Hatch = free NOED for Survivors
Comments
-
There are counters to the hatch that you just suggested. Slugging the last survivor and denying them is just like cleansing all the totems as survivor to deny NOED. Survivors don't want to have to waste their time cleansing totems for a perk the killer may not even have, and killers don't want to have to slug to deny the hatch for a survivor who may not even know where it is.
Also the hatch has prerequisites that is up to the survivors to fulfill, although small, while NOED has no requirements and is up to the survivors to prevent. Comparing these two just makes no sense. They both have reasonable counters that just boils down to your skill as a survivor or killer
0 -
@Dr_Trauts said:
Power role in sims is different to power role in dead by daylight. Becuase they are 2 totally different games. The term "power role" in sims IS the god-like thing that you describe. In dbd, it is the single character with more power than the 4 opposing characters will little power. The reason they are the power role in dbd is cause theres only 1 of them aganst 4 surivors, hence it being the power role.Except that if you give one side more power than the other the game is not BALANCED. Killers are not meant to be more powerful, even though it's an asymmetrical game. They are meant to be the AGGRESSOR or the ACTOR, while survivors are the DEFENDERS or ACTEE's. You can't have a power role in the versus game and call it balanced.
@Dr_Trauts said:
If you think your right dude than whatever, i guess its just everyone else thats wrongI am right because I actually studied game design in my masters program and worked in UX/QA/game design internships. I read books on the subjects, wrote papers on the subject, DID ACTUAL WORK IN GAME DEV. Killer is not a power role, people need to stop calling it that. Power role implies that the role is in charge of the game and dictates the flow of the game. Killer is NOT in charge of the game and DOES NOT dictate the flow of the game inherently, they have to earn that through the tactics/strategies they employ and through skillful play, just like any other multiplayer versus game. It's not just given to them like it is in games like Sims which have an ACTUAL power role.
1000 years ago everyone believed the plague was caused by "bad air" or was an act of God. But just because that's what everyone believed does not make it true, as we know the plague was caused by a germ spread through rats.
0 -
I am sorry that you refuse to understand and just repeating yourself.thesuicidefox said:@Cymer said:
@thesuicidefox said:
@Dr_Trauts said:
Dude what are you on about. Killer IS the power role. 1 individual with large power against 4 individuals with low power, kind of like quantity over quality to a certain sense. The killer IS the power roleNo its not. Power role means you have total control over the game. Killer does not have this. They are merely an opposing force to survivors, NOT the power role. The fact you think killer is power role says everything about why you feel the way you do about mechanics such as hatch. Killer is not "in charge" of the match in contrast to a REAL power role in a game like Sims where you can control literally everything, and are basically God.
Just because the game is asymmetrical does not automatically make one since a power role.
Stop writing please.
Educate yourself on asymmetrical games, therms like power roles ect.
If you need help, ask in an acceptable manner. People usually likes to help.
Try to be constructive and positive.
Thank you.You guys don't know what a "power role" is, you just toss out the term willy nilly to describe the killer's role in the game.
POWER ROLE means you have total control over the game. Which is why I point to Sim game because that's a power role. You are GOD in those games.
Killer is not GOD in DBD. They are the opposing force to survivors. If you were to describe their "role" it would be the "aggressor" since they are the ones acting on survivors and survivors ultimately have to react to what the killers are doing, ie. the "defender".
Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical game.
4 survivors vs 1 killer.
There is a power disbalance between 1 survivor and 1 killer. In the spirit of the game 1v1 the killer should always win and the survivors have to work together to overcome the greater thread.
Because in theory the killer should overpower a single survivor in a 1v1 scenario he holds the so called power role.1 -
@Cymer said:
I am sorry that you refuse to understand and just repeating yourself.
Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical game.
4 survivors vs 1 killer.
There is a power disbalance between 1 survivor and 1 killer. In the spirit of the game 1v1 the killer should always win and the survivors have to work together to overcome the greater thread.
