I'm on the fence about whether gen rushing still exists with all the nerfs to toolboxes. If it does, I think it would be the matches where the survivors come in with the intent to speed run the gens and get out, even if they lose points for not doing anything else. It's boring to play and boring to play against, IMO, but some people seem to consider it a victory to slam all the gens and run out the door.
Gen rushing is not a dirty word, but it specifically means a team that has at least 2 toolboxes with brand new parts that can knock out the first gen in a matter of 20 seconds or less right off the bat.
I would also define it as popping 2+ gens in rapid succession intentionally while the killer is distracted so he can't pressure
For me "gen rush" is basically a made up strategy phrase that a killer uses whenever a match doesn't quite go to his side? ... if the survivors you've gone against didn't have any tool boxes then I wouldn't say per say they rushed anything.
Having said this, I have ALWAYS agreed with any killers that there should be more gens to fix maybe an extra 2 because 5 with 4 survivors do go extremely quick, also by making them 1 survivor per gen and having no cooperation on them could slow the process down. Especially if you're having 2 on 1 gen it goes far too quickly.. I play both sides so being a survivor I literally like I'm at one for 5 minutes.. but playing my main babe Michael I feel like 3 gens are done within 2 minutes of the match starting. However, as a killer I base it more on how many people are at one gen? And how many there are on the map? So if anything I blame the game itself for making it too easy for survivors as apposed to saying they're gen rushing.
Great job completely Missing the point. Noone, really noone, neither op nor comment mentioned swf in any form before your comment.
The issue is the speed of gens and the definition of tactics o the survivors doing them.
😂😂 literally just saw his comment and went have I missed the comment of swf in this or.... 😳 thought I was going more crazy than usual.
Devs are killing survivors perks (MoM, BL, DS, LB,..) and you can see now prove thyself or resilience in 9/10 games, and soon it would be meta.
For me its when you use toolboxes, brand new parts and prove thyself.
Or simply doing gens even if you should be unhooking teammates or looking for active Devour totem.
Most of the gen rush is actually just a big gen spread on large maps that it seems impossible to defend, or just simply bad plays from killer who is spending time somewhere else than defending gens
Half of killer meta perks are related to generators and some people still say gen rush is a myth and doesn't exist LMFAO.
All of survs meta perks are related to escape from chases and some people still say killers are not overpowered LMFAO.
What? everyone say that some killers are overpowered and we all agree with that.
There's a scale for things where people will use the term
On one end survivors with toolboxes, BNP, separating on gens, doing pretty much nothing except for gens including potentially letting teammates go to struggle or die on hook just to do gens, and bringing perks centred on gens and item conservation, on the other it's gens being done in a short space of time by three survivors while the killer just goes on a long and fruitless chase with the 4th.
I'd lean more towards the first definition, although you don't need all the elements for it to be a True Genrush (i.e. made in the Génrush region of France)
4 very strong toolboxes with stacked gen perks and maybe brand new parts.
otherwise nothing really
killers throw the word "gen rush" a lot when it's just survivors being efficient on their objective.
Great job on missing the point COMPLETELY. If it was 4 randoms... I can see why the person went into second phase. Instead of everyone running off gens - people tend to finish their gens and see if someone else goes for the unhook. THAT was my point - and what I said. The only mention of SWF in my post was to state that I rarely SWF and that as a MAINLY SOLO survivor - I was explaining my thought process.
Sorry even the MENTION of the word SWF triggers you so much. NOTHING in my post was about what SWFs do - it was about SOLO survivors. I'm sorry you failed to comprehend what I thought was a very simple use of the English language.
By some killer mains standards: Gen rushing is when the killer is camping 1 survivor and the others still do gens and escape.
What actual genrushing is to others: All survivors bringing good toolboxes, everyone with prove thyself and a brand new part.
Gens before friends, but when it gets your teammate killed for no reason cause they weren't even being camped.
So one survivor is being chased and the other two just start fresh new gens and never go for the unhook.
Also known as solo queue.
You're getting teammates who do gens in solo Q?
Doing gens are about the only thing Meg’s are good for honestly
When it gets me killed, absolutely.
When they don't they just unhook me without BT so they can get those sweet WGLF stacks.
