I thought 3 gens were supposed to be nerfed/removed?
I did an experiment over the last few days where I went out of my way to identify the closest generators (usually 3, sometimes 4 if there was a particularly dense area of the map) and focus on patrolling those. I played a variety of killers, ranging from Myers and Wraith to Plague and Nurse.
My main strategy was to protect that region of the map, making sure survivors couldn't infiltrate and do the gens. Occasionally I would stray out of that area, but only if I knew I was going to get a down within a few seconds, or if I knew I was going to be able to snowball and the survivors wouldn't be able to effectively attack gens in that time. I brought in a mix of detection perks so I could know when survivors were trying to infiltrate my 3 gen, and gen regression perks so if a survivor managed to get a chunk of progress on one of my gens I could easily reset it.
The kick blocking mechanic never even came close to being in play because I strategically planned out when to use my regression events. I didn't mindlessly kick gens but rather waited until I knew the survivors had committed a decent amount of time to working on them before kicking.
With these strats I played 15 games and easily won all but 1 - I'm sure I would have won all 15 if only I wasn't terrible with Deathslinger. Honestly it felt a little dirty, the survivors really didn't stand a chance and they were very uninteresting games for me, probably for the survivors as well. I guess my question is, how is it that 3 genning is still a thing with the anti 3 gen system put in place?
Comments
-
Because the survivors didn't figure out what you were doing and break the 3 gen at the start. Solos are uncoordinated.
5 -
They are nerfed though, a killer can't regress gens forever now, if a survivor team is coordinated enough they will eventually win the battle of attrition because of it. Your average solo q team is always going to fall apart, but in general 3 gens are much much easier to win as survivor now
9 -
I was under the impression the developers intended to prevent the play style of holding a 3 gen from the beginning of the match, and that their system was not supposed to be dependent on survivors recognizing what I was doing early and countering it.
3 -
Sounds like some really uncoordinated survivors tbh. With two perks of gen regression and three to four free gens, this honestly sounds like it's on them if they couldn't reach enough progress for you to get even close to the regression event limit.
4 -
I mean i guess technically they are nerfed, but you said it yourself. "your average solo q team is always going to fall apart." IIRC, the whole reason for the 3 gen nerf was because the average solo q team was always going to fall apart against the strat. If the strat is still a guaranteed win against average players and the only reason I lost one game was because I'm absolutely terrible at the mechanics of that killer, if the situation that the nerf was meant to address is still there, is it really a worthwhile nerf?
2 -
If you think the killer not being able to regress gens after a certain amount of time isn't a SIGNIFICANT nerf then I don't know what to tell you. Just because I can play perkless trapper and still win against survivors doesn't mean how they changed 3 gens doesn't affect matches positively for survivors
6 -
Because they want the game to be easy mode for killers for some unknown reason, "to fulfill the horror fantasy" of the game whatever that means. They couldn't even bring themselves to nerf gen regression without buffing it at the same time.
1 -
As I said, I was (almost) always able to hold the 3 gen for long enough to secure the win, without once reaching the regression limit. Maybe the nerf was significant as you say, but if that nerf was unable to affect my ability to win in 15 games, the only other conclusion I can draw is that killer is immensely overpowered - otherwise, how would I still be able to consistently win despite such a SIGNIFICANT nerf?
0 -
The goal was to prevent the 40+ minute matches of Skull Merchant making it impossible to stop a 3 gen from the start. That was accomplished.
As well, the Erupting Call of Overbrine meta is no longer a thing. The only thing stopping all potential 3 gens from the start would do is substantially increase escapes against the limited mobility Killers who definitely don't need a nerf.
If survivors can't recognize that from the start and they let a 3 gen take place the Killer outplayed them on a macro level and deserves the win. If it happens to someone too often they can equip Deja Vu until their macro game play improves.
5 -
Or, MMR doesn't work and you aren't going against survivors of your skill level, which is an extremely common problem in this game as it prioritizes queue times over skill, my point still stands that this is a NERF and one that only helps not hinder survivors
2 -
Oh, I'm not contesting that at all, it is a nerf, it's just my impression from this experiment that as killer I am still perfectly capable of holding a 3 gen by being slightly more strategic and limiting when I kick gens. That is, the nerf was insufficient to prevent the thing it was meant to prevent. Survivors were consistently not able to force me to burn through those 8 events before I was able to burn through the pallets in the 3 gen area, and subsequently their hook states. Maybe it truly was me getting unlucky (lucky?) with the MMR. I'll have to repeat the experiment even more times than I already have.
