Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.
If everything was set the game wouldn't be in alpha stage. You are contradicting with yourself.
Yeah, stop legal human experimentation! Give us the full game already without any feedback on what works and what doesn't! That'll be great!
The ladder decision was made because raiding with them was too easy and it forced everyone to put anti ladders on every building which limited the build styles you could go for. With the tool cupboard change the ladder chance makes sense. Especially now you know if you blast through the ground floor of someones base, you're guarenteed to find the tool cupboard on that floor (assuming there is one, if there isn't then you could use ladders) so overall it's quite balanced.
Personally I like that fact he's changing things like this, testing what works and what doesn't is exactly what needs to happen for a good game to emerge when it comes out of alpha.
I mean if you go back to the original ladder post they intended to do them like this in the first place where you prop it up against a structure, but they just did a quick and dirty implementation.
You're claiming a video game in it's alpha stage is human experimentation?
I don't understand what you're really arguing for here, you have multiple points that don't relate to each other.
If Garry really does play Rust, he probably doesn't do it for the sake of the experience, but more so to test features out personally, and I highly doubt he even does that.
And please describe what you mean by "decisions are quite well random". What's random about them? Random means there is no pattern or recognizable distinction/correlation between those decisions, but adding features, optimization, and bug-fixing seems to be pretty systematic.
I'm just confused what you're trying to argue about, really. If anything, you are the one who's being random.
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48560033]Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.[/QUOTE]
It's Garry's game he can do whatever the fuck he wants lol.
Somebody doesn't know what alpha means.
I realy like the game, but the critic in this thread is not completly wrong. I understand what he means and I know a lot of players who quit playing rust for this reason. I know, its alpha and there is a mind map with things to be added in the future, but.. sometimes I cant see a clear direction in the way the gameplay goes.
Dont missunderstand me. I know things must be tested. But, as I wrote in another post, what game will rust be in the future? Whats the plan? Do we get more tech, faster gameplay and weapon mods and become a shooter with some survival aspects or a greater focus on food supply, real pve and a slower gameplay like a survival game with some shooter aspects. We couldnt have both? Or can we? I dont know, but as a player, I really want to know where the journey goes.
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48560033]Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.[/QUOTE]
How on earth does it not make sense? The game is still in early access, it says when you're purchasing the game "This game is in early access, we don't quite know where we are going with the game yet, so a lot of things will change"
Ladders were very unbalanced, although they were a great raiding tool that literally made every base raid able, they did have a few downfalls too, as it made everyone build in a certain way to counter them and so on.
I think the changes to ladders was needed, read the devblog, Garry's plans for ladders in the future seem a lot better and more realistic then being able to place ladders up against a flat vertical surface 20-30 metres up in the air, it just didnt make any sense.
I know realism isn't the main focus of the game, but ladders were a bit to unrealistic the way they were.
If people want to quit Rust because the gameplay changes over time, that's fine. That's what they signed up for. Come back when the game is finished and we're not updating anymore.
These changes might seem extreme. The thing you have to realise it's 1 second to change it back. We're seeing what happens. It's easy to prophesize about how it's going to make the game worse. People said that when we made buildings fall down, when we added cupboards, when we added sleepers, when we added or changed pretty much anything. People are looking out for their own self interests, not for the interests of gameplay.
The game is in early access. This is the time to experiment with these things to make sure they're right. This is what you signed up for. If you want to report shit you actually see on unmodified servers, how it affected gameplay negatively or positively, then please go ahead. But please don't prophesize.
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48560033]Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.[/QUOTE]
Developers playing their own games!?!? HOW TERRIBLE.
i could build this wit walls on all triangles.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/jSBxr/9272c78489.png[/IMG]
and put my main cupboard higher.
This would need 10-12 c4 to reach the center cupboard to place 1 ladder.
i could be an ahole and not put my main in center and u could spend over 20c4 just
looking for it. just unraidable.
Yeah, one thing we should do really is make it so you can't place a cupboard inside the active cupboard radius
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48567240]i could build this wit walls on all triangles.
and put my main cupboard higher.
