surv mains vs killer mains: why?
got lots of drama going on, apparently, between killer and surv mains...
some of you think the game is killer sided
some think its survivor sided
some just think both sides need work...
personally i think in general the game is survivor sided, the exception to this is with newer players, where killer usually has an easier time.
but what's everyone elses opinions? why do some of you think one side is heavily favored by devs over another?
why the drama? work together, make the game better for everyone, not just you, no?
Comments
-
Neither side is flavored both has same chances of winning depenind of skills other party posses it's slightly swf sided not survivor sided but again most swfs are altruistic as hell
4 -
Both of the roles are #########~
When you play killer more you see it's survivor sided
When you play survivor more you see it's killer sided
But when you play both sides you realize that the game itself is really #########
8 -
It wouldn't make sense for the devs to be heavily bias towards either side, because then the game would die quite badly from people leaving. I'm certain they may have their own favourites individually, but not so that it's unprofessional.
There is a whole slew of nerfs and buffs to both sides as the game is always in a constant state of flux, and any changes or additions may very well alter the norm. Also, it's 4v1 so there's that lop-sidedness to contend with.
The game can stir passions in people. Some are less able to deal with their emotions than others which results in nastiness being spread. This is the real killer of this game. Who would want to play a game when some people make the entire community seem toxic?
It would perhaps help for people to play both sides. Granted, most have a preference and that's fine, but a group of the player-base are so connected with their side that they aren't bothered with understanding the intricacies. As a result, their opinion will always be heavily bias.
Ultimately, for me it's ultimately the attitude of the individual that's the issue, which leads to such discussions. Discussing balance is fine. Outright declarations of unfairness that doesn't consider the opposing side fairly is just unhelpful.
0 -
Its funny how survivor mains say that the game is killer sided... but they dont want to play killer.
Hmmm
12 -
Because people are dumb and plant flags over the most inconsequential things.
6 -
See? Grandpa is always right
0 -
The game is SWF sided not survivor sided, like someone already said above.
14 -
That goes for both sides, some KiIller mains will say that the game is survivor sided and refuse to play survivor.
2 -
The whole issue is contrived, a false dichotomy pushed forward by a minority of Players that don't play both sides. Because of their narrow field of vision, they look at it all as "us versus them." The truth is most Players play both roles from time to time, some favoring one or the other but almost all dabbling. Many do both equally. It is largely best to ignore anyone spouting the nonsense of favoritism and sour grapes as it demonstrates how little they understand the game and how self centered their motives actually are in regards to the topic.
3 -
its the nature of a PVP game especially an asymetrical one. People always love to blame the other side.
0 -
The game isn't survivor of killer sided, however it is SWF sided.
3 -
I can only agree with that. When I play as a killer and each survivor is on it's own and not communicating with the others, the matches are ok.
But as soon as you play against a group of survivors which can communicate it often feels (and is) almost impossible to kill someone.
5 -
coz people have different experiences and form different opinions
also it's a forum so I guess we gotta discuss something
0 -
Who would refuse to play the easiest role of the game? Please be honest.
2 -
I'm a survivor main and I think the game is survivor-sided.
5 -
Except of course when the match making favors the killers in swfs, which everyone ignores. I have had six friends all quit this game because we'd get matched with a high level killer to match my rank, and the game would be over before we could even do two gens (if we were lucky).
0 -
Yeah alright dude, your either baiting or have a strong bias for Killer. Either way there's obviously no point in arguing with you, but your wrong as hell. Both sides take skill to play as, neither one is easy to learn.
1 -
Expected nothing less. Everyone does the same with me when they have no arguments. Good day.
1 -
The drama exists because this is a game where people don't have to play both sides, and humans have an inherent tribal mentality. Us good, them bad, ignore all and any evidence to the contrary because my tribemates agree with me.
9 -
I mean matchmaking is bad for ages so that's true but I don't think it happens way too much
0 -
I agree with most of what you said, but the game is in fact dearly suffering from losing players, most of them being players from the killer side.
The lack of killer players is actually one of the main issues in this game. MMR doesn't have any hope of working since they have to match survivors with somebody, and we don't have enough killers to fill even half of the lobbies, at one time, even while placing them in lobbies at random.
