PC V3.0 Sandbox Siege Sneak Peek

I was talking about right now.... Whatever was in the past, is in the past.
The change for the 30 zombies cap on horde night was introduced in 1.2 or 1.3 and it's been this way ever since.

Here's the link to the original message (Dec. 7, 2024): https://community.thefunpimps.com/threads/v1-2-b22-exp-updated-to-b24.41316/post-579500
I know. But we were talking about game options to increase the limit. They can certainly add a game option for that. And there's no reason not to just because console can't handle it. That was the point of what I said.
 
It was not put back. That 64 needs to be renamed at some point to something like "huge". It is per player and if there were 4 players that should be 256 zombies, which it previously did not give you anyway.

Max spawned zombies in the world is set to 64, so 64 x3 doesn't apply. The max spawn of the server does unless that's bugged I never seen more than 64 on horde night prior.

I'd like the option to have 64 zombies on horde night again with 3 of us in a group. Being limited to 30 because "it helps performance" should not take away our option to play with 64 zombies during horde night

7 days to die was always about choice/modding but since 1.0 those choices have turned into hard coded enforcements

All these settings don't give us the option but rather an enforced cap/minimum

30 zombie cap on horde night (horde night setting)
Solid grey glass at 15 blocks (occlusion)
Reduced distance of cars, lights and LODs at ultra (object quality)
Bright night and interiors (brightness)
 
I wish feral zombies didn't die in the morning.
I'm not sure if it was changed/fixed, but the mod WalkerSim seemed to have this 'feature'. I usually find myself relieved that feral zombies die on the morning bell. Maybe feral zombies should be able to rarely spawn at all times? I'd like that. It's fun to know that there will always be a reason to keep my head on a swivel, even in the Forest biome (without requiring nightmare run speed 24/7 + feral sense or something). I guess dog hordes count for that reason, but that's a little too rare for my preferences.
 
I guess dog hordes count for that reason, but that's a little too rare for my preferences.

Yeah the dog hordes (and hordes in general) could be a bit more dangerous.. I tend to be on the move so they always spawn and go to where i was a minute ago, always avoiding me. Maybe they should move towards the player instead of their last position :ROFLMAO:
 
Fog change -- Light fog, normal fog (current to levels in game as of 2.6), heavy fog (lasts twice as long) and extreme fog (lasts 16 hours a day in random cycles)

Canned foods give dysentery. Cooking them removes dysentery.

Make dysentery more dangerous, right now it is a worthless inconvenience. Make it cause a pain effect or quadruple the fullness/hydration drain.

Make dysentery work in tiers, so certain things give you more dysentery percentage than others.

Make a "dirty bandage" option where you can heal small wounds (HP only, half effect of first aid bandage) but you have a chance to cause infection.

Feral sense distances along with smell distances.
 
Canned foods give dysentery.

I don't understand this. Commercially canned food is really safe and stable. Canned food should be highly desirable. I would think survivors who are established and farming would be canning their own food in mason jars. If so, then you can get into improper sealing and preparation issues.

How about food prepared by some untrained cook using a dirty bone knife and an unclean cooking pot for food safety issues, instead? You could make a combination of cook skill and campfire vs better cooking environment (stove) be factors.
 
I don't understand this. Commercially canned food is really safe and stable. Canned food should be highly desirable. I would think survivors who are established and farming would be canning their own food in mason jars. If so, then you can get into improper sealing and preparation issues.

How about food prepared by some untrained cook using a dirty bone knife and an unclean cooking pot for food safety issues, instead? You could make a combination of cook skill and campfire vs better cooking environment (stove) be factors.
I think the problem is the canned food you find in the apocalypse has been around for many years and was not all stored in ideal conditions. If rust has ruined the perfect seal of the metal container then the food could have spoiled or be contaminated.
 
I think the problem is the canned food you find in the apocalypse has been around for many years and was not all stored in ideal conditions. If rust has ruined the perfect seal of the metal container then the food could have spoiled or be contaminated.

I think it is more about looking for a way to make the early game challenging. That is, it makes for an interesting game even if it doesn't model the real world. If so, I can admire the goal, but think it is better to come at it from a different angle than believing all remaining can food is dented and compromised - as if previous scavengers were that picky.

IMO, less-than-perfect food preparation under difficult situations is more believable and just as viable to implement.

I would also note the game hasn't defined just how long ago the apocalypse was and the evidence available to us in-game presents a contradiction. Some things in the game suggest the apocalypse was very recent. So, in a way, that supports an approach of "go with what's gamey and not what makes sense." I just happen to like it when we get both.
 
I think it is more about looking for a way to make the early game challenging. That is, it makes for an interesting game even if it doesn't model the real world. If so, I can admire the goal, but think it is better to come at it from a different angle than believing all remaining can food is dented and compromised - as if previous scavengers were that picky.

IMO, less-than-perfect food preparation under difficult situations is more believable and just as viable to implement.

I would also note the game hasn't defined just how long ago the apocalypse was and the evidence available to us in-game presents a contradiction. Some things in the game suggest the apocalypse was very recent. So, in a way, that supports an approach of "go with what's gamey and not what makes sense." I just happen to like it when we get both.
You can make assumptions one way or the other... I was just pointing out that YOUR previous assumption (that all canned food is in perfect condition) can't really be used as a justification for your preferred choice.

Basically, as you said, it's just a matter of "I want it this way because I like it more than the other option".
In that case, both choices are equally reasonable (or unreasonable if you prefer).
 
You can make assumptions one way or the other... I was just pointing out that YOUR previous assumption (that all canned food is in perfect condition) can't really be used as a justification for your preferred choice.

There's another problem...

Canned foods give dysentery. Cooking them removes dysentery.

... and that is that cooking canned food that has gone bad does NOT remove the problem. Botulism is caused by the toxins in the waste of the bacteria. You can cook the waste all you want and it will never become "food." It will remain a toxin.

So if we assume that remaining canned food is compromised, nobody would benefit from eating it in any form, so you might as well remove canned food from the game.
Post automatically merged:

Hmm, so maybe I shouldn't have eaten that blueberry pie I found in a cupboard?

Maybe. If it was a Hostess blueberry pie, then you're good. It's up there with Twinkies for preservatives, right?
 
Guys, guys, guys. You are all thinking too firmly in the box.

Yes it is true properly canned food lasts for years, just like properly acidified foods. But what no one is thinking about is the poop fairy. they go around and poop just a tiny bit into roughly 5% of the cans. See problem solved :P
 
Back
Top