AlwaysInAGoodShape
AlwaysInAGoodShape
About
- Username
- AlwaysInAGoodShape
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,498
- Last Active
Comments
-
@thesuicidefox said:
@Gay Myers (Luzi) said:
Hi. I deleted two pages. Please have civil discussions.I was being civil now my posts are gone 😥
Main points: This has been done before and didn't work. Incentivize killers to leave a hook by rewarding them, not punishing them.
That is all.
It hasn't been done. It functions and I can prove it.
I can prove why the timer is inherently a bad mechanic.
How the solution is a location based hooking mechanic and how everyone silently agrees.Some people, (luckily on earlier pages) have done great thinking work at applying pressure through location-based mechanics in a way, way healthier than anything that can result in camping does.
-
@Boss said:
That's a pretty huge Survivor buff, not putting that time pressure on them anymore.Right!
Check:
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN RESPONSE TO SOLVING CAMPING.
Compensation for the otherwise killer-nerf
To get an idea what our appropriate response should be to such a change (:
-
I think everyone agrees with switching the button. Accidentally switching happened to me as well.
-
Summary
Together with @Funbag5 's . suggestion having:
-No hooking timer.
-Everyone dies when all living survivors are hooked at the same time. (or within 10 seconds of it).
-Survivors move to the next hooking-stage when hooked while a new survivor gets hooked.With those 3, we would've (I think) perfectly covered the concept of camping, even with guaranteed survivor location information still in-tact.
@BlackReaper 's suggestion is also very handy and a cool alternative. It makes tunnelling useless as it costs so much time to wait out a death if someone else manages to rescue them. You will however still be forced to go to a hook even when the killer is standing right next, but if you succeed, you've pretty much won for your team.
If a fully functional mechanic revolving the 3rd variable; "Guaranteed survivor location information", then that would indeed need re-spawning/teleportation, or something of the sorts.
But it's indeed the 3rd variable that is the only way to prevent camp bullying.
When speaking of Solving Camping, we're talking here about using the strategy of camping to get anymore than the kill you camp.Solving the third variable would even prevent the killer from getting his hooked. Thought that may either be a good thing or a bad thing.
-
@SenzuDuck said:
You really can't "Solve" camping.Some people will camp regardless of any incentives not to do so.
You simply can't stop it regardless of mechanics introduced, negative effects on the killer, bonus bloodpoints.
The majority of people camp to ruin someones experience and they're already doing that and losing out on bloodpoints during the match to do so.
It's actually pretty easy to solve camping.
Without: (the 2 highlighted)
-Hooking Phases
-Phase time
-Guaranteed survivor location informationyou literally cannot camp in any shape or form.
-
@NoShinyPony said:
With unlimited amount of hook time and removal of slugging, the killer loses ways to put the survivors under pressure. I still don't see how you'd like to make up for that.Don't get me wrong, it's great when members of the community take so much time to think about how this game could be improved but I don't see it working.
See the Death-Efficiency link. We use that to simultaneously balance the better hook-play-style experience.
In short; the killers have more time to kill, (which they'll now need), but the survivors are less hurt by the death of a teammate.
-
Instead of the player re-spawning in a random location, the player would respawn on a random hook.
I'm not totally against that. In fact;
The Pressure hook.
When hooking a survivor on a Pressure hook, the survivor will slowly become wrapped in the entity's matter like the reverse birth of a butterfly. Meanwhile a progress bar instead of the normal hook bar appears, slowly filling. The aura of all hooks are revealed.
When the progress bar is full, the hook that the survivor is looking at will quickly wrap up in a human-shaped cocoon and the survivor teleports to that hook, which breaks and allows the survivor to escape. The previous hook's cocoon slowly disappears.
Is very similar
One could see it as you pull the hook instead of saving the person. The moment when that'd happen, the hooked survivor would move to another hook.
Moving survivors to a different location is tackling:
"-Hooking Phases
-Phase time
-Guaranteed survivor location information"the third variable, which is also a valid approach. The question is, how do you conceptually validate such a thing?
-
I find the event pretty interesting and it made players behave with high self-awareness.
The only thing that needs an adjustment is the amount a killer receives when breaking a Vessel, to the degree that we see a 4-1 queueing ratio.
Other than the long queue-times caused by that, I really like it.
