I'm amazed that killers are surprised by the changes

Exactly. And that becomes a problem when its a game you've been playing for years, and why its universally a bad idea to ever knowingly introduce one into a game's existing lifespan unless absolutely necessary. You front load all potential accessibility issues so that people can make an informed decision up front, and won't suddenly not be able to play the game 9 years into its life. Thats why its particular egregious, but pointing it out is apparently equivalent to people crying that the item does anything at all.

To be fair, I get accused of being a killer main constantly when I barely play the role due to tracking issues. I just focus on the game overall more than my personal experience alone, even though I wish the game didn't try as hard to exclude someone with issues like myself from half of it. I get what you mean considering the pattern, but I don't think that means he's doing some kind of double agent posting or something. It tends to be pretty obvious when people are being disingenuous.

That said, again, the "demands" were concerning completely different elements than the ones that were changed. The item was designed poorly to begin with by focusing on introducing an accessibility issue, but charges don't matter if a single use can completely ruin a game, and the opacity is the last thing to adjust because its the primary point of the item. Their reaction isn't about giving into demands, its about realizing they messed up and trying to appease the players in a way that saves face. They still haven't even addressed normalizing the effect between variables like different maps, something everyone agrees should be adjusted before touching opacity. If they gave into demands, the item would be removed and all BP would be refunded, because the current form is arguably worse than not existing for survivors.

I'm not surprised that the devs wanted to take action to disincentivize tunneling/slugging, and it's not something I'm against. I think hardcore tunneling & slugging absolutely do need addressed for the sake of the game's health. What I am surprised about is that their answer is so half baked (especially their "tunneling" "solutions", the slugging thing I'm not too pressed about, though I wonder why recovery is automatic since it seems like a redundant change, why they feel a crawl speed ramp-up is necessary, and why it's infinite once triggered) despite having a lot going on with it, and despite taking so long to reach our eyes. I find their logic to be incomprehensible and almost definitive proof that they simply don't know what they're doing over there. That they don't understand the implications of what they're introducing to the overall design space one single bit.

I'm also surprised that there isn't more pushback against the base idea of directly punishing the killer for, you know, killing, especially in situations that I feel most people wouldn't consider hardcore tunneling, and particularly from people who I generally respect the opinions of (even though I might disagree with them often). It's a real missing the forest for the trees situation in my view. I don't know if people just aren't as smart as I thought they were or if they're so deeply invested in the game that they'll accept any sloppy ideas thrown their way as long as there's a chance it might make their day to day play experience a little better (even though like, c'mon, we're gamers, we'll find something to complain about soon enough).

"Periods of time when individual servers have longer survivor queues" istg

Thats why its especially disheartening when legitimate concerns like this get lumped in with unrelated whining. It basically encourages the devs to completely ignore them by creating a false equivalence between them and people who are being unreasonable. Its also why many people have a sense of urgency about them, because they know these issues will take years to be addressed if BHVR is allowed to ignore them, exactly like the clicking example.

They wont do that, because bad ideas that require manpower and resources tend to be harder to roll back. Especially when they involve player inventory and a resource investment from the playerbase. They opened pandora's box by putting it into the live game, so removal becomes less of an option than reworking. This is exactly why so many things get reworked into an undesirable state, then readdressed up to years later. I'm not even going to get into more subjective aspects like pride or willingness to accept criticism, but just logistically, removal is a bit of a nuclear option at this point.

The overall issue precludes the specific ones. The way they handled that situation, both in pre and post release, leaves me next to no faith that they prepared adequately for how ambitious these changes would even be consecutively, let alone congruently.

No offense, but they could give every survivor a gun that insta-kills the killer, and you'd still probably defend it.

Look at the current series of votes between our posts in the discussion. Presuming you'll disagree with someone based on the username above the post is just as bad as outright ignoring whatever side you play less. As long as both sides are genuine, you should generally learn more from people who you routinely disagree with than those who constantly mirror your own sentiments. There's no reason for hyperbolie, even when you don't generally agree with a person. Just take their perspective into consideration if they're genuine, and disregard it specifically if they're not.

You certainly can, but that doesn't mean you won't miss out on a perspective that would give context to your own. I swear I reference art of war on this forum too much, but knowing your opponent objectively makes you better as a competitor in any context. This used to be pretty understood when disagreeing vs arguing.

honestly, another big mistake was not having those numbers ready at the same time.

I really feel this should've all been dropped just before the PTB went live.

My killer experience is about the same as yours. It's generally 0k or 4k. There's little in between and I kinda hate that. My ideal match is a 2k or 3k. That feels like an even and fair game. My main is also at the target 60% which also feels right for a fair player.

