ArecBalrin
ArecBalrin
About
- Username
- ArecBalrin
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
It would mean Pop Goes The Weasel would become excessively-strong, unless it was nerfed. That's the obvious bit.
Ruin would lose marginal utility, but not enough to make up for the fact that overall it can be equipped to hinder gen progress until the first person gets hooked and from then on Ruin will practically be in effect all-game.
How are survivors supposed to respond to this? They could rediscover the playstyles they've ignored for two and a half years, in order to not get in chases and not get hooked to begin with, but there is a perverse incentive to let anyone who is downed before the first gen is finished to die on the hook: they are feeders for the killer and can't carry their own dead-weight.
I personally feel the devs bottled on implementing reasons for survivors to turn on each other and it's something they should have done more forcefully about a year ago. It would have been an important step in closing the gap between solo and SWF. Now though, there is more demand for survivors to be given means of co-operating. The only ones who will engage in mechanics that nudge them towards betraying others is 2-3 person SWF, when they single-out people not in their group.
-
@Usui said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/614106#Comment_614106
Cry me a river, killer nerfs were NOTHING in comparison to what's been happening for over a year now to survivors. Daily reminder NURSE STILL EXISTS!
I'm seeing the same claim being repeated and having given you an invitation to post evidence, you just ignore that and keep repeating it. So it's just empty words.
-
@Usui said:
They don't want you telling them how incredibly easy this game is for killers (and only getting easier with more survivor nerfs, map "balance" etc) They just want to continue camping, making survivors upset and salty, then coming here to stroke their ego.
A reminder that survivors deleted their own thread listing their 'nerfs' out of embarassment when it was dwarfed by the killers own list.
Go ahead and start it again here if you're that confident. I'll make another killer one to compare it with, using whatever rules you choose when determining what counts as a 'nerf'.
-
I tried it for the first six months.
Six months of survivors edging every advantage gave me a clarity about humanity that will never leave me. I didn't need the post-game chat(introduced later) to understand.
-
@My_Farewell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613895#Comment_613895
Difference is that not all survivors are 4 swf squad so they don't know what the others did, while killers are on their own and are aware of their progress.
Not always they decide to ignore totems, sometimes they need to prioritize gens because the game is not going so well for them.
Again, gens are a must BY DEFAULT.
And just for the record, i don't have anything against noed. I just find it funny when people complain about Adrenaline but defend Noed at the same time.
Ok, why am I still hearing this zombie-argument a year after it first spawned? It's true that not all survivors play optimally and in SWF premades; it doesn't matter though because killers are not judged by the same standards. This is a complete non sequiter to the discussion we were having.
The other argument, that someone can't criticise how Adrenaline works in the game whilst there is NOED, is the basement-level standards I was criticising earlier. These are appallingly bad-faith arguments.
You know exactly what is wrong with it and don't need it spelled out.
-
@My_Farewell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613871#Comment_613871
Again, gens are a must objective for survivors, totems ARE NOT a must objective for the killer.
Can you see the difference now?
Yes, it's just that you're not really saying anything. Totems are an optional objective, ones which survivors take a risk in ignoring.
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613691#Comment_613691
Closing the hatch is a big part of EGC, what in the world do you mean I’m not talking about it? Do you seriously need data to tell you less survivors are escaping now in a 1v1 than before EGC? Holy hell man, you take being biased to a whole new level. It’s common sense and impossible for it not to be the case. You said yourself all the killer could do before is stand there and force a stalemate. Now they can CLOSE it. It is a 100% fact that the killer benefits and gets more kills now than before. You just seem bent out of shape that it powers the gates. Boo hoo, it still is killer favored overall...a point in which 99.99% of people would agree with. Start new topic saying EGC is heavily survivor sided and see where that gets you if you don’t believe me.
As I said, literally the only benefit that EGC has brought to survivors is a hatch with 0 or 1 gens. Nothing else. As for the non 1v1, this also only benefits the killer. How about you list all the benefits to survivors? Putting survivors on a timer sure as hell doesn’t help them lol.
To sum things up, just because something isn’t as one sided as you’d like it be, doesn’t mean it still doesn’t favor that side.
It's not a big part of EGC at all. Hatch-closing was in it's own PTB and worked perfectly fine without EGC. I also don't 'need data' to tell me anything: you're the one making a claim based on data which you either have no access to or have so far not felt the need to actually share it.
I have talked about EGC plenty of times before and it's largely the same discussion: split between people who don't have an argument and people who think as you do that the most important thing is that '99% of people' agree with you. I don't think group-think is something to be particularly proud of though.
Regarding the rest of your post: I will not repeat myself, you can go read what I said the first time and respond to it properly.
