Which do you prefer? A16 or A18?

[Llinx (Bassa)]

I have tried to get back into 7D on A18 but unfortunatly I'm really not feeling it.

On A16 you ran around to gain your athletics skill ( no ridiculous perk needed). You can craft a forge immediatly. No large weird square chunks of land on random gen worlds, No floating buildings..

For me as a role player on 7D, A16 wins hands down. No digging zombies. Great for those of us that made underground bases.

A18 is too much '7 days of perks' more than '7 days to die'. I know the devs are proud of their new build and said ' We think this will bring you back to the game'. No.. it wont. I play A16 on and off. I say off because It's a dead version that will never be updated, so for me 7D is like a dead game.

I miss 7D but I can't play what I don't enjoy. How I wish they had just introduced new weapons and veichles but left the perk system well alone.

Maybe, just maybe, if they lose this perk crap perhaps I may come accross a version in later builds that is almost similar to the great A16 build.

Until then... I will really miss 7 Days to Die..

Today is not a good day.

[Sinbad]

Are you still playing a16 or done completely? Alot of what you mentioned can be completed through mods which are available. There is one that gives you speed bonus through cardio perk - along with modifying other perks to give a16ish bonuses, one that lets you pickup any workbench, forge, chem station or mixer found in the world through a wrench, and one for no dig damage for zombies. Its not official TFP items but theres also plenty of large mods for added weaponry.

There is a third party program, nitrogen, that adds more customization than a16 ever could with their random gen maps not to mention 16k sizes.

Adding mods takes little effort and can change the game in so many ways.

edit: From the title i thought it was a version debate not another person coming here to say they dont like the game

[𝔇ave]

Played over a thousand hours of a16 and loved it but I would never go back to it. For me...a18 is 10 times the game a16 was.

[Azure]

a18.

[Green777]

No brainer a16, due to the large maps no cost to ram no massive wait time etc etc Only players who think a18 is better are those with massive powerful computers so do not get many of the issues through unity

[FT]

Originally posted by Green777:

No brainer a16, due to the large maps no cost to ram no massive wait time etc etc Only players who think a18 is better are those with massive powerful computers so do not get many of the issues through unity

I can play a18 on a system with 8gb RAM just fine, but RAM is cheap so now I have 16gb just in case.
Wait times aren't too bad in my opinion (it takes roughly 10seconds to get into the game and another 35seconds to load into a map/save...about 45seconds from desktop to playing).
I'm not having issues with a18 and my PC is built from medium/low-end new parts, totaling less than $500.

A18.1exp even runs surprisingly well on my nearly 10year old potato which was cheap back when I built it. Though its crappy ATI hd6770 GPU struggles at higher resolutions, in that situation a GPU upgrade to pretty much anything stronger than an integrated APU graphics would be a big improvement.

[RasaNova]

Originally posted by Green777:

No brainer a16, due to the large maps no cost to ram no massive wait time etc etc Only players who think a18 is better are those with massive powerful computers so do not get many of the issues through unity

I think a18 is better, and my 5 year old system is hardly a powerhouse. i5-4690, 16gb ram, gtx970 gives me 40-60 fps with settings on high. I do get the occasional crash but otherwise I'm happy enough with performance for an unoptimized beta, and once I got over the initial learning curve of all the changes, there's no going back.

[NocternalDaze]

Originally posted by Green777:

No brainer a16, due to the large maps no cost to ram no massive wait time etc etc Only players who think a18 is better are those with massive powerful computers so do not get many of the issues through unity

That is not quite true i only have a measly i5 4440 cpu with 16gb ram and a gtx 960 4gb and have no issues playing a18. Ok i have most options turnt off or set to low apart from textures that i have set to full and happily get 70-80 fps in towns and 100 fps in the wild.

[Computing/ELF]

A18

[Ogami]

A18 without a doubt. A16 made me quiet the game, A18 brought me back.

[Gut Instinct]

A15 ( as i never played 16 as it was terrible , and 18 isn't much better)

[Snikur]

a16

[Lord Hawkeye]

Whatever the current alpha is. Every alpha has been a step forward as a whole in some way. No alpha has been perfect, that much no one is claiming, but the game continues to get better. It is why I don't bother looking back with rose-tinted glasses.

[Steg79]

I'm enjoying a18, game has progressed a lot graphics and zombie model wise.

I play with blood moon off, don't like a mystical horde that knows your location, prefer a more walking dead type of game.

What I do miss are the random wandering hordes from the old alphas, could be building a base then hear the shuffling of feet.

The hordes were quite large too. You could then decide whether to engage them or stay hidden if possible.

For me it felt better, also couldn't just run into a town early on as there would be too many zombies around.

[Sharkbait]

Hopped into A16.4 to check it out. Can say that I'm not able to go back ever. A18 I can have everything set to max and have 70 - 100+ FPS. A16.4 I had like 30-40 on low.
The progress they've made is amazing and I would never be able to return to A16.4.

[OzHawkeye]

Originally posted by Dave:

Played over a thousand hours of a16 and loved it but I would never go back to it. For me...a18 is 10 times the game a16 was.

This. A18 > all others.