Jump to content
Dead Matter
ATTENTION: Due to issues with the new forum update the custom theme has been disabled. The theme will return when all issues have been resolved.

ltblackcoat

Members
  • Content Count

    96
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ltblackcoat

  1. Alright I apologies if I start to make a few smaller posts on my ideas in a row, But here are some more : Counter camping, I do not know how you will do it, but I sure would like it if you could not easily abuse the AI and camp in a door way where the AI keeps running into your kill zone regardless of how many bodies and casualties they suffer. --- AI behavior difficulty : (so there is more variety in the groups we fight alongside or against) Amateur grade, equivalent to an inexperienced civilian these AI's will panic more, use less tactics and make poor use of cover. Mediocre Grade, Sort of in the middle, easy as that. Professtional Grade, Equivalent to Rouge military, expert use of tactics, cover, Roles (I will suggest this later on), they will actively try to flank you and hunt you down, making any form of combat much more difficult then a "amateur" grade AI faction. --- "Roles" Really I hope that not EVERYONE will have the same identical AI behavior and hope that certain factions will use different tactical roles, but there gear is appropriate to the factions means. Spotter/Scout, Intended for higher grade factions This roles primary role is spotting threats, and they are very good at it with much better then average vision. The primary reason I recommenced such a class is so you can not abuse the AI by sniping at them from well outside there vision cones, when attacked a spotter will try to find you (encouraging you to actually hit and move). There Gear is light, by default Pistol and binoculars, maybe radio, This increased to DMR's, light Armour and thermal vision (or what ever is actually planed) in more advanced factions. may even have a map of his local base. Sniper, No introduction needed, but when on the attack will move to higher ground. There gear is precision rifles depending on faction, rarely wears Armour likely to wear camouflage. Assault, Front line, attackers even on defense will be the likely choice to hunt down any attackers. Wants to engage closer to use there closer weapons, also has the heaver Armour varies from SMG's, Shotguns and possibly melee. Lower tiers may be the only amoured (and poorly) role in the faction (like a looter with sporting knee and elbow pads). This might even be the place to have the "heavy" a class only seen in higher tiers that has military/riot Armour and may even wield heaver guns (like LMG's), as really the behavior is about the same. Leader, may very well just be pasted ontop of an existing role this role call's out tactics and reduces the "delay" in decision making. May have a radio and map. Sapper/Trapper, on attack he is the guy who will try and open a hole in your fences or open doors, depending on the factions tier this could be anything from a looter with a hammer and bolt cutters, to a rouge combat engineer with explosives. Is not a kamikaze will try to stick with other roles or only arrive when they think its clear. On defense they actively repair damage and set/reset traps. I am sure there can be more, but these are some I would be interested in seeing. --- The AI actually drives around in convoys and patrols. There is likely more to come, time willing.
  2. Alright More latter, when I have time to properly go through all the current suggestions but my ideas as of now : 1) No cartoonist "signaling" (the bandit loudly yells "trowing Molotov" and takes an almost comical amount of time to actually trow it afterward and then doing a unnecessarily long animation, which exposes a massive amount of his arm.), I accept some signaling, even encourage it, but you know I don't want it to be where the AI poses no threat to me when I am in cover. 2) AI does not always last stand, some people are ether cowards or clever enough to realise when a fight is lost. (I don't care if the AI "despawns" after they move away for some distance)
  3. Hm, Fair. A bit of overgrowth could be interesting to see on the games more rural lines. I still refer to my previous points, and can not think of anything more to add at this time.
  4. Even the given image shows a significant bit more ballast as the image I presented. By my eye that's not dirt at all but overgrown ballast. However this does supports my point about the use of wooden sleepers. I am hard pressed to actually find any examples of none abandoned lines that look like that, a causal search still shows decently maintained lines (not euro standard (like with a protective fence) but decent) this may well be because its easier to take pictures away from forested areas like above.
