I think its more annoying typically for killers when there is multiple of the “second chance perks” to where it feels overwhelmingly strong if each surv has it
Honestly Azarov's played a huge role in this win. One of my least favorite maps to play as survivor due to the 3/4 gen nature of the map edit: nvm he said that himself near the end
this is one of the times i agree with scott, and i agree quite strongly about what hes saying, although there is one thing im not sure if i agree with about "a chance" perks, and im not saying scott is wrong because he is correct BUT these perks like BT arent specifically giving the survivor on hook a chance, theyre actually mistake rectifying for the OTHER survivor, the unhooker makes a shitty decision to save immediately after the killer hooks, feeding the other survivor to the killer and instead of being able to punish a bad save by downing that survivor, instead they have a free healthstate for long enough to buy them an entire chase. you could also target the unhooker but again, now you are taking another entire chase and forced into playing around the survivors who are activle managing and rotating through eachothers hooks to ensure optimal safety. either way punishing the bad save is quite "non-punishing" and objectively ineffective under that circumstance. anyways thanks for coming to my ted talk lmao and cheers for the content!
I was legitimately just thinking today that maybe the reason im so bad at this game is im too reliant on perks. Imma just stop bringing perks altogether and play until i can git gud without the perks lmao.
Ok, now Eruption and CoB are second chance perks… You won this game because the survivors played bad, making up for any mistakes you made, not because your perks gave you a second chance. One bad take after another. But I have to give you credit… from what I see in the comments, they're swallowing your pills without question…
my arguement about alot of things here is that killer is still harder to play then survivor that is my main complaint i was gonna type a whole thing discussing it but i cba lmao just tldr it feels bad when u already have to manage 7 gen locations 4 players and the map layout aswell as any other mechanic depending on your killer and such then on top of that getting some dude that just has unbreakable and negates your hard work just because they equipped it.
Kind of a weird vid imo because the whole argument of second chance perks was based heavily around old Dead Hard and Decisive Strike, which have now been nerfed and it doesn't really apply anymore. Dead Hard was second chance because the killer could outplay you and you could prevent yourself going down and make it to a pallet with the push of a button on a lot of loops, mainly through distance in an uncounterable fashion. While I agree with you about old DS not being second chance in regards to tunneling, that's not all it was used for. A lot of survivors used it very aggressively to get an important gen done or bodyblock for a teammate and make themselves unhookable, with Unbreakable to recover so the Killer loses pressure. And finally, Adrenaline is still arguably the next perk because it saves Survivors being slugged in end-game or just wins the chase for the Survivor and gets them out. In all cases, it was a combination of the raw strength of the perk and how there was no way for the Killer to counter them except to blindly assume Survivors had it and limit your playstyle (not taking a chase b/c Dead Hard will save them, never slugging due to Unbreakable/Adrenaline). And of course the major problem with all of these perks/combos was that they were all so strong that you'd see 2-4 of them every game.
On the Killer side, I'm really surprised you didn't talk about NoED or Undying, which are the closest things to second-chance perks that Killer has. NoED, at lower levels, semi-often turned a lost 0-1k game into a 3-4k. Which usually requires some unwise altruism from Survivors, but sometimes just lucky positioning/timing. And in those moments, it's incredibly strong and essentially un-counterable because cleansing all 5 dull totems for the possibility of NoED was a waste of time and finding it after the reveal often took too long. Undying is a true second chance for your important totem being cleansed….but Undying is damn near required to make totems function on some maps because they're so easy to find. On maps where totems are well-hidden, it was VERY strong, though less so nowadays due to boons.
On the topic of gen regression perks….whether they count as second-chance or not depends heavily on the context of the killer/map. A good Blight for example on a fairly standard map that isn't heavily survivor-sided doesn't really need gen regression perks, so I would agree with you in that context. But a C or D tier Killer on a survivor-sided map? They NEED several gen regression perks to have any chance at all of winning. So this one is more of a sliding scale and makes the topic murky.
Second chance is a second chance. Doesn't matter if it's your fault that the first chance was exhausted. The killer is getting punished for doing their job.
I don't understand who's arguing about bt and ds. Both are good, well ds should go back to 5 sec stun. Like the only second chance perks that exist are dead hard and unbreakable. Ds used to be second chance now it's not.
Killer mains are the dumbest people on the planet Survivor mains are the most entitled whining idiots People who play both? Chad's.
The way I've looked at it is every perk is meant to enhance a particular strength you have or maybe iron out any weaknesses. I don't view any perk as being a crutch it's just people taking advantage of the meta to improve their performance. Of course people are going to use what's strong. Most people who complain about said perks just take a blind eye and use these perks anyway but will complain when the same perks are used against them. Just feels like a fruitless argument most of the time and if people really cared they'd give BHVR feedback rather than criticize players.
