Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
Get all the details on our forums: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/436478/sign-up-now-to-receive-a-recap-of-your-2024-dead-by-daylight-stats/p1?new=1
What I don't get about defending tunnelling
Comments
-
If you want to have opponents to play against, it is.
But it's also on the devs.
And no, it's not free escapes. Tunnelling, camping and slugging aren't required at all. Hell, most survivors would probably take a few well-placed killer buffs if it actually has to be offset in any way, but forum killers can't process that it's possible to make a game without those tactics. They just want more killer buffs AND keep their busted toys.
6 -
If a survivor feels like they don't get a chance to play the game, they have 2 choices: Queue up for a bunch of DBD matches and spend an hour or two not getting to play DBD, or don't queue up for DBD matches and spend zero time not getting to play DBD. The solution is obvious: if the survivors feel like they don't get a chance to play the game regardless, they won't queue up for the game, they'll save the hour or two of their time doing something else, and you won't have anyone to play against.
So yeah, I agree, killers should totally not care about the other side having "the opportunity to play the game." In due course you too will get to experience what that's like
2 -
The flaw I find with your argument is, yes, Killers have a right to win games but they don't have a right to win every game.
It's okay to lose games. If you're losing an outrageous amount then that's not fun for anyone. However, what your statement implies comes across more of a Killers should win every game and Survivors should lose an outrageous amount of games. I have no idea if that was your intention or not but that's how it comes across to me.
0 -
Yes, please. I wish BHVR would tie gen speed repair to number of Survivors alive. It would be better for everyone.
1 -
I am baffled by how they haven't done this yet. It would help solve the solo queue issue pf bad teammates, since having one die early due to incompetence wouldn't mean that you can't escape anymore.
1 -
They haven't done it because it solves nothing.
Survivors only advantage is numbers because they have an action economy. Generally in a 4v1, once the killer has built pressure (hook) there will be one survivor on hook, one going for rescue/recovery, one in chase, and one on gens.
The reason tunneling is so powerful is because when one survivor is out of the game, the survivor team can only do 3 of those 4 roles... And being chased, rescue/recovery, and being on hook are mandatory. Which means no one is on gens.
Unless you take it to absolutely absurd levels of gen speed repair (like 100% extra gen repair speed is nowhere near enough) there's no overcoming that there's literally no one sitting on gens in a 3v1. The level of gen repair speed buff that would be required, especially with the current state of chase, would cause people to burn the forums to the ground. So basically that will never happen.
1 -
I would argue that we are essentially doing the same thing, prioritizing to reach our target number as quickly as possible.
There is no need to compare what both camps are doing to win.
You are the one who is foolish for comparing.2 -
As survivor, the only actions that substantially consume time is doing gens or getting chased. Going for a rescue and healing should be around 20% of your time as survivor, and considering that only one survivor can be chased at a certain time, that means that most of the time the other 2 survivors are free to work o gens.
On your logic, you assume that the killer will always have a hooked survivor in a 3v1 scenario, which also comes with the thought that by the time someone rescues the hooked survivor, another one goes down, which shouldn't really happen against mildly competent survivors. As long the map hasn't turned into a huge deadzone, the average chase time of a killer is 40 seconds (which is a very optimistic number if you are considering high survivor quality).
If you have experience as killer on a high level, you should know that having one survivor down still doesn't mean you can take on any chase. You still have to evaluate if the survivor is in a good position and if they aren't too far away, otherwise you will waste enough time for the last 2 gens to get done.
Which brings to next point that generally the first survivor is supposed to die when there are 2 or 1 gen left, and if the killer is very good, on the last 3 gens. By that point, even with one down, survivors should be able to push the last gens with our current gen speed. With a +30% increase, it would actually encourage the killer to avoid getting rid of the first survivor, if the base gen speed with 4 survivors becomes -30%.
