Current state of class system

[meganoth]

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

That's what i meant by try to name the classes and then see what not fits anymore. And no matter what name you choose, some of the skills do not fit anymore. And that's imho not about realism, it's about pure logic. A game doesn't need to be realistic, but i expect some logic in the mechanics. And the current logic can only be explained by the biasing between attributes and classes.

 

Please show me the logic deduction that doesn't depend on facts and assumptions you know and expect from reading or hearing about real world snipers.

 

[Liesel Weppen]

8 hours ago, meganoth said:

Please show me the logic deduction that doesn't depend on facts and assumptions you know and expect from reading or hearing about real world snipers.

A Sniper can track animals better than others?

A Sniper can find better loot?
A Sniper can find burried supplies easier?

A Sniper can not be a good cook?
A Sniper can not be a better farmer?
A Sniper can not craft faster?
A Sniper can not be better insulated?
A Sniper can not have an iron gut?

 

Should i continue?

 

 

[uncle.heavy]

16 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

The player that wants to be a farmer has to use automatic weapons, no matter he likes to use them or not. Or the other way round, that player that wants to use automatics, has to do the farming, if he likes it or not. Imho in multiplayer it's even worse.

As in, the players in your group. No generalization is possible here as one single exception kills the theory.

*raises hand* my group is an exception

We play a lot more unrestricted than I learned we should, although playing the same game - must be, I do not know, some factor other than the game, then.

[Axonius]

On 5/17/2021 at 5:52 AM, KingSlayerGM said:

@Roland the author might be a bot, since he copy-pasted my post 

... or maybe he just shares my view.. lol

 

 

What would be the point of making a bot to copy posts? I don't get what the motive would be.

[ShellHead]

7 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

A Sniper can track animals better than others?

A Sniper can find better loot?
A Sniper can find burried supplies easier?

A Sniper can not be a good cook?
A Sniper can not be a better farmer?
A Sniper can not craft faster?
A Sniper can not be better insulated?
A Sniper can not have an iron gut?

 

Should i continue?

 

 

None of those are inherent to being a sniper and on top of that you can still get those as a sniper.

Again, the stats are Archetypes, not Classes. Perception covers a lot more ground conceptually than Sniper.

The skill system as it stands does not have the actual limitations you are saying it does, it’s not an omni-tree yes, but you can still have a flexible build without spending a long time with low rank perks. You can get noticeable perk benefits with the main stat at 5 (which is before any cost increase) and get most maxxed by 7 in the stat, both very attainable without power-leveling.

[Roland]

7 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

A Sniper can track animals better than others?

A Sniper can find better loot?
A Sniper can find burried supplies easier?

A Sniper can not be a good cook?
A Sniper can not be a better farmer?
A Sniper can not craft faster?
A Sniper can not be better insulated?
A Sniper can not have an iron gut?

 

Should i continue?

 

 

You're getting a bit crazy with this Liesel. A sniper won't track animals better than a..."shotgunnist?" who spends the points on Shotguns and animal tracking. It will cost more than someone who only hones their perception but the possibility is there. There is no forcing. There is only the economy of the points and what you are willing to spend. I'm sorry that you hate that it is cheaper for a sniper to be better at animal tracking than it is for a blademaster but it can be done.

 

Even if the game forces players into only five archetypes that they can play, that should not be considered a weakness. That is five distinct playstyles to experience at least 30 hours of gameplay a pop. Add in a 6th if you want to go broad and just do a bit from each branch (It's pretty fun actually). But the truth is that these five (or six) obvious progression paths are just the easy ones. You really can go the more expensive route with your points and mix and match for a more challenging experience. 

 

This is the thing I appreciate most about this game. There are ways to make it more challenging than simply clicking on a setting in the top menu. So go ahead and try being a Sniper that has a rock solid iron gut. Despite your assertion it definitely is possible and the game allows you to make that choice. But if you progress those two things evenly your progress will be slower and more expensive and the game may become more challenging.

 

I'm not against a change to somehow make the expense of any combination of perks the player might want to choose completely equal across the board. I just doubt that Joel is going to tinker with the perks any more at this point. It would have to be a mod. 

