gantes
gantes
About
- Username
- gantes
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,552
- Last Active
Comments
-
@HollowsGrief said:
I only use NOED to annoy the survivor team, I certainly don't need it to 4k. That being said, I never struggle to counter noed, ever. That perk is very easily shut down and you don't even have to cleanse all the totems on the map, just cleanse the well hidden out of the way ones and leave the few next to gets up and as soon as you finish the last gen walk 3th to the now glowing noed totem. Seriously I don't want to sound like that unproductive guy and I know it is very unoriginal but: cleanse totems, you do have more than one objective after all. Besides if noed didn't exist people would have no reason to worry about dull totems outside of "I want more BPs) which would make games even faster than they currently hard.
Then add a totem counter. That's literally what people have been asking for for ages, and if the devs really want totems to be an instrumental part of survivor gameplay there's no reason there shouldn't be a counter.
-
@Marcus said:
Otz also said in multiple of his videos that DS isn't an anti-tunelling perk, but a minute invincibility perk for survivors. In one of his streams he even said that the new DS is stronger and used more often than the old DS. But of course you're only gonna share Otz's opinion on NOED, because his opinion on DS wouldn't fit at all with your extremely biased post. Because God forbid to break people's bubbles about "DS being a perfectly balanced perk, just don't tunnel noob".
I have to ask, if you're not going to add anything of value to the discussion and just attack an argument that isn't even here because you have no viable answer to the matter at hand, why even comment?
Go create your own thread on Otz talking about DS then.
-
@csandman1977 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228339#Comment_1228339
It should be every persons goal to improve. They then changed infinites because they realized that winning a chase but losing a game wasnt a fair trade-off.
Yes the devs can change their mind. But until they do, do the bones is the official answer
No one cares about the "official answer". We're arguing whether it's healthy design or not, regardless of what the devs have said.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228354#Comment_1228354
It's a perk ;)
Dead Hard also rewards survivors for mistakes in every trial. ;)
You can be against perks that reward poor play instead of accepting them when it's convenient to you, but you do you I guess.
-
@The_Horde said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228345#Comment_1228345
I'm not trying to be sarcastic when I ask this, but where does it say that all objectives have to have a progress tracker? Wouldn't it be up for the devs to decide how they want to label objectives and if they want to add a progression tracker for said objectives? To say that it can't be an objective because a certain condition you would prefer is not met simply isn't true. Unless there is an unwritten by-law that states developers are required to provide a progression tracker in order for it to be considered an objective, then it is an objective.
You could pretend its not an objective because those conditions aren't met, but the penalty for that is NOED.
I understand I wasn't as clear as I could've been, but it's a DBD problem. For each and every design choice you have to consider how it affects solo survivor and SWF differently. One of the most common complaints is that devs should bring SWF and solo survivors together then balance killers accordingly. How do you expect to do that when one side has access to the progress of an "objective" and the other doesn't?
Since SWF isn't going anywhere, there should be a totem counter as long as NOED provides as much power as it does, period. Make it work for both sides so that killers can know in advance if their NOED is going to activate or not and play accordingly. If the devs are unwilling to add a totem counter then I don't think NOED should exist in its current iteration.
-
@TAG said:
I'm totes in favor of re-working NOED completely. Didn't need a streamer to convince me otherwise.
I think OP just thought it would help bring some insight here since people love linking Otz's material when it comes to "OMG gens done in 30 miliseconds game literally unplayable delete SWF". I think he overestimated the forum users though.
-
@Sluzzy said:
Wanna know what the counter is to NOED? Find the totem then save the guy on the hook. How is that soooo hard?
Wanna know something else? Adrenaline gives a free health state completely for free so NOED basically just nullifies it. Both perks are exactly the same.
Another counter to NOED? Don't get caught.
Both perks are exactly the same, If you can be rewarded for completing your objective, why can't I be rewarded for failing to prevent you completing your objective? :^)
-
@The_Horde said:
Seriously though, people have turned "do bones" into a meme, but that really is the solution. It might not be the most pleasant solution, but a solution it is. I don't understand why people want an easy game every game. I like facing NOED as a survivor because its a challenge.
If it is acceptable that doing 5 generators is the objective for the game, why can't totems be considered a side objective? I feel that most people just want to do their gens and leave, but I don't really find that much enjoyment out of simply pressing m1 in front of a generator. I like to hunt for totems and enjoy the challenge.
