Why do you did this location?

[SergSV]

When I came into this location I thought it will be as usually.

But after the 10th wave of faceless I had suspect

[LightningMonk]

I forgot to bring this up, thanks for doing it before me though. The developers seemed to have changed the Core City Faceless blockade into an area where they endlessly spawn rather than having a finite amount like in the previous build. If this area is anything like it was in the last build, it leads to nowhere. My assumption was that it just supposed to be a challenge area or that they meant the blockade to be a more dangerous area than it previously was.

You do bring a few good points. This makes it a viable classic exp farming point than last time. When bodies pile up that much, targeting and looting becomes very difficult because you can't get your cursor to distinguish between myriad of bodies and enemies. The amount of places that might happen in a playthrough is few, but it is an annoyance.

[Wildan]

Scenes like this make me wish that enemies could switch areas just like the player.

[UnLimiTeD]

Yeh.
Alternatively, just move them slightly back, and have a sniper on script trigger so that if you venture forth enough, you at least need to get rid of him.
@OP: The scene is more or less meant as a rather obvious "you shall not pass".
Saying that the area is blockaded hasn't, in the past, stopped players from wiping it, thanks to legacy metal armour with 100% damage mitigation.
It's a lot better than just making it unreachable.

[Elhazzared]

I'm not sure if I agree with that to be honest. making a player waste his time and his resources on something that cannot be done seems a lot worse to me than just making the area unreachable.

[UnLimiTeD]

Then they need to make the faceless stronger, so you always die, instead of 95% of the time.   
In the same vein that you can threaten the Faceless Leader for absolutely no chance of success, players should invest some common sense.
Unreachable areas are stupid. Imagine a Hack'n'Slash where the game would tell you "That area is 2 Levels above you, you cannot enter". I'd feel insulted if I got that.

[Wildan]

I'm not sure if I agree with that to be honest. making a player waste his time and his resources on something that cannot be done seems a lot worse to me than just making the area unreachable.

It's the players own fault if he doesn't use common sense here. After a few faceless waves any sane Underrail dweller would take one step back (in this case quite literally) and get the hell out of there. I'd certainly have nothing against it if the game would punish "I'm the hero" mentality more harshly. Take the game The Age of Decandece for example, playing an all slaying hero usually gets you killed, in some cases the game doesn't even give you the opportunity to raise your weapon but kills you trough one, two text-lines.

[UnLimiTeD]

Age of Decadence is way awesome.
It is a bit more hardcore than Underrail, though.

[Fenix]

Man, you are a man. ) Kudos to your tenacity!

I'm not sure if I agree with that to be honest. making a player waste his time and his resources on something that cannot be done seems a lot worse to me than just making the area unreachable.

Well, I should agree here with you.
It would be better if that would be very HARD, but passable area, like you have 1% to succeed.
It doesn't mean, that it should be done at all cost, just "it would be nice if".
After all, all that need resource to do this.

Also - I remember Blades of Avernum, first scenario from three. There was dragon in first part, that shouldn't be killed, but I actually managed to do it, and that was very satisfaying, like posting pics of it on forum. )))

[Elhazzared]

Common sense would say that if Ican kill them all then I should be able to pass. Common sense would dictate that there is no such thing as an infinite number of enemies, eventually you'd have killed the entire faction if needed be.

Common sense doesn't apply to games however. This is right, it's a case of balance. Balance comes first to common sense, reality or whatever you want to call it.

If an area is not supposed to be able to be breached for balance issues or maybe just to fit with the story line then option A. You cannot travel there. Option B. Traveling there gives you an instant death, the kind that the player knows that there is absolutly nothing he can do to get past it.

What you don't do is give the player the hope that if he manages to kill enough enemies he'll get through because many players will try it and end up frustated that the game blantantly disrespected their time and efforth.

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, then solution:
In the middle, put an Assault walker with visibly impenetrable shields.

[Elhazzared]

I'd be fine with that really. If it's clear you can't destroy it you are not going to waste your time doing it and it also will feel much better. You know what you are up to something that you can only destroy with a similar kind of firepower which you obviously don't... or by doing some quest.

[Styg]

Scenes like this make me wish that enemies could switch areas just like the player.

That was actually considered at some point. I hope Styg has not abandoned the idea completely.

I have. At least for this game.

[UnLimiTeD]

Why don't these faceless have active shields btw?
And on a related note, instead of a siege bot, maybe an area shield booster something?

[SergSV]

well, one year is gone, and I see nothing is changed