Jump to content

It's all gone wrong, terribly wrong.


Recommended Posts

Okay, now for the rest....

 

10 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

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.

 

I maintain that every weapon in the game is good enough to kill zombies. Some work better than others and some work differently than others. If you perk into a weapon then it is going to be the best at killing zombies but that doesn't mean you couldn't do it with an unperked weapon. 

 

Having different weapons with different strengths and weaknesses makes the game play differently each time you play. Making all the guns equal would make the gameplay feel samey no matter what weapon you picked up. It wouldn't matter if it was a spear or a club or a shotgun or an AK47 if they all killed equally well.

 

For that reason I am glad the weapons are different and some lead to more challenging playthroughs. For someone who will only play with the best, that means the rest are just backup weapons. For someone who is willing to play with a different kit each time, that means having fun and working through different challenges several times over. The only difference is in the perspective of the player.

 

There is no way to develop for players who are chronically obsessed with the one most efficient route. No matter what changes or balancing is done there will always be one way that is perceived as the new best path and those players will quickly get bored of the one and only way they choose to play (they call it forced lol) and then are back to chiding the developers for a re-balance. In addition, if developers listen to those players and attempt to do it then all the paths become equal and it doesn't matter which one you take and so for everyone else the game feels samey and loses its replay value.

 

Best option for developers is to ignore hardcore min/maxers completely. Make the game that they envision people playing if they aren't trying to speed run and either:


A) Put restrictions and rules in place that block min/maxers from rushing the game or

B) Allow gamers to do as they wish and people will choose to either play naturally or rush.

 

I'm all for a limit on daily quests and a daily cap on xp earned from the same activity. Make it so you can only do 1 quest a day per trader and xp from doing a particular activity diminishes throughout the day until it finally reaches zero and doesn't regen until the next day. That would slow people the hell down for sure....but also take freedom away. I'm happy to continue to self limit how many quests I do since it also allows someone else to spam quests all they want. In my game quests are not broken. They are perfect because I don't abuse them.

 

So here are our types of gamers

 

1) Controls self from abusing quests and is pleased with how the game plays.

2) Spams quests and is pleased with how the game plays.

3) Spams quests and is not pleased because it dominates their game but they can't limit themselves.

 

It is only the third group who isn't happy and if they get what they want it won't really affect the first group since they self limit already but the second group will get screwed by actually being forced by the game to not be able to play as they wish. Should the group who has impulse control problems and weak self-discipline and claims to be "forced" when there is no actual mechanism in place forcing be the ones to dictate that the second group is actually going to start getting forced by actual rules and mechanics that prevent them from playing the way they like?

 

As a member of the first group it wouldn't bother me but you guys in the third group could also read a few self-help books and save the rest of us a lot of trouble....

 

11 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

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.

 

I don't think you've played in awhile...

 

11 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

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.

 

I agree that the survival game should be challenging and in limiting myself I make it more challenging. Obsessively choosing the optimal path makes the game less challenging. If you race to concrete blocks before the first bloodmoon then you have basically destroyed the challenge of surviving the horde because it won't ever be strong enough to overcome what you have done by rushing. 

 

I want the challenge of survival so I don't rush. I play each day trying to mirror what I think I would do in the actual situation (to a degree, of course). I don't try and farm xp using whatever best activity has been determined to be the current flavor for grinding all so I can  be level 20 by day 3 and have my concrete base by day 7. I know that concrete isn't even close to necessary until at least the 3rd or 4th hordenight so work with wood and cobblestone for the first few weeks and that has proven to be sufficient for survival. It also makes for some extremely fun hordenights which would have been a lot more ho hum if I had concrete from the very beginning.

 

I like clearing towns because that feels more thematic and realistic to what I would do rather than just going to the same few quest locations over and over and over. So I take one job a day and spend time exploring and clearing out other POIs without a quest. Does this cause me to fail at survival? No way. I'm definitely keeping up with the progression the game follows to kill me.

 

So you reach level 100 on day 40 and I reach level 100 on day 90 and we both survive and get to the point where we feel we won. Who cares that you did it 50 days faster than I did? There is no prize for than other than in your own mind.

 

I play on Warrior difficulty and feel that my more casual and more natural progress through the development path is more than equal to the task of the challenge of survival. If I upped the difficulty another level I might need to be a bit more efficient but I can't believe it would be by much more and certainly not to the levels people here describe when they come to complain about where their own choices landed them. 

  • Like 1
  • Prime Bless You 1
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

 

7 Days to Die does offer a struggle to everyone who hasn't optimized it out of their game by rushing. "Survival" gameplay is created by the threats to your life. I am saying that as an experienced player, by limiting myself and not playing the game with a focus on always taking the optimal path and always using my time to rush the progression in grindy unnatural ways, I do not outpace the threats and therefore I do experience survival gameplay. 

 

As an experienced player, you know all the ins and outs of the game and can optimize your play in such a way that any and all threats the game has can be outpaced and left in the dust which means you are not experiencing survival gameplay at all.

 

Brand new players don't know these strategies and so they do the best they can and are almost always in survival mode.

 

I am happy to have the game remain as it is so that people can choose to experience survival gameplay by not outpacing the threats or to rush and play the game as a god of the apocalypse and never feel danger from any threats because of what they chose to do.

 

You want the game changed in a way to prevent you from rushing because you recognize that you don't like the state of the game once you've rushed but you also can't help yourself and will rush every time even knowing that you are erasing the survival gameplay as you do. The problem is that will destroy the gameplay of those who rush and like the result of rushing.

Edited by Roland (see edit history)
  • Prime Bless You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

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.

 

That's not my argument either. Besides, I already know that quests are being expanded again in A21.

 

Let's be clear about what you mean when you say quests need to be tweaked. You are saying that they need to be limited somehow. That's fine by me. I would rather 7 Days to Die be more of a game than a sandbox anyway. But, just so you understand, by limiting quests in order to bring them to heel so that they no longer overwhelm the gameplay loop like they currently do, the devs would literally be forcing a particular gameplay style. You are asking the devs to LITERALLY force us to play a particular way even as you are complaining that they FIGURATIVELY force us to play a particular way now simply because the option to do unlimited quests exists.

 

I just want the people to know I'm happy self-limiting how I play quests and how I use the trader but if the devs decide to impose limits and force us to a more limited questing game that isn't going to bother me either....but it might bother some of you. Just saying...

