Viceroy

How about we turn our collective thoughts toward zombie memory for a bit.
 
As Suomiboy mentioned in another thread, having zombies follow you or at least require more effort to shake should be the norm in some cases. Now let's think back to when we had only the test neighbourhood. We often had to zigzag between houses or make a few turns to throw the stenches off your trail before heading back to the safehouse. Whereas currently in the game, the memory settings are way off and they will sometimes cease pursuit when you are still essentially just in front of them. To address this I'd say that the memory of zeds be extended further than it is presently, to a much larger degree I'd even argue.
 
I remember when the MP game came in for the first time, the testing server had a particularly fun 'glitch' which resulted in major memory longevity among the zombies, I remember travelling with Aricane and we hit the police station in MD, retreating through the woods to the tavern, only to be absolutely swamped in zombies a few minutes later. Now granted, this had been a glitch where the zombies *knew* exactly where we were. So naturally I am not in favour of it, but the result... was one of the most harrowing and fun experiences I have ever had in PZ, bar none.
 
So my proposal is as follows: Boost our zombie memory for survival up to what would be regarded as high in sandbox terms, then on top of that -and this is about the result I mentioned previously- add a simple behaviour where when enough zombies are walking in one direction (or even just roughly half of all zombies do this.) they keep walking in that direction even after losing their 'memory'. This would result in cases where if you run up a road the zombies will keep walking up that road for a long time, it would result in the same event as the glitch did previously, except in a fair and manageable way. Aricane and I did indeed just keep going in the direction the zombies last saw us, so the event would still have occured, however if we were aware of it, we would need to anticipate their movements. Resulting in !FUN!
 
This would make for unexpected encounters and hordes moving through an area or catching up to you hours later if you happened to camp on a highway or in the general direction you fled in. Zombies would still repopulate as present and zombies would still be distracted by meta events and other things like animal traps and players/npc's.
 
So in short: Have some zombies keep on walking in the direction they last saw a human moving into (for a much longer time). This would fit with lore and create another believable hazard and potential source of a 'horde'. Also, boost basic zombie memory somewhat.

Tookie tookie!

I would actually love that.  One of the things I'm hoping for is dynamic hordes. Where they can grow and split based on how many of them are hearing or seeing the same stimulus, or just following the group because they assume the group has seen or heard something.

Managing water supplies and having to boil it on a fire or add a drop or so of bleach would be a nice added factor to survival. One that suits the survival setting very well, and as many of you would agree, it is something that is noticeably missing at present.

I think painting windows is great, used to do it all the time with store houses. Worked a lot better than curtains I can say without a doubt.

Managing water supplies and having to boil it on a fire or add a drop or so of bleach would be a nice added factor to survival. One that suits the survival setting very well, and as many of you would agree, it is something that is noticeably missing at present.

if you like them i can give them to you man; they look alright

Anyone here know someone who is claustrophobic?
 
Shouldn't the freakout be related to the size of the open area around the player (range to wall on each compass direction) rather than merely being indoors?

One thing i dont like about the rain barrels is that it rails you to using mid tech carpetry.
Like i said, it would be better if we used logic and make buckets catch rain but in a way less water then a mid tech rain collector, and even less than a full carpetry collector.
 
Making you scavange for buckets for an alternative of water.

I think instead of rain becoming less prevalent (since we have access to its setting luckily  and can tweak it to taste.) we think more along the lines of the effect rain has on difficulty.
 
Currently the wet mechanic and the repercussions of constantly being wet are negligable. Whereas in real life were you soaked, wind-chill becomes a big threat even in warm climates, wet clothes tend to cause irritation and skin damage over time, fine motor skills go out the window when you are wet and cold, you make more noise when wet, you can get chafing, rashes and even (if warm and you are constantly moist) things like ringworm.
 
Needless to say that being wet should have a greater impact on the player, and on top of any physical effect, being wet and in the rain tends to make people unhappy.
 
It wouldn't need massive overhauling or anything though in my mind, rain is rain. It should just have more of an effect when exposure time runs into a few hours. Not easily fatal, but certainly impairing to a degree.

I think instead of rain becoming less prevalent (since we have access to its setting luckily  and can tweak it to taste.) we think more along the lines of the effect rain has on difficulty.
 
