The Clot Grabbing Auto-Aim Megathread II: The Grabbening

[Amber Glass]

also you totally contradicted yourself in your argument. You are correct in this statement, The whole point of the clot is to be an easy killable, ubiquitous specimen that had serious impact if you ignored it., but i will add to the last bit by also including "if you don't notice it"

in the current system, it is impossible to not notice a clot that has grabbed you, and they are dealt with in an even quicker fashion than before. At least in KF1 you had to turn to your attacker, kill it, and kill every clot that was in proximity close enough to keep you stationary. Now it is kill 1 clot, be free from the pack if you are quick enough to hit sprint or jump. Not to mention people who are defending the auto aim constantly explain how the clot cannot be ignored now. Thus like i stated earlier, the entire point of the clot has been wiped out.

on an ending note, those who want to increase a games difficulty by making changes to the bottom tier specimen, how do you not see how backwards that is. Not to mention, all the people who think it makes the game harder definitely aren't playing at the most difficult setting, which in itself is pointless thus far until all the perks are added and we can actually start to properly balance zed stats.

 

[Shining Wolf]

The players that are adamantly calling for this camera movement to be kept are inexperienced

Ugh.

All you do is spam the big zeds to kill them currently, you really think that one aa12 shot at the clot is gonna make a difference in dealing with the scrake? The current meta is focus fire on the big zeds, so if you miss one shot someone else is going to pick up that insignificant slack, if you have a competent team.

That's an issue with the ways to kill bigger zeds atm. When the headshot classes are put in the game, most notably sharp that will be able to stunlock scrakes with headshots, a single shot will absolutely matter. The issue with the spin around clot grab is that it points the gun at their forehead, not that it screws up the camera. KF1 sharps being able to keep scrakes stunned while a clot was on them was a bunch of crap.

 

[Amber Glass]

you're right it is an issue, but the fact doesn't change that clots are not more threatening in the games current state.

I fail to see how this will affect sharps in a standard situation. Lets say we are given a bow or a sniper rifle that stuns scrakes. Since when is your sharpshooter worried about being grabbed from behind while shooting at the scrake? where is your trash management? Your team is probably screwed anyways, and its not because the clot is tougher to deal with, its because of team incompetence.

I've already explained this threefold, the players that are insisting the clots are more threatening, the only reason this would happen is due to player incompetency, or just plain bad luck, in which case **** happened all the time in KF1, and there isn't much you can do about it besides roll with the punches and try your best to stay alive amidst the **** storm.

I don't know how to explain this more clearly than i already have, any perceived increased threat due to the auto-aim camera movement is largely due to incompetence on the part of the player.

 

[Paronine]

I keep going back to the idea of using this mechanic as a way to further differentiate the three Clot types. Cysts turn you when they grab you, Clots don't, and Slashers don't, but instead make it so that you turn slower, causing it to take longer for you to turn and fight them off. Something like that.


The reason I'm against it being a gameplay option is that, in my opinion, gameplay options should affect how you interact with the game, not how the game interacts with you. Enemy behaviors should not be toggleable effects. I understand the desire for a middle ground, and certainly the desire to placate all parties, but I don't feel a gameplay option is the right way to do this. People want to complain about things being "dumbed down." How is it not dumbed down to make the way an enemy affects you something you can control with the click of your mouse under Options?

Next, we get a thread detailing why being blinded by Bloat bile is "artificial," and then that gets made optional. After that comes the argument over how Siren screams disorient players, and then there's an option for that. Don't like that Hans grabbing you takes away your agency? Okay, self-healing or not self-healing while you're grabbed is now an option. Where does it end?

The game operates under a set of rules, a set of behaviors, and players develop skills & strategies around that. When you can take control of one of those rules for yourself, it inherently means that you get an option to make the game easier or harder for yourself. That, far more than the Clot turn, is artificial difficulty.

