Interested in volunteering to help moderate for the Forums? Please fill out an application here: https://dbd.game/moderator-application
Kill Switch update: We have temporarily Kill Switched the Forgotten Ruins Map due to an issue that causes players to become stuck in place. The Map will remain out of rotation until this is resolved.

http://dbd.game/killswitch

Recall of PTB and tunneling issue

tes
tes Member Posts: 1,214



CW: really long text.

Hello. 

I just want to try to explain here what concerned me this whole month in the most casual (and maybe emotional) way. This post is going to be very long, and considering English isn’t my native language, I have to try a lot to keep this post long yet simple, constructive yet subjective, and emotional yet not offensive at the same time. I would be grateful to everyone who will take it into account and will provide their further feedback!

PTB and their main issue

  1. Poor technical implementation - the whole new mechanic with introducing zero collision caused many bugs related to killer power (like Legion, Pyramidhead, Ghostface, Twins, Cenobite). Antislug scale were also a lil broken, because even situations where killer didn't slug (survivor just used plot twist) were contributing to build the scale up.
  2. Base kits from already existing mechanics without proper consideration
  • BBQ

Basically, we killed the original version and got the nerfed one in the base kit. Considering it always was counterable as well, I find this bonus extremely insignificant and not worthy to use. The main use of this perk on actual good players never were mindless chase finder. The main reason while this perk were viable on majority of killers is possibility for actual map control and understanding of each position. 

  • Pop

25% of current progression is viable on killers with high mobility only, and alongside further nerfs of other meta perks, it was insufficient. Again, because of current progression. In PTB it was simply impossible to achieve same level of gen regression, yet anti-system changes were supposed to make trial longer. Yet it’s straightforward were impossible, if survivors actually worked on objective.

  • Haste

    I never found it fair when one side just mindlessly stacked haste only to make life easier, getting rid of any necessity in mind gaming and playing tiles using their sources, at the same time denying skill from other roles. You didn’t consider how actually problematic it looks on Springtrap, Spirit, and Clown. We should stop contributing to the already sensitive status system, making it even worse or abusable on specific killers. Moreover, for killers who actually needed it, haste would never be enough compared to actual mobility. And they won’t stack base kit with other perks - because usually their weakness hides in map pressure and chase at the same time, so they have to use slowdown or more viable chase perks that works most of the time. 

This ptb changes give a clear message here - on really low level of play games indeed would like to finish as tie more. On above mid? This is definitely would be something worse than any solo Q experience. Why? 

We got multiple nerfs considering 25% of current progression might be strong, but forgot to do the same for the survivor. Still keeping second chances perks, or buffing already extremely beneficial base kits. If we were actually up to balance, I thought devs will reduce half of numbers on gen rush perks and removed any second chances completely. Yet… devs decided to rework the same otr in a way that buffs base kit? Just… why? We also had other problems: 

  • No HUD info deprived the killer of any actual map control (alongside the buff of reassurance). As well as you directly encourage players to camp or run specific perks only to have base info that other role were already provided for free.
  • No collisions, prolonged haste (buffed babysitter), OTR provided a whole weapon as your teammate that can freely bodyblock, mess with other players' hitboxes, or simply deny killer’s power when u still can freely communicate with killers props. 
  • Complete death of any tracked tools, while unhooked survivors still keep as active members of the team. Killer instinct turns out to be redundant system. 
  • 6 hooks. I don’t want to even comment this. Just to get know - in games where I played survivor and we indeed deserved our win killer barely had 6 hook stages in endgame. Think for yourself what I'm hinting at.
  • Implemented tenacity and buffed unbreakable as a base kit. Uh… I think every tenacity user in effective SFW knows how broken it is. If not… I can’t advise western sources on this theme, but Russian streamers like Meydix and NighFuryo tested it, and it was pretty bad. We had a period of infinite unbreakable; why return to the same mistakes and make it even worse?

Possible “crutch” or actual balancing?

I think the fairest position should stay as it is—the game should have tools to utilize, and you should have the opportunity to use or not to use them. It’s not about what kill rate/escape rate you personally have. It’s not about the streaks people are doing in the media.

We should stop asking for base kits unless it’s related to UI changes, accessibility, and info that will decrease the gap between solo and SWF. Why? If you buff the whole side by numbers, it’s going to lead to game-breaking scenarios and another so-called “emotional rant.” Both experienced survivors and killers were against the recent PTB, in case they took most of their matches seriously and were oriented on the PvP genre rather than abstract comprehension of fun.

So, I tried to write down my personal proposals about QoL. Starting with small steps instead of drastic changes would be a more viable strategy for a long time period. We definitely need to make life of solo better. But if this changes are proposed in a way of some numbers, straight-off bonuses and ignores SFW/variability of killers it would be a lazy decision.

The following proposals consider this system in relation to good RNG existence and equal skill on both sides. An actually working and balanced MMR assumes that people don’t actually struggle in this game on one side more than the other. That both sides encourage playing the game seriously or in the frame of the proposed (PvP) genre. I’m also considering that the game should provide proper UI changes to this system, making it intuitively clear when and how it’s working for both sides.

  • 10 sec of elusive endurance and haste after unhooking stays as it is and cancels only in the endgame. Elusive is lost as soon as you act (pallet drop, killer prop interaction, and flashlight usage should be included). I strongly recommend keeping it about cancelling in the endgame because this part has a shorter duration of the whole game sequence, and if a survivor gets downed there, it means they are getting downed. It’s not about tunneling anymore, and the only incentives you get in the endgame should be provided by how you played the game as a whole + optional perks. I also look at this from the perspective of a survivor who has suffered many times in the endgame, because blindly counting on a free human shield in the form of a wounded teammate always led to senseless and even deadly altruism. Players should not have a "tricky tool" that may mislead the team to unsafe decisions. IMO.
  • If a survivor is unhooked and the killer initiates a chase, they get the adrenaline rush effect for the next minute:

About the Adrenaline Rush Effect:

  • After taking a hit and enduring it, you keep haste for up to 3-5 seconds (so, let the survivor who is tunnelled get out of the dead zone). Your scratch marks disappear 50% faster, and you don’t leave pools of blood for 60 seconds. Dead Hard will have huge potential to become an actual anti-tunnel perk on its own. And skill-related. If it was hit straight off the hook, you can gain more distance by getting out of zone or make the role of the saver more preferable for the killer to chase. I don’t personally appreciate this and call it a “crutch,” but if we believe it’s unbelievably hard to endure 1 vs 1 from typical solo queue… here it is.
  • Every survivor within a range of 32 m of you can see each other.
  • You can see the aura of lockers, windows, and pallets for 60 seconds within a 24 m range. You don’t create noise when fast vaulting objects.