  • Like 1
  • Prime Bless You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

7 Days to Die does offer a struggle to everyone who hasn't optimized it out of their game by rushing. "Survival" gameplay is created by the threats to your life. I am saying that as an experienced player, by limiting myself and not playing the game with a focus on always taking the optimal path and always using my time to rush the progression in grindy unnatural ways, I do not outpace the threats and therefore I do experience survival gameplay. 

 

As an experienced player, you know all the ins and outs of the game and can optimize your play in such a way that any and all threats the game has can be outpaced and left in the dust which means you are not experiencing survival gameplay at all.

 

Brand new players don't know these strategies and so they do the best they can and are almost always in survival mode.

 

I am happy to have the game remain as it is so that people can choose to experience survival gameplay by not outpacing the threats or to rush and play the game as a god of the apocalypse and never feel danger from any threats because of what they chose to do.

 

You want the game changed in a way to prevent you from rushing because you recognize that you don't like the state of the game once you've rushed but you also can't help yourself and will rush every time even knowing that you are erasing the survival gameplay as you do. The problem is that will destroy the gameplay of those who rush and like the result of rushing.

No Roland... 7dtd is easy game.  they can find trader very easy and do quest very easy. 7dtd is very fast "learn to play" . and "play on harder setting" hm... here is not solution. Why? zombies are just bulletsponges. Ok i understand why start gun i RE2 need a lot of bullets on normal difficuty to kill zombie - just read this gun decription (it's weak but small pistol). I undestand why stone weapons are weak. okay i undestand that - but firefighter axe need so many hit's too kill zombie?  ( i know about sledgehammer but...  damn sledgehammer should one hit kill spider zombie too) - no more room is good example what i mean - you can one hit kill every zombie using gun except soldiers ( one hand melee is terrible weak but two hand is usually 1 hit kill too) but it's hard - why? infection is rly easy to get, zombie children are so small and fast, number of zombie is big and soldiers zombie need a lot of bullets etc. Yes i know it's not sandbox and zombie limits in 7dtd.  But... this is good example how to do this right. I know it's too late. Just i hope it will be done better in 7dtd 2 . But new 7dtd will released probablymaybe after 10 - 15 years. Damn,..... this sounds so deppresing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Roland said:

Let's be clear about what you mean when you say quests need to be tweaked. You are saying that they need to be limited somehow. That's fine by me. I would rather 7 Days to Die be more of a game than a sandbox anyway. But, just so you understand, by limiting quests in order to bring them to heel so that they no longer overwhelm the gameplay loop like they currently do, the devs would literally be forcing a particular gameplay style. You are asking the devs to LITERALLY force us to play a particular way even as you are complaining that they FIGURATIVELY force us to play a particular way now simply because the option to do unlimited quests exists.

 

I do agree that questing has come to dominate game play.   But for me the problem isn't really the quests, its POI itemization.   It used to be that if you were looking for certain types of loot, you targeted specific POIs (Working Stiffs for tools, Crack a Book for books.... etc).   Now, however, loot has become homogenized; you can find just about anything anywhere.   With the incentive to loot particular POIs so greatly diminished, I feel like the best course of action is to not bother looting a POI unless you're doing it for a quest.... since it doesn't matter what POI they send you too.

 

If itemization went back to like it was in previous alphas it becomes a choice between doing a quest that sends you to a house, where you're not likely to find high quality tools or weapons... or foregoing the quest to loot a Shotgun Messiah where you are likely to find decent weapons.  Then, I think, questing will no longer be the dominant way to progress.

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

2 hours ago, Roland said:

[...]

I am sorry to do this, but I cannot possibly answer all of your statements, because if I do, I do it in detail and then I'll need multiple posts :D

So let me say it like this:

I do not want to take "freedom" away from anyone. Keep the quests if possible, but fix looting systems or whatever.
My point was that there is something wrong with the gameplay loop and I offered an "easy" solution.
But games, ESPECIALLY creative and survival games NEED boundries! They are essential.


But to boil it down:
I think my aspect of 7d2d is horror survival, while yours seems to be roleplay sandbox.
Which is totally fine, I just think the game fails on being a horror survival game and has become less and less so basicially every alpha since 11 I think. (at first it was basicially not noticable and I was actually for it)
This is where our differences lie. I want a challanging game that gives me challenges to overcome, you want to play the game your way and have fun that way.
And it does not matter if I am experienced or not. A good survival/horror game finds ways to challenge even the experienced of players (except speedrunners that use exploits and plan their routes beforehand :D)
Be it with harder difficulties, less loot or even harder recipes.
The problem is what we want from the game, not my experiencelevel. I've had great games that I optimized that were still challenging. Or if I found something broken they fixed it, tried to or I at least thought they should.

If you want to play an RPG sandbox, that is fine. And I think 7d2d is ok at that.
But in my mind, it isn't. So that is why I say these things. And a "real" survival game is as I stated. it needs a challenge. It needs good balance, or it will be played once and never again (obviously overly generalized but you get the point)



PS: I haven't played it quite a while, that is true. At least not to a point where I was able to analyze demolishers :D
At least I give you that much :D

  • Like 1
  • Prime Face Palm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:


But to boil it down:
I think my aspect of 7d2d is horror survival, while yours seems to be roleplay sandbox.
 

And if i good undestand  some comments - a lot of people want to be just funny MP play to with friends and mode base. So yeah this sound sad but whatever. Not expect nothing good. But this at least explain why  there is so many  similiar PVP sandbox games xd

 

17 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:


This is where our differences lie. I want a challanging game that gives me challenges to overcome, you want to play the game your way and have fun that way.
And it does not matter if I am experienced or not. A good survival/horror game finds ways to challenge even the experienced of players (except speedrunners that use exploits and plan their routes beforehand :D)
 

Well - good survival horror don't have to be challenge to be good - f.e.a.r. , contagion,  dead by daylight, NZA, days gone etc.  it have to : 1. keep good setting 2. don't fear to be controversial 3. not set to be for everyone 4. have a lot lore 

 

17 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:


If you want to play an RPG sandbox, that is fine. And I think 7d2d is ok at that.
But in my mind, it isn't. So that is why I say these things. And a "real" survival game is as I stated. it needs a challenge. It needs good balance, or it will be played once and never again (obviously overly generalized but you get the point)


 

I think how 7dtd looks like now is just.... hm... to safe and too much for everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Matt115 said:

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

 

I read this twice and its a bit of a word salad for me to understand, but I'll try my best to respond to what I think is the spirit of your concern: 

 

if you're saying that your experience hasn't made you better at this game, I'm going to call you out on that.  The foundation of human intuition (and incidentally, progression) is based in pattern recognition, even as newborns.

