Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
What player agency is left?
Not to say there is none, but what control does killer have at this point that is not desired/called for by some survivors to be heavily regulated or limited?
Choice of target: some survivor suggest that killers not be capable of repeatedly targeting the weak link or even the most problematic survivor. As it stands, this choice is already being influenced by the endurance status granted by several perks for various situation and (however effective or not) base bt discouraging the killer.
How many killers would continue to play if forced to take what is currently the least beneficial option?
Choice of action: this one is already fairly limited in option and I mean in reference to killing survivors. What are our options; hooks, mori, and bleedout. In most cases the choice comes down to attempting hooks for a stage 3 payoff or counting on poor survivor performance and bad team altruism for bleedouts. The mori was already changed for survivor benefit and many would like to see something similar for bleedouts despite it being an altruism issue.
Is there really any choice between hooks or failed altruism which can be consitantly applied?
Comments
-
Choice of Target: After every unhook, even if someone were to take the claim to the extreme and say the unhooked Survivor is completely invincible, there are still 3 targets. One of those targets literally just deadzoned themselves to get the rescue, and by completing the rescue you can know they have 0 lingering anti-tunnel effects if you were afraid. So that yields a minimum of 1 viable target always available, but far more often 3 and 4.
Choice of Action: I think this complaint is a bit silly. Do Survivors have different (efficient) methods of powering the exit gates other than gens? (Yes, technically you can wait for your team to die, and the Killer to close hatch to power them, but that is almost always a loss.) So why should Killer have different (efficient) methods of killing the Survivors than downing them and hooking them? (Yes, technically you can bleed them out, but that takes 4 minutes total, and can be picked up relatively easily. Even then, if you camp the slug to bleed them out, the Survivors have plenty of time to pump gens.)
I don't turbo tunnel (except against map offerers [other than neutral maps like Swamp/Yamaoka, or favorable maps for my Killer]), and even then burning through 1 extra hit is nothing difficult except for the weakest of players. I don't bleed out, so I am already killing Survivors the most efficient method possible by hooking them. That means I would still play Killer, and I would be happy to have the incentive on Killer at times other than odd hours.
6 -
It certainly seems like the devs want to force to killer to have to go for 12 hook games and ignore any sort of pressure a hook survivor provides without any changes to survivors and maps to make that actually possible for any killer not nurse.
32 -
"The mori was already changed for survivor benefit"
Are you trying to say 1 hook moris were balanced?
That aside, you have complete agency over what you do. You can play the game how you want. If you want to hard tunnel and camp, go for it. However, the people you're playing against also have the right to complain about it if they so please. It's your choice whether you actually listen to them or not, though.
It seems like your main complaint isn't about your choices as a player, it's the reactions that your opponents have, and you can't change those. You can ignore them, but you can't expect people to not get upset if they find the way you play frustrating.
14 -
Choice of target: Not feasible, also the fact that someone suggested it doesn't mean its in anyway a common request.
Choice of action: As a survivor I have to do gens, I don't have some secondary option where I can find some welding tools and cut the door open. You win the game by putting survivors on hooks, you just can't stand in front of them for two minutes now.
4 -
Firstly, I actually enjoyed the pressure the one hook mori provided as survivor. The need to approach the match cautiously and be wary of the Killer's presence until that knowledge was determined was an element I thought was well implemented as a survivor.
Secondly, I completely agree with playing as desired. Im not concerned with why some players complain as much as how the devs are responding to the complaints. While not every attempt to address certain issues have made it to live, some of the proposed solutions have been questionable. The saving grace to this has been ptb players quickly finding and calling out the exploits.
2 -
I kind of agree. There are some heavy incentives to not do XYZ things, when playing killer. Which in theory wouldn't be too bad, if the killer role wasn't about constant decision making and multi tasking. At least that's what it was about when I started playing.
I am not against regulating how effective tunneling and camping should be but BHVR's approach is a bit radical. I hope they'll adjust this so that camping does remain a factor in the game, just not quite as strong as it currently is, though that is mostly on the survivors for not using the tools to deal with these situations.