  5. Today I saw two images that show track that will likely appear in the alpha testing area, However as one was backer eyes only I will instead focus on the publicly available one : Summery on my initial thoughts : =========================== Sleepers seem to be mostly modern concrete, only really seen in urban areas and high speed lines, a causal search online shows most rural lines still have wood sleepers. (No strong opinion here but I feel you should know) While the gap of vegetation before the rail is about right I feel most of that dirt should be replaced with Ballest. (and should be a little higher then the surrounding area) The layout itself seems realistic nice long smooth lines and steady turns. They have gone for the realistic one track layout. My quick discussion with Shirk the poster, a summery (some paraphrasing) : ============================================================= Railways will be not be scaled versions of the Calgary network. (fair enough, But I still hope my suggested points of interest inspire areas along the games railway) His stated example is that the current railway seen above is no where near the water at present (unlike the real counterpart). He said it was to conform the games idea of, a lightly based on Calgary area using no real world information. He did say that the track tools where made by another Dev (since then left) and that he was unable to adjust the tool as of the time I was discussing with him. There is a planed industrial area for the trains to interact with(?) in the future in the alpha area. (if this includes quarry's and maybe a cement works I would be satisfied, but I think he meant more warehouses and such) A warning to not expect too big of a copy of the Calgary network. --- Additionally I saw messages talking about the fact there will be no functional trains for testing in the closed alpha. (kinda expected that) This concludes my thoughts for now, But I hope to return with some more finds I have on more areas of rail interest after I rest up.
  6. Hm, A hard "on/off" then, I am curious if you have a way to get the Zombies to head back outside properly in spring.
  7. Well, It answers half my question, I will assume the rest is "being worked on"? Otherwise thank you.
  8. They do? A source if you could I would like to read up on that. As seen in my example I just hope the Zombies will leave the buildings once temperatures return, also how will this effect times of year with warm days but cold nights?
  9. As I stated on the videos comments but hope to elaborate here on the forum : I am encouraged with improvements to the medical system, often enjoying supportive roles It is good to see a sophisticated medical system and multiple damage/injury types in play.
  10. I can only guess I am looking at an April fools gone wrong?
  11. The bunching in of itself is not a terrible thing, but consider that they leave behind a unpopulated area, on a grander scale this may mean very weird behavior. Let me reference a Project Zomboid Mod "Fear the rain" as an example of flawed horde behavior : Concept) When it rained Zombies start to rush to the nearest indoor areas. Problem) They Zombies would not really leave after ward, causing all outdoor areas to be empty travel to be trivial, but indoor the buildings would be crammed creating a hellish nightmare to actually scavenge anything indoors. However I would agree with your first point.
  12. A fresh perspective for sure. One fear I have is this might encourage the AI to "bunch" in some places while completely ignoring areas that would traditionally be populated (because no needs met). (a surreal scene where zombies leave the city's, ignoring urban survivors) Another is Zombies spontaneously dieing on mass, because they starve. (Controversially I would prefer a generic arbitrary trigger event for this) I would instead argue the way its handled in "Project Zomboid" (A noted inspiration for the Dev's), where Zombies want to form small hordes and start gravitating toward areas that players depopulate over time is a decent, dynamic and game play interesting way of handling it. Really considering a zombie is basically a broken down human I am already suspending a lot of my disbelief. If the above concerns are met however I could see it being a revolutionary mechanic.
  13. I can understand Lancers point, Both methods have merits and disadvantages, it boils down to a Quality/Quantity mentality. But I would in fact state support a "lower traffic" reporting system, I have read quite a few bad reviews (and I don't mean negative I mean poorly written) in my time while its unavoidable we will have some jokers. I feel if the person REALLY feels like they need to feedback on what they are feeling and goes through the process, we may well get more meaningful feedback.
  14. A rudimentary ecosystem simulation would be more welcome then "wolf1_Spawn, Location _15.90", certainly I for one being more in the "Survival" then "Zombie" Camp do hope for a hunting system that is not just a glorified mini-game. But this desire must also be balanced with the realistic needs of a small development team, and a game promising many features. I just hope that the right compromises are made that wont result in a compromised game that pleases no one.
  15. Certainly, But it would still be important to discuss that "base" and what it would be like.
  16. Must admit a "Landship" like base does sound cool, something I had not even considered. I simply hoped for mass hauling rail side salvage to a logistics warehouse by the railway that I would personally want to use as a base. That and historically there was a short but notable time when many nations especially Russia used armored trains as a tool of war in its own right. Modified rail cars allowing for firing holes could make for deadly mobile fortresses. (the limitations of rail however naturally limits its effectiveness). (here is the historic early conversion of a British rail car in Egypt, I choose this as an example as its a simpler conversion and layout then some of the more dedicated armored trains. A machine gun turret is not even necessary just some plates to help alleviate gunfire/boarding will do as a simple conversion Mod for a flatbed.) Note that I actually DO NOT recommend steam engines, there psychics and fuel consumption are much more complicated from a survival game standpoint and there would not likely be one operating around there anyway.