Because in theory the killer should overpower a single survivor in a 1v1 scenario he holds the so called power role.You keep repeating the same INCORRECT interpretation of a power role. Yes, killers have the advantage in a 1v1 but that does not make it a POWER ROLE. And in some cases, it's actually the survivor that has an advantage. Case and point, 1 survivor left but all gens are done. Survivor is almost guaranteed to escape because the killer can't possibly watch the hatch AND both gates, barring some kind of blessed RNG that puts them all close together. In this case killers have NO POWER over the survivors. If there are cases where a killer has no power over a survivor, then clearly they can't be a POWER ROLE.
Power role is something you see in a Sims game, NOT in an asymmetrical multiplayer versus game. Educate yourself on actual game design before you speak falsities. It's you guys that refuse to understand that you are just parroting words without actually knowing what they mean. You guys are equating tactical advantages to being a power role, yet such things exist in EVERY multiplayer versus game. If you pick up RL in Halo, the most powerful and game changing weapon, are you now a power role? NO! You just have a tactical advantage over your opponent. Nothing more.
0 -
@thesuicidefox said:
@Dr_Trauts said:
Power role in sims is different to power role in dead by daylight. Becuase they are 2 totally different games. The term "power role" in sims IS the god-like thing that you describe. In dbd, it is the single character with more power than the 4 opposing characters will little power. The reason they are the power role in dbd is cause theres only 1 of them aganst 4 surivors, hence it being the power role.Except that if you give one side more power than the other the game is not BALANCED. Killers are not meant to be more powerful, even though it's an asymmetrical game. They are meant to be the AGGRESSOR or the ACTOR, while survivors are the DEFENDERS or ACTEE's. You can't have a power role in the versus game and call it balanced.
@Dr_Trauts said:
If you think your right dude than whatever, i guess its just everyone else thats wrongI am right because I actually studied game design in my masters program and worked in UX/QA/game design internships. I read books on the subjects, wrote papers on the subject, DID ACTUAL WORK IN GAME DEV. Killer is not a power role, people need to stop calling it that. Power role implies that the role is in charge of the game and dictates the flow of the game. Killer is NOT in charge of the game and DOES NOT dictate the flow of the game inherently, they have to earn that through the tactics/strategies they employ and through skillful play, just like any other multiplayer versus game. It's not just given to them like it is in games like Sims which have an ACTUAL power role.
1000 years ago everyone believed the plague was caused by "bad air" or was an act of God. But just because that's what everyone believed does not make it true, as we know the plague was caused by a germ spread through rats.
Im sure that makes you a big noise where from your from. But putting any diplomas or certificates aside, im not saying killer should be more powerful than survivors OVERALL, im saying that killer should be more powerful than a survivor 1v1.
1 -
@thesuicidefox said:
@Cymer said:
I am sorry that you refuse to understand and just repeating yourself.
Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical game.
4 survivors vs 1 killer.
There is a power disbalance between 1 survivor and 1 killer. In the spirit of the game 1v1 the killer should always win and the survivors have to work together to overcome the greater thread.
Because in theory the killer should overpower a single survivor in a 1v1 scenario he holds the so called power role.You keep repeating the same INCORRECT interpretation of a power role. Yes, killers have the advantage in a 1v1 but that does not make it a POWER ROLE. And in some cases, it's actually the survivor that has an advantage. Case and point, 1 survivor left but all gens are done. Survivor is almost guaranteed to escape because the killer can't possibly watch the hatch AND both gates, barring some kind of blessed RNG that puts them all close together. In this case killers have NO POWER over the survivors. If there are cases where a killer has no power over a survivor, then clearly they can't be a POWER ROLE.
Power role is something you see in a Sims game, NOT in an asymmetrical multiplayer versus game. Educate yourself on actual game design before you speak falsities. It's you guys that refuse to understand that you are just parroting words without actually knowing what they mean. You guys are equating tactical advantages to being a power role, yet such things exist in EVERY multiplayer versus game. If you pick up RL in Halo, the most powerful and game changing weapon, are you now a power role? NO! You just have a tactical advantage over your opponent. Nothing more.
