Machine Master (AKA Pet Master)

[Xogroroth]

Now, this is a turn on the known concept, but with a twist.

This idea comes with it’s own skill tree, containing salvaging, crafting, …
There are limitations basic on simple logics: if you salvage parts from a runner, you cannot make a tank, or a runner.
Obviously!
Another limit would be: you need the blueprints to actually make them.

You will get what you salvage, and you can ONLY salvage depending on your skill.
Salvage would for instance be a 4 point skill (same for Crafting): each level can salvage/craft a class (Prototype, Military, FNIX, Apocalypse).
Note, new skill tree is NOT the same as more points you will get!!!
The base 30 points would still be applied, use them wisely.
Why?
Balance!

Now, imagine, you made a FNIX Missile Runner.
Upon activating it, you “stop being the human”, and “become the machine” until it is dead.
You will have all advantages and disadvantages of these machines, unless you get the “Upgrade” skill, that allows you to improve your machine A BIT, so balance is not destroyed.
You will NOT DIE (the human) as you are, logically, in a safe location (well, I hope you will be so smart ), and maybe the machines is salvageable in part.

Now, this is a VERY simple, if asked I can work it out in depth.

Thoughts?

Note: this idea would be, IF, implemented over time.
People have been fired up on the rumour that crafting WILL be a thing, I leave this in the middle.
IF Crafting becomes a thing, then this could be a simple installment, “only requiring” the skill tree and the parts being worked out, as Crafting then, as well as the machines, already exist.

Thoughts?

[Xogroroth]

A friend brought up a very good point: for those with 4 characters, how to do this.
Deleting the save, would undo everything: achievements, all you found, …

Darn good notice right there.

The issue could be ‘fixed’ by adding a new, 5th character slot.
OR, IF in time implemented, a respec.

Thank you, my friend, to bring this up…
Darn good point right there!

[Flick]

I expect crafting to be a thing since

Summary

someone found a crafting bench that opened an inventory list for “resources”. Somehow I got the impression that those resources are more like mmorpg mat stacks,

but your idea is interesting.

Edit: thought I should fold the above text away.
Edit the second: See SAW’s post below.

[Xogroroth]

@Flick
Thank you miss.
Much appreciated.

[SAW]

Crafting was intended to be in the game but was removed for what ever reason soon after. I think crafting would be a welcomed feature in Gen0 but sadly for now it’s not.

[Xogroroth]

@SAW
Thank you sir.
Much appreciated!

[Flick]

Oh… that explains that.

[Ennui]

Why?
Balance!

That’s an axiom, not an explanation.

[Ennui]

A friend brought up a very good point: for those with 4 characters, how to do this.
Deleting the save, would undo everything: achievements, all you found, …

I’m pretty sure that when you’re in the character selection, one of the options is “delete this character.” I have not tried this, but the logical assumption would be that “delete this character” deletes that character, not the other characters, the plundra, the achievements, the quest progress, or the save game.

[Aesyle]

I’m pretty sure that when you’re in the character selection, one of the options is “delete this character.” I have not tried this, but the logical assumption would be that “delete this character” deletes that character, not the other characters, the plundra, the achievements, the quest progress, or the save game.

Can confirm it. “Delete this char” deletes only that one specific char you’ve selected, not all your chars.
In the beginning, i had 2x girls and 2x boys. Didn’t like the setup and now, i have 4x girls.

[Xogroroth]

That’s an axiom, not an explanation.

One can be two things.
In this case: explanation, sir.
Balance is darn important, even though gone already.
Even MORE imbalance would destroy the game, I reckon…

@Ennui
True, still, some want to keep that character, some do not want to delete, for whatever reason.
Some might have various builds, for one.
The delete is per character that is highlighted, it will not touch others, sir.
Others use it as even more storage…
I do not think, an extra slot, will kill us?

@Aesyle
I do to, sir.

@All
Thank you for replying.

[Ennui]

Balance is darn important, even though gone already.

That’s my point. You keep saying that like it’s an axiom, without defining what you mean by balance, or supporting it with reasons why we would care about it.

some want to keep that character, some do not want to delete, for whatever reason.
Some might have various builds, for one.
The delete is per character that is highlighted, it will not touch others

Perhaps, but that’s a completely different discussion from your previous mistaken assertion that achievements, the save, or all equipment would be lost:

Deleting the save, would undo everything: achievements, all you found, …

I do not think, an extra slot, will kill us?

