"Tunnelling Gens" Doesn't Mean What You Think It Means
Whenever a thread about tunnelling comes up, usually from the perspective of acknowledging it as a problem and attempting to come up with a fix, there's a particular rhetorical trick that some people will use. I have some issues with this trick, and I'd like to lay out why I think it's misleading and unhelpful.
The trick is the following: Someone will liken tunnelling a survivor out to genrushing, and refer to it as "tunnelling gens", to claim both sides are capable of playing their objective very efficiently but people only care when a killer does it. I think this is kind of silly, because that's obviously not what "tunnelling gens" would actually be if and when any survivors did it.
To break down why, let's define what it means for the killer to tunnel for a moment. Tunnelling, to me, is defined as the following: A killer chasing a recently unhooked survivor while ignoring everyone else, with the intent of getting that survivor sacrificed as quickly as possible. In other words, the killer is focusing on one of four objectives to the detriment of others.
The killer's objective is the survivors, and the survivors' objective is the generators. Therefore, if the survivors were to "tunnel" a generator, they would be focusing on that generator, to the detriment of others. If any survivors actually tried this, it would be extremely easy for the killer to capitalise on it. It's definitely not genrushing, which is doing all their objectives as fast as possible with the aid of the strongest tools available.
The killer equivalent of genrushing isn't tunnelling, either. It'd be playing to all their objectives as quickly as possible-- IE, it'd be spreading pressure and chewing through the whole team's hook states as quickly as possible, not just one survivor's. As you can imagine, this doesn't really exist as a realistic strategy or even reliable outcome, much in the same way that survivors "tunnelling gens" doesn't exist as a strategy. In the killer's case, it's playing extremely extremely well, and in the survivor's it'd be just throwing the match. Opposites, but equal and contrasted with one another.
Comments
-
Your entire argument hinges on a definition that adds caveats to it in order to be correct.
And it's not correct.
'Tunneling' is focusing on the injured Survivor to remove them as quickly as possible. It has nothing to do with 'one of four objectives to the detriment of others'. Because the Killer's objective is TO KILL. Anyone. You're adding some sort of extra definition to it so you can say 'They're wrong'.
Survivors: Want to do gens & leave to win. They focus on already-worked-on gens to do it quicker. IE: Tunneling gens.
Killer: Wants to kill to win. They focus on easier chases & weaker Survivors to do it quicker. IE: Tunneling.
Claiming Tunneling HAS 'to be to the detriment of other objectives' is your own personal definition you added to muddle the subject and say "Because of this, tunneling gens does not exist!"
20 -
The killer's objective is not to kill "anyone", it is to kill the four survivors that are in the match.
You have four objectives, and when you tunnel, you're focusing on one to the detriment of others. That's the whole idea of tunnelling- focus one guy down so the others are forced into a numerical disadvantage when the pressure rolls towards them. Tunnelling doesn't work as an idea without the reality of having those other objectives in mind-- or if it did, tunnelling would just be how you win, you'd kill that person and dust your hands off because you've killed "someone", ergo you've won.
Survivors need to escape, that's their win condition. So when they push their objective aggressively to win, they're getting FIVE generators done very quickly, not one. One generator done is almost nothing, getting it done as quickly as possible does comparatively very little for them. To effectively play their objective aggressively, they have to split up and push pressure on multiple gens at once.
That's why tunnelling generators doesn't exist, it's completely counterintuitive. If you applied the mechanics of tunnelling to generators, you'd basically be throwing the game. On the flipside, if you were to apply the mechanics of genrushing to the killer side, you'd be as far away from tunnelling as you can get because the requirement is to spread pressure, that's how genrushing works.
6 -
Oh my god, you're arguing semantics.
'Anyone' IS 'Anyone in the match' because the Killers don't EXIST outside the matches. 🤦♂️
Your entire argument is 'But aksually, if we use MY definitions, then tunneling gens is fake!'
17 -
Uh, yeah, because it's a subjective opinion. That's the whole point of an opinion.
14 -
You misunderstand. Your goal is to kill ALL the survivors (or at least three, to be a little pedantic). Therefore, all four survivors are your objectives, the way all seven generators are the survivor's objectives.
