It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.

[Roland]

1 hour ago, No_Name_Idea said:

I'm just saying that mods should probably make some sense.

I understand your POV now, thanks. I’m not so married to reality as you. 
 

1 hour ago, No_Name_Idea said:

As for the overall "why", I figure a change like that would make weapons more equal and would let people mix and match weapons some more, plus "backup" weapons would be more viable.

This is something I am personally against. I don’t want the weapons to be equal and I think any of the weapons is already good enough to be a backup or to use instead of the one you perked into. 

[quyxkh]

On 5/16/2022 at 1:38 AM, Novamourne said:

<snip>

There's a lot there.

 

Quote

Quests - 
Way too lucrative and way too often. 

 

Agreed, but—and I saw your objection to the "just don't use it" response, I'm disagreeing with that here—I don't really see a problem with TFP trying to keep the looter-shooter-errand-boy players happy,  anybody wants a beatemup, we gotcher beatemup right here!,  so long as they also keep no-trader personal-competence-and-thinking-required play within reach, you know, the survival and crafting part.

 

Quote

Game Stage - 
Game stage scaled the world to you. […]Game Stage should not make sure you are powerful enough to do anything you want, but that's what it does.

 

I absolutely love games where "run for your life!" starts out among your best options. Games that carefully ensure every offered fight is winnable are difficult for me to talk about politely. So yeah.

 

Quote

Skills - 

I thought skills would be a lot different than they are. I thought everyone would be able to progress through everything and I thought it was going to serve as more of a "mastery" of tasks and actions.

 

Full-on ewwww to the game you thought you were getting.  I mean, sure, for easy mode, whatever. Rush the tech tree and regard everything before everybody has all the toys as tutorial. That couldn't possibly be more boring in a game this good. Cooperating teams of specialists *rock*, and you want to make that a niche little sideshow. I want to make that the only way to thrive on a hard-mode server, and it should be (barely) possible to survive if you're smart about your perk choices solo.

 

Quote

Screamers & Heat Map -
Nothing killed this games crafting and production aspect faster and more efficiently than this atrocious mechanic.

 

What? Dig a shaft 35m straight down and put your workshop down there, if you can't do that by day 3 you're doing something very wrong. A one-block shaft is perfectly navigable once you figure out how to wriggle free if you get stuck, you only need ladders every other block. I think activity should be *more* dangerous, to the point where if it's just you mining and at all exposed you'd damned well better have set traps at the higher difficulties, and if you make big bangy noise in an un-cleared town, oh, baby, you're going to die.

 

Quote

Gun parts created a parity between crafting and looting which doesn't exist at all in today's version of the game.

Not sure it was the gun parts that did it, but I hear you. Way I see it, as the difficulty cranks up you should be forced to rely more and more on personal skill and perception and strategy, less and less on tech-tree progression and looting.

 

Quote

"Smart" & "Gimmick" zombies -
You are losing the arms race and have been since you decided to enter it. Please give up. Players will always outsmart your AI.[…]Gore blocks were an infinitely better zombie threat than anything you've put in the game thus far and you removed them without trying to iterate on it at all. Get rid of the stupid demo zombies. Bring back gore blocks.

 

Sort-of agreed there except the demo zombies are a stroke of genius. In my dream version of this game playing on  harder settings should make it feel increasingly like Devil Daggers, it's not a question of whether, only when, and personal skill is by far the most important factor.

 

I think they're still iterating on the pathing, not sure it's possible to build the game they really want to build using any current game engine so it's always going to be the best compromise they can find. World War Z style gore piles would be terrifying. I'd *love* to see that mechanic boosted in 7dtd. As it is it's just a hint, it seems almost unintentional.

 

 

 

 

 

[No_Name_Idea]

12 hours ago, Roland said:

This is something I am personally against. I don’t want the weapons to be equal and I think any of the weapons is already good enough to be a backup or to use instead of the one you perked into. 

Yeah man, nothing beats emptying a double barrel into a zombie's face only for it to get up :v. Meanwhile, I can 1-hit the same zombie with a 9mm because perks.

[meganoth]

2 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Yeah man, nothing beats emptying a double barrel into a zombie's face only for it to get up :v. Meanwhile, I can 1-hit the same zombie with a 9mm because perks.

 

Yes, because with your perked up skills you are able not only to make a headshot but hit it through the eye directly into the brain 😉

 

This would be a similar explanation to what AD&D uses to explain the rogues additional damage.

