feedback-discussion

[green portal]

Not an insult, an observation from the conversation

[thin remnant]

If you think calling someone stupid isn't an insult I think maybe YOURE the one thats not bright

[hybrid forum]

of course, because actively removing content instead of reworking it is a brilliant idea, and not a waste of dev resources

[green portal]

knowing that he is not very bright will help me to adapt to the quality of his replies

[thin remnant]

Lmao you don't know that though, you think that

There's a difference

[green portal]

not all ideas are good, and pretending that every idea devs has made in the past has been good, is very delusional.

now coping with that keeping the bad design ideas because removing would be "waste of resources", is actually not very smart, lol

[hybrid forum]

I agree to some extent, since they added centy dum dum and dolch fmj, but you literally want to wipe the slate clean like darn thanos

[hybrid forum]

again with the "smart". Projecting much?

you wouldn't mention it as much if it wasn't troubling for you

[thin remnant]

Freeze I have a question and please answer

Is everyone other than you delusional? I mean look at the dislikes on your post and everyone in chat here

Are you the only smart person here

[green portal]

If you would make that suggestion at some platform that would reach ex-hunt players rather than people who joined in 2023 and enjoy the game for the upcoming 2 months, you would get a whole different dislike ratio. What I'm hoping, is that it will reach the people who can make difference about it, which doesn't require a majority of the current playerbase to love it.

[green portal]

Somebody has to say the right things even if no one wants to hear 😋

[thin remnant]

Everyone youve been arguing with who've disliked your post are old time ex hunt players. You're trying to handle the fact no one agrees with you by making another reality where your post is liked.

I go again now

[green portal]

Yeah i bet you checked that fact before submitting since they aren't.

[thin remnant]

I've talked to them before theyve all been playing hunt since the old days

Well idk for sure about crygeen but he's likely XD

And looking at the dislikes on your post they're old time players

[tawny meadow]

Hello, i've been playing Hunt since day 1 and i dislike your suggestion. Just accept the fact that not everyone agree with it 🙂

[hybrid forum]

tbf he's talking about the ones that quit, not the ones that stuck to the game

[thin remnant]

Oh ok

[hybrid forum]

atleast I must admit that he's right in this case, that this place only has current hunt players

[thin remnant]

Fair tbh

[hybrid forum]

because if you don't play hunt, why would you be here

[thin remnant]

I mean, not freeze clearly lol

[empty oasis]

You'd be surprised at the people that stay here to hate after they quit the game

[green portal]

This place, similarly to many other Discord communities attract specific type of people who are ready to close their eyes from the reality and blow any whistle they can, while offering a repulsive platform for people who are not like-minded. That does not mean that the players who are active on this chat represent the majority of hunt community, most hunters here on this discord show no interest towards the chat and discussion. This is much due to the nature of people that often take part in the conversation.

[hybrid forum]

If you want a non-biased discussion, you have to search for a non-biased place, because many people here hold this game dearly to their heart. It's true that sometimes this place is full of toxic positivity, and dismissing real issues with the game

however, I don't think that beginning anew would fix many issues

quite the opposite, it would cause a lot of problems

[green portal]

It would get rid of a lot of the problems, while undoubtedly also creating a few, which I would see far simpler to solve.

Some of the core problems Hunt has, are not solveable, unless you remove the cause, which needs drastic measures.

[radiant river]

You're yet to explain how removing stuff from the game will fix anything

[green portal]

It creates a solid foundation for rebuild

[hybrid forum]

also what are the things you want to remove, because they cause the most "issues"

[green portal]

The dynamic nature of different components that work together based on vague or very specific rules.

this contains literally the entire weapon and ammo system

the developer solution to this has been to amp up damage for everything every time there is a problem, which generates situations where receiving any kind of damage results more and more to fatality.

Increased damage output generates survival issues, which lead to balancing, which leads to increasing damage output.

[radiant river]

So you don't think they should just rebalance the weapons maybe

You want them to undo years of work and remove things players enjoy

[green portal]

I think they have gathered a lot of important information over the years that show how the game is being played, so based on that information the entire weapon system could be redesigned. But trying to fix the old model by adding balancing fixes is not really the best approach, since the damage output of weapons is at insane levels.

Currently, there are several survival methods that guarantee you near immunity, while same time battling that you have weapons with insane damage output.

[hybrid forum]

to clear confusion, you should go straight to the point and say exactly what you want to do

from the ground up

[green portal]

I don't think I am the right person to say exactly what should be done, that is for the design team, the closest approximation is that there should be base classes (such as heavy, medium, light) that would allow specific pros and cons, and the weapons would behave respectively to the class, heavy weapons being more damage but slower, and so forth.

[blissful jackal]

Hello, i've been playing Hunt since day 1 and i dislike your suggestion. Just accept the fact that not everyone agree with it 🙂

[green portal]

Because it does not really matter what kind weapon system would replace the current one, if it is less complex and more robust.

[blissful jackal]

can you give an example

[blissful jackal]

you do realize there is compact, medium, and long ammo... right?

[green portal]

The majority of the weight of the rework should be on making weapons vary cosmetically while retaining somewhat the same damage output for the respective class (speed/damage), then, we wouldn't have pistols that are as powerful as a shotgun or as powerful as a rifle, and so forth.

[radiant river]

I'm not sure where you're getting this argument that we can do way more damage now than in the past from.

If you mean there's more spam weapons then yes I agree. But again removing stuff is not the solution except for some truly broken cases (dolch fmj)

[green portal]

This would also limit access to specific items if you are playing a specific weapon class - meaning that the cosmetics of the item would be in line with the class you are using. In the current model, it is very close to any weapon being able to shoot any kind of bullet and to deal any kind of damage.

[radiant river]

Slugs used to be way stronger back in the day too, if we're talking about doing lots of damage

[blissful jackal]

what

if you are talking about special ammo then yes theres too much special ammo for guns but damage wise??

[green portal]

The damage output seems to be scaled so that a solo hunter can take down a trio, while surviving a trio. That is a very odd concept, and scaling damage down so that without any specific ultra strong survival tricks (such as regaining bars through traits when killing a hunter, strong regen etc) methods you could better sustain damage while making well landed consecutive shots reward more (like, headshots)

[blissful jackal]

yes a solo can kill trios if they are good enough, typically headshots

[green portal]

so if damage output was scaled down, lets say you would need to bodyshot someone 3 times to kill a hunter regardless of the rifle type, it would reduce the need for invisible near immunity granting traits that allow individuals to continously regenerate health and regain bars.

[radiant river]

It's always been like that

[green portal]

this game was originally designed for duos

[blissful jackal]

they are burn traits

they are rare

during events when they arent rare, it is nice to regain bards so i dont have to leave the match early after fighting

[radiant river]

So? There's always been 1 shot headshots.

The ttk has always been as low as it can go, it's just about how forgiving it is

But we've always been this lethal

[blissful jackal]

making everything 3 tap is just going to make me go for headshots even more

i already headhunt

[green portal]

yes, but that adds a layer of complexity that makes reading the situation more complicated, since you are not able to know after killing someone how many bars they have, or after hitting someone you cannot know if they can heal beyond 3 times with med kit. The game needs to be more simple, easier to read while being forgiving enough so that you are not afraid to move and take hits.

[blissful jackal]

after tagging them multiple times you can anticipate they are low on meds

[green portal]

but there is nothing wrong with that, it's respectable if you do. Problem is high damage output that is not a headshot.

[radiant river]

When I say forgiving I'm referring to how easy it is to get kills without headshots. So more forgiving = easier kills due to higher bodysjit damage

[green portal]

depends if you are giving or receiving damage, it is more forgiving for the receiving party

[radiant river]

Ok I think this is a reasonable argument but has nothing to do with modern hunt vs old hunt and is also not solved by removing weapons

[blissful jackal]

so you basically dont like long ammo damage

[radiant river]

The problem is in modern hunt you have lots of spam weapons that allow for absurdly easy kills

[green portal]

it can be solved by removing the complexity of things that has been iteratively added on, which unfortunately means removing most of the rats nest of logic.

[radiant river]

Dolch being the prime example but it's not the only one

[radiant river]

It really doesn't. For all intents and purposes most long ammo weapons are the same.

[green portal]

please remember that most of the things we have today are balancing fixes to solve an issue that didn't exist before the previous balancing issue.

the entire weapon system in the game is made of balancing fixes.

and I dare to say, there is no one in the dev team that enjoys working on it because it is an absolute mess in that level of complexity that it has.

[radiant river]

Yeah idk why you think it's complex

[green portal]

combine different weapons, different ammo types, and unique penetration features together and you have a really complex system

then, furthermore you can confuse things by generating weapons that are different class type but they behave similarly to another class type of a weapon, such as pistols being shotguns, rifles being shotguns, pistols being rifles and so forth.

all of that is completely unnecessary and it doesn't really play in favor of gameplay experience. If you want to use a shotgun, why wouldnt you want to use a well balanced shotgun, that is a shotgun? why do you need to be able to use a pistol as a shotgun?

[radiant river]

Because you can use the pistol shotgun alongside a rifle?

[blissful jackal]

small boolet pen little, medium ammo pen some, big boolet pen lots, fmj boolet pen more, dumdum poision pen none

[radiant river]

And in exchange you get a weaker version so you can have more flexibility

[green portal]

I cant say I enjoy seeing someone wield a pistol and shoot me with a shotgun because it seemed like a pistol. It makes it more difficult to interprete the game situation and makes it difficult to read what you see

[blissful jackal]

uhm.

maybe dont think its a pistol then\

[green portal]

what is more and what is less, when you talk about metal, wood, walls, shelves, staircases

[radiant river]

If only the guns had unique sounds...

[green portal]

I think from a gaming experience perspective "ignore whatever you see, it's not what you see" is not ideal.

[blissful jackal]

more walls less walls

add and subtract

1 apple plus 2 apple is 3 apple

fmj add 2 apples

[green portal]

120 unique sounds that you need to study for weeks.

while the sound also changes over distance, or whether if it is inside or outside a building.

[green portal]

that is not how Hunt's weapon and ammo penetration system works.

its rather more like if apple then damage is half orange if no pear is avail

[radiant river]

I don't know why you're acting like weapon pen effectiveness is the major balancing lever

[green portal]

remove complexity in the weapon system, including the complexity in ammo and penetration system. Make things simple. Over-generalized example, is to generate just 3 classes that only have heavy, medium and light weapons. Weapons inside the classes are clearly distinguishable so that heavy weapon wont look like medium etc (example, size and sound). Damage and fire rate is respective to the class. For example, light weapon class could shoot super fast but would require nearly all bullets to hit for a kill.

