Slugging is rampant because there are too few advantages to using hooks

since killer take 10-20 second to hook survivors, this is 10-20 second that a player can be slugged, so 180-240 = 60 seconds. the gap between dying on floor and on hook is much shorter. you only wait extra 60 second.

i still think that completely slugging is not good but if you hook 1 person and slug other 3 survivors, it might be most effective way to play because you can tunnel the one person you hook while slug for bleed out.

I don't like slugging but in a game last night I had one survivor dead and one hooked.

In corner of map with absolutely no other gens nearby I let two survivors bleed out. Don't like doing that but it is what it is.

100% agree on every point.

so, where is your proof of killers being overpowered? Or you are here just for the ragebaiting purposes?

Hey, you know, maybe if slugging takes off it'll finally kill off the pop+pain res meta that's existed for basically 3 years or so now. But I doubt that'll happen.

I think once killers realize they aren't getting their precious regression from hooking this problem will solve itself.

There is in no way shape or form you take 15 seconds to hook a survivor.

Stop it

So hold up I dont think you did any sort of statistical analysis or sample sizing for that matter, but if you are going to include the "wipe animation" You realize that same time you would include for slugging right? So take that time out of your equation already, you dont even have the parameters of this test setup correctly in the first place.

Are we talking full slug and bleedout? Or full slug and then hook? Cause you would have to include hook at the end into your equation and then total hook….

Okay. This is real simple.

Bro you did not do any testing for this. This is all head math you are doing, lets be honest here, there was no mathematical approach, there was no statistical analysis, no testing, nothing.

You are completely ignoring the times, and its quite common as proof on this forum, that you just down someone at the hook where a killer is ….. ding ding ding camping.

I can post several videos myself of it taking anywhere from 6 seconds to 13 seconds. It doesnt really mean anything as things vary in matches, and quite honestly its the internet, you can make things biased to your original take you had.

Edit: I just did a few bot matches and even put footage into Davinci Resolve and watched frame by frame. If you are taking on average 15 seconds to hook, you would have to down a survivor as far as you can honestly get from a hook, and/or with body blocks.

So no you arent taking "15-20" seconds on average to hook a survivor. And this is without the obvious agitation/pain res meta

This may be a language barrier or mistranslation here, but it looks like you're saying there are few Survivors that ARE toxic. There are actually just as many toxic Survivors as there are toxic Killers, most Killers just want to play the game the same as Survivors. Killer toxicity comes from frustration with Survivors being toxic, and Survivor toxicity comes from frustration with Killers being toxic. If anything, the chance of seeing a toxic Survivor may be higher, because there are four times as many of them as Killers in a round. So while you see toxic Survivors more often, Killer toxicity feels worse because you can't do anything about it.

If that wasn't what you meant, I apologize. :)

Its simple math friend, but like i said, i'll post a video, i went to go show you a recent video that otzdarva did, but often times he cuts the video from the pickup to when he is hooking. And i think this is part of the problem, if you aren't watching a stream, a lot of content creators do cuts from pickup to hook making it seem like it is much shorter than it is.

But i'll show you an uncut unedited one later tonight. Logging off for now, good luck in the rest of your day and catch you later tonight.

This guy knows what is talking about, i can tell because he counts grunts.

You realize I can just load up a stream and watch his vods? I have hours of footage as well

And i would suggest doing it, just fire up any streamer playing killer or look at a vod look at the timestamp right when they land the hit, and then look at the timestamp after they finish hooking the survivor. Pretty easy to see it takes 15-20 seconds.

Anyway, this is my last post for a while, hitting the road, like i said, i'll be on later tonight and tag you, have a good day/evening!

The fact that the top 3 most used killer perks all revolve around hooking someone proves this post is just head cannon.

Pop, Pain Res, BBQ

Not according to official stats, and you forgot to mention that even if kill rates were higher, that's with the caveat that you must play a select few killers. The higher the MMR, the less killers are viable to play. That's why in tournaments, you usually only see 3 or 4 killers being selected, and those killers tend to be the ones that are genuinely broken (nurse\blight) where they are deadly even at higher MMR due to their overtuned design.

