PC Developer Discussions: Alpha 17

[meganoth]

So this is a problem. when I am doing a sneak attack on a radiated I want my power attack+buff on first hit.

Just invest in sneak damage instead of power-attack damge. Problem solved. :cocksure:

 

[meganoth]

As an addition, it would help low level players who are trying to join their higher-level friends. Eventually the xp bonus for playing with people higher in level than you will even out as you get closer to their level.

Right, another advantage. (and thanks for the praise)

This could theoretically be gamed with lower level characters latching on to a higher level party to level up quicker but I'm going to slip into RP mode and say that's what would happen when a n00b runs around with veterans, they tend to develop the skills quicker than if they're on their own.

I don't see the bonus really big enough to make that problematic. If we look at World of Warcraft where such a thing was possible, xp gains incremented so steeply that killing a single level 60 monster did level up a level 1 char multiple times.

Compare that to 7 days where an irradiated Z has only 50%, maybe 100% (?) more xp as the most basic first level zomb. The level 1 will get the tier 5 quest reward though, which is much more valuable to him.

 

[Cadamier]

Hello! First off I really like A17!

For me its an entirely new game and except for some tweaks and maybe a few changes everything is good! However I do play regularly with 8 others and have since we started playing sometime ago. I and they think that the death penalty is too harsh and think it should be toned down to like 10 or 15 minutes. Reasoning for this is that you've died and you're chances of dieing again have increased exponentially! Partially due to the fact that once you get back to your backpack those same mobs that killed you are usually there waiting to kill you again; that is - if you're able to get back to it... A couple of the ladys aren't quite liking the changes, I'll have to find out more from them tonight about it. We all don't care for the heavy gating, especially with the first aid bandages... As with many things we all know its still a work in progress, especially after 'yall' said that it was all being 'redone' lol I expected something different, but not this different. A few of us still do experience the studdering/lag spikes but its all still in progress. Great work! Thank you for your time and attention!

 

[FileMachete]

Shared xp for quest kills makes sense because it is a group effort but often with different roles. A bow expert will probably make fewer kills than the front liner with a sledge hammer who often can make the final power attack. Or the miner that comes along has to be much more careful and also has less damage potential than the fighter builds. Shared effort should be shared win.

^Completely agree. Didn't mean to imply that I thought 'Shared XP' is bad, should have prefaced w that, heh.

And I think they increased xp for groups somewhat to incentivice people grouping. As long as it is only for kills it isn't that dramatically changing the speed of advancement.
But if the xp were shared for ALL activities they also would have to dial it back again and give out strictly xp divided by number of players to everyone.

^Agree. ^In yellow; just from vids I wondered if there was too much xp per kill. ^agree, going full Communist not ideal.

To yellow: thinking that Groups = combined GS, so larger wandering hordes, more z's in POIs. Auto balanced somewhat by higher lvl z's so tougher, more time consuming, yet more xp per. So as one measure of balance, and this is completely arbitrary, a SP gets a wandering horde once a day. It's worth 1 lvl. For game wide balancing (SP/CoOp/MP/PvP), is it fair or desired that a 3 person CoOp group gets their daily wandering horde and also gains one lvl? Or if an 8 player team?

It's logical and reasoned arguments like this that make me think that shared xp is a good idea.
As an addition, it would help low level players who are trying to join their higher-level friends. Eventually the xp bonus for playing with people higher in level than you will even out as you get closer to their level.

 


This could theoretically be gamed with lower level characters latching on to a higher level party to level up quicker but I'm going to slip into RP mode and say that's what would happen when a n00b runs around with veterans, they tend to develop the skills quicker than if they're on their own.

^Agree ^In blue: fully support this. Games are supposed to be fun, and games are better w friends. Mechanics that support 'late arrivals', or keep friends playing together, even when RL intercedes for a bit, are to be commended.

Good stuff guys, thanks for weighing in w thoughtful posts rather than, well you know.

