Can you disable 7 day hordes entirely?

[RestInPieces]

Yes, you can cheese the system but everything is also there to build a base and set up traps and turrets and then defend wave after wave of zombies.

 

But just because survival isn’t tough enough for someone’s taste doesn’t mean it’s not there. You can easily make edits that will increase the survival elements.

 

I don’t disagree with the sentiment that someone buys a game and then feels that the implementation of one of the advertised elements is weak. I do disagree with buying a game that is advertised as having particular elements that they don’t care for and then saying that the game is bad unless those elements are removed by the developers.

 

I completely agree, that people should not ignore the game's description. There are cases where people don't enjoy survival, tower defense, or other aspects of the game - options, xml edditing and mods can accomodate 99% of these preferences. The base game should contain all these elements because it was advertised as such. Hopefully blood moon will be one of those things you can adjust in the future (personally prefer random blood moons with cues).

 

I am also very excited about how living underground in A17 will change (though I do believe that there were better ways to go about it other than digging zombies, without those ways requiring TFP to do much).

 

But, what was that about survival? I definitely can't agree with that and I think it contradicts your previous posts.

This game has a lot of survival elements in it - I always uplauded the game for that. But it's not about wanting "hardcore" survival - as pApA^LeGBa said survival elements are mostly optional and the game is more of an "FPS with a few extras" at the moment. Even if I hadn't played most survival games out there, the very definition of a survival game includes that the player is required to survive. You can't call a game "survival" if survival is not required (or if you throw a bunch of survival elements in it without synergy/motives - and death not having real impact), like you can't call a game "tower defense" if TD is not required.

 

This is and always was one of the biggest gripes I had with the game.

 

PS: Atm the need to gather food/medicine etc, are similar to the one in a crpg like, for example, "Pathfinder:Kingmaker". Correction: actually not resting and getting supplies in that game is harsher. TFP can't expect players to be required to mod synergizing survival mechanics into the base game. Not to mention that the majority of players won't bother with xml edits and modding at all - and you know we don't need statistics for that.

 

If they are so concerned about the game not being accessible enough to newer players (not to mention that being a new/inexperienced player is a short transitional state), they should pack a selection of menu options into a survival mode and a "lite" mode.

[zootal]

If you look in serverconfig.xml you find:

 

<property name="BloodMoonEnemyCount" value="8" /> <!-- The number of zombies spawned during blood moons per player...

 

 

For non-server usage (ie playing locally single player maps, etc.), if you look in the prefs file you find:

 

<pref name="BloodMoonEnemyCount" type="int">8</pref>

 

In linux, the prefs file is found in the ~/.config/unity3d/The Fun Pimps/7 Days To Die directory, I have no idea where it is in Windows.

 

Disclaimer - I have not tried actually changing this value, so it might not work....

[4sheetzngeegles]

colors maybe

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?86933-Ambient-lighting-Tutorial

[Kattla]

You don’t think it’s good because you ignored the labeling I guess when you bought it. There’s crafting, hordes, survival, exploration, and tower defense

 

Have you noticed how the blood moon that causes the zombies to gps to you and attack your position is hard coded into the game?

 

 

I also noticed some servers become ghosttowns just before horde nights. If the horde-voiders are a majority,

probaly not. But it do seem like the horde is a lackluster for quite a few people, for many different reasons.

 

As for what this game is, i've given up trying to figure it out. Rumors as of late seems to suggest it is turning

into a roleplaying game. It do however seem to be a mix of quite a few other game types, and so it is not

completly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.

[zootal]

I also noticed some servers become ghosttowns just before horde nights. If the horde-voiders are a majority,

probaly not. But it do seem like the horde is a lackluster for quite a few people, for many different reasons.

 

As for what this game is, i've given up trying to figure it out. Rumors as of late seems to suggest it is turning

into a roleplaying game. It do however seem to be a mix of quite a few other game types, and so it is not

completly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.

 

I think that is one of the things that makes 7D2D stand out, the ability to mod out what we don't like.

 

Want a brutal death guaranteed experience? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

 

Want an easy game without the grind? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

 

Want to change RWG? Tin showed us just how far you can go with his most excellent Dying Lands tweaks, and others have tweaked it as well.

 

Want to level up really fast? Want to just build stuff and not be bothered by zombies? Want hordes of ghouls everywhere? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

 

(ok, maybe not a "few" tweaks, but it's certainly possible. A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what. I modify mine extensively to give me the game experience I want on the world I want).

