I’m starting to think BHVR announces ridiculously overkill changes as a tactic
They did this before with eruption. Announced a full nerf of eruption which they knew was overkill and would have basically made the perk worthless. Then reversed course on a tiny bit of it, just to get what they really wanted from it without any pushback. Now they’re doing it again with this massive nerf to healing and gen perks.
See, if they announce reasonable nerfs, they know a lot of people will get pissed off anyway right? So how do you nerf all this stuff and make people grateful for it? You announce an OVER-nerf. Things that are obviously beyond ridiculous. This causes massive anger from the playerbase and then after the PTB has been out for a bit they will come back, and say “Yeah so we listened to your feedback and we realized we were wrong and that was too much so here’s what we’re gonna do instead” and they walk back the changes just a teeny bit.
The playerbase breathes a sign of relief, thanks them for “listening to the community” and then the changes they wanted to begin with are welcomed with open arms because it wasn’t “as bad as it was going to be.”
At least I hope that’s what going to happen with these changes. Because as of right now they’re just beyond idiotic and not well thought out in the least. /end conspiracy theory
Comments
-
I will not be pissed about this update if Pain Res, Call of Brine, and Overcharge aren’t nerfed as severely.
0 -
Exactly. You’ve just proved my point.
14 -
I'm willing to give up TEN top tier killer perks if it means banishing Dead Hard forever.
8 -
That has nothing to do with anything I said. Also Dead Hard was never that oppressive. If you’re willing to give up 10 top tier killer perks to get rid of one perk that was high risk to use, I’d say that’s a major skill issue for you. IMO anyway
27 -
But eruption is still very very bad. Would you be happy/ok if they said "alright instead of 24 seconds it's 23'?
0 -
Or maybe, just maybe, the existence of a perk that lets you negate an entire chase by pressing E is bad game design.
3 -
You guys said that before dead hard was nerfed last time when it gave a distance boost. It was “all you have to do is press a button it takes no skill!” So what did they do? They made it so that it actually DOES take skill and damn near perfect timing to use accurately. One of the reasons I never used DH myself was because I don’t have the skill to time it right. But other survivors learned how to use the perk and even then it wasn’t guaranteed. Killer lag, latency issues etc and even if you did time it right it still didn’t work. But basically survivors learned how to use the new perk and killers still complained because they didn’t want to learn how to counter it. This dead hard is nowhere near “press a button and negate a chase” it’s high risk, high reward. Killers just don’t want to do what they told survivors to do the last time it was nerfed which was “adapt” and actually learn how to use skill to counter it. DH is perfectly counterable in its current state but when an entire half of the playerbase is too lazy to take the time to do it, then of course it has to go.
Just because a group of people whine and cry the loudest to get what they want doesn’t mean their complaints were valid or necessary. It just means they were the loudest so they got heard more.
19 -
Where did I say eruption still wasn’t bad? Why are y’all so insistent on turning this into an us vs them post? I’m literally defending the nerfs to killer gen perks in my OP, and after everything I said all you thought to do was defend eruption. 🤦🏾♀️🤦🏾♀️
0 -
My point is this "walk back" implies the state of the thing getting touched goes from dumpster to non-dumpster status. If the walk back results in it still being trash what exactly is the point of this bluff? Hence why I asked if they said ok we won't nerf healing as bad and gave back 1 second would you have a sigh of relief and say healing is saved or would you still consider the changes overkill?
0 -
I don't care how much skill it takes or who cried louder about what, the CONCEPT of the perk itself is bad game design. Period.
3 -
My point in saying “walking back” is that when they walked back the total gen progress part of the eruption nerf, the pitchforks around here died down. Yes some were still upset but it was nowhere near as bad as it was. Does that mean the nerf didn’t still suck? Nope! It means that BHVRs psychological tactic worked which is my entire point. If they walk back some of what was announced for healing will I be satisfied? Can’t say because I don’t know what the walk back would be. But my point is, even tho it may not work on you, it will work on a large segment of the player base. We’ve seen this happen already. And my point is that it’s all smoke and mirrors if it does work.
