PC Problems with A17.2 that aren't on the 'known issues' list of the patch notes

[fragtzack]

In real life, a lot of folks whined about the coming of the automobile. On and on they went about how much better horse travel is. In real life, the men that got humans of out the stone age and into the bronze age and into the steel age were the thinkers, using intelligence.

The swinging of a stone axe 1000's of times had very little to do with man advancing to the bronze age and then iron age with iron tools. It was the men behind the scenes, not the grunts swinging an axe. So yes, using simple XP as an abstraction of that advancement gated process seems very legit. Using a broad exp based system actually closer emulates this behind the scenes nature of real life human kind advances then swinging an axe thousands of times.

Somehow thinking the "majority" wants a skilled based system and if there is not a skill based system than the game is all wrong and not fun comes across as narrow and uneducated.

There has to be some sort of gating system. a17 leveling and gating is a huge step forward. The end game comes much later now and lasts longer. This is a video game and all gates are artificial.

Broad based XP systems for advancement has been around for decades in video games.

 

[Cirion]

I would be interested in a mod if it implemented a new skills/perk system, independant of LBD or not. But I have zero interest in a verbatim copy of the A16 system. If I wanted that I would just load A16. Which I even might do again in a few years.

While I get why "just play A16" is the standard reply, I am not interested in moving backwards, I do want to keep up to date with the latest version because of all the fun stuff that did change. I don't dislike A17 in its entirety.

Maybe I'll take a stab at improving the mod I downloaded earlier with my own additions.

In real life, a lot of folks whined about the coming of the automobile. On and on they went about how much better horse travel is. In real life, the men that got humans of out the stone age and into the bronze age and into the steel age were the thinkers, using intelligence.
The swinging of a stone axe 1000's of times had very little to do with man advancing to the bronze age and then iron age with iron tools. It was the men behind the scenes, not the grunts swinging an axe. So yes, using simple XP as an abstraction of that advancement gated process seems very legit. Using a broad exp based system actually closer emulates this behind the scenes nature of real life human kind advances then swinging an axe thousands of times.

Somehow thinking the "majority" wants a skilled based system and if there is not a skill based system than the game is all wrong and not fun comes across as narrow and uneducated.

There has to be some sort of gating system. a17 leveling and gating is a huge step forward. The end game comes much later now and lasts longer. This is a video game and all gates are artificial.

Broad based XP systems for advancement has been around for decades in video games.

Sorry, just your opinion. Just as my opinion is my opinion. You can't put objectivity on fun. the A17 skill system is fun for you and others, and not fun for me and others. Broad based EXP system has indeed been around for ages, and it's not very imaginative or creative. But, that's my opinion of course.

 

[meganoth]

While I get why "just play A16" is the standard reply, I am not interested in moving backwards, I do want to keep up to date with the latest version because of all the fun stuff that did change. I don't dislike A17 in its entirety.
Maybe I'll take a stab at improving the mod I downloaded earlier with my own additions.

I hope my post didn't look like the standard reply. I didn't want to suggest to you to play A16. My point was that I would play LBD any time if it was in a new form. And if I would want to experience the A16 system again I actually would have no problems playing A16 in real. But that's just me. I fully expect to do a tour of previous versions sometime in the future.

 

[Cirion]

I hope my post didn't look like the standard reply. I didn't want to suggest to you to play A16. My point was that I would play LBD any time if it was in a new form. And if I would want to experience the A16 system again I actually would have no problems playing A16 in real. But that's just me. I fully expect to do a tour of previous versions sometime in the future.

Oh gotcha. In that we can agree. If LBD ever made a comeback, I'd also want it to be done differently and made better. Even I don't want the A16 to just be re-introduced in the exact same form it was before.

 

[RestInPieces]

Efficiency players will always gravitate...........prefer to play the game organically

Roland, my 2c as usual...

(Note: I think that by "casuals", Ghostlight just wanted to describe people with a more "laid-back" way of playing.)

There is something fundamentally wrong with this line of logic in my opinion.

1) Without the need for a certain amount of efficiency everything is devalued. I think this is self-explanatory.

2) The player is encouraged by the game to be efficient (unlocking content, skills and above all, surviving).

3) A player cannot just decide to play organically. The game must thoroughly encourage the player to play organically.

4) The "grinding" you are talking about only happens because the game doesn't do the above (right amount of incentives/costs).

