http://dbd.game/killswitch
If You Play Killer, Tunnelling Is Against Your Best Interests
Comments
-
No. I don’t need to go for your specific requirements.
SWFs are the survivor equivalent of camping and tunneling because they meet the same criteria:
- Players can become dependent on it, and therefore struggle without it.
- It provides a lot of value, but takes less skill to do.
- Many players can still win games without it.
- Many players consider it an unfair advantage.
1 -
6 -
…You do when you're answering my position, my friend. It's my position, of course I set the framing for it.
I honestly shouldn't have gone this long with this train of thought, it doesn't actually matter. Whether SWF counts as well or not, that doesn't affect what I'm saying about tunnelling.
2 -
What you’re saying about tunneling is incorrect, because you don’t know if BHVR will ever make anti-tunneling changes that are so drastic that killers would be at a severe disadvantage if they tunnel.
Also, if severe anti-tunneling changes are made, it will lower the kill rates so much that killers would get major help to play the game without tunneling.
0 -
Alright, happy to talk about this instead.
So, while I can't see the future, it seems unavoidable to me that one of two things will happen:
1: BHVR continue to make incremental changes to tunnelling, like they have been so far
2: BHVR make one big swing to take tunnelling out of the game entirely.
Either way, at some point, tunnelling will reach a point where it's no longer a cheap and easy way to gain value. It doesn't have to be because of the big swing - the smaller incremental changes will get there eventually.
(Also, that's only one of the two reasons, the other one is more immediately relevant. One affects you now, one affects you in the future.)
1 -
What a load of crap. 99% of the time when someone gets 'tunnelled' it's because I either randomly run into them or because someone went for an unhook while I'm still in the area of the hook. You're not going to gaslight me into making bad gameplay decisions when attacking the already injured person is clearly the optimal choice.
4 -
It's the optimal choice now. As you face stronger opponents and as it inevitably gets balance changes, it'll stop being optimal, so it's safer not to rely on it.
If you don't care about that, by all means, keep tunnelling. I'm not policing anyone (and "gaslighting" is an insanely inappropriate term to use here either way), I'm giving advice for a specific perspective.
1 -
That is incorrect. Tunneling is still effective at high MMR, which we know of true because killer streamers tunnel when doing huge win streaks, and if anyone in the game is high MMR, it’s the players that literally win hundreds of games in a row.
4 -
Both of the things I mentioned combined are what would make it not optimal, not just facing stronger opponents.
Though, for the average player, tunnelling does get weaker as they face stronger opponents. If that's all they rely on, their games will get harder and more stressful, because they have to keep tunnelling but their margin for error in how long it takes gets smaller and smaller.
-3 -
That is incorrect. You can’t just make up criteria, and then tell people they are wrong if they don’t follow your criteria. We don’t need to follow your criteria.
Tunneling is still effective at high MMR, and is still very often the optimal strategy at high MMR. That is a fact.
1 -
…What?
In the previous set of messages, I reminded you that you can't say something is the equivalent of my claim without it fitting my criteria, I'm not trying to exert my opinion onto other people. I'm just reminding you of what my opinion actually was when you tried to compare something to it.
To briefly address the last part: Yes, it is. It's still effective, and it's even still effective enough to win consistently. My point is that if you don't learn how to play without it, even tunnelling gets harder and more stressful, because the opponents you face are going to be more capable of answering it and you won't have anything else to fall back on. You'll win, but the games will be much less enjoyable.
2 -
i win most of my matches without tunneling and camping in the cases where those two would be the best decision to make due to mistakes survivors make.
Is that because you can truly win without those? No, it's because of difference in skill between you and average survivor
2 -
I really see it as tunneling is dangerous to use as a blunt instrument to solve all issues. However, it can be a very useful and the most optimal tool in certain situations. So in general, you are correct that just focusing on tunneling hurts you in the long run, but we have to at least acknowledge that in certain circumstances it's the correct choice. Use it as a tool to supplement your games, not as a solution to all scenarios.