 

If the RNG is the same across the board, then everyone has the same opportunities/chances.  That's the nature of RNG.   It can make things tougher or easier, but to rail against that is like blaming the universe for your own misfortune.  Misfortune is one of the many intricacies that defines a survival experience.

 

The comparison of the current state of the game versus older version seems to be a pretty flat argument.  Those older versions were not as polished and likely had different goals in mind.  Similarly (if I read this right) comparison includes the state of other games in relation to this one.   Projecting your woes upon this game because it hasn't met the same standards you find agreeable in other games or older versions - that's not something that a developer should ever waste their time worrying about.

 

You also have the ability on your own to set certain bars that are linked to a more difficult experience.  Have you attempted to play with the settings to trim what sort of experience you're making for yourself?

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

2 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

But games, ESPECIALLY creative and survival games NEED boundries! They are essential.

100% agree and I have no problem adding rules and boundaries to make this more of a game than a sandbox. 
 

But trust me that there will be many others screaming bloody murder the moment an aspect of their sandbox is switched to game mode. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I think my aspect of 7d2d is horror survival, while yours seems to be roleplay sandbox.

 

It’s more like I’m willing to use the sandbox nature of the game to self limit myself so that I can role play horror survival. That way I don’t step on anyone else’s toes by demanding a whole swath of the sandbox get formalized into a game with hard and fast rules. 
 

At the least, limiting myself is a solution for ongoing enjoyment until the devs add rules that limit the game for me. Either way it’s a win. Instead of hating the game because it’s boring since I had my concrete base since day five so there is no threat and no survival, I role play limits and don’t rush to concrete and it’s fun and I’m struggling to survive. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

This is where our differences lie. I want a challanging game that gives me challenges to overcome, you want to play the game your way and have fun that way.

 

The way I see it is you rush the progression because you are allowed to and as an experienced player you know how to and so you feel no challenge. From Day one you are far beyond the threats the game can deliver. I refuse to rush and just do some of everything as my mood or necessity dictates and so I am often behind or right with the threat level of the game and so I actually do experience a struggle to survive. We both want that struggle to survive. You just choose to move beyond it asap. 
 

3 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

And it does not matter if I am experienced or not. A good survival/horror game finds ways to challenge even the experienced of players (except speedrunners that use exploits and plan their routes beforehand :D)

 

I have to disagree. It is because you are an experienced player that you intuitively know your routes ahead of time. You aren’t the type to use exploits per se but still your experience and knwledge give you an edge over a new player. Most new players flounder about and have a tough time preparing for the very first blood moon while you probably already have at least some of your base built with concrete. Experience in the game is huge for being able to rocket beyond the threats that equal survival gameplay. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Roland said:

100% agree and I have no problem adding rules and boundaries to make this more of a game than a sandbox. 
 

But trust me that there will be many others screaming bloody murder the moment an aspect of their sandbox is switched to game mode. 
 

 

It’s more like I’m willing to use the sandbox nature of the game to self limit myself so that I can role play horror survival. That way I don’t step on anyone else’s toes by demanding a whole swath of the sandbox get formalized into a game with hard and fast rules. 
 

At the least, limiting myself is a solution for ongoing enjoyment until the devs add rules that limit the game for me. Either way it’s a win. Instead of hating the game because it’s boring since I had my concrete base since day five so there is no threat and no survival, I role play limits and don’t rush to concrete and it’s fun and I’m struggling to survive. 

 

I will be the first.  I only have a couple of hundred hours now.

 

My highest day without dying was like 67.

 

But I play permadeath.  No quests.  All it takes is one mistake. 

 

So to get a bit snobbish, I once read that sandboxes are for the intelligent gamer :).

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

I'm kinda butting in without reading everything, but anyway..

 

Survival. At the moment the best ratio for "time survived / effort spent" is probably found at "about 7h / didn't do anything". As in, start a game, crouch, go read a book. If you're a little lucky, the first thing that kills you is the 7th day horde of 3 zombies.

 

But, you died, so, it doesn't count?

 

Ok, make shovel, stone axe, get a wooden spear / bow, couple cobblestone, some small game.

Stand still on a suitable cobble pile.

Kill the night spawn dire wolves for food, fix your cobble pole after them.

 

I'd bet you can "survive" for ... well. Still Quite hypothetical, but forever. Hundreds of days?

 

I don't really like the idea of "skillfully doing nothing" being considered a good strategy either. The survival thingy should IMO imply a constant urgency to do something. Once you start playing, the game actually works, but "optimizing" your play for survival would makes the experience pretty horrible.

 

I know no-one is arguing you Should so this; but this is what the counterargument of "you don't have to play optimally" sounds like to me.. If I don't gain from progressing, then, why is there progress? Why are we here, just to suffer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Roland said:

A) Put restrictions and rules in place that block min/maxers from rushing the game or

B) Allow gamers to do as they wish and people will choose to either play naturally or rush.

 

There's another option that Meganoth & I already talked about--give the hardcore players more advanced customization options for the difficulty settings. If we can impose limits on ourselves from the home screen, it leaves us free to explore the game more. Many players greatly enjoy learning the most efficient ways to become badass. If we can customize the rules, we'll have to adapt differently for each playthrough-->the game becomes vastly more replayable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Roland said:

7 Days to Die does offer a struggle to everyone who hasn't optimized it out of their game by rushing. "Survival" gameplay is created by the threats to your life. I am saying that as an experienced player, by limiting myself and not playing the game with a focus on always taking the optimal path

The fact that you seriously don't see the issue AND contradiction within your statement here is mind-boggling.

 

First,  you say the game the game "offers a struggle to everyone", but then go on to say that your an experienced player and that YOU yourself limit yourself to certain guidelines.  More than once in this thread.

 

17 hours ago, Roland said:

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. 

 

That alone is a problem.

