PC A20 Developer Diary Discussions

[bachgaman]

You said that efficiency was being measured in terms of survivability per skill points. The effectiveness of the perks then should be measured by how suitable they are to that strategy.

Okay, let me know when you think through and test your strategy on Insane Nightmare and we'll talk about it.

 

[Kalex]

Let's put it this way, while your husband sits in the bushes with his wooden bow and rags by the end of the first week, I ride a truck full of ammunition and weapons and live in concrete base. I'm talking about the results of this or that gameplay, about the speed of the game when i compare the variants of character development. This has a direct relationship with the usefulness of the bow and stealth. Bows and stealth do not allow you to complete the game in 7 days, but barter and adventurer do.

There is no completing the game in 7 days because there is no endgame. And unless you have xp gains seriously jacked up, you aren't completing skill trees in 7 days either.

 

[bachgaman]

There is no completing the game in 7 days because there is no endgame. And unless you have xp gains seriously jacked up, you aren't completing skill trees in 7 days either.

For me, endgame is getting a base from improved concrete, reinforced doors, a truck, an auger, an electric fence, and so on. When you have no options for further development.

I did it easily on my last run through Pure Intelligence on Survivalist difficulty, 100% loot / XP, 1 point zombie speed boost, 1 hour = 1 in-game day

 

[bachgaman]

It always comes back to the fact that min/maxing the game and focusing completely on efficiency ruins replay value of the game because for min/maxers there is simply only one conceivable way to play the game-- the single most efficient way. The irony of the min/maxer argument is that no game can be designed to have multiple absolutely perfectly balanced efficiency pathways. One method or strategy will always slightly edge out the rest and so that will become the new one and only way min/maxers can play without "lying to themselves and deceiving themselves" about how to play the game.

Thus the only way min/maxers can get much replay value of the game is to convince the developers to change the balance so that they have another new brief puzzle to solve. Three weeks after a new update the new most efficient strategy emerges and once again the game has no replay value for them. We have seen it time and again over the years as those who care only for efficiency complain that they are "forced" to do X by the developers. Sometimes X was upgrading blocks, sometimes spam crafting, sometimes killing zombies, sometimes spam questing, ...one time for a couple of weeks it was chopping down grass thanks to a bug.

I'm glad that I enjoy playing the game at a variety of settings and without regard to efficiency. The developers have designed the game to be replayable through conscious player choice --sometimes by changing settings, sometimes by choosing self-limits, and sometimes by choosing challenges and goals. When you don't care whether the way you are playing is the one solution to the efficiency puzzle you can suddenly do whatever you want.

And the great thing is that I'm just having fun and it isn't that I have to self-deceive at all. I just plainly don't care whether the choice I want to make is or is not the most efficient. The min/maxer can't comprehend that I simply don't think about it.

So, @bachgaman, there has been another balancing pass to traders for pricing of goods, types of goods sold, and rewards for quests for A20. There has also been a pretty significant change to loot in general. It might be enough of a change to create a new puzzle for you to solve. I hope so, since I want everyone to be able to have some fun with the game.

Man, you put the minmax label on me again as you understand it. But if I was minmax I wouldn't run without traders, I guess I would not ignore the obvious exploits that allow me to get an advantage, I would not drop LCB at the beginning of the game, and so on. You don't need to think that the world is black and white

I understand what you are talking about, you are partly right, but there are different degrees of deepening in minmax. You are talking about the most extreme form of the fulfillment of this desire

The answer for you is never. You cannot suspend your need for an optimal path. Bow and stealth will never be an option for you.

For someone else the condition would be that they wish to challenge themselves by playing a game using bow and stealth and play as that type of character. For that person it would be fine because they would not be constantly preoccupied by the opportunity costs and self deceptions over how quickly they could progress using other means. For you it would be disastrous.

Thus, you admit that bow and stealth are notoriously worse perks than barter and adventurer. Thanks. This was the topic of discussion.

They are currently balanced in such a way to anyone not obsessed with optimal efficiency.

And here you amusingly avoid admitting that they are simply unbalanced.