 

Maybe a good mod would be that when you spend a point on an attribute it raises all five attributes together. That would make it so all combinations of perks would be equal in cost. <shrug>

20 minutes ago, Axonius said:

 

What would be the point of making a bot to copy posts? I don't get what the motive would be.

Bots are normally easy to spot because their posts almost never are relevant to the forum. So a bot that goes to an old post and copies and posts it as a new thread is going to have a greater likelihood of not being spotted. Once they have a couple posts and are "accepted" then they have better likelihood of being able to embed a link and not get caught.

[Liesel Weppen]

17 minutes ago, Roland said:

You're getting a bit crazy with this Liesel.

Yeah, because nobody seems to understand what i'm talking about.

 

17 minutes ago, Roland said:

Maybe a good mod would be that when you spend a point on an attribute it raises all five attributes together. That would make it so all combinations of perks would be

equal in cost. <shrug>

I do not want to make them absolutely equal.

See, nobody understands what i'm talking about. Also you.

To answer that, read my first answers in this thread again. As we begin running in circles and it's still not understood what i'm talking about, it won't help if i repeat the same another time.

 

 

 

[Roland]

18 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

I do not want to make them absolutely equal.

See, nobody understands what i'm talking about. Also you.

To answer that, read my first answers in this thread again. As we begin running in circles and it's still not understood what i'm talking about, it won't help if i repeat the same another time.

 

 

Well, you're not exactly being consistent with what you are saying. You started by saying that what you want is for an increase in agility to have an agility themed boost to ALL weapons and a strength themed boost to be given to ALL weapons whenever strength is increased-- instead of the handful of weapons that rest beneath those particular perk list headers.

 

But then you go on to say things like a Sniper can't be good at cooking which really really makes it sound more like you want to be able to mix and match any and all perks equally. Your first suggestion of having the attribute bonuses affecting all weapons instead the few that are assigned to them would not solve the problem you later bring up about a sniper specialist not being able to cook very well.

 

So excuse us for not exactly getting what you mean. 

 

 

Another solution would be to remove the attribute gates from the perks so that any perk could be advanced irrespective of the attribute level. You could spend to move attributes up for those bonuses and/or you could spend to move perks up but the perks would not be dependent upon any particular level of attribute. That way you could mix and match any perk from anywhere that you would want to focus on. Removing the attribute requirements for perks would be a much easier mod to accomplish I think. You could probably change the value associated with the perks all to 1 so that once you put at least 1 point into an attribute all the perks under it would be available to advance all the way. So for two points you could advance blades and snipers or farming and snipers.

 

That would solve the economic problem you hate but the attribute bonuses you dislike would still remain.

Edited May 20, 2021 by Roland (see edit history)

[starscream]

i don't mind the way it is now. it forces you to make some decisions early game onto mid game. doesn't matter much late game since you'll have enough perk points to buy every perk. 

and there is really no need to rush maxing out a combat skill. i've played level 150+ without maxing out a single combat skill, and it hasn't made much difference. you can raise a lot of skills to level 4 without a huge investment in perks.

[Liesel Weppen]

47 minutes ago, Roland said:

But then you go on to say things like a Sniper can't be good at cooking which really really makes it sound more like you want to be able to mix and match any and all perks equally. Your first suggestion of having the attribute bonuses affecting all weapons instead the few that are assigned to them would not solve the problem you later bring up about a sniper specialist not being able to cook very well.

*sigh*

 

I didn't bring up "snipers". It was meganoth that led the discussion to whether those things are attributes or classes. I in opposite said, that are also not really classes. And it was meganoth that said "perception" has to be seen as the sniper class. I argued against it, that there are perks in that "class" that do absolutely not fit to a sniper. So i still have no idea what it should be, but it is not "sniper".

Has nothing to do with my solution, that have been meganoth arguments to explain to my, why it is "good" as it is. I just tried to explain why this doesn't solve the issues i see and they can't be discussed away.

 

From the ongoing discussion i'd say i want to make those "things"  attributes (again) instead of classes. And remove the hardcore binding of weapons to those squrbelburp. I call these things from now on squrbelburp, because there is no word existing that can describe what they really are (in a german forum i would call them "wolpertinger"). They are not classes, they are not attributes, call them whatever you want, it is wrong anyway, because they are completely arbitrary.

