Truly, every perk should be underpowered/bad
To really solve meta is to make all survivor perks and killer perks bad. A good example of this is to make every perk like wake up or poised, it really only does one thing at a specific time. If every perk was on the low teir side there would be no meta.
So like change sprint burst to make it where it would only work when healthy which would make it pretty bad, but if every perk is nerfed to the ground what would be considered good and what would be considered bad?. In my brain it sounds like a pretty good idea. So say save the best for last- make you loose all stacks when you hit the obsession. Just major nerfs like that, that just make a perk bad, but major nerf every perk that is considered "good" and boom you got balance and no more meta cause every perk is bad.
Obviously bhvr isn't ever gonna do that cause that's pretty crazy, but I just wanted to put the idea our there and hear opinions on what you guys think.
Comments
-
Yeah having a few clear options being miles above every other perk is boring and leads to very stale metas.
You were for example basically throwing by not taking DH/DS/UB etc.
Now that more exhaustion perks are viable, we are actually seeing more variety, aint that nice.
Dont really have to make them all bad though, nobody likes not having any good options. They just shouldnt be leagues above the rest.
6 -
I wouldn’t want to play with perks that don’t feel like they’re doing anything for me.
I will agree that the power level of some of the best perks in the game is still a bit too high even with DH finally being gone. But perks can be decent without being overpowered. Perks like Poised are just terrible and need buffs. NOBODY uses that crap.
6 -
But what if every perk was as bad as poised? I mean if you think about it, IF there were never any meta perk to begin with and know one really knew what a good perk was and every perk in the game was bad, know one would think it would be bad because there was never anything to compare it to (if there where never any good perks in this game).
Obviously that's not possible because there has been and still are meta and good perks but I'm just throwing out "what if" theories
0 -
If every perk was as bad as poised I think the game would just be a lot more boring for both sides because every perk would have to be nearly useless for that to be true.
Even your example of SB only working while healthy would be better than that.
3 -
So... firstly, meta stands for "most effective tactic available". There will always be a meta. Even if something is only 0.1% better than the other options, it is still better and meta.
Now, narrowing the gap between the meta and off meta options is always a good thing to do. That part of your post I agree with.
However hard nerfing everything is not the way to go. Firstly it kinda breaks player choice. If you can pick 4 perks but all of your options are bad and are barely noticeable then your choices don't matter. Secondly, Loss Aversion is a thing. Heavily nerfing everything will 100% cause massive community backlash and will probably cause people to quit.
2 -
Yeah no. I like it when my Perks do something
0 -
What you should looking at is archetype in order to make people use different playstyle but still get the same result.
Healing Survivors: Med-Kit perks, COH, botnay
Gen Rush Survivors: Prove Thy Self, No Mither, Overzealous
Bleeding Killer: Sloppy, Nurse Calling, STBFL
Exposed Killer: Devour Hope, Haunted Ground, Make Your Choice
Gen Regress: Jolt, overchage, COB
For killer archetype, the effective way to stall game is always gen regress. The other archetype are pretty much required suvivors to make alot of mistakes.
0 -
I think it wouldn't be too bad. I mean a lot of people starting out play games with very few or limited perks, often those which aren't good (which they don't know anyway, but still). I think there's something to be said for toning down power on perks but I do think that that's kind of what the devs just did. Some things have been overpowered for a long time, or should have been basekit and just weren't.
I like to hate on things like autodidact because you tend not to get skill checks once you've gotten it levelled up, or you tend to not be healing many people after that point. Most people aren't doing 5+ heals in the majority of games, it's more like 2-3, I'd say. But while I think autodidact is not worth taking, I do love the style of it, and I'm not sure that if you reduce the strength of perks you won't have things like that cropping up and becoming surprisingly powerful.
Also someone mentioned player choice, but I think about it more in terms of is game diversity. Something has to be a viable choice to create a difference in the game, and while I do think a no perk game can be fun, and is viable, it will probably be less interesting for those who play more than a little. Perk choice gives the game flavour and replayability, tbh.
1 -
If every perk is underpowered
No perk will be
2 -
This is actually a topic that comes up often in fighting games. Is it better to nerf characters and mechanics or buff them?
After a while, the FGC has largely concluded that it is better to try and buff weak aspects of the game to be on par with the stronger aspects, rather than nerf strong aspects to be on par with weak ones. The reason why is largely down to which option feels more interesting or fun to play. When you buff more than you nerf, you tend to get bombastic games like Dragon Ball Fighterz and Marvel Vs. Capcom 3. Conversely, nerfing more than buffing can lead to more stale experiences, like with Street Fighter 5 and Mortal Kombat 11.
It's worth noting that this is not a hard rule, and buffing can absolutely be taken too far. The general idea is to have a relatively moderate or high base level and try to center aspects of the game's balance around that (Tekken 7 is a great example; almost every character is good, none are considered non-viable). If that baseline is too low, things don't feel impactful or satisfying. It may be balanced, but it's no longer fun.
0 -
So maybe instead of nerf all perks to the ground buff all perks to the meta, which technically wouldn't make them meta cause they all just as good
0 -
Rarely ran DH pre "nerf". I use it as my main exhaustion perk now. I used to run sprint burst but then THAT became meta.
0 -
Roughly speaking, yes. My only concern, in this case, would be finding a good baseline that doesn't make the game feel insane. The fighting game philosophy might not translate well into an asymmetrical game, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
0 -
Very interesting. Thanks for the feedback I hope to see you more around the forums.
0 -
With how the community looks at the killer side this concept obviously doesnt work in dbd. Most often only the upper tiers of killers get looked at just to be nerfed. Billy, spirit, nurse currently (again) currently flavor of the month.
The killer tier gap is looked at with OP's approach of "nerf it all down" while the soloswf gap is the "buff it up" example.
Truly some marvelous us vd them bait, lol.
0