A player not obsessed with efficiency and who is playing stealth/bow won't have an AK-47 and several hundred ammo on day 2 because they will be going through the quests more slowly and stealthily and probably choosing other ways to spend their money. They also won't hear a voice in their head yammering on and on about a much more efficient way to play the game than they currently are playing. Instead they will be having fun taking the game at their pace, popping those day 2 zombies in the head with their stone arrows killing some in one shot and killing others with a few follow up hits but not caring in the least that maybe somewhere on earth another player started a new game at the same time they did and probably has an Ak-47 with several hundred ammo. That would kill you, we know.

Individual examples of bad players do not help you in any way to prove that there is a balance in the game. I'm not obsessed with efficiency, I just like making good choices. And I enjoy playing well.

 

[Jost Amman]

Many perk balance bugs can be fixed indirectly. For example, the "Well Insulated" and "Iron Gut" perks are extremely useless right now. Due to the fact that the game does not have a penalty for hunger and weather. If they were, then these perks would probably come in handy.

I agree, but, again, not a perk/skill problem per se.

In general, where did you get the idea that such settings are something non-standard? Are they in the game menu? Yes. So what's the complaint? Am I changing the xml files?

Ask @Gazz, AFAIK the game is balanced (spreadsheets and all) around the default difficulty level.

Probably that would also be an error, since pure role playing is not good for a computer based game.

Yes, but people play RP online, SAMP for example and many other games

Still. It is my opinion.

 

[BFT2020]

Individual examples of bad players do not help you in any way to prove that there is a balance in the game.

You asked me before of where you insulted others.  The fact that you don't see it, nobody can help you.

You do it all the time, whether it is a direct insult or a passive-aggressive insult.  It makes me wonder what is the motivation for them.

Why do people make snide comments like the one above;  implying that the way or difficulty levels others play makes them bad players, even as far as implying that what they say about how they play or the game itself doesn't matter?  Do they do this to make them feel superior to others?  Are they doing it because they want to demean others?

The fact that this sentence alone is not necessary when discussing with someone else about balance or improvements on game, but yet you still include it says a lot.

 

[Jost Amman]

For me, endgame is...

There you go! 

 

[meilodasreh]

now I'm not even sure anymore we're talking about the same game.

I will go home and rethink my life.

Perhaps the explanation is that I do 3-4 trader quests a day while you hide in the bushes with your homemade bow

No I also do mostly trader quests (whilst I never can do 4 a day, mostly 2 sometimes maybe 3 to the highest).

And I've never been so lucky to get awarded an AK at day 1 or 2, nor was there an affordable one in stock. Same for bigger stacks of ammo.

If you say that's generally the case...

Well I will just assume you must be like that super lucky woman from Deadpool 2.

When your life is a row of incredible flukes, then I can understand every of your arguments.

But that's not my reality.

The only thing I keep being lucky in every game I start is that I find the recipe for bacon&eggs very early, so I do not need to spend any points in Chef.

Once that failed me, and the game felt totally different because I suddenly had to care about starvation, which was not a problem at all before.

We will see how A20 performs in that way (as it was already announced that there are bigger changes in loot/progression)

TFP did already do a good job in diminishing the game being set upside down by a lucky/early find of high quality stuff in previous alphas.

 

[bachgaman]

Ask @Gazz, AFAIK the game is balanced (spreadsheets and all) around the default difficulty level.

In this case, game need a rework of everything. Default difficulty is incredibly easy even for newbie 

You asked me before of where you insulted others.  The fact that you don't see it, nobody can help you.

You do it all the time, whether it is a direct insult or a passive-aggressive insult.  It makes me wonder what is the motivation for them.

Why do people make snide comments like the one above;  implying that the way or difficulty levels others play makes them bad players, even as far as implying that what they say about how they play or the game itself doesn't matter?  Do they do this to make them feel superior to others?  Are they doing it because they want to demean others?

The fact that this sentence alone is not necessary when discussing with someone else about balance or improvements on game, but yet you still include it says a lot.

It says a lot that you did not answer when I asked, but sat and waited for the right opportunity to write this. It's funny. By the way, I don't see anything offensive in the fact that someone plays badly. If this offends you, then this is only your problem. Prove that it is not so in this case.

There you go! 

I believe many will agree that the game loses interest at the moment when you cannot create anything new and the game conditions cease to create difficulties / dangers. So its endgame for many people

No I also do mostly trader quests (whilst I never can do 4 a day, mostly 2 sometimes maybe 3 to the highest).

And I've never been so lucky to get awarded an AK at day 1 or 2, nor was there an affordable one in stock. Same for bigger stacks of ammo.

