Improving the zombie mode with 4 simple changes

[Wni0]

FIRST, LET ME GET ONE THING CLEAR. I FUCKING LOVE ZOMBIES. I HAVE SINCE UNTOTEN. I HAVE A SIGNED COPY OF WORLD AT WAR CASE THANKS TO THE TREYARCH DEVS FROM A WeTheGamerz TOURNEY. (ZergIing, WAS MY OLD GAMERTAG.)

So before I start with the proposed ideas, here is the main problem I have with the current zombie mode.

-Zombies gain health after each round, and become "invincible," rendering most guns worthless after round 20 or so. Broke players that go down in later rounds are stuck in purgatory hell hoping for a nice random roll, or an instant kill. This alone causes rounds 30+ to be exactly the same. So getting to rounds 42, 65, 87 arent determined by skill, but by NOT GETTING BORED. Aesthetically its wrong in everyway.

So to keep things interesting throughout the game I suggest a few key changes to the gameplay. I'm just talking basic core gameplay differences, not exact numbers or intangibles.

1. THE ZOMBIES CORE HEALTH STAYS CONSTANT THE ENTIRE GAME

* Guns wouldn't become irrelevant as the rounds progress,

* The broke players that went down in later rounds would now have a shot at getting back to the groove of things, instead of hoping for a lucky random box roll or a powerup.

* Aesthetically it makes more sense in every way. (Shooting a zombie in the face with a shotgun 6 times and it still murders you at round 20 is... ugh.)

* Now, the exact numbers for how much health they have is something only speculative, but, I think their core health should be the current zombies ROUND 3-6 Health, somewhere in that range.

2. THE ZOMBIES ARE SLIGHTLY FASTER THAN YOU

* Leaving a safe house or venturing out would be more interesting and instill that sense of fear that is missing for expierenced players.

-Think of the bear level from condemned 2: bloodshot and even the fog ghouls in tranzit (when zombies are right behind the player.) Its such an overlooked mechanic in games... losing control.

* Im not sure on exact numbers, but here's what i think could work

- Players sprint is slightly faster then regular speed of zombies, but the sprint duration is dialed down from current version, so overtime the zombies will catch up. It might need to be slowed down in general as verruckt, while my favorite map, was awkward with them sprinting... so idk, maybe someone can think of a better idea.

3. LIMITED AMMO

* Place random box / guns on wall / ammunition pile in a dangerous place, to make players plan ahead and use teamwork to resupply, it would also dethrone the “camping in one spot method.”

* Limited ammo would discourage players from “stealing kills” from far away as ammo is sparce.

4. HAVE AN END GOAL

* This one is the most important... talking to Telixion, he would like this as well at least in some form.

* In the zombies now, knowing everyone will die at the end is somewhat depressing.

* Put in place an end goal of something like “get to round 30 to win.” --> It would make those last few rounds more intense and more rewarding. (think of current zombies when your about to beat your highest round and your like fuck yeah!.”)

* Win/loss ratio would be coveted

5. Small grumblings...

* Buying guns of the wall / reloading / random box all uses the same button... how many time have you accidentally traded away your ray gun for a springfield etc etc.

* Screen distortions and blurring - Its a cool gimmick, but do we really need lava in every area of Tranzit AND have exploding zombies? Like the water dripping in Verruckt, use it sparingly.

* Explosives, OK, so this one is maybe a pet peeve. In the current zombies explosive weapons, (grenades, rpgs,) are literally worthless past round 6. Instead of buying 4 shitty grenades, why not for the same price buy 1 awesome grenade that actually means something?

* Allow each player the ability to pause the game once, for a limited duration. Real life issues happen, (bathroom, phone call, etc etc.) Instead of waiting for the end of the round plus making a crawler just pause the game for 30 seconds or a minute, w.e the time. And if its some jerk teammate, implement a veto vote for the remaining players. Its really frustrating to know you are going to die in later rounds because you need to do something.

