Nice and yeah, bridging the gap between solo and swf would be the best thing to happen balance wise. That way, developers can balance the game without worrying about how it would affect solo survivors or killer. This needs to happen.

So basically your idea is to buff solo so it matches SWF so now killers have toxic randomers and SWF to deal with?
It would be so much easier to pallet drop, flashlight etc with chase auras.

Yes yes they can make killers based on this premise but since when do killers get any consideration at all?

They nerfed Doctor by introducing mending so nurses calling does not work anymore for snapping out of it.

They nerfed BBQ again by making it not show up people in lockers just to try and make Iron Maiden a more attractive perk to anyone that isn't The Huntress or Doctor.

I wouldn't trust this dev team with yet another survivor set of buffs to not again give killers the shaft.

The game was designed around not being able to communicate giving survivors all of that, you may as well add voice comms.

I play both survivors and killers slightly more survivor at this point and i would rather them make changes such as Slower gens if you're in SWF queue to compensate or make it so the killer is aware of which people are a group so they can make provisions for this "Lightborne" etc.

SWF needs to be nerfed or compensated for but not by buffing solo.

My two Pence

I'd much, much rather them simply make SWF a separate queue that doesn't affect rank for the survivors, while increasing BP gains for the killer by 50/75/100% depending on the size of the SWF.

Even if I think that bridging the gap between solos and SWF is a good idea and I would support it, I don't think the devs will ever buff killers without reworking the mechanics of the game as a whole (which I don't see ever happening), and this is a bummer. The reason behind this is that killers are already slaughtering everyone in the low ranks, even with simple skill checks and holding buttons as the means to achieve survivors' objectives.

I didn't play survivor for around three or four months, deranking all the way back to R17. Yesterday I played as a solo 10 matches give or take and this is what I observed: 4Ks most of them (I only escaped a couple of times), more than half of the matches with 4 gens left so not even a chance to get the hatch, and generally survivors DCing as soon as they're hooked, just too scared, fooling around trying to ochido the killer or just plain clueless about the whole thing. The changes you propose would really help all these people (me included), given the killers stay at their current level. If they buff killers, we're back at the beginning.

After getting wrecked as a surv, I played 6 or 7 matches at killer R1 as Trapper, LF, Piggy and Wraith. Meaning I didn't play Billy, Huntress or Myers on purpose. Results of every single match: 2 gens popped with the first guy still on the hook, the 3rd gen popping soon after that, and of course having a real hard time for the rest of the match. Can you imagine what would happen with built-in aura reading? Not a single chance for people choosing to play as this killers. At this moment, mechanics need changes and some killers need buffs, even without built-in aura reading. It's a mess.

I think real balance could only be achieved if first of all, the ranking system gets reworked, making it skill-based, using statistics and such, and then balance the game around ranking brackets, where in the low ranks objectives are simple, skill checks are easy (as they are now), killers are not too powerful and murder everyone in every match, and new survivors can get a grip of the game. In the other hand, at high ranks killers should not be so underpowered that 3 gens pop in the first hook, gens need real skill checks (similar to F13, as an example) or QTE's to progress, killers need additional time, the game needs more objectives in general, etc.

But this sounds almost as designing a new game from scratch. Coupled with their need to design new killers each 3 or 4 months, a truckload of bugs to fix, optimization for consoles, and of course dishing out cosmetics, I don't see a rework this big ever happening.

TLDR: IMO, balance should be based around ranking brackets, we need a meaningful and well thought ranking system, and a lot of changes in the mechanics of the game need a rework. Not happening.

GraviteaUK said:

So basically your idea is to buff solo so it matches SWF so now killers have toxic randomers and SWF to deal with?
It would be so much easier to pallet drop, flashlight etc with chase auras.

Yes yes they can make killers based on this premise but since when do killers get any consideration at all?

They nerfed Doctor by introducing mending so nurses calling does not work anymore for snapping out of it.

They nerfed BBQ again by making it not show up people in lockers just to try and make Iron Maiden a more attractive perk to anyone that isn't The Huntress or Doctor.