 

My problem is not that i can not cross skill. I can but it feels like wasting points, because of the design i need to spend points on squrbelburps that have absolutely no effect for me and my playstyle.   

I spec into e.g. strength because i want to play a shotgun, because the squrbelburp "strength" buffs shotguns directly.

Now i want living of the land 4 and for that i need to level fortitude. The points put into fortitude for me are completely wasted. There is absolutely no effect i have from this points, because i don't use automatics, nor fists, and it doesn't effect my shotgun and my stun baton at all.

Now if fortitude (and the other 4 squrbelburps) wouldn't buff specific weapons but give generic fortitudioic buffs like... less stamina use for weapons... or reduce recoil or whatever, these points would have and effect and not feel completely wasted (because for me it's only a skill point gate).

 

The dead eye perk can stay under perception and also depend on the level of perception. Imho totally plausible that the perk that buffs rifles depends on perception.

It's fine that you need to skill a specific attribute to get full access to a weapon specific perk and finally max it with this perk.

 

And that still keeps your holy "archetypes". The trees would stay exactly the same, you can still try using only one branch like it is now if you are happier with others telling you how to play.

 

I really don't get what's so hard to understand with that.

 

[ShellHead]

Because that is effectively 1 giant skill tree, and it incentivizes taking the perks from each stat that enhance the sphere of the game you’re focusing on to the detriment of every other sphere. The concept you’re talking about isn’t hard to understand, i just simply don’t agree.

[Roland]

59 minutes ago, Liesel Weppen said:

I didn't bring up "snipers".

 

I don't care who brought it up in the first place. It was you I was quoting and whether Mega brought it up in some misunderstanding of your point, you still responded to him as you did and it was your response that I quoted and spoke to. Why ask the rhetorical question of why can't a sniper be good at farming or why can a sniper be better at finding loot if your point wasn't that such things are ridiculous and shouldn't be? I was answering THAT point which YOU made and maybe you made it in response to someone else but it was definitely you that posted it and you who ended up in my quote box.

 

1 hour ago, Liesel Weppen said:

My problem is not that i can not cross skill. I can but it feels like wasting points, because of the design i need to spend points on squrbelburps that have absolutely no effect for me and my playstyle.

 

How can you not understand that this is exactly what I answered and even gave a couple of modding solutions {that I have no idea are possible or not)? What you are saying when you say you want to cross skill with no wasted points is that you want all combinations of selectable perks to be equal in cost. You don't want it to be more expensive to put sniper together with farming than it is to put sniper together with looting if that is what you want to be able to do. I get it. Everyone is getting it. You just don't like how we are answering I guess and you want to snarl that nobody is understanding what you want.

 

Its just an economic gate for certain combos and that's it. You can do anything you want but some perk combos are going to be cheaper and others more expensive. That's how I look at it. I decide what I want to do and then I pay the cost. Back in the 90's if I wanted to throw down a card that cost more mana I tapped more land and didn't complain (much) that that card was more expensive to cast than some other one. The way games work is that once you understand the costs for the abilities you want you work at paying those costs and go with it. As I see it the fact that some of that extra cost gives some residual benefit that if I happened to pick up a weapon I wasn't focusing on I might get some little extra boost to that too-- that's a good thing.

1 hour ago, Liesel Weppen said:

They are not classes, they are not attributes, call them whatever you want, it is wrong anyway, because they are completely arbitrary.

 

They are gates pure and simple. They aren't arbitrary as many of the perks really would be governed by the attribute those gates are named for but some obviously don't fit and needed a home somewhere and I do agree that it can be jarring to the immersion senses. But each gate has a group of perks that if you stick to that gate you will be able to specialize in those particular areas earlier in the game. If you cross over into another gate the cost for mastering your custom group of perks is going to be higher and it will take longer.

[BFT2020]

4 hours ago, Roland said:

Another solution would be to remove the attribute gates from the perks so that any perk could be advanced irrespective of the attribute level. You could spend to move attributes up for those bonuses and/or you could spend to move perks up but the perks would not be dependent upon any particular level of attribute. That way you could mix and match any perk from anywhere that you would want to focus on. Removing the attribute requirements for perks would be a much easier mod to accomplish I think. You could probably change the value associated with the perks all to 1 so that once you put at least 1 point into an attribute all the perks under it would be available to advance all the way. So for two points you could advance blades and snipers or farming and snipers.

