Can we please get rid of bloodlust?
I don't know why Killers get it but it is kind of crappy
Comments
-
i'm hoping they will after all of the maps are reworked. at the very least tier 2 and 3 need to go.
0 -
It was originally created as a way to compensate for older map design with infinite loops. As maps get reworked, it should make bloodlust less and less necessary until it's safe to finally get rid of.
1 -
But I want my bps... (Sad pepe)
11 -
Just get rid of it.The FPS drops from it screw me over everytime anyway >:(
4 -
I don't think it's that big of an issue. I always thought of it as a countdown that also plays into the lore, it's like a timer until the Killer eventually gets you and increases the pressure a Killer can place on Survivors (which is all they have sometimes). Top tier Killer players will still easily catch you without Bloodlust and removing it would not stop any toxic Killer behaviour, so all that really achieves is hurting casual Killers for no reason (who seem to be the only people not hated by the community).
People seem to forget that it's not supposed to be an even playing field. Broadly speaking 1 Survivor should not be able to beat the Killer at all, and likewise the Killer shouldn't be able to easily defeat 4 Survivors working together. Survivors do need to have multiple options that allow them to escape a chase or survive for longer, but they should not be able to indefinitely extend it.
4 -
It's there for good reason. 1 survivor shouldn't be able to run a killer for 3+ minutes at no-mindgame loops, which there are many of in every map.
10 -
No map is anywhere near balanced enough to remove BL. Don't get your hopes up, I realize people like to complain about this mechanic but if you removed it without DRASTIC map reworks then it would literally kill half of the killers ability to win. BL is never going away because maps will never be fairly balanced, this is the same dev team that thinks literal god windows are okay because there is a breakable wall 20ft away from it.
3 -
I mean, sure, but you would have to buff the base move speed of a fair few of the killers in the game that practically need it half the time.
Not all the killers have means of playing without it; they did a test without it and some characters became just awful to play. Don't get me wrong, a spirit for example should not get bloodlust at all for example.
1 -
Can we please get rid of pallets? I don’t know why survivors get them but they’re kind of crappy
17 -
When they had the no-bloodlust weekend a lot of loops, particularly on Haddonfield but also others Vs 110 killers, became actual infinites due to the chase mechanics and window blocking getting reset.
DbD needs bloodlust right now, at least until it's not a bandaid to fix bad maps.
6 -
Bloodlust does two critical things to the game, one agreed as objectively good, and the other good in my opinion:
1st: Infinites. Bloodlust fixes them.
2nd: It creates a theoretical maximum chase duration.
What bloodlust does NOT do: Meaningfully alter 'open' chases (AKA survivor just holds W) or the distance gained or lost going from one obstacle to another except over VERY large distances.
Now 2 is controversial, but I think it is good: A survivor should NOT be allowed to survive indefinitely if the killer wants to devote a minute to just eliminating them, because that helps games that are already over to end. If its down to 2 survivors, and there are a few gens left to do, without bloodlust a really good survivor could run a middling killer infinitely, but they can't win the game. It creates a stalemate. This is a problem, because we want this game to end, and even though this killer was meh they clearly did enough to 'win' and the really good looper didn't, so letting the looper stall the game indefinitely because the killer is struggling to close it out is bad game design. This wouldn't be an issue if DBD matches had natural time limits, but like most games that could last idefinitely DBD needs a mechanic that pushes it to close out.
A good example of a similar mechanic is how RTS games have resources dwindle from the map, as well as very 'dense' units that will trivially break through turtle strategies. While theoretically you can just trade trash units forever in say... Age of Empires once the map is barren your just gunna eventually shove down defenses that can't be rebuilt because there is no more stone or gold and the game naturally forces a conclusion. Likewise, in Starcraft 'dense' units that aren't resource efficient but are very supply efficient do something similar: You probably won't win a game rushing carriers without being a good defensive player but if your opponent is just turtling and not messing with you at all you can FORCE the win just by rushing them or battlecruisers or whatever, even if your micro wasn't that great, simply because you noticed this stall or otherwise won positionally. It also bears resemblence to 'closer' mechanics, like Spies in Age of Empires, which does almost nothing in regular gameplay but prevents you from having cheeky hidden workers constantly building new bases so the game drags on forever by letting a player in the lead permanently see all your villagers: Normally they are just in your bases which you know, just like how normally a survivor just wants to get a chase to last 2 minutes anyway as a 'best outcome' so like bloodlust it doesn't do anything, but if you get really ahead and kill the enemy base it lets you just force the game to end rather than letting someone drag it out.
