245_Trioxin
245_Trioxin
About
- Username
- 245_Trioxin
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,303
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Orion Your argument was that it is objective fact that the strike was the cause of a massive drop in the player base and caused survivor wait times to sky rocket.
This is not true, as the strike had less impact than that if we look at the stats.
The only reason I pointed out that there were at least a couple major releases was to show that there is possibly some other influence on top of the strike itself. January could be written off due to it being directly after the holidays. People get games for the holidays, and stop playing games they usually play to try out the new games.
Correlation is not causation. There are a number of variables that could have come into play there.
I am not saying it didn't have an impact, but I am saying that it had less of an impact than you initially implied.
-
@Orion said:
@245_Trioxin However they're doing it, they shouldn't be doing it that way. 80% escape rate is absurd.
It's probably because the killers aren't as good as the survivors, due to it, currently, being easier for a killer to get to rank 1 than a survivor. So, the pool of killers is larger than the pool of survivors. The survivors that get to rank 1 and maintain that rank are going to be better than a percentage of the killers that get to rank 1. The survival rate is going to be higher.
-
Okay, here's the link to Steam Charts:
https://steamcharts.com/app/381210
You would be looking at March 2017. It wasn't a 50% reduction in the player base.
Here's the Steam forum thread, showing that the discussion started around March 3, and the protest was planned to happen on March 13. So, you cannot take January or February into account, as that is not when the strike happened.
January was the release of RE7. March was the release of the final DLC for DS3. So, there may have been at least a few other factors.
New Perk - Borrowed Time "This perk is very interesting for altruistic players. It's going to allow you to shield yourself when doing a specific action. With Borrowed Time, you can go save a survivor while in the terror radius of the killer, and at that moment, Borrowed Time will activate for you and the survivor on the hook. When you get hit by the killer, rather than being damaged, you will enter a timer, where you can keep standing up. -
@Orion said:
@245_Trioxin Then rank would become irrelevant. Your logic is like saying that if we discriminate against everyone, then inequality will be solved.
If they balance around the top players and understand how the game is played there, then they can make adjustments that don't affect the top players, but will affect the others. That's how every game ever has done it, and it works well, regardless of how competitive they're meant to be. Doing what BHVR is doing now is how Evolve died (there were other factors, but the main one was the balancing hunters around mediocre players and balancing monsters around top players).
@Orion Oh, come on now. That is not what they are doing. They are not balancing killers around rank 1 and survivors around rank 10. They're balancing around the majority of players.
Also, rank is irrelevant. It's mainly just there for matchmaking and it resets every month. It's been a garbage system since day one.
-
@Orion said:
@245_Trioxin No data was given, but unless you think it's a massive coincidence that many players all suddenly started suffering from high queue times at roughly the same time as a large group of players stopped playing, then had their queue times returned to normal once that large group of players returned to the game, I don't see what more you'd need.
Well, right now it's just hearsay. I would have to just give you the benefit of the doubt.
-
@Delfador said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/456083#Comment_456083
@245_Trioxin It is not really strange at all.
Rank 1 doesn't have pips, you either earn a pip, black pip or lose 1. As soon as you lose, you become rank 2, and for the most part, you lose a pip when you die as a survivor (not all the time)
If you want to know real survival rates at rank 1, you should make rank 1 pipping system like every other rank. In this way, rank 1 doesn't become all or none.
@Delfador That, I agree with completely. There should be a bit more play with staying in that rank. But, like I said in another comment. I think it reflects the issues with the current rank system. Killers do have an easier time getting to rank 1 than survivors, so the survivors that are at rank 1 are going to be the cream of the crop, whereas the killers may not be at quite that skill level. It would explain the jump in survival rate.
-
@Orion Oh, the one in 2017? Can you show some actual data regarding exactly how much survivors suffered from it? I'm searching and I'm not finding much outside of anecdotal blurbs on old threads in various forums.
-
@Orion What they need to fix is the ranking system. This is way off topic at this point. Balancing around a handful of people at rank 1 would ruin the game for the majority of players.
If they fix the ranking system and more players can get into higher ranks, then the survival rate at rank 1 would drop down considerably.
-
@Orion said:
@245_Trioxin Every killer that leaves means another four survivors can't get into a trial. They need to balance the game and the rest will sort itself out.
@Orion False. Every "killer main" that leaves will just be replaced by someone else who plays both killer and survivor.
Seriously, all of you who say this on the forums, put your money where your mouth is. Stop playing and let's see just how much the sky actually falls.
For real, do it. Stop playing. Take a week long break and let's see how much the game actually suffers.
You won't though, because deep down you know that statement is a lie.
These statements and ideas are ludicrous.
-
@Orion There is no double standard. Killers are just as ridiculous, expecting 4k's every match when it is balanced to be "2k = win". This whole killer/survivor garbage is ridiculous. The moment people start just thinking about players as "other players" and not "killers" or "survivors", the quicker you'll see more humanity in matches. Stop seeing the other team as some faceless opposing force and realize there are people there trying to have a good time.