This is exactly what im on about, the example that you gave where the killer has no power needs to be changes so they HAVE power. It's ridiculous that 1 survivor can easily escape the killer due to ridiculous game mechanics rewarding a survivors inability to finish all 5 gens. And im not saying that the survivor should have no alternate way out, because that wouldnt be fair either. All i was suggesting was a different endgame than the "hatch stand-off" that almost always ends in the survivors favour.
0 -
@thesuicidefox said:
@Cymer said:
I am sorry that you refuse to understand and just repeating yourself.
Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical game.
4 survivors vs 1 killer.
There is a power disbalance between 1 survivor and 1 killer. In the spirit of the game 1v1 the killer should always win and the survivors have to work together to overcome the greater thread.
Because in theory the killer should overpower a single survivor in a 1v1 scenario he holds the so called power role.You keep repeating the same INCORRECT interpretation of a power role. Yes, killers have the advantage in a 1v1 but that does not make it a POWER ROLE. And in some cases, it's actually the survivor that has an advantage. Case and point, 1 survivor left but all gens are done. Survivor is almost guaranteed to escape because the killer can't possibly watch the hatch AND both gates, barring some kind of blessed RNG that puts them all close together. In this case killers have NO POWER over the survivors. If there are cases where a killer has no power over a survivor, then clearly they can't be a POWER ROLE.
Power role is something you see in a Sims game, NOT in an asymmetrical multiplayer versus game. Educate yourself on actual game design before you speak falsities. It's you guys that refuse to understand that you are just parroting words without actually knowing what they mean. You guys are equating tactical advantages to being a power role, yet such things exist in EVERY multiplayer versus game. If you pick up RL in Halo, the most powerful and game changing weapon, are you now a power role? NO! You just have a tactical advantage over your opponent. Nothing more.
And the example you gave with HALO is ludicrous, yes it is a game changing weapon but in HALO both sides have the same access to weaponary and so skill is a strong indicator. Survivors have no "fighting" stance against killers so to compare the two games doesn't seem fair
1 -
@Dr_Trauts said:
Im sure that makes you a big noise where from your from. But putting any diplomas or certificates aside, im not saying killer should be more powerful than survivors OVERALL, im saying that killer should be more powerful than a survivor 1v1.See but the killer doesn't have power over the survivor, even in a 1v1. They have an ADVANTAGE but having an advantage is not the same has having power over them. A good survivor can still outplay you can get away from a chase and such. Killer has the advantage here because the chase is fruitless since no objectives are being done. You want to make it like the killer has control over survivors, A POWER ROLE, when they don't. Again they are the AGGRESSOR, acting on the survivors and it's up to the survivor, the DEFENDER, to react to the killer accordingly to win.
@Dr_Trauts said:
This is exactly what im on about, the example that you gave where the killer has no power needs to be changes so they HAVE power. It's ridiculous that 1 survivor can easily escape the killer due to ridiculous game mechanics rewarding a survivors inability to finish all 5 gens. And im not saying that the survivor should have no alternate way out, because that wouldnt be fair either. All i was suggesting was a different endgame than the "hatch stand-off" that almost always ends in the survivors favour.If survivors finish all 5 gens then they all have a chance to escape. If they only finish 2 gens, then only 1 has a chance to escape. Killer shouldn't be given POWER (control) over survivors just because they failed to do all their objectives. Again it's an ADVANTAGE, because if the game comes down to 2 survivors with 3 gens left, killer is in the better position and is more likely to win (the outcome when one player has an advantage over another). You're asking that the killer be given something they didn't earn. If you didn't catch the 4th survivor and they escape, you didn't earn it. Period. I've had plenty of survivors elude me all game, yet I bodied the group and only 2 gens got done. You're telling me killer should be given CONTROL over this player? No, they are given an advantage over them but that doesn't guarantee anything. Just increases the chance you will win the 1v1. Just like in Halo, if you pick up RL I can still outplay you and win a duel, it will just be significantly harder for me because you have a giant exploding insta-kill advantage on your shoulder.