[radiant river]

This is literally how it works now

[green portal]

nice way to get timeout @slate jetty

[blissful jackal]

yeah it is

different materials will reduce damage/pen capabilities

[green portal]

that does capture the essence of it being more simple, to be able to distinguish weapons from one and another

[blissful jackal]

i can already do that

yeah but thats any game

[green portal]

I know for a fact that there will be situations where you guess wrong

[blissful jackal]

from like 300 meters

[green portal]

you cannot know the ammo type inside a weapon when you look at it, no matter how close it is to you (excluding a few exceptions where the ammo is visible)

[blissful jackal]

within 150m i can tell what every sound is

[blissful jackal]

im talking about type of gun not ammo type

[green portal]

that does not apply to most of us, respectable ability it is regardless

[blissful jackal]

yes but its a learnable thing

there is a feature that you can scroll out to 1k meters and have the gun shoot tyo learn the sound in the ui

[green portal]

That however doesn't remove the complexity in the weapon system which is the main issue

[radiant river]

Most of the compact ammo weapons have a "lighter" sound to them. Not to mention you can listen to the fire rate too

[blissful jackal]

what is so complex yo ucant understand

heres a cool overlooked feature

now you can know what every gun sounds like from every distance

[green portal]

most of the 5-6 mmr players are afraid to do anything because there is 101 ways it can go wrong. Those are things that cannot be learned, as situations are non-readable. By looking at a weapon you don't know what it is, so you don't know how to approach. This is what leads to camping, once you have learned all the mistakes, you no longer make moves, because every move is a potential mistake putting your dear life at risk. If the game was more forgiving, the need for camping would be eliminated. There was no point of camping, if it didn't yield in kills (lower damage output). It would force players to go and get around more.

[radiant river]

That's a crazy argument

[blissful jackal]

as long as your character can die people will camp

[radiant river]

I think there is some truth to it but arguing that people can't because they don't know what weapon people are using is absurd

[green portal]

it's just an example, there is also 101 reasons for camping

[blissful jackal]

if you make the argument sweats will sit outside and not push shotgun then thats valid, because i will try to get picks before pushing into a shotgun when i havem mozin

[radiant river]

And arguing that you can't learn to avoid these deaths is crazy too

[bright plank]

Where do you get the idea from that most 5-6 stars are afraid to do anything?

[green portal]

but in all, what makes camping the only solution is that it is rewarding and it gives you what you want

[radiant river]

Any game with a low ttk will encourage camping

[blissful jackal]

typically done by players with shotguns and traps

not sweats

[radiant river]

^^^

[blissful jackal]

traps encourage it

[green portal]

stop and watch what happens in a 6-player game after you pick a bounty. Bounty team will sit inside the house and look out from random cracks while outside teams are holding entrances. Stale mate.

[blissful jackal]

theres also 6 star snipers that shoot once and rotate and are annoying (remove scopes)

[green portal]

this goes on for 20-30 minutes depending on the current levels of patience

[radiant river]

What a surprise, snipers and shotguns are hard to balance

[blissful jackal]

yeah when they camp inside i will try to assault with nades and wallbangs and sometimes i die

i can just leave if i was scared to die

[bright plank]

I mean that happens, but not every single game. Far from it-

[green portal]

Funny is, that camping problem on 5-6 stars was one of the main reasons why people deranked down to 3-4 stars, since the players are more active and make more mistakes (which is pretty much moving around in the game)

that has been for the past few years the only way to get an active lobby where you get involved in situations and dynamic fire fight

[bright plank]

[radiant river]

I think the deranking to avoid camping is cope

Low stars absolutely camp

[bright plank]

Yeah but that's the people that get into six star or five star for a few games and then go down again, actually good players move. A lot.

[radiant river]

In my anecdotal experience they camp way more

[blissful jackal]

everytime i spectate a 4star on my trio randoms (i havent been below 5 star in years) they are crouching on gunslinger mode clueless

[bright plank]

The reason players de-rank is to have easier games...

Not to avoid campers.

[green portal]

low stars don't camp, they don't have any reason to camp. They are curious and they want to explore the game. When you learn that something is a mistake, you never do it again, and this negative learning curve leads to camping.

[blissful jackal]

correct

[radiant river]

Before when matchmaking was less strict id occasionally get into a match where there were way less engagements and it lasted way longer than normal, and then when I finally get out I see it's a mostly 4 star lobby

[blissful jackal]

this is so not true its crazy

low stars absolutely camp

[green portal]

we must be playing different hunt showdown my friend

[blissful jackal]

typically when i run into a team camping inside its a bunch of low 5 stars or even 4stars sitting inside with shotguns or fanning

[blissful jackal]

i am 6 stars like 70% of the time

na east

[bright plank]

No when you learn something is a mistake, you adapt and become better. That doesn't always lead to camping. You learn better angles, better pre-aim, get to know the spots people like to defend a building from, you make use of nades, Hellfire bombs, etc.

[blissful jackal]

from my little time on eu they like to be wayy slower

[green portal]

what you did there was exactly confirm that 5 is the holy grail of camping, just as I stated

[radiant river]

In every game newer or lower skill players will play slower. As a result of fear and a lack of confidence they will be more likely to avoid fights and take the easy way out

[blissful jackal]

no i confirmed that lower skilled players camp more

[green portal]

3 to low 4 stars, you will never see a camper (unless it's a solo player)

[blissful jackal]

aka the lower you the more the camp

[bright plank]

Rigth exactly what you said here @green portal...

[blissful jackal]

theres no way this isnt trolling 🤣

[green portal]

why wouldn't you try it and then confirm that it is exactly as I said, since you play on 6 and don't know what you are talking about

[blissful jackal]

why dont i know what im talking about

[bright plank]

I think at the point where you have multiple players in that bracket disagree with you, while you are the only one definding your own point, maybe you are the one in the wrong.

[blissful jackal]

you would think someone good at the game would know what they are talking about

i run into bad 5 and 4 star teams all the time

[bright plank]

Sure there's gameplay differences from server to server.

[blissful jackal]

they just sit inside

[bright plank]

But not that drastic.

And the reason I won't try 3-4 star elo is because I'd have to downrank and ruin their games.

Why would I do that just to prove a point?

[radiant river]

Look at the conversations surrounding the lowering of the match timer. Lots of people complained about it and almost none of them I saw were high elo. It was mostly casuals complaining about it (which is fine to be clear).

[green portal]

I have played on every MMR rank from 1 to 6 and it is very distinctive how the different ranks behave, there are exceptions to the rule as always, but 8/10 matches on each MMR will confirm that lower star lobbies are more active than high star lobbies. I think, high 4 to 5 is probably the worst in terms of camping (since people want to desperately get up to 6 stars?) but I have seen some very stale games on 6 mmr.

[radiant river]

It'd be cool if we could see average match time stats for different elos

[green portal]

Lowering match time to combat issues with camping will not change anything. You will still wait for people to hit the 5 minute timer before the actuall playing will start.

[blissful jackal]

i rarely see 3 stars in my lobbies but theres a direct correlation of bad players /' tendency to jsut crouch and sit somewhere the second fighting happens. if they make it to bounty they always turtle up

[blissful jackal]

this like never happens in my games

[green portal]

Only way to remove camping is to make the game punish you less for trying.

[radiant river]

I have genuinely never seen a match with camping end with the timer running out

[blissful jackal]

i agree, but that would be making you keep your charater

and even then.

people will still camp

cvamping is a universal problem in like every game

[green portal]

Of course by nature, the people who never camp are the ones who are curious in their mind and excited to see what happens when they try something. But if the game is very unforgiving, you take 1 step and you get blasted to death by another camper, then you wont take that step. Reducing complexity (as in my original messages) will solve this, as it will contribute to a factor of things, such as making the game situation less complicated to read, more easy to adapt to and less harsh, allowing you to survive more (by reducing damage output) and thus making the mistakes less fatal.

If you are able to make a lot of mistakes and still survive, experience is more fun and you feel less urge to protect yourself and camp.

[subtle lichen]

I'm a low MMR player and while some of the guff spouted so far about being cautious is true, I don't agree about camping being more prevalent. At all.

Lower MMR players will tend to move slower, that's only natural, but sitting in a tower with a scope and traps? Almost never seen it. Turtling up at the boss lair is more a universal problem because you get punished by making the first move.

[thin remnant]

Holy hot dang diddly root beer this argument is still going

[green portal]

I want players to play the game, not sit and wait for someone to make a mistake. It's a massive waste of time, and the game shouldnt urge people to feel that they must.

[subtle lichen]

I saw someone mention low MMR and thought I'd chime in, given the wealth of experience I have of being terrible at the game.

[blissful jackal]

as long as 1 shot headshots remain in the game (as they should) the mistake (not camping) will always be reality

for noobs

[radiant river]

No one does that anywhere it's just about sitting in/around the boss lair

[subtle lichen]

I learned to play with my brother who is most often in high 4-low 5 star. Trapping up the boss lair was how I was taught the game was played.,

[bright plank]

Very based.

[green portal]

Head is pretty difficult to hit since no one ever stops in the game (unless they are camping), but not being able to recover from damage leads to more deaths from camping than a headshot.

if initial hit is likely the cause of death and a fatality, that definitely promotes camping. High probability of death definitely urges people to camp.

The most fair 1v1 than a camper can have is when they are seen the very moment they open fire. And faster to pull the trigger wins.

[subtle lichen]

The funny thing is at the MMRs we ended up in, rushing out and attacking the people camping the boss was just as likely to catch them off guard than sitting and waiting for someone to try and breach.

[blissful jackal]

i dont think being able to tank one more bullet will just magically open the flood gates and allow for everyone to all of a sudden have no fear and press thier w key

[green portal]

think about what happens now when you take a bullet? You run back to where you started, heal up and wait. Maybe peek a few times but that's it.

Being able to sustain more damage allows you to move around more.

[bright plank]

I agree that the health system leads to more stalemates, but that doesn't stem from the possibility of dying to a headshot, more so to being able to be body tapped by long ammo after having been downed once before.

[green portal]

This means you can improve your situation more, which will lead to more active game play.

[subtle lichen]

Actually, you take a bullet, realise the other guy is using Centi dum dum, and have to run away to staunch the bleeding.