Honestly, you're only adding to the problem.
-
@Orion Maybe competitive games do. But this isn't one of them. They need to ensure that the majority of players are enjoying this very casual, grindy, party game that was designed from the ground up to be viable for streamers and content creators.
It's not an esport. It was never designed to be. Trying to shoehorn balance standards from esport styled games would ruin it for the great majority of players.
-
@Orion I don't really think there is this huge double standard. Here, in the forums, yeah I'll give you that. Reading these forums can be draining with the amount of "killer main / survivor main" garbage. But, I think the great majority of people playing the game are just trying to have fun, and don't expect the killer, or the survivors, to cater to them.
People come here and vent their frustrations, and they're not always eloquent when they do. They make some ridiculous statements, sometimes. In game, I think some "toxicity" is simple misunderstandings. I know a number of players who wait by the gate to let the killer get hits before they leave. Teabagging other survivors is how they greet each other, so a lot of the time it's probably innocent when they do it before they leave the match.
Granted, there are some people who just want to watch the world burn, on both sides of the game. But, I just don't think they are as prevalent as some people on these forums would have us believe.
Oh, and post-game chat is terrible, but again, just like the forums, it's people not being eloquent in venting their frustrations with losing. People are always so ready to blame everything else except for themselves. It's just human nature.
-
@Orion Yeah, that is a really strange anomaly that happens between rank 2 and rank 1, a 20% increase in survival in one rank is odd.
But, it does make sense that they would balance around the mid-ranks, as that is where the majority of the player base is, more than likely, playing at.
-
@Orion said:
@245_Trioxin I've yet to meet a survivor in-game who understands there are humans behind the killers. That's why I've stopped playing nice.
@Orion Sorry you've had really bad luck then, I guess. But, as a player, I understand it no matter what side I'm playing that match. And it seems from this thread that other people understand it as well.
Do you play much survivor? Or are you strictly killer? I find playing both sides helps a lot with perspective. You come across as pretty jaded in this comment, to be honest.
-
@Jesp said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/455818#Comment_455818
@thrawn3054 I have actually seen survivors give a killer a kill when it could have been a 4x escape. Some guy just walking up to a hook and pointing at it. Sure it might have "selfish" motivations like preventing a pip, but I guess it's roughly equivalent to a killer giving a survivor the hatch.
By NO means saying it's common however, and it's as said a sort of free-hatch equivalent, but I have seen it happen (and done it myself) 😂
I've done this multiple times as a survivor. If I feel that the killer just had a rough match, I'll run to a hook and point at it. I have no problem in being sacrificed while showing a killer that there is some humanity left in the world. Hell, when I play in a SWF duo with my friend in the US, both of us will try to help the killer out if he had a rough go at the match.
-
I let a survivor farm last night. It was my first match in the event, and had a Hag ritual to complete. Wound up having two survivors not make it into the match, so I decided I was just going to let the other two get some points while I get my teleport hits finished. One of them immediately DC'd, so I found the other survivor and helped them find medkits in chests while I got my teleport hits, let them drop pallets on my head, and then let them do the gens and escape.
Had a Wraith show me where the hatch was last night, too. I guess he decided he got his three kills and enough points.
Honestly, with the infinite loading bug, and then people just DC'ing for various reasons, there's really no reason to go in hard on the couple of survivors that are willing to stick the match out with you. All it does is make everybody feel bad, and will just cause more players to DC when they get matches like that often.
I've considered it multiple times after having a match where it's just me and one other survivor and the killer decides to down one of us immediately, hardcamp the hook until struggle mode, and then down the other survivor and hook them right away. You get another match where not everyone loads in and you think to yourself "why am i putting myself through this again?"
But, I stick though it, because adding to the DCs aren't going to help the issue. And sometimes you find a killer who understands that there are humans behind those survivors. Kudos to all of you who do get it.
-
@Tsulan said:
Nurse is not broken. But she's the only killer who can't be looped around pallets.
What tells us that?
Looping needs to be reworked. But since the devs play on rank 17, they don't seem to understand what the flaw with looping is.
And they don't listen...
I agree. I would love to see less looping and more LoS breaking. I enjoy stealth builds, and they're not really viable right now.
I pre-ordered this game mainly because I was excited about the idea of a "hide and seek" type game with horror tropes thrown in. But, over the years it's become far less that and far more like playing tag.
I don't want to run in a loop. I want to hide and dodge the killer while doing my objectives. But, I also want to be able to pip for playing well, and unfortunately that play style doesn't work well in the current ranking system.
-
@Tsulan said:
Let's play the devils advocate here...
If SWF isn't prevalent, then removing it shouldn't have a major impact on the game.
Nobody is making the argument it's not prevalent. People like playing games with their friends. This data is calling into question the level of impact that it has on matches, which seems to be considerably less than many people on these forums make it out to have.
But, if you look at the first data image, it's not 70% anymore. Solo players make up over 50% of the playerbase now, and all forms of SWF combined make up ~44%.
