merlinfire
New member
I'd be curious if you can explain why having sliders that adjust simple xml settings is a bad thing that hurts you personally
PC Option for turning off enrage on hit.
- Thread starter aptalley
- Start date
My issue is that, I don't want to play on the easiest difficulty. I like the enemies to be somewhat dangerous. It just feels like a cheap way to make players take more damage to make up for the fact that the number of zombies have been decreased in general.
I realize some people love the excitement it adds. Hell, I don't mind ferals showing up, or dogs, or even bears. But when I hit a zombie biker once, he insta full sprints at me and stunning me, and I'm either locked into trading blows or trying to turn and run while he hits me in the back, It doesn't feel like a difficulty increase, as much as it feels like a message of "see? told you that you didn't need more zombies"
I realize some people love the excitement it adds. Hell, I don't mind ferals showing up, or dogs, or even bears. But when I hit a zombie biker once, he insta full sprints at me and stunning me, and I'm either locked into trading blows or trying to turn and run while he hits me in the back, It doesn't feel like a difficulty increase, as much as it feels like a message of "see? told you that you didn't need more zombies"
Hek Harris
New member
Walking zombies are free XP. The more you encounter, the more you can level up without any risk. I can understand people who ask for more zombies when they have preselected zombies running day and night, otherwise it doesn't really make sense. If you can't deal with enraged zombies, you don't need more zombies.
It's a new feature. Why not learn to beat them instead of asking for the removing of that feature after a few hours in game ?
CannedSmeef
New member
Well that's a whole bale's worth of strawman. He most likely isn't a fan of adding a slider for every single preference in gameplay because:
1. XML files do exist, why should the dev give special treatment to a fan's personal preference?
2. You can already accomplish the same thing by just lowering to the lowest difficulty. Why do you need 2 sliders to (in effect) lower difficulty? It's completely unnecessary.
3. The more sliders there are, the more clutter there is in the menus, the more variables to keep track of when submitting bug reports, and the more confusing it is to new people, etc.
wizard puke
New member
I didn't say it did. I think the game settings menu should remain coarse adjustment and the xml should remain fine adjustment. If it super bothers you then you should edit the xml. That is why it is there.
Also, if it is more complicated than tweaking the xml, then you are adding a bunch of programming work to implement both options which is taking people away from bug fixes or developing new content.
Roland
Moderator
The zombies are not less dangerous on Scavenger. The only difference is that they don't ever rage and they take a few hits less to kill. You can even increase their block damage if you want. Did you try playing on Scavenger?
As of now the percentages for raging are not exposed to the xml and faatal said that it could take some work in order to have them be exposed. Since the slider for raging already exists in the menu I kind of doubt they will do this for awhile if at all.
CannedSmeef
New member
I think you guys should probably look into changing the descriptions for the difficulty. Instead of just saying "this is badass mode" say exactly what the difficulty does. In particular it would probably be very useful for scavenger to clarify "Zombies will not become enraged."
Khulkhuum
New member
I personally love how the zombies enrage. It can be triggered by any type of damage, including falling, hit from another Z or status effects (like bleeding from my trusty shivs or knives). Not to mention when i stab them for bleed status (knife power attack) they sometimes get staggered (they grab their heads or something) and i can attack more before they continue (even if they already got enraged).
As far as i remember, the speed increase is based on the movement speed of the zombies. So if one has nightmare base speed it could potentially outrun the player, while walk will most likely be just a tad bit faster than walking. One way to tackle this i guess is making them slower?
As far as i remember, the speed increase is based on the movement speed of the zombies. So if one has nightmare base speed it could potentially outrun the player, while walk will most likely be just a tad bit faster than walking. One way to tackle this i guess is making them slower?
Which directly makes them less dangerous. If a zombie dies with 1 bowshot rather than 2, or 2 rather than 3, that zombie is WAY less dangerous, since it is therefore WAY less likely to get to me to hit, or less likely to get a hit off.
OP is also simply asking for option to have burly, tough zombies that don't have enrage....since when was asking for options a bad thing? This is a game that allows a massive level of customization. It does so because as the game changed, and features were added or changed, it JUST MADE SENSE to allow players to choose just how in depth they wanted to experience each feature. It's a smart move from a game developer and game seller standpoint, because it vastly increases replayability and individual enjoyment.
Since when has telling people to go into the xml documents when they're asking for an option to be added to a game that has made a point and a practice of offering options been acceptable or normal. People are complaining about the mindset of "asking for a slider for every single option" ...what about the mindset of "F*** what you want, I've got what I want"
crazywildfire
New member
I wouldn't really say that it is a bad thing but at the same time it is alpha after all. You start making options for everything that may or may not change next update takes away from developing time on other things. For the time being one can play on a lower difficulty and wait for the game to go gold before having even more options. Just my opinion.
Scyris
New member
So can bleed damage ticks, which like fall damage they shouldn't trigger it, but I am unsure if the game can be that specific as to only trigger it from when the player hits a zombie.
- - - Updated - - -
Could just do what most streamers do and exploit the junk turrets perma stun, just load it up with ammo, place it and laugh as the zombies can't move to hit you, and this is with no perks in Turret Syndrome at all or int. Afaik its not been changed and the placed junk turret will chain flinch/stagger on every shot no matter what. The flinch should be removed when placed UNLESS you have like 3-4 into Turret Syndrome.
