Jump to content

It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Roland said:

I, personally, like to look at how the current quest system overwhelms and dominates any other gameplay choices as a reminder for why an LBD model isn't always a good choice for games like this. I notice how loathe people are to start the whole questing process again from the beginning when they get a new trader as a reminder of how LBD can kill replay value in a game such as this. Quests could be greatly improved by making them less LBD-like.  Something to think about. :)

 

I agree.  It felt like the quests were just pushing the game too fast.  I removed those rewards from the quests so now you only get coins and XP from them.  I figured the traders would want you to buy the gear from them, not give it to you for free.  Coins seem to be enough of a payment for taking on the job for them.

 

However, I also have stated that I prefer the slower progression in the game and the struggle of making due with what you got, not what you wished you had by Day 7.  My last playthrough, I was at Day 12 and still didn't have working forge, mixer, and chemistry station...and the only reason I had a working bench was because I used up most of my earnings at the time to purchase one from the trader.

 

I also like how easy they have made it for amateurs like me to mod the game.  I know my ideas are not the popular ones, but I can easily make this changes to the game mechanics and play it the way I want to.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

They do listen but they don't always heed--especially at this stage of development where they are wrapping things up. At the end of the day this is their game and their vision. With thousands of players they are going to get thousands of likes and dislikes and very few people say, "I recognize the design that TFP went with is a good design even though I personally don't care for it." Most people call the game garbage and accuse the devs of not being able to develop their way out of a paper bag if the game is not to their own personal liking.

 

LBD may seem like the most sensible natural and wtf-not ideas to you and many others. However, there are plenty of players who don't like the gameplay that it creates. So who should TFP heed? 

 

The answer is neither. They should make the game according to their own vision and give lots of freedom to modders and make sure there are lots of options available in the final version. Ideas are a dime a dozen and every idea you come up with there will be another person who paid hard-earned money who hates your idea and would be angry if TFP listened to you and implemented your ideas.

 

TFP listens and considers but then ultimately does what their team judges to be best and whatever that is there will be haters who accuse them of not listening to the community and ruining their game, there will be fans who are convinced they posted all the ideas that TFP went with first and feel good that TFP listened and heeded them, and there will be lots of brand new players who never followed development at all and who pick up the game for the first time ever without any history to draw upon and will either enjoy or dislike the game.

 

I can tell you this with my insider knowledge: I would be absolutely shocked if LBD came back to this game for skill progression in any degree. I would also be shocked if they aren't considering it for one of their future games. There are no plans whatsoever to bring back LBD for this game. They have made that very clear.

 

That being said, the current quest system does follow an LBD model. You can do quests without limit and doing them increases your ability to quest incrementally until you reach tier 5 quests. There is no way to get better at questing other than by doing quests.  I, personally, like to look at how the current quest system overwhelms and dominates any other gameplay choices as a reminder for why an LBD model isn't always a good choice for games like this. I notice how loathe people are to start the whole questing process again from the beginning when they get a new trader as a reminder of how LBD can kill replay value in a game such as this. Quests could be greatly improved by making them less LBD-like.  Something to think about. :)

Hi Roland, again thanks for the reply.

 

I concede your point regarding questing. I can see the similarities to LBD, and it is definitely broken to a certain degree. I also see what you mean about everyone wanting the game to follow their hopes & dreams, and how going down one route inevitably @%$#es off the people who wanted it to go in a different direction. I'm not even mad about it when this happens to me, because usually whatever TFPs did is executed pretty well and just comes out ~different~ from what I was expecting, but still awesome. 

 

I'm not sold on LBD. I agree it's a flawed system. I think my prior posts have been unclear on this b/c I've been focusing on how to execute my idea of LBD rather than the reason I want LBD or something like it. THIS is what I'm trying to get across: When LBD was removed and replaced with the skills trees, a vacuum opened up in the game progression. That vacuum still has not been balanced properly--The game gets boring around level 40 or so unless you purposefully handicap yourself or increase the difficulty. Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

My suggestion to fix this was LBD, which is an imperfect solution but at least one that we know works. I get it--that's not coming back. Fine, IF the pimps acknowledge this void (or balance issue, whatever you want to call it) and choose to fix it using a method that is well-executed but just ~different~ from what I want (the LBD). If they do that I will be perfectly happy. I just don't want them to ignore the issue and move into final development with a glaring balance problem.

 

P.s. if you're going to say that others are going to argue the game is too hard as it is--that shouldn't be a big issue. All TFPs need to do is add more detailed difficulty customization options. Then everyone can be happy. Let me choose a game stage scaler that increases faster than the current rate, but keeps everything else the same. Let me choose to have more zombies in POIs, alter the spawn rate in cities, increase the size of wandering hordes with decreased frequency. Let me remove screamers b/c they're broken at higher zombie spawn rates. Let me add random bloodmoons. Etc. The newbies can play on vanilla 8-zed horde nights and change the settings on their next playthrough. LBD is just one possible solution to the balance problem, this is another and there are many more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

Hi Roland, again thanks for the reply.