2 -
You are arguing that a killer must ignore an easy target because the survivor may feel bad. It's like me saying survivors must stop repairing gens if they power 3 before the killer gets a hook. Cycling through survivors making sure to evenly hook everyone is asking to play at your own detriment just so no ones feeling are hurt.
Do you expect players to get better being treated with kid gloves?
Here, I'll help you. Killers shouldn't tunnel because it will boost their MMR higher than it should be. At some point they will begin to face survivors who can punish the tactic. They will start to lose and feel the game is unbalanced.
There are many ways to deal with killers that tunnel. Because survivors don't use them doesn't make it the killer's fault. You can't expect for an online PvP for one side to go easy. We wouldn't expect it from any other game.
2 -
Okay, let me change the statement because it seems it wasn't clear.
Killers have the right to try to win games. We all have the right to win, survivors and killers, and we all have the right to resort to any legal mean to achieve it (hacking and cheation are out of the question)
0 -
Edit: just realized you aren't the original person I responded to, so I'm changing my response.
I would argue that we are essentially doing the same thing, prioritizing to reach our target number as quickly as possible
This is the most superficial way of looking at this possible that misses actual gameplay.
Killers aren't spending time to "reach their target number as fast as possible". They're looking to get "one survivor out of the game as fast as possible". Games are far, far easier when it's effectively an unlosable 3v1 scenario (assuming there isn't just one gen left). In fact, most hard tunnel killers will even start spreading hooks and slow down the game at a 3v1 scenario.
If killers were trying to "reach their target number as fast as possible" you'd actually have healthier gameplay. Because this idea means leaving a hook. If you're goal is to gain hook stages as far as possible, then you always want to be in chase. That means leaving a hook and going for the next survivor as soon as the hook animation finishes. We had this before 6.1.0 btw. (This is also map pressure, which most current killers are oblivious even exists).
Gens get harder to complete as the match progresses. At 2 gens or even 3 it can be much harder to do gens because the playable area gets smaller, resources deplete (pallets, items). In contrast, the game gets easier when survivors lose a player. Killers also have no consumable resources at all now that hooks respawn. The killer snowballs, but survivors stall as each completes their objectives.
You also have the problem of regression that simply doesn't exist for killers. Survivors have no incentive to leave a gen partially complete because all of the work they've done can be completely eliminated by the killer if they do. There's no "locking in" gen progress, at least not until 100%. Every single hook state is permanent, though. There's no item, add-on, perk, or mechanic that eliminates a hook state from the game. And the same goes for bleed out time: you get 4 minutes that can't be extended or even sped up.
And the biggest difference here, for me, is no one is playing as the generator. An early gen complete basically means nothing to the match, and can still lead to a killer win (even all 5 gens completed can result in a 4k). An early survivor out means a player gets 3k BP and doesn't get to play.
Post edited by AmpersandUnderscore on1 -
I'm talking generally. Of course you're not going to perfectly capture that scenario every time, but in general those are the main actions of the survivor team.
You'll also have times where two people are hooked, someone is slugged (especially right now) and requires more healing, someone is doing a challenge, someone is lurking for a flashlight save, etc.
The thing you're both missing is why is a 3v1 so hopeless right now? It's because the amount of pressure when you can't dedicate someone to gens is too much.
Adding repair speed when someone can only spot touch a generator is meaningless. Or the amount of repair speed would have to be absurdly high, and most people who claim repair speed is a fix are looking to slap 5% on it and call it a day like that does anything.
You're in agreement with me that you need someone who can just sit on a gen, but the main problem in a 3v1 is that you're going to have to jump off to fill another, more critical, role even when you get to touch a gen. The guy getting chased isn't going to unhook mid chase so the third can sit on a gen, they have to go for rescue.
And in the world where the killer is doing… I have no idea what you think they're doing, but let's assume camping... Then the rescuer becomes the chase target and the third likely has to get off of gens. Or maybe you have one on hook and one slugged with the third hiding for hatch, but gen speed doesn't matter there either.
