Let's discuss Learn By Doing for hopefully the last time.

[OgreSlayeR]

I wish you guys would stick to the topic as I have laid out in the OP when it comes to discussing the mechanics of a LBD system. I personally think the hybrid system I have thought out would serve LBD the best. It solves the problem of not tying crafting to LBD and the respec problem. I also tried to think out how action skills are gained so it doesn't feel tedious or isn't abusible for the most part.

The only thing I would change in the OP is the Cardio/Athletics skill. I would change it so levels are gained by fighting in melee combat and possibly also by mining/harvest things instead of just leveling it by running around. It could give either max stamina or increased stamina gain per level instead of just affecting running ability.

Let's not discuss worse versions of LBD. I think most of us already agree for example crafting should not be tied to LBD at all. I also still support keeping perks as they are, just possibly with a bit of balance with LBD in mind. Magazines should stay as well cause I don't see them removing them and they certainly work better than LBD for crafting.

As I said, personally I think what I proposed is a good baseline and it can be expanded on.

 

[theFlu]

This is showing an example to the reasonable conclusion for the opinion "However statically the majority are unhappy with the game direction" is factually correct.

"Game direction" is still not comparable to "anything negative about the game".
Even if it was, the data to make claims about either for the majority isn't available in public; most people don't make their opinions known.

Do you understand the difference between the statements:
1) I don't think you can make that claim.
2) I think that claim is wrong.

Say, the backside of the moon; we've never seen it. If you were to say "it's pink"; I'd go with both 1) and 2).

If you were to ask me for an answer, I'd go with, 1) and a guess: "Well, I can't make a claim, but I would guess it's pretty similar on both sides. It might have more or less craters due to collisions or some tidal physics grinding it down, but it's probably pretty similar to what we see. But I can't know."

"Majority of 7dtd players thinks X" isn't really a measurable target, thus 1).
I don't think your claim is wrong, I just think you can't make it.

 

[Charger265]

"Game direction" is still not comparable to "anything negative about the game".
Even if it was, the data to make claims about either for the majority isn't available in public; most people don't make their opinions known.

You must understand the play on words and the statistical probability
The quote will provide some insight .
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right."

Say, the backside of the moon; we've never seen it. If you were to say "it's pink"; I'd go with both 1) and 2).

statistical probability says neither. Linear thinking has resulted in a fallacy

The argument you are using is looking through a black and white lens.
However you are really close to getting it in your next example. The probability of the backside being the same as the front side is statically the correct answer... Now if people would go back and read what i wrote thats exactly what was said.
Due to the natural human nature to defend and a black and white lens resulted in spam bomb.

 

[theFlu]

statically the correct answer...

No, it isn't. You're measuring a different thing than what you're making the claim of. Yes, it's all "moon", but the side not "protected by earth's gravity" may be quite different to what we see/measure.
It's all "players", but the ones Not speaking, may well be very different from the ones speaking.

You can't make a statistical claim of a phenomenon you haven't measured. You can project a GUESS by measuring something proximate, but you can't claim it to be proven.

 

[Sapient6]

I wish you guys would stick to the topic as I have laid out in the OP when it comes to discussing the mechanics of a LBD system.

Generally speaking, forum people are disinclined to do that. Topics evolve via the interactions of multiple people.

 

[Soulmonster]

If a subset of data is going to reflect the majority, two things must be true: the subset must be picked on random and the subset must be sufficiently large. The larger the subset of randomly picked data, the closer it gets to reflect the entire data.

This is why predictions on, say, election voting is based on randomly asking a statistically sufficiently large sample of people. If you were to only ask, say, middle aged, white men living in Alabama, you would get a skewed result not representing the entire electorate.

Similarly, if you were to gauge what most players think about a computer game, it makes little sense to base that study on only people who complain about the game, or even only people who speak out about the game online (because we are more likely to express our opinions when disappointed than when we are content, a well known psychological fact).

To get a statistically relevant conclusion about what players of 7DTD think about the game, TFP could ask 384 random gamers and get a result that with 95% likelihood would reflect the overall opinion (based on the assumption there are 200k players, and with commonly used statistical assumptions).

 

[zztong]

At no point did i ever say that.

Then I apologize for misunderstanding.

I wish you guys would stick to the topic as I have laid out in the OP when it comes to discussing the mechanics of a LBD system.

I shall comply with this wish. I regret having contributed to the distraction.

Along those lines, I've run out of suggestions. The approach I thought was the most viable method for a hybrid system (using the challenge system) did not get a favorable reception here.

My second favorite approach would limit LBD to influencing the accuracy of ranged weapons and the stamina use of melee weapons by about 10%. That is, without any LBD experience, a ranged weapon's target reticle would be 10% larger and a melee weapon's stamina usage would be 10% greater. With more LBD experience, that 10% penalty would eventually reach 0%.

