ASmoothCriminal

If I have to pay for the "classic maps" a 3rd time, there better be a damned good reason for it. BO revamped the graphics, added the new guns, and included the main characters in NDU and Verruckt.. it wasn't much but I was happy to have a larger player base. If they can only offer new weapons and an upgraded engine, the older maps should be free of charge on BOII if purchased before, right? If there aren't significant changes made, I can deal with the inconvenience of less people playing on those maps. So, just make us play BO for the upgraded classics and BO maps. I enjoy the variety that comes with having 10 different maps to play (plus the ones we will have from BOII), but that doesn't mean I want to pay for them again just because the next Treyarch game has released. Maybe I'm alone in this view, maybe not.

way2g00 and I split up and used traps. He ran in the fishing hut using the flogger and I ran the comm room using the electrical fence there. Our game took forever because my trap cooled down about twice as slowly as his. Eventually, he traded the waffe to me so I could use a shot or two during my trap's cooldown. I wouldn't recommend SNN if you get bored easily unless you come up with a "join-up" strategy and use the flogger. I imagine that would be faster, but more difficult. Also, running the fishing hut right next to the flogger can be difficult if you aren't communicating with your teammate when you kill off zombies or if you end up with most of the spawners. Those downs can take up a lot of time as well, but 50 on SNN is pretty rewarding because of the time and effort you have to put into it, IMO. Our Der Riese run was much faster and took something like 4 to 4 and half hours. You can find it on way's youtube channel TeamGrimReapers. He cycled between the Thompson and the mainframe using that trap and I used the power switch trap.

Congrats. It's good to know not just a reader, but the founder of CoDz is working on zombies directly.

This. Try a quicker strategy that's more challenging but rewarding and like Riley said, as long as you have some one to talk to you are good. Agreed. Switch up strategies but be sure to have a fast strategy to expedite the game. Oh, and try to pick a map that doesn't take forever like CoTD. Trap maps are quicker than most others.

The round skipping glitch sounds like the worst for a player who tries for high rounds on that map. For me, the glitches that bother me the most are the 'invincibility' spots where the zombies just ignore the player. At least on CoTD I can buy the lighthouse door (even though I've heard there is a different one near the MP40) but on Moon there is nothing to permanently stop a person from abusing the glitch.

Um, the weapon is easy to use, a one shot head shot on a non-jug, 64 bullet mag, 2 bullet kill with SP on a non-jug, hip-fire with no recoil and a great spread pattern, and on top of all that it is fully automatic. The guns people complained about in BO and MW2, like the Famas and UMP, were not overpowered. What makes a gun overpowered is a complete lack of competition from the other weapons in the game, not the fact that it is used by a great amount of people, that is a side-effect. If there were ever an example of a CoD weapon being overpowered it would be the WaW MP40 because it ridiculously outclasses the other weapons in the game.

That's my preferred spot to train on Shang, but I imagine in solo it would be difficult to maintain throughout a full game. I have clutched many a round in there, though.

That is hilarious man. Brought a smile to my face reading about that guy getting his just deserts.

when people do that I have fun 'fake reviving' them when they inevitably die or I trap them. Those who play dirty will be outplayed by the elite or at the very least, they won't get helped. If you play like an ass then you won't get revived.

I'm not sure if this post is needed or if the some of my points have been covered by other users, but here goes.. People have pointed this out already and it is key to those who oppose the idea of zombie mode changing from the core experience we have come to know and love. The classic zombie survival mode will remain intact. The zombie dev team has stressed over the years and especially at CoD XP last year that they do NOT want to stray away from the original zombie game. If we are able to assume the survival and round-based style of zombies will return, then it wouldn't hurt to add additional modes that bring a creative and refreshing edge to the zombie universe. I'm not big on speculating but we could see a campaign mode with a structure similar to L4D, but Treyarch will not copy an already established game to the 'T'. If such a mode exists, Treyarch will bring their own creative ideas to enhance gameplay and probably tie in an interesting story. The announcement of zombies running on the multiplayer engine could suggest numerous possibilities. I would like to focus on possible core additions such as host migration that has been sought after since host migration appeared in CoD MW2. Also, I don't think it would be a ridiculous assumption that leveling systems and achievements/medals will be implemented to intensify the immersion of the experience to these alternate game modes or even the original zombie mode. Zombies before had trophies/achievements but never an evolving and updated system to reward people for accomplishing varying objectives. You had leaderboards but most challenges were self-imposed by the player and documented by the players via video as proof. A system with weekly objectives similar to Halo Reach or weekend challenges similar to that of Mass Effect 3's MP would be welcome to me. The emphasis stated on ease of playing with friends or like-minded teammates could suggest more of a reliance on team work or just an improved matchmaking system that allows these like-minded players to meet up and play together. As for further speculation, I will wait for the announcements and trailers before entertaining the theories that will inevitably arrise. Most importantly, I would like to stress that the round-based survival mode will remain and we, as a community, shouldn't be resistant to new ways our beloved zombie game will evolve, as these evolutions will not replace zombies but complement the game. Feedback and further insight is appreciated and I would like to apologize if anything I've said has already been expressed in other posts on the forum. If there is one thing this community is good at, it is the ability to gather and interpret the information we are given and avoid unsubstantiated theories when there is evidence to build more reasonable theories.

