So I watched Otz's new video, and...
I find it a little crazy that the basis of skill these days is whether or not you use dead hard. Anyone remember that they nerfed ruin for being too used?
Comments
-
Just do bones.
Oh wait, wrong thread.
12 -
People use NOED?
0 -
I'd gladly lose NOED to get rid of Dead hard..
11 -
Ruin was changed because they didn't like the gameplay it promoted.(also it wasn't even nerfed it's literally a better perk)
Self Care is among the most popular perks but you don't see it nerfed.
2 -
He always whines when things do not go his way. Did you watch hardcore survivor? He had a really bratty attitude. DH does not determine skill lol! It Is a game not a competitive sport! Just have fun when you play, or go play something else...
1 -
It's a one way kinda argument though: the implication ist that (even) skilled players are essentially stuck with dh if they want to go for high MMR. - But it doesn't go the other way around: using dh does not imply skill (or high MMR for that matter).
0 -
I wonder what this forum would look like if there wasn't a nerf this thread every 5 seconds 🤔.
1 -
Do you have a clip for that?
2 -
I don't know what is was before but it's a hex. So useless in my book.
0 -
Was that the one where he got the extremely BM team who annoyed him after the game?
0 -
Because it sucks unlike dead hard which can bail out a God looper for another 2 gens of chase.
1 -
It was just an example to show that usage alone isn't why perks get changed.
0 -
my experience is same as otz. Dead hard is the strongest perk in the game in my opinion. It used to be decisive strike before it got changed. Dead hard by far is most impactful perk in the entire game for survivor. Its not surprising to see it every single match.
There is no real reason not to use it. its very reliable second-chance perk that mirrors effects of old Mettle Of Man. I just wonder why people complained so much about MoM in its release but never complained about dead hard until MMR.
I'd say the matchmaking is stricter because many players laughed at patrick's hockey anology and mocked him saying that kill-based matchmaking does not work. Well, look who is laughing now?
It works very well. in fact it might be working too well now. it is boring to face same perks/killers repeatively, but its up to survivor player-base to ask for more killers to be stronger so that there is more variety in picking killers(for killer player) and in term of survivor perks. I do not have a problem facing the survivor perks if the killer is strong. Facing strong survivor perk is only bad when the killer is weak.
Strong survivor perks just makes weak killers more unfun to play because their chances of winning go from 30% to 0%. Playing auto-lose killers is unfun. As long there is 50/50 chance to win, playing killer is not that bad. Current state of the game for weaker killers is not 50/50.
so have fun facing nurse/blight with a random killer here and there.
from BVHR perceptive, they said they do not want to improve killers until they make solo as strong as SWF with their proposal being survivor icons. I wonder where these survivor icons are. they've talked about them awhile ago with no progress in sight.
0