Other effects that also might help solo:

  • From the start of the trial, the survivor sees the aura of one random generator. After gen completion, the target changes.
  • When a survivor is hooked/slugged, you and your teammates see each other’s aura within the killer’s terror radius.
  • When a survivor is injured, everyone sees the aura of the injured within a 16 m range. The injured survivor also sees the aura of their teammates in this range.
  • If you have a hook state and are injured, you have a 100% chance to get a brown med-kit on your first chest opening. Sounds unimportant, but it can make a big difference when your solo teammates are busy or deny your healing, forcing unsafe situations. Many inexperienced players also like to open chests, so making them slightly more useful isn’t harmful. I think chests should also introduce a 50% chance of key spawn if one survivor is left in a trial.
  • Maps now can “point” at objects and highlight auras by default. You can now highlight up to 3 objects at the same time (hook, generator, chest, exit gates, totems).
  • Survivors see the aura of any dropped item until it’s fully depleted.
  • Rework of hatch locations: on every map they can spawn only in 3 specific locations (shack, main building, within 24 meters of one of the gates). The hatch closes itself after 60 seconds (to deny camping from the killer or AFK play).
  • If you are the only survivor left in a trial, you open gates 100% faster.
  • Antislug proposal (it doesn't cancel slug as a way of pressure but makes slugging irrelevant or extremely risky if you are commuting to it as the main playstyle). It also shouldn't harm Twins/Oni with their core design to down survivors over a far distance between each other.
  • If you are put in the dying state, you make 50% less noise. You can recover up to 99% progress.
  • If another teammate is put down as well, both of you have a 100% bonus to recovering, and you are crawling faster. You can crawl and recover at the same time. After this, you can pick each other up by pressing the ability button on your slugged teammate. Both of you get a 50% speed boost for 3  seconds, and you get the adrenaline rush effect.
  • If two survivors are left in a trial and one of them is downed for more than 30 seconds, this survivor can disconnect without penalty AND without losing match progress (the DC will be equal to being killed). It auto-triggers the hatch (no bot replacement).

Comms proposal

This is actually a huge need for Solo. I was thinking about adding something like a special gesture to point at the area of a location you want to show your teammate and a few additional phrases that will be seen close to the survivor HUD, like

“Go there.”
“Avoid this place.”
“Generator”
“Totem”
“Teammate there”
“Exit”
“Help me.”

Pre-lobby perks loadout

I’m against the opinion of people who don’t want to see this feature only because of potential lobby dodging. Maybe it’s the duty of the game not to create perks that encourage dodging? You also have pre-game chat; nothing prevents a player from warning their teammates about specific perks for achievements. I always did it myself numerous times without this feature, so my teammates could either support me or leave if they wanted to focus on winning. As a killer, I don’t mind it either.

  • It should help with the main issue—when your teammates draw false conclusions due to not having enough information, making team-oriented builds inefficient.

But if the changes were to turn out to be so disadvantageous, I would suggest an alternative in the form of additional roles that change the character’s HUD icon like in 2 vs 8 and inform others about what role the teammate wants to take on. It also would be nice if each of the class would have some interesting passive effect everyone would be aware of.

Rating

The most controversial take here, but… I had numerous matches in a row where teammates ruined the game for everyone, just wanting their flashlight save. When 3 out of 4 people refuse to do gens, leading to poor time management while the killer just eats sources and hooks stages. The only time I experienced the desire to give up was in matches like this. Not when someone tunneled me. If such people would have a higher probability of playing with players alike, solo queue would breathe easier.

Addressing many posts I witnessed during PTB

Just a hot take here?  It’s counterintuitive for the core design of PvP games to force one side to play less aggressively only for the other to catch up (it should stay as an option, however) and “have fun.” Just because you want to make an already casual game even more casual.

Playing a little bit less than 1k, but treating this game kind of seriously (not really, otherwise I played ladder or league), and trying both roles made me feel the average survivor skill floor is lower than the killer one. THAT’S the issue. The majority of survivors are ignoring simple truths—the other role they are going against consist less of such players, and they usually treat the game completely differently. Killers don’t have “funny chat” interaction or a sense of team play to entertain themselves, and the aesthetic of slasher and horror encourages playing to win in this specific role. They don't have the opportunity to “take a rest” on holding M1 interaction with gen, and the constant surround of 4 players, if they are capable of competing, puts them in pretty stressful circumstances, leading to more direct gameplay focused on winning and can lead to an aggressive style. Their perk roster for effectiveness and “funny” builds is 10x more limited and extremely specific to each killer. Mechanics work there as well—due to some variability of powers and requirements to learn it. Skill expressions are way more natural for killers. Survivors? It always was a hidden gem due to how this role was designed, among the chaotic behavior of 4 people. That’s where I found an answer to why it’s worse first for solo survivors. This game created a natural incentive for the killer to try to be as efficient as possible, yet failed to do the same on the survivor side. It’s an unnatural, fleeting moment the majority of players don’t notice. And we have other numerous problems, which are present in every match. Fixing it by limiting other roles isn’t the answer and never will be.

I know that my words above wouldn’t be enough, so here is a more thorough address of popular takes:

“Tunneling is an easy strategy and exploit.”

It is, indeed, easier strategy. Because effective. Why we should discourage to play effective? Because average survivor player didn't learn how to play effective as well? Maybe, to make it harder for killer, instead of providing lazy invincible power, survivors should get better RGN and taught how to counter it? So only survivors who actually progress in game receive bonuses? 

People who claim tunneling is easy make it easy for the killer.