It is possible (at least from the brief look I did in the xml file).  I was thinking about doing a simple mod (or simply change the xml file) to change the perks around (I looked at making all the weapon perks under Perception and all the melee perks under strength - though I moved Sex Rex to Fortitude and such).  There is a lot of changes having to be made and one thing I noticed was the settings on when things unlock.  You can make all the perks unlock at lower levels if you want to.  I am confident it can be done as some other mods out there already introduced their own perks and even tied them into existing ones.

 

 You can simple change the level the perk unlocks (for example, change all of the Living off the land to the first tier so all of them unlock at the beginning - no need to spec into fortitude at all).  Living off the Land has 3 perk levels (one at 1, one at 3, and the last one unlocks at 5).  Simply change the 3 and 5 to 1 and see what happens.  Though I am more of a computer hack than a computer genius so doing so may break your game  😉

[Maxley]

5 hours ago, Roland said:

 

Well, you're not exactly being consistent with what you are saying. You started by saying that what you want is for an increase in agility to have an agility themed boost to ALL weapons and a strength themed boost to be given to ALL weapons whenever strength is increased-- instead of the handful of weapons that rest beneath those particular perk list headers.

 

But then you go on to say things like a Sniper can't be good at cooking which really really makes it sound more like you want to be able to mix and match any and all perks equally. Your first suggestion of having the attribute bonuses affecting all weapons instead the few that are assigned to them would not solve the problem you later bring up about a sniper specialist not being able to cook very well.

 

So excuse us for not exactly getting what you mean. 

 

 

Another solution would be to remove the attribute gates from the perks so that any perk could be advanced irrespective of the attribute level. You could spend to move attributes up for those bonuses and/or you could spend to move perks up but the perks would not be dependent upon any particular level of attribute. That way you could mix and match any perk from anywhere that you would want to focus on. Removing the attribute requirements for perks would be a much easier mod to accomplish I think. You could probably change the value associated with the perks all to 1 so that once you put at least 1 point into an attribute all the perks under it would be available to advance all the way. So for two points you could advance blades and snipers or farming and snipers.

 

That would solve the economic problem you hate but the attribute bonuses you dislike would still remain.

Yes I think removing the attribute requirements for perks would provide a great deal of freedom. And as I said earlier attribute points, if they continue to exist, can serve as a secondary bonus that enhance the character for further customization.

[BFT2020]

So instead of just talking about it, I made some quick changes to the progression file and made all 3 perks for Living off the Land unlock at level 1.  Changed the file and started a new game.  Finished the starter quests and got my free 4 points.  I was able to unlock all 3 at Level 1.  The description still states they are unlocked at levels 1, 3, and 5; but as soon as I placed my first point in the first perk, the second perk was unlocked (same thing for the final perk).

 

I bet I can also change the description if I wanted to (when they unlock) but the objective of this quick trial was to see what would happen when I took a couple of minutes and changed two values.

[Roland]

That's great but then it brings in another problem that the economy was handling and that is rushing up the perk tiers on Day 1. It is way OP to be able to spend all four points in one perk on Day 1 like you described. There still needs to be a balancing cost associated with moving deep within perks so that the best rewards can't be accessed so early and then there is no challenge. I finally got to tier 4 on my blade perk on Day 30 and with a machete right now on Day 41 I am OP compared to the zombies. I tear them apart without effort. Now on Day 1 there would be no machete but I'm betting with the bleeds and the dismemberment probability even a bone shiv is going to be amazing-- which feels good at first and then quickly renders the game boring.

[BFT2020]

1 hour ago, Roland said:

That's great but then it brings in another problem that the economy was handling and that is rushing up the perk tiers on Day 1. It is way OP to be able to spend all four points in one perk on Day 1 like you described. There still needs to be a balancing cost associated with moving deep within perks so that the best rewards can't be accessed so early and then there is no challenge. I finally got to tier 4 on my blade perk on Day 30 and with a machete right now on Day 41 I am OP compared to the zombies. I tear them apart without effort. Now on Day 1 there would be no machete but I'm betting with the bleeds and the dismemberment probability even a bone shiv is going to be amazing-- which feels good at first and then quickly renders the game boring.

