PC Alpha 19 Dev Diary

[Adam the Waster]

If more traps were ever needed, a powered (requires electricity) version could be added as an additional trap for base defences... 

more traps would be nice,

steel spikes, Zap trap, Flamethrower, Bear traps, Spring/flinger trap, etc 

 

[meganoth]

Guys, I think that if you really want to give feedback to balance the current system you should at least NOT propose something that basically will re-write what TFP have chosen as the current attribute/perks mechanic.

I, for one, would love to see some additional "effect" that each attribute can give you when you level it up, but the proposed +1% is abysmal and would have no real effect until you reach at least level 5 in each attribute. But the concept is good IMO.

Also, to reply to those who say that strength (as an example) should affect many different things, I say that each attribute perk tree is an approximation of what the effect of that attribute could be. When you see (e.g.) an archer shooting an arrow, strength is NOT the first thing that comes to your mind, is it? Same goes for someone doing pole vault at the olympic games... do they need strength to jump that high? YES! But is it the main attribute involved in pole vault? NO!

That's the same for the perk system: you can find a specific perk in the most representative attribute tree; it's AN APPROXIMATION OF REALITY!

Having said all that you can understand why I think it makes much more sense to couple perks with attributes than leave them on their own branch.

While the current system is not perfect it IS however coherent in itself and I'm sure that most of the problems will be solved with just a little more balancing.

I'd also like to point out that given time ANYTHING is possible to achieve since you can earn all the skillpoints you need the more you progress in the game.

1) The effect would be foremost a psy@%$*#!gical bandaid for when you don't want to think about "entrance fees" and "gates".

2) 1% more speed per point in agility means the AGI player is 10% faster than the typical player. That is a huge bonus. 10% more damage for the strength player, everywhere all the time!!!! Probably the perks have to be scaled down a bit to balance that out.

 

[MechanicalLens]

If game "pushes" you towards investing in other trees let me  benefit from that skill. If I invest in strength I am stronger therefore is only logical I will hit you harder with whatever weapon I hold in my hands.

What should be achieved here imo is a system that gives the player a small bonus for investing into an attribute, but in no way should it force or even encourage players to go into that attribute for that benefit alone. Rather than having a system where every rank into Strength gives the player +5% melee damage per rank or every rank into Fortitude gives the player +10 health every time, what should be aimed for are small passive bonuses that benefit anybody who goes into that attribute. (Ex. +1% looting speed per Perception rank or +1% crafting speed per rank of Intellect, on top of the current bonuses.) Currently if you invest into an attribute that you are not using the weapons for, unlocking perks inside that tree aside, those points into the attribute do nothing for you. However, the extra +1% crafting speed bonus per rank of Intellect for example would make the player go back and have them say, "Well, it's not game changing, but at least isn't not nothing either."

 

[meganoth]

honestly i don't know how they could "fix" the perks

they ether gut the whole system and remake it from scratch but that will cost alot of money and may make it even worst

Make it like the old alphas, but that had its own problems

i don't know what they could do!   

I know. Keep the current system and balance it further. I like the current state better than any other I ever played.

 

[wolfbain5]

1) The effect would be foremost a psy@%$*#!gical bandaid for when you don't want to think about "entrance fees" and "gates".

2) 1% more speed per point in agility means the AGI player is 10% faster than the typical player. That is a huge bonus. 10% more damage for the strength player, everywhere all the time!!!! Probably the perks have to be scaled down a bit to balance that out.

i would say .5% per level for balance reasons. a total of 5% bonus isnt a great amount as to not outbalance things.

if they did it.

perc .5% accuracy inc

str all melee damage

agil run speed or attack speed.

fort crit resist

int crafting speed.

this would give those players feeling stats they dont use in their combat styles are worthless, a little cookie.

 

[Bhaaltazar]

What should be achieved here imo is a system that gives the player a small bonus for investing into an attribute, but in no way should it force or even encourage players to go into that attribute for that benefit alone. Rather than having a system where every rank into Strength gives the player +5% melee damage per rank or every rank into Fortitude gives the player +10 health every time, what should be aimed for are small passive bonuses that benefit anybody who goes into that attribute. (Ex. +1% looting speed per Perception rank or +1% crafting speed per rank of Intellect, on top of the current bonuses.) Currently if you invest into an attribute that you are not using the weapons for, unlocking perks inside that tree aside, those points into the attribute do nothing for you. However, the extra +1% crafting speed bonus per rank of Intellect for example would make the player go back and have them say, "Well, it's not game changing, but at least isn't not nothing either."

