bloom_meister
Banned
LCB's exist for the sole reason of protecting a players base. the game IS designed for that, pvp or pve is irrelevant as you well know
PC [A17 Spoilers] Claim Blocks!
- Thread starter KingSlayerGM
- Start date
Blight
New member
@TFP, you guys want a fully modable game but now we get a restriction with the claimblocks and we cant mod it? lol
Why did you want to control server owners?
Thats the same with custom chatcolors, it was removed a few alphas ago cause of the
"rainbow chat messages" - on some servers.
a few weeks later was it back, after some server owners complaining about it.
Whats the next step, UI back to hardcoded?
Give us the choice. Thats a great game, cause so much things are open for modding.
Why did you want to control server owners?
Thats the same with custom chatcolors, it was removed a few alphas ago cause of the
"rainbow chat messages" - on some servers.
a few weeks later was it back, after some server owners complaining about it.
Whats the next step, UI back to hardcoded?
Give us the choice. Thats a great game, cause so much things are open for modding.
Randy Savage
New member
Seems like we are "fighting" a loosing battle. SMH.
They just don't get it.
The changes they have made almost burries any reasonable PvP, but because PvP is a sin on this game and anyone who enjoys it should go away right?
When I don't feel like defending my stuff from other humans I've been known to play PvE and I can easily see the disadvantages of the new system.
Last edited by a moderator:
We've always needed a means of creating remote safehouses to stay the night away from home since RWG opened up and everything to spread out several kilometers apart. TFP obviously doesn't care, or they'd have done it ten alphas ago.
If you want a "safe" place to stay, you have to build your own. Hijacking POI's is ALWAYS a bad idea if it's not always going to be your home-base of operation and sole spawn point.
If you want a "safe" place to stay, you have to build your own. Hijacking POI's is ALWAYS a bad idea if it's not always going to be your home-base of operation and sole spawn point.
Pizzalicious
New member
invalid! Why have a setting to turn on pvp then
General Lee
New member
As developers, y'all want to make a great game AND make lots of money. Listen to your players, it's pretty obvious what they want. This change is a step, a big one, in the absolutely wrong direction. This not only takes away from the game, it could hurt sales as well. We want the freedom back that we had for years, the devs want money. This should be a no-brainer, y'all. We win, y'all win, everyone gets what they want.
JCrook1028
New member
Um.........no. LCB's for PvE (which is what the game is designed as) games exist for:
a.) blocking zombie spawns now in A17
b.) Allowing you to pick up workbenches/lights etc that you have crafted. THIS is the primary use for the LCB.
Poojam
New member
As far as I can tell, Madmole wants to make a Skyrim style RPG with voxels, farming, zombies, and base building. He doesn't care about you and me, or how we have come to play (and enjoy) the game. This is not an open world survival experience that allows for you to explore, do as you please, collaborate and/or compete with each other. For the unimaginative and uncompetitive, that sort of recipe spells boredom and q tabs after about 30 game days. More content you say? Blasphemy. Make existing content last longer is much easier to code plus we can set it up to include microtransactions for players with wallets so they can bypass the grind, for a fee, of course.
Lowbudgetname
New member
okay number one, i dont like your attitude. number two, in a16.4 it literally says under the lcb's description that it is used to claim your base in -PVP- or something to that effect. I'm triggered, your wrong, and please show yourself the door.
I'm so tired of all the PvE players like this acting like this game can only be for one or the other. if given the right balance, both forms of play compliment each other extremely well.
oh and as far as im concerned there was no issue with the way LCB's were before this update. if you have players taking up too much land on a server IMO it is the administrators responsibility to moderate that, not the devs, not your mothers, not the governments.....admins. if they deem that it is acceptable play, then thats the way it is.
if there is a game issue with them, then it just needs to be fixed by the devs or a new (but equal) solution needs to be put in place.
THERE CANNOT BE A LIMIT ON CLAIMS IN A MULTIPLAYER SETTING. IT WONT WORK.
General Lee
New member
Totally unrelated, but I couldn't resist. I see you have a Smuckers jar for an avatar. Awesome jars for all sorts of things once emptied, lol. Takes me back. 
chill
New member
Could not agree more. From my own thread on the subject of suggestions for A17.2 here https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?94302-A-Few-Thoughts-amp-Suggestions-for-17-point-TWO&p=872526&viewfull=1#post872526 ;
"Why not implement some basic good design policy here?
Example: When changing core gameplay mechanics like range of sound or land claim functionality where there are likely to be massive divides in not only desired outcomes between different game modes, but even between servers -- why not make these changes simple server configurable options?
Specific example #1: Sound PVE Mode On [0/1] going into A14 would have been a godsend. The PVP servers with old sound range would be so much more fun -- and popular!
Specific example #2: Claim PVE Mode On [0/1] going into A17 --> nobody complains about the claim situation at all. Want the solution provided here in A17 to the issue of POI's being claimed? Enable Claim PVE Mode. Hell, have it enabled by default if you think it's the best. Watch all the PVP players continue to explore much more complex and useful mechanics that come from being able to layer, overlap, hide, and sprinkle claims around [for a significant resource cost and investment in crafting time] for various complex purposes/battles. No complaints from them it's an easy option to solve in this case.
Just an idea that would make everyone happy and completely solve the issue :jaded: :rapture: "
I also had a bunch of other detailed reasons why this change is ridiculous & unnecessary in my original (wordy) thread. Thought I'd just copy & paste the obvious and relatively easy solution for everyone the devs could realistically implement here.