-
@My_Farewell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613844#Comment_613844
So you think that the argument of earning a perk by completing gens (survivors main objective) is flawed?
If you got that opinion then so be it, but i'll let you know something... Protecting totems is not killer's objective, so the only thing that seem flawed to me is your reasoning.
You're not 'letting me know anything'. If a killer decides they have an objective, then they do. There is no reason to accept ideas about what an objective is that are imposed.
It's the miserably low standards of argument I was criticising, but if people cling to them there's not much to say.
-
@My_Farewell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613823#Comment_613823
Still confused, please clarify because doesn't make much sense tbh.
That's the point. I made an argument that is very flawed, to illustrate how easy it is.
-
@My_Farewell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613747#Comment_613747
Survivors need to finish the gens in order to trigger Adrenaline.
You know what takes no skill? Noed. Actually it takes the opposite :)
Anyone can have a discussion based on bottom-scraping standards. Here, let me try:
Killers earn NOED by successfully protecting their totems.
You know what's wrong with that argument. You know what's wrong with your argument. The rest is up to you.
-
It's just not going to happen.
The biggest issue with Trapper is agreed to be the huge set-up that is necessary for his power to work, compared to the substantial risk of there being no pay-off for it. Time is wasted and most of that time is wasted going from trap to trap in the first place, but somehow the time it takes to set a trap was made the scape-goat. We lost one of the better game animations and it was replaced by the ugly thing we have now.
It didn't even fix the hologram not matching where the trap actually gets placed and placement is also arbitrarily restrictive. Sometimes you can only set it down in a doorway if you're facing the other way, even if it's the exact same spot.
The devs instead had this weird idea of making trap-placement during a chase viable, which it isn't. Currently Trapper enjoys a lot of success in high-ranks it seems, purely because of placebo. He benefits from try-hards over-thinking everything, so they imagine traps are everywhere.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613642#Comment_613642
Lol ummm...let’s see, there’s this thing now where the killer can close the hatch? You see, the killer actually moves a lot faster than the survivor and also doesn’t need to worry about being chased, so they actually have a big advantage in being able to find it first. After closing it, the survivor usually doesn’t have much chance, if the gates are close they literally have no chance. Before EGC, that survivor had a significantly better chance at escaping in a 1v1. But according to your insane logic, less chance of escape = heavily survivor favored lmao.
You seem to believe that just because hatch closing powers the gates, that it doesn’t favor the killer, completely oblivious to the fact killers are getting far more kills than they used to in end game. Once again according to your logic, more kills = survivor favored.
As I said earlier; you know exactly what my point is and that's why you have to selectively focus on something else. You spent most of your post not even talking about EGC, but killers receiving the hatch-close. You also have to frame what my opinions supposedly are, because that's easier than actually having to take note of what I actually post.
Whether there have statistically been more or less kills since EGC was introduced is not something either of us can know, but you seem to want to base an argument on that completely unknown fact. Say we did know though and this still represents a deliberate missing of the point: if kills had increased it says nothing about what the intent of the changes were. The devs were talking about hatch-closing causing the gates to automatically power as soon as the PTB for it was over, far too soon for any data to have been processed; the devs had already made their mind up about it before they had seen what it looked like in the wild.
As you keep asserting this claim about 'more kills' though, there is an onus on you to support it. So go on.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613540#Comment_613540
Did you read the whole thing? The guy posted that EGC heavily favors survivors. My reply is just saying that that’s crazy, and that killers have gained a lot by being able to close the hatch now. Claiming it to favor survivors is laughable and makes no sense. Do you believe EGC is survivor sided as he says?
Well be sure to list what killers gain from EGC. You never got round to that.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613267#Comment_613267
I cherry picked? You made the statement that EGC heavily favors survivors and that is pure nonsense. Nothing in your post backs it up. The 1v1 is heavily killer sided, how can you possibly even dispute this. How do survivors benefit when the killer can close the hatch now, that makes no sense at all. Just because you didn’t get the version of hatch closing that you wanted, does NOT mean it still isn’t killer sided. Come on now. You don’t think there’s a big rise of 4Ks now compared to before pre-EGC? Your gate argument is also so flawed, how in the world do you think it’s easier now for the last survivor to escape than it used to be? Killers gained big time with it and that’s a fact. Sorry but your extreme killer bias is just making you sound ridiculous.
Answering this would just mean repeating what I've already said, as your response is to simply ignore facts and make baseless assertions faster than they can be deconstructed.
-
They're a partial counter-balance to perks like Borrowed Time, DS and Unbreakable: the killer doesn't know if survivors are going to be running them, but if they can't rule them out, they have to still act as if they were being used.
This is how certain perks for both sides benefit even those who aren't using them; because the opposing side can't rule them out even when they aren't actually being used.