After that, so far, my preference would be to just leave the current spending-points system as being the most practical and expressive of player goals.

 

[Archael]

After that, so far, my preference would be to just leave the current spending-points system as being the most practical and expressive of player goals.

I would restructure skill trees. Perks affected by attributes sounds fine, but... It isn't. Why, when I'm going mining, I have to be bound to shotguns and sledgehammers?

LBD in case of action skills is fun - uses rifles, becoming better at rifles.

But magazines are bad, they restrict all playstyles as nothing else in the game.
My idea from the very beginning (around a16 iirc) is to learn to craft better items by using those items. So to learn how to upgrade iron axe, we need to use iron axe, either for combat or for wood chopping. To learn steel axe we need to master iron axe and use it some more. Then we need to use steel axe to learn to make better steel axes.

 

[Charger265]

You can't make a statistical claim of a phenomenon you haven't measured. You can project a GUESS by measuring something proximate, but you can't claim it to be proven.

Just because you dont understand it and you havent measured it...
Go back and read it... I said statically i am correct...
Why is it so hard to understand such a simple concept?

If a subset of data is going to reflect the majority, two things must be true: the subset must be picked on random and the subset must be sufficiently large. The larger the subset of randomly picked data, the closer it gets to reflect the entire data.

This is why predictions on, say, election voting is based on randomly asking a statistically sufficiently large sample of people. If you were to only ask, say, middle aged, white men living in Alabama, you would get a skewed result not representing the entire electorate.

That is correct....

Similarly, if you were to gauge what most players think about a computer game, it makes little sense to base that study on only people who complain about the game, or even only people who speak out about the game online (because we are more likely to express our opinions when disappointed than when we are content, a well known psychological fact).

This is where you may have misunderstood the data. The data included statics on every post/comment/thread. Then split with a negative connotation then apply a know model to offset the human factor for complaining vs content. I have said this is previous posts.

The problem i see is that people here dont want to accept the data not because it flawed but mainly tied to a human emotion.

I wish you guys would stick to the topic

I see a lot of threads getting hijacked due to people not wanting to accept that there is an issue and it needs to be address.
I dont have any great ideas to get to the bottom of the issue of find a way to come to some form of consensus on this forum as its very polarizing. I have very little hope now being here for a bit of time to have TFP's devs actually look here for any sort of understanding of the issue. Its clear they prefer other options.
The only thing we can hope for is to drop the suggestion into the Pimp dream and hope and prey they look at it.

Other than that the ideas you have is very much along the line of what i could come up with as a good happy medium trying to keep the best of both systems.

 

[theFlu]

Go back and read it... I said statically i am correct...
Why is it so hard to understand such a simple concept?

Yes, you have said you're statically correct. I can understand that just fine, and agree.. you have indeed said so.
Doesn't make it correct.

Nor does it make sense (static vs statistics), but that's just a jargon error on your part; nothing to worry about.

 

[Charger265]

Nor does it make sense (static vs statistics), but that's just a jargon error on your part; nothing to worry about.

Im not sure what your trying to convey here.
At no point have i used static. However i have used "statistical"

Definition:
Static refers to something fixed, unchanging, or at rest, while statistical relates to the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data to understand patterns and make inferences.
"Statistics" refers to the broader field of study, encompassing the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data.
"Statistical" is an adjective describing something related to or based on statistics, like a "statistical analysis" or "statistical data".

As for the notion of it being a correct analysis or an incorrect analysis its up for judgment. The argument that has been presented all the way through is that i cant know and there for its incorrect. Which is not a valid argument. however it can be described as radical skepticism.
I do understand people will dismiss the analysis based the distrust of the data or skeptical of the user who presented the data. To dismiss the data entirely when no other data has been presented or even collected is unscientific

But lets get this thread back on track for the OP

 

[theFlu]

At no point have i used static. However i have used "statistical"

What thread are you reading? Literally in the thing I quoted....

For curiosity, I searched your posts for "statically"; 10 hits. "Statistically" five hits, one of which was a quote from someone else. Didn't bother checking further. Feed that to your AI and stop outright lying to the poor thing ... it doesn't work with humans, don't get trained for it working on an AI...

But lets get this thread back on track for the OP

Yes, let's stop lying here, seems rather pointless.

 

[Charger265]

What thread are you reading? Literally in the thing I quoted....

Look i dont want to insult your intelligence. This is why i will provided the definition of the words.
Your original statement was "static vs statistics" I have not used either of the two
However you have now changed it to statically & statistically.

