New DS being used "offensively" why is it considered toxic/wrong?

There isn't slug pressure if they have unbreakable????? You just wasted time and lost bloodlust and your potential second chase it's a net gain for them to do it.

Let me also speak for everyone who is currently busy laughing at the insinuation that there is currently something problematic going on with any of the perks mentioned in this thread. If it sounds dismissive, it's because it's such a non-issue and anyone who's actually experienced these perks at their worst knows it's a non-issue. It's like lightly scraping your knee and making it out to be broken.

So other than being a minor inconvenience, where's the actual problem at? Are we just setting the bar at anything that makes us feel bad? Welcome to DBD, just like any other competitive multiplayer game where you're up against another person or team, some situations are not enjoyable. It happens on both sides. Interactive? I beg to differ. I'm not sorry to have to inform anyone who didn't know that already.

Statement 1) “Both sides of the game should be allowed to have things that the other side thinks is unfun”

Statement 2) “Nothing in the entire game should ever be nerfed, because the other side of the game has unfun things too”

There is a HUGE leap from statement 1 to statement 2.

I do agree with pretty much everything said there, but the one statement I disagree on is "one is accepted and the other is not".

Most killers I know here in the forums generally consider tunneling to be boring. A fair number consider it unnecessary and those that do tunnel and feel they need to to win tend to lament that other strategies available to killer have slowly been made weaker and weaker. I fall in the prior category; I don't think tunneling is necessary, and deem it to be a risky strategy that puts the game on a dice roll of depending on how well that specific survivor/team works around the tunnel, and isn't fun for anyone involved.

Decisive Strike being used offensively is in the same camp to me. I don't believe it is an optimal way to play, and just like tunneling is a dice roll. It CAN potentially win the survivors the game, but what it results in is a game where the whole game is decided by the 1vs1, and serves more to make the game bpring and frustrating more than anything else.

So I would not say that using DS offensively is unacceptable, you can do whatever you want with your perks and playstyle....but if you use DS offensively you are more often than not gonna hit killers who don't tend to tunnel, and are thus pushing for and breeding an unfun and lame game for everyone. If that killer then resorts to unfun and lame strategies in return, tunnelling you out and ruthlessly continuing that gameplan to kill everyone, it's kinda on you.

The solution is not to buff a perk that can negatively impact killers who aren't doing it. Especially a perk that is part of a DLC that you must spend money on. I think you would agree that a BETTER solution, is to make it a basekit mechanic that addressed tunneling and balance the entire game around it, rather than slapping a band-aid on it with a perk.

DS is just one of many symptoms, BGP + blinds, pallet stuns, sabotages all discourage picking up of Survivors be it the first or subsequent hook. Hooking takes up too much time and frankly kills off Killer pressure too easily. I see Killers learning that not every down mandates a hook as a good thing. Slugging for pressure is still a tactic largely slept on.

To.. what? Let me guess, "Killers try to justify tunneling"? I think this argument is in bad faith.

If a Survivor is unhooked, has Off The Record and/or Decisive Strike, and takes hits for the unhooker when Im clearly not trying to go for them, am I suddenly tunneling for hitting them when they are actively getting in my way?

Whenever I play Killer, I go out of my way to not tunnel or camp Survivors, BHVR wants to discourage tunneling with Decisive Strike, so why am I actively being punished for not tunneling by a perk meant to counter tunneling? I personally dont have an issue with players themselves doing it, since they are just using a perk, but I do have to question the game design here, since I dont think anti-tunnel perks should be used in situations in which tunneling is not taking place.

A common argument I see is that "the Survivor does not make distance since they dont get a speedboost" (not saying that you said this, but this is a common thing said in the community) but distance is distance, it make the difference between making it to a loop or not, getting a down or not, it also resets things like Bloodlust, a single hit tank can make the world of different in terms of the result of a match, which is why bodyblocking is a very important thing in the Comp scene.

To put it bluntly, this should not be a thing, and I think Survivors should lose collision with the Killer after being unhooked until they perform a Conspicuous Action; think about it like this, the Killer cannot bodyblock the Survivors to wait out BT or prevent them from reaching a loop, and the Survivors cannot use anti-tunnel perks to take hits for teammates when the Killer is not tunneling. Tunneling is made harder, those who dont tunnel are not punished for not tunneling, overall win/win.

