Passives/Synergies for every survivor

That's why those passives would have to be just "slight improvements to each survivor most basic role". Balancing that shouldn't be that hard.

For example... "Ace" is all about luck. So, overall, his luck would be 2% above "basic luck stats", which is 4%. It's not a huge deal. This idea could also be used on the prestige system. Losing everything you have to get a blood soaked up version of your basic outfit is just outrageous.

In the end, it wouldn't create a "survivor meta", cause it's just a very small "buff" to add some extra identity to each survivor. If you do not play as Feng Ming today cause you don't like her, would you play her if she were 2, 3% quieter when repairing a gen? I really doubt so. It's not "game determinant", and as a killer, unless you're a god amongst us, you can't discern the difference between 3% louder or 3% quieter when it comes to "repairing gens". You'd check that gen either way.

Killers don't need minor passives when they have add-ons such as Iridescent Head (Huntress), Scratched Mirror (Myers), Coxcombed Clapper (Wraith), Black Incense (Plague), etc.

Some add-ons are way too OP for some killers. And it's been like that for a while. If Behavior thought those add-ons were as OP as most people think, they'd have done something about it by now. And it's not because Behavior never judged those add-ons "OP" that they really aren't.

I have a question for you. Do you find the game completely unbalanced at it's current stage?

As I said, those things are easy to balance. If they run tests and find that 105% base movement speed is "too much", they try 3%, 2%. Let's not forget that killers have Bloodlust. So, let's say they change Meg's base movspeed to 102% and that extra 2% gives her 2 extra seconds of chase. It's not like your team mates could do much in this "two extra seconds" you bought them. Best case scenario (but really "BEEEEEEEEEST CASE"), one of your team mates gets close enough to try a flashlight save. But that is being way too optimistic and seeing every player as "pro".

The point is adding identity to each survivor. Plus, those minor passives could synergize well with some perks. I'll take Claudette as an example. With Botany Knowledge, if her passive was "heal team mates 5% faster"... would she consider bringing Botany Knowledge to the match? 33% + 5% = 38%. I would. Specially considering that people often don't heal due to Resilience, and that leads us to a perfectly destroyed endgame.

Nea's the "nimble character". Would I consider equipping Lightweight on her for an extra 1s of it's benefits? Definitely. It's not game breaking, but depending on my playstyle, it could help me a little bit.

As I said, survivors are basically "avatars". They're just "representations" of our differences as humans. We have black folk, white folk, asian folk, the "Barbie" stereotype, the "big booty lady", the "Bully" stereotype... that's all. That's definitely all. It's like survivors were created for us to "see ourselves" in them. This is just weird, honestly. I like the whole idea of perks but... it's not like the game benefit you in any way for deciding to play as Claudette with her 3 basic perks, for deciding to prestige a character. And please, don't even start with "10% more chances of receiving good itens on your bloodweb". I watch streamers a lot and I compare their bloodwebs with mines. It's virtually the same. I barely notice any difference.