Tired of all the complaining against killers
Ok, everyday there’s dozens of posts crying about tunneling or slugging and such. Let me try to help you understand something: That’s the idea of the game. It’s supposed to be hard to survive, that’s the thrill of the game.
The game is incredibly survivor sided. You might say:
“Killers hold a 60% win rate” Yes buuuuut this is considering every single tier, skill and mmr division there is. How many times have you had a guy leaving the game after his first hook? People doing glyphs, opening chests or just being silly and not doing the objective? A lot right? If people played to win as survivors, it would be at least a 70-30 survivor win rate.
“We don’t believe you!”
Have you seen competitive games? Every single game the killer has to slug, tunnel and camp hook and most of the times he gets a 2k, with all gens completed in 5 minutes.
Please guys, understand that is part of the fun, beating the odds and surviving. Even end game is very survivor sided. Hatch, unbreakable, keys, doors, adrenaline. There’s plenty of chances to survive, just enjoy the fun and stop trying to nerf killers to the ground, at high MMR is already very hard to win and dare I say, stressful as hell.
Comments
My last post defines the issue we getting. Hopefully you all understand where I’m coming from.
Is it because you don't know how to apply pressure without tunneling or camping?
I haven't seen anyone suggesting that someone playing killer should 'take it easy' on survivors. Most people posting about wanting killers to not tunnel just really want to play the game. It's similar to the reason why some people complain about bully squads. And honestly, I wouldn't call tunneling a 'strategy'. In most cases it seems like more of a willingness to do desperate things to win.
You're probably are pretty good at killer, so you get to play against survivors that waste so much of your time and run gens so fast that it's hard to win. But that doesn't mean tunneling is fun for your target unless their favorite thing in the game is to be chased. But at lower skill levels, the game becomes massively killer sided, and tunneling tends to wreck the match for the targeted survivor and their team. That can lead to people not wanting to keep playing the game and DBD losing support.
I'm not sure there's a good solution, but BHVR unfortunately needs to balance the game in a way that works for all skill levels so that people want to play. And that goes for the killer role too. I played 8 or so games as killer yesterday, and it wouldn't likely feel great if there were no way to do well. But I think the balance that BHVR needs to target should have the goal of making the game fun for everyone, and suppressing playstyles that make the game feel awful when they're used on a player. Personally, as killer, I don't think it's fun to tunnel someone out. We've probably all done it, but it's not something I think should be encouraged. And I'd feel bad doing it if the survivor being tunneled didn't even try to taunt me and just wanted to play the game, especially if there was a large skill mismatch.
I did not have the opportunity to play it.
I've not played since just prior to Dracula's release, I was very hyped for him. Shame.
I am very glad to hear that there's been an event to your liking, it did seem pretty fun, all things considered.
I’m astonished how you people can’t read. My latest long post explains step step my concern, I go for the mediating approach, explaining the issues and I end up with “duh you can’t win without tunneling you must suck”… how you people type drooling all over your keyboards?
Truly unfortunate, my friend. The event was indeed pretty fun, and so was Dracula's release I'd say.
You're just in time for 2v8 though, if you'd like to play it!
Because people won't take you seriously if you mock them?
If thats the case how many resources were burned in that time? How much quicker will the next chase be because they burnt the resources? Is it a killer that can laugh at hold W, or not? What perks are brought? What gens got done? Theres a metric ton of factors that goes into this.
Yes. Yes it is. You are honestly going tell us that dbd with extra rules assigned is the same as "normal" dbd where everyone can do what they want within the devs ruleset? In addition each "comp" scene has different rules as far as we can tell. In one of your previous posts you said they had a rule to allow camping, from that we can infer that some don't and camping is outright banned. Meanwhile "normal" dbd has nothing to truly moderate any self imposed rules save the player's…conscience[?].
Considering you have also previously said that the best killer in the world would "need" to camp we would question said claim to the best…Did said killer become the best by being a predictable and try to tunnel someone out asap? [apologies, he's getting off topic but he's got a point] If we're balancing on "whats possible to do" then theres alooooot of things to the point where the devs would need to chain up most actions and player agency is gone. The survivors can all spawn next to one gen in the corner, the killer can spawn within line of sight of a survivor (its hilariously awkward), the killer can chase multiple people at the same time if they all run the same way, the survivors can play it stealthy taking bits and pices of gens, survivors can body block and blind killers, the list goes ooooooooon.