The first kill supposed to happen from 2 gen to 1 in actually balanced matches no matter game style your opponent choose and you can secure it by good RNG and effectiveness. If killer use effectiveness, it should be countered by same approach. Not due to someone dying so other members get a free catch-up tool. Because when this tool is desperately needed, it wouldn’t be enough anyway, but in balanced trials where tunnelling worked as well though strategy or desperation attempt of comeback, it switches the game on adaptability difficulty for one role, ignoring previous decisions of the other role and their influence, leading to unexpected fine. I will never understand why games should punish people for logically effective strategies only because it affects their opponents in a bad way. So I indeed will not understand why some people in community claim gen rush/tunnel should be punished by system, and not as responsive play. Game should encourage effectiveness only, as well as encourage heavy counterplay. Not creating it itself

If you don’t tunnel/slug/hold 3 gen/proxy camps, you’ll never win the game in macro and efficiency against a team actually equal to your skills, so you have to stomp 99% of the lobbies by chases. This is straightforward impossible as expecting solo be aware of what of potential 160 perks their teammates have for loadout. 

People in this community have a tendency to blame in a skill issue on the part that decided to combine their chase potential with map economy, which is actually showing a deeper understanding of gameplay. It can’t be a skill issue when players commit to an effective strat as a way to put pressure. It’s a skill issue when you fail doing it or can’t show any resistance.

Game doesn't learn survivors how to deal with actual pressure. Split up, gen efficiency — something so small and not requires comp level of understanding the game, yet people fail. Why? Game never actually punished people with high level of selfishness on the side where it is supposed to be a team play, and moreover, put this punishment on killer/other survivors usually. And until we’ll move from escape and kill rate to actually strict win conditions that focus on 1 vs 4 factor, where such players will forever stay in low tab, nothing will change. My teammate played bad? We’ll all lose MMR then. And I have to deal with more of such teams in solo, stucking in same pattern as some kind of nightmare. Even me can threw up matches, but somehow game doesn't do anything to encourage player to fix it.

Maybe it's not fun, but with the contribution of many second-chance perks, this game is indeed about resource management. Killers understood this a long time ago, because the specificity of being alone on the game usually forces you to manage time. For survivors this game, unfortunately, doesn’t have clear signs, while the media is over-obsessed with chases.

Tunneling isn’t some “exploit”—at least because it has actual counterplay, at max because it’s a characteristic trait in every asymmetric game. BHVR already gave us a lot of extremely busted tools that limits tunneling, but apparently failed to teach how to use it. Watching gameplay years ago when everyone one knew about “tapping” the hook for save rescue and comparing it to nowadays, more of such changes just leads to deteriorating skills on survivor side. People forgot everything they knew cause received another base kit they can rely on. 

“But stats claim the survivor role is underpowered, so it requires incentives for catching up.”

Do we really wanna to rely on stats where…

  1. They consider matches where the killer/survivor farms
  2. They consider games where a person disconnected and it gave an evident advantage to the killer. 
  3. Games where survivors or specific one just gave up for no reason or played typical “bully squad” style, where instead of completing main objectives, it was a 20-minute match of interaction with the killer 
  4. Games where teammates are feeding/cooping with the killer

For numerous people on this forum, with all my respect, do you really want to use official stats as an argument when Sadako, arguably one of the weakest killers in the game, has a busted kill rate in general due to how people simply don’t know anything about counterplay because the design of this game didn’t provide it? 

Stats will turn out to be viable when this game will have clear win conditions. And when people who play for fun and who play for challenge will be separated.

Tribalism and why it exist 

Tunneling never was a mechanic with the possibility to tweak numbers introduced by devs. It has always been an approach to the game from a player and lives in the nature of every asymmetric game. It's pointless to fight with this factor along with the SFW one. It's pointless to shame people for playing like this, because it's a deal of their view on the game.

The uniqueness of killer ability already encourages a learning curve (besides the dash slop epidemic or recent decrease of actually complicated mechanics), but a complete generic approach to perks and, therefore, survivors creates an invisible barrier for the other group. I wouldn’t like to call it a mass skill issue, because I’m playing survivor myself. But the way it was designed heavily implies this. Micro limited, macro neglected. And we planning to push it further with generic dash/teleport slop, auto hits/grab scan, primitive props, repetitive perks, limitation of approaches. Can I receive answer why? Anyone above 1k hours will be just tired from playing games where u supposed to play PvP, but it turns out u fight with the system. One side is indeed “underpowered”. Because game didn’t show the value of time and resources. And it can falsely mislead to the situation where “it’s my opponent and not my problem”. 

Survivors need to have incentives. But not free one. As well as some Myers unviable without a tombstone, survivors have to be glued with their meta. But then why are we trying to rework killers as a first response to this problem, but with survivors suddenly having to point fingers on the other side and tell them they are the problem? I don't get such logic.

“The game is indulging killer players.”

I would like to say specific killers are just devs’ favorites, or they simply don’t know what to do with their powers, probably limited by their technical capabilities. The way BHVR quickly responded to the fog vials and PTB issue can be explained as it is—they’ll prefer for one person to be waiting to matchmake rather than 4, as well as they’ll prefer to quickly react to the “emotional rant” of the minority, which keeps the game playable. This changes also caused many bugs in technical terms. Too much I want to say. 

The last released meta on survivors that works as slowdow was shoulder the burden. No rework/nerfs, even when it’s still pretty buggy. Last released meta slowdown on killers? Artist’s scourge hook, that went through 3 nerfs and one “buff” that was motivated by horrible bug. And were almost nerfed to the ground on PTB. The Ghoul/Clown existence is a consequence of PTB not working as actual testing system and complete neglect of feedback, where many killer players weren’t denying their problematic gameplay and asked for not pushing it to the live. So, where is actually that “indulging to the role”? Attention? Absolutely, but not indulging. 

So, about true balancing.

I have never seen positions from players who seek “fun” or balance factor statements like “Let’s remove both tunneling and the SFW factor.” No tunneling, but no way to deny killer pressure from chases by stun saves, flashlights, sabos, and second chances as well, so killers won’t feel they need to tunnel”

Such people were advocating for a mass nerf of slowdown, like genuinely believing 25% of current progression is indeed a strong tool and requires the death of everything else viable in the game. But for survivors? You were able to stack everything with the new system, overbuffing yourself on the level of some nurse. No one pointed it out when told about number tweaks. So, indeed—if they are going to tell me they are up to balance, I won’t believe it. Not anymore.