Keep it, scrap it. I'm roughly 50/50 on the issue. But I think once you go down this road of trying to have your cake & eat it too, every problem people come up with becomes something everyone wants to be placated over. Establish a gameplay option as a solution for one issue, and you're setting a precedent that it can be done for others.

 

[Amber Glass]

the thing is, having it as an option to toggle on or off doesn't create a significant gameplay difference for the playerbase.

You say this "gameplay options should affect how you interact with the game, not how the game interacts with you.", but is the camera movement and auto-aiming not the epiphany of forcing the game to interact with you without your consent?

I agree that enemy behaviors shouldn't be optional, the clots/cysts/slashers will still be able to grab you, people keep confusing the actual gameplay mechanic of being grabbed as being synonymous with the auto aim.

The main reason for making this an in game option would be to placate both parties, while making the most minimal change and effect to the players. I guarantee nobody will be able to notice a change in their teammates game play unless they actually witness the player model being turned towards the clot if they choose to keep the auto aim on.

I understand yours and others mentalities that it could possibly lead to other players whining about actual gameplay mechanics, but that is not a reasonable argument, thats like saying allowing gay marriage will lead to people marrying animals or marrying children. i dont think people are actually that unreasonable to not be able to see the bigger picture, and if they are, then they are just plain wrong for believing that any other specimen mechanic should be changed because we removed a consolized feature from PC play. I mean, thus far we haven't had anyone complain about the siren or bloat, that would be pretty juvenile to want to start a mass specimen nerf because they were given the option to turn off an annoying camera movement.

 

[ChairmanMurder[Forge]]

all of your poorly thought out examples also take into consideration that the player left a clot in close proximity to a very large zed, and their teammates simultaneously ignored it. All of the examples everyone has given stating the clot is more threatening are also prime examples of inexperience in the game. the situations in which you put yourself is what caused the clot to be more threatening, all of which would have been the same without the auto aim implement. You literally kill the clot so quickly in this game, and there is so little precision in dealing with the bigger zeds, that i would actually argue in KF1, a ninja clot was infinitely more threatening and disorienting than what it is in KF2

So, answer me this then: If you have such a perfect clot interception rate that the auto-lock feature becomes a non-issue, why are you so against it? If it has no effect on your ability to to win a match, why must it go?

All you do is spam the big zeds to kill them currently, you really think that one aa12 shot at the clot is gonna make a difference in dealing with the scrake? The current meta is focus fire on the big zeds, so if you miss one shot someone else is going to pick up that insignificant slack, if you have a competent team.

The act of being turned, killing the clot, and returning to your original target takes more than "one aa12 shot".

In a game where a rampaging scrake or fleshpound can chunk your team and open you up to follow up attacks from bloats, sirens, and husks, you don't think one and a half seconds of a support not spamming his AA12 into a target isn't important?

Yeah, the auto aim could potentially be more threatening if your team is running around like headless chickens, in which case they should be punished anyways.

Again, if you and your teammates are so coordinated that this grab becomes a non-issue, why are you so against it?

That is why this mechanic is dumbed down, it literally aims for you, turns for you, and is an instant kill, do you really think killing a clot that has grabbed you is more challenging now?

My goodness.

It's not about the clot. It's about the disorientation caused by the clot that allows its more powerful cousins to close in on you in that moment of distraction.

And before you say "But it's not a problem to good players [such as myself]," I'll ask: Then why are you against it so much?

before if you had say an m14, a top tier and powerful weapon, you could still whiff a group of clots that grabs you if you spammed body shots and couldnt hit a head. Now you literally click once, sprint, and you're free from that pack of 5 clots, were before you would be chewed to a pulp.

You were punished if you couldn't hit a headshot.

In this game you're punished if you ignored the clot at a crucial moment.

Now if anyone has any viable arguments as to why making this an optional feature would be detrimental, please feel free to share your two cents.

Because, whether you like it or not, it is now a core game mechanic. Some people think it's a major mechanic, or an improvement. Other's think it's "dumb", or a bad mechanic.

