Hunt 3.0 Suggestion - Picking Order


I have had this idea a while back, though now, with 4 ability points at Stage 1 and a perk overhaul teased, I think that it may be a nice alternative to the current system.

With Hunt 2.0 as it is now, there are certain problems. One is the imbalance of certain characters vs certain others (Lennox vs Kraken, Slim vs Behemoth etc). Due to the blind picking, you may end up in a game where you are at a big distadvantage to begin with. Some people like it that way, others don’t. But in any case it would take a long time to balance this out perfectly.
The second problem I see, is that there already is some sort of counter picking on the Hunter’s side: They recognize their opponent’s name or badge and now what they will most likely pick.

What I have in mind is the following:

  • While getting into the Monster’s queue, the Monster already picks his character which then can not be changed until they quit the queue
  • The Monster also picks the Map that the next match will be played on
  • A Kraken main may want to avoid Broken Hill Mine, while a Behemoth main may want to play on it exclusively
  • It is actually more lore friendly if the Monster picks the location of its attack
  • It’s like “bro, come at me. We fight in MY domain!”
  • During character select, everybody can see which character the others pick, just like in observer mode
  • Hunters pick as usual while seeing the Monster already, though have about 15 seconds less to do so
  • The Monster however can’t change his character, only skins
  • Since the Monsters can see the Hunters’ picks, they can adapt with their 4 skill points and their perk
  • For example against a Markov, a Goliath player may want to pick 2 into Flame Breath to clear the mines faster
  • A Behemoth may reconsider putting any points into Rock Wall at Stage 1 if he faces a Cabot
  • The Monster has about 15 seconds more than the Hunters to avoid last-second picks on the Hunters’ side

Not enough rebalance of the Monster? How about every map has bad weather? Or another effect that benefits the Monster.

Once there is at least 1 adaptation for each Monster, you may even change the adaption, though the Monster would have to stay the same.


If they can see monster picks

They would pick the counter comb picks

Each comb worked effectively against specific monster . We will see repeated combs . No element of surprise . Boring matches

Monster pick the map lol . Orbital drill / Refueling tower all day long

I think monster should pick 3/4 maps . Hunters pick 1 to play it


A good idea, but a little unnecessary and adds a bit too much complication. Not being able to see who the other team picked is fair, because there’s a risk to picking certain characters. “Oh should I pick Lennox, he might choose Kraken.” “Oh should I choose Wraith, there might be a Hyde”. I just don’t see a change to the blind pick system is very needed, nor very fair.


Way, way, way for Hunter favored and complicated for it to be worth it.


I do really like the idea of a ban system. However, having the Monster show theirs outright seems a bit brutal.

I’d rather that, when queuing, each team bans a map. Having the Monster just choose a map means you’ll always see Aviary or Armory or something, and that would be kinda boring and too good for the Monster. When the two groups meet, and map is randomly selected from the remainder. Trapper, medi, and support are chosen. Then, Monster chooses, and finally assault.

Maybe the Monster could ban two characters and the Hunters could ban one, or something. Though, if the Hunters know a player, they can just always ban their main as soon as they’re matched together. Perhaps a fixed name hiding system could fix this.

Then maybe it’d go: ban any 2, pick M/S/T, ban monster, pick monster, pick assault.


I’d ban Mad Mags and Laz instantly.


I love this.

Though it seems as both of you read over the part, where I said that in most cases, the Hunters already know the Monster beforehand.
For example, if I see a million meows among the clouds (@deanimate) as my opponent, I already know 1 of 2 things is true: He picks Goliaths or he goes easy on us, in either case all of us would pick something against Goliath that doesnt suck against everything else.
From that he wouldnt gain too much knowledge, as all characters are decently viable against Goliath.

If we were at equal skill level, that would give us a huge advantage, while the Monster has nothing in return.
A ban system may work in some sense, but that would lead to big delays before the game starts, with less time actually doing something (and less time using the bathroom last minute).
If the Hunters furthermore already know the Monster’s main, having them pick first to counter that Monster, the Monster would either be forced to fight a full counter team or choose a Monster that he is not as practiced with, while also having 1 or 2 counter picks against that Monster.

I admit, this would most likely be the case. However you also have to look at the other side: Right now, the most unbalanced maps are just as rare as any other. If they were more frequent, there would be a lot more telemetry for the Devs to figure out what would be the best thing to change.

Playing on BHF, against a half decent team, you will probably never see Stage 3, if even Stage 2. What I’m trying to say is, that the Hunter favored maps are more favored towards Hunters than the Monster favored maps are towards Monsters, so having the Monster only ban some maps instead of picking one, leads to them having to ban the same maps over and over again. If Hunters also ban the most Monster favored maps, you will basicly still have a small and boring Map pool with little to no actual telemetry to figure out what exactly to change.

If only one side picks however, its easy to figure out what to do: Observe the telemetry of the most picked maps and tune them. Make the never picked Maps as Monster favored as possible until they are picked again and provide telemetry to fine tune them.


I actually mentioned that point specifically. Also, @10shredder00 and I weren’t talking about the same thing; you’re quoting us out of context.


Looks like I was still a little tired a few hours ago and skipped that accidentaly ^^
If you are going down the hiding names route, you would also need to hide badges and make it impossible to get to their steam profile (PC). Though, I really like to know my opponent and maybe get some rivalry going.
Personally, I dislike a ban system just as much as certain characters being unviable against others. You should be able to play whatever you like with no disadvantage IMO.

Though the context thing, it is once the entire suggestion and once a crucial part of the very same suggestion.
I think it’s either Monster favored, Hunter favored or it balances itself out in some way. So having two people say opposite things, even if one time its only a sub-context of the other one, I still love it and think it’s funny. Sorry, just my sense of humor.


The OP would be way hunter favored.
The most balanced picking system would be something like hunters pick two characters, monster picks, hunters pick two others, monster picks abilities.
Either way, the game is changing so much in TU09 that a pick system might not even be needed. I don’t think they should introduce a new Matchmaking system until after TU09. Let us play with the new game and then see if anything else is needed.


Can I have a link to the perk overhaul tease please?


Like I said before, that is not fair in every scenario because sometimes the Hunters ALREADY know the Monster before they pick.

Never said they should. But if I’d like to see some changes in TU10, I better suggest them now :wink:

Cant find it, sorry. Its somewhere in the HUGE micropatch tease thread.


And that is the fault of the player who only ever picks the one monster.

What isn’t fair is ruining the surprise factor for the players who put in the effort of learning multiple monsters. If a player is only going to ever use the one monster then they should expect hunters to always pick the hunters that counter him best.