 

[No_Name_Idea]

2 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Yes, because with your perked up skills you are able not only to make a headshot but hit it through the eye directly into the brain 😉

Ok but like... my crosshair points to (roughly) the same spot :v

[meganoth]

21 minutes ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Ok but like... my crosshair points to (roughly) the same spot :v

 

Bad luck, all the pellets went into the skull. If a lucky few go through the eye you'll notice it because then the head explodes prematurely 😉

 

The difference between an RPG and a shooter game is that in an RPG your characters and the weapons stats define how good you are, while in a shooter it is mostly about the skill of the player.

 

And this game is partly an RPG. There are also shooter-elements in this genre-mix of a game so the players skill has a big influence as well

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[No_Name_Idea]

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

And this game is partly an RPG. There are also shooter-elements in this genre-mix of a game so the players skill has a big influence as well

And that's great, have perks affect/add accuracy, reload speed, fire rate, recoil, scope-in speed, draw speed, etc. Hell, I'll even tolerate crits/killstreaks and the like since they're not just a flat +dmg, but as you said this game is also partly a shooter so a well aimed shot should do consistent damage.

 

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

Bad luck, all the pellets went into the skull. If a lucky few go through the eye you'll notice it because then the head explodes prematurely

I may not be a doctor, but I figure that brain damage is worse than eye damage :v

Edited May 23, 2022 by No_Name_Idea (see edit history)

[meganoth]

1 hour ago, No_Name_Idea said:

And that's great, have perks affect/add accuracy, reload speed, fire rate, recoil, scope-in speed, draw speed, etc. Hell, I'll even tolerate crits/killstreaks and the like since they're not just a flat +dmg, but as you said this game is also partly a shooter so a well aimed shot should do consistent damage.

 

It does. If you hit the head you get consistently more damage with any weapon. The rest is the RPG simulation of your character getting better at shooting.

 

You are aware that when you shoot in 7D2D you don't hit the cross, you hit randomly anywhere in the circle defined by the slowly shrinking crosshairs?

 

You yourself could be able to hit any pixel on your PC screen at any time and you still could miss a zombie at a distance because some part of the circle is not directly on the zombie. All of this is part of the RPG design of 7D2D

 

Why must it be damage? I would say because damage IS the most important stat of a weapon and RPG players want the good bits as well as the shooter fans.

 

1 hour ago, No_Name_Idea said:

 

I may not be a doctor, but I figure that brain damage is worse than eye damage :v

 

I definitely am not a doctor, but simply by looking at a skull I see that the brain is protected by the bones except for the eye sockets. Sorry I forgot to mention why I thought it was important to hit the eye.

 

Consider that zombies have bones that can digg through steel, maybe those bones protect them as well.

 

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[No_Name_Idea]

21 minutes ago, meganoth said:

It does. If you hit the head you get consistently more damage with any weapon. The rest is the RPG simulation of your character getting better at shooting.

You know damn well I'm arguing about a completely different thing. I'll reiterate for the Nth time, a bullet shot from the same gun hitting the same spot should do the same amount of damage wether shot by a skinny nerdlinger or a war vet.

 

25 minutes ago, meganoth said:

You are aware that when you shoot in 7D2D you don't hit the cross, you hit randomly anywhere in the circle defined by the slowly shrinking crosshairs?

Yes, that's how the majority of FPS games work, I think.

 

26 minutes ago, meganoth said:

You yourself could be able to hit any pixel on your PC screen at any time and you still could miss a zombie at a distance because some part of the circle is not directly on the zombie. All of this is part of the RPG design of 7D2D

CS:GO is now RPG I guess. Anyway, you're talking about (in)accuracy and I've agreed that it should be improved by perks.

 

29 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Why must it be damage? I would say because damage IS the most important stat of a weapon and RPG players want the good bits as well as the shooter fans.

Nobody is going to kidnap your RPG, I like RPGs myself. Combat perks would still be worth investing into even without the +dmg, or are you saying that those other bonuses don't matter?

My point is that with perks as they are now, there is no point in using anything off-attribute (except bombs and stun baton). Yes you CAN use weapons outside of your build as I'm sure someone will cleverly point out, but what's the point? You're just short changing yourself for no reason. The only motivation behind it would be TO ROLEPLAY, and ironically our current (apparently) very RPG perk system discourages it. That and shotguns are must-have on a garbage PC.

[Rotor]

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

 

 

Consider that zombies have bones that can digg through steel,...