[Kattla]

A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what.

 

Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas.

Thumbs up for that idea.

 

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.

[Roland]

it is not

completly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.

 

Absolutely. I’m always in favor of people modding it how they please.

[zootal]

Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas.

Thumbs up for that idea.

 

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.

 

OMG yes. I can't tell you how many times I've screwed something in the xml and can't figure out what. Be nice if the error messages would tell us where the problem is, but the line and column it gives is usually not even close where I broke it. Sometimes I have to do a factory reset on the xml and start over again...

[Gamida]

 

[snip]

 

(ok, maybe not a "few" tweaks, but it's certainly possible. A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what. I modify mine extensively to give me the game experience I want on the world I want).

 

Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas.

Thumbs up for that idea.

 

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.

 

OMG yes. I can't tell you how many times I've screwed something in the xml and can't figure out what. Be nice if the error messages would tell us where the problem is, but the line and column it gives is usually not even close where I broke it. Sometimes I have to do a factory reset on the xml and start over again...

 

It is old but I have used it right up until A16.4. It may or may not work in A17 but I am guessing it will.

Some don't like using 3rd party software but I have been using it for a few alphas and have suggested it for others and have not heard anyone complain yet.

 

The first link is the start of the origianl post.

The second link is Sphereii's link to the program (original one in first post doesn't work anymore).

The third post is my small explanation of how to install it.

 

 

This only allows changes to items and recipes but I have found it useful on many occasions....especially when I "disagree" on vanilla stack sizes.

 

http://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?7910-BloodSlinger-s-Advanced-Recipe-Editor

 

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?7910-BloodSlinger-s-Advanced-Recipe-Editor&p=441330&viewfull=1#post441330

 

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?78330-XML-file-config-suggestions&p=768768&viewfull=1#post768768

[gfoster610]

[Gamida]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]25332[/ATTACH]

 

Something I said perhaps...

[Roland]

But, what was that about survival? I definitely can't agree with that and I think it contradicts your previous posts.

 

What exactly contradicts? That I said that this game is also a survival game? I do believe it is a survival game and I also happen to know that many people who play have a difficult time surviving. I don't think the opinion of veterans who have learned all the ins and outs, know exactly how the heat map works, know how to efficiently do everything perfectly to progress can give objective feedback about how difficult or easy it is to survive unless they consciously look at it from a new player's perspective. The default experience is a challenge for survival for new players. One of the most precious resources is time in this game and new players waste a ton of it coming to grips with how to play and what to do-- things people like us just breeze through without even thinking. I think the term "Survival" absolutely belongs in the description for this game.

 

This game has a lot of survival elements in it - I always aplauded the game for that. But it's not about wanting "hardcore" survival - as pApA^LeGBa said survival elements are mostly optional and the game is more of an "FPS with a few extras" at the moment. Even if I hadn't played most survival games out there, the very definition of a survival game includes that the player is required to survive. You can't call a game "survival" if survival is not required (or if you throw a bunch of survival elements in it without synergy/motives - and death not having real impact), like you can't call a game "tower defense" if TD is not required.

 

This is and always was one of the biggest gripes I had with the game.

 

I'm sorry but I see your argument and Papa's as just a matter of degree. Minecraft has creative mode, survival mode, and hardcore mode. Taking Minecraft as a model being that it is the progenitor of the open world survival game genre I argue that the genre of "survival game" is broad enough to include 7 Days to Die. When you say that death must have real consequences they do. At default those consequences are easily mitigated. But there is a setting for Lose All on Death which can really be a blow and a setback depending on what gear you were carrying. There is no "Reset on death" mode but not even Minecraft has that as part of their Survival game. That is what they call "Hardcore Mode". A17 is definitely going to take the survival threats to a new level and I think you'll enjoy those. But make no mistake, I think you'll quickly adapt and find the game feeling not so much a survival experience again because of your skills. The only way to compensate is to mod the game to be more punishing and more complex and more disastrous for the smallest of mistakes made so that the threat is real again for you. But to make the default game that hardcore would be a mistake. It has to remain approachable by the masses-- and I don't believe that disqualifies it from being called a survival game.

 

That being said..you and Papa will be sure to be glad that you do take damage when you're hungry and can die. And dying does weaken you quite a bit for a period of time until you recover.