At the end of the day, the argument to remove it becomes even weaker, due to it not being as prevalent as it was once thought, and it does not have nearly the impact that these forums would lead one to believe.
The foundation of the anti-SWF argument is sand, and it's crumbling. There is no evidence that SWF needs to be removed outside of anecdotal one-offs by forum members who had a bad match or two and can't let them go.
-
@DocOctober said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/455890#Comment_455890
I'm not just talking about 4man SWFs, the same holds true for 3man or 2man SWFs: they are suicidally altruistic most of the time and many Solo players are as well.
The statistics, as usual, lack context in how the data was obtained. Drawing conclusions from that is dangerous as they don't necessarily reflect how the game actually plays out IRL.
And another point: realise that with a 4man SWF, all slots are full, so the number of lobbies containing 4man SWFs will always be very low. Fact is that about 70 % of all in-game lobbies contain some form of SWF set-up.
First off, anecdotal evidence is, well, anecdotal. Your experiences are not hard data, and do not need to be taken into consideration when it comes to balance.
Second, if solo players are just as altruistic as SWF players, then your point is moot regarding survival rates. You said "I think you forget that many SWF groups turn 0-1k games into 3-4k games with their extreme post-exit altruism." So, which is it? Are we still blaming the SWF boogeyman for everything? Or is it just players being altruistic because of other factors such as emblems and bloodpoints? I'm pretty sure it's the latter, and not because of SWF.
Finally, all of the data combined shows that 4-man depip squads, as usual, are not anywhere near as prevalent as people here make them out to be, average game times are not nearly as short as people here make them out to be (all those 3 minute genrushes), and survival rates are sitting right around where the devs wanted it to be on average.
Stop with the 70% stuff. It obviously does not have nearly the impact that people on here try to make it out to have.
Every time the devs release data, killers have their house of cards crumble, and then they move the goalpost to try and save face. It's honestly really sad. There is hard data staring you all right in the face and you still try to angle it to suit your confirmation bias.
Seriously, you all need to finally admit that the game is not nearly in as bad of a state as you have been pushing on these forums consistently since the beginning. Is it perfect? No. But, it's not as bad as the forums try to make it look.
-
@Kenshin said:
this stats dont matter to me since at rank one in my region the only thing i face is the tryhard swf with all the crutch perks and items. same for killer players who only uses the same two killers with the most bs addons. no fun at red ranks my friend. and you never balance a game around ppl who are bad at the game btw. game is is ######### at high ranks because the balance is ######### period.
It seriously took less than one page before someone tried the "but in my region..." excuse.
Stop lying. Your region isn't any different than the rest of the world. You are trying to blame your lack of ability on some SWF boogeyman in order to make yourself feel better. These stats are global, not "global except for your region of the world".
@DocOctober said:
I think you forget that many SWF groups turn 0-1k games into 3-4k games with their extreme post-exit altruism.
I see that happen on a regular basis and in my games, it's usually the norm. If Survivors would just gtfo and sacrifice one of their buddies, the stats would be quite different.
It wouldn't swing the stats that much, due to 4-man groups only being 3-5% of matches.
This data shows that the game isn't in nearly as unbalanced of a state as people on this forum try to make it out to be. It's amazing how every time the devs hand out data, it winds up dismantling a lot of the excuse making and ego stroking on these forums. This entire forum is purely confirmation bias and circle jerking, and this is exactly why you don't see a lot of the changes you want.
The changes you ask for are based on emotion, not data. It's knee-jerk reactions to having bad matches, while forgetting the multiple good matches that were had. The devs cannot take those opinions into account, as it would throw everything off. The only thing they can objectively use to balance things is hard data, not your soft ego.
-
@PhantomMask20763 it's live now if you restart Steam
-
@dannyfrog87 said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@dannyfrog87 said:
@Visionmaker said:
Hatch is survivor objective. Why should the killer get something for finding a survivor objective?why should the survivor get a free escape? yeah exactly lol ....
I see this parroted every time the hatch discussion is raised. So, @dannyfrog87, how exactly is it a free escape? You need to defend this point more than "yeah exactly lol".
Why does the killer deserve that 4k? What did they do to deserve what is supposed to be a very rare win? They certainly didn't do an exceptional job, as enough gens were finished to allow the hatch to spawn, correct?
well. if you read my other posts also if i steam rolled the whole team and made it to the hatch first. i should be able to close it thats what. and all i see is "survivor entitlement like the deserve an escape" for literally nothing. survivor is easy mode end of story anyone with half a brain knows this. no point debating it because you will be like survivor deserves the hatch even if the killer makes it their first hurhhhh duhhhh mentality. why does the survivor deserve the escape if the killer makes it first? didnt do an exceptional job and i suppose the survivors did as well sitting their pressing m1 and hitting a skill check the match over in minutes while the killer has to try to secure the kills. so the killer is punished for doing his job so the survivor gets a get out of jail free card. its pointless debating this anyway as the bias in this thread is stupid instead of seeing it from both sides.
I'm honestly trying to see it from both sides. That's the reason for the questions.