The survivors need to "complete" exactly five of their seven, the killer needs to "complete" at least three of their four. So far, we've not yet gotten to my opinions or definitions, that's just how this game works.
So, my argument is, when "tunnelling" for killers is focusing one of their four objectives and ignoring the others until that one is "completed" (killed, in the killer's case), that must mean "tunnelling" for survivors is focusing only one of their objectives until it is "completed" (repaired, in this case).
When survivors "genrush", they're getting the gens done as quickly as possible so they can leave. This requires splitting up, since grouping up on generators makes them go slower overall, so therefore if the killers had an equivalent, it'd require doing all their objectives as quickly as possible. For a former real-match example, think of when Nurse used to be able to speedrun a win by using Haunted Grounds and Retribution.
Finally... I mean, do I actually need to state more than once that my argument is just my opinion based on my definitions? Is that not pretty obvious based on the fact that every single discussion about this is personal opinion and personal definitions? I'm making the case for why I believe what I believe, not making a statement of fact- overall, anyway, there are facts in this post but they're the evidence for the argument.
5 -
But they're not treating it like an opinion.
They've decided tunneling means something different and, under their definition, everyone else is wrong to use 'tunneling gens' as an argument.
12 -
I've seen two discussions today where people realized opinions differ. I don't know what's going on.
4 -
I personally just dislike the notion of "tunneling" being a term applying to Generators.
People can call it anything else, just saying "tunneling Generators" sounds awful and hardly makes sense compared to the implication of "tunneling Survivors" (considering one is literally an object and the other is an actual person).
9 -
My Problem with the game from the killers perspective right now is, how absolutely easy and without consequences it is for survivors to split up and tackle gens separately.
When you startle a survivor and they run away early, its a tough choice: chase them for maybe a minute because of the head start and because it's the first chase, ie all resources are still up, or break chase and have them back on the gen the second you turn your back on them. All the while three other gens are getting worked at.
Spreading pressure is easier said rhenium done and depends on survivors getting spooked when you hit them. Seasoned veterans will jump back on gens the second you give them the opportunity, and survivors who prioritise gens before friends are a nightmare for the killer, who put such immense pressure on those poor sods.
I don't really have a solution, but having three gens popping even after a good first chase is freaky disheartening, because it puts the killer in such a bad spot. At this point, with only 2 gens left and 3 healthy survivors, tunneling is often the best solution: it offers the only way how the killer can pressure the survivors and maybe tunneling will lead to one or two other survivors taking protection hits, opening themselves up for retaliation.
A possible solution could be to penalise the repair speed of be first 3 gens, ie so that the right play wouldn't be anymore to split up completely separately, but in two teams of 2. This would lessen the stress on the killer a lot and might actually lead to some more fun games that don't feel like speed running. After 3 gens pop, this debuff would go away and allow survivors unrestricted repair speed on the last gens.
Compensation could come in the form of hard anti tunneling, ie if the killer downs a recently unhooked survivor while at 4 or 5 gens, they get both, a free UB and an auto DS, incentivising the killer to spread hooks in the early game. Other techniques could be a revival of the old BBQ BP bonus as a basekit mechanic, but only increasing the multiplier while all 4 survivors are alive.
6 -
Alternatively... we could accept that gamers like to play efficiently. When we do that, matchmaking tries to find us opponents who also do the same.
4 -
Tunneling gens is basically Genrushing isn't
Tunneling is focusing on a single person or Gen
So is it easier to finish a Gen or Kill a Survivor?
Oh and Genrushing kinda sorta leads to 3Genning
Survivor sees Gen, repairs Gen, runs to find the next one
Killer sees Survivor, chases Survivor, downs Survivor, hooks Survivor, runs to find the next one
3 -
I think Gen Efficient is a better term than tunneling.
Gen rushing would obviously refer to players who bring BNP + strong toolboxes with gen progression perks.
Being Gen efficient would just refer to players who don't waste a lot of time crouching in corners, don't cleanse totems unless needed, know where gens will roughly spawn and will just hold M1 on gens if they know someone else is being chased.
4 -
Calling it 'gen tunnelling' is pretty disingenuous when survivors have literally nothing else to do. Killers have the option to not tunnel, but survivors can't do anything other than gens.