Dum dum on a semi auto was a stupid idea.

[blissful jackal]

if i get tagged im still going to do the same thing unless they are doing like 20 damage

[green portal]

Oh yeah, the legendary "after you die once, you die forever from 1-tap". Ridiculous design issue in the game with these damage output values.

[green portal]

nope, you are immediately going back to heal up to full bars or you die to the consecutive second hit that is already exiting the barrel.

[thin remnant]

"camping" to some degree is good for the game because it makes players cautious of every angle and corner and heightens the tension

Emphasis on to some degree

[blissful jackal]

there are already plenty of scenarios which i get tagged once and still peek because the damage ive taken is worht the peek, such as winfield from like 50m doing like 50 damage or something

[green portal]

that sounds like you are not actually playing on 6-mmr at all.

[subtle lichen]

Camping is as old as the FPS genre in general. You can encourage people to move around more, but you can't stop it completely without some draconian anti-camping mechanic.

[blissful jackal]

it sounds like an ego peek

[thin remnant]

Peeking again while the enemy is reloading or cycling their gun and catching them when they try a cheeky followup can work well

[green portal]

if the second hit is fatal regardless of the situation, you do not peek more. You peek less.

[blissful jackal]

that message is after your propoosed less damage guns

[thin remnant]

Can someone just pull out the your mum card and end this already

[blissful jackal]

and this message is saying its allready like that in some cases

[thin remnant]

See who pulls it first like a quick draw

[blissful jackal]

its all situation dependent

if im going to die in 2 shots i must heal or ego peek those are the two options

if im going to live the second shot i will still go for the heal most often

[green portal]

less damage output -> game is more forgiving -> leads to better survival in combat -> reduces getting killed by campers -> rewards campers less -> less camping

[thin remnant]

But that's gonna reward literally everyone less

Not only campers have access to guns

[blissful jackal]

its not gonna reduce camping

[green portal]

the biggest reward is less campers

[blissful jackal]

if anything it would just make medium range combat suck more

[thin remnant]

Reducing damage would punish everyone not just campers

[green portal]

it's not a punishment. longer, more dynamic firefights are not a problem to anyone in contrast to getting 1-tapped by a bushwookie

[thin remnant]

So you want to remove headshot one taps now.

[green portal]

nope

reduce damage output

[thin remnant]

You said one tap

Nitro?

Campers are still gonna line up their headshot

[subtle lichen]

I'm sure there's a mum joke lined up there, but I got two strikes so I'm gonna keep quiet.

[thin remnant]

If anything reducing damage will make camping worse because they will be even more scared to shoot until they know they can hit the head.

[green portal]

there are a lot of ways to die to 1-tap currently by any weapon, for example, after losing a small bar of health you are permanent 1-tap. Of course, shotguns are big issue and should only give 1-tap if majority of the bullets hit the head

[thin remnant]

Your mum (I'm going again)

[subtle lichen]

Strongly disagree. Shotguns are already cack at range.

If you make them so they need a headshot then they may as well be removed from the game.

[green portal]

They could work up to higher range with that modification. It would be way better, than reducing the range until they are about as effective as the Katana

Obviously nerfing shotgun damage instead of prioritizing the hitpoint area is a terrible way to balance shotguns.

In some other games, shotguns can kill up to range but you still need to hit your target. They are not better or worse than most rifles, they are just different to play with.

[green portal]

with less damage output, you would also be more likely to get a second shot out of your barrel, which would lead to better chances. Currently, if you miss your shot, you very likely wont fire another round.

Shotguns wouldn't need to be 1-tap with less damage output, if you would be likely able to hit your target twice.

Honestly, if you would be able to hit someone 2-3 times from 20 meters with shotgun it should be a kill. But it shouldn't be more effective any closer (unless majority of the bullets hit head)

With the right kind of weapon design, reducing damage output so that a person can pull trigger 2-3 times while being shot at would allow fairly good and balanced gameplay exprience.

Currently, if you get shot, you are able to pull your trigger once at best, without ever seeing a follow up unless you immediately duck to cover.

[blissful jackal]

which is why traits that give bars back are so good

so i dont have to extract

[green portal]

its a bubblegum solution to a problem that still exists

If correctly balanced, when you are caught off guard and shot at, you should still be able to respond to the fire fight at any location without any cover, and sustain the damage with equal chances at defeating your opponent. This would entirely eliminate the rewarding nature of camping, since there was no point waiting for the firefights to take place in an optimal location.

[blissful jackal]

or you could like... die.. because you got caught off guard

[green portal]

If your opponent is able to land more accurate hits and deal more damage than you, you lose. Fair and simple. Camping wouldnt reward for "cheap" first hit.

[blissful jackal]

if you get caught with no cover no amount of crutch mechaincs should save you

[green portal]

no, that's reward for camping

[blissful jackal]

uhhh no?

[green portal]

of course. If you are caught off guard while you still were cautious and moved around checking all visible spots, there can still be a headglitch through wall waiting for you.

In this situation, it would be more than fair that you are still able to respond to that.

[bright plank]

That'd be the case if we had high rof fully automatic weapons in Hunt.

But unless a team shoots at you in a coordinated manner, you can usually reach cover before the cycle team leads to an inevitable death.

And if they coordinate they should be rewarded.

Getting caught off guard is your mistake, if it gets punished that's just how games work.

[green portal]

If there are situations where you are alert about your surroundings but still cannot respond to a sudden burst of fire, it defines a foundation for camping.

[green portal]

This unfortunately will not work above 4-5 stars.

[bright plank]

Y-yes, it does.

If you move with intent and awareness of your optimal route.

[subtle lichen]

Traits that give back bars should not be a controversial subject. They are objectively better for the game.

[blissful jackal]

ok well headshots one tap so all of your proposed solutions are null by this account

[subtle lichen]

Make them a burn trait if you must, but hobbling a player for the rest of the game isn't entirely fair.

[blissful jackal]

i cannot respond to a burst of fire (headshot) -> therefore i camp. using your logic

[green portal]

you have been desperate to nullify my proposals since the first one, so considering that you are not adding anything to the conversation you might as well stop trying

if you want to have a discussion about the topic, please do, but stop "reading in between the lines" and trolling. It is not taking this to the direction we want.

[blissful jackal]

im not desperate im just pointing out the fallacies but you just keep going in circles

[green portal]

you are ignoring facts and coming up with the weirdest in-between-readings up to the day, so that is not helpful.

there is not much you can say to nullify my statements about what would solve the camping problem. Make camping less rewarding. Simplify the weapon system. Punish less for trying.

Winning a firefight should never be based on situational advantage. That is the core culprit that makes people seek for camping spots.

[subtle lichen]

The best way to engage with this channel is to go to a different channel I find. I don't think I've ever seen someone openly admit that they've had a bad idea. Should check out the media channel. There's some cool stuff in there in between all the Lulu waifu art.

[green portal]

If shouldn't matter who pulls the trigger first if they are able to land less hits and less accurately. By this simple solution, it doesn't reward camper sitting in a headglitch or waiting in a dark camouflage spot where it is difficult to see them.

[thin remnant]

I've had bad ideas before lol

OMG I'm so self aware and cool look at me im admitting my bad ideas

Also hot rootin tootin cowboy shootin diddly darn this debate is still going

[green portal]

Yes, I hope it has gotten enough attention now that someone that understands the potential in it will consider adapting that it some form.

[thin remnant]

My guy your post has one like and it was from ages ago

[radiant river]

Shifting the body shots to kill to being 3 vs 2 will increase the mechanical difficulty of the game to a degree that some people wouldn't enjoy

[subtle lichen]

#game-ideas message Bear boss. Needs to happen especially if as rumoured the new biome is mountainous at all.

[thin remnant]

That'd be so cool dude I'd love that

The other roaming is a gator, so a bear would work great

[blissful jackal]

thats literally what hunt devs want

thats why theres birds and dogs and ai

[green portal]

that is not all what I'm saying lol. Birds, Dogs and AI doesn't have anything to do with camping and damage output ?

I've never seen anyone camping behind a dog

[radiant river]

Lure dogs into the compound

[blissful jackal]

but people set off sound traps and enemies will camp so they run into them

and gain a situational advantage

like if someone sets off birds to me left i can just wait for them to come to me and kill them

[green portal]

you are implying that someone is moving. That situation you described there doesn't happen above 5 MMR.

[blissful jackal]

lol

[green portal]

Literally no one is going to set off entry level sound traps on high MMR.

[blissful jackal]

people do all the time

[green portal]

go higher MMR

[blissful jackal]

im literally 6 star

i cant

[green portal]

sure you are, buddy lol

[radiant river]

"high mmr" in the context of an entire match isn't a thing. 6 stars get matched with low 5 stars

[green portal]

And that doesn't prove that you play on that account ever, considering what you have said about your 6MMR experience which isn't at all what goes on in EU servers.

[radiant river]

And low 5 star is not "high mmr"

[blissful jackal]

i play on na east

where people move their feet in 5-6 star

[green portal]

NA East MMR 6 equals to EU 4? damn

[blissful jackal]

its lower mmr where they camp on east

no eu players are scared little babies that dont push and rotate

[green portal]

Nice challenge for devs to balance a game where the differences between continents are that great

[blissful jackal]

^

[bright plank]

Nah you're just wrong man.

I play on EU and I have the exact same experience @blissful jackal is describing.

[green portal]

It's impossible to be wrong at something that is a living experience.

reality doesn't work that way

[radiant river]

Wrong

[bright plank]

Or your experience is biased towards the bad experiences you've had.

The times where you got camped.

Ignoring whenever it doesn't happen.

Because those games don't bother you.

[radiant river]

Maybe you just camp a lot so the only people you run into are other campers who are playing as slow as you

[thin remnant]

ITS STILL GOINGGGGGG

[green portal]

So, when I don't move and I listen and look around in the game, 1 team sits inside a compound and 2 others sit outside, and nothing happens in 20 minutes, UNLESS I am the one who runs out and starts killing people, explain me how this experience is not true? lol

[thin remnant]

STOP IMPRISONING EACH OTHER. GO. BE FREE. GO OUTSIDE.

[bright plank]

Yeah that happens in one out of 5 games, at most. More like 1 in 8.

Definitely the majority or most of the times.

[green portal]

If you sat down more to watch what other teams are doing, you would notice that its closer to every time. But you would notice it less if you acted more.