Also while I agree hatch standoff (as in both players just standing on/near the hatch waiting for the other to move) is dumb and needs a fix, the hatch itself does not in any way favor the survivor. If anything it favors killer, because they have free reign of the map and have faster movement therefore they are more likely to find it first, an ADVANTAGE in a 2 gen situation where the hatch doesn't even spawn until there is just 1 survivor.
0 -
@thesuicidefox said:
@Dr_Trauts said:
Im sure that makes you a big noise where from your from. But putting any diplomas or certificates aside, im not saying killer should be more powerful than survivors OVERALL, im saying that killer should be more powerful than a survivor 1v1.See but the killer doesn't have power over the survivor, even in a 1v1. They have an ADVANTAGE but having an advantage is not the same has having power over them. A good survivor can still outplay you can get away from a chase and such. Killer has the advantage here because the chase is fruitless since no objectives are being done. You want to make it like the killer has control over survivors, A POWER ROLE, when they don't. Again they are the AGGRESSOR, acting on the survivors and it's up to the survivor, the DEFENDER, to react to the killer accordingly to win.
@Dr_Trauts said:
This is exactly what im on about, the example that you gave where the killer has no power needs to be changes so they HAVE power. It's ridiculous that 1 survivor can easily escape the killer due to ridiculous game mechanics rewarding a survivors inability to finish all 5 gens. And im not saying that the survivor should have no alternate way out, because that wouldnt be fair either. All i was suggesting was a different endgame than the "hatch stand-off" that almost always ends in the survivors favour.If survivors finish all 5 gens then they all have a chance to escape. If they only finish 2 gens, then only 1 has a chance to escape. Killer shouldn't be given POWER (control) over survivors just because they failed to do all their objectives. Again it's an ADVANTAGE, because if the game comes down to 2 survivors with 3 gens left, killer is in the better position and is more likely to win (the outcome when one player has an advantage over another). You're asking that the killer be given something they didn't earn. If you didn't catch the 4th survivor and they escape, you didn't earn it. Period. I've had plenty of survivors elude me all game, yet I bodied the group and only 2 gens got done. You're telling me killer should be given CONTROL over this player? No, they are given an advantage over them but that doesn't guarantee anything. Just increases the chance you will win the 1v1. Just like in Halo, if you pick up RL I can still outplay you and win a duel, it will just be significantly harder for me because you have a giant exploding insta-kill advantage on your shoulder.
Also while I agree hatch standoff (as in both players just standing on/near the hatch waiting for the other to move) is dumb and needs a fix, the hatch itself does not in any way favor the survivor. If anything it favors killer, because they have free reign of the map and have faster movement therefore they are more likely to find it first, an ADVANTAGE in a 2 gen situation where the hatch doesn't even spawn until there is just 1 survivor.
Putting aside the technical terminology of power or agressor or defender as you put it (we both know what we're on about at the end of the day, despite the lack of agreement in term which can be used for a latter diccusion if needed). The original origin of the discussion revolving around the hatch, you stated that "your asking that the killer be given something they didn't earn". Well, if the group of survivors are not able to complete all 5 generators then a hatch is opened for the last survivor correct? where-as if all 5 generators are completed for the survivors the killer is given nothing in return. In both examples the respected side were not able to completely finish their overall objectives, but it is only the survivor that still has the POSSIBILITY of success, and whilst you can say "but the killer can still kill at the end of the game", the survivors can still technically do generators. The survivor is given the advantage in these bad situations so instead of the game getting progressively harder (as should be the case) the game instead gets easier as there is a free escape available of no opening timings or skill required.
And whilst you say killers have free reign over the map, they still have to hit survivors twice in order to down them with the same movement speed they keep from the rest of the match. The reason i say the hatch is unfair is also because if the killer finds it first, he cant do anything. he cant close it, he cant do anything but leave it and look for the survivor (which is risky as the survivor could easily walk by and jump in) or camp it and hope either the survivor doesnt complete the remaining generators and escape through the exit gates or hope that he doesnt lose the hatch standoff when the survivor eventually does find the hatch. These are the basic reasons why the whole endgame is entirely in the survivors favour as no perk or set of offerings is needed for the hatch to exist, whilst NOED sacrifices a much needed perk slot for the killer (and can be easily countered).