Complain about that if you wish, but both sides have them and they are a compromise because of survivors numerous 2nd-chance perks originally not having much in the way of mitigation at all: the circumstances that trigger them were often inevitable, as was the case originally with DS.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613173#Comment_613173
EGC heavily favors survivors?! The only thing survivors gain from EGC is the ability to possibly get hatch with 0 or 1 gen done. That however, pales in comparison to what the killer has gained being able to slam the hatch shut now. Not even remotely close. EGC is very killer sided so I have no idea what you are talking about here.
Yes you do, that's why you cherry-picked so carefully what aspects of EGC to talk about.
Killers had been asking for hatch-closing since day-one because hatch stand-offs were blatantly unfair; survivors finds the hatch first and they win, but killer finds the hatch first and it's a stand-off, in a scenario where the killer hasn't done anything wrong. The survivor who gets the hatch might not have done anything to contribute towards the necessary minimum number of gens done.
When it got to the PTB, this was the closest killers had ever come to having a specific feature that was expressly and notably requested making it into the game, after survivors had dozens over the years. It worked and it was fair, so of course it couldn't go live in that state. The devs were immediately talking about hatch-closing automatically powering the gates, defeating the entire purpose of killers having requested it in the first place. Most maps do not allow for the gates to spawn in a way they can be guarded simultaneously by most killers.
EGC is a total distraction layered over the top of that and doesn't prevent survivors holding a game hostage at all: they can just 99% the gates to hold it off, forcing the killer to do it which is intended because it means conceding the game. It's meant to be humiliating. The devs completely ignored feedback from killers over the EGC PTB, except for how the effect clashes with scratch-marks(something they shouldn't have even needed to be told, as if it was done deliberately).
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613242#Comment_613242
But they did it for applying a malus on the emblem system...
Wait a minute
Yes, the emblem system designed entirely to cater to survivors preferred playstyle, at the expense of killers. It was changed in PTB explicitly to award survivors emblem points in totally irrelevant categories as long as they were stalling the killer and others were doing objectives.
I'm entirely consistent with this: a broken system in the game being used to support other features ends up making them broken.
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613073#Comment_613073
Then what ? If the killer is in hook radius, with no chasing, he s camping right ?
Funny how the status of 'in a chase' is never suggested for anything that might be detrimental to survivors.
That's because the system for detecting 'in a chase' is terrible and the devs have ignored killers complaining about it since release.
-
@DaS_only said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613182#Comment_613182
I have no clue what you talk about but I guess u are mixing stuff up
Oh troll someone else.
-
@DaS_only said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/613173#Comment_613173
Your whole post makes 0 sense.
Because I'm the only person left that reads patch-notes. No wonder I sound like I'm mad.
'Everybody knows' Self-Care was nerfed. 'Everybody knows' base healing was nerfed'. Who needs to bother checking or even bothering to remember simple stuff beyond a few weeks when you can just listen to what everybody else is saying?
-
@Warlock_2020 said:
They just need to add in a benefit to the poor shlub on the hook when the killer stays within 8 meters with no other survivors in the area. That survivor gets a percentage of the bp earned for achievements their team makes while they are hooked. That way they get something for their willingness to not just suicide and get it over with.
I'm sorry, but face camping is purely for harassment purposes. Those who say it is a legit strategy don't understand the use of the word "legit". Just looking at the numbers, it has little chance of success beyond one or two deaths and fully depends on the stupidity of other players. It should be bannable based on the fact it is primarily a way to harass other players.
I think people confuse face camping and the occasional use of camping to secure the kill. Doors open, or survivors swarming the hook are situations where you might try to secure the kill. Throwing the first person on the hook and standing there taunting them is not.
Just about everything you said there is not true for hook-camping but is true for pallet-looping.
-
Nothing exists in vacuum; it's the context that makes something useful as a whole. Even DS in 2016 was fine; the problem was everyone could use it, not just the Obsession and it came after pallets were given the unjustified super-buffs.
I don't buy the 'it's cos Self-Care got nerfed' narrative either, for a simple reason: they never went live. They were tested on the PTB in January for 2.5. When that patch went live, the changes were not included the PTB updated with a reversion of those changes. Yes, survivors have been complaining about something that never happened, what's new?
Healing itself got an indirect nerf when Sloppy Butcher was given the Mangled status-effect a year ago. The base healing time remains 16 seconds, increased to 32 with Self-Care due to it having a -50% off the base-rate.
Adrenaline is very strong now because of EGC, which heavily favours survivors already.
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/604266#Comment_604266
Because it was badly executed. Just add an input that if a survivor is in a chase in the hook radius, the bar regress as normal.
Simple.
There it is again: 'in a chase'.
-
@CornChip said:
I hate how they band-aid problems with perks.