This game have to balance around BOTH average and top players. And of course it’s gonna be hard. Especially when u want to remove any encouragement for playing better and handling them on the most primitive way, at the same time putting whole responsibility on other role to deal with consequences of this decision.

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • AmpersandUnderscore
    AmpersandUnderscore Member Posts: 2,960

    Why is tunneling special?

    Hiding was easy, and also survivors "just surviving". It got nerfed from several directions, with distortion getting deleted, aura read is so prevalent and varied that it has no reasonable counter, and yet they still went the extra mile to punish players for doing it.

    All I see from this is that actually, meaningfully addressing tunneling would require killers to adapt and try something different. That is apparently unconscionable for most people, and they will, apparently, say or do anything to avoid that at all costs.

    And this includes not only writing a novel about it, but disregarding stats, and trying to divert to literally anything else other than the actual issue.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    I would like to see direct answer on my post rather then a rhetorical question about the specialty of something

  • AmpersandUnderscore
    AmpersandUnderscore Member Posts: 2,960

    Why we should discourage to play effective

    See above. Hiding was effective play.

    So why is tunneling special?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Because hiding was an avoid way of any interactivity on a trial where two sides that are supposed to interact. Clear answer here. And because it was as well the way to keep players hostage. Or selfish plays where people were using it for waiting whole team to die for getting simple hatch. Hiding were able to harm both teammates and killer. That’s why it was highlighted as issue.

    U still can hide in the trial, but u can’t do it forever, by the way. Want to see examples? Watch KnightLight solo q streak rn. As well as when survivor provides anti tunnel perks, killer provides anti stealth. Listen me up. I’m distortion user. Still, despite its nerf. Maybe it would be nice to have +1 token from the start, but now already it’s pretty balanced.

    I’m up to reworking aura perks, actually. I’m even up to ban aura read on specific killers like nurse. But again - your comment isn’t about direct response on my post. Is another whataboutism and tribalism contribution. So, I will wait until u’ll give actual response rather than forcing other people to answer on your questions only. Stealth wasn’t mentioned in this post. U just pushed it here in attempt of “but what about this”, and that’s all. Try better next time

  • AmpersandUnderscore
    AmpersandUnderscore Member Posts: 2,960

    So, just to be clear, doing so situationally is a "strategy" and good, effective gameplay. Yet if someone is doing that strategy "excessively", which impacts not just the match, but the overall gameplay for 4 other players, we need to address that immediately.

    I think I have that right. Especially since the live version of crows was grossly overtuned and deleted stealth completely, and now we just have significantly nerfed stealth.

    So, how, exactly, is tunneling special?

    Because: doing so situationally is a "strategy" and good, effective gameplay. Yet if someone is doing that strategy "excessively", which impacts not just the match, but the overall gameplay for 4 other players, we need to address that immediately.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Crows were fixed as soon as people started to complain.


    Are we using as argument stuff that were admitted as problematic and turned off?

  • AmpersandUnderscore
    AmpersandUnderscore Member Posts: 2,960

    I would like to see direct answer on my post rather then a rhetorical question.

    Why is tunneling special?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    U ignored other stuff as well

    — I admitted stealth aspect should be tuned and aura read have to be balanced on specific killers

    — I never said tunnelling is special, u just put it out of nowhere and put this question as rhetorical

    — I said stealth were affecting badly not killer, but teammates also. So it were affecting badly your own side. It’s not just “4 people in a trial”. It’s other 3 where u who u were supposed to help

    — U completely ignored comment about interaction issue

    I won’t respond on any of your comment anymore, just because it seems u have a great joy of selective word extraction, twisting it to suit your own purposes, because apparently responding directly to the post is too difficult, and we need to come up with additional questions to derail the discussion into meaningless tribalism. If you enjoy such dialogues, go ahead. I'm not going to invest in it.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    I played such hide and seek games on both sides in custom matches. All it represents is new rules within a completely different game, and a complete disregard for objective-based play. There's no interactivity in a game where players studiously avoid interacting with generators or chases, even though the game assumes these are central to the experience. It's a good idea for events or private games, but not for a typical 1v4.

    By the way, can we get back to the post, or is this turning into a major off-topic? In that case, I might suggest you create a separate discussion if hide-and-seek is such an important topic for you

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    "I came up with the question myself, I found the answer myself." Perhaps it's worth creating own discussion for such cases.

    I've been following your comments for a while now and I've noticed that you're a big fan of talking to yourself, because as soon as your opponent doesn't indulge your tribalism, it's very difficult for you to engage in a discussion with real arguments, and we reach the stage of "git gud, you're just too lazy to adapt." Without even realizing it, this phrase can backfire and apply to your own position.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Who are u to give chances, excuse me? Am I asked for some chances here, xd?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Take a take u are displeased with at least, and not creating off topic with stealth aspect of the game, along with question u already have your own answer for

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    The issue is - u can still do stealth, but it seems somehow it were “gutted” away as soon it was unviable in terms of long ignoring objective and making match even more long.

    I’m up to changing some aura read perks again (why u all ignoring this part of my comment) - but answer me, since when I should find stealth completely killed when I use it in game myself? Because I am playing for stealth when play survivor. It is harder now, yes. Tunnelling is also became harder, since introducion of base kit endurance, new shoulder the burden and simply more survivors playing better than many years ago. Both killers and survivor stuck in this anti - tunnel and anti-stealth meta as well to counter each other meta. But again, nothing were “killed”. U still can do this, it just requires more conditions and the actual issue game doesn't show it. Game doesn't teach and u have to spend thousand hours to distinct every perk and counter it. I’m up to changing it as well

    Would u be satisfied if some aura read perks on killers with high mobility or range would be banned? Can we find some compromise on this topic or it always had to be definite “u are wrong”?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    The issue with stealth and tunnel comparassion how u push it is because the only way stealth is unviable is perks. Stealth never were base kit, it was an approach as well, but their nerf was pushed by optional gameplay of using perks. + some “base kit” as lighting rework. U still can commit to it, but good players or perks can punish you.

