Let the Demonhost wipe full teams. No more two and poof consolation prize. No more leaving your teammate to die because someone got tossed into it by a Mutant and another chose to try and help him. No more of the don’t engage and pray it doesn’t decide to target you next.
Difficulty gate the change to malice or heresy and higher if you have too.
Cowards die in shame
will be less valid builds, so bad idea
As it turns out, the number of people an enemy can attack actually has no effect on your build!
Edit: Barring spaghetti code I should say.
So right now, when ever a brain afk guy triggers a demonhost, that guy is punished for his stupidity.
(Being thrown into a DH by a mutant is also that player‘s fault, for having bad awareness around a DH)
Your solution to this „problem“ (a player being selectively punished for their own stupidity) is, to punish everyone and wipe the entire group instead…
If this is the extend of your problem solving ability, i seriously hope (for public good) that you are never required to solve a problem in your life.
But also, as it turns out, if a demonhost can wipe the entire party and end the run, people might want to bring weapons that are specialized in dealing with demonhosts in order to prevent that.
Players would be penalized with a lower win rate for bringing setups that are not great against demonhosts.
As probably most people know, the easiest way of dealing with a DH is to use the slab shield (which is complete garbage for everything else).
If anything, it’s more odd that the dh finds a 2nd target regardless of whether said person disturbed it or was even relatively close.
Obviously two souls are always required. Reminds me of The Fog film.
But no. A full squad attack would just be too juicy food for a troll.
It’s an interesting idea - setting aside trolls for the moment, if the DH is an existential threat to the entire team, then the entire team has a good reason to help if it is aggro’ed.
As it stands right now, ignoring an active Daemonhost gives you, the individual, much greater odds of not dying to the Daemonhost, at the expense of the people trying to prevent Daemonhost kills (I’ve seen people run for the hills when the DH aggros, and have had my ass SAVED at the very last second after the neck snapping sound because the team piled on the DH).
If I try and help the DH’s first target, I’m setting myself up to die for nothing without the rest of the team helping - if nobody helps, then someone at random is gonna have to deal with the problem, right?
Maybe there are other changes required to make it less likely to be DH quad kill, but it’s still something interesting to ponder
I was tempted to disregard your entire argument due to the uncalled for insult, but you do present a valid argument.
You say it is the fault of the player that triggered the demonhost. From my perspective this is the attitude that its current state creates. You place all the burden of the triggering on the moment of the mistake, as if its an isolated incident. It is not, the event does not exist in a vacuum. Several factors that every player could have had a hand in lead up to a moment like that. One player may have missed a mark, or a zealot obscuring vision with the flamer, or the player watching the rear didn’t notice something, or the Veteran shot a barrel. The team is a team, they share the failings and victories together. My argument is the Demonhost is one of the few things in the game that goes against that mindset, and encourages a more selfish perspective.
Second point, yes, you are absolutely correct. People may want to bring weapons that are specialized in dealing with demonhosts. A want is not a need. Changing how demonhosts target players, and even potentially wiping teams still does not force you to fight the demonhost. Avoiding it remains the most effective strategy, and waveclear is still just as useful as it is. It does not change, at all, the actual viability of builds.
@Jonboy The trolling is probably the best argument against such a change. Though at current I don’t see this very often. Besides, should while I agree protections against bad actors should exist in a game, I’m not sure I agree with the idea that the balance of a game overall should be influenced by the
assumption that said bad actors will exist. Some people are insufferable, and at higher difficulties it doesn’t take a demonhost to throw a game.
@Dumlefudge That is exactly the issue I have with its current state. Punishing (one of) the player(s) that helps the teammate in the event even one player decides to act selfishly.
The best proactive solution I’ve seen so far is to add a reward for taking out a daemonhost. Actively encourage it. Idk, maybe even have them at t3+ where you can’t avoid them.
But it’s hard to motivate that action when you know you’re going to drop trash at end of level 99% of the time anyway.
Fair enough. I think successfully bringing down a demonhost should be rewarded. However the fear I’d have with that is that a reward would incentivize actually triggering it, despite the rest of the team not wanting to.
Perhaps a teamwide heal to fullhealth and a power buff for a period of time would be sufficient? So if you do bring it down, you are stronger. However going out of your way to trigger it remains an unattractive option?
It needs a redesign/ address why people are not willing to fight it
Punishing another teammate for someone agroing it is already toxic, you really want to enable griefers to wipe the team?
Guess why…
When only you and (maybe) 1 other player get killed, it is not a very effective way of griefing/trolling.
But if the demon host tried to wipe the entire party and would quite likely end the run, it is guaranteed that griefing would go up.
