Early-Game Stabilizer
I have experienced a growing tendency in high MMR matches to prioritize creating a 3v1 situation as quickly as possible. While this is mathematically the most efficient strategy for Killers, it often leads to frustration on both sides of the match.
What if we slightly adjusted the 4v1 efficiency dynamic to encourage more unique hooks? The goal would be to create conditions where Killers gain greater macro-efficiency by spreading pressure rather than tunneling one Survivor out of the game early.
Early Game Hook Incentive (EGHI)
Introducing a new Early Game Hook Incentive designed to encourage varied hook distribution without restricting Killer choice. This system provides moderate generator slowdown for unique hooks while all four Survivors remain in the match. The effect disables if a Survivor is eliminated or consecutively hooked.
Mechanic Overview
Activation Condition:
The system is active only while four Survivors remain alive in the match.
Effect:
On each Unique Hook, all generators are blocked globally for 10 seconds.
Deactivation Conditions:
The system permanently disables if:
- A Survivor is eliminated, or
- The same Survivor is hooked twice consecutively without a different Survivor being hooked in between.
Comments
-
The same Survivor is hooked twice consecutively without a different Survivor being hooked in between.
That just lets survivor take advantage of you not being wanting to hook them, there is nothing wrong with double hooking, you're literally doing your objective.
Why are we penalising killers so they can't take an opportunist chase and hook if they happen to find that person again? These types of punishments DO NOT WORK. Because it goes directly against your objective. You can't punish killer efficiency without punishing survivor efficiency aswell that compromises their objectives. Of which they are more efficient at doing in the first place as its 4v1.
Also 10 seconds of gen block is basically nothing, its still better to just get someone out. The incentives to play horribly inefficiently and spread hooks have to be good and strong or its not worth it.
-3 -
So a weaker Basekit Grim Embrace? Why dont you just use the Perk??
Unfortunately Tunneling to me seems to be more of psychological issue than a balancing one and MMR makes it worse.
Because it builds on what the Killer expects to happen in a match, they will expect that gens will fly by or that they need to tunnel. And even if they don't doing it will raise their mmr up again so they will have to expect to tunnel next game too.You can bring a horse to water, but you cant force it to drink.
There is no balanced way (I see) you can fight a psychological issue and I suspect this is why BHVR's answer to tunneling was giving up on the solution and saying its up Survivors to survive.
However BHVR DID say they plan on some MMR changes, but what those changes will do I don't know. And I have a feeling that people who tunnel might just gain mmr faster. Which will turn high MMR into a meatgrider who turns tunnelers into quitters.
For Survivors I hope BHVR will track each Survivor's skill vs each Killer so we can have some more fair matches who actually have a clue how to win and dodge attacks against each Killer as well as being able to utilize counter-play against that Killer.
2 -
Make the hook timer shorter.
-2 -
@Shinkiro That’s a valid point.
It might indeed be too weak in its current form to meaningfully compete with tunneling as the more efficient option.I also really appreciate the feedback that it’s perceived as a punishment rather than a bonus. That was never the intention. The goal wasn’t to restrict tunneling or dictate gameplay, but to create a mathematically viable alternative that preserves momentum without forcing an early 3v1.
@Emeal I agree that psychology and MMR expectations play a huge role. Tunneling often feels “necessary” because killers expect gens to fly, and that expectation reinforces itself. My thought was that if hook-spread generated tangible momentum, it might gradually shift that expectation.
From the feedback so far, it seems my proposal is simply too weak to make spreading hooks attractive — and because of that, it’s still interpreted as a penalty instead of earned pressure.
I’m genuinely curious about the broader perspective here:
Would you be interested in a system that rewards hook-spread with stronger momentum tools as a real alternative to early tunneling?
Or do you feel the current state of the game is already in the right place?1 -
It's going to be a punishment to killer no matter what, you are fundamentally nerfing their ability to do their objective, the strength the incentives would have to be aren't going to be allowed. And the punishment would never be allowed/done to the survivor side to counter balance because of the narrative that survivor is "weak" when it is not a role problem, but a player problem..
There's no "balancing" this because it already is as close as you can realistically get without reworking the game from the ground up, we're already on the knifes edge. Both sides have the tools required to gain pressure towards their objective and denying the opposing sides. But killers have routinely had their options nerfed and stripped away leading to the current environment where you feel like you need to play specific characters, in specific ways, with specific perks to feel like the game isn't lopsided right from the start. Killer players are simply adapting to how survivors have demanded the game be balanced, but most survivors won't do the same.
All these "balancing" talks ultimately lead to "nerf killer and buff survivor". The problem is MMR mismatching and survivors demanding bandaids to their poor gameplay rather than improving. You can't keep balancing for the weakest survivors because then you break the game further up and that just bleeds back down to said players. You don't see strong survivor players complaining about tunnelling because they understand why its done and why its needed.