0 -
Says who? You could say that about several perks in this game. Doesn’t change the fact that the first time DH was nerfed, killer mains got what they asked for and then when survivors adapted and learned how to use the scraps that were left, it had to get nerfed again because the issue was never how the perk worked it was the fact that it even existed to begin with and screwed with the killers getting an easy win, and the killer role is clearly favored by devs.
8 -
There’s the story of the college daughter calling her dad to inform him of bad news. She states she’s pregnant, dropping out of school, and on drugs. After hearing this the father is extremely upset but then his daughter states that is all a lie but she did get an F on her final grade in some course and will have to retake the class costing him more money.
It’s an old tactic to amp up the possibilities only to reveal a lesser negative to make it seem not so bad.
i look forward to seeing the meta shaken up again for both sides.
4 -
Says who?
MATH.
Chase, chase, chase. Pallet, window, chase. Mind game, HA! Outplayed, M1... aaaand
E.
Get bent, Killer. I win anyways, even though you made the right play. Now all that chase time is fully wasted, I am going to sprint burst away and we get to start this process ALL.... OVER... AGAIN.
4 -
In psychology it’s called the door in the face technique.
3 -
I’d love to see the actual numbers on this. You saying “math” doesn’t add up to evidence. Cuz again, sounds like a skill issue to me. Survivors learning how to use a high risk perk (that’s doesn’t even work every single time it’s used) that killers don’t want or learn how to counter does not make the perk the issue.
4 -
Exactly
1 -
Again, I don't care about skill. You talk about skill until you are blue in the face, it's not relevant.
Dead Hard has the power to completely reset a chase AT WILL. No other perk in the game can do that. Not Lithe, not Balanced Landing, nothing. You press E and get to negate every single second of chase time. That's broken. By sheer game design.
I know it is really popular to just yell "SKILL ISSUE!" in place of an actual factual argument, but I'm looking at actual game time. A reset chase wastes, mathematically, an enormous amount of time. A properly executed Dead Hard can ensure a combined double chase time of 90 seconds or more, creating a triple gen pop. Just screaming "SKILL ISSUE!" does not change the fundamental design nature of the perk in question. At all.
And that's when they actually HAVE Dead Hard. That's not counting all the lost seconds of chase time while killers "just wait it out", only to find the Survivor didn't even have the perk. Dead Hard wastes seconds of chase time even when it is not present. If that is not telling of the meta to someone, I don't know what to tell that person they just lack critical thinking skills. Or a calculator. Or both.
5 -
That's not math that's a bunch of words
Your opinion on DH is purely a subjective opinion, which is totally fair you're entitled to it but it's not a fact
Another thing though I could equally create an example where their DH doesn't go off and I win as proof that the perk isn't that good and that people are just bad at the video game.
That's not my viewpoint but it could just as easily be.
6 -
Are you suggesting that if you press E when the killer attacks you, and you get a speed boost to get away and create distance, that such a statement is an OPINION?
I am pretty sure those are all facts.
2 -
DH was designed to give David who's being injured in the beginning - another healthy state. The game getting more competitive and everyone wants to win, DH is nothing more than the 3rd health state which should not have.
I also think tunneling to make chase of 1 health state is unfair. DH is the only answer to it. But at the same time it hurts fair play killers like me alot. Im glad its gone.
No matter the change, the concept of DH giving the 3rd health state still stand, its just get harder and harder.
3 -
No fella, you said that "DA MATHS" backs up what you said
But what you said was your subjective opinion and an example of a perk working with no shred of evidence or numbers to back you up.
The only factual thing you said is that Dead Hard can extend chases. That's true, it CAN extend chases. The key word being can aka it can also backfire and not work.
^ Which in my personal experiences is the case, New DH never bothered me.
