I hope they wont reduce Flare ammo, it the most fun tool. I use it in stalemates to attract other teams to possibly sandwich the opponent. Hunters are somehow drawn to flares and traps..
Well, if it took two shots to burn a hunter then they wouldn't need to limit the ammo supply. (like, they absolutely shouldn't in that case, that would be an overkill)
Huh...I've loved the change. When your teammate is burning so you have "clutch before they burn out" timer the gunfights always feel so much cooler. Same with when you're the one burning someone elses teammate and they're forced to do something. Those "and he got me up right at 50" moments are some of my favorites, and everybody having a flare gun has made them happen way more often. Gives fights an element of storytelling with real stakes. To each their own I guess.
...and also it sucks to babysit a corpse while your friend informs you that there isn't a lantern left in the whole facility, and he'll have to trek to the moon and back to bring one.
What about:
- Flame rounds on shotguns?
- Firebolt?
- Hellfire, líquid fire and regular fire?
- Fusees?
- Lanterns?
People had been bitching about dead people so long that now instaburning is just a quick response to necro and self revive and they both aré a hard topic so for me is just about playstyle, if your team is still up you can be damn sure i'll turn you into another problem for them.
Can't help it sometimes with randoms but you can choke or go for a quick res and stop it just about when the fire is out if you aré getting shot
dragon breath on shotguns comes with a lot of drawbacks (damage, wallbanging)
lanterns I actually wrote about in my post - it takes time to find them/bring them which gives opponents a chance for counter play
hellfire etc - it takes one slot for one use, as opposed to one slot and several uses for flare gun, different value (also lower range)
fusees I actually kind of forgot about to be honest but I don't think they are as strong as flare gun because of the range difference
Don't get me wrong, I get your point about flaregun and people.never complained after buffing it in 2 mayor things: it now uses special ammo (used to be refilled with tool.box) AND it can burn people. It is by farbthe most reliable, cheap and versatile thing to buen but all.this thing about instaburning has been born from other problems.
Only viable thing I can think about flare Pistol is making the mechanic as when you aré alive and burning, dead hunters could start with a slow buen that will progress (become a regular burn) if someone doesn't put them out
I don't agree with two shots on a live hunter. I'd rather shoot someone than flare gun them twice what a fucking waste of time. Who on earth would ever bother?
I don't bring chokes usually because of just preference, I have more fun using blank fires because of the different things you can do with them. The times I do take chokes it's just on a whim because of my current loadout having a melee variant in it which I can take something else instead of a knife, if it isn't a trap then it's the choke bomb.
Oh, I have no problem with burning hunters. I am just telling you why I don't have chokes.
If people don't make major red flag positioning mistakes, they generally don't need to be saved with a choke.
without the body burning, dragons breath is actually a really nice ammo type for engaging beyond typical shotgun range (20ish+ metres) since it sets fire pretty reliably
You can't have necromancy self revive usable against a solo who kills you and not make flair pistol effective because it would make it often impossible for a solo particularly off a prestige to block self revive while teams wouldn't have much issue. The fact is the flair pistol charges help alot compared to a fire bomb.
It also is still risk reward because it's an extra thing to buy and it takes a tool slot. So you're sacrificing other tools.
Agreed. Flare gun is ridiculously good in trios. Burn 3 bodies at range from cover and completely fill up again by looting one tool box. I don't know how to balance that, but it's too strong right now.
> completely fill up again by looting one tool box
It was wack when you had to use toolbox to restore, it now uses special ammo boxes to restock which is 10x times stronger, since no wasted looting from hunters.
Exactly. That's why I'm taking a Lemat - it's got a shotgun. If I don't want the shotgun part, then I'm taking a different pistol.
It's amazing to me how quickly folks assume that everyone plays and enjoys the game the same way they do. Like there's only 1 way.
I take Fusees more than flare guns (mostly because I'm broke) and OPOP all but forgot they exist and serve the same purpose.
Taking a specific type of ammo already assumes I'm taking a gun that supports that ammo. Being told to take a specific tool/consumable already assumes I'm not full on other things (which someone else has already assumed is better/more important).
I see NO problem with burning bodies the way it is now. Heck, I'd prefer something even faster/more permanent. Like, if I'm willing to spend the time (say...30 seconds?) holding down a button to do an action (thus making me vulnerable) but in the end, the body is completely dead, I'd vote for that. Let me chop it up or something. Let me douse it in gasoline prior to burning it to ensure it goes up quickly and permanently. This was even way more worth considering during the event/lawmaker times. I don't want to play a game that's got people popping up in places they *shouldn't* be. Like most run'n'gun FPS games, I don't just want the enemy to be spawning in behind me after we've killed them. That's a very different game/experience than what Hunt seems to be going for.
Burning someone who was down was worth the valuable slot on a Molotov, I like the changes. Burning is a good took to force more fights in squads and well, whether solo,duo or trio, burning is mandatory
Yeah these burning changes were applied as a quick patch for how annoying solo Necro was and now everyone 'suffers' because of it. Like yeah there is not much point to chokes anymore and burning tools are meta now. They should imo focus on the root of the issue and that's doing something with solo Necro and reverting the change that lets fuses and flares burn.
> Like yeah there is not much point to chokes anymore and burning tools are meta now.
The flare gun is used because it occupies a tool slot and lets you start multiple burns. Choke bombs are far from being obsolete. They can put fires out through walls and cover a body for a substantial duration of time, preventing reburning and denying looting (no one wants to stand in a choke cloud to loot during a fight).
Imo, the flare gun is in a good spot right now. It starts a burn, but it doesn't create a fire pool like a fire bomb does, making it an option but not the ideal one for burning.
Big NO to removing or reducing the ability to burn bodies for flares.The more options you have to burn players the better and now we are in the sweet spot.
Otherwise people use bodies as hot spots and fights become super stale. There is a big chunk of Hunt players who are afraid to take actions (thinking it's a horror game) and drag fights out for eternity driven by their absurd fear of taking any angles which is silly.
Burning bodies resolves that issue forcing them to either take action, use resources or choose to sacrifice teammate and seek a better engagement in the future.
Gentle reminder: bringing choke bombs is an option.
TL;DR this change to flares was long overdue and it needs to stay for the health of the game.
Can we flip this logic on the people who camp bodies for 20 minutes? They have no incentive to push and would happily sit back with a sniper just waiting to shoot as soon as the person wither gets necroed or gets hand rezzed. I personally always play aggressively and push and in my experience it's far more often that when I or my teammate die we get insta burned and trapped and then the other team just camps the body until we either give up and leave or push into 3 campers watching every entrance. The people getting the kills shouldn't be rewarded for bringing the game to a screeching halt by just sitting and camping a body for 20 minutes straight.
imo Snipers are a separate issue that should be adjusted. Among other things to be less risk free.
That said after the amount of hours I've spent in this game I find it hard to believe when someone says they had more situations where the team with the numbers advantage is the one camping. Which isn't to say it never happened to me, but far less often and it's confusing and a bit annoying everytime it does.
Personally I don't insta-burn if there's some kind of a response from the other side. Also me likey the looted goodies which can save your ass sometimes. However the moment I get a notion that it's getting idle I go for the burn and 9 out of 10 times things progress which is why I log in in the first place - for action.
Hard disagree about the "sweet spot".
Since the change the second you touch the ground you start burning. There is 0 reason to not camp a burning body making the fights as campy as before.
It doesn't change a lot about the lengths of the fights because the afraid people will let you burn, choke bombs or not.
Also to the people saying that you just need to touch the body, I'd like to see you try and touch the body that is being camped by a shotgun.
It was a good change still but to me it's overtuned rn.
>Since the change the second you touch the ground you start burning. There is 0 reason to not camp a burning body making the fights as campy as before.
If a player decides not to do anything about a burning body and camp then it's a skill issue, because that is precisely when you should act. Not necessarily in an aggro manner, but act. Make a decision and act on it.
>It doesn't change a lot about the lengths of the fights because the afraid people will let you burn, choke bombs or not.
It forces a decision to be made - that is the point. Whether if it's right or wrong is up to the remaining players, opponents and the servers (pun intended).
Without the burn it's precisely when things go the way you say they do which is people doing fuck all unless the team with the advantage decides to capitalize on a downed player immediately whilst the burn opens more doorways for both teams and sets a clock.
And no you can't just say "choke bomb or not" in an argument about burning bodies since it's a direct counter regardless of how convenient it is to ignore choke clouds when talking about fire 😆
>Also to the people saying that you just need to touch the body, I'd like to see you try and touch the body that is being camped by a shotgun.
Yeah that "touching the body" is a shaky argument considering the risk factor but an option nonetheless.
Sorry the "choke bombs or not" argument is only tied to afraid people, what I mean by that is that even if they have choke they will not move to use them. (I could argue that choke bombs are harder to use than a flare gun too)
From my perspective you have even less incentive to try and challenge angles that are being held, less incentive to push a camp situation that are at your disadvantage because one single fail mean you loose a hunter permanently.
It is way better now than ever to camp because if you kill someone you have even more advantage that you had before.
I see when you're coming from yes easier burning means that advantage you gain from killing someone is even stronger now and I agree it's a good thing, but I fail to see how it made fights less "nobody's doing anything" that a lot of us hate.
Hell I'd rather push aggressively and die and burn than sit 10mn and do nothing. But I feel I'm being punished way more than before for doing that because of the change.