Last edited by a moderator:
chill
New member
Sadly I am forced to agree with everyone else that said this is insanely ignorant/oblivious.
More importantly, it actually doesn't solve the problem you just brought up -- and hilariously, there are much better/easier ways I can think of in 2 seconds that do solve it and wouldn't result in this huge crapstorm.
"The previous spam of claim blocks was a cancer" --> even with this ridiculous single claim limitation you'll still have [noobs] joining servers left and right and claiming POI's. Of course, now the claim blocks will have vastly larger radius and strength because of this change, actually making the problem you are trying to solve directly worse.
"The previous spam of claim blocks was a cancer" --> so the obvious non-ridiculous game-mechanic-destroying way to cut down on "cancerous" amounts of claims blocks make them have a much higher crafting resource cost by default. 10x the current cost still resulting in cancerous amounts of claims? How about 100x? Is mining iron for 2 hours with an auger to get enough to make a second claim finally getting down to non-cancerous levels? Great --> set that as the default.
Of course, still doesn't solve the problem of tons of what a majority of noobs inevitably, on every server, do with their original claim blocks (go to the nearest POI's and claim them). The "cancer" you are referring to, lets be honest.
"The previous spam of claim blocks was a cancer" --> Actual solution to the actual problem of tons of "cancerous" POI-claiming noob claim blocks? Server-configurable anti-claim POI protection settings. Gee, as the game was in A16 I couldn't claim within a good radius of the traders even on a big random gen map. Gee, perhaps that same functionality could be made configurable and applied to certain POI's? Gee, wouldn't that perfectly solve the problem without destroying all the good and existing freedom with the mechanic as is?
Hmmm...
It's a head scratcher. :cocksure: :jaded:
Last edited by a moderator:
bloom_meister
Banned
Complete rubbish and you know it
LCB have always been about protecting peoples bases, end of, the spawn thing was, up to A16, supposed to be done by sleeping bags, get your facts right
Kam R.
New member
Hmmm.
The bedroll as Z-spawn stopper was never good, because usually you wanted no Z-spawns in a home base, especially POI ones, but as soon as you'd drop a new roll to have a closer spawnpoint to whatever dangerous activity lay ahead, your home would get rekt. Also It didn't work when offline. The bedroll should be your spawn and that's it. So that part is cool now in my book.
But the claim as spawn stopper now has the same old flaw, because of the one-only limit.
And even if the one-only limit would be buffed to a say 3-5 only limit to allow having more than one base, it still would be bad for defense in PvP.
WHAT IF:
The claim block no longer is an actual block but rather a marker only the player, who placed it can see and also remove?
Or if the block was always invincible to the degree of not abiding the laws of game physics, meaning it would have the SI of an air block (none) and even if every other block of the base around it would get carved away, it would still float in the same position?
There could be a variable limit of how many such marker blocks a player can have (for more than one base) and instead of deactivating older blocks when placing new ones, the player has to manually remove an old one themselves first to free up a "slot" for a new one.
Then the claim could have all the functions old and new, or not?
The only impact it has on PvP is that raiders now couldn't remove it at all, but compared to a base with 100s of claims as it's been described by the Pr0s, would not having the option to un-safe a base you're raiding be that much of a loss?
The bedroll as Z-spawn stopper was never good, because usually you wanted no Z-spawns in a home base, especially POI ones, but as soon as you'd drop a new roll to have a closer spawnpoint to whatever dangerous activity lay ahead, your home would get rekt. Also It didn't work when offline. The bedroll should be your spawn and that's it. So that part is cool now in my book.
But the claim as spawn stopper now has the same old flaw, because of the one-only limit.
And even if the one-only limit would be buffed to a say 3-5 only limit to allow having more than one base, it still would be bad for defense in PvP.
WHAT IF:
The claim block no longer is an actual block but rather a marker only the player, who placed it can see and also remove?
Or if the block was always invincible to the degree of not abiding the laws of game physics, meaning it would have the SI of an air block (none) and even if every other block of the base around it would get carved away, it would still float in the same position?
There could be a variable limit of how many such marker blocks a player can have (for more than one base) and instead of deactivating older blocks when placing new ones, the player has to manually remove an old one themselves first to free up a "slot" for a new one.
Then the claim could have all the functions old and new, or not?
The only impact it has on PvP is that raiders now couldn't remove it at all, but compared to a base with 100s of claims as it's been described by the Pr0s, would not having the option to un-safe a base you're raiding be that much of a loss?
Last edited by a moderator:
General Lee
New member
Agreed. Having the bedroll prevent zombie spawns was a good idea that was also lacking. I think we need two different blocks to work with, regarding zombie spawning and land claiming.
Land Claim Block: Does what it says. Let the player have as many as they feel like crafting. Works like in A16.4, and is somewhat expensive to craft, like in A16.4
No Spawning Block: Only one can be active, only one per player allowed in world. Must be placed in area protected by LCB. Costs little to nothing to make. If there must be a recipe, make it one Small Stone. Give it the same hit points as LCBs so that it can't easily be destroyed by zombies should they attack it.
I believe this would solve a lot of the problems. As for people determined to claim POIs like skyscrapers, there's nothing you can to about that beyond letting server admins do their jobs. Griefers and inconsiderate players will always be in the game, but that doesn't mean you have to restrict 99% of legitimate players just to try to head those types off at the pass.
