I am so SICK if Wesker.

I swear he's all I face. His chase music gives me a headache. Every one of them hc facecamps and/or tunnels. Has bad ping. Is just generally annoying to play against.

Worst of all, DBD Wesker has ruined the REAL Wesker for me.

Please killswitch him again. That was the best time I've had in DBD since Wesker came out.

I'll even take Skull Merchant.

I'm desperate.

Comments

  • @Pulsar said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3481773#Comment_3481773

    You definitely cannot play SM.

    I had a daily and figured why not go for it, had three games where people DC'd instantly upon seeing me.

    I cannot condone it or encourage people to do it, but I get why they would do that

    I wouldn't want to play Skull Merchant because that would mean 4 players have to play against Skull Merchant. I play a lot of Nurse, but playing Skull Merchant is a bridge too far for me

  • if only other killers viable you'd see more than just wesker what a shame...... but we can't have bhvr buffing other killers because killers are already OP too bad so sad enjoy playing VS wesker

  • On my way to play more Wesker after work.

  • @Spirit_IsTheBest said:

    I'm tired of it as well, this game has zero variety. All it is are Wesker matches and then throw in some Knights and Blights. Nothing else. It's boring facing that all the time, especially when they use VPN's and such to gain hits they shouldn't have gotten, it gets on my nerves.

    I really hope that they add a system where you don't face the same killer all the time, kind of like the map system they made to prevent going to the same map, they should do that for killers.

    THIS. I couldn't have said it better myself.

    Fix the hit validation and ban VPN, ban lag switchers and make a system so I don't get wesker for over 8hrs when I play. Ffs it is so boring :(

  • @mizark3 said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3481746#Comment_3481746

    Someone who only plays one killer... - As does the 4 Survivors who also purchased the game. Are they forcefully conscripted into that player's power fantasy? It also would prevent the people playing against them from quitting immediately, giving them real matches instead of boring slogs of 1v3s or fewer. You later say you don't punish someone who did nothing wrong, yet somehow don't recognize that is exactly what the Killer player more often is doing to the Survivors who despise that Killer. This would solve the problem you too are complaining about. Some people have emetophobia, or fear of vomiting, and cannot play against Plague at all. This has the pleasant side effect of allowing other such players who can't handle a specific theme of Killer to play the game. Having a longer queue time at the cost of having real matches without hook suicides isn't a punishment by the craziest stretch of the imagination.

    As far as the newly released Killer concept they could disable the feature for the first week or two after a release. They said they do the same with map repeat prevention not working (or rather being turned off) when releasing new maps, so the concept is easily translated over. Alternatively they could just not allow for banning the new Killer during that timeframe. Plenty of games with ban features for characters have already solved this non-existent problem.

    Again, having 6 (1 per 5, we are above 30 below 35) Killer bans is a personal choice, but I would make the argument that if the exact same 6 Killers are banned by the entire population then they clearly are a problem in dire need of fixing. By allowing the diseased wound of a problem to fester, you risk poisoning the trust of the playerbase to the point of killing them off. Also, the devs said less than half of the playerbase even utilized the Beta Wiggle skillcheck system when that was being tested. Most people don't look in the options, so this wouldn't significantly impact matchmaking even if hypothetically everyone banned say Nurse.

    The killer is not 'punishing' survivors by playing a killer the survivors don't like. they're just playing a killer they want to play. If a survivor HATES certain killers to the extent that they DC the moment they find out they're in a game with them, that player shouldn't be playing the game. Simple. By queueing up as survivor in Dead by Daylight you're agreeing to play that game through regardless of who the killer is, what the map is, what perks or addons are in play.

    Being lenient on people DCing does not work, because if it becomes even more of the norm and seen as okay when people DC, every game is going to have DCers, and while the bots are a good bandaid fix, they're no substitute for a real player, and it doesn't feel good to go against them in an online game you're playing to play against actual people.

    I do sympathise with people who have actual phobias or medical issues that prevent them from playing against Plague or Doctor for example, but those people are in a tiny minority of overall DCs. Those DCs are more understandable but I'd wager 95%+ of total DCs are not because of that.

  • @Krazzik said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3481929#Comment_3481929

    The killer is not 'punishing' survivors by playing a killer the survivors don't like. they're just playing a killer they want to play. If a survivor HATES certain killers to the extent that they DC the moment they find out they're in a game with them, that player shouldn't be playing the game. Simple. By queueing up as survivor in Dead by Daylight you're agreeing to play that game through regardless of who the killer is, what the map is, what perks or addons are in play.