It can't be considered an objective if there's not a progression tracker accessible to all players that have to complete the objective.
-
@csandman1977 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228212#Comment_1228212
People with different opinions? The horror. They say this because the developers have said this
The devs also said "just get better as killer" after Ruin got reworked and "infinites take skill" a while back. Can we please have some critical thinking and form our opinions without appealing to authority?
-
@CosmicParagon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228312#Comment_1228312
Easily: once Killers stop getting rewarded for it, they'll stop doing it. I don't do it because it's boring as hell, but I recognize that Killers do it because the survivors flock to the hook like moths to a flame.
That's not the case at all.
Most facecamping killers do it out of tilt. They want to secure an easy kill because they're at a point where they won't catch survivors in traditional chases. Whether it works to get more kills or not, they'll still do it.
Being effective vs altruistic survivors is just the icing on the cake, and that's on the devs to fix, really.
-
@The_Bootie_Gorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228304#Comment_1228304
killer's objective is to prevent survivors from escaping.
Survivor's objective is to try an escape.
Well, if altruistic playstyles are punished that much people will just focus on gens and escape, so I hope the tutorial in your version of the game said "kill only one survivor per trial" because that's what you're getting if that happens
-
@GhostofYharnam said:
Why is everyone so against Noed. But god forbid we mention andrenline, or any other survivor perk.
I don't understand the point of playing victim here considering that historically half of the posts here have been bitching about survivor perks or survivor gameplay in general, but okay.
The anti-NOED trend is recent because people have been running it more lately. Don't let that fool you though. If you've been here for more than a month, your comment doesn't match reality at all.
-
@CosmicParagon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228301#Comment_1228301
You don't need to be SWF to leave a camped survivor on a hook, you only need a brain.
So assuming all survivors will be in separate generators - which is NOT gonna happen,I ensure you - in what world is that healthy gameplay?
How can anyone defend that?
-
@The_Bootie_Gorgon said:
Punish altruism 🤘🤘🤘
Yeah punish altruistic playstyles and ensure that survivors all do gens and nothing else, because that's what killer players ask for daily in this forum
-
@CosmicParagon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228240#Comment_1228240
That's still a guarenteed win. 3 gens pop in 80 seconds, assuming all 3 survivors were split. The Survivor on the hook still has 40 seconds on the hook, 25-30 after factoring in time to find generators. the 3 survivors can finish a gen together in about 36 seconds, so they have MORE than enough time, since the Killer will have to reach the generator theyre on, assuming he picks the right one. If he guesses right, the two survivors not being chased can finish the final generator in about 45 seconds. Since the Killer is camping, he likely is fairly bad in chases, so it's entirely feasible that the two survivors can finish the last gen in the time it takes the last survivor to go down. Then the last survivor can pop their adrenaline/DH to reach a pallet or lose the killer, thus all three survivors get out.
Oh yes, the infamous omega coordinated 4 random solo survivor squad, which is known for spreading out perfectly and playing in the most efficient manner
-
I hate this "just do totems" mentality.
The only way all five totems get done consistently is if it's a SWF, and everyone knows how much you guys love SWF right?
That doesn't happen with solo survivor. There's absolutely no way for each individual survivor to know how many totems are already done. Until this game has a totem counter, NOED is NOT "easy to counter".
Unless you're suggesting a single survivor does nothing besides look for dull totems and destroy them all game, that "logic" doesn't work at all.7
I'm all for having strong perks as long as the player has to do something in order to meet the condition to activate them. Adrenaline rewards survivors for completing their objective,so it's good. I'm a big advocate for the removal of locker DS because it takes no skill to do and provides too strong of an effect, and countering it is unrealistic quite a lot of the time. NOED falls in the same boat imo.
-
@Waffleyumboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228221#Comment_1228221
Isn't salty people the only reason? It's the only reason I see on the forums or from the scant amount of replies I get from killers on xbox.
I'm pretty sure it's not the only reason. Unfortunately camping and tunnelling are very consistent plays for risk averse players/people who don't trust their ability to catch other survivors. There's also the problem that facecamping happens to be very good versus altruistic survivors - just check how many survivors who would otherwise escape die because of late game altruism - and playing altruistic is much more fun than just rushing gens for most players.