It feels like every time survivors get nerfed, the crosshairs just move on to the next thing to point at and say 'this! This is why I lose all the time!'. But with every nerf, the bar just drops lower, and now we're at 'survivors were doing their objective at all' being the problem.
7 -
"It's tunneling because x killers focus x targets/objectives out of 4".
"It's not genrush/tunnel because x survivors focus x target/objectives out of 7."
At any given time each survivor is only targeting one generator. Theyre getting 1 out asap. (Sounds like what killers do when tunneling while twirling their evil mustaches)
If they did as they wanted to killer to, every survivor would need to jump between multiple gens and spread the progress between all 7 gens evenly.
Post edited by Raptorrotas on3 -
Except the game's asymmetrical, and gens and survivors aren't properly comparable.
If they are supposed to be, can survivors also get hookstate regression?
3 -
Right after killer can unhook finished generators. Dont you know it's asymmetrical? Try healing a survivor, or losing the killer in a chase. Don't see gens doing that. (Dayum, now i kinda wanna see gens deadhard and decisive strike survivors.)
Gonna edit my original post to show i wasnt even comparing survivors to gens, but the killer.
2 -
I think its mostly used by people who are ashamed of tunneling so they try to call genrush the same.
I never understood why tho? I also tunnel people out for easier wins, whats the big deal lmao
6 -
I always felt the term "Tunneling Gens" was an asinine inflammatory phrase aimed at survivors, intended to gaslight by describing gen rushing using the survivor hated word 'tunneling'.
I'm not convinced Tunneling Gens means anything different to Gen Rushing, because if it does, it doesn't make sense. The only thing "tunneling gens" could describe is all survivors jumping on a single gen, which has severe efficiency penalties, especially when more than 2 survivors are on that gen... so the term is useless because the game is hard wired to prevent it.
Gen Rushing to my mind is referring to a full team of survivors all taking strong perks and toolboxes for gen speed, so that regardless of whichever person the killer commits to, they can complete multiple generators very quickly, effectively forcing the killer to be in a 3 gen holdout extremely early on, and forcing a slug, camp and tunnel playstyle to even have a chance.
That's not an unreasonable thing to complain about... but 'Tunneling Gens' is a useless redundant phrase in that conversation.
4 -
To me, working on a generator from 0% to 100% without stopping (if left uninterrupted) is the equivalent of the killer hooking the survivor, picking them up off the hook manually, placing them back on the hook, and doing it a third time to sacrifice them out of the game.
The killer can kind of do this now, but it takes 120 seconds (150 if Reassurance is used, 180 if the survivor self unhooks and Reassurance is used again, and 214 seconds if they also have Camaraderie). And that's just 1 survivor; there are four. Meanwhile, a gen only takes 80 seconds and three gens can be repaired at once.
Instead of increasing the time needed to repair the gen by a few seconds every 2 or 3 years, how about adding a basekit mechanic that limits a survivor's ability to repair gens? Limit it to 50%. Then they have to run across the map, get a special item / replenish a gague / increase their token counter, and then can do 50% more worth of repairs. Just like the killer has to lose time in chases between hooks.
Then remove the inefficiency of doubling up on gens, so that 2 survivors could both dedicate their 50% to getting the gen 100% done.
2 -
"Instead of increasing the time needed to repair the gen by a few seconds every 2 or 3 years, how about adding a basekit mechanic that limits a survivor's ability to repair gens? Limit it to 50%. Then they have to run across the map, get a special item / replenish a gague / increase their token counter, and then can do 50% more worth of repairs. Just like the killer has to lose time in chases between hooks."
no. i genuinely would rather have another added 10 seconds than this kind of mechanic, and i was already against the 80->90 change because i thought it was a poor way of going about things. maybe as a gamemode, but absolutely not base game. solo queue would be even worse than it already is to the point i think a lot of solo queuers would genuinely quit.
0 -
Ignoring the other response to you because it's a little unhelpful, it is relevant that the game is asymmetrical. When it comes to tactics taken towards objectives, you have to compare the killer player's actions to the survivor team's actions.
Genrushing involves the team splitting up and spreading pressure, so if the killer team were to do that, they wouldn't be tunnelling.
Tunnelling involves concentrating pressure on one objective, so if the survivor team were to do that, they'd all be grouping up on one generator one at a time.