But it's a mechanic. Its presence or non-presence should not be made optional, the same way the blind from a bloat or the deafen from a husk shouldn't be made optional.

in the current system, it is impossible to not notice a clot that has grabbed you, and they are dealt with in an even quicker fashion than before.

And, in that time where you're flipped around and killing the clot, a more dangerous specimen has gotten just that many more meters closer to you unmolested.

It's not (purely) about the clot holding you in place. It's about the clot forcing your aim away from whatever it was you were shooting at already.

At least in KF1 you had to turn to your attacker, kill it, and kill every clot that was in proximity close enough to keep you stationary. Now it is kill 1 clot, be free from the pack if you are quick enough to hit sprint or jump. Not to mention people who are defending the auto aim constantly explain how the clot cannot be ignored now. Thus like i stated earlier, the entire point of the clot has been wiped out.

In KF, if you were lining up your weapon to eliminate a scrake or fleshpound, a clot could latch onto you and you could happily ignore it. It did negligible damage. You could safely dispatch the more dangerous specimen at your leisure, then you could turn to the clot and kill it. In KF2, you are forced to turn your attention to that clot, no matter if you were walking around, killing trash anyway, or trying to land your shots on that dangerous fleshpound.

on an ending note, those who want to increase a games difficulty by making changes to the bottom tier specimen, how do you not see how backwards that is.

All the specimens, from the clot to the fleshpound, have been changed. Don't be so disingenuous as to state that the only the clot has been changed.

Not to mention, all the people who think it makes the game harder definitely aren't playing at the most difficult setting,

Careful, your elitism is showing.

which in itself is pointless thus far until all the perks are added and we can actually start to properly balance zed stats.

Then why are you so dead set in saying it's a bad feature?

 

[Amber Glass]

a reasonable compromise for those who really love their "more threatening clot", would be to cause the screen to shake significantly enough to upset your aim without actually forcing your camera or "crosshair" placement onto the enemy. But that would mean removing the current system. That would be a much more fitting mechanic addition as opposed to what it is now.

 

[Paronine]

See, I'd be okay with that. I want a middle ground, which means how it works would have to be entirely changed. I still think not being turned or disoriented in any way is too easy. It means you can clear out bigger threats before having to focus on the clot that's got you. That sounds less challenging to me than having your focus turned around suddenly or having the camera shake.

(But then, the camera shaking is also the game interacting with you without your consent, which is what you argue against. Make up your mind.)

 

[Shining Wolf]

a reasonable compromise for those who really love their "more threatening clot", would be to cause the screen to shake significantly enough to upset your aim without actually forcing your camera or "crosshair" placement onto the enemy. But that would mean removing the current system. That would be a much more fitting mechanic addition as opposed to what it is now.

I've been wanting the clot grab to only rotate the player horizontally towards the clot so then they have to line up the actual headshot. Constant screen shake is more annoying than what's even in place and still allows the player to potentially set up headshots with their original target. Hell, I'd rather the clot start dragging the player towards a zed group or knocking the player back than a screen shake.

 

[Amber Glass]

So, answer me this then: If you have such a perfect clot interception rate that the auto-lock feature becomes a non-issue, why are you so against it? If it has no effect on your ability to to win a match, why must it go?


The act of being turned, killing the clot, and returning to your original target takes more than "one aa12 shot".

In a game where a rampaging scrake or fleshpound can chunk your team and open you up to follow up attacks from bloats, sirens, and husks, you don't think one and a half seconds of a support not spamming his AA12 into a target isn't important?


Again, if you and your teammates are so coordinated that this grab becomes a non-issue, why are you so against it?


My goodness.

It's not about the clot. It's about the disorientation caused by the clot that allows its more powerful cousins to close in on you in that moment of distraction.

And before you say "But it's not a problem to good players [such as myself]," I'll ask: Then why are you against it so much?


You were punished if you couldn't hit a headshot.

