Dead Hard rewards bad gameplay.
I use Dead Hard myself as well but in my opinion this perk rewards you for bad gameplay. If the killer makes a good play Dead Hard punishes the killer and rewards the survivor for making a mistake.
It feels super cheap in my opinion and rewards you for makiing a mistake and i don't think that's fair. Anyone else feels like this?
Comments
-
It’s doesn’t reward bad play all the time. A lot of survivors play greedy with it on purpose which in that case is a good play
18 -
DH rewards both bad and good gameplay, unlike NOED which only rewards losing.
and this is the reason why DH is 1000x worse than NOED.
3 -
Let me just press E real quick
8 -
We have a skilled gamer here.😂 Outplayed.
3 -
🤣😂
5 -
It isn't playing greedy if you have a safety net. It's called playing greedy cause if the killer calls it they should get the hit.
If you greed a pallet and the killer calls it but dead hard denies the hit then you played bad but dead hard saved you.
The fact that survivors can play greedy at all times without fear of punishment is exactly the problem with it
6 -
A lot of perks, "reward" bad game play. They are just perks, on really skilled and experienced players, they become potent. On less skilled inexperienced players, they give you maybe 4 seconds of chase time or perhaps 1k
3 -
Perks should help players when they are doing poorly. If perks reward good plays they create a self feeding loop which makes players in good state even better while players in bad state even worse.
In this sense dead hard is a healthy perk, because it helps the survivor in a bad situation. Many killer perks btw are not healthy in this sense (e.g. Pop goes the weasel).
3 -
Maybe Unrelenting should be a meta perk to counter dead hard? :D
0 -
It’s annoying when survivors DH to a window or pallet but if they use it to dodge a hit than they got rewarded there.
0 -
Dead Hard isn't strong because it rewards bad play.
A bad player with Dead Hard is still a bad player.
Dead Hard is strong because good players can use it in various ways (get to a pallet or window/DH over a trap/force a BT hit/eat a hit for a friend/eat a power/etc).
Some of those are crazy skillful actions (ie tanking a hatchet for your pal on death hook or dodging in a way that doesn't validate but allows for the swing to proc your pal's BT).
It provides a lot of options for a single perk, which, until validation is tweaked, have grown exponentially.
6 -
No, in that case the survivor played correctly, they knew they would have the extra distance so played accordingly. That’s not a “bad play”, that’s a good play.
An example of bad play with Dead Hard is using it for no reason in the open because a killer looked like maybe they would catch you or swing. Wasting a Dead Hard when it’s not needed is bad play.
And I say this as a killer main who thinks Dead Hard is overpowered and should probably be split into two separate perks, one that gives distance but not invulnerability and the other that lets you dodge an attack but give no distance.
1 -
I only have a problem with DH over traps and using it to get to a window or pallet, but other than that it’s pretty easy to play around.
0 -
Threads like this are so brave and original. Never seen anything like this before.
4 -
I honestly don't think that this aspect of Dead Hard is that much of a problem, and let me explain why.
Currently, Dead Hard does two major things: It lets you dodge a hit when the killer's on you or when you get outplayed at a loop, and it lets you reset a chase by dashing to a loop that you otherwise wouldn't have reached.
The first part of this is what the perk is intended for- both to be a little safety net on a timer, and to let you play more aggressive and ballsy as is befitting of the character who has it as a teachable. This is, in concept, a totally legitimate thing for a perk to do; it's an exhaustion perk and it can be played around by the killer via baiting it out. There's an argument to be had about how badly affected the killer is when a hit is dodged like that, but I'd argue that problem lays with how much of a time deficit the killer is under right now- slow the game down and one dodged hit every ~40 seconds really wouldn't be that big of a deal.
The second part... isn't. It's uncounterable, it's far stronger, and in my opinion, it's the part that should change. At least when a hit is dodged at a loop, you're still directly on top of the survivor and they don't get that much distance so you can try and make a play- especially as a killer with any ranged capability. When used for distance, especially as any killer that isn't Huntress or Deathslinger, there's nothing that you can do about it.