Everyone whos left may eventually plays better but the mass exodus would possibly cripple the game. The game would change from "semi party game" to "comp game". And technically we can flip this coin. If these strategies got chained players would eventually play better without resorting to these as often. We're fairly sure that less people would leave from this than having all agency taken (and no taking these is not removing all agency).
Aside from all that, what you seem to not get is that not everyone here is the best of the best, nor wants to be top dog. There are those who are hyper focused to win at all costs sure, but theres also those who are [relatively] just chiling and trying to play the game.
So we've been meaning to ask this, whats the killer doing once they hook someone? Cause its real hard to pressure gens if the killers pressuring the survivors trying to work.
They exist because they're options when needed. Now we're going to ask again real nice like: What about the killers who do those in excess? Are survivors allowed to call them out or are they suppose to shut it? Cause while theres some overactive yits, there has been an uptick in both of those and it has been not necessary. When people abuse their toys they get taken for 2 examples: The "eruption, pain res, overbrine" era and the "unbreakable DS DH" era.
So keep in mind these are our theories as we're unsure of any facts the devs have stated.
Slugging is becoming more and more prevalent because people have gotten sick of gen regression being nerfed (it doesn't matter how much, big, small, whatever, they're annoyed it was touched again period) and have found it more satisfying to have a survivor effectively "out" of the game while wasting little time. The slugging everyone and hooking or letting them bleed is more a spite thing.
Tunneling is because removing a survivor is heavily beneficial, often low risk, and easy to do. We may dislike it, but that statement is a fact. People want the easy path to "victory". 1 + 1 = fish.
So now we ask the question: What could the devs possibly do? What could they change to make these theories gone? What reward could be worth more than a survivor "out" to the killer?
We have no idea of the relevancy of this paragraph.
Well, your kinda right here… Depending on the streamer they could use those rates for something. If said streamer isn't constrained by any arbitrary rules, fair game for the average masses (so to speak). That second sentence is iffy (technically you can). We somewhat agree you shouldn't balance the game around a set of behaviors approved by the others. That said you can balance it around removing things that make your players miserable or is being abused to do so. Also since its bhvrs game, they can do what they wish, but thats us being a prick :p.
There are. multiple. happy hunting. For our 3 cents its because people grew to use them as a crutch.
Hi, thanks for taking the time to read everything.
My general concern and the solution I’m proposing is not promoting these strategies that affect the survivor experience, I am saying that if we balance the game in order to protect such experience, we have to keep in mind why those became a thing. This game has two well defined sides, killer and survivor, you can’t just call out one side saying they ruin the experience and beg to nerf them to the ground without taking a look at the overall state of the game and, of course, protect the gaming experience of the other side.
The majority of killers are going to have a hard time stabilizing a game when you lost 60% of the objectives during the first chase. If you want to regulate how killers should act in order to give you a good experience playing, you have to reward the gameplay you want them to have. By playing the way survivors want killers to play, translates into killers never winning at the current state of the game.
The problem with this is that there’s an asymmetry every game. When you have a chill killer but survivors playing to win no matter what you lose. If you have a killer playing to win and survivors chilling the killer will win, but, and this is the big one, if both are playing to win, most likely the survivors will win because of the current plethora of perks that exist, the time it takes to complete objectives and even more so now that they are adding a super powerful perk capable extending survivors time in game significantly.
Here is where the comp conversation came into place for me, because when you have both sides playing to win no matter what, the rules have to favor the killer, otherwise, they would be incapable of winning.
In this you reveal that you have never played competitive nor even watched or followed any of the DBD leagues.
Here’s how it works: A team assigns a killer and faces the other team survivors, in that first set, the killer is aiming for the best possible result, being, killing every single survivor while having the most possible generators up. All 3 leagues allow face camping hook, survivors cannot free themselves even if they fill the anti camp meter.
99.9% of every game goes as follows: Killer gets into a chase, downs a survivor, looses 2 or 3 gens, camps the hook till at least second stage. Survivors go for rescue, they trade at hook; the killer slugs the rescuer and tunnels out the dead stage survivor.
Then well, it varies but the most common strategy is slugging till he has the chance to down the remaining 3 to get a 4k. Meh no?
Every single game where he cannot tunnel the dead hook survivor, the killer loses the game. (Unless he manages to slug all 4, which is an option reserved for 3 killers in the game, nurse, hillbilly or blight)
After, the other team killer plays to match the hook stages the first killer achieved.