Long story short, at higher MMR, most kills are on a select few killers because the other killers get selected less and less. That reinforces the idea that killers are weak at high MMR except for a small handful which are overtuned and frankly DO need some nerfs. Making up numbers here to make it easy to understand - If you had 95% of the killers being incapable of reliably getting kills where high MMR leads to only 5% of the killers getting picked, and those 5% get nearly ALL of the recorded kills, then yeah, you're going to have high kill rates, but that's due to those 5% picked killers being powerhouses. Doesn't mean "killers are overpowered" if 95% of the killers aren't even playable at high MMR. That just means those 5% killers are powerhouses themselves.

I tried it a few times tonight and its hit or miss, but survivors are definitely not liking it. But it really feels like its more effective then hooking, and that is REALLY bad and not what this game should revolve around.

BHVR, please make hooks viable and strong again. But knowing them, they would sooner add another minute to the bleedout timer, totally misjudging the problem at hand.

BTW, I got called a "true talent kinda killer". Lol, thats a new one.

"Good killers dont need to slug"… can we stop with statements like these? There's always situations for certain things and not taking advantage of slugging when it would benefit you would make you a either a compassionate or bad killer.

I mean 4x1 is always 4 in Euclidian space, it's not exactly hard math to assume that if you have MORE of one role per role, the odds of getting an expected result will be that multiplier more. If you have four times as many black marbles as white ones, and toxic of either are marbles with speckles, and the draw is four blacks to a white, but there's a small number of speckles in each? The odds you will draw one or more speckles for the black marbles is higher, than for the white ones. I can even prove it for you if you all want calculations. You're not getting toxic players as often as you think.

We will be liberal here and define Killer toxicity as anything Killers do to grief or annoy Survivors: egregious camping, strong perks on already overly strong Killers they're good at, slugging for 4ks or bleedout, hard non-tactical tunnelling, humpteching, etc. We will define Survivor Toxicity as anything Survivors do to irritate anyone else in the round: running annoyance perks with the intent to irritate (and not be silly or something), sandbagging, giving up on hook, DCing, farming off hooks, teaming with the Killer, teabagging, bodyblocks to deny the first or any hooks at all when the Killer is struggling, flashlights and clicky clicky, bully squadding, singling a random out with their SWF, etc.

Let's say we have a sample of 5000 Killers and 5000 Survivors each. Let's say that 500 of each of these players are known to be toxic players in some way, because it's very unlikely people play this game just to bully - most people want to play the game. Now obviously we have millions of players, but let's pretend this is how many we have. We are not replacing players "drawn" for a match, no lobby dodging or anything. That means operating with a 1 in 10 chance of any given Killer OR Survivor being toxic, or 10%. However because there's four times more Survivors, the chance of repeatedly getting a toxic Survivor increases to 40%. That means it's four times more likely you will get someone toxic as KIller than as Survivor. We basically have to assume that at least one Survivor will be toxic based on this due to the sheer numbers.

The data are normally distributed so if an event is certain to occur, p=1 and anything above that would mean a certainty as well. Both these draws happen independently of each other. If we then remember there is a draw four times for each Survivor, we have to multiply it by four, and this assumes at least one Survivor is Toxic if not all four. Assuming a normal distribution, when starting a draw of five players:

- Toxic Killer: 10%, this includes you.
- Toxic Survivor: 40%, this includes you.

And when looking at the whole lobby, with yourself included in the number:

- Chance that the Killer is toxic but no Survivors are: 6%, not as much as you think.
- Chance that at least one Survivor is Toxic, but the Killer isn't: 36%
- Chance that the Killer is not toxic (but Survs may or may not be): 90%, meaning most of the time the Killer isn't toxic. At all.
- Chance that a Survivor is not toxic (but the Killer may or may not be), when we draw four times: 60%, which means most of the time Survs are not toxic, either. At all.
- Chance that everyone is toxic on both sides: 4%. Toxic isn't meeting toxic much to get justice on either side.
- Chance that either the Killer or the Survivors or both are toxic: 46%. In other words you kinda need to assume someone or both could be toxic to you, regardless of role.
- Chance that someone is toxic, but not both sides: 42%, on the bright side it's a little less likely someone will be toxic to you, regardless of role, but not by much.
- Chance of a game where nobody is toxic: 54%. You are not getting as many games with toxicity as you think you are. In fact most of the time you're not.