 

Sure, the game itself offers a lot of different paths but it only promotes the player to take a few of them.

 

 

Quote

It doesn't matter that we are mods. We don't have more influence in the direction of the game or what the devs implement. We don't "consider" good ideas and bring them to the attention of the devs, we are not gatekeepers in any way.

 

@meganoth You should tell this to Roland.  Because he runs arounds here like the gatekeeper himself whenever anyone says ANYTHING remotely negative about the game.

  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Roland
I know youve seen this video already... but it honestly boils down to this again:

videogame philosophy.



If you want to limit yourself, feel free. I don't. If a game does not challenge me without me setting arbitrary rules for myself, it is not a survival game anymore.
And I am a huge fan of being challenged and survival games.

So I disagree harshly on your "I limit myself, and so can you"

It is the devs obligation to find ways to make everything fun.
If there is an "instant win button" (and no not a consolue, but something that was purposefully implemented, be it a skill or an item you can buy or whatever) it is not the players "fault" to use it. That lies soley in the devs corner.
Fixing bugs, balancing the game and making sure that the "gameplay loop" is the intended one to follow.
If you'd gain everything by just staying at spawn, the devs "tell" the player that this is the correct way to play.
Same with quests. If that is the best way to gain everything, this is the way to do it. (never mind the fact that the player does not know how gamestage works, he just sees "oh I get level and loot nice")
I agree that there should be freedom to chose whatever you want and not everything HAS to be exactly as efficient as everything else.
But right now quests are so much stronger than anything else, the devs tell players "do this to get stronger and survive".

 

 

Again: "limit yourself" is not an argument.

It wasn't at building exploits, it wasn't with underground bases, and it isn't with driving away.

There are edgecases (were spikepits really exploits? You had to work REALLY hard to make them work... so input -> output), but something as clear as quests need to be fixed by the devs, not by the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Sal said:

The fact that you seriously don't see the issue AND contradiction within your statement here is mind-boggling.

 

The contradiction is maybe solved if we remember that the game is supposed to be a challenge for new players, not veterans. We veterans are using the game in "unintented" ways just like people on 9+ player servers and builders playing a single world continually for hundreds of hours.

 

It surely isn't that TFP doesn't like veteran players to play the game, but all those players are in the second row.

 

3 hours ago, Sal said:

 

First,  you say the game the game "offers a struggle to everyone", but then go on to say that your an experienced player and that YOU yourself limit yourself to certain guidelines.  More than once in this thread.

 

 

That alone is a problem.

 

Sure, the game itself offers a lot of different paths but it only promotes the player to take a few of them.

 

I agree in regards to the trader. His exploit-potential is so big that even novice players will often detect this almost immediately.

 

3 hours ago, Sal said:

 

@meganoth You should tell this to Roland.  Because he runs arounds here like the gatekeeper himself whenever anyone says ANYTHING remotely negative about the game.

 

HE LIKES THE GAME. Just like you dislike almost anything about the game (or at least are only posting to critizise and want the game to be different).

Forget the moderator-sign, we just post like any normal user, argue like any normal user. Just that we both are generally pleased with the game and you are not. We also read much and have to read much and tend to post our views in any interesting argument. If your arguments are good they should stand up to the flak.

 

Note it is no coincidence that volunteer moderators are usually pleased with how a game turns out, because if they are not they tend to vanish and eventually play other games. I'm still here since A15 because I like how the game turned out, in most aspects.

 

2 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

There are edgecases (were spikepits really exploits? You had to work REALLY hard to make them work... so input -> output), but something as clear as quests need to be fixed by the devs, not by the players.

 

Was there some change directed against spike pits?

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

13 hours ago, Roland said:

I'm all for a limit on daily quests and a daily cap on xp earned from the same activity. Make it so you can only do 1 quest a day per trader and xp from doing a particular activity diminishes throughout the day until it finally reaches zero and doesn't regen until the next day. That would slow people the hell down for sure....but also take freedom away. I'm happy to continue to self limit how many quests I do since it also allows someone else to spam quests all they want. In my game quests are not broken. They are perfect because I don't abuse them.

 

I don't think any limitation is necessary because the quests are self-limiting due to the amount of time involved. At the beginning of the game you spend a lot of time running to the quest location and back. That's why you can only do 2 or maximum 3 quests per day even if everything is in the immediate vicinity. By the way, I'm assuming 60-minute days here.

 

As the quest tier increases, so does the amount of time spent per POI. The only T5 quest I can complete in under an day is the Crack a Book headquarters. All other quests take longer if you also loot. And the quests are also further apart as there are fewer and fewer quest POIs nearby.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Was there some change directed against spike pits?

Y...yes? :D
They don't work anymore.
Spikes break super easily and permanent ones don't work anymore.
Add to that that zombies for some reason can't die anymore from falling (I don'T know the exact values, forgive me)...

Spikepits are a nuisance to upkeep and they don't work (like all spikes after day 14 hordes :D) to kill Z's just slow them down.

The removal of logspikes as well as removal of lethal falldamage AND reducing spike damage (as well as them counting as blocks, which Z's now try to avoid) means that spikepits are not useful. They are a fun gimmick to try, but in the early days, they were the non-plus-ultra directly after exploitbases (which were used A LOT, because of the 'bad' A.I.) And yes these changes are deliberate, because
"they don't want players to ever be passive"

UGH I need to stop thinking abotu that or I get mad again.


The only reasonable critizism was that log spikes were too op.
Which could have easily been fixed by making it multiply falldamage and taking into consideration the rotation of the spikes.
 

if (rotation == up){
takeFallDamage(2x)
}

Just remove the damage on walk and everything is fine.
And you could have even had a special infected that does not get Falldamage (maybe by being part slime) who you have to kill or he destroys the spikes.

But no, they'd rather remove a feature in its entirety... I guess that is on brand though. "If its broken, don't fix it. Replace it with an entirely new broken mess!"



