Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
"No Counter Play" LOL
Comments
-
People please like bomb this comment.
0 -
That's arguing semantics at this point. Of course every killer has some form of counterplay. The problem is with Spirit its so ineffective it may as well not be.
1 -
As @Ryuhi said, counterplay doesn't mean you win. It means you can influence the outcome. Which you can do against Slinger/Spirit. However, they can remove you safety nets until you are either forced to make a choice/commit to something. Like trying to run from Spirit while healthy is indeed different than while injured. You have more of a safety net when healthy because you make less noise and you can take a hit.
And if being put into that situation leads to a downward spiral where you eventually lose (which is what happens in every game ever BTW, someone gains a lead and use it to their advantage to win, a game literally can't function without this core concept) then wouldn't the counterplay then be to AVOID that situation altogether? Run early against them. Force Spirit to phase to catch up. Get distance on Slinger. HIDE. OMG I can't stand how this is "no counterplay".
If you want to define it as "no counterplay in a chase" well then the problem becomes that... the whole game is not about a chase. What about a killer like Doc who has little to no counterplay in stealth, or Billy who has little to no counterplay in slugging/map pressure? Why is it only "in a chase". The entire game is not a chase. If you have the most fun DOING that fine. I mean... majority of people that play Gears Of War play it because of the Gnasher and wallbounce. Literally they just run around with 1 gun all game trying to style on you. If you wanna bang out 1v all the time sure, but don't expect to win like that. Lancer win games in Gears. But as I said many times before, if you play to win it might suck, and Lancer fights suck. For both sides (unless you suck with Gnasher then it's the best thing ever and Gnasher is OP and needs to be removed from the game LMAO).
That's the problem with this discussion. Everyone that wants they killers changed because "no counterplay in a chase" are missing out on the bigger picture. The game is not just a chase, there are other ways to play.
And again, I don't like Slinger. But that's more because getting speared just feels lame. It would be neat if he could spear you and you could still run normally but he could influence your movements or limit the distance you can gain or something. If that was a thing the whole zoning/quickscope stuff wouldn't be a problem honestly because you don't get so insanely punished for getting speared (which is currently a hit AND being pulled out of position, it's almost like he get a hit without a speed boost).
0 -
Flip the script for a second. If "Counterplay as survivor is when he has options that will save him, when he plays correct," then how would you define counterplay from a killer's perspective? Many perks, items, and even addons are designed to punish killers for playing "correctly." I don't necessarily disagree with your definition, but I do feel it implies too much of a guarantee, which should not only not exist in a 1v4 scenario, but if it did, should be for the 1 and not the 4.
Meanwhile if a killer hooks someone and they get unhooked, the killer downs and unhooks someone else, then re-downs and picks up that first person within 60 seconds, they can eat a DS. Survivors can jump into a locker immediately after getting unhooked and put the killer in a situation where they're not guessing to win or lose the situation, but rather "how much they're willing to lose the situation by."
This seems to be lost on a lot of survivors, as their equivalent is "I might go down, but I will waste as much of the killer's time and pressure as I can doing it" but they aren't willing to see that perspective. If 2 people are hooked in the basement, and you bring the killer to the opposite corner of the map and give them time and space for everyone to get saved before you get downed, you won that chase. The killer lost. You took a situation that very realistically would have led to 2 kills, and reset the scenario entirely. If instead the survivor just sits there trying to loop the killer directly over top of the shack, they're eventually going to be placed on hook #3. Survivors are quick to say "lol don't tunnel ez gg" in response to the former, but often refuse to "take one for the team" in the latter.
As for the nurse LoS strategy, it absolutely is counterplay. The Nurse can blink through things, but she can't land inside of them. Attacks also have an incredibly frustrating degree of autoaim that can cause them to gravitate into obstacles when manipulated. Pairing the two things together makes it considerably less guaranteed that the nurse will land her blinks when there are obstructions present, in addition to needing to visually know where to blink to. It is not a guaranteed escape much like its not a guaranteed hit: instead it improves the survivors chances of avoiding being hit, and through their own input at that. Thus, counterplay.
The comparison to "hold w" is a bit of a bad faith argument, as the input is there, but it directly defies the game's core mechanics. The killer is faster than the survivor in almost every single case, and bloodlust/killer powers exist to increase that advantage. While holding W is technically counterplay, it loses efficiency linearly without other strategy to replace it. The holding W isnt the counterplay, the changes to map pressure/positioning/etc are the counterplay.