It may be, that you and rufus are very active, so you never notice that you are literally hunting sitting ducks all the time

[bright plank]

Also your argument is inherently flawed: "Nothing happens unless I do something", well of course not if you are contributing to the problem.

[bright plank]

I am very active, yeah.

[green portal]

Nothing flawed about that, if you stop and see what everyone else is doing, you see they are doing nothing.

[bright plank]

And usually me being active is met by activity from other teams, too.

[green portal]

perhaps 1 out of 10 games

[bright plank]

What you're describing is just not the experience I have been having at all.

[bright plank]

More like 7 out of 10 I think.

You say that you "can't be wrong about my living experience" and yet you are saying wrong about my experience?

How does that work?

[green portal]

More like, I'm considering that you are either not telling the truth or you are just ignoring what's happening around you

[bright plank]

Right and what if I told you that I am considering you aren't telling the truth or just ignoring what's happening around you?

Then it'd be my word against yours, right?

And in that case what do we do to resolve that situation? We ask other people what they think.

And it just so happens that most people here seem to disagree with you.

In which case it's more probable by vote that you are the one who is either not telling the truth or not paying close enough attention to what's happening around you.

[green portal]

Majority of the times when I see players, they are holding an angle from 1 spot, and they do nothing to engage more or to seek for better grounds. If they get hit they never try that specific angle again, but they'll find another, very similar to the previous one. This is the experience I have. And I consider that camping, although a lot of people disagree and say that's just normal gameplay and how it's supposed to be. That however, isn't how people play on lower MMR

[bright plank]

I mean that's why we discuss this with multiple people so in the end the point stands that has the most people backing it.

And I just have nothing to add to that.

I hate stalemates as much as every other active player.

I am not disagreeing with you on that.

But just by vote of experience, it seems more people have an experience contradictory to what you are describing.

And at that point maybe you should evaluate whether there's a reason for that expect "everyone is out to get you and lie to you".

That's all I wanna say to that.

[green portal]

Outside this platform, no.

I don't know what it is with people here, but they are built different lol

The normal people you would meet on servers, randoms etc, usually when they are on Hunt Discord they are not active, but they share similar views what I have

But oddly, when you engage into a conversation here, it's like a different world

[blissful jackal]

it seems that you think only your experience is the true one, and that everyone else in this discord cant possibly expirence something else even though i play on a different server at high mmr

you can just say the people in here are "built different" if you want to cope that way, and that's exactly how i think about you with some of the crazy things youve said, but that doesnt make you more or less right

[green portal]

well considering this chat I've perhaps only talked with a handful of people from here that have been active at this time, but they including you seem to be running very high levels of copium and share the same views about the game. However, that doesn't align with the average hunt experience and feedback you can get from a hunter that plays actively the game and that you can find on a server.

You cannot change the fact that there is also people who think very differently than you, and it's not just individuals like me, but the way how I would like hunt being improved and how some things should be fixed are backed with hundreds or thousands of active players currently

But, if the development ideas are solely coming from individuals in this chat from very specific people, then I can see why the updates are weird and very uncalled for at times.

The feedback suggestions I've written here for this game are not specifically that odd, besides for the odd part that they are always mostly disliked by the Hunt discord community, which seems to align differently to the actual player base of Hunt - I'm not sure what to think about this because some suggestions I've given (and been highly disliked here) have still found their way into the game and had a very positive effect on the game. So yeah 😄

[blissful jackal]

i play the game almost everyday, becasue my opinion is different doesnt mean its copium 🤣

[blissful jackal]

interesting not a single one in here has backed you up yet

where are the so called thousands you speak of

[sand kiln]

They already said they don't care if an idea is downvoted or upvote a lot, if it's an idea that could work great for the game they may consider it

Votes are just feedback from the discord community not the thinking of the whole community

[green portal]

That's how it should be, it would be pretty difficult to get ideas through this colony of people. lol

[slim pollen]

#game-ideas message

Play CoD?

The heck does "Abusing high damage output system" mean? Did you expect a game full of slow-firing pre-WW1 weapons to be a low damage per-bullet game?

[queen jungle]

Reducing every weapons damage to deal with campers? Now that's a wild one.

[sand kiln]

(It won't do anything)

[analog sigil]

If your only response to seeing negative feedback on your ideas is ignorance there is no hope with you. All suggestions ive seen from you are changing the game in a major way while solving no issues you adress.

Oh i see people already obliterated you i apologize

[frozen crater]

yeah most of those were pretty radical suggestions

I did like his suggestion to check a box to not play in empty servers

TBH I'm down to consider upvoting radical suggestions as long as they are well explained and have clear reasoning for their implementation

[surreal steppe]

#game-ideas message
would be cool if it gave you temporary over-health. Nothing out of pocket, maybe 10=25 health temporarily

[green portal]

Of course lowering damage output would be effective fix, because camping would be considered way less desired use for time, if you wouldn't get rewarded with a kill by simply waiting for someone to walk into your crosshair and click. Then, u would need to still win the firefight, which usually would mean that instead of just hiding and firing coward shots you need to also be subject to getting targeted.

And as stated before, you would also be couraged to move more, since you (the camper) wouldn't get obliterated the very second they step out of the shadows. They would survive more before dying, allowing for the player to relax a bit more and get around.

[frozen crater]

Yeah, but then you inflict collateral damage on non-camping gunfights, where the gunplay would be completely altered.

[green portal]

although you like to see it as collateral damage, one could see it as a blessing that would fix all the problems in the game if the simpler weapon/ammo system (suggestion above) was also implemented.

It's a wholesome package in 2 steps that would fix all problems.

[frozen crater]

I'm assuming this suggestion is connected to your 'multiply everyone's health by 2,' which I think enters the realm of gunfights taking TOO long to finish

[green portal]

well I don't prefer the current one-tap (bodyshot) firefights that much.

[frozen crater]

TTK as it is feels very good for the majority of the playerbase, but 1 tap body taps are a different story

[hoary widget]

TTK is fine until you die once

[frozen crater]

As it stands, my personal opinion is that 1 tap body taps against people missing a bar should be reserved for 1 shot weapons

[green portal]

lowering damage output for weapons would fix this

[hoary widget]

Although i don't think a blanket change will just magically fix that

[analog sigil]

time to switch games instead of changing a game a fuckton of people like in the current state

[frozen crater]

But I'm waiting to see if there are any more weekly vids that address any further gunplay changes before I really form an opinion on what Id like to see changed

[green portal]

honestly, I dislike the idea that to improve survivability they add traits that allow you to regain your health faster or completely renew it.

[hoary widget]

It's been a popular opinion around the community lately to lower the damage of repeating long ammo weapons which i'm not against either

But i think we'll first have to see how bullet drop affects weapon pickrate (if it does at all)

[analog sigil]

its been a loud one for sure but if long ammo damage is reduced below a meaningful threshold youve just added another bunch of medium ammo weapons with slightly longer two tap range

an odd gameplay decision

[hoary widget]

Part of me doesn't mind that because it's kind of already over atm if you die once against long ammo

[analog sigil]

its already over if you die to a vetterli in a compound

a lot of weapons do past 125

[frozen crater]

definitely not guaranteed

[green portal]

indeed having a bunch of similar weapons is a great reason to also remove most of the weird / similar weapons of same types and make the remaining weapon collection more concise.

[frozen crater]

vetterli has only 26 or so m of 1 tap potential, and if you use fmj, its very difficult landing a 1 tap with pistol-like velocity

[hoary widget]

Which is why i'd rather see them rework the health system if anything

[analog sigil]

350m/s within 50 meters is no lead on thorax

[frozen crater]

long ammo has the advantage of muzzle velocity, which is insanely important to their usability

[analog sigil]

I mean it is technically lead but not major

[frozen crater]

which would be easy if they were in the open

[analog sigil]

Im biased because Im used to shotbolting people

[frozen crater]

but within a compound (50m), people dodge in and out of cover VERY quickly

it would be much easier to land a long ammo shot in that situation than an fmj vetterli

[analog sigil]

with fmj its merely concealment

true

[bright plank]

You understand how ridiculously this would buff shotguns, though, right?

[analog sigil]

Watch him argue shotguns should two shot like this is some tf2

gotta pull up point blank for two meatshots to kill

[bright plank]

Yeah but then Caldwell, Terminus, and Crown all exist.

[analog sigil]

three if they got a buff

Maybe we add medics with uber too

[green portal]

not necessarily, if you consider promoting the hitpoint area in damage calculation instead of distance.

[bright plank]

In general this just buffs a lot of spam heavy weapons.

Not even gonna get into how big of an Avto buff that is.

[green portal]

this is why you cannot implement such fix on top of the current mess of the weaponsystem that it is

[analog sigil]

This is no fix

its just a silly hypothesis

which would fail miserably if ever tested

[green portal]

would be interesting to see the test results for the entire suggestion and the results would be excellent

you would be surprised, since you cannot imagine it

[analog sigil]

well if I cannot imagine it you surely also have a solution for the two main issues im thinking about but clearly you have imagined an answer to them too

do you know what these two are

or are you just foolish

[hoary widget]

I think you're looking at this too simplistically freeze

this topic and the issues it has go deeper than just ''lower damage''

[green portal]

@hoary widget if you read the entire discussion that took place today, it is addressed here in much detail

drastic changes but simple results

lower damage is a good start, but it is not enough alone, since the weapon system is an absolute mess.

pistols shooting shotgun bullets, shotguns being rifles, penetration depending on ammo type and so forth, it's like from a kids book

if someone laid out this current scheme it would be a subject to a joke

[analog sigil]

[hoary widget]

this sentence just destroyed my ability to take you serious, i'm sorry.

[analog sigil]

This must be elaborate bait

I concede

[green portal]

the excuse for a such weapon system to exist is very ingenious.

and as it is, it will only continue to get worse over time as it haywires more and more with upcoming "balance" fixes, that make it more complex

[bright plank]

What?

You have to be rage-baiting.

💀

[hybrid forum]

Holy shit, y'all were talking about this for 4 hours

💀

[green portal]

about the current damage output, and btw this is recorded from MMR 3

I wouldnt mind if the firefight lasted 20 times longer.

[queen jungle]

Not sure how this matters, you were in a 1v3 and stood out in the open, still.

[green portal]

yep exactly, unsurvivable situations

i'm less than 1 meter from cover and it would have been impossible to get behind it after the first guy peeked, let alone survive even if I traded with the first guy

it perfectly showcases the damage issue

[queen jungle]

Except you 100% had time to move and reposition.

