http://dbd.game/killswitch
Conviction is too Op and Bully squads abuse it
So basically 20 percent recovering from the dying state instantly picks you up. Not only that but you can combine it with soul guard and unbreakable the work itself is annoying. Plus it’s not that it’s a slugging issue it’s the fact other teammates quickly go for flashlight saves and they go for sabo not to mention lightborn is the only thing that helps but not only that franklins is already nerfed and it’s no help against toolboxes at all. Conviction needs to be more than just heal a survivor for the perk to activate not only that 20 percent recovery is too short at least make it 50 recovery
Comments
-
It just shouldn't work with plot twist. The drawback is supposed to be actually there. Its to pick you up allow you to do something then inevitably go back down. The fact you can go around it with PT is just bad.
4 -
the perk is really cheap because of how spammable it is
it needs be one use or have much more restrictions than it has now.
-3 -
Conviction is bugged, requires to heal another survivor but also lets you activate by healing yourself, not only that, Plot Twist token gets used if you get up with Unbreakable, however getting up with Conviction does not? Further more, Conviction ignores Mettle of Man too, which is honestly, too inconsistent.
This perk is fine, it needs lots of bugfixes however.
0 -
it deactivates once you use it until you get another heal pretty sure, at least that's how it seems to be working in the stream i'm watching right now
-1 -
it doesnt take away from what im saying.
you dont need to finish a full heal or even heal another survivor, just make a health stage change on anyone including yourself to get the instapick up infinite UB back.
it is not healthy
-1 -
the self-pickup activating it is clearly a bug (admittedly an OP one and one they should fix ASAP)
0 -
it alone isnt why the perk is broken.
it cant be infinitely rechargeable if it's going to be activated so fast.
0 -
Agree to disagree about the infinite uses. Survivors still need to be picked up a second time when they use it. That's 16 seconds for the altruistic heal and 16 seconds for the pick-up times 2 survivors, or over a minute of survivor time used per use of the perk.
you might say "but there are survivor perks to speed those things up" and to that I respond, at that point you're using multiple perks to support that one and that leaves much less room for gen speed or chase perks or bully squad stuff
1 -
they can just finish the heal.
they dont need to fully heal 100% of the stage.
0 -
But that still runs into the fact that someone has to perform the heal in the first place.
If survivor A has conviction, and survivor B heals survivor C for 15/16 charges, then lets survivor A finish the remaining 1/16 charges, that's still 32 seconds of survivor time spent getting the perk up - 15 seconds of survivor B's time, 16 seconds of survivor C's, and 1 second of Survivor A's.
0 -
first of all survivors can just recover by themselves.
secondly they still get all the benefits of the heals, they are not wasting "survivor time" for nothing, theyre doing what they are GOING TO DO ANYWAY on top of recharging better UB.
lastly you seem to argue about technicality that "it isnt truly infinite" and "well they spend time anyway" while what matters if the perk can be triggered multiple times per trial, it's not a one use you can defuse, meaning you WILL HAVE TO PLAY AROUND IT FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE MATCH and that them "wasting time anyway" is made up by them getting massively impactful pressure undoing instrument with no other limit to it.
-1 -
first of all survivors can just recover by themselves.
…which still takes around 30 seconds of survivor time to do
secondly they still get all the benefits of the heals, they are not wasting "survivor time" for nothing…
never said they were. the point i'm making is that that the cost of the perk is a perk slot, and a full minute of survivor time spent (spent, not wasted) per use, and letting the killer know you have it after the first use. i think that's for the most part a fair cost for the perk, evidently you don't. this point also applies to your last paragraph too so imagine I quoted that one
I think it should be nerfed a bit, but mainly because it activates too quickly (speaking of, the amount of self-recovery time also factors into the time cost of the perk). Right now it's possible to get up in the amount of time a killer takes to make sure there's nobody lurking for the save, and i think a higher recovery threshold of at least 50% would be more appropriate.
1 -
i dont think you understand how much value there is in undoing most of the slugging pressure and narrowing it doing to very small amounts of survivor time wasted.
i dont think I see the point in arguing with you about it if you keep insisting that if the perk requires minimal timesink input to effectively deny killer most of the pressure they could get ontop of general gameplay abuse its other activation condition enables then it's somehow okay.
have a good day.
-2 -
Oh no I understand perfectly how being able to stand up from being slugged multiple times counters the pressure from slugging.