This isnt an even sided team game, there is too much RNG, hidden effects, nuance, player skill differences and many other variables to keep going any further in the direction BHVR have been going. The game can simply snowball too fast from good gen efficiency that often the best strategy just happens to be the same as your win condition, killing survivors.
The early game already massively favours survivors, it's when they are strongest. Killers have to claw pressure back however they can or they will simply lose to half competent survivors. The game is balanced when you play against appropriately skilled survivors.
-1 -
I like how someone proposes a system which gives killers a basekit buff with no downsides, but because it has limits, it's suddenly "punishing the killer". If you want to double-hook someone under this system… go ahead? It's STILL objectively better than tunneling is now.
So a weaker Basekit Grim Embrace? Why dont you just use the Perk??
Because that would take a perk slot. AND you could still run it. I assume the effects would stack, like if you use BT as a survivor under the current system. This isn't rocket science.
These are the people they listened to when they killed the prior PTBs, lol
0 -
If you're going to quote someone atleast quote the right person please.
No downside? You mean apart from trying to make killers play in specific ways (again) for some very miniscule buff? If its worth ignoring then its not worth implementing in the first place. It does virtually nothing for anyone except for the fast mobility and lethal killers anyway so nothing changes for anyone else. But by all means buff my blight, ghoul etc at the start of the match if you want, but it won't do what people want it to do. Removing a player simply gives far more value for most of the killer roster.
Short gen block is near worthless and longer gen block either gets in the way of your perks or is oppressive to survivors. Any meaningful incentive will just be cried about by survivors anyway until it ends up as a worthless "buff" and ends up being a net benefit for them or only the strongest/fastest killers.
We don't need more basekit changes, they are inherently volatile to balance and overcomplicate the gameplay.. The game is fine when there isnt a skill level mismatch.
Edit: Also you know it wont stack lol, stacking gen block duration aint gonna happen.
-2 -
@Shinkiro nobody is "making" killers play to get a small buff. this in no way nerfs anything lol. if you don't care about the little gen block, then keep playing the game as you are currently. OP did not suggest anything that would affect that style of gameplay, simply gave a suggestion that would make not tunneling a more viable option for some killers (not everyone).
@Pasi i like your original idea, i think its a nice way to reward killers for not tunneling rather than punishing other killers who do tunnel. gives an incentive to play differently, but doesn't force anyone to use it. i also like the idea of gens always getting blocked (as a survivor main btw) because i have seen people be left on hook to go second stage far more often than should ever happen. if nobody could work on a gen, it seems like this is less likely to happen. like maybe it would encourage some players to go for unhook that normally wouldn't?
-1 -
it also works the other way, if the Killer expects to hardship then he will do everything he can up to the line you create.
And then you will have those awful feelings of, "I could have killed you here last patch, but BHVR has chained me"and the other way around then you need to make survivors and I mean the really good survivors unable to survive indefinitely or gens speeds to eliminate the need for tunneling.
Its disappointing that BHVR could not make a solution that plugged all the holes, but I don't blame them, this is basicly a nightmare to control and so they probably made the right choice to undo it. But BHVR is still not off the hook cause the problem exists and they want to do something about it and I think we are going to see that sooner or later.
1 -
@Shinkiro I’m not trying to replace kill pressure. I agree removing a survivor is always the strongest play.
The idea is just to slightly smooth early snowball without forcing perk choices.
If it’s small enough to not break high MMR, it might still reduce the feel-bad 3-minute games in mid MMR.@Emeal I completely agree that players will always optimize up to whatever line the system creates. That’s just how competitive games work.
My intention isn’t to “chain” killers or remove agency. It’s more about shifting early-game incentives slightly without preventing any decision.
You can still tunnel. You can still secure a kill early. The system just offers a small alternative pressure source.I also agree that if something like this was ever implemented, it would need to be looked at alongside gen pacing and high-level survivor strength. Otherwise it risks creating new imbalance instead of smoothing volatility.
Moreover I can see how this is a nightmare for BHVR to adress. Since they know it is a problem, I hope whatever they do, it focuses on reducing volatility without removing agency from either side.0 -
Except it won't do that, 10s does nothing to actually combat half decent early gen efficiency snowballing the match, therefore it won't change the optimal thing for killers to do if they are so inclined, kill survivors.. And you won't need it if survivors just aren't doing gens either so its also harder for bad teams to deal with. Basekit changes are inherently volatile to balance. And its why they shouldnt keep adding them.
It doesn't address the real problem, gen progression needs to be rebalanced, capped and prevented from stacking so gens dont fly first and foremost. Fix the issues rather than try to Band-Aid it.
0