What has me worried is the announced 3gen solution and a possible change to tunneling (it's only a matter of time). Because when all of these are in place and basically take all the decisions away from the killer, then I would stop playing this role. Chasing is fun (the most fun for me) but I don't want to feel like I'm just running after the survivors with no impact on the overall course of the match. It's not a 1v1 game but 1v4. And reducing it to 4 1v1s doesn't sound fun to me.
16 -
The only issue I have with the game's balance is that if a killer wants to, they can make it so you don't actually need to hold your controller for most of the match. That's really bad game design. Especially when the game isn't meant to be ultra competitive. It's not like the game rewards the survivor for sticking it out whilst other survivors do gens and escape. You spend three minutes bored out of your mind, die, and then the game calls you trash, give you next to no BP and then lowers your MMR as a final insult.
Making camping and tunneling harder is healthy for the game. But the killer win condition needs to be revised. Twelve hooks is a tall order, unless you're against an average solo queue lobby that does one gen every ten minutes or so.
I'd happily give up a hook state, just to see camping and tunneling go away.
9 -
Survivor rule book is being forced upon Killers, at least the ones who continue to play.
21 -
What is the difference between you tunneling someone off hook because they were saved by a survivor vs you tunneling them off hook because they self unhooked?
You're still free to tunnel and camp.
8 -
One requires another Survivor to come off gens. The other does not.
12 -
I understand why survivors hate being face camped. It does essentially prevent them playing the match. Decent teams know how to handle that too tho. Most don't.
However I also understand why killers proxy camp sometimes depending on the situation. Like it's end game and your trying to secure a kill. Or you know survivors are in the area and your near the hook looking for them or waiting for them to show themselves etc. Etc.
Camping is used for tons of reasons. I find a timer to prevent camping to be a very dangerous thing. Killers shouldn't get punished for standing near a hook bc face camping is just 1 of the reasons. Ya know?
7 -
I wouldn't say loss of agency for killers.
But mechanics like this do lend themselves to driving toward one stylized type of play. Favoring prolonged game time for all players over early eliminations/non-participation.
Unfortunately nothing changes the fact that less survivors means greater killer advantage more survivors means greater survivor advantage, so the more the game pushes toward survivors staying viably in game longer as a base mechanic, the more the need to compensate game slowdown in other ways to make up for the skewed advantage this brings to the survivor side.
Now you could make the point that its the killer's job to stall the game but then you could also make the point that its the survivors job to safely survive and rescue.
Yet we still have built in BT to maximize chance of escape at a base level, so what compensation for loss of mechanics that circumvent the stylized play of 12 hooks, none sequential, can killers expect.
That's the great question of balance. I don't think its trying to limit options for killer players but if the goal is to drive towards a standard of play that allows for longer survivor game time, then killers need to be buffed accordingly to make sure there is enough base slowdown.
10 -
There is enough base slowdown and very little need for compensation, is the thing. You have never needed to facecamp or hard tunnel someone out immediately, in their extremes those have always been ways to circumvent skill expression and them being reigned in to not be as powerful and free doesn't require compensation.
Assuming that survivors have no/minimal tools to speed up generators, just playing the macro game and occupying as many survivors as you can at once is enough to slow down the game if you're skilled enough-- and if you aren't skilled enough for that, there's plenty of tools you can bring in to give you a little more leeway. There is still a problem with how powerful toolboxes are and with survivors sometimes spawning all spread out on separate generators that should be addressed because that is the thing that actually harms a killer's ability to generate pressure at base, but that's not the same thing as needing to compensate for cheap tactics being weakened.
5 -
You could chase them off the gen while the other is hooked, which means ANOTHER surv has to get off a gen, so that's one hooked, one in chase, and one saving, crazy I guess.
