gkuo88
Content Type
Profiles
Articles
Updates
Projects
Twitch
Website Bugs/Suggestions
Guides
Newsletters
About GFL
Knowledge Base
Expenses/Hardware
Server Comparisons
Routing
Form Bugs
Community Representative Applications
Development Request
Forums
Events
Posts posted by gkuo88
-
-
Wot the fock is going on, where the heck is the original post and the posts after it? Either way, I'm pretty sure I read the original post several times over, and it wasn't about how unappealing it is to play as a zombie, but requesting to be as zombie without inflating.
First of all, how am I supposed to believe you when you first ask for a mechanic to play as a starting zombie, then proceed to say that mother zombies are unfun to play as? Second, just because a few players do not wish to play as mother zombie doesn't mean that all players find it unappealing, and if it was like that, then we would have an issue where most or all mother zombies are going afk, which would be heavily noticeable. Third, the issue of mother zombie being unappealing for a few is completely separate from requesting to choose which side you start on.
Lastly, inflation isn't tied down to points. Harder maps tend to have more people inflating. This is simply because certain players find it more appealing to play as zombie on those maps. It is already hard to win as a human on these maps, and having the right player in the zombie position pretty much ruins the entire session into a constant stream of losses. Then there are those who purposely wish to cause trouble for the majority, and those who just find winning as a zombie 9 out of 10 times more appealing than loosing as a human 9 out of 10 times. Letting these players freely choose to play as zombie is the equivalence of inflating, which like I said, has been an issue in the past.
7 hours ago, DUSTY said:Why not have CTs learn to stop these items?
No, just focking stop. There is nothing more cancerous than implementing something, consequences occur, and then blaming the playerbase or the admins for not playing in X manner and Y strategy.
39 minutes ago, DUSTY said:The fact that admins aren't always on argument does nothing for me. If that's the case why even have the server open if someone's not always there to babysit.
Wait a second, I'm pretty sure that you were the one to suggest that if it becomes a persistent issue that admins should come and turn it off manually. Now it's boiled down to "we should have the mechanic, and close the server when admins aren't on"?
-
Are you still butthurt? Where did I whine about tryhard maps and where did I ask about making ze easier?
All I'm saying is the design of long rounds will have different impacts compared to the shorter rounds of other maps. The design of the long round was to make it so it would be more difficult to win as a human, which worked, considering zombies win alot more rounds on santass secret. Yet we still have people complaining they feel powerless as a zombie, which like I suggested, is due to the design of the round. Wins and losses on longer rounds usually create an experience where zombies kill at a much lower time rate compared to a shorter round of the same caliber of difficulty.
-
>be santaass where over 80% of the time on secret ending zombies win
>wahhh zombies are powerless
It's probably the design of santass to begin with lol. To win a round that goes up to 30 minutes, thats like getting an avg of 1 human kill per minute in order to get to the end with 20 people. If ya start with 10 zombies, thats a rate of 1 kill for the individual on an avg of 10 min or worse. Then again the rate isn't even that bad considering the zombies win quite a lot anyways, but I know alot of zombies will end up running for 10+ min on that map without getting a single kill.
-
On 4/3/2019 at 10:25 PM, Ninja Chris said:
What are you opinions on Vietnamese war veterans? @Malal @gkuo88 @SSPigeonShit
Can't fully blame them for what they did, feels bretty bad for them since communism fucked over and vietnam eventually moved to more capitalist policies, which makes the entire war bretty questionable.
-
You’re free to answer with just numbers and letters or with your own response. I also wished that if other players had their own questions they could add it in as well, rather than have one person in charge of all the questions. I’ll look into other options anyways.
-
For a fucking second I seemed to have broken out of my madness and once again considered that I might be WRONG or something. So it best be to gather opinions. Answer these for me you slaves. You're free to skip any or add an extra answer, or choose multiple choices
1. What maps do you generally prefer?
a. casual laidback
b. hard but commonly beaten
c. tryhard maps rarely beaten
d. just specific maps
2. When faced with a map you don't wish to play what do you do?
a. leave server
b. play non-tryhard
c. tryhard if there is a chance
d. go afk
e. inflate or spam rtv
3. What level of effort are you willing to go to to get the map you wish to play
a. no effort ok with everything
b. spam numbers
c. actually use mic
d. become beloved by server
4. If you enjoy hard maps that you like how much effort are you willing to put into it?
a. no effort
b. constant defending
c. actually leading
5. How inclined are you to try a map that is barely won?
a. never
b. ok if there is someone willing to lead
c. ok if the team just pulled a hard victory
6. If you are a leader which do you usually go for?
a. leading favorite maps
b. leading hard maps that aren't commonly beaten
7. As an average player, how do you feel about an increase in difficulty?
a. I play as freely as i choose and do not care if an increase leads to more losses
b. I am willing to play harder on a general basis and even lead in order to adapt to this increase
c. I did not ask for this increase and I am upset that there are more losses on my favorite maps now.
d. I am willing to play harder or leading, but at the cost of playing less often
e. I am not willing to play harder, I will avoid certain maps more often if we lose too much on them
8. As a leader, what do you feel about an increase in difficulty?
a. An increase in difficulty will make my favorite maps more fun and challenging
b. and increase in difficulty will make it more tedious to lead my map
c. I am willing to go and place the extra effort to lead my map with harder difficulties
d. I am willing to lead my map, but less often because it takes more work each session
9. What do you feel is wrong about gfl's zombie escape? (just write the mechanic)
a. Nothing is wrong because there is no right way to play zombie escape
b. x is wrong because it makes things too easy
c. x is wrong because it panders to a select group of people
d. x is wrong because it makes things too hard or tedious
10. How loyal are you to the server?
a. This is my main server and only server
b. I jump around to other servers depending on what maps I wish to play
c. I prefer other servers for x reason
11. How much do you care about playing zombie escape "correctly"
a. there is no correct way to play
b. There are things I disagree with about the settings of the server bit I can live with it
c. While I still play on the server, I consider none of it as legit.
