Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Do you think that the Ruin rework is pushing the game in the right direction (is a healthy change)?
Comments
-
Yes
It was bound to happen sooner or later.
2 -
No
Not if done alone, without addressing the reasons why ruin was used.
11 -
No
Agreed. Other things should've happened to balance this change out too though. That is where the true problem lies.
1 -
No
Not when nothing's been done to address the core issue.
Here's the problem: One of the reasons given for changing Ruin is that inexperienced survivors feel frustrated playing against it.
What about killers? Are killers not frustrated by having three gens pop before they've made hardly any progress in the match? Seeing 2/5 or 3/5 of the survivors' objective completed when you've only gotten one hook and no kills is demoralizing. Inexperienced killers especially will feel like they've already lost at that point.
According to devs, gens are supposed to pop quickly at the beginning, and then the killer gains more power because there are fewer gens to patrol...
Okay, do new killers know this? Or do they just see gens pop, think they suck at killer, and quit (either the match or playing killer entirely)? New killers are playing alone, against four survivors, and all they see are the survivors quickly getting their objective done while the killer struggles to even get a single hook. Nothing in the game tells them that survivors' objectives go fast in the beginning and then slow down. (Not that that's necessarily true, either; not unless you get three or four gens near each other. If the gens are on opposite sides of the map, the killer's basically screwed.)
The devs eased survivors' frustrations, but not killers'.
4 -
No
I was going to say, don't fall into that non-sense. Just because they are selling It, doesn't mean It's true.
Gens SHOULD NOT pop fast at the start of games, that is absolutely absurd and shows that the people working on this game, truly don't understand their game.
This is what they call a STACKED-DECK. It's bogus and shouldn't be the EXPECTATION for a trial, that is biased and literally one-sided.
The expectation should be that EITHER outcome should be expected, with equal chance of said outcome happening.
The two outcomes...
One side has an equal chance of popping gens fast at the start of a trial, while, the other side has an equal chance of maintaining and keeping gens at the start of a trial.
Yet.. Here we are.
1 -
No
Yeah, I really don't agree, either. Sure, a lot of matches I've seen the first few gens pop and then things slow down, but 1. I sit in brown/yellow ranks being lazy (as both survivor and killer), and 2. even if things slow down, that doesn't necessarily mean even a single survivor gets sacrificed.
The imbalance here is painful. Ruin could be annoying and slow down survivors, sure, but it usually kept two or three gens from popping at the beginning of a match, and there were multiple ways to deal with Ruin. Two to three gens popping at the beginning of a match feels like a kick in the teeth to killers, and then if they still want to bother playing the match they're stressed out in a race against time trying to take back control. Which of those situations sounds like the lesser of two evils? But no, we're taking the weight off the group's shoulders and increasing the weight on the shoulders of the player who's alone with no one to help them.
1 -
No
You can't change a stop gap measure to a bigger problem and expect things to go your way.
1 -
Yes
Yes I do think so. I just feel like it might have been a bit too early. If more maps were reworked already, I feel like this change would be much less frustrating to killer mains.
Maybe this will get them to create a small second objective to slow things down slightly. It would have to be a small increase in objective time though, or they would have to nerf the strong killers too much.
1 -
No
It’s not even about the perk itself, it’s about the developers bias towards survivors.
1 -
Yes
I do but now there are many other problems that need to be addressed.
You can't just tell me that I should give up on the first two or three gens, it's insanity.
1 -
No
Lol we have a mod voting about the decisions made internally.
3 -
No
They're entitled to their opinions as much as we are.
2 -
No
Of course. And of course I'd vote yes that I believe a change I'm so vehemently for, even after trying to defend it in an entire thread about it , while people are pointing out genuine issues which I continually ignore because I'm "confident in these changes".
That kind of confidence in the hands of people MAKING the decisions, shouldnt vote on a poll intended for people playing the game that actually understand it. Especially when said person is struggling to not drown in defending said changes.
Of course, they dont listen to feedback or polls regardless, so hell we may as well get M Cote and Ochido on the vote.
1 -
No
just because the core problem isnt getting solved with that.
the gen speed in general was the problem which caused other players to use it more then someone should do and so they just think it would be a good idea to change the only perk that slows down the best at the beginning.