Correct.  While it is possible to do so, it does reduce the costs of the current system - so increase benefits, less cost.  That is something I am worried about if I change the perks around the various trees to consolidate the firearms into one tree and the melee weapons in a different tree.  For me this was just a quick exercise to see if it was as easy as I thought it would be, I wouldn't play it this way as I could be OP very quickly (which is why I backed up the original file so I can replace it after I experiment around).  The nice thing is I can do the complete opposite too.  I can now make rank 2 unlock at level 5 and so on.  Or maybe make the first 2 levels stay the same and increase the cost for the final levels.  To be honest, I never had an issue with the current perk system.  For me, this was a fun quick activity to see what I can do.

[Gazz]

The reason for attributes (feel free to call them any other name) is that they add replayability.

A character build requires rules. Without those there is no incentive to try something new instead of the clearly optimal a-la-carte rangertankmage.

It's also makes it quick and easy to tell who can do what in a group without a one hour discussion about all of their super special GURPS builds.

 

When focusing on one tree you get a lot from this one tree earlier and cheaper and that incentivises playing more than one game. With a-la-carte systems players tend to gravitate towards their comfort build if they hit even minimal resistance - instead of embracing the new build and using the different approach that it favours.

 

I did not read all the suggestions for How It Should Work Instead. At a glance, some of them are definitely meandering all over the place without getting to a point and if the pitch is already confusing there is no chance whatsoever that the design will work in a game. =P

[Liesel Weppen]

13 hours ago, Roland said:

How can you not understand that this is exactly what I answered and even gave a couple of modding solutions {that I have no idea are possible or not)? What you are saying when you say you want to cross skill with no wasted points is that you want all combinations of selectable perks to be equal in cost. You don't want it to be more expensive to put sniper together with farming than it is to put sniper together with looting if that is what you want to be able to do. I get it. Everyone is getting it.

No, you didn't get it, and your answer proofed that again.

There is a huge difference between "making equal" and make something "not feeling wasted".

Combining sniper with farming is still more expensive as combining sniper with looting, because you still need to skill fortitude in addition. BUT those points needed to spent in fortitude have at least an effect for everybody then, even if they didn't intended to directly use that.

 

13 hours ago, Roland said:

You just don't like how we are answering I guess and you want to snarl that nobody is understanding what you want.

You just don't like what i suggest.

 

But ok, this disussion is over here for me. Since people ignore half posts, ignore development of the discussion and just blame "but you wrote that (and i ignore all the rest)" and in the end everybody just ended up with saying "i understand everything but you just don't like that", it makes no sense to keep going.

 

Basically it would have been better if i dropped it once i read a restriction was seen as a feature.

 

Over and out.

[theFlu]

I'm working under the assumption that madmole hasn't changed his mind about the skill trees being "feature complete". Thus, this far I haven't bothered trying to craft an actual idea. That in mind, a "small tweaks" version popped to my mind over this discussion; without further ado.

Core point is
  "give the player Something that feels like it relates to the Attribute from the attribute." As in, make STR give something that feels natural to a strong person.

That might require scrapping the weapon-specific headshot multiplier and dismemberment from Attributes. Balance it out in base damage or other skills. Or keep it in, but it doesn't really feel that "sane".

 

I'm putting my draft into a spoiler, just to point out: don't waste your time here, there's nothing to be gained from reading this.. I just had to put it on paper

Spoiler

 

The "small tweaks" version would be to move a skill from under the attribute to the attribute itself; this would mess up the current balance the least, while maybe getting to a more "feels right" direction.

Perc: Could give either lucky looter, salvage or tracker. Each feel like a base perception thing, numbers would need to change of course. I'd go for Tracker, to leave the mats improvements in the skills, but it doesn't fall into 10 easy steps, so something like "range steps" might be needed.
Str: Best would be Pack mule, it feels like the purest base str skill. That will mess a bit with the Pocket Mods, but give the early points one slot per and the later ones 2, that way you'll want a full str build to skip the pockets.
Agi: The stealth perk (sneaking, not damage). Parkour might feel the best for Agi, but not everyone wants it (it'll mess your jumps and possibly your base design)
Fort: Injury resist or Gut improvements; the damage resistance might feel a little strong.
Int: Meds, but this is a tricky one; since most of them are crafting, there's no good candidate. Glorious Leader would be fine, but it's MP only and would require significant rework. Maybe give it something new?