 

I concede your point regarding questing. I can see the similarities to LBD, and it is definitely broken to a certain degree. I also see what you mean about everyone wanting the game to follow their hopes & dreams, and how going down one route inevitably @%$#es off the people who wanted it to go in a different direction. I'm not even mad about it when this happens to me, because usually whatever TFPs did is executed pretty well and just comes out ~different~ from what I was expecting, but still awesome. 

 

I'm not sold on LBD. I agree it's a flawed system. I think my prior posts have been unclear on this b/c I've been focusing on how to execute my idea of LBD rather than the reason I want LBD or something like it. THIS is what I'm trying to get across: When LBD was removed and replaced with the skills trees, a vacuum opened up in the game progression. That vacuum still has not been balanced properly--The game gets boring around level 40 or so unless you purposefully handicap yourself or increase the difficulty. Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

My suggestion to fix this was LBD, which is an imperfect solution but at least one that we know works. I get it--that's not coming back. Fine, IF the pimps acknowledge this void (or balance issue, whatever you want to call it) and choose to fix it using a method that is well-executed but just ~different~ from what I want (the LBD). If they do that I will be perfectly happy. I just don't want them to ignore the issue and move into final development with a glaring balance problem.

 

P.s. if you're going to say that others are going to argue the game is too hard as it is--that shouldn't be a big issue. All TFPs need to do is add more detailed difficulty customization options. Then everyone can be happy. Let me choose a game stage scaler that increases faster than the current rate, but keeps everything else the same. Let me choose to have more zombies in POIs, alter the spawn rate in cities, increase the size of wandering hordes with decreased frequency. Let me remove screamers b/c they're broken at higher zombie spawn rates. Let me add random bloodmoons. Etc. The newbies can play on vanilla 8-zed horde nights and change the settings on their next playthrough. LBD is just one possible solution to the balance problem, this is another and there are many more.

I don't believe it, I got a heart from Kuosimodo

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

Hi Roland, again thanks for the reply.

 

I concede your point regarding questing. I can see the similarities to LBD, and it is definitely broken to a certain degree. I also see what you mean about everyone wanting the game to follow their hopes & dreams, and how going down one route inevitably @%$#es off the people who wanted it to go in a different direction. I'm not even mad about it when this happens to me, because usually whatever TFPs did is executed pretty well and just comes out ~different~ from what I was expecting, but still awesome. 

 

I'm not sold on LBD. I agree it's a flawed system. I think my prior posts have been unclear on this b/c I've been focusing on how to execute my idea of LBD rather than the reason I want LBD or something like it. THIS is what I'm trying to get across: When LBD was removed and replaced with the skills trees, a vacuum opened up in the game progression. That vacuum still has not been balanced properly--The game gets boring around level 40 or so unless you purposefully handicap yourself or increase the difficulty. Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

My suggestion to fix this was LBD, which is an imperfect solution but at least one that we know works. I get it--that's not coming back. Fine, IF the pimps acknowledge this void (or balance issue, whatever you want to call it) and choose to fix it using a method that is well-executed but just ~different~ from what I want (the LBD). If they do that I will be perfectly happy. I just don't want them to ignore the issue and move into final development with a glaring balance problem.

 

P.s. if you're going to say that others are going to argue the game is too hard as it is--that shouldn't be a big issue. All TFPs need to do is add more detailed difficulty customization options. Then everyone can be happy. Let me choose a game stage scaler that increases faster than the current rate, but keeps everything else the same. Let me choose to have more zombies in POIs, alter the spawn rate in cities, increase the size of wandering hordes with decreased frequency. Let me remove screamers b/c they're broken at higher zombie spawn rates. Let me add random bloodmoons. Etc. The newbies can play on vanilla 8-zed horde nights and change the settings on their next playthrough. LBD is just one possible solution to the balance problem, this is another and there are many more.

This... is a point of zombie post apo- get everything good enough to don't have be worry anymore.  Yes this mean less replaybility now but this can be increase. But TFP want to finish game soo so... this talk is not for now. Just for next 7dtd

7 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

I don't believe it, I got a heart from Kuosimodo

Well if he agree with somebody he give hearts :)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

I don't think you represent the typical player. I am no where near where you seem to be in the progression by day 28. That's still just the 4th blood moon event. I would have to agree that this void you are experience probably is due to your skills and the speed at which you can progress. As you say, you would have to consciously limit yourself in what you do to not skyrocket past the game's difficulty progression.

 

The pimps could enact limits but if they do people will be incensed for being artificially slowed down. They could increase difficulty in a number of ways but that is usually just a temporary fix as within days to weeks a new min/max meta will emerge and players will be racing up the progression tree in no time. Options would be best admittedly. An option to limit how many quests a day you can do per trader. An option to increase the cost of perks would allow people to choose to be slowed. An option to increase the gamestage rate of growth but slow the lootstage rate of growth. 

 

Of course, as players we can always make choices that emphasize story and living through each day rather than choices that emphasize character growth. Only do one quest a day and take your time about doing it. Stick to wood blocks during the first couple of weeks and then cobblestone blocks the next couple of weeks and then concrete blocks after that.