* Zombies need to stop double hitting players... we don't have the flamethrower anymore ^^

So in conclusion - Zombies are slightly faster then you, but their health stays the same regardless of the round. To balance out the game, there would be much less ammo in general as well as harder to reach/guard guns and randombox. Imagine only buying 2 or 3 clips of a gun at a time, instead of a full gun. So one of the main gameplay elements would be deciding when to go for ammo during the rounds, (as you would run out multiple times in later rounds.) Having open areas of the map would no longer be safe havens for kiting/training zombies as overtime the zombies would catch up with you. This would bring back fear, into you know, a horror game. I would love having the zombie mode be more focused, less reptitive.

Thanks for reading, (and I'm sorry for such a boring layout. Regardless of whether people think this is a good idea I will continue to play zombies as its still really damn fun.

[TheSlushTurtle]

End goal would be like a zombies campaign...which would be pretty sweet.

Every zombie round 6 health? Pretty sure everyone would have round 99's if that were the case.

[XLORDXSITHX]

obviously this guy cant take the challenge. Sad.......

[slappamedoo]

Uhmmm...not sure what to think of this. I probably disagree with all of them.

[MysteryMachineX]

All of these ideas ruin everything that is Zombies.

[kea83]

*Zombies gain health after each round, and become "invincible," rendering most guns worthless after round 20 or so.*

-They dont become invincible, more health forces you to be more accurate, go for headshots or ensure you have enough space to not get stuck while killing them

*Broke players that go down in later rounds are stuck in purgatory hell hoping for a nice random roll, or an instant kill*

-Theres an incentive to not go down, otherwise it would be pretty easy to just resume where you were before like you didnt get downed

* In the zombies now, knowing everyone will die at the end is somewhat depressing.*

-The whole fun for many people is the challenge of seeing what round you can get to.

* Put in place an end goal of something like “get to round 30 to win.” -->*

-Uncharted 3 coop arena mode has a max level of progressing difficulty (10) and when you beat it you think... "now what???"

[Wni0]

obviously this guy cant take the challenge. Sad.......

i really really hope this is sarcasm.

Every zombie round 6 health? Pretty sure everyone would have round 99's if that were the case.

The reason why they wouldn't, is their would be limited ammo... AND the zombies are slightly faster then you. Sure you could take out 6 zombies with one Thompson clip, but you would have like 2 clips left, and as soon as you venture out you gotta make every bullet count until you get more ammo. The whole game would feel more rewarding... and there would be a lot more deaths. Placing random box / guns in hard to defend areas would also make it harder.

All of these ideas ruin everything that is Zombies.

Ok. Explain.

-They dont become invincible, more health forces you to be more accurate, go for headshots or ensure you have enough space to not get stuck while killing them

-Theres an incentive to not go down, otherwise it would be pretty easy to just resume where you were before like you didnt get downed

-The whole fun for many people is the challenge of seeing what round you can get to.

no. they literally become invincible. have you gotten past round 50 in any of the maps? 99% of the guns are worthless. PLUS the game doesnt get harder at that point... its just more of the same. so the game is fundamentally flawed. untoten was basically made by a few guys as a side project so i understand putting in zombies that gain more health, but with these changes you wouldn't need to ruin the game design just to make it harder.

"Theres an incentive to not go down," Yes, its called being able to PLAY. and 95% of players DO get stuck in purgatory so to speak in later rounds.

these changes would make the game harder...

[xXExpertCoahXx]

These changes sound like Left 4 Dead 3 Call of Duty style... :|

[Electric Jesus]

Ok. Explain.

May I do the honors?

1. If the zombies had the same core health, you would want to balance it out right? So what would that core health be? The health of wave 15 zombies? That would mean that the first several rounds would be monstrously hard since you have only a pistol, essentially on round fifteen. Then after that, the rounds would be mind-numbingly easy. They gain health progressively for a reason, and this defeats that purpose.

2. If zombie's were faster than you there would literally be no way for anybody to run a train, eliminating it as a high round strategy. If you couldn't out run them toy would just have to camp, and that can be less reliable than training in most cases. It would make rounds 15+ WAAAY different than what we are used to, in a bad way. It dumps one of our most used strategies down the toilet.

