http://dbd.game/killswitch
Borrowed Time is incoherent as it is
I cannot be the only one that thinks that. It was obviously designed around protecting the vulnerable unhooked survivor from being instantly downed again, and it does get the job well done, but kind of too well. Once a survivor gets unhooked by a BT user, the roles instantly reverse, and the "vulnerable" survivor becomes the one who protects the otherwise protector. It feels pretty counterintuitive. And also kind of unsolvable. How do you make it work by it's "original intentions" and still make it so it only protects the vulnerable one?
Comments
-
Easy. Make that survivor lose collision for the duration of the Endurance status effect.
In the meantime, you can usually wait them out, annoying as it is.
9 -
Obviously biased as a survivor main here but I hear this solution said a lot and although yes it solves an issue - but it would also buff facecamping/camping in general and would heavily discourage endgame plays.
Because right now with the current BT there's a small window of opportunity if you're the 2nd last survivor. If you win the unhook mindgame after baiting out a hit you can try and make a play with BT.
6 -
Except how it actually plays out: any competent killer instantly recognizes the obvious attempts and forcing a BT hit and follows them for 12 seconds then downs them again, you lose 12 seconds. The only time this works out for them is if they body block you at a choke or path well enough that it prevents you from hitting the unhooker AND they are close enough to a pallet or window so that they don't get downed anyways, here's a hint they usually never are.
Case and point is that borrowed time never carries anywhere close to hard enough to win games in solo que survivor, in SWF that's another story but at the end of the day it's incredibly unfun to get hit immediately after getting unhooked yet it is extremely common to so that creates quite the predicament.
0 -
Yeah, I agree with @Pepsidot, would fix one "issue" and backfire into another one. Maybe Endurance should give less of that "adrenaline rush" survivors get when hit? I think that way it would still save the unhooked, but make it very risky for them to protect their savior. It's just that it seems very, idk the exact wording for this, uncomfortable, when you as a killer go back to the unhook spot, see absolutely no track from the unhooker, but a whole trail of scratch marks and blood from the unhooked, like "Yeah, saved ya, you owe me your life, now go get the killer's attention while I hide behind this wall.".
@socalfusions, your competent killer would lose the 12 seconds of Endurance, + anything between 2 to 30 seconds depending on the quality of the Dead Hard play, and still gotta factor in a DS timer, so you'd lose a few more seconds while you wait it out, and then on this example scenario, to pick up and hook that survivor, and it takes a minimum of 60s for it all to happen. Gens require 80s. So 3 survivors on gens this whole time got 3 of them at 75%. One you'll stop, and the other 2, not likely to.
Back to the Borrowed Time thing, a solution that I think would be satisfactory would be akin to the Cover Skill that Paladins have in Final Fantasy XIV, where the protector bonds with the unhooked, and whatever hits the unhooked is transferred to the protector instead. Of course this would proc Endurance, as to avoid an unhealthy survivor being downed by evil paranormal forces of darkness or something. Then balance around said bond. Maybe they gotta walk close by (16m or something) to avoid the effect ending prematurely? This would work like, Unhooked gets hit, protector takes damage from Healthy to Injured, or into Deep Wound, bond broken. If the Protector takes damage, the bond stays, and if they get hit a second time, then Unhooked gets a Deep Wound and the bond gets broken. This way, the Protector will feel like he needs to take 2 hits to get the full value of the perk, and will do what he can to protect the Unhooked, but if the killer goes for the "easy target", the Protector still gets the value, just not as much as if he succesfully protected. Seems kinda messy idk, but my mind is chaos, please make an effort to grasp the concept.
TLDR: Killer goes for the easy prey, protector gets a cover hit when killer swings for the vulnerable guy. Protector gets in the way of the killer, he gets a way to protect and then deep wound the victim as a last resort.
2 -
I’ll say it a million times. Borrowed Time endurance should last 15 seconds, and if the player is hit during that time they’ll endure another hit. If a protection hit is registered while BT is active the player will fall down instead.
It’s supposed to allow the rescued person to get away from the hook after being unhooked. A means to counter tunneling as killers come right back to down the same person. If killers knew that unhooked survivors were protected for 15 seconds they would look for the unhooker most of the time.
The moment unhooked survivors use their endurance to protect the other then it’s beyond the intended purposes.
3 -
I would argue this should be solved with a base game change/not a perk. However, I do have to ask why should the survivor team have a 'chance' to save that is pretty normalized when they are at such a heavy disadvantage. Or in other words "Why should the survivors have a non-rare chance to save and both get out when its 2v1 and 1 is on hook in EGC"
1 -
Meanwhile u can also wait for effect to begone so indeed the change would be great.
0 -
Because the chance is low anyway. Most of the times, the survivor that goes for the unhook knows it's going to be a trade anyway, unless the killer ######### up badly. You said non rare, but it is rare. Why should the killer feel that they're entitled to one kill no matter what? If they mess up the trade and both survivors escape, that's on the killer
2 -
With the way protection hits work, this is too easily abused.
