I’ve always wondered, ever since Infection on Halo 3 really, why is infection/flood not 16 players?
I’m a firm believer of bigger is better, and with more people in Flood, the more intense and scary I reckon it would be.
Plus we’d get full use of all the maps, why not have 12 people as humans and 4 as spartans?
Anyone else think it would be cool if Flood were 16 players?
Yes, and I like the 12-4 ratio as well.
I find it unplayable from the lag as it is. Maybe 16 player would make it overtly obvious how crappy the net code is.
I’ve always wanted there to be more players per game in infection, i would like more!!! MOOORRREEE!!! 24? 30? 30 players, unlimited ammo, and create some suburbanish flood only maps
I think 13 is good, any more and there are too many flood at the end.
> I think 13 is good, any more and there are too many flood at the end.
But that’s the point, to overwhelm the player, really make it like they are fighting for their live rather than just a rabble of feral beasts!
why they can’t add some AI floods too? So that the gameplay keeps as always with the normal random players getting flood, but at the same time there are other 20 floods attacking
And yes, we absolutely need some Flood Maps only, that can be more “horror style” (some abbandoned structure in a night theme, for example XP)
I’d like to see more players in Flood. Halo 3 had 13 (I believe) for Living Dead which worked fairly well.
One of the things I liked a lot about Infection in H3 was the maps. Not the fact that they had random forge pieces thrown all over them, but the fact that there was a bit more variety; even some BTB maps were used. Standoff was especially fun with the mongoose and all.
A good way to improve Flood through playlist tweaks alone would be to increase the player count and maybe add a few more maps to rotation.
Anyone that played zombies in Halo 2 would know, 16 is better.
> Anyone that played zombies in Halo 2 would know, 16 is better.
exactly! It would just be so much better if there was more people and more mayhem!