yay guys, more anti-killer changes coming soon
first of all, YES the anti-slug surrender option is fine and cool. not gonna talk about that.
the roadmap has another segment in phase two which talks about "anti tunneling and anti camping"
and I wonder, when will the devs get the message that killers are doing these things because the whole "play nice go for multiple people" idea has been probably the most bullshit thing in the history of this game?
killer literally does not have the ability to do that against any competent team because KEEPING THE GAME A 1V4 MAKES THE GENS FLY. has nothing to do with skill, despite what many community members will tell you.
also yeah, keep nerfing tunnel/camp because we haven't been doing that every update. survivors get new meta perks to use against it nearly every chapter along with basekit features to counter it, guess it is still not enough.
we've nerfed nearly every slowdown perk the killer has and the expectation is for them to play even NICER.
its also only seen as a problem when the killers go for their objective quickly, not the survivors of course. where's my "anti-genrush"? oh wait "genrush" is fine because that's just the survivors doing their objective right, but when the killer does the same without bending their back over to make the match "fun" for everyone else then they're an evil toxic tunneler and deserve to be punished with EVEN MORE.
I see nothing on this roadmap hinting at buffs for play styles that are "healthy" such as spreading hooks around and going for multiple chases. If that's the way they want people to play the game then BUFF THOSE STRATEGIES, stop NERFING the other strats that people use because the first one is terrible.
killers try to play nice, every gen slowdown which allowed this to an extent is nerfed. killers tunnel/slug because the "playing nice" strategy sucks, we introduce 70 things which impede them from doing that. killers dont wanna even hook anymore because it enables like 20 different survivor meta perks? yeah, lets nerf that too. if you want us to behave in a certain way then maybe start giving the carrot instead of relentless beatings with the stick.
Comments
No Mither can stay.
Because they may not be good for the game. If you nuke every killer strategy with no buffs to a healthy playstyle, people just won't play killer. We know because it already happened. I remember waiting 15 minutes in queue with my SWF to play survivor because there weren't a lot of killers. They made 6.1 because they had to
6.1 was buffs to a healthy playstyle and then killers started tunnelling MORE.
I swear I'm the only player on here who's a decent surv but a lousy killer, and almost everyone else is apparently top-level 27000 high MMR monsters getting nothing but super sweaty crack killers and super sweaty 4-man bully squads every match.
I’m not the original person you’re replying to, but this point confuses me a little. Isn’t this just describing how skill-based progression works in any competitive game? As you improve and win more often, you naturally face stronger opponents—ones who know how to counter you and push you to adapt. Why is that seen as a flaw rather than a normal part of growth? The wins that got you to that point still mattered..they just lead to the next stage of challenge, which is how skill development works in any game.
If the expectation is that winning should always remain easy, then what’s the point of improving? At a certain level, you should be playing against survivors who know how to loop and use meta perks well, just like killers.
That’s not a design flaw, that’s just competition.
They kept playing the game though. That's the point I was making.
Yes and no.
Once survivors actually start playing well and acting like a cohesive team, the gens start getting done efficiently and survivors can keep a killer in chase for a long time unless they mess up. Even at high levels of play, mistakes happen, and im not going to pretend that they dont, but it boils down to the fact that it is 4v1. If all of the survivors on a team are good and they are all bringing the best stuff most killers wont be able to keep up unless the survivors make mistakes (which does not sound like a good position for the power role to be in) The only exceptions would be perhaps against the S tier killers.
Killers are thrown far fewer bones than are survivors as well, just another thing to consider.
Its actually a super easy thing to understand but the problem is that the entire MMR system is designed in such a way to make people think they are better than they actually are, which creates a lot of ignorance. Hell, you cant even request your MMR data from BHVR anymore. People say "I dont struggle so you shouldn't either" thinking that they are playing against really good teams when really they are mistaken. I know that im not a top skill level player, but I do watch people who are and what I am seeing and hearing from them vs what some people on here are saying proves that somthing is not right. Im far more inclined to believe what I can actually see and trust in the experts than what some random person on the forums says, no offense. It would be incredibly foolish not to.
