You don't get tunnelled frequently. You are just biased.
Scott Jund conducted an experiment and survey on tunnelling. In his experiment, he played 50 matches and recorded the number of matches where anyone on his team was tunnelled. Tunnelling occurred in 5/50 (10%) matches and in only 2 of the matches, the killer was deliberately tunnelling. In the other 3 matches, the tunnelling occurred due to survivors making stupid mistakes. Considering there are 4 survivors, the odds of a specific survivor being tunnelled out is 1/4*10% = 2.5%.
He also conducted a survey, which gathered 3103 responses. 80% of people were tunnelled less than 40% of the time. Only 7% of people were tunnelled more than 60%. The average tunnel frequency was 27% (assuming the average of each range). Though, the real values are extremely likely much lower since the survey question was "how often do you feel like you get tunnelled". It was based on feeling and their own definition of tunnelling rather than actually tracking their matches with a standardised definition. When matches were tracked, people were tunnelled (individually) 1%-3% of the time, as seen in Scott Jund's experiment and the data I discuss later.
Tunnel frequency | Percentage of responses |
|---|---|
0-20% of the time | 47% |
21-40% of the time | 33% |
41-60% of the time | 12% |
61-80% of the time | 3% |
> 80% of the time | 4% |
He also found that region and time of day had minimal impact on tunnel frequency.
It was also found that tunnel rate was correlated with escape rate, so it's possible that survivors that get "tunnelled more frequently" are not actually getting tunnelled more but are just dying more frequently due to being worse at the game.
From the data and his experiment, Scott Jund concluded that the myth of frequent tunnelling occurred due to negativity bias, which is a bias that caused people to remember and place higher weight on negative events than neutral and positive events. He also challenged anyone that thinks they get tunnelled frequently to record their gaming sessions and send them to him for proof.
The takeaway from this is to track the percentage of matches you get tunnelled. For example, someone recently posted data from 1212 matches they played (Jan-June 2024), which tracked tunnelling. Note that 18 matches were cancelled from the start, so there were 1194 matches in total. I compiled the data from it and these were the results:
- Tunnelling occurred in 49 matches (4.1%)
- In 47 of the matches, 1 person was tunnelled. In the remaining 2 matches, 2 people were tunnelled. Therefore, 51 survivors were tunnelled in total.
- There were 4776 survivors (1194*4) in total. Therefore, the odds of a specific person being tunnelled was 51/4776 (1.1%)
- In many of the matches with tunnelling, there was a DC, so tunnel rate would be lower if DCs were excluded.
Nazzzak also provided their data set of 421 matches and found that tunnelling occurred in approximately 1/12 (8.3%) of matches.
Comments
Your point being? I'm saying people are either bringing OTR or DS, doesn't matter whichever. It's still a waste to bring both just to "not" get tunneled
Im openly a tunneler, and admit to tunneling in majority of games I play. perfectly legit tactic that works most of the time. I find it interesting that the people who complain about tunneling are the same ones that deliberately try to get the killer to chase them while the rest of the team works on gens. They claim to love the chase and looping is the only skill aspect of the game but then complain about being tunneled when they fail at looping. There is nothing wrong with tunnelling, have to have some skill to out manoeuvre the looper. My advice to anyone that complains about tunneling is 1. Hide better, can't be tunneled if you can't be found. 2. Get better at either looping or lose line of sight. (There are many perks that aid in both of these) Or 3. Go the same character as someone else. Very easy to confuse the killer when there are 4 of the same survivor running around.
Ah. Going a little further back in the discussion, I think I misunderstood your position. I thought you were claiming that you need to run 2 perks because the game is busted, and not that you shouldn't run two perks. My bad.
I really wish people would stop acting like this Scott Jund dudes “experiments” are reliable and unbiased, as if he’s an authority. I went back and forth about this exact experiment in another thread where I pointed out how flawed his data was. This is just for people who already have decided what they want to believe.
If tunneling were not such a sure fire strategy to win, people wouldn’t do it.
This. This is it. This is why crying "tunnelling!" is absolutely friggin' meaningless.
Tunneling derives from "tunnel vision", as in the Killer only has eyes for you and JUST you to their own detriment. If the Killer is not:
Then it quite simply isn't tunnelling. If it doesn't fall under those five criteria, all five, then "focusing" is the term for what is happening to you. You're being focused, committed to, or you did something to prove to the Killer you're a threat to be removed ASAP. Tunneling is toxic. Focusing on a Survivor isn't, it's tactics.
