Why is there no double zombies XP weekend?

[Stop Mocking Me0]

If multiplier can have a weekend when leveling up and rising through ranks is half as hard, why not zombies? Your thoughts…. 

[StillTHUGGISH]

Waw was the only codz to have XP. The rank system in bo2 is different but it would be nice to have the co system back

[StillTHUGGISH]

XP NOT CO LOL

[Lenne]

Because the ranking system isn't a classic one.

[BestOfAllTime32]

Time based rankings don't tell you much other than how much someone plays. Theoretically you could get max rank never getting past round 1.

For an unlocking system time based makes perfect sense, not for a ranking system.

[StillTHUGGISH]

I just wish that the ranking system was not so difficult to understand I still have no idea about it I a sweet blue eyed skull with a knife going thru it at one point and then I took a break to play other games that came out, when I came back it was gone I was annoyed lol

[The Clay Bird]

I just wish that the ranking system was not so difficult to understand I still have no idea about it I a sweet blue eyed skull with a knife going thru it at one point and then I took a break to play other games that came out, when I came back it was gone I was annoyed lol

 

well if the eyes are what was gone, that's simple to understand, the tally marks and eventually blue eyes are awarded for consecutive days played (which is a stupid thing anyway but that's neither here nor there).  Now the actual rank system? that's far more rubik's-cubian to understand

[Guest]

If they had a multiplayer esc ranking system with prestige's which awards you with emblems and backgrounds we would definitely have double XP they would have to do it on days relating to 115 and 935.

[Chopper]

Zombies should not have ranks is my answer.  Unless they are part of a seperate mode.

 

The second that a zombies game requires you to rank to gain anything outside of cosmetic gains, such as weapon skins or what not, is the day that zombies die for good.  To me at least.

[The Clay Bird]

If they had a multiplayer esc ranking system with prestige's which awards you with emblems and backgrounds we would definitely have double XP they would have to do it on days relating to 115 and 935.

 

 

Zombies should not have ranks is my answer.  Unless they are part of a seperate mode.

 

The second that a zombies game requires you to rank to gain anything outside of cosmetic gains, such as weapon skins or what not, is the day that zombies die for good.  To me at least.

 

 

 

I disagree chopper, but only under the terms that nightmare mentioned above

 

If they used a ranking system more like multiplayer, where you gain xp level up and eventually prestige, then im all for it.  Although I agree with you chopper that it should mainly be non game-effecting stuff like cosmetics that you would unlock, but if it was straightforward and noy cryptic like the current system, i could see it easily working to unlock guns in the mystery box, sights/attachments, etc.

 

give me 15-20 prestige levels, with various different unlocks, i can totally see the replayability of zombies go even higher than it already is (which is very high lol)

[Stop Mocking Me0]

Unlock able weapons would be very cool in my eyes. I mean it's not like it would be new. Even to zombies, the Mark 2 is a HUGE advantage to have in a game. Why not have the same general concept with lesser weapons that one does NOT have to purchase DLC for? 

[Naitrax]

The second that a zombies game requires you to rank to gain anything outside of cosmetic gains, such as weapon skins or what not, is the day that zombies die for good. To me at least.

 

This.

 

One of the major appeals to Zombies is the fact that no matter your playing level, when you play or when you don't, you can get the exact same equipment as anybody else, given time in a single match. A customisable box/attachments, while some may think it would be 'cool', would destroy Zombies the way we know it. Half the point of the box is it's unpredictability, a true random weapon. Even if you think your system for it is balanced, it could NEVER be. Changing weapons up removes the equality in the game.

[lead_psychopath]

Unlock able weapons would be very cool in my eyes. I mean it's not like it would be new. Even to zombies, the Mark 2 is a HUGE advantage to have in a game. Why not have the same general concept with lesser weapons that one does NOT have to purchase DLC for?

No man, I really don't agree with you on that one.

It would be new for zombies, and it would probably push any WaW player over the edge.

I'm all for prestigeing (much like extinction, you don't get anything for it, just a new emblem), but the very second new guns get thrown into the equation, it throws everything off.