Oh you want a totem counter in the game? Well we put small game in so you dont need one.
Great. Now let me just equip the 40 perks i need into my 4 slots to counter every possible situation.
Thanks BHVR.
They use perks and new killers to 'fix' problems so they don't have to apply remedies to the core game. So they can't add more built-in secondary objectives, lengthen matches or shorten chases, because then Pig using Ruin would be objectively too-powerful, ergo that's the whole reason they designed the Pig and Ruin in that way.
You can't have a totem counter if there's a perk for it; what would be the point of the perk then? They reduced the time it takes to break pallets, so Brutal Strength HAD to be nerfed in order for it to have the same overall effect on gameplay. They wanted to incentivise killers to leave the hook, but made it cost a perk-slot whilst survivors have the aura-read for hooks by default.
The devs once got rid of the killers aura-read for used-hooks and claimed it was a bug, before later saying it was intentional, then later 'fixing' it under bug-fixes in the patch-notes. We never found out which version was true. They obviously experiment, watch the backlash and then make decisions based on the reaction.
We're having to guess at their methods though, because they're not open about anything.
-
If this is happening, then it's the return of a bug that was fixed.
It was fixed when survivors were given more points when a killer disconnects: they're now supposed to get 5k Survival. After that was introduced, survivors started complaining about a bug where if the killer used a certain method to DC, they would not get the points. They already knew about this bug though: they'd been using it on killers for ages and the devs did nothing. It was fixed within a few weeks of it affecting survivors though.
-
Why would I be a survivor?
-
Even if you ask for information that is past or present-tense, it doesn't matter; the answer will always be unhelpful.
We as players are woefully uninformed about the actual state of the game. This is not unusual; it's the case with most games, but so too is players wanting accurate information so they can have informed discussions about balance.
We will never know the point of New-Freddy, beyond getting rid of old-Freddy.
-
I main Trapper so like using Ruin in conjunction with Bloody Coil. No one is getting to the totem without getting injured first.
Other than Trapper though, the killers that get the best use out of Ruin are those who need it the least: Billy, Nurse, Spirit, New-Freddy. Killers with high map-pressure, that benefit from snow-balling.
So why would Wraith, Myers, Ghostface, Hag and others use it? Because to different degrees, they can each be kitted for finding survivors or shortening chases, but it's impractical or impossible to do both. Ruin buys time probabilistically, making up for time lost due to taking ages to find someone or chases that go on for too long due to not having the optimal kit for one or the other.
-
I will camp if my read on the situation justifies it as the best decision.
If I see one survivor, I will chase them, but if I see two: that's two people not doing gens and chasing one gives the other a free-unhook. I'd be a fool to leave the hook in that case. If BBQ reveals one survivor only, then I can't rule-out the other two being not-visible due to being too close and hiding somewhere, so I'll stay put.
When I can't be sure of what's going on, it's best to leave because everyone might be doing gens. It's often the failure of survivors to make meaningful generator progress that prompts a hook-camp.
-
@Raven014 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/609018#Comment_609018
I'm pretty sure this is a joke. Survivors tend to be serious but killers... have a sense of humor. It's funny. : )
Survivors being serious is the joke.
@Avariku said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/609018#Comment_609018
LMFAO. typical... only killers get to whine about imaginary rules made by salty players.
People get to whine about things that are true. Dogs don't get to whine about postmen biting them.
-
It doesn't work in reverse.
Survivors outright report killers for doing normal stuff. Killers complain about gameplay features that are inconsistent, create perverse incentives or weren't originally in the game but introduced as the result of feedback without being debated or tested first.
-
Whether a secondary objective is added as a core feature rather than a perk, or the generators base repair time is increased; the result is the same. Survivors will simply regain the lead over time because they have persistently received options which extend the length of chases and their own survival chances, at a rate equivalent to two perks a year.
Chases just get longer, but killers do not receive any counter-balancing skill-based means of shortening them.
-
@Omans said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/600884#Comment_600884
It isn't recent at all, though? Nurse and the strength of her addons has been a talking point since I started playing in mid-2018. I read lots of things about the game before I started playing, and a real common thing I read was how nurse (and her addons) is very strong, and in need of a nerf.
So I thought "well, it's a good thing I am going to play on ps4," because all of those threads and comments about Nurse also said that she is only like that on PC.
I played for a time on ps4, enjoyed the game, and decided to get it on PC. Then I started playing against nurses. Initially, I had nothing to say on the subject. I hadn't faced a good nurse on ps4, so my only experience was "what people said" about Nurse. And then I started playing against good nurses, and formed my opinion.