In this game you're punished if you ignored the clot at a crucial moment.


Because, whether you like it or not, it is now a core game mechanic. Some people think it's a major mechanic, or an improvement. Other's think it's "dumb", or a bad mechanic.

But it's a mechanic. Its presence or non-presence should not be made optional, the same way the blind from a bloat or the deafen from a husk shouldn't be made optional.


And, in that time where you're flipped around and killing the clot, a more dangerous specimen has gotten just that many more meters closer to you unmolested.

It's not (purely) about the clot holding you in place. It's about the clot forcing your aim away from whatever it was you were shooting at already.


In KF, if you were lining up your weapon to eliminate a scrake or fleshpound, a clot could latch onto you and you could happily ignore it. It did negligible damage. You could safely dispatch the more dangerous specimen at your leisure, then you could turn to the clot and kill it. In KF2, you are forced to turn your attention to that clot, no matter if you were walking around, killing trash anyway, or trying to land your shots on that dangerous fleshpound.


All the specimens, from the clot to the fleshpound, have been changed. Don't be so disingenuous as to state that the only the clot has been changed.


Careful, your elitism is showing.


Then why are you so dead set in saying it's a bad feature?

im so against it because:

It does not fit into the game of Killing Floor. it doesn't fit the theme or feel of the franchise, and its clear that the developers wanted to retain a good deal of that feeling when they started developing KF2.

It dumbs the game down, i don't want the game aiming or turning my camera for me, i would go play the walking dead seasons if i wanted faux-cinematic game events. Console players need aim assist, PC players do not.

It is annoying, it adds very little if anything that is beneficial to the overall game meta.

Yes the zeds have had minute changes, none of which detracts from the player and his control over aiming.

NO IT IS NOT A CORE GAME MECHANIC. THIS IS EARLY ACCESS TWI WANTS INPUT ON WHAT NEEDS CHANGES, i can almost guarantee you that TWI is going to address this issue in some form or another.

You are now arguing that the auto aim doesn't make the clot more threatening in itself, thanks for agreeing with me. If you do a bit more critical thinking you may also come to conclusion that the old clot mechanic is infinitely more threatening and causes way more of an impact than the current clot does.

I have no idea how you play KF2, but from your argument and examples stated, it very much seems like you and your team either really love kiting, or just like to run around killing as they please, so basically the epitome of lower difficulty gameplay. Of which tells me absolutely nothing about the auto aim having an actual effect on increasing the difficulty of the game. And lets be real, if you want to challenge yourself go play SUI/HoE. If you find yourself consistently in scenarios where the clot grab is having a dire effect on your survival, then you are inexperienced or playing with inexperienced players, or you are playing at too high of a difficulty for your skill level, plain and simple.

Once again, i am even fighting for all of you to be able to keep your beloved "mechanic", and still not a single person has detailed any valid reason as to why making the auto aim optional would negatively impact gameplay.

 

[Amber Glass]

and before someone calls me out, kiting isn't necessarily a lower difficulty tactic, but it IS one that inherently makes the game easier when done correctly. However, running around and killing without discretion and not having some form of hold area of which to defend, is very characteristic of new players.

 

[Gallic_Taffer]

I've been wanting the clot grab to only rotate the player horizontally towards the clot so then they have to line up the actual headshot. Constant screen shake is more annoying than what's even in place and still allows the player to potentially set up headshots with their original target. Hell, I'd rather the clot start dragging the player towards a zed group or knocking the player back than a screen shake.

Agreed, no screenshake. If I wanted that nonsense, I'd get drunk and watch Quarantine or Blair Witch.

From what I've seen so far in following both threads, those who are "for" the clot grab are open to it changing, yet they are most certainly opposed to the option for turning it on or off. This is the most reasonable argument, mainly because TWI has done so well in revamping the clot and his two cousins into something interesting. Everything done to them has been an improvement, even the grab. The clot now has character as a zed as well as noticeable presence on the battlefield. It is actually dangerous now at all times instead of simply being that damn thing whose greatest talent is blocking my LAR shot from hitting the Husk.

