What people don’t realize about adding a second objective.

Options
13»

Comments

  • Heroiq
    Heroiq Member Posts: 1,134
    Options

    @GrootDude tunneling doesn't really need any fix right now. there's currently a nice amount of counters for tunneling. for example. defensive strike. make your choice. etc.

    i don't really think tunnelers should get punished. because there's perks like Remember me. or Dying light that suggests tunneling the obsession (which also increases the chance of tunneling the person who was defensive strike cuz they're both obsession perks). adding punishments for tunneling would be a huge nerf for every perk that is focused on stopping/starting the tunnel

    for me. the only thing that i have in my mind that can help against tunneling is to add more things that rewards the killer when he's not tunneling (like what Make your choice is doing)

  • GrootDude
    GrootDude Member Posts: 14,110
    Options
  • NoShinyPony
    NoShinyPony Member Posts: 4,570
    Options

    @Pike_Trickfoot The issue of this thread is: Currently, killers don't have enough time to get their objective done - do we need a 2nd objective for survs?

    If you don't shorten chases, then the survivors have to do more than repairing 5 gens.

    If you keep chases the same length AND don't give the survivors more work to do, then nothing will change for the killer.

    This is not a thread about map design.

  • NoShinyPony
    NoShinyPony Member Posts: 4,570
    Options

    @Atrushan88 So if the gens have enough distance to each other, how is that supposed to change anything for the killer? The killer can only chase one person at a time, while the other survs are doing gens.

    Finding a survivor usually isn't the problem. The problem is that gens are done too fast while the killer is busy chasing a survivor.

  • HatCreature
    HatCreature Member Posts: 3,298
    Options

    In a way we have a 2nd Objective already, Hex Totems, technically those are a 2nd Objective for Survivors as they would want that destroyed so they can do Gens.

    But besides that the ''2nd Objective'' doesn't have to be big, it can be small, not totem small but still small and if it's small enough then nothing needs to be changed. This a game and anything can be added, even things that don't require huge changes. It all depends on what exactly you're adding.

    For example, it has come up twice as far as I know where the Gen could overheat or maybe you need a Gas can. Those are small and it would definitely slow the game down but not enough where the top Killers need nerfs. But if you added repairing the Exit Gates after the Gens are done then NOED becomes a problem. Sure just get rid of the totems beforehand but if they didn't and can't find the totem then this 2nd Objective becomes borderline impossible; especially with a Spirit, Billy, or Nurse with NOED.

    Me personally I think it would be cool to just find large gears or box of equipment to ''install'' into the Gen first before starting to repair the Gen.

  • NoShinyPony
    NoShinyPony Member Posts: 4,570
    Options

    @HatCreature I see it similarly.

    A 2nd objective has to be obligatory and should give a killer that bit of needed additional time. (I mean, we could always increase gen time, it would have the same effect. But we aren't talking about that because repairing gens is not exciting.)

    With that bit of extra time, we don't need a lot of adjustments. (I'm not saying that we don't need any at all, but there wouldn't be a lot to change.)

    And I agree with the base concept of bringing something to the gen before you can repair it. I leave a link to my concept here: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/65083/concept-for-a-2nd-objective-for-survivors/p1

  • Pike_Trickfoot
    Pike_Trickfoot Member Posts: 437
    Options

    And I made a suggestion on how to fix the problem. Something which you had brought up previously yourself. I’m getting the feeling you disregarded what I said. Just think about it for a moment. Map design is a huge factor to why killers cannot pressure. Even grootdude and others brought this up earlier. A second objective will change map design. It literally falls back to map design. All of these mechanics revolve around how the map is.

  • NoShinyPony
    NoShinyPony Member Posts: 4,570
    Options

    @Pike_Trickfoot How will a 2nd objective necessarily change map design?

    For example, if a 2nd objective follows the concept of "pick something up and bring it to the gen before you can start repairing": How does that change the design of the map?


    Sorry if I overread something, where did you make a suggestion how to fix the problem of killers not having enough time in the current state of the game?

    If you want to shorten chases/survivors to go down faster, that's your opinion. I shared my opinion why it's not a good idea to shorten chases and that DbD would lose players.

  • Pike_Trickfoot
    Pike_Trickfoot Member Posts: 437
    Options

    So your example. You are asking to add something permenant to the map. Something that adds another mechanic to the game. It will be an interactive object on all maps. The map rng will have to generate that x number of whatever within certain placements that’s x distance away from both gens and the other version of said object. This may also need gen placement spawns to also change and be more wonky than before (look at pallet spawns as an example for that).

    Now take a look at the map themselves. Some of them are already too cluttered to manage this unless other parts of the map were changed. I’m not sure how big this new variable will be, but it will affect the placement of other things. This may even break the map itself and force other rng things to bug. Adding anything like this falls under the the category of map design as you are adding variables to the set design already in place. Adding something isn’t as easy you make it seem. Especially since each new patch brings new and old bugs back to the game.

    I honestly don’t care either way, so please don’t assume I support something because I play devil’s advocate and try to point out things from both sides that aren’t mentioned. My opinion is that the two things you suggested earlier aren’t mutually exclusive and both can possibly be implemented and have the possibility to not kill the game, but I would be happy with either. I’m always down for testing out ideas and tweaking so you can see if something actually works or not.

  • NoShinyPony
    NoShinyPony Member Posts: 4,570
    Options

    @Pike_Trickfoot Please don't forget the "@" tag so the people you're replying to will get a notification. ;)

    Concerning the map changes: Take a look at the Pig's Billy Boxes or the small fountains of the Plague. There are offerings that let additional chests and hooks spawns. Or even think of last year's Halloween event and the big wobble blobs. All that is possible without having a severe impact on the map design.