I don't really see the point in you trying to make this about something it isn't. There was no talk about her addons right when she was released? Is that surprising to you...? People were still learning how to play her. When I started playing, though, people were definitely talking about her. People know how to play nurse now. What's more likely to you: that people got better at something that takes time to learn, or that the WHOLE survivor population somehow just became worse and hasn't bothered to learn to play against nurse. The answer is obvious.
I don't know why you are insisting that the hate on nurse and her addons is recent when it isn't.
I'm saying it's recent because it is recent. I never said anything remotely like 'no one was talking about addons when Nurse was released' either, please do not infer that I did.
After Nurse was nerfed, accuracy became more important than distance and addons improved distance but made accuracy worse; this was the consensus in 2016, that last through 2017. It is only in 2018 that comments about addons begin and not because it took two damn years for people to work out how to play her. Those saying her addons were counter-productive in 2017 knew what they were talking about; they were the ones with the most invested in her.
The argument that people have simply got better doesn't wash when one major-pillar of the 'nerf Nurse addons' band-wagon is that 'addons allow even average players to consistently 4k'. They are saying it no longer takes considerably practice and investment to be good with Nurse; the addons make-up the skill-gap now. People can not have it both ways: claiming addons enable sub-par players to be great Nurses whilst others say addons are a problem because people have finally got good with them(2-3 years later?). Only one of those arguments can be true.
-
@Kelmat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/605940#Comment_605940
EGC should really start when the gens are powered, as is consistent with the nonsensical trigger in the hatch-closing scenario.
That would be too much, in my opinion.
It would mean that if the killers gets someone when the gens are done, they will get a certain death.
It would mean survivors have to be careful about when they choose to finish that last gen. The devs intended this kind of thing for the Pig, but fluffed it by making RBTs no real threat due to excessive timers that pause when it's convenient for survivors.
-
I think the EGC epitomises the idea of responding to problems by being seen to be doing something and because people see you did something, they think you fixed the problems.
Killers asked for hatch-closing because hatch stand-offs forced a stalemate in a situation where the killer had done their job, but the survivor that could benefit might not have contributed anything or even been a problem to everyone else. Rather than give us what we asked for, fairness, the devs gave that survivor yet another 2nd-chance after they had lost their 'final' 2nd-chance. Then they packaged it in the EGC as a distraction from what they had just done.
As they let survivors 99% the doors, it does not prevent them holding the game hostage at all; it's just now the killer can be humiliated into opening the door for them. EGC should really start when the gens are powered, as is consistent with the nonsensical trigger in the hatch-closing scenario.
-
It's not the gens; it's the medium they exist in. A lot of feedback suggests increasing the base time it takes to repair a generator or adding more objectives, but it misses the point by acting as if time is a factor for survivors.
Time is the currency of the killer; it is the killer that spends time making every decision. Survivors doing gens are just filing away at that time, but gen progress is a means to an end, not an end in itself beyond getting points.
Killers spend time seeking survivors and then spend time trying to catch them, with decisions made during each determining whether more or less time is lost, as long as someone is doing the objectives uninterrupted.
Gen repair time was increased from 70 to 80 in early 2017, but not long after the length of each hook-phase was increased from 45 to 60 seconds, which more than cancels it out. Survivors have continually been given more options for stalling the killer, whilst gens are done just as fast. If gens simply took longer or there were additional objectives, survivors would regain their huge lead sooner or later.
The issue is there is hardly any contest of skill between the killer and survivor. Every killer except the Nurse is dependent on the survivor making mistakes: playing a virtually perfect game is not enough to get a good, let alone perfect result.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/604679#Comment_604679
I have issues with this because Nurse's addons are not the strongest in the game. Ask a Myer's main why does he not use 'Tombstone Piece'. He will probably say: I can't pip or I won't get any points. Using Nurse's addon provides an interactive gaming experience and it follows the rules of the pipping system that the devs changed to cater to survivors. This is another case of a dog chasing his tail because here we have gamers using killers and addons so they can win and pip at Rank 1 and get a lot of points for and now we are trying to take that away. The pipping system is VERY flawed!
Killers can't do their jobs and survivors don't pip when they survive. WTH? What is the objectives in the game? I honestly don't know. Survivors don't know, and the devs don't know.
You sure as hell won't catch 4 experienced survivors and hook them 3 times with 90% of the killers. That leaves only a few killers than can pip and win at Rank 1.
The devs are pulled in a million different directions and they don't know what to do. They listened to survivors to make the game fun so they changed the pipping system, that immediately disqualified most of the killers at high rank.
I think they should change it so if a survivor survives then they pip. If a killer kills 3 or 4 then he pips (like it used to be)....and not only that, give him POINTS! This way a Myer's main can use his strong addons too and we'll see a variety at rank 1.