There is a clear distinction between the understanding of the words. You are fee to call me a liar but at this point its clear you dont understand the concept or the difference between the definitions. I will have to give you the opportunity to understand the misguided judgment and allow you the opportunity to retract your statement.

 

[Kalen]

Your original statement was "static vs statistics" I have not used either of the two
However you have now changed it to statically & statistically.

Dude.... I'm loathe to get in the middle of this.... but I think you're missing that he's calling out that you said "statically" (which you did) where you clearly meant "statistically"

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

Dude.... I'm loathe to get in the middle of this.... but I think you're missing that he's calling out that you said "statically" (which you did) where you clearly meant "statistically"

That happens a lot around here.

 

[Kyoji]

Since actual data is more useful than conjecture, I'll just add that I don't like LBD. I might consider a hybrid option where it isn't used at all with any form of crafting, and where anything related to weapons requires killing something and not just swinging a weapon around, and where you don't have to jump hundreds of times just to have a high parkour. But if any of those things are there, then I don't want it.

Now, that is one known data point. That is hardly a view of what everyone else thinks. Some will agree with me and some will not. That's true about anything. It is not possible to make everyone happy. Trying to do so just muddles a game and leaves everyone upset. Why people seem to think that every game should be an exact fit to what they want, I'm not sure. If you don't like a game, there are plenty of others to choose from that will be more to your liking. I move on to other games all the time when I don't like a game.

From what I've read I think a lot of the people asking for LBD are wanting this changes as well. I don't think many enjoyed the craft 100 clubs tricks, even people wanting LBD.

Of course this is mostly from what I've read so take that with a grain of salt. I do find most people wanting older systems back don't want them vanilla but touched up. I think a core issue people had was completely changing the systems instead of just properly balancing.

Granted I don't forsee us going back to LBD, but anyway.

 

[Charger265]

From what I've read I think a lot of the people asking for LBD are wanting this changes as well. I don't think many enjoyed the craft 100 clubs tricks, even people wanting LBD.

From just about all the mentions of a LBD return. Most have pointed out they dont want a return of the LBD crafting. As much as i dislike the current book system i think that crafting would best stay on a book system.

 

[Soulmonster]

This is where you may have misunderstood the data. The data included statics on every post/comment/thread. Then split with a negative connotation then apply a know model to offset the human factor for complaining vs content. I have said this is previous posts.

What's a "know model"? Did you mean a known model that corrects bias that comes from people being more likely to to post when they are unhappy? If so, what model exists that has been calibrated for 7DTD online reviews?

 

[Charger265]

What's a "know model"? Did you mean a known model that corrects bias that comes from people being more likely to to post when they are unhappy? If so, what model exists that has been calibrated for 7DTD online reviews?

Ok that depends on the data your working with... When dealing with structured data i prefer SBI Feedback which i use on a daily basis, but when dealing with the game reviews like here then you would use SAM (Sentiment Analysis Models).
There is no need to calibrate the model specifically to 7DTD the model already tailored specifically for review systems and NLP (natural language processing) As part of the model it provides a percentage based score. This can be broken down to specific features or aspects. Eg/ finding what people hate the most about the game.
Then you need to apply a bias adjustment. When looking at the studies done in the area it works out be about 2 or 3 to 1. I applied 3:1 due to the hype factor.

You can see its work here:

C

Post in thread 'Time to reflect'

Jul 30, 2025

Ok to remove all biased aspect i thought i would let Ai do an in depth analysis. used my API to push it out to Grok/chatgpt/gemini/deepseek
then asked it to combine and summarize the conclusion.

Community Backlash and Steam Rating DeclineOverview of Backlash:

The 7 Days to Die community has been vocal about their dissatisfaction with the game’s direction post-1.0 release (July 2024) and subsequent updates (V2.0, V2.1, V2.2). Key points of contention include:

Slow Updates and Content Focus:
Players criticize the game for receiving only one major update per year, often focusing on new...

• Charger265

• 
• 

 

[theFlu]

Look i dont want to insult your intelligence.

Hah, you're busting at the seams for an opportunity. But you instead opt for lies and misdirects; I don't think you've found one.

Me bringing up the typo in the first place was a bit of a test. A test to see if you are willing to admit any fault. You obviously aren't. For a typo. That level of "wanting to look perfect" correlates pretty strongly with a certain unpleasant personality type.

Your original statement was "static vs statistics" I have not used either of the two
However you have now changed it to statically & statistically.

I never said you've used the word "static". I gave the base words "static vs statistic" as a reference to the reader, to point out the nature of the typo.
And from there, not being able to admit to a ■■■■ TYPO and your perceived perfection being on the line, you suddenly lost the ability to project from proximal data. The very statistical trick your claims about "a marginal majority" depend on.

Just stop digging.