Bloodlust is similar: it forces games to conclude when you risk a stalemate: the killer WILL catch you if you just try to loop them forever and not progress the game as survivor by breaking off the chase. At the really high end dropping chases is hard, but at the really high end the killer doesn't have the luxury of bloodlusting people down anyway even 2v1 so like... whatever. The costs and benefits of BL are mostly at the 'mid tier' of the game. And while bloodlust CAN be used to force a kill even outside of an endgame state, it will almost always come at the cost of the killer losing vs a compitent team: If your dumping a full 2 minutes 30 seconds into a chase by bloodlusting it out twice and the survivor just W'ing away you are gunna lose unless your pressure game is really good: The equivalent of good defensive play in an RTS allowing you to get luxury units early: if you as a killer can finagle survivors off gens for a full minute and a half (because gen timings are tight enough that to get 2 bloodlust 2/3 hits is enough time for 3 survivors to do all the gens AND open a gate if you crunch those numbers AND assume the down is instant once you hit 3) they kinda... deserve the ability to be terrifying to the survivor near them?
Basically bloodlust serves to both close out games and reward good killer play more than bad like many people think, because knowing WHEN to bloodlust adds to the tactical landscape of DBD and knowing when you ARE being bloodlusted and need to break chase for even a second is a survivor skill.
TL;DR: Its a win more mechanic. Good games have mechanics and gamestates that help the winning player close out the game when it really is just going to devolve to a grindy drag to help games not drag out.
So bloodlust shouldn't go away even if they DO fix the maps. Its doing a LOT more to the design than infinites, which is why the survivor Q got so heavily rocked by the bloodlust experiment and only recovered once they broke survivor hit registration so bad the game is borderline unplayable: It shows a critical lack of an understanding of how DBD actually flows as a game to just say 'Well it lets you get kills even if you can't counter the loop' because like... if the survivors don't do gens they should eventually go down as an inevitable fact, regardless of how bad the killer is. It encourages more interactive play and games ending swiftly as a 'win more' mechanic, which are important.
Bloodlust should only go away if they have a systematic way to end infinites (And they don't. Honestly it wouldn't be hard to create a formula that 'proves' something is potentially an infinite, so its silly they 'tested' if there still were any without BL. So having an anti-infinite mechanic rather than just trusting the map design is good practice. Most games have anti-infinite mechanics after all because it allows more complex scenarios as you would rather have more freedom and an 'emergency out' than to design everything painstakingly around infinite avoidance), AND they create a more robust 'Get on with it' mechanic. Like making matches have a capped time limit and after the end the killer just wins, because they are the 'defensive' side. If both were true it MIGHT be a good idea for bloodlust to go away. As is we aren't even close.
4 -
Do you play on PS4 or XB1? I hated when bloodlust would activate and the next thing you know, I'm running into a wall or obstacle 😅.
0 -
PS4
0 -
There's always lag when in-game events happen during a trial on those platforms. Even running over an item as survivor cause lag, lol.
0 -
No, Bloodrush is needed for killer. Also if you've been in the chase long enough for Bloodrush to trigger, that's already a win.
0 -
I think you mean Bloodlust.
Bloodrush is an event where we earn a bloodpoint multiplier. And if you are against THAT, well those are fighting words.
0 -
A survivor should NOT be allowed to survive indefinitely if the killer wants to devote a minute to just eliminating them, because that helps games that are already over to end. If its down to 2 survivors, and there are a few gens left to do, without bloodlust a really good survivor could run a middling killer infinitely, but they can't win the game.
Why not? If there are 2 survivors left, then the looping skills of 1 survivor may became all the more important. Why should a 'middling' Killer suddenly get such a high advantage over someone who is better than they are? The survivor could make a window for the other surv to finish the remaining gens and give both of them a chance to escape. Secondly, if the Killer decides to pour that much time into one surv - no matter how many other survs are left, why shouldn't it possible that the decision costs them dearly?