Nerfing Nurse is nerfing one of the only viable killers at high ranks and it contradicts what the devs and survivors want killers to do. Let's ask the devs to fix the pipping system and how killers are awarded points so we can see a variety and stop the nerf nurse threads.
This pretty much sums up why the devs should pick a set of standards, communicate clearly what those standards are and then nail themselves to them; no more making exceptions and excuses. Player discussion should be less about what we 'think' and more about whether we have an argument for what aspects of the game are consistent with the rest of it.
@Mister_Holdout said:
- The Nurse add on debate became a thing because over the course of many months, more and more people started to understand the power of her add ons. Content creators making videos titled "Wow! These Nurse add ons are crazy Strong" started popping up. And of course, famous streamers also started playing with these add ons. So, it's not a huge surprise that Nurse's add ons became a hot topic. With that said, Nurse does indeed need her add ons nerfed. Being an experienced Nurse main, I have a lot of insight on how to counter Nurse. And one thing i've learned while playing against red rank Nurses is that she does teeter on the edge of being overpowered. Extra blink and range add ons are probably the biggest offenders to this. The amount of map pressure you gain, coupled with unrivaled chase potential is too much. Survivors in no way can counter a Nurse with extra blinks or max range. That's because these add ons remove the need for a Nurse to be as accurate. And survivors can't counter because no matter how hard they try and juke, the more powerful blink will be able to overcome their movements.
- It doesn't matter if certain survivors hold themselves to a different standard than killers, most of the rational players know that both sides should be as equal as possible. Just because there are survivors that openly admit they want their side to be overpowered doesn't mean the rest feel that way. I know plenty of survivors who understand their side has problems that need addressing. Point is, no side should have something that is totally unbeatable for the other side. That's not healthy for the game imo. Killers don't like playing against 4 man SWF squads that effectively rig the match in their favor, and survivors don't like going against 4 blink Nurses with range who slug all the time. Neither thing is acceptable imo.
I can't accept point #1. To even entertain it as an idea means also having to accept that somehow no one noticed the addons could be used in the way they are now for ages and even after thousands of hours of testing, most agreed addons were a liability in 2017. The more realistic possibility is that there was a relevant change that affected the addons because the addons themselves have never been changed. Not one person has been able to point out to me what that change could be in specifics, I had to go looking myself.
I revisted the over-looked patch 1.9 changes and hit upon a possible explanation, which so far no one seems to want to engage constructively with. Doing so would cause any reasonable person to have to consider that the issue wasn't so much the changes, but the inability of survivors to adapt to them, as part of a long pattern of them not adapting. MoM was changed not so long ago and now no one is running it. They should be doing though, because it was only after months of stubborn play post-nerfs that killers discovered how to make the Nurse what she is now. Instead of adapting, survivors simply stop engaging with any change they dislike.
Since Enduring was nerfed, the combo of it with Spirit Fury is no longer enough to get someone before they can reach the next pallet or vault on almost any combination of tiles on any map. You still see killers using it though as no one knows if it might have another possible utility that's been over-looked.
Regarding #2, I do not see any person who thinks that the Nurse should be changed for reasons of her addons to be a reasonable person who is not promoting double-standards. The Nurse needs changing, but it has nothing to do with her addons: that issue has been chosen purely because it's strategic. They got too much push-back over calling for Nurse nerfs before the addons became the focus; their real intent is exposed every time they come out with 'she ignores game mechanics', an argument that is equally-applicable without addons. Addons are a wedge-issue; the real goal is nerfing the Nurse but leaving survivors intact because 'most people don't play optimally', a standard no killer is afforded: we're expected to play perfectly and then still called entitled over an imagined motive of 'killers think they deserve to 4k'.
-
No one can be blamed for using what the game gives them to win; it's the devs responsibility alone to make sure the game is fair and fun for everybody.
Then the knee-jerk nation attacked.
-
Brutal Strength should activate the ability to kick survivors on the floor, resetting their recovery progress. The animation will be hilarious.
I want this. I need this.
-
@Zixology said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/604052#Comment_604052
Counter measures can be taken. The survivors can't exploit it if it doesn't apply while the killer is in a chase.
Killers have been complaining about the system that detects when we are in a chase since day-one. As it seems clear it won't be changed, it should not be allowed to determine anything.
It is of course used to deny killers emblem points and naturally gives huge penalties if the killer doesn't leave the hook area almost immediately, chase or no chase, but no one complains about it because no one really wants to rank up anyway.
-
There are only 7-8 maps out of all 23 where this is even possible, where all killers can reach both doors before either can be opened. For Billy and Nurse, I haven't worked out the exact maps but it's about 11 of them. The Hag is more difficult to measure because she needs to be within range as her trap is set off to make any use of them.