In my opinion camping and tunnelling should just be universally bad plays, but don't ask me how to do it design wise. It's too complicated, just like balancing gen times in a way that punishes high level survivors without making average to below average players miserable.
NOED is also a very tempting perk because of how forgiving the game becomes for the killer players. Personally I'm philosophically against late game perks for killers in general, but at least things like Blood Warden and Devour Hope are very situational. NOED just works every time, because it's pretty damn unviable for solo survivors to do all the totems consistently. This game very desperately needs a totem counter, I don't understand why it's not a thing yet.
-
Even if things like camping and NOED aren't OP (I personally don't think they are) they make for pretty unheathy and unfun gameplay and should be further discouraged by game design changes.
Here's the thing though. Just like devs constantly need to evaluate why people DC (besides people who just DC at the slightest sign of inconvenience) they also need to evaluate why people camp or play in unfun ways,besides just salty people who would be unsportsmanlike anyway. I think they're doing a good job with the map and gen changes, but I think there's still room for improvement on both sides.
-
But like can we please stop pretending that DS is an anti-tunnel perk?
That's one of its jobs, but it's not at all the main purpose of the perk. People run it to get one minute of safety after being unhooked, period.
Whether you like it or not, no one would run a perk that only does anything when the killer tunnels hard.
-
@Waffleyumboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1228131#Comment_1228131
Killers tell survivors to use perks to counter something, but when they are asked to do the same they somehow don't accept that it's an option. The logic behind this way of thinking is absent to me, although perhaps someone who is of this mind could explain it to you in detail.
This is pretty funny, it's just like killers using the standard "just adapt lul" when survivors complained about everything but apparently "adapting" wasn't an option when Nurse and Spirit got normalized.
-
There is an inherent risk/reward ratio for every play.You could, say, run away and loop her, or play stealthy in a smarter manner that doesn't just involve crouching in a corner (like taking advantage of the killer's first person view and crouching around objects that block their LoS) and instead you opted for the least skillful form of stealth that has a very high risk if you get caught.
Try to play in other ways of stealth that are harder to learn but don't have such a high commitment so that you can run away if you get spotted.
-
@LALYTHIA said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1227960#Comment_1227960
For starters, no it isn't. You can simply not go for the same person within 60 seconds of them getting off-hooked. You can also just take the 5 second stun and remove DS from the rest of the match for that survivor. You can slug them - most people don't have room in their build for unbreakable with all the other perks they have to carry to handle ######### killer game play - same for inner strength, I rarely see people carrying this perk. And if a survivor manages to get you back up, the killer can literally just smack you back down. You're injured, and they probably didn't go far. Nothing makes a survivor invincible - at most, it makes them inconvenient for a little while longer. The DS/Head On/Inner Strength combo you speak sounds nice, but I don't think I've ever specifically seen it. Survivors don't really have the luxury of running perks specifically for a situational locker self-save. Maybe in SWF, but certainly not in solos.
This is such a poor understanding of killer gameplay it's hilarious.
Sometimes not going for the same person is a huge momentum killer. Eating DS is a MASSIVE momentum killer if the survivor team is playing somewhat decently. Not being able to convert a chase into a down because of locker DS can lose you entire games REALLY fast.
Killers are constantly running against the clock. That's just the nature of the role. There should absolutely be a limit for how much of your time a survivor should get to waste without doing anything even remotely skillful. Time is absolutely DBD's currency. Survivors should be rewarded with more time for their teams to do gens if they outplay the killer in chases, but not by pressing spacebar in a locker.
And it doesn't matter that "you can't run all those perks at once". As long as those synergies exist within the game, that's what we should balance around. Your argument is equivalent to saying that Forever Freddy was fine because you had to commit multiple perks and addons to it, but that's why it was nerfed in the first place.
-
Oni is hard to play, very hard compared to most killers in the game. That leaves him with a small, dedicated playerbase which is pretty cool if you ask me. It makes it feel a lot more "special" playing Oni over stuff like Freddy or Spirit.
Besides, I like it when strong killers are hard to play. It makes the learning curve feel rewarding.
-
@LALYTHIA said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1227783#Comment_1227783
Locker DS is counter play to slugging to run out the timer, so agree to disagree on this.
DS, in all its functional glory, works as it was intended.
