MechaJjang

Revives In Pvp; Yay Or Nay?

Recommended Posts

I would suggest the removal of revives from invasion mode.

 

By all means keep it in normal non pvp co-op play but with the current state of unbalance in Pvp I think it adds an extra level of difficulty that is totally unneeded and in essence gives the survivor a get out of jail free card in terms of life count.

 

Many times in regards to 3v1 and 4v1 (where survivors actually stick together and know how to play which I much prefer) i find myself taking out all but one player then either forced into retreat by low health or killed by the flailing 5m melee range of the last survivor with about 25 health themselves left.

 

Only for the last survivor to then pick up their fallen comrades and lose precisely 0 lives in total. I don't feel that rewards good play at all, especially as the odds are stacked in the survivors favour already. In my opinion, killed should mean killed not lying on the floor revivable.

 

I understand that there are many other issues that need resolving but they are covered in other posts.

 

Just for those who will question it. No, I don't want NH to win every time nor is it impossible to overcome but often it is the difference between winning and losing a good 3 or 4 on 1 battle, and as I said shouldn't killed mean a life taken from the counter, seems very generous not to be.

 

My only suggestion other than removing it would be to keep it but dock a life from the life count for every revive.

This would still give the survivors a tactical advantage if they played skillfully but would remove what I consider to be the unfair aspect of not being penalised for being killed.

 

What are other players thoughts on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say remove it but lower the revive count from 30 seconds to like 15. This will make the gameplay a little more fast pace as there will be a sense of urgency opening them up to mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't considered that but it's a good suggestion. I still think it would still give them a rather unfair advantage though as it still doesn't hit the life counter providing they are revived but it would be a vast improvement on the forever to die 'killed' survivor.

 

Good players would just sit one person back while harassing you with the free man in order to pick them up faster still resulting in a 'killed' having no impact on the life counter after what is always a hard earned kill against good Survivors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that 30s downed timer is excessive. There's a good chance that someone who died in fight can resurrect come back and bring back to life a guy downed in the same fight. This happened to me several times already.

Edited by Cypeq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that also happens far more frequently than i'd like to myself basically makes it 5 or 4 on 1 in that scenario.

 

And anyone who butts in with you should have finished them off by then. We are talking about good Survivors so you'll be lucky not to constantly have a UV light on you keeping your energy at 0 until you tackle what should be the last guy but isn't in that scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think lowering the revive counter is a smart idea. Taking it out does seem counterproductive to the whole teamwork aspect, but 15 seconds is more than fair. It gives the Night Hunter more opporrunities to stall the other Human(s) and force the other to bleed out, and creates a greater sense of urgency to revive, rather than still attack the Hunter.

Not gonna lie, though; I had a ballin' time last night using downed Humans as bait. Just hop up to a roof, spit some UV Spit down as he begins the revive animation, and get a two-for-one special. :3

 

EDIT: Spelling

Edited by DoctorPurrington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It`s an important co-op feature and it wont be removed I`m afraid.

My idea was to make one revival as a half of a kill for example.

I fully agree that reviving counter should be lowered.

Also it should take longer in BTZ to revive a player (fear factor).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It`s an important co-op feature and it wont be removed I`m afraid.

My idea was to make one revival as a half of a kill for example.

I fully agree that reviving counter should be lowered.

Also it should take longer in BTZ to revive a player (fear factor).

 

i agree with half a kill and longer revive but not lower countdown 

 

i love using players as bait to chain kill guys (got 2 guys down to 3 lives chaining it off a leapfrog they didnt realise)

 

as long as it slowly drains there lives with revives it would be fairer 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 Seconds is too generous. I think it should be reduced to 15 seconds. and take 10 seconds to revive a downed survivor.

 

This will require more skill and planning from the Survivors.

 

 

Having said that: I would gladly accept Techland Introducing a test phase via Tuning Files. And monitor the analytics of how games play out.

Edited by Chaos_Deception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies.

 

Given the responses how about reducing the time to 20s. This should still give some decent time for baiting but shouldn't be so long that the first dead survivor can get back when there are 3 or 4 survivors.

