Firellius
Firellius
About
- Username
- Firellius
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,210
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Murgleïs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3170099#Comment_3170099
So you want the perk to be so meta that all the killers have to play as if all the survivors have it.
This remind me of old dead hard, when survivors had 15min+ queue despite needing only 1 player willing to play killer (vs 4 survivor, do the maths). Good days.
The only thing BHVR can do to please you and keep queue time decent for everyone is to introduce bots killers who don’t ever camp / tunnel.
I mean... I literally said that DS should be baseline, so I don't know why that's a big leap.
And yes. Because otherwise tunnelling is a really overpowered strategy that any killer can employ at any time without any investment. Halved chases, early cuts in survivor potential, the game's only reasons not to tunnel are DS and OTR. So when DS is a perk that barely hinders the killer, it doesn't do its job and in fact can even make that job easier, considering other perks (Lithe, Quick & Quiet, Fixated) could actually make the chase itself harder.
Again, literally all you have to do is either not chase a survivor that was just unhooked, or not pick them up.
-
@Murgleïs said:
It will nerf bad killers and do nothing against strong killers.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3170067#Comment_3170067
First of all, you should fear the killer, not the other way around.
Eating a DS is not a « monumental screw-up ». The killer has no clue if the survivor has DS or not.
This version of DS would be S tier tier, above everything else. 7s DS, disabling killers powers, if you don’t play it you are throwing.
The killer can disable the entire perk by not hitting spacebar on a survivor that was unhooked in the last 60 seconds.
All it takes is not pressing a button to reduce the perk's value to zero.
-
@MigrantTheGreat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/344858/bring-the-5-second-stun-back-to-ds
DS stun time never should have been 5s, it was like that because of Enduring (killer perk) and than Enduring got nerfed to only effect pallets, and Nurse is also the reason why it got buffed to 5s.
2 reasons why I think the 5s stun shouldn't come back.
1. You bring back the 5s and you might as well undo 6.0 update and the game might as well be boring with a stale meta.
2. I don't like talking about this because the community is too far gone, but the game is 4v1 and not 1v1. Killers shouldn't fear a perk. They should fear survivors working together.
DS should maybe not have been buffed to 5 seconds when it was, but it got nerfed really harshly afterwards, at which point it deserved to be 5 seconds.
The 6.0 update was waaaaay more than just the DS change, and 'stale meta' is an asinine reason to keep a perk in an unplayable state. DS was objectively not very powerful, either, considering how unlikely it was to fire. With the EGC nerf, it's become even less likely to fire, so it's more deserving of that 5 second stun than it ever was. Hell, it could go up to 7 seconds and still be fair.
Killers should fear a perk if they work really hard to make that perk fire. DS requires the killer to hunt and down a survivor who has been unhooked in the last 60 seconds before they can do anything to aid their team, and then pick them up. That is a triple whammy of killer input that is required to get this perk to play out, and especially the last condition is so blatantly in the killer's control that any competent killer is not going to get hit by DS.
If you do literally everything wrong and make this perk fire, you should be punished for it proportional to how badly you screwed up, and DS requires a pretty monumental screw-up.
Honestly, 5 second stun DS should be baseline, and the perk DS should disable the killer's active powers for 10 seconds after the stun ends as an extra 'up yours' to Nurse and Blight. And hey, if you make DS baseline, the perk itself likely won't be picked as much, so you don't have to worry about a 'stale meta'!
-
Isn't this just Demogorgon's kit?
-
@Tostapane said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3166823#Comment_3166823
no, they camp and tunnel cause most of the times those are the only tactics that can work (aka they are forced to do them in order to have a chance). Did you think that's funny going always for the same dude over and over again? without having the possibility to chasing other survivors with a different mindset each time? this is the fun aspect of dbd, but the problem is that you DON'T HAVE THE TIME to do it properly (or at least not when you are aganist people with a modicum of brain)
Feel like this is a chicken & egg situation.
The forum killers like to propagate that 'you can't win without tunnelling and camping!', but if these people are tunnelling and camping, couldn't it be that they crutched on those tactics to carry them to a level of play where they're simply not competent enough to win without those crutches?
-
@drsoontm said:
No point writing about it. The issues are already well known and will be fixed sooner or later. Until then, put it in the fridge.
It's BHVR. Probably later.
Or in true BHVR fashion, he'll get an add-on that fixes his hitbox.
-
@EricDouglas81 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/337166/data-doesnt-lie-proof-dbd-is-dying-fast
When you have no survivors left to play against then we’ll see how fun you think it is
Don't necro threads.
-
@drsoontm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3163941#Comment_3163941
Sounds pretty clear though.
In games like this, language is comprised of certain phrases that carry certain definitions. 'Hook state' for example, is unambiguous. But 'Hook instance' was never used before, so it was unclear if this was a new term (Which it is) or whether BHVR meant to say 'Hook state' instead.
Part of that was wishful thinking, too, since if it was 'once per hook state', the perk would still have some anti-camping value, but that specific aspect got gutted to protect campers.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3162898#Comment_3162898
CoH killed hit and run as well, which multiple killers pretty much needed to be viable. It was also a universal strat that most killers could use, a similar lowest common denominator: "if survivors are constantly wasting time finding each other to heal, it creates pressure on gens since less people are working on them." Incredibly simple concept, completely invalidated by survivors being able to set up a selfcare station in an area of the map the killer is unable to pressure simultaneously. Also you literally just got a free BT at basekit which has a speed boost it never had in the past, stop the "survivors never get anything" dishonesty. Same with your "six-fold buff" to killers, where you emphasize the quantity while ignoring the quality. Your bar getting lowered comment is purposely ignoring factors to try to suit your perspective again.
You're thinking in excuses while assuming anyone who disagrees with you must be doing the same. Ironic that you threw in spine chill since the devs actually wanted it to require line of sight even just recently, and took a step back because they can't figure out how to do accessibility still. Your refusal to consider perspectives other than your own is why you're never going to understand balance.
CoH killed hit and run as well
Yes, thanks, that's why I said it was the only threat to non-camping, non-tunnelling playstyles.