Currently the wet mechanic and the repercussions of constantly being wet are negligable. Whereas in real life were you soaked, wind-chill becomes a big threat even in warm climates, wet clothes tend to cause irritation and skin damage over time, fine motor skills go out the window when you are wet and cold, you make more noise when wet, you can get chafing, rashes and even (if warm and you are constantly moist) things like ringworm.
 
Needless to say that being wet should have a greater impact on the player, and on top of any physical effect, being wet and in the rain tends to make people unhappy.
 
It wouldn't need massive overhauling or anything though in my mind, rain is rain. It should just have more of an effect when exposure time runs into a few hours. Not easily fatal, but certainly impairing to a degree.

I think instead of rain becoming less prevalent (since we have access to its setting luckily  and can tweak it to taste.) we think more along the lines of the effect rain has on difficulty.
 
Currently the wet mechanic and the repercussions of constantly being wet are negligable. Whereas in real life were you soaked, wind-chill becomes a big threat even in warm climates, wet clothes tend to cause irritation and skin damage over time, fine motor skills go out the window when you are wet and cold, you make more noise when wet, you can get chafing, rashes and even (if warm and you are constantly moist) things like ringworm.
 
Needless to say that being wet should have a greater impact on the player, and on top of any physical effect, being wet and in the rain tends to make people unhappy.
 
It wouldn't need massive overhauling or anything though in my mind, rain is rain. It should just have more of an effect when exposure time runs into a few hours. Not easily fatal, but certainly impairing to a degree.

Being able to convert a garbage can (or other sensible container) into a rain barrel would be a real plus, too . . .

That's one of the changes I'd like to see, Moose. Right now, I just ignore farming for that reason -- not only does it effectively win the game, it's annoying to have to baby carrots.

Wouldn't mind fruits/veges staying on the plant a bit longer as long as birds/animals would actively take them.

The thread is more focused on the late game than any particular facet of survival I must say. But to just bring back the spirit of what the game was when hordes still roamed.
 
I remember very distinctly lemmy saying: "There are no safe places, only safer places" or something to that effect.
 
So yes the zombies are a huge problem in the current state, but let's not forget the different factors that are behind the scenes to create an engaging experience while you survive. Like lots of us have experienced, it is fun to survive when you have some objective in mind. It is for this reason that I feel farming is being discussed as it is in the thread.
 
Jumpscares also need a buffing if you ask me, the number of zombies inside buildings is a little sparse in my opinion, and the game should populate areas inside buildings with corpses too, among which there will be crawlers. Zombies should sometimes faux die when you attack them, only to 'wake up' later. Enhancing the threat having corpses around provides. I mean think about it, how would a zombie react to near fatal trauma to the skull, but that is insufficient to terminate the specimen. It stands to reason if shooting them can do this that hitting them can do this as well. But some of them need to lay still like this perhaps even for days before standing back up.
 
Just increase the unexpectedness of them I suppose is what I am getting at.
 
Another thing I'd add is making random buildings start the game with ovens on and things inside the ovens, to simulate the few houses that would have lost owners during food preparation, this would damage and destroy some buildings throughout the map in a somewhat random fashion, creating a little variation and adding to the starting feel of "Shit went down.". WIth the minimal boost to danger of having no guarantee a refuge is standing and the odd unexpected early-game fire this would mostly be for immersion.

The thread is more focused on the late game than any particular facet of survival I must say. But to just bring back the spirit of what the game was when hordes still roamed.
 
I remember very distinctly lemmy saying: "There are no safe places, only safer places" or something to that effect.
 
So yes the zombies are a huge problem in the current state, but let's not forget the different factors that are behind the scenes to create an engaging experience while you survive. Like lots of us have experienced, it is fun to survive when you have some objective in mind. It is for this reason that I feel farming is being discussed as it is in the thread.
 
Jumpscares also need a buffing if you ask me, the number of zombies inside buildings is a little sparse in my opinion, and the game should populate areas inside buildings with corpses too, among which there will be crawlers. Zombies should sometimes faux die when you attack them, only to 'wake up' later. Enhancing the threat having corpses around provides. I mean think about it, how would a zombie react to near fatal trauma to the skull, but that is insufficient to terminate the specimen. It stands to reason if shooting them can do this that hitting them can do this as well. But some of them need to lay still like this perhaps even for days before standing back up.
 