It's not a good argument for your suggestion.

[green portal]

it's not good, it's excellent

you can easily say comments like yours after seeing the video, but before that, there was no need to hide from anything. I was actually waiting for the guy to come nearby the barrel to blow it up

[queen jungle]

So uh, where does camping come into this?

They pushed you hard.

[green portal]

nothing to do with camping, two separate subjects. As I said, it's from 3MMR and if you have followed the discussion, there is no campers on 3 MMR

at this point i suspect that you pretending that this very simple subject is that hard to grasp, lol

[queen jungle]

It's not that it's hard to grasp, your suggestion just doesn't make sense.

As many others would agree.

[green portal]

it's very clear from that particular video that there's an issue with damage output. And if you want to draw camping into it, if you camp, you wont even need the teammates for a similar instakill with the current damage output

i just particularly love that clip since it was super recent and there is nothing anyone could do to survive that

[hot vigil]

There is nothing "wrong" with the damage output in that clip.
Hunt have always been balanced around 2-taps and that seems no one have any issue with that

[green portal]

of course there has been a lot of discussion about that and it has been a problem. Why do you think otherwise that regen and regain bars has continuously been buffed throughout the few recent years? Not only that, also necro is added to lessen the permadeath nature of the game due to the lethality.

If there was less damage output, none of that garbage would have been needed

especially because for example necro, has always functioned quite poorly and with instaburning and bodycamping it is completely useless feature if you are not 100 meters away at the time of death.

I would rather spend my time fighting for survival rather than waiting for a revive because of these unsurvivable firefights where you don't need more than arm or a leg to kill

[frozen crater]

this is a really poor example. this example is only advocating for making it less punishing when you get caught in poor positioning.

they were able to capitalize off of you being slow (adsing) and out in the open

[green portal]

the position is definitely not poor, lol.

[frozen crater]

it is awful

you are out in the open with 0 cover, not even crouchable cover near you

[green portal]

I also love how you are now proving the second point which is, on high MMR there is only mistakes which cause people to resort to camping.

if you consider 99.9 % of the positions in hunt poor, you obviously are the person sitting in the bush

[frozen crater]

taking cover is not camping

[green portal]

exactly, you don't move much, so you can stay behind the cover all time

[frozen crater]

pushing 100% of the time is suboptimal, so taking cover is necessary part of the time. Taking cover and dodging in between cover isnt camping

camping in the context of hunt is much more subjective than other games

[green portal]

thank you for your speech for this matter, it has been very helpful considering how many points you were able to prove while disagreeing, lol

[frozen crater]

its mostly associated with using natural terrain to disguise you when ambushing someone or never peeking within a compound fight

[green portal]

afraid to move because all positions are terrible, afraid of high damage output so can only sit behind cover.

[frozen crater]

Youre acting as if taking cover is some profound instance of hardcore camping

no matter what its considered, it shouldnt be nerfed in the slightest, especially in a compound

if you think that its optimal to never move in higher stars, then you havent played in the higher stars consistenty

the best teams are those which are very aggressive and confident in their gunskill

constantly moving up on an enemy once they know their position and making sure they are covered on the most angles as possible while still advancing

using cover is not camping.

[green portal]

that does not happen in reality, as great as that sounds! I totally agree with that being how it should be, and lowering damage output would definitely make people to move more, even if the route is not optimal.

you cannot move from cover to cover, there are times when you don't have cover, that's part of the normal gameplay.

[frozen crater]

again, the definition of camping is subjective. to me, cover isnt camping since I reserve that word for bush wookies and people who never peek or move in a compound fight

[frozen crater]

yes you definitely can tf

[green portal]

What you said though, advancing once you know enemy position is a prime reveal of your camping, you camp until someone else moves into your perimeter and then you can advance "cover to cover" in a very specific spots where cover has purposely made, such as walls in a compound

[frozen crater]

You can move when the enemy is reloading, when your teammates are shooting them, when theyre distracted by ai, using consumables and equipment to distract then, or you can just dodge in and out of cover and hope you can get shot

there are plenty of options to help you move in between cover within a compound

it also has to do with game sense and timing, with you naturally knowing when its a good time to advance or retreat

[green portal]

you are expecting a situation to take place that is highly unusual. No one is reloading weapons if no one is shooting. No one is moving in your perimeter, if they are camping. You are not seeing people move, because they are just like you, sitting and waiting for someone to move so they can move to them from cover to cover.

I don't know where you get these imaginary situations.

[frozen crater]

Im talking about cover and how important it is to positioning yourself well in a gunfight so as to avoid the situation you were in that video

because this is not just about camping, its about your overall idea to increase ttk

When it comes to people not moving an inch, and there is no interaction whatsoever in a compound (not to get confused with ambush camping since I think thats valid), then I would agree that there needs to be a mechanic to encourage that fight to happen

The beetles are supposed to be that mechanic, but I think theyre much too weak in their current state to be effective in fully fulfilling that role

[green portal]

I am never going to start to be afraid to move around in the game, as horrible as the spots you think are, you should move more to see that it is highly unlikely to get randomly assaulted even if your situation isn't optimal and far from cover. These situations happen to everyone, and its besides the point. Point is, when firefights occur, you are instantly dead with this damage model.

[frozen crater]

you died in that clip with 3 enemies looking at you

that is not an instance of a nonfunctional damage model

that is an instance of bad positioning and decision-making

[green portal]

oh definitely is. First, there is no one, then the firefight starts and before anything, I'm dead.

You cannot make decisions in advance in a situation like that. You would've not been able to know if there is going to be 1 guy peeking, two, or three. All what you are saying is pointless, because you say it only now that you have seen the video. It's a great example of a poor damage model.

[frozen crater]

1. You had darksight in that clip
2. You were aiming in their direction, so you knew their general locations
3. You chose anyway to go out in the open, in a position with no cover whatsoever
4. You decided to do all this with an officer

There were so many things that you did poorly that resulted in your death NOT due to ttk being too high

You play solo by taking 3 1v1s instead of a 1v3.

You shouldve died by all accounts in that video, even if in this hypothetical world you had twice as much health

[ripe basalt]

[green portal]

Great suggestions, but I wont start camping behind a cover to survive 3v1 situations, the game is more fun when it's played, but unfortunately it has problems like this damage model, and that many people are like you, just waiting for angles behind a rock.

[frozen crater]

If you think that bad camping is using cover and taking gunfights on your terms but still actively participating in the firefight*, then I dont think I can convince you that this isnt bad camping

[tawny meadow]

To be honest, even with a lower damage output, in a 3v1 situation where you have no cover, you'll just be gunned down.

[green portal]

within 0.1 seconds, no, there I would have time to take cover.

Even having enough time to start moving left or right would have saved me there

[ripe basalt]

You don't need to hide. You had darksight. From the minimal information in the clip, we know that one of the trio is over extended to your left (as seen coming around that wall). This would have given you the first immediately 1v1. One partner is on the highground which would have given him no option to assist his partner without jumping down. The third partner is on ground level, but shows himself with a bomblance out despite the range you are at.

Overall, being in the open vs 1v3 and then complaining about being deleted is indeed a mute point. You should've died here regardless unless they simply missed.

You send a message stating "Within 0.1 second, no". The clip is longer than that, and you obviously knew they were there before you got shot. So yes, you did have time. You just didn't take advantage of the information you had.

[frozen crater]

^

[ripe basalt]

Could've been one headshot from the first person you saw

[frozen crater]

its a bad clip, I understand the argument, I just dont think the clip applies to the argument. I still disagree with the argument. think Im finished here

also loling how you prioritized aiming at the horses head instead of any other angle which hunters would most likely peek from

[ripe basalt]

I don't think it's a fair assessment to point out skill flaws in the aiming. The user did state it was 3* MMR. Instead we can isolate it down to "How can I fight this without fighting 1v3". The TTK complaint in regards to the particular clip is irrelevant because it's one person vs 3, as you mentioned above.

[frozen crater]

the aiming is definitely one of the reasons why he died in that clip, but agreed that it doesnt affect the ttk argument. thats why I merely said it made me laugh.

[green portal]

Aiming definitely didn't contribute to the death at all. Even if I traded with the first guy, I would have very likely died anyway

Especially, if I was aiming on the left as suggested and got the bomblance guy.

And showing himself with bomblance, I don't know why you even mention that, he can shoot with it too?

[frozen crater]

if you had decided to pre aim at a place in which a hunter could be, you wouldve gotten a shot off that wouldve aimpunched him or killed him

and if that turned out to be one of the hunters that shot you, you wouldve avoided getting double tapped as quickly. thus giving you a chance at least

[ripe basalt]

It's information. The chances of him tagging you with the bomblance shot is low. He doesn't even lob it in the clip to participate in killing you. The point is retrospection. bomblance user was unprepared to assist his team from range as seen by him showing around the corner unprepared to shoot at you. Your position in the middle of the opening was the downfall. You had information to take the left hand dude first. You wouldn't stay in the open and aim at the left guy. You would have taken the left hand path to fight that guy instead. You being in the open removed all options. You had no where to go but you were ADS'd ready to fight, resulting in you being double tagged. I could argue that if you did kill one player, you could'va lived. But it's irrelevant, solo vs trios is hard.

[analog sigil]

why the fuck should you survive being triplepeeked standing still

you are also firing to nowhere

POV: freezE in your game trying to egopeek an entire team wide as fuck

clearly that guy should have lived

he was right next to the cart!"

He shouldve been able to spam 5 shots to kill a guy and then tank a long ammo headshot or two and retreat safely to cover

those pesky campers right

I doubt he even is aware of weapons like shotbolt

[green portal]

most of the weapons should be removed to keep the gun base simple

[rotund obsidian]

just watched that clip. literally being shot at by 3 people out in the open. what do u mean.

[analog sigil]

In his crusade against being fucked over and over again by silly 3 star trios he has also concluded that variety of weapon choises is a bad thing

If he has to decide what to play it is far too much for any human to handle

A mental overload of sorts that occurs when choices go past 1

[rotund obsidian]

brother was 13m away from a specter and got shot at by multiple people. no cover whatsoever

[analog sigil]

They implemented this for 6 star game rating, you can only bring mosin spitzer and dolch p fmj

one ammo choice and two weapons

[analog sigil]

Bro the game HAS to change and not his positional understanding

dont you get it

he is fixing the game because his gameplay is perfect and the game just doesnt understand it

Its unfortunate nobody else really gets his point

[rotund obsidian]

I can (sorta) understand the reasoning behind wanting longer ttk, though I disagree. I think removing most of the weapons is downright absurd though.