 

 

/Biteslip damage >10

[Grandpa Minion]

On 5/16/2022 at 3:01 PM, Roland said:

 

Completely voluntary. You don't have to do a single one. Its totally possible to do one quest a day and explore a ton of POI's of your choosing and win the game. Doing quest after quest after quest maniacally striving to grind up to the highest tier as quickly as possible is not even close to necessary for survival and success. It really is interesting to me that the most LBD-like feature in the game today is the quest system and people get obsessive about unnaturally power leveling up the quest chain just as they did up the skill chain with LBD. Should TFP put a daily quest limiter in the game to save people from themselves and burning out on questing or should they keep it as a choice: quest obsessively if you want or once or twice daily/weekly if you want?  Part of me wants them to keep it a free choice but part of me is tired of people posting that questing ruins the game and act like they're forced to quest constantly or they might lose somehow. Maybe some forced restriction on questing would help those folks not overdo questing.

 

 

 

 

I have to disagree with you on this one. Anyone who plays multiplayer knows doing Quests is mandatory to stay competitive. The party share and xp players get from doing quests is OP and gives a huge advantage compared to those who "completely voluntary choose not to do them." Power level by party is a main stay in the multiplayer game and definately needs to be addressed.  Example a party of 5 sharing quests, clearing quests, turning in quests for xp and rewards will advance 10x faster or more than someone not doing quest. It really does create a huge advantage for those in a party vs those who are solo.

[meganoth]

2 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

You know damn well I'm arguing about a completely different thing. I'll reiterate for the Nth time, a bullet shot from the same gun hitting the same spot should do the same amount of damage wether shot by a skinny nerdlinger or a war vet.

 

I might be misunderstanding, but my argument is that the RPG part of the game decides where exactly the nerdlinger and where the war vet REALLY hit and that makes the difference in damage.

 

Remember the rogue example of AD&D, there it is argued that the rogue notices the spots where the armor is already slightly cracked or has a hole, where the blood vessel goes through exactly, ... The hit of a lvl1 rogue might have the same force as the hit of a lvl10 rogue, but the lvl1 rogue will not hit that spot and on average do less damage.

 

That is just a rationalization of something that is in the game because it is an RPG, simple as that.

 

2 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

 

Yes, that's how the majority of FPS games work, I think.

 

EDIT: Read Rolands reply below, he is spot on. Pure shooters like counterstrike are all about skill of the player. Especially if the shooter is used in tournaments there is surely no RNG involved.

 

2 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

 

CS:GO is now RPG I guess. Anyway, you're talking about (in)accuracy and I've agreed that it should be improved by perks.

 

Nobody is going to kidnap your RPG, I like RPGs myself. Combat perks would still be worth investing into even without the +dmg, or are you saying that those other bonuses don't matter?

 

They do, but far far less than damage and probably far less than they objectively matter. I notice it in my own handling of weapons but also in other players I play with. There is damage, then magazine size but only if the difference is really big. All the other stats are mostly ignored, maybe wrongly.

 

2 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

My point is that with perks as they are now, there is no point in using anything off-attribute (except bombs and stun baton). Yes you CAN use weapons outside of your build as I'm sure someone will cleverly point out, but what's the point? You're just short changing yourself for no reason. The only motivation behind it would be TO ROLEPLAY, and ironically our current (apparently) very RPG perk system discourages it. That and shotguns are must-have on a garbage PC.

 

One reason can be ammo availability. Ammo balance in this game is very hard to do because of the capabilities of players being so different, but optimally there should be ammo scarcity. Especially because ammo consumption is supposed to be the drawback of the otherwise OP machine guns in the game. But also because looking everywhere for ammo is a main ingredient of survival games. Sadly traders are still not well balanced and are one reason players still get too much ammo.

 

And if there isn't enough ammo to simply shoot with the specced weapon all the time and still have enough for horde night, then using all that other ammo makes sense. Or using melee extensively, but some players aren't good at doing melee, some simply don't like it.

 

Other reasons are less important:

 

I actually use bows very often even if not specced into AGI because I still use stealth in the night to not get overrun, especially when feral sense is turned on.

 

 If I'm specced into shotgun, I usually have either a sniper or machine gun for long range.

 

When going into pistols and don't have an SMG I usually carry a machine gun or shotgun for o-@%$# situations. If I have an SMG then I might have a sniper instead for the long range.