You remember, for example, in both forums and steam reviews, the negative impact that killing zombies being by far the most efficient way to level had. You can't expect these people to stop trying to be efficient when the game encourages you to do so. And the game, must encourage you to be efficient in the first place after all, by giving you incentives to survive, progress etc. But with zombies being the best way to be efficient, gameplay was anything but organic - that's the reason these people complained in the first place.

I get that you mostly mean the "speed at which one is efficient". But when one is trying to be efficient, he simply tries to be efficient in the most efficient way possible aka "is trying"! Meaning - you can't tell them to "pace themselves" because, besides that being something that is forced, it contradicts the "signals" the game gives them.

Further down the rabbit hole there are gamestages and scaling. In no possible way should that be used as a way or an argument to counteract the player's own pace, while at the same time he is encouraged to the opposite direction. Besides player level progression, which is undermined by the world progressing at (nearly) the same pace and different playthroughs/exploration which hold/s little surprise because GS is the most important factor in spawning, GS being used as a way or an argument to pace level progression is taking away its sense of reward.

Anyway, if there was "equivalent exchange" and diminishing returns in the A16 system, we wouldn't even be talking about grinding, because everything would feel organic (only have to ask yourself if you would rub against a cactus in a post-apocalyptic survival situation and what would prevent you from doing such a thing ). I think that A17's system can become as organic as they come as well, but it's the game design that will make it so - not every individual player's decision or way of playing.

PS: Also the concept you mentioned is pretty interesting.

 

[Grue]

Don't know why TFP are so stubborn... Reviews on Steam plummeted from 78% positive to 53%. I guess it will be wait and see untill final A17 release but I m worried since on the other thread they stated they want to go gold at the end of the year. So they made a U-turn with a game at the final stages and pretty much scraped all of the progress up to A16.

Yes, a late stage u-turn. I wish I could play A16.4 with A17 graphics, and fixes.

Exactly this.

Even excusing the horrific AI cluster♥♥♥♥ as, "still a work in progress"

They made several other changes that were wildly unpopular steps backward, at least by a significant portion of the player base outside of the fanboy echo chamber here.

There is no excuse for taking away the FOV slider.

Learn by doing was far more intuitive and skill books made for better game play than all this artificial level gating bull♥♥♥♥.

The stamina system is somewhat growing on me as and enforcement of "survival" needs for food, but the 16.4 wellness system was far better, you had to really work at consistently eating good food to get your wellness up before, now you just drop skill points into it which breaks immersion.

Several of the perks themselves are welcome improvements (with Miner 69'er and Mother lode split into two things), but I would much rather have them mapped into a 16.4 Learn by Doing system.

I personally would like to see the various improvements of A17, but with the progression, wellness, and zombie AI of 16.4.

And a few servers that I used to play on that died off with A16.4 have returned to full with the new systems, and friends on my friend's list are happily playing again. 'Widely shared' is a bit of an overstretch lol; thanks for the click-bait title I guess.

People will always come out of the woodwork when a new patch drops, myself included. That does not at all mean we are happy with what we are seeing.

Interesting, you mean people got sick of an unfinished game which hadn't changed in over a year? Then they came back after the game had been updated. That's so strange, it obviously means they're happy with all the changes. Thanks for the false equivalency I guess

My point exactly. Just because we are playing again, does not mean we like all of the changes.

 

[Roland]

1) Without the need for a certain amount of efficiency everything is devalued. I think this is self-explanatory.

A certain amount of efficiency as a function of time being a resource that must valued or at least expended wisely is something I very much agree with. You have posted elsewhere and I agree with you that time is not well utilized by the developers. Back before gamestages when the hordes and spawns were dependent on the day count I used to play 30 minute days and this, I found, brought the resource of time into sharp focus and made me feel like I was always racing against a doomsday clock. It was a glorious feeling and I would often plan out my activities before I started my play session so I could be sure to be efficient in how I spent my time. With the advent of gamestages this has sadly been lost. But it did show me that time certainly could be utilized better as a resource in the game. I would love it if there were repercussions to making poor time based decisions but I suspect most others would not--simply by the fact that so many play on 120 minute days which is something I can't even imagine myself doing.

This is not the kind of efficiency gameplay I am talking about here, though, so maybe efficiency is the wrong word. Level rushing might be the best word and is basically characterized by what Meganoth typed above about player motives for choosing to do various activities in the game.

2) The player is encouraged by the game to be efficient (unlocking content, skills and above all, surviving).

