Medkit nerf was the final blow for survivor role

This is the sad truth... but then it leads to a call for further nerfs to perks and toolboxes which just makes the game even worse.

Looking back I can see how OP CoH + medpack was and I don't even mind the nerf to only get one heal out of a medpack. But the nerf to heal time is what makes healing now especially laborious. Especially, as you say, most killers now run sloppy so it's never a standard 24s. It's way more and if you get interrupted, which is often the case as killers now have more time to find you, then wave goodbye to any use out of your item.

Maybe medkits don't need a change and Sloppy needs a nerf. But something needs to change.

Ok. Please take a look at knightlight on twitch when he plays with his team. They play in a 4man swf with only one perk per survivor.

Kill rates across all mmr don't mean much. They don't show how the survivor died or how the match went. A killer that has not played the whole match and memed but got all survivors in end game with a cheeky bloodwarden doesn't mean killer is too strong. Just that the survivors got fooled.

If the killer was very good and went for 8 hooks and still had a 4man out doesn't mean survivor is too strong but that the killer played less optimally.

I dislike the stats bhrv offers because they are very vague and arent a good base for a good discussion.

Toolboxes are still extremely oppressive. BNP is stronger in 3 Gen situation and as some players have found out, give only like 2 seconds less compared to before if paired with the best toolbox.

You disregarded all the strong perks I mentioned.

Sorry but again : survivor is in a good spot right now. Anything else is wishful thinking.

two...and a half issue with that tho. afaik even their escape streak hasn't passed the 50 yet (and hens and the boys haven't gotten to 100 either). I'm also not sure if the top 0.1 percent going into pubs is representative in any way shape or form. Not to mention these are people who have played together for years, literally thousands of hours.

Takeaway though: the best of the best surv players can't get past 100 but the best of the best killer players have virtually no issue getting streaks of 1000+ wins.

All that being said: very true, general kill statt mean very little. Killstats that exclude players with less than half the available perks unlocked, and excluding the first 20 matches on a killer, would probably give a better indication of killrates (also potentially exclude the top 2-5% of players in terms of killrates on a given killer)

Dont trust nightlight.

Their stats are player input. Not everyone will post all of their games. Lot of people, if not most, will upload only the best plays (for some reason, one of them being frustration after lost match, ao instead of doing screenshot, people are going straight next match), so stats are unreliable. Unreliable to the point noone should use it to something more than fun.

But the stats from bhvr are sometimes saying even less....

Im just taking the most reliable source.

Then you should choose neither.

If the choice is to be wrong because unreliable data, and being wrong because unreliable data, then its better to accept one know nothing.

Only real issue is solo que is bad team mates

It's almost as if there are exceptional people that should not be used as a point of reference....

Idk if that wasn't clear in the previous post. The whole point was to make obvious that some people (be that eternal, be that hens and the boys, be that that blight or one of the idk how many killers who eventually stopped their winstreak somewhere between 200 and 500 wins) should not be the measuring stick. Hence me suggesting to exclude the fringes from stats. Both Eternal and that blight and people like them would be excluded from those stats - precisely because they tell you very little about what's going on in most matches for most people.

.... this has gone way off topic at this point though (tbh, I thought it was a different thread, was so confused when the notification mentioned medkits...) so I'll politely excuse myself from the discussion. If in doubt let's agree to disagree.

Again, gaslighting.

I have 3300h in dbd. It is true that I play around 70% - 30% killer - survivor.

Thank you for looking through my posts.

You can see there that while yes I defend camping, I see it as a necessary evil.

There are killers in this game that cant hold up with survivor efficiency.

For these killers, camping is, by far not always, a necessary step if they play to win.

I encourage you to be more open minded and dont just gaslight people into a narrative. I play a lot of killer and also a good amount of survivor. I understand when 3 gens pop and the wraith has one hook, that they can't play nice if they want to win. If you can't understand that, that's on you. But I will tell you that you will have way less fun in dbd if you only see the games balance from one viewpoint.

I agree that these players are very good in their own right. I dot want to go into who is really good at the game and who isn't because that's heavily biased and doesn't fit the discussion.

However, is it not part of the game?

Nurse is not fine. We all agree on that. God nurses should not exist because it's dumb that you can go on hundreds of wins in a row without addons or perks.

Same can be said about these swf. They are rare for sure. But is it therefore fine that they exist?

All I wanted to say is that survivor is in a good spot right now. That is about the role as a whole. If players play the role less effective, then that doesn't mean that the role is just straight up bad. Same can be said about killer.

SoloQ is hard. But not because survivor is bad. It's hard because of the lack of communication, therefore lack of efficiency and the huge amount of misplays that accumulate to losses.

I actually think that dbd is probably in one of the most balanced states right now.

That is my point.

However, balanced doesn't mean the most fun.

Agree to disagree.

You tell me the whole time that I only play killer and that I'm a biased killer main that enjoys camping and "ruining" others fun.

Am I wrong?

I don't think you understand my point of view at all.

Just one honest question: do you play killer?

I am a pig main with 2000h solely on her. So my games are pretty hard. Pig is not that strong you know. That's why I see camping sometimes as a necessary evil.

I also don't think killers like nurse or Blight (with certain addons) have to tunnel or camp to win in most of their matches.

And if you want to go that route: agree to disagree.

Next time your look at someone's post history, please take your time and read some of the posts.

That in itself is true. My wording was wrong there.

What I meant is that the data is not really expressive.

That's the sad part.