-
@NeaKarlsson said:
just reverse the latest patch.
since you only get the points if YOU escape everyone just hides, and tries to go for the hatch. nobody saves you anymore because they dont want to lose their Vessel. its literally unplayable right now
it changed it from teamplay for the good of all survivors to selfish vessel camping and hiding while doing nothing just to get your own points which just makes this game even less fun than it already is.
reverse it and maybe lower it to 15 points but this right now is just ridiculous... you get rewarded for selfish behaviour and get punished for helping.For a temporary event, I find that quite interesting. I had a match against a clown where all 4 survivors kept hiding instead of doing the last gen, because they knew whoever would be caught would likely be the last hook.
Everyone started quite carefully poking gens and hiding, only slowly progressing through the last needed generator.
You don't experience things like that too often. People play very self-consciously. -
@Ticon said:
This event sucks. Can’t play due to lack of killers playing. Can’t believe they haven’t done anything to fix this problem.I’ll go play my other games.
I think the event is actually great game-play wise and very fun for the most part. The only problem is the problem with the queue times which simply is caused by getting 1 single variable wrong, being the points gained when breaking a vessel.
Just the change in 1 number would solve all that.
-
@Funbag5 said:
Sorry I don't have a lot to say but what if when you hook a second person the struggle phase is forced to start on the first person if they are still hanging there?So everybody who is hanging progresses to the next stage upon someone else being hooked?
I don't see anything wrong with that gameplay-wise. Could actually be very healthy.
Coming to think of it, that might actually address everyone's fear about them being ignored on the hook because there's presumably "no pressure" to save them, but done in a very healthy manner.
That's some excellent thinking work right there! I wish I could highlight your comment.
-
RNG based = a nope, even if you have some degree of control over how big the chance is.
The only reason why the self-unhooking RNG "works", is because it is only used in situations where it wouldn't have mattered if it'd fair or not, since you would've died otherwise anyways.
With this suggestion that wouldn't be the case.
-
That would definitely help fix the long survivor queue times.
-
@fcc2014 said:
@MandyTalk i just played fixed 5 generators killer dc and i got no progress, bloodpoints, or credit towards my daily. This happened 3 minutes ago.That was intended. It was mentioned during the Dev stream.
-
@Orion said:
So you want "hook and forget" to become the default, but you don't want to provide any incentive for doing so? How do you suppose that's going to work, exactly?
We don't need an incentive. It is normally the least efficient way to win, but due to how survivors get multiple chances, the most fun one.
The only problem is that losing isn't fun for the killer, where as the hook and forget is not inherently un fun for the killer.This is why (Green Headline 2 Orange headline: "Compensating for the otherwise killer nerf"), we make it the strong play-style by balancing the game accordingly.
Here is the key trick: If they cannot camp and should forget, it would also be preferable if they didn't have to think much about tunneling either.
With death-efficiency solved, they can truly play the killer the way that can be enjoyed by all sides; causing havoc across the board, fun for the killer as it's a winnable strategy for which they don't have to feel guilty and for the survivors as their match no longer has to finish after 1 minor mistake/slip.
-
@Master said:
Its way easier to get a SWF genrush team thoughMy guess is, the majority plays solo. SWF is typically stronger at anything.
-
That's exactly the mentality that brought about camping as an issue. Survivors didn't want to bite the bullet, so instead they made camping worthwhile for Killers and blamed Killers for taking advantage of their bad plays.
I think OP views it as a fun issue, not as a balance issue. Reminding him that something un fun is balanced isn't going to do much.
Aside from that, the balance of camping is not in your hands when you are the player being camped, making you the victim, despite knowing how to tackle it.
This wouldn't have been a problem if a functional ranking system was in place as it would match you with survivors who have similar amounts of knowledge, but without it, there's no growing out of the issue of camping. -
Yes it would be theoretically possible, but as I mentioned before a proper ranking sysstem would kill teh game (in its current unbalanced state)
I just showed you that balance in irrelevant; it can be as unbalanced as a wheel chair versus a sprinter. Nothing gets broken. Everything works fine.
It doesn't matter whether survivors can fly, whether they can kill the killer, whether the killer has a nuke. We can create a functioning ranking system regardless and have it select only the best players to reach the top ranks. -
DO you really believe that players will continue playing the game if at rank 1 there is a 200% speed buff? Because thats what it will feel like. Rank 1 will be nurse exclusively basically
I don't think you're getting my point, lol.