12. What sort of win ratios do you like?
a. (10, 25, 50, 75, 90) human win rates
b. 90-50% human win rates on earlier levels with 10-25% human win rates on later levels
c. no preference
13. How varied do you like your maps?
a. I enjoy a wide variety of maps which I am willing to play
b. I enjoy a mostly select group of maps, but I'm still willing to play anything
c. I enjoy a select group of maps and I avoid other maps
14. How willing are you to improve?
a. I don't improve because I play at my own rate
b. I don't improve because I know it is insignificant
c. I do improve if I feel like I can make a significant change
d. I will improve for a specific map
e. I will improve for the sake of standing above others
15. What is your driving force to continue playing the game?
a. friends
b. attention or trolling
c. having a good time (by winning as human)
d. having a good time (by challenging myself)
e. by standing above others or dominating others
16. What extent do you feel that leading can accomplish and what is your outlook on it?
a. There are people who can never change like bhoppers
b. there are people who can generally become more skilled
c. The team can accomplish much more, but it may not be enough to overcome certain maps or settings
d. Anything can be accomplished by leading as leading can be continually improved forever
e. anything can be accomplished by leading, but sometimes it is too much of a hassle in some cases
f. Leading is the norm, and the server will die without it
g. leading has been taken for granted, and people devalue the win if it was easily accomplished with leading
17. Going back to the question on an increase in difficulty how do you think OTHER players will react to it?
a. Players will play as normal like they usually do
b. players will start playing harder than they usually do
c. players will start avoiding maps if they lose too much
d. players will change tactics in a positive manner
e. players will continue to use the same tactics as before
18. What do you think is the most important thing in leading?
a. map knowledge from traps to ztele spots to timing
b. general strategy used in all maps, like when to nade, fall back, backpedal, what locations good to defend at
c. map specific strategy from timing of orders, communicating the map to the players
d. understanding players and their weaknesses and communicating information to them
e. repetition and stamina leading multiple sessions in consecutive days in order to build experience
f. overarching planning and adapting to new strategies to deal with unknown factors in the session
19. How do you feel about zombie wins and human wins?
a. I prioritize human wins in general
b. I prioritize zombie wins in general
c. I would like equal wins as humans and zombies
d. I want to win whenever I'm a human, and whenever I'm a zombie
e. I would like to win more as a zombie, but not if it comes at the cost of losing more as a human
f. I like to win more as a human, but not if it zombie wins go under 10/25/50/75/90%
19.5. How do you prefer your human wins?
a. I like to win in general
b. I like a win that comes with many losses but still occurs in one session
c. I like a win that comes only after many sessions of losses
d. I like a hard to get win, but not if it comes at playing the map much less often
e. I like wins as low as possible on certain maps because the more rare they are, the more I feel it's an achievement
20. How do you feel about the state of human wins and zombie wins in GFL? And do you think it to be too much or too little?
a. players selection of maps lead to alot of human wins compared to zombies
b. players selection of maps lead to a balanced amount of human wins and zombie wins
c. players selection of maps lead to alot of zombie wins compared to humans
21. What do you think about the playerbase of gfl and its skill level?
a. autistic mostly
b. tryhard alot
c. flexible to switch between mannerisms
d. follows along easily with leading
22. How do you feel about these map designs?
a. pure rng killers such as bosses
b. bosses with a select pattern that can be overcome with experience
c. traps that kill less than 10% of the team and slowly trim away the defense
d. traps that kill 50 to 90% of the team early on
e. traps that kill 50 to 90% of the team late on like lazers
f. multi way defenses
g. item that grant abilities
h. point systems that allow certain players to use certain things
23. How do you feel about team dependency? (where victory is dependent on a large number of players not screwing up)
a. I am against team dependency because I would not like maps that can only be won with a high number of survivors
b. I am for team dependency but only to a certain number of survivors
c. I am for team dependency and im willing to take many losses for the sake of one win
d. I am against team dependency because I feel like my teammates are dragging me down with them.
24. How do you feel about bhop?
a. I use bhop and I enjoy its benefits even if I have to defend harder against hoppers
b. While I enjoy bhop as a zombie I do not believe it is worth the extra defense
c. Bhop panders to a small selection of players and thus is not fair in certain situations
d. bhop belongs to its own servers and should not be used as a mechanic
e. bhop adds a refreshing change to defending against zombies
f. bhop grants zombies an advantage that is worth the extra defense
g. bhop is used more for doorhugging than tactical use
h. I am not willing to spend hours to learn bhop in order to be at the same advantage
i. I learned bhop for the sole sake of having an advantage on the server
j. With the inclusion of bhop I am less willing to defend against zombies
k. I use bhop to doorhug as a human and have an advantage as a zombie
l. As a zombie I feel bhopping zombies have an unfair advantage
More dumb questions later. If you wish to add your own questions, continue the number
-
1 hour ago, Malal said:
On GFL? I already lead on other servers, I don't owe anything to GFL I'm not going to waste my time trying to join when the server is full to play a map I might not even like.