0 -
Because it still is possible to do that. As a killer it is easy to find the 3 gens which are most near to each other. And since when only one gen is left there are only three open gens which can be done 3 genning never could be avoided. How could it? Even if they are not very near killers usually just patrol them. It is a strategy so no bad word here, it is inconvenient, but that is not the most bad issue I see here.
If you ask me. the best option to avoid that. Is that killer just never lose the finished gens out of sight. I mean look. What if they just change that finished gens will not shown anymore to the killer, but still be highligted. So the killer need to focus which really are finished and which not. That make it useless to patrol the gens if you do not know anymore which really are done. And 3 genning will become ineffective because killer do not know which gen need to be done by the time only one is left to get power to the gates. It would make the game more fair again. If you ask me it is pretty much unfair that the killer even can see the gens from beginning. That should either get removed, or if not, that even finished gens still will be shown to the killer. It is like a wall hack for killers to know where some survivor maybe could be. And we saw in lights out how insane that truly is. Because there killers still could see all gens, and just needed to patrol them to find survivors, while survivors even got the advantage that the gens were on already so they can even find them.
Why it is unfair you might ask? Look survivors need to find gens first to start working on them. If they do not have specific perks with they can not see gens. They only can find them by looking for the lights or listen if it is already working two things killers can use too to find gens by the way yet killers got the extrem advantage to not only get them all shown no matter how far away the gen is (Something you as survivor need a perk for and still not get all shown) and additional the gens who are finished are not shown anymore. All that summed up is making it way to easy for killer to patrol and get survivors real fast. It just make 3 genning and genpatroling way to easy. That is why survivors are mostly screwed when only one gen need to be done and that means there are only three possible gens left which all shown to the killer at any time. It is just no wonder why killers has it way to easy when for example two survivors already are dead to just win, because they find the survivors very fast no matter how far the gens are apart.
Not to mention all the perks which can killers use to keep gens down. It is okay that these perks are in the game. But for my opinion that killers can see gens is just an unfair advantage which should be removed. They should learn to find gens without these wallhack survivors need to do that too. Same goes for hooks. Survivors for example get not shown the hatch or gates all the time too. It just is unfair you can say what you want but prove me wrong.
And if they wont remove it fine no problem, but then change that the finished gens wont get shown anymore so killers acutally need to learn to play better than just rely on their gameadvantage wallhack.
And to make it short to prove my point. While survivors need to find gens by really search them by look for them or listen for them, while killers get them all shown, also can see them and hear them and also get not shown the finished ones anymore to get even more advantage to find gens. And for everyone who say it would it make harder for killers to find survivors yea and that is it when the game would be fair for both sides. Since killers just need to learn to search better more and the game is not often times already determined with the killers in favor.
It is just my idea to either remove the wallhack for gens for the killers so the fairness in game is finally kinda equal, or if not removing it change it to all gens no matter if finished or not are shown to the killer at any time, to get it at least a bit fairer for survivors. So the killers are not lose their wallhack but do not get a increasing advantage as the round progressing. And no the survivors do not have a real advantage with the 3 gens left, cause finding them becomes harder the fewer gens are not finished. And because killers can easy patrol them it is kinda impossible to make them really to get out.
Same for the hatch. Killers move around the map more fast than any survivor could. That killers can hear the hatch is pointless, cause in around 95% of the cases the killer finds the hatch miles before you even hear it. If killers are able to close the hatch okay, but than they should not be able to hear it, because that makes the existence of the hatch kinda obsolet. What sense has a way to escape which almost everytime is disable long before you are even able to find it? How is that any fair? Especially when you think how fast a killer can move from gate to gate after closing it. A survivor even when he is right at the gate already are almost everytime not able to open the gates before killer comes back. Cause killers do not need to walk all the way to the gates to see if somewhere is there but just go as far as they need to see if the lights are on. If not just turn and do the same on the other gate till you can see which is going to open. (Not to mention, that killers again have a wallhack for the switches to open the gate, another big advantage which should be removed. Since survivors do need again special perks for that while killers just got it for free again) also the killers who just can kinda teleport over the map are even more in advantage.
There must be so much changes to the killers to make it more fair.
Killers should not be able to see all gens at any time or can still see them, but all finished or not will be shown the whole round.
Killers should not be able to close or if not just not able to hear the hatch, since they will almost every time will find it miles before the survivor is even near it.