@ZombieofTheDead I fail to see the logic in your opinions. agree to disagree.

If you just mean a simple jam as in you messed up your train and got trapped in a corner, yeah you'll be fine with M&S in the upper 30s. They become pretty useless later of course. Someone could probably elaborate more, but I think you'll be fine until 40 with those things.

He was talking strictly of his experience, and I see a PSN in his sig. I think it's safe to assume he meant on PS3. That's why I said I also play on PS3 and shared my experience. PSN's 'increase in security' didn't solve any problems. MW2 on PS3 is a hopeless game because of hackers, but on WaW, well I've already told what my experience on that game has been like. There's always the option of picking up players on this forum to avoid a hacked game, if you literally run into hackers often enough to claim regular games are impossible to find. I just can't agree with that opinion on the PS3. Also, I don't think PSN's incompetence, or Xbox's for that matter, justifies the classic maps remaining exactly as they were on BO considering every other logical, opposing viewpoint brought up on this thread. And to finally answer the question of bringing all perks and PaP to the classic maps and other BO maps. No, I don't believe they should. You could go through each map and find reasons for certain perks or PaP to not be included. To do so would be complicated and tedious. Besides, I think I've typed enough for one day.

Hah you guys have good taste so far.. Mine is Der Riese. Challenging at first, yet, easy with experience. I believe that's how all maps should be. CoTD is very fun to play IMO and I also like Shangri la because most people find it challenging; which it is if you have a bad start, and I like getting those revives 8-) Those are the maps I usually pub on.

The thing about Mule Kick that I don't like? It's there. It does not belong on that map. It ruins Treyarch's progression, and overall how that maps work. Not to mention, even if I don't buy it, it's still there in an awkward area on all maps but moon, and my team mates can buy it as well. Some things are worth complaining. Others, I will agree. People are morons and like to complain. Really? it's impossible to find a nonhacked game? I play on PS3 and have only ever run into one hacker when searching for games on WaW. I still play every now and then and I played that game frequently up until BO released. If you want good players to play with, I'm sure you could find them on here. That's your personal, yet unfortunate, experience. And so, if BO2 quadruples BO's sales, they should bring back all of the BO maps mostly unchanged, and charge you for them? That.. is.. ridiculous. Game sales don't mean 'remake your old game with better graphics and charge for it'. That would be too Activision-ish, at least for Zombies. Lol at reuse of IW maps in subsequent games. Anyway, I fail to see the reasoning behind that. The story-line part.. I can kind of see... but it's almost like asking the director of a movie, or writer of a book, to go back and make changes to how the story-line progresses throughout the media. Besides, that may be what you and other members of this site want, but you have to put it in perspective. Tonight, I saw 40000 players in zombies on PS3. That's not how many play frequently, that was just at that moment in time and on one platform. This site has roughly 10K members... meaning the opinions of this site, and its members, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the average consumer. To put it simply, a lot of people just play the game for fun. The story behind it may never come to mind other than shallow observations like that's a crazy Nazi doctor or a drunk Russian. Just saying.. there are probably more unaware of a back story than there are aware. (Possibly) Sad but true. Okay, so I kind of explained why I thought Mule Kick didn't affect gameplay or change maps very much or at all. Now, I would like you to do so without just stating that 'it does'. And saying you don't like it because 'it's there' and isn't aesthetically pleasing to you, sounds like complaining. If you feel it interferes with progression, then so would adding story segments or EEs that were never present in the old maps.