1 -
Please also consider - there are Killers in this game that appear to tunnel because they can't afford to go too far away from where Survs are, because they may lack mobility. Not because they want to tunnel someone out from the word go. They're simply built to take advantage of Survivor weakpoints, not to rapidly traverse the map like others. That's not the player's fault, that's kinda how they're built to play.
In fact, hardcore toxic tunnelling out from the word go on purpose is actually fairly rare. 9/10 times the Killer isn't tryign to make the game misery for you, you're just there and they want to chase. If they're anything like me or most people here who play Killer, there truly is no hard feelings and no toxicity meant by focusing a weak link, or focusing the person close to death at one gen, or punishing someone in a bad position.
4 -
The survivor equivalent, in my opinion, is Windows of Opportunity. Many survivors literally cannot play the game without it. You can just shut your brain off and never have to even think about or plan where to run to based on what's going on in the trial. It plays the game for you. Hold W, predrop, profit. Most killers cannot deal with that and resources never run out before the gens are done if the survivors aren't screwing around.
It's pointless to make the arguments about SWF and voice comms. We know comms are a massive advantage the way that DbD and its perks/add ons are designed, but people love to enjoy their huge advantage so they constantly either downplay its usefulness or act like no one plays in a SWF of people trying to win
And again it doesn't matter if you hardcore tunnel or play for hooks you're gonna face the tryhard teams either way unless you are a baby or deliberately avoiding killing survivors. That's not a good argument for discouraging tunneling
3 -
That's not true either. If tunneling gets a player to the MMR soft cap, then that's it. The matches don't get harder than that. In fact, the higher a player gets past the MMR soft cap, the higher their kill rate will be, because MMR stopped giving them harder matches when they reached the soft cap.
-2 -
I mostly play Trapper these days. What am I supposed to do if the same idiot barrels into one of my traps twice in a row? Stand there with my thumb up my ass? Let him bleed out?
4 -
You're still not understanding that it's not the killer's fault. Their room to expand their skill and knowledge has in fact become shrunk, not by them tunneling, but by the unbalanced game state that forces them to tunnel. Hit and run, and going for random chases is great, and probably does a lot for your macro game sense. But it's not viable, and tunneling lets you develop macro game sense too. How hard do I need to tunnel, from what I've seen so far? Can I juggle 2 survivors' hooks, or do I literally not even have time for that?
And to me, which I thought was obvious, you can't be very good at tunneling if you're not good at chasing. It just makes no sense to say otherwise. "All this killer had to do was tunnel, and wasn't even good in chase, and he still beat us!" Doesn't that mean that you're the ones who aren't good? It's never made any sense, to say that a killer is bad for tunneling, but it's literally a strategy, and it hinges of getting quick enough downs consistently just to pull it off.
So for those reasons, I can't say tunneling is imbalanced. And I don't know what the devs could possibly do to make tunneling worse than going for random chases. They'd have to be like, "If you hook someone twice in a row, you give the survivors 100% faster gens" or something stupid like that. Because to me, what could possibly be more efficient than getting 1 survivor out, so that they're not a gen threat, and then going after the others? It makes no competitive sense to do otherwise. Therefore, if the devs do somehow manage to make tunneling the worse choice, they've essentially killed the game at that point. What is a killer to do against survivors who do 5 gens in 4 minutes? They used to have the ability to quickly down and kill (not anymore) or stall with gen defence (not anymore). What is 95% of the killer cast to do against 4 good survivors, who can do gens in like 8 minutes? Still, basically nothing.
And whatever the devs objectives are on making tunneling worse, they can never ever remove it. You cannot stop a killer from going after the same survivor multiple times, unless you make them literally invincible, but that would obviously be abusable (we kind of a have simplified version of that right now!).
5 -
I don't think there are that many killers who start the game with the tunneling mentality, the situation just arises very easily.
Last second rescues have become a very common practice lately, causing the killer to often return to secure the second phase and end up tunneling that survivor.
There are many rescuers who are not willing to take the killer's attention, they hide leaving the wounded person to his fate and the killer ends up tunneling him simply because he found his blood trail.