 

If I go into FOR/machine gun I actually have the least incentive to use other weapons except bow, because they are the most "complete" weapons and I do a lot of melee and save ammo that way.

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[Roland]

1 hour ago, Grandpa Minion said:

I have to disagree with you on this one. Anyone who plays multiplayer knows doing Quests is mandatory to stay competitive. The party share and xp players get from doing quests is OP and gives a huge advantage compared to those who "completely voluntary choose not to do them." Power level by party is a main stay in the multiplayer game and definately needs to be addressed.  Example a party of 5 sharing quests, clearing quests, turning in quests for xp and rewards will advance 10x faster or more than someone not doing quest. It really does create a huge advantage for those in a party vs those who are solo.

 

I later qualified my point that in PvP it does matter and you do need to quest hard to stay competitive. You probably haven't read that far yet. I agree with your point completely (for PVP).

Edited May 23, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[JCrook1028]

1 hour ago, Grandpa Minion said:

Anyone who plays multiplayer knows doing Quests is mandatory to stay competitive.

Absolutely untrue. It may be true for PvP Multiplayer but that is NOT all or even a majority of MP in this game. Cooperative MP is FAR more common than competitive MP.

[Roland]

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Yes, that's how the majority of FPS games work, I think.

 

No it isn't. If you aim at a target in a dedicated FPS and your aim is pixel perfect dead on then you will hit your target. In RPG/FPS hybrids there is a probability but not guaranteed success even if your target is dead center in your crosshairs. This game allows you to stop and aim in order to shrink the crosshairs and reduce the area of probability but where the bullet goes is still random within that area. There is no code to make a hit random in first person shooters with no elements of RPG mixed in. Those are purely motor skill, hand eye coordination, and reflexes. Some will have aim assist software that makes it so players who are not skilled can feel skilled but there is no probability test to see if your bullet missed by a pixel when you are aimed straight at the target. Games like KOTOR are very blatant that your fired shot is completely dependent on a to hit die roll while this game is a lot more subtle about it. Player skill in aiming with your mouse/controller definitely has a large contribution for success in this game but it isn't everything.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Nobody is going to kidnap your RPG, I like RPGs myself. Combat perks would still be worth investing into even without the +dmg, or are you saying that those other bonuses don't matter?

 

To a lot of people they don't really matter as much as damage buffing attachments. If they had to choose between one mod that adds dps and another that improves accuracy, they would always choose the dps booster. If the accuracy booster also is a dps booster then they are happy to add the accuracy booster.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

My point is that with perks as they are now, there is no point in using anything off-attribute (except bombs and stun baton). Yes you CAN use weapons outside of your build as I'm sure someone will cleverly point out, but what's the point? You're just short changing yourself for no reason.

 

Let me cleverly point out that in many other RPG genre games once you perk into a weapon class others are completely grayed out and cannot be selected at all. This game allows you to "short change" yourself by using any weapon in the game even if you are not specialized into it. Also, I use off-attribute guns all the time and never feel short changed. Might I have to shoot a zombie one or two extra times than I would with my perked weapon? Yes, but honestly so what? I have plenty of ammo. There is nothing wrong with asymmetry with respect to weapons and how much damage they do. It is a game design that adds variety to multiple playthroughs and challenge to the game. Its not just for roleplaying reasons. Its also for challenge reasons. I've had a lot of fun clearing out a poi using an off-attribute weapon on purpose just for the challenge knowing I could have easily wiped it clean with my perked up weapon.

 

The problem comes from obsessing over optimal gameplay and the apparent anxiety some people experience when they kill a zombie with two bullets knowing that they could have done it with only one if they had taken the optimal path. Its perfectly fine to play with a less than the best weapon it does the job.  Now, if you are playing PvP then, of course, you MUST be as optimal as possible and avoid every disadvantage. But in SP and Cooperative play, the only thing you do when playing suboptimally is to slow down a bit in your rate of progression. But does it really matter whether you reach the point where you feel like you won and succeeded by day 60 rather than day 80 or day 120?

 

I understand why it is frustrating for you. It doesn't feel realistic and you feel like you are sandbagging yourself. Not everyone feels those things when they are playing and some of us appreciate the challenges associated with weapons that are not all equal.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[No_Name_Idea]

2 hours ago, meganoth said:

I might be misunderstanding, but my argument is that the RPG part of the game decides where exactly the nerdlinger and where the war vet REALLY hit and that makes the difference in damage.