Post edited by AmpersandUnderscore on1 -
because when the killer goes for their objective as quickly as possible its toxic and unfair but when survivors split up on gens and make it extremely difficult to do anything depending on the killer/map/skill of the survivors then its perfectly fine hope this helps
in all seriousness the agenda of survivor mains like the one you are responding to is to make tunneling feel like an emotional attack and frame it like its "preventing survivors from playing" (which is only the case if you dont know how to loop) and then try to convince players that the absurd gen efficiency is perfectly fine. basically, if you say that efficiency on one side is bad because it "prevents people from playing" you can avoid talking about the efficiency aspect of it, because in the efficiency aspect they are wrong (tunneling efficiency vs spreading hooks efficiency, tunneling wins every time because spreading hooks is a terrible strategy but they dont wanna say that lol) of course they do the opposite when it comes to survivor efficiency though4 -
unlike the people who whine about tunneling, I dont whine about genrushing because, just like tunneling, its just each side doing their objective as fast as they can and there's nothing wrong with it
what I will whine about is the double standard and how efficiency on one side is seen as evil and unfair and toxic while the efficiency on one side is perfectly fineif you would like to test this double standard, create a post complaining about genrushing and a separate post complaining about tunneling, see which one you get more sympathy for :)
3 -
The problem is that rescuing is not a lengthy task. Most of the time, you are going to rescue the survivor before the killer either finds the other survivor, or even finishes the chase. In which case there will be 2 people to work on gens, and if the killer downs the other survivor before that, they should get rewarded. The same thing can be said about in a scenario where 2 survivors are hooked at the same time, the killer should get rewarded for outplaying them. The purpose of this idea is not to handhold survivors hands and completely get rid of the incentive to a kill a survivor, but simply to give them a chance to make a comeback after a rough start.
And let's say the killer is camping, well, just rush gens. There is 2 free survivors with +30% gen speed boost, which makes gens take 63 seconds as a solo, considering they are starting it from scratch. The time survivors have on each stage of a hook is much longer than that, and it should give you enough time to repair two gens and then hook trade or go for the exit gates. This makes camping even less optimal.
In the current state, a 3v1 is hopeless in a 4 or 5 gen scenario, but it is definitely possible to make a comeback when there are 2 or 3 gens left, which should be 90% of the cases, since the first dead survivor should be extremely incompetent to die earlier than that, in which case, the killer should definitely have some benefit.
2 -
yes its ok to lose games, but you should lose because you misplayed, not because you were given no chance.
if we just remove tunneling, many games against coordinated teams will be made literally impossible because spreading hooks is not an efficient enough strategy to keep up with those teams. in those situations the idea that "its ok to lose" does not apply because players should be losing due to misplays and skill, not because the outcome of games are determined at the start due to the removal/severe nerf of the only chance they have, which is tunneling2 -
To be fair, survivors have an 1v1 perspective on the game, since they are scored individually and dying means they can't play that match anymore. The thing is that when looking into a 4v1 viewing, you dying as a survivor doesn't exactly mean that your team is going to lose, or is going to be prevented from playing the game. A single survivor represents only 25% of the team, and their death shouldn't be as important in the great scheme of a match, which they should be fine with, since they signed for this assymetrical horror game. You can't punish me the killer who plays on a 4v1 view because of a survivor who thinks the game is a 1v1.
Also, when seeing tunneling, camping, and slugging, the first is the least boring to face, since you're just getting chased back to back, instead of being left on a hook or on the ground for ages.
1 -
Considering that "problematic killer behavior" is pretty much absolutely every strategy killers could do, "problematic survivor behavior" should be pretty much be every strategy survivors can do.
This means that flashlight saves, flashbang saves, pallet saves, bodyblocking, hook sabotages, and using voice comms specifically for extra game advantages, would all fall under "problematic survivor behavior". Also, if we are holding survivors to the same standards as killers, genrushing would have a definition that is easily achieved by survivors in almost any game.
