PC Eliminate Attributes Entirely?

One of the big issues we are confronted with is that Attributes represent talent, not skill. With everyone waking up being 'abysmal' in every attribute, it's as if we're waking from a coma and relearning who we once were.

The only other option would be to establish attributes at Level 1. Where as this would be more realistic, it would affect the progress curve TFPs intend for beginning, middle, and end game. It is very important someone cannot learn to do everything by the end of their career (level-cap).

 
To be honest, there's not much difference between having no attributes but perks cost 4 points, and perks that cost 3 points plus the additional attribute point you need to spend (which is the way it is now).
Click to expand...
This is a very good point. At least spending points on attributes gives you something. Increasing the cost for perks does not. If you are looking to max a perk that requires 10 of a particular attribute, you are spending 17 points (5 x 1 + 3 x 2 + 2 x 3) IIRC. If you re-work the perks so no attributes gate perks and have each tier of a perk requires 1 more point than the last, you are spending 15 points (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5). It's 2 less points spent, but no additional benefits like you would get for buying attributes. Although this could be re-worked to give the attribute benefits as you perk up. Maybe if you bought 5th rank of a perk, you would get an attribute level up for that category. Sounds more complicated than the current design, so I'm not sure it buys much.

 
Personally, the only thing I'm not ok with is the way they mixed the whole weapons aspect of the game and the skill trees. I hate the fact that, in order to be able to have rifles that aren't level 1 I need to either be lucky and find them or waste my points in their governing perk, even if I have their schematics. But that's a whole different debate.
Click to expand...
Sounds like the same debate to me.

 
To be honest, there's not much difference between having no attributes but perks cost 4 points, and perks that cost 3 points plus the additional attribute point you need to spend (which is the way it is now).
Click to expand...
There is a very notable difference, which was touched upon in the initial patch notes for A18. The devs are setting this game up for all BUILDS to be viable. Meaning that they're EXPECTING people to choose skills along certain attribute paths.

If I want to do farming and grab several levels of healing factor, the value of fists and machine guns stays the same, but the COST goes down. It becomes cheaper for me to get skills bundled into the same category. Something that would absolutely not exist if all skills were freestanding and bought with increased points.

Additionally, if all skills were able to be bought with no prerequisites, who would take fist weapon skills? who would take knives? pistols? shotguns? Those items are categorically less powerful and efficient as, say, sledges and machine guns. Yeah, we USE them as a matter of convenience, but spending our points in them would likely be ignored.

Attribute grouping allows the relative value of skills to change throughout the course of the game and each individual character's progression. It makes weapons we wouldn't normally specialize in more ideal because, depending on build, those skills are significantly cheaper than other skills

 
A high tier modded weapom is going to be useful no matter what, I'm a str/fort build and I got a tier 4 pistol with 2 mods in it that does 51 dmg, my t5 ak47 with 2 mods does 64. Yeah the ak does more headshot damage and such due to perks, but with how common 9mm ammo is, I use the pistol more than the ak as the ammo is just much cheaper and it gets the job done. IMO, the 7.62 mm ammo needs to be reduced to 2 gunpowder, same for the magnum.
Click to expand...
I agree, especially since I've just seen how useless a tier 5 Pistol - with 4 good mods plus a Bandoleer in my chest - was on horde night 21...

 
Sounds like the same debate to me.
Click to expand...
I mean, if you wanna gate things such as accuracy, or recoil, or even mod crafting behind skills, I'm fine with it, but the actual stats and quality level of the weapons? I guess I can get behind the quality level if it affected the aim, or even jamming of the gun and nothing else, but I hate it when things such as damage are linked to perks.

It's more centered on how weapons should be handled, and not much on how the skill trees should be handled.

 
I mean, if you wanna gate things such as accuracy, or recoil, or even mod crafting behind skills, I'm fine with it, but the actual stats and quality level of the weapons? I guess I can get behind the quality level if it affected the aim, or even jamming of the gun and nothing else, but I hate it when things such as damage are linked to perks.
It's more centered on how weapons should be handled, and not much on how the skill trees should be handled.
Click to expand...
Damage is also linked to how many mods are installed on the weapon. Like someone said before, multiple paths. Sure the person who has the perk is going to produce higher damage, but someone without the perk can still increase the damage of a weapon if they want by adding mods.

 
I might be a RPG fan but I am also wondering if attributes shouldn't be removed. With A17, I was lamenting the loss of Elder Scrolls leveling (skills level up as they are used) in favour of this new Fallout style leveling (Being free to progress in any skill)

Having a new system with attributes was fun and new and I liked it though, that felt like it made up for that loss.

Apparently it had to be changed to be balanced. I guess it makes sense for multiplayer but wondering if it makes the game more fun.

To be honest, the new attributes system doesn't make much sense to me. Having a higher fortitude makes character more dangerous with fists but not strength hmm? Also you have to be smart to be good with a stun baton.. ok?

Personally, I think every attribute is losing what makes it so special in the process.

