General Discussions
General Discussions
Playing a normal m1 killer is not possible these days.
I'm a nurse main. I went through the struggles of learning her and I've finally gotten to a point I enjoy playing her. After 600~ hours of only playing nurse I thought, why did I stop playing other killers? So I decided to have a match with a different killer.
Loaded up on Eyrie of Cringe with Leigon and I understand now why killer mains are so miserable these days. It doesn't even matter if the survivors are skilled or not, as long as they split up on gens and have BT, DS, DH, etc, it'll be impossible to win because maps these days are designed so that if every survivor just pre-drops pallets, theres nothing you can do. I now understand why killers tunnel, camp, because what's the point of playing fairly if the game isn't fair to you?
I honestly have no idea what BHVR can do to fix the problem because if the game didn't have perks, it would be the same situation but killers would be able to camp and tunnel without punishment. But because there are perks that can make you downright invincible off hook, survivors are only going to bring those, perfect their looping, bully you in the EGC if you do anything that isn't to their liking, and always be favored in the devs eyes because it's the majority of the playerbase.
Comments
-
It's definitely possible to win those games.
It's just so ######### stressful that it's not worth it to even queue up.
18 -
It will be worse with sb
0 -
Sb? What is that?
0 -
Sprint burst. I used overcome weeks ago, and it’s frustrating for m1 killers. You see a killer and run. It takes soooo long time to catch me
1 -
Honestly, it's not even the perks that bother me at this point. I am sick of poorly designed maps that are already near impossible to win with killer without dead hard even being used.
16 -
Unless the survivors are just bad and make a ton of mistakes you aren't winning a match with an m1 killer at high mmr of equal skill without some combination of camping and/or tunneling. That's just facts. That's how the balance of the game is unfortunately.
The core issue is map design and size. The perks just add onto an already bad problem.
11 -
While I'm not 100% that it's all favoritism and not just a little accidentally baked-in imbalance, it's plain to see that between maps and perks, survivors really have a super strong advantage with no recourse.
6 -
Honestly basic attack killers would be fine if certain maps and DH didnt exist, the killer themselves arent too bad it's other game issues that hurt them
4 -
It is actually impossible to beat a good team with three second chance perks each if you are playing a killer like Pig. The only way they can lose is if they massively screw up multiple times which just doesn't happen at higher level play. It's another reason why MMR is bad since you are forced to play certain killers if you want to beat good teams.
5 -
From BHVR's perspective, the reality is that the average survivor spends insane amounts of time doing literally nothing every game. And there's no pallet in the game that can be considered safe for many players.
It's hard to reconcile the skill gap between the bottom-average-top end of the playerbase and make a map that works for all levels of play.
Newer or less skilled players escape via stealth. Making maps smaller makes things even more difficult for them.
Average players need a lot of safer tiles because they're going to get hit at half of them.
And then that all becomes a mess at the very top end. This is before we even get into killer considerations. It's hard.
4 -
I will give Legion and Ghost another chance after the patch but still have plenty of fun with Wraith, Trapper, Mike, Fred, and Clown.
1 -
So my games as trapper still average over 2k. its still possible, you may just need to learn how to play some characters.
0 -
I agree with your points as well.
Hypothetical here: If you did balance top-down and now all those pallets were more balanced for the high end but as you said all deadly for bad survivors, wouldn't the end result just be their hidden mmr lowering?
IE other than losing a few early matches the only real thing that would change is their mmr until they were down to a level that they were winning and losing exactly as much as they were before. Except now we'd actually also have the top end balanced. Meaning balancing for the top end wouldn't technically hurt the lower people in the end.
2 -
Only consideration would be new player experience. It's already brutal as it is.
We see some pretty unsafe pallets on the map reworks, and the caveat there is that a pallet is usually safe or a free hit with very little in-between.
I still think there's opportunity to slice it both ways. Coal Tower is the gold standard in my mind. It has just enough safe resources (barring RNG) that survivors at least have to be cognizant of resource management. The map size isn't prohibitive for any killer. And the gen layout usually demands some strategy
2 -
I now understand why killers tunnel, camp, because what's the point of playing fairly if the game isn't fair to you?
Ah yes, the old chestnut that “tunneling isn’t fair.” 🙄
0 -
There's the real truth. If it's not worth your own health to actually play the character, they need to fix the character.
1 -
They are possible as long as you don't expect a 4K every match. They need different strategies than the be everywhere, down everybody Mr. Blight. Killers like Trapper are more area control. If you get 6 hooks with Pig and kill 2 it was a well balanced match.
4K should be rare.
0 -
But I'm playing Pig and Ghostface relaxed
0 -
I totally agree on Coal Tower. Probably one of the best balance standards imo.
What if we kept new player queues together until say the first like 100 hours or something? Problem solved?