2 -
I'm not arguing the Killer has to ignore the target; I'm arguing it's better for BHVR and DbD if tunnelling is removed and BHVR should change it. You're reading too much into my posts if you feel I'm putting the onus on the players. If you're unfamiliar with my arguments I've made (which is of course reasonable as nobody is going to keep up with the nuances of every person's position on a forum) I've stated multiple times (many for years)
(1) DbD should be balanced off of hooks
(2) The best way to achieve that is increased gen defense or slowdown while all survivors are alive and gens speeding up as each survivor dies
(3) Tunnelling is a crutch that lets Killers get to a higher MMR level than they should and that's harmful in the long term to Killers
(4) Tunnelling also increases win rates so much it hurts Killers who don't tunnel as BHVR looks at win rates in the aggregate and Killers may be underperforming when they don't tunnel but tunnelling disguises this. This prevents Killers who may need it from getting buffs.
(5) Tunnelling prevents Survivors from playing the game. It is completely reasonable to want to play the game and both sides need to have fun
(6) Ultimately, BHVR has to make the changes as you cannot rely on an Internet community to self police.
Your statement, though, about how we wouldn't expect that in any other game is flawed. There is a social contract even though it's easier for online players to ignore it. Gankers and twinks in PvP in MMORPGS are looked down upon just as hard tunnellers are in DbD. If DbD were a face to face recreational activity all the people who argue 'why should I care about the other side's fun' would be sitting around alone with nobody to play with. The only reason that doesn't occur online is that the Internet removes the social consequences of such an attitude. However, people who use unfair advantages are looked down upon.
Also, the forums are rife with gaslighting about what Survivors should or shouldn't do. Attempting to say a group of four people who have never met each other, never practiced together, don't know each other's perks and can't communicate can overcome tunnelling is ludicrous. It is not possible for that to consistently occur. That's also an issue as game mechanics never should give such an advantage to one side.
You're arguing from a 'me at this point in time' perspective while I'm arguing from 'better for the game and players overall' perspective. If you want to say it's better for you personally to tunnel of course it is. However, it's not better for the game overall nor for the community and, unfortunately, the social consequences that discourage such behaviour in real life are removed in the game setting. However, you were the one who falsely stated that the arguments against tunnelling were all emotional when there are many logical arguments against tunnelling; they just require being able to look beyond 'me at this moment in time' to acknowledge them.
0 -
I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing tunnelling is unhealthy for the game but, in the end, BHVR has to enforce the mechanics. That's mainly on other threads though; I started this thread to help gain clarity as to why people who do feel you can have a good win rate in public matches without tunnelling defend tunnelling. I totally understand why somebody who feels it's a necessary game mechanic defends it. I disagree but their viewpoint is very understandable. It was the viewpoint of defending tunnelling when somebody doesn't feel it's necessary I don't and I asked the question to gain more clarity. If somebody doesn't understand the viewpoint of the other person it's impossible to have a constructive discussion. It might still be impossible after understanding their viewpoint as what people value can be very different (eg someone with lots of empathy is never going to convince someone with little to no empathy using 'these are the negative consequences to other people' reasoning) but you'll never find out if it's possible if you don't ask.
As a side note, I've argued multiple times for stronger gen defense tied to number of survivors left alive (,eg Ruin and Pain Res back to 200% and 25% per hook respectively while all survivors alive but deactivating on a survivor dying, slower gen speeds while all survivors up, faster gen speeds when a survivor dies, etc) as the game is more fun for both Killers and Survivors overall when it's based on hooks and not kills.
The above paragraph also responds to your post @StalkingYou I understand where you're coming from which is why I've advocated for stronger gen defense at the beginning and stronger gen repair at the end to reduce snowballs and give both sides more chances to actually play the game.
