Randomized zombie chracteristics

Since zombies are very predictable in 3.0 why not give every zombie type some slight RNG elements? For example a normal walking zombie can have, lets say, 100 health but when it spawns there is a chance for it to have up to 30% more health or 20% less (the value of which could be adjusted in a level editor). The same could go for its speed and damage.

  • Good idea
  • Bad idea
  • Mixed opinion (comment)

0 voters

1 Like

So like zombies with missing limbs or big bit offs having rnged health?


Yes, or if they have cut off limbs it could be an indication that they have less health/deal less damage/run slower.

1 Like

Sounds fine.

1 Like

Anything to mix up gameplay and isn’t op (Looking at you burner zombie) is fine with me.

1 Like

I like the idea of slight RNG elements to zombie stats that could change things like speed, health, damage, etc., but it should probably only be like at most a 1-3%, maybe up to a 5% increase/decrease to the stats so that there can still be obvious “tiers” between zombies based on their type.


Neat idea,will add a lot of unpredictability to fighting zombies and overall improve the survival aspect of the game.

1 Like

Shooting zombies isn’t hard.

Anyways, in response to OP I think that a bit of variation would be nice.

1 Like

sure, but there should be some sort of visual indicator for it. like maybe zombies with more health then normal are a bit more muscular then regular zombies, or faster zombies have different poses. that sort of thing.


I responded to a topic with a similar suggestion, so I’m actually all down for something like this.

I don’t see a reason as to why it shouldn’t be a thing. It does make sense.

1 Like


Visual diversity will also give immersion, so we don’t see generic zombie clones.

1 Like

I feel like he is unbalanced because if you don’t have a gun there is basically nothing you can do about him. Especially since even if you come up with a clever way to kill him nearby zombies become it too. (not to mention in 4.0 guns are supposed to be rarer if he is readded)

1 Like

Is that not how a zombie would realistically be? A huge risk to engage up close.

And yes, I am aware that zombies aren’t real, thank you very much

I like the idea but there should be a way to distinguish the zombies. Such as a slow zombie would be missing a leg, or a slow hitter could only have one arm.

Right, but flat out hard to kill without firearms? The only time these zombies aren’t a nuisance is when you have tons of guns and ammo, which at that point nothing is a threat. I get that they could be the, oh you need to run away zombie, but having to avoid one zombie through an entire looting experience is awful. I think a better way to balance him is for him to start taking a little damage when he chases you, and after a while burns to death, thus fresh spawns have a way to deal with him.

Well, you have to accept that you can’t always go in loud and hard. Sometimes you need to take a stealthy or more passive approach. That’s also why I hope zombies will pose a significant danger in numbers, because using firearms (especially large ones) should be a calculated risk due to the huge amount of noise they create. This will also add viability to smaller firearms as well as melee due to being less noisy, but in the end any threat can be avoided by stealth.

Smaller firearms tend to be louder and, when using the same ammunition.

Hm. Interesting.

There has to be balance though, somehow, perhaps making smaller firearms more durable or easier to sefvice due to having less components?

(I just wrote a wall of text about realistic weapon balance, then realized how offtopic we’re getting. I’ll make it collapsible so it’s not too in the way)

Large weapons should be powerful, small weapons should be convenient

They’re easier to carry. You could put a holster with a pistol in it pretty much wherever you find it most convenient, but a rifle pretty much has to be slung over your shoulder. There would probably be a lot more and better carrying options for more compact weapons. Carrying a lot of weight might cause movement penalties (though I’m against movement penalties if they’re only for equipping certain weapons.) It can also be exhausting to hold or shoulder heavy weapons, especially if the point of balance is bad. I’d say weapons should have less spread, but should always have sway, with sway increasing as you fire or ADS. Heavier, especially muzzle heavy would have more sway/sway would increase faster. Butt heavy weapons would instead have increased vertical recoil.

To the original post: that seems like a pretty good idea, though some thought needs to be put into whether the option would be a percentage of difference from the standard or directly be the value (ie instead of 30% more health, it could be +30 health.) It’s should also be considered what the odds of having the standard value, and extreme value, or something in between would be. (Should that also be configurable, or would that be needless complexity and work for every mapmaker?)

1 Like

I’d much prefer if the RNG worked for their movement,for example let’s say if 10 zombies got aggro’d on you, some should try to attack you from the left or right, and some should walk at a slower speed or higher. That way it will be a huge improvement from 3.0, since in 3.0 zombies just rush at you with a pattern for each zombie.

While we’re on the topic of zombies, I thought I’d discuss how much I dislike how the mega zombies spawn. Instead of them appearing at the place you want by %50 chance, I think it’d be better if he spawns when a certain amount of zombies are killed, and also depending on the location. So when you’re in a military base grinding, and after killing let’s say 150 zombies, for 150 kills a mega should spawn, but this shouldn’t be the case in farms or camps because these places are small and it will be a pain having a big guy in there.