Is DS too easy to abuse?

Bennett_They1Them

Please read below in full detail: (people seem not to be reading more than the title)

TL;DR: I was curious what people think about DS. I'm not complaining, I don't have an issue with it, and I now understand it better. you can all stop arguing now, but feel free to keep sharing and discussing.

also, does anyone know how to close this can of worms?

side note: can someone close this discussion? I think it's run its course.

I feel like it could use another caveat to make it so it's not a team-wide second chance.

I'm not angry or anything, but it has certainly lost me kills and sometimes games before.

I feel like maybe it should turn off if the killer downs someone else, would that still be fair?

edit: I'd like to specify that I don't personally have an issue with ds, I'm just curious what other people think. :)

abuse = as a game mechanic, take advantage.

Mew

i think ds is fine. though id like to see small buffs to make it better for anti-tunnel

like, being able to use it twice (after each unhook)

TAG

@PIP330 said:

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2468432#Comment_2468432

Slugging never was a option, huh?

And if for some reason a survivor with only 1 hook makes it to the end game, isn't that ur fault for not pressuring gens? (I repeated this a lot, but it seems to be u can't understand)

No, because they can crawl out of the exit gate.

Ad also not necessarily because I also can't hook someone too quickly in succession or else I risk triggering DS as well. Hook fast enough to avoid reaching the endgame but not too fast that we trigger DS. Killers are to blame if they trigger DS and Killers are to blame if they let it stick around until the end. Essentially, Killers are to blame for not winning the game without ever triggering DS.

TAG

@PIP330 said:

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2468729#Comment_2468729

Then the killer hooked him really close to the exit gates, and that's pretty much a really good weird scenario for DS where it is doing what is supposed to do: counter tunneling

Every killer, every perk, every addon has a good scenario (most of them are really hard to make them work) Should we nerf as well the perk that let u throw down the pallet cause in a really good scenario it is op? You can't nerf a perk because it shines in a weird moment of the game (And that moment is the end game, that means the killer couldn't prevent survivors from doing gens) Imagine punishing a player for doing their objective.

"Hook fast enough to avoid reaching the endgame but not too fast that we trigger DS."

In most of those cases slugging is the best if gens are poppin' like crazy and applies more pressure to survivor cause if u hook them they're already in the injured state and it only takes 3 seconds to unhook, but if u slug them the survivor has either to stay in the ground and recover or someone comes in and heal them up (which takes 16 seconds i think?)

"Killers are to blame if they trigger DS and Killers are to blame if they let it stick around until the end."

Who blames killer if they trigger DS? DS is just doing it's job

Essentially, Killers are to blame for not winning the game without ever triggering DS.

Ok, drop the victim card already

It's not even that close to the Exit Gates. You have an entire minute to crawl out. DS is supposed to counter tunneling, not guarantee an escape. That is a scenario that should NOT happen. That pay-off is simply too high. I think nerfing a perk because of a weird situation is completely justified if a) that weird situation is very extreme b) the nerf in question only meaningfully affects that weird situation.

Imagine punishing a player for doing their objective.

...are you suggesting that a player should not be punished for doing gens or hooking people?

PlayEvilDead

Not any more since they make a trade for it by wasting productivity, if they saved it for endgame sure there is still potential there but mostly swf would be able to abuse it effectively which actually will become an issue (swf, not ds necessarily) for a growing amount of killers due to mmr but if you learn how to play as if you're 'farming' and just stack bbq you shouldn't to worry much about it unless you've been sweating too much most of the year already. Remember, devs want most survivors to escape so that they get happy and buy skins. So whether the imbalanced gameplay leads to it when mmr screws you over, or you let them all go to keep the mmr from screwing you over, get used to not expecting many kills as killer form now on and just switch over to survivor if that doesn't feel right for you.

TAG

@PIP330 said:

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2469115#Comment_2469115

That scenario is created by the killer, for not applying pressure. That's pretty simple.

" I think nerfing a perk because of a weird situation is completely justified"

Oh well then, let's nerf every perk and killers then.

I'll start with noed: make it so if the killer downs more than 2 survivor with noed active it automatically destroys and the perk deactivates, we did this change because we consider this is a no-win situation to survivors

If the trickster shots someone on the exit gate and is injured the chain automatically breaks, we did this because this could potentially create a no-win situation to that survivor.

Should I continue?

You realize you're nerfing the perk for a WEIRD scenario that will probably happen in 1 of every 10 games, a scenario that is the killer fault for not applying pressure, right?

Hey, if you're gonna accuse me of ignoring your point, I'm gonna ask you to not ignore the question I posed. :P Did you suggest that players should not be punished for completing gens and hooking people?

Also, the scenarios you describe are not no-win scenarios. No-win scenario means that no matter what you do, you lose. If someone is downed near the Exit Gate with an active DS, the Killer is in a no-win scenario because both options (pick up and slug) will cause the Killer to definitely lose that Survivor.

So if you can explain how the Survivors can't win no matter what they do in the situations you describe, I'd be happy to concede the point to you.

And yes, I fully realize that I am suggesting changing an interaction that isn't terribly common. It means that changing this interaction solves a problem the perk causes without harming the rest of the perk in the vast majority of other cases. That is generally referred to as a "healthy change." :P