Jump to content

Zombie killin' experience gain


Rainspider

Recommended Posts

Giving xp just for sneaking near an enemy is not that easy. You don't want to reward xp continually to a player just sitting there near a zombie and waiting or moving back and forth without doing anything sensible. That could be exploited in lots of ways.

 

I think it's doable, as long as there is a chance to fail your sneak check and the xp reward is inversely related to your sneak success. (eg higher chance of success, less xp received.)

 

Project Zomboid already has this mechanic in place.

 

-A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our rule in D&D was that if we didn't end up in a town there would be no experience or advancement and that frequently (but not always) meant we went many sessions before experience was doled out. /shrug We also used to do marathon sessions of 10+ hours, too, so whatever. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take in the first two.

 

1) Most people want a feeling of progress in a game, that the things they do, lead to accomplishment.

2) Because of the above, they will endure a surprising amount of hardship and repetitious activities.

 

Most people will then see why people do and don't do certain things in 7D2D:

 

A) Play below ground and build huge underground complexes and long subway tunnels.

-or-

B) Play above ground and gimmick an above ground fort to take as little damage as possible.

-or-

C) Cheat up a bunch of ammo and several "playdough" durability weapons and go crazy.

 

B is viable if killing zombies has a point. Ether a chance of good loot, experience or clues. As the game provides no real benefit to killing zombies, the intelligent, non-cheating person makes their base below ground.

 

Same thing with exploration, or as I call them: "Brass expeditions" as that ends up being the ONLY point.

 

So with a game that completely stops creating fun by mid game and requires the player to make up some fun, or stop playing. You would think that a robust adventure system is at the top of TFP list.

 

Is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked this game the most when it had no xp / levelling system at all.

 

And nowadays some people think that if zombies don't award enough xp players will stop killing them and the game will fall apart...

 

I can't say I am totally against a character progression system, but I don't like the game being focused on one either. A proper atmospheric/immersive survival should definitely not be about chasing carrots on sticks or grinding xp - these characteristics are more fitting to a happy-go-lucky mmo.

 

 

And about the "let me play how I want" PC catch phrase, that has become a creed during these last years in the forums... I swear I get triggered every time I see it, I want to kill a cat or something.

First of all, this is a forum and it should be obvious that everything expressed here is an opinion. Anyway, the reality (imho) is that not everyone can play how they want - it's bloody impossible. The game may contain elements from several genres in the description but it can't be everything at the same time. Neither can the devs implement a myriad of things only to gate them behind even more options. Plus some elements can hurt others by being thematically/mechanically antithetical. One such thing (imho) is getting phat xp rewards from zombies like the ones in A15(? if I remember correctly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take in the first two.

 

1) Most people want a feeling of progress in a game, that the things they do, lead to accomplishment.

2) Because of the above, they will endure a surprising amount of hardship and repetitious activities.

 

Most people will then see why people do and don't do certain things in 7D2D:

 

A) Play below ground and build huge underground complexes and long subway tunnels.

-or-

B) Play above ground and gimmick an above ground fort to take as little damage as possible.

-or-

C) Cheat up a bunch of ammo and several "playdough" durability weapons and go crazy.

 

B is viable if killing zombies has a point. Ether a chance of good loot, experience or clues. As the game provides no real benefit to killing zombies, the intelligent, non-cheating person makes their base below ground.

 

Same thing with exploration, or as I call them: "Brass expeditions" as that ends up being the ONLY point.

 

So with a game that completely stops creating fun by mid game and requires the player to make up some fun, or stop playing. You would think that a robust adventure system is at the top of TFP list.

 

Is it?

 

 

Completely disagree that this is the root of the problem. As I said above, I strongly think that a survival game should focus around survival, lest it stops being about survival and turns into a mere mmo-style shooter. One thing is for sure, it cannot possibly be everything at once.