Honestly? At this point? Would you want to risk it?

If the question is facetious for, “Would you have anything against it in concept, and if so, what concept would that be?”, then no. Nothing would be taken from me if another slot were added, or another hundred slots.

That said, we’ve just advanced to a point where the complaints about corrupted saves are getting fewer. Do you really trust Avalance to make that change without breaking things all over again? Personally I wouldn’t be surprised to spawn in as a dustbin at this point.

[Xogroroth]

That’s my point. You keep saying that like it’s an axiom, without defining what you mean by balance, or supporting it with reasons why we would care about it.

Sir, with all due respect: it speaks for itself (Axiom in the purest) while being a complete explanation?
Balance (in a game) is… just that: balance…?
I fail to get your point here, sir.

Perhaps, but that’s a completely different discussion from your previous mistaken assertion that achievements, the save, or all equipment would be lost:

From what I understood, achievements themselves are untouched, however, the work towards one is lost.
Deletion was not about the CHARACTER btw (my apologies, I should have been clearer), but the SAVE, sir.
Thank you for pointing this out.

Honestly? At this point? Would you want to risk it?

If the question is facetious for, “Would you have anything against it in concept, and if so, what concept would that be?”, then no. Nothing would be taken from me if another slot were added, or another hundred slots.

That said, we’ve just advanced to a point where the complaints about corrupted saves are getting fewer. Do you really trust Avalance to make that change without breaking things all over again? Personally I wouldn’t be surprised to spawn in as a dustbin at this point.

Well, do we trust them with new additions?
Do we trust them with new DLC?
Do we trust them with bug fixes?
I know, rhetorical question, but it does state a point.

Thank you for responding, you helped me make a mistake being corrected that I made.
As for the other points, good thinking.

Yes, all changes can lead to errors, however, they DID do far more good than bad.
To ME personal, if I have to AGAIN start over, so be it.
I do not mind, I love the game too much.
But I DO see where you come from, where you go to.

I am not a coder, I have no clue just how far this will go, code wise.
As I!!! see it, it’s ‘basically copying a slot, paste the slot, but with new name or address’.
Extremely likely it’s a tad more than that, rofl, I TRULY can’t say.

Now, we MADE characters, most DELETED a character, and so far, it went well overall.
If this is ‘issueless’ then I do not think, adding a slot, will destroy the planet, so to speak?
Again, what do I know, for all I know it just might trigger a nuclear launch!!! (War Game anyone?)

IF that were to be true, launching a global war… we could see it as LARP? ROFL.

Sir, thank you.
You bring up good points, which, I as simple fella, cannot answer.
I will leave this at the smart folks up there @Avalanche since they probably know a tad better than I do.
I brought forth an idea, where it will lead though… well… not up to me.

[Ennui]

it speaks for itself (Axiom in the purest) while being a complete explanation?
Balance (in a game) is… just that: balance…?

And brexit means brexit?

There are many things that can be balanced.
The relative power of various builds on a team.
The power of human vs machine.
The difficulty of various play-styles / strategies (trapper/ambusher, sniper, sneak, guns blazing …).
etc.

So just saying “balance means balance” isn’t really that helpful.

And at that point, we’d only know what balance you’re talking about, you wouldn’t have proved why it’s important, or even just have explained why it’s important to you.

I feel like that’s a bit of a waste, because an interesting conversation could be had here:

I’ve mentioned before that I feel our main enemy isn’t [redacted], it’s the inventory.
Half the skills are about removing inventory pressure:

• healthkits heal more -> need to carry fewer kits
• accuracy/more rounds on target -> need to carry less ammo and healthkits
• one free revive per encounter -> need less adrenaline
• better protection -> need fewer healthkits
• more health -> need less adrenaline
• and of course the queen of them all (because the skill is not bound to a specific type of resource), “more inventory slots”
• etc.

So adding a skill line that is dependent on carrying around various robo-parts is going to have an opportunity cost / trade-off in terms of inventory slots. How strong the skills will have to be (or how many slots of robo-parts you’ll need) will be related to how much an inventory slot is “worth” to a player. If there’s any “balancing” to do, this is it: The skill line has to be worth the inventory slots. I would expect that having 30 vs 40 skill points has very little to do with it.