3. In black ops 2, the wall gun placement is already pretty devious. In town the m14 and mp5 are all back in corners where you can get trapped grabbing them. Also the idea of the mystery box is that it had ups and downs. Try to get a great gun but risk getting a pistol and having no reliable source of ammo. Wall weapons should be left alone since they are the "safe" route. Less powerful, but they offer unlimited ammo (if you can afford it) and consistent availability. This is pretty balanced so I say keep it the same.

4. One does not simply BEAT cod zombies. That is not the point. The point is to survive as long as you can. That would too dramatically alter the core of the game. The only other time this had been changed was NML, and there the same basic idea applied: survive indefinitely until you die. Think of it like this: which do you do more, play through a game's campaign, or play zombies? This isn't exactly the case in black ops 2 but you know what happens at the end of the campaign. What makes zombies more fun to play over and over again is the fact that you literally CAN'T win. You can only try to get as far as possible.

Good lord, if all of these ideas were implemented, teen suicide rates would skyrocket globally. They do in fact ruin the game in many ways.

[xXExpertCoahXx]

Another thing. The whole idea of the zombies getting stronger every round is a direct response to the story of the whole game. The zombies pure purpose of coming back from the dead is so that people can kill them. Their souls fly up into the sky and feed their master power, who by the way, is in the Aether. So no...Making them the same core health would be calling Rictofen a weak Nazi who can't do anything...Which is not the point Treyarch is trying to make at all.

[Wni0]

Ok. you kind of refuted my ammo point... but I would take it a step further, making it even harder. And besides the subjective answer on training zombies, (which btw Telixion and I invented,) do not negate anything.

In response to my points actually use facts/examples not generalizations.

Ok. Explain.

1. If the zombies had the same core health, you would want to balance it out right? So what would that core health be? The health of wave 15 zombies? That would mean that the first several rounds would be monstrously hard since you have only a pistol, essentially on round fifteen. Then after that, the rounds would be mind-numbingly easy. They gain health progressively for a reason, and this defeats that purpose.

You didnt read the whole thing. I said 3-6 rounds health. So the first rounds would not be "too hard." AND REMEMBER these arent exact numbers! For instance, lets say they were Round 6 health. Maybe improve the pistol to where its 3 or 4 bullets to kill a zombie, instead of 20. Its not like thats impossible to do, (but thats not the fucking point i am trying to make.)

They do not gain health round by round for a reason! Its something the developers implemented because they cant just have 300 zombies in a map, its too taxing on the engine...

2. If zombie's were faster than you there would literally be no way for anybody to run a train, eliminating it as a high round strategy. If you couldn't out run them toy would just have to camp, and that can be less reliable than training in most cases. It would make rounds 15+ WAAAY different than what we are used to, in a bad way. It dumps one of our most used strategies down the toilet.

Correct! It also ruins the game for us competitively. With being able to basically train at will in any map, this means that you can technically never die, once you obtain a decent skill at it... thus the whole "See what round you can get to," idea is void. Its not what round you can get to. Its called not getting bored and dying to something stupid. Tell me how much more skill or the difference in the rounds of 100? and 200? Well if you are using the ray gun, or the thunder gun, or the flamethrower absolutely nothing. The zombies spawn at the same speed, their health is the same, (since those guns stay relevant no matter what the round.) So once you get past 50 the rounds become the SAME. Is that not broken? Why not just end the game then? Seems sort of pointless to me... With these changes, you wouldnt have that problem, even if you removed having the game end. because the difference between rounds 16 and 30, would be pixies GIGANTIC.

4. One does not simply BEAT cod zombies. That is not the point. The point is to survive as long as you can. That would too dramatically alter the core of the game. The only other time this had been changed was NML, and there the same basic idea applied: survive indefinitely until you die. Think of it like this: which do you do more, play through a game's campaign, or play zombies? This isn't exactly the case in black ops 2 but you know what happens at the end of the campaign. What makes zombies more fun to play over and over again is the fact that you literally CAN'T win. You can only try to get as far as possible.