7 -
I guess that just comes with playing a live service game. Things just come and go. I'm sure there are some survivors out there that miss the old hook tech, where you could dodge hits by vacuuming to actions like breaking hooks.
0 -
OK, to be clear I'm not saying there needs to be compensation for this specific event. This is a more higher concept broad scale view.
If the goal is to drive the game toward a chase everyone equally and play for 12 hooks general playstyle, then that scenario invariably favours survivors over killers, given that survivors are at their strongest while all 4 are alive.
It's more than possible to win going for 12 consecutive hooks but its really not optimal and being forced to do it every game is rather limited and laborious by design.
So while creating camping deterrents and mechanics to make these things less skewed is perfectly fine, we need to make sure to avoid scenarios where the only option is to chase every survivor sequentially and equally.
Because not only is that a dull and limited design, it hinges on the flawed concept that investing time in chasing survivors is equal across all survivors, which is blatantly untrue.
Changes to limit "face-camping" sure great, changes that limit play options to just one defined style of play... not great. I think that's the concept the OP is getting at albeit rather ham-fistedly.
9 -
yeah, not trying to validate those strats and making them a part of balancing, but those are killer nerfs at the end of the day. but the changes will lower kill rates and maybe that makes them consider doing balance changes across the board who knows?
2 -
it's on survivors' end to punish camping, by doing gens and trading hooks last second especially with hook grabs gone, with some exceptions like basement, hooks in dead zones, oneshot killers etc. to be fair that's not possible for solo queue, so i tend to think that maybe basekit kindred, speedy gens against camping killers and/or slower entity progression against campers would be a better idea. though bhvr don't seem to think you as the hooked survivor shouldn't depend on soloq teammates and the killer to be able to... play the game essentially. the "tactics" should be discouraged instead of being made borderline impossible. you can camp and tunnel but that will lose you the match type of thing...
0 -
Kudos. Very well stated.
1 -
Self unhook removes the map pressure of someone being in danger of additional hook states. That means more people who can be pumping out gens.
That being said, face camping is super, super lame. However, the PTB atm punishes killers across the board, not just face campers. Survivors have been looping near the hook just to get unhook progress - especially looping the killer around killer shack for an extended period of time since it's the strongest loop in the game.
8 -
But it is perfectly OK for survivors to have no agency. (ie. camping, bleeding out, tunneling)
All survivor strategies have been completely removed. (ie. stealth, looping, ......)
Killers can handle a very small pat on the hand now after survivors have taken a dragged out beating.
2 -
I'd agree that camping can be a tough situation without teammates coordinating, though I have had some good solos save me from this when my hope was gone.
Bleedout is entirely an altruism issue. If the killer isn't standing over you knocking you down every time you're picked up then the blame goes to personal mistakes and teammates lack of altruism. A killer that slugs and then walks away is literally giving you free chances for additional chases. 100% of my kills outside of challenges comes from the lack of team altruism.
I would say stealth is still very much viable as its my primary method for both avoiding chases and escaping them.
Looping itself has various utility relevent to which killer, map, location and timeframe a chase begins. 1st chase is by far the easiest and getting caught on a deadzone gen is bound to be problematic.
6 -
Difference is the killer gets to play the game no matter what. The killer strategies that are being limited effectively take all control away from the survivor player they're being used against, through no fault or mistake on the survivor's part.
6 -
"Firstly, I actually enjoyed the pressure the one hook mori provided as survivor. The need to approach the match cautiously and be wary of the Killer's presence until that knowledge was determined was an element I thought was well implemented as a survivor."
mhh...This might be off topic
but I'm starting to understand why u say solo q is fine in these other threads.
2 -
? On what world stealth and looping have been removed?
16 -
I agree 100% regarding the 3gen and camping.
The 3 gen is just bad gen management so it only seems fair that this blows up in your face in the end. At this point the killer won ... is that really so bad?
Regarding the camping, sure I dont like the smelly breath in my face on top of a hook through my body, but I get it as a last resort for the killer to get a kill in there at the end. If you start camping from the start that's just sad you're settling for 3 escapees but ok whatever floats you boat.
