses).

Navesgane Sam - Bully who will on occasion rough up another settler leaving them immobile and unable to provide bonuses for up to a week.

 

Most/all of the settlers need not be able to fight (that's your job), so no complex AI necessary for the overtaxed devs.

 

 

-Morloc

 

I wanted to reply to this to bring this back to the top, because this post fits with how the Devs are currently doing the game. (Items have specific bonuses given to the player).

 

So having people giving bonuses to the player as well would fit in with the game.  Finding people in POI's is perfect because you might find Bandits in POI's as well... Soon!

Also adding NPC's as part of the loot system would liven things up!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2020 at 12:24 AM, Roland said:

I agree. As long as every feature is working as the devs intend it to then there is no problem. But keep in mind that this is not the final version. More changes are coming and may require balancing. If those changes are too upsetting then the best thing is to simply wait until the game is done. At that day, you can teach your great-grandkids how to play. ;)

 

"Back in my day we had LBD..."

 

"Okay boomer."

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MechanicalLens said:

 

"Back in my day we had LBD..."

 

"Okay boomer."

 

It is forbidden to mention the glorious LBD method of excellent gaming goodness.

 

Never are the letters LBD to be united like someday the commie's will forbid the letters USA.

  • Knuckle Rub 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Aldranon said:

 

It is forbidden to mention the glorious LBD method of excellent gaming goodness.

 

Never are the letters LBD to be united like someday the commie's will forbid the letters USA.

 

No. It is not forbidden. But you are now on a list. THE list. A list only Edgar J. Hoover could invent. A list you have no chance to get off again. Except that any attempt to get off that list will make your entry in that list even longer and more damning. 😎👁️👽    😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, meganoth said:

 

No. It is not forbidden. But you are now on a list. THE list. A list only Edgar J. Hoover could invent. A list you have no chance to get off again. Except that any attempt to get off that list will make your entry in that list even longer and more damning. 😎👁️👽    😁

 

You, sir, have read "Hitchhicker's guide to the galaxy" or have watched various Monty Python movies.

If so, there is nothing that can be done for you, as its too late... I would know.   🥳

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aldranon said:

 

You, sir, have read "Hitchhicker's guide to the galaxy" or have watched various Monty Python movies.

If so, there is nothing that can be done for you, as its too late... I would know.   🥳

Who could have known that Pandora's Box really exists and is freely available for individual damnation. 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2020 at 12:19 AM, scorcher24 said:

.. then the door homing missiles were introduced, aka regular zombies. I gave this a shot more than once with A19 and the only way to somehow sustain is to make sure there is no door and try to make them spread out, so they don't get the idea to focus on one weak point. YouTube also seems to revolve around cheesing horde night.

 

For the love of this game, just remove this stupid mechanic and make them come in from all sides again as it was. 


When we got bored of the PVE and started killing each other in a village, we built a base nearby, (as the horde nights were still running).

We dug down to rock and laid down a block of reinforced concrete for the foundations, then a wide floor with gentle slopes to get onto it so they would not dig. After that, the structure was a pretty small single floor with a 2x2 ramps pillar in the middle and for "windows" we used thin pillars. The second floor was a cage for shooting vultures and sniping further out.

The main feature was two sets of zig-zagged doors, such that you could shoot through bars at the zombie that was bashing the door to the left or right of where you were aiming. If one side was running low on doors, we just move to the other side and the zombies followed.

It was ridiculously simple and easy to wipe them out. Even demolishers were so close that I just blew their balls off with an auto-shotgun, which leads into the drawback, I did have to put out a steel floor to take my shotgun shots.

Repairs were cheap, the doors and a few blocks hit for maybe 10% of their hit points.

(The blade traps were useless and a waste of effort and resources.)
 

7DaysToDie-simple-base.png

Edited by Jenshae (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/18/2020 at 8:22 PM, Roland said:

 

Interesting. You say others fail to understand the distinction but then you do the same thing with my statement. Obviously, I was saying that the devs will work to close and end "software exploits" but that they will not try to stop every strategy that people use to gain an advantage over the zombies. 

 

Stopping people from improperly using flaws (such as the hatch elevator) but allowing them to use legit strategies (such as kill corridors) that ultimately give them an advantage over their enemies is horrible design philosophy? I don't think so.

 

The real problem is that some legitimate strategies work really well and people start using them to the exclusion of anything else and become bored and refer to them as "exploits" that should be nerfed all so they can be challenged again. The devs may or may not agree with that. But if they decide to "cop out" and retain some of those strategies in the game that are not software exploits but are simply effective methods of playing, I submit that it is good design philosophy because it gives more choices to players who haven't self-limited themselves by only doing those things they perceive as the most efficient and effective.

 

Regardless, any time the devs remove an advantage whether it is a legit strategy or a software exploit, there will be people who get upset at the change because they liked using it. That was my point. Therefore, the devs should only focus on actual software exploits that they deem important and not try and nerf every gameplay strategy advantage that players find. Now we may not all agree about whether a particular activity is the type of thing the devs should limit or not. That is their perogative. 

 

Nah, you got it twisted. This part here is well and good. 

 

The issue is this:

Quote

No matter what the AI leads the zombies to do, people will find a way to exploit them.

 

It's the wrong use of exploit. The one that confuses people and gets them all lathered up. But you knew that already, no?

Edited by Psychodabble (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...