Some readers suggest that missions, the battle on the hill, and some skill checks are too easy. I have a table of average (and median) skill values I use to code checks and make them for non-IAP characters, meaning no extra Skill Points.
I am considering making missions that are easy, normal, and hard, with rewards to match. Having difficulty modes may come later but for now I want to make missions with 3 intensities.
Do you like this idea?
I love the idea of easy, normal, and hard missions/scenarios.
The game is fine with one difficulty.
Iād rather you make difficulty modes for the entire game not missions.
I may be biased/ non-representative, but I do like the idea of different difficulty levels for each missions (as in, some missions are just harder than others)
It allows you give increase reward for harder missions, and can make the player have to consider what to do (e.g. on the fight on the hill, if you could manually make it easier you wouldnāt have to focus on what you do or other important details.
Also @JimD sidenote, how many parts are planned? I remember something about 4 parts overall (obviously in a couple of years!) and a fifth if many people are interested (as in, are interested and actually buy the game) , but I am wondering if this plan has changed?
I can say for sure that Iāll be playing the third part whenever it is released in the future. But I donāt think youād have to worry about people not playing it because everyone on this thread seems to really enjoy the story that you wrote with Lys and Eiwynn.
I like the idea of having missions that have scaling difficulty. I think another alternative might be to have certain skill sets be of better use during particular missions.
I do enjoy that you make it possible to complete missions a variety of ways, depending on you skills. But I think that the two aspects could be incorporated āmaybe missions where diplomacy or stealth checks might be easier as opposed to direct combat or vice versa.
Although I am slightly disappointed, hopefully enough people will donate via patreon you will take on writing as a full time job (and likely release ZE:SH Part 99 on your deathbed haha)
I am curious, how much % do you get from an actual sale vs an equal cost patreon donation?
@JimD I am a role playerā¦ so in general i am really really sceptical about the hole DIFFICULT i play difficult games now i am playing fallout 2 on hard. I have played wastelander but the game entire is base on that and BALANCED for that to allow role-playing. But what many meta wants is literally F#*ck ROLE PLAYERS I want missions be so difficult that ONLY ONE WAY MINE BASED ENTIRELY ON CHEAT CODEā¦ oh you donāt want see code my bad TOTAL FAILURE FOR YOUā¦ METAGAMING RULEZZZ
Itās an exaggeration but anyone that have been in a rp forum have seen a post like that.
-If mission is difficult should beBECAUSE a plot reason tha enrichment storyline
-Allow all types of characters beat the mission. Not press Soldier to win
-Reward should be on info and dialogue not only on loot.
It is hard hard hard to balance. If you ace it You could be a legend.
I present me as volunteer to playing tons characters and figure balances in difficult for role players and story focus people
Just finished my first game with the new content, had lots of fun! Thank you all who worked on it! Iāll surely try many more characters to see what I missed later.
I have what I believe is an error to report: on the mission with the grocery store sniper, my claustrophobic character panicked in the confined space at the roofās ladder and burst through the door, and then I was given options for how to enter the roof area as if I were still hidden inside.
About the ādifficultyā thing, I agree with what Mara said. Of course thereās nothing difficult about passing stat checks. I think thatās the way it should be, to allow for RP. Raising the checks doesnāt make anything more challenging; it only requires more refined min-maxing, which I personally find boring and irritating. I would like the gameās challenge to come from difficult decisions.
That said, itās just my opinion on that now, without knowing anything about how you plan on approaching this. Iāll be happy for more missions regardless
Depend on whether the game is story driven or game drivenā¦ if it is story driven, then there is not necessary to add the difficulty setting because is is a game element
Yes and No. Story driven Rpg can and many use difficult as a storyline mechanism. And could serve to encourage a feeling that story tries to give to player. Like a prisioner being testing over and over with difficult puzzles or mental checks that are tricky. In that situation and story the difficulty helps further and enchance a story.
Many old if games used for that The maze tthat could be very effective as narrative media or Terrible to point destruction of the game.
