My Thoughts After Playing Alpha 17. Yes I said Alpha 17!

[Roland]

maybe, maybe not. But in the end, all that matters is hiding underground is no longer a given safe space on horde night.

 

Well, just remember this is the first iteration of the new AI. I got to horde night and none of them digged. Not sure why. I had more trouble from wandering hordes during the week than I did from the bloodmoon horde. So something is going on. I seem to remember that in past alphas zeds could sometimes see you through natural terrain but not through crafted blocks. During the week my ceiling and sides were mostly bare dirt and stone but finally right before the blood moon I was able to fully cover every surface with cobblestone blocks.

 

But still..the bloodmoon horde is supposed to gps to you no matter what so....not sure. There are bound to be issues as we go forward. I'll try and get to day 14 to see if the larger bloodmoon horde might make a bigger difference.

[DUST2DEATH]

[toores]

In addition: there are a few stealth perks designed to make you less likely to be sensed. I think for those who take those perks they will be safe from everything-- maybe even the blood moon hordes once maxed out according to things Madmole said awhile back.

 

That's good news. There is eventually a way to break away from the fight-grind-fix loop...

[Scyris]

That's good news. There is eventually a way to break away from the fight-grind-fix loop...

 

If I have a minibike, and I don't wanna bother with the horde on horde night I just go for a relaxing bike ride and do some exploring till the next morning. Then come back to loot the poi's once 4 am hits.

[Kamouille]

Actually the best is to give them one pathway of your choosing.

 

I think that designing gauntlets for the zeds may just be the next meta....

 

A while ago I tested a Vauban style fortress. It guided zombies through long corridors of spikes while I could shoot them all the way. And whatever wall they would start whacking on I could shoot them from the top of another wall.

 

But to be honest it was all too much work.

 

 

[kamer1337]

there will be only quests go kill XX, or more things to do like bring something to trader?

[Roland]

For A17 there will be three quest types:

 

1) Clear all sleepers in target POI

2) Fetch an item from target POI

3) Find hidden cache in target POI

 

There are 1-2 additional quest types planned for A18

 

Plus we’ll have to see how creative modders can get.

[Viktoriusiii]

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?85232-Quests-and-their-rewards

 

just gonna leave that here... since nobody actually visits pimp dreams anymore

Quests could be SOOO varied... and their rewards the same... it would be so sad if it stayed this bland and uninteresting bare bones concept.

[jdifran]

For A17 there will be three quest types:

 

1) Clear all sleepers in target POI

2) Fetch an item from target POI

3) Find hidden cache in target POI

 

There are 1-2 additional quest types planned for A18

 

Plus we’ll have to see how creative modders can get.

 

Are treasure maps still in, or are they replaced by #3 above?

[KingSlayerGM]

A while ago I tested a Vauban style fortress. It guided zombies through long corridors of spikes while I could shoot them all the way. And whatever wall they would start whacking on I could shoot them from the top of another wall.

 

But to be honest it was all too much work.

 

Wow, it looks incredible!

[Roland]

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?85232-Quests-and-their-rewards

 

just gonna leave that here... since nobody actually visits pimp dreams anymore

Quests could be SOOO varied... and their rewards the same... it would be so sad if it stayed this bland and uninteresting bare bones concept.

 

It has to start somewhere. Remember that this is alpha which means you are viewing the progress of its development. Quests aren't going to pop out of nowhere in their final state. Solving issues and getting feedback on simple quests will pave the way to more variation. Getting these to work in Navezgane AND in RGW for single player AND multiplayer parties has been a monumental task.

[Roland]

Are treasure maps still in, or are they replaced by #3 above?

 

yep. There are still treasure maps and still challenges both in the form of notes found in crates and on zombies.

[KingSlayerGM]

For A17 there will be three quest types:

 

1) Clear all sleepers in target POI

2) Fetch an item from target POI

3) Find hidden cache in target POI

 

There are 1-2 additional quest types planned for A18

 

Plus we’ll have to see how creative modders can get.

 

Other quests ideas could be:

 

• trader needs <list of items and materials> for <story-related reason>
  
• traders needs you to take <item> to <other trader or npc> for <story-related reason>
  
• traders needs you to fetch<item> from <other trader or npc> for <story-related reason>
  
• kill said <npc or boss zombie>
  

[DaVegaNL]

For A17 there will be three quest types:

 

1) Clear all sleepers in target POI

2) Fetch an item from target POI

3) Find hidden cache in target POI

 

There are 1-2 additional quest types planned for A18

 

Plus we’ll have to see how creative modders can get.