If you say that's generally the case...

Well I will just assume you must be like that super lucky woman from Deadpool 2.

When your life is a row of incredible flukes, then I can understand every of your arguments.

But that's not my reality.

The only thing I keep being lucky in every game I start is that I find the recipe for bacon&eggs very early, so I do not need to spend any points in Chef.

Once that failed me, and the game felt totally different because I suddenly had to care about starvation, which was not a problem at all before.

We will see how A20 performs in that way (as it was already announced that there are bigger changes in loot/progression)

TFP did already do a good job in diminishing the game being set upside down by a lucky/early find of high quality stuff in previous alphas.

On my last visit to Vanila, I bought an AK at the beginning of the second day (or at the end of the first, I don’t remember), bought a crucible for day 4, more than a thousand concrete for day 5. I think if I try to repeat it, then everything will change a little except the essence. Let's say it will not be an AK, but a double-barreled shotgun, what's the difference? Even a blunderbuss is better than a bow and allows you not to hide from opponents too much

 

[Jost Amman]

I believe many will agree that the game loses interest at the moment when you cannot create anything new and the game conditions cease to create difficulties / dangers. So its endgame for many people

When people start using "WE" when they express their own opinions, it means their argument is not so strong as they think.

Just express your opinion for yourself. Don't try to make it look like you're backed by a huge crowd all agreeing with your ideas.

I could tell you, for example, that I believe also that many will agree that you can find a lot of reasons to continue playing even after other people think they've won.  

 

[Matt115]

I believe many will agree that the game loses interest at the moment when you cannot create anything new and the game conditions cease to create difficulties / dangers. So its endgame for many people

When people start using "WE" when they express their own opinions, it means their argument is not so strong as they think.

Just express your opinion for yourself. Don't try to make it look like you're backed by a huge crowd all agreeing with your ideas.

I could tell you, for example, that I believe also that many will agree that you can find a lot of reasons to continue playing even after other people think they've won.  

Welll bachgaman is right in this sitation now Jost. I will give you fresh example- most of community of cod zombies hate der anfang- lack of content , small number of zombie types, small number of quests, no PAP camo etc So "many" suits here perfectly without doubts .

But what about 7dtd? it's depends how many is for you many XD. For example- i saw a lot of topics about lack of endgame, small number of zombies etc. So some people thing 7dtd have similiar problem like bachgaman. But how many people have this problem? idk. But let say 10%. If it is a lot? it depends. So many can be "right" too. This just subcjective

 

[bachgaman]

When people start using "WE" when they express their own opinions, it means their argument is not so strong as they think.

Just express your opinion for yourself. Don't try to make it look like you're backed by a huge crowd all agreeing with your ideas.

I could tell you, for example, that I believe also that many will agree that you can find a lot of reasons to continue playing even after other people think they've won.  

Expected, stereotyped answer, I did not expect anything else, lol

I only explained why I think that we are discussing an important issue, that not only about me, and not why I am right. It is obvious

 

[meilodasreh]

On my last visit to Vanila, I bought an AK at the beginning of the second day (or at the end of the first, I don’t remember), bought a crucible for day 4

Ok for me this is all starting to become pointless...we ARE playing different games here. Thx anyways for your thoughts.

 

[bachgaman]

Ok for me this is all starting to become pointless...we ARE playing different games here. Thx anyways for your thoughts.

Spoiler

Did they remove dog hordes from vanilla?

Nope

 

[BFT2020]

Pretty much shuts any debate about whether the bow was under powered or not in A19 lol. I'd love for it to be viable again, but imo, they are fairly pointless as is. 

Bows in the game have never been pointless, but they are probably the only situational range weapon (not including turrets) when you look at them:



Ammo Type


Weapon


Base Damage


rpm


DPS


7.76 AP


T3 MG


50


440


367


44 HP


T3 pistol


70


130


152


9mm AP


T3 SMG


8


480


64


7.76 AP


T3 Sniper


50


140


117


Shot_slug


T3 shotgun


96


70


112


Steel bolt


T3 cross


45


75


56


Steel arrow


T3 bow


31


75


39






Ammo Type


Weapon


Sneak - NHS


Sneak HS


Dam / shot (silenced)


7.76 AP


T3 MG


50


150


128


44 HP


T3 pistol


70


210


179


9mm AP


T3 SMG


8


24


20


7.76 AP


T3 Sniper


50


150


128


Shot_slug


T3 shotgun


96


288


245


Steel bolt


T3 cross


90


270


230


Steel arrow


T3 bow


62


186


158



I can't get the table option to look right, sorry.  The first table is straight DPS while the second table is stealth attacks (NHS is No Hidden Strike, HS is hidden strike).  Silenced is based on the HS column.

