The way people refer to killer a whole is so weird to me
When talking about QoL it's fine to group killers as a whole.
Talking about something universally annoying like tunneling and camping is fine as well.
But I constantly see "killer is too weak" "killer is too strong" .
Unless trapper and freddy are actually op in their current state I think it's better to differentiate it within each argument.
All of the A tier killers are on a whole other plain of existence compared to the D tier killers.
I'm fairly convinced when I see some people talking about how bad killer is they main some of these low skill expression, bad killers.
On the other side I sure hope survivors spouting the inverse aren't talking about killers being too strong in anything but A tier or higher, at least there's an argument to be made there with how strong tunneling is atm.
Anyways I see this a ton here and wanted to say something.
Comments
-
Unless trapper and freddy are actually op in their current state
Of course they are. Can a non-OP killer do what I just did:
4k on GoJ, clearly OP.
/s
All jokes aside, it is interesting how a discussion completely changes depending on which killer each participant mains.
5 -
I guess your fundamentals are just too strong.
3 -
Then you didn't see the "TS Myers needs to go" posts...
1 -
Oh I did. Ts myers does need to go.
Just because that terrible killers goes up 500%+ in power level due to an add-on doesn't mean it's ok.
9 -
When we talk about survivor we assume every survivor is a trash soloq player when we talk about killer every killer is a 4000 hour 4 meta perk using Nurse that's the rules
10 -
But that misses your point in your op. You said survivors are only complaining about A+ tier Killers, not D tier Killers.
Unless you think that Myers is A tier.
1 -
There are a lot of factors put into the strengths of each Killer, but one that's overlooked is the skill of the player. I've seen some arguments where someone will complain how bad a Killer is and become defensive when it's pointed out how decent the Killer actually is.
In the end, I think all Killers have an average of over 50% kill rate (or nearly all), which makes me feel they are all viable. Sure, there will be Trials where a Killer won't stand a chance, but that's as much to do with the abilities of the opponent as it is the power of the Killer. I've beaten strong 4 man swfs as Trapper and also been hammered by even stronger teams, but it's all subjective at the end of the day.
I do believe a Killer can be called "weak" compared with other Killers though - hence Tier lists. That's not a bad thing in my eyes though. It feels like a difficulty Tier.
1 -
Myers is D tier unless tombstone. You know that obviously.
1 -
The killers being differentiated by skill level and strength is fine. But you would have to live under a rock to not know blight is around twice as strong as trapper base kit wise.
All killers are only viable when survivors are bad enough to allow you to play them effectively.
2 -
Even with TS he is low B at best. Lockers exist and most survivors know to spam actions or sit on a Gen not to get mori'd.
4 -
They know, but catching one survivor out is insta win. You catch one and you have negated the effort of deleting 3 of one survivors health states. You know it's easy to catch even a good survivor out of position, they don't have the positioning.
1 -
Also, the norm is 0K. Somehow.
1 -
Alot of killers in forum admitted that they are at high MMR. Some manage to have 90% kill rate. So you are correct!
2 -
Only wish they were.
I couldn't tell the whole story in that comment because it would spoil the fun, but as a matter of fact they threw this match. Because when the Nea was about to get hooked for the last time, all of them showed up to bodyblock.
And that resulted in 2 survivors down.
Things just snowballed from there. They did manage to complete the last generator, but it was already too late.
1 -
That was never in question, nor in debate. Blight is a better Killer than Trapper but doesn't deter from the point.
Also, it's not always about how bad a Survivor is that determines a viable Killer; it's skill in general on both sides, alongside rng and many other factors that determines a game. The losing side isn't always bad.
2 -
Sometimes the winning side is just better. But I like how Sava pretty much re-emphasized that certain (I guess ‘B or lower’) killers are only viable if survivors are really bad. Didn’t the best team in the world lose to a Skull Merchant though? 🤔
0 -
To comment generally... the game has a really interesting way of making you feel like each side is incredibly underpowered.
Momentum plays such a big role in the outcome of many trials. Sometimes perks determine whether or not you can keep momentum, sometimes it's the Killer's power. Either way, its frustrating to feel like you dont have momentum
0 -
There are no weak killers. Maybe few like Trapper or Leatherface I guess you can define as "weak"
0 -
I don't remember typing that comment I'm really sick right now. Just ignore it
"All killers are only viable when survivors are bad enough to allow you to play them effectively."
0 -
I think they won with minutes to spare. That was a rare occasion where a Killer was so horrendously badly designed that such a scenario was possible in the first place.
I'd argue the segment about B tier or lower Killers only viable if Survivors are really bad. That could be seen as insulting to those who play those Killers well, claiming they only win because Survivors were crap, when that's unsubstantiated.
0 -
There are like five killers who are actually weak i'd say. Freddy, Trapper, Pig, Legion, and Myers without addons. If people routinely get destroyed as anyone else then it's most likely a skill issue. Even "weak" killers like Clown have good anti loop. I honestly can't take "killer is weak" arguments seriously after watching that group of comp killers winning 90% of their games as an M1 trapper with no power. A lot of people are just coping hard.
0
