Genuine Question - Why was the anti-tunnel and anti-slug scrapped?

Would've harshly punished killer players for just doing their role. If survivor players were free to rush their objective or being over altruistic, etc. It just makes killer players felt forced to tunnel or slug just to have a chance to make a comeback. If changes did went through then killers would have no means of taking any advantage they could get because of the survivors mistakes and make escapes a lot more easier for survivors.

I think they were between a rock and a hard place with releasing too much at once. If they released pallets one patch, Elusive another patch, self-recovery another, a decent anti-camp another, they would have had endless crying along the lines of, "Every patch is survivor-side BHVR hates killers!!1!" for like a whole year. But releasing them as a bundle gave the same results, with added, "the game will die!" videos. It feels like there's no winning approach.

Too many people blindly listen to content creators, where scared of changes or compared it to how the lowest tiers would feel while not mentioning blight and ghoul. I mentioned top tiers should not be getting incentives on feedback thing they did and got downvoted :/

Yes there where things in the ptbs that could of been adjusted, just because it leaned to one side does not mean it should not of been added or ghoul release would of been canceled/ delayed if we went by that logic, oh wait the ghoul makes money so its ok.

bhvr nerfs them into the ground 90% of the time also the go next prevention and anti hiding mechanics got nerfed into uselessness and i know for a fact if they nerfed it to the point where it was worthless you'd still be complaining

killer complained since they cant handle their metas being changed or removed.

but ignore haddonfield being a dogshit map for a year or kaneki still biting you through walls.

The problem with the Anti Tunnel Update was the following. A Killer which nuked one survivor out of the game at 4 or 5 gens got punished but it nearly had 0 impact, since 3 Survivors at 4 gens is most of the time a death sentence for Survivors. So these Killers which went into the game with full intend to tunnel didn´t take Gen Regression into the game but perks like Aura or Endgame perks because they know that they won´t get regression at all.

On the other Hand Killers which played normaly but got their first death on 6 hooks (which isn´t tunneling in my opinio. I mean you have to chase and hook atleast 3 different survivors to archive this) got punished instead.

Many players said the Anti Tunnel is fine but take the condition down. I think everyone would have been fine with dead on 4 hooks means no regression for you.

The slugging thing is on another plate. The problem was that most of the time the best play if someone got slugged was to crawl into a corner of the map and let themself stand up while the team does gens. Other aggressive things occured aswell when Survivors went down in open spots or pallets and you could see the 3 other survivors standing by for the rescue. So you got the choice pick them up and let them get the save or let them slug and save themself. It´s a lose lose situation which could be forced and this never feels good.

The only thing I am sad about is that the elusive state was scrapped. I know it could be used to to stand inside the other survivors but it would have been easy to programm that the survivor with elusive state doesn´t take a hit.

I love how nearly everyone (likely most if not all of them are survivor mains) act as if killer mains don't play the game ourselves. Did many of the so-called "influencers" say the same things we were seeing? Yes. Does that mean that they we were just listening to them? No. But, they have the voice we do not.

I am a P100 Pig main. Even before the first "influencer" video went up, I was against the 9.2 BS and the more videos I watched, the more I didn't hear anything I didn't already notice and think myself.

To be honest… Do you really think that BHVR only cares for some content creators?

They even showed us in their live stream that they don´t want help or fixes from Otz himself which had the proper solution for their PR on hand.

It was a big backlash for the points I wrote in my first comment and most of the people which wanted change "a real change and not a straight buff my side to oblivion" agreed that it would have been better if the penality would go live when 1 Survivor is dead on 4 hooks because that is the tunnelilng that is frustrating not to die on the sixth hook. Some Killers don´t even get this far when MMR works well.

I want to respond to this, because while it wasn’t directed at me, it does seem to be referencing my comment, specifically my use of the word influencers.

First, I want to explain why I use that term. An influencer is simply someone who influences others, and more specifically someone with a large social media presence who can shape opinions and promote ideas/ products. That feels quite accurate here. These creators have large platforms, sponsorships, merch, in game codes, and their own big community. Calling them influencers isn’t meant as an insult, I myself am subscribed to most of them, it’s just a description pointing to how much influence they objectively have. 

I think it’s disingenuous to downplay how much influence they have on both the community and the game itself.

My point is about visibility and the. impact . If most  big names strongly supported certain changes, that support would matter. Not because people are mindlessly following and obeying them, but because attaching big names to ideas has always shaped public opinion. This isn’t new nor is it tied to DBD.  People trust creators/singers/actors/athletes they like, follow, and consume content from regularly, and that naturally affects how ideas spread and how they’re received. Thats why celebrities are used in ads, in the same way these creators are. 

Do I think the devs blindly follow whatever big creators say? No. Do I think changes that are widely supported by the largest voices in the community are more likely to stick around longer or be taken more seriously? Yes, absolutely.

And as it happens, many of the biggest creators openly prefer one role over the other, which is totally fine and normal. Everyone has bias, even players who split their time evenly. But when most of the largest voices are aligned in one direction, I do think that absolutely has an effect on how discussions are framed and which concerns get attention when compared to a random individual. 

