So about gen regression perks... (a bit long TLDR at the bottom)

Ok, that's totally valid. But why?

Oh yeah, currently the game is balanced so gen regression is needed which is why I think gen regression is awful. It kinda obscures the real fact of the matter. If you make them not stack with each other, you get rid of killer's abilities to protect themselves against real fast gens sure, but you also make it so that survivors don't ever find themselves in the opposite scenario which can be hilariously oppressive.

Now, I will never suggest that the devs should make gens take longer to complete. That would be boring for survivors. i have seen change ideas for secondary objectives that aren't just "hold m1 for longer". For a start survivors could have some of their second chances that stall the game removed. Maps could be made smaller, loops less safe so that it promotes interaction between each side and it requires each side to actually outplay each other instead of just stalling.

I genuinely think compromise is the only way we will get anywhere. Otherwise it will just be killers and survivors bickering at each other forever, growing ever more resentful of each other, quitting the game, etc. If killers aren't willing to give up things that can be oppressive or stale on their side, survivors will always be able to bring that stuff up when killers are the ones asking for stuff to be changed.

But, who knows. Maybe my idea is trash. I just wanted to put it out there to see what people think : P

I know that this is how the game is balanced, but in the same way that killers can say "leave gen regression alone for now, high mmr needs it" survivors can say "leave second chances alone high mmr needs it" and then nobody does anything and everyone just bickers at each other forever, nobody willing to think "ok what if the game were like this, could we take a step in that direction by giving up something we currently use".

I know blocked gens don't regress. But i believe they do explode by surge, and so do regressing gens. Everything I proposed was specifically to kill gen perk synergy so they would never be paired. At the same time, i proposed a better base kick, to level the field between using gen perks and not using them.

Dead man's switch, corrupt and thrilling can all be gen protection perks, so since the idea is to nerf gen perks to make the game healthier overal, i decided to consider them as a means to defend gens and thus change them accordingly.

I know that having two or more gen perks is necessary for high MMR, and I hate it.

Thats a good option too. But we'd trust the devs with saying what a gen perk is or isn't.

I have played other killers without gen regression. Before Blight I was a Slinger main, I like playing Demo, I have played and enjoyed playing Wraith even before his buff. Ghostface was one of the first killers I really liked to play. Clown before his buff was another one I gravitated towards at some point. Just because I became a Blight main, since Blight is the most fun thing in this game for me, doesn't mean I don't know or understand the plight of killers without mobility. In fact, the first thing I always say when talking about how strong x killer is, is whether or not it's weak to W.

Gens can be damaged by surge while regressing, and I think they can be damaged by eruption too. They can also be damaged by surge while blocked, i think, I might be wrong on that one. I know that gens do not regress while blocked. This was mainly my way of killing the synergy between something like surge and ruin.

They would be useless in our current meta, they would be about as useful as the other gen perks if the meta were to change, which is the presumption in this post, which unfortunately is not made clear. I think the game is balanced poorly, and this was me attempting to say: "Hey, would we be willing compromises like this so gen regression isn't ridiculous when stacked if we agreed to get rid of survivor bs"

I don't think Corrupt is the best thing ever. I was trying to kill how it can work as a plan A, then Pop or Ruin Undying as a plan B.

Pop 10 seconds is admittedly (i literally said it in the post), just there so it doesnt' synergize with surge, Again Plan A, Plan B. Surge for gens close by, Pop for gens far away. I wanted to kill that. In my mind I was thinking maybe pop, in this scenario, could be a perk to control a 3 or 4 gen, meaning you'd always be within that walking distance with regular movement speed killers. I dont like gen perks, I don't know why you'd assume I'd want it trashed so that only my precious Blight could use it, that's not my intention.

Blight is not the only one that gets value of ruin undying. Nemesis, Pinhead, Pyramid head, and other killers can make use of it pretty effectively. Again, my point was to kill it's plan A, Plan B thing with Pop.

Eruption would not stack with Oppression, I specifically said they would override and cancel each other. I guess surge should do a similar thing.

I don't think the base kit kick buff would be super strong. Get's to 5% only if you manage to hook everyone and otherwise gens regress at basic speed, and goes down as survivors die, so as to not create scenarios where survivors feel the game is unwinnable because of the pressure the killer is building. Although to be fair, surge and eruption would probably be too strong cuz they'd do 10% and 12% respectively. Oppression would just do 5% at most. Seems fine to me.

But it's fair enough. I wanted to see what people thought of these ideas, but I am 100% aware that the current meta is : mash gens in 3 minutes and stall with second chances. I fully expected this to be very unpopular, but the feedback I've gotten does give me good insight into how people think. I am grateful to anyone who interacted with this post.

What do you think I think regression does? Maybe I'm just not making myself clear.

Also I completely forgot about Huntress Lullaby and Overcharge. I didn't think about them so I'm not sure what I'd do about them. This post was already long as it is so my bad for forgetting about those 😅

Upping base regression still means that a survivor can tap the gen and negate it. Immediately damaging a gen with a kick would prevent that, since a gen tap results in an extra x% damage to it if you kick it again. However increasing base regression to 0.5 instead of 0.25 could alleviate the problem with the base game too, I don't disagree with this idea.

Killers stack gen regression or gen protection perks, unfortunately, because time is too much in favor of survivors if they're efficient on gens. 3 gens can pop in a single chase, without much effort from the survivors at all and most maps give enough resources combined with the myriad second chances survivors have so that survivors can easily finish their objective and mostly making having to outplay the killer optional. I don't like this, and I'm fully aware of it. My idea with this post is: If we're willing to compromise on gen regression (then I threw some ideas on how. i'm sure smarter people could come up with better ones), would you be willing to compromise on second chances, map sizes, loop safety, etc etc.

The nerfs are to change their synergies with each other and to make them all around the same level of strength....ish.

Also, the idea would be 1% + 1% extra per survivor hooked. With 4 survivors alive, you'd do 5% instant damage to gens without any perks if you hook all 4 survivors.

But, I must clarify. The intention of this post is not: Kill killers and barely give them anything to compensate lol. The intention was to say "hey, if we compromise on gen regression and make them not stackable and not as strong, can we compromise on other aspects of the game so that killers don't have to stack up on gen perks, and games can be more of a back and forth that doesn't end in 3 minutes?" However, i messed up communicating that, severely so.

Obviously, I would never suggest these nerfs if the rest of the game stays the same, and there would need to be severe changes to survivor and the core game to compensate for them.