 

If that is combined with increasing the revive time to 5s and also docking half a life for each revive (also combined with the downed survivor having a max of 20s (I.E. They can die mid revive if the reviving survivor reaches them after 15s (15 + 5 to revive))

 

Then that could add the element of skill to the survivors side. Keep the skill of baiting for NH side and also sufficiently punish survivors for being downed in the first place.

 

Aside from the mid revive possible death which may be a bit excessive. What do you think? And what are the thoughts on a possible mid revive death. Too much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the half life penalty is a little harsh as well as dying mid revive. I would substitute that for an evolve like revive system where you can only be revived a limited number of times. Each time you come back your next revive time is shortened (borderlands). After your last revive you just die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd disagree they did have to die in the first place and it is also unlike borderlands in 2 crucial ways;

 

1. I'm talking purely about pvp and in borderlands there is no group pvp only 1 on 1 duels thus meaning the only one disadvantaged is the cpu in borderlands whereas in DL a human player would get nothing for downing someone.

 

2. You have the option of a second wind as they call it in borderlands even in single player. In DL you just die in single player no second chances and a reduction on your survivor experience, so not only is pvp lacking the immediate death (which therefore means it's already a buff/benefit) it also lacks any true penalty which benefits the NH pvp player.

 

So i'm persuaded that removing revive all together would somewhat defeat the co-op element but on the other hand it needs to be punished in some way according to the life counter or the NH doesn't get anything for what in 4 and 3 vs 1 is killing the majority of the team if the last person manages to revive them.

Removing all their lives is the only way the NH can end the game after all.

 

Whereas the survivors already have twice as many lives as nests. So I think it would be fair to implement the half life penalty given that assuming good team play you could still be downed 19 times and still be going. (Assuming no successful pounces which let's face it are incredibly rare in 4 and 3 vs 1 due to all the UV lights, their sniper like range, the ability to sense the NH and the need to have full energy to do them. (All assuming survivors know what they are doing.))

 

It might also encourage survivors not to split up one/two to attack NH and other to kill nests as if they get downed it's still taking away from the life count and thus the time they gave to finish nests.

 

If they still attack the NH at least the NH player will get some benefit for downing 1 of their hunters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No no I'm not comparing the game to borderlands I'm saying take from borderlands like the evolve idea I mentioned. In borderlands each time you die you get less time to be revived. This adds a hefty penalty to getting downed which would otherwise offer no consequence. Evolve has a penalty on being revived too much as well by way of limited revives (and you come back with less health each time). This keeps hunters from never having to fear death and launch endless assaults on the monster.

 

What this game lacks that penalties for continuously being downed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. I can understand that I just mean the way DL plays out is different so those 2 games styles so wouldn't transfer well to DL.

 

For example.

In Evolve the NH version (the monster) you can scale up your moves in session by levelling by evolving after eating monsters. You will even at the start of the game be more powerful in all things except teamwork than the hunters (survivors) which is part of the reason why they get the benefit of reduced health per respawn, so they don't just get wiped straight away but there are more important different aspects.

 

Mostly that the hunters (survivors) actually have to hunt the monster because they can't magically know its location using survivor sense only by footprints/tracks and the disturbance of the ingame wildlife. There is also a dedicated medic class in Evolve plus shield abilities on certain characters so you really shouldn't be dying often and make it totally different to the setup in DL.

 

Also because it's much easier to take down a single hunter (survivor) player in Evolve it is not punished as much, the monster once dead also doesn't respawn and once dead the game end unlike in DL. So I don't think that kind of style would be effective.

 

In DL the act of killing a survivor is a far harder task. You can't just run in Gung Ho or you will get destroyed and you are far more likely to be killed as the NH (which is why you can respawn).

So transferring to that system would just mean you'd have to totally change the current death counter and it wouldn't really make it any easier for the NH, it's not like we're going in with melee attacks trying to take out your health bit by bit. The attacks for NH are basically distraction/tactical, really low power melee or one hit kill. Yes there are tackle and ground pound, but miss with a single one of those (and with tackle survivors have a ridiculously easy counter anyway) against 3 or 4 vs 1 and you are dead and bye bye 1 nest of 5 in respawn time, so the lower health would have little impact to the overall gameplay unlike in the two other games where it works well because of the different relationship between hunter and hunted and the different movesets.

