PC Can you disable 7 day hordes entirely?

It’s a tower defense game and it’s a voxel game. News Flash: you build the tower that you defend and that tower can be whatever creative shape or form you would like it to be. In A17 it can even be an underground bunker that they will dig to attack.

Maybe you don’t want it to be tower defense but it is at least in part exactly that. The advertising of the game says so, the coding says so, most players who knew what they were buying agree it is so, you’re even trying to mod it so that it ain’t so which really also proves that even you know it to be so.

You don’t think it’s good because you ignored the labeling I guess when you bought it. There’s crafting, hordes, survival, exploration, and tower defense

Have you noticed how the blood moon that causes the zombies to gps to you and attack your position is hard coded into the game?

Psssst: Tower Defense.

 
It´s also says survival and horde in the description. Both is hardly there, it´s nearly impossible to die of thirst or hunger. So saying it´s tower defence isn´t an argument. It´s a FPS. With a few extras.

 
It´s also says survival and horde in the description. Both is hardly there, it´s nearly impossible to die of thirst or hunger. So saying it´s tower defence isn´t an argument. It´s a FPS. With a few extras.
Yes, you are right somehow, for now. The only things this game has of Tower defense are traps that aren't even needed if you stand on a skyscrapper and the day 7 horde which doesn't do much if you are smart with your hidding.

Let's hope all of that changes in a17 and we get more of the "Tower defense" part with better AI and stuff. I believe a17 will be better at that than ever before. That is indeed a welcome challenge.

 
Yes, you can cheese the system but everything is also there to build a base and set up traps and turrets and then defend wave after wave of zombies.

I’m not saying that people shouldn’t play it however they please and mod it into whatever they want. I just take issue with the idea that the devs are somehow out of touch with some mythical majority that don’t want base defense and that the devs ought to spend time gutting one of the primary elements of the game. The position that this game as conceived by the developers isn’t supposed to be at least in part tower defense is ludicrous. And the fact that it is meant to have a tower defense aspect is well advertised to potential buyers so there is no bait and switch going on here.

Also, survival is getting a huge shot in the arm. But just because survival isn’t tough enough for someone’s taste doesn’t mean it’s not there. You can easily make edits that will increase the survival elements. There are very popular mods that do this. So survival is actually in there but the matter of degree is one of taste and vanilla is likely never going to be as hardcore as veterans of the game will want. Now compare that with the fact the bloodmoon night is hard coded into the game and can’t be completely modded out. The devs intend this game to be base defense and survival becaus the first is not able to be removed and the second can be altered to taste.

I don’t disagree with the sentiment that someone buys a game and then feels that the implementation of one of the advertised elements is weak. I do disagree with buying a game that is advertised as having particular elements that they don’t care for and then saying that the game is bad unless those elements are removed by the developers. I don’t like RTS but it doesn’t mean those games are bad unless they spend time and resources to change them to turn-based strategy games the way I like it. No.. I should just play Chess instead.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blood Moon hordes should be pretty easy to effectively mod out. If you remove a bunch of lines from the gamestages.xml file corresponding to blood moon hordes. You May have to leave in 1 gamestage and set the zombie count to 1 or 0. Not sure if the game would bug out for not having any lines related to blood moon hordes, and im not sure 0 is valid so you may have to deal with 1 zombie , can u handle that?

Never tried it tho...i like increasing the counts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, you can cheese the system but everything is also there to build a base and set up traps and turrets and then defend wave after wave of zombies.
But just because survival isn’t tough enough for someone’s taste doesn’t mean it’s not there. You can easily make edits that will increase the survival elements.

I don’t disagree with the sentiment that someone buys a game and then feels that the implementation of one of the advertised elements is weak. I do disagree with buying a game that is advertised as having particular elements that they don’t care for and then saying that the game is bad unless those elements are removed by the developers.
I completely agree, that people should not ignore the game's description. There are cases where people don't enjoy survival, tower defense, or other aspects of the game - options, xml edditing and mods can accomodate 99% of these preferences. The base game should contain all these elements because it was advertised as such. Hopefully blood moon will be one of those things you can adjust in the future (personally prefer random blood moons with cues).

