Last i checked, this is General Discussion subforum, where emphasis is on discussion. Long, in-depth posts discussing points, ironing out flaws etc is the sole reason for this subforum and topics in it. If this topic would be in the Feedback/Feature Request subforum then yes, your point of:“short, clear-cut, compelling arguments” would apply. But since it isn’t, it doesn’t apply.
You might want to check your eyesight so you’d know in which subforum you’re replying into.
2 Likes
Curious - it looks like all my bosses and most of my clients…
2 Likes
C’mon, no getting personal, please.
What I am saying is that there is no point in trying to outline such potential new features in a very detailed way. IF the devs would see a point in level-based levels, they would sit together and come up with their own model.
That said, have fun discussing! 
2 Likes
Reply to the usage of "Sir". It's under collapse since it's offtopic.
Term, “Sir” is mainly used in USA/UK and if GZ forums would be USA/UK based then using the term “Sir” would be common practice. But GZ forums are international forums (heck, devs are Sweden and the forums could be even Sweden based) and for the most of the world, it isn’t common practice to use “Sir” or “Ma’am”.
Moreover, “Sir” is a formal English honorific address for men, used as a respectful way to address any men of a superior social status or military rank.
Here, you don’t know my military rank or even if i have one to use “Sir” on the basis of military rank. Also, you don’t know me personally so you can’t rank me on social status either. Lastly and most importantly, “Sir” is used for men, while “Ma’am” or “Ms”, “Mrs” and “Miss” are used for women.
If you do not know the gender of a person you’re talking to since the information in their name and/or profile may not be that obvious, don’t use any gender specific terms. If the information in their name and/or profile is obvious, use the correct term.
For example: i don’t know your gender since your username isn’t gender specific. And your avatar is default forum avatar. From your profile i learn that your 1st name is Ben and commonly, Ben is a name given to males. So, i could assume that you are a man and thus use “Sir” when i refer to you. But Ben can be a name of a woman as well or shortened version of woman’s name, so, i’m unsure about your gender. Moreover, it isn’t common practice to use “Sir” and “Ma’am” in this middle of nowhere, next to nothing place where i live. So, i don’t use those terms at all.
As for myself; aren’t my username, avatar and profile obvious enough?
Long story short: It is rude and disrespectful to say to a woman that she is a man.
End lesson.
Speaking of you, are you the same Ben as in GZ discord? Ben#9226?
Let me get this straight:
You mean that base value would be the highest char level of any player within the team? Where each new person adds 35% to the value of highest level player?
Two examples:
Let’s say one team is made up with 4 players; highest level player is lvl15 while two are lvl12 and one is lvl9. Scaling would then work like so: 15 + (35% of 15 = 5.25) + 5.25 + 5.25 = 30. Right?
2nd team is made up with 2 players; e.g me, lvl31 char and i join or are joined by new player with lvl3 char. Scaling would then be: 31 + (35% of 31 = 10.85) = 41. Right?
With this, the 4 people in 1st team would have it far easier than me with newbie in 2nd team, where the one who suffers the most is the poor bloke that ends up with me.
Yeah, that doesn’t scale well.
While i’m good and can very well hold my own, i’m unsure if i’m good enough to fight against enemy hordes equal to 4x mid-level players and then even some more. The low lvl player with me would be hiding in a safe spot (e.g inside the house) since he/she would drop like a fly against that enemy armada this skewed scaling has put against two of us, just because i have max lvl char.
Well, if person hosts a game with the settings that he/she wants, why he/she would need to change said settings to please the (random) folks that join his/hers game?
Last i checked, host is VIP and others in game are to help out host and enrich his/hers gaming experience, not make it worse. At least that’s what i’ve been doing.
When i join MP game, i basically became host’s personal guide/tutor/bodyguard to give him/her better gaming experience. In that respect, when i open up my game and others join my game, i expect that they also follow my lead, not go AWOL.
If you crouch in a bush and don’t move, your detection range becomes very small and lower type of enemies (runners) won’t detect you past 5m range or so. Same goes when standing still vs moving. When you move, even across pavement/grass, you produce some sound. More sound when moving through shrubs or sprinting. Of course, there are skills that reduce your visibility and movement noise as well.
Also, did runners casually walked past you or were they running? Since i’ve seen several times where runners/hunters have sprinted at full speed towards something, while passing by of me and completely ignoring me.
On those first instances i witness that, i stand still with 
face and thought for myself: “Where are they going?” 
followed by: “Is there something far worse coming towards me that even FNIX/Apo hunters are scared of and running away from it?” 
