PC Main skills only impacting specific weapons is backwards

[dex314]

This RPG has primary skillt trees that provide benefits other than unlocking skills. You may not be interested in those benefits but they are there and can be utilized. There is not one step up in any of the attributes that's only purpose is to unlock the next tier of perks. They all have benefits beyond unlocking the perk levels. Why do you keep stating that their only function is to unlock a lock?

First of all, sorry for making you read so much and thanks for taking the time to reply. The primary skills only boost perks for specific weapons so it falls under this category of "play the way we tell you to or gain zero benefits." I can understand the notion that it's a trade-off for choosing a build, but it's also a primary skill. Stun batons do not equal intelligence and only benefiting one to two gear items is far too specific.

I could go on but I'll stop posting about this aside to clarify since I think my point has been conveyed. That said, tldr is simply as follows:

*Add a small passive buff, or move a sub-skill, e.g., melee stamina to the primary skill. That way people can still feel like they're progressing in some tangible way, rather than missing out because they don't like a specific weapon.*

- - - Updated - - -

Also.....who only plays with one attribute? You can easily pick two and be just fine. Why would anyone only pick intelligence unless they were doing a personal challenge? Pairing intelligence with another attribute works just fine. In A19, when the non combat perks only have 3 ranks you'll be able to do well with 3 attributes according to Madmole.

Oh i only mentioned the one attribute play style because in your first reply you mentioned I didn't gain benefits from intelligence because I was not playing an intelligence build. I was trying to explain that multiple attributes are necessary.

 

[JaxTeller718]

Maybe Im simplifying this, because silly me, but if hes 100 percent dead set on getting Better Barter then farming isnt an issue. Buy the food or the seeds, or at worst loot the schematics? Literally nothing is preventing you from farming.

I mean you bought into better bartering for a reason. Go barter. I think people are over complicating the perks system.

 

[dex314]

Maybe Im simplifying this, because silly me, but if hes 100 percent dead set on getting Better Barter then farming isnt an issue. Buy the food or the seeds, or at worst loot the schematics? Literally nothing is preventing you from farming.
I mean you bought into better bartering for a reason. Go barter. I think people are over complicating the perks system.

I think with all this discussion it's become over complicated. My point isn't to change much, just add a passive benefit to leveling primary skills.

 

[Kalen]

I've been bashing away at an idea to revamp the attribute system. Instead of traditional attributes like Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence... etc. Use the attributes Martial, Marksman, Craftsman, Physical, Mental. Then I would move perks around to fit the new system. Martial would contain all the melee perks. Marksman would contain all the ranged perks. Craftsman would have perks like farming, engineering, mining... etc. Physical would have your food & water mitigation perks, health and stamina regen perks. Mental would have bartering, looting, scavenging, stealth, hunting perks.

I havent fully fleshed out where things would go... but thats the general idea.

I'd increase the skill points you gain, but up the cost of the higher tiers of the perks. The net effect should be that its easier to generalize in a bunch of skills but take more dedication to max out something.

It's mostly still all a WIP and only in my mind.

 

[BobTheBard]

This all turned into sort of a convoluted mess, but I agree with (what I think is) the original point that it feels a little bad to tie the bonuses for leveling up a stat exclusively to the weapons in that stat tree. In this case, you'll hear me give a rare compliment to A17's skill-tree system, where leveling up the various stats had bonuses that fit everyone. I know I used to take a few points in Agility not because I wanted anything in the Agility tree but because the maximum Stamina increase itself was useful, and I never felt bad sinking points into stats I didn't 'need' per se because I'd still get some benefit from them. In A18 I find myself seeing what the absolute minimum I need of a stat I need is to get the skill I want because I don't want to put any more points into stats than I absolutely have to.

To use another example, let's look at another RPG I'm familiar with, 3.5e D&D. There are six stats, and all but one of them provides some kind of bonus to things not related to its core function. Strength is favored by people who want to hit things hard and often, but it also boosts carrying capacity. Dexterity is primarily for ranged attacks and weapon finesse, but also increases armor class. Constitution affects hit points and Fortitude saves, which are useful for everybody. Intelligence gives skill points, likewise useful for everybody. Wisdom doesn't get much, but it does increase Will saves, so you don't want to skimp on it too much. All of them provide some bonus to things not in the primary domain of their class, they just provide larger bonuses to classes that actively use them.