This is a problem, because we want this game to end, and even though this killer was meh they clearly did enough to 'win' and the really good looper didn't, so letting the looper stall the game indefinitely because the killer is struggling to close it out is bad game design.
I would say giving someone who's been outplayed an easy 1-2K (possibly additional) on some arbitrary "people might want matches that fit into this specific circumstance to end" would be worse game design. Also, the looper isn't stalling the game, they're playing the game. Stalling is hiding in corners, avoiding the killer by hiding in out of the way places - all while refusing to do gens in some weird stand off to see if the Killer finds you, the other surv, or (possibly) the hatch first, forcing end game.
Bloodlust is similar: it forces games to conclude when you risk a stalemate: the killer WILL catch you if you just try to loop them forever and not progress the game as survivor by breaking off the chase.
This doesn't pass muster because it is rarely up to survivors to 'break chase'. They have neither the speed nor the base kit to make that possible in most circumstances. Even without tracking perks, there are scratch marks, blood trails, and injured survivor noises to help Killers keep the chase going. Some perk combos might count, but usually the person who gets to decide to break the chase is the Killer. So, again, if a Killer over-commits to a chase, why should the surv be punished?
Basically bloodlust serves to both close out games and reward good killer play more than bad like many people think, because knowing WHEN to bloodlust adds to the tactical landscape of DBD and knowing when you ARE being bloodlusted and need to break chase for even a second is a survivor skill.
Well, no, it doesn't. Earlier in your post, you say that bloodlust allows Killers facing better survs to end the chase and that it's a huge point to keep bloodlust. If Killers over commit, that it is NOT rewarding good game play. If Killers are worse at looping/etc then the surv they're facing, bloodlust is not rewarding good game play. This isn't a hair, I think, that can be split both ways. You can't call Bloodlust fine because it helps less skilled Killers end the game faster AND a tactical choice. The two concepts conflict heavily.
Think about in reverse. The more a survivor runs a Killer, the faster they get. Is that fair? No.
Just to note, none of this is to say that there aren't other problems with DBD that need addressing, that some of these issues may be seriously hindering to Killers on the whole, or that some loops might be way too survivor sided. I just don't buy that 'bloodlust is always needed' or that 'bloodlust rewards good game play'.
1 -
Yes I do mean bloodlust
0 -
dude, survivor queues are returning tot heir normal long lengths again, you'd best not make it worse on yourself
0 -
It's bloodlust
0 -
I mean if they quit then let him quit at the end of the day it's based around skill if you ain't got the skills to do this then you should do what you can to get better or play something else you shouldn't automatically catch up with someone just because you're bad or you need a break.
0 -
you could tun those returning 15 to 20 minute queues into half hour or even two hour queues if you don't let killers have fun too. I honestly am back to wanting to see it happen so I could and post I told you so on every thread complaining about hour to two hour queues rofl
0 -
But that's the thing I've been around when they did the no bloodlust yeah a little longer match weight but at the end of the day I was matched up with people of my caliber and in a few cases where they actually called me it was because of mistake I made not because of some default reason..and as far as the wait time threat goes if you're going to threaten me with a bunch of less skillful people leaving because they can't have a crutch then you know that's something that's not going to work on me. And I won't lose any sleep over it
0 -
*Were they actually caught me.
0 -
not everybody sees value in their time being spent playing games they wait for a lobby twice or three times as long as they spend typically actually playing in game for. when it got long enough I started forgetting I was in queue and coming back hooked, standing with crows inf ront of a hook, or dead or on the end game results screen (once came back int he iddle of clown mori on me) I realized I already wasn't playing any more anyways so whys pend money on electricity for it.