Some further info about console vs PC. (click it to read it)
For PC players, consoles are a thorn on the side since cross-platform games are limited to what the weakest platform is capable of. But from the devs perspective, it’s better to make your game to several platforms for biggest profit, not for just one platform. Though, there are companies that make games for one or two platforms only. E.g PC only or Xbox/PS4 only.
Also, when cross-platform games are made, there’s a big difference if the game is 1st made to PC and then ported to the console or made 1st to console and then ported to PC.
In the former of the case, game can be done as in-depth and complex as devs desire (let’s say 100%). And to convert the game to console, devs remove and simplify the game enough so it runs well on consoles (let’s say leaving 60% of game intact). This method is harder for the devs since when you have a complete game, it’s very difficult to decide which parts to take out or nerf for console users.
One of the best examples would be Deus Ex (2000) where it was 1st made for PCs and PS2 port came 2 years later. (Deus Ex is one of the greatest games ever made for PC.)
In the latter case, devs are limited with what console can do and they need to work with it. Even when devs want to make game in-depth and complex, they can’t (let’s say 60%). Making PC port of console game is very easy and it’s basically copy/paste (without cuts/nerfs, game is also 60% on PC).
One of the best examples would be Deus Ex: Invisible War (2003) since it was designed to run on Xbox, severely limiting the game. (Deus Ex: Invisible War is the worst game in Deus Ex series. Dumb AI, simplified controls, shared ammo between weapons etc. A true disgrace to the series.)
But enough of that.
Since GZ was designed with the console’s hardware limitations in mind (Xbox One and PS4) the “dumb” AI you see may not be the poor coding on the devs part but instead limitation of the console hardware.
2 Likes
You can say that exact line to every feature request in the Feedback/Feature Request subforum where OP has described his/hers idea in-depth.
Just because you don’t like to read in-depth posts (or “walls of text” as you say it), doesn’t mean other people shouldn’t write them.
Your attitude is discouraging towards those people who are passionate about GZ and have spent lot of time and effort finalizing their idea and put it in writing to get the point across as clearly as possible. That includes in-depth description(s), down to the minute details, so there wouldn’t be miscommunication(s).
For example;
Your way of seeing: short and vague, e.g: “MOAR WEAPONS!!!”
My way of seeing: long and in-depth, e.g: “LMG, true to the time period of GZ, also used by Swedish military at that time and it would be new type of weapon in the game.”
Sure, devs can think for themselves and it’s their call what and how things get implemented. But we, the end users (gaming community), can help devs out by finalizing our ideas, not just say: “I want THIS or THAT!”, without any explanation how it fits in GZ or is there any benefit to player base at all.
1 Like
You can go and try triggering me, if that brings you joy. As you tried before.
Back to the topic: Some feature request are very precise, yet concise and comprehensible. And they should be. It really depends on the topic. The requests regarding reworking the plundra and the looting and inventory management are a good example where it makes sense to be that precise. Because there are a lot of good, well-established practices found in many other games, which the community, represented by many players, expects the devs to bring to the game. Common quality of life features a game like GZ needs. There is basically already a consensus, which shows in the likes and comments to the requests.
This topic here, however, is a completely different story. And my goal is not to discourage anyone from anything. I am sorry if that comes across like that. I just feel that the effort and energy spent this way (and in other similar threads) is fruitless and should be spent in a more constructive way.
In the “Why, oh why…” thread at some point I noted that if the only insight that thread brings forth is that we need a difficulty setting for the game to accommodate for the different preferences the diverse player population has, that would be a great result. I felt that many contributors to the thread felt the same way. Now what it needs is a clear and concise feature request to transport this essence, message to the devs. Unfortunately, this did not happen so far. I am afraid all the energy we have put into that topic will go under, fruitless as I said. I’d just love to see our common effort to result in something.
Can you see what I mean?
1 Like
It occurs to me that I feel that way about the game (“I need to see some results”), whereas I seem to apply your take on the game of (correct me if I’m wrong) “I enjoy it for its own sake” to the discussion. 
2 Likes
I said it before and i’ll say it again: this topic isn’t a feature request but a discussion of a possible future feature request. A research before the feature request to say so.
Who is the one that cherry picks the topics that should be discussed further and which to abandon? You?
An idea, any idea, is welcome and shouldn’t… no, must not be vetoed by those who don’t like the idea.