You didn't steamroll the whole team if two gens were completed. You didn't do an exceptional job that deserves a 4k. You should try seeing it from both sides, too.
The only time a killer deserves a 4k is when they sacrifice all 4 survivors before 2 gens can be completed. Anything outside of that firmly moves the killer's game to less than exceptional.
In the case of 2 gens being completed, there has been enough accomplished for one survivor to have a chance at making it out. It's not a "free escape", no matter how much you try to lie about it.
Every statement you made is just another talking point, with little to no critical thought or greater perspective. The killer isn't getting punished, as they already had a 3k match.
No killer deserves a 4k for non-exceptional play, period. A 4k is supposed to be exceedingly rare, and the game is balanced on a 2k match being a win. If 2 gens are completed, you failed at being an exceptional killer, and do not deserve a 4k.
It really is that simple, if you look at it from both sides.
-
@dannyfrog87 said:
@Visionmaker said:
Hatch is survivor objective. Why should the killer get something for finding a survivor objective?why should the survivor get a free escape? yeah exactly lol ....
I see this parroted every time the hatch discussion is raised. So, @dannyfrog87, how exactly is it a free escape? You need to defend this point more than "yeah exactly lol".
Why does the killer deserve that 4k? What did they do to deserve what is supposed to be a very rare win? They certainly didn't do an exceptional job, as enough gens were finished to allow the hatch to spawn, correct?
-
@GolgiNea said:
Its annoying on both sides, there should be a punishment for dcing. We all know the game messes up sometimes & Kicks you out during loading screen so that shouldn't be punished though. Or when my potato internet goes out... Idk lol. This is a big issue though, & It could be fixed with dedicated servers.If it happens intermittently, then it should fall under the threshold that would mandate a timeout. But, if you're having a prolonged issue with your network, then you probably shouldn't be playing an online multiplayer game at that moment, right?
I know if my network connection is acting up, I step away and find a single-player game to play until it gets better, simply because I don't want to ruin anybody else's good time. Once it seems stable again, I switch back. So, getting a 15 minute timeout as an initial warning isn't a big deal. If you keep trying to play on a poor connection, then the timeout increases.
It's nobody else's fault, and nobody else should have to suffer because of it. I don't see the difference between someone actively playing on a poor connection and someone purposely disconnecting to keep an item (or whatever reason). Either way, it is a completely selfish act, and should be punished.
-
@Vankruze said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@Vankruze said:
@Master said:
@Vankruze said:
@Zanfer said:
@Master said:
@MrChills said:
@Master said:
Yes that system is already in place. There is a little x that lets you reroll a daily.
I spend more time in the forum too which is quite hilarious^^The dailies are supposed to force you out of your comfort zone, thats what the devs said, and it works pretty well if you wanna do the dailies.
One advice though, dont force yourself to play the game because you wanna P3 someone. Try to have fun playing the game and if you dont have fun anymore, take a break.
Maybe im mistaken, but I think the devs wanted to rework the whole daily thing at one point, but maybe it has been dropped alreadey, dont know
I have over 2k hours on this boring bland game. The only time it's fun when they bring in a new killer, with friends. They need to rework it. I think my level idea./prestige idea is good. it rewards players for leveling up their.This game doesn't reward you for being good, hitting rank 1, nothing. hardly any rewards what so ever.I am devotion 1 player level 11.Oh good, more bloodshards, hhar har. Very little rewards for player progression or getting good in this game, which we need.
Yeah, the game needs to become competitive because this is the only thing that will keep the game alive in the long run.
I dont think that a 3month injection of non-viable killers is healthy in the long run, even though so far it worked pretty well.
This game will never become competitive..
It already is though.
LMAO
There have been and still are active tournaments for DBD which by very definition is a "competition" and participants in said tournaments are "competing" so yeah it's competitive. Granted it's new on the competitive scene but give it time.
That doesn't make it competitive, that just means there's a group of people trying to shoehorn competition into it.
It cannot be competitive due to the high level of RNG across the entire game. There's no way to properly match players based on skill, as even the generation of any given map can greatly sway the tide in either sides favor.
It's a casual PvP game. It's grindy, random, and not designed for actual competition.
Shadowverse is sponsored by E-Sports so your argument is based purely on your own personal opinion. Please don't confuse it with facts.
Your argument against me is that a CCG is an e-sport, so an asymmetrical multiplayer game should be as well? You do realize that doesn't work, right?
CCGs are strategic. There's a small amount of RNG that you need to deal with in regards to how your deck will play out, but you still build a deck and can increase the chances of getting specific cards for your combo by adding more of those cards to your deck.
CCGs are designed for competitive tournament play. There is a large amount of strategy that goes into crafting decks, you need to be able to think on the fly and adapt your strategy to counter your opponent's deck, etc.
Comparing CCGs to DbD is apples and oranges. DbD is not designed, fundamentally, for e-sport levels of competition. There's too much RNG involved. If the maps were static and consistent, then maybe it could start to move towards a competitive environment. But when the generation of the map, alone, can literally decide a match, skill goes out the window. Therefore, it is not properly balanced for the level of competition you would find in an e-sport.