 

PS: Atm the need to gather food/medicine etc, are similar to the one in a crpg like, for example, "Pathfinder:Kingmaker". Correction: actually not resting and getting supplies in that game is harsher. TFP can't expect players to be required to mod synergizing survival mechanics into the base game. Not to mention that the majority of players won't bother with xml edits and modding at all - and you know we don't need statistics for that.

 

If they are so concerned about the game not being accessible enough to newer players (not to mention that being a new/inexperienced player is a short transitional state), they should pack a selection of menu options into a survival mode and a "lite" mode.

 

And A17 is more synergistic as you'll discover. Not eating has a direct and immediate effect on stamina and will kill you if unchecked. Same for hydration. There are actually a number of new ways to contract disease and food poisoning can happen as an accumulation of not eating higher quality foods. I'm sure they'll get to ultimate punishments for death with options and modes but once again I think you know the game too well to understand just how difficult it is for new players and how dismally they are able to survive. True that they get infinite lives but I think that should be set aside as a hardcore mode restriction rather than calling that survival and then putting in a carebear mode. We have already seen that very few people are willing to play the two easier difficulty settings than Nomad. Rather than going down a difficulty level or two they are likely to rage quit and call the game broken.

[RestInPieces]

What exactly contradicts? That I said that this game is also a survival game? I do believe it is a survival game and I also happen to know that many people who play have a difficult time surviving. I don't think the opinion of veterans who have learned all the ins and outs, know exactly how the heat map works, know how to efficiently do everything perfectly to progress can give objective feedback about how difficult or easy it is to survive unless they consciously look at it from a new player's perspective. The default experience is a challenge for survival for new players. One of the most precious resources is time in this game and new players waste a ton of it coming to grips with how to play and what to do-- things people like us just breeze through without even thinking. I think the term "Survival" absolutely belongs in the description for this game.

 

I'm sorry but I see your argument and Papa's as just a matter of degree. Minecraft has creative mode, survival mode, and hardcore mode. Taking Minecraft as a model being that it is the progenitor of the open world survival game genre I argue that the genre of "survival game" is broad enough to include 7 Days to Die. When you say that death must have real consequences they do. At default those consequences are easily mitigated. But there is a setting for Lose All on Death which can really be a blow and a setback depending on what gear you were carrying. There is no "Reset on death" mode but not even Minecraft has that as part of their Survival game. That is what they call "Hardcore Mode". A17 is definitely going to take the survival threats to a new level and I think you'll enjoy those. But make no mistake, I think you'll quickly adapt and find the game feeling not so much a survival experience again because of your skills. The only way to compensate is to mod the game to be more punishing and more complex and more disastrous for the smallest of mistakes made so that the threat is real again for you. But to make the default game that hardcore would be a mistake. It has to remain approachable by the masses-- and I don't believe that disqualifies it from being called a survival game.

 

That being said..you and Papa will be sure to be glad that you do take damage when you're hungry and can die. And dying does weaken you quite a bit for a period of time until you recover.

 

Sorry for the long post in advance... can't help it.... please read? Thanks

 

I don't think we are 100% on the same page when it comes to the term survival. Certainly, surviving from zombies is, too, a large part of "survival", but any fps/action game could be considered to be survival (which would be wrong), if we account for every aspect of the game's difficulty. Even "Don't Starve" for example, would be considered a top-down action game, if it weren't for its deep survival mechanics (seasons, sanity, hunger etc).

 

The elements I am talking about won't exactly make the game harder - defending from zombies is much harder already. These elements require some planning, management, thinking - that's what survival games have in common. And I am not talking about making the early game necessarily more difficult when it comes to survival elements - it's the mid/end game tha suffers more. Some examples:

 

 

-The need to gather food becomes irrelevant very soon into the game, even before farms, as your food supplies are increased exponentially. I must have given you a headache just from my spoilage posts by now, but spoilage, some farm fine-tuning and the need for fertilizer in order for the crops to keep growing (not making them even more effective) would pretty much solve that problem.

 

-Getting clean water isn't (and shouldn't be difficult in general) - but it could be something more other than just finding a pot. Boiling making it more safe early in the game is good, but it also becomes an action that requires no planning whatsoever later on. Water filtration could be another layer, with expendable filters requiring you to scavenge/explore.

 

-Temperature leaves a lot to be desired. While playing a game like Long Dark, the player can almost feel the adverse weather effects it has on your character and not because of the visual effects. More long-lasting effects, more "realistic" in nature and a little more complicated to fight against than just changing a piece of gear. The environment itself too is problematic sometimes - how can someone possibly be dehydrated in a desert filled with yukas?

