What exactly qualifies a tech to be removed? Why isn't there any consistency with the process?

Options
FrostySeal
FrostySeal Member Posts: 605

So every form of Blight's 180-degree flicks and slide tech have been patched out effectively gutting him in terms of fun even though it wasn't overpowered. If the Dev's reasoning behind this is that it wasn't intended, why then is Oni's 180 degree flick still in the game? Why can Wesker continue to have his own slide tech? Better yet, why does Hillbilly still have his flick? That was never intended either and was removed in a far earlier patch but due to community backlash was brought back. What about Huntress's hatchet hitbox? Wasn't that also patched out in an earlier patch and then reversed because of community backlash? Then doesn't that mean that BHVR's whole argument of it not being intentional means absolutely nothing as long as the community screams at them enough?

So what exactly makes a tech need to be removed? If it's because it's overpowered then shouldn't the crouch tech be removed and a couple others? Is it only a matter of time before every Killer has every bit of nuance removed from them or is it only just a select few Killers that get to be gutted like Chucky and Blight?

Comments

  • FrostySeal
    FrostySeal Member Posts: 605
    Options

    The whole point of my post wasn't to debate whether 180 blight flicks and hug techis balanced or not but what exactly constitutes a techs removal. If 180 and hug tech were too strong on Blight then what about Oni and Wesker?

  • Marioneo
    Marioneo Member Posts: 638
    Options

    They will eventually devs got a bunch of things to do new content and gamebreaking bugs to fix they will fix Wesker and Oni in due time

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,494
    Options

    Wesker's Hug is a lot harder to do and is extremely situational. Maybe rebound?

  • supersonic853
    supersonic853 Member Posts: 5,372
    edited May 12
    Options

    Doesnt billy even have a slide tech to? I've gotten it only to work like once on accident. (I rushed at a car and slid along it for some reason before hitting a survivor)

  • FrostySeal
    FrostySeal Member Posts: 605
    Options

    It's a lot harder to do but it can give a huge advantage in some situations. I don't count rebound as a tech since it feels more like an intended feature rather than a bug.

  • FrostySeal
    FrostySeal Member Posts: 605
    Options

    Technically yeah but it feels more like gliding over it rather than Blight fully coming into contact with the map hitbox. It feels like more or less the fault of weird map collision, like how in Eyrie of crows or Nostromo wreckage you can straight up crash into invisible map collision.

  • Sava18
    Sava18 Member Posts: 2,425
    Options

    Hug tech can be argued but I really don't think 180's were ever too good or even good relative to blight for that matter, oni's near instant 180s are a lot better but even those aren't breaking his kit.

    For the post: At this point I just want the killer to be a bit less sticky, you can't turn 3 degrees towards an object without colliding and it's quite obnoxious. I know the hug tech will never come back even if it was never that strong, I just want the killer to be fluid still.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,494
    Options

    I think so?

    I don't play enough Billy to say for certain

  • tyantlmumagjiaonuha
    tyantlmumagjiaonuha Member Posts: 512
    Options

    Referring to whether it is cool for the survivor. Back in the day, a Japanese community manager responded to a user's FAQ question about why rocker DS was allowed because it was a "cool technique".

    On the other hand, he also stated that the death slinger quickshot "will be changed one day because survivors can't handle it".

    BhVR's policy on technique is consistent.

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    A 'tech' is simply a bug/exploit spray painted over with a fresh new look/name. It doesn't stop being a bug/exploit just because people call it a 'tech'. It just basically signals 'I like this and think it should stay, so I call it tech'. The main difference between bugs and exploits, is that a bug is unintended behavior, and an exploit is an intended behavior used in an unusual or unintended way.

    For an exploit example, healing prevents movement, so you can't be healed while holding the run button, so the intended behavior (can't heal a runner) is used in an unintended way (crawling isn't running, but also standing still while injured isn't running). That is what people call 'shift tech' instead of saying 'you can't heal someone running'. Since this is a mechanic working as intended (can't heal a runner), only the edge case scenario might need to be removed (running doesn't prevent heals while slugged).

    The flicks and slides are (predominantly) bugs. They are unintended usages of the power, caused by programming errors. If they were intended, then you wouldn't have to jump through hoops to use them (frame perfect Wesker Slides/Hill hops), and the powers would likely be weaker to counter-balance (EG. Oni losing instadown potential). Since they are programming errors, they can be super hard to find, pin down, and fix. They can get fixed when the sufficient time or effort is put into fixing them, and should always be viewed with a limited lifespan.

    One massive bug still in the game to this day (that was fixed at one point) was damaging Survivors through stuns. Due to lag, a Survivor could send the Stun message to the server, and the Killer could send the Hit message to the server, and both go off. There was a patch where the Devs put in lag verification (so whoever between Survivor or Killer sent the message to the server first, overrode the oppositions message, AKA laggy person loses), but that caused the client sided hits on Killer side to mismatch from the server sided 'you got stunned, you didn't get the hit', and it was too frustrating and confusing for most of the playerbase to deal with. Thus they added the bug back into the game, and we have laggy BS hits going through stuns to this day sadly. So this MASSIVE bug was considered too difficult for the playerbase to deal with, so this bug/'tech' is acceptable.

