Devs, please address the map size discussion
In light of the Ruin nerf, people have been talking a lot about map size. I'm going to talk about it again.
I agree with changing Ruin. It's bad design, plain and simple. It punishes lesser players while being a minor annoyance to good players who can hit great skill checks all the time.
HOWEVER, there's a simple reason why people run it at a high level. Even though good survivors can hit great skill checks, Ruin still allows you to traverse big maps while worrying less about a get popping. I don't think gen times are the problem either. I think map variance is.
One of the justifications for the Ruin change was the inconsistency. Well, what's consistent about this game? You can get a map the size of Lery's or the size of Mother's Dwelling. You can get shack connected to a long wall jungle gym or you can have five tires connected in Autohaven with no pallet in sight. I think variance is good to make each game interesting, but not to this degree.
Some people may argue that the first generator is less important than people think, and I'd agree with that. It's perfectly possible to win even with the first generator popping before you can get to it. But one of the most talked about things in recent changes is how things feel in this game. It feels bad having to concede a generator because you can't physically get to it. It feels bad having to concede a generator because it's in the middle of an absurd building/setup. It feels bad feeling you have no control over things, which is what happens right now on some larger maps. It feels especially bad having to leave a survivor be because they have DS and get into a locker.
So I'd like to have more talks about that. Even if it's just the devs acknowledging those are problems. I'm definitely not on the "I'm leaving the game" hate train, but it gets tough sometimes.
Does the dev team even talk about map size? Do the devs at least know how awful it is to play a no mobility kiler on Red Forest or Rotten Fields?
We need less variance on map size. If that doesn't happen, we need more good slowdown perks that affect the early game. No, I don't think I need Pop to help me when I'm already winning. The weakest part of the game for killers is the early game. Even if I win a game, it still feels bad if I lose part of my objective early without having a say on what's happening.
One last thing: veteran players need changes geared towards them too. Yes, catering to new players is important, but veteran players deserve love too.
@Peanits @not_Queen @Almo hoping to get this to the right people. Just some communication about a few common concerns of the community would be nice.
Comments
-
What do you mean just because some survivors can fix a whole gen before you make it over there doesn't mean anything
3 -
So your opponent completing 20% of their win condition before you start actively playing the game doesn't mean anything?
1 -
As survivor mains would say git gud just have a Freddy teleport on every killer to apply pressure
5 -
This is surv main logic. Precisely what BHVR aims to please as well.
Thinking about dropping this game.
1 -
I already have not worth it anymore as a killer
1 -
I mean,sure,let's not have a productive discussion ever, let's shittalk the devs and not solve anything apparently that's what people are going for today
0 -
They knew this issues before hand this was a problem before the oni came out that's one map changed and a new map without working on the issue
2 -
The last huge map released was Temple of Purgation.
0 -
Listen, man. I agree with you. But the devs have shown time and again they will ignore feedback and discussions as much as possible.
There is literally no reason to trust they'll fix maps in a timely manner. Springwood for example got FIVE GODDAMNN variants, when 2 would have been fine. Then 6 months later they rework one of the smallest maps in the game (I like how it looks so I won't trash it too much). At this rate maps like haddonfield, asylum, Thompson's House and red forest will remain exactly the same for upwards of six months, likely years.
2 -
I mean, yeah, they haven't commented so far. Doesn't mean I'll stop tagging them in these discussions.
I won't just give up on trying to make the game better.
Eventually if people stopped making doomsday discussions about quitting the game and started talking about things like this and demanding answers maybe we'd get an answer.
0 -
Expect in a another discussion a dev told the op a polite way to say git gud when they asked about why people use ruin
2 -
It doesn't change absolutely anything about my point so what are you even saying
0 -
I think he's saying that if they ever address good complaints (like the one you have here) they'll just avoid the main question.
1 -
The devs have been told the issues the response was git gud so I don't know why you would get betterresults
2 -
I mean, we'll only find out by making them address it won't we?
All I've seen in the past from the devs about it is that "variance is good for the game", which doesn't apply here. Variance can be great until it starts messing too much with game balance and having the objectives work the same way in vastly different maps makes no sense. That's what I want them to answer.
0 -
I've already decided my plan. Quitting the game 2 weeks after this change goes live. Going to use ever mori, tombstone, and ultra rare addon I've got and play as brutal as possible. Hard tunneling, camping, slugging. I'm going to make the game as miserable as possible for as many people as possible, then buy Last Year, it looks like a better game anyway.
1 -
good for you
0 -
You can write this down, if a dev answers your comment. It will be "we know of this issue, which is why we are reworking the maps, we did badham and now lery" and that will be all they'll say on this
1 -
You're probably right. But again, there's only one way to know for sure.
If people focused on having civilized discussions with the devs instead of making posts calling them incompetent and ranting about how awful the game is (yes, even outside of the Ruin fiasco, that's how the forums ALWAYS are) maybe we'd get more answers. I wouldn't feel eager to discuss things here at all if I were a dev.
0 -
#bringback215PaleRose or just #215
Map size isn't an issue: the amount of information survivors can obtain at any moment is. (also swf issue). The only reason a survivor gets off of a generator is if it's finished, he/she sees a hex totem, or the survivor feels that by being on the generator, he/she has placed him/herself in too much danger by being there at that moment.
I had terrific games on the old swamp, and now my games on new swamp are less than stellar. I'm not even referring just to kills here. I'm simply talking about the fun of the trial both as survivor and as killer. Those hills leading up to the edges of the map were not meant for such a small location.
0 -
Well, this has been marked as BHVR read. Let us wait and hope.
0 -
Seems like nothing. Oh well.
0