I am also very excited about how living underground in A17 will change (though I do believe that there were better ways to go about it other than digging zombies, without those ways requiring TFP to do much).

But, what was that about survival? I definitely can't agree with that and I think it contradicts your previous posts.

This game has a lot of survival elements in it - I always uplauded the game for that. But it's not about wanting "hardcore" survival - as pApA^LeGBa said survival elements are mostly optional and the game is more of an "FPS with a few extras" at the moment. Even if I hadn't played most survival games out there, the very definition of a survival game includes that the player is required to survive. You can't call a game "survival" if survival is not required (or if you throw a bunch of survival elements in it without synergy/motives - and death not having real impact), like you can't call a game "tower defense" if TD is not required.

This is and always was one of the biggest gripes I had with the game.

PS: Atm the need to gather food/medicine etc, are similar to the one in a crpg like, for example, "Pathfinder:Kingmaker". Correction: actually not resting and getting supplies in that game is harsher. TFP can't expect players to be required to mod synergizing survival mechanics into the base game. Not to mention that the majority of players won't bother with xml edits and modding at all - and you know we don't need statistics for that.

If they are so concerned about the game not being accessible enough to newer players (not to mention that being a new/inexperienced player is a short transitional state), they should pack a selection of menu options into a survival mode and a "lite" mode.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you look in serverconfig.xml you find:

<property name="BloodMoonEnemyCount" value="8" /> <!-- The number of zombies spawned during blood moons per player...

For non-server usage (ie playing locally single player maps, etc.), if you look in the prefs file you find:

<pref name="BloodMoonEnemyCount" type="int">8</pref>

In linux, the prefs file is found in the ~/.config/unity3d/The Fun Pimps/7 Days To Die directory, I have no idea where it is in Windows.

Disclaimer - I have not tried actually changing this value, so it might not work....

 
You don’t think it’s good because you ignored the labeling I guess when you bought it. There’s crafting, hordes, survival, exploration, and tower defense

Have you noticed how the blood moon that causes the zombies to gps to you and attack your position is hard coded into the game?
I also noticed some servers become ghosttowns just before horde nights. If the horde-voiders are a majority,

probaly not. But it do seem like the horde is a lackluster for quite a few people, for many different reasons.

As for what this game is, i've given up trying to figure it out. Rumors as of late seems to suggest it is turning

into a roleplaying game. It do however seem to be a mix of quite a few other game types, and so it is not

completly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.

 
I also noticed some servers become ghosttowns just before horde nights. If the horde-voiders are a majority,probaly not. But it do seem like the horde is a lackluster for quite a few people, for many different reasons.

As for what this game is, i've given up trying to figure it out. Rumors as of late seems to suggest it is turning

into a roleplaying game. It do however seem to be a mix of quite a few other game types, and so it is not

completly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.
I think that is one of the things that makes 7D2D stand out, the ability to mod out what we don't like.

Want a brutal death guaranteed experience? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

Want an easy game without the grind? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

Want to change RWG? Tin showed us just how far you can go with his most excellent Dying Lands tweaks, and others have tweaked it as well.

Want to level up really fast? Want to just build stuff and not be bothered by zombies? Want hordes of ghouls everywhere? A few tweaks to xml and you got it.

(ok, maybe not a "few" tweaks, but it's certainly possible. A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what. I modify mine extensively to give me the game experience I want on the world I want).

 
A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what.
Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas.

Thumbs up for that idea.

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.

 
it is notcompletly unreasonable for someone like the OP to look for a way to mod out what he/she don't like.
Absolutely. I’m always in favor of people modding it how they please.

 
Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas. Thumbs up for that idea.

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.
OMG yes. I can't tell you how many times I've screwed something in the xml and can't figure out what. Be nice if the error messages would tell us where the problem is, but the line and column it gives is usually not even close where I broke it. Sometimes I have to do a factory reset on the xml and start over again...

 
[snip]

(ok, maybe not a "few" tweaks, but it's certainly possible. A nice feature would be a gui for common xml tweaks so we don't have to go hack them ourselves, or at least some better guides to what in the xml actually does what. I modify mine extensively to give me the game experience I want on the world I want).

