Anybody hitting the gen regression limit fast with Jolt?

TheArbiter

In my matches where I didn't bring jolt but did bring other gen regression perks not once did I hit the gen regression limit, but every game I played with it I hit the limit fast. Anybody else?

UndeddJester

@RpTheHotrod said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3644202#Comment_3644202

M1 killers specifically cannot afford to patrol generators at the far reaches of the large maps. This means they sre forced by game design to patrol the central generators (usually 4 gens). This means Surge usually consistently hits the center gens.

Another way is the incredibly common survivor tactic to entirely focus on center gens and leave the far away gens untouched to set up for an easy endgame. This means the only gens to even defend are the center gens which means they will get regressed a lot more with kicks or perks. This essentially is out of the hands of the killer unless they choose to never even try to regress the gens being super focused on.

@Skillfulstone said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3644283#Comment_3644283

While it does help against that, it also hurts Killers that aren't 3-genning. If the system activated at the end it would only affect those situations.

Just look at the cursed Team ETERNAL vs Cm9i match: Like all 3-genning Killers (from the start) he never really left his zone, which means the Survivors did every other gens basically unbothered and were in almost pristine condition when the 3-gen battle started.

A Killer that chases and hooks during the game will likely have to deal with a Survivor team in rough shape compared to a 3-genner that wanted to play chess from the start. If the system only starts at the end it punishes those 3-genners much more since the Survivors are in good shape and map ressources are still plentiful.

The current system punishes non-3-genning Killers as much (if not more since their builds won't be made for it) than 3-gen players and it shouldn't be.

@Reinami said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3643596#Comment_3643596

The problem is the opposite though. As a killer you don't WANT to hit that scenario, because if you do you lose. Yeah you can drag the game out, but by design you lose every time. So if they only made it count during the 3 gen, and then lowered the count to say, 4 regression events, i think it would work out much better.

I see... actually a strong point.

I don't think the current implementation in the majority of games will cause the problem of overly punishing killers... but there will be the odd outliers no doubt... the system you are all proposing does seem to more reliably address the problem where Killer's may get punished unintentionally....

However, there are a couple of issues I see is the system not enabling until 3 gens are left:

1. While it is harder to hold a 4-gen, there are certain map configurations where a 4 gen can be nearly as bad as a 3 gen, and even if not, you dont really want to wait until you've already made several attempts to break the 3 gen before you give up, take the 4th gen and the counter measure now starts to take effect from 0. I would argue it'd make more sense to enable it with 4 gens left instead of 3.
2. This does effectively allow the killer to hold the 3 gen throughout most of the match, and we all know that the game tends to really get to the crunch when 2 gens or so are left and the area of play is smaller. If the killer isn't penalised for holding that 3-gen from the start, anyone who does attempt to break it early risks using resources they are going to need later, but the time the 3-gen system starts to take effect, it's already too late. This does push the game to a "do outer gens first, then do inner gens" standard strategy/playstyle, because why take the risk?

Point 2 MIGHT be relieved by my suggestion for point 1, maybe in conjunction with the AFC making hooking in the 3 gen harder, it'd be enough, but it'd easily teeter into being ineffective to address the actual problem.

The current system does have flaws, but it DOES strongly encourage the killer to hunt rather than camp. I'm not sure how much of a loss you'd be able to attribute to the anti 3gen system with Surge over what you'd encounter normally.

An alternative point to help the current system is have a minimum regression amount to count as a regression event. So unless a gen loses a minimum of 5% its not considered regression event, which I think helps Surge not get blown constantly.

Regardless, good food for thought.