I decided once it consistently was over 5 minutes to wait I was done and the few times I ran the game again if the first match reached 5 minutes and still hadn't been found I close the game and shelved it again for a couple more weeks. eventuially I deleted it on both platforms I play on and only downloaded again because the 50k bp a day for 2 weeks was barely enought o be worth putting ontot he ssds again. but it'll be deleted again the moment those are gone since I've already seen a thread pop up about queue times again and won't even bother trying lol. the space is best put into toher games until the next time they offer enough bp worth downloading and logging in once a day for, or untilt he queues get under 5 minutes and a better game still hasn't come out and marketed itself well enough to gete nough player counts to seem worth investing any time into yet.
if the warner brokers dlc policy (like selling specials which makes versus p2w) doesn't killt hat game then once it's out I'd probably wind up going nearly another 4 years without even thinking about this game again. I played left 4 dead 1 & 2 for nearly 4 years back int he day, so, if back 4 blood is halfway decent and doesn't get killed by dlc like evolve did I'm probably gone. That kind of game can easily live off of a few thousand players for years, so if it reached the steamchart dbd numbers and held onto most of them it would last a fairly long time I assume. long enoughf or another asym with a good advertisement or brand name to come out that's not half-arsed
0 -
Lol survivors cry to have broken animation, a thousand second chances, god pallets and everything but can’t stand a bit of bloodlust. Maybe git gud?
Do you not realize that if the killer hits you and you hold W and run in a straight line you can waste around 20 seconds of the killers time with no skill required? That’s 25% of a gen, a reverse PGTW just by holding forwards. If after 20 seconds of holding W you reach a safe structure its even better.
1 -
Ah the old guy gud post
0 -
At "no-mindgame Loops" Bloodlust has no purpose anyway. Once all of those which consist of a strong Window are reworked, there are only strong Loops with Pallets, which become weak when the Pallet is broken. This would remove Bloodlust anyway.
The bigger problem are unsafe Loops, Killers simply have to press w despite being outplayed by the Survivor. Unsafe Loops are fair for both sides, but become unfair once Bloodlust kicks in.
1 -
Wahh I want my blood points
0 -
Why should a loop ever be "fair"?
0 -
So that both players can play it and outplay the other side?
I mean, if you dont want unsafe Loops to be fair, you should be ok with God Loops as well.
1 -
Sure just remove rush of survivors after getting hit and we have a deal
0 -
OMG the amount of hits i have lost because of blood lust
then again it makes it less likely that chases will last too long but against good survivors some pallets just have to be broken and you have to use your power as some killers so you'll rarely get to tier 3 blood lust.
0 -
I swear,i could probably count the amount of times where bloodlust actually helped me on one hand.
Bloodlust makes my chases last longer because the FPS drops always happen at the worst possible time.
Just remove it or give me an option to disable it
0 -
I understand why it makes sense that the killer gets the survivor eventually. But there are some problems with that.
It teaches new killer the wrong playstyle. They dont break pallets or use the killer power to not lose bloodlust. Some powers are hard to use correctly at the beginning, but you need to practice with them to get better. And i dont need to explain why you should break some pallets.
Bloodlust plays cost to much time and you will lose. I see many killer bloodlust the chase and then camp the survivor bc the game is almost over. And when they are new they dont know what they did wrong.
And bloodlust downs are frustrating for the survivor. When there is nothing you can do bc the killer uses bloodlust and then camps you, its a bad gaming experience. Its just boring for the killer and survivor who both waited til bloodlust 3 kicks in and boring for the other 3 survivor who only did gens the entire match.
1 -
A loop should never be fair. Survivors should always be the underdog in every scenario and aspect of the game.
A "fair loop" where Survivor and Killer have an equal mind game chance still isn't "fair" because the Survivor is buying time for THREE other people.
0 -
Nope, Survivors should have the same chance of escaping a chase like a Killer of catching them. This is a Multiplayer Onlinegame and not a Slaughter-Simulator.
And if you are unable to catch a Survivor at an unsafe Loop without Bloodlust, they are better than you and you need to git gud.
1 -
I doubt new killers even know that bloodlust exists or what it does to be reliant on it. I honestly don't think bloodlust makes much of a difference after they nerfed it outside of bloodlust 1 and certain powerful loops. The fact that they're only getting 1 survivor after a single hook is telling them that they're doing something wrong and they're not going to be climbing too far up the ranks either way.
0 -
This argument would only work if this was 1v1. But it's not. It's 4v1. "Equal" chance is not actually equal.
So yes, it actually IS a slaughter simulator.
0 -
Its not that hard to see that you get faster. And they dont even need to know what it was. They only need to know that they could get a hit while just running.
I have seen many killer who use it that way. Most of the time survivor are not efficient on gens. Thats the same reason why camping works so good.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.bhvr.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