Such a feature alone would make A17 one of the best alphas. Thumbs up for that idea.

edit: Maybe a button on that gui to restore to original xml's.

OMG yes. I can't tell you how many times I've screwed something in the xml and can't figure out what. Be nice if the error messages would tell us where the problem is, but the line and column it gives is usually not even close where I broke it. Sometimes I have to do a factory reset on the xml and start over again...
It is old but I have used it right up until A16.4. It may or may not work in A17 but I am guessing it will.

Some don't like using 3rd party software but I have been using it for a few alphas and have suggested it for others and have not heard anyone complain yet.

The first link is the start of the origianl post.

The second link is Sphereii's link to the program (original one in first post doesn't work anymore).

The third post is my small explanation of how to install it.

This only allows changes to items and recipes but I have found it useful on many occasions....especially when I "disagree" on vanilla stack sizes. :)

http://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?7910-BloodSlinger-s-Advanced-Recipe-Editor

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?7910-BloodSlinger-s-Advanced-Recipe-Editor&p=441330&viewfull=1#post441330

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?78330-XML-file-config-suggestions&p=768768&viewfull=1#post768768

 
But, what was that about survival? I definitely can't agree with that and I think it contradicts your previous posts.
What exactly contradicts? That I said that this game is also a survival game? I do believe it is a survival game and I also happen to know that many people who play have a difficult time surviving. I don't think the opinion of veterans who have learned all the ins and outs, know exactly how the heat map works, know how to efficiently do everything perfectly to progress can give objective feedback about how difficult or easy it is to survive unless they consciously look at it from a new player's perspective. The default experience is a challenge for survival for new players. One of the most precious resources is time in this game and new players waste a ton of it coming to grips with how to play and what to do-- things people like us just breeze through without even thinking. I think the term "Survival" absolutely belongs in the description for this game.

This game has a lot of survival elements in it - I always aplauded the game for that. But it's not about wanting "hardcore" survival - as pApA^LeGBa said survival elements are mostly optional and the game is more of an "FPS with a few extras" at the moment. Even if I hadn't played most survival games out there, the very definition of a survival game includes that the player is required to survive. You can't call a game "survival" if survival is not required (or if you throw a bunch of survival elements in it without synergy/motives - and death not having real impact), like you can't call a game "tower defense" if TD is not required.
This is and always was one of the biggest gripes I had with the game.
I'm sorry but I see your argument and Papa's as just a matter of degree. Minecraft has creative mode, survival mode, and hardcore mode. Taking Minecraft as a model being that it is the progenitor of the open world survival game genre I argue that the genre of "survival game" is broad enough to include 7 Days to Die. When you say that death must have real consequences they do. At default those consequences are easily mitigated. But there is a setting for Lose All on Death which can really be a blow and a setback depending on what gear you were carrying. There is no "Reset on death" mode but not even Minecraft has that as part of their Survival game. That is what they call "Hardcore Mode". A17 is definitely going to take the survival threats to a new level and I think you'll enjoy those. But make no mistake, I think you'll quickly adapt and find the game feeling not so much a survival experience again because of your skills. The only way to compensate is to mod the game to be more punishing and more complex and more disastrous for the smallest of mistakes made so that the threat is real again for you. But to make the default game that hardcore would be a mistake. It has to remain approachable by the masses-- and I don't believe that disqualifies it from being called a survival game.

That being said..you and Papa will be sure to be glad that you do take damage when you're hungry and can die. And dying does weaken you quite a bit for a period of time until you recover.