Sure, going by the above, having more skill points is always nominally “better” for the player (as long as their are unbought skills, you can still get some quality of life improvement, or another skill the relieves some inventory pressure). But in my experience with GZ, at a certain point, the marginal utility drops noticeably. Playing with a level 20 character is smoother sailing than with a level one. But playing with a level 25, level 30, level 60 isn’t usually significantly different from playing with a level 20. Contrast this with the difference between a full loadout of tier 1 weapons vis-a-vis tier 6 weapons. (Which I guess still ties into the inventory, better guns means fewer rounds needed?)

So even if we say something needs to be balanced, I don’t think it’s skill points. It’s power of the machine we get to control vs required inventory slots before we can build one.

[Ennui]

Oh, forgot a big one at that (as things one could balance go). Some people will no doubt wish for the powerful, slow firing gun and the high RoF full auto to primarily cater to different play-styles or situational needs, not to feel vastly different in utility/worth.
But yeah, et cetera.

On a completely different note, here’s an anecdote.

I once sat in a lecture where Robin Laws talked about pen-and-paper “action RPG” Feng Shui.
The character classes are a lot of action movie clichés, and some are eastern, so there was no way he’d get away with not including a ninja class.
The thing was, Robin didn’t want ninjas, for the simple reason that if the ninja scouted ahead doing some sneaking, everybody else had to wait and sit on their thumbs, putting the lie to “action RPG.”
So what Robin did was to intentionally make the ninja class so bad few if any people would pick it. Just in the interest of properly pacing the campaign.

I’ll just leave that anecdote here as a comment on “it’s really obvious that balancing is universally desired.”

[Xogroroth]

And brexit means brexit?

Well yes, cat means cat, alien means alien, …

There are many things that can be balanced.

True.
However: if not explicitly mentioned, it would imply Player vs Player/computer.
Or so, I would think.
Builds in a team would not be even interesting to speak of, as the very base of the game balance already is totally out the door.
For play styles the same, base balance is not existing.

HOWEVER!!!
You ARE correct.
People can interpret things differently.
That is a good point, which I initially failed to get from your earlier post.

So, making a correction here: the BASE balance player vs enemy intellect, awareness and aggression.

I feel like that’s a bit of a waste, because an interesting conversation could be had here:

And I agree, again.
So, let’s have it.
I am coming from the point of the role player, and I enter a story.
In the story, “machines went cuckoo” (I say it like this to prevent any and all spoilers), they kill all in sight that is bigger than a bird, up to a point that not only “Sweden is evacuated”, but the whole dang army was extremely very much no longer left alive.
These machines took out tanks, planes, well, they are, story wise, God-Machines.
Enter Teen Aged Player
Teen Aged Player finds wreck of a gun
Teen Aged Player finds ammo
Teen Aged Player casually kills machine with said wrecked gun
Teen Aged Player goes apeshit on machines
Now… correct me if I am wrong, but something in this picture just does not sit well with me.

Let’s get back to balance, shall we? [quote=“Ennui, post:14, topic:20977”]

• healthkits heal more -> need to carry fewer kits
• accuracy/more rounds on target -> need to carry less ammo and healthkits
• one free revive per encounter -> need less adrenaline
• better protection -> need fewer healthkits
• more health -> need less adrenaline
• and of course the queen of them all (because the skill is not bound to a specific type of resource), “more inventory slots”
• etc.
  [/quote]
  Considering what I brought up, these balance fixes that you suggest, do, if I am not quite mistaken, the very opposite.
  Where machines already HORRIBLY fail in nigh all, if not all, forms, your suggestions worsen this issue.
  How do your suggestions bring balance?
  Do not get me wrong, I actually fail to understand, I am NOT trying to be a jerk, I am not trying to insult you, it is me, I literally fail the idea behind your ideas bringing balance.

If we take the story in account, you sir, should be a rabbit in a world of hunters.
Not the way around.
Well, let me set this a bit more straight, that is how I!!! interpret the game, the story…

I’ll just leave that anecdote here as a comment on “it’s really obvious that balancing is universally desired.”

I would even go further: it is, indeed not desired, sir.
I agree entirely.
It is in fact needed…
It’s no longer about desire.
If it is?
Let’s add a build in trainer then to the game?
It would basically be that, if it was about mere desire?

Thank you for responding, sir.

[Ennui]

correct me if I am wrong, but something in this picture just does not sit well with me.