7D2D's stats, however, are basically all Charisma. Charisma is widely considered the dump stat of choice for every class who doesn't actively need it simply because there's no benefit to having it otherwise. Charisma only benefits Charisma-based classes and Charisma-based skills, the latter of which are subject to the DM's interpretation anyway. With this in mind, 7D2D's stats are slightly worse than D&D 3.5's Charisma because the bonuses the stats in 7D2D give only apply to about 30% of that stat's related skills instead of all of them. When people talk about stat-gating, this is what they mean. If I want to build stuff quicker, I need to invest in Intellect, but if I don't want to use the stun baton or junk turret (and why would I?) then those points into Intellect serve as a gate. They give me nothing I want, nothing I need, and nothing I'll ever use, thus serving no purpose except to serve as a tax on crafting skills.

 

[Aldranon]

This RPG has primary skill trees that provide benefits other than unlocking skills. You may not be interested in those benefits but they are there and can be utilized. There is not one step up in any of the attributes that's only purpose is to unlock the next tier of perks. They all have benefits beyond unlocking the perk levels. Why do you keep stating that their only function is to unlock a lock?
The model you propose would make going deeper into the perks expensive for someone who was specializing in that attribute. The whole point is that once you breach the barrier you can go deeper cheaper in multiple perks within that attribute. You want to go outside your area of specialty and have it be cheaper for you by making it more expensive for those who specialize in that area.

Also.....who only plays with one attribute? You can easily pick two and be just fine. Why would anyone only pick intelligence unless they were doing a personal challenge? Pairing intelligence with another attribute works just fine. In A19, when the non combat perks only have 3 ranks you'll be able to do well with 3 attributes according to Madmole.

Perhaps drop the attributes entirely as they seem to have gone off the deep end anyway. (here me out please).

You can have any number of categories of perks that are relevant to each other. (you don't need to have the same number of perks in each category):

-Weapons

-Crafting

-Stealth

Ect...

-Each Category has any number of Discipline perks and possibly supporting Knowledge that can be dependent on each other in various ways.

-Discipline is often the end results of stressful experience(s), the player can pick any Discipline (up to five times?).

-Knowledge is usually beyond any LBD, so must be gained by finding books or other documents (up to five levels of knowledge?).

-In the Weapons category for example, you can have a perk that depend on another like: "Sight Control" and "Head Shot". Sight Control is a Discipline and Head Shot is a Knowledge.

-Head Shot depends on Sight Control to work. Head Shot being a knowledge of where exactly to hit a zombie in the head but would be useless without the discipline to do it.

IMO, this makes more sense and is more in line with reality without being tedious.

 

[BobTheBard]

What if you just did away with the whole idea of Attributes and made five skill trees:

Exploration - Gives bonuses to looting. Contains skills that boost mobility, looting, stealth, trader interaction, teamwork, etc.

Harvesting - Gives bonuses to block damage. Contains skills that focus on harvesting resources, farming, hunting, stamina use reduction, etc.

Melee Combat - Gives bonuses to all melee damage. Contains skills that focus on melee combat and melee weapons.

Ranged Combat - Gives bonuses to all ranged damage. Contains skills that focus on ranged combat and ranged weapons.

Crafting - Gives bonuses to crafting speed. Contains skills that benefit construction, trap-making, item crafting, schematic unlocking, etc.

The 'expectation' of this would be that any character choosing any two of these trees has a viable build. Exploration/Harvesting? You're rolling in materials, ammo, and schematics, and you can rely on stealth bonuses and trader quests to get you what you need. Crafting/Harvesting? The ultimate base-builder. Exploration/Ranged? Sniper. Melee/Ranged? Rambo. Any two of them forms a viable skillset, and you can do away with the whole 'attribute' system that seems to just confuse and annoy people.

 

[Kalen]

What if you just did away with the whole idea of Attributes and made five skill trees:
Exploration - Gives bonuses to looting. Contains skills that boost mobility, looting, stealth, trader interaction, teamwork, etc.

Harvesting - Gives bonuses to block damage. Contains skills that focus on harvesting resources, farming, hunting, stamina use reduction, etc.