Also you literally just got a free BT at basekit
And how does that help when the killer isn't camping/tunneling?
Same with your "six-fold buff" to killers, where you emphasize the quantity while ignoring the quality. Your bar getting lowered comment is purposely ignoring factors to try to suit your perspective again.
They're SIX compounding buffs that all make the baseline gameplay for the killer stronger, on top of the strongest survivor perk getting a solid (Well-deserved) nerf. But you (And many killer players) disregarded all of that. Because we're right back where we were: Killer is too hard, so we're just gonna camp and tunnel again.
You're complaining about people 'ruining the alternatives' when nothing has been doing that, and then when there's six buffs to the alternatives, those don't count. Then you say I'm ignoring factors in my 'bar getting lowered' comment, but you're right here constantly shifting the goalpost. They get a tool to try and combat tunnelling and you somehow twist that to mean that the survivors got something to 'ruin the alternatives'. The alternative gets six buffs and it's not good enough because the individual buffs weren't meaty enough.
You're literally lowering the bar as we speak but then claiming I'm wrong about it.
Its simply your own fault for not being able to understand how to apply the perk, so just don't use it instead of bemoaning it needs to be made into your image of it.
I also like this comment in regards to DS and Blast Mine. "You need to understand how to apply the perk!"
Except survivors don't apply it. The killer does. It is literally dependent on them applying the action that triggers it. Survivors have practically no control over these perks.
That was the problem with DS too. It was actually a really terrible perk because it required a triple-dip misplay from the killer before it fired, leading to it rarely ever going off against a competent killer. The reason it was a high pick is because it still deterred the de facto strongest strategy and when it fired, it would actually have a meaningful impact: 5 seconds of stun, PLUS the additional chase. Blast mine doesn't give that.
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3163015#Comment_3163015
"If Decisive Strike left the survivor in the dying state but still stunned the killer for 5 seconds, would it be run at a meaningful level? My guess is no, and I hope you see that."
...Why would they, when OTR is just better in almost every single way? Thats a kinda pointless question to attempt a gotcha moment with, since the perk's usage was flat out replaced with a better version. Believe it or not people do still use it to stack second chances on top of each other, even though its generally not very effective and turns out like you'd expect. OTR flat out replaced DS in terms of relevancy though, by being better at the thing that people used DS for previous. And yes, people run that plenty.
As for your last part, thats exactly what happened with Wraith's lunge. It was a bug that accidentally made him viable and got fixed anyway once it was discovered. Same with most (unfortunately not all) bugs in the game. Like you said, they should get compensation when the bug was what makes x viable, but they don't. regularly. Most people just stopped playing him again because he was bad again. I don't understand why you keep trying to force opinions on me, but I'd really appreciate it if you didn't, its not the same thing as pointing out logical fallacies. In the end this is a game of adapt or abandon with almost every single change it ever receives, and some people have already had to make that choice often enough to not have a whole ton of sympathy for others who refuse.
Edit: upon further consideration, if your reason for asking about DS was specifically about when there wasn't a newly buffed superior alternative, it still would have seen some use. of course it wouldnt see as much use as it did previous if its power was effectively made weaker, but that narrow of a scope applies to anything in the game. When something gets nerfed in a meaningful way and still remains meta, that means that it was never ok in the first place with its pre-nerf values, or there is little to no alternative that better suits its usage application. DS would fit both in that situation, so it would still have people that use it, even if less.
...Why would they, when OTR is just better in almost every single way? Thats a kinda pointless question to attempt a gotcha moment with, since the perk's usage was flat out replaced with a better version. Believe it or not people do still use it to stack second chances on top of each other, even though its generally not very effective and turns out like you'd expect. OTR flat out replaced DS in terms of relevancy though, by being better at the thing that people used DS for previous. And yes, people run that plenty.
This is also a major cop-out, and wrong. Yes, OTR is better than new DS, since new DS is utterly garbage, but OTR doesn't beat out old DS for value. Additionally, OTR is, ironically, countered by camping/tunnelling hard enough.
But just address his argument. Would DS still be worth picking up if it didn't give the survivor their health state back?
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3162757#Comment_3162757
You're acting like some killers preferring that playstyle means all of them do. Considering how hard you strawmanned me in the other post, its not terribly surprising that you would choose to hyperbolize things in just the right way to try to force your argument. You're welcome to your opinion, but you don't really understand the consequences of your argument.
Camping and Tunneling are lowest common denominator strats. They're simple and can be effective. They are the killer equivalent of "just rush gens", which is the most optimal survivor strat. The more you ruin the alternatives, the more people will gravitate to them. It doesn't matter that there will always be people who use them, but removing them can and does cause some people to choose to not play at all vs changing that. Just like how survivors just give up and dc or suicide on hook in matches they refuse to play. Your perspective is 100% survivor oriented in a game where killer is played by other players, not bots. You are purposely ignoring their perspectives because they aren't what you want.
"The more you ruin the alternatives, the more people will gravitate to them."
So how much did these alternatives get 'ruined'?
CoH has been the only threat to non-camping/tunnelling playstyles. Other than that, survivors haven't gotten any meaningful buffs in ages. And when killers got a six-fold buff to their baselines, did camping/tunnelling become less of an issue?
Of course, all you get is that the bar gets lowered for what's 'forcing' killers to camp. That's how you wind up saying that Blast Mine makes killers camp.
So now Blast Mine's out of the picture, so what's the next reason to camp? Spine Chill? Autodidact? Lithe? Maybe Dance With Me, or Pharmacy?
You can keep looking for excuses. The truth is much simpler: Camping is low effort, high reward. It's not because Claudette is running Fixated. It's not because Nea is running around with For The People. It's not Felix with Distraction and Quick & Quiet.
It's just because it's easy and effective.
The only way to fix it is by nerfing it.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3162512#Comment_3162512
You might be less tired if you stop strawmanning people for disagreeing with you. I'm not even the player you're complaining about in your hypothetical, i rarely even touch the killer role. That doesn't mean im not allowed to understand the psychology of why trends form, nor why metas form from those, which causes new trends, and so on. Balancing game design will always be about treating the cause before the symptom, so going further up the chain will always be more important than you being tired of other players' issues because they're different from your issues.