It doesn't matter whether the game is in a state in which the killer always 4k's or whether the survivors ALWAYS escape. We could still create a competitive ranking system that would allow only the best killers and survivors to climb to the top, again; regardless of the state the game is in.The trick is in how you measure scores.
If a group of 10 people in a wheel chair and 10 sprinters participate in a 100 meter sprint contest, with a proper ranking system, you'd still be able to have the wheelchair opponents win against the sprinters, even in this example in which the wheelchair participants can't even move at half the speed of the sprinters.It's not about imbalance. It's about measuring scores.
-
Thats an issue of the ranking system, but the ranking system cant be fixed before the game gets balanced or everything will fall apart
Nothing will fall apart. With the proper ranking system, game balance is not relevant. The job of a ranking system simply is to determine who the best player is. You can do that easily even if there is a perk that increases your movement-speed by 200%, making the game unbalanced.
-
Yeah we saw that during the official tournament
The problem there isn't balance. It's the way they calculate what counts as a victory. It's more of a score issue than a balance issue.
-
The game cant be competitive with all the balance issues, so they decided to took the grindy way to keep players
The game can be competitive, even with balance issues.
-
Introducing Sections
Rank: 20 to 16 Newcomer
Rank: 15 to 11 Beginner
Rank: 10 to 6 Expert
Rank: 5 to 1 ProfessionalI think Heartstone has a very similar ranking system and I think they prove to work.
Although I disagree with the emblem section;
Emblem 1: Lightbringer/Gatekeeper
A killer can get 4 gate-keeper points through the regression of generators and the survivors could infinitely gain lightbringer points by working on the regressed generators.
(+4 points survivors, +4 points killer)
Emblem 2: Unbroken/Devout
If a game lasts long enough (about 9+ minutes) a survivor can get 2 PIPs in this category and the Killer can get 4 by the hands of teamwork.
(+2 points survivor + 4 points killer)
Emblem 3: Benevolent/Malicious
2 hooking and hitting every survivor 3 times in total (without it being healed back up. 2 times in the beginning and 1 time after . a hook) gives a killer a minimum of 2 points and 4 points if the killer 4k's, which is beneficial net, for both sides.
Survivors can infinitely farm Benevolence points by getting points for healing, meaning they can always guarantee to have 4 points.
(+4 points survivor, +4 killer)
Emblem 4: Evader/Chaser
Both can be farmed to 4 points for both factions through triggering the chase mechanic and deliberately letting the points stack up.
(+4 points survivor, +4 killer)
As you can see, the killer and survivors aren't really enemies. In fact: Cooperating is often the preferable play-style if you consider gaining as many emblems as possible winning.
This is the problem; DBD is a football match where both teams can win as long as they score 2 goals.
What we should do instead of using the current emblem system is; making the killer and survivors TRUE OPPONENTS.It's actually quite comical that players can be banned from teaming with the killer, since this is actually not gamethrowing; it's playing to your win-condition, but since this win-condition is embarrassing, it's punished unnaturally instead.
So what should we do instead of using the current emblem system? The answer is pretty easy;
In an assymetrical competitive game, we should create a system that TRULY matches 2 teams against each other. When 1 team is gaining, the other is losing.
This then of course gives people some sort of score. Because asymmetrical games can be very unbalanced, we want to create a ranking system that functions EVEN IF THE GAME IS UNBALANCED. So how do we do that?
Step 2 is by ONLY ranking killers against killers when it comes to their score and only ranking survivors against survivors when it comes to their scores.
In this world, the killer plays against the survivor and both have every incentive to obliterate the opponent. Teamwork is impossible, but even if survivors score, say 80% on average and killers 20% on average, killers would only have to score higher than 20% on average to climb, where as survivors would have to score above 80% on average to climb.That is the formula. Killers versus survivors, while using the scores obtained to only measure killers vs killers and survivors vs survivors.
Additionally; we can use such a relative ranking system to "Solve the Solo VS SWF GAP" on a ranking based level! Do I mean partially? No; I mean absolutely;
Arpad Elo, Hungarian-American physics professor has the answers;
The idea of ELO, is that a certain faction/person is expected to win more, which we factor in.
Similar in our 80-20 example above, we here factored in that survivors would score significantly higher points most of the time, which simultaneously forces them to exceed that expected amount in order to climb.If we take rank 2 and expect SWF's to score 50% more points ON AVERAGE, then we make their wins only 66.67% of that of a solo, nullifying their rank-wise advantage. Scoring lower points is also 50% more damaging.