Melee Combat - Gives bonuses to all melee damage. Contains skills that focus on melee combat and melee weapons.

Ranged Combat - Gives bonuses to all ranged damage. Contains skills that focus on ranged combat and ranged weapons.

Crafting - Gives bonuses to crafting speed. Contains skills that benefit construction, trap-making, item crafting, schematic unlocking, etc.

The 'expectation' of this would be that any character choosing any two of these trees has a viable build. Exploration/Harvesting? You're rolling in materials, ammo, and schematics, and you can rely on stealth bonuses and trader quests to get you what you need. Crafting/Harvesting? The ultimate base-builder. Exploration/Ranged? Sniper. Melee/Ranged? Rambo. Any two of them forms a viable skillset, and you can do away with the whole 'attribute' system that seems to just confuse and annoy people.

lol, I just posted pretty much this exact thing a couple of posts ago

 

[Aldranon]

What if you just did away with the whole idea of Attributes and made five skill trees:
Exploration - Gives bonuses to looting. Contains skills that boost mobility, looting, stealth, trader interaction, teamwork, etc.

Harvesting - Gives bonuses to block damage. Contains skills that focus on harvesting resources, farming, hunting, stamina use reduction, etc.

Melee Combat - Gives bonuses to all melee damage. Contains skills that focus on melee combat and melee weapons.

Ranged Combat - Gives bonuses to all ranged damage. Contains skills that focus on ranged combat and ranged weapons.

Crafting - Gives bonuses to crafting speed. Contains skills that benefit construction, trap-making, item crafting, schematic unlocking, etc.

The 'expectation' of this would be that any character choosing any two of these trees has a viable build. Exploration/Harvesting? You're rolling in materials, ammo, and schematics, and you can rely on stealth bonuses and trader quests to get you what you need. Crafting/Harvesting? The ultimate base-builder. Exploration/Ranged? Sniper. Melee/Ranged? Rambo. Any two of them forms a viable skillset, and you can do away with the whole 'attribute' system that seems to just confuse and annoy people.

This is a better way than what is currently being done. It gives the player logical choices as well as allowing for ether focused play-style for MP or a more general one for SP.

Allowing for books and other documents to supplement the perks would make it a solid game system.

 

[Katitof]

You obviously don't get what i am saying. But i already told it dozens of times here in the forum and i'm getting tired of repeating it again and again and the answers still make me ask myself if people even read my posts or just didn't understand what i was saying.
The base skills perception, strength, fortitude, ... should give genereic buffs usefull for everybody independently on what item he is using, wants to use or prefers to use over whatever. Buffing specific items should be limited to perks for this specific item (like dead eye, machine gunner, boomstick, ...).

And i don't talk about min maxing at all. If i invest a skillpoint i want this skillpoint to have an effect for me and my playstyle. My playstyle decides what i like to skill, not the skills dictate my playstyle, but the current system does. It does not "force" me, but if i want to be skill-efficient it puts me into specific directions.

I'd never invest a skillpoint into boomstick if i'm not even using shotguns. But i need to invest skillpoints into strength because other perks (and not only shotgun perks!!!!) have this as prerequisit, no matter if i WANT to use shotguns or not.

Would you prefer if the stats themseles provided absolutely nothing other then a point sink instead, so you wouldn't feel like you're "wasting" points on "improving weapons" you don't use?

You're angry, because you can't min-max every single point, there really isn't any more to it here from what you've said so far.

 

[Liesel Weppen]

Would you prefer if the stats themseles provided absolutely nothing other then a point sink instead, so you wouldn't feel like you're "wasting" points on "improving weapons" you don't use?

Yes, because then it wouldn't push me to use weapons i don't like. It is a stupid skillpoint sink already anyway.

You're angry, because you can't min-max every single point, there really isn't any more to it here from what you've said so far.

You already prooved multiple times in this thread that you either don't read my post or simply don't understand them. I'm not repeating myself the fith time.

 

[Ghostlight]

Would you prefer if the stats themseles provided absolutely nothing other then a point sink instead, so you wouldn't feel like you're "wasting" points on "improving weapons" you don't use?

I look at the other way round. If I perk into an attribute because I want to max out a non-combat perk, and I am not interested in using the weapon type associated with that attribute, then the attribute points did in fact provide absolutely nothing other than a point sink. Bad system is bad.

