http://dbd.game/killswitch
Should We Remove Level Requirement For Perk Slots?
This concept is so foreign to me.
With the ranking system, you don't rank up as individual killers. And with how each killer plays so differently, its shocking nothing has been done about it yet.
Why do I have to play a single perk killer with no addons at Rank 9? Its masochistic, I tell you, trying to level a killer.
Similar issue with survivor. Without leveling, you're stuck
This forces me to put time into other killers/survivors in order to get another in a decent and acceptable place... which is absurd, this shouldn't have to be the case. It prevents me from practicing and finding the optimal build or finding fun builds or me to try. Its a time sink.
And yet, I have to get to level 15 before I can unlock a killer's full potential in terms of perk slots.
Should we remove the level requirement for perk slots?
Should We Remove Level Requirement For Perk Slots? 36 votes
13 votes
13 votes
10 votes
Comments
-
No.
Side note: they have mentioned in the past the idea of having different ranks for different killers, because they all play so differently.
This may sound harsh, but if you're good at the game, you shouldn't need four top-tier perks to do well. It's harder, sure, but you're not "stuck". You can play a killer while levelling them fairly easily. In fact, it should only take several games' worth of bloodpoints as killer to unlock all the perk slots, which is not difficult to achieve.
Previously, it was the case that you kept all four perk slots open after prestiging a character. I don't know what their reason was for changing that, but I assume they did have a reason, which is why I'm voting for No.
0 -
Yes.
I play games to have fun, not to grind out until I am at the point where I have the ability to have fun.
Ability has little to do with the overall point but let's roll with it. Is it fair to say 'you deserve to be forced to grind for perks' for players who aren't top tier players?
What about someone trying to learn a killer and getting used to their power? How is getting stomped because you don't know how to play the killer in any way the players fault? And why should their ability to prolong games, which is locked behind perk levels, be blamed on skill? Longer games means more opportunities to improve.
Not everyone is a top tier killer or survivor who can run the game perkless and with no addons and still 4k. We should stop pretending they are.
0 -
No.
Yes, I would say that it's fair to expect players to put in a bit of effort to unlock all the content. Most people enjoy not having everything handed to them. If you struggle a bit at first, that's okay. When you're trying out a new character for the first, second or even fifth time, you should not be expecting to 4k. And If you simply must try out a character with all perks unlocked, there's KYF for that.
I'm not a top tier player by any means, nor am I pretending that most people are. All I'm saying is that if you can't have fun trying out a new character without perks, that says more about you than it does about the game.
0 -
Yes.
I'm asking that I and other players not get punished for the crime of daring to pick a killer or survivor we don't main.
Everything said thus far are excuses for working around it and blaming the player for being upset that they are put at unfair disadvantages in a game for no good reason.
I haven't heard a single legitimate reason as to why they lock off the perk slots. Content unlocking? If that's the case, then why are they giving you the killer's three starting perks? Why give you three perks but allow you to only use one? That's not content unlocking, it's slowing the progression down needlessly.
How does locking all perk slots behind a level requirement affect the game positively?
0 -
No.
I told you in my first post I don't know the reason, I just assume that there is one, otherwise they wouldn't have done it. I'm not a game designer, I'm not here to speculate about why the developers made the design decisions that they did.
All I'm saying is that, from what I can see, the problem lies less in the game design and more in your outlook. Perks help, yes, but they're not a dealbreaker. It's not a "punishment" not to have all the leveling benefits unlocked from the get-go, and if you think you should be able to immediately start winning matches the first time you pick up a character you're not used to playing, perks or not, that's a fault with you and not with the game.
EDIT: You said in your initial post that this concept was foreign to you. It's hardly an original one. Try playing other games where you unlock benefits by leveling up your characters, and then you might understand a bit better how the system works and why it's not as absurdly unjust as you seem to think.
0 -
Yes.
Firstly, it's fallacious to assume that just because someone does something means it was done for good or logically sound reasons.
Second, you're trying to attack my character as a player rather than defend the actual merits of locking the perks, which is a red flag to me. I never said I should immediately start winning marches. All I asked for is having four perk slots open because locking them serves no purpose to progression and hinders game balance for a gimmick.
Thirdly, other games are actually balanced, and aren't entirely RNG based. Other games done consist of holding down M1 and pressing space bar and actually require some skill. Other games aren't asymmetrical in design. Perks being locked isn't a foreign idea to me; what's foreign is why on gods earth would they lock it on every killer?