Yes the player is encouraged to unlock content and skills and to survive but I disagree that the game encourages the player to do it at the speeds we often see reported. If anything I would say that the game encourages the player to play at a pace that keeps their gamestage from rocketing too high too soon which I interpret from the complaints of speedsters who suddenly find they pushed their gamestage too far too fast.

The speed at which the Level Rushers are playing is far beyond the curve needed to survive as well. I know because I'm surviving just fine playing at a much slower leveling pace. To say that you must be level 20 by day seven or you aren't trying to survive is ludicrous when I survived fighting my 7 day horde at level 10 which is half of that.

Most of those who are Rush Leveling are doing so because it is intrinsically motivating for them to do so. It is how they have fun. They like to push themselves and see how high they can go in as short a time as possible. There is nothing in the game that could conceivably be said to encourage that level of speeding. It comes from within them and they probably play most of their games in that fashion. You can see it in Steam reviews all the time-- "4 hours of content and then boring".

3) A player cannot just decide to play organically. The game must thoroughly encourage the player to play organically.

I have to disagree with this. I play this game organically because I want to and I'm not fighting against any kind of strong current to do so that I can tell either. I think the game provides the opportunity to play it how you like. Right now I can choose to play it organically and others can choose to play it like they are competitors on the world tour of Starcraft. The game supports both choices. I come on here and report that I am extremely happy with the results of my playstyle. They come on here and report their dissatisfaction with the results of their playstyle. The game lets either of us choose to play it differently than we are if we wish.

4) The "grinding" you are talking about only happens because the game doesn't do the above (right amount of incentives/costs).

That can't be true because the grinding that I am talking about isn't happening in my game or other people's games and it is the same version of 7 Days to Die. The only problem I see with the current setup are the level gates and all the attention that is thrown to xp gain. I like playing without thought or regard to xp and so resent constant reminders of gaining it, and in what quantities, and how close I am to the next level. I don't want that. And level gates cannot be one size fits all. There have been playthroughs where I did not notice the level gates and others where even at my pace I found myself blocked and then once again my attention was drawn to xp gaining instead of just playing the game.

I know for a fact that I'm not going to abuse level gates to get the highest level stuff on day 2 and could care less if others do so I'd like to see them be gone so they never get in anyone's way.

Can the game incentives be improved and can time be better utilized? Yes. No argument there. But the level of grinding and Speed leveling we are discussing here goes way beyond game incentives and any sort of time crunch to remain ahead of the difficulty curve. These guys are content locusts that will always devour games as quickly as possible. I predict when new (actual) end game content is released we will get feedback of "That's it? That only lasted me 2 extra hours of gameplay...."

 

[Thiesen90]

What could be cool would be 50% from doing and 50% from skills, so lets say out of 100 you could only use 50 skill points and then have to do the other 50 by doing

 

[Roland]

They made several other changes that were wildly unpopular steps backward, at least by a significant portion of the player base outside of the fanboy echo chamber here.

Yes, because we only allowed positive posts about A17 here after it was released and the developers did absolutely nothing to mitigate the changes...

SMH

 

[Cirion]

I predict when new (actual) end game content is released we will get feedback of "That's it? That only lasted me 2 extra hours of gameplay...."

That's why we need an end-game that is meaningful, that will provide more than 2 hr of gameplay even to hardcore folks. Many possibilities

- Infinite loot / difficulty progression

- Infinite character development

- Infinite game maps

- Ability to colonize towns, hire npcs (farmers, town defenders, miners, builders (with how big towns are, would need npcs to help build walls...) ETC). ---> This would be my personal end-game favorite thing to do probably. Or close to it. Set them up to defend against both hordes and bandits. Maybe the ability to "Finish" a map if you successfully colonize all the towns, to have a goal to work towards, as well as defeat all bandits on the map.

- "New Game Plus": connected to previous point. clear a map, and be able to transfer your character to new map that is more challenging, with better loot -> constant progression. choose the same map or choose a new random seed

 

[AtomicUs5000]

Yes, because we only allowed positive posts about A17 here after it was released and the developers did absolutely nothing to mitigate the changes...
SMH

That's the first I time I actually lol'd here

 

[Lanadon Conners]

That's why we need an end-game that is meaningful, that will provide more than 2 hr of gameplay even to hardcore folks. Many possibilities
- Infinite loot / difficulty progression

- Infinite character development

- Infinite game maps

- Ability to colonize towns, hire npcs (farmers, town defenders, miners, builders (with how big towns are, would need npcs to help build walls...) ETC). ---> This would be my personal end-game favorite thing to do probably. Or close to it. Set them up to defend against both hordes and bandits. Maybe the ability to "Finish" a map if you successfully colonize all the towns, to have a goal to work towards, as well as defeat all bandits on the map.

