How do you feel about kills speeding up generator times?
Comments
-
So if there were only two Survivors left then the last gen would be normal speed. It’s a little tough imo but I’d be willing to try it.
The only criticism I can give it is that maybe the system could feel too convoluted at first. But I think people would catch on. The trial gets more difficult as Survivors progress with some small relief after a Survivor dies.
0 -
When it comes to 2nd hook vs first kill my reasoning is that if Survivors start with a penalty to repair speed; be it 25% or even as low as 5%, if all four are alive most of the match because the Killer is going for the 8 hook then the penalty should be doing its job and they should still make adequate progress.
I mean, like i said before, it depends a lot on how much of a penalty we are talking here. Lets say we use penalty before someone is killed off, it would like like this: 25% would be way to much, survivor wont stand a chance. 5%? Not enough penalty to shake up the meta. 10% probably a decent amount.
I see however where you are going with the 2nd hook idea. First, is it the 2nd hook of the game? Or is it the first 2nd hook for a Survivor? Let me know where I get it wrong.
Second hook on the same survivor.
If you mean a Survivor’s second hook: All Survivors start with a penalty to gen speed. Once one Survivor reaches their second hook, then the game goes back to normal dbd rates. Once someone is killed then the repair speed goes up. So the best way for the Killer to get value out of this is to hook everyone once then start another round of hooks until 8 hooks are achieved then go for kills.
Kinda like that. At least this would be encouraging killer to go out of their way and not tunnel.
I guess both versions are a (in my opinion) a decent step into the right direction. Early game genrush is annoying for killer, getting tunneled is annoying for survivors. I dont see a better option then evening out the game a little bit for both sides while also fixing tunneling. some argue that killers will still tunnel, but then they will simply loose. And i also argue back, that tunneling is done by people who want to win, so they use the optimal strategy.
Last but not least, the only real issue i see with both versions is that slugging will become more popular.
1 -
I think it's fair. If there's only one gen left then the survivors haven't been struggling and the killer has likely not been tunneling, at that point, the killer shouldn't be penalised for a sacrifice.
It's self-limiting for both sides. If one side 'wins too much' (tunneling or genrushing) then the other side gets a repreive/bonus, which only lasts until the game 'levels out' again.
1 -
I really like your idea the more that I think about it.
Slugging would increase… But the silver lining is that more slug perks would have their time to shine. I’d love to see wglf used more. Also, at least with being slugged there are options to still win.
But slugging is slugging… and at least with being tunneled you can hop into a different lobby. When you’re slugged you have to wait it out at the worst of times…
Idk, I would be willing to make that trade-off I think.
0 -
Gotcha. Like a catch-up mechanic. I would definitely be willing to try it. It’s a lot better than the 2 Survivor problem we have right now. I like it!
0