The result is that the devs have to make it up to the survivor playerbase, due to the fact that most people aren't exactly willing to wait twenty minutes to have a stressful experience when they have better options. The actual issue here is that they seem to think that the majority survivors exclusively get fun at the killer's expense, so they cater to those kinds of survivors instead of the people the killers would actually like to encounter. And if you cater to an audience, they tend to come running. The result is a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.
So, with at least half of survivors being mean enough that no one wants to actually verse them, and generally having three other guys there to back those guys up, and survivors being the majority of the players, killers often feel like the best (read, most satisfying) way to actually play the same way back.
What makes it worse is that some of the best tactics (read, low effort, high reward) are also the least fun for the other side, since it almost always feels like the success wasn't really deserved.
Even worse is that, given the nature of asymmetrical games, killer basically has to be a somewhat worse experience than survivor, but both sides blatantly refuse to acknowledge that hunting down four thinking, breathing people is always going to be way, way harder than alternating between holding down different buttons with the main focus being timing and basic perception.
For killers, what that means is that they pretty much either have to put in a great deal of effort (generally most or all of it) or be crushed and made fun of by the survivors and then punished by the blatantly broken emblem system (why you lose so much BP for "letting" survivors heal is beyond me). That makes survivor mains annoyed, because it's easy to interpret the killer as playing a casual game like a skill game if you don't really have any reason to believe that any part of the game isn't a casual game if you haven't played killer.
For survivors, what this means is that playing with all of your effort and power is completely unnecessary, and more than one survivor doing so can win the game relatively (keyword, relatively) easily. That makes killer mains annoyed and want survivors nerfed, even though survivors are only overpowered at all if they're playing what is basically a casual game as as it were a skill game (and/or using comms).
2 -
When I read players saying that the Game is Killer sided, I think we are not playing the same DBD or something like that xD.
A killer sided Game with less Killers every day, sounds logic.
1 -
It really depends on the map you get, whether the killer tunnels effectively , whether or not hex ruin is in an obvious spot, etc.
0 -
I play basically 50/50 - and find the hyperbole and vitriol by so-called "mains" on both sides to be inane.
0 -
all my friends quite and I hate solo queue
0 -
The problem is mostly that, as survivor, you always get that one scummy killer that makes you want to use meta perks and keys and such, and then when you use them, you screw over the killers that actually want to have fun or that are trying to play nice, so tehy give up and end up playing on a scummy way, en the cycle goes on and on with no end.
And then there is the good ol swf s who break the cycle and just use the meta perks and broken stuff to srew over the killer because they can.
3 -
Well I wish we could work together
But then you get people with nametags specifically related to dbd that dc when you make one good play and cry sorry but their nanny sitter needs them to take a break
And the devs I want to say they are fair but then again ds was un changes for 3 years and when undying a perk that could rival it was nerfed in 6 months. Hard to.say when things like that happen
0 -
I feel the game is fairly balanced right now but because of the meta, which with the DS nerf has gotten a bit better, I find myself being out perked more than anything. Playing killer Iron Will and Dead Hard can feel very broken. Playing survivor Ruin/Undying/Tinkerer make the game feel absolutely awful if totems aren't found within the first 2 minutes. Also look at some of the biggest complaints against specific killers such as Infectious on Nurse and Oni, Stridor on Spirit, BBQ or Thrilling and Pop on Freddy.
0 -
And how is that different from killer mains that don´t want to play survivors?
1 -
Because people are entitled. I've reach the "Stein's gate" of the community, went down the rabbit hole and I think I found the truth. So, I'm a hybrid player, meaning I play both sides equally. And I've noticed that most people that complain that a side isn't favored by the devs, actually don't play the other side much, or indeed at all. Let me give you some examples:
When ruin was nerfed, most killer mains believed that bhvr lost their mind, and that ruin disappearing would change the killer experience for the worst.
On the other hand, when ds was nerfed, survivors lost their #########. I even saw a post asking for a refund for the Halloween chapter, since some people bought it to have an advantage on the game.
