End game viability: killing platforms and static defense VS fortress and dynamic defense

[TruculentTonka]

One thing I am curious about is the end game.
It seems that many players on YT build a horde night base that is essentially a killing platform. These are highly structured and minimalistic buildings that concentrate zeds to efficiently kill them using falls, electrocution, blade traps, darts, and pipebombs etc,...but that approach seems to me to be really quite boring after awhile.
I prefer dynamic defense where I have to go from point to point on my perimeter fortress if my traps and spikes did not complete their work. But I wonder if, as the hordes grow larger and larger and more and more destructive, will I be forced to build a killing platform to preserve my fortress? I dislike the idea of separate horde night and production bases.

Thoughts?

[MortVent]

there is also the elevated hatch base. Uses a raised up reinforced corridor with hatches set up to slow/stop them... I've been trying it out and it seems to work very well. And can even be spiced up with traps and other things.

It basically funnels them into a corridor that combined with the penetrator perk is insane good (plus with certain melee weapons you can hit them before they can reach you)

[igorjese]

Same here. One base, and "I'm making a stand there" - basically role playing.

It's usually a bunker at ground level, often I add a full defensive perimeter later on. Demolishers can be a big pain, especially if you play with big bloodmoon zed count (hard to snipe them in total chaos), so feel free to lower their explosion damage in xml.

[TruculentTonka]

Originally posted by igorjese:

Same here. One base, and "I'm making a stand there" - basically role playing.

It's usually a bunker at ground level, often I add a full defensive perimeter later on. Demolishers can be a big pain, especially if you play with big bloodmoon zed count (hard to snipe them in total chaos), so feel free to lower their explosion damage in xml.

Presently I have 3-4 rows of barbed wire encircling my fortress 10 tiles ou tfrom my walls (which are also encircled ) which does indeed slow down their charge, I just wonder if my sniping will be suffcient to preserve the fortress in mid/late game?

[Gwizzz]

Originally posted by TruculentTonka:

Originally posted by igorjese:

Same here. One base, and "I'm making a stand there" - basically role playing.

It's usually a bunker at ground level, often I add a full defensive perimeter later on. Demolishers can be a big pain, especially if you play with big bloodmoon zed count (hard to snipe them in total chaos), so feel free to lower their explosion damage in xml.

Presently I have 3-4 rows of barbed wire encircling my fortress 10 tiles ou tfrom my walls (which are also encircled ) which does indeed slow down their charge, I just wonder if my sniping will be suffcient to preserve the fortress in mid/late game?

If a cop sees you and does his vomit attack, it will corrode your barbwire pretty fast and open up a path though your perimeter. Try to snipe zed cops from as far away as possible.

[TruculentTonka]

Originally posted by Gwizzz:

Originally posted by TruculentTonka:

Presently I have 3-4 rows of barbed wire encircling my fortress 10 tiles ou tfrom my walls (which are also encircled ) which does indeed slow down their charge, I just wonder if my sniping will be suffcient to preserve the fortress in mid/late game?

If a cop sees you and does his vomit attack, it will corrode your barbwire pretty fast and open up a path though your perimeter. Try to snipe zed cops from as far away as possible.

Very useful tip. But I am beginning to wonder about the longevity of such a fortress.

[Shurenai]

Originally posted by TruculentTonka:

Originally posted by Gwizzz:

If a cop sees you and does his vomit attack, it will corrode your barbwire pretty fast and open up a path though your perimeter. Try to snipe zed cops from as far away as possible.

Very useful tip. But I am beginning to wonder about the longevity of such a fortress.

Ultimately, You can conceivably defeat every single horde, even up at max level, in an open field with your bare fists and enough skill and knowledge. Yes, killing corridors ARE one of if not the most efficient, pretty much hands down. But that doesn't mean other methods won't works/aren't viable.

Stop worrying about whether your desired base is viable- Go for it. Give it a try. Keep using it till it gets broken, and you'll have your answer; and you'll know how you could have done better for next time. It might set you back...but that's kindof the risk you're intentionally taking by not separating your fortress from your home- That exact risk of potential loss if your fortress fails is basically the whole reason you're NOT separating the two.

[TruculentTonka]

Yes, indeed. I am drawn to the RPG aspect of the all-in-one base. It is not only intuitive in such a setting but thrilling, and it certainly does amplify the risk/reward loop.

[Limdood]

with the change to zombie AI to make them seek out the most efficient path (rather than direct line approach), Bases end up more in-line with historical fortifications. Old-school fortresses didn't build in a field and evenly distribute their active defenses around the entire perimeter. That's really inefficient use of energy, since the enemy can concentrate their force ANYWHERE, and the defender has their energy spread all over. This is illustrated in 7DTD by bases that have barbed wire or traps around the ENTIRE perimeter of the base....95% of those defenses are useless, since as soon as the zombies clear a trap, it becomes the most efficient way and they all gravitate to that path.

