Another nerf to an alternative gen defense perks
So with pentimento going away now, what do we have left:
- Pain res
- Grim Embrace
- Dead man's
pretty much all that is left.
Can we please stop nerfing perks that aren't OP in high level play for the sake of low level play without compensating it in some way for high level play?
Can we please get the old ruin that made it regress style level of perk changes where perks that are OP against average players get nerfed against average players but buffed against high level players?
For example, do this change to pentimento (pending numbers changes) but make it so when a totem is rekindled it gets blocked for 30 seconds. It wouldn't hurt average solo queues because they probably are going to take longer than 30 seconds to find that totem and cleanse it anyway, and against high level coordinated teams, they can't immediately cleanse it 5 seconds after you light it.
Comments
It's dead, Jim. You arent ever getting 5 stacks of pentimento. Never. It's one of the hardest things you can try to do as killer.
Well, the obvious question there is, why are you assuming you'll need to get 5 stacks of Pentimento?
thats the way they made it sound. You will need 5 stacks to get the full effect and even at 30% it isnt nuts. The only reason it is used is that every other viable option was nerfed into the dirt and at least this particular hex can be kept up for most of a match.
We don't actually know how this scales, so it's premature to say that it's dead in the water.
30% is a nuts number, by the way, that's almost the largest amount of % slowdown you can get from a single perk. You don't need the 30% for it to be worth running, it being 30% is just what makes it incredibly strong.
Personally, I would say it starting at or above 10% would maintain it being useful. Any higher than that for the first stack and the perk's just still flat out good.
Deleted.
Real aggressive, man, it's pretty unpleasant.
10% would make it one of the worst gen regression perks in the game. It would still be better than call of brine because being worse than that would be allmost impossible, but considering how awful hexes are in general right now…. Yikes. Pentimento must be ran with other hex perks and that combined with how weak hexes are makes your take of 10% particularly awful.
Not to be pedantic, but it's not a regression perk, it's a slowdown perk. Call of Brine is a regression perk (literally but not meaningfully, because it's numbers are so bad you'd only ever run it for its info), so you wouldn't compare them directly.
10% on a slowdown perk, as in, making the repair go slower, isn't that bad. My assumption is that the next totem gives a noticeable chunk too - and to be fair, it's also an assumption - so since getting to two stacks is pretty realistically doable, that'd mean the perk is still pretty usable.
Higher than 10% and it just starts out still strong, obviously. 10% is what I'd call the minimum for it to not be a dead perk. Just from idle speculation, obviously, I'd need to test it on the PTB either way.
It's worth just stating again that you get gen slowdown and healing slowdown from the first totem. The latter is not nearly as valuable as the former, but its not worthless.
My thoughts on possibilities
5% per totem - probably a dead perk
10% per totem - usable, but considerably weaker. If they added the recovery and gate slowdown the perk currently can potentially have, I'd say this number would be good.
15% per totem - Where I think it should be at. Not broken, not worthless.
20% per totem - Kind of impossible as this creates a hypothetical 100% slowdown (presuming that all of the totems are added together and then applied)
I actually hope, though don't expect, them to create some type of tier situation. The first is worth 12.5%, then 10% (22.5% total), and so on in decreasing values.
That's a good point, and worth bringing up- it definitely helps a bit.
I'd broadly agree with that rundown, too, I think 15% would probably be best but 10% would also be worthwhile.
It'd be most interesting if the gains per stack are uneven, so the starting the number can be a bit higher, like you say. I'm honestly getting more and more curious what the real numbers actually are, now, I want to see what they've done here.
I think you should change your post to "they took away my free asf gen slowdown"
I use these perks on killer and never have any issues. Also, value from perks varies from game to game on both Survivor and Killer. You're not always going to get value from each equipped perk, but when you do… you question why you'd ever run anything else. You cant just say "all these perks are garbage" - because they're not and I see people winning with them against me all the time, and vice versa.
Almost like hexes shold be stronger given that they can be cleansed. It still awful that they nerfed ruin the way they did.
Look at all the hex perks, the only one worth taking is devour and even then its really just RNG that can win you the game.
I can understand what you're saying, but cleansing Pentimento has to be done multiple times just to get rid of the extremely potent slowdown. The trade is SUPPOSED to be a powerful effect you cleanse ONCE to get rid of it, that's the basic idea of hexes.