I think deathb4di2h0nor said it best. You can still experience the classic feel on WaW. What would have really happened if Treyarch just remodeled the classic maps for the BO engine? There would have been an uproar of 'Why did I have to pay again for the maps that I already purchased on WaW!?'. Think about it. There had to be changes made in order for them to market it. I'm fine with the addition of Mule Kick. Some people don't buy it, as people have pointed out, but I recall quite a few of my friends wanting the ability to have more weapons. That's what I recall people wanting, so Treyarch actually did something for the community in my book. If you think the perk has that much of an effect on gameplay, tell me how much of a difference does it make in NDU? That's a barebones map and is the perfect test subject. Elite players might find it powerful, but the noobs, the majority of people who play the game, will not. It's a completely optional element of the game that barely affects gameplay. I think people just like to complain. :(

@WealthShare idea I think this is a good idea because the idea for sharing points was already implemented into the latest installment of zombies, Moon. The method of sharing points was also tedious and therefore I believe a better method should be created. So, an idea like this isn't far-fetched and I don't think the literal zombie players should be bothered over the idea of sharing points for the simple fact that you gain those points by damaging/killing zombies. That doesn't have an explanation and IMO, it doesn't need one. The point system is simply used to enhance gameplay and have a currency system; upon which the game of zombies is based. Next, I think the percentage of your nonpro version of the perk seems fine. Since we don't know if pro perks will be in the game I can't judge what the pro version should accomplish. I do just want to say that this seems like a valid perk idea and I would purchase it in later rounds when I'm trying to help my team out if they are struggling. The percentages and overall effect of the perk could be innovated, but I really think it would be useful and should be implemented in some way to the next Zombie game. @ButterCocktail My concerns with this perk are gameplay related and I'm concerned it would be OP. Perhaps, if after purchasing the perk, the ability to stumble zombies was user-controlled (via a button input of some sort with a cool down) I can see it being valid and not OP. I'm not trying to boast by saying this, but the game of zombies is already pretty easy once you've put in the time and learned the maps and strategies for those maps. Not to mention the skill of kiting. So, in order for such a game-changing and difficulty-reducing perk to be implemented, the game or maps would have to increase in difficulty in some way, making the older techniques obsolete. @Bloodline This is an interesting perk idea. This would most likely be for lower tier players who expect to go down or perhaps for players who got lucky with the box and want to retain their coveted wonder weapons. I'm unsure if the perk should be expensive or not. On one hand it is pretty powerful because a player wouldn't be in a rush to revive the downed player, and the alive player could simply just kite all of the zombies and pick up the player whenever he/she desired. In fact, that is pretty overpowered when thought about it in that way. So, because of that new strategy that would be used, I think the perk idea is OP. The penalty of not reviving your teammate in time should remain that you need to clutch the round without him/her, and simultaneously the dead player should have to wait until the next round to play. @Steam Brew I'm afraid to say that this idea instantly set off alarms. The idea that a perk would allow you to slowly kill zombies just by coming in close contact with them sounds very OP in a kiting strategy. If a player had the patience, he/she could easily make high rounds simply by kiting and killing off the zombies slowly; which is the easiest way to train (killing zombies a few at a time) although it would take ages. However, let me ask how exactly you imagine this perk would work. So, if you take the 25% chance literally, the first horde would allow you to alight 6 zombies, and then the next 6 to spawn have the same chance of lighting on fire? So, 1 or 2 of those zombies would start on fire. If the perk operated like that, maybe the perk wouldn't be as OP as I'm imagining. However, there are other options to consider (I know this is getting tedious and very analytic). On a map like moon the zombies will respawn as you move to the opposite ends of the map. So, if this trend continues into BO2, imagine how it would work for instance, on Moon. You could spawn them all in the Biodome (everyone's favorite!) set 6 on fire and let them die, then you could move to the control room fast enough (or anywhere over there just far enough to make the zombies respawn) and then kill off another 6, then repeat the cycle. I know this sounds ridiculous and I would never play like that, but people could exploit the game in such a way. Overall, I like the creative ideas. Some of your perk ideas might just need a little tweaking and more thought on how they will affect gameplay, while I feel others don't have a place in zombies because of possible exploitation. GJ. **These are all just my opinions and I'm sure I had a few oversights here or there** Regards, Smooth

Flopper isn't realistic... at all, so therefore it shouldn't exist. You don't need to take everything in a ZOMBIE game literally. DT makes your guns shoot faster. How does that make sense? Drinking something and then you instantaneously double the fire rate of your weapon. Before you try to make sense of it and come up with some convoluted explanation, just remember that it is a video game. A video game with zombie outbreaks, teleporters, random boxes that hold 50+ weapons (considering each players chance to have each weapon), and oh yea... time machines. You're using logic and reason for a game that does not. When judging additions to the game, gameplay should be the first concern, then the practicality.