We both know I was a lousy Survivor too lmao
I play solo all the time. I've lost to killers I have no place losing to. I've carried the uncarryable. Just because the game is unfair for killers doesn't mean I disregard the stupidity on the survivor side. But at the end of the day, survivors have a matchmaking issue, not a balance issue. If you got good teammates every time, and a killer whose skill was matched to yours, it would be like a 90% escape rate, except at bottom level.
Yes, that is why I said disabled in EGC or after gens are done.
Endurance system stays after gens are done to prevent hooked Survivors from just being dead, but otherwise yes, it can go. Serves no purpose.
Even at high levels of play, mistakes happen, and im not going to pretend that they dont, but it boils down to the fact that it is 4v1. If all of the survivors on a team are good and they are all bringing the best stuff most killers wont be able to keep up unless the survivors make mistakes (which does not sound like a good position for the power role to be in) The only exceptions would be perhaps against the S tier killers.I'd say there are four problem with this:
1: The game accomplishes the power role by giving killers a higher skill floor and a lower skill ceiling. If you even this out between survivor and killer (which I don't think would even be possible), you'd likely lose the power role entirely.
2: Top level SWFs are rare. It requires not just 4 players playing together, but four players who are all very good at the game, have practiced with each other, and can make time to play together. Even if this was 1% of the playerbase, which I think would be way high, it seems strange to say the game accomplishes its goal for 99% of the playerbase and then worry about the 1% that are an exception.
But even if we limit the discussion to just that group
3: Four survivors have additional things to worry about, like communication. If they make the same amount of mistakes as the killer, they should win because of the increased obstacles they have to overcome. You can't have a game where the side with the increased chance of making mistakes could lose even if they make less mistakes.
Hypothetically, with perfect play, survivors should win. Lots of elements of DbD are exactly the same, always, and don't have the built in randomness. If a killer could win in those circumstances survivor would be borderline impossible.
4: Bringing up S tier killers against teams bringing their best stuff. The killer player gets to choose who they play. The game is designed around sweatiness and killers being in different tiers (those which are starters and those which are end game). Whether those are the right design decisions is a different discussion, but they are the decisions that BHVR made. If the survivors are a 4 man running meta build, and the killer plays anything less than that, the killer should be a disadvantage.
If I'm playing survivor and none of us bring items and use 'fun' builds and we hit a sweating Nurse, I expect to be at a disadvantage. I'm not thrilled with BHVR's design, but that's the way it works for both sides.
Hell, you cant even request your MMR data from BHVR anymore.You never really could. One person, briefly, found a work around and BHVR quickly shut that down.
Im far more inclined to believe what I can actually see and trust in the experts than what some random person on the forums says, no offense.That's fair, but who is the player who is actually struggling on their killer streams? Not just saying it, but actually encountering the problems. I'm sure there must be one or two I'm unaware of, but as has been mentioned by a few people above, streamers seem to be dominating their killer game without too much difficulty.
You are a skilled killer I've seen you go. Yeah when it comes to surv you knew what to do but I'd say you have no special skill or love for the role that's true!
I think see what you’re saying, but there are some things I still don’t quite understand. You’re stating that at high MMR, killers only win when survivors make mistakes, but shouldn’t survivors who don’t make mistakes win? The way you’ve framed it makes it sound like survivors playing perfectly still shouldn’t be able to escape, which suggests that killers should win even when the other side plays flawlessly. That would remove any competition from the game entirely.
Being the power role doesn’t mean an automatic win, just a statistically higher chance of winning, which is already reflected in the game’s statistics which consistently show killers maintaining a strong position across all skill levels including high MMR. It’s also important to consider that if killers should never be designed/expected to lose, even at high MMR, then why is it acceptable for survivors to be designed/expected to lose at lower and average MMR? If difficulty for one side is a problem, shouldn’t it be a problem for both roles?
Also, I get being skeptical of random forum opinions, it’s good to take most things with a pinch of salt. But if personal experiences are unreliable and official stats from BHVR are to be ignored, then what standard do we use? At a certain point, if both anecdotal and statistical evidence are dismissed, the. The conversations are directionless without any kind of merit unless it’s an opinion that mirrors your own. (Not you directly I just mean in general)
Usually the argument goes "but killers can lose even if they didn't make any mistakes, do you think it's fair that perfect survivor play always wins but perfect killer play can still lose?" Not saying I agree with that argument, that's just generally how people reply to your point.
