Laz Man
Fun Pimps Staff
The new shutters that can open might be a good alternative. They have an inside and outside variant which gives players alot of choices in their use.
PC New zombie forcefield
- Thread starter POCKET951
- Start date
The new shutters that can open might be a good alternative. They have an inside and outside variant which gives players alot of choices in their use.
RipClaw
Well-known member
But they do seem to watch videos of JaWoodle who is known for breaking the AI. If I remember correctly, his name was dropped once or twice in a developer stream.
JoeDaFrogman
New member
Thanks Laz, dcsobral(who did the video I discuss above) already pointed that out to me as a good alternative to hatches that accomidate how this block change affects the way people can interact with electrical components.
I appreciate you going out of your way to suggest an alternative.
Roland
Community Moderator
So what if they watch streamers? I've said elsewhere that discovery is the time intensive portion of fixing bugs and so if there are a couple of guys who are dedicating their time to finding blocks that have weird and unintended properties then of course they are going to use that resource. After all, getting the community to test things and report them is a lot of what Early Access is about.
Watching Jawoodle and noticing how blocks are not behaving as intended is different than watching Jawoodle and then scheming together how they can stop players from using cheesy strategies. Think about all the posts we ever read on the forum from people who are outraged about cheese tactics and want changes made to force players to abandon those tactics. Those posts all come from players and not the developers. There are only three instances that I can remember that the developers, themselves, went on record stating that they were going to stop things that players were doing:
1) Dig down two blocks and be safe forever
2) Tread water and be safe forever
3) Drive around on vehicles and be safe forever
That's it. And they owned up to their feelings and their motivation. Everything else that they get accused of for going to war against players is simply conjecture and speculation and it is misplaced.
RipClaw
Well-known member
Nothing. I have only noticed that whenever JaWoodle has broken something is was usually fixed in the next alpha version.
I was surprised that the zombie forcefield worked for so long. It was discovered in A17 and I expected that it no longer works in A18.
For me, this looks like a funny cat and mouse game between JaWoodle and the developers. He breaks stuff, and they fix it.
Last edited by a moderator:
AtomicUs5000
New member
I hope they watch streamers more often. There was this period where watching content was a real drag and so I just stopped watching. Everybody just kept making the same bases again and again. Sure, they may have started from scratch, or started with a different POI, but in the end, it was always the same. Now, I feel like half of every game is staring at a trader, but that's another story.
blitzkrieg7498
New member
My problem with all this focus, is that its detracting from major issues that need addressing, like the wonkiest of physics engines and hit boxes, molasses-water (slated to be fixed, we'll see later), zombies choosing paths that make no sense when canonically zombies arent super engineers, the new fiasco that is armor sets (couldnt just go with the diablo 2 route with differing size sets so people can still mix and match), the lack of story implementation except that zombies get weaker in the sun and higashi had something to do with it, a crafting system that is being outshone by modded versions of your game like Darkness Falls (and DF has a nice variety of zombies while were on the note). All these blemishes cause frustration, especially when one topic receives so much attention, and it is realistically a minor issue, and it 100% is minor.
I can respect the idea of letting people like Jawoodle break your game just so you know how to fix it, but theres a line to be drawn Fun Pimps. You're taking the "Game Master vs Players" mentality too hard, focusing too hard on a small group of players, and ruining the fun for more than just them. I would like to recommend Matt Colville, https://www.youtube.com/user/mcolville , who currently is a TTRPG Game Master and Freelance writer, but also worked on games like the Mercenaries franchise. He really helped me understand how to interact with the players. Obviously not all his videos will pertain to this game, but principles can be drawn and applied.
I can respect the idea of letting people like Jawoodle break your game just so you know how to fix it, but theres a line to be drawn Fun Pimps. You're taking the "Game Master vs Players" mentality too hard, focusing too hard on a small group of players, and ruining the fun for more than just them. I would like to recommend Matt Colville, https://www.youtube.com/user/mcolville , who currently is a TTRPG Game Master and Freelance writer, but also worked on games like the Mercenaries franchise. He really helped me understand how to interact with the players. Obviously not all his videos will pertain to this game, but principles can be drawn and applied.
Laz Man
Fun Pimps Staff
Nothing. I have only noticed that whenever JaWoodle has broken something is was usually fixed in the next alpha version.
I was surprised that the zombie forcefield worked for so long. It was discovered in A17 and I expected that it no longer works in A18.
For me, this looks like a funny cat and mouse game between JaWoodle and the developers. He breaks stuff, and they fix it.
