http://dbd.game/killswitch
Endgame collapse is pointless
So in all my time of playing engame collapse has done something like 7 or 8 times, and only after rank reset because redranks just 99 the door and defeat the purpose of the endgame collapse. I really feel like it needs a change so that it can do what it was supposed to do, push the survivors out and force tough decisions. The only way I could think this would work is if you either made exit gates like totems that need to be completed in one go (which is way too powerful and could easily be abused by trapper) or to extend the endgame collapse time and make it start the minute the last generator is completed. I think the latter would make it better but it still feels like it could be abused. I feel it is just not accomplishing what its supposed to, and there has never been a time where it would have been strategically beneficial to open the gate myself as killer. so I just don't get why its basically pointless. What do you think?
Comments
-
Be careful. I suggested a change to EGC and got blasted because I haven't played long enough to remember when there was no EGC. I don't like the EGC in current form, but I'm not sure how to fix it either.
1 -
its not pointless, it does exactly what it is ment to do: force the trial to an end.
it was never ment to give either side an advantage over the other or have any significant impact on how the trial plays out, its just there to prevent games from getting taken hostage.
should you struggle with Survivors 99%ing gates, you can always open them up yourself.
11 -
Endgame Collapse serves its purpose just fine. It prevents survivors from taking the game hostage.
9 -
The EGC only exists as a way to force the match to a close so that the game cannot be delayed much longer than it should by survivors who are skilled at looping.
There is no reason to open the gate as killer except to begin the end game collapse, in order to force the match to a close.
0 -
I'm pretty sure endgame collapse is not supposed to benefit any side. It supposed to just end the game.
1 -
If you don't like 99'ing the gate kick the door open.
1 -
While I think you're entitled to your opinions I must respectfully disagree. It makes little sense to open the exit gate yourself at any point (especially if you have blood warden because you just tip them off at that point) In its "trailer", if you want to call it that, it literally says it wants to force hard decisions, I have seen nor made any hard decisions due to a game mechanic that does little to nothing in my experience (except for BW memes). Plus even if you want to make the argument that it isn't pointless, and that it's not supposed to benefit either, It makes sense both lore wise and gameplay wise for the entity to lean favor towards the killer plus it would be wayyyy cooler if it actually did something other than force the tea bagging survivors out of the trial.
0 -
In all your time playing? What is that exactly? :)
1 -
End Game Collapse is doing exactly what it's supposed to do - end the game. The whole point of EGC being implemented was to prevent the game from being taken hostage from either side, this is why killers have the ability to open the gates.
It's not meant to to be killer or survivor sided, it's not meant to help killers get kills in a match - it's a means to end the game, nothing more.
4 -
Well I've been playing since release and with my job and such I've racked up 6,500 hours (not including time I've also played on console) and probably 2000ish is with End Game Collapse implemented. :)
0 -
Like I said earlier though it was also "marketed" to have tensions running high while survivors "race against the clock to save their friends from the entity while evading the killer." If you want to make the argument that it's "to prevent the game from being taken hostage" that's fine but that's not what the reveal said it would be.
0 -
It's meant to cause a definite end for the game. If there's a glitch where somebody's stuck or the survivors just refuse to leave because they're either really good or hacking, the endgame collapse is meant to put a definite end to the game to save some time, especially since the DC penalty was put into effect.
Of course, it's really stupid and doesn't even do anything because survivors can 99 exit gates. What I think should happen is that the timer should be doubled (because 2 minutes is unnecessarily forgiving), and whenever the killer is in chase, the progression speed should be halved. That way, if the killer does nothing, meaning they want the game to be over, it'll be over. If they do something, meaning the endgame collapse is not really necessary, the onus is lifted and the survivors can play somewhat normally.
0 -
I think we can conclusively say that you're just in the wrong here. Sorry bud.
2 -
It was made to stop hatch stand-offs as well as stop survivors from lingering around in the match for as long as they want. Even if survivors choose to not open an exit gate, killers can open one themselves thus forcing the EGC to start
It serves its purpose 100% and is one of the best designed changes they've made
3 -
Uh ok? You do realize its an opinion right? So it can't be conclusively anything, Unanimously would've fit better (though would've been incorrect due to at least one other person agreeing with me to some degree.). In addition to that it is common educate to be polite, if you notice one of my previous comments I acknowledged someone else's point of view and stated that I disagreed rather than outright saying they were wrong. Because as mentioned beforehand opinions are subjective and cannot be incorrect. While they can be morally wrong I doubt my EGC opinion is morally wrong.
0 -
I think it's three minutes and I really do agree with 99 making it useless pretty much. And I kind of like your Idea for changes.
1 -
Your opinion doesn't extend to the intentions of the development team. Which is why you are conclusively wrong. And I was being polite, which is why I said sorry. Didn't want to hurt your feelings, I know that it can be hard being told that you're wrong, even if it's true.
2 -
Well firstly saying sorry doesn't make something polite, secondly as I've said opinions are subjective, and thirdly if we all followed that logic that makes about 95% of the discussions on the forum "wrong"
0 -
In regards to not extending to the intentions of the dev's; There have been many changes they've made that the community, who didn't like the intentions the dev's had gave feedback and it got changed. It is sometimes good to have more than the dev's weighing in. So does that make the community that wanted change wrong because it didn't fit the dev's intentions?
0