 

[JCrook1028]

I don't play MP but wondering if the new Shared XP is actually making things harder? Z wise. And shortens the game.
For arguments sake say TFPs find a 'perfect balance', where different specialists putting in 'equal' effort gained the same xp. MP progression would still almost certainly be faster than SP. The new changes MM revealed will allow faster progression in a specialized char build, so more resources faster from a Miner type (more stone/hr = more xp/hr), quicker z kills, etc.

While shared xp from z kills certainly encourages group play, a good thing, from vids it looks like zeds can be worth 2-3-4+ times the xp compared to a 'solo' kill. Sort of like if four peeps were mining the same boulder and they all got 75%, that's 300%.

I get why they do this in MMORPGs, they have to balance so that the really selfish players still want to group up with strangers; since they'll still lvl faster in a so-so group than by themselves.

I don't know, I don't play MP in 7dtd, but if it's really Cooperative Play, and folks aren't rushing the end game, then shouldn't shared xp be toned down to a max combined shared xp of X? Where X is a magical average of xp over time, considering distance traveled, ave zed density, etc.

Not meaning to work anyone up with this. Just seems like there are already so many benefits to a decent CoOp group that large amounts of shared xp may be counter intuitive.

Or I could be completely backwards and TFPs are leveraging the shared xp as a way to increase the GS/difficulty enough to keep CoOp/MP games exciting?

Edit: also consider a group where there are 2 stay-at-homes, 1 mining, other cooking/building base. 3 others kill z's, loot pois etc, as a group, now shared xp is likely to lvl that group of 3 faster than the other 2. And all the combinations. Would make anything other than, 'all xp earned from anyone, anywhere, will be equally shared' impossible to balance.

When you can take a group of say 4 people out to kill, tell one to stay 90 m away and the other 3 kill and all 4 level the same it's broken, badly broken. Not to bash anyone or name names but saw a group calling screamer hordes with a group member sitting in the trader watching and sharing the xp. That's the perfect example of a badly broken and easily abused game system.

I can see a small benefit in that "kill steals" are not a thing but other than that I absolutely hate the concept of shared xp. I suppose "maybe" on a shared quest it may not be so bad but all day every day? No, just no.

 

[The Gronk]

<snipped for space>

"Stand back mate, these ones are a little too dangerous for you to tackle"

<n00b hangs at the back, hopes he doesn't get spotted, and studies how his veteran friends deal with high level zombies>

 

[meganoth]

Partially due to the fact that once you get back to your backpack those same mobs that killed you are usually there waiting to kill you again; that is - if you're able to get back to it...

Backpacks will not despawn if nobody is in that area! The despawn timer will not advance if that area is empty of players and was also doubled to 60 minutes!

If you die, don't run back immediately, tell your group to not stick around too long there, wait until you are ready and well-armed again, then go back. No need to hurry.

 

[Doctor3D]

Not to bash anyone or name names but saw a group calling screamer hordes with a group member sitting in the trader watching and sharing the xp. That's the perfect example of a badly broken and easily abused game system.

Yeah, that's pretty cheesy. I think the problem is it's hard for developers to anticipate just how far people will go to abuse the game mechanics. You just have to make something and then just tweak it as the players start to find all the loopholes.

Party XP is definitely a bit too much. It does speed up the game progression quite a bit on co-op compared to single player. I like the idea of it, but it probably needs to be reduced.

 

[Mrjohn1337]

Does this mean that youll actually get better at mining by mining again?

 

[wildaxeman1]

who idea was that to drain stamina in few seconds when aiming? its stupid. in real life you can aim for very long time without getting tired

i guess, you never tryed to aim rifle in real life. but you should try and see, how long you can keep sight on target.

 

[EzRemade]

Why should parties get more EXP anyways? Being in a party is an advantage in and of itself, plus all the party only perks which I assume will be more varied in the future.

 

[Doctor3D]

Why should parties get more EXP anyways? Being in a party is an advantage in and of itself, plus all the party only perks which I assume will be more varied in the future.