I've always thought that some people forget that perks are supposed to be useful. Their whole intention is to give someone an advantage in a certain circumstances. But people cry about counterplay when they can't just simply ignore someone else's perk and they get a benefit from it. Then demand a perk be nerfed until it's no longer useful at all. Just remember perks are supposed to be useful for the other side just like yours are for you..
I understand if someone is chasing you with a weapon you might be able to juke them but spinning around them in a circle lol that's literally the only thing wrong with this game yet it can't be removed
tl;dr/short version: 2nd chance perks aren't the issue, perks being too powerful is the issue. Perks are meant to help support you, and the way you win games is via perk choice and by playing to your outs.
Long Version: I think, to a degree, these kinds of perks existing is a good thing? There used to be problem perks on both sides: Deadhard was straight up just a mistake erasure, old DS gave people free escapes in end game, but equally old Pop could make doing gens nigh impossible. Losing 25% of a gen is absolutely backbreaking, and when it was paired with tinkerer, against a good killer it could make it incredibly painful to try and get through.
That said, perks should give you an advantage, that's what they're there for! Of course, the trade off is by bringing perks that help with one thing, you lose access to being able to run other things. Some perks provide slowdown for the killer, some help speed up gens, some can help to fix 'mistakes' (new deadhard, enduring), but you cannot have everything at the same time. That's what made the old pain res so problematic, it was insane info and good slowdown rolled into one slot. There's a trade off there, and that's what makes the game fun! Maybe you're running an enduring/spirit fury build, because you need the extra support in chase, but the trade off there is now you don't have access to as much info/slowdown.
The issue isn't actually 2nd chance perks, the issue is that some perks (and killers) are significantly more powerful than others. Different perks fulfill different roles, and support in different ways. But why run premonition over spine chill? Why run Pop instead of Call of Brine? It's impossible to perfectly balance all perks, there will always be stronger and weaker ones, but having strictly better perks is an issue. Same with having must run perks. There will always be a meta, but a healthy meta is a diverse one. It's one where, if you want to be more chase focused, you can run chase focused perks, but it comes at a cost of gen defense. Or, if you want to run gen defense perks, you lose out on info, or chase. Or, if you want to run all of them, you aren't as powerful in any one role as you would be otherwise.
Perks should occupy certain roles, and the ones that are 'multiclass', for lack of a better word, should be weaker than those that are not. And playing into your perks, and playing to your outs, that's just the gameplay! Sometimes your out is you drag the game out as long as possible, because that's what your perks are there to do. Wesker is already good in chase, so you brought perks that enable you to shore up your weakness – gen defence – in order to have a more rounded build. And, when you were struggling in chase, your perks did what they were meant to do! They helped with the gen defense. Your perks carried you because they did their job, and you played into them doing that.
If you don't have deadhard, you loop differently than when you do. If you don't have COB/Eruption/Brutal, you don't spend as long kicking gens. If you have a sword, and you're in a fight, you don't say that the sword carried you, do you? It's not the perks that carried, it's the strategic use and deployment of the perks that helped. 2nd chances aren't the issue. Perks being too powerful is the issue.
And also Nurse, because Nurse is always a damn issue.
I agree with the general point you're making but in what multiverse did the survivors in your example video play well? Like 3 of them did nothing but follow you around for the first 10 minutes.
Oh wow here comes bs on how nurse is broken or that camping and tunneling is a problem Scott has became so fucking predictable all those fucking creators are so fucking trash
The frustration with send chance perks comes from them taking something away from the other side, and doing so in a jarring manner that commonly has significant impact on the game. Everyone hates noed, you are so close to victory that you have strived for, you can taste it, then bam. Same goes for dead hard, adrenaline, etc. The main problem is the unpredictability. A survivor can play around being exposed, they play ultra safe and wait out the timer, or seek the offending totem. Noed is hated because you don't know until it is in effect, and you are so close to winning. Adrenaline is the same, but for killer. You finally get the down, then they get back up, or they heal immediately and you were planning around them still being hurt. Not knowing is frustrating. Being powerless in your decisions, feeling like your agency is irrelevant.
what about people that full heal rub off the record in your face. etc drives me nuts
survivors made 3-gen themselves.. that is one of the reasons they lost
I think its more annoying typically for killers when there is multiple of the “second chance perks” to where it feels overwhelmingly strong if each surv has it
Honestly Azarov's played a huge role in this win. One of my least favorite maps to play as survivor due to the 3/4 gen nature of the map
edit: nvm he said that himself near the end
Who tf is Brian and why are we getting calls from him?