Survivor book says there is no way you're going to tell me how to use my perks after enduring this disgusting meta on top of disgusting meta. After Tunnel + Regression, a whole new chapter had to be written.

Did you really quote that lil bit of me to justify talking about you think? Alright I guess. Have some attention.

To.. what? Let me guess, "Killers try to ju

Just gonna cut you off there and let you know I'm really not interested in guessing. Keep that in the loops. You literally took this thought of yours and wrote paragraphs as if it was absolutely true, then told us all what you think, as if anything you wrote hasn't been written time and time again. Probably a chapter in the Killer's New Testament.. Good lord…

You getting unhooked, you rub your ass in my face even if i dont go for you, you body block me then go in a locker ? Hell yeah im gonna tunnel you down and eat the ds

The point of my post is that many people who are upset about DS being using in this way feel it is punishing someone that doesn't deserve it- which I understand, and agree that it isn't fun, but tunneling in itself feels like a punishment to someone that didn't deserve it either, but it is accepted as a valid playstyle, and that's why it feel hypocritical. I understand if you personally don't accept it as a valid playstyle, but enough do.

Here is the same generalization again, tunneling accepted by who? Offensive DS being complained by who?

The people that complain about DS used offensively DONT TUNNEL themselves, don't condone it and aren't the ones accepted tunneling as valid. Therefore there is no hypocrisy or double standards.

Are you saying that if they have access to anti-tunneling tools they can't complain about tunneling? Or are you saying that if they have unfun strats they can't complain about unfun strats?

Neither. I am saying that if survivor get a counter against a certain play style they don't like but then force that same play style because they are now protected against it, have no right to complain if they themselves FORCE it, which is the whole point of "using DS offensively".

so I don't understand why you feel like it's not allowed to be..upset about something you don't like?

When the opponent doesn't use that unfun thing or strategy but the other party suddenly forces it because they know they have a guaranteed counter, then they shouldn't complain. Being upset about tunneling in general is totally fine.

If your point in this is saying, "survivors can't be upset about tunneling because they have this DS they can use offensively now," then I would agree that if a person goes out of their way to use it offensively and then gets hooked because of it, then yes, I would agree they shouldn't say they were tunneled, because they weren't

And here you suddenly get my point, at least partially. Using DS offensively is ONLY possible in this scenario by definition.

If the killer tunnels from the beginning, DS CANT be used offensively because it has to be used defensively. And if the killer doesn't tunnel, it can't be used defensively, only offensively by throwing yourself in front of the killer and bodyblocking.

Those two cases are mutually exclusive and depend on the play style of the killer, which leads me back to the problem with generalization and the mentioned hypocrisy.

An analogy would be, if you (general, not personal you) drive on the highway with a cop car behind you. They simply let you go on your way but you decide to break check them. They then pull you over into a traffic stop and afterwards you cry about unfair treatment and profiling or something. You provoked the situation and therefore have only yourself to blame.

That's what I meant by "using DS offensively isn't toxic but the behaviour that often follows afterwards is" as an answer to your question in the title.

(Sorry, if I address several points multiple times but a m tired and too lazy to rewrite everything into one congruent text. 😴)

I just slug if my intention is not to tunnel.

I don’t, but if you want my attention you got it. When I kill the survivor using Ds offensively they complain I tunneled them…🤷🏼‍♂️

It's a valid strategy like camping or tunneling. People just don't like it, that's all.

DS is a one time use perk, that deactivates if you even look at an objective or another survivor. I agree that if a person is jumping lockers repeatedly or vaults that is obnoxious, but would be with or without the DS. The only people affected by this perk were all up at the offhook (which you shouldn't be) and looking for some low hanging fruit instead of actually playing the game. So if you are constantly seeing DS, maybe re-evaluate your play style.

And to all the people in here who are like I got a 5 second stun for playing poorly, so I will literally ruin 4 people's game with slugging and tunnels, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. These perks are in here because of you.

Pardon me if my post came off the wrong way originally. Looking back I understand that it might have came off passive aggressive considering the amount of back and forth this thread as a whole already has.

Im just going to ask for you to dial it back a bit here, and to maybe read my entire post instead of stopping part-way through.

If a Survivor is unhooked, has Off The Record and/or Decisive Strike,
and takes hits for the unhooker when Im clearly not trying to go for
them, am I suddenly tunneling for hitting them when they are actively
getting in my way?