[analog sigil]

A world of people who are incapable of comprehending the viewpoint of the righteous and the wise minded

[unborn dagger]

I mean the only weapons that should be considered to be removed is Dolch and the Avto

[midnight raptor]

im not a fan of the auto5 balancing

[blissful jackal]

glad to check this chat again and see everyone disagreeing with you 😁

[midnight raptor]

@green portal considering your recent posts and suggestions i think maybe this game isnt for u

[green portal]

it's apparently not for anyone since all new players quit very fast

except for some very specific people here (who seem to play entirely different game lol)

[blissful jackal]

surely the game would be be dead if only very few new players are playing\

[queen zinc]

Im sorry, what?

[queen zinc]

Crown and King?

Its good with flechettes

Not really OP imo

Expensive

[midnight raptor]

its not that expensive tho

price to power is insane plus u just spec quartermaster and get a uppercut and ur an all range machine

[queen zinc]

Anytime you are using shotguns, you have to close to shotgun range, where a LOT of things just 1-tap

Having the auto fire allows forgiveness, but if your enemy doenst miss their shotgun, its a null advantage

Uppercut is good, but doesnt quite hold up v rifles

[midnight raptor]

Its not about close shotgun range

Being in that 15-20m range where shotguns dont one tap means u can just spray down 3 or 4 shells and win the fight

[queen zinc]

At that range, ANY use of cover will largely negate your spread

And you will do tickle damage

A target in the open

Sure

But why shouldnt it?

Consider how many weapons can rapid fire 2-tap

[midnight raptor]

You do tickle damage but its like 30-40 damage at a crazy fire rate

[queen zinc]

Not even 30-40

Trust me, at higher elos, Auto 5's are fun, but by no means dominant

[midnight raptor]

Idk man ive been 6 star for a while and i do get shit on by them a lot

And im by no means a rich player

I usually stick around 12k hunt dollars 24/7

[frozen crater]

I think the crown is fine buckshot wise, but I dont think it should have long barrel slugs

[queen zinc]

They arent "bad" weapons

[frozen crater]

It would be far more balanced with medium barrel slugs

[queen zinc]

So not surpriused

But not OP
They have definitive weaknesses

You mention a SPECIFIC range they are strong at, sure

[midnight raptor]

The more mag size and fire rate in a SHOTGUN increases the range dramatically. It's why the Caldwell Rival is so good, it can deliver 2 shells super quick which extends the range of the weapon

The auto5 just has an INSANE range because of its firerate and magsize

[queen zinc]

If you can get that close

IF your opponent doesnt have cover

IF your opponent doesnt just 1-tap you first

[midnight raptor]

Its uncommon enough for a romero player to peek you expecting a quick kill, not one tapping, and getting mowed down

Nobody expects it

[queen zinc]

Then its the Romero players fault

[midnight raptor]

Thats the power point

[queen zinc]

Yes

As it should have one

At its cost'

Its like comparing the Mosin to the Sparks

Some weapons should be better than others

Everyone can die to a 1-tap regardless

[thin remnant]

Man just owned up to being bad?

Also is this argument still going

[thin remnant]

Sparks has poison and can do the funny meme strategies

Also it has the chad factor compared to sparks

[queen zinc]

Not even for memes

Sparks is a good weapon

Its use is different

But its a good weapon

[thin remnant]

Yeah I agree

Wait what

Didn't you just say mosin was better objectively

I misunderstood ig

I'm personally a martini man myself

Also I just looked at freezes other post and bro thinks you can head glitch in hunt?

[queen zinc]

Better, yes

But sparks is still "good"

Overpowered is an extreme category where a fight becomes unfair

A sparks v a Mosin is not unfair

Crown and king is better, but its not an unfair wepaon

[thin remnant]

But it's not

I mean it's better from a certain viewpoint

[queen zinc]

A mosin is not better than a sparks?

[thin remnant]

But sparks has different uses making it not objectively better

[queen zinc]

Almost same damage, multi shot, better follow up, faster reload

[thin remnant]

Statistically speaking, neither are better than the other

[queen zinc]

other than damage, how is a mosin NOT better

[thin remnant]

...you're kidding right

"other than being double action, why should I use officer instead of nagant?"

[queen zinc]

Not a valid comparison in the slightest

Sparks damage doesnt reduce shots to kill

Its still gonna be "two" in 99% of scenarios

[thin remnant]

Damage. You can kill with choke bolt. You can't do that with mosin. Therefore, not objectively better

[queen zinc]

Mosin has better/faster follow up

[thin remnant]

Mosin is better in practice. But not objectively nor statistically

Sparks has higher damage meaning longer range, a teeeeny bit better burst damage on bosses and meme strategies like choke bolt. Mosin doesn't do that

But yes mosin is basically the better pick

[queen zinc]

How, in practicality, of ANY sense, is the mosin not better?

This is an absurdism

[thin remnant]

I said, it's not

[queen zinc]

The NICHE "superioirty" of the sparks, is that under ideal circumstances they can die to "anything", which is rarely able to be taken advantage of in any unique way you couldnt with something else

[thin remnant]

Yeah, rarely

I am a man of statistics.

[queen zinc]

Minus that 1% scenario, Mosin is objectively better

Its why it costs more

[thin remnant]

Statistically speaking, mosin is not better. Sure it's better, but it's not better

[queen zinc]

What statistics are you referring to?

What in the fuck are you arguing?

[thin remnant]

...the fact sparks does 149 dmg

[queen zinc]

And?

[thin remnant]

Therefore not objectively worse

[queen zinc]

Sparks is good, mosin is better

How, in any practical sense, does the 149 damage make any "statisitcal difference"?

How many shots to kill?

2

Same for Mosin

[empty oasis]

Going to have to disagree here.
Dmg aside, The mosin meets or exceeds sparks in most stats and completely outclasses it in others

[thin remnant]

I am not talking about sparks being a better pick in practice im talking about statistics

Clearly our brains just work differently that's fine

[queen zinc]

Thats not how statistics work dude

[thin remnant]

For something to be absolutely completely and always better for me it needs the same or a less obstructing model and objectively better stats.

My argument does rest on that one time in a lifetime sparks comes in handy, but I admit that.

Yes mosin is better

Mosin is better but there will always be one game in infinite parallel universes where you'd rather have a sparks

So by how I interpret "better" I can't say it's objectively always better

[empty oasis]

By that logic, you cant say that mosin is objectively better than the bornheim

[thin remnant]

Yeah.

[empty oasis]

Thats a rather silly argument then

[thin remnant]

I'm not arguing that mosin isn't better than sparks 99.9999 percent of the time

It is, but I can't say it's objectively better always

[empty oasis]

If the mosin is better 99.99% of the time then the mosin is objectively better

[thin remnant]

Nah

Statistics vary

For one person, the sparks might be better 51 percent of the time

Purely because of playstyle and such

Also it's still not objectively better always
The way I interpret the definition is that to be better objectively, it must always be better

Imma stop this isn't even a debate about hunt this is just a debate about maths

[empty oasis]

You arent arguing in good faith and are making up definitions to suit your point.

[thin remnant]

Look up the definition of better and objectively

Oh and always is important too

Interpretation is very important

Bye bye

[rotund obsidian]

mosin is better but its not a straight upgrade over the sparks

there are (admittedly very few) things the sparks does better. there is a reason to run the sparks.

When it comes to clear-cut straight upgrades now, there aren't as many as there used to be. Winfield over the winnie c is one, Lebel/winfield/mako aperture over base, winnie/marathon swift over base. There are a good few now that REALLY toe the line, especially mako claw, since the only downside you get is... losing the light attack's blunt hit? which is functionally irrelevant. the upside is you get a grunt killer with the claw, AND an extra hit with the buttstock (lol).

[thin remnant]

thank you <3

[thin remnant]

doesnt winny c have faster firerate?

oh

[rotund obsidian]

all the winny c has is a higher recoil lmao

[empty oasis]

It's a direct upgrade in all but 1 shot dmg and split ammo pool

[rotund obsidian]

(and a smaller magazine)

[thin remnant]

i forgot about split ammo pool haha

i always remembered the winny c being "the better one"

idk why

maybe cause the downsides are no negligible no one cares and just uses the og

[rotund obsidian]

it used to get better ammo resupply because more of the ammo started in reserve, so it had a bigger reserve pool, but now resupply is constant based on type, not total reserve.

[thin remnant]

dang

i really disagree with straight upgrade game design im gonna be honest

but eh it could be worse in hunt

arent aperture variants straight upgrades

and melee variants as well soon

[rotund obsidian]

i mean sure, it's definitely a better gun. but it's not just sparks but better in every way. it DOES have downsides, even if they don't make up for all the positives

[empty oasis]

What downsides does it have that the sparks doesnt?

[thin remnant]

[also sparks has poisonnnnnn which totally matterssss actually sparks poison is pretty decent when combined with stuff like choke bolt but thats kinda a memeeee]

[rotund obsidian]

149 vs 136. Does this matter? debatable. Is it a stat that is lower? yes.

[thin remnant]

and split ammo pool [and poisonnnnn]

doesnt sparks also get more reserve ammo

[empty oasis]

Thats . . . the same thing I listed as the only things the sparks leads with

[thin remnant]

Then you argued against your own point.

Split ammo pool, different ammo types, better damage, more reserve ammo

[rotund obsidian]

They're two different guns, brother.

[thin remnant]

the only guns that are straight upgrades right now are variants.

oh actually..

crown and king slugs...

:(

[empty oasis]

Agreed but the mosin meets or exceeds the sparks in pretty much every other statistic

[thin remnant]

but ig thats not a gun thats an ammo type

[thin remnant]

yeah so we all agree here

[rotund obsidian]

what are we arguing here? it's a better gun, just not a straight upgrade

[thin remnant]

Thoughts on a roaming dropbear boss?

[sand kiln]

Nuh uh

Gimme a giant bear better

[thin remnant]

giant drop bear.