This is another place where the game being asymmetrical matters. A survivor working on a generator from 0% to 100% without stopping is not even close to the equivalent of a killer hard focusing down one guy, because it's not reflective of actual objective focus from the survivor side.
1 -
I see tunneling gens as in survivors completing that same gen over and over again. Obviously that doesn’t exist
0 -
You cannot "tunnel" gens if we're going by the real definition of tunneling.
It's a flawed equation used by killers of this forum so they feel like they have a tangible argument meanwhile they just sound funny.
4 -
Not that I disagree, but your post does somewhat beg the question of what the "real" definition of tunnelling is?
0 -
The definition has always been the same for all these years. I don't think it has ever changed or became subjective at any point.
The act of a killer chasing and targeting one survivor to get them out of the game ASAP.
0 -
Sure, I agree with that, but it is possible to tunnel gens based on this definition?
It'd be the survivor team repeatedly targeting the same generator to get it fixed without paying attention to any of the others. That's... what this thread is about.
0 -
Except that's not a thing and it's still a flawed equation.
Am I face-camping the gen as a survivor if I stand in front of it? Yeah, that's how dumb it sounds.
0 -
That's also what this thread is about??
"Tunnelling gens" isn't a thing, because applying that logic to gens would technically be possible but would effectively throwing the game. That's the entire point being made here.
0 -
"Tunnelling gens" or "Genrushing" is focusing on gens above all other considerations.
This is like repairing a gen in the killers face even when you do down right as it's finished, or sticking to your gen when your teammates are dying on the hook.
Unlike killers tunnelling, actual genrushing is almost always detrimental to the team.
As opposed to efficiently progressing your objective, which is repairing gens without ignoring other requirements and without negatively impacting the team. Killers can also efficiently progress their objective without tunnelling and camping too, but scoring quick downs and short chases.
But the two sides just aren't entirely comparable, because it's an asymmetrical game.
2 -
Well... If we want to go that route, there are 12 hook stages and 5 generators. If we compare each of these 12 chases to generator progress, the killer has a huge time problem. Especially because a killer can only target one survivor to hit and down, while the 3 other survivors can spread, work on and finish multiple generator at the same time. This is why the early game is so important to go well for a killer. They can lose 3 gens very fast, if they cant down someone quickly.
If hook stages could regress, the killer would be faced with an even worse time problem, dont you think?
3 -
Please dont take it the wrong way because i dont know how else to explain.
It's kinda dishonest to say a it's only genrushing when the whole team is doing it. What about the abundant cases when survivors arent a team? I heard 4man swfs are rare, according to the community. If i were feeling petty i'd go as far to say it's as bullshit an argument as "A survivor is not hacking if theyre only one hacking"
A team of 4 focusing down 4 gens isnt the same as a killer being told to spread his attention on 4 targets. None of the survivor players is spreading their attention to more than 1 gen.
The community is fine with survivors focusing down a single target
As for the whole team on one gen? Thats less efficient than having each survivor going for different gens, it'd only be quicker once multiple gens are already finished. But theyre still not stopping doing a gen to swap to another.
1 -
It is only genrushing when the whole team does it, though?
One person bringing a stacked toolbox isn't genrushing, it can't be. That survivor is only going to be able to use those tools on one generator, two tops if they're really committing to bringing a whole suite of four perks to enable it.
It's only genrushing when it actually affects all five generators, which requires at least a majority of survivors to bring those tools, if not all four.
Remember that we're talking about the comparison of both sides focusing their objectives here. When survivors do that, they have to spread out, otherwise the generators go slower overall. If they were to focus ONE of their objectives, like when the killer tunnels, they would not be genrushing because they'd all be grouped up on one generator.
If that seems like a silly false equivalence, that's because it is. The thread is about how those two things aren't comparable.
1 -
tunneling survivors and tunneling gens are only equivalent in the sense that they both are optimal plays, and nothing else. they are compared mostly exclusively to justify one another, but noone needs to do that. play however you need to in order to win, all power to you.
tunneling people and genrushing without healing both should be more punishing, is all i want to say. why would you not tunnel survivors if you want to win, and why would you not focus gens over healing when killers won't be able to keep up anyway and you are more than safe with current maps even while injured?