7 -
Chases with a Dead Hard use last longer than ones that don't.
Dead Hard is the only perk in the game that can do so exclusively under Survivor control without a condition outside of your control, like a height to fall from or a window to vault.
These two factors are unhealthy for the game when used in conjunction.
2 -
1) Not a proven fact, A chase with a DH user could potentially last longer, if that survivor lands their dead hard and can make it to another tile. Alternatively, a survivor who is playing extremely safe may outlast a DH user in chase because they won't greed pallets or windows
2) Good Sprint Burst users can reset their exhaustion mid chase for a similar effect. I will say that using DH is purely in the survivor's control as in the killer cannot force them to press the E key but that also means the survivor has to know when the Killer will swing. It's not like they hit E and then the perk works ONLY when the killer decides to swing.
Sometimes the Killer might hit a survivor before they've even had a chance to press the key to begin with.
That being said, I don't really care that the perk is being nerfed. It's never bothered me since its rework and I never used it because I prefer Sprint Burst so this is just for the sake of discussion. It's not like what annoys you about the perk is going away, they just made it harder for survivors to use it
4 -
And when Ruin got reworked survivors got everything they wanted and when killers adapted and learned how to use the new one it got nerfed again. Something can be nerfed and still be an issue - i.e. Nurse, Ruin, and Dead Hard.
The devs don't favour one side. Stop with this mentality.
3 -
1.) For its intended purpose, it is a proven fact. What you really mean is that it doesn't do that 100% of the time. Perks need to be looked at when working AS INTENDED, not used wrong. By that logic Dead Hard is bad because some people miss the timing. Which is like saying Huntress hatchets are bad because they can miss. In your example if you take the player that is playing safe and you test him with AND without Dead Hard, his Dead Hard timer will be longer than without it.
2.) The Sprint Burst example, while a hilarious use of whataboutism here, I'll bite on anyway. A 99'd Sprint Burst still doesn't negate a good play. It doesn't literally cancel a hit taken at a pallet. It's a distance extended, not a hit negater.
The worst part of Dead Hard is your first chase taking so long because the Dead Hard negated your down and kept you from pressuring gens, almost promising a 3 gen pop on first chase against good survivors. With an unhook requirement, that is going away.
Post edited by WesCravenFan on2 -
I never said the devs favored one side. Thanks
1 -
You forgot "pressing E at the right time"
1 -
Yep, it has been very obvious. Although I wish they would revert back Iron Will to being 100% silent whilst injured, though still make breathing noises, now that they butchered DH. Cus what are you supposed to do against good Nurses and Blights then? Marinate on hooks all game?
4 -
*pressing E at a pallet or before a telegraphed attack
1 -
What was the point of the overkill Billy nerf announcement then?
1 -
The thing about this tactic is that it only functions if the change you want to make is already unreasonable and unfair, otherwise there's no point to the misdirection. Since what they landed on for Eruption, your main example, was very reasonable and fair - almost the best change it could've been - they didn't benefit from the supposed intentional escalation beforehand.
If people are gonna get mad whether the changes are reasonable or not, you don't get anything for intentionally making them more mad.
(Also these proposed changes, with the only exceptions being PR and the Engravings addons, aren't 'beyond idiotic', they're actually good ideas in theory. They just need testing- which is what the PTB is for.)
0 -
“And the killer role is clearly favoured by devs”
Yeah you did.
3 -
What's this then?
2 -
Can't be that hard if I have to hit through it 2-5 times per match.
0 -
So you've never used it. That explains why your opinion is complete garbage. Go play 10 games with DH and then come back and tell us how easy it is. If you are hitting 5 DH'S a game the issue isn't DH and I don't even need to tell you what the issue is because you should know what I'm gonna say.
4 -
Yea I've noticed this lately too. Knowing there will be community backlash with buffs/nerfs for anything, it's easy to just over buff or over nerf something and then say they've toned it down based on community feedback. When it's really the intended nerf/buff they were going for regardless.
