People who think Distortion is selfish
Don't realize that SoloQ survivor is selfish even without the perk.
It's every man for themselves and the other players owe nothing to you.
Don't like how you're playing? People will turn on you and sabotage your game.
Run perks like Empathic or Better Together and that information will be used against you.
Hooked during End game? You're not getting saved. They won't even bother.
SoloQ survivor is a dog eat dog world and there is no guaranteed cooperation from the other players.
It's probably why there is a team based rating based on escapes because it's so bad.
Comments
If that killer has NTH, or Floods of Rage, or any of the perks we've been talking about, it IS impossible. NO killer is going to miss the bright red outline that'll serve as their handy-dandy 1-step guide to finding your exact location.
'Just' is not an argument, despite your many attempts to use it as such. We've been over this and you were forced to walk that back when you realised that you can't, as you switched tactics to 'It's not a problem because these perks are never picked'. (Which you then also tried to claim you hadn't said)
It's a good thing you said 'if' because you know full well that's not what I've been talking about.
That's not a selfish perk, it's a selfish player. They can run a playstyle that is -that- selfish without the use of Distortion by just sitting in the locker all day. At least with Distortion, there's a chance they'll be doing gens or healing.
And hey look: Shattered Hope did not receive any changes, and yet is completely superfluous because boons were annihilated.
So if you want to 'fix' Distortion, nerf aura reading.
Distortion preceded both Shattered Hope and Languid Touch.
You can't just copy my criticism of you and hope it sticks, bud. I've been responding to pretty much everything you say, while you missed several of my points.
I have given you plenty of reasons why Distortion deserves to exist. I've explained multiple times the importance of Distortion and its place in the game. You may not like the gameplay that Distortion protects, but you don't get to unilaterally decide to cut off a fundamental part of DBD's experience.
If it goes off next to you (which floods won't 9/10 time because of its conditions) and NTH is somewhere i agree goes to far and have from the start. It was in the big list i would have nerfed at the start.
I become more and more convinced you just cannot play the game. If you cannot avoid ever being chased have never faked your running direction when aura proceed or guestimated an aura perk please just stop posting at the point and I really hate to say this because whenever this comes up in a argument on the forums it looks pompous but…
It comes down to a skill issue. You can do these things.
THEN WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!
You have said its impossible to hide from the killer, that without distortion a playstyle is erased i am assuming that playstyle means never being found dude because you are talking in extremes then saying
"look how dishonest this guy is good thing you said if"
waffle waffle waffle.
Shattered hope was added to the game in the patch before distortions rework.
You have not.
read your last response in this post that was factually not just an incorrect reply here
Thats not addressing that's dismissing. You dont want to hear something then you blow it off.
You are asked what justifies distortions' existence and you say its the only thing that enables a specific "playstyle" or that Aura perks need nerfing.
waffle.
You know what a literal crutch is, the physical thing?
Its something used to hold yourself up If a player would crumble if a perk was taken away from them. It means its a crutch they are leaning on it.
No the best perks are the best perks.
What's fun is subjective but what's good is not.
Yes but there are facts you are taking as opinions.
Sprint burst is a good perk, both a fact and an opinion. Regression perks (by and large) are the best killer perks. same thing.
It's not all but it is a larger proportion than other perk users because the perk leans into in, you can say that's subjective but there is truth in that statement, and as I have said previously its easier to change perks than the players, especially if the perks are enablers.
For example breakdown is a bad perk but the way it's used to create zones players can't be hooked it I think justifies changes because the correct thing to do is to slug the players out but they usually run no mither. (its a rare occurrence but its also a rare perk and changing perks is easier then changing how players play)
You don't need this defined for you. I'm sorry.
As i have said many times its easier to change perks than the players, especially if the perks are enablers.
Swap the word forcing with encouraging and most of these answers are a yes especially within the scenario we concocted.
If you offer the killer the option to play the game with 1 or 2 less perks (assuming they bring aura perks) being able to be used on 2 people that are running distortion or to tunnel out the player/camp and force stages on the players he has the easiest access to by ping-ponging between then they will play like scumbags. Killers always have its the role that attracts the more competitive players.