1 -
No
The problem is ruin was needed to counter bigger maps like ormond and red forest that will take a while to make all huge maps smaller that's many maps that new ruin was needed on and with the way new map reworks come out that'll be a long while before it's fixed if it's fixed
1 -
Yes
It may be necessary before looking at genrush. A perk that decides so much about a game isnt healthy, just meta. I'm glad we're returning to earned map pressure instead of equipping it.
1 -
I think we'll have to wait and see.
Personally I think the reasoning behind it highlights a Survivor bias; but MAYBE, just maybe, this is just the devs' first step before adding a 2nd objective or slowing down generator repair speeds.
Yeah, I don't really believe it either, but I'm hopeful.
0 -
No
Almo voting? Lmao sure, why not, cool.
While I like the change of Ruin, why it's changed was not a step to helping the long talked problem.
GENS ARE DONE WAY TOO FAST, THAT IS WHY WE RUN GEN STOPPING PERKS AND NOT FUN BUILDS BECAUSE WE'D LIKE A GAME TO LAST MORE THAN 5 MINUTES TOPS.
Is that fun to then get t-bagged cause you got rushed gens because you didn't have a good start at the beginning of the game? No, no it isn't.
2 -
Yes
Yes. I've been on a solo survivor binge recently. I notice the chance of us winning in 99% of games directly relates to how long that totem stays up.
No ruin/destroyed instantly = we win (outside of NOED crutch)
Ruin lasts a long time = killer wins
It shouldn't be like this. One perk shouldn't be dictating the outcome of most trials. I'm not going to say gen speeds are perfect but they need some better, more fair and more consistent for both sides than a totem spawn.
The survivors I've been getting aren't great and they can't work through Ruin. I'm always the first to finish a gen. However the killers I go against aren't great and many of them would lose multiple gens in some chases and Ruin really is all thats holding them up and people shouldn't be boosted outside of their league by one perk.
i had a game earlier where I ran the Spirit around the map side to side and then side to side again. Easily a 3 gen chase, easily. However because Ruin was up no gens got done. One was close, other 2 survivors were running around looking for Ruin. This player was not a very good Spirit, and I would guess that in the next game if that totem gets cleansed instantly they will be genrushed to oblivion then they'll go online and complain about gen speeds. I think people have relied on Ruin so much that it convinces them they are better players than they are, and so they find themselves in ranks that are actually too difficult for them.
0 -
Yes
I have a feeling game changes and killer buffs will be coming after this change. They will see the drastic change in games and will have to do something to lengthen games and give killers more room to juggle between four people/gens without being toxic. Give these devs more credit, they have been fixing old maps, providing new ones, and sticking to their roadmap. They probably have another long term goal to make sure this game has another couple years.
0 -
No
No maps weren't shrunk long walls still exist buildings are still ultra safe and sometimes you can still get double pallets (rarely tho)
2 -
No
The Ruin rework was poorly handled. They nerfed it with no acknowledgement of how it was really used. Ruin being used non-stop is not ruin's fault but a deeper problem with the game that it fought against. They have not addressed the deeper problem (Gen speed) at least at higher ranks.
2 -
No
Yes with other changes, not by itself.
2 -
Yes
I agree with you
0 -
I can't really make a decision. The Ruin rework was just whatever. Nobody asked for it but it happened. The worst part about the change is the toxic killer mains tbh.
0 -
Yes
Yes, now that ruin baindaid is gone, they will start addresing and fixing real killer problems.
Think about it, if you change i.e. gen repair speed for being "fair" for killers then those who use ruin will make it extremelly bored to play with. I know ruin was (is) a bandaid for the gen speed time, but changing gen repair speed won't make less killer use ruin, some (most) killers won't think "Ok, now that the repair gen speed is fine I can stop being ruin dependant" but "ok, now gen repair speed is increased, and with ruin I will have much more time" and that will make survivors get bored because matches will be insanely long, specially adding thanatophobia or dying light.
0 -
No
I think it needed to change but I have 2 major issues with the change. 1. It came at a horrible time with maps that are too big and there are too many low tier killers who needed ruin for early game slowdown. 2. They made a HEX perk that's meant to be strong LATE GAME, it's a contradictory perk that conflicts with itself.
0 -
Yes
Yes. Ruin was overly used because it was a lazy perk, not because it was a necessity (since yes, you can play at red ranks without Ruin), and made the survivor experience very dull since almost every match felt the same. Without the old Ruin, killers will start experimenting more with their builds, making the game more varied and fun for everyone.
0
