Chickeninja

Members
  • Content count

    225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Chickeninja last won the day on March 6

Chickeninja had the most liked content!

About Chickeninja

  • Rank
    Volatile
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. So I checked, and while it can be chained indefinitely, a survivor can just keep hitting with 2 handed, and even with half damage, will eventually kill hunter. Works out of recovering from failed tackle and after missed pounce. Have also observed most active hunters to not be playing due to the flare situation. And again, instead of taking sides, I advocate more transparency in player control from both sides: a hunter should know the settings of the host b4 they decide to engage a game. For example, a survivor should have the choice of playing with one or two flares, and this choice should be visible to hunter. It's been a long time since I've been able to equalize a game, while taking care of prey level survivors, and showing them how to hold a lamp. For months, due to lock on flares and Nightmare mode, I usually always loose those games. Again, if folks want super-competitive games, they should be friends with similarly minded folks and play their heads and fingers off locking themselves in rooms, no problem. Pick the guys on Nightmare with a single flare, with survivors all clocking thousand or more hours. If a hunter takes on a challenge: normal mode with flare city => reward the hunter and/or grant him more resources, even in case of loss. If a survivor takes on a challenge, armed only with single flare on Nightmare against experienced hunter, then he should receive rewards and/or more resources in other ways as well, even if he looses. Globally, people should have the game informing them on their odds with invasions beyond the warning. And yeah, I know people are going to want to hurl insults at me, tell me to shut up and so I'm doing it myself: "Chicken shut up already, you're such a noob!" And that's fine because I can still have this opinion regardless. I am aware that my opinion is considered stupid by many, so no need for you to waste time posting, unless you can be constructive: I've insulted myself for you already. Too weak, too slow you guys.
  2. Ok and thanks for sharing. But you still have to look in the right direction of the next survivor without moving a step I guess, which makes it something for only advanced hunters in special situations. Given this, I think the move is fair in situations of 3 or 4 survivors. With 2 survivors in cramped space, I'd be less sure. Depends if it can be chained indefinitely. The claim that because something is possible, it's ok, would permit auto-crossbow and other nonsense. And really? Folks are using the grapple air jump to do DFAs and catching fast hunters such as yourselves? I'd have thought that move is too slow. Hope I can get back to playing soon again, and see what's going on. Take it easy guys.
  3. The 99.9% play for fun, hopefully understanding that they pay a commercial business for an immersive adult gaming experience. And in-game, sure: everybody is competitive, otherwise the concept of a game falls apart. But if people mistake in-game competitiveness for genuine competition and real stakes, then that can be bad for 'em because it's logically equivalent to not being able to tell the difference between their in-game inventory, accomplishments and their resources/accomplishments in life. I don't even see why you get defensive on this, as there's nothing wrong with that if you're pro-player in a context that genuinely rewards you. All glory to you then for the good work! If not, hopefully you at least have some fun. And no worries, mate: I'm not interested in squeezing the tackle out of you. But if you'd share it, I'd listen as I imagine anybody in the community would, as I indicated in the beginning of the thread. There is no I-don't-care facade here. But what do you expect? Applause? Ok, nice find and thanks for not telling us!
  4. This means Vallon knows how it's done, is holding that fact in everybody's face, and is not sharing it here... for whatever reason. But since Vallon has uncovered my purely selfish wants, I guess I'm cornered. And no, I do not play competitively. That would imply putting serious time and resources behind my game play, which just isn't in the cards because I don't see any real rewards: show me something more interesting than 50 Euro competitions held in shady, undefined circumstances, or lay out a competition yourself with proper arbitration, hotel accommodation, presence of devs as arbiters, and a proper prize fund. Something like that would reflect competitive play. Without some real world event and more robust build of the game, removing lag concerns, formalized standards and rules of play, proper standards of arbitration, competitive play is a game you play with yourself in your head. And no, I'm not dictating what mindset or approach folks should have to their games. But everybody that knows my playing habits online, as hunter or survivor, knows I'll play good survivors and get the chupacabra beaten out of me, and knows that I'll team up with anybody on a public open coop setting, including total prey beginners, and get beaten quite frequently by mediocre hunters. This game mode is an interesting interruption for me, but I control my game play and not the other way around. If I want competition in my game play, I'd play the games most suited for that. Techland isn't specialized in this area, so it is unreasonable to raise CS type of competitive expectations. Yes, I play casually for: the fun of the thing, for the funny folks one meets online, the cheap puns and bad jokes in conversations, the try-hard must win competitive types that insult all others because it makes 'em feel better about themselves... all of 'em.
  5. On PC, a friend invaded and was invisible as hunter to me as survivor. He showed up on the HUD, but when I turned, the icon would remain a fixed point and HUD became useless. I bring this one up because it happened before with other hunters, and survivors could plausibly interpret the hunter as cheating in such a scenario; that's what I thought anyway, when it first occurred to me. So we saw evidence to the contrary, it can happen by chance, unintentionally. We investigated and while he could damage me, I could slice into him (without seeing him in the game world, relying just on local landmarks) and nothing would happen.