 

Remember the rogue example of AD&D, there it is argued that the rogue notices the spots where the armor is already slightly cracked or has a hole, where the blood vessel goes through exactly, ... The hit of a lvl1 rogue might have the same force as the hit of a lvl10 rogue, but the lvl1 rogue will not hit that spot and on average do less damage.

 

That is just a rationalization of something that is in the game because it is an RPG, simple as that.

The thing is, in AD&D you can't exactly aim for yourself. That's where all the hardcore tabletop RPG comparisons fail imo.

 

1 hour ago, Roland said:

No it isn't. If you aim at a target in a dedicated FPS and your aim is pixel perfect dead on then you will hit your target.

Do we live in some different realities? A vast majority of FPS game's I've played have some amount of inaccuracy. Even some multiplayer titles centered around realism and skill have it. I'm not arguing about how big the inaccuracy is between titles, I'm arguing that it's there. Maybe we just don't play the same games, I dunno.
Admittedly, my CSGO argument might have not been the best since I haven't played it in like 5 years, but I know for sure that randomness was there last time I played.

 

1 hour ago, Roland said:

This game allows you to stop and aim in order to shrink the crosshairs and reduce the area of probability but where the bullet goes is still random within that area.

This is how many first person games with shooting mechanic work, yes.

 

2 hours ago, meganoth said:

One reason can be ammo availability. Ammo balance in this game is very hard to do because of the capabilities of players being so different, but optimally there should be ammo scarcity. Especially because ammo consumption is supposed to be the drawback of the otherwise OP machine guns in the game. But also because looking everywhere for ammo is a main ingredient of survival games. Sadly traders are still not well balanced and are one reason players still get too much ammo.

It's a good reason, I'll give you that much. Or it would be if bullets weren't EVERYWHERE. I swim in all types of ammo by week 2 and I'm pretty garbage at this game imo.
Let's consider the opposite, what if ammo was very scarce? At that point you might as well not spec into any firearm perk since you'll run out of ammo for your preferred gun too fast anyway, better invest in survival/resource gathering.

 

1 hour ago, Roland said:

To a lot of people they don't really matter as much as damage buffing attachments. If they had to choose between one mod that adds dps and another that improves accuracy, they would always choose the dps booster. If the accuracy booster also is a dps booster then they are happy to add the accuracy booster.

Do we assume that both mods provide the same +dmg? If that's the case then the mods are unbalanced as hell and that's a problem.
If the "only +dmg" mod provides more damage than the mixed one, most players will still choose the one with more damage.

 

1 hour ago, Roland said:

Let me cleverly point out that in many other RPG genre games once you perk into a weapon class others are completely grayed out and cannot be selected at all.

I can't remember ever playing any game like that, care to provide an example?

The rest of Roland's post is completely subjective so no point in arguing about it imo.

Edited May 23, 2022 by No_Name_Idea (see edit history)

[Roland]

1 hour ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Do we live in some different realities? A vast majority of FPS game's I've played have some amount of inaccuracy. Even some multiplayer titles centered around realism and skill have it. I'm not arguing about how big the inaccuracy is between titles, I'm arguing that it's there. Maybe we just don't play the same games, I dunno.
Admittedly, my CSGO argument might have not been the best since I haven't played it in like 5 years, but I know for sure that randomness was there last time I played.

With all due respect, I think you just missed. A percent random chance to miss no matter how well you aimed would be horrible for dedicated FPS games—particularly if they are competitive PvP centric games. 

[No_Name_Idea]

1 hour ago, Roland said:

With all due respect, I think you just missed. A percent random chance to miss no matter how well you aimed would be horrible for dedicated FPS games—particularly if they are competitive PvP centric games. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4zpFq2N1jA (TF2 random bullet spread example)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyvTH_6gLUo (CS:GO and CS1.6 inaccuracy example)

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5mZvIEoNAy0 (Valorant example)

I don't really have more examples since I'm not that much into sweaty competetive shooters anymore. All of those links only demonstrate first-shot inaccuracy, wait until you learn about recoil in FPS games and how it affects inaccuracy. It'll blow your mind.