But slugging is the only reliable counterplay to DS that doesn't involve not playing the game. Unbreakable is counterplay to slugging and requires a perk to execute. Teammates picking you up are counterplay to slugging. Staying in a locker makes the survivor invincible, and is especially BS when combined with Head On or Inner Strength. It's way too powerful for something that takes no skill or opportunity cost, besides just being unhealthy design.
-
The counterplay to gate DS is playing better beforehand so you don`t rely on double hooking someone within a minute in order to secure a single kill.
What should go though is locker DS. Most reasonable people will agree that`s silly.
-
@Mister_Holdout said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1216539#Comment_1216539
Your observation is wrong. Solo survivors are the majority of the survivor player base. Nerfs to SWF wouldn't hurt them (because they play alone anyway).
The other guy I was talking to did raise a good point. A nerf to SWF would hurt the teams that don't use voice comms. That is an obstacle. I'm sure the devs can figure out something though.
Even if solo survivors are the majority of the playerbase, unless you have some genius 300iq plan, nerfing SWF involves nerfing survivor in general to some degree, and no shape of survivor gameplay besides SWF needs nerfs, especially after the next patch rolls in. So my observation wasn't wrong, you just misinterpreted it.
-
@Mister_Holdout said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1216315#Comment_1216315
Oh, so it's okay to leave SWF the way it is because there are a lot of players that use the feature?
That's basically like saying "SWF is a balance issue, but we're going leave it be because any nerfs would inconvenience a large number of players"
I mean, who cares about the killers who have to put up with it, am i right?
Also, I thought most survivors played solo. Wouldn't that mean it hurts less people than you think?
You can nerf a specific character without screwing over the entire playerbase of that role. You cannot nerf SWF without touching solo survivor, at all ranks mind you. Considering that for new players the game already is killer sided (the more you learn about the game, the more survivors have an edge, but no one knows how to run anything killers are stronger) it's very delicate, very hard and if you come in here asking for SWF to be nerfed you better come with a plan ready to do that without screwing over the majority of the survivor playerbase.
-
People DC for a multitude of reasons in any game. Most of them aren't justifiable, as they're not irl emergencies or a person being held hostage or whatever.
I'm just going to comment here that if you're regularly slugging the second to last survivor when you don't have any idea of where the last one is, people aren't DCing to give the other person hatch, they just don't want to wait on the ground until they bleed out. I'm not saying that's justifiable either, it's just a comment.
-
@elvangulley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1216340#Comment_1216340
Yes if its giving an unfair advantage you don't have to cheat to play with friends unless you are a scrub that needs that crutch
People don't take the game that ######### seriously and neither should you.
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
This is how you lie with statistics :) Good job!
Let's ignore the fact that many more gamers are staying home. There was a 1.5 bloodhunt during the same period as well as a new chapter.
The largest peak the game has had was 75k but the average playerbase did not increase after that peak. Why?
The average playerbase ranges between 25 and 30k players. Which means the number of people who begin playing the game is the same as the number of people who leave the game.
The growth you're seeing now is due to some very specific set of situations, but there is no real growth. Only stagnation.
Keep an eye on your chart by the end of the year. The average players will drop to what it has been over the years and the game will continue to not see any significant growth in the playerbase.
There are many reasons for this, but it's irrelevant right now.
The game isn't dying...
But it's not really alive and kicking either.
I know you have a weird relationship with DBD and love having this anger towards it all the time, but I challenge you to average the entirety of 2019 vs any other year and tell me the game didn't grow.
DBD is slowly and steadily growing. It doesn't have to skyrocket. And the average player cares a lot less about the things that make you (or a lot of the forums tbh) tilted beyond reason about the game.
DBD is absolutely alive and kicking. Don't let your own personal issues with the game lie to yourself about that.
-
@Mister_Holdout said:
It amazes me that people think voice comms belong in a game like DbD.
What's even more amazing is that people think SWF teams do not need any balance changes to offset the increased coordination.
Survivors had no problem complaining about Nurse and Spirit being too strong.
But when killers ask for something to be done about SWF we get called entitled.
I wonder if the devs will eventually recognize this bias in the community?
It's almost like normalizing two outliers is a lot more realistic than butchering the game for half of your playerbase.
-
I love it when people randomly defend toxicity in discussions like this.
If the way you choose to communicate and interact with people in game makes for a negative experience for everyone else, you should be punished. Period.