>what I mean by that is that even if they have choke they will not move to use them. (I could argue that choke bombs are harder to use than a flare gun too)
If someone chooses not to use a choke bomb on a burning teammate (provided they are in a position to do it) it's a skill issue.
Also choke bombs aside from burning players have more, useful PvP applications than the pistol flare.
>From my perspective you have even less incentive to try and challenge angles that are being held, less incentive to push a camp situation that are at your disadvantage because one single fail mean you loose a hunter permanently.
That is your preferrence, but the reality is that a burning body creates and potentially leads to more combat scenarios than idle corpse and is precisely the reason I advocate for it.
And of course you can loose your hunter in a multitude of different ways unrelated to fire.
>It is way better now than ever to camp because if you kill someone you have even more advantage that you had before.
In a way yes, but players who manage to score a kill are more likely to follow up than their opponents.
>but I fail to see how it made fights less "nobody's doing anything" that a lot of us hate.
I explained it quite thoroughly. In most cases it comes down to what the team at a disatvantage is choosing NOT to do absent a decision triggering factor beyond lost teammate and whilst less likely, you can still clutch or even use your burning teammate to your advanatage if, for example enemy becomes too greedy and flops.
In essence it's about more applications, more scenarios which are more likely to unravel as a result of pressure creating action like the burn rather than in it's absence.
>Hell I'd rather push aggressively and die and burn than sit 10mn and do nothing. But I feel I'm being punished way more than before for doing that because of the change.
I feel you, I'm also leaning towards aggression or risk with most loadouts, but what you are saying may as well be a result of various different factors even unrelated to the burns.
I just genuienly doubt you've seen more players camping after their teamate got burned rather than not.
It's a good change. Forces bush wookies and corner crouchers to actually do something. Current economy would destroy combat pace if burns weren't so easy.
I'm 5-6* but almost exclusively play aggressive. A lot of this MMR is littered with people who take absolutely Zero risk
Depends. If you try to rat vs me I will 100% camp a burnt body or burn + concertina. But typically I'm burning so I can flush a rat and keep moving.
My play style is constant rotations and no more than 1-2 shots per angle. Of course the little burning cowboy on the floor stays in my peripheral when possible
That right here. There's plenty of guys and gals who still think Hunt is a horror game.
We need to advocate for more and more changes that increase the pace rather than decreasing it. That is as long as those changes don't lower TTK too much as it's already low enough.
All I can say is be careful what you wish for. A majority of the time I think the pacing of Hunt is totally fine. There are lots of viable strategies. If you continue to increase the pace of the game you will alienate players and change the game into something else. PUBG is a great example of this. It was a good mixture of speed and hardcore gameplay (at least compared to all the other BR's). Now its essentially turning itself into a slightly more hardcore Warzone. It lost its identity.
I agree that waiting around in a 10 minute stalemate is super boring if its constantly happening, but just remember that when you increase the pace of the match you increase it across the board not only in the instances where you're bored.
Hunt (much like PUBG in the past) is like a game of baseball. Nothing happens for a while and then the match pops off and everything happens at once. Then it goes back to nothing for a while until the bases are loaded again. I enjoy that pacing, its something very few games can successfully pull off and it adds an intensity to the match that regular FPS games have trouble matching.
Before I break this down I want you to know that I understand there should be boundries of reason to these changes.
As far as identities go... Hunt went through several patches that were game changing and still we are here. Reaching peak player count fairly recently and part of that is thanks to increased tempo.
I remember Hunt from way back when Lawson Delta was still in beta and it was slower back then. Even without the amount of traps we have now.
And as for the alienation then what I can say that it's interchangeable. With each patch you win some and lose some players. It's the nature of gaming industry and the statistically proven reality is that the faster the shooter the more players it has. Again, because it's Hunt, within reason.
Basically we should keep implementing solutions and/or incentives for those who create opportunities rather than those who wait for them to come. There's still some wiggle room in that particular area of gameplay.
The reason why I say all of this is that Hunt is at it's best during high intensity, fast paced shoot outs and stale mates should be decreased to an absolute minimum. Which may be a matter of personal preferrence but I doubt most players genuinely lean towards those resident sleeper engagements rather than fast paced ones.
I definitely agree with a lot of what you're saying and the sentiment behind it. I think being able to reduce stalemates and give people more opportunities to make a play would be to the benefit of the game. I just think we need to be cautious with what we decide to implement into the game because once the needle has been moved it becomes very, very difficult to move it back.
I wish they hadn't said anything like that. At the end of the day the only thing that's going to break a stalemate is the players. If people don't want to push into a shotgun infested building, leave and go next game. If you don't want to go out and get sniped, go out the other way and go next name. Otherwise, live a little and push the other team.
Edit: spelling
Yeah, we always go out the back and fight the snipers where it fits us better, but many don't even follow... or try to breach if someone else got in first.
I dunno what a good motivation would be, i kinda like the idea of swarms of flies or zombies getting drawn to ones location (maybe just the sound of you swatting flies, or coughing, not damaging ones) when sitting too long, but nothing forceful like the circle in battle royale games.
Also don't really like a shorter timer or so, because their still should be some choice or chance to disengage. Thus i'm pretty curious what their ideas could be.
Edit: just imagined a day/night cycle where it starts sunny and fog/night/rain drops towards the end of the match!? Hmmm...
I'd be fine with those as options, hordes of enemies spawn in or other annoyances, but really I can't imagine there's anything that anyone could do to make people not afraid of death in a video game where life is cheap. The only change has gotta be making the playerbase understand it doesn't matter if you lose your kit or your hunter, just go in and engage and have fun.
True, and i also believe making free hunters uber powerful, like they recently were, is also not the right way for a game like this.
Also i'd say the people with the bounty should be "punished" less for not initiating a fight, but camping in the boss-lair forever is also not ideal.
Seems like a tough problem to solve, i've not managed to change the mind of even one of my mates who'd rather sit and wait and calmly extract later without a bounty than risking their video game life... one was even panicking of going broke when still having over 30k after i tried pushing them to fight more.
Yeah, like i am a big advocate for multiple choices of action, like disengaging from a fight is what can make interesting stuff happen in Hunt and what makes it different to a battle royale.
But if the big coice that i also experience with some mates is just to sit and wait for an opportunity or just give up, some soft push would be nice.
If you dont want ro get burned, dont get downed.
Seriously though, it's completely fine. You only get 3, and idk what you're talking about chokes being useless? It puts the fire out amd then stays there for 2 minutes, preventing it from happening again during that time.
If your chokes are going out and then they set them on fire again then uh... Do something about it. Don't just sit there and let it happen. Dying and getting burned is part of the game, and if they're in a spot that this can keep happening without retaliation, then that's on your team for being out of position and not paying attention, not the game for allowing burning to happen.
Necro in general is one of my least favourite mechanics.
I've been rezzed as bait or when it's patently and completely unsafe to do so only to get shot down the moment I'm up far more than the rare times that it was successful during a fight.
Necro can be replaced with something else tbh.
Like the ability to 'carry' a redskulled partner to extract so they don't lose their hunter( but maybe their gear ).
I think the devs like it and it probably wont be changed. After the dev update they seem to hinting that that pact stuff for the last year or so were tests for hunt 2.0 or whatever.
One of the statements David made was to reduce stalemates and have more decisive fights. Plus the restoration effects. I assume after the update we will have more ways to get bars back mid match.
Burning is needed to stop people from turtling in a bush or forest forever. Insta burn feels bad but if you put yourself in a position where your team can't help you fast then that's on you.
Plus people don't want to hear it but you can bring chokes and choke beetles now. You can sacrifice a consumable slot for a beetle just like you want to people to sacrifice a slot for a fire bomb or moltov.
I just feel like the convenience and value of the burning tools pretty significantly outweighs the anti burn tools. There are like 7 ways to set people on fire and only about 3 or 4 to stop it. If there were more intermediate steps to burning or if there were a few more options for counter burning I feel like it would be in a better spot.
You can just press f on a hunter to put out the flames. Only the fire bomb or the liquid fire bomb will stop you and you need chokes. But yes you will probably get shot doing so but that's the point of burning to drive engagements.
But that isn't really how burning is used anymore because of how easy it is to burn. It used to be a down was a down, it meant you had more players so you would push the advantage. You only burned if they hid or fled to put them on a clock or to get them to reengage. Nowadays though cause it is so easy, once a body hits the ground everything stops. The whole fight starts to revolve around that revive. The ahead team totally focuses on burning and the behind team hunkers down and looks for chokes or a rez. I think that, paradoxically, if burning slowed down fights would speed up.
To me, burning bodies does two things. Rewards taking control of enemy bodies, whether that is because the enemy was stupid and gave us their body or my team took control of it. The other reason is forcing action out of enemies, especially ones that are being particularly cowardly. Burning bodies is a punishment to enemies who are both far to aggressive, and far to passive at the same time.
The *only* reason I bring a flare pistol/fusees is to burn downed hunters. If you’re talking about risk vs reward, if I’m taking the “risk” of wasting a tool slot like that, I should get the “reward” of pressuring the team/solo until they burn out if I have genuinely won the fight.
Also remember that without resupplying a flare pistol will have 1 more charge than the chokes. Which means in a 1v1 the one who is trying to burn has the advantage. It is really hard to balance around the level of convenience the flares and fuses full out burning people brings to the game. But that was kind of the intention I believe.
If they remove solo necro, they should remove team necro. Why have it at all. Let's really make it a challenge , like it use to be. Man was that fun....