Not only that, but griefers would be the only ones who actually benefit from the change you suggest.
To make trolles punished, there could be ‘DH awoken and strike team wiped counter’. if you get to 2 (or just 1), next time DH will just eat you and vanish without killing the strike team.
That would make trolling contained and still allow system per OPs mechanics. But its immeasurably complex to implement
There are still only downsides to OP’s suggestion.
Daemonhost arguing with Nurgle
-Is 2 a lot?
-Depends on the context. Souls? No. Players killed in Darktide? Yes.
What build revolves around running away from the Deamonhost until it kills half your team, so you can live to flee another day? xD
When a Demonhost is triggered, I make a judgement call. What is the current situation like and does the team possess the DPS and resources to burst it down in time to save one, if not two, of our members?
If the answer is yes, then I’ll make the attempt to fight it. If we just do not have the DPS to race down the Daemonhost (or if we are also at the same time being pressured hard), then I’ll move on. Because when it comes down to if you have the damage to save your team mates, you either do or you don’t, there is no middle ground; and if you don’t there’s no sense in burning resource and/or with the two surviving members ending up very corrupted. The match just got harder because we’re now two people down, depleting our ammo and getting corrupted is just going to make things more difficult. Likewise, if the host aggros on me, I will let the team know if the setup I’m using can fight it or at least tank it long enough for them to burn the thing down, if not I’ll pull it away from the team and wait for them at the next rescue point.
So its not really that I want to abandon anyone or punish them for waking the host. Its just sometimes a team just doesn’t have the means to do anything about it.
My favourite weapon back in the day.
So people can even more effectively grief others? No thank you.
Not to mention the amount of people i have had the “pleasure” to play with that still ran into a Daemonhost despite it being highlighted multiple times… in the worst possible moments, also makes this whole idea way more toxic than any sort of “i f-ed up and my teammates didn’t come to my rescue” moments combined.
Replacing a bad situation with a toxic one is not a good idea.
With a statement like that… I am guessing you are one of the people that believe you need to pull the Daemonhost on purpose, without warning or conversation with the team.
That sentence alone predisposes me against your proposed change. I have had the displeasure of playing with people like that too. First they pull the Daemonhost, before the group is ready and then more likely than not, {insert female dog} in chat about how nobody helped them, while everyone was busy trying to prevent the wipe, because the guy that pulled the DH didn’t consider the fact that we had 4 ogryns coming at us around the corner and a horde joining from the rear.
Loosing 2 people from the team is punishment enough for the actions of one person. No need to add to the grief by wiping the group.
It’s been said a lot, but as someone who tries to help anyone who has triggered a host, it would be just horrid to have it go after all the players. Way to often do I see three people go around a pinged host just to have the forth person walk blindly into it, and unless you have good enough boss dps on your team your kinda screwed. I think team play would probably end up being worse with the amount of griefing people would do and how many people would avoid quick play just to not deal with people like that.
No, that message popped up any time you selected the “Exit Game” option in WH40k
Dawn of War. If it alone predisposed you against my argument, you were already biased against it coming in and were looking for any excuse to disagree. Disagree with me if you want. That is fair and we all have our own opinions, but don’t be disingenuous about it.
Again, I disagree with the player aggroing the demonhost being solely responsible for the event and have already expressed scenarios in which that is not the case. Outside of a player deliberately waking the Demonhost (Or being utterly oblivious even when its marked, which in fairness I have seen), the entire team plays a part in the situations that arise in the game.
The situation you describe is a valid concern, and one shared by many people Including myself. I just don’t agree that its prevalent enough to warrant as much caution as people obviously have with the topic. Ideally we could find a solution to that, but admittedly it would be a difficult thing to solve.
What if it only targeted one person unless the other players were not reasonably active in attacking it. So the person triggering it is still punished, and players who try to help are not punished. Would that be more reasonable?
@Serafyna That’s fair, the experience and knowledge to make snap second gameplay decisions is something we should respect and acknowledge. My initial thoughts on the matter would be to scale the health of a demonhost based on the damage of equipped weapons, but that actually would effect build viability so that wouldn’t work. The question is, what would make you stop and think “Maybe it is worth trying to help” even if the overall team DPS was on the risky end? If a successful demonhost kill banked any materials gathered thus far so you were guarenteed to get more than the failure portion? Or it cleared the corruption and healed the survivors to full, would that be enough? What about the proposal above, if that were the case what concerns might you have with that system?
@Ogry I agree, it does need a redesign. I think ideally it should remain something you want to avoid, but also something you want to engage with if its triggered organically, without making it an attractive target for exploitation. Do you have any ideas on the matter?