An in depth discussion on zombie loot in alpha 17

[AiRJacobs]

I'm fine with the loot being rare, as long as the rare loot is actually really good; not just some paper.

I also wish there was a progress bar of some sorts for how many zombies you have to kill before your next kill drops loot. That way you have some idea of the game's flow, and a reason to not simply avoid every zombie you see.

[meganoth]

I would have liked to vote "I believe it is a good change but I'll have to play it to be sure". Since there were only extremes available I sadly had to go with one of them. Consider, even "reserve judgement" is sort of an extreme choice because everyone has some sort of expectation how he might like it.

 

 

Right, the "zombies aren't a resource" argument. Please explain to me the point of defending a base against a zombie horde when you could just ride a minibike instead.

 

That's all I want to know.

 

I really loved the tower defense aspect of the game and now unless TFP has a trick up their sleeves, I don't see the point in even bothering with it.

 

Zombies aren't a resource is a design goal. That defending a base incurs costs that have to be payed by the player and that could diminish his motivation for the tower defense is a different issue.

 

Both were linked until A16 because the loot was a solution to the costs BUT not the time of repair. As soon as the loot looses its draw (in the later stages of the game) you are left with the repair time as a drawback and so the fundamental problem still existed even with loot-zombies.

 

I don't have a perfect solution for this. The rest of the game will be improved by this change (IMHO) because a game is better if you immerse yourself into the game instead of playing a meta game (but, many players are fine with playing meta-games or are conditioned to play it). The tower defense needs some way to recompensate you for the time and material cost, but there are lots of ways to do it.

 

For example:

1) Wasn't it you that brought up the treasure map you get as reward for horde night. I think this is a great idea

 

2) Damage after a horde night is automatically repaired. Sure, sounds immersion-breaking. Maybe it is just an insurrance you can buy cheap at the trader who sends over workers to repair anything done by the zombies, would explain everything except the economics of such an insurrance

 

3) Only on horde night you get some information, only by combining the information you can win the game. For example it could be that a scientist needs 8 glands of special boss zombies that only come out at horde night to make a serum. Or every horde night boss zombie has a map with the location of their own "zombie generator". If you don't destroy the generator, you get two bosses the next horde night. And so on. Either you need to destroy all generators or multiple bosses are so hard and fast that you eventually can't evade them by minibike or other means anymore.

Doesn't solve the cost problem, but you are motivated to attend horde nights because you need the "macguffin" to win the game. (google macguffin if you don't know what it is)

[eidobunny]

I agree that there are solutions other than zombie loot, I am only bringing attention to the problem.

 

My player-driven solution will be to ride around on a minibike every 7th night, unless I really REALLY have an excess of resources and just want to kill some zombies. I just, don't really want it to be that way. I think in terms of efficiency and it just, doesn't seem practical to take a 7th night horde if you don't have to, unless there is some sort of reward or payoff in some way.

 

And yes it was me who suggested a treasure map

[eidobunny]

You can have more stuff in a base and the zombies want to eat you?

 

 

 

I'm just confused. You love the tower defense aspect of the game, just not as much as digging for loot through corpses instead of just picking up the dropped packs?

 

Nope, nothing to do with that. It's just a simple mathematical equation. If I fight the horde now, I get to have the fun of fighting a horde and I come out with a net gain in experience and value, as long as I build a good defense and am a good player. A completely positive result. If (THEORETICALLY) there was no zombie loot (AT ALL - which by the way is NOT true, but we don't yet know the extent of the rarity of zombie loot) - then I still get to have the fun of fighting the horde, but I am /guaranteed/ a net loss of value. Alternatively I can just ride a minibike around the wilderness all night and incur no loss of value whatsoever. The downside to that is I don't get to fight a horde. So what used to be an obvious choice:

 

a) fight the horde, net positive all around

b) run from the horde, neither positive or negative

 

becomes:

 

a) fight the horde, net negative all around

b) run from the horde, neither positive or negative

 

I said it before, "if, as a developer, you give them the opportunity, the player will optimize the fun out of your game, so you have to save them from themselves"

 

My concern is simple. Fighting the horde should always be the obvious and preferred option. You WANT your players to fight your hordes. Give them a reason to do so. Don't give us more reasons to run and hide.

