A COMPLETE Critique of DIMINISHING RETURNS (And solutions)

AlwaysInAGoodShape

INTRO:
Let me first start off by saying, I am on the same side of the Devs on many of the goals they have set out for the game. One of these goals is halting over the top gen-rushing, as well as preventing problematic stacking values through Diminishing Return systems, and allowing safer designs of newer perks without causing new problems. This critique however is solely and exclusively aimed at targeting the current specific implementation method that is proposed by the Devs to solve those problems. So keep in mind that when reading this post, I have the same goal as the Devs in solving these problems, but will recommend, what I believe to be, the better way to address these things.

THE CHANGE:

For those of you that don't know, this picture illustrates the changes proposed by the Devs.

MY CRITIQUE:
1.
This current implementation of Diminishing Returns in my view, will randomly slap players in the face who aren't running stacked perks that cause problems; Like Botany Knowledge + Empathic Connection, which only gives a total of 85% healing speed, which is nowhere near a problematic range. Therefore, my first argument against it is; this system creates unnecessary casualties in achieving the goals the Devs set out to achieve and unnecessarily limits build variety
2.
The system runs on assumptions;
You might wonder how they got to the modifier distribution of 100%, 50%, 25%, 12.5% and 5%, because this will prove to be important. Whether you agree with this distribution or not or would be adjusted, it will always run on an assumption; That problematic stacking values can only be achieved by a 4+ perk build (or x perk build).
For those of you who weren't here in 2019 when Save the Best for Last + Unrelenting had to be nerfed because their combined value by itself reached problematic levels, you'd realize that even a 2 perk combo can reach problematic values. Now, with a diminishing returns system that's built on the assumption that only 4 perk combos can be problematic, having a total distribution of 100 + 50 + 25 + 12.5 = 187.5% and more with potential other effects adding to it, this would once again limit the Developing perks with similar effects to avoid people being able to run 4 such perks. And the even bigger problem is; you cannot solve this through this diminishing returns system, because it's built on the assumption that only 4 perk combos can be problematic. If you'd adjust the diminishing return distribution by the Devs to counter a 2 perk combo, you would absolutely gut any 3 or 4 perk combo, or would need to add a lot more complexity to the system to solve this.
Therefore, my critique is also; their system builds on assumptions, and those assumptions will still limit the Devs freedom of future perk design
3.
It never truly solved the problem
As you just saw in point 2, we never even truly solved the problem. This diminishing returns system still allows problematic values to be reached. Nothing ever prevented it from happening. After all, this current system doesn't even allow us to define which problematic values shouldn't be allowed to be reached. But guesstimates that if we pray that we nerf 4 perk combos back into a 2 perk combo that those problems just won't take place, and accepting all the other negative side-consequences and casualties in the process, but even with this; we can still reach problematic values. (You can do the 10 million% movement speed experiment; if we give 4 perks 10 million % movement speed, would that be a problem? If yes, then the diminishing return problem hasn't been inherently solved)
4.
Categories; as some of you may have already pointed out, such a Diminishing returns system wouldn't quite interact with certain perk combos, such as gen rushing builds where the problem comes from multiple systems interacting, from skill checks to raw speed, to max gen length, etc. Similar from stacked Gen Slowdown builds that build on regression, as well as gen blocking, explosions, etc.
Nothing in this system addresses those problems. (Which in itself is not a problem, but more on that later)

THE SOLUTION:
So like I said, I completely agree with the Devs on the many goals they've set, which is why I hope they settle on a different solution; the right solution. Which I believe to be made of 2 separate parts;

1.
Diminishing Returns:
The perfect solution to diminishing returns is actually rather simple. Such a system would allow us to define a value (a tipping point), at which we'd want to start seeing diminishing returns. After that, we'd be allowed to define a value that should never be allowed to be succeeded (hard cap). And then, whenever survivors stack perks, the further they go over the tipping point, the harder it starts to diminish, approaching but never reaching the hard cap.
In one of my posts, I've explained in great detail with how such a system could be implemented: Diminishing Returns & New Perk Keywords — BHVR

Implementation:

Using it:

It would require less then 20 lines of code and solve the problem regarding problematically stacked values forever. It would be super easy for the Devs to work with, as all they'd have to do is define a tipping point, and a hard cap for each problematic value, like vaulting-speed, healing-speed, movement-speed, lunge-recovery, etc. while having completely fine-tuned control

Why this would achieve the Devs vision more perfectly?
REASON 1:
There are no more random casualties! Let's say we defined the tipping point for healing speed at 400% and the hard cap at 600%, perk combos like Empathic Connection and Botany Knowledge would no longer receive an undeserved nerf, as their total only reaches 85%, and diminishing would only start at totals for over 400%.