That's the point: There is no 'further up the chain'. There's two reasons killers camp:
1) It's a super low effort, yet still very effective way of securing kills.
2) It's a protest against things the killer doesn't like.
Every single time camping comes up as a subject, someone starts ruminating on how survivors could be nerfed further to try and 'incentivise playing nice'. The reality is that killers will continue to camp because even if they don't have reason #2, they still have reason #1. And the only way that's going to get fixed is if it becomes a very ineffective way of securing kills, or has vastly increased effort to it. Some people will argue to make non-camping stronger, but the problem with that is that camping is at an unfair point of effort/reward, and so the only way to make non-camping be more appealing than that is by having an even better effort/reward ratio.
So in short: No. Camping needs to get gutted. That's the only way to get rid of it.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3162454#Comment_3162454
Thats cool you're tired of it, killers have been tired of living it for a while. Every time other strategies get nerfed and objectives get denied, it just reverts to the lowest common denominator. The devs are just as responsible for pushing design in that direction as the survivors are for taking advantage of that. Killers aren't bots, and they want to "have fun" as much as everyone else.
Its the unfortunate result of one person's "fun" denying another. Welcome to pvp gaming.
Killers aren't bots, and they want to "have fun" as much as everyone else.
That's honestly quite rich, considering you came up with this over freaking Blast Mine. One tiny set-back and apparently killers are willing to just drop literally all engagement and just go camp instead. That doesn't sound like wanting to have fun. That sounds like wanting cheap kills and taking any excuse to effectively throw a tantrum.
I'm real tired of camping being used as a beatstick. 'Do what I want, or else'.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161139#Comment_3161139
I don't understand how you possibly got that from that post.
It was about how killers cant be in two places at once, and how denying objectives is a surefire way to encourage killers to camp and tunnel more since it punishes them for playing more "fair."
When did I say anything about throwing the game?
I'm just tired of the whole 'if the killer doesn't like something, they'll go camp, so just do whatever they want' attitude.
-
@WorthlessBeing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161611#Comment_3161611
And reward survivors for rushing the hook like brainless flies rushing into decayed meat, something we know they do whenever they can, at the detriment of the poor player stuck for at least 2 and a half minute on a hook.
If you're so concerned about that 'poor player', just don't camp. They won't be up there for 2.5 minutes if you don't camp.
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161379#Comment_3161379
Sorry but being able to use it more than once per hook state is abusive.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161431#Comment_3161431
How long does unhooking and healing take? Does it take 90 seconds? It does not. You need to remember that most of the game as killer is you chase one person while everyone else can do whatever they want. Mathematically during the first five minutes of any game you can expect a killer to be keeping one person busy during the majority of that time. This is a fact based on the idea that chases take a long time.
Killer's speed is X/4 compared to one survivor. If two people are still on generators that is 2x relative to the killer. If we consider that one person is always on the hook and one person is always being chased ( which is a false premise) then the killer needs a multiple of 8 to "catch up" to two survivors.
It doesn't take a math genius to prove that base regression speed for killers is too slow.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161755#Comment_3161755
Do you know the problem with the scenario you listed? You decided to finish the gen before you rescued your friend. If you always rescue the friend first then camping becomes far less likely.
The problem is that you know that finishing the gen first and getting the rescue right before the next stage is a better outcome. What you fail to realize is that when hook timers were increased it was so you have more time to rescue against a camper. It was not intended as "more time for you to finish gens before making a rescue".
The problem is that is exactly what most people want.
How long does unhooking and healing take? Does it take 90 seconds? It does not. You need to remember that most of the game as killer is you chase one person while everyone else can do whatever they want. Mathematically during the first five minutes of any game you can expect a killer to be keeping one person busy during the majority of that time. This is a fact based on the idea that chases take a long time.
Honey, if your chases take 90 seconds, you are the problem, not the game's base regression rate.
Killer's speed is X/4 compared to one survivor. If two people are still on generators that is 2x relative to the killer. If we consider that one person is always on the hook and one person is always being chased ( which is a false premise) then the killer needs a multiple of 8 to "catch up" to two survivors.
No, he doesn't. Because if the third survivor isn't going for the unhook, you'll get a kill long before the survivors are done with their gens, and if you have two on hook at a time, you have to royally misplay to lose that one.
And aside from the third survivor being MIA in your 'calculations', you're also not accounting for survivor travel time, or survivors dealing with totems, or the killer power adding delays, or, really, -any factors-.
-
@WorthlessBeing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161422#Comment_3161422
So 50 seconds, cumulable up to three times, 150 seconds, basically more than two minutes.
Sounds fair alright. /s
Yeah, it's really fair, considering it just keeps a survivor incapacitated for longer.
You wanna camp into an anti-camp strat, don't cry that you're spending 2.5 minutes staring at the hook.
-
@KOj420 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161421#Comment_3161421
I am solely talking about the new perks
Okay. You're still complaining about one perk that doesn't do anything for whoever you're chasing, and cannot actually heal another survivor either. It just subtracts from the time required to get them healed but it will never restore a health state, and it requires another survivor to lose theirs, meaning you are still benefitting, just not as much.
And the other one... It's literally the last person standing. You've won by this point. Why are you salty over a perk that only activates when you've already pretty much irrevokably won?
-
@DBDVulture said:
Survivors camp gens so killers have to respond by camping if the gen pressure is high. The game needs a full redesign. Let's take a quick peek at gen regression. There are 4 survivors and the killer's default regression speed is 1/4th of one survivor. No offense but giving the killer 1/16th the gen speed of the survivors by default is a complete joke. There is no wonder that killers have been forced to stack multiple gen slowdown perks for years.
