V3.0.1 Stable

I"M sorry but you Have Ruined this game for me ... Why
1) .. I can NOT even make a New Generated Map that even comes Close in v2.0-2.5 ... The sizing is all off compared to older Map ... I'm a forest player and normally ran with 62-67% forest then desert/snow around 9-11% and the other 2 as small as I could get them.

We need character creation back ... Once in game they all look the same (they all look like Allie _ when I'm trying to use Kiri) ... wasn't like this before the v3.0 Update

Just a couple thoughts ... BUT the main one is, map making is terrible NOW
Thank you
 
gpcstargate said:
I"M sorry but you Have Ruined this game for me ... Why
1) .. I can NOT even make a New Generated Map that even comes Close in v2.0-2.5 ... The sizing is all off compared to older Map ... I'm a forest player and normally ran with 62-67% forest then desert/snow around 9-11% and the other 2 as small as I could get them.

We need character creation back ... Once in game they all look the same (they all look like Allie _ when I'm trying to use Kiri) ... wasn't like this before the v3.0 Update

Just a couple thoughts ... BUT the main one is, map making is terrible NOW
Thank you
Click to expand...
You can't control town sizes from RWG itself, but you can still control biome sizes. If you're referring to town sizes, those have been based on what biome they are in since at least 2.0 and maybe even back to 1.0, with the largest in the wasteland and only smaller towns in the forest. I don't disagree that it's a bad decision when you can't choose to have it be more random, but that's how it's been for a long time now. If you are on PC or are hosting the game from a PC or server, you can edit or mod the rwgmixer.xml file to change what size towns can be in each biome pretty easily. Alternatively, if you want to take some time to learn it or just want to use a default preset, Teragon can gives you a LOT more control over your maps. But it does have a steep learning curve if you want to get the most out of it.

And if you really wanted to, you can also just make a map that is mostly wasteland and then use an image editor to swap the colors for the wasteland and forest in the biomes.png file for the map and then you'll have the "forest" have the largest towns, though you'll also have Joel in the forest and Rekt in the wasteland unless you also edit the trader locations in the prefabs.xml file.
 
1. I’ve just seen a video on YouTube about this Teragon – can’t the developers implement a Teragon or something similar, given that it’s so good?
2. Chicken coop
3. Poi Airport
I’m very interested in that
 
@faatal can you unlock the developer items for the console version as well?

The creative menu is very limited compared to the PC version.
Building would be much easier if at least all the items were included, like the Super Digger or other things, for when you just want to build and test your base.
 
CottonEyeJoe said:
@faatal can you unlock the developer items for the console version as well?

The creative menu is very limited compared to the PC version.
Building would be much easier if at least all the items were included, like the Super Digger or other things, for when you just want to build and test your base.
Click to expand...
For creative menu access, you should ask Microsoft and Sony as they're the ones that didn't want many of these features accessible on consoles... And good luck! 😁
 
Siewca Chaosu said:
1. I’ve just seen a video on YouTube about this Teragon – can’t the developers implement a Teragon or something similar, given that it’s so good?
2. Chicken coop
3. Poi Airport
I’m very interested in that
Click to expand...
1. I'm sure that TFP knows about Teragon... Maybe they could hire the guy who made it?
2. Chicken coops are coming in a future update (3.x.x???)
3. Airport? I guess a small airport could be a thing, but then they would need to create some airplane models (damaged?) for it to look good. Which reminds me that there should be crashed airplanes here and there in the world to make things look more realistic. I guess in TFP's world, planes were not invented yet... Except for that one that flies over every once in a while. 😁
 
Space4Ace said:
3. Airport? I guess a small airport could be a thing, but then they would need to create some airplane models (damaged?) for it to look good. Which reminds me that there should be crashed airplanes here and there in the world to make things look more realistic. I guess in TFP's world, planes were not invented yet... Except for that one that flies over every once in a while. 😁
Click to expand...

At any time about 12.000 to 14.000 are in the air according to estimations based on daily liftoffs and landings. A lot of those would fall into oceans because they would fly straight until their fuel runs out because of auto pilot, or would be international flights over water anyway. Still, lets assume 10.000 of those drop over land. Earths land mass is 149 million km². That means one plane every 14900 km². A 7d2d map is max 12km(?) squared = 144 km². The chance that an airplane dropped into a 7d2d map would be 1 in 100.

Correction: If we only take the numbers for the USA, there are 9.8 million km² and about 5500 planes at any time. Just taking the numbers without deducting anything for autopilots makes it more like 1 in 12.
 
Last edited:
meganoth said:
At any time about 12.000 to 14.000 are in the air according to estimations based on daily liftoffs and landings. A lot of those would fall into oceans because they would fly straight until their fuel runs out because of auto pilot, or would be international flights over water anyway. Still, lets assume 10.000 of those drop over land. Earths land mass is 149 million km². That means one plane every 14900 km². A 7d2d map is max 12km(?) squared = 144 km². The chance that an airplane dropped into a 7d2d map would be 1 in 100.

Airplane density should be higher in the US than almost everywhere else, but also concentrated around airports, so make this 1 in 50.
Click to expand...

Nice. I would add in that commercial airplanes typically limit their fuel to the amount needed to reach the destination + some amount to account for contingencies. (This is why the 9/11 hijackers targeted airplanes departing from Massachusetts for west coast destinations when they intended to fly them into the WTC in NY: the airplanes would be carrying much more fuel)

So the distribution of crashed airplanes would be a good bit less random, with the highest distribution likely falling in a large circle around major hubs.

Of course that doesn't account for zombies on board going into rage mode and just smashing ■■■■ once there's nobody on board left alive. So probably a predisposition towards crashing on or near land rather than far out into the ocean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top