SIMPLE QUESTION REDUX - YES OR NO - DO YOU THINK NOED IS FINE?
Previous topic had the vast majority of players saying it was fine.
Interested to see if opinions have changed.
My answer - Yes
Comments
-
Yes Noed is fine , there's only five totems
5 -
Yes
In the game of "do gens or die" you have to do bones at the same time as gens or dying
0 -
Yes. It has a solid counter.
2 -
No- it could be better and more rewarding then it is in the state its in.
0 -
No it's not. First of all that's not even a strong perk. It will give you 1 or 2 pity kills so your mmr goes higher. Why would you ever want high mmr?
Getting downed and camped to death on your first hook is also fun. Perk is bad for both sides
4 -
Nope. Rewards regardless of previous gameplay and the "counter" is just dumb.
7 -
Yes - I mostly play survivor, do bones.
1 -
By itself yes.
Camping with noed. I'm going to have to argue no
3 -
Sure, if solo Q had a basekit totem counter, otherwise, no.
0 -
No
It should be stronger, right now, good survivor teams couldn't care less about NOED while babies get all murdered because of it.
Give it new effect that's worthy of beiing endgame hex and make it work like No way out but much stronger once fully stacked and active.
0 -
NOED is fine.
4 -
Yes, I think it's ok.
2 -
No.
1 -
Alone or with an endgame build? Sure. Stacked with slowdown perks? No, not at all.
It makes solo queue even more painful to play. Honestly I would gladly throw away NOED and Dead Hard.
Okay not exactly thrown away, just reworked.
0 -
No.
the concept of NOED is a very fine one, but it lacks severely in its execution.
NOED shouldnt punish teams that did 4 totems the same as teams that did 0.
0 -
No
1 -
Yes
0 -
NOED is fine, its a reasonable second chance perk against genrushing.
1 -
No, i think the perk itself is fine but i think it needs a more reasonable method of announcing its presence before somebody gets hit, so it doesn't feel so terrible when you get backhanded by it.
0 -
Its fine yes.
1 -
I think its fine. Easily prevented.
The only issue I have with it is that it rewards facecamping where the only counter is to rush gens. Then the survivors dont have enough time to do bones. But thats more an issue with facecamping. Extend time on hook a bit to allow for bones and gen rushing to counter facecamping and its all Gucci. I just cant think of a way to do this that isnt abusable by either side...
1 -
Yes.
0 -
No
1 -
Needs a buff. Needs to overwrite a boon and a couple % speed boost.
2 -
As a stand alone argument, as a perk in a game, Yes.
When factoring in the often unfun playstyles people use when crutching on Noed , I guess, still Yes.
But it's not a healthy perk for the game, nor does it make for fun tactics in the majority of games it is used. And it never feels earned.
0 -
Yes, if any change needs to be made it should let Survivors know it has activated once activated
0 -
Yes. It's moderately powerful IF survivors haven't done bones (not likely, in fairness) and IF they choose to risk giving it value by going for a save or lingering in the trial, you trade out a perk slot until the end game, and survivors can deactivate it after it's spawned if they choose to take that risk.
If survivors play optimally against it, then it's at most a single kill.
2 -
Yes. Close discussion.
0 -
Yes. It's 100% counterable.
0 -
yes
0 -
If you think about how easy survivors have getting exhaustion perks back again and again, NOED is just too weak. Killer have three perks all game and then just maybe get value out of this perk. It needs a buff I think at least the speed buff should still be there even if all totems are done or the NOED totem gets cleansed. So no it's not fine.
0 -
Yes.
0 -
Yes
0 -
Optimally is the key word here.
Have you played solo q in awhile?
Optimally is rarely associated with solo q gameplay.
0 -
A fair point, but "optimally" isn't exactly hard in NOED's case. Literally all you have to do is open the exit gates and leave as soon as you see NOED activate, unless you're the unlucky SOB who gets hit with it. I do empathise with that being unfun for the person who gets hit, so the only change I'd support is NOED announcing itself as soon as it activates, that seems fair.
Not to say that you should be too harshly criticised for not leaving the trial, but if you're choosing to potentially give the perk value by playing into it then I really don't think it's fair to start complaining that the perk is too strong.
1 -
I certainly agree, survivors should just leave. I never understood the insistence on trying to get 4 out when you could easily get 3 out.
And I don't mind being left if the others leave.
But, I guess, after so long on the game, and so many escapes, the fun for some may be in the challenge of saving the one even if it turns into a 4k.
But, yes, if you choose to do this, then you shouldn't complain.
2 -
why not make this a poll?
also, yeah, I'm fine with it.
0 -
No. It rewards killers for playing badly.
1 -
SWF not a problem. Random queue its a huge problem but I said this how many a times now? *yawn*
0 -
NOED? More like NO SkillED killer mains. Ayy gottem!
1 -
No. It either rewards bad players or boosts good players too much.
Likewise, it needs a buff to be more useful but it can't receive any due to its current nature.
It's power level is fine, but it's application is not.
It unfairly ######### over Solo Q whilst being useless against SWF.
3 -
In a perfect world? No. In the game's current state? Yes.
0 -
Yes and no.
I don't like the perk, and the unhealthy and unfun playstyle it can lead to, especially with NWO.
However, it's no more busted than an SWF with multiple toolboxes popping two gens before the first minute of the game elapses, or exploiting the office infinite on RPD.
It probably needs to be reworked, but not before killers get some love in other areas.
0 -
No
As the only perk that gives a reason to clease dull totems it is the STRONGEST killer perk in the game
Every time a survivor thinks or looks for or cleanses a dull totem NOED has had an effect on that match.
Noed needs to changed completely and Dull totems need an intrinsic gameplay effect
0 -
Yes of course it is fine
0 -
No. It's strength is fine but the way it works is not.
0 -
I main killer, never cared for it myself. It's a "I can't win the game so I should get one down at the end at least" mentality, when a good build will play out the full game (usually expect one to get hatch).
As survivor, it sucks getting popped with noed every time. Just depressing and sad, with rare exceptions it means someone on the hook and no end game rescues.
0 -
Yes, it's fine.
0 -
Yes.
0 -
Honestly, at this point with SBMM, the survivors I am forced to go against and just overall how unfun the games are, I think it is fine. Why as the Killer should I not be allowed a second chance to kill the survivors when they end the game in like 3 minutes.
0