@Roland just in case the video was too long, here is the really relevant part :D
Video (again, but with a timestamp)

Don'T discourage quests. Incentivise other gameplay.
Maybe quest buildings have far more enemies or in general harder to do.
Maybe give more XP to building and mining and especially: give the "wilderness" some neat stuff as well, that you can't get when you are only in the city doing quests.
Like pois with extra big stashes. Or special NPCs (if they ever come) that you have to discover.
Radiant events are great as well...
I don't want them to discourage quests (maybe tweak the rewards) but I already hate that I can't accept more than one quest at a time, meaning I have to pointlessly backtrack after every mission.
Let us take all the quests at once, but decrease the reward and refill the quests only one every few days (meaning if you are too fast, you'll have to do something else until he has something again)




 

Edited by Viktoriusiii (see edit history)
  • Like 2
  • Prime Face Palm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Y...yes? :D
They don't work anymore.
Spikes break super easily and permanent ones don't work anymore.
Add to that that zombies for some reason can't die anymore from falling (I don'T know the exact values, forgive me)...

Spikepits are a nuisance to upkeep and they don't work (like all spikes after day 14 hordes :D) to kill Z's just slow them down.

The removal of logspikes as well as removal of lethal falldamage AND reducing spike damage (as well as them counting as blocks, which Z's now try to avoid) means that spikepits are not useful. They are a fun gimmick to try, but in the early days, they were the non-plus-ultra directly after exploitbases (which were used A LOT, because of the 'bad' A.I.) And yes these changes are deliberate, because
"they don't want players to ever be passive"

UGH I need to stop thinking abotu that or I get mad again.


The only reasonable critizism was that log spikes were too op.
Which could have easily been fixed by making it multiply falldamage and taking into consideration the rotation of the spikes.
 

if (rotation == up){
takeFallDamage(2x)
}

Just remove the damage on walk and everything is fine.
And you could have even had a special infected that does not get Falldamage (maybe by being part slime) who you have to kill or he destroys the spikes.

But no, they'd rather remove a feature in its entirety... I guess that is on brand though. "If its broken, don't fix it. Replace it with an entirely new broken mess!"

 

You are going seriously overboard here. You don't know the details and just say "don't work". But the feature was nerfed exactly to not be OP, exactly the same thing you demand for the trader now.

 

Fall damage is still there, but instead of outright killing zombies (which would be OP) the damage is one third of zombies health. That is quite good for a passive measure that also can be used to collect zombies for grenade or molotov bombardement and seriously slows them down in coming at you.

 

The exit to spike pits can be plastered with further traps. I used 2 dart throwers for such a pit just now in A20 and even most radiated did not walk out of that pit alive even without picking them off from above (at insane you would need more, sure).

 

Meanwhile basic spikes were relegated to work for early and mid-game, while in endgame they get ineffective and you need to use electric traps. That is the same mechanism that makes wood blocks obsolete and you need to move to concrete or steel blocks for advanced hordes. Basic game design, you should know that.

 

Spikes counting as blocks means they need to be put into holes so their top is flat with the surrounding earth, then they work even better than before. Did you really never read this, I must have posted this information dozens of times and CraterCreator even had an icon for some time telling about that.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ramethzer0 said:

 

I read this twice and its a bit of a word salad for me to understand, but I'll try my best to respond to what I think is the spirit of your concern: 

 

if you're saying that your experience hasn't made you better at this game, I'm going to call you out on that.  The foundation of human intuition (and incidentally, progression) is based in pattern recognition, even as newborns.

 

If the RNG is the same across the board, then everyone has the same opportunities/chances.  That's the nature of RNG.   It can make things tougher or easier, but to rail against that is like blaming the universe for your own misfortune.  Misfortune is one of the many intricacies that defines a survival experience.

 

The comparison of the current state of the game versus older version seems to be a pretty flat argument.  Those older versions were not as polished and likely had different goals in mind.  Similarly (if I read this right) comparison includes the state of other games in relation to this one.   Projecting your woes upon this game because it hasn't met the same standards you find agreeable in other games or older versions - that's not something that a developer should ever waste their time worrying about.

 

You also have the ability on your own to set certain bars that are linked to a more difficult experience.  Have you attempted to play with the settings to trim what sort of experience you're making for yourself?

1. I will give you L4D2 and city of brass as example.  First - l4d2 can be very hard or very easy depending on your luck. Even in versus - why? well Weapons, fire ammo, pill etc are in this same location but which special infected you get is so radomly enough that experience will not help you too much.  City of brass is another example - in some sitauation there is no chance to avoid take damage - so RWG mean more that experience because hm "good build" depends mostly on your luck. 

Well older games are what i mean:  older alpha are more hardcore and darker. So if you bought in "form making items" period 7dtd and played then you expected that 7dtd will be hardcore , dark survival because it's hard now ( i mean in this period). Now you have easy "light" game - and experience mean nothing  here - just change version into A10 for example - and you will big diffrences in difficulty.

And... hm change difficulty don't make that game will be harder but in good way - L4D2 again. On expert mode normal zombie hit you by 10 dmg but... number of them is much lower. So - yes it's harder but.... looks bad. Why? because it's broke climatic. NMRiH is not good because is hard but because setting, art style etc is good .

 

8 hours ago, Roland said:

100% agree and I have no problem adding rules and boundaries to make this more of a game than a sandbox. 
 

But trust me that there will be many others screaming bloody murder the moment an aspect of their sandbox is switched to game mode. 
 

 

It’s more like I’m willing to use the sandbox nature of the game to self limit myself so that I can role play horror survival. That way I don’t step on anyone else’s toes by demanding a whole swath of the sandbox get formalized into a game with hard and fast rules. 
 

At the least, limiting myself is a solution for ongoing enjoyment until the devs add rules that limit the game for me. Either way it’s a win. Instead of hating the game because it’s boring since I had my concrete base since day five so there is no threat and no survival, I role play limits and don’t rush to concrete and it’s fun and I’m struggling to survive. 
 

 

The way I see it is you rush the progression because you are allowed to and as an experienced player you know how to and so you feel no challenge. From Day one you are far beyond the threats the game can deliver. I refuse to rush and just do some of everything as my mood or necessity dictates and so I am often behind or right with the threat level of the game and so I actually do experience a struggle to survive. We both want that struggle to survive. You just choose to move beyond it asap. 
 

 

I have to disagree. It is because you are an experienced player that you intuitively know your routes ahead of time. You aren’t the type to use exploits per se but still your experience and knwledge give you an edge over a new player. Most new players flounder about and have a tough time preparing for the very first blood moon while you probably already have at least some of your base built with concrete. Experience in the game is huge for being able to rocket beyond the threats that equal survival gameplay. 