[Jedo]

I agree that there are solutions other than zombie loot, I am only bringing attention to the problem.

 

My player-driven solution will be to ride around on a minibike every 7th night, unless I really REALLY have an excess of resources and just want to kill some zombies. I just, don't really want it to be that way. I think in terms of efficiency and it just, doesn't seem practical to take a 7th night horde if you don't have to, unless there is some sort of reward or payoff in some way.

 

And yes it was me who suggested a treasure map

 

Tell me that you aren't one of those "underground shouldn't be safe people." I'm just saying that their argument tends to be "it's more efficient and the reward for fighting the 7th night horde isn't worth it."

[Jedo]

Nope, nothing to do with that. It's just a simple mathematical equation. If I fight the horde now, I get to have the fun of fighting a horde and I come out with a net gain in experience and value, as long as I build a good defense and am a good player. A completely positive result. If (THEORETICALLY) there was no zombie loot (AT ALL - which by the way is NOT true, but we don't yet know the extent of the rarity of zombie loot) - then I still get to have the fun of fighting the horde, but I am /guaranteed/ a net loss of value. Alternatively I can just ride a minibike around the wilderness all night and incur no loss of value whatsoever. The downside to that is I don't get to fight a horde. So what used to be an obvious choice:

 

a) fight the horde, net positive all around

b) run from the horde, neither positive or negative

 

becomes:

 

a) fight the horde, net negative all around

b) run from the horde, neither positive or negative

 

Except running from the horde isn't neutral because you lose the opportunity of the "fun" of the horde. What you're saying is that the "fun" of the horde does not outweigh the "not fun" of a net loss of value.

 

This seems like it's wandering into Roland's favorite territory of hard choices...

[eidobunny]

Tell me that you aren't one of those "underground shouldn't be safe people." I'm just saying that their argument tends to be "it's more efficient and the reward for fighting the 7th night horde isn't worth it."

 

Was this worded backwards? Seems like people who support underground being safe are the ones saying fighting 7th nights isn't worth it.

 

Personally, I don't think underground should be 100% safe and I'm glad they're adding diggers. I also think fighting the horde should always be the only choice. Running and hiding seems counter-productive to the fundamental design of the game. A huge chunk of the game centers around the blood moon hordes and they should be hard and you should have to learn how to fight them and not just avoid them IMO. Avoiding them on foot would be fun and interesting but avoiding them on a vehicle is just stupid.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Except running from the horde isn't neutral because you lose the opportunity of the "fun" of the horde. What you're saying is that the "fun" of the horde does not outweigh the "not fun" of a net loss of value.

 

This seems like it's wandering into Roland's favorite territory of hard choices...

 

Yeah I agree with this statement. And I also agree that it becomes a hard choice. And my opinion is that it should not be a hard choice. Everyone should WANT and HAVE to fight the 7th night hordes. It seems like a really core part of the game. As a developer I feel like if players are avoiding one of your main game mechanics you have a serious problem.

[Jedo]

Was this worded backwards? Seems like people who support underground being safe are the ones saying fighting 7th nights isn't worth it.

 

Personally, I don't think underground should be 100% safe and I'm glad they're adding diggers. I also think fighting the horde should always be the only choice. Running and hiding seems counter-productive to the fundamental design of the game. A huge chunk of the game centers around the blood moon hordes and they should be hard and you should have to learn how to fight them and not just avoid them IMO. Avoiding them on foot would be fun and interesting but avoiding them on a vehicle is just stupid.

 

Yeah I agree with this statement. And I also agree that it becomes a hard choice. And my opinion is that it should not be a hard choice. Everyone should WANT and HAVE to fight the 7th night hordes. It seems like a really core part of the game. As a developer I feel like if players are avoiding one of your main game mechanics you have a serious problem.

