Reduce survivor's perks to 1 in game
What do u think if survivor can choose in game only 1 perk?4 perks vs 4 killer's perks instead of 16 perks vs 4 perks
Comments
-
How do I delete someone else's account?
35 -
@Rancid_Discharge no!u can choose not 4 perks in match!only 1 4 survivors=4 perks
0 -
A lot of perks are useless if they're not used in conjunction with something else. Many/most survivor perks would have to be reworked. At that point, it'd be easier to just remove all survivor and killer perks from the game entirely. Which I'm fine with, really, so let's do it.
REMOVE ALL PERKS!
3 -
Ok dude this is just not it.
7 -
They should just add a mode with 0 perks
2 -
I'd be interesting if they buffed all survivor perks to worth it and made things like bt ds and kindred base kit but slightly weaker
Would be sad to lose synergy builds tho like lithe qq and dance w me
0 -
They should add new modes, period. A vanilla no-perk mode would be interesting, just have it automatically reward more BP in return for the handicap and not being able to use any BP perks.
2 -
1 is probably too extreme, how about start with reducing to 3 or 2?
Another idea I had was to allow survivors to run 2 perks from other characters, and 2 of their own adept perks. It would somewhat reduce the power-level of some survivor builds... You won't see everyone running DS/BT/DH/IW anymore. Maybe if it's a David King you can run DS/BT/DH and WGLF, however it means that if you see a David in game, you can pretty much guarantee he has DH.
You can still get powerful builds but it restricts it a little bit, and makes the game slightly more predictable for the Killer. Survivors for the most part play around a Killers power. Killers have to play around perks, and you have to figure those out in game.
0 -
Solo Q with 1 perk lmao
3 -
.......this is either a horrible take or bait
3 -
I would be a hard no on changing the number of perks that can be equipped for a match.
However, even though it's probably an unpopular opinion, I think it might be interesting (and make survivor selection more relevant) if one survivor perk slot could only equip one of the chosen survivor's teachable perks.
Unfortunately if that were to happen I'd have to give up lovely Zarina and play Dwight and David constantly.
1 -
actually swf 3perks makes sense because im solo user
0 -
I did a Self Preservation Meme season before. I'll do it again.. fight me.
0 -
And that's fine, cause if you played David or Dwight I know on sight I probably need to play around DH or Bond/Prove Thyself (not that the last two have much to play around).
Basically I've had games as Killer where I've lost kills because of big For the People plays, etc. It seems correct to play assuming that no one runs that perk, as in most games slugging would be correct but that perk hard counters it. At least if you were running Zarina I'd have an inkling it was coming and could prepare for it.
Again, anyone could run FTP, but they'd have to make a hard decision to omit DH or DS. Survivor builds ATM are too strong.
0 -
Never change forums
0 -
Ive played perkless for the achievements its not fun
0 -
UkilledSurvivor
1 -
It is possible for survs to do good with no perks, but perks are here to enhance gameplay and without the might stale the game if only 1 was available.
Also I don't consider 16 surv perks vs a killers 4. In a game your unlikely to feel the effects of all 16 even if their used against you.
1 -
Yeahhh no
1