This is damaged based on specific ammo types, a T3 Q6 "nominal" weapon (zero perks).  With the exception of the M60, the T6 weapons are in the 110-150 DPS range; but the bows are in the 39-56 DPS range.  They come into their own when you take into consideration sneak / hidden strike bonuses.  All weapons (except sledgehammers) benefit from hidden strike, while bows / knives have additional benefits.  That narrows the gap significantly on the DPS between the bows and other ranged weapons.

Bows do even better on closing the gap when you consider a single shot (based on a one shot one kill approach) and silenced weapons.  Bows are the best when comparing silenced (I don't consider Shotguns as weapons that can use silencers and that is how I play the game, but it is up to each person how they want to - I did include shotguns though as a comparison to show that they are in-between bows and crossbows).

If you got a huge horde of zombies pressing down on you and nothing between you and them, a bow is not your best defense.  If you are looking to clear out a POI quickly, then a bow is not your best option.  However, if you play where ammo is limited and best saved for Bloodmoon horde nights, then the bows are great based on what you need to craft ammo for them and the ability to limit using firearm ammo.

Is this way of playing for everyone?  No.  Should it be?  No.

 

[Morloc]

Word of the day! (11/19/2021)



-Arch Necromancer Morloc

 

[Jost Amman]

Expected, stereotyped answer, I did not expect anything else, lol

I only explained why I think that we are discussing an important issue, that not only about me, and not why I am right. It is obvious

And I'm telling you that since this is about personal perception, the fact you're trying to showcase your own point of view as the "truth", by also gauging other players' supposed preferences, that is simply preposterous. As I said, speak for yourself and try not to deflect by saying my reply is "stereotypical".

To sum it up: you think that competitive gaming is the best way to balance 7D2D, instead I think it should also take into account the "fun factor" and role playing.

We simply disagree and let's leave it at that. Thanks.

 

[meganoth]

To be honest, I had more important tasks than chasing chickens for arrows in the early days. Then I found a weapon that was very competitive with bows.

But it is obvious that other tasks are more important than collecting feathers when you don't go for agility and bows. It was you who said feathers are hard to find and that was a reason for you not to use a bow. But if you went for bows it would have been an important task.

I'm not sure if you noticed but that "more important tasks" sounds really snobbish (at least to me).  

Let's put it this way, while your husband sits in the bushes with his wooden bow and rags by the end of the first week, I ride a truck full of ammunition and weapons and live in concrete base. I'm talking about the results of this or that gameplay, about the speed of the game when i compare the variants of character development. This has a direct relationship with the usefulness of the bow and stealth. Bows and stealth do not allow you to complete the game in 7 days, but barter and adventurer do.

Lets, put it another way, another comment that is impolite without necessity.

I don't think that speed of progression to "endgame" is anywhere in the job descriptions of a survivor in a zombie game. The survival part would make not dying while playing as the ultimate goal and that can happen at any speed. Since enemies get stronger in sync with your level progress you may as well need a sturdy concrete base on day 7 while someone playing it more slowly will be as save with just a simple cobblestone base.

No, thats not exactly right, on day 7 in vanilla nobody needs a concrete horde base, not even the player on insane (this is a guess, but there are just too few zombies in the first horde night to endanger even a well-made cobblestone base by an experienced player).  

The sandbox part doesn't care about speed to endgame as well.

In short, time to reach some "win" state is not a useful metric for everyone. Someone can choose this as a goal but it isn't the only one.

I agree that in A19 the trader gives out too much ammo and too good weapons so as to make the pray-and-spray method too easy, but all of that knowledge is already moot with A20 being around the corner. Showing an ak by day 2 in A19 is beating a dead horse.

In this case, game need a rework of everything. Default difficulty is incredibly easy even for newbie

How do you know that default is incredibly easy for newbies? DId you really observe say a hundred newbies without giving them any hints and they soared through the game?