I can cover how 3 of the 4 emblems can be used to create a truly opponent structure but to make this reply not too long I'll leave it out.
In short: We basically do what weightlifters do: If you weight more, we expect to carry more! Climbing is not that easy (:
-
The real question here is; how did they manage to reach rank 1 anyways?
Maybe they are indeed learning and simply have less hours than you?
Something must be wrong with the ranking system~ -
The issue might just have been fixed.
-
The bloodweb actually works great for the most part. It's only the way perk tiers work + how many of them you can get per bloodweb + at what level teachables are unlocked that undermines the bloodweb for a lot of players.
That would be the only thing that needs fixing if the Devs consider it to be a problem. -
Dying light, good one! Together with Autodidact, (& perhaps no mither), these 3 perks can some times prove to be more of a net-cost than to be a net-benefit.
I think the evidence is clear that people don't want perks that can put them behind more than they help them.
-
If the event is bugged for an extended period of time, you might possibly see the event-duration extended. Not sure.
-
Whispers is fine. It's meant to help you find that 1 survivor that refuses to come out. And as survivor you can dodge it so long as you know the killer has it, which you can usually tell when they are always near you. Not to mention if it's a situation where you are the last one left and hatch has not spawned then the killer should get the 4k. If the survivor was going to outplay them they would have done it sooner.
The new Surveillance is a good perk, but I don't think it's bad design. It requires the killer to kick the gen, and you can bait the killer to waste a lot of time by just tapping gens that were kicked with little progress.
I agree that the perks are fine in the current state of the game. But here is the slightly less subtle part; They would completely not be okey if the game ... X.
In this case, X for surveillance would be any game in which the survivor count would be too low, or in which stealth would be vital to survival.
Similar to Whisperers, we assume that when there is only 1 person, all they have to do is find a hatch. In any more complex version of the game in which a 1 person / perhaps 2 person team has still a valid role to play, whispers would ruin their experience, mandating that stealth and low-survivor-counts never see any real play as their own state of the game.
You can look at it from a killer perspective too; Doctor of the weaker killers is also limiting such directions of the game, as he has an overabundant ability to track, making him too powerful in certain alternative, yet realistic stages of the game, thus limiting design and balance choices.
-
@Tsulan said:
Monstrous shrine?
#########? What's wrong with the most useless killer perk?We're not discussing whether it's Overpowered or Underpowered. We're discussing whether it's problematic game-design.
I don't consider NOED bad game-design, although it might be over-powered relative to other killer perks, there are a million ways in which you can turn an end-game buff into a healthy mechanic.
Monstrous shrine however cannot be healed. The number increase that you get from hooks is so low, because you wouldn't want it higher as the only thing that'd promote is camping. (And if buffed high enough even among the higher tier players.) The perk in it's design cannot be properly balanced without becoming toxic.
Similar to how whispers is problematic, as it kills off any real dynamic progression a 1 person team could achieve, limiting us to a very specific state the game needs to be in, in order for it to be balanced.
-
I personally don't DC, I would suicide. However...
...hopes they move off to get someone else?To make it easy; What would you prefer?
To be able to judge for yourself that you're not going to be rescued and choose the easy way out (which again is an abnormality)
Or being slugged for 200+ seconds, while waiting out your inevitable death?If you believe you won't be unhooked (and my guess is you'll more often guess wrong then right), then what is your problem with being able to choose whether to pick the easy way out?
The truth is, people will unhook you. If they don't, everyone dies on a hook at the same time. The longer they wait, the less they can progress the team, because the less amount of people are doing gens while the killers stacks his hooking counts slowly moving to 12.
No.. Just like it wouldn't compel any survivor to ever save you and leave you there as bait for the killer then t-bag you at the exit knowing you are about to finish the match on the hook.... 10 minutes later.
They would be compelled even when baited. The timer compels you undeniably. You aren't mandated by the game to do so, but you surely are compelled.
True. I just have worry about me EVER being unhooked, also I have to worry about WHEN I'm going to be unhooked. There is no urgency for the survivors ever to come and get me.
Do you have this worry when being slugged? You should actually feel less worried, because the killer has to pick up someone first, allowing others to save you if you were still hooked.
So to summarise:
People will quickly unhook you. They will only delay an unhook if it's unsafe (or when they are bad), but in the cases where your teammates are that bad, you would've normally died. Instead now you live on, with full control of deciding whether you believe your team will be 4ked and hooked or whether someone will pull one off.