Of course this is not the case of our regular gameplay, yet, it’s something that shows which are the most effective strategies to achieve the best possible result and diagnoses (granted, to a degree) the current state of the game.
Riot games does not balance LoL based on community feelings and “have fun protocols”, they evaluate the power of each champion based on their maximum possible performance.
Here the problem is that many times we end up balancing the game based on players feelings, so when one side plays to a decent capacity, the other side (killer) has a super tough time.
They could add an additional objective that provides a very heavy buff to either side, granting blood points. They could actually consider what happens when survivors utilize synergies with perks that make them unhookable. They could actually evaluate how long it takes to rush objectives if the players utilize every tool they get to do so. They could analyze the toxic strategies survivors can pull. They could actually take the time to balance killers and rework many of them that are simply weak. They could prevent slugging and tunneling by making the game a bit slower while granting small objectives that provide players blood points (like pumpkins) so players took a more “gentle” approach towards winning, since both sides are being rewarded by extending the game.
This is referring to the stats BH provided and the claims of the survivor community regarding killer strategies. If they patch perk an issue, might n or affect the strongest killers like it WILL affect the rest of the cast that is much weaker. So normally they change the meta with a macro change and then just shove a few seconds to certain killers thinking that’s a real buff, when a lot of times, is not enough. Why? Because getting into reworks, creating new abilities and such, is way harder than cranking some numbers. I am all for improvements, but responsable and well managed ones, not emotionally driven ones.
Personally, being a Sadako main, would love some changes to the current meta, she doesn’t really fit haha.
I just want to “plant the seed” of: Sure, prevent slugging, prevent tunneling, but actually test out and give us something that leaves the game balanced.
The new perk, can potentially give a survivor 6 hook stages, allows them to choose who will handle the chases and paired with other perks, DS, OTR etc, would make (if survivors are playing to win in a decent skill level capacity) it imposible for the killer to win. So just test it out.
By the way, AI helped me with this, because every single time the 60-40 stat comes into conversation:
To calculate the killer's real chance of winning, we need to break down the probability of the killer eliminating at least 3 out of the 4 survivors, given that each survivor has a 40% escape chance, independently.
The probability of each survivor being killed is therefore:
P(kill)=1−0.4=0.6P(\text{kill}) = 1 - 0.4 = 0.6P(kill)=1−0.4=0.6
Using binomial probability, we can determine the chance that the killer will defeat exactly 3 or exactly 4 survivors out of 4.
So, the killer's real probability of winning each match is approximately 47.52%.
Despite each survivor having only a 40% chance to escape individually, the combined probabilities show that the killer wins (defeats at least 3 survivors) slightly less than half the time.
If you try to calculate the 4k, its lower even, because of Hatch, opening the door while killer closes hatch variables etc.
people complaining about sides does not make sense when both sides will say their side is the side that should be buffed.
People need to be more open minded (which will be about as easy as convincing a tree to bow) and realize that it is a player issue and not a full game.
Slugging, tunneling, and camping are issues but so is sabo, flashlight/bang, and gen rush squads. All of these can be counteracted by perks but shouldn’t be forced too.
For every toxic match there will be more normal and sometimes friendly matches so some people need to calm down and offer genuine discussions and not revert to “of course you would say that as a ____ main, you are obviously dumb because ____ exists” when 2 problems can exist at the same time.
I tried to tone it down progressively as I took the time to read survivor concerns, yet it doesn’t matter the posture, it’s either black or white.
You are right and yeah, I am disappointed in how things turned out during the conversation, May be that my English is not native.
All I am trying to do is make sure BH considers the current state before implementing measures to counter meta strategies that could potentially make the game worst. Maybe hopefully get a few reworks and buffs to some killers.
Please, just stop trying to manipulate the stats using "math".
At minimum, these are not independent variables, so the simple probability statistic is completely meaningless and doesn't apply.
Once one survivor dies, it's far, far easier to get more kills. That's just how the game works, but that isn't captured in this formula in any way.
We already have rough win rates from nightlight if nothing else. It's not exhaustive, and not representative of the entire player base, but we already know that, overall, killers get a 3k or 4k about 51% of the time (killer win), about 12% of games are 2k (draws), and survivors are winning with a 0k or 1k about 37% of the time. Those are the rough stats.