This would need 10-12 c4 to reach the center cupboard to place 1 ladder.
i could be an ahole and not put my main in center and u could spend over 20c4 just
looking for it. just unraidable.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=garry;48567921]Yeah, one thing we should do really is make it so you can't place a cupboard inside the active cupboard radius[/QUOTE]
Bye bye multiple cupboards.
what would be amazing is if we could physically see the cupboard area of influence like a blue area when we click cupboard, it would leave a lot less guesswork out of building
While i'm also concerned about the direction the game is taking it is for a different reason than the OP.
As development moves on the gameplay looks, from my point of view, less like a survival game and more like a first person RTS.
Currently the gameplay looks like more or less like this: You collect resources > build your base > upgrade your arsenal > attack your enemy's base or defend your own. This is not too different from how a RTS like Age of Empires is played, is it? Especially now that resource collecting buildings are being added.
The survival aspect of Rust is completely undermined by several things, mostly by the fact that death carries little to no penalty.
One can respawn 6 times every 5 minutes (once every 50 seconds) and only lose their items in the case they can't loot their own corpse. But this loss can be minimized by carrying cheap equipment that can easily be replaced by the abundance of resources.
On top of it the sleeping bags can be used as a method of fast travel by spreading them across the world and committing suicide, making them useful for looting rad towns for example and further undermining the very concept of survival.
The next issue is that the hunger system is practically a joke as finding food is incredibly easy and the meter decreases at a snail's pace. Only by completely ignoring it and never consuming any food you come across is it possible to starve. However even in that scenario it is of little consequence as you can just suicide and respawn inside your base/home and regain enough for a couple of hours.
Looking at the opinions of the community i have come to the conclusions that players have different expectations from the game which can be put on a spectrum. On one end of this spectrum are the players who are only interested in the building and raiding while on the other end there are players who only care about survival and realism.
I don't think it is possible appeal all players on this spectrum with just a single game mode but it should be possible with two, one aimed at raiding and the other aimed at survival.
[QUOTE=MMM;48568747]While i'm also concerned about the direction the game is taking it is for a different reason than the OP.
As development moves on the gameplay looks, from my point of view, less like a survival game and more like a first person RTS.
Currently the gameplay looks like more or less like this: You collect resources > build your base > upgrade your arsenal > attack your enemy's base or defend your own. This is not too different from how a RTS like Age of Empires is played, is it? Especially now that resource collecting buildings are being added.
The survival aspect of Rust is completely undermined by several things, mostly by the fact that death carries little to no penalty.
One can respawn 6 times every 5 minutes (once every 50 seconds) and only lose their items in the case they can't loot their own corpse. But this loss can be minimized by carrying cheap equipment that can easily be replaced by the abundance of resources.
On top of it the sleeping bags can be used as a method of fast travel by spreading them across the world and committing suicide, making them useful for looting rad towns for example and further undermining the very concept of survival.
The next issue is that the hunger system is practically a joke as finding food is incredibly easy and the meter decreases at a snail's pace. Only by completely ignoring it and never consuming any food you come across is it possible to starve. However even in that scenario it is of little consequence as you can just suicide and respawn inside your base/home and regain enough for a couple of hours.
Looking at the opinions of the community i have come to the conclusions that players have different expectations from the game which can be put on a spectrum. On one end of this spectrum are the players who are only interested in the building and raiding while on the other end there are players who only care about survival and realism.
I don't think it is possible appeal all players on this spectrum with just a single game mode but it should be possible with two, one aimed at raiding and the other aimed at survival.[/QUOTE]
I agree with all of this apart from the last paragraph.
[QUOTE=garry;48566487]If people want to quit Rust because the gameplay changes over time, that's fine. That's what they signed up for. Come back when the game is finished and we're not updating anymore.
These changes might seem extreme. The thing you have to realise it's 1 second to change it back. We're seeing what happens. It's easy to prophesize about how it's going to make the game worse. People said that when we made buildings fall down, when we added cupboards, when we added sleepers, when we added or changed pretty much anything. People are looking out for their own self interests, not for the interests of gameplay.
