MrPenguin
MrPenguin
About
- Username
- MrPenguin
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,543
- Last Active
Comments
-
Yeah.
I don't camp and tunnel the vast majority of the time because I don't find those playstyles fun for me personally. The survivors also benefit as a side effect.
Doesn't stop a ton of survivors from being BM machines, making the gate smell like their undersides, being toxic in the EG chat, slamming gens, and such. Just how a lot of survivors are I suppose.
Idk what's different for all these players who say it "rarely happens" in their supposed killer games because it's pretty frequent for me. I'm surprised when I get a group of survivors who don't do any of that stuff.
A rare survivor or 2 every few days will thank/compliment me for playing chill but they are very much the exception.
-
Nurse, Blight, Spirit, and debatably Wesker are there. So they're fine
Every other killer depends on what you mean by "unplayable".
Games with subpar or mid level survivors sure they have a solid chance, a team of good survivors I would say no.
I wouldn't say having only ~10% of the killer roster be able to compete on more or less equal ground with good survivors means "Killer" is fine. But it depends on your definition of "Killer".
It's not like "Survivor" where everyone on the roster has the same power ceiling.
-
I did until I got to the Nurse hand power icon.
Assuming she's good. But that could legit be the only thing there and it would be the same conclusion lol.
Winnable sure. Decent chance? Ehhh I wouldn't say so unless you got a strong SWF.
-
Windows is strong, just not needs a nerf levels. Same as UW for roughly the same reasons.
They're just info perks.
Unless we get something like old OoO levels of info, which is basically perma wall hacks, they're probably not busted.
-
@versacefeng said:
Look at walls?
"Even if I face a wall while picking someone up, a teammate somehow blinds me from behind and I drop."
At least attempt to read the post if you're going to comment, lol.
-
If the survivors are Great: Survivors Only
If the survivors are good: Nurse, Blight, (debatably) Spirit, otherwise survivors.
If the survivors are decent: A tier killers and above, otherwise survivors.
If survivors are bad: All Killers.
In most cases at least.
Imo the game is overall survivor sided when most of the killers in the game struggle if the survivors actually know how to play well.
The actual number of players who are actually at that threshold is another discussion.
But someone who considers "killer" as just the high tiers would probably have a different answer.
-
As others have said its not that amazing.
But to add on: the killer also has to go walk over to each individual totem and relight them. So on large maps and for low mobility killers it can be a large time sink to go relight the totem to begin with.
You don't exactly have a lot of free time to just walk across the map to a genless area, relight a totem, then walk all the way back. On most killers at least. You'll lose all your pressure.
-
Just remove the speed boost, that's the main reason it's too strong.
Removing the endurance, while I understand is because it doesn't need both effects, won't do much. It'll still be ran every game.
-
Yeah I never really understood it either. You drop the pallet when you need it. If you need it at 5 gens you need it at 5 gens.
Idk where this idea came from but I have heard it said a lot with no explanation given
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3543550#Comment_3543550
Killer does have the advantage tho. When it goes to hatch it's generally easier for killer to find. Unless the surv is explicitly running hatch aura perks.
I didn't mean that in the sense I disagree that they have the advantage finding hatch, they do. I just mean that's the way it should be/stay.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3543068#Comment_3543068
But killers have the advantage. I don't think it's fair for a guarenteed 4k every time gens don't get finished.
That's only 1 potential option, there are/were others.
Advantage =/= guaranteed.
Killers probably should have the advantage considering the survivors failed their objective and the killer succeeded in theirs.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539503#Comment_3539503
It's far easier to get kills as killer than to escape as a survivor. Killers don't have a basekit equivalent of hatch because they simply don't need it.
I play both roles pretty equally and killer is easier by far. A 0k game is very rare for me as killer because if i know gens are going to get done I can usually focus one person out and occasionally secure an extra kill or two from ill advised attempts to save the surv I've picked. And I can tolerate the odd 0k game.
As for survivor I die in most of my games. Probably 60-70% which is a lot. Without hatch it would be much higher. And I probably wouldn't bother playing survivor at all.
It comes across in the way i play. As killer i usually deliberately release 1 or 2 survivors in a game i do well in. As surv i think i have taken pity on a killer once or twice and allowed to hook me so they can have a kill when it would have been a 0k. Survivals as surv mean a lot more to me than kills as killer.
You need 4 times as many surv players as killer players for dbd. So you need to make sure that people WANT to play surv. Making the experience too punishing would tank the game and make matchmaking a nightmare. Hatch is a good QoL machanic so survivors don't automatically just die everytime killer pressures gens right. At least there is an opportunity to escape. Its not even a guarantee so I don't see why people have an issue with it. Like it's so easy to counterplay hatch when you have 2 survs left alive
The only time a hatch escape irks me is when i need a 4k for an adept or challenge. Aside from that I couldn't care less as killer.
Ok that's fine.
The original question was was it fair, and no it's not since it only favors one side and killers have no equal. My main point was that and that's the stance I was defending.
That doesn't mean it needs to be changed. I think it can be improved or a better system can be put in its place, but I also don't think that necessarily needs to happen. I would prefer if it did but that's about it. I'm fine if it doesn't.
I think some of those aspects got lost in the mess.
-
I think I'm at the point where I'm so tired of MFT, in and out the game, that any nerf to it sounds like a good idea lol.
-
@antag0nisticw0mble said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541448#Comment_3541448
The pickrate though is down to
1 Hitboxes are broken af in windows so 90% of the time you still get hit triggering lithe.
2 Sprint burst gets used everytime you run and walking is not fun.
3 Dead hard is well DEAD.
4 You can't rely on teammates.
Smash hit and Head on are well you're lucky if you get to use them in a game. Killers get smart the first time you use either of them.
1 - bugs existing hasn't stopped them from nerfing things still e.x. Xeno that literally just happened
3 - DH is still in top 10 most used perks. That's a far cry from dead.
2 and 4 I agree with, but I don't see what that has to do with adrenaline getting picked. SB is also still in the top 10.
The reasons why it's picked a lot doesn't change that it is. I already said its not OP, but that hasn't stopped them before so idk what you want me to tell you 🤷♂️
I'm just saying there's a precedent in place for it to be nerfed even though "you play 1 perk down" and it's not OP.
-
@Steakdabait said:
It's perfectly fine, the survivor played with only 3 perks for the whole match so the reward better be big if you get to end game.
That didn't stop NoED from getting nerfed. Which was needed tbf. Not because it was too strong, but for game health reasons.
Adren could be in the same boat. No it's not too strong imo. But if the community hates it enough and it has a high pickrate (which it does) it's possible it'll get nerfed.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540316#Comment_3540316
My guy, I do realize that. That doesn't mean there aren't comparisons that can be made. There are plenty of equivalents and comparable on both sides. "it's asym" is not the shutdown you're trying to use it as.
Yes it is. Play the game.
Kills = Escapes
Ignoring that this is already a fundamental misrepresentation of the game's mechanical complexities, this still doesn't work for your argument.
The killer is able to secure a kill at ANY point in the game. Even if the exit gates open, you can pluck a survivor out of there and still kill them.
If kills = escapes, then it means that the killer intrinsically does not need the hatch because of this simple fact. You can make that kill at ANY point in the game. The hatch gives the same benefit to the last survivor.