IMO talking about what happens with perfect play is mostly pointless. Everyone makes mistakes, nobody is perfect. Especially if someone says they played perfect in a specific loss - it feels like "not yet experienced enough, or else not yet good enough at self-analysis to recognize the mistakes" is the more likely scenario
I completely agree that arguing based on perfect play is pointless since nobody plays perfectly. My issue with the original argument wasn’t about perfection, it was about the way they framed it. Saying that 'killers only win if survivors make mistakes' was presented as a negative, when in reality, the role that makes fewer mistakes should win. That’s how competition works.
I also don’t expect perfection, and I agree that it’s unrealistic to base balance discussions on that. But if someone’s argument is that 'the only way to win is to play flawlessly,' then that already says something, especially when it also implies that even if survivors do play flawlessly (which is impossible), they still shouldn’t win.
Beyond all this, statistics show that killers are succeeding, even when mistakes happen (which is good!). We should acknowledge that stats need nuance but every piece of non-anecdotal data we have shows that killers perform well, including in high MMR. And since nobody plays perfectly—not killers, not survivors, not even bots lol, It’s impossible to prove that a flawless killer will still lose, just like it’s impossible to prove that a flawless survivor will still lose. That’s why the argument itself doesn’t hold up because it’s based on an impossible, hypothetical standard rather than what actually happens in real games.
I agree that 99's a gen for a whole match is ludicrous. Not sure where you got that idea from, but yeah….probably a terrible idea. Naturally, doing a 99 decoy gen is only relevant while there's PR triggers available. Once the decoy eats the 4 PR hits, then leaving it 99'd is pretty pointless.
Why quit streaming? I've considered doing it myself. I usually just do yt videos. I'm a bit too asocial for streamer content - I play too much for the game and less for a "crowd", ha.
As for a team communication, like I mentioned, the game is balanced around SWF in mind, so communication is expected. When solo queue comes into play, it throws everything off. I think we can ALL (I'm looking at you, killer mains) agree that solo queue is inherently at a disadvantage. I'd imagine a lot of killer kills are from taking advantage of that inherent disadvantage. If the solo queue disadvantage was somehow removed, I'd imagine kill rates would likely be far, far less lower than they are.
As for me playing vs players worse than me, you can say that about every player in the game - the MMR sometimes works, and sometimes it completely fails. I'll say I've faced off against One Pump Willie and such, so I'd imagine if you consider him worse than me, it's quite the compliment…so thanks, I guess? Outside of a few popular names I've faced, most of my matches are P60-P100 squads. Sometimes I get a few full blown 4 man P100 squads, but let's face it, you can still have poor players that are P100.
Try hopping back into streaming. If you're as good as you claim to me, I'd swing by sometime. Watching someone better then the professional dbd players would be quite the treat. I'm always up for improving.
I believe the statement generally reflects that at the core, survivors have all the tools available to them to always succeed and killers do not. True, nobody plays perfectly, but survivors have the capability of being unbeatable, while killers inherently do not. In other words, if a survivor just simply cannot win, it's because they need to improve on their skillsets provided to them, not because it's impossible to win. Regardless, I do feel that nurse\blight is an exception to this - I genuinely do think they are fundamentally broken and unfair towards survivors at all levels. That is just my opinion, however. Beyond that, I feel that a lot of survivor complains about killers being impossible to beat comes down to just needing more experience. I used to get my butt HANDED to be as a survivor until I went out of my way to truly learn the game - that opened a LOT of possibilities and my success rate shot up after I started mastering looping, check spots, seeing hook states as a resource, and so on instead of just seeing "gen" as "the" gameplay. I just feel that many in the community don't want to make that effort. Just in the thread recently, I made the comment that certain perks have counters that can be used to overcome them, and boy did the community hate that idea - just downvotes upon downvotes. Survivors seriously have a lot of power - if one works on practicing all the tools made available to them, their gameplay would improve significantly.
Nope. Not every single game or even the vast majority of games at least. At high levels of play killers have to rely on slugging and tunneling to catch up and build enough map pressure unless they are playing an S tier killer and thats a problem. Some of the tools survivors have are far too strong when used optimally and either gen speeds are too fast or gen regression is too weak or maybe even both.
As things are, actually getting better at killer makes for a worse game experience as the game becomes fundamentally more and more survivor sided after a certain point. This forces the killer to play in specific ways and no one likes it. Counting hooks every game just sucks. Its not interesting or fun, but thats what had to be done.