Edited May 23, 2022 by No_Name_Idea (see edit history)

[Roland]

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4zpFq2N1jA (TF2 random bullet spread example)

 

I don't think this proves your point. Spread over distance and giving a bunch of pellets different vectors is not the same as a random chance to miss even if you are perfectly aiming at your target.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5mZvIEoNAy0 (Valorant example)

 

This is a good example and proves my blanket statement wrong. Dang! I will say though that there was some discussion in the comments about how random factors in a skill based game kind of suck. I don't like it but it does look like full on fps games do make you miss even if you are spot on in your aim.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyvTH_6gLUo (CS:GO and CS1.6 inaccuracy example)

 

Another compelling example. Seems counter-intuitive to me but I can't deny that you are correct and I'm wrong.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[meganoth]

7 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

The thing is, in AD&D you can't exactly aim for yourself. That's where all the hardcore tabletop RPG comparisons fail imo.

 

Well, there are a lot of computer RPGs with AD&D (or pathfinder) rules as well, so it isn't tabletop only. And I brought up AD&D to show the clear unaltered RPG case, the one extreme where the stats of your character is everything and your reflexes and accuracy with the mouse nothing. 

 

On the other side are shooters (though not as far on the other side as I had presumed). There it is you the player who defines how well you do. There are no stats that define you. Even though you are correct that even pure shooters have randomness in their shooting (and that was quite a surprise to me), that randomness is the same for all, your character in the game has no stat that influences it.

 

I don't know why the randomness is there, it could be there to simulate reality (wind, natural inaccuracies of weapons or bullets) or to artificially level the playing field a bit so weaker players have a chance as well. But it is definitely not there to simulate the shooting skill/accuracy of your ingame character like it would be in an RPG

 

Now find the middle between those two concepts and you have an RPG-shooter and you might arrive at something like 7D2D where your skill and your character stats both influence your overall effectiveness.

 

7 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

It's a good reason, I'll give you that much. Or it would be if bullets weren't EVERYWHERE. I swim in all types of ammo by week 2 and I'm pretty garbage at this game imo.

 

As I said the balance isn't there yet. And for veteran players there may never be a good balance in vanilla ever, because vanilla is supposed to be the version for new players to get into the game. 

 

Sorry, but even if "swim in ammo" and "pretty garbage at this game" were both true then it would only show that there are different types of garbage out there 😁.

Many players with shooter experience have no problem with melee and using their ammo effectively and economically. But I know people who will get hit multiple times if they just try to kill a zombie with a knife. I'm sure their bullet consumption is a multiple of yours since you swim in ammo.

 

A single ammo balance can't be right for all types of players. I suggested to TFP once to make higher difficulty levels also decrease loot frequency, but so far they did not do that.

 

7 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

Let's consider the opposite, what if ammo was very scarce? At that point you might as well not spec into any firearm perk since you'll run out of ammo for your preferred gun too fast anyway, better invest in survival/resource gathering.

 

Or perk into your weapon to get the most out of roughly 1/4 of all bullets you find but also to get the most out of 100% of all bullets you craft and buy (because there you can make sure it is always the right type).

Sure, you could instead invest in resource gathering, but are you the type who wants to dig in the mine a lot? I don't, I prefer to just do more kills with a limited ammo pile.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[No_Name_Idea]

7 hours ago, meganoth said:

I don't know why the randomness is there, it could be there to simulate reality (wind, natural inaccuracies of weapons or bullets) or to artificially level the playing field a bit so weaker players have a chance as well. But it is definitely not there to simulate the shooting skill/accuracy of your ingame character like it would be in an RPG

 

Now find the middle between those two concepts and you have an RPG-shooter and you might arrive at something like 7D2D where your skill and your character stats both influence your overall effectiveness.

I figure it's because guns IRL also aren't 100% accurate, but hey, same difference. Plus, I wasn't arguing about what it's supposed to simulate, you were. I only needed to prove that it exists in order to make this

20 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

And that's great, have perks affect/add accuracy, reload speed, fire rate, recoil, scope-in speed, draw speed, etc. Hell, I'll even tolerate crits/killstreaks and the like since they're not just a flat +dmg, but as you said this game is also partly a shooter so a well aimed shot should do consistent damage.

relevant again.

 

7 hours ago, meganoth said:

A single ammo balance can't be right for all types of players. I suggested to TFP once to make higher difficulty levels also decrease loot frequency, but so far they did not do that.

And thank god we got a loot abundance slider instead.

 

7 hours ago, meganoth said:

Or perk into your weapon to get the most out of roughly 1/4 of all bullets you find but also to get the most out of 100% of all bullets you craft and buy (because there you can make sure it is always the right type).

Sure, you could instead invest in resource gathering, but are you the type who wants to dig in the mine a lot? I don't, I prefer to just do more kills with a limited ammo pile.