I wouldn't trust this dev team with yet another survivor set of buffs to not again give killers the shaft.

The game was designed around not being able to communicate giving survivors all of that, you may as well add voice comms.

I play both survivors and killers slightly more survivor at this point and i would rather them make changes such as Slower gens if you're in SWF queue to compensate or make it so the killer is aware of which people are a group so they can make provisions for this "Lightborne" etc.

SWF needs to be nerfed or compensated for but not by buffing solo.

My two Pence

Condorloco_26 said:

@Doc_W__HOLLIDAY said:

The nerf to Doc didn't really affect me. I never used NC on Doc.

Anyway, if solos become SWF strong, ****they can megabuff Killers**** and not have to think twice about it.

Do you honestly believe this is a possibility, after hearing them recently (Legion-time) talk about the viability of killers?

@Kebek said:
Perfect example of survivor main who wants buff for free to his already more powerfull side. Survivors still rule the game with iron fist IF they are trying to win which most players don't since they either suck or want games longer then 5 min.

Your ideas are what would tottaly ruin any horror aspect or sence of tension that DBD has left so no I hope those never happen. Grind isn't hard to fix it's only matter of time that something will change as it always does.

Also you named quite a lot of things that need SIGNIFICANT changes so no the game has still long way to go to be balanced. On the positive side devs have been lately doing pretty good job with balancing so if they won't do something utterly stupid in following patches it might not take another 3 years to get the game balanced for both sides eaqully.

Perfect example of a killer main not thinking things through since if you buff solo survivors up the level of swf information wise. Now see how that sounds when your own insult gets used against you, it makes you look silly . If you buff solo up to swf levels you can now buff killers up to facing swf level since everyone will be on equal grounds.

Also who says people aren't trying to win just because they suck doesn't mean they're not trying or are you always playing to lose as well? Since if we go by your logic if you're new to a game or you just suck you're not trying to win.

It also doesn't matter if the player wants the match to go longer or not, if they're trying to win while having fun doing it they're still trying to win. Someone not trying to win would run up to the killer and sacrifice themselves, someone not trying to win would simply dc the moment the match started.

Also what you're saying is keep the status quo so that killers remain weak because gasp making them stronger would remove the horror aspect of the game. Do you see how illogical that sound now that' it's worded properly.

If a killer is a lot stronger to the point they can take on a swf group or solos buffed to that level then the game becomes much more scary. The grind will take time to fix properly but if you fix the killer power role issue the grind becomes easier to fix.

There's a lot that still needs to get done, map reworks, perk changes, less homogenization on both sides etc. Yes the improvements have been nice and they're actually going to do them more frequently in smaller increments which will speed things up and also avoid major bugs.

No it won't take the game 3 years to get it right and the Ad Hominem thrown in was beyond nonsensical and only serves to lower your posts quality.

@Kebek said:

OP has only posted survivor buffs into his post so yeah he is biased otherwise he would take time to write about other issues as well but he did not care about other ones since they don't concern him.

Ok so they only posted survivor ideas, that doesn't make them survivor biased since as has been pointed they've also posted mainly killer buffs. Besides sometimes it's better and easier to focus on one side of an equation so as not to lose your train of thought.

Also giving survivors aura perks for free wouldn't put them on same level as SWF since main reason why SWF is so powerfull isn't the information it gives but that it allows 4 great survivors to play together and have strategy with communication as bonus to all this. Giving aura perks to survivors would only ruin immersion of the game which is one part of survivor gameplay that I enoy so I'm against it.

It's more along the lines of giving them information since that's what is important and what makes swf stronger. If the solo player is on the same level as swf information wise they'd know when someone is going for a save, when someone isn't. Who's working on what gens etc since that's where they're at a huge disadvantage.

I play mostly solo survivor and giving me some info wouldn't ruin my immersion in the least since i'd still try and skulk around. I'd still be paying attention just as i always do for the heartbeat and my skill checks etc. I'm most definitely not going to start playing sloppy just because i've got a few extra tidbits of info.