1 -
This post is about how genrushing isn't "tunnelling gens".
0 -
i always assume people that use that term just mean focusing gens/genrushing/playing optimally or whatever. if we are actually arguing the word choice, i honestly don't even know.
2 -
It's less arguing word choice, and more challenging the core assumption about what tunnelling actually is and how it would be replicated on the survivor side.
This is also all in the post.
0 -
The actual double standard is that the requirement for problematic killer behavior is so very low, and killers can easy do these things, with minimal effort, in every game…….
…But the requirement for problematic survivor behavior is super hyper specific, and can only be done under extremely specific conditions that survivors can’t possibly even attempt to do in every game.
8 -
Not really what this post is about, but also... kinda?
I mean, the problematic survivor behaviour here is true genrushing, which is quite specific. You need at least most of the team to bring stacked toolboxes and specific perk builds. It's not really difficult after that point, but it is very specific. Whereas the problematic killer behaviour is just chasing someone immediately after unhook, it doesn't require specific perks or addons or anything.
I'm sure this was meant to be sarcastic in some way based on your post history but I also don't see how you could possibly argue it isn't true, lol.
3 -
Can we create a definition for “true tunneling” for killers, that’s hyper specific, and doesn’t apply to the vast majority of games? And then when people complain about tunneling, we can say “well, that’s not TRUE tunneling, because I’m using a hyper specific definition, with a whole mess of requirements and prerequisites”?
Would that be fair? Because that’s what you are doing with your definition of “TRUE genrushing”
2 -
That is what genrushing is, though?
What else could genrushing be, that covers for doing generators as fast as possible but isn't just playing the game normally?
4 -
I once tunneled a gen. It RQ at 70% and sent me message saying that I should "touch grass".
4 -
Slowering solo gens speed and buffing gen speed when working together could help in that problem. I've seen many use corrupt invertion it's great perk to avoid quick 3 gen pop.
1 -
I know that Corrupt is a good perk, but I am somewhat hesistant to make room for it in my build. This could be a me problem and I should 100% give it a try, but I often get a quick first down with Lethal Pursuer or even just experience with anticipating survivor spawns, so it could down pretty fast. On the other hand, by that time its main work is already done, ie preventing survivors from jumping on the gens they spawn next to and forcing them to search for gens.
Thinking about it, it might really be a good perk. Thanks for the input and making be consider corrupt, again.
1 -
Ah yes. The Survivors have nothing to do but gens (Not healing, or unhooking, or opening chests or doing totems..) but the poor, mean Killer can always just play badly and not tunnel, even if it's the optimal play!
Just more 'The Killer is responsible for Survivor fun' while absolving Survivors of the reverse.
4 -
Do you know what the criteria is for a survivor to not tunnel generators? Not work a generator that already has progress. To start a fresh generator every time.
The criteria for a killer to not tunnel is to simply target a survivor other than the one who was just unhooked.
The two are not the same, and the phrase only exists because survivors complain about tunneling.
3 -
The definition for killer tunneling is “a killer focusing on one survivor at a time”. That’s it.
The definition of gen rushing is just “a survivor focusing on one generator at a time”. That’s it.
Yes, both definitions are basically just people playing the game normally.
5 -
At that point, surely neither genrushing or tunnelling are actually issues with the game?
Which means... won't we need new terms for problematic things that lay outside regular gameplay? For instance, a recently unhooked survivor being repeatedly targeted at the expense of any others until they're dead, or a survivor team bringing the strongest tools to complete the generators as quickly as possible to leave the killer with as little agency as the mechanics strictly allow?
Or are those not problems too? Genuine question.
1 -
That is a good math.
As Dwight staying on the hook, and Meg unhooking him at exact 59sec. Twice? Goes the same to Jake unhooking Meg at 59sec, twice, while killer stand in a corner and not chasing Claudette doing Gen? And then finally after 3 other dies, who unhooking Claudette at 59sec? Do Meg and Jake teleport from Gens to hook at 59sec? I have so many questions that need your answers.
0 -
Good survivors and killers know when and what surv / gen needs to be tunneld.
Bad survivors and killers just tunnel any gen / surv they see.
0 -
Don’t forget sabotaging hooks, taking hits for their teammates and trying to blind the killer to buy their teammate more time.
3
