Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Dead Hard is a perk that gives too much value.
If you had to ask me what the most useful survivor perk in the game was, I would have to say Dead Hard. Is the perk super powerful? No. Does it stop any tactics like decisive strike? No. So why is it the most useful?
As the title states, it gives way too much value to any survivor using it. But what do I mean by value? When I say value, I am referring to the benefits the perks give you at the cost of using it. For example, sprint burst can be used against killers like Ghost Face to avoid getting instantly downed and get to a loop, but you have to walk everywhere and you can't use other exhaustion perks. Dead Hard, on the other hand, has no downsides to running it. You can still run other exhaustion perks, (mind you still shouldn't do it, but it is better than running say lithe and sprint burst together.)
But what about the benefits? Dead Hard is, without a doubt, the most versatile exhaustion perk in the game. The only times it is not useful is if you are getting instadowned, but only a select few things can do that (*insert chainsaw noises*). So what does Dead Hard let you do?
- It lets you make it to a Pallet or Vault that was just a little too far.
- It lets you, at any time, make some distance between you and the killer.
- It lets you dodge attacks by phasing through the killer.
That is a lot of things that just one perk enables you to do. That is the problem with this perk, it is just ONE perk. The value you can get from compared to what you are giving up makes it a no brainer to use. So how do you fix it? Simple. You just split the perk. Make one perk that is based around Use 1 and 2, and make another perk that is based around Use 3.
Overall, the perk is not overpowered, it just needs to have a higher opportunity cost to make other perks more worth running.
Comments
-
Really, Dead Hard for Distance is the only thing I personally dislike about the perk, but I prefer it a lot more compared to Sprint Burst. With most killers it's easily baitable, and I have no idea how many times I've seen and experienced the good ol' 'Exhausted on The Ground' problem. Could it use some fine tuning? Sure, but all the M E T A perks could use some fine tuning.
8 -
Yeah, it sucks. You make an awesome read or mind game and then the survivor press "E" to outplay you and possibly restart the chase again
24 -
Dead hard does have a downside to running it. You have to be injured to be able to use it, which is not a favorable position to be in.
10 -
Well personally i think its fine.
DH for distance is basically worse than any other exaustion perk but were deadhard gets its strength and why people use it the most is because it only prerequisite is that you have to be injured which happens basically every match.
And my favorite reason of why i use it is because it lets you do riskier plays, and riskier plays make games more interesting so i think its good.
11 -
That isn't a downside. If you aren't injured then you don't need the perk in the first place. That leaves you in a win/win situation using it.
11 -
Dead hard, imo, is broken strong when it works. It's a crutch for bad survivors, but put it on a good survivor? Yeah, you're never catching that person.
The issue comes from the fact that it means you have to outplay the survivor one extra time per chase, and that's a fair amount of time. Even if it only adds about 10 seconds to the chase, that could be the difference between 2 gens being pressured, and 1.
6 -
I Disagree that is a downside. By your logic resilience and this is not happening also have no downside either.
7 -
I don't get the people who will complain about dead hard for distance when all the other exhaustion perks give you like 5x the distance. People will come here and say "dead hard for distance has no counterplay" when neither does people sprint bursting off gens. And sprint bursting off gens is significantly more annoying when used en masse by survivors since you will never start a chase in a good position.
The buffed mindbreaker is a very good answer if you hate it that much and are on a killer who can close the distance on gens without spooking people off them, either through a natural low TR or by using monitor and abuse along side it.
8 -
I'd say that if the devs actually got dead hard working well with dedicated servers and latency then you might have a point. As things are now you could still bait out dead hard cuz survivors need to compensate the timing for server issues. Same thing with extending loops.
0 -
Those aren't comparable because you're referring to not being able to use an effect to help you escape a chase but you don't need the perk to save you in a chase if you aren't already injured. IE being uninjured negates the need for the effect in the first place.
Your examples require you to be injured but they don't counteract themselves.
If your two examples were second chance effects then they would be comparable.