 

/sarcasm mode on

 

Wow. The innovation is blowing me away.

[Roland]

As if that toggle wasn't broken years ago...

[DaVegaNL]

As if that toggle wasn't broken years ago...

 

Hehe, you got a point there.

[Aurelius]

If you "think about it for a minute" then if the tasks being given out as quests were that essential to survival the traders/factions/whatever would do them themselves rather than wait for some shmuck to wander along to do it for them.

 

You're assuming the traders/factions/whatever has the same survival state as the player. They clearly won't - the player may need a cement mixer, forge, certain type of seed, etc. and the other party clearly already has it. "You do my mission which supports my needs, and I'll give you something you need, which I have plenty of."

 

But even from a game point of view rather than a realism point of view; setting quest rewards to that you'd be "foolish" to not do them, or - worse - making them necessary to survival, would just be forcing the player to do quests they wouldn't otherwise want to do.

 

If players want to get involved in the quest system then let them. But if they don't, then the game shouldn't be trying to get them to coerce them into doing it. That's actively reducing their enjoyment of the game - why would devs want their players to enjoy the game less?

 

I never said anything about forcing a player to take a mission. Make it so it's significantly worthwhile to do so. If *you* don't want the cement mixer reward being handed out, fine - don't take the mission. Keep searching for your needed parts, and skilling up to get the perk. But if the rewards are going to be 300 dukes and 5 shotgun shells, I doubt I'll bother. Don't confuse what I'm saying with the old system where finding the very rare forge book was the only way to progress...

 

Yes it's a game. But the more realism you are able to inject into it - i.e. "If I'm going to risk life and limb for Rekt, I better get some good stuff out of it" - the more immersive it is.

 

TLDR;

I'm pushing to make mission rewards tantalizing, to entice players to do them. You are arguing against this... for why?

 

-A

[Viktoriusiii]

You're assuming the traders/factions/whatever has the same survival state as the player. They clearly won't - the player may need a cement mixer, forge, certain type of seed, etc. and the other party clearly already has it. "You do my mission which supports my needs, and I'll give you something you need, which I have plenty of."

 

 

 

I never said anything about forcing a player to take a mission. Make it so it's significantly worthwhile to do so. If *you* don't want the cement mixer reward being handed out, fine - don't take the mission. Keep searching for your needed parts, and skilling up to get the perk. But if the rewards are going to be 300 dukes and 5 shotgun shells, I doubt I'll bother. Don't confuse what I'm saying with the old system where finding the very rare forge book was the only way to progress...

 

Yes it's a game. But the more realism you are able to inject into it - i.e. "If I'm going to risk life and limb for Rekt, I better get some good stuff out of it" - the more immersive it is.

 

TLDR;

I'm pushing to make mission rewards tantalizing, to entice players to do them. You are arguing against this... for why?

 

-A

 

 

+1

I hate when you add a feature that some purists dislike it and push back angainst it.

 

@everyone who is against good rewards (because ive read that from a few people now)

I have about 100-200k dukes on day 10-20, depending on luck. You know what i still often dont have?

-cement mixer (day 20-30)

-chemstation (day 30-100)

-solar panal (day 50-90)

-good steel tools

-good armor

-parts/food/ammo

 

 

 

You know what I will do when the trader gives me 400 dukes? or a 200 quality pistol barrel?

I will completly ignore the quest. Because why would I want to travel to a poi, kill everything inside and travel back, if I dont get a reward?

If there WERE "reputationpoints" then fine... make the reward as low as you like but give me reputation... but a big chunk of the playerbase are NOT "roleplayers"/"purists". they are survivalists like me... who want to overcome the threat of zombies through days and days of preparation and finally beeing able to let the securitysystem do all the work.

And something that takes a lot of time for no reason whatsoever... will not be something those people will enjoy.

[Roland]

Woah, woah, woah...I shared one quest. I think you’re extrapolating from that a bit too heavily out of some unfounded worry. I’m all for awesome rewards. There will be plenty of time to give feedback on quests once we’ve all experienced several and can determine with a bit more evidence whether they’re worth doing or not on the whole.

