Would you welcome a wagering system to this game?
This isn't a fully fledged idea but I thought of this earlier and was wondering would it be something you'd like to see. Maybe a killer can wager not to get a certain map in exchange for not using a certain perk. Maybe survivors won't use a certain perk if the killer doesn't play a certain killer.
If anyone has any ideas on how you would want it done please explain or why you wouldn't want it. I haven't really thought this out but wanted to see if anyone has any interest in this.
Comments
I want a map banning system where the killer bans 4 maps while the survivors vote on 1 map to ban then the game chooses randomly from maps remaining. Maybe replace map offerings with offerings to give you a heavier vote as survivor and give you one extra ban as killer.
They could honestly skip the system and just delete Haddonfield, Ormund, Fractured Cowshed, Thompson House, and Sheltered Woods and have the exact same effect.
I don't even think haddo is that bad since the BL nerf. If nobody is using BL (and why would they anymore?). The main road is pretty damn unsafe, and the houses are not safe without BL. So there's a few jungle gyms, handful of safe pallets, and that's about it.
Im not even sure how this would workout... If you dont want the killer to use NOED for example and they DECLINE...wouldnt that just give away one of their perks?
Personally, id love to be able to gamble bloodpoints on a match outcome. Maybe keep the limits low so it's not abusable, but say you could go double-or-nothing on 5-15k bloodpoints gamble on any given match.
For me I wouldn't like it. I want to play how I want to play.
As for Maps I know I am in the minority when I say I like random map selection ^^ Plus if I really want to play a specific map I make an offering.
As soon as people can pick and choose maps/killers/perks for others everyone's fun decreases and lobby wait times will sky rocket.
Lmao true
When I first thought of the idea I imagined it being a deal between survivor and killer not to use something. So maybe the killer offers not to use ruin, in exchange for not getting a rotten fields or something. As I said I didn't give it a lot of thought. Both sides need to agree to it.
I personally like the random maps but I think we can all agree killers like doctor and leatherface struggle on massive maps like disturbed ward for example. It puts you as killer at a massive disadvantage to begin the game and means you have to play a lot sweatier in order to even have a chance of getting any kills. Also I imagined it as something that was wagered after you found the lobby.
Yes
How would this "deal" be made without just giving away your loadout? On one end, I could just offer something worthless like I promise not to use monsterous shrine for no Haddonfield. On the other end, I could promise something I WOULD actually use and just give free info on my perk setup if they decline the deal. I'll bet ya anything the survivor team would mysteriously know about my NOED or blood warden play if I OFFER to not use it, but they turn down my offer.
That's a fair point. I'm not sure how they would do it or how it would work but I just wanted to create an interest in the concept of it.
Personally I would like the option to avoid certain maps when I'm playing killer. Wondered was there a way I could avoid say Disturbed Ward by making a deal with survivors where we dont get that map and I'll not use NOED or Ruin.
An issue I can see is that it removes the mystery of each game before you load in.
Honestly if I was playing survivor I'd always try and avoid shelter woods. My least favourite survivor map.
Now that would be interesting. I'd imagine though only swf teams would make any sort of bet because they are more confident they can bully the killer.
I could see maybe a voting map feature, similar to what COD has. Put up a handful of maps each game with players allowed to vote towards them, while not showing what each other is voting. Could maybe have offering giving you an extra vote.
I think Ormond would be okay if it were just smaller.