I quit the game, actually. I still keep up with it, and I like to talk to people here, but I don't play anymore and probably won't play significantly again unless something changes.
Since it is not possible to completely remove the advantage from SWF, it's likely that Solo Q may only receive a 5% bump. The difference between High MMR 4-man and High MMR Solo is about 10%, but the biggest advantage for SWF, imo, is being able to pick your teammates.
Indeed, P100 means nothing. I had a P100, but I was not a good Survivor. Willie is good, but I always thought he was a specialist, maybe he has expanded.
It's been about 8 or 9 months since I played DBD, I think and probably a year or more since I played consistently. I'm somewhat sure I could win most of my matches, but I don't have much of a reason to go back to DBD, at this point
Fair, I have taken a killer break ever since shoulder the burden hit the PTB. I primarily focus on the underdog killers (ie ghostie, deathslinger, pig, etc…), and considering I play "nice" as a killer, I just didn't want to deal with the inevitable 4 man STB sweat squads. Just been doing survivor, but even then, the killer just doesn't feel like much of a threat. As long as you are good at looping, do checkspots, and so on, it's just more of the same. Heck, I played a bunch of 2v8 last week (I never did any of the challenges for 2v8, so I was burning through them the last day of the deadline), and the majority of the matches had a single survivor death. Probably going to step away from the game for some time and come back to see if any changes are made. I see their upcoming "health" update, so I'll keep tabs on that, at least.
Well, consider what we Survivors did when 6.1.0 dropped. What did we do when MFT was nerfed? What did we do when FTP+Buckle Up was nerfed? What did we do when self-healing and Distortion was nerfed, among other things? We adapted and learned to play around it.
On the flipside, what did you Killers do when basekit BT was introduced? What did you do when the anti-FACEcamp mechanic was introduced, or the 8-regression event limit was introduced? You still found ways to play around it. And I have no doubt that you'll do the same with whatever new system they come out with.
Unless, of course, you do decide to uninstall DBD, in which case, so long, and thanks for all the hooks.
Those perks were really bad for the balance of the game. I am of the opinion that both were equally egregious even if BU+FTP felt so much worse. They should have never made it past QA (Quality Assurance) in that state. BhVR does stuff like that all the time. DIstortion was a cudgel in the hands of SWFs and again, probably shouldnt have made it into the game in that state to begin with.
BhVR says they dont take SWFs into consideration when designing perks and doing balance changes and this is clearly a mistake. If they did consider SWFs I promise you, Distortion would have never made it to live with that effect, ever in 100 years.
Now, onto your main argument. Yes killers will adapt, we allways have. The thing that has people upset is that Survivors get angery about every little thing we do. They get mad when the killer brings a perk they dont like, employs any kind of strategy, when the killer uses their power, and even when the killer kills. Anytime killers adapt, survivors find a reason to complain about it and will scream to high heaven about it until it gets nerfed and or even removed from the game. Meanwhile survivors have gotten numerous basekit buffs, nerfs to hook stages, and progressively stronger and stronger perk options.
I admit I do have some trouble trying to follow some of the reasoning. The idea that survivors have all the tools to succeed while killers inherently do not is simply not supported by evidence. I truly believe if that were true, we wouldn’t see killers achieve 1000+ winstreaks, nor do I think we would see them win in matches where they play 100% perkless and only rely on the killers built in power. I think both roles are designed with the tools they need for a chance of winning. (though that's not to exclude the need for improvements for diffrent factors/tools/mechanics etc. in the game)
I don't agree with the claim that survivors can be 'unbeatable,' to then immediately contradict it by admitting that Nurse and Blight exist and are exceptions to that very rule. I feel that alone disproves the idea that killers don’t have the tools to succeed, if they truly didn’t, then there wouldn’t be 'exceptions' that dominate at all levels of play. But again, statistically all killers are performing well, and that's not exclusive to those on the top of Tier lists. Every killer is statistically winning more than they lose (which is good!)