Killers should not be able to see the switches of the gates, and the lights on the switches should only be seen when the killer is directly at the gate.
0 -
It's still possible to pick an area of the map with 3-4 gens and guard it, especially because there are maps that are built like an H, so the killer is encouraged to pick a side and not leave. The nerf made it so these kinds of games don't go on for an hour; if the survivors play smart, they can force the killer to run out of regression on a gen, so the killer has to apply enough pressure to win before this happens. This doesn't prevent 3-genning completely, but it makes games go considerably faster when, prior to the nerf, they would take forever.
0 -
the system was intended to prevent long drawn out matches where killer regresses gens faster then survivor progressing them. It was never intended to remove 3 gens or grant a survivor a free win.
3 -
I'm not saying it should grant survivors a free win, I'm saying from my experiments, 3 genning is still an *almost* free win for killers, even with the changes made to try to nerf the strategy.
as far as the "never intended to remove 3 gens" thing goes, I guess we're gonna have to just agree to disagree. when the devs said "The goal with this update is to bring an end to excessively long matches (3 gen scenarios in particular) and at the same time improve the Killer’s ability to damage Generators" i thought they meant that they were trying to bring an end to drawn out matches through addressing the effectiveness of 3 genning, but you're welcome to your own interpretation - I can see how other phrases in that announcement (https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/427) might be interpreted differently, so fair enough
1 -
the new 3 Gen system changed it to where 3 Gen matches are 25 minutes long instead of 45 minutes so they weren’t really removed
1 -
Then your opponents played bad. It's that simple. Even a group of solo survivors can easily identify a 3 gen and work around it. There is no way you can hold the game hostage anymore and survivors will break through eventually, if they play well. They split up, repair all 3 gens simultaneously and force you to kick them all over and over again until suddenly they either progressed too fast for you or your 8 regression events were used.
That's not to say that you lose every time you try to hold 3gen. That wasn't the goal. The goal was to stop killers from holding the game hostage with nothing the survivors could do, which the devs succeeded at.
4 -
This result shows that there is a lack of map knowledge on the part of the survivors, and that even 4 survivors do not know or have the skills to implement tactics to shake up the killer in an attempt to complete both ends of the 3gens.
No matter how bad MMR works, this is terrible. Theory was thrown out the window.
0 -
Why is this so typical? You got 3 gens nerfed and then you spin it into some kind of killer buff tell me what do you want? 2 kicks only? No gen regression at all? It's never the survivor's fault always the killer we're not bad the killer is just op
2 -
Returning to a 50% kill rate like it was for years before the devs decided to sacrifice balance for role-playing.
0 -
How is 50% Killrate not balanced?
The thing is, the Devs want DBD to be somewhat competitive. Yet one side has to have a lower rate of winning? A competitive game should be 50/50, not 60/40.
Post edited by EQWashu on1 -
A competitive game where similar sized teams face each other, should have 50/50.
This isn´t applyable to DbD though. Since its 1vs4, a traditional 1vs1 will always be unbalanced.
2 -
I will give you the simplest tactic to break 3 gens: Everyone should repair a different gen at the same time and when the heartbeat sound approaches, go to a safe place without getting a free hit.
Best anti 3 gen strategy 👌
1 -
You literally don't know what the word balanced is if you think 60/40 is more balanced than 50/50.
2 -
So you think a survivor should have the same strengh as a killer in a 1vs1?
2 -
Anti-facecamp turned to be the most useless thing ever. Strong campers are still strong as before. Weaker campers are now even weaker. So i really don't know AFC fixed what? Because there is still no counter for camping against Bubba, Billy, Trickster, Huntress lol.
Anti-3 gen also ended with killer buff. Pop, PR was not enough to regres gens and now every kick removes 5% as well. Sure they fixed hostage issue but this does not change the fact it ended with killer buff. Every kick 5% is huge. Also gen tapping gone is really so huge.
And both mechanics supposed to be QoL for survivors but somehow killers got better buffs.
3 -
At least for the Huntresses, just two survivors come to rescue and can do it in time. The problem is a lack of theory. Even if it is soloQ, it is fully practicable and there is no problem.
0 -
I usually ignore you, but this just shows that your take is not really valid.
The Survivor TEAM should have the same strength as the Killer. So the 4vs1 should be a 50/50. Not the 1vs1.