0 -
My opinion is that it does solve quite a few issues (with the caveat it hasn't been playtested yet). Killers quite often complain about how fast gens go. While I don't feel that is a 100% valid complaint considering how the game is designed to be Killer sided it does have some validity to it. It's based on the same reasoning as to why I oppose tunnelling; the game is moving too fast for the player to feel like they actually played
If the balance can be shifted so that there are less 4Ks and less 4Es both sides will feel they had an opportunity to play. That makes for a healthier game and community.
It would also reduce the number of 'go nexts' that occur. If a survivor dies at 4 or 5 gens left due to tunnelling then I know we're hooped. It's going to be a miserable game with very little BP. I don't DC but I understand why the people who do DC in those circumstances do. Miserable game, no BP and probably BMing from the Killer at the end? Why not play a different game instead?
While a survivor dead at 3 gens left can be super dicey a survivor dead at 1 or 2 gens left is a decent chance someone will get out and at least there'll be a decent amount of BP at the end. If that can be applied throughout the game a lot more survivors might choose to stay instead of going next (which I understand why and don't fault them for that choice but it makes the game even less enjoyable for the survivors who stay).
As well, incentives shape behaviour. While I can't do a study on it or anything like that I believe the reason why there was so much less tunnelling during Emblems is because people didn't hit Red One if they were 4K, 4 or less hooks. Pipping up quite often required 9 or more hooks at Red levels and that encouraged more hook spreading. Tunnelling has always been the most efficient way to 4K in DbD ever since the game came online. It's just so much more rampant now since all the incentives to not tunnel have been nerfed to the ground and advancement is based solely on kills. It's an invisible metric but people still chase it. Giving an incentive to spread hooks again while disincentivizing tunnelling might help spread the balance back again to less tunnelling being done.
Realistically, there will never be a 100% perfect solution. However, I feel this is worth a try as it has a solid chance in my opinion of making the game more enjoyable for everyone.
0 -
None of what you state is a behaviour, they're the intended purposes of items and hazards in the game.
Tunnelling, camping and hard-slugging (because I think slugging is more nuanced, I think it is a good tool for mementum) are decisions you actively make as a player for an advantage knowing full well it makes the experience far worse for the other side.
These strategies are actively being addressed as seen with various anti-tunnel perks, basekit BT, the camping meter and a failed basekit unbreakable which communicated a clear intent to limit slugging.
What is genrush anyway? I'll be real with you, unless it's a toolbox monster team, if you're getting rushed with a killer that isn't garbage, you were mismatched in terms of skill. Yeah, I'll say it plainly, it's a skill issue most people have here.
You could argue that it is also a skill issue on the survivor's part, but what can a survivor do while being tunnelled? They can outplay the killer for half an hour, but they'll still get tunnelled. They can't do anything else in the game which, to some, is dreadfully boring. Same for camping, what does the hooked survivor's skill have to do here? And slugging, same thing. Player choice is taken away completely, relying on teammates - which is fair, but far too easily exploited in solo queue. Hell, even teams still get smashed as shown when actually good players go on streaks.
So, no, getting flashied because you can't be arsed to pay attention isn't the same as choosing to keep everyone on the floor for four minutes.
1 -
Making a flashlight save is a decision survivors make as a player for an advantage knowing full well it makes the experience far worse for the other side.
1 -
We can't tell if we're surprised or sad that we predicted this kida response
1 -
You are missing one fundamental piece of the game and that's choice of action.
You cannot remove tunneling because tunneling is a choice made by the player. The best bhvr can do is make that decision harder to make. But in doing so you give agency to the survivor to abuse the system. For example using suggestions from outside this thread.
Make the survivor invulnerable for a set time or action taken. We've seen this played out with old DS and release BT. Instead of escaping the survivor chooses to interfere and unhooks were performed unsafe outside of reason.
Make a hook state not count if too soon after being unhooked. Same issue. If there are no consequences there will be abuse.
I'd ask how bhvr can "fix" tunneling where it's fair for both sides. (I'm sure you have somewhere.)
As for four random survivors playing well together. Believe it or not there was a time when survivors could and that was without the perks or UI to help.