What you are asking for, what you are equating to the hatch, is being able to secure a kill at the point that the fourth survivor is leaving. That is NOT the equivalent of the hatch. That would be equal to giving the survivors another chance to secure an escape AFTER all four have already died.
Functionally, what you are looking for, the ability to kill a survivor after the gens are done, already exists. You just mistake 'analogous' for 'exactly the same'.
Ok at this point as I see it, I think you have no idea what you're talking about and are making no sense and likewise I'm sure you feel the same.
I don't think we're going to get anywhere. Best to cut out losses and move on imo.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540389#Comment_3540389
Where are the stats then? Because the majority of the time I've been in that situation the killer ends up finding the survivor anyway. How reliably can the last survivor wait out 4 minutes while hiding perfectly AND get the hatch first?
You spoke about odds I'm expecting some back up on those claims.
Well, just as your argument is coming from your experience mine is coming from mine. In games where me or someone in my group want hatch for whatever reason, the vast majority of the time we get it to spawn.
If your experience is different then there's not much to say. I'm not playing in your games I'm not seeing what you see. You can't disprove my experience and I can't disprove yours.
We both don't have any stats to work with afaik.
If you are really getting denied hatch most of the time in your games and you feel like there's not much you can do, then I can see why you are taking the stance that you are.
In that case I believe that the core of the friction might be because our experiences with the mechanic and what does and doesn't work for us are wildly different for whatever reason. Maybe region, maybe MMR, maybe mindset, maybe playstyle, maybe something else.
As such, I'm fine leaving the conversation as it it. I don't believe we can really come to any further agreement or take the conversation anywhere else when our experiences appear to be the opposite of one another, as fundamentally what would help for one would harm the other.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540281#Comment_3540281
I mean, do I really have to explain why talking about things that aren't the hatch or relevant to it is unrelated to the hatch? It should be obvious.In this case yes, because the problem is, as people have pointed out, its an asymmetrical game. It's not "fair". Why does this issue in particular need to be fair?
Fun is subjective, so I try to avoid using it as an argument point.Yes, its subjective, but its the ultimate goal of the game is fun. It's perfectly fine not to find something fun, while also realizing that others do find it fun. Example: I loath the way add-ons and the bloodweb work in this game and would rip it out and rebuild it from scratch if I could, but I also realize that is not an opinion that is shared by most players or that my desire for the game is what the developers are going for. I understand BHVR's reasons and, while its not the choice I would make, live with it.
If you think you have a more fun solution to hatch mechanic, go ahead and explain why. I'm explaining why I think it would be considerably less fun.
In regards to "fun" and my opinion on that matter, no, I don't have fun playing for hatch on either side. I'd much rather just die and move on as survivor, I'd much rather just get my kill and move on as killer. I know others who feel the same. Hatch can drag the game on, it does not exclusively make the game shorter.It's possible you would enjoy your solution, but I don't think most people would. I think one of the things that makes DbD so appealing is that it is better than any other multiplayer game I've ever played at climatic moments. A good story goes through a narrative arc with building tension, its highest moment should come right towards the end. In many other games I've played, having the game decided right at the end with two sides fighting to the bitter end is extremely rare. It's much more common in DbD.
That's why I think ideas like the game just ending wouldn't actually improve the fun. The game needs a tense conclusion. You're not going to get that every game by any means, but that's what you are going for. Hatch allows something to play for at the end, or something to strive for in the middle, that keeps the tension going.
Survivors waiting for the 3rd to die, killers bleeding out to try and circumvent it, having to find hatch, close it, have gates power up, look for the survivor, wait for them to open a gate, ect.I think all of these could be addressed with hatch. Speeding up the bleed out timers is an obvious one, requiring some level of gen interaction before AFK crows is another, but both could keep the hatch.
As for the others, it's not thrilling, but I don't find it nearly as bad as you do. It has at least some mind game elements and creates a feeling of needing to rush.
That doesn't mean there isn't a better solution or we shouldn't suggest one.You can suggest all the solutions you want, but you need to explain why fairness is paramount as a reason for needing a new method and whether your solution would deal with others proposed problems.
It's also fine to realize what you want from the game is not what the game is going for.
It's not just about the survivors fun, the killer matters too. I only suggested the aura reading because you put forth ending the game quickly. If that's your main concern, there's better ways to end the game quickly and just let everyone "go next".Yes, killer fun matters. I think killers, in the long run, would get less enjoyment out of things like free aura reading, basekit blood warden, etc. Hatch is a pretty random element, but its better than just having the game totally decided and still having to play it out (which is an opinion, but I think that's what most people would decide if they actually played both versions).
So I'm not 100% on what you want to take priority in regards to the system.Overall enjoyment of all players. Given the nature of the game there will inevitably be some moments or positions that are considerably unfun for both sides. While those should be minimized, any alternatives must be overall improvements.
Example: Getting camped sucks, but if it was totally impossible for the killer to be near the hook the game would overall be considerably worse off.
If I understand correctly, you're saying the game should end once one side wins past the point where it's not longer reasonable.Somewhat. What I'm saying is a well designed game will, generally, appear competitive for the majority of the game. Let me use some symmetrical games as examples and why they deal with unbalanced situations better.
In a Team Deathmatch gameplay: the kill counter should be set at a point where, by the time it becomes obvious that the team's are unbalanced, the game is pretty much over.
In a Control Point style game: if one team dominates, they are going to totally control the objective, leading to a very quick game.
In both of the above examples if the sides are unbalanced the very nature of the game will result in a quick game. It's not perfect, brutally unbalanced sides will still suck, but the design makes the best of a bad situation.
DbD is an outright failure on that front. Given its stealth and elimination format, its possible the killer can be in a winning position very quickly, but the game not being close to being finished. The hatch is a solution to that problem, though it doesn't address all of the possible issues.
If that's the case, then wouldn't something like an instant sacrifice EGC style also solve that issue?Generally, no. Even if true, I think BHVR would worry it would feel like a farce. Horror requires tension, its what makes DbD appealing, the game just ending because a survivor got sacrificed on the other side of the map probably wouldn't feel satisfying for most players.
That said if we had to change hatch mechanic I'd take instant end game under a variety of conditions to speed things up.
Also, and you avoid this unless I missed a comment, in BHVR's mind the game is 1v1v1v1v1 - I take it you disagree with that idea, but if so we're looking at a larger overhaul then just hatch.
I'm open minded but IIRC as far as I have read in my back and forths, no one has suggested any alternatives or solutions besides myself.That's because most of us either don't seem to have a problem with hatch or don't see a superior alternative. You really seem to have an issue with the fairness, you cite it multiple times as a reason in and of itself, and it just doesn't really bother me given the game's asymmetrical nature.
Well, I might not agree with everything but I can see where you're coming from. I don't think we can come to a cohesive agreement as our views are too different even down to what is enjoyable or bothersome. But I try to get to a point where both sides can acknowledge and understand the others views. Well, or at the very least I can.