The RGM2 was available to anyone who bought the third map pack, so you didn't have to work for it. It wasn't an unlockable.

The leaderboards would be shattered if you started to throw in unlockables. The next game comes out, X player is ranked in the top 1000 players for the new map, he's happy, and gives up for the night. But Y player is ranked 5000. But he's dedicated, so keeps on playing and unlocks a new gun. Suddenly he finds that his new gun is the cats pajamas. Lands himself into the top 500 because he's skilled with it.

Meanwhile player X still has aways to go before he unlocks the new weapon.

I get where you're coming from, and zombies needs to diversify a little bit so it's not just rinse and repeat.

The leaderboards work because everyone's given the same loadout, it's your skill that determines what round you get to.

I get a new gun that's unlockable, suddenly I'm at an unfair advantage.

It doesn't matter whether all the unlockable guns are as powerful as each other. Although it would make it fair, what's the point in unlocking guns that are all the same?

Just my 2c

sent from my brain using 115 and magic

Edit: @Naitrax, as I was typing my response, you already got it!

Edited August 19, 2014 by lead_psychopath

[Guest]

With a ranking system I want no change in game apart from emblems or backgrounds, not even camos as they make the whole idea different. The changes would be your rank and is meant to be outside of a game which is where it should be. :-)

[Stop Mocking Me0]

 

Unlock able weapons would be very cool in my eyes. I mean it's not like it would be new. Even to zombies, the Mark 2 is a HUGE advantage to have in a game. Why not have the same general concept with lesser weapons that one does NOT have to purchase DLC for?

No man, I really don't agree with you on that one.

It would be new for zombies, and it would probably push any WaW player over the edge.

Why? What makes WAW players any different then other players? If you mean that they are more dedicated then I see your point… Moving on… 

I'm all for prestigeing (much like extinction, you don't get anything for it, just a new emblem), but the very second new guns get thrown into the equation, it throws everything off.

The RGM2 was available to anyone who bought the third map pack, so you didn't have to work for it. It wasn't an unlockable.

But you could purchase it. And in MOTD, or Die rise, or Tranzit, nuketown, or even origins if they didn't buy vengeance one could get to a higher rank with the M2 easier. But it just shows that dedicated players should have an easier time getting higher. Also the way you worded this makes it seem like a player could never obtain weapons unlocked through leveling up. Take the an-94 In multiplayer it's super powerful  and high in ranked locking, but one can still obtain it no matter how good a player is with dedication and effort. In zombies this is easier because basic weaponry should suffice to survive, it's not improving the ability, just allowing it to change. 

The leaderboards would be shattered if you started to throw in unlockables. The next game comes out, X player is ranked in the top 1000 players for the new map, he's happy, and gives up for the night. But Y player is ranked 5000. But he's dedicated, so keeps on playing and unlocks a new gun. Suddenly he finds that his new gun is the cats pajamas. Lands himself into the top 500 because he's skilled with it.

See this is totally out of proportion to me. See the problem you have here is not that the unlocked weapon, it's the player. The player played more and unlocked a weapon. But HE earned it, unlike the other player, and HE was talented with it. The other player could easily work and earn his spot back with the weapon if he's got the skill too. Also, you make this sound like it's the key to obtaining a new wonder weapon, not an average galil or python. Remember that. 

Meanwhile player X still has aways to go before he unlocks the new weapon.

Just as far as player Y. 

I get where you're coming from, and zombies needs to diversify a little bit so it's not just rinse and repeat.

 

The leaderboards work because everyone's given the same loadout, it's your skill that determines what round you get to.

In deed, but the way one kills zombies has always been different. What weapons the player choses has ALWAYS been different. Besides, any weapon one unlocks will not be as strong as the ray gun or wonder weapon, so in the end it matters not what weapons were used to get to the ultimate load out. As for multiplayer matches, one will still acquire a ray gun, and if one wants to truly survive past round 50 one either needs to constantly keep swapping their weapons, or buy a wall gun. 

I get a new gun that's unlockable, suddenly I'm at an unfair advantage.