    Being lenient on people DCing does not work, because if it becomes even more of the norm and seen as okay when people DC, every game is going to have DCers, and while the bots are a good bandaid fix, they're no substitute for a real player, and it doesn't feel good to go against them in an online game you're playing to play against actual people.

    I do sympathise with people who have actual phobias or medical issues that prevent them from playing against Plague or Doctor for example, but those people are in a tiny minority of overall DCs. Those DCs are more understandable but I'd wager 95%+ of total DCs are not because of that.

    I am not defending DCs, I am defending bans to help prevent DCs, as well as improve the game in general. Kind of like how it is a good idea to provide basic food/water/shelter for people to prevent drug abuse and violent crime. When people's quality of life is better, you get the worse extremes less often, be that in a videogame ecosystem or real life. Also the 'punish' argument was more me saying it is either both sides are 'punished', or no sides are. Especially since only slightly longer queue times for a small subset of the population was the 'punishment' compared to not having fun at all playing the game designed for you to have fun.

    What is at stake here? The top 5-10 Killers have 50% longer queues at worst, (using the Beta wiggle option to estimate the rate of people going through the options) so 2 minutes becomes 3 minutes. What is to gain? dropping from (in my experience) ~10% chance of a DC (or hook suicide now, or when bots are added) due to Killer choice becoming ~1% (assuming the people who only like less than 20% of the Killers in the game). This allows the 3 other Survivors and the Killer player to actually have a real match! Less bad matches would occur for people who don't DC/hook suicide as well. I personally hate Oni because my team always feeds him blood, but don't mind him when he chases me first. This wouldn't even guarantee bans are used on Blight/Nurse/Wesker, as many people still say they enjoy going against those Killers. Some scaredycats might want to ban stealth Killers, or when playing with lag you want to ban Ranged Killers to prevent hitting you around corners/through walls. This would do far more to increase quality of life, than stand to decrease it, even in the worse cases.

    I don't even plan on using the accessibility concept for my argument, as I just think they should add a cotton-candy type option for Plague instead for example (only changing aesthetics, not mechanics). I don't know how they could help Doc/epilepsy though with how the power functions.

    Also I can't tell you the amount of times I load into a garbage map with no LOS blockers as Ghostie and cry. Map bans also help reduce the worst experiences for Killers as well. I have seen all too many enemy Huntresses get RPD and facecamp the first hook, rather than play through on the map they can hardly use their power in.

  • @mizark3 said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3482285#Comment_3482285

    I am not defending DCs, I am defending bans to help prevent DCs, as well as improve the game in general. Kind of like how it is a good idea to provide basic food/water/shelter for people to prevent drug abuse and violent crime. When people's quality of life is better, you get the worse extremes less often, be that in a videogame ecosystem or real life. Also the 'punish' argument was more me saying it is either both sides are 'punished', or no sides are. Especially since only slightly longer queue times for a small subset of the population was the 'punishment' compared to not having fun at all playing the game designed for you to have fun.

    What is at stake here? The top 5-10 Killers have 50% longer queues at worst, (using the Beta wiggle option to estimate the rate of people going through the options) so 2 minutes becomes 3 minutes. What is to gain? dropping from (in my experience) ~10% chance of a DC (or hook suicide now, or when bots are added) due to Killer choice becoming ~1% (assuming the people who only like less than 20% of the Killers in the game). This allows the 3 other Survivors and the Killer player to actually have a real match! Less bad matches would occur for people who don't DC/hook suicide as well. I personally hate Oni because my team always feeds him blood, but don't mind him when he chases me first. This wouldn't even guarantee bans are used on Blight/Nurse/Wesker, as many people still say they enjoy going against those Killers. Some scaredycats might want to ban stealth Killers, or when playing with lag you want to ban Ranged Killers to prevent hitting you around corners/through walls. This would do far more to increase quality of life, than stand to decrease it, even in the worse cases.

    I don't even plan on using the accessibility concept for my argument, as I just think they should add a cotton-candy type option for Plague instead for example (only changing aesthetics, not mechanics). I don't know how they could help Doc/epilepsy though with how the power functions.