Just increase the unexpectedness of them I suppose is what I am getting at.
 
Another thing I'd add is making random buildings start the game with ovens on and things inside the ovens, to simulate the few houses that would have lost owners during food preparation, this would damage and destroy some buildings throughout the map in a somewhat random fashion, creating a little variation and adding to the starting feel of "Shit went down.". WIth the minimal boost to danger of having no guarantee a refuge is standing and the odd unexpected early-game fire this would mostly be for immersion.

Perhaps make crop tending actions have an area of effect instead of simply one tile. That way you don't need to arrange data into structures denoting farming zones that are linked, but instead can judge for yourself where to water or spray or what have you, but instead of one square it is 3x3 centered on you. Something like that. Maybe. Farming isn't my forte though so take it on face value.

Yeah the difficulty in it should be about anticipating need and managing your resources and time correctly. Crops at present are more like a vending machine to be honest. And if it results in players cycling crops and when they are planted to provide a constant supply of food, I think that it should be possible, but that is only one way to play the game. And it should not be artificially limited since it is a game and players should be able to be free in it to do as they like. The level of involvement, planning, preparation and general oversight of such a system should just be sufficiently difficult to not result in monotony and boredom.
 
Give the player the ability to realistically preserve food (To allow other playstyles that don't have cyclic crops like mentioned above.), but make it an action that requires you to judge, anticipate, plan and gather resources to do. Like smoking meat would require you to gather up wood and create wood chips for instance. Salting meat would require finding large amounts of (extremely heavy.) salt from barns and fields to restaurants and kitchens. It shouldn't be *impossible* to survive, but it should take effort to plan and to prepare regardless of your playstyle. And playstyle is a key factor too since what you ideally want is to be *able* to settle into a style: "I am a hunter!" but then to be thrown a curveball when shit goes south (Which it absolutely MUST at one point or another.) and you must then adapt to the situation and you didn't necessarily have a contingency plan for it, resulting in hardship and general apocalypsenessness.
 
And every step of the way there should be an element of unexpectedness added, like the diseases plants get, or perhaps a smokehouse burning down because you lumped in too much wood at one time. Things to engage the player. Like a drying rack being raided by animals or zombies walking into your clean and freshly dried meat and smearing off blood and guts on it...
 
Essentially more things to do and engage the player while surviving. Because make no mistake, boredom of the player is a huge issue later in the game, and this seeks to address that (not so much the difficulty part of the equation.) although the two are interlinked. And then you sprinkle in enhanced difficulty from zombies and the environment and what have you to mix it up and keep it entertaining.

Not quite sure what constitutes 'gamey' though, but the connotation seems to be abhorrently negative.  As I said I find farming to be so fucking boring to be honest I rarely ever do it in game, and the click-fest is a large contributor to it, so I'd be in favour of any way of streamlining it.
 
EDIT: Ninja'd by kajin so this is my response to him. Indeed I agree with what you are saying, especially when it comes down to the finer points of managing a large area. Ideally you'd want to be able to maintain large fields (as a group.) and it's true that the only logical and streamline way would be to treat the entire field as an arbitrary unit of size that is maintained in one fell swoop. So I agree that it would be better to be able to designate a 'field' much like one would in DF for instance.
 
If the growth time is realistic and the working field size nears realistic proportions, the scale of unexpected trampling and damage on the field becomes greater and harder to manage without tending or at the very least overwatch. So I am in favour most certainly.

Yeah the difficulty in it should be about anticipating need and managing your resources and time correctly. Crops at present are more like a vending machine to be honest. And if it results in players cycling crops and when they are planted to provide a constant supply of food, I think that it should be possible, but that is only one way to play the game. And it should not be artificially limited since it is a game and players should be able to be free in it to do as they like. The level of involvement, planning, preparation and general oversight of such a system should just be sufficiently difficult to not result in monotony and boredom.
 