Not if everyone else can earn the same gun as well. 

It doesn't matter whether all the unlockable guns are as powerful as each other. Although it would make it fair, what's the point in unlocking guns that are all the same?

Not the same. Equal. Some have faster reload time but slower ROF. Some are lighter but hold less bullets in the clip. It depends on the player to chose their strengths and weaknesses. 

Just my 2c

sent from my brain using 115 and magic

Edit: @Naitrax, as I was typing my response, you already got it!

 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Stop mocking me0

[Stop Mocking Me0]

 

The second that a zombies game requires you to rank to gain anything outside of cosmetic gains, such as weapon skins or what not, is the day that zombies die for good. To me at least.

 

This.

 

One of the major appeals to Zombies is the fact that no matter your playing level, when you play or when you don't, you can get the exact same equipment as anybody else, given time in a single match. A customisable box/attachments, while some may think it would be 'cool', would destroy Zombies the way we know it. Half the point of the box is it's unpredictability, a true random weapon. Even if you think your system for it is balanced, it could NEVER be. Changing weapons up removes the equality in the game.

 

You act like you have control over the box señor Richtofen 

 

When you look at it correctly, the game will not care if one swaps a remington NMA for a python or an AN-94 for a galil. Because you do not have control over what weapon you get. In no way, customizable box or not, is this possible. You are stuck to the belief that earning weapons will fill the box with wonder weapons for the experienced player, but in reality it's just as fair. 

[Guest]

The box is best so all players are equal weapons wise and have an equal chance of every weapon not an equal chance of different weapons. Zombies does not need to be changed in that sense just more new stuff added not updating the old stuff. Like the slot machine it could be a new gimmick to zombies like the box, perks and pap. Stuff like that is what zombies needs and Wunderfizz and soul chest or even buildables are a good attempt at it. I hope the zombie shield will actually stay in the game along with another utility like how Origins and MotD worked crafting wise.

[BestOfAllTime32]

I seriously doubt that changing any box weapons would impact the game in the slightest way. Maybe changing the WW's would, but a Galil for an AN isn't going to do anything.

I can see your argument for being able to customize said weapons, but let's be real here, nobody is one weapon away from their best round going from 20 to 65. It just isn't going to happen, even if they could get the three most OP WW's all at the same time on the same map, at best for a normal player that would add tops 10 rounds.

Change is good, especially to a stale system.

[The Clay Bird]

 

The second that a zombies game requires you to rank to gain anything outside of cosmetic gains, such as weapon skins or what not, is the day that zombies die for good. To me at least.

 

This.

 

One of the major appeals to Zombies is the fact that no matter your playing level, when you play or when you don't, you can get the exact same equipment as anybody else, given time in a single match. A customisable box/attachments, while some may think it would be 'cool', would destroy Zombies the way we know it. Half the point of the box is it's unpredictability, a true random weapon. Even if you think your system for it is balanced, it could NEVER be. Changing weapons up removes the equality in the game.

 

 

Why would that matter though? Would that not be incentive to play more, build xp and have access to new weapons?  The system works like a charm in MP, it would work just fine in zombies.  Zombies is a team game. You aren't playing against other players (grief excluded) you are working with them. Because of this, 100% equal balance among players isn't necessary for the game to still be fun and fair.

 

Its understandable to have concern over adding something that's never been included before, but don't act like simply adding to the wealth of available weapons at your disposal by way of ranking up would in any way break the game or make it unfair

 

 

:edit:  I am totally in agreement with stop mocking me here.  I don't think the idea is to add unlockable wonder weapons that will drastically alter the difficulty of the game. Its like at level 40 you unlock the peacekeeper, and it is now added to the box. so what you've unlocked is just a chance to get a certain weapon out of the random box.  Just like the PDW and Chicom etc. the peacekeeper would become rather ineffective in higher rounds, but it gives you some extra variety, gives those who really like the weapon in MP the chance to get it in zombies, etc.   The impact on gameplay would be minimal if not zero, and the replay value would go up.

Edited August 20, 2014 by the_clay_bird