Author Topic: Sneaking  (Read 1450 times)

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2017, 07:48:52 AM »
Kevin Granade, I mean that game too easy now (not becouse lack of content). Just play at the night, and if you do everything right, nobody can kill you, but you still be able to loot all types of buildings, becouse you don't need light to see something even in the cellar without windows (this is also very stupid thing). Restricting FoV is good way to revive day-gameplay and for more dangerous night-gameplay, also I think this will make game more harder. Maybe only I think so, but game really is too easy for me (with any types of settings and starting conductions). Maybe only for me.

You can make this like on/off function, if you want. Just think about it. If you think what this is stupid idea - this is your choice.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2017, 07:53:08 AM by Sayurime »

Offline Alkheemist

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #31 on: October 22, 2017, 04:37:42 PM »
If you want to increase difficulty, making it harder to play the game isn't the way to go. Restricting FOV will just mean people have to manually scan the environment, instead of the current implementation where the survivor scans the surrounds automatically. Because, y'know, they don't want to be jumped and you can easily look in every direction in the span of 6 seconds.

The counter to night raiding was supposed to be shady zombies, and adding FOV doesn't really make night raiding any more difficult because without any lighting gear you can still only see a few tiles without night vision. And if you think that FOV will allow zombies to sneak up on you, shady zombies are invisible until 1 tile away in very dark conditions.

If you're looking for a challenge, try playing CDDA totally blindfolded. You can still interact with the world though adjacent tiles, but since the game lacks map memory you'll have to get really good at recognising all the walls you bump into to navigate. Bonus points if you put on noise cancelling headgear too.

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2017, 05:51:26 AM »
Restricting FOV will just mean people have to manually scan the environment, instead of the current implementation where the survivor scans the surrounds automatically.
So this doesn't mean that you will need to be more attentive and that you will get punishment if not? I disagree with you. Restricted FoV - this is realistic feature, so that not just "hard to play" thing.

And if you think that FOV will allow zombies to sneak up on you, shady zombies are invisible until 1 tile away in very dark conditions.
Nah, this stupid zombies - can't do anything serious, unless there is a hundred of them around you. In zombie apocalypse zombie has only quantitative advantage, not brains. But they also can come to you from behind (that always happens in normal zombie world) and kill you, if you are not attentive enough. This is in my imaginary zombie world. But when you have 360 degrees of FoV and only one or two zombies, that at same time can see you at the night  and try to attack - what can happen at all? Nothing serious, at least with me. Never.

If you're looking for a challenge...
I'm looking for interesting gameplay, not a gameplay for preschoolers, which is enough for me for 1 hour. IMHO.

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #33 on: October 23, 2017, 06:52:22 AM »
So this doesn't mean that you will need to be more attentive and that you will get punishment if not?

It means that - but in the worst possible way. It would make the whole thing very tedious, to the point where all the attempted realism would be lost because looking around would be too much work.
Realism is only actually realism when it produces realistic effects. If a "realistic" feature makes everyone act less realistically, it was never realistic in the first place.

I have recently played a game that did restricted FoV angle really well - Darkwood. The problem is, it's not possible to translate this to DDA due to control scheme differences and turn based vs real time.
So the best we'd get would be some copy of DF or UW mechanics. And those would SUCK here due to crafting, reloading, enemy AI, limitations on provided information ("you hear footsteps" - rabbit's or hulk's?) and so on.
Not saying they don't suck in DF or UW, just that they would surely suck here.

IRL, if you want to look around, you turn your head from side to side. This is completely intuitive and thus not tedious. In the game this would require manually looking around, making the characters act less realistically when they don't do that, which would be most of the time.
IRL, if you wanted to say, rip apart a t-shirt while making sure nothing ambushes you, you'd look up every now and then and scan the area for threats, or put your back against the wall and lift the shirt to the air so that you see everything in front of you. The former is already simulated (the only thing that would need to change would be some perception roll penalty), the latter one would be much, much more tedious in the game than in real life, so it would be anti-realistic to make people avoid doing it in the game.

So limited angle FoV is certainly nowhere as simple to do non-badly as it seems. And so far no one provided a brilliant idea to fix the massive problems that would come with it.

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #34 on: October 23, 2017, 07:33:35 AM »
So limited angle FoV is certainly nowhere as simple to do non-badly as it seems. And so far no one provided a brilliant idea to fix the massive problems that would come with it.
K, I agree with a lot things that you say. But ordinary zombie can come from behind and kill you, if you will don't hear him, right? This happen in most times when survivors dies, with another case, when the survivor was driven into corner. This is two ways how normal man can actually die from zombie. So how this frist way can be implemented into the game without angles? With sneaking like skill and perception? This is will work and look even more stupid than angels, think about it.