Survivors actually aren't playing to win since larger part of my playtime is on killer so I'd known what builds they run and how they play. Many survivors are using builds that aren't 100% meta and are far more alturistic then they should be if winning is their goal. Main reason why killers experience ingame isn't horrific is because survivors most of all play for fun. If every single survivor decided that only winning is what they want they would dominate every game that doesn't have god nurse in it.

So because survivors aren't playing meta somehow equates to them not playing seriously to win how again? Did you ever consider that they want a challenge in order to win, they're going for that extra bit of difficulty like going perkless etc.

Also you don't need a God Nurse just to win against people playing to win, that's the biggest fallacy out there. I played Spirit at rank 1 and faced many a sweaty team and usually was still able to get 2-4k quite often. If you think you can't win unless you're playing a Nurse then you won't win even if the survivors make plenty of mistakes.

Having fun while winning isn't the same as going straight for the win only with nothing else in mind. You can play fun builds with which you can win but you could win more with more meta builds that are far more powefull. Meaning that survivors want fun which 5 min games can't give them since in such sort amount of time nobody has fun unless having fun is ruining killer's fun.

That's incorrect, you can have fun while also going for the straight up win and again this is a zero sum excuse made to back up an argument. I can go full meta builds and still have fun because I choose to have fun and not because it's a meta build.

I've faced really good killers some with 4k hours and those are games that can last quite long and both sides have FUN. It's not because meta builds were used but because both sides enjoyed the match that was challenging. Also just stop saying it's trying to ruin the killers fun since that's another zero sum excuse fallacy.

The victimhood mentality displayed is pretty bad since if the survivor have fun it's only fun if they're ruining the killers fun. To use your logic the killer is only doing quick games to ruin the survivors fun which is also a zero sum fallacy.

I have no idea where did you find that I want killers to remain weak. What I actually want is not to make all killer stronger but to make games longer which would actually make many killers stronger in the process. Many killers have optimal power level but games last far too short if survivors rush gens. So we need either to give survivors other objectives to work towards or give killers more tools to stall and protlong the game.

I was making a point that using your logic of not buffing solo up to swf level you're forcing killers to remain weak since killers can't be buffed that much. Since if killers were buffed that much you'd destroy solo players to where they'd get killed before the 1st gen was done.

The secondary objective is something they're working on which the test during Halloween proved could work provided it's done right. But again making the games longer via a another objective does help killers but again solos would suffer.

The 3 years part was exaggeration based on the amount of time fixing DBD takes since whenever devs do something right they get backlash from survivors even when changes weren't as drastical as what killer had to endure several times. (like when for some reason timing on pallets and flaslight was removed, great change indeed)

Well they just buy back the rights to the game and since then things have been improved dramatically and it's not just survivors that complain killers do as well. also using the complaints on the forums or the steam forums isn't a good way to judge balance since the extremes are more likely to post.

Most of the rest don't mind much and just roll with the changes and with the patch changes coming more frequently but in smaller sizes it'll be much easier to adjust as well.

@powerbats said:

@Kebek said:

OP has only posted survivor buffs into his post so yeah he is biased otherwise he would take time to write about other issues as well but he did not care about other ones since they don't concern him.

Ok so they only posted survivor ideas, that doesn't make them survivor biased since as has been pointed they've also posted mainly killer buffs. Besides sometimes it's better and easier to focus on one side of an equation so as not to lose your train of thought.

Also giving survivors aura perks for free wouldn't put them on same level as SWF since main reason why SWF is so powerfull isn't the information it gives but that it allows 4 great survivors to play together and have strategy with communication as bonus to all this. Giving aura perks to survivors would only ruin immersion of the game which is one part of survivor gameplay that I enoy so I'm against it.

It's more along the lines of giving them information since that's what is important and what makes swf stronger. If the solo player is on the same level as swf information wise they'd know when someone is going for a save, when someone isn't. Who's working on what gens etc since that's where they're at a huge disadvantage.

I play mostly solo survivor and giving me some info wouldn't ruin my immersion in the least since i'd still try and skulk around. I'd still be paying attention just as i always do for the heartbeat and my skill checks etc. I'm most definitely not going to start playing sloppy just because i've got a few extra tidbits of info.