This is very anecdotal my argument that follows its something that has become apparent over time with dbd.
It's why the biggest killer content creators like Scott Jund, Tru3 and Otzdarva tend to talk quite a bit about balance while the biggest survivors Ayrun, JRM, and Skermz generally don't. The players that only play one role or the other generally have different things they want out of the game and killers are generally more competitive and will play to win.
I think you need to force killer kicking and screaming away from hooks once someones on it and it's why I want the self-unhook system changed in some way to do it but by not allowing perks to give information away that can only be acted on far from the hook its kinda encourages camping.
Yea but all these perks that deal with distortion in conjunction with eachother are weak (except NTH) and like i said i dont like perks rolling over and disabling other perks anyway. It will make the game less interesting and decrease the variety of perks that get run over a long period of time if this is the direction the game goes in.
It doesn't need to be 'next to you', that thing is global and lasts seven seconds. If the killer is roughly 15 seconds away from you, this perk will still get you caught. Anything less than that just makes it easier. That's not 'next to you'.
That works against BBQ because that perk specifically demands that the killer be sufficiently far from you to allow you time to misdirect. This is a limitation NONE of the other perks have.
Knowing a perk is in play doesn't mean you can work around it. Knowing there's a Floods of Rage in play doesn't mean you can do anything about it pinging you when it fires.
You dropped this argument before because you realised it was untenable, why pick it back up?
Playing ring-around-the-rosy with a killer is going to be significantly easier if survivors don't keep getting lit up like christmas trees. That doesn't mean 'make the survivor impossible to find'. It just means 'Don't let a single perk do ALL the work for the killer and make stealth flatly impossible'.
It's perfectly fine to get caught. Just not by wallhacks. There needs to be a chance to play this style out, and the aura reading power-creep has buried that. That's why Distortion is needed.
Boldly: No. The only thing Distortion does is make it easier to contribute to the team while keeping stealth on the table as an option. If the survivors aren't contributing at all, Distortion isn't doing anything for them that a locker couldn't do.
Except Distortion already blocked aura reading before then.
Because we've been over this so many times!
You refuse to listen. You refuse to consider any viewpoint other than your own. Over the course of this thread, I have explained to you repeatedly that Distortion is not the problem here. I have taken down every argument you've tossed out multiple times. I've been engaging with you the entire time, and all you've done is say 'waffle'. Like a kid plugging their ears.
Any of the arguments you have levelled at why Distortion ostensibly requires a nerf does not stand up to scrutiny. I've been dismantling every single one of them and you have the gall to say 'you have not justified Distortion's existence' when I've been doing nothing but.
It is incredibly disingenuous to disregard everything I've said and jump to such a conclusion and I find it frankly disrespectful.
Initially Im all ears was not the issue now its chasing that's the issue.
You are wrong.
Yes and im saying its effective erasal of certain perks being able to be used on you is the issue. I did not do that back then before stacks regenerated.
You can't backup what you say so you dont. your views have bent according to what you could say to defend the perk
look here
you said this earlier
Chasing not an issue with aura for you now
Also
Then right after you say distortion does not encourage it while you also said
So the downside those players face gets erased and its not considered something that encourages them to play like that
waffle YOU JUST WAFFLE
Then you say
You do not hold any consistent viewpoints other than "i like the perk" thats it.
But when you give one out as inconsistent as they are could you please do me a favour try to back them up partially at least.
Edit: dont bother replying this is a waste of time. Im not replying to you again.
You are never going to be convinced and your views bend like a palm tree.
For a literal crutch we have seen sticks, one made of LEGO (which was pretty cool honestly) and one had a sword in it. Like we all said everything can be a crutch, and if some people really do use it as a crutch does that make it a crutch for everyone else? The answer we're seeing from you is yes. If so, so be it, but then every perk is a crutch then as they hold players up (we can't remember the last time we saw a good perkless player in the wild).
