We have temporarily disabled Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
It's stats time! Sign up for our newsletter with your BHVR account by January 13 to receive your personalized 2024 Dead by Daylight stats!

Get all the details on our forums: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/436478/sign-up-now-to-receive-a-recap-of-your-2024-dead-by-daylight-stats/p1?new=1

Balance suggestion: dynamic hook states.

Keksimus_Maximus
Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6
in General Discussions

Copy pasted from a Reddit post I made:

A while back, I suggested that survivors lose a hook state to help balance the game. Unsurprisingly, this got downvoted. I later thought maybe we should increase or decrease gens depending on rank but that was hard to balance due to BHVR's "matchmaking" that and nobody wants to play M1 simulator for longer. Instead, I got to thinking that killers lose the resource they're battling to save (time) a lot quicker in the upper ranks as the survivors get more and more skilled making killers that conserve or don't waste as much time (Nurse, Hillbilly and Huntress) much more viable than say, Mikey or Hag.

So why not have the survivors lose the resources they have as they get up in the ranks? My suggestion is that the amount of hook states you have ingame is tied to your rank. Like so:

Rank 20-15: you have 4 hooks. First stage, you hang there for the length of one hook state with the Entity not appearing until the next hook state (the regular one). This should hopefully wean killers off camping to kill as they would have to stare at that survivor for a really long time and the other survivors in the trial would learn to get gens done in safety.

Rank 14-end of purple ranks: games are normal.

Purple-rank 1: Survivors immediately go to struggle state.

(OPTIONAL): Rank 1: survivors immediately die upon getting hooked.

The last bit might be a bit extreme...but I think it would add the spice that survivors would need in the game. You're either really good or you hover between rank 1-2 all season.

Comments

  • Keksimus_Maximus
    Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6

    Except it's also a balance issue. There's a reason why the meta killers are Nurse, Hillbilly and Huntress. All other killers have to really struggle or pull some endgame shenanigans in the upper ranks as they have no way to really protect gens outside of Ruin. And Ruin can get wiped in the first thirty seconds or so making it moot. You don't see something wrong with at least 2 gens or more popping on your first hook? And the killer has 11 more hooks to go. ELEVEN. "opponent performance" is not the only issue at play here.

  • Jack11803
    Jack11803 Member Posts: 3,918
    edited June 2018

    @Keksimus_Maximus said:
    Except it's also a balance issue. There's a reason why the meta killers are Nurse, Hillbilly and Huntress. All other killers have to really struggle or pull some endgame shenanigans in the upper ranks as they have no way to really protect gens outside of Ruin. And Ruin can get wiped in the first thirty seconds or so making it moot. You don't see something wrong with at least 2 gens or more popping on your first hook? And the killer has 11 more hooks to go. ELEVEN. "opponent performance" is not the only issue at play here.

    I know, that’s why basing the entire system, a bad system no less, on rank is as I said, a bad idea.

  • Well_Placed_HexTotem
    Well_Placed_HexTotem Member Posts: 824

    I play both sides and no thanks. I’d purposely derank to avoid a game with instakill hooks lol.

    Imagine how deadlier Nurse and BBQBilly would be if downing survivors meant they were dead.

  • Keksimus_Maximus
    Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6
    Would my suggestion be more palatable if it was just -1 hook state?  You go to struggle on first hook once you hit red ranks?
  • Keksimus_Maximus
    Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6
    Jack11803 said:

    @Keksimus_Maximus said:
    Except it's also a balance issue. There's a reason why the meta killers are Nurse, Hillbilly and Huntress. All other killers have to really struggle or pull some endgame shenanigans in the upper ranks as they have no way to really protect gens outside of Ruin. And Ruin can get wiped in the first thirty seconds or so making it moot. You don't see something wrong with at least 2 gens or more popping on your first hook? And the killer has 11 more hooks to go. ELEVEN. "opponent performance" is not the only issue at play here.

    I know, that’s why basing the entire system, a bad system no less, on rank is as I said, a bad idea.