- "New Game Plus": connected to previous point. clear a map, and be able to transfer your character to new map that is more challenging, with better loot -> constant progression. choose the same map or choose a new random seed

I would absolutely so bananas for a Game that let me start out as we do and have an end goal of building a community of NPCs brought in via quests / missions and included NPC camps that were either neutral or hostile(Bandits) towards you and your community depending on your choices. The size of your community would influence your "Territory" and resources your NPCs could harvest for the community. As an end game goal to build your communities to a self sustaining level.

It would be nice to have missions post Tier 5 POIs where you have to save/ convert an NPC or sabotage a neighboring community's power grid or Ammo supply dump. Maybe kill the Gate NPC guards on BMH night and hide inside their community. This could even work rather well for MP servers.. each player either working together or against one another.

Granted, we are still working on getting the Start of the game working but having something to work towards after say level 120 would be nice. Just my 2 Dukes

 

[hotpoon]

1. Agreed.>Snip by OzHawkeye. Please refrain from the ad hominem.<

4. And what purpose would they have other then gating stuff behind pure RNG?

5. No, it wasn't, it was extremely exploitable and it was exploited, that's why it got changed.

2. Is that what you think I want? Wow. Have you even played A17? During blood moon, if you lock yourself in a room, zombies attack the current weakest block of that room. If you then attach a barb wire to that block (on the inside of your base where they cannot see), they all, in real time, stop attacking that block, and choose the next weakest block. Is that your idea of a zombie? According to Roland, it's not even the devs idea of a zombie, but the ai is a basis they are using that will be tweaked and adjusted differently for both bandits and zombies. The current x-ray vision ai is why I stopped playing 7DtD, and although I think it is reasonable to trust what Roland said, I'd still feel a hell of a lot better if 'ridiculous ai' was in the known issues of the patch notes.

3. I'm actually a middle-aged woman, but that's neither here nor there, because I fully understand you were just trying to be insulting for whatever reason...like you often are in this forum. LBD wasn't 'bad'. That's your opinion. It certainly had room for improvement as Cirion has pointed out time and again quite eloquently, but balancing it really isn't that difficult. It just takes a bit of logic.

4. For one, it would give us a reason to go out looting again. Now that crafting gives you almost everything you desire, scavenging has taken a back seat, which I feel is a bit of a shame. RNG also means that every time you play the game, you're going to get a different experience.

5. You state that the old wellness system was exploitable, and in fact was exploited. I would like to know...how so? I never exploited it and was never aware of any way to do so.

So use LBD where it makes sense and don't use it where it makes sense. Armor skill should be more like crafting skill anyway, your armor does not and should not magically get better just because you take damage.
Anyway I also like LBD because it gets around all the problems of shared pool EXP, which I'm with everyone who hates LBD by equally hating the shared pool system and don't see why people love that!

Shared pool adds all sorts of annoyances like level gates, forcing you to increase your gamestage since gamestage is based upon common exp pool, and restricting your gameplay as such because it forces you to play combat specc if you want to have a reasonable chance to win especially on insane and single player. Not to mention lack of immersion, but that's already been explained enough hopefully. Not to mention, LBD gives you a much less possibility to have "buyer's regret". By that, I mean, with shared pool exp system you have opportunity to level up a skill you have never physically used. With that there is a danger it is a skill you may dislike. Too late... you bought it, no refunds. with LBD you can just use it, see if you like it, if not, don't bother leveling it. Hardly any time or skill pts wasted. Final pro of LBD vs shared pool - if LBD is coded correctly (Noting that in some cases, it wasn't), you don't even notice the grind, every skill levels up at roughly the same pace, no "grind" necessary... just play the game. Of course the option of grind is always there if you really want something leveled up. The grind hurts, is felt so bad in A17 because you need soooo many zombie kills, sooo much mining, to level everything up. How is this less grindy than A16??