Experience not help you too much if you don't have bad EQ - you there woudn't  be gamestage. And you can find in 1 day wight if you are unlucky. Experience won't help you too much ( if presume that there would exist " normal spawpoint" ( here can spawn a random type of zombie) and "specific spawnpoint"( let say - in scrapyard there will be always zombie dog))

 

5 hours ago, theFlu said:

I'm kinda butting in without reading everything, but anyway..

 

Survival. At the moment the best ratio for "time survived / effort spent" is probably found at "about 7h / didn't do anything". As in, start a game, crouch, go read a book. If you're a little lucky, the first thing that kills you is the 7th day horde of 3 zombies.

 

But, you died, so, it doesn't count?

 

Ok, make shovel, stone axe, get a wooden spear / bow, couple cobblestone, some small game.

Stand still on a suitable cobble pile.

Kill the night spawn dire wolves for food, fix your cobble pole after them.

 

I'd bet you can "survive" for ... well. Still Quite hypothetical, but forever. Hundreds of days?

 

I don't really like the idea of "skillfully doing nothing" being considered a good strategy either. The survival thingy should IMO imply a constant urgency to do something. Once you start playing, the game actually works, but "optimizing" your play for survival would makes the experience pretty horrible.

 

I know no-one is arguing you Should so this; but this is what the counterargument of "you don't have to play optimally" sounds like to me.. If I don't gain from progressing, then, why is there progress? Why are we here, just to suffer?

Well - progress can depend on ... biomes. let say - forest is the easiest biom, wastelands is hardest --> in forest you can find mostly normal zombies while in wasteland you can find mostly wight, spider zombie but the best quality items are there so : forest --> town ---> snow biom or desert --> city --> swamp ---> wastelands -->  waste city = progress

"Why are we here, just to suffer?" rprobably - don't expect nothing good

 

2 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:

@Roland
I know youve seen this video already... but it honestly boils down to this again:

videogame philosophy.



If you want to limit yourself, feel free. I don't. If a game does not challenge me without me setting arbitrary rules for myself, it is not a survival game anymore.
And I am a huge fan of being challenged and survival games.

So I disagree harshly on your "I limit myself, and so can you"

It is the devs obligation to find ways to make everything fun.
If there is an "instant win button" (and no not a consolue, but something that was purposefully implemented, be it a skill or an item you can buy or whatever) it is not the players "fault" to use it. That lies soley in the devs corner.
Fixing bugs, balancing the game and making sure that the "gameplay loop" is the intended one to follow.
If you'd gain everything by just staying at spawn, the devs "tell" the player that this is the correct way to play.
Same with quests. If that is the best way to gain everything, this is the way to do it. (never mind the fact that the player does not know how gamestage works, he just sees "oh I get level and loot nice")
I agree that there should be freedom to chose whatever you want and not everything HAS to be exactly as efficient as everything else.
But right now quests are so much stronger than anything else, the devs tell players "do this to get stronger and survive".

 

 

Again: "limit yourself" is not an argument.

It wasn't at building exploits, it wasn't with underground bases, and it isn't with driving away.

There are edgecases (were spikepits really exploits? You had to work REALLY hard to make them work... so input -> output), but something as clear as quests need to be fixed by the devs, not by the players.

Yep ia agree - and honestly idk why they think that spikespits are exploits - in a lot of games spikepits is instant death traps

15 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

The contradiction is maybe solved if we remember that the game is supposed to be a challenge for new players, not veterans. We veterans are using the game in "unintented" ways just like people on 9+ player servers and builders playing a single world continually for hundreds of hours.

 

It surely isn't that TFP doesn't like veteran players to play the game, but all those players are in the second row.

 

 

I agree in regards to the trader. His exploit-potential is so big that even novice players will often detect this almost immediately.

 

 

HE LIKES THE GAME. Just like you dislike almost anything about the game (or at least are only posting to critizise and want the game to be different).

Forget the moderator-sign, we just post like any normal user, argue like any normal user. Just that we both are generally pleased with the game and you are not. We also read much and have to read much and tend to post our views in any interesting argument. If your arguments are good they should stand up to the flak.

 

Note it is no coincidence that volunteer moderators are usually pleased with how a game turns out, because if they are not they tend to vanish and eventually play other games. I'm still here since A15 because I like how the game turned out, in most aspects.

 

 

Was there some change directed against spike pits?

1. If i never played in older ( A11 probably) and i just bought 7DTD year ago i could agree. But i bought long time ago and older alpha were much harder that actual. If 7DTD was supposed to be easy game from begining - it woudn't complain. But they change from hardcore survival into easy game. And experience don't matter - spoiled food, meat smell,  corpse decying etc was much harder  right?   So that's  why are angry about. Because it change so radical. I think if now TFP decided to make 7dtd hard, depressing and mostly for hardcore  players  you would complain about that. So I and @Viktoriusiii are in similiar situation .

2. Well i have to agree about that you and  roland are normal. Honestly i like to you to argue with both of yours 😜

17 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

You are going seriously overboard here. You don't know the details and just say "don't work". But the feature was nerfed exactly to not be OP, exactly the same thing you demand for the trader now.

 

Fall damage is still there, but instead of outright killing zombies (which would be OP) the damage is one third of zombies health. That is quite good for a passive measure that also can be used to collect zombies for grenade or molotov bombardement and seriously slows them down in coming at you.

 

The exit to spike pits can be plastered with further traps. I used 2 dart throwers for such a pit just now in A20 and even most radiated did not walk out of that pit alive even without picking them off from above (at insane you would need more, sure).

 

Meanwhile basic spikes were relegated to work for early and mid-game, while in endgame they get ineffective and you need to use electric traps. That is the same mechanism that makes wood blocks obsolete and you need to move to concrete or steel blocks for advanced hordes. Basic game design, you should know that.

 

Spikes counting as blocks means they need to be put into holes so their top is flat with the surrounding earth, then they work even better than before. Did you really never read this, I must have posted this information dozens of times and CraterCreator even had an icon for some time telling about that.

 

Spikes traps... supposed to be OP... well that's point's of them - PoP, City of brass, tomb rider etc  but  it's not OP in this same time. Why?  if zombie fall into pit - instant death for zombie ( let say pit is 9X9X5) but for you too - you have to watch out if you are going somewhere and if you running to your base and night it's a big chance you will fall in your own trap - so car or bike is too dangerouse to keep in base.

