Six perks system

@G4rr3tt said:

@se05239 said:
It'd only really be good if the side with 6 perk slots was the killer, as they're supposed to be in a Power Role. Survivors with 6 perks would be a horrid nightmare.

Want to start the game with 2 injured survivors and 2 hooked already too? lmao

No, that'd be silly.

@Whisky_Glass said:
@MhhBurgers said:

You fundamentally fail at balance so yes, there's nothing to discuss with you.

Most killer perks are situational, ######### like Haunting Ground and Make your Choice can go off without ever doing anything for you while most of the survivor metaperks get used because they are ALWAYS useful or useful at least 90% of the time (heck SWF groups use adrenaline for a reason even tho it's situational in design).

Killers going for these perks are taking a huge gamble

Stopped reading at "MYC is a situational perk". Hooks/Unhooks are pretty frequent during the whole match, if you don't know on what killers to use it or it's situational because you don't get many hooks then maybe it's your fault.
MYC is probably my favourite perk as a killer.

MYC is situational if you don't proxycamp and play like me in other words leave the hook WAY behind to find other people, ofc if you proxycamp then yeah, MYC gives you instadowns.

@Entità said:
I'm a perfectionist and suddenly had the mental view of the following ordinate progression of characters' development:

1) 5th level = 2nd perk slot;

2) 10th level = 3rd perk slot;

3) 15th level = 4th perk slot;

4) 20th level = 5th perk slot;

5) 25th level = 6th perk slot;

6) 30th level = 1st teachable perk;

7) 35th level = 2nd teachable perk;

8) 40th level = 3rd teachable perk.

Consider this:

A) there are 56 survivor perks and 51 killer perks;

at least two other killers and survivors will be released before Spring 2019, so 6 new survivor perks and 6 new killer perks are going to be introduced;

C) six slots mean more combinations of perks, richer gameplay and a better longevity.

Four perks were enough at the beginning of the game, with a few characters, but we are going to have about four times the original number of characters, then six perks are more appropriate. Do you agree?

As long as survivor perks are stronger than killer perks, thats simply a no.

Master said:

@Entità said:
@Crizpen I respectfully disagree. Humans are basically habitual creatures: they build their certainties on a reality consolidated over time and tend to be wary of any change in that reality, as if it were the only possible or reasonable, rather than simply being the one to which they are accustomed. If the game had started directly with six perks each, nobody would have been astonished, but indeed it was born with four and then this appears to be the only appropriate number. It is not necessarily so. Many new dynamics have been introduced, from the Obsession to the secondary objectives of the Pig's victims, through the excellent stealth of Myers at Evil Within 1, to the Spirit's phasing and so on: each addition involves new tactical challenges, a radical rethinking defensive strategies, an unthinkable variability at the time of Trapper, Wraith, Hillbilly. No less important are the new challenges imposed on the killers by the new survivor perks. The game has always earned it.

Now, imagining that all the perks have been unlocked by developing all the characters or buying them from the Shrine of Secrets and making a quick calculation, having FOUR PERK SLOTS means, at present (ie without considering the upcoming two new chapters and related perks), and without considering perk tiers:
1) 56 * 55 * 54 * 53 = 8,814,960 perk combinations for survivors;
2) 51 * 50 * 49 * 48 = 5,997,600 perk combinations for killers (a drastically lower variability: I propose the introduction of another 5 killer perks, regardless of whether developers accept my system or not).

Under the same conditions, having SIX PERK SLOTS means:
1) 56 * 55 * 54 * 53 * 52 * 51 = 23,377,273,920 perk combinations for survivors;
2) 51 * 50 * 49 * 48 * 47 * 46 = 12,966,811,200 perk combinations for killers;
ie:
1) a game variability 2,652 times greater than now for survivors;
2) a game variability 2,162 times greater than now for killers.

Of course, it's a big news, and will require balancing. But the gain in terms of gameplay richness, tactical depth, longevity (the game itself is very repetitive: these are combinations that make it virtually inexhaustible), the novelty of the challenge, it will be immense.

Some possible balances:
1) to increase the number of totems or the cleansing time (since many of the most powerful killer perks are curses);
2) to add secondary objectives, which will drain the survivors' time (we talked about it in many threads, including: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the -entity );
3) to review the effects of some perks (or add-ons of the killers), to the extent deemed appropriate during the tests;
4) to lengthen the repair time of the generators or introduce a sixth generator to fix;
5) to touch up the structure of some maps, to make the six perks system more enjoyable.

In my opinion, the problem is not real, but mental, in the sense that some perceive this change as impossible, as an impracticable distortion, and look discouraged, resigned, to an incredible opportunity for both parties. I do not say it's easy, but it's definitely a great leap forward, a way to make this game even more immortal and palatable for new players (and for me, that I have a weakness for tactical challenges).