Finally, someone admits that fire up is a crutch killer perk.
this is one of the times i agree with scott, and i agree quite strongly about what hes saying, although there is one thing im not sure if i agree with about "a chance" perks, and im not saying scott is wrong because he is correct BUT these perks like BT arent specifically giving the survivor on hook a chance, theyre actually mistake rectifying for the OTHER survivor, the unhooker makes a shitty decision to save immediately after the killer hooks, feeding the other survivor to the killer and instead of being able to punish a bad save by downing that survivor, instead they have a free healthstate for long enough to buy them an entire chase. you could also target the unhooker but again, now you are taking another entire chase and forced into playing around the survivors who are activle managing and rotating through eachothers hooks to ensure optimal safety. either way punishing the bad save is quite "non-punishing" and objectively ineffective under that circumstance. anyways thanks for coming to my ted talk lmao and cheers for the content!
Yeah maybe second chance to kill them? No one is talking about 2nd life for killer
I was legitimately just thinking today that maybe the reason im so bad at this game is im too reliant on perks. Imma just stop bringing perks altogether and play until i can git gud without the perks lmao.
Ok, now Eruption and CoB are second chance perks… You won this game because the survivors played bad, making up for any mistakes you made, not because your perks gave you a second chance. One bad take after another. But I have to give you credit… from what I see in the comments, they're swallowing your pills without question…
my arguement about alot of things here is that killer is still harder to play then survivor that is my main complaint i was gonna type a whole thing discussing it but i cba lmao just tldr it feels bad when u already have to manage 7 gen locations 4 players and the map layout aswell as any other mechanic depending on your killer and such then on top of that getting some dude that just has unbreakable and negates your hard work just because they equipped it.
Kind of a weird vid imo because the whole argument of second chance perks was based heavily around old Dead Hard and Decisive Strike, which have now been nerfed and it doesn't really apply anymore. Dead Hard was second chance because the killer could outplay you and you could prevent yourself going down and make it to a pallet with the push of a button on a lot of loops, mainly through distance in an uncounterable fashion. While I agree with you about old DS not being second chance in regards to tunneling, that's not all it was used for. A lot of survivors used it very aggressively to get an important gen done or bodyblock for a teammate and make themselves unhookable, with Unbreakable to recover so the Killer loses pressure. And finally, Adrenaline is still arguably the next perk because it saves Survivors being slugged in end-game or just wins the chase for the Survivor and gets them out. In all cases, it was a combination of the raw strength of the perk and how there was no way for the Killer to counter them except to blindly assume Survivors had it and limit your playstyle (not taking a chase b/c Dead Hard will save them, never slugging due to Unbreakable/Adrenaline). And of course the major problem with all of these perks/combos was that they were all so strong that you'd see 2-4 of them every game.
On the Killer side, I'm really surprised you didn't talk about NoED or Undying, which are the closest things to second-chance perks that Killer has. NoED, at lower levels, semi-often turned a lost 0-1k game into a 3-4k. Which usually requires some unwise altruism from Survivors, but sometimes just lucky positioning/timing. And in those moments, it's incredibly strong and essentially un-counterable because cleansing all 5 dull totems for the possibility of NoED was a waste of time and finding it after the reveal often took too long. Undying is a true second chance for your important totem being cleansed….but Undying is damn near required to make totems function on some maps because they're so easy to find. On maps where totems are well-hidden, it was VERY strong, though less so nowadays due to boons.
On the topic of gen regression perks….whether they count as second-chance or not depends heavily on the context of the killer/map. A good Blight for example on a fairly standard map that isn't heavily survivor-sided doesn't really need gen regression perks, so I would agree with you in that context. But a C or D tier Killer on a survivor-sided map? They NEED several gen regression perks to have any chance at all of winning. So this one is more of a sliding scale and makes the topic murky.
Only real OGs remember when Scott was an Elden Ring streamer instead of Vile DBD player.
I think the disparity comes from the fact that survivors have essentially 4 times the second chances as killer does and so it feels oppressive.
Yo wtf. You have Call of Brine?
Imagine buying Sadako, smh
Semantics.
So it’s a second chance?
Your hair looks great in this
9:54 your dad watches your streams? wholesome 100 chunbgus keanu
Was that Mikasa??
Second chance is a second chance. Doesn't matter if it's your fault that the first chance was exhausted. The killer is getting punished for doing their job.
I love your videos Scott. It impresses me how much you and I think alike on these dbd topics. Keep doing them. Love ya 😍❤️
I don't understand who's arguing about bt and ds. Both are good, well ds should go back to 5 sec stun. Like the only second chance perks that exist are dead hard and unbreakable. Ds used to be second chance now it's not.
Killer mains are the dumbest people on the planet
Survivor mains are the most entitled whining idiots
People who play both? Chad's.
This is how I play Wesker, except instead of those times where Scott lands a hit I don't.
