http://dbd.game/killswitch
Disable Perks After Use
I don't think it would be a great idea and it's probably never going to be added, but what would happen to the game if after a game of using a perk it was disabled for 3 or 4 games?
You definitely wouldn't see the same Perks every game unless it was a perfectly in sync swf.
This isn't a serious recommendation, just wanted to hear others thoughts on what it would be like.
Comments
-
Play Trapper with Corrupt, then play 3 or 4 games without Corrupt ... yeah, that would be great 🤡
7 -
I'd drop the game.
Shadowborn only once every 3 games? You couldn't pay me to play like that.
2 -
Sounds like a great way to lose players tbh.
A better way could be randomly selected few perks of yours are buffed after every game as in they get better numbers or w/e and you get 2-3k bp per each of those buffed perks you use in game.
Punishing players vs rewarding players in an essence
0 -
No thank you. I need my BBQ and Balance Landing xd
2 -
so id I fail my “escape using only no mither, repair 6 gens, unhook 5 different survivors and stun the killer with a pallet 7 times all in a single match” tome challenge then I gotta do 3 more matches to play it again?
7 -
Didn't say I didn't agree. This is just a "what if..." discussion.
0 -
I don't think it would be a great idea
Agree
2 -
Jesus, I didn't even think of that. Perk challenges would immediately become absolute misery to attempt. Brr...
Besides, I'm pretty sure this would end in three different survivor meta loadouts instead of one. Same for killer. People would just cycle between the next best perks. You'd still get a meta, but now camping is easier because BT isn't guaranteed in every match.
1 -
Uninstall
1). some of the rift missions and daily objectives are a real chore without some perks
2) if i was a new player i would refund the game in a heartbeat. I have a limited amount of perks and i have to be limited more?
0 -
This would be nice for a personal challenge(like hardcore killer or hardcore survivor), where winning with a perk means that perk "dies". But in public games? As long as you do not get to see what killer you're facing, or what inventory the survivors have equipped, that's not a good idea. And seeing the inventory of survivors or seeing what killer is being faced can literally change the outcome of the game.
0 -
So you rely on perks then?
0 -
I would hate it. I mean, to be forced to do it. If I want to drop perks after I used them, I can do it without the game forcing me. Like a challenge I made for myself.
I know you're just making a fun theory but I have to admit I don't get the point of having a perk disabled for three matches. If it's for having more diversity, I don't think it's the good way to do so. Plus, imagine you had to drop your favorite/strongest perks and you are against someone who is able to use these perks again because they had their three matches done.
Running perks should be a choice, not a burden.
0 -
I rely on Shadowborn. Nothing else matters.
1 -
The point is coming up with something that everyone agrees is a worse idea than whatever BHVR is doing. It's not about what I want, but to get other people to think about what they want instead of just saying "No, I don't want this." Probably a fruitless effort, but this is just a meaningless post.
0 -
0 killers left and the game dies
1 -
No. Just no.
1 -
It's a cute idea (as per Otz's recent streak attempt) but in reality, it would be miserable.
Weaker killers are incredibly dependent on certain perks - Corrupt on Trapper, for instance.
Plus - BBQ.
What I want is for mandatory killer perks to be baked in baseline, to encourage variety. BBQ's BP bonus is the biggie.
But as that's unlikely to happen, it never leaves my bars.
0