 

Every action needs a motive - I completely support that. But there are many different kinds of motives with different levels of motivation power that make the player act differently. I play with 6-7 rl friends of mine every time the game releases an update. Observing them, their playstyle never changed significantly since A1, until A15 (if im not mistaken) with increased zombie xp was released, at which point they clearly viewed enemies as grinding material. As enemies are abundant and instantly accessible, they felt compelled to "power level", ignoring their characters' lives/well being or other activities, for the sake of these xp rewards. Completely natural, since the game encouraged them to.

 

Zombies awarding experience will not make "underground players" live above ground and in the case they do, it will be for the wrong reasons. Players living underground are not a problem in the first place - the underground itself is, according to the opinion of those of us who want underground threats (for our sakes ofc).

 

As for the brass expeditions - they will just turn into xp grind expeditions. They are brass expeditions because survival mechanics are flawed. Maintenance and upkeep costs need adjustments, spoilage and machine failures need to be introduced, loot needs to be adjusted, events and other more compelling and less bland reasons than xp grind.

 

 

 

But I bet an arm and a leg, that many of these problems come from the plenty of options we have in the first place, that are supposedly always a good thing. Hopefully someone understands why I am saying that but won't get into it further at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main point in my view is that if you are actively doing something and the game has a progression system then you should be getting XP in some form for it.

 

Killing zombies is active.

Mining is active.

Crafting was active. ish. it got nerfed to not give skill xp cos of grind...

Collecting resources and building traps is active, killing zombies with traps is passive

 

For me, when I play, I usually just want to go destroy some zombies. I often wish they would do that in walking dead instead of the dramtic long scenes of people crying and such.

 

Im good at fps games, so zombies in 7days are not much of a challenge. I also enjoying choping them to bits...

 

I still find it easier to get character xp from mining.

 

I wouldnt really change how I play if zombies gave no xp, but progression would be a lot slower so if it was balanced to offset that then it doesnt matter.

 

If someone wants to go full rambo on horde night it should be rewarded with mad xp, because they should be considered mad :p but the game doesnt have a way to stop people with the right buffs (i.e coffee), so instead of nerf xp, that should be addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recommend reading both RestinPieces and StompyNZ last comments.

Somewhere between mine and their two comments, is a great game.

 

Maybe giving XP at all isn't the way to do it. Maybe just a straight what you do is what you get better at kinda thing. Some things will need to be grouped up but that would stop the dig a hole in the ground to get good at bartering for example.

 

You want to get better at fighting Zombies? Then fight zombies! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, pardon me. I tried to come up with something as (immersion breaking? daft? counter-intuitve? poor game design?) as not getting XP for kills. Given your "WTF" reaction, I think I hit the mark.

 

Strange, that you have so much problems with imagining that killing zombies without XP could be fun in itself. I must be much more bloodthirsty than you :smile-new:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's doable, as long as there is a chance to fail your sneak check and the xp reward is inversely related to your sneak success. (eg higher chance of success, less xp received.)

 

Project Zomboid already has this mechanic in place.

 

-A

 

Ok, still exploitable (for example surround yourself with spikes, watch tv until you hear spikes cracking), but it sounds like a workable alternative on the whole. Not sure if the calculation of the distance to all zombies around as soon as you are stealthed would hurt performance though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

B is viable if killing zombies has a point. Ether a chance of good loot, experience or clues. As the game provides no real benefit to killing zombies, the intelligent, non-cheating person makes their base below ground.

 

Well, at least I would never change the play style I like to a (for me totally boring) play style just because my play style lost XP rewards. Would you? I'm sure not. So why expect it from thousands of other players around?

 

The non-cheating intelligent person you are imagining would turn off zombies completely as that is a valid option and it allows you to sit there and just watch the time go by. Then stop playing because the game has lost any use except for building and in that regard minecraft is probably the better alternative. Or mine sand in the desert with an auger, because mining in general gives too much xp in A17 compared to other methods.

 

Giving xp for kills is a standard practice in the gaming industry, it is working well enough in many games and perfectly in some. Many players are so used to it that they can't imagine playing without. But it is also one way to train players to expect micro achievements every few seconds and to train player to play the meta-game instead of the game.