I'd argue that chasing someone directly off the hook because you can't find the unhooker, or the unhooker got out of the way or didn't take a hit, is usually accidental tunnelling or soft tunnelling at best, and a mistake you're capitalizing on at absolute worst. Both are understandable reasons to "tunnel" like this.
So, if you're the Killer is focusing on you to the exclusion of anyone else, but has to change targets because they can't find you or so many gens are popping because the Killer is taking so long to chase the wrong target, it's not actually tunneling. Cool, so all we need to do is redefine the definition. That'll definitely take care of all the issues and make the player base happy.
I'm also glad to see that since tunneling has a much lower skill floor than what is needed to counter tunnelling people just need to play better and that's not an issue. In that spirit we should revert Brand New Parts to when they completed a generator 100%. I mean if you can't find a survivor before they use the BNP the problem isn't that the skill floor to complete the gen was just lowered substantially it's that you just need to play better and learn how to locate survivors. It's not that it gives an unfair advantage over one side; just get good. And who cares if you're having fun because only your fun is important and not the fun of both sides because that makes for such a healthy game and improves player retention.
The arguments supporting tunneling are so flawed it's unreal. DbD has had a lot of really unbalanced stuff like instablinds, infinite loops, hit validation pre 6.1 DH, maps being changed so Boil Over can't make you unhookable, permanent sabo, etc that were nerfed because of the detriment it had and how little fun it was to one side. It's tunneling's turn now to get the same treatment.
Weren't you just saying how toxic and OP gen rushing is and why it's the root of all tunneling in a different thread?
To turn it back on you, "It's just tactics."
I don't think I'm far off from the original definition of tunnelling. There is an unofficial dictionary entry for it on Urban Dictionary from 2019. The way they defined it resembles tunnel vision and focusing only 1 survivor. It's also the most upvoted definition with only 4 downvotes, so the vast majority of people agreed with it.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tunneling
I just like calling people out when they are wrong. It doesn't matter what side they are on. I've made threads in the past calling out killer mains for crying about survivors, e.g.
https://new.reddit.com/r/deadbydaylight/comments/1cbwjhf/stats_prove_swfs_dont_escape_much_more_than_solos/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
I even mention this in one of the comments.
High mmr is the top 10% of players. Similarly, low mmr would be the bottom 10%. The "overall stats" overwhelmingly represent the average player as 80% of the data comes from the middle range.
I assume you are referring to the Legion game for the one he was tunnelled? That Legion was actually trying to avoid tunnelling. Look at timestamp 00:30:44.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2187365999?t=0h30m41sWell, if we look at the stats posted so far when tunnelling is tracked, the vast majority of people don't do it. It only occurs in 3%-10% of matches.
Once again, as a relatively old player, tunneling never had an agreed upon definition. As we've seen, it's highly subjective.
One Urban Dictionary post does not a definition make.
I've checked several threads from 2016-2018, and most people agreed that tunnelling was exclusively chasing one person (ignoring everyone else), usually until they died. Tunnel vision was mentioned several times. If you want to disprove me, show me threads from 2016-2018 where this wasn't the majority definition.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/381210/discussions/0/144512526676470299/
https://new.reddit.com/r/deadbydaylight/comments/8ebbkm/what_is_tunneling/
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/209374-dead-by-daylight/76187687
https://steamcommunity.com/app/381210/discussions/0/1485482132154427735/
Of course you can disagree with any definition and make up your own at any time, just that 99% of players understand "tunneling" as something that revolves around ignoring any other survivors and confirming kills
Come on, there is no point in denying the fact tunneling is NOT common in practice, it's just an objective fact, accept your bias
I don't believe genrushing is relevant to this thread, friend. But you are correct that pushing gens is in fact "just tactics" and not toxic at all. I don't recall defining genrushing as toxic, either. I DO recall defining it as problematic.
If you're gonna call me out, at least do it correctly or don't do it at all.
Mispost, ignore this, something didn't quote properly.
I am gonna be real with you, we are not gonna come to a resolution since I know the forums and reddit were even more unpopular and non-representative of the player-base back then.
There's also people in those same threads disputing that definition.
"Fast Generators are the problem and genrushing is why Killers feel a need to tunnel."
You have directly blamed genrushing as the only reason tunneling exists.
