PC The absolute biggest problem with A17 (and I guarantee I'm right) is....

[Ghostlight]

...that people think they can play on the same difficulty they always have.

You can't.

We used to play max difficulty in A16. We have had to drop to difficulty 3 (or normal) for A17.

And it's fine. Horde night is fine. All our old base designs are working fine. Building is as viable as it's always been.

In fact the only thing that is not fine is that OUTSIDE of horde night, difficulty 3 is too easy. Slight balance tweak needed is all.

 

[PoppaTot]

...that people think they can play on the same difficulty they always have.
You can't.

We used to play max difficulty in A16. We have had to drop to difficulty 3 (or normal) for A17.

And it's fine. Horde night is fine. All our old base designs are working fine. Building is as viable as it's always been.

In fact the only thing that is not fine is that OUTSIDE of horde night, difficulty 3 is too easy. Slight balance tweak needed is all.

I have no issue at all with the difficulty, and I play on the same as I always have.

My issue, which you've seen from other posts, is the fact TFP rendered builder/miner play style useless for leveling. I'm patiently waiting/hoping they balance this.

 

[Sergoros]

All our old base designs are working fine. Building is as viable as it's always been.

Capped fall damage and lack of log spikes should have made most common defence impossible, no?

 

[Maxwar]

I have no issue at all with the difficulty, and I play on the same as I always have.
My issue, which you've seen from other posts, is the fact TFP rendered builder/miner play style useless for leveling. I'm patiently waiting/hoping they balance this.

I actually like it right now because you have to make choices between building/harvesting and looting/killing in regard to gamestage. I think this makes for an interesting dynamic.

One one hand you need to loot to get good items early on which means more killing and faster leveling. But when you do more of that you spend less time building a solid base. Which makes you more vulnerable in the end. But finding ''The item'' early on can be game changing, so there is still en incentive to go out and loot.

When you are out looting you level faster and gamestage gets up quicker and you get harder hordes. Mix that with the fact you spent less time on your base and your might get rekt during the bloodmoon.

So yeah, the builder playstyle is still rewarded but in different way. Lower level also means easier hordes.

I agree with you in the context of a multiplayer team where each players kind of have a different job, then that gets annoying for the builder guy to be under level. But I do play with friends and we tend to do a bit of everything each so this is not really an issue.

 

[Pizzalicious]

My 3 servers have always been 5/6 diff and will continue to do so.

 

[PoppaTot]

I totally do see what you are saying, I guess I am more thinking MP though as you've addressed. In MP the lack of leveling for anything but Enforcer playstyle is useless now.

 

[Viktoriusiii]

Disagree. Still play on highest difficulty. And while I got surprised once or twice, its not much harder. (Easier in some aspects, because zombies are slower and easier to kite)

The problem I have is that it took all the fun out of A16.

Building got nerfed hard

Limb explosions are locked behind perks

Level-gates completely take away the freedom to be whoever you want to be

Everything is slower (in a few parts its actually nice to have an early game, but a lot just feels sluggish and punishing)

It has become a chore to play. Its work not fun.

There are other issues (bad game design, bugs, performance, reworked rwg and more) but the main problem is the missing fun.

I want the game harder and slower. But gutting the player and forcing him to grind levels to have fun is not the way to do that.

 

[Poojam]

Disagree. Still play on highest difficulty. And while I got surprised once or twice, its not much harder. (Easier in some aspects, because zombies are slower and easier to kite)The problem I have is that it took all the fun out of A16.

Building got nerfed hard

Limb explosions are locked behind perks

Level-gates completely take away the freedom to be whoever you want to be

Everything is slower (in a few parts its actually nice to have an early game, but a lot just feels sluggish and punishing)

It has become a chore to play. Its work not fun.

There are other issues (bad game design, bugs, performance, reworked rwg and more) but the main problem is the missing fun.

I want the game harder and slower. But gutting the player and forcing him to grind levels to have fun is not the way to do that.

Agreed

 

[Jarod_Silverstar]

The problem is that things are currently poorly balanced for single player. You almost need to be in a group of 3-4 to be able to accomplish all the tasks needed. The daily 20 zombie wandering horde can be handled easily by 2 people while the others continue to loot or construct as needed. For a single player the 2-3 hours it might take to clear the horde prevents them from doing anything else in the meantime.

A 3 story dungeon POI would take 4 person team less than half a game day to completely sweep and loot out. Single player would have to take all day or more to completely clear.