If you can't express your anger/competitiveness in a healthier manner that's on you.
Anyone would 100% get physically removed from a public place by behaving like this. I don't see why a game would be any different.
Being online isn't an excuse for being a piece of #########.
-
@aregularplayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1216030#Comment_1216030
43k is closer to 50k than 20k as you clearly was putting as the 2016 number, so I was right and you wrong. You mad?
Also, vast mayority of 2019 and 2020 also was spent under 50k. Don't pretend you don't see the data right in front of your nose. Peace.
Peak doesn't mean #########. I repeat: peak doesn't mean #########.
If the game peaked at 80k players every month but had 3k average players it'd be doomed.
Average players is what matters. I can't tell if you legitimately don't understand that or if you're trolling.
-
Are we still misinterpreting matchmaking times as "killers leaving"?
These forums never cease to impress me, not gonna lie.
-
There are many factors.
For starters, Freddy has a lot of "hidden power" that is hard to appreciate from the killer side. His lullaby can be very confusing in chases, and he's hard to spot from afar.
His playstyle with snares involves forcing early pallet drops, which can be seen as less skillful than regular mindgames (think Clown).
He's also the most powerful out of the extremely easy to pick up killers. He gets too much done for how little effort it takes to play him.
He also has a lot of synergy with slowdown in general which is pretty boring.
He's not overpowered by any means, just obnoxious.
That also makes him pubstomp-y which is never a good thing.
-
I'm too lazy to do it now but I'm pretty sure that if you use accurate comparisons and analyses between same time periods from different years the game has either been stable or steadily growing since 2018.
But I'd save my breath if I were you. If people want to hate they'll hate, even if it involves deliberately misinterpreting data. This game "dies" every month according to some people.
-
Sources: dude trust me
-
It's funny that people are complaining about Oni and Billy getting stronger since they benefit the least from these changes. It's negligible for a Hillbilly to have to run 20 meters more or less. It's a HUGE deal for a Huntress, a Deathslinger or even any 115% killer with no mobility.
The top tiers barely even care about map size changes. It's both the weaker killers and the slower killers who notice things like this.
-
Yeah hard agree on that one. I do think we should wait some time to see how it plays out though, PTB is just such a small sample size to truly visualize this. Maybe in the next update or the one after the next.
-
@Xx_Daniel_xX69 said:
Sorry didn't read most the posts here but one thing I wanna say about mori's is if used properly, as in on death hook, I dont see them being an issue it just comes down to the person playing with said mori. Other than that I agree that the changes are going in a great way.
But as long as they have the potential to be used to just eliminate one person from the game extremely early they're unhealthy.
-
@oxygen said:
When it comes to the map changes I like them, especially as the screenshots of the new window locations/tiles don't just delete the windows from the game. Many can still be ran once and be useful while passing through, but they're not braindead and uninteractive like before. Curious to see what the maps that will become smaller will turn out as well.
While I personally think co-op gens at the start of the game is actually not optimal at all and people should want survivors to stack on gens instead of doing 3 seperate ones, I guess it might make it less common to have a gen pop in like 30 seconds or something? While I'd much rather have one gen go in 30s than 3 gens being worked on at the same time it seems like to many people that sort of thing is demotivating and demoralizing.
The QOL changes are quite simply good I guess. Didn't expect the Legion change but it sounds nice, the UI improvements are always welcome and I've always been of the belief and I'm certainly not going to miss mori spamming 😄
I honestly think survivors should always spawn close together. That way you either force them to (suboptimally) work in a gen together or spread out to look for separate gens, which wastes time too. That way the changes have even more impact.
-
@xTalon32 said:
It's not 100% fixed, but it's definitely a step in the right direction.
I think the devs taking baby steps with changes like this is a good idea, but too drastic of a change could negatively impact the game.
Yeah that's exactly what I was thinking. Some people think it's too little but honestly you can't stack changes in the same direction too heavily and ship them. You have to start small and see the impact they have to the game little by little.
-
@Rezblaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1196967#Comment_1196967
I admit, I was among the people who was upset with the Ruin changes. But that was mostly because they didn't really give me a reason to trust them. What, we got a Doctor rework? That's great, but doesn't make up for the Ruin nerf.
I'm redownloading it now, I'm giving the PTB a try, as it seems our feedback is finally being listened to.