Or perk into better resource gathering and/or Advanced Engineering to make more bullets. The thing is, choosing that over combat skills makes you better not only in shooting and therefore would be a more viable choice in a low-ammo reality. By the way, I may be nitpicking but you don't have to mine all day to gather resources for bullets. Salvage Operations, recycling and Lucky Looter exist.

Edited May 24, 2022 by No_Name_Idea (see edit history)

[meganoth]

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

I figure it's because guns IRL also aren't 100% accurate, but hey, same difference. Plus, I wasn't arguing about what it's supposed to simulate, you were. I only needed to prove that it exists in order to make this

 

And I was only interpreting the randomness in shooters to make my argument (that there is a difference here between shooters and RPG) relevant again.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

relevant again.

 

It was always relevant. You want no damage increase perk for guns because of realism and I am not contesting that in the least. I am just saying there are other reasons in play as well and the developers take all reasons into account to decide whether something is in the game or not.

 

In that vein it should be mentioned that TFP have given "fun" and balance a higher priority than realism as design criteria. Players only arguing with realism usually have a hard time convincing the devs to change the game.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

And thank god we got a loot abundance slider instead.

 

Yes, luckily that exists, but you can only select very few values and it does not change what you get out of mining for example.

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

 

Or perk into better resource gathering and/or Advanced Engineering to make more bullets. The thing is, choosing that over combat skills makes you better not only in shooting and therefore would be a more viable choice in a low-ammo reality. By the way, I may be nitpicking but you don't have to mine all day to gather resources for bullets. Salvage Operations, recycling and Lucky Looter exist.

 

Sure, "mining all day" was just the usual expression used for showing that I don't view this as desirable 😉

 

To have a balance between resource gathering and mining for ammo production in a low-ammo reality TFP would need to lower the ammo ammount you get out of mining as well (preferably without touching stone and iron gains used for building). You can't have players find 20 bullets per day but one hour in the mine give 200 bullets and call that a balanced game.

 

Making a gun more efficient costs 5 xp in your selected attribute, improving the resource gathering perk in your attribute costs 5 xp as well, I would take both.

 

Since madmole once said that they view brass as the ammo-limiting resource in the game, you might be committed to always choose perception (you can convert dukes into brass, but you shouldn't swim in money in a low-ammo reality as well). And that makes strength perks like mining cost you an additional attribute to perk into. Or vice versa, taking strength limits the points of salvage operations you can get for cheap.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[No_Name_Idea]

20 minutes ago, meganoth said:

It was always relevant. You want no damage increase perk for guns because of realism and I am not contesting that in the least. I am just saying there are other reasons in play as well and the developers take all reasons into account to decide whether something is in the game or not.

 

In that vein it should be mentioned that TFP have given "fun" and balance a higher priority than realism as design criteria. Players only arguing with realism usually have a hard time convincing the devs to change the game.

The thing is, I genuinely believe that it would make the game more fun. As I've explained before: I figure a change like that would make weapons more equal and would let people mix and match weapons some more, plus "backup" guns would be more viable. This is an idea I've gotten after making my post about removing attributes.

 

Yet, the responses I got from both you and Roland seem to kinda boil down to (imo): No because muh RPG. Ironically, here I am, arguing for more freedom in roleplaying.

Guess we just have different definitions of "fun".
 

29 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Since madmole once said that they view brass as the ammo-limiting resource in the game, you might be committed to always choose perception (you can convert dukes into brass, but you shouldn't swim in money in a low-ammo reality as well). And that makes strength perks like mining cost you an additional attribute to perk into. Or vice versa, taking strength limits the points of salvage operations you can get for cheap.

I figure my argument still stands, Salvage Operations does not ONLY give you more brass and Mother Lode does not OLNY give you more coal/nitrate. Combat perks give you more DPS, that's it. The (sometimes) increased perk cost seems justifiable imo.

[Matt115]

On 5/23/2022 at 1:02 PM, meganoth said:

 

Bad luck, all the pellets went into the skull. If a lucky few go through the eye you'll notice it because then the head explodes prematurely 😉

 

The difference between an RPG and a shooter game is that in an RPG your characters and the weapons stats define how good you are, while in a shooter it is mostly about the skill of the player.

 

And this game is partly an RPG. There are also shooter-elements in this genre-mix of a game so the players skill has a big influence as well

 

 

23 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

It does. If you hit the head you get consistently more damage with any weapon. The rest is the RPG simulation of your character getting better at shooting.