I asked this for a reason. And I wish you would please answer it.

Tunneling is defined by the Killer going out of their way to get a Survivor out of the match as early as possible by repeatedly chasing and hooking them. Killers, as evident by the current meta, are not obligated to ignore Survivors. Tunneling has become an issue because it's not only the easiest way to win (path of least resistance) but because it is the most effective way of winning.

But what exactly constitutes tunneling? To put it bluntly, this was my question.

If the Survivor is unhooked, the Killer can clearly go for the unhooker, and they go for the unhooked Survivor, that is tunneling. But when the opportunity to go for the unhooker is obstructed by the person who is unhooked, are exceptions created for such or is such lumped into the category with the rest?

For me, if Im chasing another Survivor, Im not going for the unhooked Survivor, I dont think I should be called a "tunneler" if the unhooked Survivor bodyblocks for the unhooker, especially if I dont even continue the chase with the unhooked Survivor and still go for the unhooker. Which is my point.

But everyone has their own interpretation, so I asked you this question to open up the room for conversation.

Some other things to wrap up.

"Probably a chapter in the Killer's New Testament," is implying that Im a Killer main…

I feel like Ive been called a Survivor main and Killer main many times for my opinions. At this point, Idk. Apparently I main both sides but also neither and everything and nothing at the same time. I play strictly one role, which is both roles, but also neither, but also only one, but only the one that opposes the broader opinion apparently. (/j)

To put this as bluntly as possible.

I paid 20 USD for Dead by Daylight, as did everyone else. But for me personally, I want to get the full experience for my money, so I play both sides rather evenly. I dont main Killer or Survivor. I paid for the full game, for both Survivor and Killer, so I want to play both. I form my own opinions based on my own experience with the game from playing both sides. I have empathy for both sides since I understand the ups and downs from both ends.

I dont tunnel as a result.

Since I feel as if it ruins the experience for others, since Ive had matches where Ive been thrown into a 3v1 because my teammates got tunneled out early into a match. But at the same time, I feel as if the game's design has a lot of issues, since the perks designed to prevent tunneling are also used in ways that hurt Killers for going out of their way to not tunnel. Ive had matches where I get tunneled out and Im forced to sit in timeout since Im in a SWF and cant just "go next", Im forced to sit there and watch.

Also, to put it bluntly again, Im on team "anti-tunnel" here. My original post mentioned this, but you seemed to have missed that.

Oh, and as mentioned in the original post… I think collision with the Killer should be removed to make it harder for Survivors to use anti-tunnel perks beyond their intent; it doubles for making tunneling not as effective since it becomes harder to bodyblock Survivors in certain locations (e.g. basement) to wait out BT.

Not tunneling should be encouraged, not punished.

Im just going to ask for you to dial it back a bit here

With such curtesy, I would never decline. Apologies for -my- post. I wrote it after coming out of back to back trials where I was ignored after showing a smidge of looping ability. Someone else always gets tunneled and I cant do anything about it :( Still, was not a good excuse, so my bad. Will try to do better!

If a Survivor is unhooked, has Off The Record and/or Decisive Strike,
and takes hits for the unhooker when Im clearly not trying to go for
them, am I suddenly tunneling for hitting them when they are actively
getting in my way?

I asked this for a reason. And I wish you would please answer it.

Tunneling is defined by the Killer going out of their way to get a Survivor out of the match as early as possible by repeatedly chasing and hooking them. Killers, as evident by the current meta, are not obligated to ignore Survivors. Tunneling has become an issue because it's not only the easiest way to win (path of least resistance) but because it is the most effective way of winning.

I don't think the community is on board with this as a whole. 'Tunneling' has been given so many definitions, who can keep up? But for the sake of this conversation, lets go with this one :)

Your issue with 'why' tunneling is an issue at all is at odds with me, as my personal reason is the amount and frequency of seeing tunneling. And not when it's clearly -the- move to make. Im talking when its the -only- move made by the killer. Game starts, survivor found, hard tunnel and before you can blink, the games over.

To answer the question, no of course not. Anyone arguing otherwise is deficient or not being genuine. There is a difference in having an opinion, or being factually wrong. Saying that scenario is tunneling , imo, would likely come from a survivor who is trying to cope with what just happened, but in a poor, immature manner. Just kind of makes the pain of it all feel….. better. Is this sufficient? Think I covered it all lol.