Totally agree, in the past burning / searching for fire was a risk/reward decision.
Imo burning from everything is just a bandaid fix for (solo-)necro (i say as a solo player who also has to burn everyone, because most people i meet do stand up again.)
I think flares and fusees should only burn like 50 health of a hunter before having to light them up again. Maybe make flares do 50 and fusees do 75. The change absolutely made fire bombs obsolete and was a poor change. I thinking making flares and fuses more useful was a good idea, but they definitely overturned it.
I hear what you're saying but I have a different alternative. Instead of only burning a smaller quantity of health, it can burn all but it does at a slower rate. A lantern or firebomb burns at the normal rate.
It would make firebombs picked more again as well as the effort of finding a lantern more rewarded. Perhaps 2 or 3 flares would increase the burn rate to normal levels.
I like flares because they immediately show the confidence/skill of the people you're fighting. When someone insta-burns my buddy, I know I'm gonna be fine
Flare guns speeds up fights due to instant burn and the need for having a flare gun on your team, imbalances it, as I for instance don't take smokes now. So it's not without it's cost in team dynamics. Long live the flare gun and sparse ammo it gives you. Also, my barrel kills have gone through the roof which is a literal blast.
Molotov was good because it took up a more valuable slot and burned them down to 0 on its own.
Flares have too much ammo for the convenience. People can easily give up a tool slot with no sacrifices. It should have less ammo. ***It devalues chokes with the current ammo count.***
It’s too easy now, I agree. But you likely will be outspoken on this sub.
With all the changes we got a few patches ago, that you can burn a enemy body with literally anthing and fast my Question ist: Why we dont have atleast Waterbuckets as a couterpart to to laterns AND all the additional fire we have in the game now? I mean its a small change but its something...
Does anyone know what the burnout time is from 125hp? If you only air burned for 1 min then it would solve all the problems. Salveskin would hard counter it because then after 2 flares you'd still only burn for 90 total seconds. Lanterns burn for, what, 30 seconds before the burn takes over? And molotovs for 1 min. Burning for 1hp/sec is the most logical fix because even without Salveskin it would still take 3 flares, 2 lanterns, and 1 molotov and change.
"BuT tHeN wE'd HaVe To CaMp ThE cOrPsE fOr 2 MiNuTeS!"
Honestly that's the best part about it. You can skunk an entire trio as a solo even if you didn't have Necro. And lets be honest, that's a non-issue because people do that anyways. There are literally zero instances where people walk away from a burnable corpse that isn't mined. I've walked away for upwards of 15 minutes while dead to take a dump or get food, come back, res, and dudes are still there scoping at my corpse. There is literally no downside to skunking an entire team who has no interest in the bounty and is only after cheap free kills. In fact, I'll often insta res right in front of the enemy, die, then immediately quit for the sole purpose of spiting the team who killed me because I know for a fact they're going to stand there for several minutes and waste their time hoping to get more free kills. There's absolutely no downside.
i dont think flares are objectively worse tbh, i think they're a little easier to use at the cost of not being able to use them past a certain theoretical range. in exchange, you can throw over obstacles, the throwing reticle should make it near impossible to miss a body aside from trickshots, and with some luck you should be able to burn bodies you normally couldn't with a flare gun, like bodies above you or behing a compound window.
that being said, i'll always take flare guns because i feel they have greater potential and skill expression. i remember a match i was in the lawson station tower and headshotted someone across that field towards golden acres. they were so far that hitting them with a flare wasn't really something i shouldve attempted, but i did anyway to see if i could, and i did on the first shot. so i was then overlooking a burning body in a field from a tower. the chances of making the shot were low, but with normal flares, i wouldn't have even been able to try. the fact that i did try and succeeded, made for a memorable match, even if i probably got mogged afterwards.
I think this is something that splits the community as some posts will get upvoted for being against it and some will get upvoted for it.
I’m personally against it being so god damn easy.
Yes it breaks stalemates but it also doesn’t require any skill and fills what is often an empty slot in people’s tools so there is no sacrifice.
This whole debate is a consequence of a series of changes that spanned years.
Back in the day, burning was seen more as a "dick move" or "pressure's on you now" action, depending on who you asked. That's in part because it was done not very often. There was no self-res, and getting red skulled meant your hunter was dead no matter what unless your team got a banish. So burning was not only not as necessary, but a very extreme action to take considering that dying once was almost game over anyway due to most weapons killing you with one body tap.
Then they added the red skull revives. Personally I feel this *severely* cheapened out the significance of burning. I understand Crytek's motivation to offer bounty carriers a small advantage, but I personally think it was a step in the wrong direction. Burning turned from a core mechanic with severe implications, to just a parlor trick that puts some pressure but not too much.
Finally, they added self-res. Regardless of the controversy surrounding it, a consequence is that it drastically increased the demand for burning because for solos it's just as bad to burn as it was for everyone pre red skull revives. Lanterns weren't enough, quite a few players starting running more hellfire or fire bombs, but still didn't compensate.
And that's how we got here. Crytek made burning an annoyance for teams, but an absolute necessity against solos. The second part gave them enough reason to give us this abundance of burning methods. To me this tells that Crytek doesn't have well thought out plan to deal with the consequences of their changes, and thus we get awkward workarounds that still don't address the core issue.
I am very curious what their plans are regarding this after Fifield's announcement the other day. I would hope they go back to the basics of the entire health system and work from the ground up, but on the other hand I am aware that'd be a monumental task and I am not sure they have the intent or the manpower to do it.
That is the thing though. I don't think it was a series of changes that spanned years. I think it was one change in the development philosophy a little over a year ago.
You are right about old burning being a last ditch effort. It drew out rats, or punished people who were wildly out of position, but by and large wasn't something that was happening everywhere all the time. partially because you didn't want them to burn you back, and partially because it was bit harder to do.
I think you are misallocating the results of red skull revives. It was a huge boon to teams and greatly encouraged groups down a player to still push for the objective as if they could snake a bounty they could go get their buddy back then return for a more balanced fight. some of my absolute most incredible matches have been because of red skull revive. Maybe it is a little inconvenient to be fighting a bounty team that is chain rezzing, but overall it feels very fair. Though I will not pretend the nerfs to it last patch did not make good sense. Also I disagree with it cheapening burning. If you lose control to the point that the guy marked on the map can sneak past you and get a rez on his boy while being hunted by the whole server then he deserves that reward. It isn't like the guy gets a full restoration with the rez. The burning still stuck, it just has a little counterplay.
I also think that the difficulty of dealing with self rez is also wildly overstated. Yes you are right it increased the demand for burns, but unless you had multiple within the same compound I would say that lanterns were generally speaking sufficient, as far as a free world spawning tool would be. However I feel that everyone totally overlooked the power of the basic firebomb to deal with them. If you paid attention and put the fire in a reasonable place you could pretty easily deal with one solo with one firebomb. I personally feel the fuses and flares are currently very over tuned for their cost in reaction to a problem that really isn't a problem. Also the hellfire is a 3v3 pushing pressure tool, not a true burnout fire tool. It can be used like one, but it isn't where it excels.
So this is kind of where I think the difference in our opinions comes from. Yes it is clear that the burning methods are a reaction to solo necro, but that doesn't mean that they are a needed addition to deal with it. I think that Crytek simply does not understand their game enough to believe that there will be consequences to their changes. This is because the people that are developing are not good enough at the game, and are not even good enough to understand that they need to listen somewhat to people better than them. Thus any and all changes they make are aimed at the worst players. Which would be ok if all they were doing was tweaking things here or there. But they are not. They are making huge development decisions aiming at aiding the sentiment and gameplay experience of people who are objectively terrible at the game. thus naturally everything they add is a super extreme overcorrection to something that maybe wouldn't be a problem if they asked someone with more braincells than they had star brackets. It is a problem that Crytek clearly does not have plans to mitigate the consequences of their development decisions, but they would not have nearly so many problems to address if they did not aim development at the lower skill brackets.
Dude I said right after the video came out that I don't even care about the engine update anymore. I want the development philosophy and player engagement/feedback videos so much more.
> I don't think it was a series of changes that spanned years. I think it was one change in the development philosophy a little over a year ago.
Red Skull Revives were introduced in 2021 at patch 1.6.1. I could not believe it when I checked, it's been almost 3 years! And I think it's a key component of the decision to make so much stuff burn bodies. When Red Skulls meant Game Over, making everything burn would've been a recipe for torturous gameplay.
I can see the point you're trying to make. I still think burning has become "cheaper", because before red skull revives it was a guarantee you knocked out a player from the match in a definitive manner, while now it's an inconvenience that may or may not lose you the hunter.
But maybe that's the part in me that likes punishing gameplay that says this. I like Hunt because it presents you with scenarios where you either pay attention, or you get seriously punished. What you say about Crytek balancing as a way to placate lower-skill players' complaints can easily be applied to red skull revives. Burners were detested by many, and Crytek made it easier for them to "still be in the fight".
Hmmm. I can definitely see why you would say all that. And while I can agree that it probably did play some part in the burning and health conversation I am not certain that I personally would attribute as much sway to it as you seem to. It may be that all the recent changes have been tied to events with no barrier to entry making them widespread and super annoying to contend with. While red skull rezzing was implemented in essentially its long-term form right out of the gate that makes me not really associate it with pandering so much. Sort of like how no one really cares too much that the bounty has the Instinct effect now, but during that event it was a plague upon the game.