Instead, historic defensive fortifications made the vast majority of their perimeter unusable and unapproachable. No one could get in or out the giant, fortified walls on a cliff surrounded by a moat. But since people DID have to get in and out of the fortification, some sort of path was needed, so those fortifications had (often only) a single gate that was the obvious entry/exit. That single point on the perimeter was the only place where it was FEASIBLE to attack or attempt to gain entry, so the defenders energy could also be concentrated on a single point. The concept of killboxes is literally as old as humans building fortifications. In 7dtd, its evidenced by bases with an "easy" approach...a clear path between the outside and the target (player). The zombies have an obvious and easy path, so they take it, and the player can concentrate their energy in the most efficient way possible, with every trap being utilized and every bullet counting.

The specifics of the base don't really matter, so long as they allow you to concentrate your energy where it will do the most good - and you can only do that if you can dictate where the enemy will be. That could be a complex, trap ridden all in one base with a gauntlet the zombies run to get to you, or it could be as simple as 2 ramps almost connected by a walkway that you jump between so you can at least control exactly what direction the zombies approach you from.

[↯Zindy⛦]

I argue fours sided bases do still work because the zombies dont all spawn in the same direction the whole blood moon, meaning a well designed dynamic base is still very efficient. In some ways I would argue actually a base with dynamic 4 sided defenses are MORE efficient than "kill corridors" or whatnot because you get more loot from more dead zombies. And if you can kill them as quickly as possible, getting the most zeds at once, that is gonna get you the most loot and exp. killboxes are therefore not as efficient as you have them all in the typical line where each one has to be picked off at a time, while the ones in front absorb all the bullets and such.

[Trooper Bri]

When I'm on 2-hour days building a new home base design, I want as much time as needed to gather resources, and save on ammo since I have a 30 minute horde. For those I will build a separate fancy pants efficient horde fighter. My SSP worlds rarely go past 120 days or so since I'm just building designs for fun.

One hour SSP worlds are just for on-the-fly survival with integrated bases or separate ones. Doesn't much matter. Depends on what catches my eye. And even these saves don't go much past 100 days. Either my horde fighter is effective enough to be sustainable and I quit. or it isn't and I die.

Regardless, after 2500 hours of play, I always spend less than 150 game days before starting over. I don't consider a lack of an "end goal" in a sandbox a failing by any means. For me it's an Etch-A-Sketch. Shake it up and start a new project.

[Supergoober]

Originally posted by Trooper Bri:

When I'm on 2-hour days building a new home base design, I want as much time as needed to gather resources, and save on ammo since I have a 30 minute horde. For those I will build a separate fancy pants efficient horde fighter. My SSP worlds rarely go past 120 days or so since I'm just building designs for fun.

One hour SSP worlds are just for on-the-fly survival with integrated bases or separate ones. Doesn't much matter. Depends on what catches my eye. And even these saves don't go much past 100 days. Either my horde fighter is effective enough to be sustainable and I quit. or it isn't and I die.

Regardless, after 2500 hours of play, I always spend less than 150 game days before starting over. I don't consider a lack of an "end goal" in a sandbox a failing by any means. For me it's an Etch-A-Sketch. Shake it up and start a new project.

I like the Etch-A-Sketch way to play. I've probably started over nearly as many times as I have hours in this game lol.

[TruculentTonka]

Originally posted by Limdood:

with the change to zombie AI to make them seek out the most efficient path (rather than direct line approach), Bases end up more in-line with historical fortifications. Old-school fortresses didn't build in a field and evenly distribute their active defenses around the entire perimeter. That's really inefficient use of energy, since the enemy can concentrate their force ANYWHERE, and the defender has their energy spread all over. This is illustrated in 7DTD by bases that have barbed wire or traps around the ENTIRE perimeter of the base....95% of those defenses are useless, since as soon as the zombies clear a trap, it becomes the most efficient way and they all gravitate to that path.

Instead, historic defensive fortifications made the vast majority of their perimeter unusable and unapproachable. No one could get in or out the giant, fortified walls on a cliff surrounded by a moat. But since people DID have to get in and out of the fortification, some sort of path was needed, so those fortifications had (often only) a single gate that was the obvious entry/exit. That single point on the perimeter was the only place where it was FEASIBLE to attack or attempt to gain entry, so the defenders energy could also be concentrated on a single point. The concept of killboxes is literally as old as humans building fortifications. In 7dtd, its evidenced by bases with an "easy" approach...a clear path between the outside and the target (player). The zombies have an obvious and easy path, so they take it, and the player can concentrate their energy in the most efficient way possible, with every trap being utilized and every bullet counting.

The specifics of the base don't really matter, so long as they allow you to concentrate your energy where it will do the most good - and you can only do that if you can dictate where the enemy will be. That could be a complex, trap ridden all in one base with a gauntlet the zombies run to get to you, or it could be as simple as 2 ramps almost connected by a walkway that you jump between so you can at least control exactly what direction the zombies approach you from.