  6. This is a community forum where we hopefully post for community's benefit. And that includes players of all levels, no matter username win screenshots. So coming here to tell folks that you're not going to tell them... Got to hand it to ya, man... Not bad. I mean if we're all really UFC, hard core, military, ninja, super soldier, zombie, super strong tough guys in reality guarding military secrets, then why are we playing zombie games on PC spamming keyboards? Whatever. So just another situational trick, like the DFA's from Spinoza with the grappling hook. Not something that can be milked for wins because it's too particular. Doesn't change the fact that tackle generally in 1v1 is not only op, but is evidence of insufficient game design and/or testing. Sure, some of us love "the unique Dying Light" experience, but to outsiders, tackling through nearly every object in the game world feels cheap and is evidence for poor quality.
  7. Even if Nuclearwolf's question is not posed to your satisfaction or isn't fair, I see no reason to throw this level of negativity around. And I say this as somebody who believes in self-defense in the absence of mods in most online situations. All that is needed, is to point out that the spam idea does not make much sense in context of this competitive multiplayer game mode, as its high reliance on tactics and live combat imply spamming moves on both sides. Can we blame a survivor for spamming melee attacks? Sure, such questions make little sense to people more familiar with the game mode but to suggest that the person asking a question should get a grip, is a troll, or insanely stupid is a bit heavy handed imho. Asking questions and giving feedback is what forums are for. Somehow fostering negativity with our "answers" is perhaps worse than posing invalid questions, as nobody needs extra negativity.
  8. Good post plus nice video. Thanks for posting. The level of play, particularly on survivor side, is above average though; these are experienced players playing together + we don't really know when the video was produced. There might already have been modifications through patches that address your concerns, such as molotov, bow, crossbow etc. because this is "an older vid" via the description. All I can tell immediately is that video is produced "post crossbow". And because these are all experienced guys, it is difficult to see how they've tweaked their playing styles to essentially do good teamwork WHILE AT SAME TIME deploying high number of high risk moves, such as exploding arrows and super molotovs. In the hands of normal survivors, using all these items together would get them killed. Everybody can check for themselves how easily super molotovs or exploding arrows can knock over or kill fellow survivors, which is a sign that the devs do care about survivors spamming those items carelessly. Watch your health bar when you expose yourself to a friends super molotov. Damage from friendly fire is so high/fast, that I've seen survivors start fights because some people use those items while others hate being damaged by them! The hunter also doesn't seem to get in many successful tackles, which makes me doubt a little whether the two sides are appropriately matched. And while many believe that only high level of play videos should be posted, this is a great example of how that kind of play will tend to confuse viewers without the experience: as you say, those survivors are OP, and I agree that it can look like item damage problem. But imho it's less the items and more the general level of experience + Hunter not using his resources to fullest extent, that make it look that way. And while there are a lot of things that need more care/fixing/testing in this mode, I'm not sure it's about damage of Molotovs, arrows etc.
  9. So victorious in the event implies survivor privilege with respect to hunter ranks... I don't know man... when I return back to Old Town tower, Brecken's, or a country safe zone after a day of hard work ridding our fair zombie world of volatile nests, what do I tell the kids? That I'm a mean Apex Predator now? Nah, when one of the kids says "I saw you DFA'd a top hunter today... you're so awesome..." I'll reply "there is no glory in violence kid; we're all just doing what we have to do to survive. Hopefully you'll live in a zombie city where you won't have to do such things just to get water from the river." And as Hunter, how can one, being the zombie, become a survivor of any sort? Zombies are dead, aren't they? Picture a zombie coming home from work to some nest, telling a Bomber, a Spitter, and a Goon: "Omg, you guys wouldn't believe what I had to go through today to survive... I am so glad to be alive as the ultimate survivor!"; and the spitter would reply "Aaarrrgh", and the goon would go in his super deep voice "Dude, you undead... don't mean you alive though because you get into some deep philosophy of mind stuff with that..." at which point the bomber randomly feels like teleporting super fast and exploding, so he does. And then the hunter puts on "Eye of the Tiger- will to survive type music" and does the moves? Is this punishment for the event loss or is he really enjoying it? I kid everybody though. Fun event and with the clarification of the switcheroo being due to survivor victory, indeed, survivors become hunters and vice versa. Ok, sleep should be easy tonight. All good.
  10. Many have noticed, although I haven't seen it reported here yet, that there seems to be an error displaying player rank b4 and after invasions, post event. Some folks playing as survivor have "Apex Predator" displayed in the post match tabs, while some invading hunters are billed as "Ultimate Survivors" while a new match loads. Some people who didn't take part in weekend event seem immune, but I haven't been able to verify that. Minor problem and doesn't bother me. But it does confuse folks that are really proud of their ranks, wins etc.