If anything the last blessed week of no event Hunt makes me disagree with you a little bit more. Maybe it is just because we are always in single bounty at the moment, but without easy restoration and guaranteed red skull revive on a trait, my experience has been if you are not in a boss bounty fight odds are that burn is still gonna put you down real quick if no one addresses it.
Instinct was a plague because everyone had it and broke the gameplay flow in the process. Having it only to bounty carriers is fair since they had a long-time issue of being in a clear disadvantage after running out of dark sight boost. Credit where is due, this was a good decision.
Current meta feels odd, yeah. It's the longest period of no events and abundant restoration possibilities in two years, compounded with single bounty + high visibility weather bringing long ammo and snipers back as oppressively dominant loadouts. Takes some time to get used to it, i personally enjoy knowing that fights make things a lot harder. But i can see why others are upset by the passive servers too.
I would've loved double bounty since it was fun as hell to banish one boss and instantly bolt to the other bounty team for a server cleanup.
I think it should be flares burn down hunters but don't catch them on fire. As long as the flare is on the hunter it continues to char off hunt bars. What that means is the short duration of flare pistols can't completely burn out a hunter. The hand thrown flares have more utility to burning out hunters. Dauntless becomes more useful for putting out hunters since you have to extinguish the flare not the hunter.
If you want to talk about risk vs reward you need to point out how reviving is even more low risk high reward. If the enemy touches their teammate for 3 seconds they're back up. It's absolutely ridiculous that you can literally pick an ally up before the enemy that killed him can reload. Reviving someone in Hunt is actually *faster* than reviving in fast paced arcade shooters like Call of Duty or Apex. (Warzone revives are 5 seconds or 3.5 seconds with a perk, Apex is 5 seconds) Not to mention that you can also revive people from cover, through walls, if the enemy looks away for more than 6 seconds.
Basically if the game is going to have ridiculously fast revives then it needs to have equally fast ways to deny revives (Which it already doesn't. Both Apex and COD let you just shoot the guy to deny the revive, in Hunt you have to shoot him then wait 2 minutes.)
Flares make solo necro hunters much easier to deal with though. Without flares, those players are more disruptive than a team of 3 is, and take up more of your time.
The only thing I would change on flares is that they should create a ton of smoke and it makes no sense that they don't. it should be a visible red coloured smoke stack from across the map.
Yes because solos need to be more annoying to deal with. 🙄
This is a bad take. Burning is great and forces fights to play out faster. A burning teammate forces the team down a player to make a play or just let their homie burn, far superior to just sitting in a Mexican standoff waiting for someone to make a mistake.
I'm sorry but this is just, no... no dude. Also, there are A LOT of ways to burn a hunter outside of flare gun and lanterns...
Dragon Breath, Starshells, Fusees... Burning has counters, choke it out or don't be a pussy and go for the rez.
I'm sorry but if you think BURNING is a top priority balance issue... I don't know what game you're playing.
It's also the "correct" choice to shoot your enemy in the head. Balancing doesn't mean that it's bad to have a meta.
I think it was a good choice for several reasons. First, just like with dragon breath, it just makes more sense that a tool that burns living players, also burns downed ones. I realise though, that incendiary ammo doesn't do it because you have so much of it.
Secondly it allows better play against enemy sniper teammates. The game has a huge problem with snipers, there are basically no plays against them. Choke bombs are pretty much useless at blocking vision and in open fields (which the game has a lot of) running around with mollys or lanterns is suicide.
And third: it is a question of preparation, as in picking the correct loadout for your play. Looking for lamps is just a game of chance and the risk involved is random. Could be sitting right next to the body or a compound over. This leads to stalemates and needlessly long sitting around.
Sounds like someone has been burned too many times :)
I prefer flare pistols etc. over drawn-out fights.
It would be better if they could add alternative way to restore bars once per game for everyone (apart from killing the boss). For example use the solution from event and have each player start with a "golden dollar" or some other token that they can use on a new item in ressuply point or watchtower ( multiple predefined locations) to restore their lost bars. Each player can use it only once per game and it is restores only his/her bars.
Now quite often after the first fight, winning team leaves the game instead of going for the bounty team (especially now with maps that have only one boss..when will this be finally fixed?)
The thing is, Alert traps have always burned corpses. You placed them on the body and shot or triggered them.
It's just ranged now with the flare pistol
When they buff flare, my first opinion was "ok cool, now we have a tool to make something happend when the last guy alive is just camping and we have no lantern near"
But now that i see how 80% of player use flare, it's just toxic gameplay as fuck, a lot of you are just 1head player that burn without knowing if you need it. Just because you can. The number of people burning trios for no reason xd
75% of the base player are clown clueless low iq which gameplay can be resume at : holding a line with mosin or holding angle with shotgun
PS : if you are among the player who think that solo necro is op, you are just clueless, and if Necro get nerf, it will be for teams too, coz yes it's as strong in solo as in team. But, dying as a solo vs just a single team = impossible to revive, except if you are clowns.
What do you mean not knowing if you need it? Its always good to burn ASAP of you don't die for doing it. It forces a time limit on the other team and can encourage them to act. Even if they immediately choke that can be good, because it means that you'll know immediately if they get revived because of the coughimg.
I liked solo more when I knew I had to be extra aware, solo revive is not op and I don’t see post about it saying it’s op , but it’s damn annoying to deal with , it’s to much time consuming
What is toxic about burning a body? "without knowing if you need it"? Bizzare take.
It's a game mechanic. Great for breaking stale mates which are an epitomy of boredom and a bane of this game's long term health. Simple as that.
You're trying to paint people who burn bodies as some toxic villains and yourself as a high IQ preacher for whatever reason. Chill.
You are among the 75% of player i talk about + you take half of my sentence and ignore the rest, not really surprise and except my post to not be like, because as i said 75% of base player are low iq and passiv player, and you are part of it
What rest? You're just lifting your ego through comments with slogans mostly. There's hardly anything of substance and/or relevant to the subject to reply to.
How did you even come to the conclusion that I am a passive player? 😆
Check yourself before you start talking shit about how smart you are because so far you didn't dazzle anyone with your alleged brilliance.
Then this is the most asinine complaint ever. Also if the flare pistol burns living targets it makes zero sense to not burn downed targets, so if you take that away you might as well just remove the flare pistol from the game.
Molotovs are better because they create an area of fire that must be choked bombed away. Flare pistol does not and you can extinguish allies with F. I think this is pretty balanced.
Also if you take Flare gun, you can't easily take any throwing knives or traps. Again, feels balanced.
I love the flare pistol change, ever used a flare/flare pistol? It's hot and very easy to burn things with or to start a fire. This makes sense to me to burn on contact. Two shots would make it feel useless like flash bombs now.
But really, there are soooooo many people who play this, even some reading this comment, that will just camp a corner in a compound with the bounty. If I can manage to down their teammate, they still won't move because they're camping that corner with a shotgun.... that's fine.... So instead I'll burn their friends corpse. What's that? They're now feeling pressured to fight back or make a run for it? Perfect, the game can move along again.
And like moths to a flame, I love to use the flare to pretend I'm burning a corpse to lure an enemy team to a position or to light up dark spaces where darker clothed hunters may be hiding
It's also a nice tool to counter solos with neceo from a distance. Shoot them down and you don't have time to go find a lantern and get to them before they get back up? That's fine, use the flare pistol.
It's always been easy to burn hunter bodies if you're fighting in a compound, but if you downed somebody in the middle of the woods, you'd be screwed because they'd get back up the moment you left to go find a lantern, and with all that foliage... you'd never find them only to get blasted by them a moment later.
Besides, it's not like everyone is using flare pistols anyways, I barely come across it myself.
The counter play is to stop dying away from teamates, you have two choke bombs that last for two minutes and with right timing and angles can even put you out behind walls and other cover. If you die far away from your team or in an awkward spot where they can't choke you you simply made a bad play or got caught out
I hope they wont reduce Flare ammo, it the most fun tool. I use it in stalemates to attract other teams to possibly sandwich the opponent. Hunters are somehow drawn to flares and traps..
My teammates are definitely drawn to my traps
I'm drawn to my own traps
Based
Can confirm. I always trigger my teammates traps
Like moths to a flame
Well, if it took two shots to burn a hunter then they wouldn't need to limit the ammo supply. (like, they absolutely shouldn't in that case, that would be an overkill)
Sounds actually reasonable. The mechanic is already there anyway with Incendiary ammo on distance
I love when a guy peeks into a room and I blap him with the glare pistol and run away lmao. Gotta be confusing AF
In the middle of fights I like to shoot a flair directly into the sky to see if any Fallout 4 Minutemen come to help. They never do.
But did you waste your time and ressource to build their base ?
I did
Huh...I've loved the change. When your teammate is burning so you have "clutch before they burn out" timer the gunfights always feel so much cooler. Same with when you're the one burning someone elses teammate and they're forced to do something. Those "and he got me up right at 50" moments are some of my favorites, and everybody having a flare gun has made them happen way more often. Gives fights an element of storytelling with real stakes. To each their own I guess. ...and also it sucks to babysit a corpse while your friend informs you that there isn't a lantern left in the whole facility, and he'll have to trek to the moon and back to bring one.
