PVP in 7 days to die

[NeferPitou]

well let talk about something here a lot of people don t see..... the fun in this game as a PVP player ( Player vs Player)

some people can say that the game never made for that and it s laggy and buggy and i do know that ...

that why i wanna see the devs to work in this kind of mod that been very popular in 7D2D

the Alpha 16 was the coolest update for PVP like camera alarms turrets traps i feel like it was made for PVP and i wish that ronald will the this post and ask the devs add a c4 that make a lot of damage for a claimed area like rust just for the sake of this mode it s not a hard thing to do and please guys the POIs distance was a really a disappointment for me i was hoping that you can see bases just like the normal POI that really rutted up my dream please add that

i liked the A17 new player movments it look so smoth and much better then the laggy crap that we had

i am sorry for my english trying hard to be clear

thanks

[toores]

Beta is getting closer and once TFP start to optimize the game, we'll see how it will run multiplayer. Definitely something to be excited about.

 

And yes, Roland, anything you can do to make the C4 happen would be much appreciated

[Reth]

As a general rule, non-consensual PvP and extensive building capabilities don't mix in games. The reason is very simple - if something takes two days to build and ten minutes to destroy, griefers will not let normal players enjoy the game.

 

The way your message reads, you don't even want to spend ten minutes.

[Guppycur]

Until they address the fact that you can turn off grass, shadows, etc etc etc in PvP to easily see your enemies, I just don't care for it. It was fun in an arena setting though...

[Junuxx]

trying hard to be clear

 

That would be slightly more credible if you used some punctuation and capital letters every now and then.

[Maharin]

That would be slightly more credible if you used some punctuation and capital letters every now and then.

 

They used periods at least. They just bunched them together in random groups.

[Blazer777]

i do and dont agree here with the C4 as it would completely negate land claim blocks use and ppl would just do 3 thick reinforced concrete or steel walls GL getting through that

[kamer1337]

i dont know why do you want c4 to raid base. it depends on server settings how hard it is to get into base. and there is something similar to "c4" called tnt, but cant be placed on claimed area

 

i guess you want something to ignore claimed block protection and do insane damage

[SylenThunder]

Just another disclaimer on this.....

 

7 Days to Die is not a PvP game.

 

Yes it can be played that way.

Yes, eventually some balance may be added for PvP.

PvP was not part of the developers original intent though, and Co-op PvE play will always take priority when it comes to balance, mechanics, and items in game.

[ParaSyt]

Just another disclaimer on this.....

 

7 Days to Die is not a PvP game.

 

Yes it can be played that way.

Yes, eventually some balance may be added for PvP.

PvP was not part of the developers original intent though, and Co-op PvE play will always take priority when it comes to balance, mechanics, and items in game.

 

Tell that to Epic when they released Fortnite.

[SylenThunder]

ok, maybe it should be worded a little differently....

 

7 Days to Die is not designed to be a PvP game.

[zombie4hire]

..and I am very glad it is not.

[Blazer777]

heres why i say no c4 kamer coz i watched a video in another game and 1 c4 charge took out half a guys base and the server was on vanilla settings

[LuckyStar]

OP sounds like he's never written a line of code in his life...

 

...yet claims it's not hard to add stuff. >.<

 

Okay besides that..... 7DTD is a PVE game. Always has been.

 

If it ever gets a focus on PvP I'd prefer it comes AFTER Colonies and an in-depth SP story line.

[Kam R.]

Just another disclaimer on this.....

 

7 Days to Die is not a PvP game.

 

Yes it can be played that way.

Yes, eventually some balance may be added for PvP.

PvP was not part of the developers original intent though, and Co-op PvE play will always take priority when it comes to balance, mechanics, and items in game.

 

I don't know the full history of when PvP became a thing and how it came to be (got the game at A14), but if PvP was never intended to take place, why did the devs ever open up the possibility for it, just to let it stay a half assed feature and continuously ignored/ frowned-upon issue for years?

 

I think from the point player killing and base raiding was made possible, the devs kinda forfeited the right to keep saying it was not their intent to be a PvP game. And suffice to say there's no going back to making it a pure PvE-only game now – The backlash would be more than unpleasant, I'm sure.

 

Just my opinion on that. I'm not going on here crying about the state of PvP or even demanding it to be "fixed", but enjoying a PvP environment just as much as a PvE-only one, I think from this point onward at least PvP aspects should ALWAYS be considered and discussed when it comes to the introduction of the upcoming new features.