Well, I think the idea is that party gamestage is higher than single gamestage. So you end up getting harder zombie groups if in a party. I know in single player on my first day 7 horde - i've never seen a radiated zombie even when I play really hard and do very well those 7 days. But, in this playthrough i'm playing with 3 people and we got radiated zombies, ferals, and cops on the VERY first 7 day horde. I can see a utility for party XP in that and if doing things like quests together where the individual zombies that spawn in the POI are also going to be quite a bit tougher compared to if you were just playing single player.

 

[Royal Deluxe]

Why should parties get more EXP anyways? Being in a party is an advantage in and of itself, plus all the party only perks which I assume will be more varied in the future.

If there are 200 Zombies in a town.

One player get XP for 200 Zombies

and without XP Bonus in a team of 4 everyone would get only 1/4 that.

Maybe you are right that groups have a easyer gameplay and so they dont deserve 100% of that XP. But leveling would be a joke in a team of 8 men without such a bonus

 

[Doctor3D]

If there are 200 Zombies in a town.One player get XP for 200 Zombies

and without XP Bonus in a team of 4 everyone would get only 1/4 that.

Maybe you are right that groups have a easyer gameplay and so they dont deserve 100% of that XP. But leveling would be a joke in a team of 8 men without such a bonus

Party XP should still exist - just shouldn't be as much. You could even scale it with difficulty level. Easiest settings would be 100% shared XP, hardest setting maybe 25% shared XP. This would slow the progression as you increase the difficulty.

 

[Gnomaana]

If there are 200 Zombies in a town.One player get XP for 200 Zombies

and without XP Bonus in a team of 4 everyone would get only 1/4 that.

Maybe you are right that groups have a easyer gameplay and so they dont deserve 100% of that XP. But leveling would be a joke in a team of 8 men without such a bonus

Plus, they don't actually get 100% of that experience. If the experience is shared it is less for each person than if one person killed it without sharing.

 

[Snollygoster]

Two questions please! Firstly, currently A17 is out but in an experimental build, is there a time frame until A17 proper is out? and secondly, one I'm sure has been asnwered, If I played the experimental build, would my save carry over to when A17 proper is released? or will majour things be changing still that could prevent saves?

 

[Gareee]

Some people are avoiding horde night due to frame-rate issues, not difficulty issues. Locking core mechanics from players who are trying to avoid your sub-optimal systems is really going to annoy a lot of people.

We saw people avoiding horde nights on guppy's server going back to a15 I think. Blaming that behaviour on current performance issues its misdirected at least in some amount, I think.

 

[khzmusik]

Two questions please! Firstly, currently A17 is out but in an experimental build, is there a time frame until A17 proper is out? and secondly, one I'm sure has been asnwered, If I played the experimental build, would my save carry over to when A17 proper is released? or will majour things be changing still that could prevent saves?

1. Time frame: "soon" (realistically, once the major A17e bugs/balancing/performance issues are gone, which will be a while)

2. Saves: almost certainly will NOT carry over - they aren't carrying over between A17e builds now.

(Caveat: I'm not a fun pimp)

 

[Gareee]

So this is a problem. when I am doing a sneak attack on a radiated I want my power attack+buff on first hit.

It was done to make regular attacks worthwhile again. Its not a perk buff you buy, its an extra buff you get when completing the attack combo in order, and makes sense to me.

 

[The Gronk]

We saw people avoiding horde nights on guppy's server going back to a15 I think. Blaming that behaviour on current performance issues its misdirected at least in some amount, I think.

There are many reasons why someone may wish to avoid horde night, both legitimate and illegitimate. Surviving a horde night should be rewarded but locking vast tracts of gameplay away from those with a legitimate reason to skip horde night is just cruel.

Due to work commitments I can only play a few hours a week. Unfortunately, due to my shift pattern I'm unable to hang around and do any horde nights. Should I then be denied character progression?