isnt that game progression too? imo it should get deactivated when you touch the gate switchbox
Yeah endgame DS is too strong so I’d say this is fine
I really don't think it needs any more limitations, it's already a well balanced perk.
Technically it would just be a correction to a missed action.
DS should deactivate whenever it does something to advance the game in some way and openning a gate should count for that.
No idea. Imo it shouldn't deactivate when healing yourself but deactivate when opening the gates to compensate.
Obligatory 'they played the whole game with three perks!'
Thing is, the way Devs have described it, is that they want survivors to touch the lever unaffected by any other things. So no Madness t3, while Madness t3 disables pretty much anything that isnt unhooking or opening exit gates. Or how incapacitation doesnt block unhooking and pulling the lever.
The only inconsistency here would be that DS also shouldnt deactivate on unhooking survivors, which I think was part of the initial design but later was changed after some obvious plays.
I do think DS shouldnt deactivate on a lever purely because of the 1v1 scenario where the killer should have enough pressure to prevent someone with DS from opening an exit gate anyway, but that mainly means that DS shouldnt deactivate if EGC started through the hatch being closed.
I think it’s fine.
DS has a horrible design.
I think it doesn't deactivate when boon a totem
Okay I'll trade you exit gate deactivation for double DS with no skill check requirement.
I mean, you shouldn't be able to progress a game and be invincible. Literally ever. So no, in that, it's not "well balanced". Exit gates are objective, and progression of game.
Killers should not be punished in EG for trying to make a play considering they obviously didnt tunnel you all game. Cancel in EG and in return can be used twice.
I never really understood why the perk doesn't deactivate since it is objectively progressing the game.
If they are progressing their objective, it's not tunneling. That argument has never worked.
Honestly, before it was just an idea that I thought should have been the case, but after recently, I 100% believe it should.
Someone had just gotten unhooked and I chased another survivor around for a little (apparently not enough), and I hear SOMEONE on a gate and I knock them off and pick them up and get hit with ds. They then finished the animation and Dead Harded out. I literally was chasing someone else and the only reason I went back to them was to make sure the gate didn't get opened. Also, these fools had identical cosmetics and at this point were all injured so I had no way of knowing it was the person who was just unhooked (in the moment) until I got hit with DS. Either way they shouldn't have HAD DS because I didn't tunnel them and they were opening the gate which is game progression. Which was basically the one thing the devs used as criteria for what should deactivate DS and what shouldn't, are you pushing the game forward. Opening an exit gate is 100% pushing the game forward.
I once heard the argument of "Well sometimes when you're being tunneled you have no choice but to be the one to open the gate when it's 99'd so all the survivors can get out." Honestly my only come back to that is someone should be ready to proc the gate at any moment in that situation. It should not be the person who's getting chased job to open the gate.
If you just got off a hook, and your first action is to go and start working on your objective (in this case, opening a door), you are not being tunneled, and trying to say you're being tunneled after being caught progressing the game is straight up entitlement.
Tunneling, by definition, is when a killer ignores everyone else to go after you until you're dead. You are incorrect.
Again, sit down.
Are you ever going to lose that high and mighty attitude of yours? I'm all for discussing perk balance but not when the person I'm discussing it with acts as though their word is the be all and end all of every single thing they talk about, why not just treat other people with a bit of respect?
Incorrect. If you are working on your objective, you can't say the killer is tunneling when they are doing theirs. Getting hit with DS does not mean the killer was tunneling. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about.
You'll never be right. Sit down.
I'll lose the high and mighty attitude when I'm conversing with someone who lacks entitlement, and possesses common sense and logic.
Until then, I choose arrogance, because I am unequivocally correct.
"unbrainful" isn't a word
Your scenario doesn't apply to the main issue.
That being, a survivor gets unhooked after the last gen was completed. They immediately go to the gate and begin to open it, because it wasn't 99'd. The killer, who knows they were hooked near a gate, does the logical thing and goes there. Finds the survivor on the gate, downs them. This survivor didn't have DS, so they were hooked, and sacrificed.
Your entire argument is saying that in this situation, they were being tunneled. No. Who was the killer supposed to go for? Of course they should go for the person on the door. They were not tunneled. They were doing their objective, which is attempting to escape. The killer was doing theirs, which is attempting to prevent that.
You still seem to be on the hill of thinking you're right. You're not. Your hill is a speed bump. Mine is a mountain that you're incapable of climbing. All you are is an entitled DBD player. Which is the biggest issue with the community.
Nah before they even think about that they should kill dead hard
a 99 gate can still be in favour of the killer . the survivor needs to go to the switchbox first before the gates open. this time the killer can get you. but oh no dstrike. guess the killer is bad.
"oh he shouldnt tunnel"- first its endgame ,second he didnt tunnel you the whole game if you used ds in the endgame (yes you could run him all 5 gens but thats a sbmm problem wich is a complete different topic)
oh he/she got banned rip.