PS: Atm the need to gather food/medicine etc, are similar to the one in a crpg like, for example, "Pathfinder:Kingmaker". Correction: actually not resting and getting supplies in that game is harsher. TFP can't expect players to be required to mod synergizing survival mechanics into the base game. Not to mention that the majority of players won't bother with xml edits and modding at all - and you know we don't need statistics for that.
If they are so concerned about the game not being accessible enough to newer players (not to mention that being a new/inexperienced player is a short transitional state), they should pack a selection of menu options into a survival mode and a "lite" mode.
And A17 is more synergistic as you'll discover. Not eating has a direct and immediate effect on stamina and will kill you if unchecked. Same for hydration. There are actually a number of new ways to contract disease and food poisoning can happen as an accumulation of not eating higher quality foods. I'm sure they'll get to ultimate punishments for death with options and modes but once again I think you know the game too well to understand just how difficult it is for new players and how dismally they are able to survive. True that they get infinite lives but I think that should be set aside as a hardcore mode restriction rather than calling that survival and then putting in a carebear mode. We have already seen that very few people are willing to play the two easier difficulty settings than Nomad. Rather than going down a difficulty level or two they are likely to rage quit and call the game broken.

 
What exactly contradicts? That I said that this game is also a survival game? I do believe it is a survival game and I also happen to know that many people who play have a difficult time surviving. I don't think the opinion of veterans who have learned all the ins and outs, know exactly how the heat map works, know how to efficiently do everything perfectly to progress can give objective feedback about how difficult or easy it is to survive unless they consciously look at it from a new player's perspective. The default experience is a challenge for survival for new players. One of the most precious resources is time in this game and new players waste a ton of it coming to grips with how to play and what to do-- things people like us just breeze through without even thinking. I think the term "Survival" absolutely belongs in the description for this game.
I'm sorry but I see your argument and Papa's as just a matter of degree. Minecraft has creative mode, survival mode, and hardcore mode. Taking Minecraft as a model being that it is the progenitor of the open world survival game genre I argue that the genre of "survival game" is broad enough to include 7 Days to Die. When you say that death must have real consequences they do. At default those consequences are easily mitigated. But there is a setting for Lose All on Death which can really be a blow and a setback depending on what gear you were carrying. There is no "Reset on death" mode but not even Minecraft has that as part of their Survival game. That is what they call "Hardcore Mode". A17 is definitely going to take the survival threats to a new level and I think you'll enjoy those. But make no mistake, I think you'll quickly adapt and find the game feeling not so much a survival experience again because of your skills. The only way to compensate is to mod the game to be more punishing and more complex and more disastrous for the smallest of mistakes made so that the threat is real again for you. But to make the default game that hardcore would be a mistake. It has to remain approachable by the masses-- and I don't believe that disqualifies it from being called a survival game.

That being said..you and Papa will be sure to be glad that you do take damage when you're hungry and can die. And dying does weaken you quite a bit for a period of time until you recover.
Sorry for the long post in advance... can't help it.... please read? Thanks :D

I don't think we are 100% on the same page when it comes to the term survival. Certainly, surviving from zombies is, too, a large part of "survival", but any fps/action game could be considered to be survival (which would be wrong), if we account for every aspect of the game's difficulty. Even "Don't Starve" for example, would be considered a top-down action game, if it weren't for its deep survival mechanics (seasons, sanity, hunger etc).

The elements I am talking about won't exactly make the game harder - defending from zombies is much harder already. These elements require some planning, management, thinking - that's what survival games have in common. And I am not talking about making the early game necessarily more difficult when it comes to survival elements - it's the mid/end game tha suffers more. Some examples:

-The need to gather food becomes irrelevant very soon into the game, even before farms, as your food supplies are increased exponentially. I must have given you a headache just from my spoilage posts by now, but spoilage, some farm fine-tuning and the need for fertilizer in order for the crops to keep growing (not making them even more effective) would pretty much solve that problem.

-Getting clean water isn't (and shouldn't be difficult in general) - but it could be something more other than just finding a pot. Boiling making it more safe early in the game is good, but it also becomes an action that requires no planning whatsoever later on. Water filtration could be another layer, with expendable filters requiring you to scavenge/explore.

-Temperature leaves a lot to be desired. While playing a game like Long Dark, the player can almost feel the adverse weather effects it has on your character and not because of the visual effects. More long-lasting effects, more "realistic" in nature and a little more complicated to fight against than just changing a piece of gear. The environment itself too is problematic sometimes - how can someone possibly be dehydrated in a desert filled with yukas?