Great, then GFL doesn't have to pander to your ideals.
1 hour ago, Malal said:How is this a bad thing
The entire death of gfl css is caused by fucking dependency on teamwork. Harder settings from removal of rebuys, lower knockback, crazy bhop speeds all created a massive need to for defense. I don't expect you to understand this, considering you look down at players like Mao looks at his people as if they were cattle, but you know what, I'm try my fucking best to explain it to you.
-server runs on a classic set of map favorites
-difficulty increases thus increasing the defense needed by the team
-It is either significant enough to warrant a change and if it isn't, it acts as another excuse to increase difficulty again
-
players react by improving their skills(this does not fucking happen)Let me explain why this does not fucking happen. First of all, a vast majority of players never even notice a difficulty increase has occured. Bhop is noticeable, but knockback decrease is no one can tell. This is because no one actually picks up news on the changes to the server.
Second of all, even if everyone notices there was an increase, no one translates it out to "the need for more defense". For example, removal of the negev means defense power decrease, do the defenders or doorhuggers start thinking "we need to defend/aim more" or "from now on, we might have to lead to win the map"? No, rather the most noticeable changes for players is the increase in losses. But losses are built upon the team, which is why instead of looking a self improvement, they instead start blaming other players.
Third, there are players who already are at the top of their game, who are already contributing the max amount of effort. They cannot improve in any other way other than getting a mic and leading, which they either dont want to do or can't do it. But at the same time, they cannot get doorhuggers to start defending more, nor can they get other players to play better.
so continuing on
- players still continue to play at their own rate as before
- losses increase, resulting in players blaming each other, or moving to a easier set of maps because it isnt fun for them (in a rare case someone will step up as a leader, but in order for a counteractive effect, they will have to lead for many many hours which may go for a month)
- casual players begin to leave because they are forced to a smaller mapset, or they get raped by settings
- pro players begin to leave because they lose more often and become selective on their map choices, and they cannot force other players to play better
- team dependency teaches players that in order to win, they need a good team, a good leader, etc
- so instead players stop playing until all of those things come together, such as an event
The best example of this I can think of is where minas was killing the css server 2-3 years ago. During that time, players played minas every single day. The server will always start with 50-60 people. They will always lose at ex4 (because everyone knew the balrog teleport doorrape trick). They won minas before alot before this occurrence, but the balrog teleport trick was such a gamechanger, that they now always lost on ex4. And during this time, did people change tactics? Did people start defending harder? No, instead they all left the server. And as time passed on, people began leaving en masse on ex4 until only 10 to 20 people were on the server. Well until the admins banned the fucking map.
-
4 hours ago, Malal said:
Servers that both have bhop and very similar settings to GFL?
Now youre just straight out making lies. I know for a fact because even the control freak who forced those settings on gfl was insistant on making the server a lot harder than nide and unloze. Also negevs still take more skill deal with it firing a lazer beam and spraying with a smg take the same skill, one simply outputs more damage at the cost of having to carefully choosing when to defend, reload, and move.
Seriously this aint getting anywhere, all your arguments revolve around ideology rather than actual experience. Also the only communist here is you. Removing negevs does nothing but remove potential power from human players. Skilled players don’t benefit from this, rather now their efforts are now dependent on other players because overall defense power has decreased. Zombie escape is already team dependent, and now you’re literally trying to make it more team dependent. So now instead of the less skilled people dying and more skilled winning as humans, its more of everyone loses no matter how skilled they are.
Seriously csgo zombie escape is supposed to be a fun comfy place and instead we have people like you trying to make it into some tryhard elitist team. The same bullshit happened on the css server, why the hell aren’t you there? The manager there literally runs with the same mentality as you did. “If we implement harder settings players will play better” “if the doorhuggers dont defend they don’t deserve to win” “it’s not the mechanics faults, players need to play harder and lead more often” It’s the same toxic bullshit where you prioritize idealogy over player enjoyment and then proceed to blame players for not working hard enough when they end up not enjoying this.
in the end of it all, i get your arguement, and i’ll tell you it doesnt work like that. If you’re going to reply, can it not be minor nitpickings? Instead I would rather you answer one question. “In the case where settings are made harder, will you be willing to lead at least 1 hour daily on average in order for the playerbase to improve back to its original state?”
-
2 hours ago, Malal said:
They're using it because it's overpowered, in certain holds you can just rebuy negevs and you'd be able to solo hold against 20 zombies, reducing it to the original cost of $1700 allows for 8-9 negevs thats around a minute and a half of solo holding a hold, you have to be literally brain dead to not realise how that is a problem.
Zeus had freeze nades, hellz had unlimited ammo, asian servers had their gravity nades. Even the classic spawn can be abused on mapedores to literally have rounds starting off with 2-3 zombies. All of these things can be argued as overpowered based on a persons subjective opinion, like how you view the negev. Also never asked to reduce it back to 1700, just said 6900 is overkill. Also only a few players can pull off rebuys that well, and no they cant pull a solo hold.
2 hours ago, Malal said:That's not true there are many people who care about balance, it's why some servers ban the negev, some maps ban the negev and other servers nerf the negev.
And what, they managed to appease a few whiny people. Meanwhile the rest of the server went about switching to the next overpowered tactic, while others flocked to gfl because it had a higher level of wins. Also you missed the point completely. No one gives a shit about balance because fun and victory is a higher motivator. Same manner in which everytime theres a contest, players flock to the first server that manages to win, regardless of the settings of the server being "balanced"
2 hours ago, Malal said:And the people who don't use it?