As it stands, EGC is heavily-detrimental to killers in both scenarios. In scenario 1 where survivors have finished the gens, they can 99% progress the door and leave it without it regressing. They can still hold the game hostage unless the killer themselves opens the door, which is intended purely to humiliate.
In scenario 2 where the killer has found the hatch, they are screwed-over by the fact that closing it powers the gates, which defeats the entire purpose of killers having requested this feature. It's replaced one stand-off with another because unless the gates are close enough and the survivor is incredibly foolish, the survivor still wins. The killer is left having to decide in those circumstances whether closing the hatch is best. The survivor can still work the gens, the killer has to stay near the hatch because they can't hatch-grab any more. On most dice-rolls, the survivor is going to win.
-
@scorpio said:
Also the fact that people are now complaining more about her add ons specifically than the Nurse as a whole in general shows exactly the opposite of what you said, that survivors HAVE adapted and gotten better, because more of them think the Nurse would be okay to go against without her OP add ons. Before they just wanted her nerfed into the ground or gone but it seems more and more people are on board with just her add ons being adjusted. This means they feel confident that they can counter her base kit whereas before just the sound of her blinking at the start of the game was enough to cause 4 insta DCs.
If the tactical switch in emphasis of survivor complaints about the Nurse can be used to claim that they have in fact improved against the basekit Nurse, then there are two issues.
- Why are they still using 'she ignores game mechnics' and variations of that argument? This applies whether she uses addons or not.
- People were claiming she 'had no counter-play' even before the focus switched to her addons, the same old poor-quality arguments are used now, they haven't changed. If they were wrong before, they are probably wrong now: their standards hae no improved and they've ripped into me for wanting better ones.
-
@twistedmonkey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/601723#Comment_601723
They only nerfed the Nurse once by removing her third blink in 2016.
The change in 2017 was originally thought of as a nerf by some but it was actually a slight buff which was argued at the time. The change was made due to the game map for easier vertical movements. Her blink changed so you could control the distance travelled and where she could blink too on the map. It just took some time for some players to get used to those changes to realise it.
People have asked about add on reworks since 2017. They devs first discussed doing in over a year ago.
Omega and extra blink ones were asked to be changed and most of the others to be reworked as they are not worth using due to you losing more than you gain.
People asking for addon reworks in 2017(I was among them) does not mean they thought Nurse was too-strong due to addons. Tell a 2017 Nurse-main that and they'd laugh. The issue then was the glaring injustice that after the devs had made knee-jerk nerfs to the Nurse in Autumn of 2016, they didn't adjust any of her addons which is what made it obvious that these were knee-jerk nerfs. They had not been planned or thought through. Killers were asking if this at least would be recitified because Kavanagh's Last Breath was a JOKE of an addon after her default charges were lowered to 2.
It wasn't just the reduction in blink-charges; the nerf was also a decrease in base move-speed to be just a fraction slower than that of a running survivor, meaning the Nurse could no longer do a normal chase and blinking was mandatory in order to keep up. This of course back-fired as it meant Nurses were practicing more with blinks, leading to the new style of playing her.
The patch 1.9 changes happened at the start of 2018. They did make blinking up to different levels and blinking a shorter distance on a full-charge possible, but they were also meant to make it easier for survivors to out-play a blinking Nurse by making the visuals more obvious. Unfortunately it actually confused survivors. Visuals give you something to react to, but Nurse's audio tell of gasping allows anticipation. That was made no longer reliable because a Nurse could now aim low and blink a much shorter distance than the time she charged would indicate.
Patch 1.9 changes are the closest there is to an explanation for why survivors are struggling against Nurse's with multiple-blink addons, but the changes do not actually affect the addons.
-
@premiumRICE said:
You dont always need to buff or nerf smothing to make it powerful. The meta changes and what wasnt good before can be the strongest thing ever without even being touched.
This is true, but can not account for why in 2017 that addons were a liability for the Nurse. Then only about nine months ago they became the key to sub-par Nurse's being decent and decent Nurse's being experts and experts still being experts but now it was easier.
The addons were not changed when Nurse was initially nerfed in 2016. They haven't been changed at all since she was released. If I were to accept that it's entirely possible that it would take two years for a meta to develop based on addons, that still leaves me with the question of what that meta actually is and why it took so long?
What is the meta exactly? Were Nurse players just simply not trying to use addons to compensate for missing on the first blinks? Well, they were. That was the first thing everyone was trying after the Nurse had her default charges reduced from 3 to 2; people thought that using addons to get the blink back to 3 would mean they could play her exactly as before. That wasn't the case though: all extra-blink addons except for Fragile Wheeze interfere with muscle-memory as they alter the range of blinks by differing amounts. Her move-speed had also been changed, so she could no longer keep-up with a sprinting survivor without blinking; which make accurate blinks more important than distance now.