Trickster was released, killer Maine complain that bhvr is too afraid to release something useful for the killer side
OoO change, survivors complain and they want their old OoO back to bully people
Undying nerf literally broke some killers
Camping/tunneling/slugging for survivors
Tbagging for killers
At this point, I feel that people complain just for the ######### of it. So the real question is, am I complaining that other people complain? Only time will tell
1 -
It's fine to have an opinion on which side the game is balanced in favour of, if any. It's the constant "your side is easy and brainless" "your side is toxic and entitled" that's unproductive
0 -
Yeah, I do agree that the way gameplay is catered towards low effort/ high reward tactics has impacted on the frustrations of both sides. Unfun tactics like camping or bullying makes it emotive for either side.
Also, having the attitudes of those problematic people breeds a domino effect that's passed on from game to game like a virus of resentment and negativity. It is right that people need to be much more empathic.
I admit it's been a while since I've experienced any long waiting queues, and the Steam chart alone shows a jump in new players either starting or returning players, so I don't think the player base is depleting. Granted, I couldn't tell you what portion plays which role more. Having that information would be useful, because if you're experiencing long queues and I'm not having that issue, is it a sign of who plays what servers?
Thinking about what you said about devs thinking survivors get more fun at the expense of the killer, I don't necessarily agree the devs thing that way, and recent nerfs to OoO and Decisive Strike would reflect that (as a side note, weird how a character as caring and empathic as Laurie Strode got all the dick perks 😁). Yet I am totally in agreeance that making fun of the killer is a big pull for some survivors, which is shown by the various videos on YouTube. Maybe some buffs to the killer such as enlarging the hitbox on the killer side, so survivors cannot pallet-drop/blind then slide over a pallet through a killer to mock them, or making it impossible to run through a killer via Dead Hard. Not major buffs, but enough to avoid those. Would that help? Not sure, but it's a thought.
1 -
I think the game is survivor-sided simply because of how many tools they can bring in a single game and how those tools are balanced.
many perks exist simply cause you can end up with a bad teammate in Solo Q. Take DS for example. As much as people call it an anti-tunnel perk. it simply a perk that exists cause you will end up with some low IQ teammate who will unhook you without BT when the killer is near. So now what happened is that because we don't want to make tunnel annoying to play against, Since when it happened it mostly will be because your teammate played badly. We make it so the killer is punished for profiting off a survivor's mistake.
Even if I'm a killer main, I know it annoying to die cause of a teammate, it happened to me a lot the few times I played Survivor But I still think that since you play in a team you should get the downside of being in one.
Another thing is how they made the f2p perk kit better for survivors than for killers. As a survivor, you can run BT, Kindred, and sprint burst +1 perk and you got yourself a decent solo Q build. It could be better but it got all the important stuff. Now killer on the other side got some awful stuff and no f2p regression perk.
Then there SWF. even if we ignore the tryhard one. just playing with 3 other people using basic communication give you tons of advantage. you can tell at any time what people are doing, who the killer after, who can go for a save, is the killer camping or not. Who's the killer and what addon he brought. Just that is tons of free perks. not only you get all of these for free. Compare that to a Solo Q game where if you don't bring kindred you risk your team wasting info and time each time someone gets hooked.
My last point about the risk-reward of basic action. Overall, Survivor action takes no commitment and can be interrupted at any time. it takes a few seconds for the killer to kick off a gens, he risks losing distance and field of view when he does so. On the other hand, survivors can deny this commitment of the killer in 1/60th of a second by taping gens. Then you got unhooking. you can fake it for some reason if the killer is nearby enough to grab you, yet the killer can't do the same if he picks up someone and there somebody to drop a pallet or flashlight him, if the killer press the spacebar he becomes vulnerable and there nothing he can do about it.
Oh, and survivors also have hatch every game. it a small thing but it kinda an equivalent of NOED for a survivor base kit.
2 -
I play both sides equally. For very new players it’s equal but eventually you reach a point where I think it’s slightly survivor sided only because some killers are so weak and survivors can all have each other’s teachable so that doesn’t really matter. You can get by with the base game survivors just fine but trying out killers either means buying them or grinding for hours.
That being said I think the fighting in the community is also pretty useless. It’s an asymmetrical so it’s just the nature of the game. There’s not so many games even in this genre which is probably why people get so frustrated, a lot of other online games seem more fair.