Fourthly, your defense for this consists entirely on the idea that my conception of what is 'fun' is somehow corrupt and therefore is a problem with me and not anything to do with the game. Don't really appreciate that, but it's a non-argument anyway.
0 -
No.
You said "I play games to have fun" which strongly implied that you thought this system wasn't fun. You also said "not everyone is a top tier killer or survivor who can run the game perkless and with no addons and still 4k", which in context seemed to imply that you thought you ought to be able to 4k while trying a new character, and the only thing stopping you was the locked perks/slots. I suggested that you might have more fun if you adjust your outlook and stop expecting to do well when you're trying out a new character for the first time.
I apologise if I misinterpreted anything you said, but pointing out that you're looking at something the wrong way is not attacking your character. The fact that you interpreted it that way tells me that this issue is clearly getting way too personal for you, so I'm going to end it here before it gets ugly. I hope you find someone else to discuss this with who you can better see eye-to-eye with.
0 -
Yes.
I understand what you're saying but outlook doesn't change it.
The perk slots being locked and being at a rank where players will have all perk slots and the perks they want isn't a matter of outlook. That's a result of what this system does if you try to do a new killer.
Losing a game because I took bad perks, or because I played poorly, or because the other team was simply better, are things within my control.
How can I change my outlook on something that puts me in a disadvantageous position for no fault of my own, my only mistake being trying out a killer before investing 15 games worth of bloodpoints into it?
0 -
No.
The deal here is the following. You are playing on Rank 9, as you said, thus you played a fair bit already. Therefore you already have at the very least a character with perks. If you really dont like playing a character with no perk slots or add-ons (the latter has little to do with this topic since at some point you will need to have 0 add-ons), then dont play that character. Use the characters that already have perks, and any BP you get from them, funnel them into the character you wish to play. I really do not see the problem here.
0 -
Yes.
Locking perks by levels hinders a lot of things. For example a guy who leveled Clown to rank 1 suddenly leveling Plague will be facing far more optimal survivors who have 4 perks each while he has one. That's a huge power imbalance. The same can be said for survivors. if someone leveled Claudette to rank 1, but the killer has 4 perks and you're using level 1 Kate, it's going to be significantly harder for you to get points to level Kate. You can argue that you could level someone else to level Kate, but someone might actually like to play the character they're leveling. Also 100k, or 150k, can't remember which BP can level you to like level 10 or so. That takes a decent amount of time without double BP. Then there's prestiging, in which case you've leveled that character well over the required amount of levels.
0 -
Yes.
Survivors and killers should already have the first 3 slots unlocked and the last one needs level.
The new players are pitiful
0 -
Yes.
As I said before, that's an excuse to work around it's existence, not a justification for it existing in the first place.
0 -
No.
Doesnt sound like an excuse. Following your line of thought, if you have a load of fruit and you dont like apples, then apples shouldnt exist in the world. Instead, you should have purchased the bundle that didnt include apples.
Its not a game design problem. Its a problem that its entirely up to the player to figure out and how to solve it. Such problems arent problems to Devs, because its based on your experience as a user, which you (as user) define.
0 -
I don't care either way.
It doesn't really matter much to me personally, as I don't play killers unless they're Level 15 at the very least.
I still play survivors even at Level 1, but that's mainly because Survivor gameplay and Killer gameplay are vastly different. I usually play Survivor when I just want to play a game that's relaxing rather than stressful.
0 -
Yes.
Well, for one, your analogy makes no sense.
Two, it's absolutely the devs problem. They made the issue, literally. And so far there is no demonstrable reason for it existing. The whole reason I have to work around it in the first place is because of a poorly designed decision to make leveling characters seem more meaningful.
0 -
Yes.
I really don't see why we have them locked to begin with. You already have very little add-ons and perks to work with. Just seems like an unnecessary hindrance. It doesn't make you grind more, it just makes the grind harder and more annoying.
0 -
No.
There is a reason for this.
At level 1 you have very few perks to chose from. You have 3 perks and if you have 4 slots there is no decision to make. This means at lower levels when you having less perks, having more slots means no build diversity. Once you've leveled up a bit you'll have more perks and thus having 4 slots no longer causes this issue.
If you're experienced then just grind BP for a few games on a different Killer and problem solved. The first 15 levels are quick anyway.
0 -
Yes.
How is having three perks you can swap out with the one's you gain any less diverse than having one perk slot you're stuck with until you reach a certain point?
How is that any less of an injury than having three perks you can use?
0 -
No.
Because most perks are #########. So you'll only have 2 or 3 actual candidate perks to use even if you have more total perks.
0