It's okay for perks to fix survivor mistakes if that fix isn't too strong and it isn't that often- survivors are the role that can be removed from the match entirely, it's good design to give them more tools for fixing mistakes, but Dead Hard does a pretty strong version of that and an even stronger chase utility half.
0 -
The irony is certainly palpable.
0 -
It doesn't "reward you" for making a mistake, it can help you correct a mistake, though. Which a lot of perks do and is part of every video game ever. So that's not really the problem here. If you think its effect is too strong, then that argument has merit.
2 -
I'd rather say that DH allows survivors to correct mistakes in chases a lot too easy. Not that it rewards bad plays.
2 -
pretty much all exhaustion perks and killer endgame perks reward bad play. SB rewards bad positioning, Balanced rewards going to a height that would otherwise slow you down enough on landing to confirm a hit, Head on rewards hiding in a locker instead of using time efficiently, Fire up literally rewards gens being done, no way out and noed reward ALL the gens being done, etc. Hell, even Blood Warden rewards the exit gates being opened.
The biggest outliers for dead hard are that the survivor has to make themselves vulnerable (injured,) but can use it on command (for the most part,) that it can be baited/countered with proper timing and paitience, but also that it can be used at times where it can't be countered if used for distance. It has too many variables to its uses (both good and bad( to boil down as much as the others.
The reason its so strong is, as others have said, because it can have a much higher effect when used properly. Likewise, it doesn't make a player good because it is extremely fallible when used incorrectly.
0 -
The problem is that dead hard turned that bad play in a good play with little to no requirement and with little to no way for the opposition to change it.
That argument that dead hard used that way is good play doesn't mean much.
If they made a perk that allowed you to open the exit gates at any time without the gens being done and you opened it as soon as you spawn without doing gens then that's technically also a good play. You didn't bother with gens cause you know you had a perk to circumvent it.
I don't think i need to point out that that wouldn't mean that perk would be okay.
0 -
unlike NOED which only rewards losing
Show me where the rules state the Killer lost when 5 gens pop. Oh wait; you can't.
Stop with the bullshit 'ReWaRdS lOsInG 🤪🤪🤪' mentality. It's factually wrong. It's not an opinion. It's just wrong. And the sooner Survivors stop this idiocy, the sooner they can stop whining about a perk that has no problems with it other than the garbage they invent to stomp their little feet and scream about like spoiled toddlers.
1 -
People use dead hard to dodge right into walls or away from loops constantly. It most certainly has bad uses that would have been good ones if they were used differently. Dead hard also does have counterplay (MOST times) by baiting it out, attacking with a short m1 instead of a lunge so they have no time to react, even some killers like wraith can tap their power to change their animation enough to scare survivors into using it early. Of course there are times where it can't be countered, but using it in those situations specifically is, in itself, a good play.
0 -
A good survivor running DH can get amazing plays out of it. A bad survivor using DH may use it to correct a mistake, which will only slightly delay their death, or may use it badly and instantly get downed.
In any case, a survivor may be rewarded for a mistake or simply not.
I understand the frustration and even if you learn to play around DH it feels unfair sometimes.
The reason for this is not the perk itself bit the nature of the game. Both the killer and the survivor are conditioned by RNG. A good survivor can make a mistake and get downed even after a good DH play, and a bad survivor can get lucky and escape with a bad DH play.
It's annoying to see them win the chase without effort and knowing you can play better than that punk, so it's easy and comforting to blame on DH, "it's unfair", "it's OP", "it rewards bad gameplay". We forget that most of the time we are playing against ourselves and against luck.
0 -
NOED activates only when you are about to lose/let survivors go, DH activates in all chases and is much stronger than NOED too.
2 -
That's exactly how i think about it.
1 -
NoED activates when Survivors have 2 more steps to escape; opening the exit gates & walking out them. The Killer is not 'about to lose' because he CANNOT lose until Survivors are literally off the map.