Again I see where you're coming from. I don't entirely disagree or agree and you bring up some additional angles to consider, but in interest of time and energy, I don't think it would be worth it to discuss further if that's fine with you. I think I have a good understanding of your argument, and I can't say you're wrong. The most I can say is I disagree on some aspects, but I'm ok with that and I believe that's a good spot to leave it in.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540256#Comment_3540256
Even if the survivor waits out the 4 mins you can still find the hatch first or the survivor first. You're implying that being unable to 100% guarantee hatch denial is not good enough, but then claim you were not insinuating that a 100% winrate...ok? The winrate was not mentioned for all the games, but being able to deny hatch 100% of the time would give you 100% in the scenarios you crush survivors at 4-5 gens, that's where it was pointed at.
Well let me try to clarify.
I never said it needs to be 100%, but as is now if the survivor hides and wants hatch to spawn they have pretty damn good odds. Maybe not 100% but way better odds than the killer finding whatever random spot they threw themselves in. Survivors mostly only get caught before then if they make a risky play for the 2nd survivor, get caught as the killer downs the 2nd survivor, or the killer gets lucky.
It only works because the survivors let it, not because it's inherently a good counter. It's stopped by just waiting safely. But it's the only option the killer really has if they want to try and play around it.
Maybe a rewording and deeper explanation would help. My main point is that hatch has flaws, especially from the base kit system and/or the killer side perspective, that make it unequal. Part of the question asked was "is hatch fair". Which from that perspective, no it's not. As with any other perceived flawed thing in the game, people (me included) are going to suggest ways to improve it and their gripes. As a neutral player who plays and cares about both sides of the game, I would like it to be evened out somehow, or at the very least improved upon.
So, as I responded to someone else, if hatch being replaced or removed or a new system for killers is too much, then maybe something else such as cutting out the 3rd chance from the equation would at least be an improvement. Such as when the killer finds hatch the survivor gets EGC sacrificed or something similar to just end the game and improve the slog that can happen sometimes and to balance it out at least a little. Whoever finds hatch first gets the E or gets the K.
I'm open to other solutions and improvements, but so far I haven't really been purposed any as far as I can recall at this time.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540243#Comment_3540243
My guy, you have still to figure out that this game is asymmetrical. That the killer and the survivors are playing fundamentally different games.
You say it's unfair that the killer doesn't get the hatch, or an equivalent but you are colossally failing to illustrate why this is unfair. Everyone with experience with this game, which is Dead By Daylight by the way, in case you erroneously wandered in from some other game's forums and are confused, knows that you are able to get any number of kills at any point in the game, up until the second that the survivors actually physically leave the trial.
Your hatch is the entire game up until that point.
Survivors only get it at the last second if they have already lost. Killers get it from the start, lasting the entire game.
You want the equivalent of three dead, one hatch escape? Camp. Tunnel. Get that 1E and throw the game for it. It's the exact same.
Everyone else has cottoned on to the fact that this is an asymmetrical game and thus mechanisms don't translate 1 to 1, except you.
That's why I assumed you have never played this game.
Ignoring the ad hominems.
Also going to preface this with If you don't want hatch improved than fine. If you just don't think or want the killer to get anything and keep it unequal and survivor biased in this aspect, then that can be your stance and on that I'm not going to change your mind. Especially not online. We can agree to disagree and move on. I want the game to be improved, and hatch is something that can be improved. Sorry you don't feel the same way and you offered no alternative improvements. Moving on.
My guy, I do realize that. That doesn't mean there aren't comparisons that can be made. There are plenty of equivalents and comparable on both sides. "it's asym" is not the shutdown you're trying to use it as.
- Kills = escapes
- Gens = hook states
- Gen time = chase time
- Pallet drop = pallet break
- Boons = hexes
- Exposed = endurance
- Dead zone = god loops/tile chains/ pallet cities/ w.e. you wanna call them
- Tunnel = gen rush (not hatch)
- Camp = focusing on a single gen (not hatch)
- ect.ect.
If you (general) think they're not comparable you don't understand the game enough to compare them or don't understand they don't need to be exact 1:1 to be "comparable". Speaking of which, some things don't have a 1:1 sure. In this case it's because it literally doesn't exist on one side which is what I've been saying. Boons didn't exist, they got added and now we have a comparable for hexes. You should really stop assuming what others think/know, so far you've gotten them all wrong. Again, "it's asym" is not the shutdown you're trying to use it as.
The entire match is the same as hatch? Hmm lets see:
- Activates when the killer already lost? No.
- 2nd chance at avoiding the worst score? No it's the only chance.
- Activates 3rd chance if the killer loses it as well? No see above.
- Separate from the normal way of completing the objective? No.
- Survivors can "turn it off" for the killer before the match is over? No.
- Voided from results? No.
No I don't think they are comparable. There's no similarities as far as I can see.
Again, if you just don't want hatch improved, think or want the killer to get anything and keep it unequal and survivor biased in this regard, then that can be your stance and on that I'm not going to change your mind. Especially not online. We can agree to disagree and move on. I want the game to be improved, and hatch is something that can be improved. Sorry you don't feel the same way and you offered no alternative improvements.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540163#Comment_3540163
Losing the argument? They either made up points and pretended I said them, straw manned, whataboutismed, ad hominemed, completely ignored points they cant counter, or didn't even understand the game.I don't agree with every argument in this thread, but you way over deploy strawman, especially because you don't explain why..
I was wasting my time with someone either heavily biased or just clueless but doesn't see it.Yet you took the time to respond. If you are going to respond to an argument, saying you didn't read it is silly. If you think its that much of a waste of your time, don't engage.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540166#Comment_3540166
Ok so like I keep saying and like I've been saying since the beginning, give the killer an equivalent or replace it. Doesn't have to be removed and that's it.You like fallacies: this is the Nirvana fallacy. You are looking for a perfect solution. It's possible the hatch is the best solution that can be achieved.
Even we grant every complaint you have about hatch, we run into these two things:
Not having the hatch would make the game considerably less fun.
Giving the killer an equivalent "power" would make the game considerably less fun.
I might have missed a proposed solution, but I saw base kit blood warden after 3 survivors escape. Would you really be interested in playing a game like this as either the killer or last survivor (not even counting how easily SWFs would deal with this)? I have no interest in playing either scenario.
Alternatively just replace hatch with something like aura reading on the survivor to speed it up the death process then. If your only concern is speeding it up as that would remove the "robbery" or undeserved RNG escape aspect, or w.e. you want to call it.Again, how is that a fun game? The killer has a massive advantage and the survivor is doomed. Why are we even playing the game at that point?
Games require both sides to have some chance of victory. If one side can no longer realistically achieve victory, the game should end (either by design or a mercy rule). There can be a little bit of downtime as one side finalizes the victory: example carrying the survivor to the hook, but otherwise once the chance to progress is gone the game should be over.
The hatch mechanic keeps the idea that there is something to play for. That is absolutely needed.
It's possible there is a superior solution to the hatch mechanic, but I've never heard one that doesn't have even more problems.
I mean, do I really have to explain why talking about things that aren't the hatch or relevant to it is unrelated to the hatch? It should be obvious. I did say multiple times when they were talking about perks that we're talking about base kit. If I was questioned or felt like it was not obvious I would/can explain. So if you want to bring up anything you feel like was not explained well enough or wasn't obvious why I believed it was a strawman please do. Also isn't burden of proof usually on the person trying to make the connection to say why they're relevant to each other?