I just think it's sad they keep trying to find ways to make the game "not over till it's over" for survs, even if I'm a surv main. Killer should have fun too ... if you really want to add these mechanics, why don't you add a gen to be fixed before they can escape if 2 or more survivors spend to much time before the finish line. Now that wouldn't seem fair either right ... but why should killers not get a last chance
1 -
I mean, here are some things taken away from survivors:
Choice of loop: Some killers suggest that survivors not be capable of repeatedly vaulting the same windows or even the most problematic window. As it stands, this choice is already being influenced by the window blocker by several perks for various situations and basekit window blockers discouraging the survivor from staying at the same loop.
How many survivors would continue to play if forced to take what is currently the least beneficial option?
Choice of action: this one is already fairly limited in option, and I mean in reference to escaping the trial. What are our options? Finishing all gens, finding hatch. In most cases, the choice comes down to attempt finishing gens before you reach stage 3 on a hook, or counting on poor killer performance and bad strategy for long chases. The BNP was already changed for killer benefit, and many would like to see something similar to hatch, despite it being a strategic issue.
Is there really any choice between gens or bad strategy which can be consistantly applied?
If your logic holds up for the opposing team, then your logic is flawed.
Yes, good coordinated survivors are extremely difficult and require a high mobility killer that either benefits from obstacles, or that turns obstacles against survivors. But good coordinated survivors are not that common, odds are more likely that you find pairs of 2 survivors who are good at cooperating together, and a soloq fill that is basically RNG if they can coordinate well or horribly with their teammates.
The main issue in DBD from a survivor perspective, is that 1 survivor exits the game before 4 minutes have passed, having only been able to do chase and nothing else, which in most cases means that 3 survivors cannot finish the remaining gens without sacrificing another survivor. While the first survivor dies with at most 11k points out of 40k possible points. And survivors have no basekit strategy to combat this issue.
The main issue in DBD from a killer perspective, is that they need someone dead before the survivors can work on the final gen if they want to consistently have 2+ kills in a game. However, the problem there is that while you want 1 survivor dead, everyone else has 0 hooks.
So optimally, you want to be able to 1 hook at least 3 survivors, and kill 1 survivor before survivors can work on the final gen. This is best done by rewarding the killer with a benefit to get back into the game after hooking, but also by punishing the killer more harshly when they stay when hooking.
Before gens were pushed to 90 seconds, if a killer camped early, survivors could punish the killer by rushing gens. Currently this isnt really possible.
1 -
The problem with 3 genning, is that killers can enforce it. Especially certain killers. It's not bad gen management if the killer 3-gens from the start.
Camping early on no longer grants survivors a guaranteed 3 escapes unless they are coordinated survivors, which is rare. Let alone that the survivor on hook gets less than 8k BP in a game where you can get 18k BP for just playing. Both are issues.
Survivors are the ones that have an endgoal. If survivors dont have a "it's not over till it's over" option, they literally have no incentive to try until they are the last one remaining for hatch. Since solo survivors both want the hatch if 2 survivors remain with 3 gens remaining, then you have survivors hiding from the killer at all costs without progressing the game. And you can't punish them for it, as it's not holding the game hostage.
And I agree that killers should have fun too, but if killer fun is at the cost of survivor chances of escaping, then you have a problem that needs to be solved.
As for a mechanic that killers need, adding an extra gen is overkill, but they need a mechanic that rewards them for hooking a survivor. Like 10 seconds of 10% haste to give them an incentive to run back into the match. Or guaranteed bloodlust 1 the moment they enter a chase within 60 seconds after hooking which remains for 30 seconds even if you kick any pallets (which to me makes a lot more sense than Bloodlust appearing after 30 seconds of not kicking any pallets or using your power in a chase)
2 -
DBD. If you actually played survivor at all you would actually know killers have aura perks, they have Ultimate Weapon! Most killers have anti-loop powers, so there's simply nothing going for survivors.
