One frustrating part of Ruin left out while changing it

@antgnstea

lol now they don’t have to fix totem spawns anymore. Save them self’s some work

Now you know. 🙂

Sorry, I should have been more specific - my comment was attempting to explain why Ruin might be too strong if it weren't a hex perk, and therefore couldn't be cleansed.

You mean this:

Yeah, I definitely feel like survivor spawns can be better because literally the entire team spawned here! 😕

I genuinely think you're overestimating it. Base regression is 1/4 of the rate that a vanilla survivor repairs at, with Ruin that becomes 1/2. And yes, it does potentially affect all the gens on the map, but a killer can really only force 1 survivor off a gen for an extended period of time, 2 if they're unhooking someone. This will only affect bad players who are scared of doing gens and non-coordinated teams who end up with 3 people going for unhooks.

I mean if they know Ruin is used in 80% of games they should also know totems don't stay up for 80% of matches. Just unrealistic thinking on their part

Seems to me like he's just saying that the intention is for it to get more dangerous over time if the totem doesn't get cleansed, meaning that it's meant to encourage survivors to find and cleanse the totem once they realise it's there. Not that it's meant to be a late game perk, but that if survivors ignore it, it becomes more powerful over time. Presumably it still does its job before that.

But again, and this goes for @Lucama too, I could be overestimating it but we're not going to know for sure until we actually get a chance to try it. The devs have already said that they have found in their testing sessions that it's actually a lot more powerful than it sounds on paper, so the next step is to test it for ourselves and see if they're right.

I mean, they said that Ruin won’t be as impactful as before in the early game, they stated that it’s meant to build up the more the game goes on, they said that it is devastating in the late game (note the verb tense: is, instead of would be), they compared it to Devour Hope..

I understand you always want to see things with empathy, but what I wrote is not some stretched deduction, it’s not even paraphrasing, it’s exactly what they wrote.

They want it to be a late game perk - which doesn’t always work, exactly as DH.

I'm not convinced that that's the case, because I interpreted the comments differently, but it's a very subtle distinction that I'm not confident I could properly explain. At any rate, at this point we're just debating semantics. Whether it is a late game perk or not, we will find out when we get the chance to test it for ourselves.

Fib, point is that you said that we “misinterpreted” dev words, but dev words say otherwise.

PTB can even let us see that new Ruin is so much OP that all survivors will stop playing, still: what devs said is not really up to debate; if they worded it incorrectly it’s another beast, but we can’t be in their mind.

As I said, while I respect your interpretation of what was said and definitely understand where you're coming from, I read the same comments and interpreted them slightly differently.

To me, it seemed like Almo was saying that the perk was designed to be strong in the late game not because they expected it to last that long necessarily, but to incentivise getting rid of it early. Part of this is from the way he compared it to Devour Hope, and how DH doesn't usually last until the late game, but when it does it's devastating.

But as long as we have different interpretations, and no Almo here to clarify what he meant, I don't see much use in debating over semantics. One way or another, we'll find out the truth for ourselves pretty soon.

Semantics are important in a place where only words matter, otherwise everyone is free to “misinterpret” the other ;).

In fact, you are “interpreting” devs words, I’m simply reading them as they are: they know ruin is not as good as before early game, and they know it shines in late game.

It’s a late game perk in the sense that it works best during that part of the trial, certainly not because it works “only” late game, as NOED would. But this is borderline nonsensical because Ruin usefulness was to slow down the early game, no one cared about the late game anyway, of those 80% players. Plus ruin would break anyway :P

If Ruin somehow survives to late game it would only be useful if the survivors three gen and those gens are really near each other.

Fair enough. I would say, in that case, that regardless of what Almo said, the rationale for changing the perk isn't good, because they seem to have assumed that the reason people use Ruin has to do with emblem progress and largely failed to take into account the fact that there are important strategic reasons for exerting pressure in the early game as killer.

Also, I believe that the changes made will only encourage "genrushing", and discourage healthy, altruistic gameplay on the survivor side. But I'm waiting to make my final judgement as to whether the changes themselves are a net good until I can test them out for myself.

Excellent! Mwah 😘

I think you miss understood how a generator regresses.

A regressing generator loses .25 charges a second. This means a 100% gen takes 320 seconds to fully regress to 0%.

Ruin makes it so generators regress at .5 charges a second. This means it will take a full generator 160 seconds to fully regress.

However, if you scare some one off a generator at say... 50%, it won't take 320/160 seconds for it to hit 0. It loses the .25/.5 charges a second. So a 50% generator will take 160/80 seconds to fully regress. You also save time by not having to kick it to start the regressing.

There are two things I can think of that could make this ruin powerful. Since it affects generators and not survivors in anyway, it will remain hidden. Meaning you need to actually look at a gen to see if it is regressing or not. Won't help in red ranks but will punish people in lower ranks.

The second is slug builds. GG indirect buff to Oni. Basically more survivors you have busy not doing gens, the better.

You do realize this is a multiplayer game right? Both sides have to have the ability to do their jobs, both sides have to have the ability to win not just killers. There is not a single killer below a 55% kill rate on average, going all the way up to 75% average. No multiplayer game on the planet is balanced for one side to dominate every game, no game is balanced to one side winning all the time. If you truly take actual balance into consideration not entitled I have to absolutely dominate every game to feel good, killers are over tuned in the perspective of actual balance not survivors. 50% kill rate is balance, not 100%. If killer could never kill anyone no matter how good they are then killers wouldn't play the game, same goes for survivors. Balance. I'd love to dominate every game of OW or Apex I play but BALANCE makes that impossible. Stop only looking at killer and consider both sides of the equation equally and you too can look at actual balance in a game.

I play red rank survivor and 90% of the time I finish the first gen even with ruin before the killer gets a single down. Why is this? Because of the go to answer killers give for anything a survivor complains about. Do gens, git gud at gens, learn to hit great skill checks forehead, and so on. The state of gens is because survivors listened to the direct advice of killers, no more no less.

If you want a single player experience where you can't lose go play a single player game and leave the multiplayer games to people who understand balance.

They are and killers are complaining that a 2k is a black pip and a loss. In any other pvp game when you hit the skill level you are supposed to be at you don't advance unless you get better but killers don't have a skill level they all think they are gods and deserve to be rank 1 when they shouldn't be but they don't think about that either.

If a killer is at the same skill level as the survivors they are playing against they shouldn't advance. They need to be a higher skill level to advance. Same with survivor, bullying a killer means you are far more skilled and should advance at an accelerated pace ie double pips.

But they need to tune survivor pips as well because advancing is too easy to actually balance the game. I played against a rank 2 survivor today thinking match making sucked but they were rank 2 playing like a rank 15, horrible immersion (like no iron will trying to sneak around while injured horrible), couldn't loop, I gave them the hatch and they only got 12k, literally depended on everyone else to carry them. I didn't want them to feel bad about bad match making, but in post game chat I realized the error of my thinking.

Of course they left the worse part in, they want the game to become "Go play with a killer and have a fun time at their expense sim."

Anything that makes the killers life better takes MONTHS to fix or happen.

But when its survivors, barely a week passes and they get all that they need.