And we thought you were learning…
Who decides what's the best? You? Us? Firellius? The devs? Cause let us tell you, EVERYONE has a different definition of that. It. Is. Subjective. What's the best for one person isn't for the other which you really don't seem to get. Saying this or that is good or the best doesn't cut it, especially when you simply SAY that it is and don't back it up. A friend of ours never kept in mind whenever he got SB in chaos mode cause he never ran it, was it still good on him? When people 99 SB against us, we keep going and ask "ok, now what you got?" as they proceed to scramble for something once they run out of resources. And if you go and say something along the lines of "Well they were using it wrong" then what about the cowards using distortion? ohh "Well, they were using it wrong" because they weren't being productive while having a way to stealth aura reading.
Your missing or ignoring the point on purpose now aint cha? Let us spell it out clear and concise out in the open:
You keep trying to debate your opinions and views as facts. We are explaining how your word alone is NOT fact and that the few facts you have given have counter points.
Then we define your definition of both as: "Anything I say is Fair is fair" and "Whatever I want" respectively. Thats going to go over so well with anyone with a smidgen of free will.
Surprisingly the answers are still no. Its not encouraging camping, its not encouraging risks from survivors, and no its not affecting how the safe option is the boring one. If a killer was gonna camp due to distortion then they'd camp if everyone suspected or was paranoid of BBQ (or was just gonna camp from the start anyways but we'll leave that option away). If survivors were gonna take risks they'd do it with or without it. You seem to think that it has some super influence on the majority, we can assure you it doesn't (the majority, the minority we'd be more inclined to agree, but even then its a maybe and no one knows).
So we're back again to the players being the issue. Since you claim that "they will play like scumbags" then whether or not they see an aura they wouldn't leave since they'll do the "tunnel out the player/camp and force stages on the players he has the easiest access to by ping-ponging between". Since distortion wouldn't change that it gets a new positive in that those "scumbags" won't be able to ping pong between them and have a harder time tunneling if they lost their target.
And here we go again. Who defines weak? Weak is in the eyes of the beholder (kinda sad that wasnt the dnd killer) and a handful aren't weak to us. Gearhead is good on its own for info while Weave attunement, Lightborn, and undying have some conditions but are good with the right set up (the first if survivors have items, second if flashlights or flashbangs are in play, and the third goes with any totem build) [Suppose we should explain that we do not see niche perks as inherently weak for lightborns case not that we think this will be read].
And again, thats your views and thats fine. Our views on that specifically is that some perks hindering others is fine. Considering we already have some perks that disable others and some POWERS that disable perks, we don't feel like it'll decrease all that much more. Especially considering theres a lack of variety anyways.
What good is not subjective. You can make the argument that technician is better than sprint burst. Just because its murky does not mean that it is all arguable so stop trying to say it is.
If you want to argue against the convention and say that a perk seen as worse is good then you need to argue to back it up rather than falling back on saying it's subjective. I have made many arguments that aura perks are just less effective than regression perks for example even if that is not actually against the convention and therefore you can surmise my reasons if you know what people's general opinions on regression perks are.
If I say something that is conventionally seen as basic dbd knowledge such as sprint burst is an S tier perk if you believe it is not (which their is nothing to say you don't) then you need to say why.
That's why some opinions I don't need to justify you need to say why it's wrong.
The ones I have had to justify such as that aura perks are generally not strong perks and that gen regression/blocking perks are better (even though this is generally thought to be true) I have had to prove, referencing tier lists of generally respected players (such as otzdarva's) Individually explaining their weaknesses (such as with floods of rage) or in the case of distortion (i have made many arguments as to why it should be nerfed)
Then you say "it's just your opinion bro"
Yes its been backed up or is something so obvious such as
or
That saying "that just your opinion" to a statement as blanketly accepted as that just makes you look like you have nothing to argue or don't understand dbd which I doubt is the case as you have played the game since 2017 but you may just be bad what do I know if I did not show your achievements that's what I would assume.
Its why stuff like this
In the face of something like
Is mental. You are either bad or to quote yourself
The players aren't the issue because you cant change a player base as easy as a perk but you know what my view on the killer playerbase is I've said what I think a lot of them want out of the game and referenced the anecdotal evidence as to why pointing to the killer and survivor content creators as examples because there are no real good things to reference for this stuff.
and they will in my view generally be more willing to compromise on playing "nicely" to win so if BBQ for example doesn't go off when someone's hooked they will camp.
