PC Developer Discussions: Alpha 17

[Darkfoxx117]

Game is built for 8 people though.

 

[Rashnudamz]

I'll be ok with a smaller / more populated map so long as each biome isn't tiny.

A desert should be a desert and the sea should be a sea, not a puddle.

 

[crazywildfire]

Was talking about servers having 60 players on at once. Now all of them are looting everywhere on a smaller map. Even if those 60 weren't on at that time there could be 60 different players on. Now they are looting...and there could be a 3rd or even 4th lot that comes on at a different time. Now all of them have started a base and put down their land claim blocks. The amount of livable and lootable space for each server player gets smaller and smaller and is made even more so with a smaller map.And (although nothing to do with map size, just mentioned it as an after thought) add to that the horde night chaos of 60 players on with the max amount of zombies on also. The lag I imagaine would be terrible.

Yeah I would imagine but that would be the price to pay if you are playing with that many people on something that wasn't designed for. But as far as size goes if a server is going to get that many players like said before I would hope they would go in and make the map bigger for this. I'm sure even now if a server has that many people it is suffering somewhere.

It has be shown that servers have done this so nothing would change as far as that goes it will still be a option. Just like it will be a option to go in and make the map bigger. Just have to know that the game wasn't designed for that but nothing is stopping anyone from doing so.

 

[Llamas]

If the map size only affects initial generation time, and not run-time performance, I'll add my voice to crowd that hopes that the 8 km x 8 km size is only a default, and not hard-coded. I don't mind a one-time wait when creating a map on which I will spend many, many hours playing.

 

[crazywildfire]

I'll be ok with a smaller / more populated map so long as each biome isn't tiny.
A desert should be a desert and the sea should be a sea, not a puddle.

Why would it? It isn't like the map is that small. Yes it will be smaller compared to now but rwg maps are still going to be twice as big as navezgane so it is still a decent size map.

Edit: personally I wouldn't mind if the water was cut down way less then now. But that is my opinion some like lots of water I just don't lol.

 

[emarat]

If the map size only affects initial generation time, and not run-time performance, I'll add my voice to crowd that hopes that the 8 km x 8 km size is only a default, and not hard-coded. I don't mind a one-time wait when creating a map on which I will spend many, many hours playing.

Well then you are in luck because the new size is just default but not hard coded. You can always change it in xml

 

[Rashnudamz]

Why would it? It isn't like the map is that small. Yes it will be smaller compared to now but rwg maps are still going to be twice as big as navezgane so it is still a decent size map.
Edit: personally I wouldn't mind if the water was cut down way less then now. But that is my opinion some like lots of water I just don't lol.

By that i mean so long as if i stand in the middle of a biome i cant see a different biome in every direction.

 

[Space4Ace]

Game is built for 8 people though.

Yes! There should be a disclaimer to warn people that, if they play with more than 8 people, then don't bother us with your lag issues, or other problems... Solved! (Of course, this is from a guy who basically always play solo)

 

[Guppycur]

@gamida

You keep being misunderstood I think...

I think you bring up a valid point... We have always assumed the 8 player max was for 8 people on the server at once, period, when in reality, it's 8 OF THE SAME PLAYERS on the server... Same 8 people, no swapping out

That is a big paradigm shift, and leaves the concept of open servers useless.

This map size would indeed allow 8 of the SAME players an opportunity to loot to their hearts content, but would definitely stifle looting on a server with 8 players where the 8 were made up of 30 people who were on and off again at different times.

 

[Wolf959]

RE: Being unable to tell if a zombie is dead-dead.
You don't need a health bar. You simply need to pay attention. They might or might not make a sound when you hit them. That doesn't matter.

The true indicator of whether a zombie is dead or not is this - They, invariably and without fail, turn into loot containers.

So... That means you watch for the "Press E to search " type dialogue to pop up. That will confirm if it's dead or not. And depending on various factors, this pops up as soon as your weapon hits in melee, and they start to fall. - If they're on the ground you don't have that, but it should still pop up before you look away.

Or if you're worried about it, pick a position that puts them in front of you. Never leave a potential enemy at your back.

This gave me the BEST Idea! Zombies are ALWAYS lootable!!

Think about it... just keep thinking. pickpocketing, running away, dying while looking at their pockets, not knowing if they're actually dead till you hack them to pieces! And it wouldn't even be that hard to implement...maybe...

edit: Just imagine sneaking into the room with the new bosses, carefully walking up to the big mean radiated zombie, getting the loot from their pockets, and running away! I can't stop thinking about it...

 

[Wolf959]

Rule #2: double tap.
If a zombie is down, whack it again to be sure.

what's rule #1?

 

[wolfbain5]

It would be great if they joined edges of map so if you left on East side of map you would seamlessly appear on west side. Same north/south

not doable in a voxel game as far as I know. plus this is supposed to be a segment of the world story wise, not the entire planet, so wrapping wouldn't make sense.