    Also I can't tell you the amount of times I load into a garbage map with no LOS blockers as Ghostie and cry. Map bans also help reduce the worst experiences for Killers as well. I have seen all too many enemy Huntresses get RPD and facecamp the first hook, rather than play through on the map they can hardly use their power in.

    One of the issues with killer-bans is the snowball effect. If say 40% of players banned Nurse, then the people who -don't- ban Nurse are going to be playing against Nurse a lot more often, because all the Nurse players have a smaller pool of survivors they can end up with. This would cause a similar kind of burnout we're seeing with Wesker, and so more people would then decide to ban Nurse. Say 70% now ban Nurse, then the 30% who don't ban Nurse face -even more- Nurse and get even more burnout, and more then get sick of her and ban her. The players who -don't- ban certain killers will over time see more and more of that particular killer and thus are more likely to then ban her in turn, and over all this time, these killers get longer and longer and longer queue times.

    As I mentioned before, BHVR value short queue times over everything else in the game, even basic matchmaking, so they would NEVER add a system that would give players longer queue times, it just doesn't make sense on their end, and so killer bans would never happen in any capacity.

    Again, I understand that there are gonna be killers that people like more than others, but part of queueing up to play this game is that you are open to playing against anything. DCing because you don't like what you're against is a problem with -that- entitled player, and the only solution should be to punish that player. Heck the system ALREADY temporarily bans players who rage-quit, that's the game telling that player that what you're doing is bad and you shouldn't do that.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't be trying to actually balance the game and fix frustrating things that are commonly hated, SM for example is a complete mess and NEEDS big changes. But an outright killer ban option would simply not work even if you could only ban a single killer, being able to ban multiple killers would ruin the game.

  • @Krazzik said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3482801#Comment_3482801

    One of the issues with killer-bans is the snowball effect. If say 40% of players banned Nurse, then the people who -don't- ban Nurse are going to be playing against Nurse a lot more often, because all the Nurse players have a smaller pool of survivors they can end up with. This would cause a similar kind of burnout we're seeing with Wesker, and so more people would then decide to ban Nurse. Say 70% now ban Nurse, then the 30% who don't ban Nurse face -even more- Nurse and get even more burnout, and more then get sick of her and ban her. The players who -don't- ban certain killers will over time see more and more of that particular killer and thus are more likely to then ban her in turn, and over all this time, these killers get longer and longer and longer queue times.

    As I mentioned before, BHVR value short queue times over everything else in the game, even basic matchmaking, so they would NEVER add a system that would give players longer queue times, it just doesn't make sense on their end, and so killer bans would never happen in any capacity.

    Again, I understand that there are gonna be killers that people like more than others, but part of queueing up to play this game is that you are open to playing against anything. DCing because you don't like what you're against is a problem with -that- entitled player, and the only solution should be to punish that player. Heck the system ALREADY temporarily bans players who rage-quit, that's the game telling that player that what you're doing is bad and you shouldn't do that.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't be trying to actually balance the game and fix frustrating things that are commonly hated, SM for example is a complete mess and NEEDS big changes. But an outright killer ban option would simply not work even if you could only ban a single killer, being able to ban multiple killers would ruin the game.

    If a Killer is that annoying to go against that it causes burnout from repeated matches, I'd say that alone is a problem in need of addressing. This would reveal an existing problem, not make a new one.

    Also BHVR doesn't value short queue timers over EVERYTHING, because when they did the test with far more lax (and even removed MMR), the match quality went down so bad the game was considered unplayable. The current 'top-MMR = the top 25% of the playerbase' is the current best balance of queue times and match quality. They care about the balance, not strictly queues.

    Again not defending DCs, defending basic QoL like bans.

    A killer ban (for Survs, and Map ban for Killers) most certainly would improve the QoL of the game, and the only argument I have heard with weight was around the number of bans. Since you think even 1 ban is too many, I haven't seen any statements to support that position beyond the equivalent of 'because I said so'. I think 1 per 5 (round down) is the perfect ratio, it allows for archetypes to be banned (stealth/ranged/only personal unfun matches), without banning too many. There could even be an argument 1 per 10 might be a good ratio. I just haven't seen any argument that none is superior other than the dev time may be too much over other QoL improvements like perk search bar.