I think I've seen more gaslights in this thread than I would have if I were taking an evening stroll in Victorian London
I don't even understand if your post is pointed towards me, or someone who claims two hooks is a tunneling, funny
You have completely misread my post and part of that's on me, sorry.
I MEANT to say that fast generators are a strong reason why some Killers feel they have to tunnel. It's hardly the ONLY reason genrush exists, and I never said it WAS the only reason it exists. Again, if you are going to call me out please at least do it properly, ask for clarification first.
With that clarification, I find that to be lacking.
Most Killers tunnel simply because it's easy and effective. Getting someone out ASAP is always the winning move, and it's extremely difficult to counter.
The term "tunnelling" is exclusive to DBD, so if people mentioned tunnelling in a chat lobby in 2016, people would have had no idea what they were talking about. To learn about what tunnelling is, they had to either learn it from a content creator, which is unlikely since there were very few back then, Googling it or online discussion. If they learnt about it from Googling or online discussion, they would have seen those threads I linked.
Such as? Were their definitions very different from "focusing mostly on a single survivor"?
No, but they did not mention anything about ignoring others or killing the Survivor. In fact, a couple specifically mentioned it being hooking a Survivor twice in a row with no one else being downed/hooked between.
And then many more were the typical comments I'd expect from that time. "Those filthy Survivors use DS, insta, BNP etc etc and expect us to play nice grrrrrr"
or something to that effect.
It's pointed at you but not just you. You don't get to say what another person's experience is. According to this thread, it's not attempting to tunnel if you focus on taking one survivor out but also down the unhooker for easy pressure and then hook the unhooker if you can't get the unhooked survivor.
It's also not tunneling I guess if a different survivor bodyblocks chokepoints so the Killer can't get to the survivor they want to down and has to hook someone else.
It doesn't seem like it's tunneling either if, in one game I recently had, I get two hooked while the Killer is chasing me but all gens get done in that time and the Killer switches to someone else to try to get a kill with NOED in the endgame instead of chasing the already wounded survivor who was looping away from the exit Hamed.
I guess it's somehow not gaslighting either to be 'Hey @Pulsar, give me your definition of tunneling" "That's great, now show me your games." "Watches games". "Hmm, now that I've seen your games I'm going to say I disagree with the definition and your games don't count and not saying that at the beginning isn't deceitful nor disingenous in the slightest"
To me, tunneling is attempting to remove one survivor before any others but, if you're smart about it, you'll realize when it's a losing proposition and switch or the survivors will counter the tactics. If the Killer stops because they're not mindless and realizes they were losing that doesn't mean tunneling didn't occur. If the survivors counter the attempt to tunnel that doesn't mean tunneling didn't occur. The definition of tunneling given by those who are saying it's not common is essentially the Killer has to be a single minded bot who can't hook more than one survivor at a time or it's not tunneling. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?
As well, it's gaslighting to speak to another person's experience. You can't say what the majority of anyone else's games are since you're not that person. Also, the supposed data supporting the OP is ludicrous and would get you disciplined or fired in any profession that uses statistics. I just had ten solo games where tunneling was used in four of them. Do I get to then claim that tunneling is in fourty percent of games? No, because that's baseless to say that it represents more than my experience on that particular night. It would be beyond ridiculous to claim that extrapolates to all MMRs in all regions. I could ask if you think it's only 10% or less of the time feel free to tape and post 200 solo survivor games and we'll see how often you get tunnelled but that's also silly because the sample size is too small to extrapolate on anyone but you.
The reality is that there are no stats on tunneling, only BHVR possesses the tools to get accurate stats they're not doing it and this entire thread is nothing but a gaslight. It's not even addressing the issues with tunneling which are:
(a) The skill floor to counter tunnelling is much higher than the skill floor to tunnel; and
(b) That represents an unfair advantage for one side up for the majority of skill levels
The whole frequency thing is nothing but a gaslight as well because if, for example, BNPs 10% of the time repaired a gen from 0 to 100% would that be fair because it's infrequent?
So, yes, this thread is full of gaslighting. It's not just you though.
There is no official definition for low mmr, but based on an official response from BHVR, high mmr is top 10%, so the most likely conclusion is that low mmr is bottom 10%.
Meh. Focusing mostly on a single survivor is the general definition. If their definitions are in line with that, that's good enough for me.
There is nothing in the world where people 100% agree on, so we have to look at majority opinion. If 2 people disagree but 18 people agree, the definition from the 18 people is the general consensus.