 

[mrsirr]

I don't think the issue is so much that making the thing optional would negatively impact the game. The idea, from what I'm seeing, is that it's a weird precedent to set. I know on-screen bile and sonic effects have been brought up, and I know that people aren't going to turn around and ask for those effects to be optional. The argument isn't one of slippery slope but just that it is odd to make something like this optional when things like the screen obstruction from bloat bile is not optional. It's not about difficulty (personally the bile effect doesn't really hinder me so much) it's just odd to set the precedent that certain enemy interactions can be made optional, when on-screen effects (nothing more than UI) aren't optional.

 

[jalex3]

I prefer the new system, it works well with the faster pace of the game.

 

[Kagemusha1945]

I think that the mechanic needs to either stay or be removed.
It clearly has an effect on how people are playing and engaging with the clots and making it a toggled option in a menu would most assuredly not be a good idea.

I initially was put off by it and found the pull to be quite jarring. Almost always seemed to happen when I was reloading and I would either have to take some hits and finish the reload to kill the offending clot, melee the clot (interrupting reload), or switch weapons and shoot the clot (interrupting reload).

It creates a new dynamic with the clot. If you are playing well the clot grab should only ever happen when you have failed to maintain sufficient arcs of fire within your squad. The effect of the clot grab can be rather devastating when it pulls your aim off of that final headshot on a scrake or the perfect grenade that would have made a difference but is now going to go off at your feet because a clot got through the lines.

I did wonder whether it might be better to simply have the clot disrupt actions and pull off your aim. But, after engaging with it a little more I think that the mechanic works very well. It is an elegant method to simulate the idea of a clot grabbing your arm. There are probably better ways to simulate it but this method works rather well.

I seldom get grabbed by clots because my squad is doing their jobs. When I do get grabbed it's because all hell has broken loose and in those moments that clot grab can have serious consequences. I do think that it auto snapping to their head is a little console pandering in a sense, would be sufficient just to pull the camera around on the horizontal plane and require either some aiming or a melee.

I don't like the mechanic. Yet I feel that that is reason enough to keep it. It is receiving so much ire because it does something.

 

[Amber Glass]

I've been wanting the clot grab to only rotate the player horizontally towards the clot so then they have to line up the actual headshot. Constant screen shake is more annoying than what's even in place and still allows the player to potentially set up headshots with their original target. Hell, I'd rather the clot start dragging the player towards a zed group or knocking the player back than a screen shake.

im personally against anything in this game that forces a player to perform a certain action or to play a certain way. That was one of the best things that distinguished KF from all the other co-op shooters of the like. The game had an almost sandbox feel of how you went about playing it, yes there was a meta in place, but there were also vast amount of possibilities available to be successful. You weren't forced to do anything, you didn't HAVE to pick up a downed teammate like in L4D, if you so chose you could be a selfish player(not that i recommend it) and choose whatever play style you wanted, or best suited you.

I don't think the clot should really be buffed in anyways other than damage output and sheer numbers. For all the players claiming the old clot was nigh useless, i've seen quite a surprising number of wave 1 and 2 wipes because of cockiness and carelessness. Clots have their well established place in the game, it has been proven many a time in KF, i really don't see what all the talk about them being previously underpowered is. I'd say the biggest cause of wiping in the first game in a camp/hold situation would be the big zeds smashing just a bit into the hold area, enough to displace the players from their advantageous positioning and cause them to focus fire on the FP or scrake that had just broken the line, giving the trash zeds just enough time to start to make their way in and cause all hell to break loose.