Good lord, if all of these ideas were implemented, teen suicide rates would skyrocket globally. They do in fact ruin the game in many ways.

There is something called a skill ceiling. With this gamemode, there is a LOW SKILL CEILING... Once you are able to "train" zombies, and know the map layouts its nearly impossible to tell who is the better player. If you use that same logic and apply that to StarCraft, (Knowing how to macro/micro,) You can Instantly tell who is an amateur and who is a pro. Just because this has an infinite rounds, IT DOESNT MAKE THE GAME HARDER.

OK GO.

Another thing. The whole idea of the zombies getting stronger every round is a direct response to the story of the whole game. The zombies pure purpose of coming back from the dead is so that people can kill them. Their souls fly up into the sky and feed their master power, who by the way, is in the Aether. So no...Making them the same core health would be calling Rictofen a weak Nazi who can't do anything...Which is not the point Treyarch is trying to make at all.

Right, its not like you cant make something ambiguous at the start and make up answers as you go.

[TheDunbarian]

"Oho, zis is going to ve so much fun!"

You didnt read the whole thing. I said 3-6 rounds health. So the first rounds would not be "too hard." AND REMEMBER these arent exact numbers! For instance, lets say they were Round 6 health. Maybe improve the pistol to where its 3 or 4 bullets to kill a zombie, instead of 20. Its not like thats impossible to do, (but thats not the fucking point i am trying to make.)

They do not gain health round by round for a reason! Its something the developers implemented because they cant just have 300 zombies in a map, its too taxing on the engine...

Well, you're wrong on that last point. They DO gain health by round because it adds challenge. You're correct, the first rounds would be too hard if they started at round 15 health. Just like the higher rounds would be too easy if they had round 6 health - and I mean even "high" rounds. Like into the teens. The game would be infinitely easy. If the zombies had constant health, then using the box to get better weapons and Pack-a-Punching would be a complete waste of points. Not to mention the fact that I would never die because whenever I get trapped I could shoot my way out with almost any gun. Now if you were talking about capping the health at a certain round, then we might be able to talk.

Correct! It also ruins the game for us competitively. With being able to basically train at will in any map, this means that you can technically never die, once you obtain a decent skill at it... thus the whole "See what round you can get to," idea is void. Its not what round you can get to. Its called not getting bored and dying to something stupid. Tell me how much more skill or the difference in the rounds of 100? and 200? Well if you are using the ray gun, or the thunder gun, or the flamethrower absolutely nothing. The zombies spawn at the same speed, their health is the same, (since those guns stay relevant no matter what the round.) So once you get past 50 the rounds become the SAME. Is that not broken? Why not just end the game then? Seems sort of pointless to me... With these changes, you wouldnt have that problem, even if you removed having the game end. because the difference between rounds 16 and 30, would be pixies GIGANTIC.

This is the one point that I sort of agree with. To an extent. In Call of the Dead, some zombies were faster, and I thought that was a nice added challenge. However, it wasn't because they were faster. It was just because they were moving at a different speed than all the other zombies. Black Ops 2 has already attended to this: even in high rounds, there will still be some zombies who walk instead of run. I cannot tell you how often this has screwed me over just because they're not with the rest of my train. And yet, I complain not, because training before was incredibly easy. This is a much more balanced solution than making every zombie faster. In fact, the added walkers might be even harder than every zombie being faster!

There is something called a skill ceiling. With this gamemode, there is a LOW SKILL CEILING... Once you are able to "train" zombies, and know the map layouts its nearly impossible to tell who is the better player. If you use that same logic and apply that to StarCraft, (Knowing how to macro/micro,) You can Instantly tell who is an amateur and who is a pro. Just because this has an infinite rounds, IT DOESNT MAKE THE GAME HARDER.