 

As NeferPitou already said, let's talk about something that appearently does not get talked much about. I guess the hardest part in that for some people is to hold back on saltiness from bad experiences and for others to keep their d.icks in their pants. But that's what the moderators are for.

 

 

On OP: C4 as strong force against player structures? – Maybe, but needs a bunch of conditions for it not to be OP and just annoying. For one, should only available be on servers that have claim settings that prevent offline raiding.

Also should be non craftable, rare loot.

And as Reth pointed out, it's no fun if you need to grind for a long time to set up your base and it can get torn down in no time. One way to counter that might be a game mode where building and crafting takes a lot less time and/or resources.

 

Cue the "It can be modded in" comments...

[DragonFyre]

I don't know the full history of when PvP became a thing and how it came to be (got the game at A14), but if PvP was never intended to take place, why did the devs ever open up the possibility for it, just to let it stay a half assed feature and continuously ignored/ frowned-upon issue for years?

Well, looking back, it's more likely due to an oversight or incomplete game mechanics in the early Alpha stages. There was no friend/foe filters for weapon damage. At some point it was added so you wouldn't accidentally kill your friends. It's not so much that they opened up the possibility for it, as there was no filter to prevent it. It's largely frowned upon because the majority of "PvPer"s are just as*hats that get a kick out of screwing over people who are trying to play normally. They apparently get their giggles from causing other people actual pain because they aren't actual humans.

(I'm mostly from the console side, and the player base there is a lot more toxic. I'm sure the PC gamer kids aren't that far off though. It's a damn good reason behind why PvP should have zero place in a co-op survival game.)

 

I think from the point player killing and base raiding was made possible, the devs kinda forfeited the right to keep saying it was not their intent to be a PvP game. And suffice to say there's no going back to making it a pure PvE-only game now – The backlash would be more than unpleasant, I'm sure.

Most children don't play games for what they are actually designed for. Hell, I would bet that almost half the people who purchased this game don't even know it's still in the early development stages. What kind of backlash should be expected exactly? It was never advertised as a PvP game. It was advertised as a survival co-op sandbox game. Hell, originally it was only intended to be single-player from

 

co-op

[noun, adverb koh-op; verb koh-op, koh-op]

 

noun

1.

a cooperative store, dwelling, program, etc.

 

verb (used with object), co-oped or co-opped, co-oping or co-opping.

2.

to place in a cooperative arrangement, especially to convert (an apartment or building) to a cooperative.

 

adjective

3.

(of a game, especially a video game) cooperative, requiring players to work together to achieve a common objective: co-op play modes; co-op multiplayer games.

 

Idioms

4.

go co-op, to convert to a cooperative: Our apartment building is going co-op.

 

 

I don't see anything there that deals with PvP, the PvP mentality, or purposefully killing other people.

Just sayin

 

 

On OP: C4 as strong force against player structures? – Maybe, but needs a bunch of conditions for it not to be OP and just annoying. For one, should only available be on servers that have claim settings that prevent offline raiding.

Also should be non craftable, rare loot.

And as Reth pointed out, it's no fun if you need to grind for a long time to set up your base and it can get torn down in no time. One way to counter that might be a game mode where building and crafting takes a lot less time and/or resources.

 

Cue the "It can be modded in" comments...

 

If you're going to bypass the inhernt safety on the claim block, you'll have to resort to modding it. I'd make it so that it only works on non-sleeping claims, and only does a small area of damage. like to blast a door with.

[Roland]

I don't know the full history of when PvP became a thing and how it came to be (got the game at A14), but if PvP was never intended to take place, why did the devs ever open up the possibility for it, just to let it stay a half assed feature and continuously ignored/ frowned-upon issue for years?

 

The game began as an open world Minecraft clone. The devs had it in their minds that it would eventually grow into something else but the starting point was a very loose and open sandbox where players could play however they wanted.

 

As the development progressed more and more features and systems were put in place that pushed the game balance more towards the cooperative adventure/RPG end of the spectrum and away from the open world PVP end of the spectrum. This isn’t to say PVP couldn’t be done but many of the rules of gameplay and progression don’t favor that mode of play.

 

I think from the point player killing and base raiding was made possible, the devs kinda forfeited the right to keep saying it was not their intent to be a PvP game. And suffice to say there's no going back to making it a pure PvE-only game now – The backlash would be more than unpleasant, I'm sure.