 

And yet "avoiding them on a vehicle" is exactly what you are going to do?

 

Really, the diminution of loot from zombies has finally caught you up with where the underground builders crowd have been: fighting the 7th night horde is not worth it. And yet, you can't stop it from coming. TFP are making more and more efforts to make you HAVE to fight the 7th night hordes, but they aren't necessarily making more efforts to make you WANT to fight them.

 

Where I disagree with you is that we should want to fight them. Why? I don't want to fight Bowser in a Mario game, but I have to in order to reach my goal: beating the game. That's what I want to do. That's the real design of most games: put obstacles in the path of the player as they attempt to reach their goal. What's the goal of this game? Surviving. What's the obstacle? A recurring horde of zombies threatening to decimate your survival chances the next time around. In that case, TFP should focus their efforts on the obstacle, and I think they have no need to make it desirable.

[bloom_meister]

Was this worded backwards? Seems like people who support underground being safe are the ones saying fighting 7th nights isn't worth it.

 

Personally, I don't think underground should be 100% safe and I'm glad they're adding diggers. I also think fighting the horde should always be the only choice.

 

The problem with that is that when there is only one option its no longer an option its a fixed gameplay instruction, the opposite of a sandbox in fact.

 

This is not aimed at you Eido but people repeatedly show an incredible lack of thinking with their blinkered ''I want everyone to be forced to play how I play'' mentality. What the hell is wrong with giving people choices? As long as you have a gameplay choice that suits your playstyle why the heck do you care if billy in the corner wants to make a different one because he enjoys that more?

 

Seriously people.

[Jedo]

I will say that your mention of diggers reminds me that PVP should be ecstatic about this. Another layer of difficulty to avoiding detection. Will zombies thwart your underground base in a way that human players couldn't? Maybe so. Better build an underground base now which is undetectable by human and AI alike.

[Jedo]

The problem with that is that when there is only one option its no longer an option its a fixed gameplay instruction, the opposite of a sandbox in fact.

 

Some people certainly do take the mentality which you outlined in the remainder of your post, and they are wrong in that.

 

What sometimes gets translated as being part of that mentality is the argument that the devs of this game (since it isn't just an open sandbox) have every right to funnel you down a path (here being "survival") and make it difficult for you in as many ways as possible. Making underground dangerous is not saying, "You have to play above ground," but rather, "If you want to survive underground you will have to work at it." The devs are closing off the glitch which allowed the player to step outside the game and make it to the end. (Think of the race in Ready Player One.) Still, on this path of survival, you can traverse it in all sorts of ways (air, underground, walking the path, running the path, travelling just off the path, sitting at the start and hoping that all the danger just goes away, etc.); but in knowing the myriad ways in which players might travel, the devs establish impediments to one's survival for all of those ways.

[eidobunny]

The problem with that is that when there is only one option its no longer an option its a fixed gameplay instruction, the opposite of a sandbox in fact.

 

This is not aimed at you Eido but people repeatedly show an incredible lack of thinking with their blinkered ''I want everyone to be forced to play how I play'' mentality. What the hell is wrong with giving people choices? As long as you have a gameplay choice that suits your playstyle why the heck do you care if billy in the corner wants to make a different one because he enjoys that more?

 

Seriously people.

 

There's a gray area and you have to draw the line somewhere. If you keep saying "what if x wants to do y" then eventually you can get to a point where the game isn't even 7 Days to Die but something else entirely. Developers make decisions and restrict gameplay in certain ways, and those design choices make the game what it is. Be careful about claiming that you can never under any circumstances restrict gameplay. I do see where you're coming from with your statement though. It is my personal opinion, and if I was the developer I would be forcing people to participate in 7th nights because that's a core element of my game's design. Not because I don't want people to have options, but because that's a specific mechanic that the game revolves around and people /need/ to be participating in it. Whether it's out in a random PoI, dug into a hole in the ground, running through the forest, whatever. I would definitely want to encourage people to participate and not to not participate.