To be honest, the claim that survivors just need to put in effort to win does rub me the wrong way as I feel it ignores a major disparity: killers have multiple ways to practice. You can practice in customs or against bots with every perk in the game, and against every perk in the game regardless if you own it, and any map of your choosing. Survivors have no way to practice counterplay outside of live games. Learning counters to 38 killers, plus all perks, add-ons, and playstyles, is a trial-by-fire experience. In addition you have to learn the fundamentals of survivor, primarily looping, which is a skill and takes time and practice to be good at. Saying survivors 'just don’t want to make the effort' comes across as dismissive when killers have significantly more resources available for improvement. By that logic, should every struggling killer just play Nurse? She’s free, and shes the most powerful thing in the entire game. Why couldn't that be considered "practicing all the tools made available to them"? If you apply that standard to survivors, it should also apply to killers, but I don't agree with that because everyone has preferences and natural strengths and weaknesses.
Ultimately, we may just disagree at a fundamental level. Every kind of statistical evidence, along with both my personal experience, contradicts the idea that killers always lack the tools to succeed while survivors always have them. Survivors and killers both require skill, experience, and game knowledge to perform well. And while the game is designed with killers in favor for the power role, that (usually) doesn't diminsh the effort it takes to get those wins, nor does it (usually) diminish the effort it takes to survive in a role that is designed with intentional lower odds.
Thanks for the discussion though! Even if we don't agree I appreciate your perspective!
"Learning counters to 38 killers, plus all perks, add-ons, and playstyles, is a trial-by-fire experience."
100% agree. Survivors have a LOOOOOOOOT to learn - a massive amount to learn - in order to reliably succeed on the regular. Putting time into that will absolutely show positive results, but there isn't a lot of people with that much patience or time. There's a reason that a lot of the community says that 500 hours of DBD means you are no longer a "beginner". While that seems "the accepted truth" in DBD, putting that logic vs other games…the reality of it is just bonkers…most people don't even PLAY games for 500+ hours, ha. The point though is, by design, the survivors literally have the advantage over the killers (talking SWF here considering the game is balanced around SWF), but the amount of experience it takes to reliably do that isn't exactly fair….scratch that…isn't remotely fair for the casual playerbase (which is why BHVR tends to balance around the average player and not vs the experienced players). That's why so many high tier players who play killer complain, but their requests go ignored - BHVR isn't balancing around high tier play - they are balancing around the average player. So it's true that survivors absolutely have all the tools to just stomp killers, but it's unrealistic to expect the average player to ever get enough experience on survivor to ever reach that point. As for players who excel at DBD and move beyond the average player, they start falling into broken balance territory which won't be changed to avoid hurting the average player base. So generally, it's a skill issue, sure, but the amount of time it takes to invest to overcome killers on the regular most players simply either aren't willing or aren't able to apply. Again, 500 hours is becoming "decent" at the game…a claim that would be ridiculous in 99% of the games out there but rings true in DBD.
"I don't agree with the claim that survivors can be 'unbeatable,' to then immediately contradict it by admitting that Nurse and Blight exist and are exceptions to that very rule."
There are always exceptions to rules, that's what makes them exceptions. There's also the phrase of the exception that proves the rule.
"To be honest, the claim that survivors
just need to put in effort to windoes rub me the wrong way as I feel it ignores a major disparity: killers have multiple ways to practice."I seriously feel that survivors should have the ability to do killer bot matches to practice outside of the tutorial. It'd be awesome if BHVR came out with some ingame scenarios on looping and such - even if they outsourced it to volunteer players to put it together for them.
"Every kind of statistical evidence, along with both my personal experience, contradicts the idea that killers always lack the tools to succeed while survivors always have them. Survivors and killers
bothrequire skill, experience, and game knowledge to perform well."You have have misunderstood this point. I'm talking about if you assume 100% skill, knowledge, and experience, and both teams have that, the SWF has the clear advantage over an equal level killer. Teamwork and the tools survivors have simply trump the majority of killers (nurse\blight being the exception). The trick is having that skill, knowledge, and experience…which as I mentioned the average player will not. I'm just saying design-wise, survivors do have the upper-hand. The rest is up to the players to utilize those tools appropriately to succeed. Some are crazy good at it - some dedicated SWFs have 500+ wins in a row.
I appreciate the well mannered discussion. Nice to see on the forum - even if we don't see eye to eye. Cheers!
Edit - While I claim to be a killer main, my playtime is more like 60% killer 40% survivor, and over the past 2 months, I've only played survivor.