I have recently played a game that did restricted FoV angle really well - Darkwood. The problem is, it's not possible to translate this to DDA due to control scheme differences and turn based vs real time.
But this will be the best choice if you want to do well, not somehow. Anyway UW have angels and also turn-based, no?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 07:52:18 AM by Sayurime »

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2017, 09:05:06 AM »
But ordinary zombie can come from behind and kill you, if you will don't hear him, right?

Not really. Currently you could be woken up by a zombie bite and would spring up into action and fight it back.
Zombies aren't good at assassination - they just hit things. Even if there was a major penalty for being surprised, most zombies couldn't utilize it well. Hulks and predators could, but hulks are huge and loud and both of those zombie types are rare.
The worst thing that can happen is a NPC headshotting you. NPCs can use that extra time to aim, so they do benefit from sneaking. But it's a terrible thing for gameplay to be insta-killed like that.

Anyway UW have angels and also turn-based, no?

Yes, but UW has very little creatures, buildings, scavenging, city exploration and so on. You don't peek around corners in UW, you don't drive vehicles, you don't look through clouds of smoke or goo on your eyes.
The problems that are tiny in UW would be huge here.

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2017, 09:44:59 AM »
Not really. Currently you could be woken up by a zombie bite and would spring up into action and fight it back.
I mean that this can happen in normal world. Like I said:
This happen in most times when survivors dies, with another case, when the survivor was driven into corner. This is two ways how normal man can actually die from zombie.

So zombies are not dangerous at all. They can't do anything to kill you, unless there is a lot of them and you are lost legs and brain. They are just useless. Avoid hulks and predators and game will be casual. Right? You don't think, after this, that game too easy, if you can own everything without anything? And please don't say that angles are not solve this problem, becouse this is only first step to make creatures more deadly and game more harder.

I can explain why I started this discussion with angles, if you want. But reason is very simple and I think you know it.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 09:50:07 AM by Sayurime »

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2017, 10:16:06 AM »
So zombies are not dangerous at all. They can't do anything to kill you, unless there is a lot of them and you are lost legs and brain.

Introducing annoying limitations to vision will surely not make zombies dangerous if they have problems killing a sleeping player.

And please don't say that angles are not solve this problem, becouse this is only first step to make creatures more deadly and game more harder.

But it has to be said. Angles aren't a solution to this problem.
Angles can be introduced as the last step, certainly not the first one. If your solution relies on first introducing the angles and then figuring out what to do later, you don't have a solution at all.
And even if angles somehow were relevant to the solution, you haven't explained how, other than "sometimes zombies could sneak up on you", which is a very shallow explanation that doesn't account for how the gameplay would look with angled FoV and how players could prevent zombies sneaking up on them.

Offline Alkheemist

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #38 on: October 23, 2017, 10:59:24 AM »
Unless you're batman, turning your head and checking your surroundings every six seconds is trivial.

Consider gameplay if FOV is a requirement:
  • Walking around, you have to constantly hit up and down to check your surroundings. If this doesn't decrease your speed by a third, it is still 3 times more keypresses per distance travelled
  • While looting, you have to check the "List all items" menu up to eight times, just to see what's in the same room as you
  • In your base, you have to keep all your crafting components in view and have your back in a corner

This doesn't make the game harder, it makes it more tedious. You want a game that is difficult, not difficult to play. But even then, if you implement FOV for the player, then you'll also be implementing it for monsters (otherwise there's no point reason for the PC to have limited FOV). This makes night raiding easier, since you only aggro less than half of the zombies that would normally detect you but have their back turned.

Difficulty will come from more specials and mechanics, not from limiting player view and increasing tedium. If we really want to implement angles, the one case I would say it makes sense is when aiming with a high magnification optic, since you'll be more focused on your target and less aware of your surroundings.

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #39 on: October 23, 2017, 11:01:31 AM »
Angles can be introduced as the last step, certainly not the first one. If your solution relies on first introducing the angles and then figuring out what to do later, you don't have a solution at all.
Agree with you here. I only try to say that only way to do good sneaking system is angles. Not a skills, random rolls and same trash.
And even if angles somehow were relevant to the solution, you haven't explained how, other than "sometimes zombies could sneak up on you", which is a very shallow explanation that doesn't account for how the gameplay would look with angled FoV and how players could prevent zombies sneaking up on them.
Look Project Zomboid and there is no need for explanation. This is 3D game but essence is same. Game is positioned as survival, which implies a certain realism (unless stated otherwise) and realism is not about 360 degrees radar on your head, so you don't need to look around and be careful.
If you think that angles not make game harder but boring - ok. This is your position, but I think that this borings things, that needs to be done, are the key to make player responsible for the mistakes, even if they happens once per game. How to make these mistakes more deadly - different story.