1 -
Sometimes you have to though. Not every killer is as strong as Wesker or above.
A majority of maps are still very problematic in terms of size and loop design. Only made worse by perks like Made for this and Windows of opportunity.
A Freddy cant go for 8-12 hooks every game and not lose by default.
As a Pig main myself, I lose 2-3 gens very consistently for my first down. You can't expect me to go for many hooks at this point.
12 -
Possible replies to your experience would be:
1) Use chase perks
2) Know when to leave chase
3) Lower your win condition from Kills to hooks
4) Skill issue
Ironically, 8-12 hook games would be possible for weaker Killers if Survivors you are matched against are less experienced or skilled which would let you end chases faster. In order for a long and “fun” game for all, you cannot be on the same skill level or weaker than your opponents as Killer.
2 -
Good thing that this lies completely in your hands as killer and not the borked matchmaking algorithms. /S
6 -
Funnily enough, 1: I have Stbfl autolocked.
2: I play Pig and have no power if I have no downs. Losing 2 gens for a down is manageable.
3: I tried that. Sorry but I dislike the gg ez and tbaggs in exit gate. Call me childish but I want to have a fun experience as well. Not just the survivors.
4: I have 3400h in dbd and 2000h on pig. I do t think it's a skill issue. I sadly don't have video footage to show though. I can't turn into nurse mid chase to outplay a god tier set up on asylum. Especially not when survivors run 3% faster.
If you play killer against survivors that are worse than you overall, you will have a ok match.
If they are at your skill level and you don't play a strong killer (a tier), your game will most likely be a stress fest.
13 -
Part of the problem is that currently camping/tunneling often works with the lower tiered killers. If someone chooses to do so, and play to win, then their MMR is going to go up because of it. This also means that a lowered skill player can use the same tactic and there MMR will go up.
Once someone's MMR is up because of using it, it's going to be harder and harder to play for hooks. The survivors will be at a higher skill level at that point. Matchmaking can still be wonky but that's another issue.
I play a lot of pig and m1 killers. Most of the time I have no issues playing for hooks. It's because I don't play to win with them, by what MMR considers a win anyway. So I'm often matched with people lower or equal to me.
If I want to play for kills then I will switch to stronger killers. That's what they're good for. Hopefully one day all maps can be balanced and some of the lower tier killers looked into and buffed if needed. With camping/tunneling able to bring those kill rates up though, it's hard to say who or what needs changed.
3 -
I agree with most of this. One of the two points I do not agree with is "but if killer fun is at the cost of survivor chances to escape" portion. The killer and the survivor's goals are conflicting goals. Odds are the fun of both sides will always come at a cost of the other's chance of succeeding because that's just how this game is designed. That being said, neither side should be able to completely delete the other sides experience.
If BHVR is looking to turn this in to a game where 12 hooks is the goal for balance, that is perfectly fine by me. It is what I go for, which frequently leads to me losing games almost on purpose, because I want everyone to have a good time, even if that means I lose.
They need to find a way to incentivize that playstyle, and "haste" is not a suitable reward for doing so. They should rework pain res, and give a weaker version as a basekit incentive for each consecutive unique hook. Maybe like 10 percent regression on a random gen.
3 -
I usually play to win. Nobody plays to lose to be honest. I try almost always to go for as many hooks as possible. However, some perks and maps make this very hard to do and therefore I sometimes have to tunnel and camp. I think most players can get behind that.
2 -
Oh yeah, but the thing is, that survivors HAVE to be able to escape. It's why early game is so stacked in favor of survivor, and survivors who maintain that early game momentum are the ones who can escape with 4 people. The killer needs to be able to break that momentum in a way that is fun for the killer, for sure. But if a killer is having fun and easily breaks the momentum without really doing anything special, then it's a problem. Because then literally anyone can play that killer and guarantee 2+ kills. A few examples that currently are in the live version(but not in the PTB), is a Bubba facecamping at 4 or 5 gens with Dead Lock, NOED, Corrupt Intervention and either Insidious or No Way Out. Then that is a killer who can, at basically 0 cost, kill 2 survivors.