That’s really something only you can decide.

That said.
Consider Batman. As a setting, not a character. It’s a Joker episode. We know from the start that the Joker will be defeated, either in this episode, or at the end of a multi-parter. But unless he plain-out gets away, we know that if he falls out of a plane into a chimney, he will be presumed missing or dead, only to return when it suits story-telling needs.
We know this. We accept this. We even expect this; without it, the whole thing would feel “less Batman.”
But realistic it’s not.
We accept these genre conventions not because they’re the rules of our reality, but because they are learnable, knowable rules that make for a fun world.

As the proof of a pudding lies in the eating, the proof of a given set of genre conventions lies in the fun-ness of the stories in that universe.

In perhaps the best Arnold film, Last Action Hero, there is a scene where … well, let me pull this straight from TVTropes’ “Wrong genre savvy” entry: “Child hero Danny rides his bicycle head-on to play chicken with the main villain’s car, reasoning that it has to work because he’s the hero in a non-R rated movie where the kid would never die. Then it dawns on him that he’s the Plucky Comic Relief instead, and is vulnerable.”

Long story short, your complaint that the player avatars are too capable sounds like you might think GZ to be of a different genre than its creators did?

How do your suggestions bring balance?

I haven’t made any.
I have described how I perceive the skill system: that many skills, perhaps most, exist in direct relation to the inventory: “Having skill X means you may need fewer inventory slots for resource Y.”

Considering what I brought up, these balance fixes that you suggest

They’re a statement of what I think is.
I haven’t really spoken to what I think should be at that point.

Remember, I’m not the one who is even convinced we’re in dire need of balancing of anything for the game as it stands.

The only point where I talk about changes or what “should be” is that if your idea were to be added, I think they’d have to worry not about skill points, but inventory space:

If the robo skills are not strong / not fun enough to warrant blocking precious inventory spaces with robo-parts rather than other resources (ammo etc.), almost no one will get the skills, and it’ll be a lot of work for nothing.

So even on the one occasion that I say “balancing could happen here”, my main reason is that I think if people feel they’d be better off having ammo in those inventory slots than robo-parts, they will not use the skills, and developer time will have been wasted.

It’s almost solely the opportunity cost I’m concerned with there.

[Xogroroth]

That said.
Consider Batman…

Now, I do not get how you can compare this with GZ?
Batman surely is NOT a survival game, is it.
Same for Last Action Hero.

Next thing: you compare a game with a movie?
That’s like comparing an apple to a space station.

When a game gets easy, it becomes dead boring.
Both go, actually, hand in hand.
Too easy = deadly unfunny.
If you actually do want super easy, well a trainer will help you.

Why else, you think, many ask for a game+ or even game++?
Why do so many say: game is too easy?
Well… read up.

[quote=“Ennui, post:17, topic:20977”]
I haven’t made any.
I have described how I perceive the skill system: that many skills, perhaps most, exist in direct relation to the inventory: “Having skill X means you may need fewer inventory slots for resource Y.”
[/quote][quote="Ennui, post:14, topic:20977]
Correct, I misread.
Apologies.

They’re a statement of what I think is .
I haven’t really spoken to what I think should be at that point.

This too comes forth from my misreading.
Apologies are due.

Now, yes.
But the biggest issue is not inventory, or skills.
If you want to address the room we have: plundra is the major bad apple.
As for skills, well… these are there.

I circle back to the machines, THIS is where ALL goes wrong.
Example:
I ran a bit back into a heap of 8 FNIX runners.
75M, NOT EVEN, as I engaged them.
I killed 5, and began to damage the 6th, before THEY WOKE UP.

I’ve had Tanks staring at me, decisiveless, Hunters…
I’ve had machines RUN FROM ME!!!
Machines SCARED???

THIS is where all is just… well… bad.
Machines do not need 10 seconds to wake up from their slumbering stagger over the fields?
If I had a toolbox instead of a gun, I would have taken them apart with a screwdriver, that much time I had (Note, tiny hyperbole).
Machines often fail to see me past 50 meters, not even TOUCHING 300 meters.