E-sports need a level playing field in order to ensure that matches are skill-based. DbD does not have a level playing field in any way, shape, or form. I fit did, people would not be constantly complaining about a lack of balance.
-
@redsopine1 said:
Ok before people cry op I'm on about slow acting poisen that wears off but it could be useful like if you get hit with a weapon using this perk at full health instead of wounded your have a chance of being poisend which slowly kills you and theres 2 ways to stop it being slugged and hooked/finding the antidote in a chest but said chest only spawns in the killers hutYou want a killer to have a mechanic where the survivor would need to either get thrown on a hook, or go to the basement to find an antidote before they die?
They need to either get thrown on a hook, or go to a specific area that the killer could easily block access to before time runs out and they die.
Are you starting to see yet how this would be completely unbalanced?
-
@Vankruze said:
@Master said:
@Vankruze said:
@Zanfer said:
@Master said:
@MrChills said:
@Master said:
Yes that system is already in place. There is a little x that lets you reroll a daily.
I spend more time in the forum too which is quite hilarious^^The dailies are supposed to force you out of your comfort zone, thats what the devs said, and it works pretty well if you wanna do the dailies.
One advice though, dont force yourself to play the game because you wanna P3 someone. Try to have fun playing the game and if you dont have fun anymore, take a break.
Maybe im mistaken, but I think the devs wanted to rework the whole daily thing at one point, but maybe it has been dropped alreadey, dont know
I have over 2k hours on this boring bland game. The only time it's fun when they bring in a new killer, with friends. They need to rework it. I think my level idea./prestige idea is good. it rewards players for leveling up their.This game doesn't reward you for being good, hitting rank 1, nothing. hardly any rewards what so ever.I am devotion 1 player level 11.Oh good, more bloodshards, hhar har. Very little rewards for player progression or getting good in this game, which we need.
Yeah, the game needs to become competitive because this is the only thing that will keep the game alive in the long run.
I dont think that a 3month injection of non-viable killers is healthy in the long run, even though so far it worked pretty well.
This game will never become competitive..
It already is though.
LMAO
There have been and still are active tournaments for DBD which by very definition is a "competition" and participants in said tournaments are "competing" so yeah it's competitive. Granted it's new on the competitive scene but give it time.
That doesn't make it competitive, that just means there's a group of people trying to shoehorn competition into it.
It cannot be competitive due to the high level of RNG across the entire game. There's no way to properly match players based on skill, as even the generation of any given map can greatly sway the tide in either sides favor.
It's a casual PvP game. It's grindy, random, and not designed for actual competition.
-
@Kebek said:
So you want to make viable killer not viable ? I guess you would also like billy to have gas to replenish for his chainsaw and nurse to collect breathers around the map ro refill as well right.How about replacing DS with UE insted of whining.
Replacing a one-time-use crutch perk with a perk that's consistently useful?? You're absolutely mad!
-
@Brady said:
You can change the bindings yourself in the settings.^^This.
The only issue I have with the console version is that there's a button dedicated to inverting the controls, and on the PS4 it's the entire touchpad. Any other game has it as a setting in the options, and not mapped to a button.
I have no idea how many times I was trying to wiggle out, got off the killer's shoulder, and immediately was boned because, suddenly, up was down.
If there's any one thing I would love to see them fix, regarding controls, it's that. Do people really need to be able to change their controls like that on the fly?
-
All of the killers (outside of the licensed ones) are now free with shards. Why would they need to make the DLC free?
The only thing you're paying for, at this point is convenience. Now you want convenience for free as well?
-
I thought I've seen people say you can close or minimize the chat window. I've never tried to do it. Is that something you have to do each match? Or does it become persistent?
Maybe that could be a fix that they could easily implement, where if you minimize the chat window, then it stays minimized across matches until you open it again. That way, players wouldn't feel the need to rush out of the lobby and can look at their final score, pips, etc.
-
@Giche said:
@245_TrioxinAgree but to be fair it's not only that, there's a lot of boosted SWF survivors who normally don't belong in high rank, pip requirement became easier for killer too, so you see some of them ranking up while not killing anyone, only to get ######### on in the purple ranks already, etc...
A LOT of variables.
Also the dev's stats should make the difference between a DC and a death.
Only logical, and would also help to get a better view on what is happening in this game in general.Of course, I 100% agree with you on this.
-
@Giche said:
@245_Trioxin said:
So, here's a question. What if they made the ranks bracketed like they did with ranks 20-16?So you could have:
20-16 - Beginner bracket
15-11 - Low rank bracket
10-6 - Mid-rank bracket
5-1 - High-rank bracket^^^^^
This is actually a good idea.Good concept, but should be tweaked, no one want to be stuck in the ranks 5-1's hell.
If the game was more balanced that wouldn't cause that much problems tho.