First off, I appreciate the civil tone of your responses! It's refreshing to have a discussion without condescension or hostility. :)
I think one of the main issues I have with understanding where you're truly coming from, is regarding the points about SWF. From your posts, it seems you view high-tier SWFs as the baseline for survivor strength rather than an outlier. You do acknowledge that Nurse and Blight are exceptions to the rule, yet don’t seem to extend that same logic to top-tier SWFs. My issue with this is that I can make the exact same argument in reverse: If an experienced SWF can "stomp" killers using their tools and coordination, then an experienced Nurse or Blight can do the same. Both are outliers, not the standard experience.
Statistically, high-level SWFs win about 8% more than solo survivors, but they still remain under a 50% win rate even in the top 5% of players. That suggests they are far from an instant win button and are less common overall. To me, these highly skilled SWFs are the survivor equivalent of a strong Nurse or Blight player, both are extreme ends of the skill spectrum. That's why I struggle to follow when conversations use top SWFs as proof of survivor strength while excluding Nurse and Blight as proof of killer strength, and are only considered as exceptions. If feels like a double standard. In my opinion, if we’re going to use SWF success as proof of survivor potential, then we need to do the same with Nurse and Blight success for killers.
I'm happy we agree with the need for more survivor-side tools for learning/practice, like killer bot matches or tutorials for both roles. The knowledge gap between roles is massive, and it’s only growing with every update. I feel It’s unrealistic for new players to enter the game as Solo and perform well, when the learning curve is so much steeper than for a killer playing a single character, simply due to the amount of control that you do and don't have between the two. I would like SoloQ to have better incentives compared to SWF, especially as the expectations for survivor performance and knowledge keep increasing, thus making the standards for perfoming well higher and higher.I think it's better for the game as a whole, and can help with many frustrations for both roles. (less DC's please!)
Your opinion on, "100% skill, knowledge, and experience," SWF has the clear advantage (excluding Blight and Nurse) feels contradictory, due to what I've already mentioned before. If we’re excluding Blight and Nurse because they’re exceptions, why isn’t a fully optimized SWF with 100% knowledge, skill, and experience considered an exception too? Why is one removed from the equation while the other is used to define the rule? Despite them both being statistically uncommon?
Overall, I think we agree on quite a few things and we may be on opposite opinions of others, but I’ve enjoyed hearing your thoughts. For clarity, I will explain as well that I am not entirely sure where I stand on SWF or Blight/Nurse. It feels like you need both because the other exists, and if you took one away then the other would completley dominate. And at the same time, it's because they exist that it holds back buffs or perks etc. that would greatly benefit the majoirty. Maybe some kind of ranked mode where only certain perks, killers, items, and add-ons etc. can be used,? And those same killers, items, perks, add-ons etc. are restricted from the standard mode? I'm not entirely sure. But I agree that in top tier play, both have potential to be unfair and unfun.
(I really have enjoyed this back and forth and I mean no disrespect to you or your opinions and if any of my points feel that way please know it's not my intent, sometimes tone can be tricky in text format) 🙈
People call for nerfs for Blight and Nurse ALL THE TIME despite the fact that the vast majority of players, especially on console, has no ability to ever play them to the level where they're actually problematic. In contrast, calling for nerfs for 4-man SWF is met with cries of "you can't punish people playing with friends!!! You'll kill the game!!!"
Playing in a 4-man SWF to get to a level where they're a significant problem for the balance of the game is considerably easier than trying to become a console giga Blight or something. You just need to get on comms with 3 other people, run a whole bunch of 2nd chance perks, communicate basic stuff like where the killer is and where the gen that's regressing is at, hold w and pre drop. That's it. It doesn't take a lot and you will wipe 90% of the killer roster. You can even make it easier by throwing on an Eyrie or Badham offering.
I see where you're coming from, and it's an interesting perspective, but the biggest difference is that the tools available to survivors are basekit for the entirety of the playerbase. Nurse and Blight are very specifically a balance problem for those very specific killers and isn't a basekit problem for all of the killer roster. Survivors' potential and its problems applies to the entire side. Nurse\Blight potential and their problems are very specifically them and not a problem with killer balance as a whole.