 

Hopefully there will be cool options to set the rules of the world to settings that keep you from getting to endgame by Day 28 instead of you having to self limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

Hi Roland, again thanks for the reply.

 

I concede your point regarding questing. I can see the similarities to LBD, and it is definitely broken to a certain degree. I also see what you mean about everyone wanting the game to follow their hopes & dreams, and how going down one route inevitably @%$#es off the people who wanted it to go in a different direction. I'm not even mad about it when this happens to me, because usually whatever TFPs did is executed pretty well and just comes out ~different~ from what I was expecting, but still awesome. 

 

I'm not sold on LBD. I agree it's a flawed system. I think my prior posts have been unclear on this b/c I've been focusing on how to execute my idea of LBD rather than the reason I want LBD or something like it. THIS is what I'm trying to get across: When LBD was removed and replaced with the skills trees, a vacuum opened up in the game progression. That vacuum still has not been balanced properly--The game gets boring around level 40 or so unless you purposefully handicap yourself or increase the difficulty. Horde night can't compete with a full-concrete horde base and tier 5-6 weapons on day 28. Tier 5 POIs become cake-walks that you can blitz your way through without ever receiving significant risk to your life. Zombies melt in front of your m60 with max skills, and even the toughest challenges the game has to offer are essentially meaningless. I think the only times I've died in the last 4-5 years are before lvl 30, when you're still in survival mode. After that, you become an untouchable god, and the only possible way that you'll die is by acting reckless.

 

My friends and I had this "void" in Alpha16 as well. It probably was a bit later (we are players who don't mind slower progression and we don't even play at insane or even survivalist) but eventually we had the best weapons, an endless supply of ammo, and zombies had no real chance anymore. Then we started a new game.

 

So in my opinion LBD is not a solution to this. Solutions IMO might be:

1) Less ammo. Difficult to achieve as the player can always invest more time into mining but that might not be a fun way for the game.

2) Less progression of weapons and skills or more progression of zombies so that the final player is less OP against the best zombies

 

If I remember correctly, there were players as well that complained about the game being too easy eventually in alpha 16, but the discussion in the forum was slightly different: People were asking for the "end game". They said that there was a need for more stuff to find and better zombies. And you will notice that many of the overhaul mods, while often implementing LBD, also have that "end game" with more powerful zombies. 

 

And A16 had players as well who complained about being immortal. I think one player said he never had died anymore for a few alphas even (no idea whether he could be believed). And lots of players were doing horde nights in the open, just running around.

 

1 hour ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

 

My suggestion to fix this was LBD, which is an imperfect solution but at least one that we know works. I get it--that's not coming back. Fine, IF the pimps acknowledge this void (or balance issue, whatever you want to call it) and choose to fix it using a method that is well-executed but just ~different~ from what I want (the LBD). If they do that I will be perfectly happy. I just don't want them to ignore the issue and move into final development with a glaring balance problem.

 

I think if you would ask them currently, then their answer would likely be "bandits" (this is only a guess though, I don't have access to insider information). But there are also two considerations they have mentioned sometimes:

1) Vanilla is for new players to start in the game, veterans have to look for their challenge in mods if they don't find it in options.

2) The players should feel OP at the end of the game. 

 

Both considerations might stand in the way of fixing this void.

 

1 hour ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

 

P.s. if you're going to say that others are going to argue the game is too hard as it is--that shouldn't be a big issue. All TFPs need to do is add more detailed difficulty customization options. Then everyone can be happy. Let me choose a game stage scaler that increases faster than the current rate, but keeps everything else the same. Let me choose to have more zombies in POIs, alter the spawn rate in cities, increase the size of wandering hordes with decreased frequency. Let me remove screamers b/c they're broken at higher zombie spawn rates. Let me add random bloodmoons. Etc. The newbies can play on vanilla 8-zed horde nights and change the settings on their next playthrough. LBD is just one possible solution to the balance problem, this is another and there are many more.

 

I'm pretty sure TFP will add more options eventually that make the game more adaptable without modding, but that will happen near release (maybe in the last half year of development) as part of balancing. 

 

To combat boredom right now I can only suggest playing mods.

 

Edited by meganoth (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

My friends and I had this "void" in Alpha16 as well. It probably was a bit later (we are players who don't mind slower progression and we don't even play at insane or even survivalist) but eventually we had the best weapons, an endless supply of ammo, and zombies had no real chance anymore. Then we started a new game.

 

So in my opinion LBD is not a solution to this. Solutions IMO might be:

1) Less ammo. Difficult to achieve as the player can always invest more time into mining but that might not be a fun way for the game.

2) Less progression of weapons and skills or more progression of zombies so that the final player is less OP against the best zombies

 

If I remember correctly, there were players as well that complained about the game being too easy eventually in alpha 16, but the discussion in the forum was slightly different: People were asking for the "end game". They said that there was a need for more stuff to find and better zombies. And you will notice that many of the overhaul mods, while often implementing LBD, also have that "end game" with more powerful zombies. 

