Issue with limited revive in co-op if we do get it.

Shashu Unconfirmed, Member Posts: 6
edited April 2023 in General Discussion

Now don't get me wrong, am all in for limited revive, i don't like the cheesy unlimited revive where ppl can use 1 person to bait traps while other hangs back and revives and .. well barely die... kinda ruins the fun.

Now i always thought 3 revives for the whole team is about the right amount...

...but then i just realize something that may be a problem with limited revives, what happens if 1 person is still alive and no revives left? how does the second player get the genmat if both are needed to get the genmat to complete the map and get rewards?

Lets say for example.. both you and your friend just about to reach the genmat after 10-20 deaths each with no revives left.. and your friend dies meters away from the genmat (or killed by second wave), all that hard work and no traps left but 1 person standing, he could pick up the genmat and leave without issue.. but your friend won't get anything.

Sure the other person could just suicide but is that really a good answer?

I can now kinda understand why unlimited revive is "handy" in this situation.

So what would be the best way to fix this? only thing i can think of is once someone has the genmat and able to escape, you can revive teammate at terminal, so he can run back in and grab it unless he already grabbed it before death.


  • cubanchris
    cubanchris Unconfirmed, Member Posts: 26

    The other thing to consider is limiting lives enforces conservative play so if you hate the people that anchor it works opposite. When you reduce revives everyone will anchor. At least when you have unlimited revives you get teams like mine where we goof off and both run in same time. If you limit my revives, I can't do that before it gets boring, so I am forced to play conservatively which means anchor swapping with my teammate.

    If competitiveness is important to the game, then reducing rank exp to coop players would make more sense. Limiting revives is a good middle ground but I would sooner give up my utility slots to keep unlimited revives.

    Removing revives like you said ends up with one person having to watch the better player, being frustrated at your teammate for dying, or playing slower than you would normally. I wish this didn't become a spotlight for people because the people complaining are mostly solos and not actual coop players.

  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,079

    I wouldn´t mind unlimited revives (like now) if builders get more points from co-op players. They´re playing brutal maps in easy mode, so the least thing they could do is reward builders more for it.

  • Seraphor
    Seraphor Member Posts: 8,652
    edited April 2023

    You're literally rewarded for deaths. Co-op players die more.

    Also (I've not played co-op yet so I'm not certain) but don't co-op players each give up to 2 Accolades? The devs have flat out said that Accolades are designed to be the most rewarding metric.

  • chezpizza
    chezpizza Member Posts: 120
    edited April 2023

    I liked the idea of unlimited but timed revives I saw someone had. Basically you partner had like 30 seconds to revive you before they couldn't anymore.

  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,079

    Yes, they are dying more often anyway. Because they usually are less cautious or skilled. But since most traps are 1 time use, it heavily defeats the purpose if all are triggered by someone suiciding and then are useless. For example, traps that are not 1 time use, like the Flamethrower, cost more and impact the rating more than one time use traps. Same goes for the mods that allow repeated use. It makes bases more expensive.

    So maybe, give bases against co-op players a lower difficulty rating or let traps recharge/be usable more than once without mods.

    Just a thought. Probably not viable.

    But yeah accolades are probably doubled, IF the raiders give accolades.

  • Seraphor
    Seraphor Member Posts: 8,652
    edited April 2023

    Does it matter if traps are one-time if you get more deaths for it? Wouldn't you rather have two co-op raiders die 20 times in total while bypassing certain mechanisms by expending limited use traps, than one solo raider die 2-4 times because they're being super cautious and memorising each trap combination in sequence?

    Additionally, I've found a significant portion of deaths from co-op runs on my outposts are due to friendly fire, something that doesn't really happen in solo outside of the odd grenade to the feet.

    They specifically mentioned that they intended for co-op to be an avenue for lesser-skilled players to partake in higher difficulty raids. Which is a very good thing considering the 'Brutal Boycott'. Besides, the difficulty of your outpost as it relates to the raider, doesn't have an impact on the rewards you receive. 1 death from a Dangerous base awards you as much as 1 death on a Brutal base, the difference pertains to the raider, with twice the genmat acquired from a higher tier difficulty compared to the one below it.

  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,079

    As i said, i´m not against unlimited revives. It just feels weird as a solo.

    But sure, Brutal needs all the love it can get. If those bases get only raided by co-op players, than so be it.

    Maybe we´ll see a trend of normal and dangerous bases being run by solos only and brutal by co-op players. Would definetly help the base owners.

  • Seraphor
    Seraphor Member Posts: 8,652

    Wouldn't be a bad outcome, but we still need a more competent system of calculating difficulty to go with all this. Maybe if Brutal bases were truly Brutal, rather than simply large 'Dangerous' bases that have spent too much of sporadic trap placement, it wouldn't be such a big problem of co-ops burning through Brutal bases with little challenge.

  • Tishus
    Tishus Member Posts: 34

    Unlimited revive is a super bad mechanic for coop. Thats why we got the reviving pot and 2 people using it is 4 life witch is enouf.

  • Nahasno
    Nahasno Unconfirmed, Member Posts: 47

    Yes both can give accolades so that you could get 4 in one raid but mostly you will only get two...

    And Accolades are more an excuse for an feedbacksystem than a real help in designing your outpost

    An Example

    small 750 starting cap

    normal/dangerous (since Rank 7)

    Raid attempts 190

    Kills 309

    killratio 1.6

    Accolades :

    Fun 95

    Ingenious 40

    Brutal 24

    Artistic 50

    The only thing i can read out out that data is that a part of the raiders "liked" the outpost for something. I don't know what they specific liked or disliked.

    And i can't even correlate with the videos, because no i don't have the time to watch 190 vids between 1-25 min duration just to guess where there might be the reason for one outpost.

    Don't forget that many raiders just don't give accolades because they hit the wrong button while trying to select them, which is very frustrating when accolades give necessary points to the builder.

  • Nahasno
    Nahasno Unconfirmed, Member Posts: 47

    Well the System in place is not completly bad, at the moment it's trap density hrv - path that mostly defies the difficulty?

    Just integrate the capacity of the building site and perhaps the number and distance of specific traps to one another especially those that can trigger unlimited times.

  • konchok
    konchok Member, Alpha Surveyor Posts: 1,719

    I have a counter proposal. Limit co-op to Brutal bases only and keep the unlimited revives.

  • MadMoeZel
    MadMoeZel Member Posts: 685

    i have a counter counter proposal, as a builder who makes brutals, give me the ability to mark an outpost as "for solo players" and prevent co-ops from coming in so i can properly balance my base for solos instead of having to run tons of fire and plasma to counter infinite revives. the opposite can be true also i don't mind, but i doubt it'd see much use.