Why Tunneling needs to be examined by BHVR

It was 5.3% of the time I saw tunneling in the original set of games close to two years ago and 26% now. The reason for the nice, neat number is that my original data set had 75 games and my current data set has 100 games.

I'm probably consider something like this again later if I notice major changes. I now have two snapshots of what things were like over different periods of time so it would be interesting to see over a period of time.

That could be one of the reasons it went up. It still doesn't change that a mechanic that unfairly advantages one side needs to be examined and corrected. Take, for example, the games where Otz had people play against Skull Merchant in the Erupting Call of Overbrine era and they couldn't break the 3 gen. It was an unfair advantage and got corrected. Another example was pre 6.1 DH for distance that unfairly elevated escape rates.

If my experience holds true to BHVR's playtesters then tunnelling is the same sort of situation and it provides an unfair advantage that needs to be corrected. Then BHVR can balance if needed. Based off of my experience I don't know if any changes would be needed as the escape rate was overall 44% in the games without tunnelling. It doesn't appear that tunnelling is needed and that it's more people say that because they want a win rate that is significantly greater than that of their opponents (which is the definition of an unbalanced game) and that's why they defend tunnelling.

It does discourage a lot of new players from playing; I definitely agree. I also added in my post I linked to Killers might need buffs if the desired escape rate is 40% and another of the issues with tunnelling is that the Killers who do tunnel are masking that from the dev team with such a disproportionately effective tactic by increasing kill rates so much it looks like everything is either fine or some Killers might need a nerf (when they don't in reality and the opposite might be true).

That negatively affects player retention moreso for Survivors but also for Killers although not as much. Some Killers might like the chasing but not want to camp or tunnel and a lot of the 'but Killers need to tunnel!' rhetoric might come from people who used tunnelling a lot and are now against Survivors that are so skilled they don't stand a chance against unless they tunnel.

It's anecdotal but I think that's shown in how there are examples of Killers with barely a hundred or two hundred hours who are winning games against teams with Survivors over a 1000 hours. The asymmetrical nature makes it more complicated but in what other game would a player with less than one-fifth to one-tenth the experience pull off wins against far more experienced players on a regular basis? This leads to situations where Killers are faced against Survivors that have multiple times the experience and then against coordinated teams who maul the Killer since their other game skills are underdeveloped for the MMR they're at. That's not a fun experience either.

As well, if Killers do need a buff but Killers needing a buff is disguised by artificially inflated kill rates due to tunnelling then that would also be very frustrating for new players. In the long run, if my data holds true to the playtesters, the only group that isn't disadvantaged by tunnelling being in the game is the ones doing the tunnelling.

I hope we do too. I have some ideas that may work but it's not like I can playtest it or it's going to be an easy fix. It has to be something that addresses the issue without being abusable and especially not abusable enough it swing balance too far in the other direction as that wouldn't be far either. It's not like any of the players can just casually rewrite the code and access a group of playtesters to measure how it works in reality so all I'm really doing is just bringing my experience to BHVR's attention so they can check it out themselves.

It's more that you're missing the point again. The majority of the issue most likely lies with the strategy itself and yet you're attempting a 'git gud' discourse once again ignoring that the escape rates in the first batch of games was 45.3% which declined by over 19% over two years with the main change in the games being tunneling substantially increased and the overall escape rate between the two sets of data was nearly exactly the same once the games with tunneling were filtered out.

Once again if you feel that is the issue you're more than welcome to post your own data set and videod of 100 to 175 games showing how you managed to get four random people to tank hits, coordinate hook exchanges, etc when you have never met them before, have no idea of their perks, can't communicate with them, etc. Until then you sound like you're just making a wild defense of a strategy you're afraid of losing as it gives easy wins and should take your own advice regarding your Killer play.

That appears even more so to be the case as the thread itself is suggesting BHVR use its own playtesters and investigate it themselves. Are you scared of it being investigated as you know it'll reveal it's an 'easy win' strategy? If not then there shouldn't be an issue with BHVR doing its own investigation and coming to their own conclusion as DbD is their own game and their major revenue driver so BHVR can make their own decisions as to what to do. If BHVR doesn't feel it's an issue they won't change it and, if they do, they'll change it as soon as they come up with a feasible strategy.

Your overall argument isn't supported, though, either by my Survivor data or my albeit anecdotal Killer experience. Tunnelling is not necessary to get a good win rate in public matches. I'm not referring to competitive of course but tunneling is not necessary for myself to have a good win rate and my data set showed that Killers who didn't camp or tunnel still had a kill rate of 56% overall. That does not imply anyone was struggling because they didn't camp or tunnel.

Specifics of your arguments are more nuanced as you made reference to specific Killers and I don't have the data to discuss specific Killers. As well, it's clear from observation there's a huge delta between the strongest Killers and the weakest Killers and my personal preference would be the delta be reduced by bringing more of the Killer roster closer to Nurse and Blight and not closer to Freddy and Trapper.

As well, the competitive scene is entirely different from public matches and that's something BHVR will have to consider as well. I can't change the code and I don't have access to playtesters so any suggestions any player makes is essentially just spitballing and brainstorming anyway. I wouldn't want to see the pain one group is currently experiencing simply displaced to another anyway but tunneling is unnecessary in public matches. I wouldn't want comp scene players, though, to end up suffering either so that might complicate the solution. I say might because I can't say definitively what the solution is because of the code and playtester factors I mentioned above.

Overall though and the problem with the incentives argument is that tunnelling is not necessary in public matter and, if there is no reduction in effectiveness in tunnelling, people will still tunnel and just use the incentives to make tunnelling more effective. DbD's history has shown that so the only way to effectively address the issue is to reduce the effectiveness of tunnelling.

So riddle me why the overall escape rate for my games two years ago was 45% overall and has dropped to 26% overall now with it also being 44% overall if tunnelling and camping games are excluded but the actual escape rate for games where tunnelling games are solely considered is 7.69%? With the major change being tunnelling increased by 500%?

Had survivors "gotten gud" before but just got worse after even though the escape rate for both sets of time is the almost the exact same amount once tunnelling is excluded? Or is the problem that tunnelling is disproportionately effective? What makes more sense? People overall got worse in two years or that you're missing the point yet again and making specious arguments?

That's ridiculous. Keep on believing that then.

What I've suggested in different threads is that there is a generator repair speed debuff that is active while the survivors are alive. This debuff would then disappear and be replaced by a repair speed buff each time a survivor is killed.

My hope is that it would reduce the snowbally nature of DbD and make more matches 2 or 3K instead of the 4K or 0K.

Realistically of course I have no way to test it to see if it would work but that's the theory anyway.

For some reason, reading your post gives me an image of an elderly Trapper in a lawn chair yelling for the survivors to get off his lawn.

You didn't respond to any of the actual arguments or points by the way except for a disingenous attempt to paint tunnelling as comparable to spreading hooks which is completely false.

You're obviously brand new to the forums and possibly the game. Based on your posts I'm inclined to believe both. That, of course, by its own means nothing. However, if you wish to say 'so and so' is an X main it runs the risk of making you look foolish when you make accusations that don't match up with the facts.

As well, I haven't seen any argument from you that addresses any of the data I presented and instead try to address the actual data and videos I provided with opinions. Can you please actually familiarize yourself with my actual posts and data if you're going to address me on multiple threads?

That is one of the items I mentioned in my analysis. If Killers that don't tunnel and camp are at a 56% kill rate overall and the goal is 60% then some Killers might need a buff here and there.

I say some because my data size isn't large enough to make any specific observations about specific Killers. It could be one Killer is fine and the other not.