Killer regression should be 1:1 if all 4 survivors are alive. That still gives survivors an approximate 3x advantage most of the time assuming someone is either on the hook or being chased. Whenever you kill someone you lose half your regression speed. In other words with two people dead you would have the base kit 25% regression speed. For anyone who is not good at math this is the current regression speed with no perks.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3159805#Comment_3159805
Welcome to DBD killer balance for the last 6 years. Maps RNG is broken and sometimes generates infinite or near infinite loops. Instead of weighting tiles they made the Bamboozle perk. The only problem is that you have four perks as killer and you already have the problem of 1/16th regression to repair speed. We can down the list and shrug off a huge number of perks that are bandaids that "fix" a problem most of the time if you use that perk. The only problem is you can't bring all the perks necessary to fix the problems.
It's not 1/16th except at the very start of the match. If the killer does their job right, it's going to be 1/4th because one survivor will be rescuing/healing, one will be getting rescued/healed, one will be in chase, leaving only one on the generators.
What's with these doom scenarios where people work off the assumption that the killer is AFK?
-
@KOj420 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3161259#Comment_3161259
However they are counterable, the new survivor perks are not
I'm sorry, which survivor perks are uncounterable which you think should have some kind of counter?
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3158417#Comment_3158417
You really don't want to admit that hatch isn't perfect, do you?
You gonna argue your position or just going to misrepresent everyone else's?
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3160098#Comment_3160098
That is an extremely pidgeonholed comparison. Using your own logic, the killer can't use BBQ unless a survivor messes up enough to get downed and hooked. Not only are they both common occurrences in normal play, if killers are kicking gens then they are not facecamping a hook which is something you shouldn't exactly want to discourage with game design. If killers got flashbanged every time they kicked a gen, they'd just stop kicking them and facecamp as bubba instead. Especially since Reassurance is apparently so abysmally awful that people refuse to use it :)
"Just hardcore throw the game and maybe the killer won't camp you!"
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3158132#Comment_3158132
When everyone's always questioning your MMR and skill level, yes gaining MMR is important. If I faced nothing but baby survivors, my opinions would cease to be valid, because I wouldn't be experiencing the level that I'm talking about.
So all I have to do to get an extra kill is SIMPLY camp or tunnel? Why didn't I think of that before?
I know the spawn logic of hatch quite well. It just seems like it's always spawning near the survivors for me, and allows them to jump through anyway when they screwed up and waited too long before I got close enough to close it.
When everyone's always questioning your MMR and skill level, yes gaining MMR is important. If I faced nothing but baby survivors, my opinions would cease to be valid, because I wouldn't be experiencing the level that I'm talking about.
Maybe you should let go of rank elitism then?
This sort of top-down balancing is only effective for turning games into spectator sports, it doesn't help general playability because the average player's game is completely different from what tournament level players play. Trying to focus only on this elusive 'high MMR' bracket has a tendency of making the game worse for the vast majority of players.
What you find fair or unfair in any game can still be valid, in disregard of your rank.
Additionally, the hatch is not going to be the reason you're not at your proper MMR. A hatch escape doesn't deduct from your rating, it just doesn't give you the heavily diminished value from the fourth kill because, if not for the hatch, it would be a freebie anyway. If MMR is working as it should, then your MMR will, over time, wind up where it should be, especially as killer, since there's no one but yourself to rely on. Getting a hatch escape is just going to make it take a little longer, which is healthy for the MMR system, because a larger sample size of games means a more accurate representation of your actual competence.
So basically, what you are arguing for is a change that would likely have severely negative impact for both survivors and killers (What's the fourth survivor going to do if there's no hatch? Hide away as long as possible in hopes of frustrating the killer into quitting is my guess) because
A) You believe that MMR determines the validity of someone's opinion, full stop
and
B) You are so impatient that you want literally every last point you can get your hands on
Not a good look, bud.
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3158115#Comment_3158115
This is why I dread talking about this topic, because people refuse to give the killer the benefit of the doubt. Every single time, y'all say "The hatch is for the survivor who played amazing and had trash teammates." #1 That's balancing the game off survivors playing bad. #2 You must realize that hatch also largely rewards survivors who wait it out rather than assisting the team to pull off a legit escape, and also emboldens the toxic survivors because hatch will always be there to bail them out. But I never hear y'all say "The killer deserved that hatch close because he played well." On the contrary, the killer is instantly suspected of having "steamrolled" the survivors from the start, or was toxic, or didn't go easy on the survivors simply because some were potatoes.
I can't believe you literally said hatch got nerfed, therefore it can't possibly be problematic anymore. The same would never be said of something on the killer side. This is where we are.
I can't believe you literally said hatch got nerfed, therefore it can't possibly be problematic anymore. The same would never be said of something on the killer side. This is where we are.
That is literally not what they said, they said the hatch was 'Gutted to the ground', not just nerfed. There's a very stark and obvious difference that you chose to ignore there.
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
That perk had to be changed. You can't just have ability to hold hostage someone forever or just make someone stay alive no metter what even at end game where killer has nothing better to do since gates are 99% and no gens left.
"then go for the rescuer..." Sure, so if I play weak killer with no instadown atm and they can just run to exit anyway while I can't even secure a kill. No can't do, sorry.
Both could've been fixed without also gutting the perk's usability in its own purpose. If the latter issue even required fixing.
-
@Carth said:
Because In some survivor mains eyes if it's not a single perk that can completely change the flow of the game by themselves with no comms or provide a free second chance in chase ala old DH,old ds, unbreakable, CoH then it's a dumpster tier perk that's awful.
Edit: a super fun thing to point out is some of the people calling 30 seconds 'measly', or 'nothing'. Are the same people who claimed that a .2 and .3 second reduction to pallet breaking and survivor sprint from 6.1.0 were massive and huge buffs to killers.
Because In some survivor mains eyes if it's not a single perk that can completely change the flow of the game by themselves with no comms or provide a free second chance in chase ala old DH,old ds, unbreakable, CoH then it's a dumpster tier perk that's awful.
Both Reassurance and DS require killer compliance in order to work. These perks are not going to work in any game where the killer doesn't let it. It's not a big ask to get the perks to actually be impactful when its one and only use case comes into play.