    There is a line that needs to be crossed where what stands to be gained from the bug, is compared to what is lost from its removal. Similarly that line also exists with exploits and intended mechanics in unintended circumstances. If they removed the 'can't heal a runner' line of code, they might accidentally allow healing on the move with both players running in the same direction. That would be a far worse problem to have, so we are stuck with 'shift-tech', from that analysis. Since most Survivor experiences are hurt by these Killer extra potential bugs (IME 3/5 players), and the Killer and 1 Survivor enjoy them (2/5), they likely are all on the chopping block. At the same time, Blight finally stopped rushing through nerfs that instead landed against far weaker Killers, and his power level was finally hit a bit, as 'bug-tech' was finally fixed. At the same time most people enjoyed Billy's flick (IME 4/5), so it was considered to be up for basekitting.

  • Killing_Time
    Killing_Time Member Posts: 894
    edited May 13
    Options

    Isn't looping "hug tech" tho? Survivors exploiting their smaller hotbox to run around clutter on a map is an exploit. It was never intended

    Post edited by Rizzo on
  • Shroompy
    Shroompy Member Posts: 6,269
    Options

    There are certain surfaces that you simply dont bump into as Billy

    Filler loops that have a car and truck on Autohaven, and the car on the side of the school on Badham are probably the most well known.

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    The vast majority of popular game mechanics across multiple genres often started out as unintended exploits/bugs/glitches/player interactions.

    When your playerbase finds interesting ways to engage with the game that express a deeper level of skill and understanding of the underlying systems of your game you're always gonna have to weigh the pros and cons of removing it carefully. Whether it be hug tech, flicks, moonwalks, crouch techs, 360s, wallbangs(blinding through slotted surfaces), etc. they're all forms of skill expression that add depth to the game and a large amount of the playerbase enjoy both seeing and using. DBD has a history of rather than choosing to make these things proper parts of the game they instead either remove them or stifle them to near uselessness. There are ways to adjust the game to accommodate these "techs" while keeping the game balanced.

    Fighting games originally were not made with combos as we understand them today in mind. When players first started to really do long strings of attacks in SF2 it was straight up unintended by the devs. Rather than squash the "tech" and force players to lose skill expression that they were having fun with. They made adjusts to the game overall in the future revisions to enshrine the ability of characters to combo attacks together as part of the normal design then balance it so everyone could do with a decent level of consistency. Players who were better at the game would get more mileage out of it, but since it was made a natural part of the game it made it easier to balance in the long run. It became a genre defining mechanic that fundamentally changed the genre for the better.

    Shooters are notorious for exploits and glitches that ended up becoming tech that is considered benchmarks for how well you understand the functions of the game. IR shots, drop shots, cross map knife ricochets, wiggling(found in shooters with leaning mechanics while aiming), etc. Stuff that now gets celebrated and widely used that used to be just straight up bugs and unintended design quirks. The devs choose to more often than not embrace these things turn them into proper codified and balanced mechanics rather than just denying them outright.

    DBD by comparison goes the abnormal route of and flattening out the game's skill expression and time after time just straight taking away genuinely fun things. Like I'm all for fixing actually problematic bugs that destroy the spirit of the game no matter which side they benefit, but the only thing keeping this game going is the fact that it is unchallenged in its genre and the licenses it has access to. When people look up DBD content these days they get tons of videos seeing genuinely fun and funny stuff that gets them excited to play the game only to then get the game and find out that most of it has been patched out or nerfed into the ground.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,327
    Options

    To my knowledge the syn cars are the only objects that have this issue though. I even managed to hit a moonsaw on accident because you literally cannot bump there. They could fix it by adjusting the car's hitbox slightly (just don't make them quite as punishing as the ones on Garden of Misery).

  • GloomySpooks
    GloomySpooks Member Posts: 26
    Options

    I'm enjoying this discussion and agree with a lot of this but also I'm wondering if the recent changes within the company have a lot to do with it as well and I'm wondering if they're trying to find a way to balance the game overall. I mean at this point tho from what I gather about the coding, they should just make a DBD 2 for balanced competitive play updated for future tech and revert current DBD to a more meme-friendly game.

    IMHO

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    Vast majority of popular mechanics started as exploits/bugs/glitches - I'm sorry this is ridiculous hyperbole. What, was jumping in its own right a glitch? Was damaging specific bodyparts (aka headshots) doing more damage a glitch? Did moving faster with a button/double input to activate 'running' mode start as a glitch? While there may be offshoots of these respectively such as bunnyhopping, richochets bouncing to multi-tap hitboxes, and wavedashing, the base mechanic was already enjoyable without the hyperspecific bug/exploit for the new 'tech'. To be generous, I would give a maximum of 10%, and that is far more generous than I should ever be. This gives far too little credit to all the mechanics put into games that we enjoy, as if a noise to cue getting a reward wasn't planned. Essentially you have to play a game that intentionally makes movement clunky and bad to enjoy good movement. the newer RE engine games are a perfect example of bad floaty movement, when we had Rev2 and Res6 with clean(er) movement, or even the OG RE games with responsive fluid movement, which is still used in games as late as OG4 and RE5.