It's not the meta that has changed. It's survivors becoming more reliant on mechanics which the Nurse is explicitly designed to counter, in order to get survivors to be less-dependent on them. Survivors didn't adapt though, even after Nurse was nerfed. Then last year in January, the devs made changes in patch 1.9 which nominally were supposed to help survivors predict them by making the visual telegraphs more obvious. In doing so, they made the audio telegraphs less reliable. In attempting to help survivors with their adaptation problem, the devs made it worse; the survivors then didn't adapt to those changes and may not actually be able to.
If you have experience, being able to anticipate is better than being able to react. Audio telegraphs for blinking are better because they allow a good survivor to anticipate. Visual telegraphs only help them to react, but the Nurse can react to with additional blinks. If addons are really a problem now, then the solution is to revert the 1.9 changes to blinks. It should not be used as the basis for any changes to Nurse that are being loudly called for, on flimsy grounds.
-
@Mister_Holdout said:
I appreciate you taking the time to write this. Many people are quick to throw the book at Nurse.
Here are my brief opinions on Nurse:
- Nurse does need her add ons reworked. There are killers in red ranks who take full advantage of using Nurse's overpowered add ons. Playing against an experienced Nurse with three or four blinks + range is a nightmare. You can't win if the Nurse starts slugging. Also, the baby Nurses will just have to get used to playing her without the powerful add ons. Many of us veterans persevered while learning Nurse (without add ons), they can too.
- Base kit Nurse is fine imo as of now. Unless I see strong evidence that shows experienced Nurses can always beat experienced survivors, then I will maintain my position. Also, I don't buy into the argument that Nurse shouldn't be touched because she has a low kill rate in low ranks. If a killer has the potential to be overpowered, then that killer needs to be adjusted.
Thanks for the reply, but it's left me with the same unanswered questions.
- Why is this? What has changed about the addons or anything that could affect them in a relevant way that has made it so in 2017 addons were a liability and now they are over-powered? There has been a reversal: complaints used to be focused on the Nurse being too-strong, period. The addons have only become a focus more recently and to my eyes this looks to not be based on any verifiable facts but on an opportunity being seized and a band-wagon becoming popular. The most common reason I seem to be seeing for why addons are a problem now is 'lots of people think so', which as a self-reinforcing belief; of course lots of people think so if the main factor in their belief is that it is widely-believed.
- Funny thing and people desperate to invent reasons to disagree with me miss this: I do not think the basekit Nurse is fine. I am opposed to changes on the grounds that Nurse is being subjected to standards which survivors resist at every turn ever being applied to them: the maximum known potential. I believe that any feature is as strong as it could potentially be, not as strong as it de facto gets used. De facto Saitama/One-Punch Man is as strong as the last strongest thing he punched, but in actuality he is as strong as the writer decides, knowingly or not. Once this double-standard is gone, I'll then be arguing that the Nurse does not need changing in accordance with the game as-is though, but in accordance with how the game is going to change without survivors being measured by a wholly more generous standard to them than killers are given.
-
@KaoMinerva said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/602503#Comment_602503
He's not better really. The snares are absolute garbage. Pallets are good when they work, but he's still very loopable and without add on... He's not very impressive.
One thing I'm wondering is that the devs have not mentioned the no-clip on fake-pallets when discussing the intended dynamics of them. Their focus has been on having to remember where the pallets were not there while awake. That to me suggests that no-clip on fake-pallets is an oversight.
Now we see if they will change that, because this removes the risk of wasting a real pallet.
-
@Victor_hensley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/602546#Comment_602546
Well, you said that survivors have choices, but killers do not have choices, pretty much saying killers should not use their powers, because you can't have choices, because survivors do not want you to use your power.
Ready to get back on topic now?
Where did I say that killers do not have choices? Is there some identical version of myself that I can't see which you are conversing with?
-
Why are you....making up...something....I DIDN'T say at all?
-
@Victor_hensley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/602503#Comment_602503
...Which will reveal the survivors, letting Freddy know where they are, or at least know that their doing, even with the common addon!
Which is the survivors choice, unlike with options a killer uses to get that information. The survivor gets to pick the optimum time to do it, such as if the killer is pre-occupied in a chase.
Survivors are already doing this, it's just now they never have to risk dropping a real pallet.
-
If they don't have collision, they can essentially be 'disarmed' by anyone who isn't in a chase.
Slowly, very slowly, it will dawn on people that new-Freddy is not really an improvement on old-Freddy and all the embarrassing praise for the rework is down to novelty-factor alone.
-
@Visionmaker said:
Play Civ 5.
"If no mistake have you made, yet losing you are, a different game you should play." - Master Yoda