 

The whole thing has to go through some iterations. Don’t you want to be part of that? Why expect the whole quest feature to be fully fleshed out with dozens of variations and perfectly balanced against what min/maxers can molest the traders into doing for them...?

 

It’s step one. More will come. The whole quest system and the dialogue trees are moddable. Right now TFPs goal is to get the system in place. They’ll Pimp it up eventually—possibly via inspiration taken from what modders might be able to create with this new digital play dough.

[A Nice Cup of Tea]

You're assuming the traders/factions/whatever has the same survival state as the player. They clearly won't - the player may need a cement mixer, forge, certain type of seed, etc. and the other party clearly already has it. "You do my mission which supports my needs, and I'll give you something you need, which I have plenty of."

 

That's exactly the situation I'm trying to avoid - where you have all-powerful traders/factions/whatever that are clearly surviving the zombie apocalypse fine, but rather than being part of them (or, since you're the protagonist, leading them) you're stuck outside sleeping rough, having to defend yourself, and going cap-in-hand to them doing odd jobs for handouts that you need to survive, then still not being part of the community.

 

Don't forget, we're talking about needing to do quests because, to quote the post that I was responding to:

 

The reward either has to be

A) So amazingly good, it'd be foolish to say no

B) Necessary to further your survival - if you don't do it, your odds of surviving are lower.

 

I never said anything about forcing a player to take a mission. Make it so it's significantly worthwhile to do so. If *you* don't want the cement mixer reward being handed out, fine - don't take the mission. Keep searching for your needed parts, and skilling up to get the perk. But if the rewards are going to be 300 dukes and 5 shotgun shells, I doubt I'll bother. Don't confuse what I'm saying with the old system where finding the very rare forge book was the only way to progress...

 

To be fair, you were talking specifically about quest rewards being "necessary" to further your survival, not just letting you get access to something a bit quicker than you would scavenging for it.

 

Yes it's a game. But the more realism you are able to inject into it - i.e. "If I'm going to risk life and limb for Rekt, I better get some good stuff out of it" - the more immersive it is.

 

Realism is what I'm after - the realism of people working together and co-operating, rather than a gamey quest/reward system where NPCs are merely quest dispensers in ivory towers.

 

(Not to mention the anti-realism of the quests often involving "dungeon" POIs with "bosses" at the end of them!)

 

TLDR;

I'm pushing to make mission rewards tantalizing, to entice players to do them. You are arguing against this... for why?

 

-A

 

Because you're pushing way too far. I'm happy for there to be optional quests that the player can do if they like that sort of thing or can ignore if (like me) they don't like that sort of thing.

 

But you're pushing for the rewards to be either - in your words - so amazingly good that you'd be foolish not to do the quests, or necessary for survival.

 

The thing is, for people who would enjoy doing quests anyway such an extreme carrot/stick approach isn't necessary. And for people who don't want to do the quests they have to either "foolish"ly miss out on the "amazingly good" rewards, forego rewards that would be "necessary to further [their] survival", or begrudgingly do the quests that they don't enjoy just to get the rewards.

[A Nice Cup of Tea]

You know what I will do when the trader gives me 400 dukes? or a 200 quality pistol barrel?

I will completly ignore the quest. Because why would I want to travel to a poi, kill everything inside and travel back, if I dont get a reward?

 

Because you'll have fun doing it?

 

After all - if you didn't enjoy doing it, but could be easily bribed into doing things you don't enjoy by having a big virtual reward dangled in front of your nose like a carrot in front of a donkey, how sad would that be?

 

If there WERE "reputationpoints" then fine... make the reward as low as you like but give me reputation...

 

Don't get me started on "reputation points"!

 

but a big chunk of the playerbase are NOT "roleplayers"/"purists". they are survivalists like me... who want to overcome the threat of zombies through days and days of preparation and finally beeing able to let the securitysystem do all the work.

And something that takes a lot of time for no reason whatsoever... will not be something those people will enjoy.

 

Which is absolutely fine.

 

Those who don't enjoy it don't have to do it. Those who do enjoy it don't need to be bribed into doing it. Everybody wins.

[Viktoriusiii]

@Roland:

I know... I was more concerned with others trying to defend barebone quest just because "you have to enjoy questing and rewards shouldnt be a thing"

 

 

Because you'll have fun doing it?