Between my playing SP maps and watching various streamers playing in groups, there seems to be practically no difference in the frequency of hordes and numbers of zombies in the POIs. Sure, the groups will see the harder zombies earlier but that is because they are being more successful in the first place.

The Pimps simple need to fix the spawning so that the numbers of zombies are also impacted by gamestage I think many of the complaints about how hard it is will go away.

 

[HungryZombie]

The problem is that things are currently poorly balanced for single player. You almost need to be in a group of 3-4 to be able to accomplish all the tasks needed. The daily 20 zombie wandering horde can be handled easily by 2 people while the others continue to loot or construct as needed. For a single player the 2-3 hours it might take to clear the horde prevents them from doing anything else in the meantime.A 3 story dungeon POI would take 4 person team less than half a game day to completely sweep and loot out. Single player would have to take all day or more to completely clear.

Between my playing SP maps and watching various streamers playing in groups, there seems to be practically no difference in the frequency of hordes and numbers of zombies in the POIs. Sure, the groups will see the harder zombies earlier but that is because they are being more successful in the first place.

The Pimps simple need to fix the spawning so that the numbers of zombies are also impacted by gamestage I think many of the complaints about how hard it is will go away.

I've been playing on Scavenger (lowest difficulty setting) with Never run set. The wandering horde of zombies is a piece of cake. At Scavenger every heavy swing knocks them down and the 2nd swing kills them. If you feel you are struggling lower the settings!

 

[Jarod_Silverstar]

I've been playing on Scavenger (lowest difficulty setting) with Never run set. The wandering horde of zombies is a piece of cake. At Scavenger every heavy swing knocks them down and the 2nd swing kills them. If you feel you are struggling lower the settings!

The difficulty setting was not my point. It is the spawn numbers. Except for the bloodmoon hordes you deal with the same number of zombies on day 2 with a gamestage of 10 as you do on day 40 with a gamestage of 250. And it doesn't matter if you are in a group or not, the numbers are same, just the types of zombies change.

Personally I enjoy the challenge of killing stronger zombies. Back in A14/15 there was an adjustment for the overall zombie spawn rate in the world. I would turn it down to low so there were fewer zombies, but put difficulty at insane so it took some effort to kill them. If you like having the glass hordes that you can swat down with little effort, that is your choice. I don't think people should be forced to make the zombie killing easy just so they get the chance to feel like they have been able to accomplish anything else.

 

[Scyris]

I actually like it right now because you have to make choices between building/harvesting and looting/killing in regard to gamestage. I think this makes for an interesting dynamic.
One one hand you need to loot to get good items early on which means more killing and faster leveling. But when you do more of that you spend less time building a solid base. Which makes you more vulnerable in the end. But finding ''The item'' early on can be game changing, so there is still en incentive to go out and loot.

When you are out looting you level faster and gamestage gets up quicker and you get harder hordes. Mix that with the fact you spent less time on your base and your might get rekt during the bloodmoon.

So yeah, the builder playstyle is still rewarded but in different way. Lower level also means easier hordes.

I agree with you in the context of a multiplayer team where each players kind of have a different job, then that gets annoying for the builder guy to be under level. But I do play with friends and we tend to do a bit of everything each so this is not really an issue.

All you need for the first horde night or 2 is a open bottom floor filled with barbed wire fences, and shoot at the zombies. They'll be so slowed they can't hit anything and don't even got a chance in hell to get to you.

- - - Updated - - -

I've been playing on Scavenger (lowest difficulty setting) with Never run set. The wandering horde of zombies is a piece of cake. At Scavenger every heavy swing knocks them down and the 2nd swing kills them. If you feel you are struggling lower the settings!

On nomad, with 2 in skull crusher and 3 str, you: 1 shot normal female zombies, 2 shot the normal males, and 3 shot the fatties.

 

[Jugginator]

Capped fall damage and lack of log spikes should have made most common defence impossible, no?

IF you think inside a small, enclosed box, then yes. If you think outside the broken, easy A16 box, then no building a defensable base is doable.

 

[Sergoros]

IF you think inside a small, enclosed box, then yes. If you think outside the broken, easy A16 box, then no building a defensable base is doable.

Have you read the quote in my post? It was stating, that on normal difficulty, old designs are viable. Which sounds wrong, since log spikes and fall dmg was doing most of the damage.