So having an ending to the game at round 30 makes it so that skill level is easier to recognize...? Look, having infinite rounds is something that has been a tradition in zombies since the very beginning. That's the entire point of the game: no matter how good you are, you're going to die. Is it depressing? Yes, if you think about it. But what else is a zombie apocalypse supposed to be? There's supposed to be no hope. An ending would give hope, while counting rounds only gives the false illusion of it. And if you don't like that, then hey, there are plenty of zombie games that are winnable. Or you can go play Grief

Right, its not like you cant make something ambiguous at the start and make up answers as you go.

Yes, you can. And that's exactly what the zombies team has done. They took an addictive game mode and beautifully implemented this amazing story into it. What's done is done. What they've put into the story they can't take out.

Zombies can never be innovated by removing key aspects of it. You can only add onto it. That's why things like perks, Pack-a-Punch, and wonder weapons are genius. If you have an idea of something cool that can be added to zombies, then be my guest. But I believe the team at Treyarch has done a beautiful job with this game.

[xXExpertCoahXx]

Very well said Dunbarian.

[Rickety Cricket]

I disagree with a lot of what you've said. If the way zombies works bothers you, I suggest you try a new game. However I completely agree with what you said about trains, I feel they require no skill and get extremely boring. I cannot tell you how many times i've gotten into a game where it's either some little kid or some douche bag who just goes awol and runs trains it's incredibly annoying. TA does need to develop a way to counter act people who do this, i'm not saying completely eradicate trains but instead make them more difficult. I know people who talk about how boss they are for getting high rounds when all the did was run a train, it no longer becomes a matter of skill but of time and perserverance.

[Wni0]

Its not like ive stated a billion times that the game would be harder with these ideas. AND round 30 would be next to impossible. LOW AMMO / FASTER ZOMBIES / SAME HEALTH != easier. seriously were talking like 2-3 clips with your gun. if your not careful you end up just getting run down and murdered before you can get into the next house for ammo or what not. Of course you can remove or replace ideas in zombies... what makes it any different than any other videogame? I get it. Its only something that bothers me and a few friends...

if i wanted ideas for the current mode i would suggest:

-Turn on the power by slowly dragging (holding x,) a generator to a specific spot, while your teammates escort you there.

-Rain in a map that discourages players from roaming outside, (like fog on tranzit,) maybe its "harder to aim."

-Build your own wall in certain areas with a "Toolkit."

-Randomly during rounds a powerup for zombies, (something unique,) is placed on the map and you try to kill the zombies before they get to the powerup.

-Rooms/hallways where its pitch black besides gunfire, until you turn power on or something of the sort.

-Lower areas of the map get flooded/burnt/ forcing players to seek higher ground

-Have doors you can open and close/ as long as there is another entrance point.

-Have a Winter map where venturing outside slowly freezes you to death.

etc etc.

i dont see why it always needs to be a new powerup or weapon. they should make the maps more interactive.

[TheDunbarian]

Yeah, I hear your ideas, and they sound great... for a different game. Those type of things mess with the core of CoDz too much. I mean, that sounds like a great Left 4 Dead type thing, and I'm not saying your ideas are bad. I'm just saying they're not right for CoDz.

[Rickety Cricket]

Your ideas for map features like the flooding and stuff sounds great imo but your ideas for engine and core gameplay changes just sound ridiculous, not trying to sound rude.

[Wni0]

Your ideas for map features like the flooding and stuff sounds great imo but your ideas for engine and core gameplay changes just sound ridiculous, not trying to sound rude.

well, to be fair. im kinda in the wrong i cant really focus right now. sorry. if mods want to delete this page ok.

[TheDunbarian]

And hey, don't be discouraged from further interaction with this community just because it seems we got off on the wrong foot. Your bringing of new ideas to the table clearly shows that you do enjoy the game, and that's all you really need to be part of this community. Just consider this thread a... spirited debate. We actually have a lot of these here :lol:

[MysteryMachineX]

@Electric Jesus. Lol. Well put.