I play on warrior difficulty, they enrage i'd say over 50% of the time, makes melee awefully exciting, but I can see it causing issues when higher hp zombies come out and your certan melee builds like well, anything other than clubs. Knives damage is completly garbage until you get a machete for direct damage, the bleed is insanely good though, I have lv 2 in deep cuts, and dropping a tri stacked bleed as a opener on a power attack does wonders for dps, just hit 5 agi, grabbing level 3 next. Power attacks with deep cuts perk land the max stack bleed you can if you bleed them. Great opener. I just wish knives could knockdown even if you need a mod for it. As if you don't time your strikes well, they will get a hit in.
Stun baton damage is just garbage period no matter what, prob why they have the junk turret I'm guessing your supposed to use a combo of both.
Fists melee is just, no, just no, its bad enough zombies enrage, and most weapons other than spears/clubs have crap range, these have even worse range.
Spears are meh, they have nice range, but do piddly squat for damage unless thrown.
Clubs still are the all around best melee weapon, as it has the most weapons for it (Baseball bats hit like trucks, seen a t6 one at trader with 38 base damage), 2nd highest range, and tend to knockdown enemies if you do a certan amount of their hp, which once you have 3 str and pummel pete 2, you generally can knock them down in 1-2 hits on nomad with a iron club, 1 with sledge or a decent baseball bat, and then kill them before they get up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Khulkhuum
New member
I'm not one to compare weapons yet, as i've been using only knives so far (considering melee), but i had quite a few fun situations with them. Topped a couple heads off (on the first and second hit even) using only the Bone Shiv (didn't want to use the Hunting Knife before i got a steady amount of Repair Kits), but also the Bleeding is quite satisfying, even against armored enemies (killed a bunch of soldiers).
Morloc
Arch Necromancer
Patient: My kidney hurts!
Doctor: Not a problem, we'll replace your torso and you'll be fine.
===///===
Can you (please) confirm that? or does the difference between various difficulty levels scale unevenly? AFAIK zombies also hit harder as you increase difficulty.
===///===
Playing on Insane I really think I'm spending too much time running away from zombies. Trying to stun-lock a zombie with a club is a big gamble when 3 or 4 hits will kill a lightly armored player. I totally understand that this experimental is likely much less balanced as we move away from default difficulty, so these are just observations and suggestions.
I think a GREAT answer to these problems would be to give the melee "tanking" player some options to counteract rage...
1) When a using a club or knife a staggered or stunned zombie has its rage wiped. Tactics using power attacks can almost guarantee you can prevent rage, though you'll not be able to keep your stamina up indefinately.
2) Sledgehammer power attacks have a ~chance~ of wiping rage.
3) Spear attacks have a very low chance of causing rage (imagine that the rage is being offset by the theoretical pinning/holding of the spear). Optionally...longer reach.
-Morloc
There is nothing simple about adding options from a developers standpoint. Look how often specific options are requested in the forum and how seldom those request are fullfilled.
Options cost much in development but almost always cost a lot more in debugging a game. Usually options are added as late as possible in development, preferable in beta shortly before release.
Considering this, calling for options in practically every third critique is useless noise. Especially since the developers already know that they have the option to add options and what they cost. You are here to tell them what is wrong, they will decide what to do about it and most of the time an option is the remedy they take when all other remedies fail to convince.
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the big things to me is trading hits in melee with a zombie, or hitting a zombie and turning around to run as it sprints after me, are not fun. It just feels wrong on multiple levels.
More zombies that hit harder, with the focus on killing without getting hit at all, because a hit is fairly devastating, is much more exciting than a zombie hitting me all the time, but doing less per hit (because of armor being so powerful now)
More zombies that hit harder, with the focus on killing without getting hit at all, because a hit is fairly devastating, is much more exciting than a zombie hitting me all the time, but doing less per hit (because of armor being so powerful now)
Khulkhuum
New member
I wouldn't mind a sort of dodge mechanic or a kind of sideway/back jump. Having a split second invincibility (that dodge would cost stamina, equal to jumping) would add sooooo much in terns of combat diversity. It would also solve most of the fighting troubles, as you wouldn't have to turn your back on a zombie right in front of him, but a few steps back (or to the side).
Put in some skills for less stamina used, a little longer invincibility (or further dodge-jump or ability to have a chance to cancel stun debuff when dodging) and you got most of the melee fleshed out.
Put in some skills for less stamina used, a little longer invincibility (or further dodge-jump or ability to have a chance to cancel stun debuff when dodging) and you got most of the melee fleshed out.
I love charging zombies, but in the form of ferals, (which are already there. This isn't some super high action game where you have methods to counter unpredictable speed surges. This combat is much more methodical. You use different tactics for different situations. Ferals are great. When they come at you, it throws some excitement in, but its something you can combat once you see it. You choose to run or fight or to throw the big guns at it.
Again, this is not about difficulty level of the game, this doesn't make it too hard, it's just not a fun mechanic to me. I mean, back in A14/15 I felt in MUCH more danger than I ever do in A18 currently
Again, this is not about difficulty level of the game, this doesn't make it too hard, it's just not a fun mechanic to me. I mean, back in A14/15 I felt in MUCH more danger than I ever do in A18 currently