Gen rushing is survivors playing optimally to repair gens as quick as possible. Usually involves no more than 2 on a gen, working two gens at a time, and using perks and/or toolboxes, ideally with BNPs.
It is most definitely "a thing" just as much as camping and tunnelling are "things". The issue is that none of those things are necessarily "bad", they are simply strategies/tactics that have their own pros and cons.
Well that's simple.
The killers objective is to catch and sacrifice survivors. The best perks for a survivor will therefore be to prevent the killer completing their objective. = prevent capture and sacrifice
The survivors objective is to repair generators and escape. The best perks for a killer will therefore be to prevent the survivors completing their objective. = prevent generator repair
Neither means either one is 'overpowered'.
For me gen rush is if they let someone die to finish gens.
Using 4 toolboxes/bnp/prove thyself etc would be also gen rush for me.
So you see both is not really similar, so while i never use the term gen rush, i understand it as "scummy" tactics to do gens quick. And what scummy is, is subjective.
"NOTHING in my post was about what SWFs do...." - Maybe, but you started your post with "Or they were 4 randoms".
This implies that either op or any comment made the assumption that the game op was talking about was versing a swf, which noone did and you brought into the discussion.
So, from my limited comprehension (according to you), you were the first and only one starting to make this another solo vs swf discussion, which is the same type of annoyance like whataboutism in threads about killer or survivor only side mechanics which often end in a us vs them argument.
And back to the point at hand, the fact that the other 3 survivor let the fourth go far into second phase can either mean coordination from an swf to leave them or the assumption of all separate survivor, that another one might go for the save (which normally ends with multiple survivor go to check). Therefore, in my eyes this argument is no real indication on the make up of the survivor team.
Thats an issue right there with Trapper and how you may have played him, not gen rush. He doesn't have strong map pressure and really needs that time in early game to set up. Corrupt Intervention is almost a necessity on him. Hes not a killer who can stop and kick gens as he can't make up the speed later on (i.e. Hillbilly, Spirit, Hag, etc.). The fact that the gens popped at 80s each that they were working on them as you were chasing Meg. She got hooked as they were finishing the last 2 gens and rescued her before she got to stage 2. Maybe you engaged in another chase before it she got hooked, but that point was too late unless you started to slug.
Gen rushing imo is team full of purple toolboxes with BNP and perks. You can't do much to stop them at that point, but its key for killer to identify strong 3 gen and slug if necessary.
Not really. You can still hook an entire survivor, find a recently unhooked person, and they could still have DS. Just means they weren’t doing anything
Survivors being smart isn't gen rushing.
Leaving teammates to die on hook over gens, using multiple Prove Thyself and Engineer toolboxes, foregoing healing against a good killer to prioritize gens is genrushing.
Survivors completing gens fast because you're playing badly and not giving them anything else to do is not genrushing.
Crazy that people still complain about it when old BNPs could complete 3/4 gens in under 20 seconds at match start. Or commodius toolboxes (rip). An organised swf on a map like Ormond can still destroy gen speeds but thats an outlier, really. On most of the map reworks the devs have shrunk the maps so it shouldn't be bad in the future.
I call a gen rush "playing the game as it was intended".
That said, I'm not going to pretend that I like super fast games on either side. I don't care so much about winning and getting lots of points, I play this game to...well, play the game. If most of my time is spent in menus and queues it's not very fun. I like my games to last at least 7-10 minutes or longer, if possible. That to me is a well-played match.
Blaming the survivors for trying to achieve the specific goal that they've been given though? Silly.
it means doing all of the generators in a short amount of time. the actual definition of gen rushing is a lot more complicated
Good commodus toolboxes and gen speed perks.
Well maybe don't assume. Maybe instead of assuming one's intent - and posting a wannabe shady comment - you simply ask one's intent.
So since you keep talking about something I never even addressed - let me address it.
I have absolutely no issues with SWFs as a killer. I am a 50/50 player and rarely SWF when I play survivor. When I do SWF it's usually just me and 1 person. I don't think the majority of SWFs are nigh unbeatable like certain "mains" like to constantly post. I don't use hyperbole in my posts - I stick to the facts and my experience. So maybe next time when you have an assumption you will approach it in a more logical and mature way than to assume ill intent.