Is it healthy for the game to make more perks each chapter?
I am asking this because I see how hard it is for the devs to come up with new ideas for perks each chapter. The perks just get worse and worse each chapter. Perks gets more difficult to balance and more perks mean a bigger mess. I've been noticing that it gets more difficult to fix the mess each new chapter when the perks come out.
What if the devs would stop making more perks for a temporary time to test and see if it would be good for the health of the game?
THINK ABOUT THESE THINGS BEFORE YOU GIVE YOUR THOUGHTS!
Do you think that this may be a better and more efficient way to fix the clutter? How would this affect the health of the game?
Comments
-
There needs to be incentive to purchase the chapter, otherwise chapters are more or less cosmetic, at least on the survivor side. They've clearly swapped mindsets from making perks that are generally able to be used into being more niche so it doesn't affect the entire game as much.
8 -
New perks keep it interesting, and it's not like there have been any real meta shaking things for a long time since undying. The survivor meta is exactly the same, BT/DS/Exhaustion Perk/Whatever.
1 -
IS IT HEALTHY FOR THE GAME TO MAKE MORE PERKS EACH CHAPTER?
NO, we need a 5th perk slot to slightly balance the HUGE GAP of having just having 4 slots for dozens of perks
2 -
I'm not talking about making more perks meta and change the meta around. I'm talking about fixing the clutter, cause it's clearly not healthy for the game to have over 200+ perks in the future.
0 -
Agreed, I'd probably use some of the crappier perks if they didn't deem certain perks like dead hard, ds, etc, essential to play the game decently..
3 -
I don't see why it's a bad thing, other than it will be a pain to get the perks you want on a certain character. In theory the perks are only supposed to be accentuating your playstyle instead of defining it anyways.
It's just some of them have been created to address core gameplay problems (such as how easy it is to tunnel a survivor coming off the hook), and it's hard to get away using anything else if the opposing side is using the meta and is of your skill level.
More choices is always good.
0 -
5 PERK SLOTS - MAKE THE 5TH MANDATORY TO BE ONE OF THE BASE (EXAMPLE "BOND" FOR DWIGHT ETC)
2 -
New perks are like the most exciting part of new chapters imo. The only problem I see is blood web bloat now that we've reached what, almost 80 perks per side and counting? Which means you have to grab perks about 240 times in the blood web to "complete" a character (god forbid you don't get a perk you really want until the later part of that) assuming you have all the teachables unlocked.
1 -
No, just because you can make builds for survivor that would entirely break the game, same with killer
5 -
It is a problem because it gets harder and harder to make new perks that are actually decent that go in your favour. And the most important thing is that it gets harder to pull out balance changes to perks if we have over 200+ perks. Most of the current perks need buffs and changes to even give a normal game value and purpose.
0 -
will you still want just 4 perk slots if at some point we have 200 perks choices for surv and another 200 perks choices for killer? Answer
0 -
That's not your problem though? That's a problem for the dev's. They have buffed quite a few perks to useable levels recently.
You don't need to be running a full meta build to win by any means. Especially not as a killer vs. a solo Q team, you can be running total meme builds and still be fine in most cases. As survivor you usually don't really need perks at all, assuming you are good at looping and make smart saves.
1 -
Yes, cause that way the game won't have perk builds where the killer can regress gens so much that it takes 5 minutes to get 1 generator done, and survivors won't have perk builds that allow them to get gens done in 5 seconds
3 -
Having 200 perk choices for just 4 slots is ridiculous, sorry
1 -
Dead Hard, DS, etc. are obviously strong, but they're not necessary to play the game decently. I avoid meta builds as survivor because the niche builds are more fun and because full meta squads often irritate me as killer. I almost never run exhaustion perks either. I still do fine.
If they added a fifth perk slot people would just switch from UB/DS/Dead Hard/Adrenaline to UB/DS/Dead Hard/Adrenaline/Iron Will.
1 -
Killer are so overpowered now you need these perks to have a minimal opportunity as solo surv.
0 -
What about a game mode in which everyone (survs and killer) start the game with random perks? I would play in this game mode for sure
1 -
I would disagree, personally. Solo can be brutal sometimes, but it's usually because of potato teammates. Dead Hard isn't going to prevent Claudette from running to the corner of the map to self heal, and it won't prevent the Feng from hiding in a corner and leaving you to die on the hook instead of coming for the save. When I'm matched with decent teammates we usually do reasonably well.
0 -
Most of the time, this is how it goes:
You're either leveling a character for the first time or working on a prestige for them. Since the perk rarity change, you probably only have like 20 perks total by the time you hit level 50. So, you just try to find the most fun, synergistic build you can out of those 20 or so perks. It's not like we're going to have baby Dweets staring at six pages of tier three perks and not knowing what to do. If you have that many perks unlocked you should have great knowledge about what they do and what synergies they have, so you shouldn't have that hard of a time putting together some good builds.
And, counterpoint: if we're just going to increase the number of perks you can select as more perks are added, wouldn't it be similarly ridiculous if in five years' time all survivors and killers have like 10 perks each? They'd have to completely rework most of the perks in the game in order to keep it balanced with that many perks in play, and I just don't think that's a good use of the devs' time. I'd rather they continue to refresh maps, buff weak perks/killers, nerf strong perks/killers, release new content, and work to improve performance and stability.
1 -
So you would rather have an unfun game than just using different perks?
1 -
You need new content to keep the game interesting. I'm all down for them taking a chapter and completely making an overhaul to perks/killers to balance it out but they need new content so that DBD will stay interesting for those who bought it. I'm looking forward to using the new perks because I've got some perk builds I want to try out
0 -
I'm happy for new perks, as long as they're viable and don't worsen the grind. Yet very few of the new perks are worth equipping and all of them worsen the grind.
0 -
not to disrespect my boy Dwight, but if survivors had a 5th slot they could only use a base perk in then everyone would play David, Laurie, Bill, Meg, etc. so they could get 5 second chance perks and no one would play Ace cause his perks are bad
0 -
no way, I use Bond with Dwighty and some put the style and char personality over the perks
0 -
Yes? Variety is the spice of life.
0