And as expected, an unfavorable start will cause any killer who wants to win to do what it takes.
4 -
Why is it that everyone assumes the opposite of tunnelling is "random" chases? I've never understood that.
Obviously you wouldn't go for random chases, you'd have a plan of some kind. Get a hook, go to a survivor you either already knew about or got revealed with a perk, occupy three survivors at once would be the obvious basic bread-and-butter, and you'd hardly call that random, it's very purposeful.
However, there's something else to point out as well, which is where you start talking about needing to be good in chase to tunnel people. Do you?
The chase you're taking when you tunnel someone has the following attributes:
- The survivor's guaranteed to start injured
- The survivor's guaranteed to start right next to you with no distance to capitalise on
- The survivor's got a good chance (but not guaranteed) to be starting in an area with few resources, since a chase just happened there
The chase is explicitly, objectively much easier for the killer. If it wasn't, people wouldn't tunnel, there wouldn't be a point. The whole point of doing it is that you have to exert much less skill, and your opponent has to exert much more. Why bother doing it otherwise?
Outside of perks, all the survivor has is ten seconds of Endurance, and that's pretty easy to circumvent. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it's still heavily stacked in the killer's favour.
As for what to do about it, that was outside the scope of this post, but for the record I support survivors losing collision on unhook. It'd be impossible to tunnel someone you can't hit, and it'd be impossible to bodyblock if you don't have collision. With a few extra tweaks, everyone wins.
3 -
I could answer that, but I'd like to prompt you to seriously, sincerely consider if this is what I was talking about in that post. Was that the context I had in mind?
0 -
I'm not necessarily saying not to consider tunnelling a specific tool, but that is where the other half of the argument comes in.
Sure, right now it's a good tool to use in key moments- it's easy to do, hard to counter, and has a very good chance of giving massive value. It's good for turning games around if they're looking dicey.
However… those attributes are why it's unbalanced and why it's receiving changes. If these specific changes don't make it significantly less reliable, more will eventually come down the line. It's why I personally try not to rely on tunnelling even in those key moments, and why I think people who care about improving should probably do the same.
Again, though, play how you like. I'm not here to police anyone.
0 -
The problem with tunneling is that people get a bit confused about what tunneling is. Most times you could be accused of tunneling are just survivors making plain bad plays or just downright bad luck and in that sense I think that's fine. Because as a killer, you're developing a keen sense of when you should be punishing survivors for their mistakes. Actual hard tunneling people off the hook every single time does promote bad gameplay and growth and should be fixed but that RARELY ever happens. I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding here, when a lot of people say "don't rely on tunneling" it's just another way of saying "don't capitalize on enemy mistakes" which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
6 -
What Kind of options are you wanting to provide killers that would effectively replace the need to tunnel once things are dire (such as all gens done, no kills yet)? If you have a suggestion that would be implemented to give them an alternative to focusing one survivor, I'd be happy to hear it. As for other forms of tunneling, such as just tunneling to tunnel from the get go, I personally dislike it. I think it's lame and ruins the fun of the match for others, and as you have pointed out, discourages actual healthy gameplay to hone actual skills such as gen and map pressure. An early tunnel is a cheap shot, imho. However, if we are abandoning tunneling, especially if forced by BHVR, killers need some sort of options in the middle to late game, especially the weaker m1 killers with no mobility that already struggle in the face of 4 man SWFs.
4 -
I mean, it sounds harsh, but the answer is honestly gonna be "don't get into that situation" a lot of the time.
I think the only real bone you can throw in this context is that most forms of anti-tunnel should probably disable when the gens are all done, I think most people can broadly get behind that. If the devs were to ever change Endurance to a loss of collision, changing it back to Endurance when the gates are powered would probably be reasonable.
Other than that, though, if the survivors put themselves in a situation that heavily advantaged, it pretty strongly implies the killer misplayed at several key junctures. At a certain point you should lose for poor play, right?