 

After all - if you didn't enjoy doing it, but could be easily bribed into doing things you don't enjoy by having a big virtual reward dangled in front of your nose like a carrot in front of a donkey, how sad would that be?

 

Are you having fun while mindlessly mining 100 stoneblocks? No? Why are you doing it? Maybe to get ressources for your base and building it... which is fun... or surviving the night knowing that you have prepared well?

 

I'm not saying "give me special stuff for easy rewards". And of course its a balancing act.

But I'm not "grinding ressources" to have fun right now... its to have fun later.

And you know what makes fun?

Having electric lights in your base... having a shotgunturret defending you... having a chemstation and producing gunpowder for the hordenight... having a better tool to save some time on mindless grinding...

 

If you want to do the quest just for fun, I feel like you are one of those players playing on easy (no offense and obviously you can also play on hard... just generalizing) who just play for fun and not to actually achieve something big.

 

I play to have a massive base and defend my fort against the horde. I play to have a nicelooking base where i enjoy living in. There is no real story or living world. So if they implement npcs and camps that you can help out and see grow... then sure I'd enjoy questing even without a direct reward... because it actually makes a difference.

If I just go from a to b and kill/loot some stuff, go back, make no difference in the world AND dont get something out of it... why would I want to do that?

[meganoth]

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?85232-Quests-and-their-rewards

 

just gonna leave that here... since nobody actually visits pimp dreams anymore

Quests could be SOOO varied... and their rewards the same... it would be so sad if it stayed this bland and uninteresting bare bones concept.

 

Mmmh, if I look at your quest list there, the quests principally are already in the game (quests 4,5 and 6) or basically what Roland listed (1,2 and 3).

 

If we look at "i have a lucrative buyer for 'xzy' if you get those you get half of the profit" for example, that is a so called fetch quest "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_(gaming)" . We already have dozens of fetch quests and a reason for a fetch quest is simple to come by.

 

The quest would only be something "more" if there really was a buyer you could talk to (not the trader). And you could rob him instead which should lead to friends of him hunting you. Or he could try to ambush you or you can find out later that he used the item you gave him for nefarious dealings. Such a quest chain is a lot more work to implement, quality comes at a prize.

 

PS: Not talking about the rewards at all, it is just common sense that the reward must reflect the effort. Balancing 101, but also very subjective what is a good reward and what isn't

[A Nice Cup of Tea]

Are you having fun while mindlessly mining 100 stoneblocks? No? Why are you doing it? Maybe to get ressources for your base and building it... which is fun... or surviving the night knowing that you have prepared well?

 

Exactly.

 

What we don't need is another boring-but-necessary grind.

 

If they're going to put quests in (which clearly they are) they should make them something that people do because they want to do them, not something that people don't enjoy but resign themselves to grinding out in order to enable future enjoyment.

 

If you want to do the quest just for fun, I feel like you are one of those players playing on easy (no offense and obviously you can also play on hard... just generalizing) who just play for fun and not to actually achieve something big.

 

I don't want to do the quests just for fun. I don't want to do them at all.

 

And that's why I'm against the idea that they should be rewarded in such a way that people who don't want to do them find them a necessary evil that they "have" to do now in order to have fun later.

 

And I don't play on easy, but do play for fun. Don't we all? I can't imagine why someone would play if they weren't having fun doing so.

[Roland]

I hinted at this before but now I’ll come out and say it. The traders are broken because they can be abused in a way that gets the player tens of thousands of dukes very quickly. In short, trading is the replacement for spam crafting for those who play this game like a race.

 

Now it’s sounds like some of you are wanting quests to be balanced so they offer a competing pathway to the trader exploit— instead of fixing the trader exploit.

 

I would much rather eliminate the ability to amass so much wealth so quickly so that the reward of 300 dukes actually is a tempting offer.

 

@Tea: I am mostly on board with your logic but I also want passed-up opportunities to hurt. I think choices should be hard and the quests should be such that even those who don’t like quests will be tempted. There’s no way to know where that line is for everyone so a good variety of rewards is what is needed. If TFP can get it to a point where someone like you can easily ignore 60% of them, ignore 35% with some regret, and can’t pass up 5% of them then I think TFP will have succeed.