I understand why people got upset, but I knew they would make up for it because quite frankly I never fell into the "devs are survivor sided" narrative. You can't possibly believe that if you stick to facts over emotion.
-
@Rezblaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/142022/very-happy-with-the-mid-chapter-update
While it doesn't address all the major issues we see with this game, it is touching upon some fundamental things over the past two updates, which makes me happy with the direction this game is going.
Sabotaging is back, albeit still not meta, its now something that's viable, even if its situational.
Trapper and Plague both have their powers upgraded to make them more consistent and useful.
Generator Efficiency on Survivors are reduced, thus not completely negating teamwork but making overall generator time and repair for a group less costly.
Hangman's Trick, while nerfed to the ground since PTB, is still in a better place than where it was.
I expect them to address things like a Leatherface rework or Moris/Keys in time. But I say that with more confidence, as I see they are actually making efforts to make changes to the game, rather than some bug fixes and a ritualistic Pig nerf.
Right? I genuinely can't see how people still think they're doing a bad job with the last updates. I'm still very confident that everything they've done since MoM got fixed was good for game health.
They nerfed Ruin, people freaked out. They said they'd address gens, people didn't believe them. Then we got the one-two punch of toolbox changes+gen efficiency and the map changes people have been begging for for years. I'm truly happy for DbD right now.
-
Very very good changes overall. Good survivors didn't need god structures to do work anyway. All those loops did was allow mediocre survivors to go unpunished or allow god survivors to run the killer for the entirety of the game.
Some people are saying that gen speed changes "aren't enough", and that's how you spot people who don't quite have a lot of understanding on how these things work. You can't ship a ton of changes that aim to do the same thing all at once. Game balance is too fragile of an ecosystem for that. The changes are already very considerable in volume. They are doing the right thing in showing restraint on the gen changes and waiting to see how they play out.
I was expecting to see mori and key changes soon as well, because those are REALLY necessary (moris have absolutely no place in this game as they are, and keys are also pretty OP, just a bit less than moris) but they can't do that much at once. I'm surprised we're getting a patch this huge the way things are in the world right now in the first place.
-
Ebony moris aren't a challenge, they're an instawin for the killer unless they play horribly.
I don't dodge the loading screen because sometimes it's not a mori, sometimes it's a Cypress, sometimes the killer is very, very bad, I don't want to put myself and everyone else through lobby sim again, etc. But I will absolutely throw a bit of exit gate BM if the killer somehow manages to lose with a mori.
Also I don't think OP was talking about DCing in game. That would actually be pretty bad for your teammates, but that's not what's being talked about here I think.
-
I didn't even watch the whole video because we all already know the answer: if you don't down people fast you won't have pressure.
(also these threads are getting old real fast)
I did, however, check the killer's build. It was absolute and utter garbage, and the choice of perks suggests that he's relatively new to the killer and doesn't have many options. Even if he wasn't, half competent survivors would be able to beat a killer with a build like that.
Perk builds are part of the game, you know. Just like any other game that involves pre-match planning and strategics. You can't expect to win games in League of Legends if you troll your runes, or win in any TCG if you have a crappy deck. He had Ruin, which is pretty weak on most killers, Surge, which is terrible, NOED, which can be okay if you don't lose the game this bad beforehand (still not the best if you don't have perks that synergize with it) and Dead Man's Switch, which is absolutely horrible if you don't have a build around it. No reliable slowdown. No tracking. No snowball. Basically 4 perks thrown together without thinking how they work with each other. Why should this killer deserve a win unless they played exceptionally well, which they didn't?
-
Honestly, besides "just dedicated things" the only problem survivor as a role has right now is matchmaking putting good players with immersed potatoes and potatoes vs good killers.
Sure, camping feels like absolute garbage but that can't be solved without changing core game mechanics
And moris because it's honestly ######### unnacceptable that they're still in the game in their current state, it's 2020 guys. I don't know why BHVR sleeps so hard on moris and keys still. Those take even less skill than instaheals did and instaheals were already bs
-
So something that encourages killers to camp even more when survivors are hooked in the basement? Nah thanks I'd rather not have any more perks that encourage unhealthy playstyles
-
That's part of his strength, especially when compared to Huntress. If he had a bigger terror radius he'd probably be bad. Getting surprise shots from outside his terror radius with M&A and Nurse's Calling is the playstyle that makes him competitive.