Look at it from the other side: Yes, the killer did just double back to hook after you got unhooked and chased you down within 60 seconds of you getting unhooked and then decided to pick you up once you went down, BUT the killer STILL shouldn't be punished for refusing to use literally ANY of the perk's counters.
Yes, the killer did just decide to stick by the hook and refuse to interact with any other survivors, despite being aware that they're playing into a perk specifically designed to counter this playstyle, but should the killer really be punished for making such a gargantuan tactical blunder? Nah, let's just nerf the survivors again.
Edit: a super fun thing to point out is some of the people calling 30 seconds 'measly', or 'nothing'. Are the same people who claimed that a .2 and .3 second reduction to pallet breaking and survivor sprint from 6.1.0 were massive and huge buffs to killers.
Golly gee, maybe getting 5 or 6 compounding buffs, basekit, to scenarios that are 100% applicable in literally every game you play without any extra investment isn't really comparable to a perk that requires extra investment specifically to counter one scenario.
The exact same scenario you described occurred with old reassurance as well
Yes, it does. But in that case, you're not wasting 90% of the perk's value, since the perk has literally, what, 10 times as much value? Before the nerf, if you mess up and all wind up at the hook, you can then adjust and start working together to get them lined up and thus get value out of the perk, -because you have time to do so-. Now that one slip-up makes a perk that has ONE use case and is really difficult to pull off properly almost entirely useless, since it can only be used once.
You can't balance around 'what if my teammates are bad/doing challenges/want to meme'
But apparently we can nerf survivors around 'What if the killer wants to grief?'.
Or do you think just reverting it to have the low cooldown + chain potential is fine?
Literally yes. Because it requires spectacular misplays from the killer to actually be a hindrance. As has been mentioned dozens of times: Just give survivors a way to opt out for that once-in-a-lifetime scenario where the other three survivors and the killer are dead set on griefing one poor soul and you're done.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3154261#Comment_3154261
It has its uses. But it’s a far cry from the solution to camping people keep screaming about.
Personally I don’t think camping needs a solution because it already has one called team work.
Good luck working in a team where no one can communicate with one another.
-
@Krazzik said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3153847#Comment_3153847
In that scenario the other two people are glued to gens. One person leaving a gen to use reassurance is still a net gain for survivors by a wide margin.
That's assuming they are glued to the gens and not moving in for the unhook. That's the problem, this nerf disproportionately affects solos over swiffers. The way they handled this perk goes against everything it needed.
-
@mizark3 said:
Instead of fixing abuse case scenarios, they nerfed it against abuse and realistic use cases. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. If someone wants out of Reassurance, give them an option. Don't just nerf it for everyone else. This is using a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel to fix problems.
Exactly! This nerf was the nuclear option for something that could've been fixed with a very small adjustment. The path chosen just has the most collateral damage possible.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3153838#Comment_3153838
Ah the ol have my cake and eat it too argument.
”I hate camping and tunnelling but I don’t want to run any of the perks that help me avoid it because there are better perks for other things, so please give me anti-camping and tunnelling for free thanks”
I run lightborn a lot, not because I need it but basically I’m pretty lazy and like not having to worry about flashlights, flashbangs, locker blind squads, positioning when I pick up survivors.
One could argue it’s a relatively useless perk and not needed but it makes something I’m not a fan of, getting repeatedly blinded easier to avoid so I run it a lot.
I run lightborn a lot, not because I need it but basically I’m pretty lazy
That's a very far cry from why people wanted Reassurance to actually be a good perk.
-
@HP150 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3154070#Comment_3154070
I don't see it being much weaker in solo-queue vs SWF, at least not relative to how everything is weaker as solo-queue vs SWF.
Kindred and/or Bond never leave my loadout as a solo q survivor. With Kindred/Bond I can see that someone is closer to the hook and running towards it; So I can hop on a gen instead of going for the Reassurance. Minimal time wasted, no issue.
Again, I don't think the issue is with the perk itself. The issue is that some form of Kindred or Bond isn't part of basekit. That is what people should be advocating for, not some revert of a single perk that was nerfed for a reason.
PS: PBE Reassurance is definitely more abusable as SWF and would only widen the gap between Solo Q vs SWF, not decrease it.
The reason for the nerf does not match the nerf, is the problem.
-
@Bardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152643#Comment_3152643
Only with an AFK killer? How to you figure that? A team with Reassurance can take turns swooping in on the far side from the Killer & keep the onhook survivor going indefinitely.
Because the killer can just do his or her job and chase, down and hook the other survivors. Yes, two survivors could keep one person going forever. But what about two hooked survivors? What if there's two hooked and one in chase?
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152802#Comment_3152802
You underestimate toxic SWF squads that are bored.
Again, the perk needed an opt-out to solve that. Not this complete gutting.
@Deadeye said:
To OP, this must be trolling right? For the Reassurance nerf, read below. Bad design needs to go, period. 30 seconds is still enough to allow a lot of gen progress, you can even do a gen near the hook and activate it a second time on the next hook stage, which basically allows every survivor to finish a gen. 3 gens for a single hook stage is quite a bit. Beneath that I cant really remember that there were killers yelling "I can't camp now D'UH"
And the nerf for Awakened Awareness? How was that hindering the nurse? This is actually to nerf nurse, old Awareness was way too strong if you combine with Starstruck and Lethal. 4 seconds aura reading on an exposed survivor within 20m? That's a safe double down on each semi decent nurse.
And regarding the basekit BT and the conspicious actions, there you completely ignore how old DS was abused. Nice one. Argue without even half of the facts, cant take this serious.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152427#Comment_3152427
So they listened to killer mains when they invented the perk to finish gens solo in about half the time it should take?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152376#Comment_3152376
It is a band aid perk as others in the game, but a much needed one. That only the killer can activate? Is the same on BT and Unbreakable for example right? Do you trashtalk Unbreakable like that? It is a game changer when it comes to action and is exactly for this situation. You can say the same on almost every perk, everything is conditional. No Dead Hard against insta downs or SLinger/Legion, RIP Bite The Bullet when the killer has Nurses Calling and so on and so on.