The way I've looked at it is every perk is meant to enhance a particular strength you have or maybe iron out any weaknesses. I don't view any perk as being a crutch it's just people taking advantage of the meta to improve their performance. Of course people are going to use what's strong. Most people who complain about said perks just take a blind eye and use these perks anyway but will complain when the same perks are used against them. Just feels like a fruitless argument most of the time and if people really cared they'd give BHVR feedback rather than criticize players.
I've always thought that some people forget that perks are supposed to be useful. Their whole intention is to give someone an advantage in a certain circumstances.
But people cry about counterplay when they can't just simply ignore someone else's perk and they get a benefit from it. Then demand a perk be nerfed until it's no longer useful at all.
Just remember perks are supposed to be useful for the other side just like yours are for you..
Scott dropping pure facts and logic
I understand if someone is chasing you with a weapon you might be able to juke them but spinning around them in a circle lol that's literally the only thing wrong with this game yet it can't be removed
This match was over 15 minutes long. That’s bad survivor play if you in fact made so many mistakes
tl;dr/short version: 2nd chance perks aren't the issue, perks being too powerful is the issue. Perks are meant to help support you, and the way you win games is via perk choice and by playing to your outs.
Long Version: I think, to a degree, these kinds of perks existing is a good thing? There used to be problem perks on both sides: Deadhard was straight up just a mistake erasure, old DS gave people free escapes in end game, but equally old Pop could make doing gens nigh impossible. Losing 25% of a gen is absolutely backbreaking, and when it was paired with tinkerer, against a good killer it could make it incredibly painful to try and get through.
That said, perks should give you an advantage, that's what they're there for! Of course, the trade off is by bringing perks that help with one thing, you lose access to being able to run other things. Some perks provide slowdown for the killer, some help speed up gens, some can help to fix 'mistakes' (new deadhard, enduring), but you cannot have everything at the same time. That's what made the old pain res so problematic, it was insane info and good slowdown rolled into one slot. There's a trade off there, and that's what makes the game fun! Maybe you're running an enduring/spirit fury build, because you need the extra support in chase, but the trade off there is now you don't have access to as much info/slowdown.
The issue isn't actually 2nd chance perks, the issue is that some perks (and killers) are significantly more powerful than others. Different perks fulfill different roles, and support in different ways. But why run premonition over spine chill? Why run Pop instead of Call of Brine? It's impossible to perfectly balance all perks, there will always be stronger and weaker ones, but having strictly better perks is an issue. Same with having must run perks. There will always be a meta, but a healthy meta is a diverse one. It's one where, if you want to be more chase focused, you can run chase focused perks, but it comes at a cost of gen defense. Or, if you want to run gen defense perks, you lose out on info, or chase. Or, if you want to run all of them, you aren't as powerful in any one role as you would be otherwise.
Perks should occupy certain roles, and the ones that are 'multiclass', for lack of a better word, should be weaker than those that are not. And playing into your perks, and playing to your outs, that's just the gameplay! Sometimes your out is you drag the game out as long as possible, because that's what your perks are there to do. Wesker is already good in chase, so you brought perks that enable you to shore up your weakness – gen defence – in order to have a more rounded build. And, when you were struggling in chase, your perks did what they were meant to do! They helped with the gen defense. Your perks carried you because they did their job, and you played into them doing that.
If you don't have deadhard, you loop differently than when you do. If you don't have COB/Eruption/Brutal, you don't spend as long kicking gens. If you have a sword, and you're in a fight, you don't say that the sword carried you, do you? It's not the perks that carried, it's the strategic use and deployment of the perks that helped. 2nd chances aren't the issue. Perks being too powerful is the issue.
And also Nurse, because Nurse is always a damn issue.
I agree with the general point you're making but in what multiverse did the survivors in your example video play well? Like 3 of them did nothing but follow you around for the first 10 minutes.
Oh wow here comes bs on how nurse is broken or that camping and tunneling is a problem Scott has became so fucking predictable all those fucking creators are so fucking trash
The frustration with send chance perks comes from them taking something away from the other side, and doing so in a jarring manner that commonly has significant impact on the game. Everyone hates noed, you are so close to victory that you have strived for, you can taste it, then bam. Same goes for dead hard, adrenaline, etc. The main problem is the unpredictability. A survivor can play around being exposed, they play ultra safe and wait out the timer, or seek the offending totem. Noed is hated because you don't know until it is in effect, and you are so close to winning. Adrenaline is the same, but for killer. You finally get the down, then they get back up, or they heal immediately and you were planning around them still being hurt. Not knowing is frustrating. Being powerless in your decisions, feeling like your agency is irrelevant.
you seem like you'd be intolerable in person
They are needed because there is 1000 cheese iri addons for killers.
Survivors have second chance perks and killers have.. oh I dunno.. a power?