PC Alpha 18 Dev Diary!!

Alpha 18 Dev Diary!!

  • A18 Stable is Out!

    Votes: 2 66.7%

  • <img alt=":)" data-src="" src="___base_url___/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • Total voters
    3
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds that way yes. But I'm okay with that... Your overall constitution allows you to persevere.
Really, death is meaningless with this new system entirely. It doesn't take much to level up so what, you lose 10, 15 minutes of play? No biggie.

Plus, I never know what level am I at anyway so it will not affect my play one iota.

Hm, maybe I do want more of a penalty...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it was stated that leveling is going to take significantly longer in A18. I think this falls under "wait and see before wringing hands". We're going to have at least a few more patches in that alpha anyway.

 
We will see.

I suspect tfp's idea of take longer and an experienced player's idea of take longer May differ.

But we will find out soon.

 
The new proposed penalty on death seems pretty.. minor. 25% of your xp is not a lot. 75% (or even all your xp gains this level) is more or a penalty.

 
You lose 25% of what it would take to level in XP. If it goes below the start mark of the blue xp bar it turns the XP bar red and it grows outwards in red. So if you get in a death loop (die 4x times), you never lose a level, but there is still penalty to dying and you have to earn back a full bar of red before you are back in the blue and working towards the next level again.
Click to expand...
I love this alot! Simply because a friend I play with will kill himself whenever he gets a broken leg. It's the lamest reason to off yourself but he does it because, he doesn't like how he has to wait for it to heal over time. By day 40 he will easily have 200-300 deaths.

he is always building these MEGA structures which requires him to jump down from very high up which results in either breaking his leg or killing himself. Very immersion breaking IMO, so I am happy with this change. I am sure moders can either add to, reduce or even turn this penalty off all together. but I think that having a death consequence is vital to a game like this. it will make you think twice going into that military base on day 1 or sky diving off your current build because you don't want to get down from there properly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes that is correct. The worst it can get is 200% well unless you keep dying it would stay -100% or the red bar would be maxed out.
Click to expand...
I hate it.

Firstly, on multiplayer the weakest player is the one most likely to die, and the experience penalty means they'll get further behind the rest each time they do, making it even more likely that they'll die again.

Secondly, on single player you can reach a point where you can no longer increase in level because you can't stay alive long enough; and there's no way back from there.

The idea of using the same score for both character advancement and avoiding bad things (in this case you're effectively paying 25% of a level's worth of xp to "avoid" permanent death and merely have a near death experience instead) is one that's been used at various times over the decades in tabletop roleplaying design, and it's proved to be almost universally unpopular for these reasons and is something that's pretty much never used in modern games.

Sure, there should be a penalty for dying. But it shouldn't be something that makes it harder to avoid dying in the future by slowing and possibly stopping character progression. It should be something that you can recover from in time, not something that permanently sets you back compared to others who haven't died.

 
quick thought: if earning experience has been balanced such that less dangerous activities are viable then intentional recovery may lessen this impact.

 
It should be something that you can recover from in time, not something that permanently sets you back compared to others who haven't died.
Click to expand...
You can. It just means you gotta work a bit harder to make up ground. Which is what a "penalty" is all about. If it doesn't have some sort of negative effect on you, it isn't a penalty. People who don't die/die often should be ahead. It's a survival game and that means they are doing a better job.

They tried reducing stats and such for a period of time, people hated that as well. I certainly like the sound of this one more than the A17 version.

Besides, you just lose some XP. Not the end of the world. Much better than respawning and being unable to craft or use certain items due to the NDT.

 
Yeah, if gaining XP was a limited factor, like some games where monsters don't respawn and you can do only set number of quests, then this penalty would have been bad...., but honestly, you can make back 25% by just digging where you stand when you respawn. This is a none issue.

 
Secondly, on single player you can reach a point where you can no longer increase in level because you can't stay alive long enough; and there's no way back from there.
Click to expand...
Your math is quite backwards.

Everything you do increases your likelihood of survival. If you don't gain levels during that time the game does not get harder.

As a result the game gets easier every time you die.

This is not a race where a player is declared winner on day 100.

 
Your math is quite backwards.Everything you do increases your likelihood of survival. If you don't gain levels during that time the game does not get harder.

As a result the game gets easier every time you die.

This is not a race where a player is declared winner on day 100.
Click to expand...
Just imagine the low gamestage with that scenario. You have all these supplies, and base building from spending all this time playing, but not leveling. Really the only deterrent is lack of perk points from not leveling. Which isn't going to be huge given the expanded book system.

 
I hate it.
Firstly, on multiplayer the weakest player is the one most likely to die, and the experience penalty means they'll get further behind the rest each time they do, making it even more likely that they'll die again.

&lt;snip&gt;
Click to expand...
Tea, I get the following isn't at all what you meant, and I don't play MP, so it really is 'just a thought'...

What if along with Group shared XP they also shared the death penalty?

Could be "minor" like the dy-eee (heh) gets hit by entire numeric loss, but then, if her friends don't abondon her, the group gives up an additional percentage of their xp to the deader. So it would slow the I-didn't-die-Group down a bit, allowing the poor thing to catch up.

Or maybe, "ouch! dangit Kenny!!!" where -all- the Group takes the full xp hit even if just one member dies.

.... not saying this is a good idea, but ya know... some folks have advocated for harsh death penalties :bounce:

---Edit: forgot to say, "Thanks MM for the reply about the bridges! :) "

--- & err, sry in advance Roland if the above results in any mayhem :hug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just imagine the low gamestage with that scenario. You have all these supplies, and base building from spending all this time playing, but not leveling. Really the only deterrent is lack of perk points from not leveling. Which isn't going to be huge given the expanded book system.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's a deterrent to the game getting harder. Essentially you gain bonus time.

 
I hate it.
Click to expand...
I don't like death penalties in general. For me it's like kicking someone who's already on the ground. But some obviously want to be kicked and this punishment is something I can live with. I'll probably just go to the mine after a death. So I not only get the XP but also get resources at the same time.

Firstly, on multiplayer the weakest player is the one most likely to die, and the experience penalty means they'll get further behind the rest each time they do, making it even more likely that they'll die again.
Click to expand...
I only play single player and know multiplayer games only from streams but there it was always so that the other players supported the weakest player. For example, they were farming screamer hordes and the weakest player just waited in a trader outpost nearby. The shared XP allowed him to level in a safe way.

Secondly, on single player you can reach a point where you can no longer increase in level because you can't stay alive long enough; and there's no way back from there.
Click to expand...
In my experience, it's the other way around. I die in the early game much more often than in the late game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top