Give the player the ability to realistically preserve food (To allow other playstyles that don't have cyclic crops like mentioned above.), but make it an action that requires you to judge, anticipate, plan and gather resources to do. Like smoking meat would require you to gather up wood and create wood chips for instance. Salting meat would require finding large amounts of (extremely heavy.) salt from barns and fields to restaurants and kitchens. It shouldn't be *impossible* to survive, but it should take effort to plan and to prepare regardless of your playstyle. And playstyle is a key factor too since what you ideally want is to be *able* to settle into a style: "I am a hunter!" but then to be thrown a curveball when shit goes south (Which it absolutely MUST at one point or another.) and you must then adapt to the situation and you didn't necessarily have a contingency plan for it, resulting in hardship and general apocalypsenessness.
 
And every step of the way there should be an element of unexpectedness added, like the diseases plants get, or perhaps a smokehouse burning down because you lumped in too much wood at one time. Things to engage the player. Like a drying rack being raided by animals or zombies walking into your clean and freshly dried meat and smearing off blood and guts on it...
 
Essentially more things to do and engage the player while surviving. Because make no mistake, boredom of the player is a huge issue later in the game, and this seeks to address that (not so much the difficulty part of the equation.) although the two are interlinked. And then you sprinkle in enhanced difficulty from zombies and the environment and what have you to mix it up and keep it entertaining.

Yeah the difficulty in it should be about anticipating need and managing your resources and time correctly. Crops at present are more like a vending machine to be honest. And if it results in players cycling crops and when they are planted to provide a constant supply of food, I think that it should be possible, but that is only one way to play the game. And it should not be artificially limited since it is a game and players should be able to be free in it to do as they like. The level of involvement, planning, preparation and general oversight of such a system should just be sufficiently difficult to not result in monotony and boredom.
 
Give the player the ability to realistically preserve food (To allow other playstyles that don't have cyclic crops like mentioned above.), but make it an action that requires you to judge, anticipate, plan and gather resources to do. Like smoking meat would require you to gather up wood and create wood chips for instance. Salting meat would require finding large amounts of (extremely heavy.) salt from barns and fields to restaurants and kitchens. It shouldn't be *impossible* to survive, but it should take effort to plan and to prepare regardless of your playstyle. And playstyle is a key factor too since what you ideally want is to be *able* to settle into a style: "I am a hunter!" but then to be thrown a curveball when shit goes south (Which it absolutely MUST at one point or another.) and you must then adapt to the situation and you didn't necessarily have a contingency plan for it, resulting in hardship and general apocalypsenessness.
 
And every step of the way there should be an element of unexpectedness added, like the diseases plants get, or perhaps a smokehouse burning down because you lumped in too much wood at one time. Things to engage the player. Like a drying rack being raided by animals or zombies walking into your clean and freshly dried meat and smearing off blood and guts on it...
 
Essentially more things to do and engage the player while surviving. Because make no mistake, boredom of the player is a huge issue later in the game, and this seeks to address that (not so much the difficulty part of the equation.) although the two are interlinked. And then you sprinkle in enhanced difficulty from zombies and the environment and what have you to mix it up and keep it entertaining.

I like the idea of crops taking longer to grow as long as the crops last longer before going rotten.  Potatoes in particular really last a long time if stored correctly.

Perhaps make crop tending actions have an area of effect instead of simply one tile. That way you don't need to arrange data into structures denoting farming zones that are linked, but instead can judge for yourself where to water or spray or what have you, but instead of one square it is 3x3 centered on you. Something like that. Maybe. Farming isn't my forte though so take it on face value.

Not quite sure what constitutes 'gamey' though, but the connotation seems to be abhorrently negative.  As I said I find farming to be so fucking boring to be honest I rarely ever do it in game, and the click-fest is a large contributor to it, so I'd be in favour of any way of streamlining it.
 
EDIT: Ninja'd by kajin so this is my response to him. Indeed I agree with what you are saying, especially when it comes down to the finer points of managing a large area. Ideally you'd want to be able to maintain large fields (as a group.) and it's true that the only logical and streamline way would be to treat the entire field as an arbitrary unit of size that is maintained in one fell swoop. So I agree that it would be better to be able to designate a 'field' much like one would in DF for instance.
 
If the growth time is realistic and the working field size nears realistic proportions, the scale of unexpected trampling and damage on the field becomes greater and harder to manage without tending or at the very least overwatch. So I am in favour most certainly.