 

The easiest way to encourage people to fight the horde would be to make fighting and winning the ideal option, but running and hiding better than fighting and losing. In other words, fighting is high risk high reward, running and hiding is low risk low reward. A16 follows this model exactly. With the zombie loot proposals (not sure of the actual implementation yet of course) it is possible that this model will get scrambled up. Running becomes the ideal option, and fighting and winning is better than fighting and losing. I see this as a problem. Many people arguing with me.... do not see this as a problem???

[Exxodous]

 

a) fight the horde, Fun and Engaging

b) run from the horde, Boring and Gamey

 

becomes:

 

a) fight the horde, Fun and Engaging

b) run from the horde, Boring and Gamey

 

 

Fixed it for ya

 

Seriously tho, I truly understand what your saying but just like in life, having fun generally "costs" something. For example if I take the kids to the lake for a week, we sure have a lot of fun. That is the reward, then I have to go work all week to pay for that fun.

 

I see this as a similar situation. Enjoy the horde night and the accomplishment of surviving, then scavenge, mine, prepare so you can enjoy it again next time. I don't think the goal of horde night should be to gain wealth or items, instead one should enjoy the challenge or failure of the experience.

[bloom_meister]

Eido,

 

Everyone participates already in the 7day horde because they make gameplay choices, depending on their preference and then allocate time and resources to effect that choice.

 

Your choice might be to build a base on the surface and put a lot of time into anti zombie defences such as a deep moat, lots of spikes, turrets etc and then go reap the rewards (in A16) of collecting all the loot

 

My choice may be to build a base at bedrock and have to stay down there all night, not scavenging and maybe mining whilst the horde plays out but get no loot or experience from the zombies.

 

In both examples we have altered our goals based upon a reaction to the fact that the horde will arrive, we both participated but simply in different ways, some people (and I have seen them post it here) think that both these options are cheap and you should be forced to run around on the surface, that spikes and moats and turrets are abusive, that clever design is a cheat (placement of doors for example) and likely there are some like me that actually do all 3, I have a base at bedrock for when i cannot be bothered with the horde, a base on the surface for when i feel like fighting it and sometimes run around with a sledge or AK because that is, at moment in time, fun for me.

 

My point is that everyone participates in their own way and each makes choices they deem to be more fun for them. With the current game design none of these choices hurts or influences other players so....why do you care?

 

I get your point on what the devs want btw and thats up to them, but for players to be asking for other players to be restricted due to that players own style? nah, thats selfish and wrong.

[eidobunny]

Fixed it for ya

 

Seriously tho, I truly understand what your saying but just like in life, having fun generally "costs" something. For example if I take the kids to the lake for a week, we sure have a lot of fun. That is the reward, then I have to go work all week to pay for that fun.

 

I see this as a similar situation. Enjoy the horde night and the accomplishment of surviving, then scavenge, mine, prepare so you can enjoy it again next time. I don't think the goal of horde night should be to gain wealth or items, instead one should enjoy the challenge or failure of the experience.

 

 

In all seriousness though, I disagree. There is inherent fun to fighting and winning a horde night, but I'm wired for maximum efficiency and I'm going to pick the more efficient option. If riding on my minibike is a better use of my time then that's what I'm going to do.

[Roland]

I guess you guys are all talking about late game after you don't need or want xp for leveling up? Because until you reach the level cap there is still a pretty strong incentive to kill zombies on horde night.

[eidobunny]

I get your point on what the devs want btw and thats up to them, but for players to be asking for other players to be restricted due to that players own style? nah, thats selfish and wrong.

 

Interesting point. I wonder if I'm so vocal about this specifically because I'm the one being restricted in this scenario and it was selfish and wrong (in my opinion!) of the developers to make this change. Or that I feel like I'm the one being slighted by this change. And that's exactly the reason why I'm here posting. I certainly have the right to be like, "hey, this negatively affects me, what gives???"