    What about tunnelling? Absolutely same. Side nerf for base BT/face camp scale + more antitunnel perks as optional play. U still can commit to it, but good player or perks can punish you.

    My whole post literally was about “it's fine to make tunneling harder. But not by blind number tweaks”. The only reason why tunnelling is easier because majority of teams are disorganized and game don't know how to fix it. So, survivors should be buffed by information? More free comms, the best possibility of perks synergy, better RGN, rework of the approach to killer powers with removing lazy creep mechanics? Effective play counter tunneling, so it’s not some exploit on its own. It's just showing the need we need to encourage for more effective play by buffing effective approach, alongside with fixing specific killer powers

    The issue with question “what makes tunnelling special” - because it isn't in any way. It's just an optimal approach. Telling it’s uncounterable so have to be nerfed - is what makes it actually “special”. In a really bad way

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    As soon as u see good team that knows efficiency tunnelling is a gamble and investment as well. So, the issue is responsiveness, isn’t?

    So again - we should have more good teams and encourage efficiency on both sides maybe? Now survivors aren't encouraged to play safe and good. No matter how u play . If your teammate is sandbagging, it is your fault. So this system literally dicentivise any motivation to play effective on survivor until u not playing some SFW?

    The only way tunnelling doesn't work as gamble and highly risk challenge is the way how your opponents literally play. And what conditions your opponent have. If u are suddenly deprived of this convenient conditions and all survivors suddenly have fair RGN and can play as good as you - it is harder. If it's not blind run off the hook to the killer hug, careful play and healthy altruism along with focus on main objective - tunneling isn’t exploit anymore. So, maybe it wasn’t exploit since the start? So, just maybe, game have to provide such conditions for solo instead of 30 sec of MR invincible play?

    I played ptb myself, witnessed everything and just realized it was a way to flip coin on other side and that’s all. Nothing about balancing when u blindly believe in power of heavy nerfs and number tweaks. Look at the rework of “made for this” From blind % haste to a tool to encourage team play and heal meta use. Maybe whole game should look like this?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    If there's an option to remove the tunnel in effective matches and provide another effective strategy, I'm all for it. But ptb didn't provide that. It removed the tunnel and seriously nerfed gen regression, without affecting survivors at all. It was simply absurd: I was playing a survivor solo (it was a good solo) against a good A-tier killer, but the killer had no chance of winning. And this despite the fact that this was yet another match where a teammate disconnected at 5 gens. Killer played objectively well, made no mistakes in the game, we were clearly at a disadvantage due to the bot, but the new system gave us four free escapes because Man's skill no longer mattered – only how poorly your opponent played. And we calmly followed the rules of effectiveness and split up.

    every third hook kills that survivor regardless of who you hook. 

    I think it's unfair to the survivors, who were objectively better but were unlucky enough to get hit by a killer at that very moment when the hook becomes fatal, but let's say so.

    I know that solo can't follow efficiency so easily, which is why my post included QoL with comm variations. For me, the tunnel wasn't an issue. But my teams were. How did I figure this out? I started playing SWF with one streamer. We didn't have real comms, we didn't have Discord calls. But the team consisted of four players who felt responsible for each other. None of us are comp try hard, by the way, we just played okay/well. My rating jumped and I started seeing really good numbers for last 30 days.

    IMG_0888.jpeg

    And then solo q happened:

    IMG_1095.jpeg

    Nothing changed. Same killers, same tunnel. The feeling of confidence in the team and their behave changed only , and that's all.

    For me, the conclusions became very simple. I got tired of solo Q not because of the tunnel, but because of who I was forced to play with. Once you're playing in a decent team and your MMR is working, the tunnel becomes insignificant (except for three killers).

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    It’s only way to win. But it doesn't guarantee 100% win, lol. Nothing contradicting. In a way to be able to compete u have to tunnel against pro teams while they handcapped by some ridiculous rules - that's it. If u tunnel pro team it doesn't mean u win. It means u CAN. Possibly. Not always.

    But is it harder than 12-hooking

    Why it have to be 12 hooking? Good play from survivor when they actually outplay killers usually mean killer barely have 6 hooks in endgame. Balanced games where skill matches usually have 1 kill-2 kills until the endgame. In advanced games it can include tunneling, because from survivor side it was extreme gen efficiency. Result would be the same.

    IMG_1097.png IMG_1098.png

    In both screenshots below killers tried to tunnel but survivors denied it or they made unwise decision to switch targets - it cost game for them and it was 3-4 man escapes. I played duo sfw in both cases, other 2 - random players. If killer hook everyone twice before first kill and somehow survivors aren’t on gates already - MMR never was right in this match already. Nothing balanced in such games, as well as challenging, killer just got easy on you

  • BbQz
    BbQz Member Posts: 414

    You mentioned that you got free wins in the PTB because the killer was left ineffective. And then as you point out even a tunneling killer can't always win vs a coordinated group while yes you were not on comms but you all came to win. Not to do tomes, testing a build or goofing off which is always a risk when you have randoms. But also MMR could be effecting your out come as well. If you joined up with 4 individuals of different MMR ranks the system could be putting you vs inappropriate skilled killers. This of course is hard to test. But I always love playing in swf with my work friends the games are very relaxing and easy since the players we vs seem to be lower on the totem pole.

    Now the reasoning tunneling is the problem is killer power. With tunneling in the game they have to have a really really tight leash on killers and constantly nerf them to make things fair or as you seeing now handing out base kits like candy. They have been developing the game for years with tiny bandaids to fix the problem "anti camp, basekit BT, assortment of anti-tunnel perks" all of that was hoping it would fix tunneling so they could finally buff killers to make them truly devastating. But non of it work having a player kicked out a few minutes in is always the problem and problem they never see in there internal testing im sure since it's probably a strategy that they just don't use. As you mentioned in your original post allllll of the issues the purposes anti tunneling and slugging would have caused. I vividly remember Texas chainsaw massacre and getting into a match and being killed 40 seconds in multiple times a day. I quit and many other did as well. DBD doesn't have that dramatic of a problem with tunneling but there is always a weak link in any team and some players find it's them every time which results in them just quiting. Behavior isn't at risk of there game dying I don't think especially with cross overs that really keeps shuffling in new players from other fan bases but keeping them is the goal and fixing tunneling is a huge step in that direction

  • Firellius
    Firellius Member Posts: 5,441

    It’s only way to win. But it doesn't guarantee 100% win, lol. Nothing contradicting.