0 -
Im telling you the same i said up there. Who would refuse to play the easiest role of the game? Braindead gameplay with no skill at all, the only skill required playing survivor is looping, and even though they drop every pallet they see.
1 -
It's one of those games where which ever side you're on something doesn't fit right. Either way you look at it both sides equally need changes.
Hand on heart though I can't remember the last time I mailed just one side.
0 -
I generally don't have long waiting queues myself, but that's because I pretty much main killer. I've never played against over half the killers on the roster. And I know that the game is getting a lot more players, but that's mainly because BHVR is desperately trying to expand the target audience, and are currently very much succeeding.
On your first second points, yeah. I was kinda trying to say that, but I couldn't really find the words. I probably would have drawn it out to being incomprehensibly long even if I did, though. Thanks for spelling it out, I couldn't really have done it myself without help.
I feel like the main reason that the devs are finally fixing survivor meta perks (some of which, such as OoO, are almost useless outside of the already broken SWF) is because the game was kinda dying due to lack of killer population not long before All-Kill came out, and they don't want that to happen again.
On the suggestion of expanding hitboxes... absolutely not. I'm sorry, but that would actually be a nerf for killers more than anything. Pallet stuns would be easier than they already are, and Dead On would become almost ubiquitous in SWF. I do have some other ideas that could help, if you'd like to discuss them.
Giving the killer the ability to physically push survivors around instead of having to stop as if they were walking into a brick wall could help. They would still be slowed down while pushing survivors, but they wouldn't completely stop. This would make bodyblocking less immersion-breaking and make it feel less cheap.
Another one would be making it so that you can't start blinding the killer until they're halfway through the animation they're in. They already implemented something like this, where if you blind a killer while (I mean while the animation is still playing) they pick up a survivor they don't drop them. That way if the survivor is at a god pallet with a flashlight, they don't essentially automatically win the chase, and if a survivor sees the killer pick someone up, they can't just hide outside of hearing range and then SB or DH towards the killer and basically automatically get the flashlight save.
I feel like they should turn the chase music down for the killer, and then revert the change that made it so that slow vaulting was overwhelmingly loud in order to compensate. It would be better to have auditory tracking in a chase than, you know, completely ruining the stealth element of the game for survivors and basically forcing them to play offensively. They already have the emblem system to force the survivors to interact with the killer, literally shoving them in the killer's face won't make the game any better.
Making flashlight blinds actually intuitive and/or realistic at all. Right now, the blind cone is so wide that it's actually wider than the visual cone. Even worse is that it's actually more effective to point at the killer's sternum than their actual eyes. That makes no sense whatsoever. How the hell is a new player supposed to know that the killer can be literally blinded by pointing a flashlight at their neck? And how on earth is that fair at higher ranks?
Making it so that they decided whether hooks could rotate or not would be nice, too. If the entity is supposed to favor the killer, why do they have to be standing directly in front of the hook in order to use it, while the survivors can be at the actual side of the hook and it'll just rotate towards them? I get it's supposed to discourage camping, but all it really does is allow for easier face-unhooks and make it easier for survivors to block the hook. Even a survivor in the middle of sabotaging the hook can block it of entirely. Plus, there are so many things in the game that discourage camping already, including just how ineffective the strategy actually is. In addition, the devs actually said, repeatedly, that camping is a viable strategy, so that means that this deterrent is both redundant and unnecessary.
Making grabs calculated on the killer side would be nice. Also making it so that the survivors can't do anything while the animation is playing. A lot of people said that this would promote camping, but if you get grabbed while unhooking that is entirely your fault (unless it's Myers or Ghostface, but the survivor still should have been more aware given that they have a 360° third person camera and can cancel the animation before the killer grabs them).
1 -
The hitbox idea was more due to my ignorance of all the full implications, but I guess I was just trying to find a way to stop survivors run through killers. Ironically, in hindsight I've realised even if it didn't nerf the killer, it wouldn't resolve the issue bexquse it won't change the existing issue and I'm not sure if the tech exists so that instead of a hitbox you have a hit cylander. Even then, there's the issue of body-blocking by the killer to contend with after a successful hit. But a cylinder would narrow the collision detail. This might also may improve the chances of the "push" idea you suggested.