 

Constantly being downed would be punished by the method taken from the suggestions already as you could only be downed 19 times (with no pounces) until your next down was game over. That is still being rather generous to the survivors I think but would account for skilled NH and also skilled survivors who currently aren't really bothered about being downed with teammates around as they can be revived for no time/death counter penalty.

 

The limiting overall health option I don't think is going to stop survivors caring without changing the death system to be exactly the same which would be rather unfair on the developers as it would be a lot of work which, I think, could be solved with a few tweaks to the current system rather than a total overhaul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but I'm not talking about overhauling the current system and making it exactly like those games. I understand they are different games. My point is looking at how they handle being constantly revived. Like evolve or borderlands limit the amount of times you can be revived on one life, either by giving a limited amount of revives or by decreasing the counter each time making it more difficult to be rescued. This imo would be much more forgiving than losing half a life every time you get downed as that can be a very cheap hit and run tactic for the hunter resulting in easy wins.

 

Also I'm not suggesting lower health each time I was just pointing out an example. Survivors with infinite health packs and common sense will never be bothered by something like that.

Edited by jcks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in essence they should be allowed to be downed more than the 20 times in total before their 10 lives are gone which is the highly generous version that was suggested?

 

I don't think survivors really need anything that's more forgiving than that.

The point still stands that the systems you are pointing to are from games that run entirely different concepts so I don't think importing their revive systems in any form would improve the gameplay balance.

 

In regards to either of the suggestions limiting amount of revives or decreasing the counter these would still give the survivors multiple revives per life, so the NH should have to down 1 survivor say 3 or 4 times before they actually register a kill?

 

That doesn't address the issue of the NH not being rewarded for a down in terms of the life counter and therefore will give the survivors all the time in the world to kill the 5 nests while they get downed multiple times losing no lives as it is now.

 

Your point about hit and run tactics for the NH I don't really understand.

 

If pounced they are ripped apart and dead anyway,

 

if leapfrogged then they really aren't good players, or have been outplayed and deserve the loss in the life counter but let's face it your pounce will be interrupted at least 5m from your target anyway in 3 or 4 vs 1 by sniper range UV lights or UV flare if you managed to hit them with UV suppress first.

 

Horde hit just means they climb to a ledge they can't be reached or jump into the nearest invincibility giving water nullifying the effects totally which is hardly difficult given this is a parkour based game and ledges are everywhere.

 

Other than that how do you suggest a hit and run for the hunter?

 

Melee is simply not powerful enough and would take too long.

 

Tackle = jumped over 90% of the time by skilled playes resulting in death if you don't retreat and even death straight after the miss animation sometimes and would require you to hit them at least twice even combined with melee and ground pound.

 

Ground pound - Miss any of the 3 or 4 survivors near you and goodbye NH and again you'd have to combine with other moves or hit at least 4 times to even down them.

 

All of this meaning hit and run tactics for downing at least would be totally impractical.

 

If you are saying they are split up, they are either

a)Easy pickings (so weren't a problem where downs were concerned anyway) or

b)Hunting you while the others destroy the nests.

 

(We are talking about good survivors)

 

Giving the survivors hunting the NH a limited amount of revives they aren't going to care at all because the NH still gets nothing for putting one of them down, no reduction in lives therefore no reduction in time left for killing nests.

 

Decreasing the counter each time also will do nothing as the NH will have little energy in this situation so his problem is and always has been getting the down in the first place. Even if they both finally die by either of your suggestions this would have given the other members of the team plenty of time to take out several of the nests then they just respawn again and repeat at the cost of 2 of 10 lives, whereas if they lose half a life each time they are downed they might think twice about hunting the NH and potentially reducing the time for their teammates and would give the NH a far better chance to win by attrition. Currently and by your suggestions I don't see how the NH has any chance winning by taking out most of the team with downs. They'd simply have too much time left as they do now and downing would still not have any real reward without being done multiple times for 1 life.

 

Finally, one doesn't scale well. The previously suggested method would be consistent at all multiple numbers of survivors. How would you scale number of allowed revives fairly without making the coding more complex for each additional survivor?

 

Otherwise the more survivors you have the more downs they could spread out between the team before they died with worst case scenario (assuming 3 downs per life) 9 downs before you finally got 1 kill in 4v1. They shouldn't be getting more downs the more of them there are that's a double benefit on top of the many advantages they already have. Even at a middle it would still require 5 downs for 1 kill and that would mean remembering who has been downed and how many times (unlikely you'll be able to reach and down the same person every time) which is a bit much to ask.

