Just me or does new gen regression feel like a hard nerf to survivor?
Maybe I misread the intention behind the mechanic?
Maybe I misread the intention behind the mechanic?
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Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media.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
I had a match on RPD with pyramid head running surge, brutal, eruption and nowhere to hide. I burned through regression events so fast and I was not guarding any of the gens. By the time they had two gens left, I had three gens blocked from any further regression events. Surge definitely took a hit with the new anti 3 gen, especially on multilevel maps.
For the record, I do think it will still be possible to hold a 3 gen with Legion (and most other Killers if they chose to). Players will adapt. But it might require different perks and add-ons to do so more effectively (things like Hex: Ruin, Fuming Mix tape, Filthy Blade, Thantaphobia and gen blocking could become better options). But I tend to avoid these perks and add-ons because I find them to be tedious to go against in my Survivor games. Ironically, with these in play it might end up making 3 gen games even longer. Surge definitely doesn't feel like such a good choice for Legion anymore, though. It still won me the game in this case, but now has the potential to backfire on the Killer.
I do think Legion is a more versatile Killer than a lot of players give them credit. I could go for a full end game build instead and still do quite well. I'm more worried about the weaker area defense Killers (like poor old Trapper), because defending a cluster of gens with his set up is all he really has going for him. It's only because BHVR created 3 really strong area defense Killers that this has become a problem.
The main issue for me is that the solution should be there to deal with the most egregious examples of the 3 gen strategy. If I can get a kill before the Survivors break the 3 gen, then I know I'm free to commit to more chases, because a few more Kills will probably follow. I get bored and I don't want the game to last forever either. I do patrol a portion of the map (4-5 gens usually) but I don't "3 gen" from the start unless the Survivors are really interested in breaking it early. At present, I feel like the system has the potential to unfairly punish a Killer for patrolling a cluster of gens simply because they chose the "wrong" perks, especially so on the smaller maps. As Ghouled_Mojo points out, it's even punishing Killers that aren't defending a 3 gen.
I don't think the system should be rewarding Survivors for finishing gens without any consideration for a potential end game 3 gen. At the moment, it kind of does because the regression penalty begins to apply on all gens from the very start of the match. I understand why it was implemented this way, because if a Killer chooses to defend 3 gens from the very start, there has to be a way to punish them for it.
Hopefully BHVR will take some feedback onboard and make adjustments to the system.
Agree
You say that as if you are kicking gens 8 times before it’s complete lol. By the time you have to kick an individual gen that many times either everyone will already be dead or your 3 gen should be broken. In short, it’s not common to get 8 regression events on one gen.
Not putting words in my mouth would be a start.
I don't recall mentioning anything about gen tapping. You in the wrong thread?
Kill rates in the week before the update dropped:
Kill rates in the week after the update dropped:
Keep in mind those numbers will also be affected by the Billy buffs, but take from this what you will.