I will state that teddy bears have been a classic easter egg in many games. Resistance Fall of Man had a Teddy bear located outside of the map Somerset, for example. However, I am not claiming that any of the supposed easter eggs in MW3 do not relate to treyarch in any way, because it can't be proven by mere speculation; but it also can't be disproven. The main counterargument is "Why would a developing company include EEs from a rival dev. company?" I would like to submit that the rivalry doesn't seem to be as much of a dividing factor as it used to be. I follow a member of the Treyarch Dev. team on twitter (David Vonderhaar) and I am almost certain I remember reading tweets of him acknowledging that he was aiding the mw3 devs months ago. Not saying he was working directly on mw3 at all, but perhaps the rivalry has diminished with the loss of many original IW members and the remaining IW dev. team's corroboration with a different studio, SHG. I would try to find these tweets for supportive evidence but searching twitter can cause quite the headache. :/ Not to mention, Treyarch developed the Wii version of MW3 (insert shallow fanboy comments here). So, maybe the notion that IW and Treyarch are arch enemies (no pun intended) should be dismissed since IW handed over the Wii development of "their" game to Treyarch. Keep in mind, I'm not analyzing the proposed EEs, just questioning the notion that these two studios do not cooperate with each other. In the past, you could see quotes of the head IW employees "insulting" Treyarch, but I definitely think the studios' attitudes towards each other have changed over the past year or so.

A different strategy: probably not faster but perhaps easier if one of the players isn't great at kiting; would involve one player cycling between the swamp and the turret near spawn, using the AK74 trap. While the other person cycles between Flopper/MP5 (wherever most comfortable) and PaP area, using the PaP trap. In the swamp area, it is easy to progress through the early rounds quickly with a few different flop spots accompanied with a raygun to finish them off. Because of this, I recommend the other player use the Thundergun until ammo is low and then the traps. Communicate when you are killing off your zombies and try to stay synchronized when running separated strategies. Way's #2 strategy may be a little challenging, but it is very fast. I saw it on his livestream. (oddly enough the first time I went to his channel) @yeti 2 hours to get to round 50, by spawn killing with rayguns until round 40? I don't mean to call you out, it just seems a bit far-fetched.

true. It's like pooling together all of the powerful weapons in the game to maximize the amount of zombies you can kill before ammo becomes scarce. So, raygun, v-r11, scavenger, and the dolls. It's interesting how this map relatively easy to obtain high rounds in 2 player, yet not in solo. Often times, the trend is the opposite. On a sidenote, I would be much more interested in playing solo if there were a leaderboard for it. I don't have a way to capture so there is no proof of any high rounds I might get or any way to prove I made them legitimately. I know I'm not saying anything new, but I felt like I should post it at least somewhere on the forums.

Death by Black Hole - Neil deGrasse Tyson Believe it or not, it is believed with the particle colliders available to humans today that "micro" black holes can be created on Earth. These black holes would instantly "evaporate" or devour themselves, however. Those are just theories and I can't be sure if there is proof of such occurrences, but a little bit of research may yield the answer. Now, black holes exhibit the effects of gravity immensely. They are so dense that even light is unable to escape their gravitational pull (thus they are black). The gersch doesn't exactly create a black hole because it isn't black and it teleports players through unscathed(although it is theoretically possible to pass through a black hole, the chance is extremely rare and requires a specific type of black hole), but the main concept is there so I will make the comparison. I cannot answer your question but I think I can narrow it down a little. If a device was able to create a black hole capable of drawing in great amounts of mass for many seconds; would that black hole continue to grow in size, increasing its mass and inevitably its gravitational pull or what is the minimum size/density/mass needed for a black hole to sustain itself? Maybe that book has the answer but any answer you find will most likely be theoretical. I was actually trying to check it out from the library today because NdGT is the shiz. If you are interested in space, physics, etc. check him out, you won't be disappointed.

understood. I guess that is the fear of most people who want the formula to remain the same; that they would have to adjust to something "too" different. Although, I would argue each succeeding zombie map has had those gameplay changes that players needed to adapt to. Nothing as radical as the proposed ideas on this page though.

Welcome to the site shirtless.

"If you make it to round 40 because you PaPed for the 2nd or 3rd time, then the players who can survive difficult rounds, will now routinely make rounds 60-70 rather than 40-50. Increasing the number of times you PaP will adjust the leaderboards for each person accordingly. There is no point for extra PaPs, inevitably you'll have to use strategy to survive the difficult rounds." That's my opinion on extra PaPs. I liked most of your other ideas, though, especially the point about bringing in fresh, regular guns. Perhaps the pro perks idea would be neat but the example you gave would be too OP. Nice post!