The game is in early access. This is the time to experiment with these things to make sure they're right. This is what you signed up for. If you want to report shit you actually see on unmodified servers, how it affected gameplay negatively or positively, then please go ahead. But please don't prophesize.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for your statement, garry. I understand that changes and tests with game aspects are necessary and part of early access. Its ok. Its a kind of challenge to handle with all the different changes and I personaly have no problem with it. But Im still interested in your and the other devs view of "what kind of game do we want to make". "Sandbox survival" can mean a lot of things. From a "hardcore survival sim" to a "survival means dont get shot" game. I hope you understand what I mean and you can write something about it. I still think you devs do a great job and hope that the future Rust will be a game that we all (or most of us) like. Thank you
I think that to be all happy, the raid must be a difficult thing. a single player has to have the opportunity to build a house "safe".
before the "stairs", I was playing alone. It built on rock foundations. I was relatively quiet when I went to sleep. This does not mean that my house you could not ride. In fact, a group of people destroyed it with rockets. (Rockets were introduced because of the houses on the rock)
Now I play in a group. it is too easy to raid solo players or small groups of players !! too much!! I think it makes little sense.
the game is not balanced! and why? because someone does not like the house on the rock? because someone has decided that there is no room for individual players?
here's my proposal: no stairs. (Building blocked, it means building blocked) c4 and rockets, very (much) more expensive!
This means: more peace of mind for the individual. more stimulus for groups of players.
ALL the houses are raidable! almost always the raid defeat the enemy, but does not justify the costs. this is not a problem for me, and help players "defensive" and "individual".
if someone does not want the houses on the rock, please disable the option of building on the rock! do not ruin the game with rockets, stairs and cup with a strange range, or with strange rules.
(Sorry for my english)
[QUOTE=TopGun90;48573704]I think that to be all happy, the raid must be a difficult thing. a single player has to have the opportunity to build a house "safe".
before the "stairs", I was playing alone. It built on rock foundations. I was relatively quiet when I went to sleep. This does not mean that my house you could not ride. In fact, a group of people destroyed it with rockets. (Rockets were introduced because of the houses on the rock)
Now I play in a group. it is too easy to raid solo players or small groups of players !! too much!! I think it makes little sense.
the game is not balanced! and why? because someone does not like the house on the rock? because someone has decided that there is no room for individual players?
here's my proposal: no stairs. (Building blocked, it means building blocked) c4 and rockets, very (much) more expensive!
This means: more peace of mind for the individual. more stimulus for groups of players.
ALL the houses are raidable! almost always the raid defeat the enemy, but does not justify the costs. this is not a problem for me, and help players "defensive" and "individual".
if someone does not want the houses on the rock, please disable the option of building on the rock! do not ruin the game with rockets, stairs and cup with a strange range, or with strange rules.
(Sorry for my english)[/QUOTE]
If you want to play a game where it's easy to be safe, Rust isn't the game you should be playing.
The game [B]isn't[/B] balanced right now, it's alpha. The balance changes with almost every weekly update.
[QUOTE=MMM;48568747]While i'm also concerned about the direction the game is taking it is for a different reason than the OP.
As development moves on the gameplay looks, from my point of view, less like a survival game and more like a first person RTS.
Currently the gameplay looks like more or less like this: You collect resources > build your base > upgrade your arsenal > attack your enemy's base or defend your own. This is not too different from how a RTS like Age of Empires is played, is it? Especially now that resource collecting buildings are being added.
The survival aspect of Rust is completely undermined by several things, mostly by the fact that death carries little to no penalty.
One can respawn 6 times every 5 minutes (once every 50 seconds) and only lose their items in the case they can't loot their own corpse. But this loss can be minimized by carrying cheap equipment that can easily be replaced by the abundance of resources.
On top of it the sleeping bags can be used as a method of fast travel by spreading them across the world and committing suicide, making them useful for looting rad towns for example and further undermining the very concept of survival.