Further, these aren't predictive either: you can't try to guess the outcome of a match ahead of time with any accuracy, because there's too many variables and literal RNG.
A 60% kill rate is exactly that: 60% of survivors die. With the data we do have, the killer is winning 51% and survivors win about 37%. That's about as far as we can say anything.
Except that people try to manipulate statistics to show that this is somehow not killer sided. The devs have said exactly that, and it's by design.
That's on the players though. We had little trouble and if we could do it, those better than us can as well. We asked a similar question in the previous post that's relevant here: What could the devs reward that would be acceptable? What would be worth it for people to follow this gameplay?
That second paragraph has a flaw: if both sides are trying to win its down more to skill and luck rather than the perks. The killers affect the gen times via perks or pressuring survivors (via brains, powers, good ol fashioned brute force, or most likely a combination) enough while the map can either help or hinder their ability to do so. What super perk? The hookstate trade? We think it's good but we're not going to see it as super unless it completely removes a hookstate.
And here's where our point is proven. See one of us actually tried a competitive tournament back in 2018 (don't remember exact date) and there were a different rules than what you stated here. Then you point that survivors being handicapped which brings multiple thoughts such as "why are people worried enough about that to install a rule?" and "these people camp this much and are supposed to be the best?" and the like. If the killer camps it's no wonder gens go fast, the killer isn't being a threat.
Maybe it's because those players rely on said strategies to much and are bluntly unable to do much else? It shows what works best for them as each and every player is different. It's a similar vein to how many killers have a "main" who they excel with and suck with others even if they're considered "high tier".
{Entity damn we need to start condensing}
League is different than DBD. League is an actual competitive game, DBD is no where close. DBD has much less players than League. DBD has more ways for players to straight up make others miserable for no practical reason than League (League to its credit can make players miserable but it's atleast in a practical sense).
Extra necessary objectives would be fine with us but as we've seen how much gens can possibly regress it's would be unwise to implement. Some of these can be flipped to the killer. They might have had that idea with what happens when killers utilize the strategies you say are necessary with multiple perks that make things a pain (side note: what makes survivors truly unhookable? We can only think of temporary). We thought we weren't balancing things based on "an utopian concept of people acting by the approved norms of niceness." So why add a slowdown that can be used regardless if said strategies are used or not (disregarding the fact that people sadly only did pumpkins when effectively forced and currently totems work under this same idea)
So we're unsure of what specifically your addressing here so if we missed the point we'll apologize and ask for specific things. When perks change they affect each killer differently yes but we ask why on occasions that's not enough? Since reworking takes more time and effort why not use these as stp gap measures?
We don't repeat this to be mean, we repeat this cause it seems true to us: your arguments are not doing a good job of what you're trying to do.
We're ignoring this next paragraph cause "impossible to win" is heavily untrue.
As for the math, we've stated to others that clean numbers don't work in DBD because of one important element: the human element. Humans are prone to errors, which adds unknown variables in those clean numbers.
Edit: if we missed something please let us know as I (the rulebreaker responding) have a hard time reading all that and keeping it organized on a tiny phone
So, how many times i have to tell you to do something besides assuming something on other people?
No, the math is wrong because its not using the right equation. @AmpersandUnderscore is correct.
Let me give an example that I thought of after the last time the math discourse happened.
Let's say BHVR changed the game that when there are two survivors left, the gens aren't finished, and the killer down ones, he begins the mori animation immediately and the hatch opens. This would make it much easier for the fourth survivor to escape as it would totally prevent slugging for the 4k and give the survivor a head start.
What would that do to the survivor escape rate? It would increase it. What would it do to the kill rate? It would decrease it. What would it do to the win rate? Absolutely nothing.
Let's go even crazier. Let's say not just one hatch but three hatches pop open. In this type of game the last survivor is now almost always escaping. This would be a substantial increase to escape rates, and a massive decrease to kill rates.
And again, it would not impact the win rate at all.
You can't set up a math formula to determine win rates based on escape / kill rates without knowing the breakdown of the 5 possible game outcomes (0k, 1k, 2k, 3k, 4k). A 60% kill rate could be a win rate as low as 20% (which would require an absurd 80% draw rate) or as high as 80%, but we can see from the data we do have that it hovers around 54%.