The fact is, the act of "tunneling" is never a smart play, but rather a determination to kill specific survivor, there was never a time it is called "tunneling" when "smart switching" happened, there was never a time it is called tunneling when killer decides to hook a body blocker or unhooker, the reason is simply because in all those situation survivors that are on death hook has enough time to heal up, hide, do gens and all that
All who tries to make up weird definition of tunneling seems to be moving the goalpost and literally trying others to believe as if tunneling had some other meaning before, which is just false narrative and nothing more than that
The fact is, his definition was simply incorrect, majority of his game don't have any real tunneling, this is literally just correcting the wrong usage of words
It's not even "according to this threads", it's literally according to any of the dbd community ever was, that statement is honestly ridiculous
I'm not moving any goalposts nor has my definition of what tunneling is ever changed. You can argue over the definition of tunneling with @Pulsar all you want and both of you are just as equally valid to have an opinion on it. The only goalposts moving I've seen was the OP telling Pulsar to post videos and then disagreeing at the end result what tunneling is instead of at the beginning.
It is gaslighting to tell people who do experience a lot of tunneling they don't actually get tunnelled. You don't know what their experience has been as you're not them and you can't speak to their experience anymore than they can to yours. Nobody knows what the actual incidence of tunneling is since the only entity that could get data over all players is BHVR and they're not doing it.
Unless you disagree with those last two sentences then this entire thread is just a giant gaslight and telling people who say they see tunneling a lot needs a lot more than a 'well, that doesn't happen to you because I say so' to not be gaslighting.
Also, if you think tunneling is completely fine explain what part of '(a) the skill floor to counter tunnelling is much higher than the skill floor to counter; and (b) a much lower skill floor for one side but not another is an unfair advantage' do you disagree with?
Just my input why tunneling is easy & effective
Honestly, I dont think average killer able to make multiple chases against healthy survivors, while spreading pressure and self earning a hit. Most killers arent good, just like most survivors.
Killers always mistake between survivors are so great they have to tunnel ; and they're so bad they cant do anything but tunnel. Most thinking they're on the first case.
18/60,000,000 is not enough to proclaim your absolute correctness lol.
Did you watch the video linked in the OP? Because there is a definition of tunnelling laid out in the video, "…going after the same person until they die.". If any definition is going to be used, it should probably that one.
I don't think anyone is moving the goalposts or gaslighting by sticking to the original definition that was in the OP. It also isn't gaslighting to say someone wasn't tunnelled if they show videos of them not getting tunnelled according to the definition in the video.
I think he is trying to gaslight others by calling others gaslighting, heh
This threads a little messy but I just want to chime in to say I agree that tunneling is "focusing one survivor until they escape or they die" and that's the general definition I've always seen most people go by. Centralizing your play to eliminate 1 particular survivor ASAP.
Since "time" is being brought up I've been part of the game/community since 2018, so 6+ years. It's only recently where I'm seeing a noticeable increase in beliefs that tunneling is "getting hooked twice" or "chased soon after getting unhooked" regardless of what else the killer was doing in-between.
They existed before but it was very much the minority (usually new players) and they usually got corrected pretty quickly. In my experience at least.
No, what was said by @Neaxolotl and I quote was "Come on, there's no denying the fact that tunnelling isn't common in practice" That's gaslighting and disingenous. You have no way to tell if tunnelling is common or not over the entire DbD community. You have no reliable statistics, no reliable data and no way to garner that data.
You're just focusing on a definition of tunneling that's different than mine because you're gaslighting and don't want to admit to yourself. I can't speak for anyone else but I see tunnelling defined as a Killer trying to remove a survivor first over any other quite often. I'm saying that's my experience but I'm not gaslighting because I can't speak for anyone but myself and I can't say if it's common or not either. Unless you can get the data, which you can't, you can't say that 'tunnelling being uncommon is an objective fact' because it's not and saying that it is an objective fact with nothing but your opinion is gaslighting.
So rather than deflect because you can't actually rebut my argument please feel free to answer my questions directly.
(1) How can you speak for other people when you have no reliable data and say tunnelling isn't common when people say they specifically get tunneled a lot? How is doing that not gaslighting?
(2) If you think tunneling is fine which part of 'Tunnelling has a lower skill floor than countering tunnelling; and if one side has a lower skill floor to accomplish their goals than the other side that represents an unfair advantage' do you disagree with?