- - - Updated - - -

You're angry, because you can't min-max every single point, there really isn't any more to it here from what you've said so far.

Not sure about min-maxing as such but do you really think that having 17 of the precious points you spend give you no benefit whatsoever and in fact be only a point sink (your words) is good design?

 

[Hyperbolt]

I still think they should put more universial benefits in the attributes, as some of you here already stated. They should have kept the ranged weapon damage in perception, melee and block damage in strength, health in fortitude, stamina in agility and crafting speed in intellect, as they used in alpha 17.

Just some rebalancing to adapt to alpha 18:

Give only +5 instead of +10 health/stamina with fortitude/agility, since we get those when leveling up now as well.

And i guess intellect should no longer increase crafting quality on everything. (even though i kinda miss that.)

 

[njugul]

So you're not playing an intelligence build. The intelligence perks are outside your class so to speak. In most other RPGs you would be blocked from taking Better Barter in the first place. It would be greyed out. At least in this game if you choose to spend the extra points you can reach into any other tree and take what you want. It should be expensive to do so. It IS expensive to do so.

In most other RPGs with his intelligence build, he would roast the enemies with blizzards and fireballs and cast a spell on him to improve his loot chance/runspeed/miningspeed.

 

[Katitof]

Not sure about min-maxing as such but do you really think that having 17 of the precious points you spend give you no benefit whatsoever and in fact be only a point sink (your words) is good design?

If they don't do anything for you, its by your own choice.

Also, that design is pretty common, usually employed in increasing cost of purchasing perks/skills.

Would it really be so much better if you've had to pay increasing costs for perks, so rank 5 of a perk cost 3-6 points instead?

Exponential progression curves are extremely common and since leveling itself can't be made impossibly long, you have increasing costs the deeper you go into tree.

That being said, there really isn't anything that forces you into any specific tree anymore. You need int to craft something? So do it and then respecc back into whatever you want.

If trader and quest related perks are that valuable to you, well, live with the cost of them.

Remember that we're still going to get some perks reduced from 5 to 3 ranks, so you'll have even more points to spend around soon.

Yes, because then it wouldn't push me to use weapons i don't like. It is a stupid skillpoint sink already anyway.

Well, too bad for you, that's how the system works now and according to MM, its final.

 

[The Gronk]

I look at the other way round. If I perk into an attribute because I want to max out a non-combat perk, and I am not interested in using the weapon type associated with that attribute, then the attribute points did in fact provide absolutely nothing other than a point sink. Bad system is bad.

I can't help but agree with this.

I'm running an int/str character with a fully trapped base and nearby mines. Early on I found a very decent assault rifle and a few of the machine gun perks. Unfortunately I'm reluctant to put points into automatic weapons because I'd have to put points into a stat for the sole purpose of increasing the weapon perks, which does seem a bit of a waste.

Which int based character would use anything other than an assault rifle? With a decent ability over quite a broad set of ranges there's a very good reason that an assault rifle is the standard armament for a soldier in the field.

 

[Liesel Weppen]

Well, too bad for you, that's how the system works now and according to MM, its final.

The problem is not the system, but what buffs the base skills give. I've never read that the exactly skills are finally and will not change anymore. The "system" doesn't need to be changed anyway.

But as we can see AGAIN, you still have not understood what we are talking about.

 

[hotpoon]

Are you saying that you would never consider playing the game by choosing Agility and seeing how well you do? Are you always and forever going to choose strength because those perks are predominately the way you like to play? If so, that is certainly your choice but the developers are supporting a variety of playstyles that everyone can try out by making a different choice the next time they decide to start over. If your plan is to just play this game once and then move on to new experiences or if your plan is to play maybe 5-10 complete games but always stick to the same exact attribute tree then I agree that the game is limiting and you won't be able to experience it all. But if you choose to play it through 5+ times and decide to mix up the attribute trees in different ways each time then the current system is great and allows for a different feel every time you play.

I doesn't feel like they are supporting different play styles - they are pushing a few seemingly arbitrary play styles that don't really exist naturally.