0 -
I'm not suggesting items from outside the thread; I'm suggesting what I've suggested. There's no point in discussing suggestions outside the thread as they're not relevant to my point.
And solos did not at any point in time in the past communicate more effectively than now. What happened is that survivors had more tools to combat tunnelling than they do now. An FPS analogy would be if damage and rate of fire was normally on a scale of 1 to 10. If both sides have guns that rank 10 out of 10 then it's fair. The guns are really strong but it's fair. If one side has their guns nerfed to 5 out of 10 but the other side has guns that do 10 out of 10 then it's unfair. It's not a 'skill issue's for the side with the 5 out of 10 to struggle; it's a game mechanics issue.
That is what happened to Survivor. They're the allegory with the 5 out of 10 gun. Pre 6.1 DH, release CoH were all things that Survivors could use in the past to counter tunnelling. Those things no longer exist. There is nothing now that is really strong on the Survivor side. However, Killers can still tunnel.
But no, Survivors did not magically communicate better in the past. Survivors just had stronger tools to counter the really strong stuff Killer has and the Survivor toolkit has been overall nerfed far more than the Killer toolkit (of which the only really egregarious and overpowered tool left is tunnelling).
0 -
Sorry for the double ping; one other thing I forgot to mention is that my suggestion for fixing tunnelling was stated above. Slower gens while all Survivors are alive followed by faster gens when Survivors start to die. Reduce the snowball by allowing the Killer more time to establish a foothold and spread hooks while giving Survivors a comeback mechanic so it's not a virtually guaranteed 4K if a Survivor dies before 3 or 4 gens are done.
0 -
Not sure why you would find it interesting to glare at biased opinions and then make a point about one side being represented more when it has 4 times the population by design.
If you want something really interesting then compare why both sides complain. It is for the exact same reason - they don't get to do anything. Except that's not really true. Killer can always fight for a 1k, is always free to move, always some choices even if all of them are bad. What does an invidiual survivor get in the worst case? Sitting on their hands for a full hookstage then attempting to buy time against a killer who doesn't care about pallets nor windows. Only choice is hold forward.In the meantime your wrote this:
This is exactly how gamers feel about tunneling and S-tier killers. 2 issues, not necessarily related, but even worse if they are. You can put up the worst scenario and describe why it is necessary to use the strategy the opposition dislikes the most and is, not feels, powerless against. Doesn't make one side less biased than the other just because you read about it less.
There is no point in paying attention to the most unknowledgable opinions. Giga-toolboxes need to go and it would be nice if a survivor wasn't dead just because they got found first.
1 -
As long as the game counts Kills as Wins, has archives and dailies that require kills, killers will do just that. No matter how efficiently or inefficiently a tactic is.
It's a 4v1, if you play killer enough you'll understand how it's like to be matched against very good survivor teams and good 4-man SWF. That si disregarding all the second-chance perks and items survivors can bring, which again is 4 to 1.
You can battle tunneling by doing gens, aside from that it's changing DBD's core game as a whole, changing its achievements, archives and tomes that require 4Ks and so on.
0 -
The point of bringing up outside suggestions was because I don't know your suggestions and didn't want to attribute what was listed onto you.
Tunneling wasn't the issue before. Camping was. Not many chances to tunnel when they never get off the hook. While bhvr mitigated camping, it is still possible to do so. While you can plea with bhvr to tunneling less enticing it will still occur.
Let's bring up another option. Lets say repair speed increases with each hook state or dead survivor like in 2v8. Well then its detrimental to kill off survivors right? In other words, it's incentivised to keep survivors alive but unable to progress their objective. In other words slugging. Slugging will become the meta and you will be making threads about how slugging is killing the game. (Like others are already doing)
Also survivors in the past were more likely to actually play the game instead of giving up at the first inconvenience as they do today. Most DCs occured on their final hook or to spawn hatch. Even when there wasn't any real penalty in doing so.