This feels like an oversimplification of the strength of a 4-Man by downplaying the skill that is required to do it successfully. People constantly call for Nurse and Blight nerfs , and many also call for SWF nerfs or to be removed from the game entirely, despite both of which, having most players not being skilled enough to play them to that point. The average SWF is nowhere near the level where they wipe "90% of the killer roster" and that is based on evidence, not my opinion. Just because something is possible does't mean it is common, and the stats show that it is not common.
"Being in a 4-Man" and "being in a 4-Man that stomps high tier killers" are completely different things. Just hopping on comms doesn't automatically mean you're coordinated, nor does it mean you have the mechanical skill, game knowledge or fundamentals honed to dismantle all killers. Much in the same way that playing Nurse or Blight is also not a magical win button either. There's a huge skill difference bewteen a casual SWF, and a top-tier SWF, it has been statistically proven. Just like there's a huge difference between a Blight on a winstreak, and a casual one.
Map offerings are not exclusive to survivors or 4-mans, Killers can also bring them, so I don't really see how that's relevant because maps can be "abused" by both roles.
We know from Stats that SWFS win more than solos, but it is not an automatic stomp, even when looking at the very best players. They are not out performing killers, which is a good thing. I am always looking for more perspectives, to help understand or to learn, but this feels like asking me to ignore actual statistical evidence and data and unfortunately I am not wired that way. If the stats said something different then my opinions would absolutely change, because that's what being open minded is about, but to willfully ignore what has been proven doesn't make sense to me even if it's a stat I may not like.
Both roles have the basekit tools needed to win.
Survivors: Gens, use pallets, and loop. All requiring a level of skill (knowing safe pallets, looping tiles, timing stuns, knowing safe gens vs unsafe, not 3 genning etc.)
Killers: Injure/down, use powers, kick gens, and kill. All requiring a level of skill (chase management, zoning, gen defense, knowledge of power strengths and weakness etc.)
Perks, maps, stronger killers, or 4-man SWF tilt the balance but they do not define it. You still need skill to win. These tools make things easier but don't replace fundamental gameplay knowledge and skill.
A cracked Nurse or Blight isnt' a general survivor issue just like a cracked 4-man isn't a general killer issue. Both are outliers, proven statistically. (According to the stats that BHVR has released, they may have changed but all we can go off from is what they've given us, and I'm all for consistently updated stats to better understand the state of the game)
Nurse has a 4% pickrate, a 55% killrate. Blight has a 4% pickrate, a 59% killrate.
4-Man has a 3-6% occurance, an average escape rate of 43.09% and for high MMR 48.30%
Both outliers, and neither of which grants a 100% winrate.
When we look at killer balance as a whole, they have an average of 58.50% which is slightly below the goal of 60% which should be met, but it also proves that all killers are performing well, and they don't need to be a Blight or Nurse to do it. You don't need to rely on being a Blight or Nurse to win more than you lose, but even if you are in a top MMR 4 man SWF, you will still lose more than you win, and that is intended by design.
I can't agree with applying different standards to each role by trying to dismiss the skill required to make it there. If the stats showed that it was way more common then that would imply it's much easier to accomplish and my opinion would change, but that's not the case. My perspective is shaped by the evidence that's been presented. My perspective is subject to change, because evidence is subject to change, but I personally can't just willfully ignore the evidence.
always found it odd that people think endurance/otr/DS is fair because it only disables when you touch an objective.
your suggestion of giving survivors godmode after they get unhooked is obnoxious and absurd because who cares if it only disables if they do an objective? so they can get unhooked, run to a gen and wait. if the killer tries to get them… well they cant because the survivor has godmode. so the killer goes away and the survivor does the gen.
conspicuous actions were needed, but they do not automatically make these perks fair because the perk only disables when you've actually done an objective. it doesn't disable when youre planning to do an objective. so if a survivor gets unhooked and starts running towards a gen its a lose-lose. you either try to stop them from doing it and eat whatever benefits they have from the perk, or you go away and they do the gen.
Or you could go chase someone else…?
