Just wanted to let everyone know the "ds is an anti tunnel perk" argument isnt valid anymore
This was on my post asking if the devs confirmed ds is an anti tunnel perk.
Just wanted everyone to know that argument is officaly not true
This was on my post asking if the devs confirmed ds is an anti tunnel perk.
Just wanted everyone to know that argument is officaly not true
Read THIS post.
Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media. The archived data will be published at the end of October. This site is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Behaviour Interactive.
Comments
Btw Peanits himself also said that he thinks DS should deactivate if you put yourself back in action, like touching a gen and that people hopping into lockers from a gen when the killer approaches counter the counterplay to DS.
And it is pretty funny, that this article is linked and same time saying that the idea of being an anti tunnel perk is coming from the community. I'd rather say the idea comes exactly from this post
Ds while it can be annoying isn't really nearly as big an issue as it's made out to be. And noed sucks but it only activates at the end and if you've been doing totems it doesn't even happen. My biggest issue will always be bbq, it is a hugely op perk for killers to the point where I won't even run it on principle
I agree with the lack of variety in perks played. That's why I like some of these tomes, it makes me use perks I haven't used in awhile or at all
I would love to get tunneled every game. Getting chased is literally the best part in DbD. I use Object of obsession every game just in case if i get a potato survivor whos terrible at chases at rank 1.
getting chased and t-bagging is alot more fun than holding M1 on a generator...
If anything, the perk is weak for what it is. If you have something in your hand to stab the aggressor "there is nothing to be afraid of" , why is there a 60 sec window to use it? That object is mysteriously gone?
Thank you for letting me know. Can I continue using it now so I can punish tunneling killers? Thank you. Bye.
Why didn't you highlight the very next word.. farmed? Because that right there shows at least two different intentions for the perk.
But regardless, nowhere does Horvath say that is its only purpose. He is saying a 2 minute timer gives it too broad of a scope.
Because farming is the SECOND purpose, but this thread is about the FIRST purpose.
And as I understand farming, that would also include tunneling. Survivors farm the hooked person to get the 1k BP, not caring about the person being downed again. Same outcome to the hooked survivor, therefore the same purpose: not being hooked twice within a short amount of time without a chance to escape.
And the argument with the two minutes underlines it. This even supports the view of several mentionings when killers were able to down several people or hook at least another person within that time and suddenly get d-striked without having intentionally tunneled. This is pretty much the situation I read from Horvath they wanted to avoid. Not arguing that one minute is too long, but when he says "2 minutes is too long and out of purpose to protect" reads pretty much as they wanted to address "I did not tunnel but got d-striked"
Farming does not include tunneling. If a survivor farms another off the hook right in the killer's face then it's not tunneling unless they were camping with intent to tunnel.. and it would be a smart move to hit the unhooked. If they have BT then it's triggered and now healing will take an extra 8 seconds for them. If they don't then they immediately go down and you now chase the farmer, creating a large amount of pressure on the survivors.
But anyway, you point out in your own comment that DS has at least two purposes. So right off the bat the idea that DS is strictly an anti tunneling perk is proven false.
This is how I play. Generally I have two builds, one for max bp regardless of how long the game lasts, and one for max damage if I'm feeling mean and looking for a 4k. The rest of the time I'm going with different combinations to see what if anything I can get out of them just for fun.
It's a game. Why so serious everyone?
It is still the same outcome, no matter how you describe it: the perk protects you from quick downs off the hook. The reason behind it is irrelevant. I could also say there is no tunnel without the killer being around. Doesn't really matter if the survivor pulls the killer to the hook or if the killer decides to stay at the hook. It also doesn't matter if it is a smart or a d**k move at that moment. The perk should protect you from that situation.
And once again: this post is about denying that "anti tunnel perk" is a valid argument to complain. The post from Horvath gives the purpose of being an anti tunnel perk. This "idea" is not coming from the community. The complaints are about the invincibility that allows you to do stupid stuff that would normally without that perk be punished. And with that initial description of being "protective" is reason enough to take it as argument when people use it offensively.
Or let me try it from the opposite side: No one ever mentioned the perk to have the purpose to give you one minute invincibility
Unfortunately, your arguement about intent is akin to killers exclaiming that looping wasn't intended. Killers stating that it's exploiting the survivor's smaller hitbox that allows looping to happen as it does currently.
Looping may not have been foreseen by the devs but they decided to roll with it.
What I'm trying to get at is just because something was done or made with a specific intent in mind doesn't mean that intent can't be changed or expanded.
I didn't say that either. This post is about "it is not a valid argument". But it is as the screenshot from the post clearly states that this was the purpose.
And the only official statement to that was by Peanits saying "we never said that, this is a community idea" while referring the thread that clearly said that. And arguing that people "think what someone said" is not a base for an argument, but this post is pretty much the base for their arguing.
If they say, it was intended as anti tunnel but we changed our mind and we are happy with the offensive DS playstyle, that would be fine. Saying people arguing with "anti tunnel perk" have no point is not fine. Denying that the anti tunnel perk idea was raised by BHVR is also not fine. Before the rework it was clearly never called an anti tunnel perk because you could use it before your first hook, it was the survivors decision how to use it.
It is an anti tunnel perk since its only activation requirement is to get off the hook whether you get pulled off or you pull yourself off
I get where you are coming from and I agree with you. My intent was to explain how your point could be argued against.
Original intent is irrelevant as it can change.
Your post reminded me of something. When somebody unhooks themselves, with or without deliverance, it won't count towards devour hope. That is intentional but should it be changed so that it works even if they unhook themselves?
It never was an "anti-tunnel perk" that idea came from entitled survivors who were taking control of the meta and making Survivor the power role. It's only use was to extend a chase if you had just got off hook so you had some semblance of a chance to have a chase after getting off hook.
Presently it's being abused to do more than that, which is why it's getting looked at and most likely nerfed.
Eh not really since I'm pretty sure that'll be too unfair because devour punishes altruism and pulling yourself off isn't an altruistic action
I still dont get how this justifies to say "anti tunnel perk is not a valid argument" as long as they didnt clearly comment on that. The only comment on that is from Peanits and this one is simply incorrect. This post is based on Peanit's comment that they never said it is an anti tunnel perk which is not true, also untrue that this is a community raised idea.
Counter example: the killer shack. There is arguing that the killer shack should be a strong loop because it is the "killer" shack and then people said "it is nowhere written that this is the killer shack". I tried to find references and also found nothing anywhere, it is only just referred to as "shack". THIS is a community raised definition and not a valid argument to discuss about the strength of this loop. DS being an anti tunnel perk is still a valid argument, unless someone says explicitly "we decided to go that way"
I don't mind DS being a anti tunneling perk but if the timer was a lease 80 Seconds that I will be fine with it
That is funny. It's pretty sad how bad the devs are at PR sometimes.
Ok then. So the BS involved in the second, third, fourth and fifth chance perks is intentional. Gotcha.