Complaints of some things that "essential" being difficult to grind using A16 system IMO is not even much of a debate for a couple reasons

1.) in A17 there is plenty of "essential" skills being far worse to grind. Take INT for one. In A17 you MUST have int to craft anything, yet if you specialize in it, you are gimped in damage for a long time, especially on harder difficulties

2.) Again, the complaints upon certain skills can be easily addressed in LBD. Example - I believe all guns leveled at the same pace per shot. Meaning some skills lagged behind, Pistol vs. SMG. Pistol doesn't fire as much, so the correct balance is to make it level more per shot. Same with rocket launchers. I downloaded an "Action skills" mod recently, and I balanced it this way and it seems so much more logical.

3.) In the end, it is far easier to max out many skills in A16 vs. in A17, especially when you consider how long it can take to level up in A17 at 100, 200+, you only get 1 skill point per level, and it can take upwards of 5 skill points to level something up ONCE. So I hardly see how A17 is easier. TO really drive home this point, even with how bad some of the skills in A16 were (armor) it is still probably faster to grind armor this way than it is with A17 system once you've reached high levels in A17 where you need hundreds of thousands of EXP to level ONCE. A17 "Feels" better than LBD early game because levels and skill points come fast, the pain is not fully realized until you reach high levels. It is really imbalanced because at that point, it could take several game days to get a single skill point, whereas it takes the same time to get a skill up in LBD, whether you're a new player or on day 100.

--> Some were harder yes, and again we aren't debating that some were imbalanced (like armor), but done correctly, a LBD system should feel so much better.

Anyway this debate is silly because several of us ALREADY addressed certain skills that you have complaints against like armor, and we're actually mostly in agreement with you on it.

The ONLY thing A17 has going for it is the ability to "cheese" and max a skill super early, but only one skill, maybe two. I'm betting alot of people seem to like A17 because you can cheese it by maxing combat super early. If anything that's pretty overpowered anyway, which is what virtually everyone does, so there is no variety with that system. They should put level gates on combat... and then we'll see how many people are praising A17 =P I am only half joking. They level gated stuff like INT after all... If level gates were removed from INT, then INT would actually have merit vs. combat speccs.

Couldn't say it better myself.

@Roland, I'm curious to know what you think of the above. In fact, all of you that feel LBD in A16 was bad...would you get behind it if it were implemented like Cirion suggests?

 

[Ghostlight]

I would absolutely so bananas for a Game that let me start out as we do and have an end goal of building a community of NPCs brought in via quests / missions and included NPC camps that were either neutral or hostile(Bandits) towards you and your community depending on your choices. The size of your community would influence your "Territory" and resources your NPCs could harvest for the community. As an end game goal to build your communities to a self sustaining level.

You should try State of Decay. A fantastic zombie survival game that has most of what you wrote above.

 

[RipClaw]

In real life, a lot of folks whined about the coming of the automobile. On and on they went about how much better horse travel is. In real life, the men that got humans of out the stone age and into the bronze age and into the steel age were the thinkers, using intelligence.

Kind of ironic. You put a lot of emphasis on intelligence, but this skill tree is the only one with level gates. And to overcome these gates, hordes of players armed with clubs and bows and like a horde of stone-age humans roam the area killing every zombie they can catch.

 

[Khulkhuum]

I think i understand where everyone ranting about LBD is going into... Although my mind is fuzzy about the exact distribution of XP in A16, so do correct me if needed, although i will make up the numbers to settle the point in if needed be.

I will be using a merged notation of perks for A16 perks and skills (found there was distinction between the two in the past) to make it clear i'm generally talking about everything you can invest into, as well as A17 perks.

So let me make a comparison (i marked similar information that is in both solutions):

== LBD ==

1. All of the perks can have points invested in them, but in general require more than 1 point (even on first levels). You get a number of points every level.

2. Some perks require other perks to get a specific level (mining 20 to get miner 69'er, etc., later called XP PERK) or have a specific general level, before you can advance it using a SP (Skill Point). These skills cannot be raised until the requirement is met.

3. When you perform specific actions (or craft) with specific tools/weapons in mind of certain XP PERK, you gain a certain amount of XP for it. The sum of all gathered this way XP contributes into regular XP. After meeting certain thresholds you level up and gain SPs. There is no XP for killing Zs, only for using weapons or tools during the killing.

4. Investing into XP PERK, apart from unlocking some perks for advancement, grants only a small advantage towards specific actions - mining to using mining tools (Fireaxe, Pickaxe, Shovel), knife handling to using knife weapons (not even damage, less stamina usage or better harvests), etc.

== 1 XP BAR FOR ALL ==

1. All of the perks can have points invested in them, but for higher levels require more than 1 point and there are also overall attributes (later on called STATS for short). Big difference is you get ONLY ONE point every level (perhaps this is the biggest issue here, where you feel you can't invest much when you advance).