What about them? They get butthurt that they dont have to defend as hard? They get triggered because people are defending with a weapon they think is overpowered? As for the zombies, it's low priority for them. No one cares about a zombie win compared to a human win and since they are connected, the increase in wins for one leads to a decrease in wins for another. History has shown of people leaving or abandoning maps when things are too hard for humans, but it's never the case for zombies. You know why? Because if its too easy for humans, they win and go onto the next map lol.
2 hours ago, Malal said:And that has less to do with the negev than other factors doesn't it?
I point this out because you're the one claiming that we win all the time. Never did I say the negev had anything to do with it.
2 hours ago, Malal said:People would not find it fun to win every time, it is human nature, if you win every time the challenge of winning is gone and the motivation and incentives to win are also gone, if people cared more about winning than other factors as I said more people would play offline against bots or play icecap/boatescape far more often.
Seriously why the heck do you keep acting as if I claimed that players wanted to win all the time? Everyone already knows that winning all the time as human would be boring.
2 hours ago, Malal said:oh no i need to run with my knife out with falling back, such impressive tactics
That verses having your smg out all the time. Seriously I dont expect someone whos never used the negev to understand it. Also bosses are a bitch too. Reload times are long and anything with push/pull can interrupt the animation.
2 hours ago, Malal said:Anyone can bhop if they put the time into learning it, Bhop is skill based and rewards a player for playing well, the Negev requires basically 0 skill and even someone completely new to fps games could figure out how to use it.
Over half the server doesn't know bhop. Another portion still continue to doorhug. And a good portion of players feel like they dont have enough defense power without the negev. Time and time again, these dumbass mechanics take it out on the defenders and your excuse for things is "it's not my ideal of zombie escape at fault, its the players fault for not playing hard enough"
When the hell will people like you learn that you can't force people to do what you want? Why the hell are you so desperate to have players play by your ideals? Why the hell are you so desperate to make people with other skills have benefits over other players? Why the hell are do you constantly want to shit on defenders by making their victory more dependent on doorhuggers? You people already got that shit with the css server, a server that panders to those with the most skill and zombies as entertaining as hell to play. And look what the fuck happened. Casuals didn't have fun because they were getting assraped, and the skillfags fucked off too when they had no one to have an advantage over. Now the same shit is happening to RSS and people like you still haven't learned anything from this. Seriously, why are you so fucking self centered? When did zombie escape become all about how certain players should have more privileges over others?
2 hours ago, Malal said:Now this is a hot take, tell me how a gun with recoil and spread takes less skill than a literal laserbeam.
you dont need to aim with a bizon either. recoil is low as hell and even low when moving. You dont even have to switch out weapons.
2 hours ago, Malal said:The more you aim and shoot the better your aim becomes.
spraying in the general direction is literally more effective with any smg. If you're aiming for headshots or aiming just to hit, you aren't really accomplishing much defense.
2 hours ago, Malal said:People are actually going to have aim for once oh my god the horror.
A decrease in human defense power leads to more losses, and that leads to avoidance of maps rather than an increase players getting more skilled. The same bullshit happened to css and instead of players playing harder, they simply began avoiding most sessions.
2 hours ago, Malal said:This is a toxic mentality and mindset that happens regardless of how easy the server settings are.
It's a toxic mentality created by people like you. By removing individual power such as the negev from the players, they have to blame other players, because now their victory is dependent on more players. Even if the pros do everything correctly, they are limited in what they can accomplish, and victory becomes more dependent on others. That is something you cannot control. You yourself are no different. You force your own standards on players, and then blame them for not adapting to it.
2 hours ago, Malal said:Because something isn't handed to you on a silver platter and you have to actually work towards it it is no longer a game, got it.
No it's more like your boss wants you to work overtime for no extra pay.
The same crap happened in css past where a whiny ass few bitched about how rebuys made zombies powerless. It got removed. Then it got brought back a few months later when everyone realized it ruined their human experience.
-
1 hour ago, Malal said:
No it isn't, you shouldn't be able to rebuy the negev at all honestly.
That’s your opinion, which doesnt mean much if half the team is using it. Like I said, no one gives a shit about the “balanced” or “legit” way to play the game, cause if they did, then we wouldn’t have as many negev users. Your entire arguement runs on your own subjective view of how zombie escape should be played, which players are not obligated to meet.
1 hour ago, Malal said:If you win every single time it no longer becomes fun, the negev removes all the skill involved with aiming and dumbs it down to the point where a 2 year old can use it.
First of all, gfl doesnt win all the time. Players are still constantly challenging maps with or without leaders where the zombies win much more often than humans. Second of all, if gfl won all the time, then that is the server audience. Your opinion that it’s not fun doesnt mean shit if everyone else is finding it fun to constantly win. The server is free to tackle harder maps, but it chooses not to. Third, the negev does take some level of basic skill in the tactics division, its a tradeoff of power for speed. Fourth, whats wrong with something that can be universally used by all players vs something like bhop which can be used by a select few? Fifth, the bizon literally takes less skill than the negev.
1 hour ago, Malal said:People will learn to actually aim eventually and get better, and it's mostly try hards using negevs not casuals.
No they wont. When will you people stop running under the assumption people will work harder when things get shitter. When people begin to lose more they blame their team first rather than looking to themselves for self improvement. The same bullshit mentailty ran in css, and the players didn’t play harder. Instead they stopped playing and came to event only sessions because they knew that was their only chance to win. How is Rss going? Are new players learning to bhop or enjoy the maps that mapfags keep pushing? This is a game not fucking work. And if a person has already mastered aiming, how the heck are they going to get someone who hasn’t to master it, considering that person is the key between victory and loss?