You bring this perk as asssurance to counter a playstyle you dislike, or to counter it when it simply makes sense to camp.
And the CD was insane because you could activate it 5 times per hook stage. Two survivors can keep the hook stage active for an unlimited time. And this is simply a bad design, nothing in the game, for whatever solid or dumb reason, should ever allow to extend anything for an unlimited amount of time. The trolling factor is the same reasoning like the mori spamming that was possible for killers not too long ago, which stopped the bleed out process and could take the last survivor hostage for hours. Bad design, needs to go. This was not about 30 seconds of not being able to give up
You can say the same on almost every perk, everything is conditional. No Dead Hard against insta downs or SLinger/Legion, RIP Bite The Bullet when the killer has Nurses Calling and so on and so on.
First off, the stuff you're listing is conditionally disabled, not conditionally enabled. IE: They're on most of the time, except for [condition]. Reassurance is the opposite: It's worthless most of the time, except for [condition]. DS has this too. BT and UB also have this, but to a lesser extent, considering they can be forced if the survivors coordinate well.
But secondly, how are you going to compare such powerful effects as BT and UB to Reassurance's effect? BT and UB buy you time by making the killer invest his in a new or longer chase, but Reassurance doesn't buy your team time unless the killer is camping, and it costs the survivors time instead.
That's the thing that goes over a ton of people's heads when they say it had high uptime. Yes, it does. It's also a really worthless effect unless the killer hardcore faceplants his way into it. But apparently that's something killers should be permitted to do. You can have anti-tunnel, but it should be the equivalent of a gun that just unfurls a flag that says 'BANG' if the killer does everything they need to do to get the perk to fire. You can have anti-camp, so long as the killers can just camp through it without too much bother.
And the CD was insane because you could activate it 5 times per hook stage. Two survivors can keep the hook stage active for an unlimited time. And this is simply a bad design, nothing in the game, for whatever solid or dumb reason, should ever allow to extend anything for an unlimited amount of time.
A ton of perks in the game last for an unlimited amount of time.
The trolling factor is the same reasoning like the mori spamming that was possible for killers not too long ago, which stopped the bleed out process and could take the last survivor hostage for hours. Bad design, needs to go. This was not about 30 seconds of not being able to give up
Again, the trolling factor could easily be solved by allowing the hooked survivor to reject the effect. The perk didn't need to get the hardest nerf in the game's history, thereby making it infinitely worse at the one job it is supposed to do.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152731#Comment_3152731
Imagine the killer is playing fair and attempting to spread the hooks evenly = tries to go for 12 hooks. The survivor could spend way longer than 5 minutes on said hook.
Uh... Sure, if the survivors are just gonna hand the killer the win. I mean, it's literally worse for the survivors than if the guy on hook just timed out and died.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152694#Comment_3152694
5 minutes = 2 hook stages.
How would the killer participate? He can´t unhook? He can leave the hook and the teammates could keep the hooked survivor on hook as long as they are alive.
That's the point. As long as those survivors are alive. If the killer continues playing as normal and just gives chase, that 'forever hooked' scenario doesn't play out. Eventually there's going to be two people on hook, one in chase, one on Reassurance duty, so at that point, it's already no longer infinite.
-
@Tsulan said:
After the hard nerf, a survivor still has up to 5 Minutes on the hook. I repeat 5 Minutes. Thats more than enough to complete all gens and attempt a rescue during endgame.
If you´ve never encountered toxic teammates, then you are a lucky person. But the truth is, that before the nerf, your teammates could have taken you hostage for an infinite amount of time. Giving survivors a button to release early would have simply shifted the way of it being abusable to the hooked survivor suiciding instantly. Which is currently a problem.
Not sure where you're getting your calculation, but 120+90 = 210, which is 3.5 minutes, not 5.
EDIT: Unless it's been confirmed that the patch notes meant to say 'once per hook state' as opposed to 'instance'.
But the truth is, that before the nerf, your teammates could have taken you hostage for an infinite amount of time.
A) This would require the killer to participate
B) This could've been fixed without nerfing the perk
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
So you would have been okay with hanging an hour on the hook?
Loads of people were saying that survivors should've been given the ability to opt out of the perk's effect, and that would fix the only problem with the perk. Instead it got about 90% of its potential removed with a big fat double whammy nerf to the one job it's supposed to do.
-
@Bardon said:
WIth the original Reassurance, a team could make a survivor on hook immortal and unkillable indefinitely. That's just not balanced in any way, shape or form and the nerf brings it into the category of "Effective but not OP."
WIth the original Reassurance, a team could make a survivor on hook immortal and unkillable indefinitely.
Only if the killer is AFK. But at that point, no one is gonna die anyway. The killer does have to put in at least -some- effort to get a kill.
-
@Dead_Harder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152387#Comment_3152387
No im not because you and i had this conversation about 500 times and you are still not tired of it.
You are one of the people who lack basic common sense in this game and i dont know how you became ... like this but im not here to fix you baby nor am i here to have the same conversation over and over like a crazy person. I know you want to, ill have to leave you blueballed.
<3
Yeah, I'm not tired of it. Because it's baffling that you don't understand how bad Reassurance is when used in any situation that doesn't involve a camping killer. You legitimately think that killing off one of your own teammates one chase earlier and committing two perks and part of two survivors' output to do it is a bad idea. You think that it's unfair that a killer who gets thrown a bone and gets someone out of the game a full chase earlier and has two survivors constantly bouncing to the hook to sustain Reassurance could possibly miss a kill if they can't manage to get a single down in all that extra time they've been bought. And you think it's a good idea for a killer who is struggling that enormously badly to still get that kill and thus keep them in the skill bracket where they -clearly- don't belong.
You just don't look at the perk's played scenarios, you just go 'ten seconds downtime for 30 second effect OP', in disregard of what the effect actually is. You think a killer deserves that kill, no matter how badly they get outplayed by survivors.
And then you whinge about others not having common sense.