-Medicine... I've barely had to use it. There is no urgency in curing diseases imo. It would be a miracle not finding antibiotics (or not being already able to make them) during the very lengthy infection process. Bowel problems don't really phase the character at all, food poisoning is negligible because the player will intentionally get poisoned (to eat), at the time when he has to do something that doesn't require stamina. Broken bones, if not being treated, could also use be a little more impactful - it is easy to treat anyways. Certainly death not being impactful played a role in not bothering curing diseases but still they leave a lot to be desired.

-Death. First of all I am really glad that it will have some sort of penalty! Inventory loss was circumstantially impactful, since death can be -even unintentionally- exploited if the player wanted to reset his condition.

-Loot distribution. Even with 25% and 10m days I was getting an overabundance of items. I know this is an ongoing work, but loot lists for some groups of items could be a little more POI-specific and rare at the minimum settings. It is logical after all, such a huge density of loot containers.

-Stuff I am forgetting - haven't played the game in a while.

What I want is not a more hardcore gameplay. Simply put, I just want reasons to do more stuff for a longer time. Reasons to plan my resources and work for my survival needs. And that could be done, almost with the already - rich, but not-so-synergizing-yet - existing content.

PS: None plays MC because of its survival elements - it barely has any, even if the main mode is called "survival".

And A17 is more synergistic as you'll discover. Not eating has a direct and immediate effect on stamina and will kill you if unchecked. Same for hydration. There are actually a number of new ways to contract disease and food poisoning can happen as an accumulation of not eating higher quality foods. I'm sure they'll get to ultimate punishments for death with options and modes but once again I think you know the game too well to understand just how difficult it is for new players and how dismally they are able to survive. True that they get infinite lives but I think that should be set aside as a hardcore mode restriction rather than calling that survival and then putting in a carebear mode. We have already seen that very few people are willing to play the two easier difficulty settings than Nomad. Rather than going down a difficulty level or two they are likely to rage quit and call the game broken.
Can't speak for A17, but I am certainly eager to play with the new systems and a lot of the changes seem intuitive.

Now, about what I wrote above and new players:

I don't know what skills you are talking about, veteran player or not, but I avoid playing on the highest difficulties. That's because of the enemies and bullet sponging though (and it's not like I don't play FPS games, going at it online since unreal 99). The things that I mentioned above have little to do with the difficulty settings themselves. Yes, they will empower the overall difficulty and feeling of urgency, but mostly because of resource management, need for more scavenging and survival needs. If someone like me, who has played the game for a long time avoids the higher difficulties, would you not think that a new player avoids higher difficulties for the same reasons?

My point is that fighting enemies, defending, blood moons, or being in the general vincinity of dogs, are vastly more difficult endeavors (and different in nature) than having to manage your food needs and scavenge for fertilizer, having to prepare/plan in order to visit a harsh biome or really having to stock up on medicine.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
-The need to gather food becomes irrelevant very soon into the game, even before farms, as your food supplies are increased exponentially. I must have given you a headache just from my spoilage posts by now, but spoilage, some farm fine-tuning and the need for fertilizer in order for the crops to keep growing (not making them even more effective) would pretty much solve that problem.
Not at all. I've been a Food Spoilage Warrior since forever. Food Spoilage is the number one necessary feature that I feel the game is missing. I am all for it and I hope it gets in. After playing Ark, Madmole made comments that sounded like he felt this game needed food spoilage but he wanted to figure out a way to do it that would be better than what Ark does. Since then, I haven't heard anything but I am with you on food spoilage.

-Getting clean water isn't (and shouldn't be difficult in general) - but it could be something more other than just finding a pot. Boiling making it more safe early in the game is good, but it also becomes an action that requires no planning whatsoever later on. Water filtration could be another layer, with expendable filters requiring you to scavenge/explore.
I think I get what you are wanting. You are wanting survival issues that must be maintained on an ongoing basis. Not concerns that can be overcome after doing a few tasks and then it is solved for the rest of the game. Some people would call that tedium. Going back to minecraft...there was always a small but vocal group that wanted torches to extinguish after a couple days so that players would have to relight them and keep them maintained. So for example in this case you wouldn't want a helmet attachment that was a water filtration unit unless it ALSO had filters that would have to be replaced. You don't want flashlights unless they have batteries that drain and need to be replaced. etc.

