Do you think that killers should lose Bloodlust when they whiff?
Why or why not?
Why or why not?
Read THIS post.
Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media. The archived data will be published at the end of October. This site is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Behaviour Interactive.
Comments
If someone is struggling so badly that they're getting bloodlust and they are whiffing hits, I don't think that punishing them even more is doing anybody any favors.
Agree the whole point of bloodlust is too stop 3 min chases and even with it it happens
No, if anything I think bloodlust should last longer and have fewer restrictions.
I somewhat agree, but some tiles/tile chains can and often do totally nullify the killer's inherent speed advantage. That's usually down to crap RNG, but I think the presence of bloodlust is just as much to band aid bad RNG/map design as it is to close a skill gap.
But generally speaking, going into bloodlust 1 is fine, but by the time you hit the higher levels, you should have already dropped chase.
If someone is struggling so badly that they're whiffing hits with bloodlust, handholding is not doing anybody any favors.
Bloodlust puts you in a built-in advantage to land a hit overriding bad rng. If you whiff, that's entirely a skill issue. And a bad outcome should follow a bad play.
Ok we remove bloodlust but in return, all safe pallets get exchanged to mindgameable pallets and windows block after 3 vaults no matter how fast they are.
You cannot complain about killers getting hit "bcs the devs said so" while ignoring survs being safe "bcs the devs say so"...
I don’t think bloodlust should be a thing in the first place.
There is a bad outcome; you missed the hit and have to now continue the chase for extra time. Also given the jankyass hit system on consoles, it can commonly not be a "skill issue" when the PC guy 360s and the game becomes confused and smacks that nothing next to the survivor instead of the survivor.
There's no need to pile onto whiffs
No.
Bloodlust was added to stop infinite chases, compensate for lag, compensate for skill difference (particularly in a typical MMR mismatch), give the killer a faster head start if body blocked while in chase, etc.
You can just as easily argue skill issue with Bloodlust as with DH giving an extra health state to fix a chase error/avoid an otherwise earned down. Both are there to cover problems that shouldn't be in the game, yet here we are.
Bloodlust is a necessary evil
Since Bloodlust is a huge handholding mechanic and used in instances where it is clearly not needed, yes. In the end, Killers should also be for it, since they are also saying that mistakes should be punished. And Whiffing a hit is clearly a mistake.
Ideally Bloodlust is removed completely (with Maps being balanced with a lot of fair and unsafe Pallets and only very, very few safe Pallets which need to be kicked immediatly), but given that the Devs even buffed Bloodlust in 6.1.0, it will not happen.
On maps like Haddonfield if u are an M1 killer on some loops they are so big you need Bloodlust or give up on the chase.
While I appreciate bloodlust's necessity to prevent chases going on for too long, when the killer swings they are committing to an attack, and failing that attack should come with a cost.
I'd sooner like to see 360's and auto-aim addressed so that whiffing is less down to luck than remove the cost of failing to land a hit.
Bloodlust also drops when chase drops. Try bringing misdirection perks to help you break line of sight from the Killer? Quick and Quiet, Deception, Dance with Me?
If all the Survivor is doing is simply looping a loop without doing anything fancy, yes, I do think that a safety net is fine for the Killer to get a hit in. Being found by the Killer should feel more like a guarantee that you will be hit, if you do nothing out of the ordinary.
Killers are designed to catch you. By nature of the game, they are entitled to hit you.
A Survivor should not be able to 1v1 a Killer for a considerable amount of time, unless there is a major skill disparity between the two (which matchmaking should be trying to avoid).
A better way to look at it is that Bloodlust Tier I is the Killer's natural movement speed. Rather than receiving a buff after struggling to catch you, they've been given a nerf to help Survivors extend a chase.
Ultimately, the goal is to have each survivor eat 1/4th of the Killer's time. But because the map elements are all static, there's nothing really stopping Survivors from taking a Killer on the equivalent of 4 chases. Bloodlust adds a dynamic element to the game that allows tiles to play differently, at different stages of a chase, even though nothing has fundamentally changed about them.