 

-Medicine... I've barely had to use it. There is no urgency in curing diseases imo. It would be a miracle not finding antibiotics (or not being already able to make them) during the very lengthy infection process. Bowel problems don't really phase the character at all, food poisoning is negligible because the player will intentionally get poisoned (to eat), at the time when he has to do something that doesn't require stamina. Broken bones, if not being treated, could also use be a little more impactful - it is easy to treat anyways. Certainly death not being impactful played a role in not bothering curing diseases but still they leave a lot to be desired.

 

-Death. First of all I am really glad that it will have some sort of penalty! Inventory loss was circumstantially impactful, since death can be -even unintentionally- exploited if the player wanted to reset his condition.

-Loot distribution. Even with 25% and 10m days I was getting an overabundance of items. I know this is an ongoing work, but loot lists for some groups of items could be a little more POI-specific and rare at the minimum settings. It is logical after all, such a huge density of loot containers.

-Stuff I am forgetting - haven't played the game in a while.

 

 

What I want is not a more hardcore gameplay. Simply put, I just want reasons to do more stuff for a longer time. Reasons to plan my resources and work for my survival needs. And that could be done, almost with the already - rich, but not-so-synergizing-yet - existing content.

 

PS: None plays MC because of its survival elements - it barely has any, even if the main mode is called "survival".

 

And A17 is more synergistic as you'll discover. Not eating has a direct and immediate effect on stamina and will kill you if unchecked. Same for hydration. There are actually a number of new ways to contract disease and food poisoning can happen as an accumulation of not eating higher quality foods. I'm sure they'll get to ultimate punishments for death with options and modes but once again I think you know the game too well to understand just how difficult it is for new players and how dismally they are able to survive. True that they get infinite lives but I think that should be set aside as a hardcore mode restriction rather than calling that survival and then putting in a carebear mode. We have already seen that very few people are willing to play the two easier difficulty settings than Nomad. Rather than going down a difficulty level or two they are likely to rage quit and call the game broken.

 

Can't speak for A17, but I am certainly eager to play with the new systems and a lot of the changes seem intuitive.

 

Now, about what I wrote above and new players:

I don't know what skills you are talking about, veteran player or not, but I avoid playing on the highest difficulties. That's because of the enemies and bullet sponging though (and it's not like I don't play FPS games, going at it online since unreal 99). The things that I mentioned above have little to do with the difficulty settings themselves. Yes, they will empower the overall difficulty and feeling of urgency, but mostly because of resource management, need for more scavenging and survival needs. If someone like me, who has played the game for a long time avoids the higher difficulties, would you not think that a new player avoids higher difficulties for the same reasons?

 

My point is that fighting enemies, defending, blood moons, or being in the general vincinity of dogs, are vastly more difficult endeavors (and different in nature) than having to manage your food needs and scavenge for fertilizer, having to prepare/plan in order to visit a harsh biome or really having to stock up on medicine.

[Blazer777]

or just turn zombie spawning off in the options menu if you dont want em that bad and ts 10 times easier too

[Roland]

-The need to gather food becomes irrelevant very soon into the game, even before farms, as your food supplies are increased exponentially. I must have given you a headache just from my spoilage posts by now, but spoilage, some farm fine-tuning and the need for fertilizer in order for the crops to keep growing (not making them even more effective) would pretty much solve that problem.

 

Not at all. I've been a Food Spoilage Warrior since forever. Food Spoilage is the number one necessary feature that I feel the game is missing. I am all for it and I hope it gets in. After playing Ark, Madmole made comments that sounded like he felt this game needed food spoilage but he wanted to figure out a way to do it that would be better than what Ark does. Since then, I haven't heard anything but I am with you on food spoilage.

 

-Getting clean water isn't (and shouldn't be difficult in general) - but it could be something more other than just finding a pot. Boiling making it more safe early in the game is good, but it also becomes an action that requires no planning whatsoever later on. Water filtration could be another layer, with expendable filters requiring you to scavenge/explore.

 

I think I get what you are wanting. You are wanting survival issues that must be maintained on an ongoing basis. Not concerns that can be overcome after doing a few tasks and then it is solved for the rest of the game. Some people would call that tedium. Going back to minecraft...there was always a small but vocal group that wanted torches to extinguish after a couple days so that players would have to relight them and keep them maintained. So for example in this case you wouldn't want a helmet attachment that was a water filtration unit unless it ALSO had filters that would have to be replaced. You don't want flashlights unless they have batteries that drain and need to be replaced. etc.