I don't believe I'm looking for an unachievable perfect solution to the point it would fall under that category. I don't even believe there is a perfect solution. I'm also trying to use things already in the game just repurposed to keep it more feasible. But saying hatch as it is now is the best possible solution I do disagree with (obviously). Which is why I'm suggesting improvements when prompted or I feel is necessary.
Fun is subjective, so I try to avoid using it as an argument point. It would be less fun for some, more for others. The game would be less fun for those who want to have privileges over others I suppose. But more for those who want a balanced game. Amongst others on both sides, obviously we can't think of every possible person.
In regards to "fun" and my opinion on that matter, no, I don't have fun playing for hatch on either side. I'd much rather just die and move on as survivor, I'd much rather just get my kill and move on as killer. I know others who feel the same. Hatch can drag the game on, it does not exclusively make the game shorter. Survivors waiting for the 3rd to die, killers bleeding out to try and circumvent it, having to find hatch, close it, have gates power up, look for the survivor, wait for them to open a gate, ect. However, it's better than having survivors hold the game hostage for up to an hour. That doesn't mean there isn't a better solution or we shouldn't suggest one.
If you disagree with the scenario given purpose another to even it out. It's not just about the survivors fun, the killer matters too. I only suggested the aura reading because you put forth ending the game quickly. If that's your main concern, there's better ways to end the game quickly and just let everyone "go next". So I'm not 100% on what you want to take priority in regards to the system.
If I understand correctly, you're saying the game should end once one side wins past the point where it's not longer reasonable. If that's the case, then wouldn't something like an instant sacrifice EGC style also solve that issue? The game won't drag on, it can't be held hostage any more than it could currently, there's no undeserved robbed or w.e. anything going on. Isn't that an even faster solution?
Maybe it doesn't need to replace the hatch completely or be a new system if that's too extreme. Maybe once the killer closes the hatch then the survivor get sacrificed. That would at least be better than having a 2nd and 3rd chance to get out and the match would be over sooner. Hatch is the last chance and both sides get either a kill or escape for finding it. It's at least an improvement on the fairness aspect and keeps some of the aspects I believe you want to keep.
I'm open minded but IIRC as far as I have read in my back and forths, no one has suggested any alternatives improvements or solutions besides myself.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540219#Comment_3540219
When they released statistics last year I think hatch escapes were accounted for. DC's were the ones that weren't counted for.
Hatch escape doesn't raise your MMR though, I don't understand how it doesn't count as an escape when it gives you points. Not counting as a win I can understand.
I don't think people who want to remove hatch want to give compensation to survivors. When people on either side complain about a mechanic that favors one side they don't go thinking that to balance the killrates killers/survivors will receive a different buff. They just want the killrates to change in essence. You also didn't make such an argument until I mentioned it, which makes me think you didn't really care about offering survivors compensation if hatch was removed but feel free to correct me.
If you dislike the RNG aspect of it then I don't understand how this bothers you so but 4% chance which is even worse gets no attention, or gen spawns in certain maps than can be awful etc. If you're coming at it from an RNG side you should be against many other RNG things DBD forces on its players, not just hatch.
Your basekit mechanic that gives you advantage is basically breaking pallets. Imagine a game you would not be able to break pallets, you'd be at a rather huge disadvantage even late game. But by breaking pallets at key places (say shack) you're weakening survivors and making deadzones that makes it easy to down them in any part of the game. Why are we acting as if this is not a basekit mechanic killers have that survivors don't have the equivalent of. Survivors can't rebuild pallets, and to even reset a pallet that's already down they need a specific perk. You should not be taking pallet breaking for granted, it's not. The game would be extremely difficult if pallets could be rebuild or survivors had a basekit ability to protect some.
Killers are have basekit BL in 3 levels and survivors have no such mechanic. BL becomes stronger in deadzones so it has great synergy with basekit pallet-breaking.
As for Hope and MfT, no we do not include that because we're talking on a basekit level. Just like we can not include Unbreakable and we didn't include moris either or add-ons. I addressed those earlier and I still told you that you have slugging on a basekit level. You really don't have to bring anything to counter hatch for the most part. Like a killer who brings 4 slowdowns can still lose a game duh, you cannot expect a 100% winrate on certain strategies that's delusional.
If you wanna have the MfT + Hope discussion I could also say, well just win the game before all gens pop, easy. No need to deal with this combo. MfT + Hope cannot counter 4 slowdown perks.
Well saying hatch doesn't count for a kill or escape, then counting it as a kill or escape doesn't make sense. But its BHVR so I wouldn't put it past them.
I can't talk for "people" and what they might be okay with if they haven't said so one way or the other. A that point I'm just heavily assuming. But if a change to solve a problem, or any change, causes an imbalance you should correct it or compensate for it. I didn't bring it up because it was never necessary to bring up. It would have just been unsubstantial fluff convoluting the discussion and point I was trying to make.
I am against all the things you mentioned for RNG. They are just not the topic at this time.
Breaking pallets is the killer equivalent of survivors dropping them, not for hatch. Imagine if killers couldn't break pallets. It's not an advantage it's an equalizer. Hatch still has no equal.
Ok well if we're talking base kit then why did you even bring up the perks to begin with? That's why I said it doesn't matter anyway.
As I told you earlier, a survivor can wait out the slug. The survivor can choose not to and risk getting caught which is what happens sometimes. But as is you can just hide and get hatch to spawn extremely more often than not. People can choose not to but that's on them not the game.
"you cannot expect a 100% winrate on certain strategies that's delusional."
Good thing I never expected or asked for that.
"If you wanna have the MfT + Hope discussion."
I don't. That's not relevant like I said earlier in this and the last post. You're the one who brought it up. I just responded.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540134#Comment_3540134
"In what way?"
Welcome to DBD, there's a tutorial in-game.
If you can't figure this one out, then I'm convinced you've never played.
I don't think the tutorial explains something that doesn't exist and you haven't refuted what I said either.
If you're not able to explain your argument I'll just assume you don't have one.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540186#Comment_3540186
Removing hatch though swings the game to the killer's favor and survivors might get compensatory buffs to keep the killrates at their deserved numbers.
Killers already become stronger the less resources are in the map (broken pallets and used up hook states, used up items) without having to equip any perks. Obviously a killer who has created dead zones can already probably get his 1k on survivors , unless we're talking about survivors running MfT + Hope which I don't think it's the case, so we're not referring to that scenario.
Like to claim survivors get more 1e than killers get 1k is not honest because we'd have to look at statistics and if it came out that they both happen at the same rate then you would not be able to claim hatch is unfair because it would not be offering any more advantage to survivors in that case. You really have to ask BHVR to release statistics how commonly hatch escapes happen on killer's crushing victory and the other way around and see their relation. Because if they both happened at the same rate then hatch is not really as much of an advantage as you claim and it would be the only thing that balances killrates a bit. And last time they got released all killers were averaging over 2 point something kills for all levels I believe.
Devs already said hatch doesn't count as a kill or escape so it shouldn't be affecting the kill rate or escape rate currently. The % shouldn't change since it didn't count to begin with. For sake of argument lets say it's removed and somehow that changes things so survivor is underperforming. Then they should get buffed. Why is that an issue?
