Skip to content

Hatch change suggestions?

GolgiNea GolgiNea
in Feedback and Suggestions
The killers ability to close the hatch is not ballanced at all. You're lucky to make it that far in a trial to begin with, let alone complete one more gen to re-open the hatch. It will be nearly impossible to get a hatch escape with the killer just patrolling the last remaining gens.

Here are my suggestions on making it more ballanced:
-Remove killers ability to see gen auras when one survivor remains in the trial.
-Remove the ability for the killer to grab a survivor from the hatch if the survivor has found the hatch first or has re-opened the hatch.
-Give the survivor a significant speed buff to completing the gen they need to re-open the hatch.
-Hatch can only be closed by the killer once per trial.
-Alternative switch for the hatch to be re-opened that the survivor & killer have to find somewhere in the level.

A combination of these suggestions could make the hatch change more ballanced and more fun for everyone. 

Comments

  • PigNRun PigNRun
    I personally find the hatch changes fair. Sure, faster generator progression would be nice, and all.

    Just for the love of The Entity, dont go back to the old hatch standoffs. They are not tests of patience, its just luck during a boring staring contest. If they were not to implement the hatch closing option (which I strongly disagree with), then the least they should do is change it so killers can instantly grab a survivor (not exposed effect, I mean grabbing directly) if they are within range of an open hatch. Survivors only need one click to get away. The killer needs 3 with a reasonable time between them, or an extremely well timed and positioned one.
  • GolgiNea GolgiNea

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    How did they force the killer to do anything?

  • Jack11803 Jack11803

    @GolgiNea said:

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    How did they force the killer to do anything?

    as someone who played during that, I wasn’t forced at all. People completely forget that if you walk away, instant unhook, and you can now hook him again, saving the time from an entire hook phase. People just don’t think outside the box....like...ever.

  • GolgiNea GolgiNea

    @Jack11803 said:

    @GolgiNea said:

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    How did they force the killer to do anything?

    as someone who played during that, I wasn’t forced at all. People completely forget that if you walk away, instant unhook, and you can now hook him again, saving the time from an entire hook phase. People just don’t think outside the box....like...ever.

    Yeah, thats what I was thinking. I think the devs should revisit this now since there has been a lot of changes since it was tested back then.

  • DreadfulProton DreadfulProton

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    I'm not among those who beg for punishment for camping. I was simply interested in what tests had been taken to alleviate the issue of face camping. I asked the forum the other day if this test had taken place and when it happened. Someone was kind enough to provide enough information to narrow down my search and I found what you're talking about. However I'm not convinced that face camping was intended by design rather than a consequence of the design of the game. In otherwords, in that ptb you refer to, it was not intended by design that survivors abused the punishment system but rather a consequence of how the system was designed. Likewise, I doubt it was intended by design for killers to camp but rather a consequence of how the game was designed.

  • AlexAnarchy AlexAnarchy

    @GolgiNea said:

    @Jack11803 said:

    @GolgiNea said:

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    How did they force the killer to do anything?

    as someone who played during that, I wasn’t forced at all. People completely forget that if you walk away, instant unhook, and you can now hook him again, saving the time from an entire hook phase. People just don’t think outside the box....like...ever.

    Yeah, thats what I was thinking. I think the devs should revisit this now since there has been a lot of changes since it was tested back then.

    Too bad for you that they already swore not too.

  • AlexAnarchy AlexAnarchy

    @DreadfulProton said:

    @AlexAnarchy said:
    .

    How convenient. Sounds to me you have no proof. Which is a shame because I would also like to see this apparently "common knowledge". I guess the knowledge is so common that its invisible like water is to a fish. Golgi was clear on the terms of your surrender and it seems you've been beaten by a simple request for information lol.

    At one point perhaps someone would ask themself...why are the devs only making incentives to choose to not camp instead of punishing camping like you all want and whine and beg for?

    It could be because the devs did design camping into the game from day 1, it could be because indeed, the devs tried once during the 1.4 era where the game almost died due to infinites being unstoppable and the ptb for the camping punishment that made the survivor die slower on the hook the closer the killer was too the hook, well as is common knowledge by anyone who played that PTB or during that era of darkness for the game, It was quickly found and brought too the devs in mass that survivors were forcing the killer to stay at the hook while the others did the gens, thus enforcing camping and a survivor on hook to not have anyway of playing, After this PTB was ended, the devs made a statement that camping will not ever be punished as survivors will abuse any form of punishment put in but only give killers the choice by making incentives for them to choose to camp or not.

    You can doubt anyone and everyone who knows this information but at some point you must be finding yourself wondering...why is camping not getting punished like we keep begging for?

    I'm not among those who beg for punishment for camping. I was simply interested in what tests had been taken to alleviate the issue of face camping. I asked the forum the other day if this test had taken place and when it happened. Someone was kind enough to provide enough information to narrow down my search and I found what you're talking about. However I'm not convinced that face camping was intended by design rather than a consequence of the design of the game. In otherwords, in that ptb you refer to, it was not intended by design that survivors abused the punishment system but rather a consequence of how the system was designed. Likewise, I doubt it was intended by design for killers to camp but rather a consequence of how the game was designed.

    Camping not intended by your perspective huh?
    Let me and the devs then educate you with a video they presented before the game even came out and a strategy they talk about known as Baiting the survivors.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS3DvvOQI04&t=2s

  • mintchapstick mintchapstick

    @PigNRun said:
    I personally find the hatch changes fair. Sure, faster generator progression would be nice, and all.

    Just for the love of The Entity, dont go back to the old hatch standoffs. They are not tests of patience, its just luck during a boring staring contest. If they were not to implement the hatch closing option (which I strongly disagree with), then the least they should do is change it so killers can instantly grab a survivor (not exposed effect, I mean grabbing directly) if they are within range of an open hatch. Survivors only need one click to get away. The killer needs 3 with a reasonable time between them, or an extremely well timed and positioned one.

    Hatch standoffs don't even make sense tbh. Like, as a survivor, I've never been in a hatch standoff. I will literally run past the killer and try to slip past them and escape if they're in my way. If they hit/grab me, then they do, whatever, not the end of the world. I do the same thing when people block the basement stairs & try to take the game hostage.

    As a killer, I just run at the person when I see them & if they escape, they escape. If they don't, they don't. ######### is the point of standing there, staring at each other?

1 2 ›

Categories