2 -
I read this after my reply but somehow already answered it.
0 -
No worries, I'll tackle both here. The first is that, at least according to my definition of tunnelling, you cannot tunnel without camping. There were Killers in my data that camped but went for the unhooker so they camped but didn't tunnel. While they performed better than Killers that did neither overall the tunnellers did better than the only camped category. So, from my experience, it's the tunnelling. Tunnellers performed better than anyone else so I do believe the problem is tunnelling and not camping (or at least how I define tunnelling because my definition implies you have to camp to tunnel; if the Killer isn't camping I don't see how they could meet what I feel to be tunnelling).
I also don't think slugging would be that much of a problem. My experience has been that if a Killer can pull off a 4 person slug at 5 gens the Killer would have handily won the match anyway. Most 4 person slugs are because the Survivors swarm the Killer and that doesn't require coordination to not do or the match making crewed up; it just requires one but preferably two Survivors with enough sense to just hang back and let the Killer leave in the first case and only BHVR improving their algorithm would help in the second.
If there is an issue it'll probably be handled with whatever changes BHVR makes to slugging anyway. The slugging the second last survivor for the 4K is exceptionally unpleasant and common enough now BHVR will tackle it soon anyway.
Realistically, no solution will be 100% perfect but the reason why Killers complain about gen speeds and Survivors complain about tunnelling (and slugging as well now with its uptick) is the same underlying reason; the player doesn't feel like they got to play the game. Tying gen repair speeds to survivors left alive would be something that, in my opinion, helps with that issue for both roles.
0 -
A decision to use an item for its intended purpose?
Then it is problematic for the killer to use their power to down people, since that's a gateway to potential slugging and tunnelling.
Given this is your response to the effort I've put into mine, I'll take it as a concession that you do not have anything else of substance to bring other than "other side annoys me so it is problematic" and comparing it to things the other side is effectively helpless toward in standard (read: solo queue) play.
0 -
You literally used the words "is a decision _____ make as a player for an advantage knowing full well it makes the experience far worse for the other side" to define problematic behavior. So I used your definition.
Are you going to keep changing your definition, until it's super super easy for killers to have problematic behavior, but super super difficult for survivors to have problematic behavior? Do you think that would be fair for both sides of the game?
0 -
What does a flashy save do to prevent you from enjoying the game to its fullest?
You can still chase.
You can still hook (next time when you don't let yourself get flashied).
You can still slug.
You can still hump the survivor out of pettiness (which they can't do anything about).
You can still hit them on the hook.
You can complete challenges.
You can still tunnel.
You can still camp.
You can still use your power.
You can still 4k.
This is applicable to everything survivors can do to you, by the way. You're never disabled from doing any of the above.
What can a survivor do if you tunnel, camp or hard slug?
You can't do gens.
You can't get more than a fraction of the bp you could make.
You likely aren't going to rank up in higher grades even if you are far better than the killer.
You can't escape (lose con for individual survivors with how MMR works).
You can't complete challenges.
You literally can't play the game if it's hard slugging.
You can't do ANYTHING about it if a killer is determined or you have a strong team - this is why standard play is disproportionally affected since the latter can be handled by SWF's.
The positive is that you get chase time. Your teammates, however? They'll hardly get any interaction until it's either too late to win or they're next to be slugged/camped.
I guess you can tbag still, but the killer can put a stop to that, lol.
So no, I'm not bouncing around definitions. You're just using the words 'problematic' and 'behaviours' so loosely, it could mean anything anyone does in the game that might annoy. So here, I showed you why people dislike these behaviours a killer can CHOOSE to do versus what behaviours survivors CHOOSE to do.
And this is the root cause of all the complaints. One side, in the end, can't do crap about certain behaviours. The other gets to play the game to fullest even if they get flashied or bodyblocked.
1 -
Do you understand that your definition of “problematic” is massively survivor sided?