[empty oasis]

But it is a straight upgrade in all aspects other than single shot damage

[thin remnant]

ammo pool reserve ammo ammo types

anyway thoughts on a roaming drop bear boss? im changing the subject here whether you like it or not

#game-ideas message

[rotund obsidian]

It is a straight upgrade in most aspects but a strict definition of "straight upgrade" implies that you make no concessions, there are no tradeoffs, it is just better or equal in EVERY aspect.

cause if there are tradeoffs thats just an upgrade

[empty oasis]

Which is why I asked, aside from dmg, where does the sparks compare

[rotund obsidian]

do i gotta wear my ground harness to fight the drop bear

[thin remnant]

AMMO RESERVE SPLIT AMMO DIFFERENT AMMO TYPES.

[rotund obsidian]

i mean there are other small aspects but damage is enough of a downgrade here

[thin remnant]

Anyyywaaaayyyyyssss, thoughts on a roaming drop bear boss? #game-ideas message

this cant go on forever surely

[empty oasis]

Thats just it, what other small aspects? There's not really any of them that I can think of

[rotund obsidian]

#feedback-discussion message

[thin remnant]

AMMO RESERVE AMMO SPLIT AND AMMO TYPES.

did you block me or smth lol

[rotund obsidian]

they're different guns lol

[empty oasis]

And while being different guns, the mosin is superior to the sparks

aside from the 2 aspects I listed before

[thin remnant]

Yes in practice but it's not a straight upgrade

..different ammo types and ammo pool

[rotund obsidian]

throw reload time of individual bullets onto the pile

[thin remnant]

Soooooooo what are your opinions on a roaming drop bear boss? #game-ideas message :D

[empty oasis]

Pretty sure the mosin doesnt reload 1 bullet every 4 seconds

[thin remnant]

....more..
more reserve ammo... and.... different ammo types and split ammo types......

[rotund obsidian]

If my gun's empty and I need to reload one shot, i think the sparks does it faster, doesn't it?

especially if i only have 4 in reserve

[thin remnant]

https://tenor.com/oAr7.gif

[rotund obsidian]

i am absolutely agreeing with you that the mosin is a superior gun. there is no contest

[thin remnant]

Both have downsides and upsides, but mosin's upsides outweigh the sparks'.

but it's not a straight upgrade due to sparks having stats that ARE better

hit me up when yall are ready to change the topic ;-;

[empty oasis]

The sparks would still take 4 seconds to reload that 1 shell
The mosin i'd have to test but reloading a single round shouldnt take 4 seconds I dont think

[rotund obsidian]

the mosin's reload is pretty absurdly fast but there literally doesn't need to be more than one tradeoff for it to not truly count as a "straight upgrade"

If there was a mosin variant that dealt 1 more damage but it deals less melee damage or something. that's not technically a straight upgrade.

[thin remnant]

imagine if they added a sparks ironside

[rotund obsidian]

lmfao

[thin remnant]

ok seems like that argument is done

now i can ask

Thoughts on a dropbear roaming boss? #game-ideas message
I feel like hunt needs more monsters that are actually a threat to you and need more playing around.
Something where just leaving its area doesn't instantly make you completely safe.

[flat sandal]

I think adding the drop bear would be a bit much. You have to think about all the families that could get a upset by it irl.

the families of all the victims that is

but adding rarely occurring mini bosses would be cool. without clues even

[thin remnant]

My uncle got killed by a dropbear I still haven't gotten over it :(

[flat sandal]

I'm sorry

[thin remnant]

He tried to boop its nose but didn't realize the nose was actually his mouth...

[flat sandal]

dam dude that's rough.

sry gtg

^^

[thin remnant]

goodbye

[flat sandal]

I mean I do but before I go. One game I didn't know RJ was there and I suddenly heard the noise when going through the water. Took a second to compute. Was kinda cool. So more mini bosses that just make their presents known when you accidently stumble across them would be super fun I think.

[thin remnant]

Yeah, so something like that but when you're wandering through the forest you hear this growl and branch rustling up in the trees and now you're about to get pounced and have to react fast

[flat sandal]

So a drop bear like creature would be a good idea imo. You'd have to have some time to react though. Like, it just rarely happens and when you hear the noise you have to be quick to react.

[thin remnant]

Or the whole sprinting at you with enough noise thing

[thin remnant]

yeah for sure

[flat sandal]

oh yes lol

[thin remnant]

Even just a drop bear enemy would be pretty cool I guess, but I think a similar boss would be nicer. I want a roaming boss that poses a real threat without having to intentionally run after it.

Something that's terrifying and shakes up the game when it's there

anyway u gotta go dude <3

[flat sandal]

it's one of these things. it might take a lot of developing time for seemingly little effect but it being rare would make it actually super effective imo

alright, cya

[tribal wyvern]

@fathom totem Nobody is telling you how or when to play the game.
Hunt is incredibly lenient in allowing you to play in other regions.

You can't just switch regions like you switch underwear in other fps games for a reason.
Your ability to play the game doesn't triumph every player you come accrosses enjoyment.

Expecting to play with full lobbies and active players 24/7 is not reasonable nor something to demand.

[rustic timber]

Well.. with center crosshair, and a relauch.. Maybe we can get a bigger player base.. Yeah, it comes at a cost of orginality.. But so what.. More player.. Welcome COD people! 😉

[tribal wyvern]

maybe

Some people could feel pushed away by things like bullet drop to.
Where we already have leading shots.

[rustic timber]

Yeah.. but a slight bullet drop after so and so many meters.. Just to remove pistol sniping, and make long ammo range kills a tad more nerfed.. I think we are imaginign a worst case scenario to be honest.

[rotund obsidian]

haha surely they won't give long ammo rifles the best drop off ranges, right? ...

[rustic timber]

Apperantly they go for velocity, barrel lenght.. and weight of bullet. Meaning that long ammo falls more.. Not a problem to be honest.. A curved bullet drop opens up for kills behind obstacles, if the bullet falls upon them.

Pluss removing of headshot range limit... Which makes more weapons dangerous at distances... Where long ammo used to be king.

Ofcourse damage droppoff the long ammo is still the deal..

[tribal wyvern]

We have no idea. They just refuse to elaborate yet.

[rustic timber]

Well, they have told what they gonna do.. and the photoes are showing how fast the droppoff will happend. But you are right, that we are not sure how much it is yet visually..

[rotund obsidian]

Hoping there's another video tomorrow that actually showcases it, but i guess that's optimistic

[rustic timber]

Isn't it comming today?

I think it is later today, if they follow their schedule.

[rotund obsidian]

today technically sure, but it's 3am for me so in my head that's tomorrow

[tribal wyvern]

They have said they will add bullet drop.
And Pax i think had 15m bullet drop range. What it means no idea

Drops after 15m, drops 15m after a base range, how big is the drop

[rotund obsidian]

Pax had 10m. That's the range where bullet drop starts

[tribal wyvern]

but it also said weapons will not feel anything between 25-50m

[empty oasis]

You can't just switch regions like you switch underwear in other fps games for a reason.

Like what? Most of the big fps that I can think of let you pick a region

[tribal wyvern]

R6 siege afaik you cannot go into any settings in the game to switch.

[rustic timber]

I think it will affect long range play. Most fights are up to 60 meters. So I think we that play normally, won't notice much. All do, we might get sniped a bit more with high velocity ammo..

[tribal wyvern]

did a quick google, and you need to change config files in your folder, doesn't seem like an intended way.

[empty oasis]

Seeing as its an article from ubisoft, I'd say it's intended

[rustic timber]

Are you guys discussing ubisoft games here at Hunt showdown?

[tribal wyvern]

CS2 you cant either

[empty oasis]

tangentially. Mostly discussing how most fps let you pick your region

[rustic timber]

Ahh.. I see.. Well I am in norway, so I am also a bit suprised when we get ping issues.. We are like a rock throw near germany.. So it suprises me.. Happend more often lately.. Perhaps it is something with the new update comming.

[tribal wyvern]

This is all speculation though. I'd prefer it only affecting ranges of 100m+

[rustic timber]

Wasn't it 85 on springfield or something? So based on the rifle, that might be a thing.. But it makes sense that pistols, and medium slot weapons get a little bit of sniping nerf.

[tribal wyvern]

I think a bullet drop of 10 or 15m is a bit more than "little sniping nerf"

[rustic timber]

And I am glad that long ammo gets it.. Because.. yeees.. I am only meeting mosin, krag and lebels these days.

I have only seen 10 or 15 m on the pistols.

Have you seen that number on the rifles? For I seem to recall in the video, that was much higher on the rifles.. Like I said.. I think springfield had 85.. if my memory serves.. (which it doesn't always do)

[rotund obsidian]

They mentioned action type and barrel length will matter, so I figure that the springfield is one of the highest.

[rustic timber]

and type of ammo.. Hv and spitzer gets buffed.

Hope the buff medium ammo do.. The damage droppoff is insane.

[rotund obsidian]

Looking at previous videos right now for the drop range stat, martini says 60

[rustic timber]

that is a long ammo do.

[rotund obsidian]

I mean, winfield is 50

bornheim is 15

[rustic timber]

compact one?

[rotund obsidian]

Lemat is 15, winnie vandal is 35

Berthier is 50

[rustic timber]

Good numbers to start with then.. I think martini is gonna get hv ammo then, if it has 60.

[rotund obsidian]

.... i sure hope not

[rustic timber]

I can't really really recall fights I have had above 100 meters without scope.

Some lucky shots I guess..

And then we don't know how much the fall is.. A steep drop, or a slight bullet dropp.. (as they called it).. If you aim between their eyes, are it gonna hit the belly or the mouth.. That is the question..

[tribal wyvern]

I was talking about the pistol. That means they're rough to use in compounds even, unless the guy is in your face.

Take scupper lake for example. Coming from NE standing on one of the roof tops, you might even experience bullet drops there just shooting towards the bosslair

To specify, with pistol.

I just want compound battles to be untouched by bullet drop. Anything shooting from outside & in, should be. Like sniping.

[rustic timber]

I can see that. Again, I suppose steep vs slight drop is the thing here. But fmj bullet is gonna have a rough time now...

[tribal wyvern]

ye i'm suspecting spitzer/HV to be the kings

Gonna practice the living F out off HV.
As i really dislike the dmg loss on spitzer

[rustic timber]

same here for hv.. a little above 50 meters make a hv centannial perform 43 damage..