    Weigh pros and cons of remove or basekit - See my final paragraph of my previous post, already covered. (Short version being Billy flick was fun, basekitted, Blight flick+faceslide wasn't, thus removed.)

    Fighting games/comboes, future revisions - The difference being here, is both versions exist at the same time. I can buy the OG Street Fighter, or the original release of SF2, or the latest remake/remaster. You can have your cake and eat it when there are different versions/revisions. Someone who likes the mechanic can play the version that they like, and someone who doesn't like the mechanic can play the version they like. Here, we have to pick someone to irritate, and someone to please (or more accurately try to figure out which group is smaller and irritate them). We only have 1 version of DBD, unless they allowed for greater customization in KWF. If I could roll back patches in customs, then I wouldn't have issues with this, and it would be even better if you could customize which version of various things are allowed (maybe 80s gens, with 5% regression on kick, with Blight flicks, with 200% Ruin), but we can't do that sadly.

    Shooters with exploits and glitches becoming the norm - This suffers massive survivorship bias. How many of these bugs and exploits were patched out of future iterations because they caused negative backlash also? I remember glitching out of maps and shooting people from the outside (since outer wall collision was unidirectional), and that was fun for me, and bullschenanigans for my opponents. I remember glitching the physics engine to hop on top of a beam that couldn't be reached normally, and if I did that with a sniper, it was a free win. Both of these were fun for the bug exploiter to use, but weren't adding to the game at large to be more fun or fair, so they should be removed. Sadly people view many of these exploits as the 'good ones', and that IMO is what Blight/Oni bug abuses are/were. Oni shouldn't be able to 1-hit down with 180 turning (Left/Right, full 360 coverage), he should only be able to hit 90 degree turning (Left/Right, for 180 degree coverage). If his flick is basekitted, IMO he should lose the ability to instadown with Demon Dash, and only keep instadown on the Charged M1 without sprinting.

    DBD flatten's skill expression by removing fun things - Again, fun for the exploiter, not the recipient on the other side. Should we remove the entity block on windows? That was a mechanic added to prevent fun for the exploiter at the cost of health for the game, just as Blight and Oni flicks did/do. Billy's flick on the other hand was fun enough for everyone to basekit, so not all exploits are removed. You can still see this infinite vault partially happen on Dead Dawg's infinite, and Hawkin's infinite (both against M1 Killers mostly). Should every map get an 'infinite'? Something 'fixed' that I disagree with is invisible walls added EVERYWHERE on 2nd stories. The 'problem' there is falling onto loops from above (which was hyper rare and too specific to matter IMO), and instead of fixing it on the problem's end (adding cone hitboxes onto loops so you would slide off), they just added invisible walls any and everywhere you can gain altitude, especially where it doesn't make sense (bug report I posted with YT vid of invisible wall). Essentially there was 2 ends of the problem, and they picked the wrong end to fix.

    As far as people looking things up to have fun in DBD, there are more than enough core problems with the game that have gone unaddressed for nearly 8 years now that you don't need to pretend exploits are saving the game. We still have no method to deal with bleedouts other than "just wait 4m LOL". We still have no method to deal with 2 Survivors holding the game hostage other than "just record at least 10 minutes of gens being not worked and report them LOL". There are plenty more massive problems, and little to nothing is done to fix the worst of experiences for both sides. That is far more likely the cause of people being turned off of the game, and the direct cause of 4/5 people IRL that I know that have quit the game for any period of time (the last being "I play the first month of a cool Killer/Survivor/Perk then wait until the next content drop with something cool", invocation of spiders was his last 'cool' thing then soft quit again).

  • AMOGUS
    AMOGUS Member Posts: 482
    Options

    One step closer to Nurse-only meta, just as planned!

    Oh wait, I forgot, we need to nerf Nurse next so Killers will get appropriately destroyed for daring to play against us at high MMR. <3

  • AMOGUS
    AMOGUS Member Posts: 482
    edited May 15
    Options

    The funny thing is that you're actually right, looping itself was never intended, and it's something that only people who really know DBD history are aware of. Since it's "not fun for the other side" as @mizark3 argues, and that's all that matters regardless if whether the other side's reasons for finding it "unfun" are actually understandable or not (Hint: It wasn't in the case of hug tech. :P), we need to removing looping!

    Key tech, FOV tech, heal tech, getting running/fast vaults on loops designed to prevent them, are also instances of unintended behavior. We need to remove them too, obviously, following this reasoning.