 

I think that either method would still be far too generous on being downed. If the NH got you the NH deserves some time reduction benefit in terms of removal of life which is the only way to win the game for the NH.

 

Chances of being pounced are vastly reduced the more survivors you have (assuming they stay together) so that puts the only instant life counter reducing ability of the NH to bed, it only seems fair that the NH should be rewarded for investing considerable time and combo moves in downing survivors by having something more substantial than a time to revive reduction or revival per life counter reduced.

 

If you got downed 20 times as you'd have to be to wear out all your lives (assuming no pounces) on the suggested change then I think you deserved to lose and the NH deserves some credit for his or her downs, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One suggestion I can think of would be survivors are given one free revive (normal revive) after that the revives now have penalty survivors now lose half a life out of the shared lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in essence they should be allowed to be downed more than the 20 times in total before their 10 lives are gone which is the highly generous version that was suggested?

 

I don't think survivors really need anything that's more forgiving than that.

The point still stands that the systems you are pointing to are from games that run entirely different concepts so I don't think importing their revive systems in any form would improve the gameplay balance.

 

 

Better than infinite revives.

 

Don't forget that there are several ways a survivor can get downed. Fall damage is a big one that can happen voluntarily or involuntarily. For instance sometimes when grappling to a roof and holding grab Crane still won't grab the ledge and depending on how high you went up you'll fall into a downed state. Or if you ground pound someone off a roof who doesn't have a grappling hook (low level survivors). Or if you pounce someone who is grappling to a high place and they interrupt your pounce. They'll be animation locked and take fall damage resulting in a down depending on the height.

 

These are common situations which can easily occur in most matches. You shouldn't be getting half life kills this way.

 

In regards to either of the suggestions limiting amount of revives or decreasing the counter these would still give the survivors multiple revives per life, so the NH should have to down 1 survivor say 3 or 4 times before they actually register a kill?

 

That doesn't address the issue of the NH not being rewarded for a down in terms of the life counter and therefore will give the survivors all the time in the world to kill the 5 nests while they get downed multiple times losing no lives as it is now.

 

Again that's better than an infinite amount. Besides there's no guarantee that survivors will be revived 3 to 4 times every single game. The situation doesn't lend itself to always being able to revive teammates no matter why e.g. horde running around or enraged virals around a nest. Throw in the every looming threat of a night hunter trying to pounce you when you aren't looking and you have a situation where it probably isn't the best option to go and revive your buddy.

 

 

Your point about hit and run tactics for the NH I don't really understand.

 

You just downed someone, he's being picked up. You fly overhead with an aerial ground pound and hit the guy who just got revived. Two swipes and he's back down, and you just got away with an easy kill (when in reality you didn't kill anyone).

 

 

Giving the survivors hunting the NH a limited amount of revives they aren't going to care at all because the NH still gets nothing for putting one of them down, no reduction in lives therefore no reduction in time left for killing nests.

 

Decreasing the counter each time also will do nothing as the NH will have little energy in this situation so his problem is and always has been getting the down in the first place. Even if they both finally die by either of your suggestions this would have given the other members of the team plenty of time to take out several of the nests then they just respawn again and repeat at the cost of 2 of 10 lives, whereas if they lose half a life each time they are downed they might think twice about hunting the NH and potentially reducing the time for their teammates and would give the NH a far better chance to win by attrition. Currently and by your suggestions I don't see how the NH has any chance winning by taking out most of the team with downs. They'd simply have too much time left as they do now and downing would still not have any real reward without being done multiple times for 1 life.

 

That's a completely different issue. We're talking talking about downs in general not stopping people from hunting the night hunter.

 

All you need to stay ahead of the game is 2 lives per nest. And besides splitting up like that decreases their chances of reviving. If two people hunt and two people go after the nest and one of of the hunting members gets downed the other hunting member has to deal with you by himself if he wants to revive his friend. If 3 or 2 people hunt and 1 person goes after the nest you just lead those 3 or 2 away and use your superior speed to race back to the nest and take care of the lone wolf.