Halloween event (Haunted by Daylight) gave a nice bonus to bloodpoints in the form of pumpkins, opening portals and even using the void crystals, each of those rewarded the players, also extended the matches and they granted an extra advantage to both sides if they did such sidequests. I think that we need to take a look at interactions between perks, generator repair time and in general, extend the game a bit.
The fact that some skilled players manage to recover doesn’t mean that every killer can, especially without support or incentives. With the wide range of player skill levels, any gameplay adjustments need to work for the broader player base, not just the elite few. Balance isn’t about what some players can do; it’s about providing a fair baseline for everyone. By offering rewards or adjustments that encourage certain gameplay styles, developers could create more positive experiences for both sides, regardless of skill.
Survivors are naturally rewarded for cooperation, healing, and unhooking—things that make the game more fun for everyone. Killers don’t have the same incentives for spreading hooks or going easy on certain tactics. Adding rewards for these styles of play could really balance out the experience.
Well first of all rules have changed because the game has changed and evolved.
The need for camping or tunneling often reflects the balance issues within the game. Competitive players may use these strategies because they’re effective, but if killers feel forced into these methods, it signals areas where DbD could provide more tools for killers to play effectively without limiting survivor interactivity. When survivors complete gens too quickly, killers often feel they have no choice but to camp or tunnel to have a chance at catching up. It’s not that killers want to play this way—it’s a response to survivors speeding through objectives. If survivors weren’t rushing as much, killers could play more strategically across the map
The competitive meta has naturally adapted to survivors working in teams with efficient coordination. Survivors have access to perks, items, and strategies that can make them significantly harder to catch or eliminate. Tunneling and slugging counteract these advantages, rebalancing situations where survivors may be trying to outpace the killer entirely by focusing solely on generators or using "second chance" perks like Decisive Strike and Borrowed Time. You are also implying that profesional players that get paid to win are bad?
Balancing a game isn’t about preventing players from having fun; it’s about ensuring that both sides can win if they use effective strategies. Riot Games balances League of Legends based on the highest potential of each champion, which creates a fair playing field, even if it sometimes results in certain champions or strategies being less enjoyable for some. This type of balancing would make sense in DBD, too, so killers and survivors each have a fair shot at success based on skill rather than relying on “feelings-based” changes.
Tunneling and slugging aren’t about making the game “miserable.” They’re responses to how fast survivors can complete objectives, which is often faster than killers can reliably manage without these strategies. If DBD were balanced purely around “fun” feelings without considering practical in-game needs, killers would have to rely on suboptimal tactics and struggle to succeed consistently, leading to more frustration on their end.
Balancing based on strategic effectiveness isn’t the same as balancing around “niceness.” Killers who tunnel or slug often do so to control the game due to the pressure they face, not to be disruptive or “unkind.” Rather than enforcing “niceness,” balancing around alternative objectives allows for fairer strategic choices that can diminish the necessity for killers to use these tactics as frequently.
Reworking perks frequently introduces new meta cycles and forces players to readjust, which can be disruptive. While perk reworks can be useful, they’re best when supporting a solid foundation rather than compensating for underlying balance issues.
Asking to attend both sides equally? My only argument is that if you end up implementing perks that try to counter complaints, could be useful to ask yourselves why such strategies began.
The math was released by BH, not me, and it´s "shady" at best, people believe that the actual win rate across the board for every killer is 60% which is not correct, each survivor has a 40% survival rate, variables, "human element" (as you mention) so I am a bit lost in what point you are trying to make. I am ASKING for balance, not defending tunneling and slugging, which I dont even do, hell I play Sadako…
When im mediating and saying sure, prevent strategies that are unfun for survivors, just make sure you check why killers rely on such strategies and you just try to shut down the thought completly, well, it comes across as just lazy, biased or annoyed. Idk.
I’m kinda tired of forums. I’m taking a break from you all.
You could easily prove me wrong by posting video of your killer gameplay. You always claim how easy it is to 4K as killer so there should be no shortage of clips for you to choose from.
I get the feeling that you're fishing to hear one particular answer, and unfortunately, it's not that simple.
'Because it's necessary' is not the whole of it. You stated earlier that killers don't do it to be mean, but I can guarantee you that some of them do.
And in general, people tend to take the path of least resistance. So, hypothetically, if tunnelling were to be blatantly overpowered, would people not gravitate to such a tactic?
No, this is very much your math. BHVR has not released any winrate statistics, to my knowledge.