  • Crowman
    Crowman Member Posts: 8,978
    Options

    It took the devs 2 years to remove hug tech after stating it was a bug and will be fixed. Sometimes issues can be quite complicated to fix and may not be the highest priority to fix over issues that are more game breaking.

  • toxik_survivor
    toxik_survivor Member Posts: 1,181
    edited May 15
    Options

    Check this out, it's pretty old but it capitalizes on the same things. It's a very interesting read that may answer some of your questions and has alot of responses, I think even a dev responded about a cj tech or smthin.

  • AMOGUS
    AMOGUS Member Posts: 482
    Options

    People thought it was staying in the game because there was no more info on it, so people assumed BHVR silently accepted it was okay.

    Also, to add onto Reiko's point, Smash literally has several popular tech that are all unintended, yet remain because they're fun or add depth. Hug tech has counters, the community as a whole just did not want to learn how to play against top tier Killers that actually spent the time to learn how to play them effectively.

    Ironically, people whined about the Freddy rework, saying he was "too OP and no skill"… well, we just deleted skill expression from a Killer, so it's pretty obvious that it's not actually about "outskilling you", the community just does not want to lose as Survivor, it's that simple. lmao

  • AMOGUS
    AMOGUS Member Posts: 482
    Options

    Yeah, so, hug tech was perfectly fine and Oni flicks are fine because Oni is M1 70% of the time, "exploits" should not be removed if one's reasoning for "not finding them fun" is because "you suck at the game" or "you have 10 hours total", not because it's actually uncounterable like shooting through the map.

    Also, to add onto Reiko's point, Smash Ultimate off the top of my head has several techs that remained in the game even upon discovery like Bayonetta double witch twist, slingshot was also unintended yet is considered skill. You mentioned wavedashing but there's more to it. OW2 also had the Mercy jump tech that was made basekit upon discovery by the devs.

    Also, since the reason why people really hate hug tech is because "it stops me from doing the same thing I do against every Killer aka hug an obstacle for gens, then teabag after I drop the pallet", people will complain about Billy flick and demanding he be nerfed next as soon as people switch to him after the top tiers are gutted. Huntress and her orbitals would also be considered a problem if it was more common.

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    As long as you frame everyone using a tech you don't care for as an exploiter you're going to reach the conclusion that nothing is valid tech.

    A vast majority of popular mechanics did indeed start out as bugs and glitches, but that isn't to say that every basic function started that way. That's not even something I claimed yet you chose to argue against the hyperbolic statement you made. "Popular mechanics" isn't anywhere near all encompassing and I would hazard to say that when people think of popular mechanics they are thinking of something a bit more involved than simple running and jumping.

    i also said that things that are legitimately problematic absolutely should get patched. Like if something is gamebreaking or so disruptive to normal play that there is no means to balance it out then obviously it has to go. In DBD's case we have precedent that shows that flicks aren't gamebreaking nor due they rise to an extreme level of disruption. That's why Billy got his back, that's why Oni continues to have his so why exactly is there a need for Blight and now Chucky to lose their flicks? Blight losing his isn't really going to affect him all that much most likely as strong killers tend to be pretty impervious to nerfs. It does make a group of people happy and flattens the game out.

    DBD is in need of depth and generally fun little things for people do with their characters on both sides. Rarely does survivor actually get new tech and killers are starting to lose tech at about the same rate they gain tech. Rather than we as players constantly wanting this removed and the devs actually removing things it would be more beneficial to embrace some of this tech and find ways to apply it across the game in a balanced way. It shouldn't just come down to picking a smaller group to irritate because if that is the kind design philosophy at play then what's the point in anyone getting into this game if they gravitate towards the "smaller group"?

    Tech is one of the things that can keep players invested in even a bad game.

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    I see you don't/haven't play/(ed) Oni in soloq, where he has power in chase 80%+ of the relevant time. The only way to have less power is if you are greeding for a 4 slug, or using power for exclusive mobility, or other misuses of his power, in which case it is merely a 'skill dif git gut' circumstance. His 1-hit down is balanced around the limitations, so bypassing the limitations with a bug exploit should remove the benefit. That's why Oni flick should either be removed, or basekitted with Dashes no longer instadowning.

    Wasn't Bayonetta beyond broken in Ultimate? Like 2 tiers above all other characters? That sounds like a perfect comparison for Blight, so I think that is good bugtech was removed, to put the character in line with the rest of the cast.

    People hate bugtech because it removed a limitation of the power's usage, not because whatever 'the other side revels in my misery' victim complex that made up quote contained. It countered the main counterplay of Blight's normal power usage, and would put Survivors into scenarios where there was no way to outplay. If I run out and away, the Blight (with normal human reaction speeds) could peel out and still get the hit, so it was a free-win for Blight (at short loops where the Blight can see). I honestly think it would have been fine to keep if he went back to the groin height camera like it was bugged on release. That would have been a fair tradeoff for the power to be gained.