If you aren't injured you don't need a second chance. If you are injured you get the second chance. When is that ever a losing situation?
9 -
It's a perk. It's supposed to give you an ability you normally would not have. It doesn't need to have a losing situation or downside.
And resilience will absolutely save you in chases, even in spots where dead hard might not. With resilience and spine chill you lob through windows so fast the killer has to pre-swing at every window or they will never hit you.
2 -
I think you being hyperbolic when using the term losing situation. That terms implies that its a perfect strategy that that always work 100 percent of the time when it can sometimes have the opposite effect.
And you can potentially argue that resilience is a second chance perks since it provides a buff to action speeds and also can extend chases if used well, which by your logic also provides a losing situation.
2 -
"I think you being hyperbolic when using the term losing situation. That terms implies that its a perfect strategy that that always work 100 percent of the time when it can sometimes have the opposite effect."
The only time it's not working is player error. Otherwise yes, it is working every time if the person plays correctly. That said, even it wasn't 100% of the time that is irrelevant. That wouldn't change my point being accurate at all.
"And you can potentially argue that resilience is a second chance perks since it provides a buff to action speeds and also can extend chases if used well, which by your logic also provides a losing situation."
I could see that argument if it was substantial enough to matter in the chase. However, it's not. The effect is near placebo it's so small.
1 -
No, perks are supposed to have a cost, downside, requirement etc per the devs own words.
Not to mention you're talking about one of the strongest perks in the game having none of those. I could at least see your argument if it was a mediocre effect as that would have some balancing in tow.
The times Resilience is saving you is mostly in your head. It can make a difference, but it is extremely minute and more placebo than anything.
2 -
Absolutely not. Resilience was meta for a while when the window hits were extremely killer sided. Now they have been buffed significantly, and the vault build is as relevant as ever.
The only "cost" of most of the perks in the game is the slot they take up and what could be in their place. What's the downside of something like botany knowledge? Or the downside of bond, sloppy butcher, etc? There are none, only what you could have in that spot instead.
7 -
No, Resilience was never meta at all.
Botany Knowledge isn't getting its full effect without using a medkit and you're deciding to spend gen time on healing.
Note that I said the criteria that the devs stated they want to get the perks to. I did not say that all perks currently fit that criteria.
I think the devs were referring to having that criteria for stronger effects, not necessarily all perks in general. IE Bond would probably fit this criteria. However a second chance like Dead Hard clearly fits the top standard for this.
0 -
"The only time it's not working is player error."
I'm sorry but thats wrong. I and many people on the forum can attest to this that it does not work 100% of the time and it not player error but an error with the servers.
"That said, even it wasn't 100% of the time that is irrelevant. That wouldn't change my point being accurate at all."
Actually it does change your point from being accurate. You claim that using dead hard doesn't produce a losing situation but logically speaking if something in the game doesn't work when its supposed to it creates a losing situation, which dead hard can produce that situation. Thus your claim is still hyperbolic.
"I could see that argument if it was substantial enough to matter in the chase. However, it's not. The effect is near placebo it's so small."
Thats not what were arguing though. We are taking about dear hard and resilience not having downsides even when injured, not how substantial of an impact it makes. Based on what was previously said it could still both dead hard and resilience are comparable.
2 -
All these "top tier" survivors say it's amazing because it's bad? Noob3 ran it, and after that video I saw it so many times in my games. I can literally tell when a survivor is running it when I am the killer because they go through the windows so fast.
And if you are telling me botany knowledge has a downside because you have to heal people, I don't know what to say. It's a core action in DBD buffed by a perk. There is no downside to that.
3 -
A youtuber meme'ing with some perks does not make them meta dude rofl. Even if we hypothetically say he was using it because he thinks it's crazy strong, that doesn't make it meta. That isn't what the word meta means. Meta does not mean strong, it means popular among top tier players for winning, of which it was not.
Many youtubers make videos exaggerating how strong perks are for views(not saying there's anything wrong with that, but just making my point.). You are taking click bait on youtube too seriously.