    Except it's not a 'gamble' if it's the only way to win. At that point, it's just plain playing the game. To call it a gamble would suggest that it's a risky option to take, but apparently there is NO risk.

    You either choose to use the strategy that gives a chance to win, or you choose the strategy that allegedly has no chance to win.

    Is it a 'gamble' to choose the former?

    Why it have to be 12 hooking?

    Because for anti-tunnel to be effective, it needs to encourage killers to not tunnel. Giving survivors the tools they need to be just as efficient as the most highly skilled and trained teams just so they can level the playing field against tunnelling does not fix tunnelling so long as tunnelling is still the preferred method.

    In fact, judging by what you said before, of tunnelling being the ONLY way to win against such efficient teams, boosting survivor efficiency would surely just cause more tunnelling, wouldn't it?

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Except it's not a 'gamble' if it's the only way to win. At that point, it's just plain playing the game. To call it a gamble would suggest that it's a risky option to take, but apparently there is NO risk.

    It is still a risk. Because u may have not to be able to tunnel at all and it’ll be denied. U may be got unlucky and choose the hardest target for tunneling. U may have lack of time as source. Or not. It's an actual mix of play sense and gamble. When we talking about good players… U gambling with level of difficulty u set up when choose specific player for 1 vs 1. Because u don't know their perks, their skill, and u can't be sure in what position u’ll start the chase.

    Why create anti system rather than playing around it? Just because it's a simple answer(not) on difficult question? Look at ptb, it showed how such phantasy turns to a tragedy with mass rant and more tribalism. U don't have simple answer on tunneling, because it never was a mechanic introduced by devs and it never meant for being adjusted by numbers. As well as SFW never were meant to be, but we have them in the game. Naive thought that u can get rid of player’s perception of game that they brought themselves here and it had a set up of 9 years. Even in era of hide and seek media of dbd were obsessed with this two themes.

    U don't even deny that tunneling is a necessity on a top level. But u still want to get rid of it completely on this so called top level (because on low level tunneling will be cheesy anyway, even with approach that came from PTB). So the issue will stay the same and even sharp itself. Killers will be more toxic to low skill survivors or solo Q, they’ll find way to abuse in this game anyway, but they wouldn't be able to actually compete against players on high level no matter their skill. U wish to see this? What’s the difference then?

    More efficiency will boost tunneling, but it will make tunnelling harder for killers who playing bad. Aren’t u satisfied? Only when u aren’t able to compete with this strategy at all maybe, but it’s personal issue I bet. I’ll say it out loud - being unable to dodge tunnelling at all with so many perks for it now and when killer isn’t S tier is the same skill issue as players who play same S tier through 4 aura read/slowdown and call it valid. Complete lack of self awareness, tribalism, and desire to avoid any challenge. I’m not embarrassed to say it. When u have answer on case of tunneling - no matter, is it u or your teammate in term of perks and still fail, it either skill issue, either unorganized play. Game can make it easier and less stressful by good RGN, better UI and contributing actual learning of mechanics.Game can ban specific perks on specific killers and can stop creating characters like Ghoul. Skill issue must to be fixed by players themselves.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    I would like to say the healthiest way to treat new players shouldn’t inside system that affects players on top side.

    TCM isn't great example because I found their devs pretty greedy and they share same issue as DBD - no playground for baby players and obscure instructions of winning and the way to commit this win. If we really want to compare DBD with other games in same genres…

    Identity V and their approach to new players is the best solution. Somehow this game despite having less player base don’t struggle with teaching new players that much. They have much more thoughtful tutorials (many of them), trials for characters, better comms for Solo, and most important, since the start of the game player plays with bots until progressing (and they don't really know about this). They don’t afraid to tell truth - in their matches u are about to get tunnelled or tunnel yourself, so new players are aware of it. So they can have that pleasant feeling they contribute to something and learning at the same time.

    This game is still completely different so, but in terms of treating new players I would like to say they are way more friendly and healthy. DBD now is as unfriendly as TCM. I can say it by judjing about 3/4 of my friends quit DBD on first hours despite not facing with tunnelling even. They just were too overwhelmed by that thing that they facing more experienced people, at the same time being deprived of learning about characters in game. Killer gameplay also was too much for them. Majority of FNAF fanbase quit by the same reason.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    When? If it was, we should have the possibility to fully interact without 3rd part software for communicate. The way how DBD imagined existence of SFW were extremely limited. I know they have some concepts of voice chat in their files and codes, but it never was approved.

    Moreover, majority of in game aura perks since the start of the game like bond or empathy, or killer perks that applies blindness (I look at you, third seal), were clearly created with intention of solo majority. Actual SFW we see now wasn’t supposed by devs.

    I admit that tunneling and SFW were always sidely encouraged by DBD - due to pre lobby existing or for example, existence of killer who has a feature that implies tunneling (pyramidhead), but still, it is more a thing that came from player base rather than devs.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 22,931

    From the beginning. They arent required to add in VC. External voice chat was always expected to be a part of the experience.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Do u have some devs comments about it? Like their intentions towards SFW from the start?

    If it is really like this, am I wrong or devs consciously considered that solo would always get such an unfair treatment and suffer from comms difference? Like really, their view on SFW existing alongside with third seal existence?

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 22,931

    May as well be stickied at the top of the Forums for how often I hear this myth. SWF was always intended, as was the expectation that people would use Voice Comms outside of the game.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    So they created comms imbalance consciously...

    Well. Another day of another great balance in this great game

  • Firellius
    Firellius Member Posts: 5,441

    It is still a risk.

    You cannot claim that tunnelling is a risk, while also asserting that there is no other way to win. Those are mutually exclusive positions.