1 -
@FireHazard said:
@powerbats said:
The only one missing the point here is you, it's not about the hatch standoff, if someone sneaks by you to get the hatch they outplayed you plain and simple.
If you get them before they get to the hatch you outplayed them plain and simple, if either one does a hatch standoff it's an ego contest.
Clarify the first point then next time cause you made it sound like you were implying this towards the hatch stand off.
I stand by what I said about who finds who first, its basically a gamble if they even have SC or not, and if they have urban evasion or not. A whole lot of factors play into this, Do they know where it is if 4 gens were done? Do they have SC? Are they good at stealth? Can I catch them before they find hatch on first swing? And what if they weren't hurt in the first place when the 3rd person died? then what...
Its a gamble, there's no skill involved in it, skill only happens when the chase is engaged when the killer actually finds them somehow.
Apologies for that, I'd meant to do so and got sidetracked in games, the hard part is of course solving the hatch standoff in a way that's fair for both sides.
0 -
@Dr_Trauts said:
Putting aside the technical terminology of power or agressor or defender as you put it (we both know what we're on about at the end of the day, despite the lack of agreement in term which can be used for a latter diccusion if needed).The technical terms means a lot, because when you say "power role" you imply that killer is meant to have some sort of control over survivors. When someone else hears that term, they think that, which may not be your intent. It's like if I were to called someone like Donald Trump an IDIOT, when I really mean UNQUALIFIED. They carry much different ideas and people take them in a much different manner. (To be clear, he is unqualified, but not an idiot, IMO because he lacks the political experience to do the job properly NOT the intelligence to do the job. There is a huge difference. But I digress, I'm not about to get into politics just making a point about why precise terms are important).
The original origin of the discussion revolving around the hatch, you stated that "your asking that the killer be given something they didn't earn". Well, if the group of survivors are not able to complete all 5 generators then a hatch is opened for the last survivor correct? where-as if all 5 generators are completed for the survivors the killer is given nothing in return. In both examples the respected side were not able to completely finish their overall objectives, but it is only the survivor that still has the POSSIBILITY of success, and whilst you can say "but the killer can still kill at the end of the game", the survivors can still technically do generators. The survivor is given the advantage in these bad situations so instead of the game getting progressively harder (as should be the case) the game instead gets easier as there is a free escape available of no opening timings or skill required.
But the survivors DID earn it. They did at least 2 gens, which earns the GROUP the opportunity for at least 1 to escape. The more gens they do, the more they increase the chance for everyone to escape. Just like as killer, the more you kill the more you increase the chance you will kill another because their objectives are now harder to do. This is where the "anit-hatch" side's logic keeps failing. You keep saying "survivors didn't earn the escape" but fail to acknowledge that they don't ALL get to escape. Only 1 gets the CHANCE to do it. Doing all gens gives all of them that same chance.
And whilst you say killers have free reign over the map, they still have to hit survivors twice in order to down them with the same movement speed they keep from the rest of the match. The reason i say the hatch is unfair is also because if the killer finds it first, he cant do anything. he cant close it, he cant do anything but leave it and look for the survivor (which is risky as the survivor could easily walk by and jump in) or camp it and hope either the survivor doesnt complete the remaining generators and escape through the exit gates or hope that he doesnt lose the hatch standoff when the survivor eventually does find the hatch. These are the basic reasons why the whole endgame is entirely in the survivors favour as no perk or set of offerings is needed for the hatch to exist, whilst NOED sacrifices a much needed perk slot for the killer (and can be easily countered).
Which is why you shouldn't just camp the hatch if you actually want to catch the last survivor. Every time I have ever done that, the last survivor would legit get away because they just need to get close enough now I can't really stop them. The times where I did catch the last survivor before they hatch it was because I left the hatch and found them clear across the map.
Also if you ever played survivor against any sort of competent killer, you're not going to finish 3 gens. You will be lucky if you finish 1. You are better off doing something to bait the killer away from the hatch. And while I've personally managed to do 3 gens by myself when everyone was dead, every single time it was because the killer just stood on the hatch the whole time and made it impossible to use, thus forcing me to do gens if I want to escape (or go for a hatch standoff which is just a game of "who is more stubborn" that I never want to play). If they ever left the hatch and caught me on the gen, I was dead, unless I managed to outplay them and reach the hatch.