Yes there are other reasons it may not go off or they may be not running BBQ another perk can be used as the example the point is taking the aura away and forcing them to take a risk. It is not going to happen so it no its not necessarily true that the players that play in a specific way would all do it anyway. Its why the perk encourages it.
Argue gearhead or Weave Attunement is better than an actual good perk then. You are the one with the maverick opinion here you and im just ending part here because i would just being going over the start of this reply all over again.
Their is nowhere to go with this paragraph i think this is just somewhere we need to agree to disagree.
and therefore you may only know the term from gaming. Also if you don't mind me asking what's up with the we thing?
{[(Ohh we're so going to end up derailing the topic]})
And how is it not subjective? Lets again look at this: "A friend of ours never kept in mind whenever he got SB in chaos mode cause he never ran it, was it still good on him?" The implied answer is no, to him Sprint Burst is not good because he doesn't run it effectively.
Then we get to: "When people 99 SB against us, we keep going and ask "ok, now what you got?" as they proceed to scramble for something once they run out of resources." These survivors used it "effectively" but still ultimately did near nil so we don't think its as good as claimed.
This goes both ways: "Distortion existence in its current state makes the game worse for the people who are not using it and for killer using the perks in counters furthering the gap between the detection perks and the top perks its existence is not justifiable within this context." Distortion shuts down aura reading temporarily, it of itself is not making the game worse for us if we don't use it.
Have you said why its an good perk? (in honesty we have yet to see an in depth look from anyone) We can make counter augments and say why we don't think its as good as people claim but all we've seen is "This is good because". We can list off all the pros and cons against SB and that would be why we see it as not a great perk, but tell us, would that change someone elses mind (not specifically you, but in general)? Maybe yes maybe no. What a person thinks of as "good" is influenced by their own beliefs and feelings. Which is the definition of subjective unsurprisingly.
Do we really need to explain how they work cause last time we tried this in your other thread you said it won't work. Do we deep explain how by hitting a survivor, it begins to chew through Distortion stacks of those working on gens? Or how anyone within Weave attunement's effect will start burning tokens. Also we're pretty sure that this specific paragraph of train of thought came from listing the ways distortion gets chewed up and aura perks still work without running 2+.
Just because 1 thing is easier to change doesn't mean it was the problem. Lets put it this way: Would you rather treat the symptoms or the disease. One is easy but not healthy in the long run, the other is not easy but better in the long term. Thats what we see it boiling down to. If you treat the symptoms (in this case Distortion) the disease will continue to still be there (the rotten players [almost feeling bad that we keep indirectly lumping the non coward distortion players together.]) and a new symptom pops up.
Gonna be honest, once we saw the "It's why the biggest killer content creators" we just ignored it. If there really is and important bit of info in there one of us will read it but we generally don't like them due to what we call the "sheeple effect" [People parroting the content creators beliefs and ideas without seeing for themselves]
Believe us when we say you've offended us more with "You don't need this defined for you." than the crutches thing.
Also: "I do putting me at an advantage if you don't." …..what?
"Rulebreaker" is shared between the 3 of us. When we say "we" we often times literally mean it opposed to "I" where its that specific one. (Admittedly other times we also like to mess with ppls heads) Also if you really wish to continue this, we ask for either another thread or PM as we do feel bad about derailing this one.
What I am referring to with ring-around-the-rosy is moving around an LoS-blocker to keep it between survivor and killer so the survivor doesn't get found. Which you could have reasonably inferred from the context, but I think I might know why you didn't.
There's that strong argumentation again. 'Just no'.
Imma snap back with an unbeatable: 'Actually yes'.
And you haven't engaged with the fact that the perks that get 'blocked' by this do the same thing.
You misinterpreting what I mean by 'ring-around-the-rosy' is not 'my view bending'.
It's not like I went
"You can avoid those perks without distortion"
"How?"
"You don't need to, they're never picked"
"But they ARE picked."
"I never said they're never picked"
"But you did, though."