Pretty sure no one has ever insinuated that the winrate for every killer is 60%, but it's certainly higher than 40%, or the projected 47-something that you conjured up with your dice-roller. Going by Nightlight statistics, for example, would indicate that most killers tip over the 50% in terms of winrates, far in excess of the winrates for the survivors they face.
I can tell you that this math tangent is a waste of time. DBD's killrate-winrate relationship is far too complex to be caught in a neat equation, especially since it shifts per killer. Some killers achieve higher winrates on lower killrates, for crying out loud.
The relevance of the 60% kill-rate is that someone in BHVR's employ once stated that that is a benchmark the developers have targeted because it works well for the horror atmosphere while being relatively balanced.
True balance would require the target kill rate to be lower, but that's not something BHVR is aiming at, and I'm pretty sure most everyone is well past asking for such a thing by now.
All that's fine and good but detracted from your original goal of "stop complaining". Or the goalposts have been moved.
You were previously talking about "HAVE TO BALANCE A GAME TO WHAT IS POSSIBLE TO DO. Everyone, eventually, plays to get better." no? Wouldn't that concept apply here? Since it is possible to win without resorting to those strategies, should they be hampered enough wouldn't players get better eventually enough?
That's due to the asymmetrical nature of the game. The team of 4 would naturally be rewarded for trying to help the group instead of the self.
Offering rewards for certain play styles would inscite some but part (ok most) of the problem is people are doing these strategies right out the gate regardless. Is it necessary to tunnel at 5 gens? No. Do people do so anyways? Yes. We've previously said sometimes they are needed but people are heavily abusing them, how would these rewards get those types to stop?
Or hear us out here, they reflect the desire to have simple ways to kill. We're pretty sure we've already spelled out the difference. Second, what causes a killer to feel forced? It's a personal thing that varies from each individual. We don't feel forced into anything if the first 3 gens pop after a chase as long as we burnt through enough resources to make the next super short. Meanwhile killer whowhatsit may feel forced if that first gen pops after 3 seconds of getting a hook.
And killers have ways to catch survivors via powers and perks to make this easier. Also you may want to pick different perks from the survivor side as those 2 only work well if the killer tunnels. Also yes, if that situation you keep describing is the best they can do, we'll happily call bad. Just because you get paid to do something doesn't mean you are always the best. Sure they might be better than us, but sitting there at the hook after first chase leaving 3 others unimpeded? Really? Not going to call that good in our life time unless some major shake ups happen. (we're getting sidetracked)
Tell us, would you play a game if it made you miserable? No pay, no fame, just in your spare time, just to play something to make yourself suffer. The game needs to balance both practical and fun aspects. We restate we agree sometimes tunneling and slugging are needed, they are unfun but valid (for lack of better words) and when used in moderation are reasonable and tolerated. But when people do so starting out, when there's no pressure (which like we said above varies from person to person) it's unreasonable to assume many are ok with their match ending in the first 5 minutes or doing nothing but crawling for effectively 4. They don't do it out of necessity, they do so cause they want to for whatever reason, malicious or not. We also realized you never talked about these types of people…thoughts on them?
The problem above applies here. People are using said tactics to make others miserable intentionally or not (though the slugging out the gate is a pretty good indicator of the former). You'd be giving more tools to those who don't (admittedly a YAY from us) do this while simultaneously not keeping these in check.
Your not really asking that though. From what we've seen it's: "everyone stop whining to nerf killer" to "survivors can win anytime they want as long as they all work for it" to "comp shows why tunneling and slugging are needed" to "let's get back to topic (which credit is due, you tried)" to "*mental snap* start complaining" to next is what we can only sum as a mashup of things to now which is "find ways to reduce these strategies while simultaneously defending them and explaining thought process (including math)". This is all filtered through our doggy brains mind you but it seems accurate enough.
The human element is to point out that trying to use math to work out things here is useless at best. As someone above said, it's not Bhvr's math as they only put up kill rates as far as we know. Kill rate isn't equal to win rate (per the definition your using is 3k+). We maybe lazy but again, it's not what you were doing in any meaningful capacity. And one pot shot deserves another, the last time you said you were done you came back within 24 hours.
None of those builds are problematic imo
The games problem is much more nuanced and complex, then many players give it credit:
pre 6.1 killers was at its worst in sheer player experience. Most survivors had multiple levels of safety nets and old DH was so busted that nearly no one left the house without it, and it was so soulcrushing to do a good play on a survivor, but then "nah nah nah, did you really outplay when I can do this?" and dashed away, laughing in "skill issues".