It's a very rough idea, and definitely needs some tweaking, but it could even help in further balancing the game. Honestly, I think some of the issues with balancing things properly across the board, is that it's hard to tell where things actually land, due to people purposely de-pipping, etc. I'm sure it makes it harder to tell where things should be across the ranks.
-
So, here's a question. What if they made the ranks bracketed like they did with ranks 20-16?
So you could have:
20-16 - Beginner bracket
15-11 - Low rank bracket
10-6 - Mid-rank bracket
5-1 - High-rank bracketThey would need to tighten up the rank reset system to ensure that the high-rank bracket can only reset to say rank 10 (bottom of the mid-rank), mid-ranks would reset to 15 at the most, and low-ranks would reset to the beginner ranks, and then everyone would climb back up from there.
If the issue actually is needing to derank to find matches faster, this would help alleviate that, as the other side (killer/survivor) would not be able to derank either.
Personally, I find the "faster matchmaking" excuse to be just that. No matter how you try to frame it, it looks to everybody else that you're looking for easier matches.
I am not accusing anyone of doing that, but you do need to understand how players are going to perceive these things, and how it's going to lead them to form bad practices in the game as well.
-
@Tsulan said:
What is this new "sweaty" thing? Is this the new term Ochido uses instead of baby killer?Nah, it's used in a lot of games. I know it's been commonly used in Destiny for years. It's usually not a derogatory thing. It's kind of the same thing as "tryhard" in that it means "overly competitive", but a lot of the time it's used to describe matches as well.
In the Destiny Crucible (PVP arenas for those who don't play), you'll hear of "sweaty teams" which are usually all friends who play together regularly, as compared to teams with randoms (which are known as blueberries in Destiny). When two teams like this would play against each other, it was known by everyone as a sweaty match. Even the teams would call it that.
You could call 4-man SWF death squads sweaty teams. Players like Tru3, Marth88, Tyde, they would all be considered sweaty players. Like I said, it was never considered to be a derogatory term.
-
Fine, my mistake. I will re-watch the first match when I get home. I am always willing to admit when I am wrong, and I will give it a thorough viewing.Mycroft said:@245_Trioxin said:
@Mycroft said:
Nah, this is pretty much how most games go, if you stop caring about how the opposition thinks of you.Old school matches. But times never change.
That video is not helping your argument lol. I couldn't bother to watch the whole thing. I watched the first four minute chase, but I can't be bothered with a 44 minute video. I'm getting ready to go to the movies.
Seriously, he didn't break any pallets to make areas unsafe. There were zero mindgames by the killer. He totally let the survivor take the lead in that dance. There were multiple opportunities for him to capitalize on, and he didn't take them, and then he got brought back through areas he had already chased through because they were still safe. All in all, horrible killer plays there. It's a terrible example to prove a point with.
Honestly, if you posted that video to show what usually happens to you, then you need to rethink your strategy as a killer. The only thing we should take from that chase was "this is how not to play as killer".
LOL He 4ked every match on there camping. Cause survivors are dumb. That was the point of it.
But that first chase really was terrible, you have to admit. I was laughing while watching it. -
@Mycroft said:
Nah, this is pretty much how most games go, if you stop caring about how the opposition thinks of you.Old school matches. But times never change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYJlFbtbvAMThat video is not helping your argument lol. I couldn't bother to watch the whole thing. I watched the first four minute chase, but I can't be bothered with a 44 minute video. I'm getting ready to go to the movies.
Seriously, he didn't break any pallets to make areas unsafe. There were zero mindgames by the killer. He totally let the survivor take the lead in that dance. There were multiple opportunities for him to capitalize on, and he didn't take them, and then he got brought back through areas he had already chased through because they were still safe. All in all, horrible killer plays there. It's a terrible example to prove a point with.
Honestly, if you posted that video to show what usually happens to you, then you need to rethink your strategy as a killer. The only thing we should take from that chase was "this is how not to play as killer".
-
Absolutely! I agree 100%, and it definitely gets their attention. It's pretty funny to watch them from the hook as they visibly start to panic. You'll see them start to pace, like they can't decide if what they are doing is smart. Then they make a mistake, and then I'm off the hook.Mycroft said:Most survivors who complain about it just want the cake and to eat it too. Everyone knows, if a killer is defending do generators. It should be second nature. It puts the pressure right back on the killer. It's a strategic 'screw you' to pop gens like fireworks while dummy is over there wasting two whole minutes for one kill.
But no. They want that extra bit. The itch. And that itch gets them every time. It's perfect.
It's a mind game, like so many things in this title. -
@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
Most times, that hatch escape was well-deserved, no matter how much you want to cry about it. You got three kills already, more than likely. You don't need, nor deserve, nor are you entitled to a 4k every match.
That's pure nonsense. The hatch shouldn't even be in play if the exit gates are open. The goal of surviving should be, oh, I dunno SURVIVIVING. Not opening the gates, and sharing the points to open them then tiptoeing over to the blatantly obvious hatch you saw 7 minutes ago while being NASCAR stock car racer around the pile of tires now you know where it is.