-Temperature leaves a lot to be desired. While playing a game like Long Dark, the player can almost feel the adverse weather effects it has on your character and not because of the visual effects. More long-lasting effects, more "realistic" in nature and a little more complicated to fight against than just changing a piece of gear. The environment itself too is problematic sometimes - how can someone possibly be dehydrated in a desert filled with yukas?
Temperature survival is improved in A17. In one game I couldn't get to my trader because he was in the snow biome and I knew I would freeze to death before reaching him unless I could find proper clothing. As far as what you are probably hoping for like frostbite, blizzards causing whiteouts, etc. It's not that complex of a system, true.

-Medicine... I've barely had to use it. There is no urgency in curing diseases imo. It would be a miracle not finding antibiotics (or not being already able to make them) during the very lengthy infection process. Bowel problems don't really phase the character at all, food poisoning is negligible because the player will intentionally get poisoned (to eat), at the time when he has to do something that doesn't require stamina. Broken bones, if not being treated, could also use be a little more impactful - it is easy to treat anyways. Certainly death not being impactful played a role in not bothering curing diseases but still they leave a lot to be desired.
This part of the game is much better and a lot more impactful. Just the new Permanent damage vs Temporary damage really helps in giving the player a need to find medical supplies that can heal the permanent damage. Just eating food or waiting over time does nothing to help the permanent damage. Also sickness, disease, and poisoning come more into play.

-Death. First of all I am really glad that it will have some sort of penalty! Inventory loss was circumstantially impactful, since death can be -even unintentionally- exploited if the player wanted to reset his condition.
As of now negative conditions persist through death. Plus you take a 24-hour debuff that lowers all your attributes by up to four ranks and thereby closing off perk advantages you had with those attribute levels. I'm not clear on whether negative conditions are supposed to persist or if it is a current bug.

-Loot distribution. Even with 25% and 10m days I was getting an overabundance of items. I know this is an ongoing work, but loot lists for some groups of items could be a little more POI-specific and rare at the minimum settings. It is logical after all, such a huge density of loot containers.
Zombie loot has been cut almost 90%. It is a huge reduction and the biggest hit I've noticed is canned food and water. Despite all the moaning it really has been a fantastic change. In addition POI's have almost half the containers they once did due to the new open and empty versions of most containers. I check garbage heaps a lot more praying for something useful and I have also found that getting a food source going is much more important than the past. Those who just ignore planting something early or stopping what they're doing to go hunt that doe that just spawned in will find themselves in a lot of trouble in short order.

What I want is not a more hardcore gameplay. Simply put, I just want reasons to do more stuff for a longer time. Reasons to plan my resources and work for my survival needs. And that could be done, almost with the already - rich, but not-so-synergizing-yet - existing content.
PS: None plays MC because of its survival elements - it barely has any, even if the main mode is called "survival".
I'm not saying MC survival hasn't been surpassed by newer games who built upon what it did but I think it is also being to narrow to say it isn't really a survival game. I think with all the maintenance you want in survival systems you would be surprised at how many people would look at it and think "hardcore". Personally, I think anyone who looks at 7 Days to Die and says, "Not a survival game" is probably at least an elitist survival gamer and probably what most people would label as a hardcore survival gamer.

But that's great. We need people who are hardcore in different areas to push and give suggestions and get food spoilage in the game (there are sooooo many people against that by the way) :)

My hardcore wish? I wish that nerdpoling could only be accomplished by purchasing the top tier of Parkour....

EDIT: Found this quote in another thread and I think it relates to this idea of possibly going too far with how maintenance heavy we get with survival in order to define a game as qualifying as a survival game:

I just hope the game never gets too realistic, for example I couldn't stand project zomboid due to the stupidly insane levels of micromanagement you need to do for your char. Needless to say I refunded it, because the char needed way to much management, so much so that it just wasn't any fun to play.
Would you say Project Zomboid is the ideal survival simulator that 7 Days to Die should aspire to?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top