Like I said there should be something in place to prevent a hatch STANDOFF. And I agree that end game needs some tweaks because unless you have end game perks it's pretty much a GG for killer if 3 or 4 survivors are left. However it doesn't mean that hatch should be removed or changed to make it a super easy 4k for killers than only really got a 3k. That's is ultimately what this thread is about; salty killers asking for a 4k. Most of them don't care about balance, they just want the hatch gone or want some super OP thing they can do to remove hatch as an option (eg. closing hatch). That's not a good solution. A good solution would keep the hatch mechanic but solve the standoff issues such that games don't just devolve into a staring contest.
1 -
I mentioned this in a previous thread. Not a perfect fix in terms of fairness. Players are welcome to weigh game mechanics differently. However, the only two mechanics I hear players speak of rewarding poor game play/performance for either side involves the Hatch and NOED.
MY THOUGHTS
- Remove NOED
- Remove Hatch
No One Gets Rewarded For Poor Game Play/Performance
I am not a user of NOED and I am far from a "hatch king" - Monto
So I could see these two cancel each other out and continue on with my killer & survivor games without being affected.
0 -
The game could implement the same effect as NOED as soon as the hatch opens, maybe that would balance things a bit?
0 -
@xmenfanatic said:
The game could implement the same effect as NOED as soon as the hatch opens, maybe that would balance things a bit?I thought this could be a viable option as well.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
@White_Owl said:
As a killer your survival depends on other three guys that might be literally braindead? No.
NOED rewards you if you fail as killer, the hatch compensates for having a bad team.So what your saying is noed is rewarding losing but somehow failing to complete all 5 generators and running out of the exit gates and everyone dying but one equals spawing a free escape on the map isn't rewarding a player for losing? Ok lol
2 -
@ThirdSealOPplzNerf said:
@White_Owl said:
As a killer your survival depends on other three guys that might be literally braindead? No.
NOED rewards you if you fail as killer, the hatch compensates for having a bad team.So what your saying is noed is rewarding losing but somehow failing to complete all 5 generators and running out of the exit gates and everyone dying but one equals spawing a free escape on the map isn't rewarding a player for losing? Ok lol
Yes, unless you're so delusional to think you're able to repair 5 gens and open the gates while keeping the other survivors alive all by yourself. This is not a team game, if the other survivors fail it doesn't mean the last one did. The killer on the other hand is alone, and his mistakes are only on him.
2 -
What annoys me to no end in these conversations is when people are discussing one topic, people try to bring in other stuff to justify it.
"You don't like NOED? What about DS?"
"You don't like the hatch? What about the pink mori?"
"You don't like omega blink Nurse? What about SWF?"I understand where this comes from, but that shouldn't be the answer. Fixing annoying crap with more annoying crap isn't the way to go.
3 -
@White_Owl said:
@ThirdSealOPplzNerf said:
@White_Owl said:
As a killer your survival depends on other three guys that might be literally braindead? No.
NOED rewards you if you fail as killer, the hatch compensates for having a bad team.So what your saying is noed is rewarding losing but somehow failing to complete all 5 generators and running out of the exit gates and everyone dying but one equals spawing a free escape on the map isn't rewarding a player for losing? Ok lol
Yes, unless you're so delusional to think you're able to repair 5 gens and open the gates while keeping the other survivors alive all by yourself. This is not a team game, if the other survivors fail it doesn't mean the last one did. The killer on the other hand is alone, and his mistakes are only on him.
Except one or two mistake equals a loss and there isn't any in game mechanic that just randomly kills a survivor and fall on the floor like a dc for losing is there? Ranking up as survivor isn't that hard even with bad teammates just doing saves and a couple gens with some heals is a pip. If hatch is a second chance to win the game then the killer should get one too. Or just let killers close it or remove it from the game.
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k95DSQbQmJY