The only times you'll get one-hooked is where everybody gets 4 hooked. Unlike in vanilla, you'll in every other case get a second and third chance.
They can also escape without you, but a timer wouldn't have helped you there; quite the opposite.It's this idea that you need to understand; if they don't rescue you, they will be 4 hooked, meaning that they will rescue you.
-
Survivors being immobile.... okay can be compared but theres still huge differences... on one hand you have a gamble that can give a huge amount of reward on the other you most likely waste time hooking to have the guy saved in a matter of seconds but that hooked survivor is closer to being sacraficed...
I think you're getting closer to the understanding here; now. The comparison here is not about the power in between the 2. Slugging is singlehandedly more powerful; but you see the effect that I'm trying to illustrate;
When someone is rendered immobile and their timer is irrelevant, it is beneficial to heal/save them rather than to wait things out.
Now, see it like this: There still is some sort of a timer; the hooking phases. For every time a survivor is hooked this "timer" ticks, slowly coming to an end.
While this timer ticks (as the killer attacks and hooks defencelessly) you preferably have AS MANY survivors mobile rather than hooked.Similar to slugging, your preferred behaviour remains: Save as soon as you CAN. but the "CAN", is now more healthy as it only includes a safe-unhook.
If you understand that, then you understand my argument as for why the idea of removing the hook timer is initially so deceiving and makes you believe that you are no longer compelled to unhooked.
A lot of people fall for this one and believe that no timer = not being compelled. They will have to learn it the hard way (: -
@Orion said:
Option 1:
People who perform unsafe unhooks are put in the Dying state and become afflicted with the Broken status effect for the remainder of the trial. Unsafe unhooks are redefined to "An unhook where the person who was unhooked is hit by the Killer after less than 10 seconds".Survivors will go back to working on generators like they're supposed to, and camping will be punished by the Survivors, just like it's supposed to be.
The issue at had here is not that camping is imbalanced. (It's weak at a normal-high level). It's that it's un fun and a frequent point of complaining at lower ranks.
I don't see how this would solve this.
As a measurement against safe-unhooking, I think it's unfair and maybe unintuitive; in cases where someone will nearly reach the next hooking stage, it's beneficial to unsafely unhook someone. If the Anti-Unsafe-Unhooking mechanic were to exist to purely tackle farming/bad-behaviour unhooks then it wouldn't properly address that.Option 2:
Sacrifice speed is increased by 0.5% for every meter the Killer is away from the hook (starting at 16 meters). Killer becomes Hasted for a short time every time they hook a different Survivor. Killer also gains increased recovery speed from both hits and misses for a short time after hooking any Survivor; this effect is strongest in a 2-meter radius around the hook, where recovery is instantaneous, but distance from the hook does not otherwise affect this status.This causes a same type of unintended awkwardness with the killer being near hooks, for whatever reason we deem valid. Why should the killer not be allowed to stay close to a hook? Why should this area be so punishing?
It is somewhat similar to the emblem system, where it keeps a certain playstyle in but tries to artificially punish it at the same time. I'm generally against such solutions and find them clunky."Hook and forget"
That's the right mindset. And exactly that bit. But we want to ensure there is nothing there was to gain by forgetting in the first place; to eliminate exactly that.
-
Not at all... unhooking will always be faster then picking up.... you hook the first survivor most likely you'll have 3 gens pop if you slug you can possibly stop a gen or 2... I never 4 slug survivors (and unless their potatoes you cant really 4 slug) i always use the tactic to slow down the survivors momentum
Meaning I'll slug 1 find another chase them and that forces the 3rd to grab the slug... Making only 1 doing gens
I'm not sure if you still track the purpose of the comparison. The comparison with slugging was to prove that if a person is rendered immobile, you are still mandated to heal/save them, even if their timer is mostly irrelevant/non-existent as the killer will work his way towards a 4 hooked/4 slugged.
-
Hooking is in no way shape or form close to slugging and never will be.... when the killer hooks its more of a time waster for the killer because of the pick up and walk and hook. Slugging is a gamble because you can gain momentum if the survivor stays on the ground for a decent amount of time but if someone is there it could cause you to lose momentum and start from scratch you didn't hook the person...... like I said hooking is and never will be close to slugging and vice versa...
It wasn't about the extra momentum from slugging by not having to walk to the hook here was it?