I just happen to believe that both sides having counterplay to their opponent's options is a good thing. In this case, the survivors can counter the strategy of "not pressing spacebar" by using an entire perk slot and pre-investing 30 seconds as a team and then using an additional 30 seconds as a team after using the perk activates, per use. And in turn, the killer can counter that pressure by using the "press spacebar" strategy.
"But it's more complicated than that" I know, I'm using this simplified model to express how I think giving players options to deal with complex situations they may not even face is a good thing. You apparently think only one side should have those options 🤷♂️
1 -
you dont seem to understand the difference between "counterplay" and "counterpick" alongside either being possible to be unbalanced. conviction isn't a counterplay, it's a counterpick by definition and absurdly unbalanced because it powercreeps unbreakable.
you also seem to be one of those people who forget they dont play a pve game and think that having pictures play the game for you is a good design and that the idea of counterplay to a thing in pvp game is "a thing i can consistently do that entirely shuts down the option my opponent has" which is an insane thing for a pvp game.
0 -
How is it a counterpick? You don't know your opponent is going to slug going into the loadout select screen. Do you think "counterpick" is just like, a thing you can pick that counters things? No, it's when you see what your opponent is bringing and pick something to counter that.
Personally I think "I should be able to slug for pressure and my opponents should have to deal with that without having any consistent counters" is a far more forgetting-the-game-is-not-pve thing to do but you do you bud
1 -
are you one of those people who argue that calm spirit is doctor's counterplay?
please stop bothering me
-1 -
...are you one of those people who thinks Calm Spirit is unfair because it counters Doctor? Are we calling Calm Spirit unfair now?
You're allowed to not respond to me. I'm responding because I think this is valuable discussion, I'm learning a lot about what some killer mains think are core, essential mechanics
1 -
deflect, good, that means your claim about "perk isnt counterpick because you dont know what youre facing" is disproven.
i do not value discussion with you because you repeatedly proven yourself to purposefully neglect tremendously important aspects concerning the perk and the play around it and resorted to using bad faith shallow arguments like "but people need counterplay".
so, again, please stop bothering me.
-2 -
That's the second word I've seen you use in a novel way, I don't see how explicitly stating what Calm Spirit is in relation to Doctor is a deflection from you raising a question about what Calm Spirit is in relation to Doctor.
This repeated insistence that I not respond to you is actually so fascinating. You have multiple options for how to deal with not wanting to engage in discussion with me, and yet you choose to request that I change my behavior to be most convenient for you, rather than modify your own behavior to avoid the situation you dislike.
I hate to be presumptuous, but I think we've found the root of the problem: you're struggling to modify your own behavior (be that posting habits or gameplay) to deal with how other people are playing. In the case of this public forum, you're asking certain people don't engage with you instead of simply choosing to ignore them, as if "not responding to someone" is some massive undue burden. In the case of Conviction, you're asking the perk be nerfed instead of trying to play around it.
1 -
oh i love when people extrapolate "the perk is overpowered because it lets do too much for too little and puts you in lose-lose situations, massively restricting the plays you are allowed to make as reactive role" into "you just dont want to change the way you play".
yeah, gives me just enough insight into your line of thinking to validate why I dont value your opinion or want to have a discussion with you.
-2 -
lose-lose situations
This term always kinda tickles me when used in regards to perks.
Is there some expectation that a survivor perk should create a win situation for the killer?
1 -
I mean, as I've been saying, I personally think it's relatively simple to play in a way that gives the survivors minimal chances to activate Conviction, and to deny further uses of the perk if they have shown they have it. I think it's not a huge leap to make, especially in the context of the parts of my post about how you Just Keep Responding despite saying you don't want to discuss things with me.
0 -
no, there's an expectation that I should be able to make a reasonably correct play to not lose the game to one out of sixteen perks survivors can bring against me.
instapicking to counter the perk and losing a lot of pressure because I wasted a dozen of seconds carrying survivor to the hook instead of pressuring other people in the area(we dont even count the potential of a save that i cant counter because if I do, the perk goes off) is not a reasonably correct play in my book.
this is not the perk you can afford to just "power through" either because not only it has massive impact on your momentum, it also is rechargable meaning that you cant just push through it like you could with last stand (another new still unhealthy but marginally less so perk) or most other survivor perks in the game.
nor can I "adapt" to it like I can against shoulder the burden and play around its downside - switch targets and deal with lesser benefit of them resetting the 2nd stage and having to go after a potentially stronger link.
this isn't designed like most "anti" perks that can be reasonably ignored by killer playing the game normally like babysitter/bloodrush
not like any of these examples are making up fair trade either, however conviction has neither of these things true for it.
there is nothing I can reasonably do against conviction except never slug under any circumstances and "win too hard" because the perk is that versatile, easily triggered and powerful.