  17. Has some truth, there are a LOT of company's related to the petroleum business in Calgary even some HQ's but from what I remember of the lore the world was already ending just before the game starts (news reports CEM (Canadian equivalent of FEMA) camps). I recall (but cant find) the Gas prices on the dead matter gas stations being very high, a sign of a gas crisis. Again for the record I am under opinion of recommending a lower then realistic fuel consumption for trains to bring them in line with being more equivalent to a fuel inefficient car/truck then a large freight train. I wish you all to consider that a train can not (really) leave its tracks, and realistically has a capacity that is far too large for the simpler needs of a typical survivor therefore you would be having a player running a say 1-3 car train (if not just the locomotive itself) but consuming far more fuel then if they simply used a van or even 18 wheeler (the trailers have unusual psychics but I see you already are working on this general area). Even if the lines are very direct what stops the player simply using the overall cheaper road vehicles. Therefore my recommendation is to make sure the train is effectively kept in the games "meta" by making its fuel consumption far more attractive. (as I assume its maintenance is in the upper end already) After all whats the point in adding something that's never used.
  18. I have made suggestions for "minor" derailment (the object in question effectively "slides off"), But I am no programmer so I can't know how easy that would be. I appreciate the insight. My remaining (and main) concern however is how you intend to stop (or alleviate) the rail network from clogging (all possible sources)? Not an easy answer I know. From what I get trains will be simpler then I had hoped, but decent enough for me to be satisfied. Good luck then hope to make in-depth reviews when the time comes.
  19. That does honestly seem weird, But not deal breaking. I will take an assumption the plan is a train would "breakdown" if it collides with another train or buffer at speed. And I will encourage that at minimum, as driving a train at maximum speed and then jarringly coming to a sudden halt seems odd as is, for there to be zero repercussions (no damage to player or train (let alone derailment)) is bordering farce. But I really do appreciate you taking the time to get back to me and answering truthfully to all you can and honestly understand if you guys feel trains need pretty minimal attention compared to other elements of the game.
  20. On another note these snowplows look awesome. also it should be noted the importance of railway reflectives are mostly ORANGE not the more common green so they are less likely to blend into trees as they work on the tracks.
  21. A fair point. But through all this my stance remains the same, I don't expect or even want this to be a true railway simulator, I really do like the addition of the trains but I understand them to be a sideshow and therefore there development needs just the right amount of Realism/Balance/Fun. Regardless I think this conversation is turning fruitful, it is important to not to just talk about zombies and guns there is MORE that dead matter promises and why I'm even here. I am curious however if the Devs have any thoughts on trains yet?
  22. Thank you, Niche but useful. But I imagine it would take a fair bit of unique animations to properly integrate it into the game.
  23. It hadn't occurred to me as really these are not really intended to fill the job of a locomotive, Not a solution I would personally go for but also a fairly valid one taking a few liberty's (like how the description on that "manual mover" states its only appropriate for ONE car on FLAT terrain and would do no help for a stalled train on a slopping bridge). Despite these realistic drawbacks if given balancing like my "train jack" we do have a nice foot speed way of moving a train. While that one by the Subway car is small my instincts tell me I would break my back hauling that thing off a railcard and onto the track without aid from a forklift. I otherwise can't comment too much on the rail mover itself as I could not find too much about there specs, however as viewed from the players stand point you would ask a player to (likely on foot) go to the nearest depot where they can find one of these rail movers then drive it up to the track and push the train ready for it to be refueled again. Realistically its possible, I don't think player trains would have many cars on them so a mover could even act as the locomotive for the smaller train. But would all these steps be FUN? I really am a fan of realism over balance but there is a point where realism can get tedious as is widely noted in the long time it takes to loot in RDR2 for instance.
  24. While true, in a hypothetical scenarios where the locomotive is say stalled on a bridge or a highly difficult to reach area (with a fuel truck) you then come across a scenario that becomes problematic. We have to approach this as "worst case scenario" as while there will be responsible drivers it has been known since even before the time of the internet that there are people that get there kicks from making others suffer. Quite simply what practical steps can be made to ensure a locomotive can move from anywhere in a time that wont make most players give up, or completely clog the rail network. Once again I hope we can discuss the hard questions before we are tested. One solution comes to mind as of now : The train will continue to move (but slowly, foot speed perhapes) if it "runs out of fuel", Gamey but has its merits, notably allowing a train to stagger to a convenient point for refueling.
  25. A typical Jerrycan can hold 5.3 US gallons, the tank in a locomotive is about 3000 Gallons, and its consumption is 3 by the mile. Are you telling me "on Hand" Diesel will not only suffice, but you are comfortable filling that tank over 600 trips? My recommendation was simply to balance your typical diesel locomotive to something far more manageable for a player to use.
×
×
  • Create New...