-4 -
To a certain extinct, sure. Keep in mind the game is designed around the survivors. If survivors make mistakes, killers need to capitalize on those mistakes. Survivors have a lot of power and tools available to them, so it's all about making effective use of that power and those tools. Survivors who would theoretically play to perfection would be unstoppable. Killers who would theoretically play to perfection could still lose. In the end, it comes down to how many mistakes the survivors make. Thats why lower mmr, killers reign supreme - survivors don't have enough experience to know how to effectively play. At high mmr, those survivors make far less mistakes. In the end, it comes down to survivors and their mistakes or lack of mistakes that dictate the match. If they srent making mistakes, then the killer is effectively at their mercy - especially weak killers. Granted nurse and blight exist - and they are way overtuned.
Remember, according to BHVRs official stats, experienced 4 man swfs have each of their survivors having an average of a 48% escape rate. That's each survivor. If it was 1 on 1, we would want both sides to have a 50% chance to win. However, this is FOUR opponents the killer has to face, and each of those opponents only have one opponent. Mathmatically, each survivor would need a 38.5% escape rate to make it fair for the player who has multiple opponents to deal with. 48% is so close to 50, you can do a simple experiment. Flip a coin 4 times. How often do you get tails 3 (kills) out of the 4 flips after 100 flips? Not very often.
Innately, survivors hold the advantage. It just usually comes down to their ability to avoid mistakes than it is the killer avoiding mistakes. The game is designed around those survivor mistakes and taking advantage of them. If they don't make mistakes, even perfectly playing can result in a loss.
6 -
I've got 2 and a half minutes from the start to make a difference and I'm maining an M1 killer.
It doesn't matter if you're a fresh hook or got off 45 seconds ago, If I find you and have an opportunity to down you in a timely fashion, I'm going to try because I will lose the game if I don't.
Gens fly and I do not possess the power level of the blight or the nurse. I don't have time to care about what order anybody is hooked in.
Trying to spin it as a skill issue is ignorant and it's ridiculous to think that your feelings take precedence over what's fair in an asymmetrical scenario with a strict time constraint.
(Ugly truth disclaimer)
"I just got off the hook! It's someone else's turn! This feels bad for me! I don't care if there isn't time to think about my feelings! Think about them anyway you dirty, sweaty, no-skill loser!!! DEVS! MAKE THIS FEEL BETTER FOR ME! Asym-what? I don't give a s**t! MEEEE!"
4 -
I feel perhaps you're responding to the vague idea of tunnelling more than the actual post, here.
0 -
That's not how any of this works.
A 60% kill rate means that, on average 60% of survivors are being killed in matches. Your coin analogy is entirely wrong in this context.
That number doesn't have anything to do with a 1v1 scenario, since matches aren't a 1v1.
But the biggest problem is that it's not "a coin flip", no matter what percentage you decide to cherry pick. Coins are independent outcomes, so every time you flip one has the same chance, regardless of what happened in the last flip.
Kills, though, absolutely depend on previous outcomes. If you kill one survivor early, and at least a couple of gens remain, then you're pretty much guaranteed to kill at least 2 other survivors. That steamroll effect is called being dependent outcomes, and it's really the entire reason people tunnel in the first place: if you kill one fast, you win the match (and in this conversation that boils down to killing one early basically guarantees killing two more).
You can see this really plainly in any detailed data as well: even if it's incomplete, data on nightlight shows that the "4k" match outcome is the most common (about 30% of all matches), followed by 0k at about 20%. A coin flip, is exactly the opposite distribution, with the "4 heads" and "4 tails" outcomes being the least likely outcomes.
Not to mention other factors like players actively working to force one outcome or the other, vs what we presume to be a fair coin flipped randomly (rather than, say, dropped gently to force one outcome).
-4 -
One of my regular swf members always rages hard about killers playing smart. I always try to show her how things are from the killers POV, but she will die on the hill that right now killers are strong enough to always aim for 12 hooks and, for example, she already gets angry when a killer ignores one of the survivors to go for one that they already hooked. But thats not tunneling, that is just playing smart! Most of the time a killer can't affort to spread hooks over all survivors, so pingponging between two and only taking opportunity shots at the other two survivors, is a completely valid tactic, thats still a far cry removed from "hardcore tunneling". But this shows how varied and different the views on this topic are.