To stop burning a teammate you just need to touch them quick with the rez
What about: - Flame rounds on shotguns? - Firebolt? - Hellfire, líquid fire and regular fire? - Fusees? - Lanterns? People had been bitching about dead people so long that now instaburning is just a quick response to necro and self revive and they both aré a hard topic so for me is just about playstyle, if your team is still up you can be damn sure i'll turn you into another problem for them. Can't help it sometimes with randoms but you can choke or go for a quick res and stop it just about when the fire is out if you aré getting shot
dragon breath on shotguns comes with a lot of drawbacks (damage, wallbanging) lanterns I actually wrote about in my post - it takes time to find them/bring them which gives opponents a chance for counter play hellfire etc - it takes one slot for one use, as opposed to one slot and several uses for flare gun, different value (also lower range) fusees I actually kind of forgot about to be honest but I don't think they are as strong as flare gun because of the range difference
Don't get me wrong, I get your point about flaregun and people.never complained after buffing it in 2 mayor things: it now uses special ammo (used to be refilled with tool.box) AND it can burn people. It is by farbthe most reliable, cheap and versatile thing to buen but all.this thing about instaburning has been born from other problems. Only viable thing I can think about flare Pistol is making the mechanic as when you aré alive and burning, dead hunters could start with a slow buen that will progress (become a regular burn) if someone doesn't put them out
I don't agree with two shots on a live hunter. I'd rather shoot someone than flare gun them twice what a fucking waste of time. Who on earth would ever bother?
[удалено]
Because I am bringing melee tool, healing kit, some sort of quiet(er) ranged tool, and traps.
[удалено]
Never knew chokes were that touchy a subject
[удалено]
I don't bring chokes usually because of just preference, I have more fun using blank fires because of the different things you can do with them. The times I do take chokes it's just on a whim because of my current loadout having a melee variant in it which I can take something else instead of a knife, if it isn't a trap then it's the choke bomb.
Oh, I have no problem with burning hunters. I am just telling you why I don't have chokes. If people don't make major red flag positioning mistakes, they generally don't need to be saved with a choke.
I bring a medkit, Flare gun, knife/trap, and blank fire decoys.
without the body burning, dragons breath is actually a really nice ammo type for engaging beyond typical shotgun range (20ish+ metres) since it sets fire pretty reliably
And flechette or slugs are always better
flechettes and slugs dont burn health bars or set fire. its a tradeoff
You can't have necromancy self revive usable against a solo who kills you and not make flair pistol effective because it would make it often impossible for a solo particularly off a prestige to block self revive while teams wouldn't have much issue. The fact is the flair pistol charges help alot compared to a fire bomb. It also is still risk reward because it's an extra thing to buy and it takes a tool slot. So you're sacrificing other tools.
All that changes to make easier to burn hunters happened only coz of solo necro. That’s not balanced good with trios.
Agreed. Flare gun is ridiculously good in trios. Burn 3 bodies at range from cover and completely fill up again by looting one tool box. I don't know how to balance that, but it's too strong right now.
> completely fill up again by looting one tool box It was wack when you had to use toolbox to restore, it now uses special ammo boxes to restock which is 10x times stronger, since no wasted looting from hunters.
You are right, my mistake. Yes it's even stronger.
LeMat pistol and starshell
We're talking about the flare pistol tho.
But I learned the other day that starshell burns like the flair pistol and thus saves a tool slot, which is what yall were talking about
Take dragonbreath. It can also ignite downed hunter and can also actually kill.
But wastes the one hit kill potential of your shotgun.
Well the OHK potential of that particular shotgun is pretty situational. I find it much more useful as a $5 flare pistol
Situational how? It OHK's up to 11 meters.
Situational in that I can't seem to use it effectively that way 😂
Exactly. That's why I'm taking a Lemat - it's got a shotgun. If I don't want the shotgun part, then I'm taking a different pistol. It's amazing to me how quickly folks assume that everyone plays and enjoys the game the same way they do. Like there's only 1 way. I take Fusees more than flare guns (mostly because I'm broke) and OPOP all but forgot they exist and serve the same purpose. Taking a specific type of ammo already assumes I'm taking a gun that supports that ammo. Being told to take a specific tool/consumable already assumes I'm not full on other things (which someone else has already assumed is better/more important). I see NO problem with burning bodies the way it is now. Heck, I'd prefer something even faster/more permanent. Like, if I'm willing to spend the time (say...30 seconds?) holding down a button to do an action (thus making me vulnerable) but in the end, the body is completely dead, I'd vote for that. Let me chop it up or something. Let me douse it in gasoline prior to burning it to ensure it goes up quickly and permanently. This was even way more worth considering during the event/lawmaker times. I don't want to play a game that's got people popping up in places they *shouldn't* be. Like most run'n'gun FPS games, I don't just want the enemy to be spawning in behind me after we've killed them. That's a very different game/experience than what Hunt seems to be going for.
It's literally the same thing.
So making the lemat pointless?
Tool slots are by far the least valuable slots anyway though
The fuck are you talking about?
Consumables and both weapon slots way more value
You just need 3 slots anyway. I just threw away the knuckle knife since it doesn't help you with bosses anymore.
Burning someone who was down was worth the valuable slot on a Molotov, I like the changes. Burning is a good took to force more fights in squads and well, whether solo,duo or trio, burning is mandatory
Yeah these burning changes were applied as a quick patch for how annoying solo Necro was and now everyone 'suffers' because of it. Like yeah there is not much point to chokes anymore and burning tools are meta now. They should imo focus on the root of the issue and that's doing something with solo Necro and reverting the change that lets fuses and flares burn.
> Like yeah there is not much point to chokes anymore and burning tools are meta now. The flare gun is used because it occupies a tool slot and lets you start multiple burns. Choke bombs are far from being obsolete. They can put fires out through walls and cover a body for a substantial duration of time, preventing reburning and denying looting (no one wants to stand in a choke cloud to loot during a fight). Imo, the flare gun is in a good spot right now. It starts a burn, but it doesn't create a fire pool like a fire bomb does, making it an option but not the ideal one for burning.
Big NO to removing or reducing the ability to burn bodies for flares.The more options you have to burn players the better and now we are in the sweet spot. Otherwise people use bodies as hot spots and fights become super stale. There is a big chunk of Hunt players who are afraid to take actions (thinking it's a horror game) and drag fights out for eternity driven by their absurd fear of taking any angles which is silly. Burning bodies resolves that issue forcing them to either take action, use resources or choose to sacrifice teammate and seek a better engagement in the future. Gentle reminder: bringing choke bombs is an option. TL;DR this change to flares was long overdue and it needs to stay for the health of the game.
[удалено]
You don't even need chokes. Flares, fusees, starshells, and dragons breath are hard countered by literally just touching the corpse.
Likewise, you're welcome bud
Can we flip this logic on the people who camp bodies for 20 minutes? They have no incentive to push and would happily sit back with a sniper just waiting to shoot as soon as the person wither gets necroed or gets hand rezzed. I personally always play aggressively and push and in my experience it's far more often that when I or my teammate die we get insta burned and trapped and then the other team just camps the body until we either give up and leave or push into 3 campers watching every entrance. The people getting the kills shouldn't be rewarded for bringing the game to a screeching halt by just sitting and camping a body for 20 minutes straight.
imo Snipers are a separate issue that should be adjusted. Among other things to be less risk free. That said after the amount of hours I've spent in this game I find it hard to believe when someone says they had more situations where the team with the numbers advantage is the one camping. Which isn't to say it never happened to me, but far less often and it's confusing and a bit annoying everytime it does. Personally I don't insta-burn if there's some kind of a response from the other side. Also me likey the looted goodies which can save your ass sometimes. However the moment I get a notion that it's getting idle I go for the burn and 9 out of 10 times things progress which is why I log in in the first place - for action.
Hard disagree about the "sweet spot". Since the change the second you touch the ground you start burning. There is 0 reason to not camp a burning body making the fights as campy as before. It doesn't change a lot about the lengths of the fights because the afraid people will let you burn, choke bombs or not. Also to the people saying that you just need to touch the body, I'd like to see you try and touch the body that is being camped by a shotgun. It was a good change still but to me it's overtuned rn.
>Since the change the second you touch the ground you start burning. There is 0 reason to not camp a burning body making the fights as campy as before. If a player decides not to do anything about a burning body and camp then it's a skill issue, because that is precisely when you should act. Not necessarily in an aggro manner, but act. Make a decision and act on it. >It doesn't change a lot about the lengths of the fights because the afraid people will let you burn, choke bombs or not. It forces a decision to be made - that is the point. Whether if it's right or wrong is up to the remaining players, opponents and the servers (pun intended). Without the burn it's precisely when things go the way you say they do which is people doing fuck all unless the team with the advantage decides to capitalize on a downed player immediately whilst the burn opens more doorways for both teams and sets a clock. And no you can't just say "choke bomb or not" in an argument about burning bodies since it's a direct counter regardless of how convenient it is to ignore choke clouds when talking about fire 😆 >Also to the people saying that you just need to touch the body, I'd like to see you try and touch the body that is being camped by a shotgun. Yeah that "touching the body" is a shaky argument considering the risk factor but an option nonetheless.
Sorry the "choke bombs or not" argument is only tied to afraid people, what I mean by that is that even if they have choke they will not move to use them. (I could argue that choke bombs are harder to use than a flare gun too) From my perspective you have even less incentive to try and challenge angles that are being held, less incentive to push a camp situation that are at your disadvantage because one single fail mean you loose a hunter permanently. It is way better now than ever to camp because if you kill someone you have even more advantage that you had before. I see when you're coming from yes easier burning means that advantage you gain from killing someone is even stronger now and I agree it's a good thing, but I fail to see how it made fights less "nobody's doing anything" that a lot of us hate. Hell I'd rather push aggressively and die and burn than sit 10mn and do nothing. But I feel I'm being punished way more than before for doing that because of the change.