The bleed ammo used to be the only way to make a centannial take out someone at three shots.. But now.. Naah.. the damage droppoff needs a tiny buff..

and a medium buff for medium ammo! xD

[tribal wyvern]

I guess the fine line between Medium ammo is too competitive with long ammo at a much cheaper price

[rotund obsidian]

cent is already the best medium ammo gun imo

it's the other ones that actually need love

drilling is solid, just a tad overpriced, especially for base ammo

vetterli is mid, springfield is just bad

[dusky tapir]

vetterli is still faster than cent baseline isn't it?

it lacks dumdum and mv but makes up for it with its sheer dmg output

[rotund obsidian]

i think vet is slightly faster but not enough to really make a big difference imo

it's more of a preference thing, but iron eye on the vetterli leaves you with basically no indication of aim point, while iron eye on the cent only obscures it slightly

[tribal wyvern]

Vetterli also downs an already downed player

Cent does not

[analog sigil]

Cent has spitzer comparable velocity with hv

You just click heads even if players are downed

Because you have velocity its guaranteed taps to like 30 meters while they are running aiming center

Its a little reliant on aim though

But a loadout that scales with aim in a terrific manner

[thin remnant]

30m isn't long and people strafe.

[analog sigil]

What i mean is that even if they run sideways

The velocity is enough to catch their head if you dont lead

[thin remnant]

I mean sure

Why does that matter

Or is this a way of measuring velocity

[analog sigil]

Because you click on people especially when they ads walk up to 60 meters

[analog sigil]

But of course its a direct reason why velocity is so strong

Hitscan like is strong always

[thin remnant]

People don't run in straight lines unless you're in 2*

But yes velocity is strong

[analog sigil]

???

They can jump squiggle all they want i click on head

[thin remnant]

Yeah that's fine im just curious if the straight run scenario is meant to be realistic

[analog sigil]

Its a benchmark of sorts to visualize how fast its going

800 m/s is incomprehensibly fast otherwise

[thin remnant]

Anyway arguing "just click head" in every situation basically makes lebel Spitzer the only viable weapon

[rotund obsidian]

he's just saying the velocity is high enough that you don't have to lead in that situation (or really any other)

[thin remnant]

Maybe mosin

[thin remnant]

Ok yeah so it is to measure it. Thx

[analog sigil]

Lebel has a slight benefit in velocity at 860

Its indifferent

[thin remnant]

So if click head is the argument in any situation, lebel Spitzer is the only viable weapon

Correct?

Unless you want firerate ofc

[analog sigil]

There are also mosin cent and berth that all reach to around the 800 m/s group

Of course lebel is fastest but doesnt make others not viable

[thin remnant]

Yeah but mosin cent doesn't get long ammo opness

[analog sigil]

Its just a tiny gradual change when you need to start leading

[thin remnant]

And lebel has lots of ammo

[analog sigil]

Lebel has 15...

[thin remnant]

Not reserve

Anything above 9 if you're a trio doesn't matter if "just click head" because you click the enemy's head before they can revive

[rotund obsidian]

why are we assuming you'll always hit every shot? 'just click head' doesnt mean always landing it in one try lol

[thin remnant]

That's my point lol

Just click head isn't a good argument

[rotund obsidian]

??? what point

[thin remnant]

You can miss and accidentally tap body

[rotund obsidian]

?

so

[thin remnant]

∆∆∆

[rotund obsidian]

what does that have to do with anything. velocity is good, and clicking heads is good. being more likely to click a head and hit is good.

[thin remnant]

Yeah I didn't disagree with that

I'm saying the just click head argument is invalid.

Even the best players hit the body

[rotund obsidian]

who's making a 'just click head' argument

[thin remnant]

Metso

Unless I misunderstood

[rotund obsidian]

i think they were just saying that the velocity is high enough that clicking on the head = a kill

no leading required

[thin remnant]

I apologize for my misunderstanding then

[misty walrus]

This game is one big RNG now

[last ferry]

how so buddy?

aside from dualies and shotguns of course

[misty walrus]

tickrate, who first peek have adventage etc

Many rng elements

[tribal wyvern]

Pick? Or you mean peek ?

[rotund obsidian]

neither of these are rng

[fathom totem]

Overnight is when I get to play it on my nights off because I do nightshift. This has been the case since I started playing. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect I can continue to play when I've always played for the last 6 years. Crytek changing the ping cap is absolutely making an active and fully aware decision to shut people in low pop regions out of being able to play during off peak, thus, they are deciding when I am and am not able to play. There is nothing false about that statement.

[rotund obsidian]

What regions do you play on typically, and at what ping?

because i would be GENUINELY surprised if the ping limit is reduced to 150 or lower.

[tribal wyvern]

So when you start hunt & you choose Australias region, the game stops functioning ?
The matches do not load ?
Your region having a low pop is not Cryteks fault. They do not decide who plays the game.

It's reasonable to expect you to be able to play, yes & you can.
Comparison for you. You think this change for you, is the same as PS did with Helltakers where if you did not have PS you couldn't play? Which made it so countries that did not have PSN, couldn't play it at all.

Because THAT is deciding that you cannot play anymore. Forcing you to play on your region, which happens to be low pop is not telling you if you cannot play or not.

[rotund obsidian]

I imagine it doesn't help a region's playercount when a significant portion of the playerbase hops to a different region either.

[tribal wyvern]

That to. But it's incredibly overdramatic to claim that crytek is making the game unavailable to him, because he cannot play all over the world.

Because if forcing him to play his region = I cannot play anymore.
Then what the hell is the Helltakers example then ? The same? Hardly.

Nightshift sucks, I know. I've worked it to.

[fathom totem]

When the game's core mechanic of PvPvE is inaccessible because of empty servers... yes, it's absolutely the same thing. The game I our chased and have been playing in it's intended state for years becomes an entirely different game when you suddenly take a P out of PvPvE and make it PvE. That is no longer Hunt: Showdown... that's a different game called Hunting for Meaningful Combat.

So yes, it is exactly the same as not allowing me to play the game because at that point I am no longer playing the game I paid for and have continued to support for years.

[rotund obsidian]

Why are we pretending like this is gonna lock you to only one region?

Unless your second best region is like, 200 ping, in which case, good.

[fathom totem]

Cool story... everyone that's done a touch of nightshift thinks they understand my experience of doing it 4-6 days a week for the last 15 years. Add to that that entitled clowns from high pop regions don't understand the low pop region experience at all, nor do they give a f because they think the priority should be an S tier experience for them rather than more people being able to enjoy the game at all. Good stuff.

[fathom totem]

It's about the only available options all being dead at certain parts of the day. It wouldn't matter if the 2nd best option was popping with players during the off peak of the primary region, but that isn't the case.

[tribal wyvern]

I cannot agree that someone not allowing you start a game vs playing on a low pop off hour server, is the same whatsoever. The absolute delusion.

And why does your experience in the game triumph others ?

Also i do not care about your experience on night shift, to be frank.
I don't see how it differs from anyone elses experience on night shift.

But you've also done an active choice to work night shift.

Because all your statement says is, "my right to play on a populated server, triumphs your right to play and enjoy your matches."

Heres actually a good reason why it's not the same aswell, to add to my first statement.
You can simply take the day off, play during normal hours and VOILA you can now play with other australians.

The people who play Helldivers on a blocked country, needs to literally MOVE TO ANOTHER COUNTRY.

[rotund obsidian]

what the fuck is helltakers. do you mean helldivers 2?

[tribal wyvern]

Yes

Ty

Haha

[rotund obsidian]

i mean tbf they can still play if they owned the game, it's just not available for purchase

[tribal wyvern]

It was blocked to play it aswell

because you needed pSN, which was not available in the country

[rotund obsidian]

maybe briefly, but not anymore

no wait, i don't think they ever went through with the psn thing

they announced it and then pulled it back before the change actually happened

[tribal wyvern]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/553850/discussions/0/4357872738330787875/

So there was if not anymore, a restriction in place.

[rotund obsidian]

the restriction in question is buying the game. It was made unavailable for purchase

[tribal wyvern]

ye was like 177 countries the sale was removed from.

Well im done discussing here, needed to kill a few minutes of time before going home from work.
My main point was just, you're not blocked from playing the game. You just won't be able to play when your region is populated. Which sucks, i'm sure.

But its a decision on your side aswell. And again one mans enjoyment doesn' triumph everyone elses.

I respect voicing the concern, but I do not think you're right in demanding to play everywhere on any region.

[thin remnant]

Yeah gotta go with amaradas here, lower the trade/server validation window not the ping limit

[fathom totem]

No, I just expect to be able to play the game with populated servers like I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO DO FOR THE LAST 6 YEARS. You're the one expecting the mere quality level of your games to take priority over other people's ability to play the game at all. What does that say about you? You care more about whether the quality of your matches is improved slightly then you do about more people being able to play the game.

[thin remnant]

What's your opinion on lowering the trade/server validation window instead of ping limit? I for one am a massive advocate for that.

[fathom totem]

Agree with that 100%. Lowering the ping cap is some fools idea of a shitty workaround to fix the problem they created 3 years ago.

[thin remnant]

I prefer the trading/validation we have now than what we had before, but it's definitely too lenient ATM.

Give us something in between like 200ms

[fathom totem]

Too lenient we can definitely agree on... dropping the ping cap doesn't fix anything because there's been plenty of instances where both players have had ~30 ping in a trade that involves a corpse shooting the person still standing.

[thin remnant]

Eh imo two players who both have 30 ping should always have their hits validate

Once you get to 100 ping territory that's where I think invalidation should occur.

[fathom totem]

You've got to take both players into account though... for example, players in Western Australia tend to get anywhere from 70-110 ping to the OCE servers (based on the East coast of Aus). Throw in someone on a fairly standard 30 and you're already at a minimum 100 combined.

[thin remnant]

This is true, which contributes to me thinking a 200-250 validation window would be great.

[fathom totem]

Still... even though I run around with the slowest velocity bullets in the game (pretty much FMJ on anything from silenced winnie to sparks sniper), I would STILL prefer to just revert to having my shots invalidated than have them make the game unplayable at certain hours.

[thin remnant]

If you play on 200 ping, yeah, I agree, your shots should be invalidated at times haha

[fathom totem]

Yeah, well... isn't it currently something nits like 600-800? Someone did the math at some stage over on reddit a while back.

[thin remnant]

Yeah it's 800 rn but that's a hard limit and usually isn't reached.

Definitely too high

[fathom totem]

Yeah, 200 ping with 200m/s ammo? I absolutely know what I'm getting myself into and accept it for the sake of being able to play when I can.

[tribal wyvern]

No, i'm saying that your right to have fully populated games does not triumph my enjoyment in my games.

You're making a chicken coop out of a feather with your "cannot play the game."

if you gonna inflate it like that