6 -
You have incredible patience. I couldn't have responded to as many posts as you have here while also remaining civil toward people who in some cases try to twist your meaning. Here's a trophy 🏆
1 -
Yeesh, I'd suggest emailing bhvr and letting them know theyve been wrong for all of these years. Every match is 4 distinct 1 v 1 scenarios happening simultaneously. then again, you probably disagree with them in that, too. Make sure you include that in your correctional email to the team.
60% kill rate also is 2.4 kills on average. A 50% kill rate is a 2k. A 75% kill rate would be a 3k. So yeah, on average killers kill roughly 60%. That means generally killers on average would win every other match. In reality it should be 62.5%, but for whatever reason they went with 60%. In game design, you want to balance on the lowest common denominator - in this case, the player facing multiple opponents while alone. Thats why the killer gets the ~50% win treatment (the 60% kill rate). The more survivors there are, the less their escape rate would need to be to make it fair. I just gave the 1 v 1 to point out a basic mathematics example. IF the game was 1 v 1, we would want a 50/50. However, it's not a single 1 v 1...the killer faces 4 opponents, so to be fair, they each obviously shouldn't have a 50% chance to win - the killer is literally outnumbered, so he needs power to reduce the chances of opponent wins. Mathematically calculated, that would give the killers a win chance in the low to mid 30's.
In case you're having a difficult time grasping it, let's say there were 1,000 survivors. Would you think each of them having a 50% escape rate would be fair for the killer? The killer would probably win under 1% of the time. Clearly, the number of survivors directly affects the chances they should have to win. The more there are, the lower the chance.
Now, the big question is, why did BHVR go with 60% instead of 62.5% (which would be an even 2.5 kills on average over the course of many matches)? This goes back to the game balance. Since there are 4 survivors, that means to balance it out, each survivor would need a 38.5% chance to win. However, that's not very fun for the survivors to have such a low win rate, so BHVR reducing the kill rate to 60% makes sense, but more importantly, they made a statement not too long ago that clarifies an aspect that's a hard pill to swallow - even for me.
The game is not designed around the new player experience, and the game is not designed around the experienced players. BHVR has stated that they do not view the game as a competitive game, and they view it more as a casual game. This also means, and again, this is BHVR stating this, that they WILL make balance changes that the competitive players might not be happy with. Again, they are NOT focusing on balancing the game at experienced levels. By design, the survivors have the advantage, as the game is focused around the average\casual crowd in the middle where that advantage is watered down with the average killer. In this range, the killers have enough power, and survivors have enough power to fight back, as well. You can see this in BHVR's recent stats released on high MMR - solo queue has a ~40% escape rate, and 4 man SWFs have a ~48% escape rate for each survivor (nearly 50%!). This is clearly well above the "true" balance of a 38.5% escape rate, but the game isn't designed around those super experienced players where the survivor balance problem begins to actually show.
Essentially, yes, the game is designed in the survivor's favor, but the "sweet spot" the devs focus on typically won't have that survivor experience realized amongst the "middle ground" playerbase. With little experience, the game sucks for survivors. With a lot of experience, the game sucks for killers (unless you're blight\nurse…boooooo them anyway). The game is fundamentally broken at that lower MMR and higher MMR brackets. If you are bad at the game, or you're too good at the game, you essentially become "out of scope" of what the devs balance around. As a new survivor, your experience suffers. As an experienced killer (and in turn you face experienced survivors), your experience suffers. That's why a lot of "professional" killers are miserable - either that, or they just give in and start maining blight\nurse, and that's why "professional" survivors just have a field day. The game just simply breaks down at that level. If they did balance the game for high MMR, then the newer players would have an even worse time, and the average players that BHVR focuses on will start to have a negative experience. Ultimately, BHVR had to make a call what the game will be, and that final call was a casual game for the average playerbase. By making survivors have the inherent favor, they "catch up" to acceptable win rates much faster, and that's where the balance stops. Go beyond that into higher MMR, and the cracks in the balance begin to show.