 

I think if you would ask them currently, then their answer would likely be "bandits" (this is only a guess though, I don't have access to insider information). But there are also two considerations they have mentioned sometimes:

1) Vanilla is for new players to start in the game, veterans have to look for their challenge in mods if they don't find it in options.

2) The players should feel OP at the end of the game. 

 

 

Well less ammo and weapons ( or a lot of weapons but in terrible condition). Would be good - btw mining can be even more funny that looting if it would be expended - more ores types,  more workbenches with upgrades, mines , buidling ( secret bases or building after earthquake) , made massive grave of indians who became zombie and maybe are easy but a lot of them etc. This could be soo good - but it would be target into more "base builder" players like factorio.

It could be done as hm... reduce number of players in next game, increase zombie number, more types of them -- well it would be much funnier to kill 20 weak zombie zombie that 5 strong ( now zombies have too much hp but i understand why but  NMRiH 2 is going to make something in this style).

Well i hope another game will be more focused on hm be exanded game not mod base

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, meganoth said:

If I remember correctly, there were players as well that complained about the game being too easy eventually in alpha 16, but the discussion in the forum was slightly different: People were asking for the "end game". They said that there was a need for more stuff to find and better zombies. And you will notice that many of the overhaul mods, while often implementing LBD, also have that "end game" with more powerful zombies. 

 

And A16 had players as well who complained about being immortal. I think one player said he never had died anymore for a few alphas even (no idea whether he could be believed). And lots of players were doing horde nights in the open, just running around.

I see what they mean, and I suppose in a way that's exactly what I'm asking for--better 'end game'. I don't really feel like I'm trying to speed-run the game or use one gimme tactic to get uber powerful really fast. It just kind of happens, and a little earlier than I'd like. Around level 30-35. A little longer if you up the difficulty. Maybe that's because I rarely die anymore--it's definitely possible to never die if you play safe until you have the right gear & skills. The LBD suggestion was a way to make it take longer to become powerful, thereby prolonging playability.

 

4 hours ago, meganoth said:

So in my opinion LBD is not a solution to this. Solutions IMO might be:

1) Less ammo. Difficult to achieve as the player can always invest more time into mining but that might not be a fun way for the game.

2) Less progression of weapons and skills or more progression of zombies so that the final player is less OP against the best zombies

You're right, those would be workable solutions. But I agree with you--they'd be less fun to play. There are much more fun ways to keep it interesting, such as:

 

Add more challenges that are more likely to kill us once we're powerful. Voluntary stuff that you have to really prepare for, that you'd have no chance of completing before level 50+. Unlike tier 5 POIs--those are fun, but most of the challenge comes from the endurance required. Usually your blood only gets pumping in the very last room when 50 zeds come at you at once. Think 'explosive' and 'final quest'--giant horde quests that you opt to complete once you think you're strong enough. Quests to locate and disable unstable nukes, which will detonate if you don't reach them in time. 'Attack the bandit fortress & kill the head baddy' quests. A 'cure' quest where you go find the cure at a fortified lab location, maybe by finding & killing patient zero (boss zombie) to collect their blood. Idk I'm just spitballing, that last one doesn't really fit TFP's vibe. You get the picture. The point is to add options to make the game end with a bang & give the endgame some teeth, rather than just becoming untouchable and having the fun peter out of the game. Like it did to you & your friends.

 

Both the nuke quest and the cure-lab quest would be ways to introduce new zombie types while still preserving viable realism, btw. "Oh no, the virus mutated and now we're seeing X type zombie, etc.

 

4 hours ago, meganoth said:

I'm pretty sure TFP will add more options eventually that make the game more adaptable without modding, but that will happen near release (maybe in the last half year of development) as part of balancing.

^I hope you're right that they add this. It would go a long way toward making this game truly glorious.

 

5 hours ago, meganoth said:

I think if you would ask them currently, then their answer would likely be "bandits" (this is only a guess though, I don't have access to insider information). But there are also two considerations they have mentioned sometimes:

1) Vanilla is for new players to start in the game, veterans have to look for their challenge in mods if they don't find it in options.

2) The players should feel OP at the end of the game. 

I hope you're right about bandits. I'm going to reserve judgement, but I really hope they do solve the endgame issue. As for the comments about the new vs old players, yeaaaah but I still think they need to tweak it a bit. You can have the player feel OP in most normal situations, but I don't think they should feel that way till level 60+. Or at least later than they do now.  We'll see, maybe A21 will shut my mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, meganoth said:

So in my opinion LBD is not a solution to this. Solutions IMO might be:

1) Less ammo. Difficult to achieve as the player can always invest more time into mining but that might not be a fun way for the game.