I pray @Malakir @se05239 @Acromio @TerminalEntropy @MhhBurgers @G4rr3tt @Whisky_Glass @Scourge @Master @Justicar @Peasant and all other users to read carefully this post, and to think about it.

Of course, @not_Queen and @Patricia are always welcome!

Nobody claims that adding perk slots would not give more variety to build etc, but the balancing is the problem.

Regarding your suggestions:

1) Would be necessary anyway since the killer would be able to use more than 4 hex perks

The other points are just very vague.

Basically you are requesting the whole game to be adapted just to support the idea of 6-perk builds.

I simply dont see the necessity for such insane changes just to add more perk builds to the game, because lets face it. With the current perk balancing we will simply established a new meta build that will hardly change.

What they need to adress are the actual issues of the game and adapting the hex mechanic aswell as looking at secondary objectives (adding gentime is rather dull) instead of some mind gymnastics to enable 6 perk slots

@Entità said:
@Master Let's help each other to make a detailed list of balance changes, then:

1) about totems, I wrote to @TerminalEntropy and repeat now that they can be doubled, if needed;

2) about secondary objectives, my ideas are specifically explained in https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the-entity ;

3) about killer perks and add-ons, which ones do you consider ineffective?;

4) adding 15 seconds per gen or a sixth gen, for example;

5) less loops, more mind games, more hidden totems, for example.

I'm not in the Balance Team: I'd be happy to give you more details, if I were in there and could do many tests.

@Malakir @MhhBurgers I ask you a very direct and sincere question: would you have the desire and enthusiasm to spend time and money for players who judge you openly incompetent and incapable? It is not the right approach, this. The game will not be perfect, but if each of us tried to:

1) bear small smears;
2) to report serious problems in a calm manner, not angry, not contemptuous, possibly balanced and without supporters for one or the other faction;
3) to work for a more cohesive, more collaborative, friendlier, granitically available community to support and motivate developers;
then, perhaps, it would be easier to obtain results and satisfactions. It's a general speech, I'm not accusing anyone, but it's not constructive to debase those who offered us the opportunity to have fun with this game of ruthless hunting and desperate survival. Dialogue, hope and perseverance are my polar star.

I get told every day at my job that we're too slow etc. I don't give a crap about it as my payment doesn't change from ppl's opinions. I wouldn't give a ######### if some ppl said I'm incompetent/incapable and I think the devs themselves are probably aware of that considering how small changes in this game already break their spaghetti code frequently. Also we're not talking to the devs here, I've never seen anybody here visit the forum, the biggest change we saw took Mathieu Cote being humiliated live on korean TV to get the changes that the community was demaning for months.

@MhhBurgers said:

@Entità said:
@Master Let's help each other to make a detailed list of balance changes, then:

1) about totems, I wrote to @TerminalEntropy and repeat now that they can be doubled, if needed;

2) about secondary objectives, my ideas are specifically explained in https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the-entity ;

3) about killer perks and add-ons, which ones do you consider ineffective?;

4) adding 15 seconds per gen or a sixth gen, for example;

5) less loops, more mind games, more hidden totems, for example.

I'm not in the Balance Team: I'd be happy to give you more details, if I were in there and could do many tests.

@Malakir @MhhBurgers I ask you a very direct and sincere question: would you have the desire and enthusiasm to spend time and money for players who judge you openly incompetent and incapable? It is not the right approach, this. The game will not be perfect, but if each of us tried to:

1) bear small smears;
2) to report serious problems in a calm manner, not angry, not contemptuous, possibly balanced and without supporters for one or the other faction;
3) to work for a more cohesive, more collaborative, friendlier, granitically available community to support and motivate developers;
then, perhaps, it would be easier to obtain results and satisfactions. It's a general speech, I'm not accusing anyone, but it's not constructive to debase those who offered us the opportunity to have fun with this game of ruthless hunting and desperate survival. Dialogue, hope and perseverance are my polar star.

I get told every day at my job that we're too slow etc. I don't give a crap about it as my payment doesn't change from ppl's opinions. I wouldn't give a ######### if some ppl said I'm incompetent/incapable and I think the devs themselves are probably aware of that considering how small changes in this game already break their spaghetti code frequently. Also we're not talking to the devs here, I've never seen anybody here visit the forum, the biggest change we saw took Mathieu Cote being humiliated live on korean TV to get the changes that the community was demaning for months.

Thats not correct, Ive seen a dev during the spirit PTB telling us that our opinions are basically irrelevant
But other then that, they ignore the forum pretty well