0 -
Semantics can be important when people bandwagon a misrepresented argument. The majority of people who are in team "zero counterplay" are the ones who want a flawless counter, not normalization. I know you're not one of them, but its important to know what kind of mentalities can follow in the wake of rational ideals.
0 -
The fact you quoted the other guy but he @ me genuinely confused me.
0 -
I figured people could figure out it does not mean there is literally nothing you can do, as people don't immediately die upon loading into a match with Spirit, but I guess that's my fault for assuming.
1 -
I mean, people didn't instantly die when legion had no counterplay, and he didn't even get guaranteed kills. Likewise, there are plenty of games where said killers can underperform. Hyperbole doesn't really have a place in balance discussion, its important for developers to accurately understand both player experience, and the severity of oversight when evaluating feedback. Saying "The Spirit and Deathslinger's degree of counterplay is considerably weaker than it should be" gives more to work with than "Its so bad it doesn't really exist." The latter puts emphasis on the weight of it, but not how it should be compared and normalized. That becomes especially dangerous when it turns into an echo chamber, because the number of respondents grows exponentially compared to the actual relevant data. Everyone agrees on the what, but nobody is offering a why.
And again, I know you are one of the proponents of the "why" argument, which is very helpful perspective. But many, many, many people who agree with you are more focused on the "what", and disrupt the dialogue, making it harder for the devs to get useful feedback to consider. Its all the more reason why its important that these things are compared properly, as you could argue that there are many situations where certain killers find themselves having "zero counterplay" when they, too, are in a situation where "their counterplay is considerably weaker than it should be" vs the survivors.
0 -
Well spoken and fair enough. I'll try to choose my words more carefully so people don't parrot the wrong thing.
1 -
Tbh OP has no counter play.
1 -
Great you mention Chess. Chess is a game with all informations. There is nothing you dont know, it is all on the board and you see it with your eyes. Chess also has nothing to do with guessing. I mean sure, you can only guess which opening your opponent is playing, but it is not important since you still have all the information on the board anyway. Its always important to find the best move in every situation and dont rely on enemys mistakes.
Now compare it with Spirit. What kind of information do you have in a chase against a Spirit? First of all you never know if she is actually phasing or not. Second, if she is, you have no clue what she is planning and where she is until its 2 late.
So what do you do when you have no informations? You guess.
Now compare DbD again with Chess. Imagine you have to make moves during a chessgame, but his pieces are invisble and you have no idea what kind of move your opponent did. You might guess it right, but its based on luck eventually.
You might say now that you know his patterns, but what makes you think he does not know that you know? Also you can not just play the potentially strongest move, because it might be actually a big plunder in that scenario.
Is it even possible to call a guess in whatever game where you dont have information "counterplay"? I dont think so.
And about how strong or weak counterplay is, its relative like i posted before. We can call EVERYTHING counterplay, even staying still and doing nothing. I guess we have to cut a line somewhere.
Guessing games are no counterplay and there is so far nothing convincing i have ever seen or did that would prove anything different.
0 -
ok but if you guess something and it happens to be correct that is a prediction right? I guess people are just wrong for feeling good about a prediction. That is what I'm getting from that. Also i never said everyone is the same. But as spirit there is only so much she can do right? Guessing someones move isn't assuming they are going to do something its just that..... a guess.
0 -
Chess is also 1v1, has no loadouts or progression (aside from promoting pawns, technically) and, (unless specified by its rules) has no inherent time limit for any given action. You're taking a relevant comparison about a single point and extrapolating it as if there was an overal parallel.
That said, I'll still humor it: The guessing comes from precalulating your opponents future moves. Chess is not a game that is played at the present moment, it is played multiple turns in the future. This is why it has the same foundation in mindgames: You are trying to influence your opponents movements to suit your future plan, while attempting to not fall victim to the same from them. This is what things like "moonwalking to hide your red stain" is: The red stain doesn't disappear, but rather you are attempting to use its absence to misdirect your opponent to commit to an action that is more beneficial for you than them. In chess, this would be the same as baiting a piece trade which ultimately ends up in your advantage.
Misdirection is one of the most important aspects of any human competition: It can turn both perception and information that would normally be beneficial, into a weakness.
Also as a final note: If guessing is not allowed to be a counterplay, the entire genre of fighting games must be the most one dimensional genre of games mankind has ever seen. Vortexes and mixups aren't real, right?
1