-
@Dead_Harder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152376#Comment_3152376
I'm not going to sit here and spoon feed you the reasons why a 10 second cool down on a 30 second effect is insane.
If you cant understand why, there is no conversation to be had.
Love you honey <3
No, you're not. Because you can't argue it. It's a 10 second cooldown for a 30 second effect that -keeps another survivor incapacitated for longer-.
Very OP.
-
@Dead_Harder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152339#Comment_3152339
Honestly yeah. Good players would have used it to keep their team mates on death hook safe and trolls would have griefed with it but all of that is secondary to how insane the cool down was in the first place.
People dont have the most basic common sense in this game and i have no clue what breaks them like this or if they were already broken in the first place lol
Why was the CD insane?
It's a bad perk. It is basically a weaker, more conditional version of a baseline feature. It ONLY benefits you against camping killers or really, really bad ones.
The only valid complaint was the griefing one, but that didn't warrant the perk's neutering.
Now getting, at max, thirty seconds out of it is not enough for a perk that, effectively, only the killer can activate.
If you're terrified of a survivor being incapacitated for an additional thirty seconds as opposed to being taken off hook to help his or her team, you're probably playing above your skill level.
And if Reassurance scares you, I think we can make an educated guess as to how you got there.
-
Because tunnelling is too much output for too little effort and honestly quite OP. So if you want to 'incentivise' NOT tunnelling, you'd need to make the alternative either lower effort or higher reward.
-
Boons as a concept need to be more flexible. Individual boon perks should have different boon parameters. Exponential, for example, should have a WAY bigger radius than Shadow Step or CoH. Maybe CoH can have a longer bless time than other boons. Things like that.
-
@GoshJosh said:
Rebuff to five seconds, remove the skill check, make it worth for both hook states, and make it also disable killer powers for 10 seconds. Then we would have a scary anti-tunneling perk again.
Don't remove the skill check but make it near unmissable. DS should be used within the first second or two of being picked up and the skillcheck system is the perfect coatrack to hang that function on. It's got audio and visual cues all baked into it.
-
@Shroompy said:
because it just hurt the killers who didnt need to be hurt by it the most like Trapper, Pig, etc. While barely having an effect on high mobility killers like Nurse or Blight.
I think it should go to 4 seconds for a nice middle ground
It only hurt them if they activated the perk. They could just not tunnel and be done with it. 5 seconds is fine. It was fine already, outside of the EGC usage, and with that clipped, there's no reason not to have it at -at least- 5 seconds.
-
Corrupt Intervention seems like a pretty healthy perk to award baseline, especially with the 'dissipates on first down' stipulation added. It's just cleaner and more fair to low mobility killers to get that little set-up time.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149032#Comment_3149032
Because killer perks literally require them to play more skillfully to get use out of them, whereas survivor perks are kind of just there, and the more powerful ones can be used offensively despite being defensive perks. For example Ruin, Pop, and Pain Res got called OP and nerfed even though they only reward killers who left hook and went for multiple chases. The people who say killers got carried by those perks despite camping are wrong; it's their bad play, allowing the killer to get off multiple uses of those perks while they're supposedly camping, that caused them to lose. We've seen time and again that even with 4 gen defence perks and whether the killer camped or was always being in chase, killers aside from Nurse and Blight couldn't have won, because the survivors were too efficient on gens.
That's why killers camp and tunnel: the race against time. Survivors don't have an option to do gens in a skillful way. They just do them, although it's their decision to be efficient or not. On the killer side, being efficient and playing skillfully are considered polar opposites, because the skill is all in the chase. If the killer camps or tunnels, they have to do less chases which is them being efficient on their time. Going for multiple chases, you can end chases very quickly, but it's inefficient unless it immediately results in a survivor being sacrificed. That's why it's hard to play like that and still win, because while you're wasting time displaying skill instead of being efficient, survivors have no reason to not be efficient on gens, and they almost always beat you to the punch.
I for one want to see Reassurance in action, and I'm hoping it will be as good as I'm predicting it will be. I want to see if it stops camping and, if so, I want to see how well killers do by not camping. That doesn't mean that I'm optimistic about how killers are gonna perform though. What I like about Reassurance, and Kinship, is that it's for a survivor who's on the hook, not a survivor who's off the hook.
Anti-tunnel perks are the problematic ones, because just about every time they've been strong or buffed, they've been used offensively. DS, Mettle Of Man, BT, Off The Record, base Endurance, the works. Those are constantly used to protect the unhooker, who everyone thinks the killer is obligated to go for. Unless we want to talk about the game having some sort of body blocking detection system, we're admitting that these defensive perks become problematic when their uses exceed just making unhooked survivors safer. That's why they're crutch, because the unhooker didn't do anything to evade the killer in that interaction. Some random other survivor, since they could afford to take a hit or 2 because of their perks, jumped in the way and extended the chase for the person being chased when they should have been downed.
The killer main message that says that survivors win because they're OP, and killers win because the survivors are bad is mostly true. Survivors have enough tools, time, and killer weaknesses to exploit so that they can beat the killer on pretty much any given map. But I want to focus on that second part, that bad survivors is what allow killers to win. It's true for all killers except maybe Nurse and Blight, because they are so strong that they can play catch-up with the survivors having a lead on their objective. I don't care how creative your traps are as Trapper or how good your curving is as Hillbilly, how smart your snare placement is as Freddy or how good your reactions are with Deathslinger, you're not beating good survivors with that stuff. Their gen speed will be too quick to manage and they'll have too many second chance perks. You can beat bad survivors with that, because they take unnecessary risks and think that they can't be organized just because they don't have comms. They also don't seem to want to run strong perks or even items, but then they're the ones complaining about the strong stuff killers have?