What this breaks down to is this.

As Survivor:

1. You are more likely to get toxic teammates than a toxic Killer.
2. No, you are not "always getting Toxic Killers when you're playing nice". You're catastrophizing if you think this. It's just not happening, you are remembering bad matches aside from good.
3. If you think the other side is being toxic to you, it's more likely to be happening because you are doing something toxic or perceived as toxic.
4. If you're SWF, there's a stronger likelihood than not that you will have a toxic random, but also a stronger chance your SWF will be the toxic ones. If you're looking for "justice" against a "useless" or toxic random, you're probably also being toxic.
5. It is unlikely, however, if that random OR your SWF are toxic, that the Killer will also be toxic. You're bullying the wrong people.
6. It's even less likely that the Killer is going to be toxic to you all if all of you are random, though it does happen. Most Killers are not toxic or super aggro to random lobbies.
7. If you have no idea as a SoloQ and have all randoms, it's highly likely that the Killer is probably not going to be toxic. However you need to be prepared if someone is toxic, because there is almost a 50/50 chance someone or both sides will be toxic to you.
8. No, people are not being toxic to punish toxicity on the other side. They're just being toxic, and most toxicity is not even aimed at toxic players but people just trying to play the game. If you think you're serving justice to toxicity, you're probably just being toxic yourself.

And this all explains why SoloQ sucks. You get toxicity from both sides, and even when you're nice and the Killer is, there is no guarantee the others will be. That also means that you are much more likely to get it from other Survivors instead of Killer. Your problem is not toxic Killers - it's toxic Survivors, but toxic Killers do not help when you DO get one. You are probably overassuming that Killers are more toxic than they really are, and giving your teammates too much of the benefit of the doubt.

As Killer:

1. You need to assume at least an over 50% chance that someone in the lobby is toxic or going to play aggressively especially if the queue is a SWF.
2. You have a higher chance of meeting toxic Survivors, either one or all four, than if you were Survivor - and if they're SWF it's likely this tendency increases because toxic players play toxically together, and much Surv toxicity needs coordination.
3. If nobody in the lobby is being aggro or toxic, but you are then you might be the toxic Killer.
4. You yourself probably are not intending to be toxic.
5. No, you're not punishing toxicity on toxic Survivors being jerks to their team as much as you think. You could be accidentally targeting the wrong people.
6. Most of your games probably aren't toxic but you still have to err on the side of caution, and be prepared for if they are.

So as Killer, you probably aren't trying to be toxic, but people will think you're toxic anyway, so you may as well play what helps you win. That said, you do have a responsibility, since you can do more about it, to be a good human. That doesn't mean being a pushover, that means not being one of those 4% of toxic Killers being toxic just to be toxic. You know better. Be the bigger person. You're the power role.

But looking at these data, even with this very rough estimate of 1 in every 10 on each side being toxic? Survivors are still on average more toxic to everyone in the round by far, based on sheer numbers, and it isn't even close. Survivor Mains? Be better.

People certainly do hate it. I tried it on a few different killers tonight just to gauge how effective it was and it's pretty oppressive for solo queue and even SWF not on comms. Reactions seem to be quite different depending on what killer you play. Dredge seemed to be the killer that received fairly positive end game chat with one person saying it was fun. Wraith, Skull Merchant & Billy got abused. Pinhead seemed neutral.

I think if you straight up just slug all 4 people and let them bleed out it's problematic & toxic, but if you slug 3 people and start hooking and give them a chance to recover and find the totems it can actually lead to some pretty intense games with a lot of action. As a killer it's also more fun that way because you're pretty much in chase mode for the entire game.

Love it or hate it, it's a valid strat with perks that are designed to do just what it says on the box. Its fairly useless versus a decent SWF on comms, but you can say that about any perk combo that is completely negated by having voice chat.