If the killer gets a 1K then the system can't kick in. What's the problem exactly? Technically hatch can spawn after someone escapes, but at that point it doesn't matter so it not worth considering imo. Effectively it's the same. Once a 1K or 1E happens the system doesn't matter. So that also shouldn't be an issue.
"unless we're talking about survivors running MfT + Hope which I don't think it's the case, so we're not referring to that scenario."
You mean the most common build running around right now? Honestly kind of biased imo to consider all these scenarios for killer but when its the most common survivor build its "we're not referring to it".
However in the end its not relevant as far as I can tell and doesn't matter, so I won't needlessly continue on that point.
"Like to claim survivors get more 1e than killers get 1k is not honest"
Never made that claim.
Again, hatch doesn't effect the statistics at all. Even if it did/does, that doesn't change anything. The frequency one side does or doesn't get a 1K or 1E to activate doesn't matter. That doesn't change that fundamentally one side having a basekit extra chance mechanic while the other doesn't is unequal.
I'm considering Hatch as an advantage because it can only ever benefit the survivors with an extra escape and the killer has no base kit equal or comparable that adds an extra mechanic due to 3 escapes happening to even it out. Unless that's changed it will remain true. So unless you can say something that changes that, it will remain unfair.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540173#Comment_3540173
I thought you didn't like guaranteed escapes, why do you like guaranteed kills then? (or what should be according to you a kill)
Not finding a survivor for 4 mins happens how often? If it happens as often as a survivor 4% unhook that escapes that you have no problem with then, it's not a real problem either.
Also your problem was hatch being a consolation prize for survivor and killers not having any. When you have to slug for the 4k it means you've already won, therefore you don't need a consolation prize in that scenario.
So which bothers you really? The fact you didn't get your "guaranteed 4k" or the fact you didn't get your "guaranteed 1k", neither of which you deserve because according to your own arguments survivors don't deserve "free escapes" either. Why does a killer deserve a free kill again?
Then don't give it to either.
It's not guaranteed K or E, I don't believe anyone ever said it was. It's a 2nd and 3rd chance at avoiding the worst score (0k and E respectively). I've said that multiple times now.
If one side has a 2nd and 3rd chance so should the other. Right now one side has it but the other doesn't.
My main point was that its unequal/unfair. Like I keep saying. Also like I keep saying, you can go either direction to make it equal. I don't specifically want one over the other.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540134#Comment_3540134
Making it equal and also have a chance to give the killer a 1K would even it out no? At the very least it would be a lot more fair than it just not benefitting one side at all.Earlier in the thread you say:
It's only purpose is to give the survivor a chance to get out for essentially free, just because the killer won before they could, because otherwise they would potentially hold the game hostage by hiding forever.So I think everyone agrees on why hatch exists. If it didn't, survivors might just hide for extended periods of time and no one wants that.
What game element requires the killer to have something like that? How in the world would such a design make the game more fun? Hatch exists because the game is practically over and we need to speed up the ending. Any element on the killer side would simply slow the game down when the core of the game is already done.
Ok so like I keep saying and like I've been saying since the beginning, give the killer an equivalent or replace it. Doesn't have to be removed and that's it.
Explaining why something exist that is unfair, does not change the fact that it is. If you want to keep it around, the other option is to bring the other side up.
Alternatively just replace hatch with something like aura reading on the survivor to speed it up the death process then. If your only concern is speeding it up as that would remove the "robbery" or undeserved RNG escape aspect, or w.e. you want to call it. You don't need to hand out a get out of jail card. Start the EGC for good measure.
Then both sides only have 1 chance to get their objective done. They lost and that's that.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540150#Comment_3540150
I stopped at "most of the time benefits the killer".I don't know if there is a phrase that makes it sound more like you are losing an argument then starting off a response by admitting you didn't read a post.
Losing the argument? They either made up points and pretended I said them, straw manned, whataboutismed, ad hominemed, completely ignored points they cant counter, or didn't even understand the game. I didn't continue reading because that line made it extra clear that I was wasting my time with someone either heavily biased or just clueless but doesn't see it.
Not wanting to waste more of my time shouldn't be something wild. They probably think the same things I'm saying about me tbf, so in the long run it'd be saving both of our time.
If they say something reasonable as a response I'll go back and read the rest. But given how they've been reacting thus far I doubt it.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540117#Comment_3540117
You're the one who has taken an issue with a mechanic that is extremely chance based (unless either party brings an offering and then you know the exact spot and can act accordingly) that most of the time benefits the killer anyway. If it didn't bother you, you would not be here making a post. If you find slugging boring then don't complain? You literally don't have to equip anything to counter it. Do you also refuse to camp/tunnel or 3-gen when survivors don't go down like flies? Your refusal to use the strategy that counters hatch has no weight to it as much as you want it to have.
4% chance to unhook yourself is really relevant because it's a random mechanic that still exists in the game and probably feels even worse to play against than hatch (you cannot do anything to deny 4% chance sometimes) and that can also very well deny you that coveted 1k. And there have been posts with killers complaining even for that and asking an equivalent mechanic for killer like you are for hatch. (I can find you the thread if you don't believe me).
The thing is the game is pretty much over at 2k for survivors but it somehow isn't over at completed gens. You can get your kills before survivors get to the end game, survivors cannot escape before they get to the end game though. It used to be that survivors could also go through the hatch with a key, but not longer. So indirectly yes, survivors doing 5 gens is intristically tied to their escape. You cannot escape if you don't finish 5 gens, but you can 4k at any point in game as killer. That's the difference. If you played badly you can still COMEBACK, exactly because the game is not done for survivors despite their escape being tied up to their 5 gens (which is their win condition). You're just arguing on a technicality really because the game doesn't end instantly when they complete them, but that's exactly why killers have comeback potential and survivors don't.
Killers also didn't always have to hook survivors, old moris existed and they could well by-pass the hook mechanic. If the mori/infinite unbreakable were to be implented tomorrow (I mean it won't) then you would not even be able to make a comparison between hooks and gens because technically the killer's win could also very well be tied to downing survivors and never hooking them. And you never know how this game will evolve in the future.
Killers can skip hook stages (you can just hook the person who has 3 hook states last and deny them their resource therefore winning the game at around 9 hooks instead of 12), survivors can't skip gens (maybe you could make an argument for old toolboxes but those don't exist anymore). Sadako doesn't even need to hook and some Nurses can also get away with slugging, but survivors still can't skip gens.
I stopped at "most of the time benefits the killer". There is absolutely no scenario where hatch would be better for the killer than it not existing. It literally only ever gives an escape where there would otherwise be none. The killer never benefits.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540099#Comment_3540099
But it would be very heavily slanted in favour of the killer, so it'd be back to unfair again.
In what way?
Current hatch can only ever give a 1E where it otherwise would not have happened. It only ever benefits the survivor.
Making it equal and also have a chance to give the killer a 1K would even it out no? At the very least it would be a lot more fair than it just not benefitting one side at all.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540100#Comment_3540100
Hatch doesn't spawn when survivors at their strongest, last I checked this isn't old hatch. It spawns when there's 1 left and you could say regardless if they're winning or not.