At the end of the day, I'm okay with BHVR's call to do this. The only thing that really irks me is just how much of a problem the game has on balancing killers vs each other - mostly on how badly designed the M1 no mobility killers are and we end up losing out on killer variety due to less people bothering to play them. I'd like to see BHVR drop the concept of focusing on dashers or overly complicated killers and go back to the roots and focus on M1 killers for a while. However, that's a completely different topic.
Post edited by RpTheHotrod on4 -
So many unaccounted factors and nuances. The topic is quite complex and confusing in terms of interpretation. What is tunneling? Everyone here will have their own understanding of what they mean by tunneling.
Your advice is quite vague. It lacks details and specifics. If you want to teach people to fish by giving them a fishing rod. You should specifically show with examples and tactics that this works with one nuance only against survivors who understand how to play this game. Since from the outside it looks like naive idealism at best. At worst, like sabotage for the entertainment of the surviving side.
After all, on the one hand, I believe you if the question concerns Blight, Hillbilly and other similar killers. Indeed, with due practice and desire, you can play without tunneling. I would even go further and say that they are balanced against SWF. Since when such killers come to a solo lobby, it looks like a massacre, not a game.
When the question concerns Trapper and his M1 team. He needs all the help and tactics he can get. Anything within the game that will bring victory. Despite the price that will have to be paid demonization, contempt and persecution from the survivor's side.
In general, what is real tunneling?
Real tunneling is mind games. Your job as a killer is to create a false sense of security by convincing the survivors that it is safe to save them. By striking at the most inopportune moment.
There is also double tunneling, when you simultaneously tunnel two survivors. Nemesis + Friends 'til the End + Alien Instinct + Furtive Chase or Leverage or Rancor.
Tunneling on 5 generators is more of a psychological tunneling, where your task is to undermine the morale of the tunneled unit and the team as a whole. I learned the last conclusion, oddly enough, while confronting toxic survivors. If you look at such survivors not as toxic people, but as tacticians. This is a simple tactic to morally dominate the killer so that he starts making mistakes, or better yet, gives up and hides in a corner. In a sense, a weapon that can be used to win. There is something to learn.
A little poetry about survivors, where would we be without them in this matter. Survivors are egoists who think only of themselves. One evening I finally managed to play with my friend in a duet for a survivor. Just in time for the release of Steady Pulse and the archive tasks for 55 escapes. My friend was interested in trying the build Borrowed Time + Babysitter + Duty of Care + Overcome. I was more focused on Bond and three healing perks for the effectiveness of another task.
It was the most pleasant evening with many escapes, where we even smiled ironically at Kaneki, who looks like an unlucky m1 joke, and not a killing machine as it is described here.
But why am I saying this? Babysitter this perk alone was enough to run away from any hapless tunneler in a straight line if he expressed a desire to make me his target. I spent enough time to make them regret it, provided that the others were holding m1 on the generator. If it weren't for the missions, I would have even played along with my friend by taking Babysitter. Although my build looked more like this Bond + Open-Handed + Kindred + Babysitter. After all, there is nothing more priceless than watching a proxy tunneler while the survivors are busy with m1 on the generator.
Unfortunately, the survivors lament more about Distortion than about the next Babysitter buff. After all, no one wants to take responsibility for themselves. After all, it's better to kill him than me...
((Why is it that everyone assumes the opposite of tunnelling is "random" chases? I've never understood that.))
We are not exactly monsters. Personally, I am ready to play 12 hooks if it brings me kills. I think many people think the same way as I do. The problem is that I had games with 6-8 hooks in the game, but no one died in these games. At that moment I thought that I had not had a fun game, and somewhere I made a big mistake by not tunneling a survivor. Even 2 kills would have been fine for me, while 4 escapes are unacceptable.
I understand perfectly well that tunneling is not fun for survivors, but the end justifies the means. Killing survivors. If killing is impossible with 12 hooks. I will look for other ways to kill. Nothing personal, just business.