This doesn't make the game harder, it makes it more tedious. You want a game that is difficult, not difficult to play.
Most of things that you said sounds for me like "Oh, why I need to look around in real life? This make my life boring and take my time. I need radar and sonar and picture from satellite in my head". You can't see what's behind you. This is at least stupid and then cheating.
But even then, if you implement FOV for the player, then you'll also be implementing it for monsters (otherwise there's no point reason for the PC to have limited FOV).
Yes, and this make the opportunity to pass most of zombies unnoticed during the day, if they will have some wandering AI.
This makes night raiding easier, since you only aggro less than half of the zombies that would normally detect you but have their back turned.
Night gameplay - this is just an huge unbalanced thing. We will not talk about it.
Difficulty will come from more specials and mechanics, not from limiting player view and increasing tedium. If we really want to implement angles, the one case I would say it makes sense is when aiming with a high magnification optic, since you'll be more focused on your target and less aware of your surroundings.
Ok. Ok. I half disagree with you, reason in third paragraph of this reply.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 11:29:57 AM by Sayurime »

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #40 on: October 23, 2017, 11:28:22 AM »
I only try to say that only way to do good sneaking system is angles. Not a skills, random rolls and same trash.

Roguelikes typically solve it with skills and rolls and it works better that way. Brogue, Sil, Crawl, Forays into Norrendrin - all have workable stealth in the form that could be introduced here.

Look Project Zomboid and there is no need for explanation.

Project Zomboid is a completely different game that relies on real time and delayed insta-kills. That example doesn't really answer any questions and doesn't offer any possible course of action to make workable stealth in a turn-based game with no insta-kills (other than headshots).
That turn based part is absolutely vital here. Being able to scan the area with a mouse is totally fine as a requirement in a real time game, in DDA a mouse support can't even be guaranteed.

Offline Sayurime

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #41 on: October 23, 2017, 11:47:46 AM »
Roguelikes typically solve it with skills and rolls and it works better that way. Brogue, Sil, Crawl, Forays into Norrendrin - all have workable stealth in the form that could be introduced here.
Ye, but I just hate this systems. They works well but is just stupid.
Project Zomboid is a completely different game that relies on real time and delayed insta-kills. That example doesn't really answer any questions and doesn't offer any possible course of action to make workable stealth in a turn-based game with no insta-kills (other than headshots).
I said: "how to make these mistakes more deadly - different story". But if you want here is: you can be grabbed by something from behind and bitten in the neck or head, recive a lot of damage, bleeding and etc. This is different story about how to make this more intresting, but with rolls and skills - this at least will look stupid.
That turn based part is absolutely vital here. Being able to scan the area with a mouse is totally fine as a requirement in a real time game, in DDA a mouse support can't even be guaranteed.
Just front and back sight will be enough. This is not about a lot of microcontrol and mouse required.


Okay. I see. You all think that this is stupid, boring idea which can't be realised. Fine, I shut up.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 11:55:10 AM by Sayurime »

Offline §k

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #42 on: October 23, 2017, 11:54:57 AM »
How about my idea of camouflage based sneaking? It's completely dice-free.

Also, driving an 8 wheeled military composite armored deathmobile with periscope is the ultimate sneaking.

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #43 on: October 23, 2017, 12:26:42 PM »
Okay. I see. You all think that this is stupid, boring idea which can't be realised. Fine, I shut up.

If you somehow managed to bring up anything new to the table that would somehow fix the massive glaring flaws with the whole idea, it could work.
But so far you keep bringing up examples that you don't describe more than "zombies will somehow sneak up on you", while not having anything to say about the giant problem of having to manually look around, which makes the whole thing way less sensible than skill rolls - both when it comes to game design and making the whole thing realistic.

How about my idea of camouflage based sneaking? It's completely dice-free.

It's similar to my attempted implementation (a year ago or so).
My idea was that everything has a visibility multiplier: creatures around 0.5 (similar to ranged size), "tall" terrain (walls) 1.0, flat terrain something lower (possibly even less than creatures), vehicles something in between.
This visibility multiplier would essentially be a multiplier on range from which the object can be spotted, assuming all other visibility calculation elements remain constant.

Offline §k

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
    • View Profile
Re: Sneaking
« Reply #44 on: October 23, 2017, 04:00:44 PM »
That's realistic. How would it display? Would distant wall appear on unseen black space because the ground is less visible? That would look strange but actually quite realistic when we project 3D view to 2D display. Probably we can get used to that.