Missed skill checks on generators should regress them further

Orion

This is my suggestion on how to buff Killer perks and abilities that are supposed to make skill checks harder, as well as make missed skill checks more relevant.

Instead of having missed skill checks regress generator progress by a set amount, have the amount be dependent on the total completion of the generator. The exact percentage may need adjustments, but I recommend starting at 33% on a PTB and lowering it to 25% if 33% proves to be too much.

My idea allows new Survivors to get used to skill checks without being punished too much (even 33% is not that much if you've barely started a generator), while buffing skill check perks by making them more effective at slowing down the Survivors if they miss a skill check later on.

xxaggieboyxx

I do agree skill checks should regress further but 33% even 25% is too much 

Orion

@xxaggieboyxx said:
I do agree skill checks should regress further but 33% even 25% is too much 

If you could hypothetically regress a fully repaired generator by 33%, it'd be an additional 26.666(...) seconds of repair time, and that's the worst case scenario. 25% would be an additional 20 seconds. That's not too much, IMO.

Global

Missed skill checks should regress it further giving Unnerving Presence a reason for actually existing and could be a good combo with Distressing giving both perks a good place to be used.

Nos37

Instead of regressing the gens further with missed skill checks, increase the duration before the gen can be worked on again (10-15 seconds)

Orion

@Nos37 said:
Instead of regressing the gens further with missed skill checks, increase the duration before the gen can be worked on again (10-15 seconds)

That would be the same as just doubling/tripling the current regression penalty, if I'm not mistaken.
My idea allows new Survivors to get used to skill checks without being punished too much (even 1/3 is not that much if you've barely started a generator), while buffing skill check perks by making them more effective at slowing down the Survivors.

Nos37

It would be a deterrent. If you mess up, move on to another gen.

Orion

@Nos37 said:
It would be a deterrent. If you mess up, move on to another gen.

I edited my comment to add more of my thought process behind my idea.
10-15 seconds should be about the length of time it'd take you to reach a new generator anyway, and the Killer is already coming for you, so you'll have to leave it (eventually) whether you want to or not.

Nos37

My point, really, is that there are two ways to punish failed skill checks. The exact numbers are arbitrary and adjustable.

Orion

@Nos37 said:
My point, really, is that there are two ways to punish failed skill checks. The exact numbers are arbitrary and adjustable.

I'm sure there are many ways to do it. My point is that your suggestion is equivalent to simply increasing the numbers in the current method, and becomes pointless given what usually happens when Survivors miss skill checks.

Chi

This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

Orion

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

Jack11803

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

Orion

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

If I'm not mistaken, 10% of all skill checks are missed, across all ranks. The difference between new players and "pros" is not significant in terms of balance, since you're supposed to balance taking into consideration the "pros". Furthermore, SWF and solo have no bearing on skill checks.

Jack11803

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

If I'm not mistaken, 10% of all skill checks are missed, across all ranks. The difference between new players and "pros" is not significant in terms of balance, since you're supposed to balance taking into consideration the "pros". Furthermore, SWF and solo have no bearing on skill checks.

Never said they do. Also, about 1% of players are rank 1 so....

Orion

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

If I'm not mistaken, 10% of all skill checks are missed, across all ranks. The difference between new players and "pros" is not significant in terms of balance, since you're supposed to balance taking into consideration the "pros". Furthermore, SWF and solo have no bearing on skill checks.

Never said they do. Also, about 1% of players are rank 1 so....

You did. It was literally one of your arguments for why you said this change was dumb.
So skill checks all around need to be more noticeable. Both in difficulty and in impact on the game.

Jack11803

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

If I'm not mistaken, 10% of all skill checks are missed, across all ranks. The difference between new players and "pros" is not significant in terms of balance, since you're supposed to balance taking into consideration the "pros". Furthermore, SWF and solo have no bearing on skill checks.

Never said they do. Also, about 1% of players are rank 1 so....

You did. It was literally one of your arguments for why you said this change was dumb.
So skill checks all around need to be more noticeable. Both in difficulty and in impact on the game.

I said the difference beftween solo and SWF is the core reason for all balance issues. Guess I was right in that one thread, you really are bad at reading.

Orion

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Jack11803 said:

@Orion said:

@Chi said:
This would make the game hellish to play for the lower ranked people.

As I explained, the regression would be very small at the start. 33% of 10% (for example) is a minuscule amount.

The problem with balance is the massive difference between solo and SWF / noob and pro. No good player fails a skill check except once in a blue moon. Making this differential bigger is dumb.

If I'm not mistaken, 10% of all skill checks are missed, across all ranks. The difference between new players and "pros" is not significant in terms of balance, since you're supposed to balance taking into consideration the "pros". Furthermore, SWF and solo have no bearing on skill checks.

Never said they do. Also, about 1% of players are rank 1 so....

You did. It was literally one of your arguments for why you said this change was dumb.
So skill checks all around need to be more noticeable. Both in difficulty and in impact on the game.

I said the difference beftween solo and SWF is the core reason for all balance issues. Guess I was right in that one thread, you really are bad at reading.

You also said "noob and pro". Maybe you're just bad at writing.

Jack11803

@Orion

Separeted by a backslash, with the latter and former having each individual word separates by and. They were both examples, but not the same. Your name should be prion, because you’re giving my brain a disease.