I’d say kiting is a legitimate tactic, maybe it need balancing and what to balance is debatable but kiting (at a normal level) should stay since it’s not like zombies are very smart.
I thought using circular distances cancels out the kiting problem? Or am I wrong.
Or are zombies just too damn slow.
No, I play with circular distances on and that doesn’t eliminate kiting, only make it harder (and more realistic IMO). Normal zombies are slow and if aren’t in much pain you can reliably sidestep them and lead them into bushes,
Well that seems completely logical - to kite zombies into bushes.
Unless you can make an argument that zombies are smart enough to avoid bushes and then code it.
If not, you have to argue that a artificial bush trap is not a good idea.
“Remove kiting” is not a useful suggestion.
Kiting is not an ability added to the game that makes combat trivial, it’s an obvious tactical consequence of the way the game is set up (and a consequence of how things would actually function with slow zombies in a facsimile of real life.)
Combat against basic zombies is not particularly difficult or tactically very interesting, but the design document (which was requested by Binky et al) essentially says that it isn’t supposed to be, so I don’t know why this continues to be an issue.
I don’t think that makes any sense at all. Starting kit and skills only matter for the first day or two of the game. In fact I challenge anyone to identify starting background/gear/skills by looking at a 7-day old character. There might be some obvious ones (like ruined bionics and particular traits), but in terms of gear and skills the characters will be relatively similar.
Yet the proposal is to permanently alter that playthrough’s creature and loot spawns? Makes no sense at all.
On the more recent topic of kiting and such; I personally think that making a zed try to attack you from a bush is legitimate. Don’t you yourself sustain the same penalty when you try to attack from it? Obviously the player is merely making a meta game move to have an advantage against a mob that is supposed to be low-IQ. On the other hand, to balance it, why not give the toon attacking from a bush a significant defensive advantage. If you imagine yourself standing in solid bush (not a manicured bush 24" high in a city or suburb), wouldn’t someone swinging a bat at you get slowed before it hit you or completely stopped? Maybe you could have low height and high height bushes where a head or upper body hit would not be protected on a low bush. Likewise attacks deferred or partially mitigated would destroy aforementioned bush so bush kiting doesn’t get you much before it’s gone…
I personally play shower victim because its easy to find stuff. You really only need a knife and a lighter. That’s usually found in 10 real world minutes. I think the point is a bit cheap, but everyone does it, etc. Why can’t we implement decimal points? Starting out as a streaker should be maybe a half point.
[quote=“Inadequate, post:19, topic:5293”]Because once melee is nerfed, then he can claim that ranged is overpowered, and once ranged is nerfed, he can get back to nerfing melee. It’s a constant cycle that pops up every few pages, because the only thing people around here know how to do when faced with problems is to nerf stuff. Binky in particular will not rest until the game is borderline unplayable.[/quote]For once I partially agree with Mr. Buzzkill, the answer to every problem in the game isn’t to nerf something.
I just thought it would help with the class that dumps you naked in to the world. Remember, the other 2 point classes can exploit the exact same tactics, but also start with some armor. The addictions that some of them have are not difficult to manage and ween yourself away from.
Yes, kiting is an exploit vs zombies. No it is NOT unreasonable, as I would exploit that same exact thing against these kinds of zombies in the real world (and probably hurt myself trying to make a machete and die of a staph infection). So, while it is an exploit, it is technically an exploit of a monster’s vulnerability, not an exploit of a flawed game mechanic. There are several monsters, and some zombies, that can keep up with you or even move much faster with no issues (except cougars, which NEVER SEEM TO HIT).
Now that it starts with a towel and some soap, I’m wondering what can be done with those. Perhaps make a weapon some day? Some maps start your shelter in the middle of a city, and you might not have time to make a nailboard or makeshift crowbar (my favorite, due to +2 to hit and be a universal lockpick for doors). Lately I’ve been getting shelters with a ton of stuff in the basement…along with a couple of zombies. Immediate tough zombie giving you bleeding is nasty.
Really, the point of the shower victim is to start you off at a disadvantage with no initial useable equipment. If you start off with immediately useful items, that rather defeats the point of the class.
Shower victim is slightly harder if you stop zombies from dropping piles of clothes and containers, but not by a whole lot. It’s much easier than starting with any addiction.
The -2 classes have bigger drawbacks. For example the tweaker is crippled for the first 2 days and the android is permanently fucked for the rest of the game.
Hobo is much harder than shower victim and is only a -1 profession. Failed cyborg should give a lot more than -2.
I am more and more thinking that, sadly, point cost of professions is bad.
Spending points on them gives you a head-start at best, but you are permanently gimping your character by not spending these points on your stats / traits. Which essentially removes all non -1 choices from players, who would love to pick profession for RP reasons, but are not willing to be inferior character for the rest of game.
I would suggest to make profession cost 0 and mark them as: Trivial start, Easy start, Normal start, Tough start , Impossible start (or similar).
Or even better, split point into 2 categories. Perma point and Temp points:
Stats and traits would use perma points, professions and skills would use temp point.
It only removes non-negative cost professions from the potential choice of players who are gaming the system for maximum benefit. People who want a challenge or want to play out a particular role won’t much care. Changing things to be as you suggest would result in removing anything but the most advantageous professions from the choice of the same people who’d be unlikely to choose costly professions at present, so it’s really just six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Well, not really.
Now:
If you choose non -1 profession, you gimp yourself permanently → I have hard time to justify such pick, when only reward is easier start and nicer label in character overview
All cost 0:
If you choose profession with hard start (no skills / no items), you gimp yourself temporarily → I would choose it for RP no problem, only start is harder, I am not gimped permanently for my choice
Professions and skills cost Temporary points (and Stats / Traits cost Perma points)
You will get separate temp points pool, you can spend it on costly profession, only skills, or mix → I would mix it to my liking, could not spent these points on stats anyway
I see what you’re saying with regard to stats being permanent (excluding bionics and mutation as means of increasing them). I suppose I just don’t see this as being terribly important myself, since putting points in skills/professions makes the start of the game much easier, and if I can get past that I can usually survive indefinitely.