    U may be got unlucky and choose the hardest target for tunneling.

    But the gamble you are referring to here is who to tunnel, not whether or not to tunnel. You have asserted that tunnelling is the only way to win. That means that choosing to tunnel is not a risk, because the alternative is a guaranteed loss.

    U don't even deny that tunneling is a necessity on a top level.

    I do disagree with this assertion and above all its relevance, but more importantly, I am not fighting this assertion because it is opposed to your own argument.

    Your assertion that tunnelling is a gamble is mutually exclusive with the claim that tunnelling is a necessity to win.

    If it is the only way to win, then choosing to use this strategy is not a gamble.

    So when I point out that choosing to use stealth is a massive gamble, you can't counter with 'well, choosing to tunnel is also a gamble' when you are also convinced that it is 100% the only path to victory. According to you, there's no reason to ever NOT tunnel, whereas there is plenty of reason to opt out of stealth play.

    Why create anti system rather than playing around it?

    Because tunnelling is extremely easy to do and extremely hard to counter, and we're not going to force newbie survivors to play like team eternal because someone is employing a strategy that a bot could run.

    Look at ptb, it showed how such phantasy turns to a tragedy with mass rant and more tribalism.

    And? Any change that would disparage tunnelling would always draw the ire of people who like to tunnel. The game shouldn't be governed by who can throw the biggest tantrum.

    U don't have simple answer on tunneling, because it never was a mechanic introduced by devs and it never meant for being adjusted by numbers. As well as SFW never were meant to be, but we have them in the game. Naive thought that u can get rid of player’s perception of game that they brought themselves here and it had a set up of 9 years. Even in era of hide and seek media of dbd were obsessed with this two themes.

    The game is malleable. If anything, the shift away from hide and seek shows that. This idea that the game is immutable is only being tossed around now because you want this particular thing to not change.

    More efficiency will boost tunneling, but it will make tunnelling harder for killers who playing bad. Aren’t u satisfied? 

    No. I'm not too concerned about the balancing outcome of tunnelling. I want tunnelling gone because it's awful for gameplay.

    being unable to dodge tunnelling at all with so many perks for it now and when killer isn’t S tier is the same skill issue as players who play same S tier through 4 aura read/slowdown and call it valid.

    Quick reminder: YOU asserted that killers have no other choice but to tunnel. Can't blame survivors for something that killers are forced to do by the game's base balance. Again, as asserted by you.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 22,931

    Least you know that it was intended.

    Voice chat in DBD would probably not work, especially at the time.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    You cannot claim that tunnelling is a risk, while also asserting that there is no other way to win. Those are mutually exclusive positions.

    Why not?

    When u commit tunnelling on comp level, it because u literally have no other opportunities. But it doesn't cancel risk factor, it makes risking conscious only. It’ll stop being risky when it’ll lead to guarantee win. Do I really need to explain the meaning of “risk” word?

    IMG_1100.jpeg

    U can lose trial when tunnelling comp survivor? U can. Is it possible bad outcome? It is. Limited opportunities doesn't stop being risky just because they are limited.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Nuh, I’m agree with this and even told about this under some post. Were downvoted anyway.

    Solo still need comms. Even in form of limited messages we can send each other. We can’t fight with using of side software for comms and honestly no need in this, but the thing that devs were heavily relying on it and didn't provide alternative for solo, alongside creating blindness effect in the game makes me disappointed. They created this issue themselves

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    No. I'm not too concerned about the balancing outcome of tunnelling. I want tunnelling gone

    This just shows u expect simple answer on difficult things. Better not to contribute to the discussion at all in this sense. My post were up to balancing through slow systematic changes, with high consideration of balancing on every level and actual balancing. It doesn't mean “throw this to the bin because I hate this”. Let’s stop this us vs them then because we are literally consider game on different level, nothing usefull will be anyway.

    U can’t convince me with tunneling being hard to counterplay because I did it myself having less than 1k hour multiple times. And I have other issues that concerns me as solo Q more.

    This post just not meant for you.

  • Coffeecrashing
    Coffeecrashing Member Posts: 5,667
    edited September 20

    Well, that's not what the video said either.

    The video basically said they are EXPECTING people will use voice comms, because they can't stop people from using voice comms.

    The video also heavily implies they don't INTEND for people to use voice comms, because it breaks the horror aspect.

    Expecting and Intending, are two massively different words. Expecting means they know it's going to happen. Intending means they want it happen.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    If u can’t stop something, shouldn't u try to play around it for balancing? Instead of fighting with it or just giving it as “welp, we can’t do anything about it so here u are”

  • Coffeecrashing
    Coffeecrashing Member Posts: 5,667

    BHVR stated multiple times they don’t want basekit voice comms, or for the game to be balanced around them.

    The percentage of games where all 4 people are using voice comms, is really low. Also, if this game was balanced around voice comms, then it would punish players that don’t use voice comms (or have teammates that don’t use voice comms).

    I see this all the time in other PvP games, where a team is in a severe disadvantage if someone chooses to not use voice comms.

  • Firellius
    Firellius Member Posts: 5,441

    Do I really need to explain the meaning of “risk” word?

    Try it, because the way you're applying the word here is missing the point of it.

    It’ll stop being risky when it’ll lead to guarantee win.

    This is a terrible interpretation of the word 'risky'. This means that doing a generator while the killer is chasing someone else is also 'risky'. With this definition, everything in this game is 'risky', barring the mori on the fourth survivor and walking across the finish line.

    The problem you're running into with your argument is that the possibility of a loss is not a risk if it is a guarantee in all other situations.

    Choosing to tunnel is not 'risking a loss' if you are guaranteed a loss if you do not tunnel. If you are guaranteed to lose if you don't tunnel, then tunnelling is, by far, your safest bet.

    Do you understand?

    It's a public forum. You don't get a monopoly on feedback. When you argue something, I have the right to point out a different viewpoint.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214

    Nuh, the issue is that u imply on fact that if opportunities are limited and that’s the only thing u can do, it suddenly have to stop being risky. By your logic. If u really don't understand and need in game comparasion…

    The only way for survivor to have escape when he left alone in the trial is opening the gate if hatch is closed and he doesn't have a key. Opportunities limited. The only way to win is opening the gate. But It’s risky or sometimes even impossible. If u can’t do anything else for securing the win, but this only way isn’t 100% rewarding, since when it stop being risky? Same with killers on comp area. The only way to have chances for winning is making the game 3 vs 1 as soon as possible. Yet it risky, because u could have lose still by other side getting more points next round.