@WnIO: It doesn't matter what I say to you. I could argue all day about why it should be left alone, but it will never please you. The thing is, the core mechanics of this game cannot be changed, and they will not be changed. The mechanics of this game made it grow from a single level to half a disc. The mechanics of a game always come first. Then the aesthetics. You may not like the way the game works, but the majority of the population disagrees. The game is popular as it is. Period. You may think it'd be better, but all the changes ruin the appeal of the game. To be honest, you might be better off with Left for Dead, Dead Rising, House of the Dead, or ZombiU.

[Rickety Cricket]

Your ideas for map features like the flooding and stuff sounds great imo but your ideas for engine and core gameplay changes just sound ridiculous, not trying to sound rude.

well, to be fair. im kinda in the wrong i cant really focus right now. sorry. if mods want to delete this page ok.

No need to be sorry, this site is a place of debate and new ideas. You're not in the wrong at all. You shared your ideas and we discusssed. Just because we may disagree doesn't mean your ideas are bad. I honestly think you should expand on those other map features you mentioned, you have some awesome ideas.

[kea83]

they literally become invincible.

Literally invincible means that no amount of bullets will kill them. Not even billions of bullets on a single zombie. WRONG.

They may feel 'invincible' to you but they can be killed even in the >50 rounds you referred to- but yes they do become bullet sponges.

[xXExpertCoahXx]

The idea of more interactive maps is something I wanted in CoDZ for the longest time. I was hoping that COTD and Shangri-La would both incorporate mechanics such as the ones you described. I always thought that if the Napalm zombie exploded on the bridge, it would catch on fire and burn the bridge apart, causing players and zombies to fall into the pool/waterfall area...Very hurt and confused.

And I always liked of the idea on COTD where a random ass shipped crashed into one of the down ships causing you and any team mates with you to slide into an icy pool, with the only way to climb out is ropes and chains on the side.

I thought about interactive map packs ever since Der Riese on WaW so I'm passionately enthralled by your ideas.

[Electric Jesus]

Your ideas for map features like the flooding and stuff sounds great imo but your ideas for engine and core gameplay changes just sound ridiculous, not trying to sound rude.

well, to be fair. im kinda in the wrong i cant really focus right now. sorry. if mods want to delete this page ok.

I agree with rickety on this. But don't worry. Do you know how many ideas all of us have had that have been shot down or otherwise disliked by the masses? It's no biggie. As has been said this is a site of ideas! Your ideas for features and interaction are frankly awesome, but you must expect that any idea that so dramatically alters the gameplay would get a bad reception.

PS: also there is no need to delete this thread. My first proper theory got the following response: "I honestly don't really see what you did here..." so yeah, you'll catch on like the rest of us.

PPS: welcome to codz by the way!

PPSH: (ucwutididthere?) call of the dead's water, shangri la's mud and water, zero gravity on moon, and fog on tranzit give it a nice interactive feel which IMO makes the games more real to you. I can't wait to see ideas like yours implemented into future maps.

[xXExpertCoahXx]

Your ideas for map features like the flooding and stuff sounds great imo but your ideas for engine and core gameplay changes just sound ridiculous, not trying to sound rude.

well, to be fair. im kinda in the wrong i cant really focus right now. sorry. if mods want to delete this page ok.

I agree with rickety on this. But don't worry. Do you know how many ideas all of us have had that have been shot down or otherwise disliked by the masses? It's no biggie. As has been said this is a site of ideas! Your ideas for features and interaction are frankly awesome, but you must expect that any idea that so dramatically alters the gameplay would get a bad reception.

PS: also there is no need to delete this thread. My first proper theory got the following response: "I honestly don't really see what you did here..." so yeah, you'll catch on like the rest of us.

PPS: welcome to codz by the way!

PPSH: (ucwutididthere?) call of the dead's water, shangri la's mud and water, zero gravity on moon, and fog on tranzit give it a nice interactive feel which IMO makes the games more real to you. I can't wait to see ideas like yours implemented into future maps.

To your PPSH (hehehefunnyman) I don't agree with the weather and nature elements as being 'interactive', more of nuisance...I honestly hated the mud in Shangri-La and the freezing water on COTD. The zero gravity on MOON was tolerable, but also annoying.