I'm not saying that hexes don't need help because they absolutely do, but with the way Pentimento is currently designed, it's actually standing in the way of that. Hexes being improved from basically any angle with current Pentimento in the game just makes the already very powerful perk even stronger.
Making each cleanse more actually impactful (while still maintaining the timesink of multiple cleanses) and instead making multiple lit totems a focus instead of a safety net is a good first step to actually being able to safely buff hexes as a mechanic, hypothetically.
The point of pentimento is specifically to force the survivors to stop doing gens to do the secondary objective because it is more efficient to do so. What happens if that number is too low? I'd bet we hit a point where suvivors just don't both to cleanse it. The good teams already ignore plaything because then they'd know they have to deal with pentimento.
If it's below a certain point, yes, the perk won't be worth running.
However, that point isn't 30% flat. Anything high enough to make the slowdown legitimately noticeable is going to push survivors to go cleanse, which is itself more slowdown— and if it doesn't, you just get noticeably slower gens.
We have to know what the numbers are before we can form a conclusion here, they're too important to the perk's strength.
You clearly know what I mean, so dont play dumb.
But why do survivors need to get nerfed at a high level? Is it not understood that killers being stronger than SWF makes it so there's no reason to play anything but killer.
The trade-off is that killer can easily win vs uncoordinated teams and easily win vs mediocre SWFs, but is challenged by competitive SWFs. Competitive SWFs are a tiny minority of a minority, meaning that anyone, experienced or otherwise, can pick up killer and have a good chance of winning not only one, but several games at any given time on any killer. That's good design. I genuinely feel like if you're on a loss streak as a killer player its a skill issue.
For suvivors the idea is that the more coordinated you play, the higher your chance of escaping is. Nerfing things like shack just removes any incentive to learn how to play the game. That's not even considering coordinated SWFs don't even have egregious winstreaks either.
Because the only viable killer(s) at that level is nurse and blight? Is that not a problem to you?
So these teams are rare, and we should balance around the average level players.
Then by definition you must contend with the following fact:
If you balance the game around average players, then nurse needs massive buffs, because she is often one of the lowest, if not the lowest kill rate killer in the game when looking at average level players. Unless of course you mean the game should be balanced around average level "SURVIVOR" players but high level killer players, in which case you are obviously holding some massive biases.
Lastly, you didn't try to refute anything i said, read what i wrote. And explain to me how nerfing killer shack would hurt the lower skilled players. You said it removes incentive to learn the game. Like, what? 1 structure being slightly nerfed suddenly makes it so there is no point in learning the game? You can't maybe learn the game by learning how the structure works in this different state. That doesn't make any sense.
At what level? Are you saying a high mmr killer player will lose the majority of their games purely because of killer pick? Or are we talking competitive?
If we are talking comp, they have their own rules. It doesn't matter nor is it related to the normal gameplay by any capacity.
Otherwise, as far as I know stats relating to high mmr indicate killers are doing fine there too and nothing would suggest it's purely because of nurse/Blight. Sure you may have a harder time running weaker killers but the same could be said for survivors running non meta perks.
My point is that if a killer can queue up in any mmr, pick whatever they want, and still win most of their games, there is no reason to nerf survivors at a higher level, especially since any nerfs will undoubtedly trickle down no matter how targeted it might seem.
And yes, it's way easier to be bad at survivor than killer. Maybe not in the past, but with maps and perks continuing to get weaker, killer has never been easier to win with especially considering tunneling/camping which have a low skill floor to begin with.
Considering how easy it is for killers to tunnel/camp their way into high mmr I definitely think there's merit to balancing around high level killers and average/below average survivors.
I don't have the stats but I'd be confident estimating that the proportion of high mmr killers to high mmr survivors would be skewed in favor of the killers.
There's too many factors that influence survivor success, which is why the most successful survivors are in swfs and why they're too rare to be balancing point.
As far your second point, it removes the desire to learn because the result would be marginally better than an average player because the structure is so weak.
Shack is also one of the only static strong loops in the game, several maps would become Haddonfield tier if shack was no longer strong.
The only reason why DDS shack has the breakable door is because the main building is extremely close to it and the devs had the foresight to see how it'd be problematic.
Nerfing Shack on Rotten Fields would be nonsensical.
So you are just biased then. You think we should balance the game around what the highest level killers are capable of, but what average survivor players can do.
At least you are consistent. But i'm sorry, that is pure bias.