3 -
In other words, is it correct to understand that you do not follow the developer's opinion that ``this game is a killer vs survivor x4'' opinion?
For me, it's easier to have a conversation that way, and I welcome it. Of course, since it's a team, we should talk about game balance with the assumption that survivors can cooperate rather than be selfish.
0 -
I mean if you focused on protecting 3 gen specifically from start of match I'm assuming you ended up in a 4v1 situation with only 1 gen remaining.
It sounds like it's more of a survivor skill issue than 3 gen being too strong. You shouldn't be losing as a survivor team in that scenario. 3v1 yes but not 4v1.
They literally just need to chip away at each gen and try to bait you into a chase every time you come over. If you commit you most likely lose a gen. If you don't commit ultimately it will stalemate until the survivor team eventually wins because you can't be in 3 spots at the same time or the gens will get blocked.
Out of 15 games I don't believe this 4v1 3 gen tactic would be netting you like a 90% win rate unless you're playing extremely weak survivor teams.
3 -
Really this. The HUD shows who is planning on completing which generator, and all survivors have to do is offer to take charge of the other side, and the killer are thrown into the generator seesaw game.
The problem is that certain survivors' incompetent chases can consume the pallets near the generator, or they can take extra hits from killers due to lack of pre-positioning. Survivors who receive easy hits do not have skill to ride this seesaw.
......Maybe it's not a skill, but a thinking ability.
0 -
I've had killers try that and I just alternate which generator I'm on. My teammates usually pick up on this and do it too.
Although I must admit, I've seen three generators spawn where I can see all three very close without moving my camera, the spawns are wonky.
2 -
60% kill rate isn't the same as 60% win rate. 2/5 outcomes are a lost. 1/5 outcomes is a tie. And 2/5 outcomes is a win.
If you want a 50% win rate then you need a higher kill rate to offset the fact that only 40% of outcomes are a win.
2 -
This means that although it is rare for 4 Survivors to survive in a single match, it is more common for 3 Survivors to survive, but that is how most Survivors win.
It may seem unfair at first glance, but if the kill rate were not this high, there would be 4 survivors left until the 5 gen was completed, which is an overwhelming disadvantage for the killer.
0 -
What was your build? Were you using Pop or Pain Res and actually going for chases, or were you using Overcharge and Eruption and strictly guarding the gens without committing to chases much?
8 regression events is indeed a lot for a single gen to suffer in one match, so if you were actually going for hooks while keeping the cluster, then yeah, the system shouldn't affect you at all.
I believe the devs' intentions with the generator changes weren't supposed to stop 3 gens from being defended at all, but rather, put an end to excessively long matches brought by the killer fiercely guarding their 3 gen without ever committing to much chases or hooks at all which this system does indeed accomplish.
1 -
It doesnt matter at all if you play 1vs4 3vs2 oder 11vs11. Every competitive game has to have an equal chance on "winning" the game. Thats what 50:50 balance is about. What the game is actually doing is a killer fantasy where the survivor side not supposed to have an equal chance. If you think this is fair, you should really work on your sense of fairness.
3 -
Stepping in with a reminder to please keep the discussion civil, constructive, and on-topic. Thank you.
0 -
Didn’t the devs say why it’s a 60/40?
Killers on average should get 2 kills and perhaps one more. Thats how they try to balance every killer from what i remember reading. Their system is basically
Match 1-4: 2K and 2Hook states
Match 5: 3K and 1 Hook State.
They said Killers getting none stop 4Ks is not good for the game but killers getting 0Ks is worse. So the split the difference and said 2.25 kills per match is a good balance. Hence a 60% “win rate”.
1 -
BHVR never intended on killing 3-genning strats, it was simply to prevent instances where the game is prolonged to a ridiculous degree. The only map I really find problematic with 3-gens is Dead Dawg anyway. If your team can recognize whats going on they can split up on two of the three gens and win by attrition.
1 -
There are two incorrect assumptions here
1: That 1 out of 5 games are ending in a draw. It's probably closer to 1 out of 10.
2: That the draws are just coming out of the killer's potential win rate.
You just can't take the 20% difference between killers and survivors and attribute it to draws. Draws decrease the win rate for both killers and survivors. You are more likely looking at a scenario of: 2 out of 20 games draw (10%), 7 out of 20 games survivor win (35%), and 11 out of 20 games killer win (55%). It's possible those numbers could be a little closer together, but you are still going to have a substantially higher percentage of killer wins compared to killer loses.
0