But the same is true for the opposite. Survivors shouldnt be able to do 5 gens uninterrupted without the killer being forced to walk across the map all the time.
As for Pain Res being basekit, no, I dont really think that is needed. We already have a small portion of Pop basekit and there are plenty of generator regression methods that would easily be overkill if there is even a 5% basekit pain res. 10% haste for 10 seconds is insane value for all non-mobility killers. It basically means that a killer is capable of walking 51 meters instead of 46 meters. It means that a killer can close a 5 meter gap between survivor and killer in 5 seconds, rather than 8. With the addition of a free bloodlust 1 if they manage to enter chase in that 10 second period, they would be closing that in 3.5 seconds.
It basically allows killers to get back into the game and prevent a gen from being finished, where it normally would be finished.
Haste is truly an underrated killer effect that people consider weak, but that isnt because Haste is weak, its because activating Haste for killers is unconventional.
1 -
All survivor strategies have been completely removed. (ie. stealth, looping, ......)
*laughs in mft*
3 -
Game is designed for survivors to get caught fairly quickly with bloodlust and unsafe pallets everywhere, dying on first hook because it's impossible to save against a bubba/myers/anything with a one shot ability was the lamest thing in the game, talk about player agency..
16m is kindred radius it's really not that bad you can still proxy camp easily, it's sad that we're crying to keep facecamp in the game
3 -
Well that's kind of why the anti camp mechanic is a good thing. Right now some people feel forced to camp or tunnel so they do it. Then there MMR can become inflated because of it. Making it less effective can hopefully show what kill rates can be more like when it doesn't work. Then maybe they can buff some killers accordingly.
I don't do it simply because it doesn't feel like winning to me. I just figured I played badly or maybe got bad rng and lost the match. Or I might've gotten matched with players far above my skill.
I don't blame anyone for doing it. It's in the game and is currently effective. It just makes it hard to bring any kind of balance around hooking people while it's still used so often.
2 -
It should also be acknowledged that those perks have requirments, conditions, limitations, or timed windows for counterplay to be implemented. Thats before having to use perks as a counter measure. In the time when BBQ was the meta and to this day, I utilize the built in telegraph to employ counterplay before its activated.
Im personally not seeing ultimate weapon enough to address by changing my build, but we do have a perk that directly counters the scream detection.
Overall I think the devs have been extremely cautious about giving killers reusable detection perks and attaching some form of action requirements.
1 -
If bhvr is trying for 12 hook games they arent really trying enough.. the state of gens and toolboxes are atrocious
Gen defense perks decimated except 2 that are decent and both need hooking and 1 RNG to find a hook nearby..
Survivors refusing to add another objective because "reasons".. anyone notice how sadako demand nerfs have decreased in the past few weeks? what happened? you finally realized that if you pick tapes and keep actually adapting the killer rework is meaningless?
To say bhvr wants 12 hook games is weird there's 0 indication where bhvr wants those games considering gens do fly vs competent survivors and if you want to win you have to adapt on the spot while survivors can potentially get 3 out and leaving 1 dead..
7 -
Tackling those first two points together: No you don't. You do not ever have to facecamp or hard tunnel someone immediately off hook. Facecamping is a pretty bad tactic in almost all cases if you want to win, and hard tunnelling only works if you've picked the right target + even then isn't as effective as other strategies.
I imagine what you mean is that you sometimes have to proxy camp, or prioritise someone who was unhooked recently. I would disagree with the phrasing "have to", but there are circumstances where that's the optimal play. Since neither of those things are being touched right now, though, I don't see any reason to shift the discussion to them.
Moving on, you don't need to go for 8-12 hooks? I don't know where that idea came from, there's nothing wrong with getting snowball downs on survivors who haven't been hooked yet/only hooked once and hooking them all at once. That's still a win and that hasn't been taken away from you.