 

-Temperature leaves a lot to be desired. While playing a game like Long Dark, the player can almost feel the adverse weather effects it has on your character and not because of the visual effects. More long-lasting effects, more "realistic" in nature and a little more complicated to fight against than just changing a piece of gear. The environment itself too is problematic sometimes - how can someone possibly be dehydrated in a desert filled with yukas?

 

Temperature survival is improved in A17. In one game I couldn't get to my trader because he was in the snow biome and I knew I would freeze to death before reaching him unless I could find proper clothing. As far as what you are probably hoping for like frostbite, blizzards causing whiteouts, etc. It's not that complex of a system, true.

 

-Medicine... I've barely had to use it. There is no urgency in curing diseases imo. It would be a miracle not finding antibiotics (or not being already able to make them) during the very lengthy infection process. Bowel problems don't really phase the character at all, food poisoning is negligible because the player will intentionally get poisoned (to eat), at the time when he has to do something that doesn't require stamina. Broken bones, if not being treated, could also use be a little more impactful - it is easy to treat anyways. Certainly death not being impactful played a role in not bothering curing diseases but still they leave a lot to be desired.

 

This part of the game is much better and a lot more impactful. Just the new Permanent damage vs Temporary damage really helps in giving the player a need to find medical supplies that can heal the permanent damage. Just eating food or waiting over time does nothing to help the permanent damage. Also sickness, disease, and poisoning come more into play.

 

-Death. First of all I am really glad that it will have some sort of penalty! Inventory loss was circumstantially impactful, since death can be -even unintentionally- exploited if the player wanted to reset his condition.

 

As of now negative conditions persist through death. Plus you take a 24-hour debuff that lowers all your attributes by up to four ranks and thereby closing off perk advantages you had with those attribute levels. I'm not clear on whether negative conditions are supposed to persist or if it is a current bug.

 

-Loot distribution. Even with 25% and 10m days I was getting an overabundance of items. I know this is an ongoing work, but loot lists for some groups of items could be a little more POI-specific and rare at the minimum settings. It is logical after all, such a huge density of loot containers.

 

Zombie loot has been cut almost 90%. It is a huge reduction and the biggest hit I've noticed is canned food and water. Despite all the moaning it really has been a fantastic change. In addition POI's have almost half the containers they once did due to the new open and empty versions of most containers. I check garbage heaps a lot more praying for something useful and I have also found that getting a food source going is much more important than the past. Those who just ignore planting something early or stopping what they're doing to go hunt that doe that just spawned in will find themselves in a lot of trouble in short order.

 

 

What I want is not a more hardcore gameplay. Simply put, I just want reasons to do more stuff for a longer time. Reasons to plan my resources and work for my survival needs. And that could be done, almost with the already - rich, but not-so-synergizing-yet - existing content.

 

PS: None plays MC because of its survival elements - it barely has any, even if the main mode is called "survival".

 

I'm not saying MC survival hasn't been surpassed by newer games who built upon what it did but I think it is also being to narrow to say it isn't really a survival game. I think with all the maintenance you want in survival systems you would be surprised at how many people would look at it and think "hardcore". Personally, I think anyone who looks at 7 Days to Die and says, "Not a survival game" is probably at least an elitist survival gamer and probably what most people would label as a hardcore survival gamer.

 

But that's great. We need people who are hardcore in different areas to push and give suggestions and get food spoilage in the game (there are sooooo many people against that by the way)

 

My hardcore wish? I wish that nerdpoling could only be accomplished by purchasing the top tier of Parkour....

 

EDIT: Found this quote in another thread and I think it relates to this idea of possibly going too far with how maintenance heavy we get with survival in order to define a game as qualifying as a survival game:

 

I just hope the game never gets too realistic, for example I couldn't stand project zomboid due to the stupidly insane levels of micromanagement you need to do for your char. Needless to say I refunded it, because the char needed way to much management, so much so that it just wasn't any fun to play.

 

Would you say Project Zomboid is the ideal survival simulator that 7 Days to Die should aspire to?

[pApA^LeGBa]

Well than people who want 7 Day hordes to be hard can mod them in. Meh. We can go in circles here. Survival is even the first word in the subtitle.