"And if you are telling me botany knowledge has a downside because you have to heal people, I don't know what to say. It's a core action in DBD buffed by a perk. There is no downside to that."
Top tier players don't waste time healing when they want to win. So yes, wasting time healing is a downside.
Post edited by Blueberry on4 -
The difference is, the perk is typically used in a chase right? So all you do is loop normally, then when you inevitably get hit, now you have a dead hard. It's not like you have to go out of your to be injured at the start of a chase. You just use it normally as a chase progresses. Typically a killer will eventually hit you, it's just a matter of when. And the problem is that, unlike the other exhaustion perks, it restarts a chase and give you essentially an "extra life", You have to win 3 chases now instead of just 2 to down the survivor.
2 -
"I'm sorry but thats wrong. I and many people on the forum can attest to this that it does not work 100% of the time and it not player error but an error with the servers."
Server ping only matters when you are attempting to use it for an invulnerability frame. If you use it for simply distance you don't have any errors related to server ping.
"Actually it does change your point from being accurate. You claim that using dead hard doesn't produce a losing situation but logically speaking if something in the game doesn't work when its supposed to it creates a losing situation, which dead hard can produce that situation. Thus your claim is still hyperbolic."
Something not working sometimes isn't "creating a losing situation". That's a misuse of the phrase. My claim only comes off as hyperbolic when you misunderstand terminology and proper use of the perk.
"Thats not what were arguing though. We are taking about dear hard and resilience not having downsides even when injured, not how substantial of an impact it makes. Based on what was previously said it could still both dead hard and resilience are comparable."
The potential impact of the perk is important because it determines the need for "downsides", which is part of the conversation. DH's "downside" that you use as being injured is negated by its effect meaning it negates its own negative. Resilience doesn't negate its negative so it still retains the downside. That's why they aren't comparable.
0 -
I'm sorry but thats not always the case. The fact that you get any good use out of it is basically a flip of a coin. It could potentially restart the chase it could not. We shouldn't ignore the cases when it doesn't work just for the cases it does.
3 -
If this is the mentality you have, that one perk, dead hard is good enough to stop you fromt catching a survivor entirely then it's probably not the perks fault and instead your own ability.
"I hit this survivor once and then they used dead hard, how could I possibly catch them again when this perk is now disabled?"
5 -
Well let's agree to disagree then. I think the vault build is crazy strong in the hands of a good player. I equate it to going into a game with light amour. You will be super hard to catch, but easy to kill once you go down. Where-as running the BT/DS/Unbreakable/DH combo is like going in with heavy amour. Easier to catch, but hard to actually kill off.
"Top tier players don't heal" and they only get away with that against bad killers. People who don't heal in my games usually die fast when I am the killer. Not healing against me when I am playing a killer like spirit / hag / wraith / ghostface / etc is a death sentence. You can try to get away with it if you want, at your own risk.
1 -
""Top tier players don't heal" and they only get away with that against bad killers. People who don't heal in my games usually die fast when I am the killer. Not healing against me when I am playing a killer like spirit / hag / wraith / ghostface / etc is a death sentence. You can try to get away with it if you want, at your own risk."
They get away with it against good killers as well. Most survivors are just bad on average, your comment about them not getting away with it against you is using the average survivor you face, not top tier survivors.
We can agree to disagree though.
0 -
I play against the teams that played in Hexy's tournament on a regular basis. I've beaten pretty much every popular streamer on the NA servers. So if those are not top tier, I don't what is.
0 -
Most the players in Hex's tournament weren't very good bar just a few teams.
"I've beaten pretty much every popular streamer on the NA servers. So if those are not top tier, I don't what is."
How many times could you have possibly faced them to have developed an opinion that they can never get away with not healing? Really that many games? Also, were they solo queue'ing? That makes it not mean nearly as much if they had bad teammates pulling them down.
0 -
The guy hasn't even seen the video and is assuming they are meming. I would much rather not argue with such an ignorant person if I were you (they are like flat earthers when they prove earth is round but then proceed to say it is flat).