2. Each higher level of any perk requires a STAT under which it is to be of a certain level (barter 3 requires int 3, etc.) or have a specific general level, before you can advance it using an SP. Some of the perks (INT tree) are gated so that you can't enhance them with the lowest STAT, but most others can have 1-2 levels bought without raising STATS.

3. When you perform specific actions like gathering resources, crafting or killing Zs, you get regular XP, for example you get regular XP after a zombie kill.

4. Investing into STATS, apart from unlocking some perks for advancement, gives some vital bonuses and expansions like bigger stamina pool, bigger health pool, greater melee damage, greater ranged damage, etc.

== MY COMMENTS ==

1. One could think that "you get more XP in LBD, because you can get a lot from different sources". Sure, but so in A17, yet you didn't get XP for killing Zs. Additionally, if you hit mining or knife handling to 100 you wouldn't get any more XP in LBD. In A17 you can kill a million zombies and mine a million stone blocks and you'll get XP for everything.

2. Each system was gated in some way. Current in my opinion is less heavy, because you can advance something without any XP PERK at some levels, though level gates in current are very debatable. Hell, anyone complained that they couldn't advance tool crafting, because they didn't hit 20/30/40/50/etc. level? I sometimes did...

3. Both systems have similar flaws and to some extent work in similar fashion. You gather XP in some form, you get SPs and invest them in anything you want (mining all day, but i invest into SCIENCE!).

I know i'm hitting a painful topic, but i am trying to bring up how things were and are.

 

[Roland]

@Roland, I'm curious to know what you think of the above. In fact, all of you that feel LBD in A16 was bad...would you get behind it if it were implemented like Cirion suggests?

I'm agreeable to any inclusion of LBD in the player progression system. Many of the ideas expressed including those asking to return to the A16 model sound fine to me. I have never been against LBD other than that I truly believe that as a design model it represents a greater incentive to grind for levels which I guess would be called "training up" in real life. The problem for me is that if I hit a wall and so am required to do the boring repetitive work of "training up" then I don't feel like playing any longer.

As Meganoth stated so well... I want to mine, break down cars, shop, farm, loot, and kill zombies for reasons pertaining to the natural unfolding of my day and my survival needs. I never want to to do those things just to level up a skill or level up my character. Cirion makes good points about balancing the boring stuff to level faster and whatnot but the problem always comes back to who gets to decide what parts are boring or fun?

For my playstyle the central pool of points never ever gets in the way of me choosing to do activities for the purpose of natural and organic play. The level gates definitely get in the way and I mod them out when I play seriously. I modded them out of A16 as well. I personally don't like level gates.

BUT...I know some people do like level gates. They LIKE having a defined goal to work towards and accomplish and they feel good when they pass the gate. So I'm happy to mod gates out for myself.

LBD in A16 was fine for me because I never even get close to fully speccing out my Characters. I like the early and midgame too much to play as a superman for more than a few hours. Therefore, I felt absolutely no anxiety about spending points on skills which I know for some around here was a horrifying 7 Days faux pas...lol.

I have never written for or against either system being best. They both have their good and bad and I have fun with either one because my focus is not on gaining levels and xp for the sake of gaining levels and xp. They always have been a secondary feature of the game for me. My involvement in these debates is pointing out flaws in arguments and pushing back against wild accusations regarding the development team.

From a purely academic viewpoint on design I can understand why the devs don't like LBD. It is easy to exploit using macros and hard to balance. I don't think we need to think them lazy and incompetent for not wanting to tackle the problems associated with it. If I made a game i wouldn't want there to be a feature that could be easily cheated if there was a different route to go. I think the current system is a lot of fun. I know the LBD fans call it bland and boring to spend a point but damn if making perk purchasing decisions during the night doesn't make it go faster and then the next day when I can see a noticeable difference it is wonderful.

If a mod comes out for LBD I will surely give it a try. I love all the creative iterations of this game. I'd love it if someone took my idea of no experience and just points for days survived and went with it since I have no idea how to do it. For me, that would be the ultimate nostalgic return to the days of Alpha 10 before any of this xp nonsense muddied the waters for how to play the game. Back then EVERYONE just did what they needed to do to accomplish their goals and there was not a single person in the entire playerbase who ever made it their goal to level up.