"…"
"Well you can just avoid them without distortion"
I wish this was an exaggeration, but it's really not. It's an accurate summation of how that conversation went. And it's also bringing to mind that, once again, you take my criticism of you and attempt to apply it to me, which is why you take this misunderstanding to mean I am referring to these perks being used in chase. You are chomping at the bit to pull this stunt.
No, think about it for a bit more.
You say that Distortion enables a selfish playstyle. I point out that they don't need Distortion for this, and the only difference Distortion makes, is that the playstyle becomes less selfish. Therefor, Distortion isn't enabling a selfish playstyle, it's making it non-selfish.
Then you go 'AHA! So it removes a downside! That means it encourages it!'
But that doesn't fly when the downside it removes is the entire objection to the playstyle in question.
Alright, have a nice life. Just know that if you keep talking about this matter, I will continue to refute you. You being done with this discussion does not mean I'm not going to contest your views in a public sphere.
@Firellius
I want to compliment you on your civil discussion. You really won this argument against him
Yea I can be confrontational but he is dishonest, and only engaged in sophistry arguing consistently for things to be defined as re-argued pages onwards.
For example how he never refuted properly my earlier point that arua perks are weak referencing the tier list's of a youtuber that likely has way more hours than both of us and addressing the perks on an indiviudal level. Then brought up knightlight stats to say look they are strong actually bro.
That's not civil. He never has been, when I directly asked for him to reference the perks he is talking about multiple times, he never listed them, When i asked him to write written justification he never did so
and before its mentioned referencing his argumentation makes this not an ad hominem as it's about his argument not him.
I have been way more willing to engage with rulebreakers posts because of stuff like this and don't want to interact with him.
You cannot annoy someone like SpongeBob and then celebrate victory for being annoying.
He did not win an argument he just acted a bit like a ****. (yes that is an ad hominem)
Edit- Tbh re reading this you can think whatever you want of the argument that your right and my tilt does not change that.
but the fact you called that a civil discussion is outside the bounds of reality im sorry it just is
Sorry i dont know how to PM but i think we should wrap this up soon as we are not really going anywhere.
Its kinda a semi-important point on why killer players will play in a specific way that survivers generally won't.
I recommend reading it because I think it works as evidence as to why I am correct on one of my other views if you agree with the premise of the views I express in the paragraph.
It's because even if something counters something else if its too weak its still not worth bringing.
Think of it using this overwatch analogy (you don't need to understand overwatch to get it, its just a game where this problem is a core part of its design.)
Hero A counters Hero B
Hero B is counted by Hero C
If Hero B is significantly stronger than Hero A to the point that picking Hero A is just not worth it and hero C counters B then depending on the balance of their strengths hero C or B will be the meta.
Think of this example in dbd being
Token burning Aura perks counters Distortion
Distortion is also countered by having a full slowdown. (because 1 less suv perk vs full slowdown put the slowdown build at an advantage)
Then the existence of token burning aura perks doesn't matter as A just becomes the inferior option to C.
It just dose not matter that these perks exist while slowdown is better even at dealing with distorion.
And if the game becomes more like this and this style of perk design is explanded the game will fall flat on its face and its why even if most perks right now work into eachother just fine i am cautious of new perks being made solely to nullify the existence of other perks because the issue is not about how it is now its how it will be if it become too prevalent as it makes games more about luck and what you bring. (even if luck is never going to be the determining factor it will make the game seem worse.)
That's kinda my reasoning behind all the languid touch/distortion related arguments surmised in a much better and clearer format.
I will give you the rundown but it's so basic that every good dbd player should know this.
All for the low cost of having to manage exhaustion, which is not that hard to do its very easy to know when you may need it in the next 40 seconds as you can see who is in chase at all times so you don't even need to walk just have good gamesense.
Its been the best exhaustion perk in the game and has been for years.
But to be honest something this basic should not need justifying I want to assume you are a better player than to make the argument something like lithe is better I know it sounds insulting but just asking for this information seems ridiculous because is so basic and rooted in dbds fundamentals.
I can justify why everything that's good in dbd is but i should not need to and tbh i dont want to because it strays super off-topic.