2 -
You really should actually watch the video if that's what you gathered.
2 -
I am just fundamentally against the idea of each survivor having access to a literal invincibility button in a 4v1 game like this, and a horror-themed one no less. You literally cannot be hit during the animation, even if standing perfectly still. It's both powerful and versatile.
I consider it one of the most irritating perks in the game. Irritating doesn't equate to power, by the way, but my lord it can be infuriating when you're in a position where you have no choice but to swing since you don't have time to bait it out.
I feel like compared to 95% of other survivor perks, it gives you so much, and requires so little. You don't gain as much distance as sprint burst, but you don't have to walk everywhere and in exchange for more distance you instead literally cannot be hit, and can phase through the killer for some reason, which can be clutch, especially if it's a killer that relies on a charge-type power in chases like Billy or Blight. It doesn't require building stacks like Mettle of Man, which after so many protection hits, you basically get a Borrowed Time where you still have to mend. A build phase, and still a downside if hit. The exhaustion meter doesn't mean much if you're only running one exhaustion perk, it's essentially just a cooldown for your next invincibility dodge at that point. Again, if you want another BT hit from Mettle of Man, you don't wait for a meter, you go get those protection hits.
And being injured is not a "downside" to a perk that's literally only used in chases. Resilience gives you a benefit while repairing gens and such. Yeah you vault slightly faster, so there's that I guess, but that repair speed is a primary reason to run it. But repairing while injured can be really dangerous. Being injured in a chase... means you're playing DBD. It's so silly.
Post edited by Xbob42 on2 -
Deadhard actually takes some measure of skill, so I don't think it's that bad.
1 -
Saying that its "not always the case" is not the argument. It is also "not always the case" with other exhaustion perks. The point is though, in optimal play, which is what we are talking about. You know, the people who are good at this game with 1k+ hours? The perk is extremely frustrating to play against when compared to other exhaustion perks. It is poor design, similar to the old ruin. It was extremely frustrating. And saying you have to be injured to use it, is not a downside. This meta of gen rushing half the time people don't even heal and just slam the gens, because you can.
A survivor can literally hold w, not loop, do nothing but hold w for both hits, and it'll take the killer a solid 30 seconds to down you. Adding in looping plus an extra dead hard is too much as it is.
4 -
Well, good survivors don't give a crap about anything until they're injured so...
0 -
I disagree, any person with 1k hours who plays the game optimal can be overpowered with just about any perk. If a killer has 1k hours and play the game optimal and they also have noed. thats a bit too much as well if you think about it. And before you counter by saying that noed had counters while dead hard doesn't that's wrong because dead hard also has counters.
Furthermore we shouldn't balance perks because some people play optimal with it. The problem your describing seems to stem from skill not the perk.
0 -
It's honestly irrelevant to your argument anyways. Give me the drawback of lightweight. "YoU HaVe tO rUN to Use It, tOP tIeR sUrviVors oNly waLk".
Even if botany knowledge was a 1% increase to healing, that's still an advantage from a perk with no drawbacks. The only cost is opportunity cost.
3 -
I don't get what you mean.
But anyways objectively speaking being injured in the game is bad and therefore a downside.
0 -
"It's honestly irrelevant to your argument anyways."
I didn't bring it up.
"Give me the drawback of lightweight. "YoU HaVe tO rUN to Use It, tOP tIeR sUrviVors oNly waLk"."
Why are you even mentioning this? We've already gone over this. Not all perks have downsides to them.
"Even if botany knowledge was a 1% increase to healing, that's still an advantage from a perk with no drawbacks. The only cost is opportunity cost."
The cost here is by using the perk you are committing to healing more than if you didn't bring it. That is a cost.
I thought we were gonna agree to disagree? This is going no where.
2 -
Ah yes, the standard of a person that only ever looks at the game from the perspective of one role. Nice try, troll.