 

And that is my main reservation. In a survival game zombies should be killed for self preservation not for farming xp or as micro achievements in the meta-game of getting to the next level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, at least I would never change the play style I like to a (for me totally boring) play style just because my play style lost XP rewards. Would you? I'm sure not. So why expect it from thousands of other players around?

 

The non-cheating intelligent person you are imagining would turn off zombies completely as that is a valid option and it allows you to sit there and just watch the time go by. Then stop playing because the game has lost any use except for building and in that regard minecraft is probably the better alternative. Or mine sand in the desert with an auger, because mining in general gives too much xp in A17 compared to other methods.

 

Giving xp for kills is a standard practice in the gaming industry, it is working well enough in many games and perfectly in some. Many players are so used to it that they can't imagine playing without. But it is also one way to train players to expect micro achievements every few seconds and to train player to play the meta-game instead of the game.

 

And that is my main reservation. In a survival game zombies should be killed for self preservation not for farming xp or as micro achievements in the meta-game of getting to the next level.

 

I'm saying going into harms way for no reason is not playing a survival game, but to each there own. For me, being in an above ground fort while zombies are tearing it down is comical when there are better ways to survive.

 

I'll repeat myself: I would prefer getting better depending on what you do.

 

The game is not a top shelf FPS, not really a adventure game (yet), a so-so RPG (for now), to me, its basically a much better minecraft, for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying going into harms way for no reason ...

 

The reason should be that you need to scrounge food and materials to survive. That underground or minibike riding isn't dangerous and can be used to avoid the dangers is AFAIK not the intended state of a finished 7D2D.

 

And XP as the driving meta reason to go do stuff is surely not intended (by the game designers) as well. It is ok as a measurement of advancement but as soon as you play a game in a way that you change your actions according to how much XP they generate, game designers will not be pleased. Think back to A15 where XP was awarded for crafting useless stuff in your backpack. Nearly everyone didn't play a simulation of survivial at night (the ideal) but a trivial mini-game of meta-farming XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason should be that you need to scrounge food and materials to survive. That underground or minibike riding isn't dangerous and can be used to avoid the dangers is AFAIK not the intended state of a finished 7D2D.

 

And XP as the driving meta reason to go do stuff is surely not intended (by the game designers) as well. It is ok as a measurement of advancement but as soon as you play a game in a way that you change your actions according to how much XP they generate, game designers will not be pleased. Think back to A15 where XP was awarded for crafting useless stuff in your backpack. Nearly everyone didn't play a simulation of survivial at night (the ideal) but a trivial mini-game of meta-farming XP.

 

Ah, I see the problem now, you're still stuck on Exp points. I will say again: A player should improve what they do. At most make a category of things that relate to each other. So doing some technical activity will let you chose what technical skill you want to improve.

 

Have you absorbed this?

THEN if you want to get better at killing zombies, go out and kill Zombies. Want to improve mining, go dig.

 

The final reason for exp is getting more hit points... a 40 year old D&D concept. What should it be? Max out melee and you can evade attacks and hit faster. Something more realistic and still doable.

 

NOW, if the player is some super being, then gaining hit points over time might be part of the plot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I see the problem now, you're still stuck on Exp points. I will say again: A player should improve what they do. At most make a category of things that relate to each other. So doing some technical activity will let you chose what technical skill you want to improve.

 

Have you absorbed this?

 

Have you absorbed that the pimps do not use this system in 7D2D? And actually I'm very fine with this, I like to make choices which perks to select. "learning by doing" is surely more realistic, but at least for me less fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the game more before experience was a thing. I think (in my view) the game peaked in A12 from a "fun to play" perspective. Less goofy zombies, less gating, more interesting terrain.

 

I would be cool with it if zombies didn't yield loot, so long as there was more reasonable loot available in the world as a replacement. Pretty much guaranteed that if you clear a house, there will be at least some useful loot in there as a reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...