From observing arguments in the forum, we know what the real play styles are - the minecrafters (people who like to mine and build and not bother with survival), people who like to go out adventuring and looting, people who prefer to shoot shoot shoot and pvp. Those are the real play styles. So if there are skill trees, wouldn't it be better if they were divided up into the type of game play that actually occurs, and not lock specific weapons arbitrarily to those play styles? ...because we all need different weapons for different situations.

If I'm quietly looting, I might favour the crossbow. If it's horde night, I'm probably going with guns and junk turrets. If it's a day horde, then out comes my spear or club. There are certain weapons I will never use (the knife, the stun baton, etc), so when my attribute points are benefiting those weapons, it feels like a waste.

In my opinion, a simple fix without too much fiddling with the perk system would be to just remove weapon benefits from the attributes and have it's own level up section. I personally like Ghostlight's LBD for weapons only idea, but it could easily be a separate perk panel.

 

[Guest]

If you're going to look to RPGs to base your skill system on, you should also look at why they work for those type of games, and I don't think TFP have really done that.

It's my understanding that 7Days is supposed to be primarily focused on the single player experience, so a lot of players won't have party members to cover other specializations. In a single player RPG, you tend to have AI companions that can do stuff like check traps, heal, front line tanking, ranged, etc. There's usually also a broad selection of skills/weapons per class, so you can be creative within the constraints of specialization.

In 7Days, we have no AI teammates to fill in the gaps in your own abilities, and when you "specialize", you're essentially being limited to using two weapons if you want to enjoy their specialist perks. Or you can waste precious skill points on boosting a stat that you won't otherwise use.

Like others suggested, grouping perks together in themed skill trees, and allowing the player to mix and match skills from different trees more freely, would allow for more creativity in perk selection (without having to hamstring yourself by sinking skill points into stuff that you really don't use).

A game like Dying Light does this pretty well, imho. Skyrim did away with attributes and just gave us several skill trees to mix and match with; Fallout games have attributes, but they have their own point pool and the perks themselves are way more interesting and game changing than increasing some hidden percentage.

I'm not one of the people yearning for the return of LBD, but in my experience, A17 & A18 don't really invite me to play around with the perks. Some of them are so clearly more game changing and useful than others that I always feel like making bad strategic choices if I pick them.

 

[meganoth]

What if you just did away with the whole idea of Attributes and made five skill trees:
Exploration - Gives bonuses to looting. Contains skills that boost mobility, looting, stealth, trader interaction, teamwork, etc.

Harvesting - Gives bonuses to block damage. Contains skills that focus on harvesting resources, farming, hunting, stamina use reduction, etc.

Melee Combat - Gives bonuses to all melee damage. Contains skills that focus on melee combat and melee weapons.

Ranged Combat - Gives bonuses to all ranged damage. Contains skills that focus on ranged combat and ranged weapons.

Crafting - Gives bonuses to crafting speed. Contains skills that benefit construction, trap-making, item crafting, schematic unlocking, etc.

The 'expectation' of this would be that any character choosing any two of these trees has a viable build. Exploration/Harvesting? You're rolling in materials, ammo, and schematics, and you can rely on stealth bonuses and trader quests to get you what you need. Crafting/Harvesting? The ultimate base-builder. Exploration/Ranged? Sniper. Melee/Ranged? Rambo. Any two of them forms a viable skillset, and you can do away with the whole 'attribute' system that seems to just confuse and annoy people.

So how does the Exploration/Ranged sniper live through horde night or how does he build a base? How does the miner or crafter combat zombies? He needs ranged and probably melee too. At least in single player your new system will just make everyone who plays the whole game invest in all trees somewhat. Nothing gained really.

But I don't even want to argue about all those new proposed redesigns. Read the writings on the wall: There will be no totally new system. Only smaller corrections now have a chance in vanilla. Make a mod if you want something else, Kalen at least got the right idea.

I actually like dex314 idea: Add small non-combat benefits to attributes.

They have to be really small so the player doesn't think he needs the attribute for its boni or make any perks irrelevant. The benefits can then be mirroring already existing perks, just to a lesser degree.

For example one point in the perception attribute would give 1/5th of one lucky-looter-perk and lucky-looter would be decreased to a level-3 perk (this would tie in perfectly with MMs planned perk-reductions). Fully perked you would have exactly the same bonus, but now you get some of the LL-benefit with the attribute.