21 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

Meanwhile basic spikes were relegated to work for early and mid-game, while in endgame they get ineffective and you need to use electric traps. That is the same mechanism that makes wood blocks obsolete and you need to move to concrete or steel blocks for advanced hordes. Basic game design, you should know that.

 

 

Not rly - you can make sea of spike using chainsaw --> 200 spikes is good enough usually . PS electrical traps... hm kinda useless - why? Zombie AI - they usually rush only one place so electricty  don't help you enough because have durability

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, meganoth said:

You are going seriously overboard here. You don't know the details and just say "don't work". But the feature was nerfed exactly to not be OP, exactly the same thing you demand for the trader now.

We disagree on the how much, that is for sure.
Spikepits are insanely hard to do (a lot of work, not complex), especially in earlygame.
So they are only for the midgame. But we don't have anything to do damage, because inthe midgame spikes are worthless. And traps degrade so fast that you can't even say "heyamama" before the first ones are broken.

46 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Fall damage is still there, but instead of outright killing zombies (which would be OP) the damage is one third of zombies health. That is quite good for a passive measure that also can be used to collect zombies for grenade or molotov bombardement and seriously slows them down in coming at you.

I do think that 4/5ths is a good value for the amount of work needed to dig a 40 block deep 3 wide trench (120*50 = 6000 blocks). I agree that outright killing themis OP. No argument there... well...
Why not cap it at a certain HP value? Then weak ones die instantly, but the hard ones survive, except if they somehow got extra damaged.
Or do full damage but to the legs, meaning they nearly always break. Making them easier to deal with.

46 minutes ago, meganoth said:

The exit to spike pits can be plastered with further traps. I used 2 dart throwers for such a pit just now in A20 and even most radiated did not walk out of that pit alive even without picking them off from above (at insane you would need more, sure).

 

Meanwhile basic spikes were relegated to work for early and mid-game, while in endgame they get ineffective and you need to use electric traps. That is the same mechanism that makes wood blocks obsolete and you need to move to concrete or steel blocks for advanced hordes. Basic game design, you should know that.

The problem is that we do not have anything that holds up for an entire hordenight.
MAYBE darttraps... haven't used them much, mostly bc they sucked so hard on implementation (my fault i know :D) but I don't think a pit with loads of darttraps is very elegant... but maybe I'd need to tryit.

46 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Spikes counting as blocks means they need to be put into holes so their top is flat with the surrounding earth, then they work even better than before. Did you really never read this, I must have posted this information dozens of times and CraterCreator even had an icon for some time telling about that.

I only realized like a year ago, when someone (maybe even oyu brought it up) because it is so god damn counterintuitive.
That means that they WILL maze-pathfind through broken spikes. I don't get why they don't just code spikeblocks (or any trap blocks really) like pressureplates or air blocks. makes 10x sense and leads to less stupid behaviour.

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

20 minutes ago, Viktoriusiii said:

We disagree on the how much, that is for sure.
Spikepits are insanely hard to do (a lot of work, not complex), especially in earlygame.
So they are only for the midgame. But we don't have anything to do damage, because inthe midgame spikes are worthless. And traps degrade so fast that you can't even say "heyamama" before the first ones are broken.

I do think that 4/5ths is a good value for the amount of work needed to dig a 40 block deep 3 wide trench (120*50 = 6000 blocks). I agree that outright killing themis OP. No argument there... well...
Why not cap it at a certain HP value? Then weak ones die instantly, but the hard ones survive, except if they somehow got extra damaged.
Or do full damage but to the legs, meaning they nearly always break. Making them easier to deal with.

The problem is that we do not have anything that holds up for an entire hordenight.
MAYBE darttraps... haven't used them much, mostly bc they sucked so hard on implementation (my fault i know :D) but I don't think a pit with loads of darttraps is very elegant... but maybe I'd need to tryit.

I only realized like a year ago, when someone (maybe even oyu brought it up) because it is so god damn counterintuitive.
That means that they WILL maze-pathfind through broken spikes. I don't get why they don't just code spikeblocks (or any trap blocks really) like pressureplates or air blocks. makes 10x sense and leads to less stupid behaviour.

Yep, zombies are too smart. And honestly... if i can undestand turrets that dart traps are just terrible concept 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

We disagree on the how much, that is for sure.
Spikepits are insanely hard to do (a lot of work, not complex), especially in earlygame.

 

Correct. But on the other hand you don't need need to go deep in early game (forget fall damage) and just use spike traps that are effective against normal zombies. Though I must admit I usually don't use pits in early game. Partly because my early game horde base is not the final horde base anyway, but also because placing spike traps around the small POI I usually use work as well.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

So they are only for the midgame. But we don't have anything to do damage, because inthe midgame spikes are worthless. And traps degrade so fast that you can't even say "heyamama" before the first ones are broken.

 

Yes, here we differ. Iron spike traps are very cheap and put down in masses work through a whole horde night. Also because zombies see the hole where a spike trap was as a longer way than the hole with a spike trap (because that way is still flat!!) zombies will NOT avoid traps when a path is cleared through a trap field.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I do think that 4/5ths is a good value for the amount of work needed to dig a 40 block deep 3 wide trench (120*50 = 6000 blocks). I agree that outright killing themis OP. No argument there... well...
Why not cap it at a certain HP value? Then weak ones die instantly, but the hard ones survive, except if they somehow got extra damaged.

 

Sure. That could have been a different solution. It does not make a huge difference, who cares whether weak zombies survive that fall?

 

By the way, a pit to bedrock is obviously the pit deluxe and rightly in endgame. Even a pit 5x5 and 10 blocks deep (250 blocks) can be very effective in combination with a sledge turret throwing them down there form a small access way. And naturally any size inbetween.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

Or do full damage but to the legs, meaning they nearly always break. Making them easier to deal with.

The problem is that we do not have anything that holds up for an entire hordenight.
MAYBE darttraps... haven't used them much, mostly bc they sucked so hard on implementation (my fault i know :D) but I don't think a pit with loads of darttraps is very elegant... but maybe I'd need to tryit.

 

There are lots of ways to make pits. You can make them into death traps with turrets, dart traps and electric traps and as I said before they are great for throwing explosives down there or putting a sniper there in MP.