Wait Wot? The negev is only effective with aiming and being still, or crouching. If tryhards are the ones using it then why be upset that 2 year old noobs can use it. People who can effectively use negevs already know how to aim so removing it how does it teach them to aim?
1 hour ago, Malal said:We're nerfing a buffed weapon, undoing a change that was never intended for zombie escape because it's insanely powerful for the game mode.
People managed to play without the negev for years on css and years before it got buffed on cs:go.
No one gets to decide how zombie esape is intended to be played. Also theres nothing that shows that the players hold the same mentailty of “zombie escape is designed to be played without the use of the negev”
Here let me fix this for you:
bhop was never intended for zombie escape because it’s insanely powerful for the game mode.
people managed to play without bhop for years on css and csgo before it was added due to the incessant whining of the select few who can use it
-
Yea like i said, great results both the m4 and the tmp were a blast to use.
-
Better to buff than to nerf. The 6900 price tag on the negev is focking overkill as it is.
13 hours ago, Malal said:It makes it too easy, it's a literal laserbeam with no skill, even fucking Zeddys reduced the ammo count on it, the gun is horribly balanced and was not made with ze in mind, if it would be possible to revert the negev to before the retarded update to it that would be the best option.
You can always increase the m249 ammo count if you reduce the negevs.
The negev isn't a chill weapon, it's a horribly designed weapon that appeals to tryhards who value winning over fun(this isn't necessarily a bad thing), the negev is fun in regular csgo because it's a shit gun with retarded mechanics, in ZE it's an overpowered weapon with no skill required.
Maybe people like it easy. Maybe for some people winning is their sort of fun. Wait make that the vast majority of people. If theres anything games are plagued with it’s players who are shit and end up being a burdon on the rest of the team, but they still want to play hard maps and win for some reason. The negev if anything, serves to make up for that burdon. We can remove that benefit, and people will simply lose more and simply play certain maps much less often. And no, not even the casual fun people are going to push for it if they know through experience that zombies win all the time.
As to the others
And will you guys shut the fuck up about “balance”? No, for fucks sake no one here knows how to balance zombie escape. Because you can’t. “Balance” has become nothing more than a buzzword for “players need to play by my ideals.” To argue one server is balanced is to say all other servers are unbalanced, and the last fucker who ran with that mentality fucked his server over because he didn’t consider what made other servers popular, rather he just regarded the players of other servers as shitters.
All there is the players and their own enjoyment. The most OP weapons are used out there because people who use them wish to win, or maximize their survival. If 90% of the server uses those weapons you should consider that 90% of he playerbase wishes to win. Buffing weapons is reasonable, but nerfing weapons is fucking retarded because you are going against the player mentality. Same shit applies to maps and win rates. If the server constantly plays maps where they win 90% of the time as a human, thats the audience you have. It is an audience that likes winning as humans alot. If you have a server where 90% of the time they win as zombies, thats your audience. Gfl right now at the moment isnt even at any of the extremes, but theres still an average win rate that the playerbase is comfortable with. As css has shown, trying to force players to accept a lower win rate for the sake of “legitness” or “balance” doesnt fucking work and players will simply leave because at the core of it all, its not fucking fun for them.
Also css ran this experiment already. Great results, the m4a1 and tmp got used more. 60% of the weapons were still unpopular as before.
-
12 minutes ago, andrewzong said:
THE LONGEST 6 SECONDS IN MY LIFE :<
It is just way too hard for zombies to chase human especially when all Bhopper defend the first line. Then all they need to do is just throw a grenade and Bhop back fast while we get slowed and get fked by the defense xD
Sorry but thats how good defense works. It's built to make zombies powerless by adding several layers of tactics to reduce human loss. The thing is it doesn't always happen like that. Sometimes players forget to throw nades, sometime bhoppers arent the last to leave the defense, sometimes non-hoppers overdefend.
Incidents where everything goes perfectly as planned don't show that zombies are underpowered, and if zombies had the capability to overcome the best situations with at least a kill or 2, then the amount of kills will easily stack up on maps with many defenses and harder maps become a bigger chore.
-
Any factor that increases potential power for zombies will lead to an increase in zombie wins which leads to a decrease in human wins. Some defenses might need more players, some maps may require less humans turning zombies. However, depending on how big of a decrease in knockback there is gfl might be able to "handle" it, or start shifting to a different selection of maps/ change in player action.
If you do plan any sort of change I hope you have at least a select audience burn into their minds the current situation of the server, including what maps are currently being played, their difficulty, and how players view the current state of the server, along with taking a revaluation of these opinions a few months after the changes have been made as to what new complaints have come up.
Eh gfl mite be able to deal with it, or maybe not. Heck I'd rather argue for a consecutive decreasing knockback modifier.
-
Classic spawn - loses alot of people at the beginning causes players to give up more easily, causes people to be upset being zombie multiple times in a row. On the plus side, if you know how to abuse it you can turn alot of maps into easy wins
Knife knockback - made for trolling, not much gameplay change, shit version of one hit knife
Failnades - a fucking failure throughout the history of zombie escape, made for trolling. Usually leads to people purposely throwing cause no one wants to be on the shit end of the stick. To quote an idiot "failnades are totally fine, all you guys have to do is not throw a failnade!"
One hit knife - Oh jee wiz, it seems like the only mod that's popular is the one that grants power to the human players, while all the ones that grant power to zombie players are unpopular! I wonder if there's a pattern here?
