Who loses when the timer goes to zero?


From my understanding the monster loses, although this objectively doesn’t make sense to me.

Why then would it be the monsters job to hunt its own hunters?

Isn’t it the hunters jobs to either hunt the monster, or get some defensive measures setup again?

Or in other terms why would it be the job of the pest to kill the pest control for the win?

Why not have side objectives for both sides?

Hunters either defend the gen, or set up the fort’s defense measures, and boom logic.

Is this to prevent 2nd objective races like in other mobas?


I think the monster loses because the monster player is either supposed to kill all the hunters or destroy the objective


Your 1st, 2nd, & 3rd questions are based on the concept of the objective, which is just a wrapper for the game. We can explain it to make sense in future, so no need to worry there.

As for 4th & 5th question, it seems as though you’re trying to understand the point of the secondary objective. The secondary objective just serves to guide the game away from degenerate cases for people who are legitimately trying to play the game of the hunt. Without a time limit, the game could go excruciatingly long and lead to a poor experience for some players. Currently what we have works out pretty well


Yes as the monster you are given a time limit (though a fair one) to evolve and kill the hunters or take out the objective (stands to reason killing the hunters means free rain on the objective) only thing I want to know is if there is a reason for the time such as the 4 hunters are only a per drop and more hunters are on the way or if the base on planet has a defence system that will activate.


Agreed, I too would like an in game reason for why the hunters win. Why dosnt the monster just go to the generator after the match? My two thoughts were pretty much what @1300ndaba said, are you just the first wave of units sent to protect the objective? Is there like a shield generator that’s being installed nearby?


What is the generators function, what incentive do these monsters have for attacking it when the hunters arrive instead of attacking it before the hunters arrive, what narrative-based reasoning is involved in that equation? That sorta stuff was the main point.

The side point is.

I understand the functional role it plays in ending the game, but I don’t understand why there aren’t more then 2 ways to end a game, and why there is no side objective for the hunters other than ‘survive’.

If a game stalls and one side does ‘better’ then another shouldn’t there be another side objective to meter scores so you have some quantifiable metric for who did better in accomplishing the side objectives?


Which brings up another question; are the monsters unique within the lore? In other words, is the Goliath the FIRST and ONLY Goliath they’ve ever seen? Is there only ONE Kraken? Or have there been sightings of multiple of these monsters.


in the tournament did we see any matches where the hunters intentionally tried to drag out the clock? Like camped away from the objective and just had a medic snipe whenever the monster tried doing the objective?


The clock stops when the hunters and monster are in combat with each other, if a hunter just sniped at Goliath, the clock would start


I agree, but I think it benefits the hunters more, while not being particularly fun for the monster.

Oh they’re going to run off for the drop ship timer to tick down?

One of them’s going to snipe, and then if you go to chase them the gen’s safe and its a matter of if you can catch them all out.

If you stick on the gen and make no progress, you’re not re-gaining armor, and reengaging the revived team without refreshing armor is darn near suicide, and the timer ticks down and you lose.

Maybe the tracking abilities is enough to find 2 running players or 1 player whom ran while the other sniped…its hard tell.


I think it’s kind of obvious really. The monster might be human-controlled, but the monster is a monster. It is the “bad guy” by its very nature. The “good guy” perspective of the game is held by the hunters. There is only one win scenario for the good guys: threat neutralized. You can either neutralize the threat by killing it or containing it. If time runs out, then one of two things can be assumed.

  1. The monster is not a significant enough threat to survive in the long term. It will eventually be hunted down and killed.

  2. The monster has chosen not to be a threat anymore. It has cowered in the face of the hunters. (READ: someone turtled too much.) And so, as far as the perspective of the “good guy” is concerned, the threat has been contained. Win.

Again, it all comes back to the rather obvious perspective that the “good guys” are the hunters. Don’t think of the monster killing the hunters as the monster winning but as the hunters losing.


problem with this is can you really get a good angle on the generator to take those shots? I feel it would not be smart to do something like that but idk