Thread: Why L4D2 is better than BF2.....

And by the way... I could live with the survivors of both teams making it into the safe room every... single... time. Then it comes down to how skillful each team was with those supposed useless spawns. It's going to mean that as infected you DO have to be that much better each and every time you coordinate an attack so that you get the +25 bonus at the end of each round.

L4D2 does tend to favor the "rush" tactic which I hate frankly. I like to be much more methodical in my movement through a map. But I'll just have to adapt. And because those survivors might be rushing now, it means that they have to stay together that much better. And communicate that much more if they get separated. Because if you get smoked back and are being covered by three other infected... while your team hesitates for 2-3 seconds... That just ended their rush and the scales tip in the favor of the infected as they coordinate that attack.

I love a close game. And when you are fighting for that +25 bonus... You know it's going to be close.

The scoring system is clearly designed with the idea of the survivors not making it to the saferoom, yet the director spawns medkits, pills, shots, and fucking defibs (not to mention grenades) everywhere... plus you see teams getting their hands on autoshotties and assault rifles on the first goddamn map of a campaign. Seriously don't think that Valve knows which direction they want to go with VS. In L4D, you had a dumb scoring system that was apparently based around chip damage. In L4D2, you have a dumb scoring system that's apparently based around map completion... and in both games, a good team of Survivors will generally make it to the safe room every time unless they make dumb mistakes, finales notwithstanding (still haven't had a game where the Survivors finished the DC4 finale.)

Personally I think the game would be a lot more fun if the only medkits/defibs were the ones in the safe rooms, pills/shots were rare (like 2-4 a map), and grenades were rare (again, 2-4 a map plus maybe the occasional BBB from a CEDA zombie.) It's really demoralizing to put together some well-timed ambushes only for the survivors to find a medkit or two a little farther along and erase all of your effort like it was nothing. You still get your little 25 point consolation prize for doing better... but when you can do like, 1400 damage to the survivors (enough damage to knock them down 14 times over!), and all four of them still make it because of endless medkits and defibs... it's silly. More than anything, I want chip damage to actually matter in every game, not just the occasional game where the survivors keep making dumb mistakes.

Think of it like this. How many games have you played where the survivors didn't make it to the saferoom (not counting finales), and it was due solely to the Infected team performing perfectly, versus the Survivors doing something stupid? I've had a handful of games where it was because the Infected did it perfectly, but the vast majority of the time, it's because the Survivors were doing something dumb and left themselves open.

Originally Posted by PizzaSHARK!

(still haven't had a game where the Survivors finished the DC4 finale.)

Seen it twice... from the bad end both times :/

Only completion I haven't seen in VS is HR finale... but we were sooooooo close (fuckin home-run-hitting tank)

I've seen teams get close (like 10 cans) in the DC4 finale, but eventually they lose simply due to attrition... pretty sure DC has the hardest finale out of all of em. SF probably has the easiest (really easy to avoid tanks by using all those hedges and trees.)

HR's finale is a mixed bag. It's either really easy to survive, or really hard... and it's mostly involving tank performance. I'm pretty sure I've been hit by a car while hanging out on the roof (fuck you, Blitz.)

What if Damage counted towards your score. Now realizing this could be unbalanced, afterall it says its better to beat up on survivors but let them survive, i'm think a bonus for stopping them before they make it (500 points). But that still makes it worth it more to let them make it well beating them up, so i'd say take the % of distance left (so if the survivors make it 25% of the way, it would be 75%) and multiply the damage+Bonus by the % and ADD that to the score.

The downside to this would be that Survivors would try to rush more to not give the infected as big of an advantage. But it could also make it more important to find medkits/pills since you have a better chance of getting to the end and giving the infected 0 bonus. OR you could take say 500 points away from the infected plus an extra 100 per survivor to make it.


Basically i'd like to see infected damage matter more in the scoring, just trying to think of the best way to do it. any thoughts?