 

You can put spike traps in there as well but spike traps need space which you seldom have in a pit. Plastering a whole field with spike traps for example is a good way to soften and slow down a horde, it doesn't need much work and is as effective as the work put in.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

I only realized like a year ago, when someone (maybe even oyu brought it up) because it is so god damn counterintuitive.

 

Yes, very hard to find out, most players will never know about it. I have criticised that as well. My prefered solution would be changing the graphics into something that looks more like a block with smaller spikes on it, similar to the one a mod had.

 

1 hour ago, Viktoriusiii said:

That means that they WILL maze-pathfind through broken spikes. I don't get why they don't just code spikeblocks (or any trap blocks really) like pressureplates or air blocks. makes 10x sense and leads to less stupid behaviour.

 

Not sure what you mean by broken spikes (there are either spikes that do damage or the spike is gone), but as I said above, when a spike in a hole is gone it is a longer path for the zombie than the spike beside it that is flat ground and so he will maze-pathfind through spikes and avoid the empty holes.

 

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

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

Yep ia agree - and honestly idk why they think that spikespits are exploits - in a lot of games spikepits is instant death traps

 

Show me any post where spikepits are termed exploits by TFP or me or Roland (I assume you mean that with the "they"?).

 

3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

Spikes traps... supposed to be OP... well that's point's of them

 

No. Bring an argument instead of saying "they are supposed to be" or at least say exactly WHO decided that they have to be and why should we listen to him.

 

3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

- PoP, City of brass, tomb rider etc  but  it's not OP in this same time.

 

Tomb raider for example is an absolutely pointless comparison: You don't build the trap in TR, it is a trap specifically for you to fall in, a danger made by the game, not one you made to let zombies fall in. And if you fall in you just reload. PLEASE PLEASE at least in conversations with me, could you please avoid that silly name dropping of other games.

 

3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

 

Why?  if zombie fall into pit - instant death for zombie ( let say pit is 9X9X5) but for you too - you have to watch out if you are going somewhere and if you running to your base and night it's a big chance you will fall in your own trap - so car or bike is too dangerouse to keep in base.

 

So TFP could make simply wood traps insta-kill traps for any zombie including demolisher because a few clumsy players could be killed by that trap as well? (And yes, I was killed by stepping into wood traps quite a few times).

 

Meanwhile all the more careful players AND the clumsy players will be bored to death! That makes no sense.

 

3 hours ago, Matt115 said:

Not rly - you can make sea of spike using chainsaw --> 200 spikes is good enough usually . PS electrical traps... hm kinda useless - why? Zombie AI - they usually rush only one place so electricty  don't help you enough because have durability

 

And they can be repaired if you can reach it. And it is part of the design of a horde base if all zombies rush through a specific place or only some. Redundancy is another option. And lastly, while the electric fence is working it keeps your ammo usage low so you still have enough ammo for spray-and-pray when it is gone.

 

 

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

12 minutes ago, meganoth said:

 

Show me any post where spikepits are termed exploits by someone (from TFP or someone defending the change).

 

 

No. Bring an argument instead of saying "they are supposed to be" or at least say exactly WHO decided that they have to be and why should we listen to him.

 

 

Tomb rider for example is an absolutely pointless comparison: You don't build the trap in TR, it is a trap specifically for you to fall in, a danger made by the game, not one you made to let zombies fall in. And if you fall in you just reload. PLEASE PLEASE at least in conversations with me, could you please avoid that silly name dropping of other games.

 

 

So TFP could make simply wood traps insta-kill traps for any zombie including demolisher because a few clumsy players could be killed by that trap as well? (And yes, I was killed by stepping into wood traps quite a few times).

 

Meanwhile all the more careful players AND the clumsy players will be bored to death! That makes no sense.

 

 

And they can be repaired if you can reach it. And it is part of the design of a horde base if all zombies rush through a specific place or only some. Redundancy is another option. And lastly, while the electric fence is working it keeps your ammo usage low so you still have enough ammo for spray-and-pray when it is gone.

 

 

1. Well i know there was some types of exploits by using traps so i undestood by :

6 hours ago, Viktoriusiii said:


There are edgecases (were spikepits really exploits? You had to work REALLY hard to make them work... so input -> output), but something as clear as quests need to be fixed by the devs, not by the players.

That spikepits were exploits like killng corridor. So this can be mistake

2 and 3 .  I would say "standard created long ago" but without " dropping of other games" i will use argument - logical thinking . Okay - weapons in 7dtd are rly underpowered. You have to stab with spear so many times,  shotguns are so... unsatiscating usually. I undestand why - "perks" probably to slow down progress but.. this create so stupid situation that you shot shotgun in zombie head and is often still alive - in older before perks it would be 1 shot kill except wight. But ok now about just traps, well - in 7dtd zombies are (except spider) reanimated corpses - fall from 5 m on spikes should be instant death why? high + well accleration combine with penetration. This one of the oldest traps in history and it was usefull because it was soo cheap and effective. Okay TFP done in that why because  zombie limit  so zombie have to have a lot of hp because if zombie were pretty weak ( i mean hp not dmg) could be too easy - i get that but i hope increase zombies number into 128 will be consider for 7DTD2 .

4. Perfect example how to use demolisher : demolisher fall into hole -- boom --> hole is safe for zombie  so this could be easy " neutralisation " of spikespits . Ok but what about "bigger spikepits" - well it think  spike dmg can be combined with fall dmg so --> let for example   1 m = 10 hp so dmg of  spike would be (fall dmg) x 3 piercing dmg.  So if  you have something like  ;    Lxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ( x spike, L earth) then after fall of demolisher it could be L.....xxx (...  dirt in pit)  so zombie could get 0x3 piercing dmg --> so without fall spiketrap is totaly useless. 

5. No they will not... or will be - well TFP decided to choose crawling zombie instead Behemot - if there would a lot of types of zombie: armored zombie, sapper suit zombie rock thrower zombie etc there would be a lot to do - so even if you are " a little bit" safe against onb begining of blood moon normal zombie still you have too deal with special ones

6. You forget about one but vital problem --> iron is not endless so if you mine every close iron you have to go farer and farer to mine iron but this need time right? but tree you can  plant near you base ( i know you can scavenge cars etc but you have too go for them farer and farer too).

 

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...