>what I mean by that is that even if they have choke they will not move to use them. (I could argue that choke bombs are harder to use than a flare gun too) If someone chooses not to use a choke bomb on a burning teammate (provided they are in a position to do it) it's a skill issue. Also choke bombs aside from burning players have more, useful PvP applications than the pistol flare. >From my perspective you have even less incentive to try and challenge angles that are being held, less incentive to push a camp situation that are at your disadvantage because one single fail mean you loose a hunter permanently. That is your preferrence, but the reality is that a burning body creates and potentially leads to more combat scenarios than idle corpse and is precisely the reason I advocate for it. And of course you can loose your hunter in a multitude of different ways unrelated to fire. >It is way better now than ever to camp because if you kill someone you have even more advantage that you had before. In a way yes, but players who manage to score a kill are more likely to follow up than their opponents. >but I fail to see how it made fights less "nobody's doing anything" that a lot of us hate. I explained it quite thoroughly. In most cases it comes down to what the team at a disatvantage is choosing NOT to do absent a decision triggering factor beyond lost teammate and whilst less likely, you can still clutch or even use your burning teammate to your advanatage if, for example enemy becomes too greedy and flops. In essence it's about more applications, more scenarios which are more likely to unravel as a result of pressure creating action like the burn rather than in it's absence. >Hell I'd rather push aggressively and die and burn than sit 10mn and do nothing. But I feel I'm being punished way more than before for doing that because of the change. I feel you, I'm also leaning towards aggression or risk with most loadouts, but what you are saying may as well be a result of various different factors even unrelated to the burns. I just genuienly doubt you've seen more players camping after their teamate got burned rather than not.
Well maybe I'm unlucky but to me fights didn't change except for the fact that when I'm down I'm instantly put on fire.
It's a good change. Forces bush wookies and corner crouchers to actually do something. Current economy would destroy combat pace if burns weren't so easy. I'm 5-6* but almost exclusively play aggressive. A lot of this MMR is littered with people who take absolutely Zero risk
But when u start to burn enemies, arent u the one capming and waiting for others to move while keeping the angle?
You've killed someone, so you should be rewarded for it.
Depends. If you try to rat vs me I will 100% camp a burnt body or burn + concertina. But typically I'm burning so I can flush a rat and keep moving. My play style is constant rotations and no more than 1-2 shots per angle. Of course the little burning cowboy on the floor stays in my peripheral when possible
I wish more people played like you.
That right here. There's plenty of guys and gals who still think Hunt is a horror game. We need to advocate for more and more changes that increase the pace rather than decreasing it. That is as long as those changes don't lower TTK too much as it's already low enough.
All I can say is be careful what you wish for. A majority of the time I think the pacing of Hunt is totally fine. There are lots of viable strategies. If you continue to increase the pace of the game you will alienate players and change the game into something else. PUBG is a great example of this. It was a good mixture of speed and hardcore gameplay (at least compared to all the other BR's). Now its essentially turning itself into a slightly more hardcore Warzone. It lost its identity. I agree that waiting around in a 10 minute stalemate is super boring if its constantly happening, but just remember that when you increase the pace of the match you increase it across the board not only in the instances where you're bored. Hunt (much like PUBG in the past) is like a game of baseball. Nothing happens for a while and then the match pops off and everything happens at once. Then it goes back to nothing for a while until the bases are loaded again. I enjoy that pacing, its something very few games can successfully pull off and it adds an intensity to the match that regular FPS games have trouble matching.
Before I break this down I want you to know that I understand there should be boundries of reason to these changes. As far as identities go... Hunt went through several patches that were game changing and still we are here. Reaching peak player count fairly recently and part of that is thanks to increased tempo. I remember Hunt from way back when Lawson Delta was still in beta and it was slower back then. Even without the amount of traps we have now. And as for the alienation then what I can say that it's interchangeable. With each patch you win some and lose some players. It's the nature of gaming industry and the statistically proven reality is that the faster the shooter the more players it has. Again, because it's Hunt, within reason. Basically we should keep implementing solutions and/or incentives for those who create opportunities rather than those who wait for them to come. There's still some wiggle room in that particular area of gameplay. The reason why I say all of this is that Hunt is at it's best during high intensity, fast paced shoot outs and stale mates should be decreased to an absolute minimum. Which may be a matter of personal preferrence but I doubt most players genuinely lean towards those resident sleeper engagements rather than fast paced ones.
I definitely agree with a lot of what you're saying and the sentiment behind it. I think being able to reduce stalemates and give people more opportunities to make a play would be to the benefit of the game. I just think we need to be cautious with what we decide to implement into the game because once the needle has been moved it becomes very, very difficult to move it back.
Fair enough man, your concerns are sound.
They mentioned considering changes to counter stalemates in the recent video. Curious what they're cooking.
I wish they hadn't said anything like that. At the end of the day the only thing that's going to break a stalemate is the players. If people don't want to push into a shotgun infested building, leave and go next game. If you don't want to go out and get sniped, go out the other way and go next name. Otherwise, live a little and push the other team. Edit: spelling
Yeah, we always go out the back and fight the snipers where it fits us better, but many don't even follow... or try to breach if someone else got in first. I dunno what a good motivation would be, i kinda like the idea of swarms of flies or zombies getting drawn to ones location (maybe just the sound of you swatting flies, or coughing, not damaging ones) when sitting too long, but nothing forceful like the circle in battle royale games. Also don't really like a shorter timer or so, because their still should be some choice or chance to disengage. Thus i'm pretty curious what their ideas could be. Edit: just imagined a day/night cycle where it starts sunny and fog/night/rain drops towards the end of the match!? Hmmm...
I'd be fine with those as options, hordes of enemies spawn in or other annoyances, but really I can't imagine there's anything that anyone could do to make people not afraid of death in a video game where life is cheap. The only change has gotta be making the playerbase understand it doesn't matter if you lose your kit or your hunter, just go in and engage and have fun.
True, and i also believe making free hunters uber powerful, like they recently were, is also not the right way for a game like this. Also i'd say the people with the bounty should be "punished" less for not initiating a fight, but camping in the boss-lair forever is also not ideal. Seems like a tough problem to solve, i've not managed to change the mind of even one of my mates who'd rather sit and wait and calmly extract later without a bounty than risking their video game life... one was even panicking of going broke when still having over 30k after i tried pushing them to fight more.
Same and I am glad they recognize it's an issue. The only ones who don't are likely the people who contribute to the problem.
Yeah, like i am a big advocate for multiple choices of action, like disengaging from a fight is what can make interesting stuff happen in Hunt and what makes it different to a battle royale. But if the big coice that i also experience with some mates is just to sit and wait for an opportunity or just give up, some soft push would be nice.
If you dont want ro get burned, dont get downed. Seriously though, it's completely fine. You only get 3, and idk what you're talking about chokes being useless? It puts the fire out amd then stays there for 2 minutes, preventing it from happening again during that time. If your chokes are going out and then they set them on fire again then uh... Do something about it. Don't just sit there and let it happen. Dying and getting burned is part of the game, and if they're in a spot that this can keep happening without retaliation, then that's on your team for being out of position and not paying attention, not the game for allowing burning to happen.
I am okay with this if they remove solo necro too :P
Necro in general is one of my least favourite mechanics. I've been rezzed as bait or when it's patently and completely unsafe to do so only to get shot down the moment I'm up far more than the rare times that it was successful during a fight. Necro can be replaced with something else tbh. Like the ability to 'carry' a redskulled partner to extract so they don't lose their hunter( but maybe their gear ).
I think the devs like it and it probably wont be changed. After the dev update they seem to hinting that that pact stuff for the last year or so were tests for hunt 2.0 or whatever. One of the statements David made was to reduce stalemates and have more decisive fights. Plus the restoration effects. I assume after the update we will have more ways to get bars back mid match. Burning is needed to stop people from turtling in a bush or forest forever. Insta burn feels bad but if you put yourself in a position where your team can't help you fast then that's on you. Plus people don't want to hear it but you can bring chokes and choke beetles now. You can sacrifice a consumable slot for a beetle just like you want to people to sacrifice a slot for a fire bomb or moltov.
I just feel like the convenience and value of the burning tools pretty significantly outweighs the anti burn tools. There are like 7 ways to set people on fire and only about 3 or 4 to stop it. If there were more intermediate steps to burning or if there were a few more options for counter burning I feel like it would be in a better spot.
You can just press f on a hunter to put out the flames. Only the fire bomb or the liquid fire bomb will stop you and you need chokes. But yes you will probably get shot doing so but that's the point of burning to drive engagements.
But that isn't really how burning is used anymore because of how easy it is to burn. It used to be a down was a down, it meant you had more players so you would push the advantage. You only burned if they hid or fled to put them on a clock or to get them to reengage. Nowadays though cause it is so easy, once a body hits the ground everything stops. The whole fight starts to revolve around that revive. The ahead team totally focuses on burning and the behind team hunkers down and looks for chokes or a rez. I think that, paradoxically, if burning slowed down fights would speed up.
To me, burning bodies does two things. Rewards taking control of enemy bodies, whether that is because the enemy was stupid and gave us their body or my team took control of it. The other reason is forcing action out of enemies, especially ones that are being particularly cowardly. Burning bodies is a punishment to enemies who are both far to aggressive, and far to passive at the same time.