As to tweaking the weapons to correct for the lost headshot damage, make the tweaks emphasize their "style":
Rifles: removed headshot from Perc, increase base headshot damage a bit and add the rest to the rifle perk. This could be used for the default treatment..
Shotties: move toward the mass splatter; remove the extra headshot bonus, but give improved dismemberment at base and at the skill. Blowing off arms and legs is a little pointless, but the overall wreckage would be fun..
Autorifles: improved stun ability... spray and pray a crowd, they'll start toppling on each other

Pistols: recoil reduction (essentially removal), no need to do more per hit if you get less missed heads..
etc..

 

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by theFlu
refining pistol/autorifle (see edit history)

[Roland]

4 hours ago, Liesel Weppen said:

 

Basically it would have been better if i dropped it once i read a restriction was seen as a feature.

This right here is most likely the problem rather than any lack of understanding. We just have different philosophies about game design. In my mind, restrictions ARE a feature related to player choice and balance. If you don’t want restrictions then give yourself skillpoint through the console, turn on god mode, and/or enable the creative menu. No more restrictions. 
 

it may seem counter intuitive but giving the player full freedom actually reduces tough choices and options to challenge themselves. Sorry that our perspectives are too different to be able to have this discussion. 

[Roland]

I just want to add that there can be rules and mechanics that make a game feel too restrictive and I understand that. Each player is going to have their own sense of how far is too far with restrictions. Obviously, @Liesel Weppens line is drawn in a different place than mine. I didn't like the level gates that TFP previously had implemented as that felt way too restrictive to me. But there were others who liked having level gates as a goal to work towards. 

 

So I'm not saying that Liesel probably wants the game completely unrestrictive, its just that the current mechanic feels to restrictive to them but not to me. But I also wouldn't be angry if they made it less restrictive towards some of the suggestions that Liesel made such as having attribute bonuses affect all weapons. Something like that wouldn't go to far in permissiveness and freedom as far as I can tell-- for me.

[Boidster]

One person is confused by what you say, that person might have a problem.

Most people are confused by what you say, you might have a problem.

[Maxley]

23 hours ago, Roland said:

That's great but then it brings in another problem that the economy was handling and that is rushing up the perk tiers on Day 1. It is way OP to be able to spend all four points in one perk on Day 1 like you described. There still needs to be a balancing cost associated with moving deep within perks so that the best rewards can't be accessed so early and then there is no challenge. I finally got to tier 4 on my blade perk on Day 30 and with a machete right now on Day 41 I am OP compared to the zombies. I tear them apart without effort. Now on Day 1 there would be no machete but I'm betting with the bleeds and the dismemberment probability even a bone shiv is going to be amazing-- which feels good at first and then quickly renders the game boring.

It’s just a matter of balancing numbers. Perks can cost more with each level. Also there could be diminishing returns. Another way to help balance it out would be to double the number of levels for a perk but half each levels benefit. 
 

however, I get what @Gazz is saying when he says that without attribute requirements people would just chose the same thing they always do with each play through. I remember playing Oblivion and I always chose heavy armor, repair, blades, etc and pretty much never deviated since there was nothing to prevent or discourage me from doing so. 
 

So in the end, I guess someone (not me lol) will have to make mod and then I’ll see how it feels.

Edited May 21, 2021 by Maxley (see edit history)

[uncle.heavy]

5 hours ago, Roland said:

But I also wouldn't be angry if they made it less restrictive towards some of the suggestions that Liesel made such as having attribute bonuses affect all weapons. 

Me neither but as I had pointed out, that change in its present form would just redistribute the costs.

To be equally sufficient with any one weapon as just maxing out its current category and perk, several categories would have to be maxed out - plus the current category and perk.

This is just to prevent someone spending months of modding to discover they have gone nowhere at all 😀