One solution would be to regroup skills by a class instead of an attribute (Brawler, assassin, survivalist, engineer, etc.) if they had to keep to the RPG paradigm. Or they could split attributes between damage dealing attributes and non damage dealing attributes...

Or they can remove grouping altogether but then we are getting back to the first system.

Well someone once said don't fix what ain't broken... please don't lose the things that make the game so enjoyable.

 
/SNIPOne solution would be to regroup skills by a class instead of an attribute (Brawler, assassin, survivalist, engineer, etc.)
Click to expand...
I really like your idea right here. I've been arguing for keeping the attribute system...but you're absolutely right that the NAMES of the attributes, and what those names imply, doesn't match up with the implementation of the attributes in this system.

Taking points in perception fails to improve my ability with sneaking, machine guns, or pistols, and that seems really odd...

BUT if I took points in the EXACT SAME THING, and it was called "scout," It'd make perfect sense....of course gaining levels in scout makes me better with spears and rifles. It's not perfect, but it's a lot more palatable than perception.

I even like most of your names...I'd just change brawler to "brute" (to avoid the implication of strength improving fists)...Scout, Brute, Survivalist, Assassin, Engineer...suddenly the system, while not actually changing one bit, makes a ton more sense.

 
So much this!

I can and have used pretty much all the weapons, but I definitely have my favorites. Right now I'm using weapons, not because I want to use them specifically, but because I put points in fortitude so I could harvest food better for my shared game, so I might as well get the benefit of that with dropping a few points in fist.

I actually really miss the system of "Use this skill to get better at it" To me, that spoke to the survival nature of things. If I woke up in the zombie apocalypse, naked and pretty much unskilled (as you are at the start), it makes sense that the more I did something, the better I'd get at it. As has been mentioned many times "killed 20 zombies and now I know how to make soup!!!" is just sort of strange.

 
I agree 100%. I am not liking how this is laid out at all. half the perks i want to invest in I am first forced to waste points in one of the parent perks. Most of my skill points are wasted in crap I do not want to spend points on. This is honestly horrible and I hope it changes. If it does not, I'll end up modding the game because no way I can play like this forever.
Click to expand...
That's a slippery slope imo. Not everyone is going to agree which perks should be under what class/attribute.

I do like how class/artritube forces me to make trade off decisions. So I think it's a good thing in general. I think it just needs alittle bit more tweaking so the less useful perks are buffed to add more value.

If it was attributes/classes were removed most would be back to playing only one specific way and never needing to try a different build.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm pretty sure that TFP is sticking with the attributes in order to group skills and create choices. By showing that choosing the skills in a given attribute will cost you the ability to take a different desirable skill, they add more weight to the decision.
Click to expand...
That was the same conclusion I came to when I was trying to figure out how I wanted to handle my own perk overhaul back in A17. Also, like you already said regarding specialization.

The one thing that bugged me, and this is more of a personal preference sort of thing, was how attributes played such a heavy hand in increasing damage output. With a lot of the new possible modifiers available in A17 (like gun recoil), I thought it was a missed opportunity to shift certain attributes and perks over to improving those areas and decreasing the attribute and perk dependence for damage increases.

I do get why TFP went with the overall model that they did though. Like I said, mostly just my personal taste.

 
To be honest, there's not much difference between having no attributes but perks cost 4 points, and perks that cost 3 points plus the additional attribute point you need to spend (which is the way it is now).
In the end, the attributes thing is just to reduce the pace in which players gain their perk abilities so that they don't become too OP so early in the game. That's literally all it is, a way to make sure players take longer to progress and buy their abilities, because they're all very powerful.

If they were to remove attributes, then the overall costs of each level in every ability would have to increase, else players would become too strong early on, so the end result is kind of the same.

Sure, they could just remove attributes and not increase the skillpoints costs, but then the game would become too easy very early on.

Personally, the only thing I'm not ok with is the way they mixed the whole weapons aspect of the game and the skill trees. I hate the fact that, in order to be able to have rifles that aren't level 1 I need to either be lucky and find them or waste my points in their governing perk, even if I have their schematics. But that's a whole different debate.
Click to expand...

That's true but only because of the current limited perk system, 1 point into attribute, 1 point into 1 melee and 1 ranged (weapons you might not be using in this play through), it feels robotic and limited. Previous system were grouped into weapon type, use any bladed weapon to up blade skills, reach a certain point then specialize in a weapon like the hunting knife or machete. Made total sense and felt way more progressive to how we want to make a character. But know we're locked into these 5 attributes (or 6 can't remember).

There's this idea hanging around ppl only play 1 way or 1 set of skills every time. This is simply not true. But honestly I've been repeating the same stuff since the first week of A17 and end of the day if devs like this system we can only use mods.