2 -
Hypothetical here: If you did balance top-down and now all those pallets were more balanced for the high end but as you said all deadly for bad survivors, wouldn't the end result just be their hidden mmr lowering?
Not exactly. it would hurt casual survivors more, in other words they would go from winning sometimes to winning never where as more skilled survivors would lose more often but would still win every now again.
demographically speaking, in most games, there is like top 10% of players that are outstanding and really good. I would say about 20% are like semi-competitive while the rest are casual. Not to be rude or anything, but most of m1 killers were never truly in a good spot. they were always lackluster. Its just that you as killer were typically facing the less good survivors in most matches. Its whole question whether you balance around 30% goodish players or 70%.
A recent post that I have been seeing lately is how steam charts are negative and how MMR is hurting the game. I'd say a lot of m1 killers not being viable might be hurting the game. MMR just exposes the bad balance for killers.
0 -
"Not exactly. it would hurt casual survivors more, in other words they would go from winning sometimes to winning never where as more skilled survivors would lose more often but would still win every now again."
But if it's lowering their mmr than that would not be the case. They would go against worse and worse killers until they were low enough mmr that they were losing only the same amount as they were previously. IE they'd end up with the same difficulty of matches.
"demographically speaking, in most games, there is like top 10% of players that are outstanding and really good. I would say about 20% are like semi-competitive while the rest are casual. Not to be rude or anything, but most of m1 killers were never truly in a good spot. they were always lackluster. Its just that you as killer were typically facing the less good survivors in most matches. Its whole question whether you balance around 30% goodish players or 70%."
I completely agree.
"A recent post that I have been seeing lately is how steam charts are negative and how MMR is hurting the game. I'd say a lot of m1 killers not being viable might be hurting the game. MMR just exposes the bad balance for killers."
Oh of course. The main reason mmr is hated is because it's forcing people into unfair and unbalanced matches. If hypothetically the game was pretty well balanced I don't think people would mind mmr nearly as much. I think people (myself included) prefer the old grade matchmaking not because it was "better" per say, but actually because it was worse. It being worse covered up the games balance problems by mixing in a lot more average players. MMR forces me to play a lot of matches that are literally unwinnable, that is not fun. I don't mind losing, what I do mind is losing when I never actually got outplayed, I just lost through balance problems. Which is something totally out of my control and not something i can improve on.
Typically when I lose on survivor I can point out the spots where me or my team misplayed to improve on for next time. That is not nearly the case on killer. You can play perfectly and still lose, that's what frustrates people.
5 -
But if it's lowering their mmr than that would not be the case. They would go against worse and worse killers until they were low enough mmr that they were losing only the same amount as they were previously. IE they'd end up with the same difficulty of matches.
What I meaning to say is that the game becomes more killer-sided overall leading to lower escape rate. Strong players use same loops as weaker players. Its just that weaker players use the loops less effectively. so what was once weaker survivors escaping sometimes out of survivor bias map design now survivors seldomly escaping.
You see this a lot of weaker survivor maps, for example recently, the dev posted that midwich elementary school is deadliest killer map. A vast majority of pallet loops on that map are very fair for killer. they're unsafe enough that most killers can win chases at the pallets. Newish survivors probably get lost finding generators on that map and using the pallets to waste the killers time is difficult. Does that mean that nobody ever escapes midwich elementary school? Of course not.
Imagine every map being as unsafe pallet-wise as Midwich elementary school. for casual players, you would have much lower escape rate for survivor. This kinda what your aiming for in your statement.
Here's controversial statement about killer. base movement speed for killer is meaningless statistic in current iteration of the game. The better loopers and efficient objective players are able to use the maps so well that it renders the base killers ineffective. A lot of stronger killers are well... non-standard m/s killers. Even the ones that were strong as 115% m/s e.g old billy or current blight have highly exaggerated movement speed. Its always about their killer power. Killers express their skill through killer powers, not their movement speed.
MMR forces me to play a lot of matches that are literally unwinnable, that is not fun.
yeah well welcome to killer life. Its like wow, your good at killer, well too bad. you have to lose half your matches. you never really get completely used to it as killer but I think it grows on you over-time as killer. it is terrible for competitive mindset players.
1 -
well there a lot of m2 killers that are fun and strong against good players. it's not just either nurse or m1 killers.
you play m1 killers if you're looking for a very hard mode and it'll stay this way till maps are balanced and dead hard is nerfed.
0 -
One thing would be to make secondary objectives for survivors to slow down games but then make ds and bt stronger cause tunneling would only be even better stragedy or make gen speed faster the less there are survivors alive. But nurse would need nerf and blight probably too as well then. I think nurse should be changed like oni she has to start as m1 killer.
0 -
Nurse and Blight can take 4K almost every games?
0 -
If they could get games, absolutely. Or the option to do bot matches.
1
