Anti-camp?
"Face camp" in the end game chat is censored.
If it's such a dirty phrase in BHVR's mind, shouldn't it be considered a dirty playstyle? If so, why not do more to combat it? The anti-camp mechanics feel extremely weak. It's so frustrating to play fair games as killer, then to swap to survivor to work on the rift/compendium or daily rituals only to have people just barely get far enough away from me so the meter stops filling, but remain close enough to still prevent anyone from coming to unhook me.
Give meter faster. Extend the distance at which meter is gained. Give a slower hook state progression (or maybe something like base kit Reassurance?) if they're within 32 meters. Disable slowdown perks when the killer is camping. Increase generator repair speed while they're camping. Maybe some combo of some of those ideas?
There are so many options. Is it that they're so difficult to implement? Do we think the meta is in a healthy spot and don't think changes are needed?
We went from being told camping and tunneling being legitimate ways to play, to base-kit Borrowed Time, to the anti-camp mechanic. The words are BANNED in end-game chat. Are these not strategies we want to encourage anymore? Then why not do more to discourage it? If you want to stand 16 meters away from someone and stare at them until the game ends to guarantee your singular kill so you feel good about yourself, go right ahead, but everyone else will escape and get tons of points.
This is supposed to be a fun, non-competitive game. It's absolutely zero fun to get camped and tunneled. It's not fun to tunnel people, except for the toxic losers whose only goal is to make everyone else mad. If we ARE worried about competitive balance, make this a toggle-able option in custom games.
Comments
Pretty sure "Meg" is also censored in end game chat. And GG sometimes. Really not a good indicator of what BHVR considers bad, just an indicator of a broken chat censor.
While I agree more could be done towards camping and tunelling, using examples like base-kit borrowed time and the anti-camp don't really prove anything. If they actually wanted something done, these would be stronger.
This.
And it is extremely unlikely they'll ever be made stronger because camping and tunneling aren't exploits or problems, they are strategies. Strategies which are acknowledged and recognized by the developers as valid.
A base-kit feature that impacts a valid strategy will never be strong enough to completely stop it, even if the strategy happens to be frowned upon. Which is why we need perks like Decisive Strike.
I'm aware that they consider/used to consider them valid. I said as much in my OP. However, if they still consider them so valid, why are there any features to dissuade them at all? Clearly, they see SOMETHING inherently wrong with those strategies.
That's part of my point, too, I guess. They're very well aware of the toxicity in the game. That's why some of those seemingly innocuous words are banned. Even just some of the survivors' names. We want to foster a less toxic environment, clearly. Be inoffensive, no mean things allowed! Except toxic playstyles are allowed, making people want to use their gamer words, and rewarding the people who are purposefully aiming for that reaction with a good chuckle.
The base-kit stuff added in is pretty worthless. So the question of why have it at all if tunneling is a valid strategy rises. They 100% should crank it up if they actually want to prevent it from being done. If they don't actually want to discourage the "valid strategy," why are any counter measures there? It's just a lame half-measure that really doesn't do anything, but makes some people think they care about fixing the playstyle more than they actually do. Proceeding to confuse those of us who think about it for just a few seconds.