Much of this is premised on the formidable problem-solving capacity of humans who tend to use the easiest approaches, though history is replete with unconventional strategies that were surprisingly effective, too.
Zeds are a different matter entirely since they lack all but the most basic problem solving abilities. As such, and when we consider the good points made by others (the random spawning sites, different attack vectors, etc), what I have come to notice is that I am getting zeds coming into my base from two of the four sides which seems to me to vindicate a wide dynamic defense (not to mention non-horde night indviduals or roamers coming from any direction) rather than the boring, dare I say 'lifeless'?, killing corridors. I know that this is mostly a personal choice in terms play-style, but the aesthetics and RPG factor are huge to me-I do not prefer a shooting range experience over dynamic defense.

Still, my ultimate concern is that defense system maintenance in a dynamic style of play will ultimately cost too much over the efficiency of a killing corridor approach.

[MiSFiT77]

Originally posted by ↯ℤ𝕚𝕟𝕕𝕪⛦:

I argue fours sided bases do still work because the zombies dont all spawn in the same direction the whole blood moon, meaning a well designed dynamic base is still very efficient. In some ways I would argue actually a base with dynamic 4 sided defenses are MORE efficient than "kill corridors" or whatnot because you get more loot from more dead zombies. And if you can kill them as quickly as possible, getting the most zeds at once, that is gonna get you the most loot and exp. killboxes are therefore not as efficient as you have them all in the typical line where each one has to be picked off at a time, while the ones in front absorb all the bullets and such.

Agree. The last 4 sided, traditional fort type base I built the Zs spawned on every side. First they'd probe the north wall, then the east, then the south, then the west and then the sun rose. This happened every single horde night until I got bored at day 140 plus. Now. It's true to say that they never made any significant breaches on the north wall before switching to the east, so it's plausible that if they had then they may have continued spawning North since a clear route in would have been established. But it does seem to me that the Zs do switch the direction they attack from if no significant progress is made.
This contradicts an earlier post above stating that 95% of your defences are idle for the whole of horde night. Obvs I can't say this is never the case, since I haven't built every concievable type of base. But for a big square fort, with built in pinch points on each wall, and identical defences on each wall it's not the case. My fort got tested on all four sides and therefore all 4 of my shotgun turrets where used, all 4 of my SMG turrets where used and all of my automated scrap guns where used (man I love scrap guns). All 4 main walls sustained minor damage and all 4 spike areas took much more damage, but heh that's what spikes are for right ?

[Graebeard]

In our games, we use a starter base to deal with Day 7, then as we acquire more resources, we design a horde base intended to need minimal repair. Once we accomplish that, it does get boring, so we either start a new game or design another base taking advantage of our increased skill levels.

During one such game, we were so well designed that we sat inside our innermost room and never fired a single shot. Our layering of various traps configured inside a maze wiped out the whole 49 day horde, and our sustained damage was repaired by noon of Day 50.

[TruculentTonka]

Originally posted by MiSFiT77:

Originally posted by ↯ℤ𝕚𝕟𝕕𝕪⛦:

I argue fours sided bases do still work because the zombies dont all spawn in the same direction the whole blood moon, meaning a well designed dynamic base is still very efficient. In some ways I would argue actually a base with dynamic 4 sided defenses are MORE efficient than "kill corridors" or whatnot because you get more loot from more dead zombies. And if you can kill them as quickly as possible, getting the most zeds at once, that is gonna get you the most loot and exp. killboxes are therefore not as efficient as you have them all in the typical line where each one has to be picked off at a time, while the ones in front absorb all the bullets and such.

Agree. The last 4 sided, traditional fort type base I built the Zs spawned on every side. First they'd probe the north wall, then the east, then the south, then the west and then the sun rose. This happened every single horde night until I got bored at day 140 plus. Now. It's true to say that they never made any significant breaches on the north wall before switching to the east, so it's plausible that if they had then they may have continued spawning North since a clear route in would have been established. But it does seem to me that the Zs do switch the direction they attack from if no significant progress is made.
This contradicts an earlier post above stating that 95% of your defences are idle for the whole of horde night. Obvs I can't say this is never the case, since I haven't built every concievable type of base. But for a big square fort, with built in pinch points on each wall, and identical defences on each wall it's not the case. My fort got tested on all four sides and therefore all 4 of my shotgun turrets where used, all 4 of my SMG turrets where used and all of my automated scrap guns where used (man I love scrap guns). All 4 main walls sustained minor damage and all 4 spike areas took much more damage, but heh that's what spikes are for right ?

I have also found that were I to simply stand at one corner of the fortress, most attacks would occur beneath me or along the two walls adjacent to the corner. Were I to move to another corner, generally the zeds follow. This means that we can essentially kite them along our defenses if we want to distribute the damage or keep them isolated at a specific point or walls.