I believe the finisher mori has absolutely increased kill rates. Before it was implemented, I got a good amount of mercy hatches and killers who wanted to goof around. I still give a lot of mercy as killer but if I want it myself, I have to be very endearing or funny. It's become super rare and that's kinda depressing. I like when those barriers come down. I think it's addition was one of the worst changes for the general vibe of the game. And yeah, it's absolutely altered the stats.

I also think the survivor changes probably won't do much against the most misery-inducing killer-players, despite the loud voices crying ALL KILLERS WILL QUIT THE GAME. For the killers I play, the basekit changes are a buff and I do actually expect them to help me, a mid player using mid killers with fair tactics. But I don't think the survivor stuff is going to help as much as I'd like it to. 90s is a long time on the ground. I've had killers who've hovered over me and waited for me to bleed out for four minutes and maybe it will help those extreme scenarios, but more likely they'll just hit me again. And people who tunnel at 5gens will still do it. I don't know how you change them, and they're the real problem.

I imagine they want to see what happens with kill rates and then address more killers after, like how they're reworking Myers. I know everyone lacks faith but they're doing a lot here, and they're always doing a lot, things just get rushed with deadlines and squeezing money out of IPs. I'm looking forward to seeing future reworks for lower tier killers.

Oh, I believe you play killer. I never doubted that for a second. I think you're probably very, very good, too. So good that you have become very detached from the actual killer experience for ppl who haven't dumped 20k hours into the game.

I believe it. Once they hype for Springtrap died down, queues went back to normal.

They are indeed doing a lot, its very ambitious. The issue with overambition is, like you mentioned, things like deadlines and squeezing money out of IPs exist. Looking back at the comment about 90s being a long time, think about killers who have slugging built into their kit, like Oni or the Twins. The timer has been presented in a way that assumes it will be consistent in both growth and a lack of resetting, which means people are assuming that it will count up every second a survivor is on the ground, and cumulatively build up regardless of number of times downed. This would essentially put a "down limit" on killers like the Twins or Oni, because they generally need or want to leave one survivor on the ground for a short period of time. This also gives the killer yet another thing to mentally track, as they will need to know whether a survivor could potentially pick themselves up before they can reach them, with a growing potential as the match goes on and more downs are secured.

So now your average Twins player needs to keep track of: each player's amount of time being downed throughout the match, in a presumably non-resetting fashion regardless of not slugging any more than their kit is designed to force. Victor can situationally help with keeping track of where they go while beelining to them, but they can recover while crawling without even needing to try so they will pretty much never stay in his proximity even when someone is there to kick him. The Twins will have to keep track of hook counts for everyone mentally (like usual,) but now will be punished for killing anyone before 6 hooks, making mentally tracking hook states arguably more important than it was when people purposely used it to tunnel players out, yet the best they get is a notification of which Ada or Ace was the last one they hooked. This is on top of everything else, just the changes (as they have been presented so far) and how they apply to that specific killer when introduced all at once.

When changes like that affect a single facet of a role, that can be a bit more forgivable. Mess up a perk or killer with an update? Sucks, but there is still plenty of game to play without them. But once you start messing with things like the act of hooking and killing survivors, you need to be extremely careful with those changes as the game relies on them to function. This is why the importance of getting things right on the first try is so high, and why I compare it to 6.1 when many people found the game outright unplayable due to oversights with specific changes amongst a tidal wave of other ones.

I was gonna post something similar. Not to glaze him too hard, but Pulsar is someone I've always enjoyed seeing post because he's knowledgeable and about as unbiased as one can be with DBD.

(You too btw but I don't know that I'd call you unbiased 😝)

My intention was not to accuse him of anything, but it becomes very confusing when I have seen him argue against console players from having aim-assist on the Singularity, defending Made For This on release, or not show a single complaint about survivor perks that have been in a bugged or game breaking state for months. I mean, he mostly play as a killer, he suffers through all that but never has nothing to say. While, on the other hand, he has long discussions throughout the forum defending the concerns of survivors. It's just weird, and even extremely annoying.

Total apparently

For me in day survivors que time is fast and killers is few minutes and in the evening survivor que time is 5+ minutes and killer que time is like 1 minute, depends where you live and what new chapter brought or new game mode like 2v8,lights out etc.

Because most players play duos and in 2v8 its way funnier to play and team as killer than survivor so no surprise killer ques are 20+ minutes and survivors is almost instant. People would love more to play as wesker and nemesis togeather than two megs which they can do in 1v4.

Is two minutes suppose to be long?