 

Also if they are destroying multiple nests while you are trying to get kills then you need to rethink your strategy. Remember you have to defend the nest as well not fish for kills all day.

 

Finally, one doesn't scale well. The previously suggested method would be consistent at all multiple numbers of survivors. How would you scale number of allowed revives fairly without making the coding more complex for each additional survivor?

 

Otherwise the more survivors you have the more downs they could spread out between the team before they died with worst case scenario (assuming 3 downs per life) 9 downs before you finally got 1 kill in 4v1. They shouldn't be getting more downs the more of them there are that's a double benefit on top of the many advantages they already have. Even at a middle it would still require 5 downs for 1 kill and that would mean remembering who has been downed and how many times (unlikely you'll be able to reach and down the same person every time) which is a bit much to ask.

 

I think that either method would still be far too generous on being downed. If the NH got you the NH deserves some time reduction benefit in terms of removal of life which is the only way to win the game for the NH.

 

Chances of being pounced are vastly reduced the more survivors you have (assuming they stay together) so that puts the only instant life counter reducing ability of the NH to bed, it only seems fair that the NH should be rewarded for investing considerable time and combo moves in downing survivors by having something more substantial than a time to revive reduction or revival per life counter reduced.

 

If you got downed 20 times as you'd have to be to wear out all your lives (assuming no pounces) on the suggested change then I think you deserved to lose and the NH deserves some credit for his or her downs, no?

 

It sounds like it'd be harder to implement half kills than just simply shortening the timer or limiting revives after a certain point.

 

Here's a scenario:

 

Survivors have 2 half lives left. You down someone and then kill the person trying to revive him. How does the game calculate that with only one half life left? The match would end in a negative value. They'll need to add more decision logic that will register a one hit kill as both a full life or two half lives along with special cases when the life and kill point (half or whole) don't add up. They'll also have to trigger a point where when you only have half lives left then a kill equals two half lives. It sounds much simpler to say "after 3 revives you just die" or "timer decrements by 5 seconds after every successive down on one life."

 

You don't need to scale that, it's the same all around. Just because you have more players doesn't mean you need to scale how many chances they get to be revived.

 

And no pounces are not the only one hit kills in. Spikes are still around and useful against very aggressive survivors not to mention survivors can blow themselves up resulting in an instant death.

 

If you get downed 20 times and constantly brought back by your teammates then no you don't deserve to lose. That means you have very good teammates and they shouldn't be dragged down by one person who can't stay alive for more than 2 seconds. That's a cheap win and I don't like knowing that I only have to do half the work to win because there are more people, ESPECIALLY when the game already makes easier for me by giving me increased volatile spawns, shorter ability recharge time and higher zombie density (with a higher chance for special class zombies I'm guessing, not sure on that one). That just makes a lazier player not a better one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crane not grabbing a ledge is a separate issue which needs to be fixed and shouldn't have any bearing on the discussion and I would hardly call it common, people not aiming properly at the ledge is a problem but that shouldn't detract from the revive penalty. That's human error. I've done it myself, sure it's annoying but it was my fault after all. You get punished in the main game so why not in Pvp?

 

I admit there are also times that Crane just doesn't grab the ledge at all despite being perfectly aimed towards it, but the amount of times this happens is miniscule compared to successful grabs and even then very unlikely you die. Far more likely you hit one of the multiple other ledges below you and lose a bit of health.

 

Annoying? Yes.

Frequent enough to be an issue in regards to a half life penalty for being downed? I don't think so.

 

As to your next point given that they will still have 30s to be revived and a practically non existent time to revive in, it will still give no balance in regards to being killed.

Be killed as the NH guarantees time penalty in the form of respawn time which any good survivors will use to take out a nest. What does being 'killed' as the survivor get you? Still no significant penalty at all, you can still in the majority of cases go about your business like nothing happened after your tms locate the NH with survivor sense and go chasing then come back to revive you.

 

Yes, your suggestions are better than the current system but I still think they are too generous to survivors who are perfectly capable of going 1 v 1 against the NH assuming they are skilled, let alone when you add multiple survivors to the mix.

 

On to the next point.

 

1. How exactly did you down that first person under the hit and run style?

 

2. The NH is about hit and run tactics anyway. They are not meant to be slogging it out in CQC because they are insanely weak against multiple survivors at this range. So i'd suggest it required some skill to down this survivor in the first place and you are simply reaping the benefits from that.