The whole point is to encourage you NOT to be lingering around that person to try and chase them again. If anti-tunnel allows you to prioritise the person who was just unhooked, it's not functioning.
yeah, you could go chase someone else. which allows that survivor who was immune to start doing whatever they want.
survivor gets unhooked, they get OTR or in this case, godmode. killer cant chase survivor because of that. survivor is free to go to any gen they want.
the "conspicuous action = fair" argument is dumb, because it's based on a premise that the killer should not be able to interrupt the survivors with those perks before they do any gens, only after because that's when the perk disables. the perks say "if you chase me, you have to eat my off the record or godmode. if you dont, you know damn well im just going to go for a generator." not very fun or balanced.
u r us vs them incarnate
I mean, yeah, at every point in the match, SOMEONE is going to be doing generators. That doesn't change if you target the person who was just on the hook, it only changes WHO is going to be doing generators.
If you're already in a chase with someone else when the unhook happens, though, you're doing more overall damage to gen efficiency and you don't have to eat any anti-tunnel measures. That's much better overall.
still not addressing what I said.
survivor gets unhooked. killer sees survivor get unhooked. survivor starts running towards a direction where you know a gen is nearly complete. killer has two options:
A: chase survivor so they dont just run to the gen and do it. except oh wait if the killer does that then they eat ######### due to OTR or literal godmode
B: killer chases someone else. survivor goes to gen and completes it.
none of these situations feel fun or fair, especially when you consider that the whole reason why the killer is given this lose-lose situation is simply because they did their objective of hooking survivors. it doesn't matter who's doing gens and who isn't.
It's very much addressing what you said.
If you choose option A, you are not stopping gen repair in general, just that one survivor doing gen repair. The other three survivors are also free to do generators in this scenario and will most likely loop around to do the one that's nearly finished.
If you choose option B, you are not stopping gen repair in general either, just the survivor you're chasing… except if you're not nearby for the person who just got off hook, they could at least feel the need to reset, which keeps them off generators a little bit longer.
The literal only difference is that picking option A is trying to tunnel for the easier chase, it doesn't have anything to do with gen repair.
except if you're not nearby for the person who just got off hook, theycouldat least feel the need to reset, which keeps them off generators a little bit longer.why would they? 🤔
People do still like to heal, in general.
Hypothetically I might agree that staying injured is often a smart choice, at least temporarily, but in my experience in both roles the survivors typically like to heal when they can.
I mean I would reset because 2 health states is better than 1. The only time I don’t actively try to reset is due to some other variable I need to account for. Ideally though resetting is preferable, of course.
That doesn't make sense though. Every perk would be a second chance perk.
If I use Resi to vault a window and the extra X% saves me from getting hit, that's a second chance perk by your definition.
Have you considered chasing the person who unhooked them?
I'm not sure how I can make the intention any more clear. If you simply, idk, don't tunnel; this system will never affect you.
Someone is going to do gens, that's kind of inevitable. It is better for you if someone injured does gens.
basekit deadlock… if you simply dont genrush, this system will never affect you
What exactly did that statement accomplish?
You have managed to completely ignore all of my points, which only serves to hurt your own argument.
Umm how does that compare? Deadlock would proc regardless of gen rushing while Pulsar"s idea would only affect you only if you choose that recently unhooked survivor…
u can try to justify it, but what im saying is that it is simply not fun to see a survivor running towards a gen after getting unhooked and you know that there is nothing you can do to stop them because both situations allow that survivor to either make you suffer from their perk/godmode or allow them to do the gen. its not fun especially when its enabled by you doing your objective. and people wonder why killers are slugging, because situations like that are unfun.
it shows the hypocrisy between survivor efficiency vs killer efficiency.
apparently we need literal godmode for survivors who are unhooked (when being hooked is a result of their own misplays lmao) and if anyone disagrees then they should just "not tunnel"
just pretty sick of people suggesting the most obnoxious things in order to prevent the killer from doing their objective efficiently when I never hear anything that stops the survivors from doing the same
If you think that in the year 2025 that being hooked is somehow a "misplay" on the Survivors part, I really think that says everything about your argument.
It is not 2017 DBD anymore. Getting hooked is a part of normal gameplay. Survivors are not meant to be able to run the Killer the entire game. Being hooked is not a misplay, just like a Survivor being unhooked is not a misplay from the Killer.
Aren't you missing something?
The perks you're complaining about automatically disable themselves the second that survivor touches the gen. If you want to defend the gen, you easily can.
StalkingYou12:52 pm
And the pot calls the kettle black. If you're having to resort to insults, it's time to stop commenting in this thread.
Why? This point is always assumed and never argued properly.