The exit gates could be OPEN, and the Killer has not lost yet. Because, UNTIL THE SURVIVORS PHYSICALLY LEAVE THE GODS DAMNED MAP, THE KILLER CAN STILL KILL THEM.
Do I need to say it any louder?
- The Killer has not 'basically lost' just because 5 gens pop. This is entitled Survivor whining creating a fake lose state.
- The Killer has not ACTUALLY lost until Survivors LEAVE THE MAP. The gates could be open & Survivors could be in the exit area; until they pass that exit LINE; the Killer can still kill them. He has not 'basically lost' or any other kind of lost.
- This mindset is the mindset of spoiled, entitled, whiny, baby-rage Survivors creating a lose condition, then claiming it's enforceable, and thus inventing a flaw with NoED that DOES NOT EXIST.
The. 👏 Killer. 👏 Has. 👏 Not. 👏 Lost. 👏 Just. 👏 Because. 👏 5. 👏 Gens. 👏 Pop. 👏
The. 👏 Killer. 👏 Has. 👏 Not. 👏 Lost. 👏 Just. 👏 Because. 👏 5. 👏 Gens. 👏 Pop. 👏
The. 👏 Killer. 👏 Has. 👏 Not. 👏 Lost. 👏 Just. 👏 Because. 👏 5. 👏 Gens. 👏 Pop. 👏
Keep repeating the above until you get that garbage 'Rewards losing! Derpy-derr!' mindset out of your head.
1 -
As a killer, I'm pretty sure I'm almost losing when gate is powered.
1 -
Then you're wrong. Congrats. You're personal view on winning and losing does not change how the game works.
0 -
I think the reason people feel that way is because of how abysmally short that part of the game is compared to the rest. Exit gates don't take terribly long (unless you have perks designed to slow or prevent them for a time) and can be 99'd to prevent blood warden/EGC, and EGC itself puts a relatively short (compared to the gen phase) timer on the rest of the match. Combine that with fast gen speeds and, well.
Not saying that the match IS over at that point, just that its not exactly halftime in most cases.
1 -
"losing" and "lost" is two different things.
You are pretty much losing if your ruin/undying popped and yet to find any survivors, but you aren't lost.
1 -
Okay 😭
0 -
Nobody cares about the dead harders into walls and those in dead zones.
Give a 5 year old a two handed sword and they won't be able to lift it. Doesn't change the fact that a two handed sword is still a deadly weapon in the right hands.
You look at the highest levels of play to balance a asset in a game not at the lowest
this video explains that concept pretty well
1 -
Technician rewards bad gameplay.
1 -
nothing in this game is balanced for high level play, short of maybe nurse and blight. Spirit used to be, but we saw how that went. I understand (and am a supporter of) people getting better vs balancing for lower level play, and my first post in this topic was outright talking about how the "rewards bad play" argument is asinine. I don't really understand what you're replying to.
0 -
By that logic; Survivors are 'pretty much losing' when I hook someone for the first time, because it's one step closer to being Killed.
And Killers are 'pretty much losing' if 1 generator pops, because Survivors are 1 step closer to escaping.
Yet we don't balance around this idiocy, do we? So why do people think '5 gens popped! 🤪' is a valid argument while knowing 'One gen popped!' is not?
0 -
i agree with this, I hate dead hard
0 -
Corrective Action rewards bad gameplay
Unrelenting rewards bad gameplay
3 -
The good plays, the bad plays, and the ugly plays
They are perks in all depends on whos using it
Survivors not cleansing Totems ( then NOED says Hi)
Killers getting antsy on attacks ( then Dead Hard says Hi)
Survivors not hitting Skill checks ( then Huntress Lullaby says Hi)
Just find 8-12 perks that work for your playstyle (and Killer) and have at it
1 -
It’s not a “bad play” when you intentionally know something will work and run a loop a particular way knowing that in advance.