Just saying that it’s fruitless even to discuss it, isn’t in no way, shape or form constructive on your part. If you have something against the idea itself, come forth and say it. Discuss why do you think it’s a bad idea and/or why it shouldn’t be implemented. Perhaps there are flaws in the current idea that need correcting.
That is what we are doing here. Discussing the idea, trying to find the flaws, improving the idea. And even if at the end, we do come to an agreement that the current idea can’t be implemented into GZ or doesn’t give the benefit over current system then so be it. Not all ideas make it but it’s the thought (discussion) that counts.
The “Why, oh why…” topic isn’t a feature request topic. It’s instead feedback topic where several people (myself included) express their feelings about the game. There isn’t any final goal to be achieved within that topic itself. Though, discussions in that topic can spawn new feature requests or tweaking of current features which merit their own topics.
1 Like
No, I mean, it COULD be like that.
Or, it COULD be like 35% of each of the client player levels.
Sir, this was not a suggestion topic, but a do you like it topic.
It was not meant to be technical.
I am no coder or so, no idea how this would work, and 35 as stated was a throw at a number, not a set one…
And yes, that would indeed scale unfair, granted, sir.
In the end, someone has to decide.
Now you can do it as host, and set your foot down, or you can go with the ideas of others if not too baffooonish.
If I were to set a game up (and I learned this is not possible/quite impractical for console) I would try to meet up in front and set rules for coming event.
Now, let me take something out of context quite quick:
True, and add to this optional scaling, and you got the game you REALLY want: harder or not, by choice.
Not? 
I stood in the middle of a normally deserted road.
I did not move, true…
Still.
This… seems just wrong…?
No?
And the walked, no, shuffled… past me.
Console vs PC limitations:
I could be wrong here but…
If someone can see 500m on a console, then I believe the machine can see you too?
I do, furhtermore, not believe that awareness and reaction time are the console limitations, as these are atm.
I could be quite wrong, but…
Info, please, sir?
Thank you for posting.
Overall on the latter subject: We would all like to see SOMETHING chance.
One would like more damage from weapons, another more, mean machines, yet another bananas, I might like more realistic wall posters, I mean, we all have our taste.
Now, here I asked out of sheer interest: would you like to see scaling.
Where Why oh why as sir @Aesyle said is a feedback topic, here was a mere “I wonder what folks might think about” topic.
Interestingly: It’s becoming a “who should post what” pickle rather than a to me informative post about scaling.
Would you like me to open a post about the “Posting Pickle” topic?
Might be fun to read what people think in this regard…
Just simple strict NO to this level based enemy idea. This is not any fantasy RPG or some MMO games where you cant stumble across high level enemies because of your own level. That is just simply hand holding players not to have bad feeling about the game because they cannot win some enemies.
Game world has to have some dangers and areas where you have to think, do i want to go there. Am i prepared enough to go there.
This level based system would just turn this game to tunnel like run where you just blow through enemies gun blazing. (And i have said this on other discussions also).
This game is different nature by its design.
4 Likes
Optional why not, maybe.
But this small dev team it would just increase work load. Every update would have to be done for 2 systems.
Fixing things and updates would take longer. So only option is to choose between current or this new system.
1 Like
Sure, but then a thread with the title " Why, oh why do some make to “my taste” weird suggestions" should not remain in the Feedback (to the devs or the studio) / Feature requests (to the devs or the studio) section.
I am sure you can agree with that. It needs to be moved.
And if it was for me, I’d love to see a concise follow up to it presenting it’s essence in such a general way that many players can agree to it.
No, Aesyle. If follows from the topic and content.
Then why the FRICK is it still sitting in the Feedback / Feature request section? @Xogroroth?
1 Like
Be nice to eachother, guys. And keep on topic.
I wondered the same. There is a good amount of discussing in it, so with that in mind I’ve decided to moved it to General Discussion.
2 Likes
Sorry for losing my patience. To everyone in this thread.
2 Likes
Not like you called anyone names or such like.
1 Like
Yeah, I usually don’t do that.
And I did not take issue with anyone in particular. Just to make that clear.
2 Likes
EEEP…
I think I hit the wrong section in the choice…
My apologies.
yhank you, sir, my apologies.
It happens to anyone at some point, sir.
Besides, it was me who placed it in the wrong section.
My bad, not yours, sir.
1 Like
I think in the beginning your thread was somewhat sitting between discussion and feadback. Probably just the way the title was worded that let it ultimately go all kinds of directions.
1 Like