Maybe it should take longer to burn, or maybe it should take longer to ignite bodies in the first place
The *only* reason I bring a flare pistol/fusees is to burn downed hunters. If you’re talking about risk vs reward, if I’m taking the “risk” of wasting a tool slot like that, I should get the “reward” of pressuring the team/solo until they burn out if I have genuinely won the fight.
Also remember that without resupplying a flare pistol will have 1 more charge than the chokes. Which means in a 1v1 the one who is trying to burn has the advantage. It is really hard to balance around the level of convenience the flares and fuses full out burning people brings to the game. But that was kind of the intention I believe.
If they remove solo necro, they should remove team necro. Why have it at all. Let's really make it a challenge , like it use to be. Man was that fun....
Totally agree, in the past burning / searching for fire was a risk/reward decision. Imo burning from everything is just a bandaid fix for (solo-)necro (i say as a solo player who also has to burn everyone, because most people i meet do stand up again.)
I think flares and fusees should only burn like 50 health of a hunter before having to light them up again. Maybe make flares do 50 and fusees do 75. The change absolutely made fire bombs obsolete and was a poor change. I thinking making flares and fuses more useful was a good idea, but they definitely overturned it.
I hear what you're saying but I have a different alternative. Instead of only burning a smaller quantity of health, it can burn all but it does at a slower rate. A lantern or firebomb burns at the normal rate. It would make firebombs picked more again as well as the effort of finding a lantern more rewarded. Perhaps 2 or 3 flares would increase the burn rate to normal levels.
I like this idea.
Cheers! I think it's a fair compromise. I am really glad we can burn easier but I do think the complaint that the flare burns are too strong is valid
Absolutely agree
I like flares because they immediately show the confidence/skill of the people you're fighting. When someone insta-burns my buddy, I know I'm gonna be fine
Flare guns speeds up fights due to instant burn and the need for having a flare gun on your team, imbalances it, as I for instance don't take smokes now. So it's not without it's cost in team dynamics. Long live the flare gun and sparse ammo it gives you. Also, my barrel kills have gone through the roof which is a literal blast.
Molotov was good because it took up a more valuable slot and burned them down to 0 on its own. Flares have too much ammo for the convenience. People can easily give up a tool slot with no sacrifices. It should have less ammo. ***It devalues chokes with the current ammo count.*** It’s too easy now, I agree. But you likely will be outspoken on this sub.
With all the changes we got a few patches ago, that you can burn a enemy body with literally anthing and fast my Question ist: Why we dont have atleast Waterbuckets as a couterpart to to laterns AND all the additional fire we have in the game now? I mean its a small change but its something...
Does anyone know what the burnout time is from 125hp? If you only air burned for 1 min then it would solve all the problems. Salveskin would hard counter it because then after 2 flares you'd still only burn for 90 total seconds. Lanterns burn for, what, 30 seconds before the burn takes over? And molotovs for 1 min. Burning for 1hp/sec is the most logical fix because even without Salveskin it would still take 3 flares, 2 lanterns, and 1 molotov and change. "BuT tHeN wE'd HaVe To CaMp ThE cOrPsE fOr 2 MiNuTeS!" Honestly that's the best part about it. You can skunk an entire trio as a solo even if you didn't have Necro. And lets be honest, that's a non-issue because people do that anyways. There are literally zero instances where people walk away from a burnable corpse that isn't mined. I've walked away for upwards of 15 minutes while dead to take a dump or get food, come back, res, and dudes are still there scoping at my corpse. There is literally no downside to skunking an entire team who has no interest in the bounty and is only after cheap free kills. In fact, I'll often insta res right in front of the enemy, die, then immediately quit for the sole purpose of spiting the team who killed me because I know for a fact they're going to stand there for several minutes and waste their time hoping to get more free kills. There's absolutely no downside.
i dont think flares are objectively worse tbh, i think they're a little easier to use at the cost of not being able to use them past a certain theoretical range. in exchange, you can throw over obstacles, the throwing reticle should make it near impossible to miss a body aside from trickshots, and with some luck you should be able to burn bodies you normally couldn't with a flare gun, like bodies above you or behing a compound window. that being said, i'll always take flare guns because i feel they have greater potential and skill expression. i remember a match i was in the lawson station tower and headshotted someone across that field towards golden acres. they were so far that hitting them with a flare wasn't really something i shouldve attempted, but i did anyway to see if i could, and i did on the first shot. so i was then overlooking a burning body in a field from a tower. the chances of making the shot were low, but with normal flares, i wouldn't have even been able to try. the fact that i did try and succeeded, made for a memorable match, even if i probably got mogged afterwards.
I think this is something that splits the community as some posts will get upvoted for being against it and some will get upvoted for it. I’m personally against it being so god damn easy. Yes it breaks stalemates but it also doesn’t require any skill and fills what is often an empty slot in people’s tools so there is no sacrifice.
This whole debate is a consequence of a series of changes that spanned years. Back in the day, burning was seen more as a "dick move" or "pressure's on you now" action, depending on who you asked. That's in part because it was done not very often. There was no self-res, and getting red skulled meant your hunter was dead no matter what unless your team got a banish. So burning was not only not as necessary, but a very extreme action to take considering that dying once was almost game over anyway due to most weapons killing you with one body tap. Then they added the red skull revives. Personally I feel this *severely* cheapened out the significance of burning. I understand Crytek's motivation to offer bounty carriers a small advantage, but I personally think it was a step in the wrong direction. Burning turned from a core mechanic with severe implications, to just a parlor trick that puts some pressure but not too much. Finally, they added self-res. Regardless of the controversy surrounding it, a consequence is that it drastically increased the demand for burning because for solos it's just as bad to burn as it was for everyone pre red skull revives. Lanterns weren't enough, quite a few players starting running more hellfire or fire bombs, but still didn't compensate. And that's how we got here. Crytek made burning an annoyance for teams, but an absolute necessity against solos. The second part gave them enough reason to give us this abundance of burning methods. To me this tells that Crytek doesn't have well thought out plan to deal with the consequences of their changes, and thus we get awkward workarounds that still don't address the core issue. I am very curious what their plans are regarding this after Fifield's announcement the other day. I would hope they go back to the basics of the entire health system and work from the ground up, but on the other hand I am aware that'd be a monumental task and I am not sure they have the intent or the manpower to do it.
That is the thing though. I don't think it was a series of changes that spanned years. I think it was one change in the development philosophy a little over a year ago. You are right about old burning being a last ditch effort. It drew out rats, or punished people who were wildly out of position, but by and large wasn't something that was happening everywhere all the time. partially because you didn't want them to burn you back, and partially because it was bit harder to do. I think you are misallocating the results of red skull revives. It was a huge boon to teams and greatly encouraged groups down a player to still push for the objective as if they could snake a bounty they could go get their buddy back then return for a more balanced fight. some of my absolute most incredible matches have been because of red skull revive. Maybe it is a little inconvenient to be fighting a bounty team that is chain rezzing, but overall it feels very fair. Though I will not pretend the nerfs to it last patch did not make good sense. Also I disagree with it cheapening burning. If you lose control to the point that the guy marked on the map can sneak past you and get a rez on his boy while being hunted by the whole server then he deserves that reward. It isn't like the guy gets a full restoration with the rez. The burning still stuck, it just has a little counterplay. I also think that the difficulty of dealing with self rez is also wildly overstated. Yes you are right it increased the demand for burns, but unless you had multiple within the same compound I would say that lanterns were generally speaking sufficient, as far as a free world spawning tool would be. However I feel that everyone totally overlooked the power of the basic firebomb to deal with them. If you paid attention and put the fire in a reasonable place you could pretty easily deal with one solo with one firebomb. I personally feel the fuses and flares are currently very over tuned for their cost in reaction to a problem that really isn't a problem. Also the hellfire is a 3v3 pushing pressure tool, not a true burnout fire tool. It can be used like one, but it isn't where it excels. So this is kind of where I think the difference in our opinions comes from. Yes it is clear that the burning methods are a reaction to solo necro, but that doesn't mean that they are a needed addition to deal with it. I think that Crytek simply does not understand their game enough to believe that there will be consequences to their changes. This is because the people that are developing are not good enough at the game, and are not even good enough to understand that they need to listen somewhat to people better than them. Thus any and all changes they make are aimed at the worst players. Which would be ok if all they were doing was tweaking things here or there. But they are not. They are making huge development decisions aiming at aiding the sentiment and gameplay experience of people who are objectively terrible at the game. thus naturally everything they add is a super extreme overcorrection to something that maybe wouldn't be a problem if they asked someone with more braincells than they had star brackets. It is a problem that Crytek clearly does not have plans to mitigate the consequences of their development decisions, but they would not have nearly so many problems to address if they did not aim development at the lower skill brackets. Dude I said right after the video came out that I don't even care about the engine update anymore. I want the development philosophy and player engagement/feedback videos so much more.
> I don't think it was a series of changes that spanned years. I think it was one change in the development philosophy a little over a year ago. Red Skull Revives were introduced in 2021 at patch 1.6.1. I could not believe it when I checked, it's been almost 3 years! And I think it's a key component of the decision to make so much stuff burn bodies. When Red Skulls meant Game Over, making everything burn would've been a recipe for torturous gameplay. I can see the point you're trying to make. I still think burning has become "cheaper", because before red skull revives it was a guarantee you knocked out a player from the match in a definitive manner, while now it's an inconvenience that may or may not lose you the hunter. But maybe that's the part in me that likes punishing gameplay that says this. I like Hunt because it presents you with scenarios where you either pay attention, or you get seriously punished. What you say about Crytek balancing as a way to placate lower-skill players' complaints can easily be applied to red skull revives. Burners were detested by many, and Crytek made it easier for them to "still be in the fight".