I'm guessing they'll take the "community feedback" into consideration with the upcoming update and find a middle ground for base healing: 20s.
3 -
That's a lot of words to try use "skill issue" like some kind of weird uno reverse card.
Especially since it changes literally nothing I said. At all.
0 -
Let's not intentionally confuse two different situations. Legacy ruin was changed in response to complaints, but 6.1 ruin was because the devs picked the top picked perks and slammed the nerf bat around. If survivors got changes because of complaints in that patch, they would've done something to functionally reduce camping in 6.1. That was, and continues to be, a much larger complaint than ruin was at that time. It's like trying to say self care got nerfed that patch because people complained (they didn't, the pick rate got it nerfed).
Dead Hard was nerfed in 6.1 exactly to the community request: dead hard for distance was directly targeted. Killers got exactly what they asked for, it just wasn't what they wanted. The complaints came back after several months when survivors adapted and now we're getting nerf round 2 entirely because of complaints again.
3 -
It's worth mentioning and remembering that all of the nerfs in 6.1 were a direct response to complaints and feedback- just not complaints about any specific perk. The reason 6.1 happened is because of complaints about a stale meta, not because those perks were chosen solely for having a high pickrate or any other more arbitrary and senseless reason.
So, yes, Self Care was nerfed in that patch because of complaints- so long as we understand "because of complaints" to be acting on community feedback for the health of the game, at least.
(Also worth remembering that 6.1 was the anti-tunnel implementation as well, so specifically highlighting a lack of camping fixes is a little misleading- whether you think it was successful or not, there was an attempt at addressing complaints of base-game scale rather than just perks, same for the generator time increase and the other killer buffs.)
0 -
Oof, sounds like a...
1 -
... busted perk, yes. Hence the insane pick rate.
0 -
I respect the theory, but I assure you there's nowhere near as much scheming going on as you might think. I would love nothing more than to announce some changes and celebrate with people as they say, "Wow, this is perfect!" from the get-go. Obviously that's easier said than done with an asym game, but we try our best.
In reality, we just aren't afraid to try bold things. The PTB exists for a reason. We can try these things out and see how people feel. If it's not popular; that's fine, we can change it before it goes live. We've gotten a lot better at this as time has gone on. There's a lot more knobs and switches we can fiddle with behind the scenes to make these changes a lot quicker than before, making it less risky to try. Basically, be bold, but be receptive.
Ultimately, nobody can say for sure how people are going to feel about something until it's actually out there. Not even us. We would much rather test things and get feedback than be too scared to touch anything and constantly wonder, "What if?"
16 -
I just hope bHVR are very skeptical of the reception too, People have been saying they are planning to play foul in protest.
0 -
We already saw how they handled the 6.1 changes. Players were balling their little eyes out then and said the changes needed to be reverted. The problem was that instead of showing examples of why the changes were bad and how killers were getting large value from zone kicking(they weren't) they just said "trust me bro it's op".
3 -
Then survivor outplayed you when that happen. Most often dh is used on prediction and possible for killer to outplay. Few times though I havd outplayed dh and they still been able to drop pallet so that really only change it needs you should not be able to drop pallets or vault an window after you used it for few secs.
2 -
Well I sincerely hope you guys are considering doing some of these nerfs less severe or even forgoing some due to some negative feedback from a lot of these things.
1 -
Doesn't that imply that they do listen in the first place? The PTB's are great for testing so it makes sense for them to go *all out on hypothetical changes.
0 -
I’m seriously hoping “if it’s not popular” doesn’t literally mean “revert survivor nerfs if that is the popular opinion”, because then killers would be absolutely doomed.
Look at the forums now, where we have a few threads complaining about the killer nerfs, and these threads are absolutely lost among the giant flood of threads complaining about survivor nerfs. This will not change when the PTB happens, and the popular opinion on these forums will continue to be “revert the altruistic healing nerf because it’s not popular among the survivor population”.
0