Once again you act like people saying these things never play survivor. Legacy 3 Meg, Claudette Legacy 2 Nea. I've nodded off during survivor matches and still made it out. It's easy AF.
And yes I'm biased. It literally makes me feel guilty playing survivor cause the fundamental basics of killer design is inept. Every killer, but Nurse has the same damn weakness. You can play against them the exact same way. Killers are like trains on tracks. They speed up, slow down, can't do much else. Linear AF.
If the gates are already open, why do you care about the hatch? That seems pretty pointless. The only reason you should be complaining about the hatch is because the gates aren't open. Now you're just complaining to complain.
No, I'm responding to what you are saying. Don't infer anything else. I care nothing about your time in the game, because it doesn't change the fact that all of the things you have said have come from a place of negativity and emotion, instead of reason and rationality.
I don't know what to tell you. Don't play the game like other survivors? Or killers? I don't feel like I'm on a train when I'm playing killer, probably because I don't let the survivors control the match. I assume if you are trying to get my attention, it's because you don't want me patrolling gens, which I then proceed to do. So, I don't really get looped, and I make a bunch of points, and I pip, and I usually walk with at least two kills. I don't need more than that, because I don't let my ego control my happiness in a video game.
-
@Mycroft said:
Self Care will never be changed. Obamacare In The Woods will live forever. DS will never be changed. They say it will, but it's been almost a year of "gonna be" and nothing. The hatch will never be changed. Makes no sense the way it is. Instead of a last gasp escape to get out when all else fails it's a luxury, survivors sip a latte deciding which one will leave and get the extra points.You're right, regarding SC. The devs blatantly said that they have no plans on changing it, as it stands right now, because of the changes that were made to numerous perks that can be used to counter it or slow it down further.
They just said in the last Q&A that they tried to add the DS change this chapter patch, but they couldn't, and that it is definitely coming in the mid-chapter patch.
The hatch doesn't need to be changed. Instead, they need to look more at the endgame as a whole. Survivors don't "sip a latte deciding which one will leave and get the extra points". Your obvious bias is showing. Most times, that hatch escape was well-deserved, no matter how much you want to cry about it. You got three kills already, more than likely. You don't need, nor deserve, nor are you entitled to a 4k every match.
Changes are happening. Just because it's not fast enough for your taste doesn't mean they're not. Honestly, you are incredibly negative. This is exactly why Matt initially made the "go play some Civ 5" comment. You need to chill out and realize that it's just a game. There's probably things that are far more important to be this wound up about.
-
@Mycroft said:
They're not going to balance anything. You and I both know this. This is just pleasant-speak and you trying to make it seem like on that fine great gettin' up morning the devs will finally hear the cries of the mere plebs and lead us into salvation.Never going to happen. A year from now, or two years from now or however long this monstrosity survives people will still be here going around in circles.
Nothing "divides the player base" more than finally saying screw this and playing Fortnite. As awful as that game is at least it doesn't feel like Epic has taken any sides, perpetuating this myth change is going to come.
The only consideration these devs have about balance is if Jendenise made a Twitlonger. That's the only thing they've ever listened to consistently. Not Marth, not TydeTyme, not Truetalent or anyone who actually plays both sides and offers valid criticisms.
I don't know that. I'm not nearly as jaded and negative as you are.
I see them making changes. The current PTB patch notes show numerous changes to maps that cut off long loops. They have been reworking and tweaking killers to make them more viable. They are trying to come up with ideas to change the endgame. They straight up said, in the last Q&A that they are planning on adding more things to do for the survivors in order to make matches longer for the killers.
Balance is happening. The game has come leaps and bounds just in the past few months. Did you ever stop and think it's not the community, or the devs, or the game, but maybe it's your own pessimistic outlook on it that is causing you to see it as so much worse than it actually is?
Just some food for thought.
-
@Mycroft said:
You're literally telling me to place my trust in BHVR data. The same people who nerfed a killer a week released cause of mass disconnects.Sorry, no I don't expect the US government to give me data about DBD but I trust these devs to provide accurate impartial data about as much as I trust some random dude selling me a Roiex in an alley.
SWF is their cash cow. I don't bring up that point to say there's a vast conspiracy just that I know they'll never fix it. I watched the pressure that caused it's creation two years ago. No way they'd ever stand up with changing it for the better.
Like I said, I was there too. I completely understand where you are coming from. But, like you said, they are not going to move it to a casual mode. They won't, and they'll use the excuse that it will divide the player base.
The only thing they will do is balance it as much as they can, and they have been working towards that. The argument I am making here is that you can't create balance with emotions. It has to be done objectively, and none of our feelings can come into play on it, as biases will create imbalance.
This isn't an attack on Killer mains, nor is it an attempt to silence anyone. I love hearing opinions, and I will happily debate them if I disagree. But, none of it is personal. We need to look at both sides, and we need to stop perpetuating myths and untruths.
I know they screwed up when they shoehorned SWF into ranked. They panicked and rushed it out, and have been dealing with it ever since. We can't change that.