2) Less progression of weapons and skills or more progression of zombies so that the final player is less OP against the best zombies

We could always, you know... maybe remove them damage bonuses from perks *wink wink*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/16/2022 at 10:01 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 love quests. It is not the quests themselve that we hate, but how it changed the rest of the gameplay loop.
And no it is not optional. You (and TFPs) should know best:
A survival game forces you to find the most lucrative/savest options. Otherwise it is a creative builder.
Certain exploits like building under ground or driving away got fixed because of this.
"Just don't use it" is not an argument.

On 5/16/2022 at 10:01 PM, Roland said:

Every weapon is viable and equal to the task of killing zombies whether or not you are perked into them. I use weapons all the time outside of my skillset and they are fun and effective. Once again, this complaint is only going to come from the most stringent of max/min players who can't bring themselves to use anything but whatever gives them the most effect dps. A purple weapon fully modded that you have zero skills invested into will mow enemies down. You say that survival is about using whatever you pick up. So do that. Nothing in the game prevents you from that kind of gameplay.

 

Same as before. And while easy normal mode might work like this... why would you even want the skills if they don't give you an advantage?
This is a death or die situation.
Either they are useless so you can use whatever, or they give you an advantage which means using other weapons is less effective, which, as said above, locks them from being "the most efficient route" and is at best a backup weapon.

 

 

On 5/16/2022 at 10:01 PM, Roland said:

There's nothing to be said here except that the devs love special infected zombies. This may not be the zombie game you want although it has been a zombie game with special infected zombies since the very beginning and you should have known. Cop zombies that launch acid vomit and all zombies with the ability to tear down structures with their bare hands were special abilities from day one. Later came spider zombies that could run up the sides of buildings, screamers, radiated zombies, demolishers, pus erupters, and there may still be a few more coming before they are done. This is that kind of game and always has been

. Period.

I like the special infected. What I don't like is their frequency and their balance.
The demolisher is STPIDLY OP because he does not have a weakness. Said this since his introduction. Still not fixed:
large healthpool, insane damage, a lot of armor, traps activate his bomb and shooting the ticker STILL does massive blockdamage.

On 5/16/2022 at 10:01 PM, Roland said:

Gimps you severely against whom?

Against the SURVIVAL GAME.
Sure on easy it is easy to survive. But whatever difficulty you chose, it should be challenging to you, or it is no longer a survival game.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

 

I see what they mean, and I suppose in a way that's exactly what I'm asking for--better 'end game'. I don't really feel like I'm trying to speed-run the game or use one gimme tactic to get uber powerful really fast. It just kind of happens, and a little earlier than I'd like. Around level 30-35. A little longer if you up the difficulty. Maybe that's because I rarely die anymore--it's definitely possible to never die if you play safe until you have the right gear & skills. The LBD suggestion was a way to make it take longer to become powerful, thereby prolonging playability.

 

You're right, those would be workable solutions. But I agree with you--they'd be less fun to play.

 

I only said this about less ammo. I don't think that less OP players at the end would be detrimental to fun. And even the ammo idea depends much on how it is done. For example there is brass in ammo that can't be mined and Madmole has said that it is supposed to be the limiter. And it should be a limit, especially for 7.62 because machine guns are OP exactly because there is no limit anymore. There are just too many good sources for ammo and brass (dukes can be smelted to brass as well).

 

If we had a hard limit for ammo you would keep Spray-and-pray game play to situations that need it. And that without removing the fun.

 

Unless fun for you means recklessly shooting machine gun in continuous fire. Then I'd say you really want to be OP subconsciously. Machine guns NEED a disadvantage in this game (or need damage greatly reduced). You can't achieve balance without a change here.  

 

10 hours ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

 

 

There are much more fun ways to keep it interesting, such as:

 

Add more challenges that are more likely to kill us once we're powerful. Voluntary stuff that you have to really prepare for, that you'd have no chance of completing before level 50+. Unlike tier 5 POIs--those are fun, but most of the challenge comes from the endurance required. Usually your blood only gets pumping in the very last room when 50 zeds come at you at once. Think 'explosive' and 'final quest'--giant horde quests that you opt to complete once you think you're strong enough. Quests to locate and disable unstable nukes, which will detonate if you don't reach them in time. 'Attack the bandit fortress & kill the head baddy' quests. A 'cure' quest where you go find the cure at a fortified lab location, maybe by finding & killing patient zero (boss zombie) to collect their blood. Idk I'm just spitballing, that last one doesn't really fit TFP's vibe. You get the picture. The point is to add options to make the game end with a bang & give the endgame some teeth, rather than just becoming untouchable and having the fun peter out of the game. Like it did to you & your friends.

 

A lot of excellent ideas. One of them can't be done because of performance on minimum spec hardware. Many of the performance problems also seem to depend on Unity and can't really be fixed by TFP. 

 

So the obvious solution of bigger zombie hordes is one that is currently relegated to mods though I think it is inevitable that more zombie count options will be added to the game (besides the zombie blood moon count option)

 

Don't expect much in this final stretch of game development. The developers have a priority list of stuff they want to get into the game and then start a short beta. I assume the combined Bandits and Story feature will eat massive time for both programmers and designers and the rest is probably already largely committed to bug fixing and some smaller features that are high on their list. Roland has warned a few times that what you see now is essentially what you get for release, minus bandits.