    Concerning changing loops and/or buffing killers so that it will lead to shorter chases: I'm not saying that it won't help the killers to get their objective done. I'm saying that chases are the fun part of the game and when you shorten the fun part, this will hurt the game.

    On another note: If you want to rework all the maps, we are probably talking about several years until this is done. In comparison, a 2nd objective could be implemented relatively quickly because the code is partly already existing.

  • Pike_Trickfoot
    Pike_Trickfoot Member Posts: 437
    Options

    @NoShinyPony Okay mom.

    Pig/Plague additions: Say you have your new variable along with this. You are limiting the spawns for both. Placements will have less rng because there will be less spots. Makes them easier to find (if there’s no aura to your addition like totems). Add a perk to help you find them. This adds a small amount of time. Spawn placements are easy to figure out. More perks will be needed to delay this since it isn’t an add-on addition. And then we get problems with hooks being close again. I still see this. It’s poor map design. These offerings shouldn’t exist. Sorry devs. Didn’t participate in the Halloween event so I cannot speak for it. Your addition would have to compete with the spots these already have. Less rng, less time added.

    Point 2: Does Spirit, Billy, nurse shorten loops? If yes, is it a significant amount of time? I’m not saying to overly buff. We have these three and people still loop. Nurse isn’t really a loop but it’s fun to mind game against her because it isn’t the traditional looping. They are already lessening safe pallets. This in theory should shorten looping and chase time. But I still have to actually see it. On the subjective point of fun, not everyone does. In fact, it seems to frustrate people more often than not. Yes, a chase can be thrilling, but it’s just as likely to be anger-inducing. I find fun in the team part of this game. It can be played as team-oriented. I choose that style. Doing what I can to help others survive, yet I loathe chasing. Even when I play as killer it is boring until the kill. I had to take breaks and play other games if I wanted guaranteed fun. I only find fun in swfs. I only have fun with messing around as killer. Not everyone enjoys it. It just happens to be the most enjoyable thing the game can offer for enough people. So we deal with it or move on.

    point 3: I would love for them to just shut everything down and prioritize fixing what they already have. That would be my ideal. It doesn’t have to take long. Adding this second thing would mean more components to fix later. In this regard, I am looking at the long-term. You will get your influx but you will lose people.

  • Karl_Childers
    Karl_Childers Member Posts: 669
    Options

    @Heroiq If survivors can no longer rush their objective, why should killers be able to rush theirs? It would be completely unfair to slow survivors down, yet still allow a survivors game to be ruined by being tunneled out of the game. If you leave this playstyle untouched and slow survivors, all you’re doing is buffing those who play like that currently as it will be even more successful. Trust me, people aren’t just going to change how they play until you put in measures that stop it. I have no idea what they can do, but I think there needs to be an another objective that the killer is involved in as well. Genrush and tunneling/camping are linked issues, you don’t just fix one and leave the other. That can not happen

    As for perks like Dying light, rework them. It’s a horrible perk for the game. They would never release a perk like that today.

  • ReikoMori
    ReikoMori Member Posts: 3,333
    Options

    You can't fix tunneling as the reality is that no one can agree on what counts as tunneling. Also, depending on the game situation tunneling has to be done as it is the way to start putting pressure on the game. Camping actually sorts itself out the same as it always has. Just do the objective and if a killer wants to waste two and half minutes camping then let them. Honestly, people just want a second objective that adds at most a couple of extra minutes to the game. Just so the fastest trial completion time goes from 3-4mins to 6-8mins. That would place the timing more in line with the current Gatekeeper and Lightbringer emblem weight.

  • Karl_Childers
    Karl_Childers Member Posts: 669
    Options

    So add 3-4 minutes a game by slowing survivors, but leave camping as is so they can get additional kills due to survivor objectives taking longer? Absolutely not! You have to look at things from both sides. I don’t think longer hook stage is the way to go though. The type of tunneling that needs to be addressed is what we are all most familiar with. The ones who tend to linger (or what most would probably call proxy camp) around the hook repeatedly just targeting the unhooked survivors. The killer needs to be given something to do to where this type of playstyle can’t happen. If you want to give killers a better experience by slowing gens, then it is only fair to give survivors that same thing by addressing their top complaint at the same time (camping/tunneling) . Otherwise, you are just making it a successful way to play, it would ruin the game.

  • HatCreature
    HatCreature Member Posts: 3,298
    Options

    @NoShinyPony Ok so that was your thread, I couldn't remember who made it. I love that idea, that's exactly what I want, something engaging that adds more to the game without being overbearing for both sides.

  • nhattminhh
    nhattminhh Member Posts: 16
    Options

    Pfft, i can deal with gen rush with no add on/perks as a nurse at red rank. Not sure about Hillbilly but I heard he perform quite well with the same requirement.

  • Atrushan88
    Atrushan88 Member Posts: 2,084
    Options

    @NoShinyPony Because you'd only have to patrol 3 gens if you got tired of chasing a survivor. This cuts down time significantly. Also, if for example one gen is separated from the other two, that makes it harder for survivors to actually get the gens done because you as killer also know that's where they're gonna go. They'll get a gen done eventually, they're supposed to, but you're asking to slow the game down. This would allow for that as you don't have to patrol as much due to having only 3 gens you need to worry about in early game. This also rewards survivors by giving them more breathing room as they complete more gens while giving them more pressure in the early game. Keep in mind they also wouldn't know which gens are entity blocked until they found them.

  • FishFry247
    FishFry247 Member Posts: 696
    Options

    @NoShinyPony huntress is top rank killer as wehll just not as good as hag