 

[HungryZombie]

It's obvious why people love the new shared XP pool perks: it's dumbed-down, and it gives the player everything on a plate for minimum effort. In short it is for a more casual audience. Not knocking such people, just stating the truth here. The new perk system is casual-friendly in many ways, this is an obvious one. Another is that it gives the player the ability to make everything in the game. No need to explore, no need to go out there and loot. Just gain XP by your preferred method and everything is eventually given to you. Can't get more Casual than that.
Unfortunately for a survival game, casual-friendly is the LAST thing you want your in-game systems to be, because the result of that is inevitable: a BLAND survival game with little replayability. Q.E.D

I think you are really off the mark on this. What's so smart about grinding your stone axe out by beating things to level your construction tools skill so you can unlock concrete? Talk about a gate, geeze that one really sucked in A16.

Not sure what you see is so casual about combat. I'd think it's more casual to be underground mining safely rather than exploring POI's full of zombies but we all look at things differently I guess.

In A16 you could mine all night and level up pretty fast. Mine and then magically learn how to use your pistol better or whatever other skill you felt like spending your skill points into. I didn't see grinding out mining all night as either smart or hardcore. But again different people see things differently.

Both systems are rather similar once you zoom out and look at them.

 

[hotpoon]

I'm agreeable to any inclusion of LBD in the player progression system. Many of the ideas expressed including those asking to return to the A16 model sound fine to me. I have never been against LBD other than that I truly believe that as a design model it represents a greater incentive to grind for levels which I guess would be called "training up" in real life. The problem for me is that if I hit a wall and so am required to do the boring repetitive work of "training up" then I don't feel like playing any longer.

As Meganoth stated so well... I want to mine, break down cars, shop, farm, loot, and kill zombies for reasons pertaining to the natural unfolding of my day and my survival needs. I never want to to do those things just to level up a skill or level up my character. Cirion makes good points about balancing the boring stuff to level faster and whatnot but the problem always comes back to who gets to decide what parts are boring or fun?

For my playstyle the central pool of points never ever gets in the way of me choosing to do activities for the purpose of natural and organic play. The level gates definitely get in the way and I mod them out when I play seriously. I modded them out of A16 as well. I personally don't like level gates.

BUT...I know some people do like level gates. They LIKE having a defined goal to work towards and accomplish and they feel good when they pass the gate. So I'm happy to mod gates out for myself.

LBD in A16 was fine for me because I never even get close to fully speccing out my Characters. I like the early and midgame too much to play as a superman for more than a few hours. Therefore, I felt absolutely no anxiety about spending points on skills which I know for some around here was a horrifying 7 Days faux pas...lol.

I have never written for or against either system being best. They both have their good and bad and I have fun with either one because my focus is not on gaining levels and xp for the sake of gaining levels and xp. They always have been a secondary feature of the game for me. My involvement in these debates is pointing out flaws in arguments and pushing back against wild accusations regarding the development team.

From a purely academic viewpoint on design I can understand why the devs don't like LBD. It is easy to exploit using macros and hard to balance. I don't think we need to think them lazy and incompetent for not wanting to tackle the problems associated with it. If I made a game i wouldn't want there to be a feature that could be easily cheated if there was a different route to go. I think the current system is a lot of fun. I know the LBD fans call it bland and boring to spend a point but damn if making perk purchasing decisions during the night doesn't make it go faster and then the next day when I can see a noticeable difference it is wonderful.

If a mod comes out for LBD I will surely give it a try. I love all the creative iterations of this game. I'd love it if someone took my idea of no experience and just points for days survived and went with it since I have no idea how to do it. For me, that would be the ultimate nostalgic return to the days of Alpha 10 before any of this xp nonsense muddied the waters for how to play the game. Back then EVERYONE just did what they needed to do to accomplish their goals and there was not a single person in the entire playerbase who ever made it their goal to level up.

I know exactly what you mean about the faux pas. lol! I knew with LBD that the things I did as a result of playing the game would naturally get better, so I felt no need for any kind of grinding. I was simply playing, and slowly getting better. I do recall using points manually for something (though I forget what) and feeling slightly guilty - like I was cheating because I really should just do the action to get better naturally, but I got over it.

In A17, I just found my gameplay hamstringed. I couldn't just play the game, and be rewarded for that, so ended up grinding zombies, and then actually being frustrated at not being able to find enough of them to grind.

I wasn't around for Alpha 10, (I think I started in A12 or 13) but wouldn't mind at least trying your idea. I *think* I will probably still prefer LBD, but one doesn't know if one doesn't try.