 

 

10 hours ago, ISPARTACUSI said:

 

Both the nuke quest and the cure-lab quest would be ways to introduce new zombie types while still preserving viable realism, btw. "Oh no, the virus mutated and now we're seeing X type zombie, etc.

 

^I hope you're right that they add this. It would go a long way toward making this game truly glorious.

 

I hope you're right about bandits. I'm going to reserve judgement, but I really hope they do solve the endgame issue. As for the comments about the new vs old players, yeaaaah but I still think they need to tweak it a bit. You can have the player feel OP in most normal situations, but I don't think they should feel that way till level 60+. Or at least later than they do now.  We'll see, maybe A21 will shut my mouth.

 

A21 will have bandits (with bugs and lots of exploitable quirks to be corrected) but I don't think it will have the final story of the player killing the duke. So practically A21 will be the same situation where you just play until you have had enough of the current world.

We players have unrealistic expectations about what a small team can accomplish in a year, and between all the bug fixing. Currently it very much looks like A22 will get the story and that will be the version they will release.

 

By the way, there are already options to prolong the game for veterans, maybe you missed one:

Loot Abundance should be turned down, block or player damage of zombies can and should be increased independently of the difficulty setting. And their run speed at day and night can also be increased. Feral sense is nice but alone not that big of a difference.

 

 

Edited by meganoth (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I love quests. It is not the quests themselve that we hate, but how it changed the rest of the gameplay loop.


Im glad you finally see how an LBD model harms gameplay. I purposely limit myself on quests for the sake of preserving my own fun much in the way I used to limit myself on spamming crafting or specific skill activities. 
 

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

A survival game forces you to find the most lucrative/savest options. Otherwise it is a creative builder.


No. I’m living proof that this statement isn’t a universal truth. I’m not the only one. I know that there are many who play differently and focus on other goals than rushing the progression in ways that are unnatural just because it’s possible to do so. Only in a PvP competitive environment is anyone forced to find the most lucrative and efficient progression paths. 

 

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

"Just don't use it" is not an argument.


Sure it is. Not only that but it is a viable practical philosophy I utilize whenever I play. The first time I utilized it was when I decided to play Ironman and deleted my own game and started over after I died. It’s called “free will” and I don’t just argue for it, I live by it as well. 
 

You can tell me all day long that the game forces us to spam quest after quest after quest but since I don’t do that AND I successfully survive I just don’t believe you. 
 

I’ll have to address the rest of your post later….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

 

I only said this about less ammo. I don't think that less OP players at the end would be detrimental to fun. And even the ammo idea depends much on how it is done. For example there is brass in ammo that can't be mined and Madmole has said that it is supposed to be the limiter. And it should be a limit, especially for 7.62 because machine guns are OP exactly because there is no limit anymore. There are just too many good sources for ammo and brass (dukes can be smelted to brass as well).

 

If we had a hard limit for ammo you would keep Spray-and-pray game play to situations that need it. And that without removing the fun.

 

Unless fun for you means recklessly shooting machine gun in continuous fire. Then I'd say you really want to be OP subconsciously. Machine guns NEED a disadvantage in this game (or need damage greatly reduced). You can't achieve balance without a change here.  

 

 

 

A21 will have bandits (with bugs and lots of exploitable quirks to be corrected) but I don't think it will have the final story of the player killing the duke. So practically A21 will be the same situation where you just play until you have had enough of the current world.

We players have unrealistic expectations about what a small team can accomplish in a year, and between all the bug fixing. Currently it very much looks like A22 will get the story and that will be the version they will release.

 

By the way, there are already options to prolong the game for veterans, maybe you missed one:

Loot Abundance should be turned down, block or player damage of zombies can and should be increased independently of the difficulty setting. And their run speed at day and night can also be increased. Feral sense is nice but alone not that big of a difference.

 

 

1. this could be done easy if mining would be only soruce of brass, making bullets will be expensive neccesity of advance workbenches with upgrades + scrapped perks skill by reducing this so receptures + perks magasines ( i don't mean LBL but old magasines like art of mining),  return of few parts guns and most of them would be in terrible conditon. Yes game would be much harder, junk guns would be thrown to bin but progress would be much much slower and guns forced to use only during blood moon andin T5 PoI to save bullets. tihs could be soo good

2. Yep there is no chance for expanded story it will be  pretty simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Roland said:

Im glad you finally see how an LBD model harms gameplay. I purposely limit myself on quests for the sake of preserving my own fun much in the way I used to limit myself on spamming crafting or specific skill activities.

So lets remove quests?
NO. That was never the argument.
A great system, like quests or LBD needs to be tweaked until the kinks are gone.
Spamcrafting was eliminated in A16, if you don't remember. A16 basicially ironed out most of the kinks with LBD by introducing a pointbuy for things they were unable to fix normally.

Same with the quests. They need to be TWEAKED not removed.
But what OP means (or at least my interpretation of it) is that TFPs want us on this loop, because instead of decreasing available quests, they increased them in the last Alphas. THAT is what he critizises.