The forcefield is actually a very good example of the devs prioritizing bugs correctly. I vaguely recall it being reported and reproduced in A19.
If my memory is correct, there wasn't a good fix at the time that wouldnt impact performance so the bug was shelved for the moment.
One thing that causes people to think the devs are out to ruin people's fun are content creators. Its usually specific wording (eg. "Nerfs"vs "fixes"), statements (e.g. "take that TFPs!!!") and or thumbnails in their videos that get people thinking that way.
Edit: On the positive side, there are some players who fully acknowledge how helpful content creators are at finding/reporting issues and are not mad at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
RipClaw
Well-known member
Fix or nerf. It always depends on your point of view. If you used something to your advantage it is a nerf. If something bothered you then it is a fix.
Let's take a current example. SMG turrets and shotgun turrets no longer trigger the explosion of Demolishers. However, this change was not mentioned in the release notes. Therefore, it is unknown if it is a bug or intentional.
Players have now started to integrate the turrets into their bases. If it's a bug from the developers' point of view and they fix it, it will be a nerf from the players' point of view because their base's defense has been weakened.
POCKET951
New member
I'm not outraged and nor do I want to try and force people to abandon this strategy. The intent of this post was to simply inform everyone(TFP included) in a clear and quick manner(gift wrapped so to speak) so that the information was there and it would be easy to make a decision or evaluate it.
Roland
Community Moderator
Again you are extrapolating the attention given this issue by players on forums and stream chats to attention given by developers. Players talk about these things ad nauseum but very little development time is spent on it. In this case, players have been talking about it since A17 so it may seem that it has been a focus point for years. But it isn't so. The programmer spent very little time on the fix-- apparently just turning them into bars in all but appearance. You are correct that this issue is minor and was treated as minor for the devs and I can assure you there has been zero features cut due to these sorts of polishing fixes to block behavior. Now, they may decide to spend more time on arrow slits to get them to behave differently than plain bars but that will depend on whether it gets reported and whether they want to spend the time on it.
There is no "Game Master vs Players" mentality going on here except in the minds that are cooking beneath tinfoil hats...
There are hundreds of ways to exploit and creatively circumvent the AI and to quickly acquire loot and speed run the whole game to oblivion and the devs will never touch those things as long as it doesn't involve what they consider to be a bug. They are content to let people play the game the way they want. I wouldn't say that three instances of direct and admitted intervention into players using the underground, using bodies of water, and using vehicles on horde night is going overboard in a vs players campaign.
TFP has shifted into a hybrid of optimizing, polishing, and adding the last few features they need to make the game complete and this hybrid of traditional Alpha and Beta activities will continue until they release the game. So polishing actions like fixing a block that zombies should be able to walk over but can't is not blocking them from adding new features like bandits. Those actions are all being done by different programmers who are tasked with those actions. TFP is not the tiny studio it once was when time spent polishing by the programmers was time they were not adding new features. Now they have programmers who they hired specifically to optimize and polish and other programmers are also working on the final features to be added.
None of the games in that series were developed in an Early Access model. They were released as complete games and the first time players got to experience it was when all the polishing and editing and changes were accomplished. Somebody who starts playing 7 Days to Die once it is released in its final form will not feel ANY of the frustrations you are feeling. To them zombies will be perceived to behave the way they are supposed to because that's their nature in this universe and these new players never knew differently. Only those who experienced the changes during development can compare previous versions to later versions and make their own judgements about which they liked best. We agreed to experience these changes. I think it is definitely helpful to express discontent with changes you don't like. What is not helpful is adding in an accusatory "They're out to get us!" slant to it.
You see the change to arrow slits as an assault upon the players by the devs and implemented to punish them for playing in a way contrary to the developer's wishes.
At release, new players will just use arrow slits as they are with absolutely no negative feelings about how they can't stop zombies from pathing over them or not being able to repair traps through them.
Mercenaries had the benefit of all of their changes (that some might see as punitive if they had played through those changes) being made behind closed doors with just their internal play testers.
It can be known. Report it. The QA team will either thank you for the report or inform you that it is working as intended.
Yeah, I got that. I also get that those who want these strategies would be annoyed that it is being talked about and attention drawn to it if they are afraid that TFP might address it. I'm not sure that they will. Since steep slopes are not a problem any longer for zombie pathing and the road line blocks also do not bug zombie pathing they might not care that both used creatively in tandem create a "forcefield". They will evaluate it at some point (maybe) and decide what they want to do. But everyone should understand that even though this thread has stretched across three pages debating these types of exploits-- this is just player time that is being spent on this and not developer time.