So rather than both of you gaslighting further by referring to a definition of tunneling that doesn't match mine why don't you answer my questions?
On another note, regardless of your definition of tunnelling, it's also pretty disingenous and deceitful to ask someone specifically to give a definition, ask them to record videos of that experience, and then say after the fact that you didn't agree with the definition to begin with instead of stating that at the beginning. @Pulsar gave his definition and went through in good faith while the OP acted in bad faith and is now saying that doesn't count. That's pretty duplicitous. I'd say Pulsar was gaslit because the OP did not act in good faith and had no intention of letting Pulsar make a point.
But, aside from that, rather than pointing to things I didn't say in an attempt to gaslight further feel free to answer the questions I asked above. Please don't try to gaslight more by pointing to things I didn't say as that's also pretty disingenous.
You can claim it is gaslighting or any other buzzwords you want to throw around but if you define something incorrectly, especially when a definition was given in the OP people are not "gaslighting" you by saying that definition is incorrect. For example, if I claimed that a bully squad is any squad that has a flashlight or person running flashbang, regardless of how they use them, someone then saying "Hey, that isn't what a bully squad is." is not then trying to gaslight me, they are trying to correct me.
Your other points though:
(1) You can't rely on self reported tunnelling rates, as people may lie, or, more likely, misremember and have a negativity bias and will remember the games where tunnelling took place more often and forget the ones where nothing negative happened. It's the exact same thing that happens with people reporting that every game they have bully squads or super coordinated SWFs. If you have any sort of proof that tunnelling is super common you should present it, because no one has presented anything with any sort of actual evidence it is as common as some people believe. Scott in the video linked did 50 games and had hardly any tunnelling, and that is more evidence than anyone else has put forward that I know of.
(2) I actually don't think tunnelling is fine in every circumstance, I just think it is overstated in how common it is. My personal experience lines up with Scott's, being at around 5% of games, but my self reported experience doesn't matter for much as I have no proof for that. As for the unfair advantages though, this is an asymmetrical game. Each side is going to have easy strategies and things that are easier to pull off than they are to counter. That's a given in any game where things are not the same on each side and if anyone has a problem with that, they should probably not being playing an asymmetrical game.
OP did ask what his definition of tunnelling was, but seemingly never got a chance to agree or disagree with that before the games were done. Either way though, I don't really care about that as I am not the OP, all I'm saying is that is not what tunnelling is and it is pointless to have a discussion if you're going to try and have a different definition than what is in the video in the OP, especially given that it is the vastly agreed upon definition.
Perhaps people need a visual example of what actual tunneling is, so I've got one right here.
Interestingly enough, in Scott Jund's survey, he asked which Killer tunnels you the most, I put Wraith. And here I am, getting tunneled by a Wraith…
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2188877905Why do you think your definition from 1/60,000,000 is the absolute truth then?
Also, Scott Jund polled people on Twitter and 97% of people agreed that tunnelling was going after the same player until they died, so even in today terms, tunnelling shares the same definition from 2016-2018.
https://youtu.be/HI7FFpVpgRY?t=30Also, if you have ever seen sample sizes from surveys, only 1000-2000 people are needed to be representative of the American population (333M). See https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/howcan-a-poll-of-only-100/
It was shockingly bad before the DS buff but recently I have noticed a marked decrease in shameless hard tunnelling. I also think part of it is that people playing killer want to have normal matches for the most part, so having someone DC at 5 gens because you tunnelled them is not ideal.
Anecdotal of course and regions may differ
Tunnelling isn't extremely difficult to counter. The solution is simply being better at the game. Good survivors actually want the killer to tunnel them, so they can waste all of the killer's time and allow their team to work on gens uninterrupted. This is how Hens carries his solo queue games and escapes far more than the average solo queue player. See
https://youtu.be/dYmnejC2yZQ?si=tRrxKl7Kv6JBNlvA https://youtu.be/Je3AQGuG2C8?si=HhXiuyR0Kb4_tGcQUnfortunately, it's not as simple as "being better at the game." Even if you loop the Killer well, it all hinges on how fast your teammates can get the gens done. In most cases, they won't. Many will try to protect the person being tunneled, which only slows down gen progress and delays the inevitable (that being the death of the person being tunneled).
But whatever the case, looping the Killer well doesn't make being tunneled any more fun.