    Good, because I haven't been doing that. I don't call things techs, I don't redefine what they actually are, I don't use the thinly veiled coat of paint other people put on them. That means I can have nuance and allow some, allow some with tradeoffs, and disallow others, instead of blindly allowing all of them carte blanche.

    Is jumping not a popular mechanic? Do people not get disappointed when the latest game doesn't have it? That isn't hyperbole if I proved it to be true. I'm using "popular mechanic" to encompass any facet of gameplay that people enjoy, a 'mechanic' that is 'popular'. You might be using "popular mechanic" to specify anything that isn't a core mechanic, and that is just us not using the same language. If we were to use your definition, then the bugs lose their bug status in the next game, so SF2 it was a bug, and SF3 it is a basekit mechanic, not a bug. It never was a bug in SF3, because they found a way to integrate it into the game without the problems that were coupled with in before. Sprinting may be coming from the bug of older games allowing 'W' and 'D' movement at the same time, giving a diagonal speed of sqrt(2) ~1.41, which roughly compares to the 35% and 50% common sprint speeds seen today. I guess to rephrase my point, former bugs inspire similar mechanics to be basekitted, not the direct adaptation of the bug itself.

    Everyone who lost their flick only lost it because it was never intended for the level of power they bring to the table. Chucky was busted with his flicks, and not intended, Blight was busted with his flicks, and not intended, Oni is busted with his flicks, and not intended, Billy is good/great with his flicks, and not (originally) intended. The difference between them is both the power level (Billy being fair), and how easy the bug was to fix (Chucky had the design eyes still on him, Blight finally got major focus to reign in his power, Oni is still ignored).

    I do agree there needs to be more fun opportunities for both sides (although mostly for the M1 simulator that is Survivor atm, I can still have fun chasing as Killer). I don't think bug depth is how we should reach that though. We should make the core loop more enjoyable, or add gameplay elements or modes like the 2v8 mode. I think the game is too set in stone, once your side starts to win, you can't really lose. We need more rubberband/comeback mechanics. Basekit NOED if you go into endgame with 0 kills, disable gen regression after a kill, these would allow the other side to still have a chance and be willing to play the game when most people would want to afk/give up on hook instead.

    It may be true that 'Tech' can keep players invested in a bad game, but shouldn't we make the game better instead of dealing with a lesser evil like many of these are?

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    Disabling gen regression after a kill instantly creates an inevitability scenario that would place too much pressure on killers. It's a reverse snowball that rather than causing the game to rubberband would just incentivize one side avoiding doing their objective in a timely manner unless they were already playing a killer who actually can thrive without gen regression. Basekit NOED is one of the biggest band aid fixes people have thrown around for years. It's lowkey kinda insane to get to endgame with zero kills and be handed innate NOED which as a base mechanic either has to be strong enough to truly be game changing or weak enough to only offer a bare advantages. It feels weird to place survivors is a situation where they can suddenly go from handily winning to being at an extreme disadvantage without some sort of investment of resource from the killer. It also feels like to trash to get what amounts to pity buffs that don't really help your situation if you're a killer who is losing. DBD has comeback mechanics already, but the design of the game doesn't really allow for a back and forth because the sides aren't meant to be on equal footing. So comebacks either succeed in grand fashion or they fail outright.

    The recent changes to the game have further cemented the fact that having a back and forth style of gameplay isn't seen as desirable. Caps to gen regression means that killers are hard limited how much they can impose their will on the game in regards to undoing progress. That's a direct statement that no matter what after a certain point the survivors will complete their objective and preventing it can only be done by kills. It makes sense to do this with the issues for 3 gens and general game stalling, but removing gameplay whether intended or unintended by design further sets the game in stone. Having more modes would be great, but the gameplay loop is still largely the exact same as it has been and we're now 9 years into the life span of this game with little to show for it in terms of mechanical depth and skill expression. New intentional mechanics are rarely added to the game and when they do get added they usually get absolutely decimated or they're too clunky to be with the time investment. Things players figure out for themselves and get a lot of value out of using either for fun or competitive advantage get removed as well.

    So what are we gaining? 2v8 is still more of the same DBD, but with an extra killer in the mix. That isn't a substantial addition because the base game is still losing depth rather than embracing it in any meaningful way. Tech can keep players interested a bad game, but it can also keep players interested in good yet stale and flawed game as well. DBD is at its core a good game, but it has grown very stale and is taking too long to iterate on its formula. SF2 had around 28 iterations of itself by the time Capcom finally moved on from it to work on the Alpha series of SF. Each one keeping the core gameplay, but adding something to it or adjusting the balance. In DBD we get regular balance changes, but we also get more subtractions of things than additions. Even when intentional mechanics get handicapped or outright cut post introduction to the live game. If the expectation is that this sort of philosophy is going to make the game better then time hasn't proven that to be true. 9 years in and we have less overall freedom within the game than at any other point in the game's history.