None of this is me saying killer mains don’t play the game or don’t think for themselves. Killers, much like survivors, are NOT a massive hive mind. But they are all humans, and humans can be and regularly are influenced. Influence exists. We see this all the time, all it takes is one single video from a big name and it increases the use of certain perks, strategies, techs, or even exploits almost overnight. That’s influence. That influence doesn’t suddenly disappear just because the topic is something they dislike.

So if my use of the word influencers came across as dismissive, my apologies, that wasn’t my intention. If they were more receptive or open to the changes, I do genuinely believe that the changes would’ve stayed around longer, because of the amount of influence that they have.

This was exactly the scenario which went through my head

One side brings up valid points which can be discussed about and the other sides counter argument is "You just won´t have my side buffed"

There is no conter argument just trying to insult the other side.

But that's always true. It's not even limited to DbD. Whenever a change or idea is proposed, amidst the discussion there will be people who are angry/ranting.

Hey guys these things could be abused in this or that way can we talk abuot it? (adjust the numbers to 4 hooks)

Abuse is one of those words that people have been throwing around like it ends the argument. The level of hooks is more about how extreme the anti-tunnel should be, but its also directly related to how many boosts the killers should get for unique hooks (basically, if the number of hooks dropped, so should the unique hook benefits).

This is no discussion this is just demanding without seeing the other side which was trying to negotiate with arguments.

If we're going to do a broad 'this is how sides behaved', the forum was filled with people/killers opposed to the 9.2 PTB even before it was released.

Because the anti slugging was a permanent unbreakable for the rest of the match after enough time down. Not a one time thing each down. This could lead to higher level play being completely unsustainable given slugging is a majorly important way to waste survivors time without incurring the risk of picking up or wasting time you could spend chasing survivors off a gen. Let's also take a minute to remind ourselves slugging and tunneling don't happen in a vacuum. Just because you aren't paying attention doesn't mean everyone else can afford to do the same. What I mean by this is that from the survivor perspective generators being done is stress relieved and means they are one step closer to reaching their goal. Viewing things from a killer's perspective, however, means rapidly mounting stress as generators done translates to an approaching loss, so given the time constraint and the stress that imposes, killers are inclined to slug so they can save time. The issue here is that because of the bleedout mechanic, bhvr are caught between a mechanic that means nothing because the time you spent on the floor empties out a chunk of your bleedout timer and a super juiced mechanic that makes normal gameplay unviable for killer if they get preoccupied with something other than the survivor they just downed. Since bhvr apparently couldn't find a sweet spot to make this anti slug functional, they opted to scrap it in the face of negative feedback since somehow bhvr has put themselves in the position where outputting mediocre updates is actually worse than doing nothing. The wisdom to put out good updates eludes bhvr so they opt to take the wisdom of waiting for a response. Getting back to the talk of player perception, put simply when you frame getting slugged as something about you rather than as something the killer made a calculation and a decision to do in context of the match, you ultimately rob yourself of the ability to learn and become a more useful teammate in survivor matches. I've mainly ignored the possibility that the slugging could be out of spite mainly because those events are typically uncommon as a whole and often mistakenly attributed to actions done for the sake of pure function and taken as malicious. Kind of like getting mad at an administrative worker for taking a long time to get back to you, when they have to process bs messages and paperwork from psychopaths like scientologists making terroristic threats and filing slapp lawsuits.

Absolutely. There is a direct correlation to the impact these guys have on the game. One tech showcase and then the game is flooded with people attempting it. They do have the influence, so what they say matters and it can matter more to BHVR because at the end of the day they’re a business and if your top influencers, that bring in a lot of players, AKA money, aren’t happy with something, you’re going to take that seriously because it can become a threat to your business.

And that’s not to imply that BHVR is wrong for doing this, any business that has big supporters would take what they have to say seriously especially over some random person that doesn’t have the same kind of reach. A random review on yelp vs a critique by a food critic are not the same and the influence they have are not the same.

I really don’t think that’s true. People have had arguments for and against tunneling for years. I think a major factor is that many people don’t even consider certain things to be problems. If someone doesn’t consider something a problem, then it doesn’t matter what solution you have because regardless if it’s a good one or not, they don’t think it’s a problem to begin with. I think anti-tunnel is probably one of the biggest examples of this, where there are many people that don’t believe tunneling is a problem at all therefore any proposed change or solution is seen as unnecessary, and that believing it’s a problem is entitlement or stupidity and nothing more.

(This, and probably also how buggy Nurse is and has been for such a long long time, and how some people don’t want her to receive bug fixes at all due to how powerful she is.)

I know that tunneling is a big problem and I think it should be nerfed or hard tunneling should be made completly unreliable.

But this seems to be leaning into what @hermitkermit says: If someone doesn’t consider something a problem, then it doesn’t matter what solution

You are saying that hard tunneling is a problem, while BHVR's approach in 9.2 PTB was a much broader definition of what they were looking at being a problem (i.e. what they considered tunneling).

So to you the solution looks bad, but that's primarily because they are trying to address something you don't consider a problem. If all they wanted to do was address hard tunneling, there would be easier ways (but they don't seem to want to take out hard tunneling as an option).

This leads to a disconnect in the initial discussion because people think they are talking about the same thing, but there is actually a pretty big difference in what they are trying to accomplish.

Yes, many of us were opposed to it because we are able to read. We read the patch notes. We have played the game long enough to know that the 9.2.0 changes were going to be a trainwreck even before the PTB itself dropped.