 
This is a very good point. At least spending points on attributes gives you something. Increasing the cost for perks does not. If you are looking to max a perk that requires 10 of a particular attribute, you are spending 17 points (5 x 1 + 3 x 2 + 2 x 3) IIRC. If you re-work the perks so no attributes gate perks and have each tier of a perk requires 1 more point than the last, you are spending 15 points (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5). It's 2 less points spent, but no additional benefits like you would get for buying attributes. Although this could be re-worked to give the attribute benefits as you perk up. Maybe if you bought 5th rank of a perk, you would get an attribute level up for that category. Sounds more complicated than the current design, so I'm not sure it buys much.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be pedantic its 16 points to level 10. You get the 1 point in each attribute for free

 
These attributes do not contribute to anything. It only limits you.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It feels like wasting points.

> Oh yes I'd like to level this perk please

< Ok, but it needs two points since you now have to put another one in [strength, ...] first

 
If it was attributes/classes were removed most would be back to playing only one specific way and never needing to try a different build.
Click to expand...
You mean everyone would be playing the way they wanted to play? And this would be a problem how?

I am a min-maxer and a base-builder. It is obvious to me that the most efficient way to build a char is Int + Str. Int to go up the tech tree and Str to maximise raw gathering power. I am going to build like that every time, no matter what, when playing solo. The presence of attributes will never make me 'try a different build' because I know that for my playstyle, that build is by far the best.

If anything, the removal of attributes would encourage me to try different things because it would make it cheaper to experiment with builds while still having my necessary Str + Int core.

Attributes and forced builds work OK for MP, but really suck when solo.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The system shows their wish of a some kind of classes, where you play one game as one, and another game as another class. But it doesnt work for this type of game.

In other games, I do want to fight in one game as a warrior and another time as a mage. But in this game, if I like building I will always build. You can change the way people fight enemies, that is good. But what they like to do, usually remains between games. I cant imagine myself starting a single 7d2d game where I wont build a big base. That's precisely the point I play this game and not dying light or many others. So, I will always 100% want miner 69 and motherload.

Classes work when its about different ways to fight. So making us chose in each game between one weapon or another is fine. But making us chose about skipping types of gameplay, wont work in many cases.

Not saying many players dont do all types of runs, with bases, without them, nomad, burying themselves, using vehicles during the horde, no crafting games, only crafting games, and so on. There are players like this.

But many of us like this game for somethig specific, in my case I think it has no competiton at all regarding gathering and building. SO I wont play a single game without it. For a looter shooter run I have other games.

TLDR: this class specialization thing is only good for weapons, not with utility skills.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You mean everyone would be playing the way they wanted to play? And this would be a problem how?
I am a min-maxer and a base-builder. It is obvious to me that the most efficient way to build a char is Int + Str. Int to go up the tech tree and Str to maximise raw gathering power. I am going to build like that every time, no matter what, when playing solo. The presence of attributes will never make me 'try a different build' because I know that for my playstyle, that build is by far the best.
Click to expand...
Same. Id love to be encouraged to try different weapons. but I wont play without gathering and building perks, so I just can chose between 2 weapons every game

 
What if we just got rid of the attributes (Strength, Agility, Fortitude, etc) and just had perks to buy?
Personally, I think it would greatly improve the perk system by not requiring you to put points into attributes in cases where you really only want one or two perks in the entire section.

On that same note, what about having varying point costs per perk based on how useful they are instead of just 1 point per perk? That or maybe boost the usefulness of some of the perks and maybe reduce the number of levels in them to make it more worthwhile for each level of investment. As right now there's definitely some perks that are way more useful in general than others.

Really, either way if attributes were removed you'd need to ramp up the costs for later perk levels anyway just to balance it properly.
Click to expand...
Then it would be A16 and it was tremendously BAD.

The system shows their wish of a some kind of classes, where you play one game as one, and another game as another class. But it doesnt work for this type of game.
Click to expand...
Except, it does. Just because you lack imagination to go out of your cookie cutter comfort zone doesn't mean other playstyles then yours aren't viable - they perfectly are as of A18.

In other games, I do want to fight in one game as a warrior and another time as a mage. But in this game, if I like building I will always build. You can change the way people fight enemies, that is good. But what they like to do, usually remains between games. I cant imagine myself starting a single 7d2d game where I wont build a big base. That's precisely the point I play this game and not dying light or many others. So, I will always 100% want miner 69 and motherload.
Click to expand...
That does not mean "classes" are not viable in A18, that only means you refuse to play as anything else then what you personally favor.

Classes work when its about different ways to fight. So making us chose in each game between one weapon or another is fine. But making us chose about skipping types of gameplay, wont work in many cases. Not saying many players dont do all types of runs, with bases, without them, nomad, burying themselves, using vehicles during the horde, no crafting games, only crafting games, and so on. There are players like this.

But many of us like this game for somethig specific, in my case I think it has no competiton at all regarding gathering and building. SO I wont play a single game without it. For a looter shooter run I have other games.
Click to expand...
You aren't skipping anything, you are prioritizing what you need sooner and what you need later.

There is no level cap anymore and schematics assure that eventually you'll have everything. Up to you how you want to start tho and again, just because you refuse to leave your safety bubble does not mean its impossible to.

It only means you, personally, have pidgeonholed yourself into a single thing to do and you, personally, will not change it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top