But what exactly constitutes tunneling? To put it bluntly, this was my question.

I feel you stated what tunneling is, as accepted generally by the community. In other words, the logical and factual definition when spoken about. "Tunneling is defined by the Killer going out of their way to get a Survivor out of the match as early as possible by repeatedly chasing and hooking them." -specifically. I'd note that this definition, again, is made volatile to me when I see this at the beginning of the match. Not if the killer needs to change tactics, not if the killer has an obvious need to tunnel in the match. Just as the mindset going in.

There are so many scenarios where someone can look at whats going on, and with just a hint of bias one way or another, determine if something is tunneling or not. But this will happen regardless most likely. If a killer decides they are losing and start tunneling around 2 gens left, is this bad? Of course not. Will the killer still get flack at the end game chat? Oh yes, probably. But this is simply not deserved or warrented, just survivors 'coping and deflecting' to protect ego. There will be people who will call tunneling for any reason under the sun. I call those people bad apples and they will make any discussion or issue more difficult and annoying.

Some other things to wrap up.

"Probably a chapter in the Killer's New Testament," is implying that Im a Killer main…

I feel like Ive been called a Survivor main and Killer main many times for my opinions. At this point, Idk. Apparently I main both sides but also neither and everything and nothing at the same time. I play strictly one role, which is both roles, but also neither, but also only one, but only the one that opposes the broader opinion apparently. (/j)

lol! I feel this so much :P

Many play both sides, but unless its 50/50, one side will have a slight edge, just as a fact. Doesnt mean you main that side. I dont even feel someone enedfs to claim to be a 'main' at all. But you can. And its kind of easy to tell them on here sometimes.

My killer book comment remains in tact, however. I can state now its not directed at you personally, but just in general. But its meant to show my frustrtation over every killer main arguing, in bad faith, that tunneling is fine, accept it, gg move on, etc.

Nah. Ill just play something else. And they are fine with that too! Im just floored players are fine with other players leaving the game when I do genuinely thnk most of us like the game and want it t be great. But I try to remember this is the internet and humans Im dealing with. Makes it make more sense.

To put this as bluntly as possible.

I paid 20 USD for Dead by Daylight, as did everyone else. But for me personally, I want to get the full experience for my money, so I play both sides rather evenly.

Not gonna paste the whole thing, but still respond. And your view on this in this excerpt is what Im talking about with what I was saying just above this. You are showing you clearly love the game and want it to be better. If you didn't you wouldn't even be here trying to understand things, right? I dont get the vibe you want to play and make the game miserable for others on account of "Just trying to win', 'Its just a strat', 'Its the most efficient way." Or any of the other broken record excuses for being an internet human. So its easy for me to discern one from another. :)

 I feel as if the game's design has a lot of issues, since the perks designed to prevent tunneling are also used in ways that hurt Killers for going out of their way to not tunnel.

If a perk does something, it does something. If you can get creative and do something else also, go for it. BHVR makes the game and has testers, right? PTB, etc. On this topic, I'm pretty cut and dry: If people can complain about things such as tunneling being rampant, BG+FB, BU+FTP, Proxy camping, etc, AND NOTHING CHANGES, then it doesn't matter. Everything is fair game. The community has too many of these bad apples I mentioned to meaningfully play without doing these things. But its just my current view of the Dbd landscape.

Also, to put it bluntly again, Im on team "anti-tunnel" here. My original post mentioned this, but you seemed to have missed that.

Oh, and as mentioned in the original post… I think collision with the Killer should be removed to make it harder for Survivors to use anti-tunnel perks beyond their intent; it doubles for making tunneling not as effective since it becomes harder to body block Survivors in certain locations (e.g. basement) to wait out BT.

"""Not tunneling should be encouraged, not punished."""

So to this, specifically the last line, I ask why? If we have to encourage/reward for NOT tunneling… what's that say about the game? Or the state of it anyway. If we feel that should be done, the issue is still clearly an issue that BHVR will eventually get to, Im sure. But its something thats been talked about to death, so Im gonna call it there for me.

Hope this helped and again, apologies for the harshness. Was quite a bad day and I need to stop coming here after… well. After playing. Because its usually just bad bad bad thoughts lol

Edit: Grammar