    Even truly exciting new additions like Vecna's mechanics are hard to get excited about because we've seen how the devs handle things that either perform too well or allow players to get too creative on their own. I also agree that survivors need a more dynamic objective and have been suggesting for years that they should have at least part scavenging mechanic to repair gens rather than just holding down a button for a minute.

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    Comeback mechanics - I disagree that it will cause a side to finish their match out in a timely manner, I have been 6-8 hooking before my first kill for the majority of my Killer career. The only reason I say 6-8 is because sometimes you get the 1 rat player who will hide no matter what, and then they complain I tunneled them (for their 2nd stage going from 7 total hooks to 8) when their entire team was death hook. I do agree it can be too swingy, but I would want to test something out at the very least. This is a way to potentially influence the match timing that doesn't involve significant changes like say generator parts and other suggestions to alter the game flow. It uses an existing mechanic, could easily be thrown in a PTB (like the UB Mori finisher PTB where it is being made clear it is to test and test only, but sadly it sounds like they might be going through with the Mori finisher that was universally rejected by the playerbase).

    Stale gameplay - I partially agree and partially disagree. We still have no solution for base game flaws, that's true. We also get new mechanics to both play as, and play against, in the form of a new Killer. The problem stems from the same Killers being bottom of the barrel, and the same Killers being the best. The not too insignificant nerfs to Blight, and the significant buffs to Billy keep the game fresh. I'd love to see another patch where Freddy and Nurse trade effective spots as well (even if Blight wasn't nerfed to Billy's old level). I still can't play with friends to this day though because they don't like the game. Why don't they like the game? Because they get tunneled out at 5 gens since we have a (~) 100hr/500hr/1000hr/>2k hr split. The Killers ALWAYS (in terms of per session, not per match, but negativity bias makes it feel like every match) turbo tunnel the 100hr and 500 hr players, even when I'm trying to run interference, take chase, making loud noises while the Killer isn't in chase, and so on.

    Techs keep interest - I would agree this keeps interest, but in such a small percentage of the population that it isn't going to help. This is largely going to help only the top 1% of skilled players, and even then not all of the members within that population. Also SF2 did have a massive amount of different versions, but from googling, Turbo was the best version, the one that came out in 1994. That means every iteration after Turbo was bad (in comparison to Turbo itself). They had the advantage of separate releases, we don't. I don't want to run the risk of losing what might be DBD's Turbo, to get 2017's Ultra Street Fighter 2: The Final Challengers (one that showed up frequently as one of the worst SF2 remake versions, but I'm not in the Fighting game sphere, it might actually be the pro's favorite version). I think variety is the best way to keep interest, and I think the Chaos Shuffle is a good type of variety. The Killer effectiveness shakeups is another good way, as long as we mostly buff the bottom 5 and nerf the top 5. (I think we have Killers ranging from S-D tier, and S and D tiers shouldn't exist.)

    Perform too well/Creative on their own - I mostly disagree here. Someone could make the argument the Potential Energy bug was players 'getting creative', and that's the argument I make for Oni flicks. Both bugs are people abusing a bug to bypass a limitation, for the detriment for the opposite side. The only difference is the minimum skill level to execute the bug. The effectiveness gained is too high in both cases for the effort put in. Oni is supposed to have restricted mobility during Demon Dash, just as Toolboxes are supposed to lose charges, and a bug bypassing those limitations is bad for the game. I'd be willing to try a gen parts mechanic, but to implement it correctly would likely need more testing and R&D than BHVR would be willing to put in.

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    Trying to balance killers around tiers is bad way to approach design. Tiers are something that players derive based on their subjective experience with the game. Dbd is one of the few games where due to the nature of its gameplay there is rarely any natural shifting of perspectives on killers. Nurse isn't ever going to be a mid or low tier killer through nerfs as her base power is the absolute best power to have in this game. She's legit not playing the same dbd as any other killer because she can ignore terrain. Freddy's probably never going to be a high tier killer through buffs alone because his power gets weaker over the course of a match and losing mobilty/map pressure is one of the worst traits to have baked into a killer kit. That's why the best killers in the game all tend to have high mobility on demand as a key feature.

    Like even Billy at his worst was still like a solid A tier killer imo due to the fact he was very fast on top of an instadown. The power a killer ships with is often very set in stone and then you get a bunch of number tweaks mainly to addons that ultimately doesn't change the overall inherent strengths and weaknesses of a power. If the powers aren't going to just go through sudden drastic changes on a regular basis then you need changes to basic universal gameplay.

    The Final Challengers isn't well liked because it commits the cardinal sin of being a shallow cash grab that has even less features than original version of SF2 and adding things no one likes. It was a lackluster switch port all in all, I think the "newest" revision of SF2 Turbo pro players actually play with some passing regularity is maybe Turbo HD Remix which has its own set of issues. Most just play classic ST when they want to play ST. DBD on the other hand hasn't even made it to its ST era after 9 years and we've the benefit of being able to patch games without making a whole new arcade board or game cart. We've got plenty of new characters over time, but most actually share mechanics which isn't necessarily a bad thing. What is bad is that the core gameplay is a hindrance to innovating the ways in which players can engage with game. Hopefully the new mode menu will help with that, but this is something we should have been seeing experimented with years ago.

