The argument that its a 4v1 is very weak
I hear some killers say that its 16 perks vs 4, 4 survivors vs 1 killers, etc. They completely ignore the strength differences, as if one killer perk that impacts all survivors is equal to a survivor perk that impacts only the survivor using it.
Comments
-
No... its not? Other than nurse and blight with alch ring killer is generally still very weak against survivors that can do gens efficiently. Then you stack up perks like exhaustion on it to add 20-30 seconds to chase and OTR and maps then suddenly as m1 you just can't compete anymore. Like I don't want to be forced to run 4 slowdown to have a somewhat reasonable length of a trial.
Like I accept the fact that some m1's are just weak but even some mid tiers feel like matches end within 3-4 minutes.
Post edited by Brimp on25 -
I don’t know why killers complain. I play a ton of killer and I rarely run up against a competent team, say 1 in 10. Most of the time it’s just easy/boring. I really wish there was more teams. Those are the most fun, even if I lose.
9 -
Weekends tend to bring out teams and ttvs. Eventually you'll get a competent (not necessarily smart mind you) team that will try to speed run the gens.
1 -
It's also very common to make into a 3v1. Which the game is not balanced for.
3 -
It kinda is a resonable argument however not for every perk so i can see where your coming from.
Sure perks like fearmonger and hexes effect the entire team at the same time so in terms of balance these perks are balanced in a 4 v 1 but if you consider gen progression vs gen regression perks (other than ruin) it is at this point it gets unbalanced in favour of survivors.
This is due to the fact that all 4 survivors can progress gens seperately using their perks where as a killer can only regress 1 gen at a time (unless its oppression or ruin if survivors let go)
I think the point a lot of killers make when arguing that its 16 v 4 perks is the range of the perks when dealing with SWF.
Now solo que doesnt really matter for this arguement because there is usually no setup for stratagy which often results in more selfish builds which benifits the killer. however with SWF they can bring 10 - 16 different perks that benifit the whole group, for example Boons. The fact that a good SWF will have different roles (basicly healer, gen worker and killer looper) is what makes the 4 v 1 unbalanced currently.
Thankfully 4 man SWF arn't found 2 often so its not to big of a deal. if u get destroyed you just go next.
4 -
Killer perks are on average far weaker than survivors perks, so if anything your line of thinking makes it more in favor of the 4 in the 4v1.
6 -
From someone rage quitting or going down instantly 3 times in a row? Sure.
5 -
Ok...
I don't even understand how can you compare the strength of killer and survivor perks...
Completely different meaning and completely different outcome...
It's like: "Dead Hard is stronger than Franklin's change my mind" - and I will be like: "What in the hell did I just read?"
9 -
Most survivor perks do affect the whole team though. If you use Dead Hard and buy an extra 20 seconds of a chase, that's 60 extra seconds of gen time you just gained if your team is playing correctly. The only exception would be truly selfish perks like Low Profile and Left Behind, but these are the minority and they are rarely being ran.
13 -
I mean
the game is literally 4 dudes vs 1 dude
2 -
I know what you mean...
But it is also a question of thinking resources.
I personally think the killer is more difficult, not only because of the simple numerical difference between 4 and 16, but also in terms of completely guessing who has which Perk.
I also think the 4vs1 argument is legitimate; I don't think it should be possible for one survivor to deal with a killer instead of a team of 4.
2 -
I would not say it is weak. But Killers seem to think that it equals 4x4=16 vs. 1x4=4 Perks, while this is not true.
Also, the "It is a 4v1"-Argument seems to make Killers believe that this means that Survivors should fall like flies. However, but the 4v1 and the 1v1 aspect are important.
0 -
What i believe, the 4v1 idea gets the misconception of thinking 4 survs are four times the killer, which is not true.
Yes, if we take the literal number there are 4 people against 1, but the objective on the survivor side is balanced and programmed under the concept of multiple people repairing at once.
You cant repair in a 1v1
You can barely get a gen if you are lucky in a 1v2
In some situations, you cant even repair in a 1v3
But the killer does not need anybody to kill the survivors.
I would say the true value of one survivor must be 0.30, because whenever one teammate is killed the game is tilted so much on the killer favour.
1 -
When is comes to Macro plays yes it is 4V1... but Micro plays are 1V1
The Macro is map pressure... whos on what hook... whos injured... whos working on Gens and how many Gens are left
The Micro is the chase... where is the Survivor... where does the Survivor want to go... where is the Survivor going
0 -
It's almost like everyone's experiences are completely different, and that the world doesn't revolve around you! Wow!
7 -
Say what you want about the current balance of the game, but if a killer messes up thats 100% of the "team" messed up, while if 1 survivor messes up thats only 25% of the team
0 -
I watched "Terrifier" last night, and I think Art would make a good killer. Not sure what his power would be
0 -
Yeah, but it also takes one bad teammate to completely lose the game for the entire team
0