The last of us is a pure story driven game however played on hard survival mode is far more immersive not for combat for fact of thee scarcity of suplies.
I personally would prefer a mode that makes loot and bullets be far less quantity and more need of taking though choices than a inflated artificially stat chrcks made for metagamers leisure only.
I magine if people had to think SHIT i want save X but how i havenāt food if I save X i would have to raid or stolenā¦ Thatās the difficult situations i want story based and with consequences
Yea I agree. I feel like I have an over abundance of supplies and Iām super super kind in my playthroughs cause I donāt want to hurt anyone and Iāve received no consequences acting this way. But that kindness would be tested if supplies were low or something.
Yes For instance Mara bases if save someone skills if it would eat x and if it is injured.
In a Real situation it has sense as supplies will be scarce.
In game nothing is scarce I have more stuff That Emperor Palpatine. I could build Death Star with all I have I donāt build for the engine boringness not for lack of materials.
If there were a similar situations in resources to This war of mineā¦ How the dramatic choices would be come far more dramatic as Lack of real resources and a mouth more could mean starvation or damage one you love. Or see a weak person with stuff you REALLY need but wasnt want to tradeā¦
Unless you donāt have high enough empathy to have Lyle and Jillian like you enough and decide to invite them in. Then you get a first taste of how some will likely repay careless kindness.
Lots of things certainly get tested when supplies are low and people are abruptly put in a situation where they have to fend for themselves in some way. And we certainly have seen a few examples of that in the story so far (and those examples are likely just a small taste of how truly terrifying humanity can get, even when compared to the growing threat of the zombie hordes).
Hey quick question, is Zombie Joe always going to killed/ removed from group, or is it just that many choices (trying to research him, using him as defense) result in his death?
Also, in my most recent game I was very kind and had a good relationship with Keith, but then in the fight killed Natalie and took Benton hostage.
Does this mean Keith and I are now eternal enemies? Or is there a bit of leeway?
(And also, will what we do with the sniper affect future relations with the New Army?)
No. Jude deserted the New Army when he found the grocery store. Your relationship with Goodman is likely what affects New Army relations. At this point, I donāt think that a relationship with Goodman can be established by non-military MCs.
I think itās easy to say that itās too easy when a lot of players seem to have level 4 and above skills or they have nearly all recruitable survivors in their group. I donāt know if itās like this way for other people who have basic and average level combat skills and your MC has 8-12 group members it is NOT easy. You can tell that having a normal skill level and a fairly small group makes the game a lot harder.
What do you mean by that ? 99% of the group wants it dead, you have to persuade them of itās worth to be able to use it as a weapon/research sample ? Also, heās not a group member heās a means to an end. No one would actually have a zombie as an actual member of the group roaming freely.
Sounds like he played you like a fiddle and manipulated you into letting your guard down. As for your "are you eternal enemies ? " A lot of players seem to think so based off of the type of player and how moral of a character they make but, so far it seems dependent on how you responded to him.
Thatās the problem, Keith seems to respect displays of strength or at least a fighting spirit, I imagine trying to find a peaceful resolution makes you look like a sheep for the slaughter in his eyes. Not to mention he threatened you in your own camp/home and drew guns on you which makes letting him go without fighting back or some form of retaliation makes you look weak as leader in front of your own group because you didnāt protect them from a threat that was in their own home.
I mean in my game where Iāve maxed out stats, not matter what Joe dies if I try to use him for research, or if used as a defense and we fight Keith.
Iām simply wondering whether Jim didnāt really mean to have Joe as a long term- member/ defense, or if it is simply that many choices lead to his death (again)
Uh I dont know about letting him play me like a fiddle, I simply want to see many paths and how our relationship will develop.
You can check my comments on the first thread, where me and other peeps like Steampunkninja were looking for the ābestā result (which I think now is Natalie dead, Benton hostage, or Wyatt, Benton and Natalie dead)
Iām not some sort of Keith fanatic-- this is the first run through where Iāve tried to be kind to Keith.
Also, what is your strategy (in you main playthrough) for dealing with Keith and others?
