So much for a “fog” vial
and this is with the iri addon post nerf.
”i think we did a pretty good job so far”
it also looked way clearer in game rather than this screen shot and i dont have any filters or anything on either.
and this is with the iri addon post nerf.
”i think we did a pretty good job so far”
it also looked way clearer in game rather than this screen shot and i dont have any filters or anything on either.
Read THIS post.
Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media. The archived data will be published at the end of October. This site is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Behaviour Interactive.
Comments
it’s not that he doesn’t agree with the grace period. It’s that he only agrees for a grace period for killer powers. If it’s anything that remotely helps survivor he’s going to be against it and he contradicted himself about 600 times already on this forum. You are a really good dude and I just highly suggest that you stop communicating with him whatsoever because it’s never going to go anywhere. He fundamentally wants killers to have everything and survivors to have nothing.
That wasn’t what they said, ease up on coffeecrashing.
Why there are people saying that the Fog vials were "strong" while other people say that they were "useless" even before the nerfs, when in reality it was actually both?
The Fog Vials opacity were dependant of map's lighting. Saw a video comparison and on some maps the survivor were visible even when he was far from you in the fog, and on other maps the survivor would magically dissapear after the fog vial was used even if he was just 1 or 2 meters ahead from you.
I had some games, dunno if it was because of the map or the iri addon (or a combination of both) were the fog vial was a big "nah bruh i win chase now" button, because once he used it the survivor would just vanish from the existence, even if he used the vial in front of me. And honestly it wasnt fun.
I understand the frustation when the opposite does happen but saying "they were useless" is not remotely true, and neither is saying the opposite.
A middle ground needs to be found.
Yes, when I explicitly asked them to give a suggestion for common ground so that it could end amicably as they had rejected my attempts, and Instead not only flat out refused to give common ground only use it as an opportunity to almost insult me by making it seem like I am in favor of something blatantly unbalanced, I realized they don’t actually want to find common ground at all. My last message to them I stated this and said I won’t be further responding to them. I do try not to assume bias of people or bad faith but the last conversation I had with this individual, in addition to this one, I think has confirmed exactly what you said.
Thanks for reaching out though, and advising me not to get lost in what appeared to be an endless back and forth. Cheers!
You made an extreme claim, that there should ALWAYS be a grace period. Therefore, I am allowed to use extreme scenarios to test your extreme claim.
Question: If a killer is released with a 90% kill rate, should they have a mandatory grace period before being nerfed? Or should survivors be forced to deal with a 90% kill rate killer, for the duration of the mandatory grace period?
Choice 1: The mandatory grace period should still apply, and the survivors should be forced to suffer with a 90% kill rate killer.
Choice 2: The mandatory grace period should not apply, and therefore the claim "there should ALWAYS be a grace period" is proven to be false.
That is why there should never ALWAYS be a grace period. It's also why you should be careful when throwing around extreme words like ALWAYS, unless you actually mean what you say.
I think maybe they should just remove them completely. They're useless. Go back to the drawing board and come up with something else to never use.
It's because some people literally only care about the visual fog effect, and completely ignore the fact that fog vials are literally up to 4 times the area of fog crystals, and block scratchmarks, and block auras, and block survivor noises, and are bugged to screw up some of the killer powers, and still often hide the survivor if the killer is far away enough from the survivor.
I'm literally saying it was fine that Ghoul got 25 nerfs BEFORE the grace period started.
That was the aim attack locking onto a survivor despite you looking at a completely different object. Now that change allows ghoul to grab and leap towards a spot close to the survivor and get the decreased cooldown with little option for the survivor. This is opposed to the survivor getting either deepwound or the killer getting a longer cooldown.
BTW even if its more of a sidegrade than a buff, you focus on that over me simply saying that your "giant list of nerfs" from PTB to LIVE wasnt even true…
Are we really supposed to believe your statement of "Literally all of those were buffs or sidegrades" is true?
"LITERALLY ALL"??????
If you bothered to actually read what you said then it will make sense.
Your original comment which I replied to said this:
I replied by saying this:
Now if you look at the implication of this sentence it implies that from all the changes made in the PTB to LIVE they were not nerfs. The point of this was to sharpen the reasoning used since you simply included the changes made in the ptb-live and the changes in the hotfix as your example of:
That's not a valid implication. "Literally all" means "Literally all".
At this point you are arguing semantics while completely missing the point that has been spelled out for you. I’ll phrase this in a way you hopefully understand.
Your original comment said that ghoul had a “giant list of nerfs” going from the PTB to Live and then two hotfixes later as well. My reply was pointing out that those “changes” from the P-T-B to L-I-V-E were not actually nerfs which contradicts your point.
There is no point continuing this further since you are just not replying in good faith. Hopefully this helped clarify why you are wrong but if it is intentionally misunderstood then that’s unfortunate.
I feel it's really for hiding your aura and less about visually avoiding the killer. I typically still bring a medkit, but when I'm tired of the constant lethal pursuer + blight every other match, the moment the match starts, I immediately pop the fog. Instantly counters the perk, and it also counters BBQ - survivor about to get hooked? Pop vial - continue gen while the killer heads straight to someone else's aura read.
I think after consideration if we limit the charges we can rebuff the fog vials
Nope. That didn't help at all. That's not a valid interpretation for "literally all", because it directly contradicts "literally all".
When statements are open for interpretation, it means there are multiple ways for the statement to logically make sense. "Literally all" doesn't have any room for interpretation, because it's such an extreme statement.
It's good we agree this conversation is done.
If the 90% kill rate is from survivors not understanding a counter for the killers new mechanic waiting is best in this scenario. Clearly during internal testing the creators didn't have a 90% kill rate so something is happening they didn't forsee. For example is there a perk combination that synergizes with this new killer that is causing this? Is the ability truly just overpowered? Or is the community demonstrating their unwillingness change. All of these issues require one thing. Time a period of grace to see which cause is truly to be at fault. A grace period is 100% needed aside from bug fixes and bugs adjacent issues. To claim otherwise and so say no common ground can be made with the above statement is being contrarian for contrarian's sake