The similarity was that both do have a (mostly) irrelevant timer and in both cases do survivors quickly go for the saves/heals. They don't ignore them because otherwise they get 4 slugged/ or in this case 4 hooked.
See the similarity?
-
@Dwight_Confusion said:
The idea behind perks is to get a varied play style...Exactly, which is why a perk that is for so many people part of their basic need of making the game enjoyable, should be part of their base-kit. Could've prevented all the awkwardness with older versions off BT and could've prevented the entire Mending mechanic. (:
-
I still dont see how slugging should even be mentioned in a conversation about "fixing" camping.... survivors already have more then enough tools to combat slugging... UB, insta heals, the ability to recover to 95% and have 3 other people able to just tap em up is enough to combat really.... not too mention tenacity and no mither as well.....
The reason why slugging has to be solved is because we're basically making hooking weaker for killers, while buffing them appropriately. How can we buff killers while keeping their strongest strategy on the same power-level?
Slugging is mentioned because of this compensation.this idea does not fix the problem and causes new ones
It does not solve camping? It doesn't teleport the killer away obviously, but it nullifies it being anything productive throughout the game at any skill-level from Rank 20 to 1. I'd call that solving.
You can not play killer and think "Let's camp". It's no longer a concept to you, because we just removed the single variable that made it one.
As PiiFree brought up;
Only at the end when the exit gates are open, can you conceive of the idea of camping, and this is also where it's accepted or at times mandated. We even switched up that game. -
You are assuming all the survivors know what the killer is doing...
...assuming the survivors are all or will be playing smart.I'm not. I'm saying that this covers camping, and it also targets tunnelling insofar that it's by the mistake of the survivor to go for that unsafe unhook.
The link is what covers tunnelling.
A general indicator for not getting your mate tunnelled: Somebody else gets hit, but you can't see them/hear the TR as you're going for the save.I might aswell DC then if I don't see anyone coming to save me
You could ######### on hook, but if DC'ing is your preferable choice (:
Again, this hooking system is similar to slugging, but isn't as bad as slugging as the killer has to pick someone up, meaning that if you indeed get to spend a long time on the ground (or in this case on the hook) then it's your teammates fault.
Every issue with having to wait is worse with slugging as it's here.Which you don't really know until you've searched the whole area near the hooked person looking for the insidious killer, or the hill billy / nurse on the otherside of the map who comes back a couple of seconds after the unhooking.
Well played on the killer's part. But this time the game didn't compel you to play into it.
The issue I see with the idea is the survivor side of it. It would feel more hopeless getting caught early without the incentive to stay around. I don't want to be found first and hooked to sit there for 5 minutes
You will not have to worry about not getting unhooked. Remember, it doesn't matter that the timer is gone;
We didn't break someone's incentive to rescue people, and the best time to do is remains; AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. This is the META strategy. The only change is that instead of possible meaning unsafe unhooks, it means the moment you can go for a safe unhook, instead of it being unsafe.Just ask yourself this:
Would you rather finish a generator or heal someone being slugged? (Generally the timer rarely ever goes to 0 there either, making it practically the same.)The Devs would have to give a big reward to that player staying on the hook and not DCing, otherwise there would be no point.
I won't cover all of it here, but the rewarding system in DBD is broken and inaccurate. Creating a team-based rewarding system. (How many gens were finished: How many people were injured, how many died, etc) would make it irrelevant that you are the person camped/slugged/hooked, etc.
-
Slugging is a strat to stall the game and prolong repair times.
Slugging is a strat that allows you to not having to deal with the game (Ds and walking as you mentioned), up until the game is over.
That is why slugging should indeed only be for momentum. (Meaning that at 1 point, players should be able to revive themselves from the dying state.)
You can still get momentum, but you can no longer use it to having to deal with the game until the very end.It would effectively create a new "hook standoff" where the last 3 survivors would hang around the last hooked survivor waiting for the Killer to make a mistake and vice-versa.
As linked; the issue of safe-zones has to be addressed, meaning that survivors can no longer escape "for free" when the exit gates are open and they avoid their opportunity of escape.
This grants the killer the ability to (succesfully) chase healthy survivors even if the exit gates are open.If it is believed that killers are too stubborn to chase another survivor even with that, and survivors are too stubborn to leave, then it could be possible to activate the timer as it would normally, as you correctly point out;
The reason why the removal of the variable works is that the killer is compelled to leave because of generator progression, but in the end, there's no longer something they'd loose. If such an issue would become a problem then an adjustment could solve that last piece of the puzzle.
