Is this an issue?

Some interesting ideas here.

"I'd add an aura or some other visible effect to show that basekit
Endurance/OTR/DS is active and collision is off. The argument against it
is that you can't bait a Killer into following somebody as a strategy
and it shows who could be tunneled but the counter argument is that if
you take OTR or DS and it deters the Killer from tunneling you it's done
its job as intended and if you have to take a perk to avoid being
tunneled you'll need to take it anyway regardless of a visual effect or
not."

I was generally just thinking like a soft white glow of the survivor with zero collision in the games base kit so the killer knows not to chase them while it's active.

"I can't remember if you had an opinion on my thread about anti-tunneling
ideas but my suggestion had been slowing down gen progress while
survivors are alive and speeding it up incrementally as survivors are
killed to slow down the early game but make doing all gens easier as
survivors are killed so getting all survivors or nearly all to death
hook and then killing survivors would be more effective. That would
reduce the effectiveness of tunneling and slow down the game so anti
tunneling perks aren't as needed."

I actually love this. Essentially rewards not tunneling and punishes tunneling. While also just generally giving the losing side more of a chance for a come back.

"Another suggestion from the same thread (apologies to the suggestor; I
don't remember who suggested it) was giving a pool of hook states so no
survivor died until the 9th hook state. The effectiveness of tunneling
would be severely diminished at that point. I like the suggestion; the
reason why I prefer mine is because gen speed can be a major issue for
Killers in higher MMR so a slowdown that encourages spreading hooks hits
both and lessens the need to tunnel. They're both good suggestions in
my opinion."

I like yours better. If the gens we're slower to compensate I could see this being good though.

"If tunneling is less effective then there will be less tunneling and
that equates to less need to buff anti tunnel perks. That'll require
some changes to mechanics though. In the meantime band aid changes such
as reverting DS to 5 seconds are very much necessary."

I generally agree. My only issue with 5 second DS is getting hit by it when I'm not tunneling or it's being forced on me aggressively, of which these scenarios will be happening a lot. So if it hypothetically got changes to only hit me if I'm actually tunneling I'd be totally fine with it. I don't tunnel.

Oh I totally agree about regional differences, I do think there's a difference there. I guess we didn't mention that specifically. In my region the perks being ran and the survivors play styles I view as objective. I'm sure people can have subjective interpretations of them though. My statements are more about what is happening there, not peoples experiences of said happenings.

I get your point, but let's do a hypothetical to see the problem with this.

Let's say that we can't just argue, well I'm at high mmr and your not so you don't know. However let's pretend that said person is at high mmr and the things he's saying are true. How would he prove it to the other person that isn't at high mmr?

He couldn't.

The principle of that person at high mmr's said problems are based on the experiences of what goes on there. If someone else doesn't experience those things they aren't going to agree with them. There's nothing you could say to change their minds. That's my point.

So while yes I understand me saying high mmr could be just used as a blanket dismissive point it's because if they don't play there then there's nothing you could say to them. There's no other way you could prove your points. At that point you're essentially playing two completely different games.

Unless you of course have a hypothetical example of an answer a high mmr person could give to sway their mind that I haven't thought of.

Well ideally I'd do no collision so the body block detection criteria you're referencing wouldn't matter.

I think those scenarios are recoverable on solid tier killers but I'm talking m1or lower tier killers generally speaking.

1: Is it common at high MMR? Yes. To lesser extents than the extreme listed above, but generally abuse of anti tunnel perks for their unintended purpose, yes.

2: Is it unbalanced? Yes.

3: Is it abusive? Yes.

"The first argument, is it common, requires a few things. First, we'd
need to have a definition of common. Some people this might be one out
of ten games, of rothers it could be every other game. Then we'd need a
standard for what exactly we are discussing - is it the full DH / OTR /
BU / DS build, or if a person is using a portion of that build does it
also count. "

I referenced this already in another post here, it's probably every 5 games or so. Time also has a massive impact on this though. during the day for my time zone, quite rarer, like once every 10 games. Prime time at night though where almost every match is a sweat fest? Every few games. So it can very significantly by time.

"Beyond definitions though, you'd probably need a data set. Over the last
50 games I encountered X Y number of times. That's boring, and not
everyone will believe it, but it makes things clearer."

So that I do have. I play way, way more than the average person. I'm getting these numbers from about 300+ matches a week.

"On the second argument, is it unbalanced, discussing personal MMR is not
critical to it, we need to discuss what else survivors might do. For
the sake of argument, let's say the above build is very common. What if
it wasn't? Would survivors be running heal builds to trade off body
blocks? Gen rush? Sabo squad? If a survivor dedicates an entire build to
something it should get value, to consider the value we'd need to look
at what else a high MMR survivor could do."

Discussing personal mmr is completely critical to this. This happens significantly more at higher mmr. A person at lower mmr probably never sees this, hence why they don't even see it as a problem. Yes, if they weren't running they above build they would be running other perks and yes, obviously you have to get value from perks. The issue isn't value from perks, it's whether they are too strong and simultaneously abusable for more than there intended purpose. Would those alternate perks they'd run instead be too strong? No. Would they be abusable? No. We already are looking at what else a high mmr survivor can do, that has nothing to do with the point being made here.

"The third argument, which is the meat of your original post, really has
nothing to do with high MMR and that discussion was a distraction from
the issue. This is an ethical discussion on player behavior and the
intent of perks. "

It has everything to do with high mmr and is not a distraction, that's not understanding the issue. This abuse doesn't happen in lower mmr groups.The point is brought up to explain why others never see this happen and don't see it as an issue. It's also brought up because in higher mmr matches every second counts. Why is that relevant? Because you see people that don't play at higher mmr post things like, "just eat the DS", "just eat the UB". These responses make sense at low mmr where the time of the matches isn't pin point and you can waste time like that. This is not an ethical discussion on player behavior whatsoever. It is a discussion on intent of perks. Intent of perks and use of said perks is the entire point of this discussion.

"My opinion is tunneling will always be a part of the game as long as it
has an elimination format and survivors will have perks to try and
counter it. I see nothing wrong of trying to use those perks in an
offensive way because it comes with trade offs (time not spent on gens
for example). Is the trade off balanced? Well, that goes back to the
second issue."

Tunneling will always be a part of the game, but that's not the discussion being made here. The discussion here is abuse of perks. You're conflating two things that are not the same. Anti tunneling perks are good. Abusing those anti tunnel perks for their unintended purpose is not. Saying they have a trade off is a pointless statement as the tradeoff is always in their favor, hence why they do it. If it wasn't worth the trade off they wouldn't do it.

"This does mean that survivors have to accept that killers might tunnel. I
think that leads to boring games, but its a core part of the game
design."

This has nothing to do with this topic at all. My topic has nothing to do with tunneling. My topic is abuse of anti tunnel perks for their unintended purpose. Those are not the same topics.

After all this tangent none of this had anything to do with my question to you. The question was, hypothetically if it was a high mmr only explainable issue that wouldn't make sense to someone not at high mmr and I couldn't use "high mmr" as a rational, what is an example response I could give instead to convince them? Since you don't like my high mmr response.

You never actually answered this question.