Also
Yes but the effects of taking away aura is what matters not taking it away.
Weaker builds are punished see the A B C hero example and stronger builds are not. That's an unhealthy position for a perk to be in.
To quote a dbd youtuber
"when you order a toothbrush how important is the review of the guy who sticks it up his ass"
If something is misused anything can be perceived as weak it does not mean it is.
The amount of players back in the day who used to Dead hard into walls and then go "Well dead hard not good because I cant use it" was mental and they were all wrong.
It's just not a subjective thing, yes it's not definitive either and a lot of how strong some perks are can be debated and argued but some things are just true.
edit sorry quotes seem to be bugged at the top and are unfixable.
edit 2- Laura croft has a bad perk meant to only work as an anti-scream perk. Dbd is slowly 100% going to go down the path of perks constantly countering other perks so they cant break another perk like Ultimate weapon at the expense of perk diversity when they inevitable do :(
Shout out to Mr tatorhead aka NoPerksSince2020 he's probably the only perkless Chad I've ever had the pleasure to meet xD
Apologies for quoting all that just for a fluff comment, I'm typing 1 handed on mobile X.x
…well least someones adventurous o.0
Distortion is a selfish perk in its current form but it doesn't mean the aura reading from killers being in great abundance isn't an issue. Both are problematic but personally I'd prefer the user running Distortion just have a perk that helps them survive in chase longer for when they actually eventually get in a chase.
Oh, I am the dishonest one?
That is literally just a disagreement. You point to the subjective opinion of one Youtuber (Who, it could be argued, would naturally value aura reading perks less to begin with due to Otz's notable mastery of the macrogame), and I point to the consensus of the wider playerbase.
This somehow means I never refuted you (Even though you cannot refute a subjective opinion, which is the only thing you've fielded), and worse, makes me 'not civil'?
This is the most basic form of disagreement, and apparently, to you, that is the equivalent of hurling insults towards you.
No. This is crybully behaviour. You're falsely accusing me in the hopes that it'll make you, and by extension your argument, look better. It doesn't.
This makes you look worse.
EDIT: For a double whammy, I went back to Otz' tier list with the specific intent of highlighting that the tier list itself very explicitly says: This is Otz' OPINION.
But then I realised, hang on… You're now trying to argue these perks are -weak-, when you yourself already pointed out five of them in the 'strong' category, and your initial claim was that the rest aren't strong. Which is fine. But now you're claiming that these perks are specifically weak.
And guess what?
'Weak' is two tiers down, not one tier down from where you cut off the image. And there's a couple more aura reading perks that are NOT in that tier.
So even IF Otz's subjective opinion was somehow a valid argument, it would still not agree with you because Otz's opinion differs from how you have now portrayed it.
This is the second time you falsely claim this. We were three or four posts down the discussion when you suddenly didn't know which perks we were talking about anymore (Even though this wasn't a problem for you up until that point in the discussion), and I immediately pointed out a number of examples.
You then promptly ignored those, babbled on for two more posts, and then started claiming I never listed them. I told you I had, you didn't bother to check back over the thread to find what you had missed, so I gave you the courtesy of linking to the post.
AND YOU IGNORED IT AGAIN.
And now you're here, calling ME dishonest, because YOU are refusing to read my replies, specifically so you can up and claim I never replied!
That is literally the only thing we've ever been talking about. My very first post in this thread details why I think Distortion is justified. You can't ignore that and then demand that I grovel before your feet and offer up a 14-page written essay of why Distortion should stay, while arguing only from your perspective, and trying to construct this reason only from your opinions. Because apparently anything that refutes you, you will either pretend doesn't exist, or call 'non-civil'.
You keep shifting the boundaries of the discussion further and further onto your own turf in an effort to take control of it. Like I'm some kind of monkey that's supposed to dance for your entertainment. Do you want a 'Here you go master, if it pleases the master' to go with it?
He was specifically referencing to my civility, not the civility of the overall discussion. And initially I was of the opinion that I wasn't being as civil as I might have liked.
But I've changed my mind.
In comparison to you, I have been nothing short of a saint.