I agree with that, I would like to see a system where I would invest in other tree ( basic PER,AGI, FOR... ) just for the sake of basic bonuses I get from that. So as you said maybe I want extra HP, or I would like to get extra AGI for faster speed or stamina.
I believe the solution would be that you loose some of the perks giving you these benefits, and just add them the under basic attributes skills. Therefore for example since I already invested so many points into AGI ( extra speed or dodge ) I will also invest in few of the points into lets say parkour or sneaking. 

 

[MechanicalLens]

I agree with that, I would like to see a system where I would invest in other tree ( basic PER,AGI, FOR... ) just for the sake of basic bonuses I get from that. So as you said maybe I want extra HP, or I would like to get extra AGI for faster speed or stamina.
I believe the solution would be that you loose some of the perks giving you these benefits, and just add them the under basic attributes skills. Therefore for example since I already invested so many points into AGI ( extra speed or dodge ) I will also invest in few of the points into lets say parkour or sneaking. 

No, that was not what I was proposing at all; you're twisting my words here. Read again. "What should be achieved here imo is a system that gives the player a small bonus for investing into an attribute, but in no way should it force or even encourage players to go into that attribute for that benefit alone." Just saying.

(Just my opinion.)

 

[Kosmic Kerman]

honestly i don't know how they could "fix" the perks

they ether gut the whole system and remake it from scratch but that will cost alot of money and may make it even worst

Make it like the old alphas, but that had its own problems

i don't know what they could do!   

Keep it the way it is, tweak it, and improve the classes TFP finds lacking. There will always be people who don't like whatever system ends up in gold. The goal is not to please everyone but to deliver the best system they can that fits their vision. 

 

[Bhaaltazar]

i would say .5% per level for balance reasons. a total of 5% bonus isnt a great amount as to not outbalance things.

if they did it.

perc .5% accuracy inc

str all melee damage

agil run speed or attack speed.

fort crit resist

int crafting speed.

this would give those players feeling stats they dont use in their combat styles are worthless, a little cookie.

Strength - carry cap and damage
Agility - dodge and speed
Fortitude - extra health and effects resistances
Perception - accuracy and "hidden loot" - as in you find few extra treats 
Intelligence - faster crafting + extra crafting results ( being smart you know how to be more efficient using resources - like when crafting  you have a chance to get some extra quantity or quality  )

 

[MechanicalLens]

Strength - carry cap and damage
Agility - dodge and speed
Fortitude - extra health and effects resistances
Perception - accuracy and "hidden loot" - as in you find few extra treats 
Intelligence - faster crafting + extra crafting results ( being smart you know how to be more efficient using resources - like when crafting  you have a chance to get some extra quantity or quality  )

The problem there is we would end up with a system where players would feel forced, or at least highly encouraged, to go under an attribute just for the passive benefit that that attribute provides alone. If every rank into Perception increased your chance of headshot decapitations by 10% per rank, then why wouldn't you go under Perception solely for that benefit? It would create a very rigid and restricting system. To each their own though, but I think that these bonuses should be small enough that players don't think of going under those trees just for the attribute bonus alone, but not insignificant enough that they can't look back and said, "that was worth it".

 

[wolfbain5]

Strength - carry cap and damage
Agility - dodge and speed
Fortitude - extra health and effects resistances
Perception - accuracy and "hidden loot" - as in you find few extra treats 
Intelligence - faster crafting + extra crafting results ( being smart you know how to be more efficient using resources - like when crafting  you have a chance to get some extra quantity or quality  )

carry capacity? that is the pack mule perk. unless uou mean adding a percentage to stack size. but that would have to adjust to every player per stack, lots of background calculations every time a different player with a different str interacted. headache.

hidden loot is lucky looter. its a voxel game so we arent gonna get the ohh, this block transformed to loot type of effects. just an addition to a lootable object which is covered.

dodge is an interesting idea. not sure how that is coded.

bonus crafting? like .1% chance to get a double craft of an item? <edit> think this got covered by lowering mats costs through perks.

 

[Adam the Waster]

I know. Keep the current system and balance it further. I like the current state better than any other I ever played.

that too!

but some perks like "Infiltrator" and "Lock picking" could be Mixed together, i mean infiltrating and lockpicking kinda go hand and hand. (at least to me)

and it will be kinda hard to please everyone!