-
@George_Soros said:
There is a subtle but fatal scientific error in your otherwise very well thought over concept. The best I can explain it is by responding directly to your discussion title:"SO YOU WANT TO TRULY SOLVE CAMPING?"
No.
A lot of members do. It's not an ignorable issue.
Complaints become more valid based on frequency and always tell that something is inherently wrong about something else, but may not always communicate what exactly and in which manner. -
@Might_Oakk said:
Ruin: Heavily punishes new players with little effect on veteran players.Facts.
-
@Dwight_Confusion said:
I don't really think any of them are too strong per say.I think that they need to shake up the ones people don't use... which they've been doing recently... and create more varied perks.
No perk should be above 33% use. I would assume Self Care is around that mark.
I think self-care tells a different story;
Self-care's pick-rate tells us that the survivor experience at it's base state is just more fun when you have basic self-sufficiency. Even when people have a particular built, they will shove in a self-care anyways.That is why I believe self-care should be base. (And killers need a more healthy version of hex ruin into their kit, or anything that grants them more time, while not hurting lower-survivor count teams.)
-
I patrolled outside of terror radius not really looking for anyone.
The survivors control whether you can tunnel or now. If you don't bother actually finding someone, then there's no reason for them to unhook yet, while they keep doing gens, you lose.
The survivors will also control where you'll be able to find them. There's no more timer that mandates that you should go for an unsafe safe.Removing the timer from hooks doesn't negate tunneling as a concept; only removing differences between different hooks stages does, but it does negate the killers ability to choose to tunnel, because that's inherently in the hands of the survivors without the timer.
You think so?.... How many survivors do you think are going to wait more then 2 minutes on the hook for a save they think may or may not come?
Here's the difference between being hooked at a timer and being hooked without a timer:
1 forces you out of the game if nobody unhooks you.
2 let's you choose whether you actually want to leave the game. You can choose to live on longer.Don't make the mistake of thinking that a killer will still have time to stick around a hook; the killer will be chasing, and in both cases is unhooking someone as fast as possible the best way to go about things. The only difference is that the only time you have to go for a save is when the killer is indeed not camping.
-
A Camper should never be able to pip, therefore should never be able to rank up and therefore should never be a problem for higher skilled players.
I'll leave what "should" up to you (:
I view camping solely as a fun issue, not a balance issue.How would your solution handle "self-unhook attempts"? Are you able to unhook yourself 6 times until you finally die? Can you just unhook 5 times (wish me luck daddy) and then wait for an unlimited amount of time for the unhook and repeat the process on next hook?
Undecided on that. A little bit of experimenting or wrestling with the idea should give us the answer.
This would promote gen rush and slugging
Slugging is dead, remember. (Check Green Headline 2, Orange headline: slugging. It also doesn't promote gen-rushing barely any more as a killer leaving the hooks causes genrushing. Not only that, but with the talked about balance compensations, such gen-rushes wouldn't be as effective as they are now.
There would be no pressure in unhooking anymore
Is there pressure on survivors when survivors are slugged? If the answer is yes, then your statement is wrong. The timer when it comes down to slugging is also mostly irrelevant.
What would happen to perks like Monstrous Shrine?
I remember someone coming up with an ingenious suggestion of turning Monstrous Shrine into a perk that gives you a buff that repeats itself for every-time you hang someone in the basement.
-
Yeah, if you get hooked, you can die if the bar goes down, but if they save you, you can be hook one more time and if you get the 3 try you die like right now.
Ah, I understand it. So to take your example 80-100 seconds, you'd be able to hang for a duration of 99x3 seconds in total, which is a net buff.
In your example, the total seconds are lower than 120 seconds, meaning that preventive camping would be worse, but if you'd even be able to get someone of the hook, they'd have their entire bar reset, completely obliterating the idea of tunneling and if pulled of successfully also camping.
I actually find your suggestion surprisingly interesting!
-
@fcc2014 said:
Camping, Tunneling, Hook Swarming, Body Blocking etc are all part of the game. People may not like or agree with these strategies but they do in some scenarios work. Just learn to play around it. If the killer camps knock out as many generators as possible. If the killer tunnels don't rescue till the last minute with a borrowed time user or plan to body block. If survivors swarm hooks proximity camp.The problem isn't that it's a problem balance wise. It's a problem fun-wise. We can justify a lot of inherently un fun things throughout various games and still call them balanced. The question is whether we should.