I have no issue winning my games when I play killer, including when Dead Hard exists, but it is an incredibly unfair perk at its core. I also have no real issue winning my games as survivor
3 -
Just to be curious how would you change it to make it more fair?
0 -
They could do it a few different ways.
One way is giving the Exhausted debuff a negative. Something hypothetical like louder breathing while Exhausted.
Another route is not touching them at all and simply adding more counter play. IE more killers having Exhaustion addons or new Exhaustion causing perks/improving the current ones we have to be actually decent.
I wouldn't take either of these routes literally, but more as a general concept of the point I'm trying to make. In essence both these ideas would be looking to add potential risk or downside to running an Exhaustion perk. When you're picking your perks running an Exhaustion one would be a consideration where you're weighing the pros and cons or deciding if the possible downsides worked with your build. Currently there is zero reason you would ever not run an Exhaustion perk if you were wanting to actually win. To me that is a sign of flawed design if there is no decision to be made and it's just an auto pick.
3 -
I could see this being a good nerf.
2 -
I'm also not necessarily saying all perks need downsides or negatives. I think it's more of a sliding scale.
Some perks are very situational, so they rightfully so need to be very strong in the situation they do arise. While other perks are not situational at all, happening many times a game and consistently, which is why these perks need their effects to be much weaker.
In this same sense, most the second chance perks (or Exhaustion ones for this conversation specifically) are some of the strongest effects in the game while simultaneously being not situational at all and happening many times every single game consistently. So you can see why this is a mismatch with the balancing philosophy I posted above. Since they completely ignore the balancing and just get the best of both sides they need some sort of checks and balances such as downsides or requirements.
IE we need downsides or negatives specifically for perks that are overly tipping the scales of balance compared to the rest of the pool to even them out and not that all perks just in general need these criteria.
0 -
If only that were true, I just don't subscribe to the "killer is so hard" club that forum does.
you're the one that said if a good player had dead you'll never catch them, therefore, you only play against bad players with dead hard, as you have no issue winning even with dead hard.
1 -
Exactly...matchmaking is this game's worst enemy; if I get a good survivor running Dead Hard, I can just ignore them because the chances are the other 3 aren't so skilled...the issue comes when it's a stack of 4 very good players.
I don't subscribe to the 'killer hard' narrative, tbh. I play both roles a lot, weighting more toward survivor. Dead Hard is, in my eyes, still a crutch perk that needs to be completely changed.
2 -
And this is where i bow out and am not even going to discuss this with you anymore. If you are one of those "It's fine if the game is unbalanced at high level play because average players..." person. No point in even discussing it. A game should ALWAYS be balanced around the capabilities of what can be done, not what is done by the average player. If you honestly believe that, then looking at those stats BHVR published we clearly need to buff nurse since she is below a 50% kill rate.
0 -
Whoa hold on a min I'm not saying it's fine the game is unbalanced. Where are you getting this average player nonsense from. I must have worded what I said weirdly because that's not what I ment to say.
I agree that this game heavily needs balancing. But I'm confused on what you mean by "A game should ALWAYS be balanced around the capabilities of what can be done, not what is done by the average player". Could you explain more on that?
0 -
Killers are ridiculously OP as it is because of speed, small map size and abilities and the option to equip Mori’s to kill faster. You’re complaining about a perk that lets the survivor dodge an attack prolonging the chase for only a few seconds longer? 😂 killer perks are the ones that need to be checked. Pop needs to get nerfed. Killers get way too much info from perks too imo.
0 -
As Killer, I've seen survivors running in middle of emptiness, tried DH in hope I swing and miss. But I just didnt get the bait and down them.
But I also have seen survivors manage distance so good that only DH at the final moment into other side of pallet, after loops me for 5-6 rounds.
0 -
If you're in a deadline with no pallets, dead hard does almost nothing against a killer that baits it out. There's your downside. Sprint burst, lithe, or even balanced would be more useful in a deadzone because they give a lot more distance.
0 -
Awww poor baby.. boo hoo😭
0