    So what would you suggest then?  Since BHVR thinks the game is balanced enough to hold official tourneys. 
  • LiveByNightTime
    LiveByNightTime Member Posts: 17

    @Keksimus_Maximus said:
    Copy pasted from a Reddit post I made:

    A while back, I suggested that survivors lose a hook state to help balance the game. Unsurprisingly, this got downvoted. I later thought maybe we should increase or decrease gens depending on rank but that was hard to balance due to BHVR's "matchmaking" that and nobody wants to play M1 simulator for longer. Instead, I got to thinking that killers lose the resource they're battling to save (time) a lot quicker in the upper ranks as the survivors get more and more skilled making killers that conserve or don't waste as much time (Nurse, Hillbilly and Huntress) much more viable than say, Mikey or Hag.

    So why not have the survivors lose the resources they have as they get up in the ranks? My suggestion is that the amount of hook states you have ingame is tied to your rank. Like so:

    Rank 20-15: you have 4 hooks. First stage, you hang there for the length of one hook state with the Entity not appearing until the next hook state (the regular one). This should hopefully wean killers off camping to kill as they would have to stare at that survivor for a really long time and the other survivors in the trial would learn to get gens done in safety.

    Rank 14-end of purple ranks: games are normal.

    Purple-rank 1: Survivors immediately go to struggle state.

    (OPTIONAL): Rank 1: survivors immediately die upon getting hooked.

    The last bit might be a bit extreme...but I think it would add the spice that survivors would need in the game. You're either really good or you hover between rank 1-2 all season.

    fine the way it is

  • ThePloopz
    ThePloopz Member Posts: 1,010
    edited June 2018
    3 hooks is fine I think . The problem isn’t hooks it’s the chases due to a variety of reasons
  • Keksimus_Maximus
    Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6

    @ThePloopz said:
    3 hooks is fine I think . The problem isn’t hooks it’s the chases due to a variety of reasons

    Except BHVR seems to be fine with chases as they are, wagering real money (15K!) on a game that has been proven beyond a sliver of doubt to be horribly unbalanced. If this is their idea of balance, I'll become a permanent survivor main and just play killer until R10 or so.

  • White_Owl
    White_Owl Member Posts: 3,786

    Who would want to rank up as a survivor then?

  • Keksimus_Maximus
    Keksimus_Maximus Member Posts: 6

    @White_Owl said:
    Who would want to rank up as a survivor then?

    A lot of people I talk to don't rank up anyway. For the most part rank doesn't matter too much. This tweak won't really affect those who play casually or even those who get to mid ranks. The difficulty only spikes for those in the red ranks, really.

  • ShrimpTwiggs
    ShrimpTwiggs Member Posts: 1,181

    Sorry, but I don't think this is the way to go. Maybe lessening the amount of time on certain hook states, but I don't think that this is something to add to the game. The core problems of the game center around the chases themselves and how killers who don't have something to help them in a chase have nothing to compensate. This paired with pallet looping and the flood of second-chance perks survivors have is what should be looked at first. Another thing is how fast gens get done. The way to fix this is still up in the air, but it's one of the biggest issues right now. Then there's SWF. Once all this is worked on, then we should see where the game lies but adding this change will sap a good amount of fun from the game and the core problems would still mostly remain.

  • ThePloopz
    ThePloopz Member Posts: 1,010
    edited June 2018
    Keksimus_Maximus said:

    @ThePloopz said:
    3 hooks is fine I think . The problem isn’t hooks it’s the chases due to a variety of reasons

    Except BHVR seems to be fine with chases as they are, wagering real money (15K!) on a game that has been proven beyond a sliver of doubt to be horribly unbalanced. If this is their idea of balance, I'll become a permanent survivor main and just play killer until R10 or so.

     Whether they think it’s balanced or not still doesn’t change the actual problem. Killers are still gonna be pissed at chases even if they win them because it’s simply not fun for them. They’ll be forced to learn or let their game die
  • White_Owl
    White_Owl Member Posts: 3,786
    edited June 2018

    @Keksimus_Maximus said:

    @White_Owl said:
    Who would want to rank up as a survivor then?

    A lot of people I talk to don't rank up anyway. For the most part rank doesn't matter too much. This tweak won't really affect those who play casually or even those who get to mid ranks. The difficulty only spikes for those in the red ranks, really.

    That's not really a valid argument. Currently ranks serves to be paired with more skilled players and having (ideally) more balanced matches. Not having high rank survivors means extremely long queue times for killers who would be forced to derank, and having a completely messed balance since players with all range of skills would be mixed up.
    The incentive is already small enough, adding a disincentive would just make the game worse especially for less experienced players.