 

[RestInPieces]

This is not the kind of efficiency gameplay I am talking about here, though, so maybe efficiency is the wrong word. Level rushing might be the best word and is basically characterized by what Meganoth typed above about player motives for choosing to do various activities in the game.

As soon as you select activities with XP in mind instead of in-game reasons, you are doing the worst kind of grind and yes, I don't see the fun in that.

Time being a factor in the formula again is something I want yes, but in this case it's more about time being a resource because of emergent needs. Meaning that, like meganoth said, if the player chooses activities with XP in mind, we are talking about a non-organic grind, in which time is not really a resource because the player affords to do this. I am of the opinion that the player must not afford to choose activities with XP in mind, which is why I said that organic gameplay is created by the game - not the player.

I have to disagree with this. I play this game organically because I want to and I'm not fighting against any kind of strong current to do so that I can tell either. I think the game provides the opportunity to play it how you like. Right now I can choose to play it organically and others can choose to play it like they are competitors on the world tour of Starcraft. The game supports both choices. I come on here and report that I am extremely happy with the results of my playstyle. They come on here and report their dissatisfaction with the results of their playstyle. The game lets either of us choose to play it differently than we are if we wish
.......................... Yes the player is encouraged to unlock content and skills and to survive but I disagree that the game encourages the player to do it at the speeds we often see reported.

.......................... The speed at which the Level Rushers are playing is far beyond the curve needed to survive as well. I know because I'm surviving just fine playing at a much slower leveling pace. To say that you must be level 20 by day seven or you aren't trying to survive is ludicrous when I survived fighting my 7 day horde at level 10 which is half of that.

Most of those who are Rush Leveling are doing so because it is intrinsically motivating for them to do so. It is how they have fun. They like to push themselves and see how high they can go in as short a time as possible. There is nothing in the game that could conceivably be said to encourage that level of speeding. It comes from within them and they probably play most of their games in that fashion. You can see it in Steam reviews all the time-- "4 hours of content and then boring".

......................... That can't be true because the grinding that I am talking about isn't happening in my game or other people's games and it is the same version of 7 Days to Die.

Roland, these people don't see or choose to see this game as a world tour of Starcraft. They are thrown into the game, given an incentive and just try their best to reach a goal. They identify the best way to do this and follow it (to be fair, that's what we would all do when thrown in a post-apocalyptic zombie wasteland). I can't imagine how you expect them to *decide* to play organically, if you consider that the above is what is natural for them, speed included.

Why do you think "gates" exist in the first place? If players could choose to play organically in order to get the best exprerience from this game, gates would not be needed... Seriously, Roland, I can't change your mind about this, but give it at least some more thought, because everytime you reply to a person complaining about the above, you are dragged in a circular argument which is doomed to never end with someone being satisfied, because neither party understands the other one's line of thought.

If anything I would say that the game encourages the player to play at a pace that keeps their gamestage from rocketing too high too soon which I interpret from the complaints of speedsters who suddenly find they pushed their gamestage too far too fast.

Well I expected you would bring this up and already wrote about this below these 4 points in the previous post... This is the absolute worst way to go about it. This, straightforwardly, punishes people for progressing at their pace, instead of encouraging them to play more organically.

The only problem I see with the current setup are the level gates and all the attention that is thrown to xp gain. I like playing without thought or regard to xp and so resent constant reminders of gaining it, and in what quantities, and how close I am to the next level. I don't want that. And level gates cannot be one size fits all.

I agree that it is a problem and it's no wonder so much attention is drawn to them. I am happy that player progression is more paced but the way they chose to do it was quite crude. I am confident that a *controlled*-rng schematics approach to at least gate essential recipes would be far better.

These guys are content locusts that will always devour games as quickly as possible. I predict when new (actual) end game content is released we will get feedback of "That's it? That only lasted me 2 extra hours of gameplay...."

Expect that to happen with the "legendaries" - pff, I cringe when I mention them. The same way I cringe every time someone asks for zip lines, underwater/space/etc content. "No reason to loot after looting legendaries, which I looted to make looting easier!", "too easy killing zombies with legendaries need stronger enemies". Enter bullet-sponge hell, eventually.

I was always of the opinion that the game in its current state has a huge wealth of (unpolished - it's an alpha after all) content. I've seen so many other games with much less content than this one - only difference is that they pace the player (both progression and item-wise) much more prudently. If a game doesn't do that, no amount of content will be enough.