Last edited by a moderator:
JoeDaFrogman
New member
I hereby challenge the POI designers to incorporate Arrowslits into the design of some POI(s) such that they would be used as a floor and no other block or combination of blocks would be a replacement! ;-D
So, to your point about pathing, now I am thinking of how arrow slits SHOULD be used in normal practice(forget about the magical repairing and connecting electrical devices through them). ie, arrowslits perpendicular to the human body as a wall. If the devs were thinking of bringing back something similar to the old A15(ish) spider zombie that climbed walls, well not only would that be cool as heck, but also would be a very positive and expected use case for "we must make these blocks pathable."
Speaking of non pathable blocks I know a few more, will all the non pathable blocks be changed? More importantly, can such a change still allow for melee through them(not really asking you specifically Roland, but more in general).
As well, there are a few blocks that are pathable that honestly I don't feel should be such as the .05 bars (or whatever they are called.) I mean are these infected zombie acrobats? I jest while being serious in wondering why(but not "demanding" a change).
If you are looking for proof that the devs are fixing pathing issues rather than just trolling players-- I guess you'll just have to trust me.
I do trust you, and I don't at the same time(since I don't trust anyone).
There is another possible option to consider: move the arrow slits out into their own shape helper since they are kind of specialty blocks anyway and limit the rotation(and likely remove some of the shapes(mainly the full block variant) This assumes my above use case of no climbing zombies will come true and would also.
blitzkrieg7498
New member
@POCKET951 you dislike what i said, but offer no discourse? do you concede my points are valid regardless of your approval?
roland has. ill read through that first
roland has. ill read through that first
Last edited by a moderator:
JoeDaFrogman
New member
One more you missed that I can agree with being "fixed" is dynamite for digging quests. I know Prime pretty much admitted on stream that most of the fun pimps staff utilized dynamite on dig quests and well, they are players too so they nerfed themselves.
blitzkrieg7498
New member
speed run the whole game? what story is there to complete?
i mentioned mercenaries offhandedly. i mentioned MATT COLVILLE for his work as a game creator and storyteller. you are just as capable of extrapolation.
and just because you dont feel the "GM vs players" mentality doesnt mean the players all feel that way.
Roland
Community Moderator
Speed run the progression and be at endgame status much faster than a natural playthrough would produce. Speed running a game doesn't require story cutscenes to skip
I wasn't extrapolating. I was speaking to the example you provided. As for Matt Colville, I didn't read the link you provided but I will take a look. My point, which I believe is key to the argument is that we are playing the game concurrent to its development. The devs have a roadmap and they are going to make changes that some won't like. Taking the changes as a personal attack against your playstyle is ridiculous. Your FEELINGS are subject to the context in which you live. You feel like the devs gave you the middle finger because they made a change that affected how you like to play the game and decided that they they did it specifically because they were feeling adversarial and wanted you to stop doing what you were doing. There are other people who may pick up the game today and when they play with the current changes they will not have any of those FEELINGS because to them its just the way the game is. So can the truth be found by looking at feelings? No. The changes being made are purely to polish and tighten the game in the ways the developers want it to be done and not out of any hostility they feel towards the players and how they want to play the game.
But see? I'm not basing my knowledge off of my feelings. I'm basing it off my experience and in listening to the team in meetings and participating in discussions with them. Part of what I do is direct their attention to threads that I suspect they may not have seen. I've directed them to a number of these types of threads and passed on a number of exploits and every single time they didn't care how the players were using blocks to defend their bases-- unless it involved a bug. If a bug was involved then they cared about fixing the bug. These aren't my feelings I'm sharing.
I understand that players may feel that the devs are out to get them and I also know that personal feelings seem to be the highest litmus test on what is good and true these days regardless of anything else. That's why I'm here dispensing what I know to be true based on my position in the company as a means of dispelling what some loudly proclaim that they believe to be true based on their feelings
POCKET951
New member
Roland has dissected what you said better than I ever could.
I just disagree with this whole "TFP are wasting valuable dev time fixing bug X when they could be developing feature Y or rebalancing feature Z" type arguments/opinions because TFP have stated in multiple post in the forums that minor things like this don't require alot of dev time.
If for whatever reason it does it will get put on a back burner and solved later, as Laz said in this thread earlier, Roadmarks being 'blocks' was a placeholder solution
so if TFP figure a better way to implement road markings in RWG than this problem will solve it self. if there is a simpler more elegant solution I am sure it wouldn't take to long or alot of resources for TFP to fix either.