VIP - Neat, but bad on certain maps, no benefit for humans.
LMS - stage 5 of lms was balanced out with all the zombies having 500 health. 2 teams also lack flexibility due to being stuck with the same players every round and having half the team start with zombies is pretty much recreating the same problems as classic spawn. Oh and lms stage 5 is usually where the server dies and gets dragged out
Rifles only - das cool
My
suggeshitpostPump shotguns only - cause pump shotguns are cooler. If possible increase knockback and spread and decrease range. Actually range is already low enough. AWPS only but infinite ammo same fire rate seems cool too. Probably cant work with bosses
Double the speed of humans - gotta go fast, humans will have to learn how to stand fucking still when defending, and probably watch their jumps too. Reduce friction sounds fun too. Probably wont work with maps with little defending and lots of running
Drugs mode - I hope csgo has drugs mode like css. getting slapped every 5 seconds sounds fun, both for humans and zombies. Or just make them jump every 5 seconds.
Reverse - if there are those infinite deagles like css, have there only be like 5-10 humans verses the rest as zombies
Freezenades - freezenades
Gun game - have guns change every 10 seconds, lol
Zr mode - decrease zombie hp until 500 hp. Add one or more of the following flavors:
- decrease zombie knockback
- increase zombie speed and respawn,
- have one zombie act as the respawn point, but hes slower than the other zombies
- humans take damage from zombie knifes rather than infection
- increase zombie spawn ratio
heck i got no idea what go is even capable of.
-
I was moreso thinking about Temporary manipulation into playing a map which isn’t normally played by the server, due to negative reputation built from past experiences from the map.
However there was a past instance where some fool tried to justify shitty settings with leading. As settings became harder, people began staying away from maps that used to be self sufficient because it took too much effort now. Of course the fool wouldn’t have it, so instead he lead his ass off for a few weeks in order to manipulate people into the mentailty that the settings weren’t at fault, but it was instead the players fault for not trying hard enough. Of course once the leading ended, the map returned to being dead, even though it was originally was a self sustaining map to begin with. So yea, i can definately argue that leading can be used as manipulation.
-
Harder maps mite as well have map modifiers that make things easier. A good deal of them are unpopular enough already due to their difficulty, and the ones that are popular enough will have server mentality push against making it easier with a modifier. Easier wins on excesively hard maps may raise thier popularity, prompting players to attempt them with normal settings in the future.
as for people being upset about it being “legit”, you guys are autistic. Every single contest usually leads to a hefty number of tryhards flooding to the first server that beats the map, a sign that no one gives a shit about legitness, considering there isnt universal standards for how zombie escape should be played. People flooding to the russian servers for cosmo, to mapedores/chinese servers for aesthetic, and even to gfl for frostdrake. In one case, one autistic dude was so obsessed with players playing by his standards, that it drove away the playerbase, mirroring how the hardest maps drive away players due to the same patterns. Take it or leave it, you can either play in easier conditions prompting to more willingly accept playing the map, or you can leave things as it is and let the map get played once in a blue moon due to consecutive sessions building a negative reputation within the playerbase. Theres always a third option of course, to get a mic and lead, prompting temporary manipulation of the playerbase actions.
-
I voted nope for seperate map modifier under the guise that it was refering to no map modifier for tryhard maps, rather than implying that tryhard maps should have the same map modifier.
tryhard no modifier> tryhard different modifiers> tryhard same modifiers
-
Every zombie escape e-penis contest in the history of ze has lead to some cancerous shitfest that slowly proceeded to kill the server. Attempts by past faggots to prove themselves as the best player only did nothing but promote backstabbing and mapfagging in order to make themselves the sole survivor. Even cases where servers tryhard to prove themselves as the superior server died out hard due to them turning a comfy game into a fucking workfest.
-
Ah that explains it, thanks. But ya, I doubt valve or discord have the capability to monitor all that stuff to begin with. They probably end up getting thousands of reports a day over something minor.
-
Alrite, so no to micspamming, but yes to racism, only because it's easy to ignore. Though I got no idea why ya be looking into if valve has a rule for community servers where servers have to conform to certain standards like no racism. (They probably dont)
-
36 minutes ago, Citizen said:
I read a facebook post by a dota 2 personality years back and I think it articulates what I want to say better than I could do so myself. Plus I'm too fucking lazy to type shit myself so here it is.
Dude wot the heck is your freaking position on things? First you get triggered by things like micspam and you want more regulation to stop it. Next you say people should just ignore racism and just not have people react to it. Now ya want to valve to regulate shit to stop racism. No seriously I am legitly curious as to where you actually stand on this.
-
1 hour ago, Malal said:
most autism in my experience happens on casual maps that are easy to win
Well then, are they winning those maps? Casue if they are then they usually then move onto the next map. The server goes on like usual. if you're trying to stop attention whores, then I guess of course direct intervention is needed. But there is no doubt that there are groups of players who purposely cause trouble in order to get off the map, and you have to understand why they don't like the map. If those problems can be mitigated, then they might become more accepting of the map and cause less trouble.
2 hours ago, Malal said:i said you can force players not to doorhug, and then you mention about people quitting because they dont want to play anymore
Ok explain to me how you can force players not to doorhug. Shit didn't work for css, I dont see it working for csgo either on any sort of server. There will always be some doorhuggers, and I want to hear how you're going to force them not to do it.