REASON 2:
The system makes no assumptions; This means that it's irrelevant whether a 2 perk combo or a 4 perk combo could achieve problematic values, the issue would always be blocked from occurring. Let's say for whatever reason 2 movement stacked perks would give a survivor 15% extra movement speed. If we set the tipping point at 5% and the hard cap at 10%, it would matter not if it would take 2 or 4 perks to reach a problematic value since this diminishing return system would solve those values equally. And that brings us to advantage 3;

REASON 3:
Unlimited design freedom; Since this system makes no assumptions, the Devs would be able to design as many movement speed perks, m1 hit recovery perks, or whatever type of perk indefinitely without ever having to worry that their stacked value could cause issues. Once the proper tipping point and hard cap are set, the issue is solved for that category forever

REASON 4:
Robustness; It is almost comedic how good this system works, because not only can you freely design perks without having to worry about them reaching problematic values. You could design a movement speed perk, have your cat walk onto your keyboard and having it type in a value of 10 million% movement speed and push the perk to production, then the game would not break and killers would not have any problem downing survivors who run this perk, due to how robust the system is, as that 10 mill movement speed would only contribute to approaching towards the hard cap, but never reaching it, which is also how you know; you have the perfect system on your hands; The ultimate safeguard.

2.
Now with diminishing returns on stacked values solved, we need to move to the second solution, as we still have to address problems where perks that use different systems, like Hyperfocus (skillchecks), Deja Vu (Genspeed) and Fast Track (Permanent Gen Progress) stack together.
Now let me propose something maybe more surprising here; It is not the job of any perk based diminishing returns system to solve this issue; I believe this issue is better solved through a Minimum Gamelength Mechanic, which would be a separate system that tracks the total amounts of forms of progress that are applied to generators, and uses it's own diminishing return method on it. Which could very well borrow from our own diminishing return formula. (Now it is outside of the scope of this post to detail such system, and such a thing is deserving of its own post, so I will not cover it more here)

If we design such a Minimal Gamelength Mechanic, it would prevent not only perks, but also toolboxes, addons, etc from speeding up the minimal gametime of the game, allowing killers a fair chance to play out the game, but would still provide the shorter term boosts in speed that such tools can provide over the longer course of the game, to provide chances for comebacks, etc.

DISAGREEMENT:
Now with all my critiques covered and solutions covered, there is 1 thing I disagree with with the vision of the Devs; nerfing Gen Regression builds. I do not wish to destroy the gen regression META, for the perhaps surprising reason that it is in fact the HEALTHIEST meta that we can have in the game, from (quite literally), a survivors standpoint. All that gen regression does, is buy more time for the killer to play the game, and leaves the entire game intact; fun and interactives chases, etc. Any other meta would be significantly worse; no survivor enjoys strong anti loop builds, where they just run into a window just to discover some obscure perk has blocked it, and ending up with them dead on the spot. Neither will it be enjoyable for them to be healing, just to be interrupted and instantly downed, because they were revealed by some sort of information perk; Gen Regression meta is the healthiest meta we could have wished for, and I hope the Devs realize that too. Forgive the survivors advocating for the opposite, as they are blindsided by the sole intent of winning the game, and nerfing things they are losing to, because the future they are building is plainly worse.

END NOTE:
I think the initiatives by the Devs are overall great, which is why I really hope that they settle with the right solution, as settling with the wrong decision can lead to a lack of build variety and overall fun, when we have the perfect solution on our hands. Build variety, and niche builds are what's fun, and will undoubtedly become casualties if the current system goes through. So let's hope we achieve the Devs vision through this healthier way of doing it, so that us niche builders can keep enjoying their niche builds in peace, while making the game healthier overall ❤️