 

And it´s not only not hard enough. No, that´s not a veteran problem here. It´s barely existing at all. You can play the game not even having food in mind and you still get enough to not starve to death. It´s comes automatically. And even if you are super unlucky, there is yucca and snowberrie. There is no challenge at all, besides learning that you need to eat in the game when you play it for the first time.

 

Cold and heat aren´t a problem either. Just leave the biom if you don´t have the proper clothes yet and don´t build in the desert or snow biomes.

 

And no, settings that aren´t default do not count. If they call this a survival game also, there has to be at least a bit of a challenge on default settings.

 

Well, let´s see what A17 will do, but from your posts i don´t have much hope here.

[RestInPieces]

Damn it, got carried away again, but please bear with me :'(

 

Not at all. I've been a Food Spoilage Warrior since forever...

 

I do remember that, but the Union of Immersion Warriors of 7DTD ™ thought you had abandoned our holy cause in the last couple of years! Seriously though, I do hope that it is included in their plans for the base game. It would make much of the content more relevant - canned food would be invaluable in early/mid game because of large expiration times, farming and hunting would become more important through mid/end-game, electricity would offer an important QOL upgrade by extending the expiration time and so on.

 

I think I get what you are wanting....

 

Yes. You often see people asking for more content, more end-game goals etc. I am not saying that these activities will solve that problem, but I am saying that the game already has plenty of content that can be used more prudently because atm there is a lot of content that is used a couple of times in the game and then gets forgotten, becomes something repetitive, or used so rarely that there is little point to it.

 

I do not advocate for repetitive activities, I want some activities to be tied more deeply to scavenging/exploring and I believe that tech/character progression should progressively improve QOL for many of these activities.

 

The water filtration example, which may not be a good one but describes what I am saying:

1) Initially the player tries to get by.

2) A pot can be found early in the game so that the player can boil it and avoid getting the a-nus icon debuff. That's great so far. Since that point, the player has to fill bottles and boil them in a bonfire for the rest of the game.

3) Another layer could allow the player to use a device with electricity, by skipping boiling (or even skipping filling bottles with a device that can e.g. automatically collect rain water and filter it) and producing perfectly pure water that can be a little more advantageous. The player would have to change filters every 1-2 weeks by scavenging and finding rarer materials.

 

Do not take this example as an "idea thing". I am just trying to convey that I do not necessarily want a more hardcore or repetitive approach, but an approach that creates the sense of progression with "tech" tied to survival by giving extra QOL and actually makes activities less repetitive by pushing the player towards exploring/scavenging.

 

In short - repetitive activities do not equal better use of content, but tying them to exploring/scavenging while also improving QOL, does and at the same time feels like meaningful progression.

 

Temperature survival....

 

This is great to hear. I wouldn't want for the more extreme biomes to be strictly "gated", but to require some preparation beforehand. The yuka-filled desert is a good example to demonstrate how some things in the game work against others. Also, temperature changes with gear and being next to a bonfire should be a little more interactive, so that a combination of both is needed. Not saying they should make the player light a bonfire every 2 minutes - the opposite, but for example, having a bonfire lit at night while wearing heavy clothing could allow the player to go through the next of the day without even needing to warm up - having a "heat safe-reserve" kind of how humidity works in the Long Dark, but seamlessly, without the player having to micromanage anything or check any meter.

 

This part of the game is...

 

These are also great to hear! I do hope that it's not a bug, because reseting your status with death is like bread and butter from what I've experienced in MP at the moment and I wouldn't expect anything different considering how the system works. And it may sound strange to hear and at first glance the death status reset feels player-friendly, but this makes status effects feel even more annoying than having to treat them or preventing/preparing for them, because when having to treat them players engage in actual game mechanics, while having to, for example, go to your hideout and use glass shards, in order to die, return to the base and so on, it ends up being "the tedius thing you have to do when contracting a disease".

 

Zombie loot has been cut....

 

It's true that zombie loot contributed to the problem I was talking about. It's the same psychological mechanism with the above - the average player will complain as a knee-jerk reaction because he knows he will get less loot right outside his door. Long term though, chances are that the same player will end up being happier with not having to click on each zombie or having to explore more, alleviating his "need for extra content" a little. Plus I hope that exploring with the new POIs will be made more diverse. The zombie loot change is a good change indeed.

 

I'm not saying MC surviva...