Lets take this scenario:
Survivor unhooks you with BT, then dead hards. Since that survivor is injured, now your hit counts as a protection hit and you would be downed in a situation where survivors literally brought you a perk that protects the unhooked survivor from being hit.
There is no real issue with blocking when BT is active, its a high risk high reward situation, the biggest issue with BT blocking is the way Dead Hard works right now. For someone to block you with BT, then reach the other side of the pallet(without Dead Hard) and stun you without you being able to block the pallet drop yourself is someone who simply outplayed you. Personally, I would say that either Dead Hard wouldnt work while you have endurance or that Dead Hard only works while the killer attacks you(similar to how Overcome works). In both those cases, BT is no longer an issue.
0 -
Exactly this, protection hits are something like, 10m near an injured survivor counts as a protection hit, it would completely negate BT if the person that saves you is injured when they save you, the killer could then not hit the saviour and hit the saved which would down them through BT because they're within range of the injured saviour.
2 -
This leans into my idea to balance SWF and solo. A SWF team uses a shared pool of perks so only one of them could have Borrowed Time thus minimizing the impact of multiple BT/body block situations in then end game. Balancing SWF solves many of the issues this game has, including this one.
1 -
In a swf vs an m1 killer with at least 3 survivors alive at EGC just 1 BT is easily enough to save + get to the gates. Between body blocking + exhaustion perks you are unlikely to down anyone. 2 is a bit riskier but basically if you manage to force the killer to either hit the BT survivor in 13 seconds or bodyblock enough to create a delta to where DH + the distance gained by the bodyblock gets you to the gates you escape. The killer will only be able to target at most 1 person at this time so the other n surviivors can easily get in the way, if the killer ttries to shift his focus even on the largest maps you will not have enough time to M1 a survivor and hit them twice assuming everyone is holding w to the nearest 99'd gate.
0 -
I usually don’t see BT abuse when saviors are healthy. It’s when they’re injured. They risk the save anyway if the killer is far enough away from the hook to set up their abusive tactics. Then the rescued body blocks the injured savior.
Scenario B. Injured savior unhooks. They DH through each other to make you miss. The rescued person kites behind the injured savior until they reach a safe zone.
All of that would craziness would cease if BT wouldn’t count for protection hits. The injured savior wouldn’t risk an unhooked person getting hit again unless the killer is far enough for the unhooked to get 10 meters away from the savior. The injured savior now has to distract killer, using DH to stall probably.
Survivors can no longer stand next to each other while injured, or save in the killers face unless the savior is healthy. The saviors should always have to heal first to guarantee safety, which is how it should be.
0 -
Its a lil incomprehensible yeah but to counter just body block back for 12s and then put that sucker back on the ground and back on a hook if you're so inclined.
It only becomes a no brainer play when combined with DH for distance to secure a pallet/window and initiate a full looping chase before the 12s are up. Even then they burn their DH for it so you'll get em down again eventually.
Then you just have to watch for DS, so really you can get yourself 5 quasi hits/health states if done right.
Maybe BT base kit isn't a great idea.
0 -
In this scenario you should go for a gab on the unhooker instead
0 -
I think BT is fine as it is.
1 -
It would, but exactly how does one balance SoloQ from SwF? It comes down to DbD's core. Other games like VHS, Evil Dead, Friday, all were balanced around having voice communications and a very clear teamwork, hence them offering built-in VC in their matches, but DbD never went that route, so they had to think on the most likely scenario that players are playing solo, and balance around that. Should a debuff be applied to players on SwF, if it only debuffed 4 player teams, then the solution would be to ditch one and queue as a trio. No debuff, team coordination, and the Solo one can just play normally. So debuff all players who queue with friends? Because that would lead to survivors that are clearly stronger or weaker in a match, and on most scenarios, a killer that manages to identify them can tunnel them down the same way we did with the CoH user on teams when we identified them. Restricting the number of repeated perks could work, but if the max number of say DH is 2, but all 4 survivors are running it, how does the game decides who gets to keep it? And what happens to those who don't, they just play with one less perk because it was deactivated? I think unless DbD completely reworks itself to have integrated VC and rebalance the whole game around that, every solution that could come would invariably create another issue.
It's not exactly about being fine, its more about it doing only what its original design envisioned. Reversing the Protected-Protector roles isn't what should happen with BT, but it is an extremely common event on matches.
1 -
Sometimes I miss the original BT that was 1 use per match but protected the survivor doing the unhooking as well as the survivor coming off the hook. It certainly made camping non viable.
0 -
But also made 2 survivors, who had their positions known by the killer, be unpressurable for the duration. In scenarios where the killer couldn't find anyone nearby him during the unhook, the best option was to come back and punish the unhook, and old BT posed a lose-lose situation in that regard.
Kinda in the same fashion as when the only person in sight is the unhooked survivor that carries both Unbreakable and Decisive Strike.0 -
Edit - Just gonna save my time...My Borrowed Time...
0