Lets say we are camping the couch room/lobby on biohazard and we choose to weld all the doors except the main entrance(personally i like all the doors to be open, and assign a player to watch the side entrances). Its wave 10, and double FPs walk up to the camp spot. The demo takes them out easily, but in doing so he has accidently raged a scrake which comes charging out of the smoke, so quickly that the sharp misses the crucial stun shot. Lets say our medic comes in to tank, saving the day momentarily, and the other perks focus on killing it. However, nobody continued to watch the front (probably the most common mistake encountered in pub games) and now we have gores and clots and crawlers and sirens and husks stumbling into those main doors. The team might be able to recover if they have enough cohesion and aim to fight the horde back, but more than likely the camp spot is compromised and its time to kite. The surviving team members blow open the left door and make a run for it, attempting to cut a path through the swathe of zeds. one player remains and is backpedaling while killing the gores and crawlers about to overtake him, when all of a sudden he stops moving. WTF IS GOING ON? is probably the players first reaction, with the second being DAMN I NEED TO KILL THIS CLOT QUICK, and thus he must turn his attention to the clot, kill it, and hope it hasn't slowed him down enough for the trash zeds to overtake him.

QUEUE KF2, same scenario, and that clot is dead as the player is just beginning to realize what has happened, no element of surprise, no underlying threat, just a dead clot in less time than most people's reaction speeds. The clot is rendered useless now, its almost a big a joke as the stalker was in KF1.

 

[Amber Glass]

I don't think the issue is so much that making the thing optional would negatively impact the game. The idea, from what I'm seeing, is that it's a weird precedent to set. I know on-screen bile and sonic effects have been brought up, and I know that people aren't going to turn around and ask for those effects to be optional. The argument isn't one of slippery slope but just that it is odd to make something like this optional when things like the screen obstruction from bloat bile is not optional. It's not about difficulty (personally the bile effect doesn't really hinder me so much) it's just odd to set the precedent that certain enemy interactions can be made optional, when on-screen effects (nothing more than UI) aren't optional.

on screen-effects =/= hindering ones aim with an auto-aim and auto-camera movement. It's like comparing apples to oranges, i don't get why people don't see that.

It really isn't a weird precedent at all given they literally have no relation to one another.

Why are people so adamant about having options? i don't understand and still nobody has pointed out a legitimate argument against it, just reiterating the same weak arguments that i have already picked apart.

 

[Paronine]

Here's what I don't get: you claim that the Clot turn removes player control and makes it easy to land a headshot on the Clot grabbing you. Fine, good, excellent point. But you want it to be left in as an option, despite the claim that it's easy street, casualized, dumbed down console nonsense. You're basically saying there should be an option in the game to make it an aspect of it easier for certain players. That's what I'm having a hard time grasping. I get being for the turn. I get being against it. But if you're adamant one way or the other, how can you also be for an option to leave it in?

 

[ChairmanMurder[Forge]]

I was going to analyse your arguments but

im so against it because:You are now arguing that the auto aim doesn't make the clot more threatening in itself, thanks for agreeing with me. If you do a bit more critical thinking you may also come to conclusion that the old clot mechanic is infinitely more threatening and causes way more of an impact than the current clot does.

This... this lack of reading comprehension and logical flow tells me I'm wasting my time.

If you couldn't understand that I was talking about how the clot was a threat because it worked in tandem with other threats, then I don't even...

Anyway, I'm done. I've said my piece. We'll let the votes decide which side is more convincing.

 

[mrsirr]

on screen-effects =/= hindering ones aim with an auto-aim and auto-camera movement. It's like comparing apples to oranges, i don't get why people don't see that.

That's the point. If we're talking about how much of a difference it makes, it makes more difference than some green stuff getting on my screen.The issue isn't that they're the same thing. The issue is that we would have the option to turn off the effect a zed has on you but not have the option to turn off mere visual effects.
I'm pretty neutral on the topic, but I'm reiterating this because I haven't actually seen it defeated, you say you defeated it, but just saying that does not, in itself, defeat the argument.

different wording: I don't think the argument is that they are the same, the argument is that it's weird to make something optional if it has an effect on the character, while not leaving simple visual effects optional.