    I wouldn't be so dead set on seeing weird janky pieces of tech held onto if there was a historical precedent in this game for things trending towards being fairly innovative. Yet, it's the opposite where players finding interesting things is tamped down and the game trends towards long term stagnation rather than some sort of reinvention. Number tweaks and slight effect changes can only do so much and the same loop/gen/chase structure can only be so fun. When we do get novel mechanics they often feel and look hamstrung by the basic gameplay if they fall outside of the couple handfuls of mechanics that we recognize as "known goods" in dbd. For me I've been engaging with the game in some way or another since just a few months after it launched till now. The last time I was dedicated to playing was when Skull Merchant released and stopped when she got reworked cause I think the rework solves none of her core issues and playing matches isn't fun when no matter what I do people still just give up the moment they see a merchant.

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    I don't mean to balance around tiers, because if we nerfed everyone from S-tier down, and buffed D-tier up, people would still expand the top of A tier to become the new 'S-tier'. Heck, even if everyone was within the current understanding of B-tier, people would still rank them sequentially and say the top X# are S and the bottom X# are D. I just mean the current lines in the sand most people tend to agree upon (Nurse is S, Tombstone-less Myers is D), still roughly compare to power levels and potential that should be adjusted. I'm just using a colloquial understanding as a shortcut for this paragraph of explanation, sometimes the explanation works, sometimes it doesn't. I think that overall that the current S and D tier shouldn't exist, and the bottom and top 5 should be regularly (at least every 6 months) rotated in and out through buffs and nerfs (both of buffs to the weakest, as well as middle power to top tier, and nerfs of top Killers to be weaker than mid tiers).

    Freddy could be buffed to become more powerful instead of weaker as the game goes on, like his perks would also indicate. We could allow Freddy to TP to completed gens, but now it also puts the closest non-alarm clocked/sleeping Survivor to sleep as well. When you TP to a gen, it could also reveal the auras or do a Rancor styled info on people working gens (with or without an add-on for the intel), maybe also a shorter CD for TPs to completed gens. We could also make it so Freddy gets both Pools and Pallets, (like Clown Purple and Yellow Bottles) with 3 tokens per Pool, 2 per Pallet, with 15 tokens base (for the same current limits of 5 Pools/7 Pallets, or raise the base tokens to something like 18). I don't think we can just throw in the towel and say X Killer can never be balanced, especially with how the first half was simply things I thought of off the top of my head. (The Clown swap power buff I have suggested in the past.)

    While I agree that Billy was far stronger than people previously gave him credit for (I've played both Blight and Billy as M1 only, power only to break pallets to see how Mobility is the greatest strength), people still ranked him at B-C tier prior to his last major update. That update was the exact type of update I would like to see more of for other commonly under-ranked Killers. For example people think Ghostface is super weak, but that is only true if you play him as 'Chaseface'. Playing him as a strategic Killer like Hag/Trapper where you set the traps on Survivors (99'd stalks) is far far far more effective, and I've had much above 'expected' kill rates (for all individual Killers, not even the average) with Ghosty when playing him in that style.

    I don't know the full history of SF2, so I was relying on google averages, but I think your clarification still helps my point. I am of the opinion that 6.1 was a "Final Challengers" tier update, adding in a bunch of things no one likes for the sake of 'shaking things up'. Since we have to recover from those bad updates, we can never iterate from the best of updates that came before. Eg. Super Cool edition was a 9.2/10, and Super Uncool edition was a 8.9, they can still go back and improve from the 9.2 before with separate releases, and release Super Cooler edition with a 0.2 increase up to 9.4. DBD has to commit to the Super Uncool edition and slowly roll back the changes to get back to the 9.2 rated patch, and can't just start there fresh. Even if DBD did an equivalent Super Cooler update from the Super Uncool update, that would only raise us the same 0.2 from 8.9 to 9.1, instead of the 9.4 the separate release model offered Street Fighter. I would say overall though, that change is probably good overall for the sake of 'shaking things up', even if I think 6.1 truly failed to understand what made the game playable before its introduction, willing to take the risk and fail is better than perpetually playing it safe. The important part is to learn from failure, which with the map updates I would say it appears they aren't doing that very well.