 

They aren’t abandoning PVP. They are abandoning the hope of having one unified game that can be balanced for both competitive play and cooperative play in a way that is fully satisfying for both. It can’t be. There are too many mutually exclusive balancing issues of one vs the other. So a separate PVP mode is planned but obviously their first priority is SP and MP Co-op.

 

 

...One way to counter that might be a game mode where building and crafting takes a lot less time and/or resources.

 

Cue the "It can be modded in" comments...

 

I won’t say “mod it”. I’ll just say your solution highlights the fact that the game can’t be both PVP and PVE at the same time. Fast building would work great for PVP action but would completely run counter to a satisfying single player or cooperative survival experience. The main game is the single player and co-operative survival adventure. PVP mode will have to be its own separate entity to be worked on later.

[Kam R.]

Well, looking back, it's more likely due to an oversight or incomplete game mechanics in the early Alpha stages. There was no friend/foe filters for weapon damage. At some point it was added so you wouldn't accidentally kill your friends. It's not so much that they opened up the possibility for it, as there was no filter to prevent it.

 

So since a proper no friendly fire mode is in, what keeps the devs from making it the only mode? Remove all the current options to claim settings (they are not inherently safe as you said) and have only full base protection granted by them and there ya go, no PvP game anymore. Instead of making the game PvE only with a few tweaks to the system right away the devs just keep pointing out it was never intended to be PvP but at the same time leave the PvP option in.

The point I'm trying to make is that the argument that the game was meant to be X is void when in fact the game is Y.

 

 

Most children don't play games for what they are actually designed for. Hell, I would bet that almost half the people who purchased this game don't even know it's still in the early development stages. What kind of backlash should be expected exactly? It was never advertised as a PvP game. It was advertised as a survival co-op sandbox game. Hell, originally it was only intended to be single-player from

 

co-op

[noun, adverb koh-op; verb koh-op, koh-op]

 

noun

1.

a cooperative store, dwelling, program, etc.

 

verb (used with object), co-oped or co-opped, co-oping or co-opping.

2.

to place in a cooperative arrangement, especially to convert (an apartment or building) to a cooperative.

 

adjective

3.

(of a game, especially a video game) cooperative, requiring players to work together to achieve a common objective: co-op play modes; co-op multiplayer games.

 

Idioms

4.

go co-op, to convert to a cooperative: Our apartment building is going co-op.

 

 

I don't see anything there that deals with PvP, the PvP mentality, or purposefully killing other people.

 

The backlash would be all the players that won't find their particular playstyle available anymore leaving the game.

 

It was advertised as something it currently is not or not entirely rather. Devs can either go the route of making it what they advertised it to be or go with the flow and actually see and work with the positive side of the unintentional features of their product.

The way it is now (with PvP being an OPTION) is the best it could be, because besides some (or even many) asshats it attracts a huge variety of interesting players and offers the same variety of interesting playstyles on a variety of interesting servers.

 

 

It's largely frowned upon because the majority of "PvPer"s are just as*hats that get a kick out of screwing over people who are trying to play normally. They apparently get their giggles from causing other people actual pain because they aren't actual humans.

(I'm mostly from the console side, and the player base there is a lot more toxic. I'm sure the PC gamer kids aren't that far off though. It's a damn good reason behind why PvP should have zero place in a co-op survival game.)

 

As is the nature with any game that has PvP, such as 7dtd, it will attract the less desirable crowd of players, but I wouldn't ever make that a reason to disable PvP, that's just lazy and unimaginative. I won't go on a rant about them, I'll say I hate those kinds of players just as much as you seem to. But first thing you shouldn't do is throw those players in the same pot with everyone else who enjoys PvP and talk about a general "PvP mentality". What about players who are mature and not toxic and have a good sense of sportsmanship? People who can play fair too and know not to raid that newbie's wooden hut with 2 stone axes and a bundle of plant fiber in a measly chest? People who actually will help out a player who had just that happen to them? People who enjoy the additional challenge of human unpredictability (not sure if that's a word lol). People like me who like the moral implications and decisions that such a scenario offers over the plain grinding mats and slaying dumb as hell Zs (Which I love just as much, btw).

And to respond to the dictionary copypaste, Nr. 3 specifically: There is also Co-op in working together with a team against another team for example. The common objective being either seizing their resources, or defending against a very tyrannic group (read asshats). None of the definition gets lost with PvP enabled really, just more objectives added. IMO both the devs and their forum mods as well as some members of this community including you should throw out this concept of a dichotomy "PVE vs PVP".