    It's a public forum. You don't get a monopoly on feedback. When you argue something, I have the right to point out a different viewpoint.

    Indeed. But what I supposed to say? My discussion here is about balancing stuff around both mid and top play. But implying that u can’t balance game on top level without tunnelling. And then along come you and your fellow “just git gud” thinkers, who insist on "it should just go because it's my opinion, and I don't actually care about balancing." Well, what u expecting? Congrats? It's your opinion, but because you don't care much about the balance issues raised in the post, and because me sharing experience with stats or screenshots completely contradicts your genuine belief tunnelling is sebere exploit in balance , your opinion simply can't compete.

    You can just say "no," downvote, and move on and start your own posts with own sentiment. But starting a discussion with me claiming about balance, after which you'll sooner or later say, "I don't care too much about balancing, it just should go." This message simply devalued all your attempts to prove anything to me, turning it into pure subjectivity. Why I should even listen person who don’t actually care about balancing under the post about balancing?

  • brewingtea
    brewingtea Member Posts: 702

    If you stay home and never go to the grocery store, you'll starve. If you drive to the store, you could get hit by a drunk driver and die.

    We don't consider drunk drivers a "risk" of driving to the store because the alternative (starving to death) is just as bad. If you'll die either way, you're not "risking" some better outcome. Google the term "free roll" as it applies to (for example) Poker

    If you "can't" win unless you tunnel, then the outcome is a loss. If you tunnel and fail, the outcome is a loss. You're not "risking" a better outcome because (just like the grocery example above) you're dead anyway.

    If you define risk as "Any bad thing could happen." then that's useless for most purposes, but specifically DBD and games discussion in general.

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214
    edited September 20

    @Coffeecrashing

    I mention above about no need in voice comms. But the alternative.

    It doesn't mean u should forget solo need for communicate. Moreover, if u are highly aware about such gap, u have to provide compensation for solo survivors at the same time not affecting sfw, which I already mentioned in the post

    But solo q got heavily neglected in these terms. And instead of fixing this, they created even more crutches in ptb, not fixing actual issue

  • tes
    tes Member Posts: 1,214
    edited September 20

    The issue that nothing limits u from getting to the grocery store to buy food. It’ll get risky when u’ll became extremely limited and something could happen with high probability of making u unable to reach this grocery store. So really bad example

    When u tunnel, being extremely limited by balance conditions in the game AND players of the high level as you, u either win, or either lose. Nothing “clear” until first or second kill, that’s why it’s risky. It depends on various factors that influence the level of risk. Well, if u don’t play against disorganised players or on S tier killers.

    If u really struggling with understanding what risk means, ask GPT copying my message. Because now u both are fighting with the meaning of the word and it seems only soulless machine can explain u the difference. I don’t have enough patience for it.

  • Firellius
    Firellius Member Posts: 5,441

    Nuh, the issue is that u imply on fact that if opportunities are limited and that’s the only thing u can do, it suddenly have to stop being risky. By your logic.

    Yes, it's not risky if you're not risking anything. That's the point!

    The only way for survivor to have escape when he left alone in the trial is opening the gate if hatch is closed and he doesn't have a key. Opportunities limited. The only way to win is opening the gate. But It’s risky or sometimes even impossible. If u can’t do anything else for securing the win, but this only way isn’t 100% rewarding, since when it stop being risky?

    But you're not risking anything. Even in the little blurb you pulled up, it mentions the possibility of something bad happening. But in the situation you describe, and the way you've construed tunnelling, it's not a possibility at all. It's a guarantee.

    You don't 'risk the possibility of losing' if losing is a guarantee.

    Say you bet on a roulette wheel. You put in 50 bucks. If you win, you get 100 bucks. If you lose, you get nothing. That's a risky thing to do, because you could be out 50 bucks.

    But if you go in with 0 bucks, and you get 50 bucks if you win but get nothing if you lose, it's not risky anymore. The only thing you're risking is a win.

    That's the stumbling block in your claim. Tunnelling is not 'risky' so long as it is the only avenue towards a win. It'd be risky if there's other ways to win that you could bet on, but you have precluded that in your assertions.

    Indeed. But what I supposed to say? My discussion here is about balancing stuff around both mid and top play. But implying that u can’t balance game on top level without tunnelling. And then along come you and your fellow “just git gud” thinkers, who insist on "it should just go because it's my opinion, and I don't actually care about balancing."

    I have made no such claim!

    You made some kind of remark about mega-buffing survivors to balance around tunnelling and then asked me, personally, if I'd be happy with that, and I gave you an honest answer. I did not come into this thread talking about balance and I have not talked about balance in this entire thread at all.

    I've only been picking apart your logic and exposing flaws in your argumentation. I've not made any kinds of claims about balance.

    your opinion simply can't compete.

    I've barely expressed an opinion, I've just been engaging with what you wrote and what you've been arguing.

    Why I should even listen person who don’t actually care about balancing under the post about balancing?

    Because like it or not, the thing you're commenting on isn't designed exclusively to cater to the raw numerical concept of balance. Part of the reason why BHVR is moving forward with anti-tunnel plans is because tunnelling is bad for gameplay. Balancing the game to force killers to tunnel all the time is the exact opposite of BHVR's goals with an anti-tunnel system, rendering your feedback pointless.

    Survivors don't want to get tunnelled all the time, and while there are certainly plenty of people that would like tunnelling to remain in the state it is currently in, I doubt even they would want to be forced to tunnel all the time.

    You will have to contend with those elements. Simply boosting survivors to be able to overcome tunnelling, subsequently increasing the likelihood of tunnelling being used in the first place, is not a good way to achieve the goals that BHVR had set out for this PTB.

    It's anti-tunnel, not 'the great tunnel rebalance'. The goal is to reduce tunnelling, not decrease its win rate.