Some people want to be good at everything, some do not, its a hard balance to keep people pleased  

 

[MechanicalLens]

carry capacity? that is the pack mule perk. unless uou mean adding a percentage to stack size. but that would have to adjust to every player per stack, lots of background calculations every time a different player with a different str interacted. headache.

hidden loot is lucky looter. its a voxel game so we arent gonna get the ohh, this block transformed to loot type of effects. just an addition to a lootable object which is covered.

dodge is an interesting idea. not sure how that is coded.

bonus crafting? like .1% chance to get a double craft of an item?

Not pointing fingers here, but what we're all having here is a conflict of ideas. Idea A proposes a system that encourages players to go under attributes solely for that benefit (perks aside), while the other side proposes a much humbler approach. Again, to each their own, but I highly suspect that if TFP picked a side here, they would go for the latter. They probably wouldn't want another A17 scenario where, for example, every player went into Fortitude just to boost their max health.

 

[Bhaaltazar]

The problem there is we would end up with a system where players would feel forced, or at least highly encouraged, to go under an attribute just for the passive benefit that that attribute provides alone. If every rank into Perception increased your chance of headshot decapitations by 10% per rank, then why wouldn't you go under Perception solely for that benefit? It would create a very rigid and restricting system. To each their own though, but I think that these bonuses should be small enough that players don't think of going under those trees just for the attribute bonus alone, but not insignificant enough that they can't look back and said, "that was worth it".

Well I just made an examples which can be tuned down after testing. I liked the leveling systems where game let me switch between skill trees or attributes for certain small benefits - without committing to it fully. maybe I just want little more accuracy for my lets say shot gun, so I would like to train some more "aiming" under PER - but not at such high jumps of 10% as you said. I would just like to see when I spread my points around in different trees I get some sort of benefit, but at the same time not at OP level, but just enough that spending point in a different tree makes some difference.

 

[wolfbain5]

Not pointing fingers here, but what we're all having here is a conflict of ideas. Idea A proposes a system that encourages players to go under attributes solely for that benefit (perks aside), while the other side proposes a much humbler approach. Again, to each their own, but I highly suspect that if TFP picked a side here, they would go for the latter. They probably wouldn't want another A17 scenario where, for example, every player went into Fortitude just to boost their max health.

nah, he had good ideas, just point at the few that were covered in other  ways. I agree tho that basic stats should have a small bonus to gameplay simply for being high in any particular stat. stats should have an overall governing effect of some sort. At least that is how I believe all gamers have been raised to expect through the last 50 years of gaming. <not just comps or consoles, but tabletop as well>

side note, has anyone field tested the stun baton with the aoe effect with the relevant perks maxed?

 

[MechanicalLens]

nah, he had good ideas, just point at the few that were covered in other  ways. I agree tho that basic stats should have a small bonus to gameplay simply for being high in any particular stat. stats should have an overall governing effect of some sort.

I will admit that, yes. I'll be a bit more open and say that everything is free game, but my opinion stands in that I will strongly disagree with any kind of benefit that forces or even encourages players to go under an attribute solely for that passive bonus, creating a very cookie cutter system. For example, +1% looting bonus per rank of Perception? Humble and serviceable, and serves more as a brief afterthought. +5% accuracy when firing a weapon from the hip / ADS per rank of Perception? Decent but not in any way game-changing. +10% damage with headshots per rank of Perception? A little too extreme, in my eyes.

 

[Khalagar]

It really comes down to players not wanting to make choices.

They want the path to their preferred combination of perks all highlighted and linear with zero points "wasted" on something they consider non-essential

Huh? That's not what I was getting at, at least. Builds are great, the issue with wasted points is that  general use perks are locked behind things that don't make sense and are very, very build specific.  Gating a chef perk behind shotgun damage or a doctor perk behind stun baton damage just doesn't make sense. It LIMITS build options because it encourages you to use Dev decided weapons for specific builds.

Want  to be a miner? Sounds like you are using Shotgun and Sledge whether you want to or not. Want to be a sneaky guy with high stealth and high crit damage and uses a sniper? Too bad, you  are now going to use an SMG for some reason instead, because that's so sneaky

The builds are basically presets by devs. You can use off build weapons, but are actively punished by doing so because then all of your points are wasted on weapons you are not using that someone else decided made sense. Cuz chefs are well known for using Shotguns and Sledgehammers in their cooking after all

That's why it makes sense to connect perks to attributes, I don't understand how you can't see it.

??

I did say perks connected to attributes, like "All the stamina perks go under Agility, the tanking perks go under fortitude, the crafting perks go under int, the gun perks go under perception, and all the mining and melee damage perks go under strength" etc

My only change to attributes is that the attribute itself should be relevant to all builds, but not gamebreakingly strong so you feel like you HAVE to invest in specific ones on every build. Gun perks should go back under Perception and melee perks should all go under strength, so you can invest in which ever tree you prefer for damage, and the perks themselves could be relevant to the tree like each point in Perception raising headshot damage and each point in strength raising melee damage or something.