 

 

Oh and the same argument goes for the "Originally it was supposed to be only single player". Why did they add multiplayer then? Probably because they wanted to try it out, or maybe because many players asked for it. And it made the game tons better because it added new ways to play.

[Kam R.]

The game began as an open world Minecraft clone. The devs had it in their minds that it would eventually grow into something else but the starting point was a very loose and open sandbox where players could play however they wanted.

 

As the development progressed more and more features and systems were put in place that pushed the game balance more towards the cooperative adventure/RPG end of the spectrum and away from the open world PVP end of the spectrum. This isn’t to say PVP couldn’t be done but many of the rules of gameplay and progression don’t favor that mode of play.

 

 

They aren’t abandoning PVP. They are abandoning the hope of having one unified game that can be balanced for both competitive play and cooperative play in a way that is fully satisfying for both. It can’t be. There are too many mutually exclusive balancing issues of one vs the other. So a separate PVP mode is planned but obviously their first priority is SP and MP Co-op.

 

I won’t say “mod it”. I’ll just say your solution highlights the fact that the game can’t be both PVP and PVE at the same time. Fast building would work great for PVP action but would completely run counter to a satisfying single player or cooperative survival experience. The main game is the single player and co-operative survival adventure. PVP mode will have to be its own separate entity to be worked on later.

 

I'm absolutely fine with that, all I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with discussing how all the currently developed and to-be added features impact /will impact that future "PvP mode". I know it cannot be crammed into one game, which is why the game should open as many options to be those many games it can be.

 

I'm just somewhat frustrated by how anything PvP related seems to always just bounce off the "later" statements, as well as the PvE purists condemning it altogether.

[Roland]

“PVE purists” have been burned time after time by developers abandoning them to follow the PVP MMO $$$$$$.

 

It’s actually refreshing to FINALLY have a game that is keeping PVP on the back burner so that it doesn’t overwhelm and kill off single player and cooperative balance and gameplay.

 

I get that the “PVP purists” aren’t used to being treated this way as they usually get what they want. For this title, however, they are just going to have to be patient and wait their turn.

 

Not that I think TFP is purposely sticking it to the PVPers at all. It’s just the natural result of the limitations of the game engine and voxel technology. This game will never be a Fortnight or PUBG or H1Z1 or DayZ or Rust type of experience the way it is built. There’s a reason none of those games are voxel.

[Kam R.]

I'd love to see less purists altogether. Anyway, found that other thread about the "PvP update" and might drop my 2 cents there after I crawled through all the posts and still have something to add

[sadpickle]

I say no to C4 and other griefy tools. Look at Rust. It's a ♥♥♥♥fest because of C4 and no-lifers ruining things for everyone. Hell, there's even a flamethrower and there is always at least one guy who makes it his mission to run around and torch everything made of wood. It's awful.

[Kattla]

I say no to C4 and other griefy tools. Look at Rust. It's a ♥♥♥♥fest because of C4 and no-lifers ruining things for everyone. Hell, there's even a flamethrower and there is always at least one guy who makes it his mission to run around and torch everything made of wood. It's awful.

 

There are other ways to do PvP (player vs player) then running around looking for bases to raid. Guppy said arenas had worked

well in the past. Perhaps limited free roam pvp to certain days or nights could work out. Or limited to certain areas or biomes.

A slow paced battle royale perhaps, as in the circle shrinks every ingame day (or night).

 

But, i am not into PvP, and i guess those who are, know better what works and what does not.

[sadpickle]

There are other ways to do PvP (player vs player) then running around looking for bases to raid. Guppy said arenas had worked

well in the past. Perhaps limited free roam pvp to certain days or nights could work out. Or limited to certain areas or biomes.

A slow paced battle royale perhaps, as in the circle shrinks every ingame day (or night).

 

But, i am not into PvP, and i guess those who are, know better what works and what does not.

There's PVP, and then there's base demo. Open PVP is fine, but being able to explode others bases is griefy. I have no problem with being able to KOS in a PVP server, or having your base infiltrated through an open door. I just don't want to wake up to ruins. That's Rust's meta.

[ColdGate]

Current PVP is extremely boring and unbalanced. Armor need reworking, weapons deals too much damage, sometimes you may search for other player base on populated server for few real days and do not find it. Its easy to hide small base in place, where even texture glitch wont detect it.