-1 -
👍️
-1 -
no, there's an expectation that I should be able to make a reasonably correct play to not lose the game to
one out of sixteen perkssurvivors can bring against me.
But what do you define as a 'correct play'? What is the benchmark of that?
this isn't designed like most "anti" perks that can be reasonably ignored by killer playing the game normally like babysitter/bloodrush
Because this expectation of a loss-less play is not really reasonable. A survivor perk is meant to have some kind of benefit, not be negligible.
not only it has massive impact on your momentum
Does it?
If there's no one nearby, you can pick 'em up and ignore the perk. If there is someone nearby, you can ignore the slug, let them fire their perk, while you pressure another survivor. The person that got up can run, sure, but they're forced to go down and be helpless again. They're extending their own helpless state by using this perk. That doesn't seem like it's that harsh.
0 -
To my point earlier, saying that a perk should be balanced such that it can "reasonably [be] ignored" does prove my point that SMT is averse to changing their playstyle in reaction to other players. Shame they don't want to engage with that discussion, I think there's a lot of really interesting discourse on player expectations to be had there.
1 -
>But what do you define as a 'correct play'? What is the benchmark of that?
I already gave enough to define it in my previous statement. Im not looking forward to further arguing technicalities and semantics, the other guy proved it's an utter waste of time to engage in demagogy about it.
Because this expectation of a loss-less play is not really reasonable. A survivor perk is meant to have some kind of benefit, not be negligible.
by that logic decisive strike, unbreakable, etc etc on their own are bad perks? Because they, by themselves at least, stay counterable enough to be acceptable and yet are S tier perks.
Does it?
dOeS iT? iTs jUsT 30 sEcOnDs
"if there's no one nearby"
how do I know that? I dont have time to check, the perk is triggered way too fast.
If there is someone nearby, you can ignore the slug, let them fire their perk, while you pressure another survivor.
oh what a great suggestion.
okay, I let them set the perk off, this is midgame, conviction doesnt get charged normally until midgame unless Im playing hit&run (yet another killer whole playstyle massively hurt by this fair and balanced perk) so by that point I should already have set priorities for who I want to hook and how soon and I will most likely lose any close game (the one where survivors have reasonable gen pressure and 2-3 gens done + prog on last few).
One of my potential kills / 4th grim stack (lets assume and give YOU the benefit of the doubt im not throwing the game by 8 hooking and Im not abusing broken tunnelling/camping/slugging and have 2-2-1-0 split and therefore won 6 chases) just got +30 seconds and instead of getting a kill and getting to pressure the gen early, I have to go out of my way to chase down another most likely fully healthy survivor (as resets are incredibly free in current meta especially when Im playing in a way that doesnt give them too many chances to charge the fair and balanced perk aka chase-hook-chase people) who is going to be another tunnel out in best case. Let's give you another benefit of the doubt and assume I somehow know there's only one conviction in play.
We dont consider all the funny synergies the perk has like plot twist or inner strength that let survivor just ignore the main downside or trigger the perk even faster or get endurance after pick up so I dont even get to react hit them
We dont consider that I would have to find that person again somehow, let's also, again, give YOU the benefit of the doubt and imagine I have perfect game sense and supernatural awareness to locate the survivor that can die practically anywhere in those 30 seconds while Im distracted pressuring someone else.
We just consider the fact I just lost myself a game where I didnt "abuse" camping/tunnelling/slugging and yet I played well enough to win 6 chases before survivors supposedly reached a tipping point where the game is lost because a funny perk put me in an unwinnable situation preventing a 3v1 from happening for another 40 seconds which is a massive amount of time for that point of the match.
just win harder I guess, if you cant afford to delay a kill by 40 seconds, then you totally didnt deserve to win anyway, amiright wink-wink?
and this is just the most basic scenario with this perk, me doing a simple reasonable precaution that punishes me by delaying the hook for up to 30+ seconds. Im not even bringing up all the countless situations the perk can still come in clutch because of how easy it is to set off and get value from, Im just breaking down the most basic scenario you yourself brought up while giving you as much benefit of the doubt as I reasonably can.