Survivors actually aren't playing to win since larger part of my playtime is on killer so I'd known what builds they run and how they play. Many survivors are using builds that aren't 100% meta and are far more alturistic then they should be if winning is their goal. Main reason why killers experience ingame isn't horrific is because survivors most of all play for fun. If every single survivor decided that only winning is what they want they would dominate every game that doesn't have god nurse in it.

So because survivors aren't playing meta somehow equates to them not playing seriously to win how again? Did you ever consider that they want a challenge in order to win, they're going for that extra bit of difficulty like going perkless etc.

Also you don't need a God Nurse just to win against people playing to win, that's the biggest fallacy out there. I played Spirit at rank 1 and faced many a sweaty team and usually was still able to get 2-4k quite often. If you think you can't win unless you're playing a Nurse then you won't win even if the survivors make plenty of mistakes.

Having fun while winning isn't the same as going straight for the win only with nothing else in mind. You can play fun builds with which you can win but you could win more with more meta builds that are far more powefull. Meaning that survivors want fun which 5 min games can't give them since in such sort amount of time nobody has fun unless having fun is ruining killer's fun.

That's incorrect, you can have fun while also going for the straight up win and again this is a zero sum excuse made to back up an argument. I can go full meta builds and still have fun because I choose to have fun and not because it's a meta build.

I've faced really good killers some with 4k hours and those are games that can last quite long and both sides have FUN. It's not because meta builds were used but because both sides enjoyed the match that was challenging. Also just stop saying it's trying to ruin the killers fun since that's another zero sum excuse fallacy.

The victimhood mentality displayed is pretty bad since if the survivor have fun it's only fun if they're ruining the killers fun. To use your logic the killer is only doing quick games to ruin the survivors fun which is also a zero sum fallacy.

I have no idea where did you find that I want killers to remain weak. What I actually want is not to make all killer stronger but to make games longer which would actually make many killers stronger in the process. Many killers have optimal power level but games last far too short if survivors rush gens. So we need either to give survivors other objectives to work towards or give killers more tools to stall and protlong the game.

I was making a point that using your logic of not buffing solo up to swf level you're forcing killers to remain weak since killers can't be buffed that much. Since if killers were buffed that much you'd destroy solo players to where they'd get killed before the 1st gen was done.

The secondary objective is something they're working on which the test during Halloween proved could work provided it's done right. But again making the games longer via a another objective does help killers but again solos would suffer.

The 3 years part was exaggeration based on the amount of time fixing DBD takes since whenever devs do something right they get backlash from survivors even when changes weren't as drastical as what killer had to endure several times. (like when for some reason timing on pallets and flaslight was removed, great change indeed)

Well they just buy back the rights to the game and since then things have been improved dramatically and it's not just survivors that complain killers do as well. also using the complaints on the forums or the steam forums isn't a good way to judge balance since the extremes are more likely to post.

Most of the rest don't mind much and just roll with the changes and with the patch changes coming more frequently but in smaller sizes it'll be much easier to adjust as well.

I really don't mind if they are/aren't biased. Although it would be nice to hear their opinions on killer issues as well to get the feel for their view of balancing the game.

Yes but that disadvantage only slows their efficienty of working on gens. We want games to last longer so them not knowing if someone is going for the save is good for game's health, it wastes their time to go check. If surviovrs knew where killer/ all survivors are their coordiation would increase but their game skill wouldn't (chasing, juking skills etc). There would still be huge difference between SWF and solos since SWF can manage to not have even 1 single weak survivor chase wise. We see this issue differently so we'll probaly won't come to agreement in this topic.

Ofc everyone plays for win. That's from where the fun is coming from, overcoming the difficulties of actually winning changes. If you run no mither you'll have far more losing games then if you would run DS insted.
I'm just pointing out that if both sides do their maximum to win god nurse would equate to try hards 4man SWF group of experienced players. We can win games against them but even if we do as Freddy for example that doesn't mean it was purely because of our skill or them making mistakes. There are many variables to win from maps, pallet spawns, gen spawns etc. I personally encoutered such group and managed to win a few times even with bad killers but I really didn't enjoy those games.