2 hours ago, Malal said:whats your solution then, other than removing bhop
I don't have much of a solution. Heck maybe do something to increase human potential, just like bhop removed human potential. Like I said there are factors you can control and factors you can't. Also there be a good deal of choices that will require a sacrifice for a greater benefit. I can barely see the admin system being improved, well other than phantom and hotever's suggestion to decrease the acceptance time and probably hide the application process.
2 hours ago, Malal said:theyre not played every day but that wasnt your point
Well I hope you get my point. They're avoided more often because of their difficulty. Harder maps require more work, it eats the energy of the players. If its too hard, players will learn through experience after many losses that they need more than what they regularly have, such as leaders, admin regulation, a good team that doesn't fall through on the first several levels. If they realize they aren't even close to what they need, they avoid the map because they know its a lost cause.
2 hours ago, Malal said:so now its from harder maps are avoided to theyre avoided when theres no good leader and the rounds go poorly
That should have always been a given, because the vast majority of time servers are not on tryhard mode and they dont have leaders on all the time. I decided to state it again, because I remembered that back when css was dying, people used examples of sessions with leadership to justify setting changes, which was another shit goalpost. Sessions with leadership are not representative of the vast majority of what happens on the server. For the vast majority of the time on the server, there isn't leadership. Sessions with leaders are run by the will of the leader. Sessions without leaders are run by the will of the players. That is why you have sessions where players attempt hard maps with a leader pushing them, but outside that, players usually do not vote for those maps, and if they do end up on the map without a leader, they usually rtv off it after rounds go poorly. You can't use a session with leadership to argue that players will naturally attempt difficult maps.
Also rounds going poorly is already a given for very hard maps. If, without a leader, rounds have a chance of not going poorly, then it leaves a positive experience within players prompting them to try it out more often. (Also it would not be considered as a hard map to some) If, without a leader, rounds always go poorly, of course players are going to start avoiding that shit.
2 hours ago, Malal said:humans can bhop faster than ZMs usually because they arent being shot at, csgo has capped bhop so theres no 500+ vel zms either
Work is work, stop trying to come up with weird scenarios in some attempt to prove that the amount of defense has decreased. The aspect that zombies can catch up faster and are harder to hit literally means more defending is needed no matter what. The team can have the zombies get shot at, but now they need more people to backpedal and cover and actually shoot at the zombies. And note that means the efforts of other players, aka factors you cannot control. If the players dont put in that extra effort, then zombies can regain ground faster, and zombies advance faster too. So shaving off 5 seconds from a 40 second defense means nothing if the defense team looses more than 12.5 % of the path compared to dealing without without bhop, or if there isn't an increase of 12.5% active defenders.
3 hours ago, Malal said:and with my second one im pitching why nide and unloze are doing fine with bhop but it killed off gfl
Like I said, surviving with poison. Gfl had a higher cap (or was it unlimited? I know some players had it unlimited) and they also implemented a bunch of other things that increased the amount of defending needed. Decreasing knockback, boosted nades, double cost rebuys. When you got a fuckton of small poisons, it eventually gets to the players and they don't want to fucking deal with it, especially when they can go to another server and get the same win with lower effort.
3 hours ago, Malal said:you claim bhopping creates more defence work for non bhoppers but you also claim bhop creates less defence on maps like potc because you can trigger early
No I never claimed that. Potc needs like 5-10 people defending that final ship. This is map design, not a benefit of bhop. The second problem is that you assume by triggering early this is a benefit for humans. The thing is, this isn't about ease. potc is easy to win as humans with or without bhop. But just because humans win, doesn't mean everyone is happy, and it doesnt mean that all players who started out as human have the chance to win.
A server without bhop usually has players running from defense to defense while loosing a few players here and there, while covering at the major defenses. You don't need to know how to bhop and win because you have wide freedom of choice. A server with bhop, those who can't bhop are stuck in the back. Defense spots are lost due to early triggers and non-bhoppers have to continuously run or backpedal throughout most of the map. (which is pretty hard if they haven't memorized the path) People can't really cover for you because they have to also continuously be moving forward as well. The bhopers in front have no incentive to slow down for you either. You assume that because triggers were hit early there's less defense needed. Rather, the type of defense had just changed from "holding spots" to "constant backpedaling", with backpedaling being harsher on the new players. Because backpedaling was hard and not many new players did it, zombies weren't getting hit by bullets as often, which gave them close to the same time saving boost as humans get from early triggering. Also new players get more easily slaughtered.
It's something you have to be there to understand. During those sessions, it was always the same people winning the map, which was why other players got sick of being stuck in the same role of cannon fodder. I've already seen this happen many times, dont attempt to make excuses or come up with theories on how you think it played out. Bhop granted a wider range to those who could do it, but at the same time removed a good range of options from those who couldn't do it.
3 hours ago, Malal said:and then people boost with other weapons or find other ways to go about it
Just to clarify here, we're talking about a significant boost, enough to kill a good portion of defenders. Now, what other weapons or other ways are there? Shotguns?
-
1 hour ago, Malal said:
How is removing bhop going to prevent trolling and mic spam/cancer?