  11. Lol on that chat excerpt. Agree that its possible with more experienced players, as survivors have to be a perfect fortune tellers to know hunter's heading and location. Also agree that above 2v1 it gets tougher, as probability that somebody is facing hunter by chance is doubled. Whether such settings fit with normal game play would depend on lots of things, not least of which would be peoples' individual playing styles and preferences. Many prefer more live combat, which I can relate to, but I could definitely see it as its own modification of the game mode; not so much along the spectrum of normal to nightmare, but more as its own thing. Didn't have much time for it as it was holidays, but when I did, I definitely had a blast as hunter. More or less experience, wins or losses didn't really matter that much; I was too busy having fun trying to be sneakier.
  12. Hunter buddy of mine beat 4 survivors with everybody having hundreds of hours. Don't underestimate speed of entry and lack of information in any game setting. Correctly played, nobody knows what trajectory the approaching hunter will have. Hunter has to invest some time into learning range of a more limited survivor sense. It seemed like one street or block of houses to me. Thanks for the advice but the video is not intended to prove anything more than what worked for us. My point was, as you say, "once you are tracked..." so the focus became more a matter of stealth and observation. Running on the roofs is more because I am too lazy to gather footage and edit properly, but at some points I am trying to get out of range of their tracking.
  13. It is Christmas and while nobody really has time to edit or upload videos, much less fully explore a tweaked game mode, I can nonetheless offer 2 compressed games from hunter point of view for those of us interested in the possibilities of the thing. Hope you can get something out of this before the event ends. First off: if folks approach these modified settings from a background of playing styles that are aggressive, tactical, or relying heavily on high level techniques and forced combos ‘n sequences… You'll be disappointed because these games feature none of that. No genius combinations or moves, which seems to be the point. Because it's these types of -in your face- brawler anywhere- playing styles, particularly for hunters that seem to place them at a disadvantage in this weekend event because the tweaks: 1. No Howl 2. No Spit 3. No Tackle 4. (2) UV Block/Heal per life negate close range tactical abilities; the very mechanisms at the core of aggressive, confrontational playing styles. So far, I've seen a few hunters frustrated by looking for a fight, only to be overpowered close range by survivor arsenals/melee. On the other hand, more strategy oriented, ninja hide and attack playing styles seem to be rewarded, which is what I tried to show in the vid. To be blunt, a hunter just wanting to get into a fist fight with his tactical bag of tricks… with survivors wherever and whenever… is almost impossible given these settings. The only way for the hunter to retain his edge under these circumstances is to focus on the character's core advantage: speed. More similar to predators in the wild who observe from far away, then move in for the kill as fast as they can at the right moment. A Hunter who is one or two streets away from survivors is invisible! No direction is given by survivors' HUD and a hunter's initial trajectory into an encounter can therefore be hidden. Almost completely b4 he closes in. I dub it Ninja mode. And yeah, I too met some hunters that still had spits enabled, which is unfortunate as it tends to anger survivors. Some of these hunters seemed clueless about that fact though. My guess is that as cool as these changes are, with this awesome minimalist feel, that they won't be well received as many folks, hunters and survivors, love the aggressive, hack-and-slash, dominate your enemy style approaches, and it is a smaller audience that appreciates this kind of chess quality, where aggression and forcing sequences aren't enough and observation of the whole game world plays a role (yeah, tonight reminded me that this is an open world game...). This was fun and purer/closer to playing the game in the early days. Aside from the hunters that still had spits etc. the game also runs cleaner as there is less overall potential for bugs, or dropkick ground pound nonsense, losing frames etc. The play feels more direct. My two cents wrapped in Xmas paper. Anyways, seasonal greetings and best wishes.
  14. That'll be interesting no matter how it turns out, lol. Merry Christmas + Happy Hunting and Surviving!
  15. Sure, and yet a standard move that is common, should allow for evasive measures. Otherwise you reduce a game to a forced mechanism; e.g. spit smash you mention. And while some of these you can justify with extraordinary resource use on hunters' side, this move requires no such resources and network conditions coupled with high pace of the game lead to a lot of pounces that aren't deserved. The measures you sketch out would be nice for people to see as video, even if they imho suffer from being too highly advanced for everybody except veterans: who is this game for? I'm all for veterans getting a decent game play experience but calibrating the game towards high skill/wins exclusively will dry up the player base, with people increasingly realizing that to play a single decent game they have to invest some few hundred hours of losing in a buggy game world where every 3rd dropkick or Ground Pound doesn't connect. And veterans will get bored eventually with such state-of-affairs in tuning the game, simply because there will be less and less interesting matches to play. And therefore I cordially disagree on the quality of the game having increased since flare limitation: if quality increases for some small group putting in 100s of hunter hours, then intermediate level, casual players become a liability. I dislike the fact that I'd have to kick beginning or intermediate survivors from my game to give hunters a decent fight, and then wait a few long days for a game with high enough general skill to be considered "decent". That may convince try-hards that confuse accomplishment in games with the fun of the thing but that's not my playing style. This game has potential to be more fun for everybody while satisfying veterans. As a fan of the game, I've been eating losses from mediocre hunters for months because of this, while trying to offer beginners and intermediate players a good enough time to keep playing invasions. Therefore, from my point of view, quality of games have gone down since these changes, with the the games becoming more tactical in general, therefore more predictable and less interesting.