 

You are aware that when you shoot in 7D2D you don't hit the cross, you hit randomly anywhere in the circle defined by the slowly shrinking crosshairs?

 

You yourself could be able to hit any pixel on your PC screen at any time and you still could miss a zombie at a distance because some part of the circle is not directly on the zombie. All of this is part of the RPG design of 7D2D

 

Why must it be damage? I would say because damage IS the most important stat of a weapon and RPG players want the good bits as well as the shooter fans.

 

 

I definitely am not a doctor, but simply by looking at a skull I see that the brain is protected by the bones except for the eye sockets. Sorry I forgot to mention why I thought it was important to hit the eye.

 

Consider that zombies have bones that can digg through steel, maybe those bones protect them as well.

 

 

 

20 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

I might be misunderstanding, but my argument is that the RPG part of the game decides where exactly the nerdlinger and where the war vet REALLY hit and that makes the difference in damage.

 

Remember the rogue example of AD&D, there it is argued that the rogue notices the spots where the armor is already slightly cracked or has a hole, where the blood vessel goes through exactly, ... The hit of a lvl1 rogue might have the same force as the hit of a lvl10 rogue, but the lvl1 rogue will not hit that spot and on average do less damage.

 

That is just a rationalization of something that is in the game because it is an RPG, simple as that.

 

 

EDIT: Read Rolands reply below, he is spot on. Pure shooters like counterstrike are all about skill of the player. Especially if the shooter is used in tournaments there is surely no RNG involved.

 

 

They do, but far far less than damage and probably far less than they objectively matter. I notice it in my own handling of weapons but also in other players I play with. There is damage, then magazine size but only if the difference is really big. All the other stats are mostly ignored, maybe wrongly.

 

 

One reason can be ammo availability. Ammo balance in this game is very hard to do because of the capabilities of players being so different, but optimally there should be ammo scarcity. Especially because ammo consumption is supposed to be the drawback of the otherwise OP machine guns in the game. But also because looking everywhere for ammo is a main ingredient of survival games. Sadly traders are still not well balanced and are one reason players still get too much ammo.

 

And if there isn't enough ammo to simply shoot with the specced weapon all the time and still have enough for horde night, then using all that other ammo makes sense. Or using melee extensively, but some players aren't good at doing melee, some simply don't like it.

 

Other reasons are less important:

 

I actually use bows very often even if not specced into AGI because I still use stealth in the night to not get overrun, especially when feral sense is turned on.

 

 If I'm specced into shotgun, I usually have either a sniper or machine gun for long range.

 

When going into pistols and don't have an SMG I usually carry a machine gun or shotgun for o-@%$# situations. If I have an SMG then I might have a sniper instead for the long range.

 

If I go into FOR/machine gun I actually have the least incentive to use other weapons except bow, because they are the most "complete" weapons and I do a lot of melee and save ammo that way.

 

 

3 hours ago, No_Name_Idea said:

I figure it's because guns IRL also aren't 100% accurate, but hey, same difference. Plus, I wasn't arguing about what it's supposed to simulate, you were. I only needed to prove that it exists in order to make this

relevant again.

 

And thank god we got a loot abundance slider instead.

 

Or perk into better resource gathering and/or Advanced Engineering to make more bullets. The thing is, choosing that over combat skills makes you better not only in shooting and therefore would be a more viable choice in a low-ammo reality. By the way, I may be nitpicking but you don't have to mine all day to gather resources for bullets. Salvage Operations, recycling and Lucky Looter exist.

 

Well RE2 and RE3 use this same thing : there is chance for 1 hit kill zombie if  you headshot them and...  it is  very logical --> if zombie get a woud in head ( attack by pipe, fall from hight , car accident) just skull breake easier

[Matt115]

Btw - to @meganoth - Stat's usually mean a lot in fps and skill a lot of in rpg. In cod you can be rly good and always lose. why? Well stuff - depending on cod --> Noob tube army ,  granade spamming , "commando" knifing,  meta weapons etc. 

In some RPG like Vampyr you can beat much more powerfull enemies if you can dodge attack, using location design etc.  even in FPS mixes like bordelands if you know how to use map, which enemy attack first  you can kill enemy even if they are 20 levels more powerfull.

Even in musou games you can elimiante much powerfull enemies if you know what to do ( finding crates on map, learn how musou attack animation looks like etc)