The TLDR; would be

Perception = Ranged Damage

Strength = Melee Damage and block damage

Fortitude = Durability and healing

Agility = Mobility

Int = Crafting

Like how the name implies.

You would still have builds, you would still have perks grouped under the relevant attribute, it would just actually make sense and would give each attribute a more focused niche. Their current niches are all over the place, like how Perception is explosives and precision weapons and wrenches for some reason. That's 3 completely, 100% unrelated niches all grouped under a tree that only makes sense for the snipers.

You might consider the E.O.D. guy perceptive, but you probably don't consider the redneck making home made molotovs and chucking grenades by the dozen as perceptive, you'd consider him an agent of pure chaos. In most games, explosive builds get built in damage reduction from explosives because they blow themselves up so much, so fortitude would probably make more sense thematically

  Attributes being valuable in general on their own just makes it feel less bad when you have to invest 15 points in a tree for a useful perk, but get zero value from those 15 points because you don't use what ever random weapon the attribute buffs.

When you see (e.g.) an archer shooting an arrow, strength is NOT the first thing that comes to your mind, is it?

Yeah, kind of. Because I know how high draw weight is on a bow and know it takes a beast to actually use them. I'd say Strength or Perception are the ones that instantly come to mind, not agility. Agility doesn't even cross my mind as being remotely relevant to a bow, we aren't Mongolian Horse Archers here

 

[Bhaaltazar]

nah, he had good ideas, just point at the few that were covered in other  ways. I agree tho that basic stats should have a small bonus to gameplay simply for being high in any particular stat. stats should have an overall governing effect of some sort. At least that is how I believe all gamers have been raised to expect through the last 50 years of gaming. <not just comps or consoles, but tabletop as well>

I just think there may be too many perks - deep under certain trees that could be solved differently with maybe incorporating some of them under basic skill sets. Currently basic skills only gives you + damage and chance to dismember with weapons of that tree. Basic skills currently serves only as a replacement of level gating - if they would offer more, maybe players wouldn't be so negative about spending points on different trees ( the hot topic at this time is Miner69 - maybe if basic STR offered some more than just bonuses for STR weapons - something that comes in handy with other trees as well than players wouldn't be so opposed to invest in it ). 

And please take this just as a brainstorming exercise and not as something definitive. Just  throwing out some ideas around and maybe something will come out of it with all the different inputs. 

Maybe the better question would be for players currently being angry that Mining is under STR - under what conditions would you invest in strength basic skills other than mining skills?
Same question for other trees: What would make you decide to invest in other trees?

For me it would be some kind of intertwined effects/benefits that I could apply/benefit from with my current build, under different attribute. ( nothing big maybe lets say just +1% crit chance or better chance to trigger a "mass effect" on a weapon - maybe chain stun effect with batons on group of zombies, same as sledge group knock down, etc... )

 

[RhinoW]

I will admit that, yes. I'll be a bit more open and say that everything is free game, but my opinion stands in that I will strongly disagree with any kind of benefit that forces or even encourages players to go under an attribute solely for that passive bonus, creating a very cookie cutter system. For example, +1% looting bonus per rank of Perception? Humble and serviceable, and serves more as a brief afterthought. +5% accuracy when firing a weapon from the hip / ADS per rank of Perception? Decent but not in any way game-changing. +10% damage with headshots per rank of Perception? A little too extreme, in my eyes.

That buff really isn't too extreme considering we currently have +20% damage with headshots per rank. Also, the game requires you to abuse the damage values later on into the game, because of irradiated high tiers.

 

[MechanicalLens]

That buff really isn't too extreme considering we currently have +20% damage with headshots per rank. Also, the game requires you to abuse the damage values later on into the game, because of irradiated high tiers.

Yes, but the warning I was giving is that would create a very narrow, tunnel vision system. Instead of increasing your damage with headshots +20% per rank of the weapon of your choosing, it would just create a cookie cutter system of, "Forget Pain Tolerance, forget Living off the Land, forget Advanced Engineering, I'm going under this one size fits all perk to increase my headshot damage.

Regardless if I agree or disagree that every gun should have their own perk attached to it, that's what TFP have gone for and I don't see them overhauling it again. Instead, I'm taking a flawed system and suggesting some minor meaningful tweaks that could realistically be considered by TFP.