Then the 6.1 patch pulled the rug out from under the collective survivor population and bereft of their most potent survivla tool, that many had started to rely on in a true crutch way, many survivors fell into a stupor. It really was as if nearly no one could play the game anymore, survivors ran around like headless chicken and many were too scared to even touch gens. I vividly remember that it felt like an all you can kill buffet, and in the games I played as survivor, there were matches were I finished 4 gens from start to finish, because everyone else was just too frigging scared to touch them.
It wasn't helped by the fact that many killers struck back with a vengeance and fell on the helpless survivor population without mercy. The stupor held on for two days, then many survivors started adapting, and adapting they did. They learned that, in order to survive, they had to stop wasting time and be efficient. This adverse conditions bread into the survivor population to split up and do gens seperately, and to at least pay a modicum of attention to the main gen and gen spread, while not doing too many totems or chests, if any at all.
Gens soon started flying off the shelfs and killers now really had to show what they got, but for a short while the game felt really fresh and fun. But new DH turned out just slightly less obnoxious then the old one and killers discovered that they had to defend their gens with all they got, so Overbrine and Eruption became the new killer meta, driving survivors nuts and pushing them towards gen efficiency and rushing even further.
Eventually all this tools were nerfed on both sides, but the damage was done: both sides had learned to play as efficiently as possible and to trim all unnecessary fat from their playstyles - all that was left were lean and mean surviving and killing machiens. You can change the game around survivors and players, but you can't make them unlearn what they learned during this times of suffering.
And thats were we stand now: both sides feel like they are backed against the wall before the game even begins, both sides have learned the most efficient ways to play to game and increase their chances and both sides basically optimised fun out of the equation. The game is often cited as a "fun party game about killers and survivors", but eh, its as competitive as ever, with the MMR system forcing survivors to play consistently well, unless they want to drop down into MMR hell (that happened to me once).
What could help to revitalize the game were a real and true health chapter: there is so much skill bloat, maybe it would be good to reevalute a lot of the skills, turn some into general perks and only give each survivor and killer only two perks. Also BHVR should think more about restrictions: while it was always a fun design choice to not limit builds, it now severely limits design space. Caps on certain maximum values like repair speed or limits on how many perks of a certain category could be taken would help to streamline certain aspects of the game. If we could only use one repair perk, maybe we could give them all a bit more interesting and unique additional effects. And with killer perks, one of the big limiters will always be Nurse: "this fun perk for Trapper will be utterly broken on Nurse, so we will artificially power it down" … Awakened Awareness could never show its real potential, because Nurse, just zooming off after a hook, was just too broken - so why not ban the perk on Nurse and Blight and thus free up design space for all the other killers?
Incentivice survivors to do gens together and give killers a true incentive to not rush the killing, but having it in their best intrest to spead hooks and not kill a survivor early, would help to give everyone time to play and time to shine. Maybe even set up a director AI like in many horde shooter style games, but instead of spawning specials according to how well the players do, let the Entity block gens or eat good pallets if the survivors are too good, and let it respawn a pallet or set up a medkit in the corner the survivor is hiding. Don't listen to the "hur dur why should they be rewarded for playing badly?" crowd, but give it a try.
By going back and redesigning a couple of the games basic rules and setting up other hard and fast limits, it would elevate the game play so much.
We need a cookie counter everytime we see this
I am sorry for you regulars :D But I honestly think that this is what happened … sadly this isn't a short throwaway easy answer like "hurdur killers tunnel because its the easiest and most braindead strategy and playing killer is piss easy these days".
BTW, not implaying that you would ever say something like this, I know that you guys are about the most levelheaded peeps around.
When i use to play in a good swf we didn't use coms an most games it was a 4 man out when you have 4 people working well there isn't much the killers can do an don't need to be any kind of god looper. And we use to get angry messages about gen slamming an sweating but most games we were chilling it's just what the game is like when you an 3 other people know what they doing.
Been back into solo que for a while now an can't belive how low the skill level of most survivors has sunken
ohh we don't mind hearing it again and again cause it is effectively what happened, we just want cookies for it~
Though us being called level headed is new…cookie worthy it is
Yes, even if don't personally agree with the answer I would like the cookie counter for it 🍪