You are advocating for something like the hatch to be given to killer cause you feel hatch is unfair. And I made the point that survivors not having comeback potential also feels unfair to me as a survivor. Why should the killer be able to turn a 0k into a 3k+ but survivors can't turn a 0E into a 3E? Lots of multiplayer games only temporarily remove their players and let them play again until the game is over.
But you'll tell me it's an asymmetric game so the two sides cannot be compared which is basically what everyone who claims hatch isn't a problem seems to be claiming. Killing to people at 5-4 gens makes the game unwinnable for survivors, but killers getting to end game with 0-1k doesn't mean they have to accept defeat cause they have a chance to turn it around.
The game already offers you a basekit counter to hatch, if you rather not take it, it's on you really. Not much else to say. You can't go expecting to play the game the same way when you started. Metas change, you get better, your opponents get better as well. Can't just turn off your brain and play like a bonobo cause it used to work in 2020 or something.
If you find slugging for the 4k too boring just don't? Many people don't and they probably still get to the hatch first at least 50% of the time (and this number might even be low).
Are you gonna start complaining for the 4% now that denies you an end game kill in 1 game out of 500?
The two sides can and should be compared, being asym doesn't change that it just makes it more complicated and not always straight forward.
The killer is not turning a 0K into a 3K, there are no kills/escapes yet and the game isn't over. Once a kill is done that's it its locked in the same way once a survivor escapes that it its locked in.
A comeback mechanic does not exist for either side. Just because its endgame doesn't mean the survivors won. They won once 3 people escape.
That would mean after the survivors escape they get dragged back in so the killer can kill them, that doesn't happen.
Gens done does not mean the survivors won the same way just because the killer got 8 hooks but 0 kills does not mean they won. 3E is a win, 3K is a win. Once those points are in that's it. Neither side can "make-up" for lost points.
That'd be like the killer saying "I had 8 hooks, the survivors turned a 0E into a 4E because they escaped at endgame". That's ridiculous.
I already addressed the "bypass" point and you haven't disproven what I said so I'm not restating it. Go reread it if you want.
"If you find slugging for the 4k too boring just don't?"
I already said I do that. Why are you bringing this back up?
"Are you gonna start complaining for the 4% now that denies you an end game kill in 1 game out of 500?"
Why are you bringing this up? Stop making up irrelevant points from thin air. You're bringing up a lot of whataboutism.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540064#Comment_3540064
Uhh you do realize that killer gets stronger the longer matches last right? It's because resources get depleted. If you wanna make that point then please get a hatch equivalent so I can get a come back equivalent for survivors. As it currently is if 2 survivors are dead you can never turn it into a win, gives us the option to resurrect survivors so we can turn around a tie or loss to a win, just the same way a killer with 0-1 kill when gens are done can still end up with a 3k+ lol.
I'm sure many people would give you that trade. I would not care if you got a random mori for the last person in the game when you have not managed to sacrifice anyone. Just want come back potential for survivors since we're giving both sides equal chances.
I'm the one advocating for a hatch equivalent, no one said anything about a comeback mechanic. Neither side has that.
I have given hatch equivalents that kick in at a 3E, at that point the killer also can't turn the game into a win. The killer also cant turn a 2E into a win either.
Gens getting done is not the same as a kill or escape. The win condition is not gens, it's not hooks, it's kills and escapes. Hatch spawn condition is not gens, it's kills. The equivalent would be based on escapes.
The killer can get a 3k after gens, because the games not over yet and the kills/escapes are not locked in.
I'm not asking for that trade, you're just making up points and then throwing them onto other people as if they said it.
You do realize survivors are strongest at the beginning of the match right? That doesn't stop hatch from spawning at 5 gens. Why should it stop killers from getting something at the end?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539660#Comment_3539660
If we're considering these mechanics as "free", getting the 3rd escape shouldn't give the killer a free kill, then getting the 3rd kill shouldn't give the survivors a free escape
Good thing it doesn't, then.
Then why'd you even bring up[ anything being free to begin with?
If hatch isn't a free escape then an equal for killer would also not be free. In the model given it would also not be free as it followed the same formula.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539986#Comment_3539986
That's like the guys complaining "why can't I win as Killer when I play weakest killers, with niche perks and in the nicest way possible (no camping, tunneling, slugging)" so it's pretty relevant. Can games be won in playing nice? Yeah, sure. But you'd have to be pretty good as killer and probably above the survivors skill level. It's why people hate playing against co-ordinated survivors, cause that adds a layer of difficulty for killers who are used to playing vs uncoordinated solos and have strategies that work only vs them but fail vs survivors who can communicate.
But see? I was able just fine to guess you are one of those "I don't slug for the 4k" guys without you even saying anything in the first place. Your solution is right there, if you would rather not take advantage of that cause "omg boring" then it's on you, not the game.
That's like me crying the killer 3-genned when we did all the wrong gens and someone tell me "you can actually start by doing these gens to avoid a 3-gen situation" and me going "that's too scary/risky/boring, I rather do the ones in the edges first". Lol ok, I guess it's the games fault then for my inability to adopt a different strategy.
How is any of that relevant to 0 score prevention mechanics not existing for both sides? I don't care about he last survivor getting away or not. Its the fact that the killer doesn't have a hatch equivalent. Something base kit that kicks in at 3 escapes to give extra chances for at least a 1K like survivor has for a 1E. Thus its unequal.
Slugging for the 4K is not even really a bypass. There's nothing stopping the last survivor from waiting it out in a random corner, tile, room, or locker. Realistically if they want hatch to spawn it will spawn.
People have suggested a rushed bleedout option if you're slugged. I agree with that proposal. Because I agree waiting 4 minuets just to play out the match is a lot.
All I "see" is your strawman and ad hominem arguments.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539731#Comment_3539731
There's already plenty of luck in the game. Survivors run to dead zones all the time cause they don't know. There's your luck. That doesn't seem fair to me either but it happens and there's no skill involved. Equipping NOED and getting downs if you did bad all game is also based on luck somewhat (good hex spawn). Isn't it unfair for survivors who worked to get all the gens done and not lose any of their teammates, they must have played really well up until NOED triggered but you can still come out of such a game a winner.
I have never seen a killer say how unfair that must feel for survivors and how they got robbed. Instead they say "the game doesn't end when all gens are done".
It also feels really unfair when the killer is slugging for the 4k and he's not even good enough to find you within the next minute, but you have to wait out the 4min duration or go save and there's hardly any comeback from that, but hey it's still in the game and I'm kinda surprised no one told you that this is the way to bypass hatch. Or are you gonna tell me you're too noble to slug for the 4k suddenly? Or maybe that Unbreakable can still happen lol? I mean if it's risk you gotta take and Unbreakable won't win them the game anyway, you can still down them. There's already a basekit solution to hatch, any killer can slug.
You also have Devour Hope which most people agree on is high risk high reward so there's your luck based thing that actually allows you to outright kill survivors or insta down them just by playing the game as you would normally.
Cool strawmans but none of that is relevant to nor changes what I said.
Sure dead zones exist, but loop chains and god structures also exist (and are far more common). Both sides have their equivalent, but those aren't relevant.
Perks are not the same as base kit mechanics. Also not relevant.
I don't slug for the 4K, but that's also not relevant regardless. It's not even about being "too noble" (whatever that means), I just don't have fun doing that.