TLDR: I don't think your points are valid.
Roland
Community Moderator
I watched the first two episodes and they are really good. I'm sure there will be more instruction about GM and player interactions but in the second episode it was interesting that he was talking about the setup aspect of running a D&D game and he made a map. He then said that often when running an adventure you discover something that doesn't make sense and you want to change it and sometimes you might be able to make changes on the fly but other times you might have to wait until the next time you run that adventure and that's okay because you are always working towards becoming a better GM and creating a better adventure.
This is a screenshot where he shows that he reworked the map he made to have the trap be after the offering room because he decided it made no sense to have it before the room where people anciently would have made pilgrimages to go to that room. So he made a change. What if some player felt betrayed by that change and assumed Matt was just trying to kill them or ruin their stealthing before the room with the boss instead of the room with the underlings? Would their feelings make it so?
The designing of the game is where TFP is still at and just like Matt decided to change the location of his trap to make the adventure make more sense to him and hopefully his players but without any malice towards them, so is TFP making adjustments to their game during its setup phase. Thanks to the Early Access model we get to experience that process.
Now if there is a specific episode that speaks to the point you are trying to make in how TFP should be more like Matt in how they have the game interact with the players I would be glad to watch. They are very interesting.
Roland
Community Moderator
Okay, now I watched the episode about railroading and can kind of see where you might be coming from. I agree that a GM that railroads his players into that one moment that he wants them to have and so confines their choices and their agency is a bad thing. But I also don't think this principle applies to the level we are currently at in the development of the game.
Right now, the developer's role is not game master players but it is to set up and create the adventure. In the video, Matt talks about how in The Lord of the Rings it could be interpreted that the Fellowship was railroaded into Moria because they were forced back from going over the mountains. He states that something like that could be railroading but it could also simply be that the Fellowship wasn't prepared and rolled really badly and that the GM didn't really do anything intentional to force them the way he wanted them to go.
The problem is that is not where we are. Where we are is that TFP is making the dice that will be used and every once in awhile a 20-sided dice slips into the hands of a player where instead of being numbered 1-20 the die has 16-20 repeated four times and obviously the player loves playing with that die. Once it is determined that an unfair die is being played with in the game, it is replaced with the standard die that goes from 1-20 and the player is disappointed about being punished.
We are still in the phase of determining the rules of the game and establishing what is going to be allowed and disallowed from a rules perspective. This is all way before looking at whether a GM is stifling player choice by insisting on his way or the highway.
For us who are playing while the rules are being written it can be jarring and there will be times when something ends up being more restrictive. But it isn't to punish. It is to hone in on what will make the game better in the opinion of the game creator. Every time there is a change that restricts we get posts from people who say that freedom is gone-- until they are proven wrong a short time later by others who innovate adapt and overcome. The game still has a lot of sandbox qualities to it but it also is a game with rules and those rules are being worked on while we play. There is nothing intentionally punitive about the changes any more than making sure everyone is using fair dice.
Right now, the developer's role is not game master players but it is to set up and create the adventure. In the video, Matt talks about how in The Lord of the Rings it could be interpreted that the Fellowship was railroaded into Moria because they were forced back from going over the mountains. He states that something like that could be railroading but it could also simply be that the Fellowship wasn't prepared and rolled really badly and that the GM didn't really do anything intentional to force them the way he wanted them to go.
The problem is that is not where we are. Where we are is that TFP is making the dice that will be used and every once in awhile a 20-sided dice slips into the hands of a player where instead of being numbered 1-20 the die has 16-20 repeated four times and obviously the player loves playing with that die. Once it is determined that an unfair die is being played with in the game, it is replaced with the standard die that goes from 1-20 and the player is disappointed about being punished.
We are still in the phase of determining the rules of the game and establishing what is going to be allowed and disallowed from a rules perspective. This is all way before looking at whether a GM is stifling player choice by insisting on his way or the highway.