 

Let's go back to the issue of zombie loot, since that's the main topic at hand. The developers remove zombie loot which has quite obviously affected many people, myself included, in the same way that if the developers fight underground bases with new mechanics to snuff them out like diggers and worms or environmental hazards. This issue affects me so I'm posting about it, just like how the underground base players all rise up and complain when mechanics designed to screw them over are proposed.

 

All we can do is state our opinion, how it will affect us, and make a case for how we think things should be in order to benefit our own playstyle. The developers have to choose whether or not those voices make up the majority or the minority and how they want to design around that.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

I guess you guys are all talking about late game after you don't need or want xp for leveling up? Because until you reach the level cap there is still a pretty strong incentive to kill zombies on horde night.

 

99% of zombies die on spikes or to turrets Roland. Are we getting trap XP yet? 99% of the time I shoot a zombie in the head with a crossbow and his leg flies off and he starts crawling around spinning in circles rapidly in the spikes and dies before I get another bolt loaded or before I'm able to hit his head again like going for a particular space in wheel of fortune.

[Exxodous]

 

In all seriousness though, I disagree. There is inherent fun to fighting and winning a horde night, but I'm wired for maximum efficiency and I'm going to pick the more efficient option. If riding on my minibike is a better use of my time then that's what I'm going to do.

 

So you will choose efficient over fun then. I can think of a lot of things I do in my life that fun trumps efficient. Everyone marches to a different drummer I suppose and there's nothing wrong with that. Hopefully there is something on horde night that satisfies us both.

 

btw, not sure what the picture in your post is supposed to signify.

[eidobunny]

btw, not sure what the picture in your post is supposed to signify.

 

I guess you can't see it on this forum, but the title of the file is "fun costs something"

 

It signifies that I already paid for my fun, I shouldn't need to continue virtually paying for more virtual fun.

 

It was a joke obviously. I know that investing time and energy to collect resources is a core gameplay progression mechanic.

[eidobunny]

So you will choose efficient over fun then.

 

Yes and in my opinion the most efficient option should also be the most fun option. The "easy" option should be to run and hide but should come with less rewards. I don't see how anyone can argue with this but you people are doing a damn good job of it.

 

High risk, high reward.

 

Low risk, low reward.

 

Duh???

[Roland]

Interesting point. I wonder if I'm so vocal about this specifically because I'm the one being restricted in this scenario and it was selfish and wrong (in my opinion!) of the developers to make this change. Or that I feel like I'm the one being slighted by this change. And that's exactly the reason why I'm here posting. I certainly have the right to be like, "hey, this negatively affects me, what gives???"

 

Let's go back to the issue of zombie loot, since that's the main topic at hand. The developers remove zombie loot which has quite obviously affected many people, myself included, in the same way that if the developers fight underground bases with new mechanics to snuff them out like diggers and worms or environmental hazards. This issue affects me so I'm posting about it, just like how the underground base players all rise up and complain when mechanics designed to screw them over are proposed.

 

All we can do is state our opinion, how it will affect us, and make a case for how we think things should be in order to benefit our own playstyle. The developers have to choose whether or not those voices make up the majority or the minority and how they want to design around that.

 

Yes, but you consistently are inaccurate about it. Both Kinyajuu and Madmole and myself have stated that the zombies will drop bags if they have loot. So please stop saying they have removed zombie loot. It is inaccurate. It is rarer now but Madmole also stated that as they playtest they will make adjustments if they feel the loot chance is too low.

 

I get that you want to make your desire known but repeatedly stating an extreme scenario (complete loot removal) that isn't even true does your credibility and your side of the argument great harm.

 

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

 

You want to say it's been nerfed quite a bit and you hope they increase the probabilities? Then that is fair. Be fair Eido. Don't Chicken Little the argument as a sensationalist way to make your point.

 

Besides, if you kill them with arrows and bolts then the loot you get back is absolutely greater than it was before. You get whole arrows and bolts as loot in every zombie you kill compared to A16 when you often got nothing at all.