 

Actually, I partially agree with Silveria - that this level of micromanaging (even if I do enjoy it) is not for everyone. But I believe that depending on the way you introduce a mechanic to the game, it can feel like annoying micromanaging or it can alternatively feel like seamless, simple, planning ahead. I really do not wish for this game to become a micromanaging nightmare for the extra reason that, in contrary with PZ, it's an action game in which micromanaging does not fit.

 

For example, I hated looking at my character sheet to check temperature levels and so on - if it was up to me, it would be very much worth to streamline them and add a non-intrusive but clear visual effect, or a non-numerical graphical UI element that lets the player know his state instantly and efforlessly. Or as another example, crafting requires more micromanaging that it really has to. I can't blame anyone who worries about extra micromanaging considering the current level of it.

 

I don't doubt that there will be some players that may consider having to plan even for the slightest survival need, a chore. But the reason you replied in this thread initially was practically the same, but for the tower defense part of the game. Micromanaging in an action game particularly, sucks, but what I am saying barely needs any as long as the game intuitively lets the player experience clear cause and effect. For example, a streamlined spoilage system would quickly not be seen as micromanagement, but as a natural part of the game, as soon as the player experiences it and learns to plan accordingly. And it's less about being hardcore and more about putting already existing and rich content to better use so that more of it gets exploited.

 

Finally, as I said in the previous thread, I am all for accessibility and I do understand a developer's point of view on it, but inexperience is only a short transitional state that is not worth sacrificing gameplay for. A smoother curve can also alleviate new player concerns while keeping mid/end game more engaging. Target audiences is also definitely a real thing and tastes can be vastly different, but in the end, humans and how their brains work is not that different. I am not claiming that I know how they do, I am just saying that not everything has to be taken at face value and that sometimes it is worth exploring any underlying reasons.

[Survager]

As of now negative conditions persist through death. Plus you take a 24-hour debuff that lowers all your attributes by up to four ranks and thereby closing off perk advantages you had with those attribute levels. I'm not clear on whether negative conditions are supposed to persist or if it is a current bug.

Roland,

What happens if the character dies during the debuff?

Will we lose 4 more points of all attributes? (SUMM 8) If so, what happens after the end of the debuff? We will return 8 points of attributes or only 4, and the remaining 4 points and progress of perks will be lost forever? (if yes, that one also needs to lower the overall character level).

[Vomkat]

Hm, I'm not sure what's happened to this thread, you guys seem to have changed subjects.

 

With regard to being weakened by death, I mean... some of us play dead is dead, so that's irrelevant.

I've never understood the mentality of someone who thinks dying over and over is a sensible way to play a game.

 

I would very much like to see more genuine survival features added to the game. The challenge should not be that you need to defeat a horde of radiated monsters from DOOM 3, but that you need to get firewood and there might be a zombie out there in that blizzard. I hope the developers try to be more creative with their challenges, instead of continuing to dump absurd super zombies on us. There definitely needs to be an option to make the game more difficult in ways that don't lead toward flying green monsters with red eyes and flames coming out of their fingers while they kamikaze suicide upon your steel reinforced autocannon turrets.

[OzHawkeye]

Hm, I'm not sure what's happened to this thread, you guys seem to have changed subjects.

 

With regard to being weakened by death, I mean... some of us play dead is dead, so that's irrelevant.

I've never understood the mentality of someone who thinks dying over and over is a sensible way to play a game.

 

I would very much like to see more genuine survival features added to the game. The challenge should not be that you need to defeat a horde of radiated monsters from DOOM 3, but that you need to get firewood and there might be a zombie out there in that blizzard. I hope the developers try to be more creative with their challenges, instead of continuing to dump absurd super zombies on us. There definitely needs to be an option to make the game more difficult in ways that don't lead toward flying green monsters with red eyes and flames coming out of their fingers while they kamikaze suicide upon your steel reinforced autocannon turrets.

 

Well, to be blunt, I don't really believe you when you say you can't understand someone who continues playing a game on their 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc life. That said, I do agree with you, I'd rather not see zombies with "odd" abilities, but return more to the idea that the sheer number of them (particularly in cities) and the costs of dealing with them, or the impediments their presence puts in place, is the major threat factor.

[RestInPieces]

I would very much like to see more genuine survival features added to the game. The challenge should not be that you need to defeat a horde of radiated monsters from DOOM 3, but that you need to get firewood and there might be a zombie out there in that blizzard. I hope the developers try to be more creative with their challenges, instead of continuing to dump absurd super zombies on us.

 

Very well put Vomkat.