 

3. It says on the screen as a big notification that the survivor has been killed when they are downed (rather than one hit pounced or spiked) so you have killed them already. If you had the skill to bypass the reviver and down them again I don't see how this is getting easy kills for as you put it 'when in reality you didn't kill anyone' bottom line is you did the game even tells you so.

 

Yes, you're right it is a completely different issue but it would be handy wouldn't it?

 

Well if the people hunting you are good which they will be or they wouldn't be confident enough to hunt you then you'll never have full energy so it's still going to be a supreme effort just to take a single person down. Yes that does make it easier to take out the 2nd person hunting you and yes it does mean you can zip away and get the lone survivor, but if they are playing that tactic then that lone survivor won't be easy prey so his tms will have easily caught up to you again within a very short space of time. It's not difficult to make sure you don't leave your nest attacker vulnerable while still hunting the NH. You just make sure you always stay between the NH and your tm. If the NH flanks you can easily intercept. If they don't attack then good bye nest. Fair enough that is good survivor teamwork but they got their reward by killing one of the obj. Why shouldn't NH be rewarded in the only way that counts (by life counter reduction) when he takes away all the health of a survivor? That doesn't seem balanced to me.

It's not like the half life down penalty is penalising good teamwork in any way. Good teamwork should be the counter to getting downed in the first place.

 

Also the point wasn't I was seeking out kills instead of defending the nests. The point was being hunted by the survivors can make it extremely difficult to get anywhere near the nest being attacked regardless of how quickly you tendril around.

 

For coding. That's quite easily solved just by saying when counter reaches 0 then game end. That's probably what it does already. If for whatever reason it has a problem with a minus number in the current format then you can just change it to when counter reaches value lower than 0.5 then game end.

 

I think you overcomplicated it a bit. Actually the only way I can think it would require any major change is by adding logic which would mean you didn't get penalised 1.5 lives for being downed (0.5 lives) then dying from not being revived which under the current logic would minus another 1 from the life count. Though that is literally the only scenario I can think of where it causes an issue.

 

I think it would need to be scaled if you are implenting penalties to revives. Otherwise as I said you'd be giving the survivors extra revives just because they had more players. Yes, no different from the current system really but rather defeats the point of penalising revives using the method you stated if having more players is a simple way to give you more revives.

 

Fair play. I didn't mention spikes and you are quite right. Two things that make it hard to utilise this however are

 

1. Because the NH's vision is different it's often hard to tell where the spikes actually are which is still really easy for a survivor. And yes I could learn the entire map and exactly where all the spikes are but I think making them a bit easier to see as NH would be a far better solution.

 

2. Around nests which you fairly pointed out should be defended rather than hunting kills all the time. There are generally a surprising lack of spikes and sometimes even a surprising amount of explosive gas canisters.

 

I have no problem with the latter it's funny making the poor survivors blow themselves up, but that's exactly what they are; poorly playing survivors. I have not had a single good survivor team blow even one of themselves up (trolling aside). So I think the explosive suicide is a moot point.

 

As for the you have very good teammates point regarding the 20 downs. Erm, I would call them rather useless teammates if they allowed you to be downed 20 times unless you were purposely trying to die or one of the worst survivors in history. Yes, again having a noob ruin your epic team play sucks but again 20 times is going to be pretty darn time consuming for the NH giving you plenty of time to wreck nests Or if you don't want a cheap win then simply don't attack that player. It depends on play style whether you like to win at all costs including cheap wins or whether you like a challenge, so it's individual, as is your choice over whether you target their weak player or give yourself more of a challenge by ignoring that exploit.

 

But overall that's a separate issue regarding unskilled players.

 

As for the scaling on zombie density, NH recharge times etc. I have seem some of your videos playing as NH so you have to admit if they didn't scale with more survivors especially spit recharge times then you'd be really hard pressed to tackle 4 survivors. Imagine spit recharge as slow as 1v1 on 4v1, you certainly wouldn't be able to post any videos with frequent good combos as you do. Balance wise it would be the stuff of nightmares. That's not laziness related just 'oh please god actually give me a chance' otherwise known as balance related. :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now