[Jedo]

Interesting point. I wonder if I'm so vocal about this specifically because I'm the one being restricted in this scenario and it was selfish and wrong (in my opinion!) of the developers to make this change. Or that I feel like I'm the one being slighted by this change. And that's exactly the reason why I'm here posting. I certainly have the right to be like, "hey, this negatively affects me, what gives???"

 

Let's go back to the issue of zombie loot, since that's the main topic at hand. The developers remove zombie loot which has quite obviously affected many people, myself included, in the same way that if the developers fight underground bases with new mechanics to snuff them out like diggers and worms or environmental hazards. This issue affects me so I'm posting about it, just like how the underground base players all rise up and complain when mechanics designed to screw them over are proposed.

 

What did you say to the undergrounders when they stated their opinion about the changes? Did you say, "Thanks for stating your opinion. We'll have to leave it up to the devs to decide"?

[Jedo]

Yes and in my opinion the most efficient option should also be the most fun option. The "easy" option should be to run and hide but should come with less rewards. I don't see how anyone can argue with this but you people are doing a damn good job of it.

 

Probably because it is opinion and not fact?

 

Again, I don't think that fighting bosses at the end of a linear game is fun. It's brutal. It's hard. I usually get really mad a time or two when I don't succeed. When I finally do succeed, what I have gained is a sense of accomplishment, and I was able to get it through twiddling my thumbs and fingers around rather than through sweating outside at some task. That's what was fun about it for me.

 

Incidentally, vacations are fun for entirely different reasons, and they don't require brutal, hard things which cause me to curse at the world.

[eidobunny]

Yes, but you consistently are inaccurate about it. Both Kinyajuu and Madmole and myself have stated that the zombies will drop bags if they have loot. So please stop saying they have removed zombie loot. It is inaccurate. It is rarer now but Madmole also stated that as they playtest they will make adjustments if they feel the loot chance is too low.

 

I get that you want to make your desire known but repeatedly stating an extreme scenario (complete loot removal) that isn't even true does your credibility and your side of the argument great harm.

 

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

Loot reward for killing zombies has not been removed.

 

You want to say it's been nerfed quite a bit and you hope they increase the probabilities? Then that is fair. Be fair Eido. Don't Chicken Little the argument as a sensationalist way to make your point.

 

Besides, if you kill them with arrows and bolts then the loot you get back is absolutely greater than it was before. You get whole arrows and bolts as loot in every zombie you kill compared to A16 when you often got nothing at all.

 

Most of my introductory posts clearly state that I am aware that there is zombie loot being dropped at a rare percentage. If you step into a middle of a conversation I can't be expected to repeat a giant disclaimer every post I make. To be fair, this forum moves too quickly to read everything so I don't blame you for missing my disclaimers. I've written this particular disclaimer every time I'm engaged in this discussion:

 

If (THEORETICALLY) there was no zombie loot (AT ALL - which by the way is NOT true, but we don't yet know the extent of the rarity of zombie loot) - then I still get to have the fun of fighting the horde, but I am /guaranteed/ a net loss of value.

 

I'm just talking theoretical scenarios. We know zombie loot was changed. We know it's extraordinarily more rare now. We don't know the extent to which we will be getting loot, especially on horde nights. All we can do is sit on this forum and talk because A17 isn't out yet. And that's what I'm doing.

[Roland]

99% of zombies die on spikes or to turrets Roland. Are we getting trap XP yet? 99% of the time I shoot a zombie in the head with a crossbow and his leg flies off and he starts crawling around spinning in circles rapidly in the spikes and dies before I get another bolt loaded or before I'm able to hit his head again like going for a particular space in wheel of fortune.

 

99% of zombies die on spikes or to turrets in your setup. I level up a few times thanks to horde nights. Trap XP is likely to be a "never" and not a "yet". Your last bit is not at all fair. You're taking an announcement for A17 and putting into a known A16 buggy context.