Can we stop comparing keys with moris?

Thatbrownmonster
Thatbrownmonster Member Posts: 1,640
in General Discussions

I hate to see this argument that if one gets nerfed the other one should too

Both involve the other role doing his job

Keys=survivors did enough generators for the hatch to appear

Moris= Killers downed you fast enough for the mori to happen

And survivors need to take moris with a grain of salt since it's supposed to be strong since...they are the power role after all


And killers need to take keys with a grain of salt since keys are just a way for them to escape faster

Comments

  • supersonic853
    supersonic853 Member Posts: 5,855

    No NEXT!

  • Wuhelm
    Wuhelm Member Posts: 260

    The argument gets brought up because people complain about one or the other. If one is nerfed the other should too. I am perfectly fine with removing both from the game as they add nothing to it.

  • supersonic853
    supersonic853 Member Posts: 5,855

    A actual response though: keys and moris both bypass the main objective the killers supposed to hook a survivor 3 times and hook all 4 survivors 3 times then he wins (technically even though the devs said the killer should average 2) while the survivors have to complete all the genes and open the exit gates. Both bypass that.

  • Bleediss
    Bleediss Member Posts: 137

    I mean they both have the same problem: they end the game faster than intended in a way that is not fun for the other party.

    Killers don't like keys because they promote tunneling the key user due to the key being so much of a threat that survivors could possibly escape early while not completing all of their primary objective.

    Survivors don't like moris because they promote playing extremely cautious and hiding due to how quickly a match can end due to a mori being in play, while the killer also doesn't have to complete all of their primary objective to get a kill with the mori.

    Both aren't healthy for the game due to their design of ending the game faster than intended with no extra work where it feels cheap to play against.

  • TAG
    TAG Member Posts: 12,874

    I don't necessarily believe in "you can't nerf one without the other," but I do believe that both are problematic for similar reasons (they both have the ability to end a game prematurely with no downside and with no additional effort needed compared to normal, regardless of the momentum of the game at that point) and both do need to be rebalanced IMO.