When you shoot at them, 7 out of ten times they just let it happen, too tired of stepping aside.
Wait, hold on, OK, that is not fair.
They just killed a WHOLE DAMN ARMY, poor thingies…
As they say, no rest for the wicked…
Damned…
If I get my hands on THAT slaver…
Imma kick him so hard in the [BLEEP] he’ll end up with 6 vocal cords instead of 4.
Poor machines.
Either way, let’s give them rest, for a bit, they deserve it.
Y’ALL QUIT PLAYING NOW for at least 2 seconds.

But yes, where the machines “are the hunters”, they act far more than very, VERY old men trembling down a street, blind as a bat, deaf as a brick, and totally senile…
And yes, you too, my friend, has been there, seen it, and used it against them.
If you say you did not, no one here will believe that.

SURE, some people love it.
Easy kill, easy loot, easy Exp.
Damned, GET ME BIGGER GUNZ, MORE BOOM BOOM AMMO!!!
I wanna 1-shot them.
Or, no wait, I just wanna look at them and then loot them.
Imma no frikken shoot’m.
Toooooo tiiiireeed.
Nooo tiimee.
Needz… sleeeeeeppppppp…
lets the game play itself

But then there are those very few, like me, who thinks:
“The hell? I just saw a tank, where is it?”
*Goes over the hill top."
“OMG, IT DROPPED DEAD??? FU… DGE, am I THAT ugly???”
(Well, in their defence I am… last time I looked in the mirror, my mirror image had a heart attack… died of terror…
That, or a vampire licked me.)

Sure, it’s a game.
But in this game, a total noob teen wrecks havoc with a gun that should explode if you tried to fire it.
But not our hero!
Oh no!
He is darn hardcore, MACHINES even fear him.

Njjjaaaa… no… I prefer a “tad” more realism.

Being killed each time you exhale, wind moving through your hair, even thinking (well some say: “You can hear him think”, thus it should make noize?) is THE THING, if it were somewhat real, seeing EVERYONE either left extremely hard, or quit thinking permanently.
Now THAT I do not ask either.
Somewhere in the middle would be good I think.
Well, “the middle”… more like… 80% towards the latter would be the damn sweet spot for me.
Game ++.
Others would prefer a more mediate game +, and damned, YES, they should have.
OPTIONALLY, for BOTH additional versions.

TLDR:
Yes, I do fully not disagree with you.
Hmmm… yes.
And yes, Inventory (or stash in general) is maniacally big.
Skills, removal of plundra, and similar might help, but just not enough.
Unless you make ammo 10 times more scarce, Adren 100 times more scarce, and HP heal 25% of what it does atm while also being nerfed by a factor of 10.
Additionally to fix it through these ideas: triple to quadruple the machine Armour and HP.
Gold Drops should fall 100 times less, Exp Weapons 5000 times less.
And it will eventually “balance” out in better favour for the machines.

OR: we could just increase their response time, increase their awareness range and aggression range to 400M.
Could just very well be, that doing these three things will result in machines being nerfed badly, both in armour and HP, since “actually being a threat”, which they should’ve been in the first place…
OPTIONALLY, not shoved down the throats of all…
For the good record, as I HATE shoving stuff down someone’s throat…

Thank you, sir @Ennui!
You brought up good points, good ideas, and you told me where I was wrong either due to insufficient explanation from my side, as pointing out I had read a part wrong.
Do I disagree?
Nope!
Do I agree?
In part.
It’s not only about fixing the AI, we all know that.
AK is heavily OP damage wise (in comparison to other weapons), the .44 underwhelming (Also compared to other weapons), and from what I understood, it was needed to nerf certain explosive devices (Gas and Air Tanks, if I got that right), but NOT up to a point where they are just neutered, as it now seemingly is (Helliv-I know, I stay as far away from explosives as possible, I tend to kill myself trying to use these. Or if OTHERS use them… O_O)
Adren stacks to 20, 25? while HP packs stack to 5…
Logic eludes me here as well, I would reverse that!
Hell, I would REMOVE Adren, as this is ACTUAL GODMODE, IMHO. (Note, IMHO here, please ) and give even MORE HP out.

The game could surely use an overhaul, I am fully with you.
IMHO, though… they should take a look at the “unintelligence” and “Physical Disabilities” (blind, deaf, paraplegic) of these machines before anything.
One simply cannot keep slapping on armour and HP, I think…

[Xogroroth]

@Flick
But we do not, miss…
Sweden is not Gotham.
I think?

[Ennui]

Sweden does have Gothenburg, though.
Which I imagine to be like Duckburg, except with goths.