Ideally, people should be forming their opinions after careful assessment of all available knowledge.
If your opinion is grounded in reason, then it shouldn't waver when I bring forth a logical argument. Of course, when your opinion is tested against new information it is okay reassess your position--you don't need to double down for the sake of being right.
I won't postulate on whether I even provided a convincing argument, I just think it's disingenuous that you would respond with the equivalent of "I made up my mind, so it doesn't matter what you have to say."
It sounds to me like you're looking at Bloodlust all wrong.
You see it as a crutch for Killers, when there is enough evidence to suggest it's no less a part of the game than pallets and jungle gyms. BHVR ran a test without Bloodlust and found the game is more balanced WITH it than WITHOUT. Meaning, if they were to remove Bloodlust, they would need to redesign map tiles accordingly. Unsurpisingly, they chose to keep Bloodlust, as that required the least amount of work for the dev team.
No. Missing an attack already comes with an inherent drawback whether you have Bloodlust or not.
Definitely not. Bloodlust is, sadly, a necessity due to crappy map design.
Even after 6 (almost 7) years BHVR haven't quite figured out how to balance maps. They keep adding either way too strong tiles, that no killer can mind game and pretty much always promote brute forcing (i.e. The Game, Garden of Misery, Cowshed, Eyrie, all Badhams, Haddonfield), way too many tiles in close proximity, that promote Shift + W and create literal infinites, if left pallets are left unbroken (Temple, The Game, Cowshed, Ormond, all Coldwinds, Shattered Square) or way too unsafe loops (Midwich, current Wreckers Yard).
If you can run a killer for so long that they have to build up bloodlust, you're already doing fairly well and will most likely buy enough time for your team to finish the gens (unless you're playing with potatoes, then even a no-blink Nurse is deadly). Removing Bloodlust when whiffing would only punish newer killers. And newer players already suffer in this game.
Which is why using your power makes you reset Bloodlust. What's the problem?
Bloodlust is still a needed mechanic though because some loops are just atrocious especially car loops or extremely safe tiles. If bloodlust wasn't a mechanic people would just stick to killers who have high chase potential such as Nurse, Spirit, and Blight.
I know you hate bloodlust, but without it, most killers with low chase potential would just get screwed over by rng strong loops and tiles. This already happens even with bloodlust mechanics all you really need is a survivor who knows how to run such tiles.
Do you think that killers should lose Bloodlust when they whiff?
Personally I feel bloodlust is fine the way it is. Breaking the pallet, losing chase or attacking a survivor successfully resets bloodlust and I feel that's fine. Although I wouldn't be against Bloodlust being replaced with a similar feature with the same intent to end prolonged chases. Granted I feel the current mechanic does exactly what it needs to. If a survivor is constantly getting into a chase with a killer where they get bloodlust 3 I feel the game is probably heavily in the survivors favor at that point. The only argument I'd understand for removing it for example or nerfing it is so a survivor can eventually break chase from the killer as they are likely wanting to do.
I get some survivors ONLY want to be chased but there are cases where the survivor is good enough to prolong the chase while being pursued with Bloodlust 3 but not good enough or in the situation to actually break the chase completely. I feel if anything this is what bloodlust could be adjusted for. Maybe whiffing an attack resetting bloodlust could be the solution for this. Although I admit I am content with the features existence as it is now.
Side note - I do agree with most of the comments above referencing bad map design and that being a necessary reason to have bloodlust. Some maps are genuinely unwinnable with certain killers for the average player. Granted it's much more rare now I feel that map RNG is something that should be considered when tweaking Bloodlust.
When maps are hand crafted you typically wouldn't need to worry about such things but given the random nature of some maps in DBD Bloodlust is kind of like a safety net if map generation creates a very one sided map.
^This.
Bullshit that a whiff is clearly a mistake. Try playing on console against 360s with poor sensitivity, deadzones, and auto aim. Bloodlust should stay in the game because the maps are so poorly designed that they tilt too far in the survivors favor. Look at Garden of Joy and Shattered Safe Pallet, two of the newest maps