And this is why the best anti slugging solution is for survivors to get teleported to a 2v8 cage if they are slugged for 60 seconds. This would actually be a buff for survivors when killers try to slug for the 4k, because eventually the slugged survivor will get teleported to a random part of the map, which means there is a much much higher chance their teammate can save them.
0 -
Well, yes, because killers have the power to be problematic, survivors do not. That's the point. The only way they can be problematic if you are just far worse than they are as a team (or you're playing a terrible killer, I will admit that's just horrible). You're not getting flashied regularly if you're as good as them, nor will you get gen rushed. On the other hand, you can be as good or better than the killer and still tunnelled/camped/slugged. It may not happen as quickly, but it will, with little recourse in solo queue. This lack of recourse is why people hate it.
I actually agree with this solution. Perhaps prevent it from happening if a survivor is within 10 meters or something to avoid cucking if they're trying to pick up. I prefer this over basekit unbreakable. And yeah it may be a slight buff to solo queue but also allows for good momentum gaining for the killer if they spread pressure well.
2 -
Meanwhile you have a point… What about the other side? I mean what about when survivors only go after repair and go out. 4 BNP, perks, and everything. They get out with 11-17k (since they get a huge bonus just getting out)
Yes, it can backfire since there would be nothing in their hand to save themself. But still, they got out, and probably the killer didn't enjoy a bit from that game.
And to be honest if it is in the game, it is allowed in the game, and it is a playstyle, why everybody reeee about tunneling. It is in the game, it is going after only one aspect of the game. It is boring, it is unfun for the other side. But meanwhile there is plenty perks, basekits and things (and even teammates) can help, on the other side not really. Yeah, there are regress perks. But since you are alone as a killer you cannot really prevent them, and you are extremly short on time.
So I really cannot see why people still can talk that much about tunneling and that it needs to go, meanwhile the same people never complain about the genrush.
And as others mentioned, something which is hardcoded and mechanicly is in the game could be weaponised against the killer. Survivors can run 4 2nd chance perk, and they can defend each other. Off the record already cam be horribly strong in that way (and survivros still can cry if the killer deicide to go after who wasted their time).
Also what is the definition of tunneling? It used to be when the killer throw the match just to kill one person. Nowdays people scream tunneling about everything, even if you dare to look in their direction. Hell I even saw people call commiting on a survivor tunneling when nobody has a single hookstage. So how can you define tunneling, and how should the game deicide it is tunnelling or not?
0 -
I find it rather ironic you're making such widespread generalizations in this thread where everything you just mentioned is touched upon and a solution is mentioned. Making widespread generalizations and dismissing the other side's concerns without even trying to understand their viewpoint doesn't make for compelling arguments.
Also, while complaints about tunnelling, slugging and gen rushing (which is no longer possible in its old definition) have the same basis (the player feels like they didn't get to play the game) they aren't 100% comparable situations because of the degree of agency the player has. While it sucks to be so badly mismatched a Survivor team can stomp the Killer (and if the Survivors are sore winners it's even worse) at no point in time does the Killer lose complete agency over their character for more than a few seconds.
If you compare that to tunnelling the Survivor has very little opportunities to play while in the game and the slugged Survivor (assuming it's a slug for the 4K -- with strategic slugging the Survivor can position themselves for the pick up, etc) has virtually nothing to do but scroll their phone, play YouTube, etc while awaiting a 4 minute bleed out.
As such, the degree of relevance is different. The Killer who is stomped by the Survivors has a very unsatisfactory game experience but the Survivors who are tunnelled and slugged for the 4K don't even get to play the game. The majority of complaints aren't for 'free escapes'; they're for an opportunity to actually play.
As well, if you're acknowledging how deeply unsatisfactory it is for Killers to get stomped and the Survivors out the gates in 4 minutes then how do you feel Survivors who lose a teammate at 4 or 5 gens up due to tunnelling or get slugged for the 4K and wait around for a 4 minute bleed out feel? If you're going to apply arguments they should be applied equally to both sides.
0