At the beginning of every map, there are four medkits and one defib in the safe room. There are four medkits and one defib in the safe room at the end of the map (allowing for some kind of crazy last-ditch blitz to try and save that teammate.) Within the map, there are no more than four health items, and no more than three pills or three shots (so there will always be at least one pills and/or one shot.) There will be no more than six grenades, and no more than four of any given type (again, so that you never run into a situation where there aren't any mollies or BBBs on the map.) There would be an additional four pills and two random grenades at each finale location (no medkits/paddles) in addition to props like gas cans and propane tanks.

Each medkit and defib on your back when you close the door is worth 50 points. Each pills or shot on your belt when you close the door is worth 25 points. Each grenade on your belt when you close the door is worth 10 points. This is a maximum possible bonus at the end of each round of 340 points (4x medkit/defib for 200, 4x pills/shots for 100, and 4x grenades for 40.) This system accomplishes several primary goals:

First, there is a much more tangible reward for making it to the saferoom with those medkits and items. This encourages searching for those elusive pills and grenades to try and ensure you get the maximum item bonus at the end. This provides an alternative to rushing, particularly if your team is in good condition and can therefore afford some time to go item hunting.

Second, use of medkits becomes a tactical decision, rather than an automatic decision. In the current game, you will more than likely heal with your medkit if you are below 40 health (slowed), making the safe bet that there will be another medkit to replace it before too long. With my approach, those medkits become a major tactical decision - they're the only way you have of wiping your incap tally, so maybe it's better to risk running around with 30 temp health instead of healing and running the risk of being killed through attrition later in the map.

Third, and related to the above, the inclusion of a single defib in the safe room presents an additional strategic decision. It still represents an opportunity to remove a player's incap record (by killing and then reviving them), but is harder to use. On the other hand, taking the defib instead of that fourth medkit means that if your entire team is in bad condition, you may never get a chance to use the defib, whereas one person could heal up and keep the rest of the team safe if you had that fourth medkit.

Tangentially related, with medkits and defibs in set locations in every map, there is no random bullshit where the dude with 2 health in black and white status just happens to come across a medkit that god himself apparently decided to place under that sofa or in the goddamn swimming pool (who the fuck puts a first aid kit in a SWIMMING POOL!?)

The idea is to keep the game relatively the same (i.e. no removal of fire/boom bullets, grenade launchers, chainsaws, or other silly things) while encouraging more tactical decision-making on the Survivors' part.

Oh, and there would be a tank and at least one witch in every map, assuming the map allows them (some maps apparently don't allow tanks!) Especially given the prevalence of T2's in L4D2, I'd say a tank every map is almost a necessity.

Why can't you people just accept the game for what it is and ENJOY IT!?

I swear some of you are like Mikey... He hates everything!

Yes, there are a lot of health kits, but what I've seen from most of my games is that the survivors need them to even stand a chance of making it to the safe room against a well organized SI team. Just my two cents.

Hmmm Actually BF2 is better than L4D2 :P lol figured this would be a hot subject! For me a game is supposed to be fun, the fact that the director shits out medkits and goodies is frankly fun, keeps the survivors going, I'm in accordance with Kanati, I wouldn't really care if they always finished the level... I've seen the survivors not make it past the buses in the (DC) due to brutal attack of the charger/boomer/spitter/jockey (Very fun but waaaay too short...) remember L4D were the SI would keep spawn killing each other to get 4 hunters? That kind of PWN'D doesn't really interest me - the large chance of making the level is better. If you want harder - play on the hardest level... Personally Normal suits me fine!

L4D2 does require a more rounded skill set - I'd give someone a couple months free reserve slots in BF2 if they ever see me in assault... I never play that class, and really I limit myself to medic, support and AT. I bust out the Spec-ops if the SL tells me to.... I love playing the infected, in fact I really prefer the infected to the hoomans.

Both are fab games (thats right War... it's back) and deserve a play - oh and if you didn't know... TTP servers are the best!!!!! :6

Originally Posted by Kanati8869

Why can't you people just accept the game for what it is and ENJOY IT!?

Jebus, this thread is still going on?