For the past arguments trying to answer how removing a mechanic reduces the amount of work needed to win a map, thus reducing the amount of regulation needed. Now, that I think about theres another argument too. Any mechanic like bhop increases the amount of work needed to be done, thus decreasing the probability of winning, especially in sessions without leadership. The players stop giving a shit when they come to the conclusion that they clearly cannot win or they dont care much about winning. That usually leads to some of them actively trolling and micspamming, probably to push the players into rtving. Its noticeable in some cases because it tones down heavily on the next map. (unless the same problems come up again)
1 hour ago, Malal said:oh you can, its a matter of if you want to
you can also just reward defending to incentivise it like some servers do
No you can't. There will always be a limit as to how much players can deal with until enough is enough. The decline of css server is proof that there is a limit as to how much players can deal with before they decide its not worth playing on the server. As it was declining, all sorts of decisions to incentivise players such as skin rewards, resetting of the ranks, and even VIP in some cases were added onto the server to promote players to play. But just because there is incentive, doesn't mean that players will take it. Not only that, theres a limit on how much the server can offer to the players as well in terms of giving incentive. But in the end of it all, there will always be cases where players will just do their own thing.
1 hour ago, Malal said:To control the admins you obviously just need to be more strict with them in terms of not doing their job, abusing commands etc
Ya sure we aren't doing this enough already? Theres a limited number of people who apply for admin, and a limited number of those who are worthy. For a server thats 24/7 active, there's almost no way to prevent micspam and trolling completely unless you personally force admins to come on at specific times.
2 hours ago, Malal said:This isn't true at all, even the hardest maps are still played and attempted and not rtved immediately.
Yea once in a blue moon. Other than that, it usually a set up event, or a leader is present, or the first several rounds havent gone to shit. Or its the possibility of a new map that they haven't lost enough times to demoralize them enough. But the general idea still remains universal, harder maps are attempted less often, and the harder it gets the less its attempted. (just to reiterate one more time, leaders pushing for the map, or set up events do not count)
1 hour ago, Malal said:if you dont see how 40 seconds of holding is harder than 35 seconds of holding thats on you
I already told you. Humans with bhop can get to the door faster, save them 5 seconds. Zombies with bhop can get to the humans faster, saves them 5 seconds too. The amount of defending time remains the same. The amount of fire power needed increases, due to bhopping being harder to hit along with prefire needed at certain doors.
1 hour ago, Malal said:also i said rss doesnt suffer from this problem, dont see how population is related to it
1 hour ago, Malal said:Nide and Unloze are doing fine and both have bhop, the reason for GFL CSS dying isn't because of bhop.
Thats because you made a shit goalpost. It's the same crap as on css where people justified server setting by putting up a single win and acting like it proves everything is alright. Like I said, as long as the servers have players, anyone can claim that bhop was a success. It's not like anything implemented will kill a server within a week. (and even if it did, biased people can simply claim it was something else that happened that week)
Bhop is an increase in work, the amount of work will take some effect on the server. It might turn away some players, but not all of them, it might shift the general set of maps the server normally plays, to maybe easier ones, or ones that don't involve alot of running. It might cause some players to begin doorhugging more often. It's not going to kill a server outright, if anything it slowly poisons it. Server can still survive with the poison though.
Bhop was one of the factors that killed the gfl css server. There was a bunch of other stuff that fucking increased the difficulty, and when you get them all together, it's a lot more work than usual, and no one wanted to do that work. As a person who had treated the server as their home server since the death of plaguefest, I'm pretty fucking sure I know what killed it compared to whatever theory you have. You lead the players there, you understand the population, what they like, what they don't like, how they react to change. When certain incidents come about that are abnormal, you attempt to learn about them, and why the players acted as they did. Patterns emerge which gives a general idea of what drives players away from certain maps, and in some cases, away from the server in general.
2 hours ago, Malal said:You contradicted yourself, first you claim the bhoppers can just trigger early and win without the team, now youre claiming more people need to defend because of the bhoppers.
It's one or the other.
no I didn't, reread that stuff. And who said it has to be one or the other. Some maps are easy enough that you dont need alot of defense to begin with. For example POTC was one where the pro bhoppers literally just hopped to the end without giving a fuck because all it takes is like 5 to 10 people to defend the final ship. Other maps actually require defense and the survival of the team. (I shouldnt have to give you an example of this)
2 hours ago, Malal said:the only way to prevent boosting is to remove knockback
wot, ya cant reduce knockback or damage on certain guns? Even possibly restrict certain guns like the awp? on maybe select maps? (imbf you get pissy over another suggestion cause you dont want to give up one benefit at the cost of another)

The real Human vs Zombie discussion
in Zombie Escape
Posted
No it doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure having 8 pro zombies at the beginning of the round is more damaging to human chances verses having 8 pro zombies join in midround. And having the same group of pro zombies at the beginning of every single round kills variety, so if multiple rounds of losses leads to driving in the idea that the situation is hopeless for players.
I hate to break it to you for like the 3rd time, there's a freaking reason why inflating was considered as a massive problem. It's because people saw it as an imbalance that made the game unplayable. You may not see it like that, but other players have had the experience where a few select players managed to drag enough rounds down until the session became a shit experience. And yes this became enough of an issue that the admins had to decide "no we cannot have this player play as a zombie every single round"
Also zombies will probably never feel as accomplished on winning on a tryhard map, and having players get to choose to play as zombie will not change any of that. Tryhard maps make it so zombie can put in minimal effort and win, and tryhard maps tend to have much more zombie wins than human wins. Human wins feel like an accomplishment because they are rare and they took alot of effort. If you wish to feel accomplished as a zombie you should go play on a map where humans win often because it will be harder for zombies to accomplish a win.
Unironically this. You think its a joke, but map deaths, server deaths have constantly been tied to zombies getting too good, but never the vice versa. Zombies become too good, humans end up never winning, players begin to leave the server and spam rtv as the session begins to drag on. Either way it becomes apparent that players are frustrated and not having fun.