And that analogy is kind of far fetched. You’re just saying that when a perk is overpowered that survivors can’t make good plays using them, but that’s not the case, I’ve definitely seen quite a lot of survivors who make legitimately bad plays with Dead Hard by mistiming it. And I’ve seen a lot of survivors who make good plays by knowing how and when to use Dead Hard for the best benefit.
Also as a reminder I specifically said I think Dead Hard is overpowered and should probably be split into two perks, one for distance but no invulnerability and one that gives invulnerability but no distance. I’m not defending the status quo, I’m just saying that Dead Hard does reward smart survivors and doesn’t help bad ones as often.
1 -
8 hooks with 0 gens done and 5 gens done with 0 hooks are equally bad extremes of "its not over yet, but it might as well be." People's threshold for hope in the remainder of the game pretty much always falls somewhere in the middle, but usually not at either extreme.
0 -
It's not over until it's over. I mean, imagine if sports teams played like people here demand the 'other side' play; The Falcon's 'basically won' in Super Bowl 51 with a 28-3 lead in the 4th quarter. Instead, the Pats turned it into a 34-28 win.
This is why the 'basically already lost' argument is bullshit; No one has lost until the match is over, or they give up. Survivors are demanding Killers GIVE UP when 5 gens pop, and then saying this is a valid rule that NoED breaks. It's stupid and entitled.
1 -
While I tend to be more on the side of sticking with a match until the very end, you're being pretty unrealistic with expectations (especially with your expectation of other people's expectations, ironically.)
Again, most people don't think a situation like 8 hooks 0 kills all gens done is a done game. Same do, some don't. Likewise, some people think 5 gens done in a 1v3 is winnable. Either match could have either side win, but the expectation of victory is going to differ from person to person.
0 -
True but I'm pointing out that people are putting their personal beliefs onto NoED, and then claiming it's flawed for not following their own, personal, subjective rules.
I don't care if someone thinks 'The game is lost when 5 gens pop'; them thinking that does NOT mean NoED is flawed or 'rewards losing'.
But instead, people believe this, then scream it on the forums so loudly that OTHERS believe it, and then I get treated like ######### in-game if I use NoED, even if it never pops. And when people's subjective, personal views of the game are used as an excuse to treat other people like #########; it's a problem. THAT is why I always smack down the 'basically lost' fallacy; it's not true. People can think it all they damn day, but when they start to demand the game be balanced around a PERSONAL viewpoint, and treat others like garbage for not following their PERSONAL rules; they need to be metaphorically slapped down.
0 -
One of the biggest reason for them to think that way is because the bulk of the survivor's objective is to repair 5 gens. The exit gates take less time than a single gen by themselves, and the only pressure the killer can really apply is in regards to hook saves. They CAN pressure doors to prevent them from being opened, but one survivor running from the door to a loop is simply opening the door to be worked on by someone else during said chase. The Pressure dynamic is mostly gone in the match, with the exception of lategame perks designed specifically for it (like the aforementioned noed, no way out, and blood warden,) and hook saves.
Part of why a lot of survivors get especially upset about that is because of last second denials. They might have done great the whole game, looped very well and even sacrificed a hook or two to ruin the killer's map pressure and give the other survivors the time and space to do the gens. Then they get tagged by noed and nobody is willing to hunt for the totem/go for the save/etc and they die. The frustration is what makes them so emotional in that situation, and is a big part of why so many people hate the perk's design. Like with most perks in the game, it can turn a losing situation into an advantageous one, with the end result being pretty extreme.
Some people just straight up hate it, some don't see a problem with it at all, other think the problem is deeper than just noed, and has more to do with how quickly the game can snowball in either direction with minimal reasonable counterplays on an individual player level. The nature of the game inherently brings out the beast in a lot of people, so to speak.
0 -
So good, literally 2022 DBD in a nutshell 😂😂
0 -
DH and NoeD dont reward bad gameplay.
DH reward greed and NoeD punish survivor for doing gen to fast
0
