Re-do the vote system, it's unfair to the monster


In my opinion the voting system on each new map and mode in evacuation is pretty one sided. It seems to me that any hunter team that can talk to each other are going to collaborate and decide on a map together. With a 4v1 game the 1’s opinion has no meaning when it is equal with anyone of the 4 which isn’t in the spirit of this game. After thinking about it for a little while I’ve decided that the monster having three votes seems fair. If at least one of the hunters agrees with the monster instead of the rest of their team then the map should go to the monster’s side.

On that point I did consider the monster having 2 or 4 votes, but at the point there becomes a problem with a tie. And what happens then? Is the map randomized? That doesn’t quite seem fair. Do you get two new maps to vote on? Odds are they were voting on the game type and not necessarily the map so the votes are likely to stay the same, and since you’re moving from one region to an adjoining region there probably aren’t that many for a tie or multiple ties.

In my opinion a monster vote being worth 3 to each hunters vote of 1 sounds pretty fair. What do you think?


The point is that the only thing the Hunters may achieve trough that is a different Map/Mode/Future bonus possibilities.

They don’t gain an advantage. The system’s pretty much fair.


I understand what you’re saying but I don’t think you understand what I’m saying. With the way it is now, why even give the monster a vote. Let the hunters decide what map and what game mode will be played next since it is basically decided by them, and the monster gets to wait and see what they decide. Does that seem fair?


I think this is the more casual mode so you’re expected not to choose the map based on any strategic advantages and rather what you want to play. The monster being only one person only gets one vote or else their preference is more important than any if the other players


Yea I guess that makes sense. I’m kind of going off all the videos I’ve seen (a lot of them being with the developers) and the hunter teams being unified. I suppose we’ll have to see what happens with the beta and see the data to see what happens. I think they need to pay attention to the number of games chosen by just the hunters though to see if it is unbalanced. Just going off what I’ve seen of evacuation though, it seems a bit unfair.


In the Turtlerock-stream they said, that they want to test the voting system in the beta. If they get mainly negative feedback they will change it to: Loser of the last match picks the next map


Yeah, the problem I do see with the voting system is I imagine evacuation won’t just be played casually and you will get hunter teams voting together deliberately. The problem with that is even if you make the monsters vote count more the hunters will still win.


I saw that, and I don’t think loser picks is fair either. If I won the first two matches and purposely lost the third match just so I could pick the 4th match so I have a better chance of winning the 4th so that I get the (very important advantage) in the 5th round, which is the most important, then I can fix the voting to my advantage (in a way). That was my issue with the loser chooses. They need to find a balanced way for the voting system, that way its fair no matter who wins any round.


Like I said if there is even one hunter that isn’t with the rest of the team then the monster should win the vote. The monster can’t have 4 votes to equal the hunters because then you run into the tie problem, but if you think of it in the sense that if the hunter team isn’t completely together then the monster should win. The game is 4v1, if during the vote it ends up being 3v2 then I think the monster should win that vote. It would encourage hunters working together, keep to the spirit of the game, and if they’re staying together like they should be, this change would only make a slight difference overall, and balance out the game based on how maps/modes are chosen.


No, you’re misunderstanding the system.

If the Hunters don’t gain advantages trough playing a specific map, there’s no point in having the Hunters cooperatively decide what they want to play. Each player votes based on what he/she wants to play, regardless of what team he/she is on, simply because there is no point in an agreement between the Hunters on what map they want to play.

So if the Hunters perform such a cooperative decision, it means the majority has spoken, and thus it was perfectly fair, not that they chose to do that because some meta dictates them what is the best decision.

It’s only that point of view that violates the system.


Why should the hunters automatically gain an advantage? That means you think the monster should be at a disadvantage throughout the entire game. And the monster should always lose? But if the 4 are equal to the 1 then the 1 will sometimes win. If that’s the case the 1 is greater than the 4 sometimes. What I don’t understand is you seem to put an emphasis on the 4 hunters over the 1 monster. And I’m assuming you’re saying “through” when you say “trough”. And if I’m mistaken on that let me know.


Voting system is weird, what about this?

  1. Hunt
  2. Nest
  3. Rescue
  4. Hunt
  5. Defend

Because we all want to play every mode in evacuation and 2 hunts because it’s the best mode in this game. And just cancel useless voting system.


I was saying if any hunters teams were voting for strategic purposes they would all four vote together easily beating the monster even with the monster getting three votes

For casual play giving the monster three votes would result in him getting his map 90%+ of the time! hardly fair to the other hunters


What? Why should I want somebody at a disadvantage?

The Hunters don’t get any advantages from choosing maps, simply because the maps are made to be balanced.
The monster doesn’t gain any advantage from the map, same reason.
So the voting doesn’t influence the outcome of the game that comes next.

The Hunters don’t have to vote for the same map if they don’t want to.

Thus, it makes no sense for the Hunters to choose a map as a team, unless all of them want to play it.

And if all of the Hunters want to play the map, then most of the players on the server want to play the map, and the voting is fair.

The Monster is not there as a team with less votes, but only as another player, just like every single of the Hunters.

EDIT: Perhaps someone who knows english better than me and understands what I’m speaking about could help explain this? I feel like my knowledge is insufficient.


I have actually thought about that myself. And I think that might be the way to go, you run into the problem with the maps but I guess the map is pretty much connected with the mode. The only problem I see is the lack of choice. People are going to bitch that they were forced to play these modes… But now that I think about there’s always going to be someone to bitch about something. I like your way of laying it out, they could put a story to that order, and if they only put maps to vote on, and not connect those maps with modes it could work. So instead of canceling voting system. They could just make the modes predetermined and that would create enough difference for the hunters and monster to vote on and to disagree on and give the monster a choice.


No I think it was just that one word you had issues with. But think about it this way. A lot of people are only going to play hunters with their friends. If they’re playing with friends they are going to come to an agreement on map choice. If it were me and I were playing hunter without my friends, I’m going to have a headset on and talking to the other people on my team. If they want a map I don’t want but make reasonable arguments for it, then fine i’ll agree with them. If during evacuation a hunter team isn’t talking and collaborating odds are they’re going to lose anyway. And if they aren’t collaborating then they won’t vote together… If you do it my way either they’re together and win. Or they aren’t and they lose. Kind of how it should be, in a 4v1 game.


You obviously don’t know a lot about the game. You can play a whole evacuation mode without playing one of the game modes. It’s all voted on. And when you talk about advantage, it’s different for every mode and every map. So unless you’re playing a certain mode and map you can’t predict it.


Well in my opinion, most people are going to be able to communicate. And if that’s the case that means the monster needs that advantage to keep up. I have an xbox and I realize this is also on PS4 and PC so if the communication is really that limited between those other two devices then yea I suppose you could be right about the strategic side of the hunters.


I’m sorry if I made you feel stupid.


And if you don’t understand the role the maps play in the advantage of the next mode and map then you haven’t watched too many of the latest videos.