New BP caps and replacement for BBQ/WGLF
- Raising the BP category caps from 8k to 10k is great, but it raises an issue. The Survival and Sacrifice categories are notoriously stingy when it comes to what actions provide BP score events for these, pretty much being tailored specifically to optimal performance plus escaping, or getting 10+ hooks and a 4K. Those extra 2,000 BP are going to be very difficult to obtain.
- BBQ and WGLF's BP bonuses provided an incentive to play in a fairer healthier way. Spreading hooks out amongst survivors instead of camping/tunneling, and in aiding your team mates instead of leaving them to fend for themselves.
So, there seems to be a clear solution here. Introduce new BP score events that replicate the effects of the BBQ/WGLF BP bonuses.
Survivor: The first four times you; unhook a survivor, heal a survivor to healthy, recover a survivor form the dying state, take a protection hit, you score a bonus 500 BP in the Survival category.
Killer: Each time a survivor is hooked for the first time, you score a bonus 500 BP in the Sacrifice category.
Comments
-
No.
"BBQ and WGLF's BP bonuses provided an incentive to play in a fairer healthier way."
Uh huh. Sure. If BBQ is such a fair and healthy perk, then there should still be a close to similar number running it ater the new update, right?? Let me know. Nothing to do with the large number of bonus BP for every match, particularly killer? LOL. Ok. Also, there's nothing fair or healthy about running WGLF.
"So, there seems to be a clear solution here. Introduce new BP score events that replicate the effects of the BBQ/WGLF BP bonuses."
Nothing clear about it. The idea is that the BP are going and not being shuffled around. This topic has been covered multiple times. The bonus BP are going because it's bad game design and there is zero necessity that the equivalent points be found somewhere else.
You shouldn't conflate the two issues here - if there are issues with points scoring in any particular category, that's seperate. Personally, I don't see why activities that get points need bonus points. Sounds like you are just trying to inflate the giving out of points because of some feeling of loss, rather than making a sound design decision. It's also bad because it introduces the concept of giving out random bonuses for regular gameplay and it's only a matter of time before people start demanding bonues for everything.
A simpler solution to your proposed non-problem, would just be to slightly raise the point values already given to actions undertaken in the two categories. SImpler and without the fluff perk stuff.
0 -
Yes having BP bonuses tied to perks was bad design, but there has been a load of calls to make these bonuses a basekit feature, so that they're not tied to perks. If you haven't realised this or understood why then you seem really out of touch.
These bonuses provided healthy gameplay for other players. BBQ helped survivors because it discouraged camping and tunnelling, and WGLF helped other survivors because you would be incentivised to aid them instead of leaving them to die. So of course these effects alone will not warrant the use of those perks, because they're helping others, not yourself. That's the whole reason why they provided BP bonuses in the first place.
2 -
I really dislike this "grind" change. It's not a reduction in grind for players like myself who play a 3 or 4 characters and have them maxed out already.
There is not point p3ing a character I don't play to get the perks. Even new ones being released as the last 8 chapters apart from some perks.
Removing the bloodpoints gains just increases my grind to get the 1.5m blood points for each side and then farm the perks on my characters.
It is unbelievable that they spent so much time working on a system that they stated was to help the grind for all which only really helps a percentage of the playerbase who play all the characters get the perks.
They said they don't want players to feel forced to use perks but then add a side incentive. If that statement is true then in turn that just makes players feel forced to play a side they may not wish to at that point if blood points are what they play for.
I can't understand the rational thought of how they thought it was grind reduction for all.
Going on an ave of 25k per game. It will take 120 matches to get 3m bp. Levelling up the perks after tier 1 could be another 48 at least depending on where my webs are at. That's 168 matches. With the BP bonus that is 50k instead lowering that to 108 matches. I would get this bonus in at least 90% of my matches.
My personal grind has increased to around doing another 50 to 60 matches to get the same results on 6 characters 3 for each side.
This seriously needs looked at and addressed as whoever sat around the table and thought about these changes only did so with certain players in mind and disregarding others.
0 -
So do we think giving another potential 2000 BP in either Survival or Sacrifice categories is a good idea or not?
0 -
I think you're misunderstanding the fundamental way in which an incentive works. The BP is the incentive. Without the BP incentive, yes, you are going to see people run BBQ and WGLF less. However, the acquisition of that extra BP required, in BBQ's case, spreading hook states and further encourages players to leave hook to chase after faraway survivor auras. WGLF encourages playing in an altruistic manner.
As for whether or not its appropriate to continue giving those incentives out with the new structure - I think you're right in that it probably is not. I think the matchmaking incentives will probably be a suitable replacement (and stacking the two could have become ludicrous)
It certainly can't hurt, right? I mean - you'd also be able to make the case that a BP cap increase barely affects Plague wrt the devotion category because her numbers are super undertuned there. You'll also get more value out of survival/sacrifice offerings (and the remaining perks that provide BP bonuses to categories) as those are typically limited in value to the former cap.
0 -
Awesome idea, yes that is a good solution for the survival category.
0 -
Really a shame how they remove the perks that motivated players to play in a good way rather than the optimal way. But they'll come up with something in the future I'm sure.
0