For us who are playing while the rules are being written it can be jarring and there will be times when something ends up being more restrictive. But it isn't to punish. It is to hone in on what will make the game better in the opinion of the game creator. Every time there is a change that restricts we get posts from people who say that freedom is gone-- until they are proven wrong a short time later by others who innovate adapt and overcome. The game still has a lot of sandbox qualities to it but it also is a game with rules and those rules are being worked on while we play. There is nothing intentionally punitive about the changes any more than making sure everyone is using fair dice.
blitzkrieg7498
New member
@Roland there wasnt a particular video i had in mind; ive watched only about half of his videos so i cant remember where i heard what, but basically "retaliatory behavior," JUSTIFIED or not, can have long lasting implications on the relationship between the player and creator, and any changes need to be transparent and/or talked about outside of session (in this case patch notes {i.e. no more sneaking in "all random gen workbenches and chem stations are broken," that leads to further distrust}). In the example used, Matt realized that the trap made NO GOD DAMN SENSE (as austin from game theory would say) because normal people would traffic through the area. People just coming for pilgrimage are ok; people sneaking into the back area are not. He made a change to keep verisimilitude in tact... unlike zombies going into "engineer mode." When people stop to go "wait why....." its not good in most instances. I do realize that Matt would be akin to dev and mod in a video game analogy. I also have GM'd a sandbox module and know exactly how "oh ill change this next time i run this campaign" works. Theres also another video of his going over that if one player receives a lot of attention, by default, you alienate others, and can make them feel less important than others. Whether thats true or not doesnt affect how the player feels. And sure theres players saying "whatever, doesnt bother/affect me," but thats no reason to dismiss how other players feel, were all a part of this.
On your die analogy, what about handing out dice that only roll nat 1s? As others have said, now the arrow slits dont even function as they should. So how do you justify "taking away a little fun for some" to "ruining a mechanic for all?" (and bro dont get me started on dice probabilty, ive witnessed Wil Wheaton not roll above a 10 for 6 hours and watched my buddy roll nat 20's like he had loaded dice). Hell, this past wednesday in the game I play in (not GM) my character rolled low on initiative (so i went last in turn order) and got stunned repeatedly until i was out of HP. I didnt claim the GM was out to get me, nor did i make a big stink that RNGsus was not on my side that day. The GM was doing what made sense, and acted accordingly. Now conversely, one of the people we were fighting had "unlimited ki" (im not going to bother explaining, just imagine infinite ap bullets vs 100 normal bullets), but the GM didnt nerf that even after a couple other of us who GM pointed out it was imbalanced. That was something that "should not have been allowed," but the GM here is new and learning still.
I have dabbled in programming so i know these fixes are no where near as immediate as they can be in D&D, and that one line of code can stop a whole method from executing correctly. Im not saying they need to be "fixed yesterday."
i still stand behind my statement of there really isnt a speedrun when theres no ending; no major objective other than survive and "git gud." I can concede the "reaching endgame status" as part of being endgame, but miss
TFP need to properly compensate Jawoodle for his time. Time is money and hes spent a lot of time breaking things for TFP to fix. You wouldnt dare put up a Network without paying hackers to stress test it first.
All this still just proves my first point that this is detracting from more important issues, whether it be the players or devs, or, as you said, its being talked about "ad naseum"
On a side note, im glad youre enjoying Matt's videos as well, and appreciate that you invested the time to watch just for discussion purposes.
On your die analogy, what about handing out dice that only roll nat 1s? As others have said, now the arrow slits dont even function as they should. So how do you justify "taking away a little fun for some" to "ruining a mechanic for all?" (and bro dont get me started on dice probabilty, ive witnessed Wil Wheaton not roll above a 10 for 6 hours and watched my buddy roll nat 20's like he had loaded dice). Hell, this past wednesday in the game I play in (not GM) my character rolled low on initiative (so i went last in turn order) and got stunned repeatedly until i was out of HP. I didnt claim the GM was out to get me, nor did i make a big stink that RNGsus was not on my side that day. The GM was doing what made sense, and acted accordingly. Now conversely, one of the people we were fighting had "unlimited ki" (im not going to bother explaining, just imagine infinite ap bullets vs 100 normal bullets), but the GM didnt nerf that even after a couple other of us who GM pointed out it was imbalanced. That was something that "should not have been allowed," but the GM here is new and learning still.
I have dabbled in programming so i know these fixes are no where near as immediate as they can be in D&D, and that one line of code can stop a whole method from executing correctly. Im not saying they need to be "fixed yesterday."
i still stand behind my statement of there really isnt a speedrun when theres no ending; no major objective other than survive and "git gud." I can concede the "reaching endgame status" as part of being endgame, but miss
TFP need to properly compensate Jawoodle for his time. Time is money and hes spent a lot of time breaking things for TFP to fix. You wouldnt dare put up a Network without paying hackers to stress test it first.
All this still just proves my first point that this is detracting from more important issues, whether it be the players or devs, or, as you said, its being talked about "ad naseum"
On a side note, im glad youre enjoying Matt's videos as well, and appreciate that you invested the time to watch just for discussion purposes.