Now, about your post. It is not about thinking inside or outside of the box. It is about expecting a good passive protection from the base, if you have wasted over 100 hours of irl time on it. And if you have to waste even more hours on repairing it after every bloodmoon...lets just say, it doesnt sound like such a base is worth the effort.

 

[grieferbastard]

I have no issue at all with the difficulty, and I play on the same as I always have.
My issue, which you've seen from other posts, is the fact TFP rendered builder/miner play style useless for leveling. I'm patiently waiting/hoping they balance this.

Here's the issue I see with this though.

Risk vs reward. There is no risk in builder/miner. If you can level up with no risk at enevn close to comparable speed as high risk zombie fighting then it's flat out superior and you've functionally temovrd the risk from the game. The only time one has to take risks is when they want to and at their own pace.

There's a huge difference in the games experience between "the world is scary and dangerous and survival very uncertain" and "the world is scary and dangerous when you choose to go out into it, but you can accomplish most of it in safety and get as prepared as you want before engaging with it".

I agree mining is too slow. I feel like I'm slapping at a mountain tepidly and languidly with a ham sandwich even at level 120 all the mining perks and a steel pickaxe. I would mine and build way more than I do not because of any XP gain but that mining and building has become absolutely tedious.

 

[PoppaTot]

Here's the issue I see with this though.
Risk vs reward. There is no risk in builder/miner. If you can level up with no risk at enevn close to comparable speed as high risk zombie fighting then it's flat out superior and you've functionally temovrd the risk from the game. The only time one has to take risks is when they want to and at their own pace.

There's a huge difference in the games experience between "the world is scary and dangerous and survival very uncertain" and "the world is scary and dangerous when you choose to go out into it, but you can accomplish most of it in safety and get as prepared as you want before engaging with it".

I agree mining is too slow. I feel like I'm slapping at a mountain tepidly and languidly with a ham sandwich even at level 120 all the mining perks and a steel pickaxe. I would mine and build way more than I do not because of any XP gain but that mining and building has become absolutely tedious.

But if accommodating other playstyle has zero affect on yours, why are you so opposed to it when it does not affect you in the slightest?

 

[RestInPieces]

But if accommodating other playstyle has zero affect on yours, why are you so opposed to it when it does not affect you in the slightest?

It's not a matter of playstyle tbh, it's a matter of game design. For example, let's take Tetris. A playstyle choice in Tetris (sounds ridiculous, yes), is how you choose to stash the blocks. A matter of design is whether you can go upwards. Doing the latter is not a playstyle choice - it would invalidate the game's point. In the same analogy, being safe whenever you want to changes the game at a fundamental level and goes against its genre description. Playing as a nomad is an example of a playstyle choice.

 

[OzHawkeye]

It's not a matter of playstyle tbh, it's a matter of game design. For example, let's take Tetris. A playstyle choice in Tetris (sounds ridiculous, yes), is how you choose to stash the blocks. A matter of design is whether you can go upwards. Doing the latter is not a playstyle choice - it would invalidate the game's point. In the same analogy, being safe whenever you want to changes the game at a fundamental level and goes against its description. Playing as a nomad is an example of a playstyle choice.

Well, this is definitely an opinion I know others disagree with (which I accept), but I still believe - in the name of player choice - that if a player chooses to make themselves invulnerable (by whatever method they chose), then the Pimps shouldn't be going massively out of their way to close that off.

 

[PoppaTot]

It's not a matter of playstyle tbh, it's a matter of game design. For example, let's take Tetris. A playstyle choice in Tetris (sounds ridiculous, yes), is how you choose to stash the blocks. A matter of design is whether you can go upwards. Doing the latter is not a playstyle choice - it would invalidate the game's point. In the same analogy, being safe whenever you want to changes the game at a fundamental level and goes against its genre description. Playing as a nomad is an example of a playstyle choice.

But if I could go upward a month ago and have been for quite sometime, I would be upset if the Tetris devs pulled a fast one and removed it lol. See the difference?

 

[RestInPieces]

Well, this is definitely an opinion I know others disagree with (which I accept), but I still believe - in the name of player choice - that if a player chooses to make themselves invulnerable (by whatever method they chose), then the Pimps shouldn't be going massively out of their way to close that off.

Well, what I am trying to say is that such a thing is more of a genre-defining change rather than a matter of playstyle freedom. And genre-defining elements have to be solid in a non-sandbox game.

But if I could go upward a month ago and have been for quite sometime, I would be upset if the Tetris devs pulled a fast one and removed it lol. See the difference?

Hahahhaha, definitely.