I'm useless with torches, so any change would hinder me, even it was meqnt to help😁. However, your change could work. Or would it work better if the torch doesn't start to work until the animation finishes, but takes less time to get the blind, or have the light level slowly instead. Maybe make the point the torch needs to hit trickier? No idea how though.
I don't think the balance of reducing the level of chase music versus a lighter slow vault noise would help balance. Maybe the survivor could make more panic noises instead, but I guess it also trains the killer to improve their game. I know a fair few people would want the reduction in chase music, but in doing so would take away the tension and in my opinion make it too easy for a killer, especially if they have Stridor equipt.
Rotating a hook would be successful, so long as the killer didn't just have to walk to the hook from any angle for an instant hook. Survivors blocking adds to the tension and rewards altruistic play. Maybe the hook rotates automatically, but slowly so that the killer still has to maneuvre and gives a chance for the survivors to fight back. Automqtic hooking will just mean there's really no point to block the killer.
100% in agreeance with the grabs! It's so frustrating to get the grab, but instead the killer's arm freezes like a dope and the survivor escapes. If it is hard with m1to fix, maybe give the killer a grab-only button which allows them a much stronger chance for accuracy at grabs at vaults or interractions, but has a shorter reach. So a killer can decide whether to do the hit, or do a snatch grab. Or just fix the exiwting issue would work too!
1 -
I'm sorry, I can't actually understand most of this. I don't mean I don't understand why you have your opinions, I mean I can't really read this.
0 -
I feel the game is still survivor sided, and the reasoning why is why I stopped playing after 2.3k hours.
Killer is still stressful at and I hate the fact that slow down is still the meta for killer.
Survivor is too brain-dead easy, and not even as much skill as killer.
1 -
Ah, OK. What would you need me to do to make it clearer for you?
1 -
Spelling, mostly.
Punctuation needs a bit of work, but it's good enough.
The way you actually wrote out the paragraphs makes them borderline nonsensical. It reads more like a surrealist novel than an argumentative forum post. The only way I can think of to fix it would be to read over it again to make sure it makes sense.
0 -
Now I don't wanna go making any accusations under the watchful eye of God here, but are you trying to tell us that you're just too damn smart to play something as lacking in intellectual stimulation as Survivor, quite unlike playing Killer?
Or rather, can you say it outright for my immense entertainment?
0 -
I play both but have been a killer main lately because the queues are shorter most of the time.
0 -
I didnt understand anything here lol
0 -
Personally, I think the game is developer sided. They get to make changes and add new characters and we don’t!? Disgraceful stuff, really truly unfair. I say, we should all be made paid members of Behaviour, even if you only have 2 minutes of experience in the game.
0 -
I think my biggest problem with the game is gens. I hate everything about them. They are a barely interactive objective, that is generally too safe and requires minimum effort from survivors. I wish gens put survivors in more danger, had them being more active around the map or just were harder to do in general. I dont want them to take longer. I want them to not be "hold M1 for a bit"
Survivors also have an unhealthy amount of perks designed like this: Undo or get rewarded for the fact that you were outplayed or made a mistake. This is problematic because, as much as it helps survivors that don't know what they're doing, it becomes insanely powerful at the hands of survivors that know what they're doing. These safeguards become overkill.
Comparatively, killers have less perks that work like that, and the only impactful ones are NOED, Spirit Fury and Bitter Murmur I think? To be fair, I'm not sure I agree with perks designed this way. On either side.
The game is not necessarily survivor sided, but it does have some things by design that make it so that when of equal skill, a killer is usually working way more and against way more safeguards than survivors. So when survivors are good and on coms, it generally breaks the game in their favor.
The problem is, it's hard to address these issues, because a huge chunk of survivors don't know what they're doing and matchmaking is bad. Also killers can stack up gen slowdown perks... Honestly I'd get rid of gen perks entirely if we could just have a game that's balanced around gen perks not existing, which provides survivors with a meaningful objective and tools to work with, without just giving them safeguards on top of safeguards.
0 -
OOGA BOOGA ME WANT SPRITE AND BOOBIES
1 -
See? Perfect example of one of the Meghead gang, a collection of misfits often catagorised by their love of strong french women and carbonated sugary lemon drink.
2