 

2 hours ago, Roland said:

No. I’m living proof that this statement isn’t a universal truth. I’m not the only one. I know that there are many who play differently and focus on other goals than rushing the progression in ways that are unnatural just because it’s possible to do so. Only in a PvP competitive environment is anyone forced to find the most lucrative and efficient progression paths. 

I'm not saying you can't have fun without a challenge.
But its not a survival game, if you don't have to struggle to survive.

 

6ivow5[1].jpg

Edited by Viktoriusiii
brainfart. Obviously want the kinks gone, not the details :D (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roland said:

Im glad you finally see how an LBD model harms gameplay. I purposely limit myself on quests for the sake of preserving my own fun much in the way I used to limit myself on spamming crafting or specific skill activities. 

No. I’m living proof that this statement isn’t a universal truth. I’m not the only one. I know that there are many who play differently and focus on other goals than rushing the progression in ways that are unnatural just because it’s possible to do so. Only in a PvP competitive environment is anyone forced to find the most lucrative and efficient progression paths. 


Sure it is. Not only that but it is a viable practical philosophy I utilize whenever I play. The first time I utilized it was when I decided to play Ironman and deleted my own game and started over after I died. It’s called “free will” and I don’t just argue for it, I live by it as well. 
 

You can tell me all day long that the game forces us to spam quest after quest after quest but since I don’t do that AND I successfully survive I just don’t believe you. 
 

I’ll have to address the rest of your post later….

 
I see both of your sides on this. I have to add that when criticizing the current game loop, you should also try to do so from the perspective of a new player.  
I think when you play a lot, and things are not to your liking, you are more likely to shift your habits and try different things. The fact that you can even do this is great, but at the same time, is this really something that should be in the mind of a new player? It's easy to do when you are comfortable with the game and know every single mechanic.
 
I have to agree that this feels like an LBD system. LBD might be terrible for some people, and it might not have been very exciting, but I see some differences. The LBD system was never intended to be the actual game loop for starters.. and although some people might have put focus on it, realistically it never was or could be the main game loop. For most people, it was something a little extra you could do if you chose to. Your survival didn't hinge on it and there was always something more important to do. In this case it is pretty clear, especially to a new player, that this is indeed the more important thing you should be doing (and really compared to LBD, there is actually less variety of things to do).
 
"Just don't use it" or "just don't do it" I think can be valid arguments, especially in this game for some things. There was a time where I would apply that to the trader. I've always hated the trader, so I just didn't use the trader. It was pretty cool that it was balanced where the effort to survive was generally the same whether you chose to do everything on your own or rely on trades and economy. As a new player, you would quickly see these choices and decide on your strategy. These days, avoiding the trader is like removing half of the content and grinding the trader is the go to strategy, conveniently handed to you with no thought required from the player. The trader is the focal point now. Avoiding the trader and the missions for the sake of trying to harness that survival game feeling disconnects yourself too much from that game loop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, AtomicUs5000 said:

It was pretty cool that it was balanced where the effort to survive was generally the same whether you chose to do everything on your own or rely on trades and economy.

Yeah. Maybe I should have said that... but I thought it was implied:

"Just do something else" is a valid argument, if there are other options that are just as viable as the one you don't like.
So if I dislike that you need paint for a sham sandwhich (obviously I love this detail, but I needed an example that nobody used before :D), I can simply eat other foods. There is no noticable difference between a sham sandwhich and other foods.

If I dislike , lets say... building a hordebase.
What am I supposed to do that is equally efficient?

-use exploits (?) like driving away or just dying to crouch the hordenight?
- ... there is nothing else as effective.

Sure I could just build like I did in pre A17 days.
But that would get me killed 9/10 times, because on difficulties that I need to feel challenged, they just rip one hole in the wall and my whole house is at risk.
 



And same goes for quests.
There is no other way to get levels, money AND loot this quickly. There simply isn't.
Give me a group of 3 that don't use the quests, against me with quests, on any day I outscale them so hard that they'd wish to have never started this 3v1.

Wait maybe if you'd just go city to city, just cheesing every pois lootroom... that might be as effective... at least on the loot aspect.
And for xp I could go with a screamer base...

But yeah... both of those are just cheesing a gamemechanic.


 

Edited by Viktoriusiii (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

And no it is not optional.

It's absolutely optional. NO one is forcing you to do anything. If you cannot control yourself that's on you.

22 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

There is no other way to get levels, money AND loot this quickly.

You are the one deciding it needs to be done quickly. You and only you are making this choice. I personally don't go so far as to never do more than 1 quest a day but it's a rare day when I do so. It does happen tho every now and then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Yeah. Maybe I should have said that... but I thought it was implied:

"Just do something else" is a valid argument, if there are other options that are just as viable as the one you don't like.
So if I dislike that you need paint for a sham sandwhich (obviously I love this detail, but I needed an example that nobody used before :D), I can simply eat other foods. There is no noticable difference between a sham sandwhich and other foods.