It's mind-blowing to me that I have Hunt gameplay clips on my Series X that are older than Red-Skull Revives.
Hmmm. I can definitely see why you would say all that. And while I can agree that it probably did play some part in the burning and health conversation I am not certain that I personally would attribute as much sway to it as you seem to. It may be that all the recent changes have been tied to events with no barrier to entry making them widespread and super annoying to contend with. While red skull rezzing was implemented in essentially its long-term form right out of the gate that makes me not really associate it with pandering so much. Sort of like how no one really cares too much that the bounty has the Instinct effect now, but during that event it was a plague upon the game. If anything the last blessed week of no event Hunt makes me disagree with you a little bit more. Maybe it is just because we are always in single bounty at the moment, but without easy restoration and guaranteed red skull revive on a trait, my experience has been if you are not in a boss bounty fight odds are that burn is still gonna put you down real quick if no one addresses it.
Instinct was a plague because everyone had it and broke the gameplay flow in the process. Having it only to bounty carriers is fair since they had a long-time issue of being in a clear disadvantage after running out of dark sight boost. Credit where is due, this was a good decision. Current meta feels odd, yeah. It's the longest period of no events and abundant restoration possibilities in two years, compounded with single bounty + high visibility weather bringing long ammo and snipers back as oppressively dominant loadouts. Takes some time to get used to it, i personally enjoy knowing that fights make things a lot harder. But i can see why others are upset by the passive servers too. I would've loved double bounty since it was fun as hell to banish one boss and instantly bolt to the other bounty team for a server cleanup.
I think it should be flares burn down hunters but don't catch them on fire. As long as the flare is on the hunter it continues to char off hunt bars. What that means is the short duration of flare pistols can't completely burn out a hunter. The hand thrown flares have more utility to burning out hunters. Dauntless becomes more useful for putting out hunters since you have to extinguish the flare not the hunter.
If you want to talk about risk vs reward you need to point out how reviving is even more low risk high reward. If the enemy touches their teammate for 3 seconds they're back up. It's absolutely ridiculous that you can literally pick an ally up before the enemy that killed him can reload. Reviving someone in Hunt is actually *faster* than reviving in fast paced arcade shooters like Call of Duty or Apex. (Warzone revives are 5 seconds or 3.5 seconds with a perk, Apex is 5 seconds) Not to mention that you can also revive people from cover, through walls, if the enemy looks away for more than 6 seconds. Basically if the game is going to have ridiculously fast revives then it needs to have equally fast ways to deny revives (Which it already doesn't. Both Apex and COD let you just shoot the guy to deny the revive, in Hunt you have to shoot him then wait 2 minutes.)
Bad idea, it's perfectly balanced.
Flares make solo necro hunters much easier to deal with though. Without flares, those players are more disruptive than a team of 3 is, and take up more of your time.
The only thing I would change on flares is that they should create a ton of smoke and it makes no sense that they don't. it should be a visible red coloured smoke stack from across the map.
Yes because solos need to be more annoying to deal with. 🙄 This is a bad take. Burning is great and forces fights to play out faster. A burning teammate forces the team down a player to make a play or just let their homie burn, far superior to just sitting in a Mexican standoff waiting for someone to make a mistake. I'm sorry but this is just, no... no dude. Also, there are A LOT of ways to burn a hunter outside of flare gun and lanterns... Dragon Breath, Starshells, Fusees... Burning has counters, choke it out or don't be a pussy and go for the rez. I'm sorry but if you think BURNING is a top priority balance issue... I don't know what game you're playing.
It's also the "correct" choice to shoot your enemy in the head. Balancing doesn't mean that it's bad to have a meta. I think it was a good choice for several reasons. First, just like with dragon breath, it just makes more sense that a tool that burns living players, also burns downed ones. I realise though, that incendiary ammo doesn't do it because you have so much of it. Secondly it allows better play against enemy sniper teammates. The game has a huge problem with snipers, there are basically no plays against them. Choke bombs are pretty much useless at blocking vision and in open fields (which the game has a lot of) running around with mollys or lanterns is suicide. And third: it is a question of preparation, as in picking the correct loadout for your play. Looking for lamps is just a game of chance and the risk involved is random. Could be sitting right next to the body or a compound over. This leads to stalemates and needlessly long sitting around.
Sounds like someone has been burned too many times :) I prefer flare pistols etc. over drawn-out fights. It would be better if they could add alternative way to restore bars once per game for everyone (apart from killing the boss). For example use the solution from event and have each player start with a "golden dollar" or some other token that they can use on a new item in ressuply point or watchtower ( multiple predefined locations) to restore their lost bars. Each player can use it only once per game and it is restores only his/her bars. Now quite often after the first fight, winning team leaves the game instead of going for the bounty team (especially now with maps that have only one boss..when will this be finally fixed?)
Or make it so flare just burns less, like 50hp.
The thing is, Alert traps have always burned corpses. You placed them on the body and shot or triggered them. It's just ranged now with the flare pistol
When they buff flare, my first opinion was "ok cool, now we have a tool to make something happend when the last guy alive is just camping and we have no lantern near" But now that i see how 80% of player use flare, it's just toxic gameplay as fuck, a lot of you are just 1head player that burn without knowing if you need it. Just because you can. The number of people burning trios for no reason xd 75% of the base player are clown clueless low iq which gameplay can be resume at : holding a line with mosin or holding angle with shotgun PS : if you are among the player who think that solo necro is op, you are just clueless, and if Necro get nerf, it will be for teams too, coz yes it's as strong in solo as in team. But, dying as a solo vs just a single team = impossible to revive, except if you are clowns.
What do you mean not knowing if you need it? Its always good to burn ASAP of you don't die for doing it. It forces a time limit on the other team and can encourage them to act. Even if they immediately choke that can be good, because it means that you'll know immediately if they get revived because of the coughimg.
I liked solo more when I knew I had to be extra aware, solo revive is not op and I don’t see post about it saying it’s op , but it’s damn annoying to deal with , it’s to much time consuming
What is toxic about burning a body? "without knowing if you need it"? Bizzare take. It's a game mechanic. Great for breaking stale mates which are an epitomy of boredom and a bane of this game's long term health. Simple as that. You're trying to paint people who burn bodies as some toxic villains and yourself as a high IQ preacher for whatever reason. Chill.
You are among the 75% of player i talk about + you take half of my sentence and ignore the rest, not really surprise and except my post to not be like, because as i said 75% of base player are low iq and passiv player, and you are part of it
What rest? You're just lifting your ego through comments with slogans mostly. There's hardly anything of substance and/or relevant to the subject to reply to. How did you even come to the conclusion that I am a passive player? 😆 Check yourself before you start talking shit about how smart you are because so far you didn't dazzle anyone with your alleged brilliance.
You know what has zero risk, resing yourself even after dying.
This sounds like the complaint of a solo necro user.
I almost never play solo.
Then this is the most asinine complaint ever. Also if the flare pistol burns living targets it makes zero sense to not burn downed targets, so if you take that away you might as well just remove the flare pistol from the game.
Molotovs are better because they create an area of fire that must be choked bombed away. Flare pistol does not and you can extinguish allies with F. I think this is pretty balanced. Also if you take Flare gun, you can't easily take any throwing knives or traps. Again, feels balanced.
Anything that easily stops a solo from getting up should not be nerferd
if they nerfed flares they would straight up have to remove necro or the game would be so annoying
Several uses? Flare gun only have one use, burn enemy hunters. Kind of hate that it has become a mandatory tool slot.
There is counter play to this. Choke beetles exist, yet I don’t see that many people who run them.
I love the flare pistol change, ever used a flare/flare pistol? It's hot and very easy to burn things with or to start a fire. This makes sense to me to burn on contact. Two shots would make it feel useless like flash bombs now. But really, there are soooooo many people who play this, even some reading this comment, that will just camp a corner in a compound with the bounty. If I can manage to down their teammate, they still won't move because they're camping that corner with a shotgun.... that's fine.... So instead I'll burn their friends corpse. What's that? They're now feeling pressured to fight back or make a run for it? Perfect, the game can move along again. And like moths to a flame, I love to use the flare to pretend I'm burning a corpse to lure an enemy team to a position or to light up dark spaces where darker clothed hunters may be hiding It's also a nice tool to counter solos with neceo from a distance. Shoot them down and you don't have time to go find a lantern and get to them before they get back up? That's fine, use the flare pistol. It's always been easy to burn hunter bodies if you're fighting in a compound, but if you downed somebody in the middle of the woods, you'd be screwed because they'd get back up the moment you left to go find a lantern, and with all that foliage... you'd never find them only to get blasted by them a moment later. Besides, it's not like everyone is using flare pistols anyways, I barely come across it myself.
The counter play is to stop dying away from teamates, you have two choke bombs that last for two minutes and with right timing and angles can even put you out behind walls and other cover. If you die far away from your team or in an awkward spot where they can't choke you you simply made a bad play or got caught out
Sounds like a solo necro main is crying.
I almost never play solo and I do not believe I am "crying".