Fun is subjective. Some people can have fun while losing others only be winning. I find every game fun as long it's not too short. I'm just saying that current meta builds aren't exactly build around both sides having fun which is something I'd like to see chane.

Exatcly, killers can't get any more buffs but we can encourage them to prolong games by picking more chases. That way they won't tunnel 1 guy because of fear that unless they do the might lose not killing anyone. Currently 3 hooking all survivors isn't really good way to win. Solos get afflicted by tunneling and camping far more then SWF so if solos should get buffs it would be in the department of these 2 issues. It's just my opinion but if there was some certanity that gens won't suddnely pop like crazy killers would tunnel/camp less. Longer games mean we can give survivors more tools to fight tunneling/camping without buffing killers to silly amounts.

Agreed, since they bought rights to DBD the game has improved significantly. I think that devs listen to people's complains maybe a little too much no matter if it's killers or survivors (which I agree complain quite equally). During halloween event they incread rewards immidieatly after there was an exposion of complains on forums. It's not same as balancing but it gives us insight on that devs listen to us and incorporate our feedback more then we might think.

It's pretty late where I live so if you have more to say I'll respond tomorow, if not then it was pleasure disscuing.

@Vietfox said:
Ok i kinda read it.
If i could decide i wouldnt give kindred to solo survivors. Same way i've said many times that killers shouldn't be equally viable (please don't burn me) BUT VIABLE because i see them as different kind of difficulties so should be the same for survivors. You tryhard survivor? Play solo with the same features.
If any offering needs to be change is BNP, it's a joke that its price is still 7K. They should buff it, reduce the cost or simply remove it, i don't care.
Btw killer mains, if you see survivors using party streamers dont camp them right off the bat please, those points are for you as well.

make a killer challenging because their MECHANICS are challenging, not just because they're hot trash

@Vietfox said:
yeet said:

@Vietfox said:

Ok i kinda read it.

If i could decide i wouldnt give kindred to solo survivors. Same way i've said many times that killers shouldn't be equally viable (please don't burn me) BUT VIABLE because i see them as different kind of difficulties so should be the same for survivors. You tryhard survivor? Play solo with the same features.

If any offering needs to be change is BNP, it's a joke that its price is still 7K. They should buff it, reduce the cost or simply remove it, i don't care.

Btw killer mains, if you see survivors using party streamers dont camp them right off the bat please, those points are for you as well.

make a killer challenging because their MECHANICS are challenging, not just because they're hot trash

@yeet no one wants hot trash killers lol

you said "killers shouldn't be equally viable", which is the wrong kind of thinking when it relates to making a game challenging

unfairness =/= challenge

@Vietfox said:
yeet said:

@Vietfox said:

yeet said:

@Vietfox said:

Ok i kinda read it.

If i could decide i wouldnt give kindred to solo survivors. Same way i've said many times that killers shouldn't be equally viable (please don't burn me) BUT VIABLE because i see them as different kind of difficulties so should be the same for survivors. You tryhard survivor? Play solo with the same features.

If any offering needs to be change is BNP, it's a joke that its price is still 7K. They should buff it, reduce the cost or simply remove it, i don't care.

Btw killer mains, if you see survivors using party streamers dont camp them right off the bat please, those points are for you as well.



make a killer challenging because their MECHANICS are challenging, not just because they're hot trash

@yeet no one wants hot trash killers lol

you said "killers shouldn't be equally viable", which is the wrong kind of thinking when it relates to making a game challenging

unfairness =/= challenge

@yeet and i also said with capital letters "but viable". By that i meant that it would be like choosing a difficulty, but far from being impossible, all of them would be viable. Plus the fact that killers with different powers and mechanics would be quite difficult to make them all equally viable.
Same thing for survivors,that's why i'm discussing with nickenzie about solo survivors. Funny thing is that this time it's him who wants to give something to survivors and i don't like it. 😂

i'd just prefer more skill based interactions between killers and survivors
because what is a more skill based interaction: juking a nurse blink or sprint bursting away from a leatherface saw