-2 -
by that logic decisive strike, unbreakable, etc etc on their own are bad perks?
Yes, they are. The former is the pinnacle of it, since it has extremely restrictive use that's entirely in the killer's control. (Unbreakable has more wiggle room because hook denial is too strong)
I get that killers like to complain about this a lot, but DS has zero value of its own, and its prominence is dependent on the prevalence of tunnelling. These anti-perks aren't good perks, and everyone would drop 'em instantly if the thing they counter wasn't broken anymore.
We dont considerall the funny synergies the perk has like plot twist or inner strength that let survivor just ignore the main downside or trigger the perk even faster or get endurance after pick up so I dont even get to react hit themThese synergies are not inherent to the perk itself and I do agree that these need to be looked at and probably changed in a few cases, but that doesn't mean that Conviction itself is overpowered or should cop a nerf to compensate for these outliers.
preventing a 3v1 from happening for another 40 seconds
Let me pull the plug out of this argument: A survivor using Conviction doesn't make it NOT a 3v1. They are still incapacitated since they cannot pick themselves up anymore. It's not as permanent of a 3v1, but a slugged survivor is not a threat to you, since they cannot help their team in any way. So while you are chasing another person who was trying to go for the rescue, the person using Conviction is still incapacitated, and you have, at max, two survivors on gens while you are chasing a third, because the fourth is bleeding out elsewhere.
just win harder I guess, if you cant afford to delay a kill by 40 seconds, then you totally didnt deserve to win anyway, amiright wink-wink?
But the survivors are slowing themselves down here, too. Slugs are slowdown.
Im just breaking down the most basic scenario you yourself brought up while giving you as much benefit of the doubt as I reasonably can.Except not really, because you've dichotomised it in such a way that if you hook the survivor, you instantly win the match, whereas if you get delayed by any amount of time, you instantly lose the match. That is a recipe for maximising the value and impact of the perk. Vast majority of the time, it's not going to hit that.
-2 -
holy mother of takes, DS/UB are bad perks. Im sorry, I didnt read the rest, didnt see the point.
have a good day
-1 -
I know, I know, any perspective that's not your own is entirely, irredeemably invalid.
-1 -
i dont think anyone needs to value a perspective that calls S tier survivor perks "bad"
you wouldnt take my opinion seriously if I said nurse is a bad killer, would you? and if you ever did, you'd be a fool.
-1 -
meanwhile I had a fair conviction proc like this. I guess just dont slug, amiright, wink-wink?
-1 -
i dont think anyone needs to value a perspective that calls S tier survivor perks "bad"
Of course, this is 100% objective truth and anyone who dares to disagree with you is immediately discredited on all their opinions and must be wrong all the time.
(Or perhaps you're just using it as a cop-out, because you have a tendency to ditch conversations the second they aren't going your way)
You went to kick a gen first and then lost the survivor, this Conviction proc was entirely avoidable and would've been utterly meaningless without a secondary perk backing it up.
-1 -
this is a problem with the perk activating too quickly, which most people (myself included) recognize as a problem with the perk. it has nothing to do with your complaint of the perk being able to activate multiple times.
0 -
I presented sufficient evidence to prove a point, got you arguing semantics and making the most ridiculous points possible as a response. I dont owe you anything, you have already compromised my good will to consider your point any further than I already did.
so, again, have a good day.
almost as if there are multiple problems with the perk.
-2 -
I presented sufficient evidence to prove a point
Narrator: He did not, in fact, present any evidence
got you arguing semantics
The foundation of your argument is 'semantics' now, is it?
making the most ridiculous points possible as a response.
Opinion that isn't my own = 'most ridiculous possible point'
you have already compromised my good will to consider your point any further than I already did.
You never had any goodwill to begin with, that's why you keep resorting to 'don't talk back to me'.
so, again, have a good day.
Like I said: Cop-out.
0 -
"Oh no I can't slug people to guarentee the 4k anymore" Yeah dude this perk gets no value if you just pick up lmao
2 -
This content has been removed.
-
If its a flashlight, face a wall (duh) and if its a pallet save, tank the save and then break pallet.
Killers are so afraid of ANY inconvinence that they will actually inconvinence themselves more by trying to avoid a minor problem. (Killers that won't break very strong pallets because of chem trap allowing survivors to save more time than if the killer just took the slow and broke that pallet.)
1