So my question to survivors is always what fun way would you like to die that would be enjoyable for you?
1 -
I personally don't like hard tunneling which is concentrating on 1 person until they are dead, but tunneling is such a broad term nowdays i feel like survivors yell tunneler no matter what now.
There are also times when i do "tunnel" .
- You get unhooked but you start bodyblocking me with your off the record, DS and DH. I will tunnel your butt back to the hook. Run away from me instead to me.
- Im running out of time and i need to put pressure back to the survivors.
- Survivors are just nasty.. ( this can mean anything).
- I can't find anyone else but you are out in the open doing gen or healing after being unhooked and i happen to find you.
I agree if you always heavy tunnel from 5 gens you do hinder your ability to learn, but i am so tired of hearing about tunneling and camping nowdays when theres so many perks and helps against that.
As long as maps are big, survivors spawn straight to gens, theres perks and toolboxes that help gens go by faster and strong loops and weaker killers, tunneling will always happen.
I know im going to get a lot of downvotes for this post…im already fully aware forum is quite hateful anything killer positive, but i do play more survivor nowdays, but i can see things from both sides. Im not heavily biased on eather side.
2 -
Always amuses me what people call "tunneling" in these discussions. My personal definition is split between opportunistic tunneling and hardcore tunneling.
Opportunistic Tunneling refers to instances where the killer targets a survivor that makes logical sense given the events if the trial... such a survivor is unhooked while another is looping near the hook or running to the hook while in chase, unhooks while the killer still hasn't had time to leave the area yet, and when previously hooked survivors don't make themselves scarce and keep pressuring generators in dangerous areas. These instances of tunneling are perfectly fair and reasonable, and a byproduct of *ahem*... overly optimistic survivor play and just general good attention being paid in the trial.
Hardcore Tunneling refers to instances where the killer targets the same survivor relentlessly, regardless of context, and will actively drop chases and leave slugs in order to return to hook and focus out a player. The distinction is that hardcore tunneling will drop whatever they are doing and pursue the tunnel, even if it's quite a significant gamble to do so. These gambles are mitigated significantly by certain killers with high map mobility, and so the argument can be made this is the best strategy to use on those killers, however I would argue playing such a killer in the first place does a lot to skew your DBD fundamentals. After all, why worry about M1 gameplay at all if you intend to keep playing Nurse? It's the same with gen and survivor tracking... if you don't need those skills to succeed, your ability in them will naturally wane. The point is hardcore tunneling on a less mobile killer will often backfire and put you in an even more lost position than you were before.
As such, when certainly discourage a new killer from hardcore tunneling to learn how to exert map control withoit it... and would also discourage veterans from it, even if playing a killer who has the mobility to get away with it... just so you stay in practice.
Opportunistic tunneling however... that's fair game to my mind... in some ways it's your duty to capitalise on opportunistic tunneling... otherwise survivors will never learn that unhooking in 10s is bad 😁
0 -
I only have one definition of tunneling - going after someone who has just recently gotten off hook that has not done anything to progress the objective or help their team and focusing entirely on that person even if therre are other opportunities to go after other players.
The moment that person starts healing another survivor, starts working on a gen, starts to try to bodyblock - ANYthing that isn't trying to gtfo and reset themselves, then they are fair game. Also, if someone else has gotten hooked after they got unhooked, they are also fair game, as you clearly went after someone else.
3 -
Ha, I appreciate that. I try to keep a level head where possible!
3 -
Well, this wasn't really a post about how I think people should play, so giving alternatives wasn't really within the scope of this specific post. I've considered making posts about how I see the basics of killer pressure, though, maybe I should do that sometime.
This post was solely about how I feel relying on tunnelling can harm you in the long run. Though, you're right that I probably should've given my definition of tunnelling in the post.
I clarified it a few posts down, but if you didn't see that- I define tunnelling as chasing someone who was just unhooked, nothing more nothing less.
-1 -
This topic is too complex to be limited to advice. First of all, you need to know the context and many details from the survivor and killer side. The answer will be strikingly different from the input data.