Skill is considered a factor for killers. It's not included in a lot of discussions even though it should, but it's absolutely tied to game balance. The killer has to down really fast to get the best use out of perks like Pop and Pain Res, but to down fast you have to end chases fast, and that takes skill. Some loops you're forced to brute force until the pallet is down, like shack, because you'll waste an equal or greater amount of time trying to mindgame there. You can mindgame a survivor at a place like that, and that's skill, but the survivor had to make the mistake to allow your skill to matter. But assume the survivor doesn't get mindgamed there. That's still your skill you were trying to use but couldn't do anything with, similar to survivors being camped to death. Camping a survivor doesn't take much skill, but it saves you the pain of going through 1-2 more of those chases where you have to waste an arbitrary amount of time, and where your skill didn't matter that much, only for the survivors to win in the end. I think what most people who hate camping do is they say, "It takes no skill" and call it a day, and don't really go into why killers do it, or they do and they say, "Yeah, but the killer still shouldn't do it." Killers find places to use their skill when they can, but when they can't, you see what they do instead.
The killer main message that says that survivors win because they're OP, and killers win because the survivors are bad is mostly true.
Based on what? Kill rates, as far as we know, never dipped below 50%. Red ranks used to have kill rates approaching 70%, and this same argument was tossed around back then, too. You toss out a crapton of words without actually addressing the matter. You just open with a blanket statement about game balance and about how killers just can't win, but you're extremely reluctant to consider any killer faults.
you're not beating good survivors with that stuff
No, YOU aren't beating good survivors with that stuff. Other killer players do. That's kind of the problem I'm highlighting. There's a lot of words going on here, but very little argumentation on the actual balance. Killer skill is not considered in these kind of diatribes. The fact that you complain about 'second chance' perks does kinda highlight that: None of the second chance perks (Barring OTR) work if you don't allow them to. Especially DS. But these perks still see regular complaints. It's a go-to complaint for killers, honestly, despite these perks being negligible to anyone who gives them a modicum of counterplay.
But survivors OP because you can't hard-tunnel into an anti-tunnelling perk and win anyway.
I mean, 6.1.0 gave a ton of buffs to killers, and if anything, the 'survivors OP' complaints have -increased-. It's just indicative that killers aren't fairly considering whether they made any mistakes or errors and would rather just camp and tunnel to break the game down, and use that as leverage to try and enforce more changes in their favour.
-
@Cameragosha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3148559#Comment_3148559
Reassurance need more nerf.
Your face needs a nerf! It's too pretty!
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3148525#Comment_3148525
30s is a whole half another hook state. If you use it on first and second hook, you've essentially given a survivor an additional hook state. This is very powerful for obvious reasons. It doesn't magically become less useful just because you're not grouped with your teammates.
I'm so sick of people blaming all the ills of the world on solo queue. Oh no, spooky scary solo! It's trite. It's boring. Grow up, it's not that bad. It's fun most of the time, even.
Can't use it on first and second hook state. Only once per hook instance.
-
It's not once per hook stage, it's per hook 'instance'. This probably means that if you use it on someone who's on first hook stage, and they progress to second hook stage while on hook, you can't use it on them again.
So against a camping killer, it can now only be used once.
Which means it's #########.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3148661#Comment_3148661
And I argue that you don't have to see tournament level survivors to be beaten; just good enough survivors will do. Gen speed, arbitrary time waste at loops, and second chance perks stop the killer from killing the survivors on time. Their skill isn't enough to win, so they have to turn to strategies and perk/add-on loadouts to maybe see a chance of winning. Even if the survivors do go down quick or make multiple misplays, there's not much room to punish them. You're on a strict curfew, and spending just 20 seconds chasing 1 person can be game-losing. Why else would killer players pick the strongest killers, perks, and playstyles even at the cost of ceasing to learn their killer?
"Their skill isn't enough to win, so they have to turn to strategies and perk/add-on loadouts to maybe see a chance of winning"
Aren't you here complaining about how your skill isn't enough to win, so you have to turn to strategies and perk/add-on loadouts to maybe see a chance of winning?
Why is it that when survivors use anti-camp/anti-tunnel perks, they're unskilled and using them as a crutch, but when a killer relies on tunnelling and camping, it's because the game is unfair?
It's that classic 'Survivors win = survivors OP, killer wins = survivors bad' mindset.
Why is skill not a considered factor for killers?
-
@Cameragosha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3146823#Comment_3146823
It get already buff.
It still is 30 second and now not have cooldown.
It doesn't have a cooldown because it can only be used once now.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3148151#Comment_3148151
It's people who are upset that they can't solo stall a hook state and never have to save their teammate thinking the perk is bad.
30 seconds per a hook, can be used up to 6 times for a total of gaining 3 extra minutes if used properly along with proper hook trading is not a killer sided perk unless your teammates literally don't touch gens.
Not to mention the perk can be stacked so you can extend a single hook by 1.5 minutes and 3 minutes if you manage to save the hooked survivor in time. It's fitting a perk called reassurance is effective when you actually save your teammates instead of leaving them on the hook.
30 seconds per a hook, can be used up to 6 times for a total of gaining 3 extra minutes if used properly along with proper hook trading is not a killer sided perk unless your teammates literally don't touch gens.
The problem is that you will never use this perk 6 times. If other survivors are getting hooked a total of 6 times, the killer isn't camping. And if the killer isn't camping, Reassurance won't benefit your team -at all-.
Reassurance is a laser-focused perk. It has one applicable scenario, which is that of a camping killer. That is the only way it is going to get value. Now that value has been crippled from the singular perk offering up to 360 seconds of extra hook time to 30. The one job this perk has it is now bad at.
This is the same issue as the massive stun cut on DS. It has one singular job, and it is now bad at it.
This perk should not have had any nerf. It should've allowed the hooked survivor to reject the effect to solve the hostage situation, and that is it. But instead of just fixing the one problem the perk has, BHVR went gung-ho on it and gave it a massive, crippling nerf which specifically makes it worse against camping.
Keep in mind as well that, prior to the nerf, if the killer saw someone use Reassurance, they had a strong reason to leave the hook and give chase, since that one survivor, left unchecked, could kill his entire strategy. That is gone now, too, since chasing the survivor won't take the perk out of the game; it has already deleted itself.
This perk is now going to require a full team to all run it in order to do the one job it was supposed to do. It's basically dead in the water for solo play, which was the only thing that needed it.