When people frequently bring up a complains, ignoring it will cause the complaints to go on for infinity, whatever reasons we have to justify ignoring it.
Addressing the problem improperly causes complaints elsewhere.
Addressing the problem fundamentally and universally will eliminate such complaints entirely.That's the art of it (:
-
I see what you said but here its goes an idea, if you hang an a survivor and its has like 80 sec or 100 sec and if nobody save him, he dies?, and if they get him out he will have another shot to get hooked. Sounds legit for me, right now if you get hook you can go through the whole 3 states, so if we make the 3 states into a single one for each time you get hook, you have the chance of die in the first two, So save the survivor hooked is a priority and still have another chance to be hooked without diying.
I'm not sure if I understand what you mean.
Do you mean that you want 1 bar that doesn't cut parts off the timer depending on stages? -
Well but the classic genrush SWF now dont have to rush the hook, they can wait for an appropiate moment when walking to the next gen. And no, it cant happen that multiple go down due to voice comms, if a killer chases you they can unhook anyway.
We should indeed rarily see multiple people hanging on the hook. That was part of the thought experiment to show that it would still all work.
However, with death-efficiency solved (as linked above), we shouldn't see the same extreme results, even what it's with the inherently problematic SWF mixed into the SoloQ.I only compared to slugging, my point was the hostage situation on the hook. What is supposed to happen in this scenario? Imagine a leatherface reving the chainsaw infront of the hook or survivors refusing to unhook their mate.
Suicide. Camping can only get you 1 kill in total and that would be the 1 kill you deserve. (If it's not a LF then with BT, you might actually still be able to save them; with open exit gates and all)
-
One that was mentioned above about not having a time limit. People not being saved and having to sit on the hook the whole match, in the hopes to be saved at the end or not. Not fun.
There are a few things that aren't mentioned in this post, but assume that killers have received their compensating buff;
You could consider killing yourself on the hook if you don't believe things are progressing. (The better version of being slugged)
Or you could actually go as far as saying; survivors can unhook themselves after 120(+) seconds. (Which would replace the attempt escape bar) Meaning that if it takes too long for teammates to do anything, you'd be able to free yourself.
There are plenty of opportunites with a healtheir hooking system.One other issue is just... It doesn't stop tunneling.
We cover camping here. The anti-tunneling post is linked. However; even this alone can solve tunneling. If the killer is close enough to return in time, then why would you unhook? The other 2 survivors should be out of reach and the killer is forced to find other survivors. He/she cannot wait.
It makes it so that if you get tunneled, it's probably the fault of your teammates, where previously it was the "fault" of the killer.It isn't a bad idea, but I think it wouldn't end up turning out the way you wanted. There is no incentive to go save the survivor at all when there is no time pressure to do so. Why bother? Especially if the killer starts patrolling and not really looking for anyone.
Exactly. Only IF HE DOESN'T look for anyone. Beautiful isn't it (:
Because otherwise you have all reason to save your teammates.That would be the worst as a survivor.. to sit there on the hook the whole match.. People probably would start DC'ing if they were on the hook for 2 minutes and still didn't see anyone coming over to save them.
It would be the healthier brother of what we currently call slugging, but again, this time if you hang as long, it's the fault of your teammates, and them completely. They either are impatient or DC during their normally unsafe unhook in vanilla.
-
@Bravo0413 said:
Now I can agree with a new sacraficial system (honestly just do gens but a change or at least a test for something new wouldn't hurt)...... don't mess with slugging ----> it's a way for killers to slow the game down not many even use the tactic and because you use zubat (some one who has nearly 6000 hours in the game really?) Doesn't mean it needs nerf or change because camping is changedIt's about how you look at it. Slugging is a vital strategy, not that it is really healthy game-design, it avoids an otherwise terrible main way for killing, which hasn't been balanced properly because of such an unequal learning curve.
At low ranks, survivors are worse than their killer counterparts with the same amount of hours, meaning that survivors need to be "OP" in order to "Balance" the game. In order for killers to compensate for survivors "having to be OP", they try to avoid the main way of killing with whatever methods they can. Slugging is the manifestation of that.
I don't see it as a problem to remove slugging as a viable way of killing everybody, if we fix the main way through which killers can kill.
I only see removing slugging as a problem when the learning curve is unequal and killers have no way to compensate for an otherwise broken state of the game due to their main route of killing begin insufficient.