The next issue is that the hunger system is practically a joke as finding food is incredibly easy and the meter decreases at a snail's pace. Only by completely ignoring it and never consuming any food you come across is it possible to starve. However even in that scenario it is of little consequence as you can just suicide and respawn inside your base/home and regain enough for a couple of hours.
Looking at the opinions of the community i have come to the conclusions that players have different expectations from the game which can be put on a spectrum. On one end of this spectrum are the players who are only interested in the building and raiding while on the other end there are players who only care about survival and realism.
I don't think it is possible appeal all players on this spectrum with just a single game mode but it should be possible with two, one aimed at raiding and the other aimed at survival.[/QUOTE]
My favorite comparison is to call Rust a Sid Meier's Civilization game in first person.
Barrels = Ancient Ruins
Monuments = Natural Wonders
Signs/Artwork = Great Works of Art
Parties of 1-3 people who do nothing but raid/KoS = Barbarians
Large clans of 4-6 = City States
Anything bigger than that = Civs
Some groups can be better at production while others can be better at military. Really I can't stress enough how similar Rust is with the first few Era's of Civ5 gameplay. It's really cool when you think about it.
Some players are more like scouts the way they move around a lot. Some are more like warriors the way they fight. Some are more like workers, building non-stop until they are safe, some are more like spies, infiltrating other civs and stealing tech, SPEARMEN! BOWMAN! :words:
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48575696]If you want to play a game where it's easy to be safe, Rust isn't the game you should be playing.
The game [B]isn't[/B] balanced right now, it's alpha. The balance changes with almost every weekly update.[/QUOTE]
Your post is pointless. as usual you do not understand the point and do not add anything new.
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48560033]Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.[/QUOTE]
you forgot to put your tin foil hat on
[QUOTE=Mezamorphis;48580148]you forgot to put your tin foil hat on[/QUOTE]
no i dint
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48581391]no i dint[/QUOTE]
aren't you afraid of what Garry's gonna do if you let him read your mind?
[QUOTE=Mezamorphis;48581428]aren't you afraid of what Garry's gonna do if you let him read your mind?[/QUOTE]
Yes i know thats why i dint forget to put it on. :)
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48581447]Yes i know thats why i dint forget to put it on. :)[/QUOTE]
oh sorry for some reason I read it that you didn't put it on, that's good
[QUOTE=Bounce303;48560033]Moderators throw garry's vision at you at every post but sometimes i doubt what he is doing makes any sense. Or part of anything.
Sometimes the decisions he makes are just outright random. Im starting to belive garry is secretly playing the game.
And events like 'garry's in a big group' makes him say things like we don't care about solo players or not ment to be played solo.
And i got the feeling some random group just raided garry'd and hes decided lets remove ladders. Really the decisions are quite well random.
And not taught true. How can you raid a person without stairs now. It makes no sense. He removed zombies becouse this is not dayz.
But what is this dungeon siege? whats up with siege ladders omg.
And we know this is an alpha but what your doing is outright human experimentation.[/QUOTE]
Garry is a master troll. Never judge a change on it's own or based on what the game is right now, a lot of the changes they push are for things that are going to make sense in a week, or several weeks.
Removing ladders like they did was bad. But they are adding siege ladders which counter this. Granted they should have pushed both changes at the same time, but that's Garry for you.
[editline]31st August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Thor-axe;48577723]My favorite comparison is to call Rust a Sid Meier's Civilization game in first person.
Barrels = Ancient Ruins
Monuments = Natural Wonders
Signs/Artwork = Great Works of Art
Parties of 1-3 people who do nothing but raid/KoS = Barbarians
Large clans of 4-6 = City States
Anything bigger than that = Civs
Some groups can be better at production while others can be better at military. Really I can't stress enough how similar Rust is with the first few Era's of Civ5 gameplay. It's really cool when you think about it.
Some players are more like scouts the way they move around a lot. Some are more like warriors the way they fight. Some are more like workers, building non-stop until they are safe, some are more like spies, infiltrating other civs and stealing tech, SPEARMEN! BOWMAN! :words:[/QUOTE]
Never saw it that way, but yeah, good comparison!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