 

[The Gronk]

not doable in a voxel game as far as I know. plus this is supposed to be a segment of the world story wise, not the entire planet, so wrapping wouldn't make sense.

It's most certainly doable, it's also a lot of work to implement.

 

[Wolf959]

It's most certainly doable, it's also a lot of work to implement.

You could always just teleport the player. Not hard at all! but the lag may be intense

 

[qprophet]

About the size reduction of the map; I'm all for a more densely packed map with an higher amount of POI's. That said, a reduction of 80% of the size of the map is huge, and might be a bit over the top.

I'm mostly playing SP, but I'm guessing MP will be affected big time.

This would have been an excellent topic to 'consult' the playerbase beforehand about.

blah blah blah...they are the Devs and don't have to necessarily 'consult' with us beforehand on their idea...blah blah blah

blah blah blah...this is Early Access so things could change...blah blah blah

I am not too happy with the idea of that big of a reduction to the map size either. But we really should wait until we get our hands on A17 before we get too up in arms about this new revelation. Maybe it's not that bad and could even be an improvement.

Who am I kidding? *grabs pitchfork and torch* BURN THEM! GRRR!! BLASPHEMERS!!!

 

[rdunham3]

I swear they purposely do things every alpha update to mess with the timing so you have to relearn how to melee. This time will be no different with the added variables of:
1) You just don't know when they're really dead now with the ragdolling and removal of the enemy HP bar

2) They can hit mid-animation which makes for getting sucker punched if you're battling the way you're used to

3) You have to have the cursor exactly on them when the hit lands to actually hit them. Hits are much less forgiving.

4) Power attacks are tempting but tough and you will take hits trying to land them.

I'm just warning people to have medkits and beer handy during the first few hours of new-update-melee-timing-adaptation because the learning curve is real.

#3 concerns me more than the others, since as it is now the only way to assure a melee head shot on some zombies is to aim ever so slightly above their head. Actually aiming at their heads, for me, has resulted in a much less functional body shot every time. Hopefully they fixed that when making this change or I suspect I'll have real difficulty getting head shots in melee.

#2 is...just...wrong. The hit happening before the animation says it does used to be a bug. Now they've embraced the bug and made it the new normal? /smh

 

[rdunham3]

what's rule #1?

You, sir, have some homework to do. Zombieland. Stream it.

http://www.zombielandrules.com/

 

[KingSlayerGM]

@gamida
You keep being misunderstood I think...

I think you bring up a valid point... We have always assumed the 8 player max was for 8 people on the server at once, period, when in reality, it's 8 OF THE SAME PLAYERS on the server... Same 8 people, no swapping out

That is a big paradigm shift, and leaves the concept of open servers useless.

This map size would indeed allow 8 of the SAME players an opportunity to loot to their hearts content, but would definitely stifle looting on a server with 8 players where the 8 were made up of 30 people who were on and off again at different times.

But servers can either generate a bigger map or change loot respawn time. Sure enough if you play once a day for 4 hours on a server, actually the server time has kept going on many days without you, like 20... so loot could have respawned

 

[Gamida]

@gamida
You keep being misunderstood I think...

I think you bring up a valid point... We have always assumed the 8 player max was for 8 people on the server at once, period, when in reality, it's 8 OF THE SAME PLAYERS on the server... Same 8 people, no swapping out

That is a big paradigm shift, and leaves the concept of open servers useless.

This map size would indeed allow 8 of the SAME players an opportunity to loot to their hearts content, but would definitely stifle looting on a server with 8 players where the 8 were made up of 30 people who were on and off again at different times.

You complete me.

 

[Roland]

#3 concerns me more than the others, since as it is now the only way to assure a melee head shot on some zombies is to aim ever so slightly above their head. Actually aiming at their heads, for me, has resulted in a much less functional body shot every time. Hopefully they fixed that when making this change or I suspect I'll have real difficulty getting head shots in melee.

It's quite accurate now. If the crosshair is on the head you hit the head. If it is not on the head you miss or hit the body.

#2 is...just...wrong. The hit happening before the animation says it does used to be a bug. Now they've embraced the bug and made it the new normal? /smh

That's not what it means. Sorry for the confusion.

Before A17 if a zombie was walking it would always stop the walking animation before starting the hitting animation. Before A17 if a zombie was standing up it would never start a hitting animation until it completed it's animation of standing up.

In A17 a zombie can do the hit animation while it is walking and while it is standing up. So if you are used to running past groups of zombies knowing you've always been safe or if you are used to standing over a zombie as it stands up from being asleep or knocked down getting several hits in with no risk...it ain't that way any more.

Pass through a group of zombies and you can get clocked. Rush over to a sleeper and start wailing on it and it might just reach out stun you while it is standing up. That means an adjustment and adaptation to tactics people have been used to.