-
@VoidOfMe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539731#Comment_3539731
Hum... That's already in the game? It's called... closing the hatch?
In what situation are you closing the hatch after 3 people escape? Even so it wouldn't do anything since the gates are open. That's not the same at all.
I'm talking survivors do all gens, 3 get out, entity blockers stop the last from leaving to give the killer a chance at a 1K. They need to escape through hatch or find a switch or w.e.
Something that rewards the killer since they lost with an extra 1K chance the same way hatch rewards the survivor since they lost with a 2nd and 3rd chance for a 1E.
Survivors lose: hatch + gates powered if hatch gets closed.
Killer loses: nothing
-
@VoidOfMe said:
when you start to complain about one single survivor escaping by luck in a hatch, it's because 4k is so important to you that you, for sure, sweat your way around every game making it the most unfun experience for everyone else in that match. If a single survivor escaping bothers you enough to make you create a topic like this, it's because you HAVE to win to have fun. One of the biggest problems in any online game.
Would you agree with putting in a system to allow the killer a chance to get a kill by luck if 3 survivors escape?
A single survivor getting sacrificed also shouldn't bother anyone.
It's only fair the killer gets a similar mechanic.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539549#Comment_3539549
It's by definition unfair
It's only unfair when you refuse to consider the actual game itself. It's an asymmetrical, bud. Again, getting three kills does not mean you get to have the fourth for free.
Being asymmetrical is part of what makes it unfair bud. Were it not, both sides would have access to and benefit from it. If you refuse to consider the game, then you can pretend it's fair.
Nowhere did I say getting the 3rd kill should make the 4th free. The last survivor can get away if the gens are done, hatch existing or not doesn't change that. You just have to actually earn the chance to escape.
However the killer doesn't get 2 last ditch base game systems to secure at least 1K if they lost the same way survivor does for a 1E.
If we're considering these mechanics as "free", getting the 3rd escape shouldn't give the killer a free kill, then getting the 3rd kill shouldn't give the survivors a free escape.
Again, if you don't want to remove hatch then give the killer a comparable system that kicks in at 3 Escapes. I don't really care which one.
Either both get an equivalent or both don't. Wanting one to have it but not the other is just entitled double standards. In this case it would be survivor entitlement/bias since they are the ones benefiting.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539525#Comment_3539525
Cry about it. A 4E still requires all objectives done. Just because you got a 3K doesn't mean you are freely entitled to the fourth.
A 4K also requires the entire rest of the killer objective done as well. You need a 3K to get a 4K obviously.
The killers objective is kills. Killer gets their objective done, survivors get 2 get out of jail cards.
The survivors objective is done? Killer gets nothing.
It's by definition unfair, you would need to have some survivor blinders on to say otherwise. That was the question askes by OP, I answered.
Cry about it? Pointless immature comment. Are you upset? Are you just an anti-killer survivor main? Maybe just being petty over not having an actual valid argument? Regardless of your reason(s), your ad hominems are unneeded and unproductive.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539510#Comment_3539510
But more importantly turning of some specific perks is nowhere near the same as "the killer won here's a 2nd and 3rd chance that skips your objective" as a basekit mechanic.
That's probably because, for the killer, this is active during the entire game. You don't have to hook a survivor a second or third time when you can just camp them out.
And as a survivor the entire game you can rush gens and get at least one person out the same way you can camp and get at least 1K.
But hatch still exist regardless of that fact. So that's still unfair to the killer side.
Like I understand boo hoo camp and tunnel blah blah but that's not really relevant unless the game spawns the 4th survivor on hook and teleports the killer to them as soon as 2 escape. Not that I would want that specifically, that sounds like a bad time. But hatch isn't exactly "fun" for the killer either.
Essentially it's "oh 3 survivors died? You failed your objective? Ok its fine, you can escape anyway. Here's hatch and here's the gates just in case you lose that too".
What does the killer get when 3 survivors escape? Nothing.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538585#Comment_3538585
"Like I said before, if you don't want to remove it for survivors just give an equivalent for killers. It's not about being against hatch, it's about being against unfairness."
They already did. It's why anti-camp/anti-tunnel is disabled in end-game.
IIRC basekit BT is still active during endgame.
But more importantly turning off some specific perks is nowhere near the same as "the killer won here's a 2nd and 3rd chance that skips your objective" as a basekit mechanic that happens every match one side loses.
An equivalent would be something like locking the 4th survivor in and forcing them to escape through other means or needing to find something to get out.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538618#Comment_3538618
Killers have plenty of ways to force a kill in the endgame if they've done bad. Namely: NOED, rancor, face camping, bloodwarden, NWO. As killer I find losing 1 surv to a hatch escape much less annoying than getting insta downed and facecamped to death by a NOED enjoyer.
And which of those are basekit mechanics in every match that stop the last survivor from leaving when the 3rd escapes with no input from the killer to let them attempt a 1K? None.
For example a basekit Bloodwarden that activates for the last survivor once the other 3 escape would be comparable. But we don't have that.
3 survivors die? Here's hatch, here's powered gates if you lose hatch game as well.
3 survivors escape? Killer gets nothing.
It's annoying to lose a survivor to hatch. But on the survivor side the killer literally doesn't have a comparable system for you to be annoyed at to begin with.
-
@tjt85 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538325#Comment_3538325
I don't really see it as a "free" escape. The killer has the speed advantage, so you have to be very lucky with the hatch spawn and skillful enough to evade the killer in order to make a successful escape. The chances of escaping are still very low.
Besides, it's a fun consolation prize to play on for. If a survivor is dead at 5-3 gens, the game is essentially over and the rest of the team are just playing for BP, safety pips and hatch at that point. DBD isn't chess. It doesn't give you the option to resign an obviously lost game. So without the possibility for a hatch escape, there wouldn't be all that much point in continuing for a lot of players.
"free" as in you get it without needing to do anything. It's spawned in for you just because you lost. Yes you haver to actually find the hatch, but the process of it spawning is just "whoops, the killer won, here you can skip your objective". Then if the killer wins the hatch game you get a "whoops the killer won again, here's the gates powered for you as well". Finding hatch is also just luck 9/10 times, it's not like you have to outplay the killer or anything. You just run and hope you find it first.
I don't disagree with the second portion, as I said I just believe in fairness. For fairness the killer should also have a "whoops, the survivors won" mechanic as well for a 1K, or neither should have it.
The main question was is hatch fair or not, and hatch as is is not fair to the killer side as implemented from a mechanic standpoint imo. To even it out you should give killers an equivalent 1K chance mechanic if you don't want to remove hatch. I'm fine with either.
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538585#Comment_3538585
This game is a (1v1v1v1)v1. Killer isn’t entitled to a 4K because three survivors died. And to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Also, no matter how you try to defend your point that is what you’re saying. The final survivor can either go for hatch or wait and attempt the gates, and there are perks designed specifically to help the final survivor (Low Profile, Sole Survivor, Wake Up!, etc). These perks provide enormous boosts so obviously no it isn’t over for the 4th survivor because three died.