    I mean SM has a bunch of problems in terms of enjoying facing her. First off, she is a stealth Killer without sound cues, a big no-no. Myers, Dredge, Ghostface, Wraith, Sadako, all have sound cues to prevent stealth from being just stupid unfun, and SM doesn't. Also when you disarm the drone now, it lasts far too short, instead of say putting in back in the SM's inventory with a delay before redeployment. It currently just serves as a self-location snitch. You also can't remove scan stacks by doing anything, so it feels like there is no counter-play. With all that and more, I can understand when Survivors go "Oh you didn't want me to enjoy playing the game huh? Fine right back at you.". I just wish there were Killer bans to prevent the worst scenarios like that, or doing a heal tome running into a Plague, or a pallet stun tome running into a ranged Killer. It just makes people have a 'go-next' mindset that is poisoning the game right now (and too many poorly designed Killers that either are unfun or only draw in sweatlords). While I think bans would improve match quality, I think Killers should also get map bans to match, both to feel more 'fair', as well as to prevent Autohaven for Stealth Killers, or Indoor maps for Ranged Killers, and equal measure "gosh darn it I'm just gunna go next" hinderance for Killers.

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    Killer bans is an idea that folks have been asking for, but it's a feature that would a poison pill for the game.

    One of the things that DBD has going for it is that you can play whoever you want whenever you want. If you want to only get good at playing one killer then you can master that killer and comfortably know that you'll always be able to play that killer. They may not always have the same balance points that you like about them, but their general features will be there barring a few exceptions. Bans would force more killer diversity, but not in a good way. Bans in MOBAs work due to the sheer number of characters and the expectations that since you're filling a role within a team you will learn multiple characters who can fill that role. DBD doesn't really have roles which is something that in a way holds the game back on the survivor side, but is extremely pronounced for solo killers as well.

    It takes a lot of time to learn killers in this game and the process of picking up a new killer is actually pretty bad for the average player. You immediately have to go into matches geared more towards your skill level with your main killer rather than lower tiered competition or just straight up bots. Like you can go to customs, but you don't gain any progression that way which ultimately is one of the most important things in DBD. Killer bans would just make people who play popular, strong, or hated killers not be able to play the game comfortably. A solo killer player would be eating 4 bans every match being allowed to pick or they would queue up only to discover they have huge waits between matches because the killer they play is getting mass banned. It's a quick way to drive a wedge between an already tribal playerbase.

    Skull Merchant's stealth used to depend on her passing through her drones' detection field which made things much more fair in that regard. If you saw the drone you knew it was a place she was most likely to pass through if she was playing stealth builds. Merchant by default isn't really a stealth killer, she's a weird hodgepodge of mechanics and stealth just happens to be one she can make use of without as much hassle as relying on others. She would be more balanced as a tracking/stealth killer that was purely focused on only those two aspects, but the devs seem to want her to be a weird toolbox that only Pixelbush enjoys. Then again my main killer before SM was Legion so I've been through the hellscape of DBD reworks gone wrong a few times at this point so perhaps I'm overly jaded about the whole situation. Either way it's been a breaking point for me really engaging with the game on top of everything else.

  • ArkInk
    ArkInk Member Posts: 521
    Options

    You could fill a novel with the comments on this post. There aren't even that many, it's just loooooooong.

  • mizark3
    mizark3 Member Posts: 1,793
    Options

    I would argue that while each Killer may be unique, they still often have heavy similarities for a 'class' of Killer, like 'Stealth', 'Ranged', 'Mobility', 'overwhelming chase presence', with some overlap in all of those categories. Nonetheless, the vast majority of Killers can fall back on the 4.6 M1 standard. With that, you would only pick a 4.4 Killer if you had the confidence, or wanting to learn how to play them (just like now).

    I highly doubt bans would significantly impact queue times, and even then, it would help prevent false start games (where one of the Survivors Kobes on first hook and dies at 5 gens). It may take the 4 minutes instead of 2 to find a match, but it will also mostly remove those false start games which cost you ~5-10 minutes of wasting time before you can even queue up for another match. Since the way I would implement bans is an option menu before you even click 'Play', it would never impact the pre-game lobby like other games' bans. I do agree it might hurt 1-tricks on off-hours, but if the opposing team wasn't going to even try against them in the first place, it means they were never denied a 'real' match, and only a 5-gen Kobe match that would waste their add-ons and offerings. That would be more useful, as it would let them know 'maybe you should play a different Killer, because no one wants to deal with that right now'. The only thing that player loses is fake matches, and I don't think that is a loss at all. The 'heal tome into Plague' is definitely something that should be addressed, either by fixing her kit, or in a universal way like bans. I've had sooooooo many teammates give up against Plague, and it usually is when a big heal tome is in the rotation (probably my single most frequent Kobe at 5 gens situation I've experienced, but that's anecdotal [hard DCs are taken by the 'Nurse blink at 3am']).

    Overall I feel bans would significantly reduce the number of these 'false matches', which appear all too common now.

    SM's OG stealth was fair with no sound cue, as keeping an eye on the drone boundaries was the counterplay. Current SM gets 8s/10s or 9.6s/10s of Undetectable uptime, or 36.8m/44.16m of silent walking distance per use, without even including perks for added confusion. SM is just a bad example though since it is probably the single worst designed Killer, even including old Freddy.

    This is all getting off-topic though, so if you want to reply more on bans you can have the last word here or ping me in a new thread. If it is related to the whole tech/bug/exploit conversation then I'd be willing to continue this here though.