What is it? Solo player, SWF, Trapper, Blight, builds, map, etc.
Each input will perceive your advice differently. Somewhere I will agree with you that tunneling is harmful in the long run. Somewhere I will deny it because any means are good for achieving the goal. This is the paradox that arises. Although it seemed like one piece of advice, the interpretation of the situation can be different.
What can I say, we don’t even agree on the issue of tunneling. After all, everyone has their own, sometimes even several versions of understanding tunneling. This will also affect perceptions.
1 -
This is the only pvp community where one side gets hate for… trying to win the game?
4 -
Yeah the killer is supposed to prioritize the survivor fun! Like a survivor has ever done literally anything to make the game more fun for killer players
4 -
Well, the problem is that often, the game is decided in the loadout screen. If I load in with a C-tier killer with a fun build, I can usually do okay against a lot of solo queue teams. But if the other side comes in with 12 second chance perks, 4 gen perks, and comms, I'm going to get maybe 2 hooks.
4 -
You kind of have to lobby shop if you're gonna do that, the matchmaking is worse than broken
-1 -
it dumb but they saying that if they in a SWF group they always be in SWF group (become dependent) never play solo so they never have to improve so the game wont be hard for them.
but your right SWF is advantage like camping and tunneling not really but they can do something about camping and tunneling(not really).
and the dev can't do anything about swf on comm.
so were at a loss.
-1 -
😂🤣funny
maybe?
0 -
Uh, no.
That's definitely a direct response to the OP from the POV of a Ghostface main.
Run around with a knife, legs and nothing else for a week in standard matches and ignore/chase players you find based on hooking order and you might start to understand just how silly and entitled the complaints about "tunneling" really are.
1 -
Close, but I'm actually saying the way you'd play in a SWF won't stop working out for you unless you consciously choose to stop playing in a SWF. Compare that to tunnelling, which if you rely on it too much, will make your games harder without you needing to change anything at all.
For a killer equivalent to that concept, consider Nurse. If you only ever play Nurse, you are building specific skills and you are improving, but what you're learning won't translate to playing Trapper, who needs much more M1 fundamental knowledge and a lot more macro map knowledge than Nurse does.
That doesn't mean playing Nurse stunts your growth, though. Sure, hypothetically you'd have a more complete understanding of the game if you also learned Trapper… but that's only a problem for you if you actually want to play any killer other than Nurse. If you stick with Nurse (or SWF), you won't start seeing problems. Stick with tunnelling, and you will.
1 -
If it's a response to the post, what's the back half where you talk about entitled survivors all about?
You're doing it here, too, talking about tunnelling complaints. How's that relevant?
-1 -
Thats true. One of my regular SWF survivors is super hung up on the idea, that right now the killer role is strong enough to always go for 12 hooks, so anything else is "skill issues" and "what an a******! He is targeting that Feng again!", when in reality that killer is ping ponging between two survivors. I always try to give some insight into the killer role and how the killer probably sees the match right now, ie two gens already gone, two others openly worked on, a third probably in some far off corner of the map, etc. and that he just can't effort to spread hooks and chase each one of us individually, but to some players this is already playing "unfun". So you will never get all players onboard, someone will always have a somewhat different definition, while also calling the things the sameway as you do.
Many survivor players really don't understand the kind of pressure that 4 healthy survivors pose to the killer. It doesn't matter if you are on deathhook or never hooked, you can still churn out gen pressure like everyone else and my the midgame, some survivor has to bite the bullet, or the pressure is just too much for any killer to withstand (unless they got an extremely secure 3 gen, but even that won't hold forever).
The big thing is that even outside of this situations tunneling isn't discouraged and it even works at 5 gens. Yeah, if you got the opportunity to tunnel someone out at 5 gens, then the MMR fluked and/or the survivor massively missplayed, but it occasionally happens that you jump right in the middle of their gen-repair party, hit left and right and down them in quick succession. In that case the honorable thing to do is not to tunnel the first unlucky one, but to keep up the pressure while chasing someone new.
5 -
sad truth of asymmetrical games unfortunately
3