I don't believe I ever said the killer is entitled to a 4K but if that's your angle then the survivor also isn't entitled to a 2nd and 3rd chance to escape just because they're the last one and they lost. Otherwise as I said the killer should also get an equal mechanic then for 1E, it's not entitled to ask for fairness. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Also, no matter how you try to defend your point that is what you’re saying.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538585#Comment_3538585
For the record, I think 4E's should be just as unlikely as 4K's. So yes, Any kind of 'equalising' mechanic for when there's an impending 4E's could also be beneficial, but I'm not sure what such a mechanic could look like.
I've always been fond of scaling gen speeds relative to objective progress for each side. i.e. kills increase gen speeds while successive gen repairs slow them. This would be a leveling mechanic that gives the killer a slight advantage when survivors rush gens, and survivors a slight advantage when killers tunnel, or little difference if the game progresses evenly. This would likely reduce the chances of a 4E by making those last few gens take a bit longer and give the killer a chance to secure at least a hook or two more than they would have otherwise.
But I can't think of anything that could replace the vital function the hatch provides. That final survivor needs that significant chance of escape.
Perhaps instantly starting EGC once the 3rd survivor is killed, while giving the last survivor a semi basekit Sole Survivor, at least the aura hiding part. But I'm generally against basekit perk effects so...
Killer equivalent: You could give the killers a exit entity blocker after the 3rd escape and the last survivor has to find the hatch to get out. If the killer finds it the survivor gets EGC sacrificed.
It would also increase the use cases of perks like left behind.
Scaling objectives could work. I always believed we need something to reward player who play "the fun way" and don't tunnel. Slowing down gens would check that box.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3538325#Comment_3538325
Just because you've killed 3 survivors, doesn't mean that you've automatically killed the 4th by default, so no, you haven't 'already won'.
The fact that this is a prevailing sentiment only speaks to how much of an advantage the killer has when there's a sole remaining survivor. The odds are heavily stacked against the final survivor, and so this it matched with a high risk mechanic against the killer.
Fundamentally, the final survivor has to have a significant chance of escape, that's uncoupled from the way the match has played out until that point. A 'sudden death' mechanic of sorts.
Otherwise, if the final survivor is already more or less guaranteed to die, then that means the game is already over at 2 remaining survivors, because the killer WILL find and down at least one of them with little to no chance of a recovery. When there are 3 survivors, one can serve to take the killers attention while the other assists the hooked/downed one, but that's not possible with 2.
If the game is over at 2 survivors, then survivors have no incentive to do anything other than give up once that 2nd sacrifice is made. If the last 2 survivors always give up, then every 2K becomes a de facto 4K automatically. Every 2K equalling a 4K means kill rates skyrocket, which will be met with heavy killer nerfs to ensure that killers have a roughly 50-60% chance to score TWO kills, instead of four. That means insanely tough chases, powerful survivor counters, etc.
You don't need the 4th kill for a win, once you hit a 3K its considered a killer win. So yeah by the point the killer has "already won", that's not an opinion that's a fact. I also never stated that the killer should get the 4th by default just because they got 3.
I just don't think the survivors should have a last second RNG robbery for them losing without the other side also having one. As that's unfair which was the original question. Either both have one or both don't.
The odds should be stacked against the final survivor, its a 1v4 game. 1 survivor should not have anywhere near the same odds as the killer, that's how we end up with C tier killers and below.
The game in its current state is over with just 2 survivors in 9/10 cases assuming its before endgame. Hatch doesn't change that, it just undermines the killers work/win as I said earlier. You're still going to most likely get at least a 3K a.k.a. a win. If 1 survivor escapes it should be because they got down to one gen or the gates and finished while the other got chased. Not because RNG said so.
If the killer won by that large a margin they should get the 4K. If the survivors won by that large a margin they should get the 4E. However only one side is subject to basekit get out of jail free shenanigans.
Once there's 3 escapes the killer has already lost, they don't get a last chance mechanic to get at least a 1K the same way survivors get one for a 1E.
Like I said before, if you don't want to remove it for survivors just give an equivalent for killers. It's not about being against hatch, it's about being against unfairness.
Afaik hatch also doesn't count for kills or escapes and kill rate, it gets voided out.
The balance of the game doesn't change with or without hatch. The result is the same, the killer won. It doesn't make the rest of the match any easier, it doesn't make the killers any stronger, it doesn't make the survivor any weaker.
-
@CatnipLove said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537701#Comment_3537701
I think maybe you see this game differently than I do. I don't consider a killer who has won the match already as getting robbed by the hatch. The game says the killer won even if they escape. The game doesn't need to still be sweaty at that point.
I get it if you want the game to be really competitive, but I think the game has enough of that already, and the hyper-competitiveness is what ruins the game half the time.
I didn't say it robs them of the win, it does rob them of the kill though and any BP, emblem points, or achievements/challenges that would come with it.
It's not about being competitive or not. It's about it being unfair and/or undermining the killer doing well.
It's only purpose is to give the survivor a chance to get out for essentially free, just because the killer won before they could, because otherwise they would potentially hold the game hostage by hiding forever. Then it also activates the gates for the survivor if the killer finds it first giving the survivor another 3rd chance to get out after they lost at their 2nd chance.
It's a heavily survivor biased mechanic that punishes the killer just for doing well. At least give the killer an equivalent to even it out if you won't remove/replace it. Once the 3rd survivor leaves there's nothing stopping the 4th to give the killer a 2nd or 3rd chance.
If it still gave the appropriate pay out it would at least be better. As is now I don't think there's any way to argue it doesn't rob the killer of things they would reasonably otherwise have gotten.
-
No its not fair, but without it survivors would just hold the game hostage hiding because they don't want to die or to be spiteful towards the killer. IIRC that's why hatch and the EGC were implemented to begin with.
Imo replace hatch with something else. Getting rewarded a free escape and robbing the killer of a kill just because the rest of your team died and you got lucky just isn't something I agree with. Especially when the main reason why it even exist is due to the side you're rewarding being unsportsmanlike and spiteful.
I don't see any system that gives the killer a chance of a free luck based kill if 3 people escape. So its also unfair in that regard as well.
-
It's strong, but it punishes killers who don't tunnel more than those who do in most cases.
A tunneler will hit you somewhat instantly. So unless you have something to loop right next to the hook and they didn't hit you immediately for whatever reason, the extended timer rarely matters. They don't need to read the survivors aura either as they will know exactly where they are.
However if the killer doesn't tunnel, that survivor has super long to go get healed if they want, come back and body block or tank 2 hits for someone else. They have 80 seconds where any aura reading doesn't work, and the killer needs to find them the old fashion way.
I don't think the devs ever said it was a "replacement for DS" I believe the community gave it that title.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
How many "bully" squads can anyone actually be facing? Around half of all survs are in a SWF but the vast majority are two mans, with threes and especially fours a very small percentage indeed.
If someone is in that fabled "very high MMR" they'd maybe get a stupidly skilled four-man more regularly, but everything is busted in that area and everyone knows this.
I agree with the others, this proposal would leave SWF never getting a trial, and wreak queue times all over.
I don't tunnel camp ect. and around half my games today have been toxic flash click t-bag ect. squads.
It's not uncommon.
Just depends on the day and your MMR I suppose.
-
They still lose to hold W and hold M1 if the survivors have a few braincells🤷♂️
I haven't been having problems facing them