 

[SenpaiThatIngnoresYou]

And I'm telling you that since this is about personal perception, the fact you're trying to showcase your own point of view as the "truth", by also gauging other players' supposed preferences, that is simply preposterous. As I said, speak for yourself and try not to deflect by saying my reply is "stereotypical".

To sum it up: you think that competitive gaming is the best way to balance 7D2D, instead I think it should also take into account the "fun factor" and role playing.

We simply disagree and let's leave it at that. Thanks.

But it is obvious that other tasks are more important than collecting feathers when you don't go for agility and bows. It was you who said feathers are hard to find and that was a reason for you not to use a bow.

I'm not sure if you noticed but that "more important tasks" sounds really snobbish (at least to me).  

Lets, put it another way, another comment that is impolite without necessity.

I don't think that speed of progression to "endgame" is anywhere in the job descriptions of a survivor in a zombie game. The survival part would make not dying while playing as the ultimate goal and that can happen at any speed. Since enemies get stronger in sync with your level progress you may as well need a sturdy concrete base on day 7 while someone playing it more slowly will be as save with just a simple cobblestone base.

No, thats not exactly right, on day 7 in vanilla nobody needs a concrete horde base, not even the player on insane (this is a guess, but there are just too few zombies in the first horde night to endanger even a well-made cobblestone base by an experienced player).  

The sandbox part doesn't care about speed to endgame as well.

In short, time to reach some "win" state is not a useful metric for everyone. Someone can choose this as a goal but it isn't the only one.

I agree that in A19 the trader gives out too much ammo and too good weapons so as to make the pray-and-spray method too easy, but all of that knowledge is already moot with A20 being around the corner. Showing an ak by day 2 in A19 is beating a dead horse.

My issue, that i have been addressing to a small extent with mods, is that there is no end game. minecraft sorta has an end game with the ender dragon. But there are a lot of things to do in minecraft. 7 days is a weird game for me because i get very hyped after a release, play non stop for a week, then after i hit a point i quit. Once you hit the high end tiers of equipment why continue? In linear games you defeat the boss, put the game away, then move on. With 7 days it gets tedious after a bit.  7 days has some amazing things that separate it from other games. The pois are astonishing. It feels like i am in real world buildings. I know this has been improved. The jumpscares and danger in the pois are good as well, and horde night is fun. 

I have found some amazing solutions in mods, and i think they give insight to how the end game development should go. The game falls apart with the end game and with the quests. with the quest i get annoyed when i go into the same poi multiple times. When a poi is raided by the player those quests should be removed from the pool, if not permanently then at least with a cooldown. Or have poi specific quest chains. Once they are cleared then you go back and set something up, or clear out bandits/ ferials, or move in. 

Age of oblivion found a crazy solution that i think should be made in the real game: citizen collection quests. Traders giving too much ammo? nerf that. People hating the nerf? well have  a special quest chain for trader joel to collect brass, lead, and gunpowder so that everyone gets ammo.  The reward is some xp, but all ammo rewards will be doubled for quests. Give the traders a merchant level, that gets improved if you do quests for them. 

Dynamic random quests would help too, like have courier npcs running around and getting into trouble, maybe give them smoke bombs that indicate they are in danger and you can run up and give them first aid/rob them. Stuff like that, stuff that makes the world more active. 

House flipper is a popular youtube content. The game is a crafting game, if npcs come into the game, then why not have a crafting element? why not flip and fortify houses? Have a community style gameplay that state of decay tries to do but messess up because they suck. 

 

[meilodasreh]

Ok for me this is all starting to become pointless...we ARE playing different games here. Thx anyways for your thoughts.

Spoiler

View attachment 21403

View attachment 21404

View attachment 21405

View attachment 21406

View attachment 21407

View attachment 21408

I somehow knew you would feel called upon proving you get all that stuff so early by posting some pictures,

although I never said I didn't believe you. 

Well those pictures don't "prove" anything cause there's no way to say how your game options are tweaked,

or even whether you gave yourself all that stuff via console command.

But that's not the point, and I'm not saying that.

I truly believe that's your actual real and straight game,

as you can believe me when I tell you that I never have all that stuff that early ingame (and no thx I'm not lazily hiding in the bushes all the time...)

(or should I post some pictures of a trader's inventory without any full-auto guns or impact drivers to prove it? )

So it's what I said. Different games. Pointless discussion. I'm out.