That does baffle me, now that I'm typing it out. Why do people act like there's a hard binary between immediately facecamping and/or tunnelling someone out as quickly as possible, and going for twelve evenly spread hooks on sequential survivors? The game doesn't work like that.
5 -
The issue with the game mainly is the design. Tactics like genrush, tunnel, camp and slugging are just far too easy to exploit in a game like this. It's worse than a fighting game when it comes to capitalizing on mistakes from the other side. Without really redesigning the core concepts of the entire game there is really no way to fully get rid of these playstyles.
2 -
Buff some killers accordingly. That's what i constantly hear. How do you buff killers accordingly? Right now it seems the answer is to literally make killers faster base. Maps are problematic. That's a fact. Survivors have perks that make that problem even worse. How do you buff a character like Pig to compensate for this? Make her crouching faster? Make the ambush faster? That won't help. She's still an m1 killer that has to run around the map.
2 -
I don't Taki it to any extreme. But going for lots of hooks seems to be BHVRs vision for the game right now. Every survivor should have enough time to play and have fun.
I agree with that, however, the more survivors are in the trial. The harder the trail gets for the killer. There is no better slowdown that a killed survivor.
2 -
But what are you actually basing that on? All we've seen is BHVR tackling the extreme edge cases of the cheaper gameplay tactics- IE, immediately downing someone as soon as they're unhooked, and standing immobile by the hook until they die.
Camping and tunnelling are still possible, they're just weaker and have counterplay/obstacles. There's no indication that BHVR are trying to force 12 hook matches on everyone, they're literally just addressing the most problematic edge cases of killers trying to circumvent skill expression to get easy value.
3 -
I cant base on any facts, because the only stats we have are not expressive enough for a logical argument. Im basing my argument on the recent changes to the survivor role. Longer playing time for survivors seems to be the route the game is goiung right now. Dont get me wrong, im all for that, as i said before. I do however think that there needs to be compensation for that on killers side. The early game mechanic that was once mentioned didnt even make it to any ptb. Am i wrong? It could have at least been given a try.
The contrast to being downed immeidately after being unhooked is now that survivors mostly bombrush the hook and dont think about any form of safe unhook. Its most of the time the best play and sometimes definitely the best play (deliverance). Sometimes DBD only goes in extremes. Look at end game. BT at base: you have a good chance to just make it out without the killer having any counterplay. No BT at base: you getting downed right at the hook, without anyone having the actual BT.
1 -
There are lots of things they could try but at the end of the day, I don't know. I wouldn't ever deny that some maps are a problem. It's always been an issue but I do think some have gotten better.
As far as individual killer buffs it's hard to say what could help. So long as camping/tunneling can get basic killers a win, then it's hard to make bigger changes without making it even stronger.
For pig they could try changing what traps do. Make the head pop less likely to happen, but still within possibility, but add a movement speed / action speed penalty while they have a trap on. This will make it take longer to run to a machine and remove the trap. Not removing it will result in major slowdowns across the board. It isn't going to do a lot for her chase power but should help make her game slowdown a little stronger. Again though, something like this would just make tunneling stronger. Knowing that the unhooked survivor with a trap is just going to run slower.
Personally, I think some killers are just meant to be fun. If you want to win then playing weaker killers is just going to hinder you. If you don't want to camp/tunnel then either don't do it or play a stronger killer.
0 -
You just showed that you don't understand the problem the pig faces right now. Her slowdown is absutely fine. Her problem is her applying the slowdown. Making the traps better slowdown doesn't help when you get no downs.
That's just one killer though.
Every killer should be able to get wins. Saying that if you play a weaker killer you just shouldn't expect to have a chance at winning is bad. Very bad. People want to win. If they can't play their favourite character and win with them, they are encouraged to stop playing. What is fun about playing and knowing that you will eventually lose?
Basicly you say: just play blight.
Sorry but I disagree heavily.
4