If I dislike , lets say... building a hordebase.
What am I supposed to do that is equally efficient?

-use exploits (?) like driving away or just dying to crouch the hordenight?
- ... there is nothing else as effective.

Sure I could just build like I did in pre A17 days.
But that would get me killed 9/10 times, because on difficulties that I need to feel challenged, they just rip one hole in the wall and my whole house is at risk.
 



And same goes for quests.
There is no other way to get levels, money AND loot this quickly. There simply isn't.
Give me a group of 3 that don't use the quests, against me with quests, on any day I outscale them so hard that they'd wish to have never started this 3v1.

 

Since you use survival as the root motivation you have an argumentative problem here: For survival in 7D2D skilling up as fast as possible is detrimental even. Because the enemies scales with your level, but the number of resources you get is constant with time. So skilling up fast means getting the stronger enemies earlier but with less resources to combat them.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

So lets remove quests?
NO. That was never the argument.

 

You probably should rewrite this before Roland gets a cheap shot by rightly accusing you of strawmanning 😉

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Matt115 said:

1. this could be done easy if mining would be only soruce of brass,

 

I don't see how brass mining instead of looting would help at all.

 

2 hours ago, Matt115 said:

making bullets will be expensive neccesity of advance workbenches with upgrades + scrapped perks skill by reducing this so receptures + perks magasines ( i don't mean LBL but old magasines like art of mining), 

 

Ammo could be reduced without changing the game completely. The problem is that TFP itself doesn't see a necessity to reduce ammo further.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

There is no other way to get levels, money AND loot this quickly. There simply isn't.

 

Prove to me that it must be done quickly. I don't do it quickly and survive just fine. That's on warrior difficulty which is where I prefer the game and is default +2.  I'm betting that even at highest difficulty you don't have to spam quest to stay ahead of the difficulty curve. You just choose to do so. Its like the very first horde night on day 7 could easily be survived with a wood base because it is such a cakewalk. But how many people push to have concrete in place before their first hordenight? That is far far far more efficiency than is needed to survive and nothing forces you to go that far even if it is allowed as a possibility.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Give me a group of 3 that don't use the quests, against me with quests, on any day I outscale them so hard that they'd wish to have never started this 3v1.

 

I already said that if you are playing competitively then of course you must keep up and try to surpass those you are against. But in most cases people aren't talking about PvP. Is that what you have been talking about all along? PvP gameplay? I've been talking from the perspective of single player and cooperative where it doesn't matter whether you are the highest level character or not.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

I don't see how brass mining instead of looting would help at all.

 

 

Ammo could be reduced without changing the game completely. The problem is that TFP itself doesn't see a necessity to reduce ammo further.

 

 

1. effectivenes -- > you want to make iron tools - forge. You  want bullet casting? fine spend 1 hour for 10 of them. you want to have them more? mine with better tools and make better forge but this mean you need steel etc

2.  Yes it's problem because of dmg etc perks and because number of zombie hp is too big. If  ammo was reduced by 80-90% this mean bullets have too be much much powerfull that melee weapons and "no gunpowder" range - 2  pistol bullet normal zombie head mean instant dead of zombie.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I'm not saying you can't have fun without a challenge.
But its not a survival game, if you don't have to struggle to survive.

 

6ivow5[1].jpg

This can be a cheeky and often selfish argument to make.

 

You might realize that sometimes parts of the game are easy, not because every nuance of it has been made to be difficult by TFP, but because you - as an experienced player in 7D2D - know how to make things easier on yourself.

 

That's not a flaw in a game's design.   A lot of people seriously overlook the fact that their own presence can change things.   Newer players and players with less experience in managing their play and game will not have the same argument.  People still struggle, and I've personally watched streams of people who clearly have very little knowledge and experience maximizing their own output.

Edited by Ramethzer0 (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Ramethzer0 said:

This can be a cheeky and often selfish argument to make.

 

You might realize that sometimes parts of the game are easy, not because every nuance of it has been made to be difficult by TFP, but because you - as an experienced player in 7D2D - know how to make things easier on yourself.

 

That's not a flaw in a game's design.   A lot of people seriously overlook the fact that their own presence can change things.   Newer players and players with less experience in managing their play and game will not have the same argument.  People still struggle, and I've personally watched streams of people who clearly have very little knowledge and experience maximizing their own output.

This unfortunatly this way - some things are hard and this not connected with "skill". Because of RNG. L4D2 is good example of that one time while i was playing in dead air i get witch, tank in this same place somehow- this is not possible to do with AWP only team ( lack of ammo so we picked AWP). In older cods you could do easter egg quest very hard or easy depending on your luck. This same thing with city of brass or biding of issac. So... let say gamestage in 7dtd don't exist- if you have in first car you can find automatic shotgun but in small newsstand you can find screamer - so this depends on your luck not on your experience. And.. well spoiled of food is harded that not spoiled food system right? this same thing with smell, corpse decying , old wellness system etc. now 7dtd is much easier that older ones - not because we are more experied but because game is much easier

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...