    One argument you keep bringing up that I can't even fathom is the 'well you decided to play the game, so you have to play EVERYTHING that could pop up'. This game is far too bug ridden and too many edge cases that sum up to showing up in nearly every match that not having a good time occurs far too often. If that is limited to someone despising Ghostface's reveal mechanic, I don't mind never running into that player. I'd rather both sides are having a good time in every match beyond the win loss requirement. If they get a good Blast Mine on me before they die, they probably had fun. If I flashbang save my teammate for them to just get downed again, the Killer still got the hook. If my teammate hook suicides because it was a Nurse, no one in that match has fun, regardless of side. If you think someone deserves every match that could happen, then could you take all my Slugging Hag matches when I play soloq, thanks.

  • BHVR has admitted that backfilling throws MMR out of the window and will grab anyone for the sake of not making the other players wait in queue again, even though they know the match quality is completely random and will often be a complete stomp with no chance of one side to win. They've admitted to that and they've not done anything to change that, they're fine with that being the case if it means short queue times. That to me shows they value short queue times higher than anything else, since wonky MMR is one of the most common complaints and they're happy to have it remain for the sake of shorter queue times. This makes it seem incredibly obvious that they would never implement something that would cause longer queue times, which I keep saying is the big reason against a blacklist feature.

    I don't know how you've ignored so much of what I said that you think I simply don't like blacklisting 'because I said so', even a single ban would cause certain killers to experience longer queue times, which firstly isn't fair on people who like playing those killers, and secondly, referring again to the above, is something BHVR is highly unlikely to ever impliment because they don't want longer queues. Multiple bans would only make the problem worse because killers like Nurse, Blight and Skull Merchant would be banned by most people and would be near-unplayable.

    I feel like were argueing in circles here. Blacklisting -would- cause longer queue times for certain killers and would unfairly punish people playing those killers. DCing because you don't like the killer/map/perks/playstyle is an issue with the DCing player. Yes there are things in the game that are commonly considered frustrating and should be dealt with by BHVR, but until then it's upto the player to deal with those things for the sake of being a decent human being and not screwing over 4 other players.

    Also hook-suicides are exactly the same as DCs in this arguement. I suppose now with bots DCing has less of an impact on your teammates but they're both bad and are both things players shouldn't do.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    It sucks. I'm sick of Wesker too, but I get why his pick rate is astronomical. They've released one killer that is fun to play and has a high skill cap in the last 5 or 6 chapters.

    Knight? Literal AI killer. Skull Merchant? Press button to deploy a drone. Singularity? M1 killer with Fire Up. Dredge? Noob stomper. Sadako? M1 killer.

    The devs have, for whatever reason, moved away from making even moderately mechanically demanding killers. Wesker is the one killer they put out in the last year and a half with any real depth.

    Wesker doesn't need nerfs. They need to get back to designing killers that are actually fun to play with deep mechanics. This isn't meant as a slight to console players, but it really feels like they are trying to design killer kits solely with an analog stick in mind. No mechanical input is built into these killers beyond basic M1 stuff. It's boring as all get out.

    Look at what they did in 2019-2020: Spirit, Plague, Pyramid Head, Blight. Compare those kits to what we're getting now. We've gone from "killer has a ranged attack, carves trails in the ground that inflict a status effect, puts you on a special hook, etc" to "killer deploys a drone by pressing a button and all power effects from then on are passive". Killers are being designed to do so. much. less.

    Dredge is not a noob stomper

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    Half my games are Resident Evil. I hope we never get RE Part 3.

    But Mr x plz

  • @HoopyK1 said:

    If they killswich Wesker again who will tunnel me out at 5 gens 10 times in a row????

    Pyramid head

  • I love versing Wesker and prefer that to 80% of the killer pool quite honestly. Buff the weaker killers out of irrelevance and I'll probably change my mind.

    Pls buff Trapper and Billy

  • @Spirit_IsTheBest said:

    I'm tired of it as well, this game has zero variety. All it is are Wesker matches and then throw in some Knights and Blights. Nothing else. It's boring facing that all the time, especially when they use VPN's and such to gain hits they shouldn't have gotten, it gets on my nerves.

    I really hope that they add a system where you don't face the same killer all the time, kind of like the map system they made to prevent going to the same map, they should do that for killers.

    I can tell you this for free, that whole map cycle thing, to prevent you from seeing the same map...is bs...because for 6 games in a row I saw nothing but corn 🤣

1 2 ›