Oh, I see, no nw! I was discussing the merits of bringing DS over OTR with someone else, who claimed that just because people aren't bringing OTR it equals to them not being tunneled. I bring DS because killers do tunnel more often during this event, but the given stats are not representative of the entire community base at all. It's a correlation, not a causation at best.
I'll give two examples on my servers that have occurred multiple times before and during this event, which had nothing to do with the killer "wanting pressure" but because of
1: the characters the gamers were playing (Sable, David & Leon) and
2: flag charms. On EU servers some people ALSO tunnel someone out because of those reasons. Those gamers have outright said they were doing so in EGC: tunneling someone out for flag charms/characters.
The above happens less often, in my experience, but it still does happen along with your usual gamers who tunnel for pressure or x/y/z.
Regardless of how prevalent it is, it would be nice if more could be done about tunneling, be it by giving survivors more side-objectives so that they don't gen-rush, incentivizing the killers to spread hooks, maybe switching up the scratchmarks from the unhooked to the unhooker? So the killer only sees theirs if they are healthy? IDK.
The killer isn't tunneling me, I'm just running ahead of them and falling on their weapon as they swing in the air. I'm so bad.
But honestly Scott was saying this b4 he got his stats. Like the number 23, you notice it and then that's now everywhere. His mmr is high(my guess) as his team usually doesn't struggle.
Tunneling isn't an issue if the surivors can unhook at the last second and pump gens. It's when it happens at the start of the game, say first hook.
I bring Reassurance to stretch out that time.
Isn't doing the gens efficiently still just "being better at the game", though
That weighs on your teammates, though. If you're being chased and looping the Killer, and teammates aren't doing gens, you lose, no matter how good you are at the game.
But there is literally nothing you can counter without help of teammates, simply because this game is a team game
If "just being good" from everyone's perspective is the counter, there is nothing easier than tunneling to counter, no comms needed, no perks needed, just play good and that's it
Not to mention that doing generators hardly require any skills from the beginning, especially when you don't get chased
Saying tunneling doesn't happen much is like saying cheaters do not cheat much.
At the end of the day regardless, both acts is horrible to play with. Tunneling is essentially an exploit of game design for a huge tactical advantage. It's easy for killer to tunnel but impossible to counterplay it.
I just realised that there is somewhat of an official definition to tunnelling. In patch 4.6.0, BHVR changed Decisive Strike to deactivate after performing Conspicuous Actions. Their logic at the time was that the killer was no longer tunnelling if the survivor was progressing the game, so DS should deactivate. Most anti-tunnel perks also deactivate after 60 seconds. Going by this logic, BHVR would consider it as no longer tunnelling if a survivor performs a Conspicuous Action or a long time elapses after the survivor is unhooked. This doesn't define tunnelling but it shows scenarios in which BHVR thinks it's no longer tunnelling.
No no, we get tunneled out and we get genrushed by sweaty teams on coms 9 matches out of 10, trust.
Oh wow!
A comp player can win more games than the average player.
Look, I don't think you're arguing in good faith at all. I've tried to be patient and play by your rules, but you've routinely made me regret my decision. Honestly, I feel pretty gaslit after you asked me to record my games, asked me for my definition and then just said, "I don't agree so that doesn't count"
Shouldn't your argument apply to Hen's matches since he's playing solo queue as well though? He managed to boost his team's escape rate by 50%, which is very significant.
I believe the playing better argument is still applicable since if your team played better, the gens would have been done. If you loop the killer for 20 minutes and your team doesn't finish the gens, it's more reasonable to blame your team at that point.
That isn't a problem specific to tunnelling. If the killer isn't tunnelling and your team doesn't do gens, you would have the same problem.
Cheaters are extremely rare though? They probably occur once every 500-1000 matches.
It isn't an exploit. BHVR has already acknowledged tunnelling as a legitimate strategy and has no intention of treating it as an exploit.
Can you explain what's happening here then? If it's impossible to counterplay, why are 3-4 survivors escaping when the killer is hard tunnelling?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYmnejC2yZQFor starters, he's coming into the match with the intention of getting tunneled and bringing a build specifically designed to counter it. Not everyone wants to play that way, nor should they.
The comment said it was impossible to counter. If a build can be ran to counter it, it is not impossible. Also, the build was only a small reason for why Hens did so well. It was clearly because Hens was far more skilled than the killer. If an average survivor used the same build as Hens and tried the same strategy, they would have been downed in a fraction of the time Hens ran the killer.