We can try to help by giving opinions and possible options, but if we're basing those opinions on personal biases, then it'll never work. If false information, such as the 70% myth, is used to argue for something, than that argument cannot be taken seriously. That opinion will try to push for more than is necessary because the person believes in something untrue.
-
@Mycroft said:
Ok then, for the logically impaired.
https://clips.twitch.tv/OutstandingInexpensiveWaterKlappa
Do you want me to tell them to fax it to you?
Didn't they just state that if you are systematically face-camping then it's considered griefing and is a bannable offense?
This makes no sense. You just posted a clip that said it could be bannable if done for specific purposes. How does this help your argument?
-
@Mycroft said:
Yeah, we know.So, now we're down to specifics. What is facecamping? Because I have heard from numerous killer mains on here, that facecamping no longer exists due to directional hooks, and it should now be called hardcamping.
Based on that, then facecamping, which was purposely done to block the unhook prompt, was an exploit and the reason as to why they added directional hooks.
This doesn't prove anything. All Matt is saying is that camping is not reportable. Which I, and plenty of other people agree with.
-
@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@Mycroft said:
New survivors complain about camping? LOLI sat there and saw one of Jendenise's patented Twitloinger tweets about "I get so tired of being camped. Woe is me."
And about a week or two later they put in the directional hooks.
Killers have been complaining consistently about the same issues since release, nothing has changed.
Right...couldn't have had anything to do with facecamping being an actual exploit that they needed to fix.Directional hooks needed to happen because of prompt blocking.
An exploit? Oh wow, now I know what I'm dealing with here. At no point in time has face camping ever been classified as an exploit. Never. I almost took you seriously.
Yes, it was. Because you could block the unhook prompt. That's an exploit that was taken advantage of. How are you even arguing against that?
That's the only reason they put in directional hooks.
What exactly are you dealing with? Please, follow through on your little attempt to discredit me.
So far, you have failed spectacularly. Keep trying, though. At least you're persistent.
-
@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
Ranked should be reworked, not reset monthly, and have proper tiers. It should also be solo-only. SWF should be a casual mode where you can have fun, grind bloodpoints, and experiment with new builds before taking them into ranked.
But, that's not going to happen. So, we need to allow the devs time to try and balance this whole mess out.
And herein lies the issue. You admit these things but then act as if those who have issues with it are the problem.
It's been two years plus. I've heard "give it time" for two years. It ain't going to happen. Any thing that the survivors deem not worthy of changing gets a mob of review bombers together and the next week all is forgotten.
I keep hearing about all these things that are supposed to change and see little of anything. That's why people complain. It never changes.
Again, no. I just showed it's not as bad as a number of you are making it out to be. Because you're blowing it way out of proportion, and trying to use the 70% myth is disingenuous.
If we're going to discuss balance, then we need to look at it realistically, and stop trying to conflate it with our own personal experiences, because those experiences do not matter.
It's human nature to dwell on bad experiences. We'll forget the 9 good matches we had, but that 10th match that sucked? Oh, we'll remember that one. That's why we can't use personal experiences in balancing things. The only thing that can be used to create balance is data sets.
The devs have the data sets. They're working on it. Obviously it's not as important as some of you want to make it out to be, or they would rush out major changes.
They're not rushing things out, and looking at the actual statistics, instead of the fake one that has been going around for a year, we can now see why. Because it's not nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.
So, yes, I admit it's not perfect and it definitely has some issues. But, not enough to cry about it, and certainly not enough to remove it.
Oh that's nice. Tone policing.
Oh for the love of God, that is not tone policing . It's the only way you can balance things properly.
I'm not saying you can't have a voice. I'm saying that our biases cannot be used to create balance.
-
@Mycroft said:
New survivors complain about camping? LOLI sat there and saw one of Jendenise's patented Twitloinger tweets about "I get so tired of being camped. Woe is me."
And about a week or two later they put in the directional hooks.
Killers have been complaining consistently about the same issues since release, nothing has changed.
Right...couldn't have had anything to do with facecamping being an actual exploit that they needed to fix.Directional hooks needed to happen because of prompt blocking.
-
@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
Ranked should be reworked, not reset monthly, and have proper tiers. It should also be solo-only. SWF should be a casual mode where you can have fun, grind bloodpoints, and experiment with new builds before taking them into ranked.
But, that's not going to happen. So, we need to allow the devs time to try and balance this whole mess out.
And herein lies the issue. You admit these things but then act as if those who have issues with it are the problem.
It's been two years plus. I've heard "give it time" for two years. It ain't going to happen. Any thing that the survivors deem not worthy of changing gets a mob of review bombers together and the next week all is forgotten.
I keep hearing about all these things that are supposed to change and see little of anything. That's why people complain. It never changes.
Again, no. I just showed it's not as bad as a number of you are making it out to be. Because you're blowing it way out of proportion, and trying to use the 70% myth is disingenuous.
If we're going to discuss balance, then we need to look at it realistically, and stop trying to conflate it with our own personal experiences, because those experiences do not matter.
It's human nature to dwell on bad experiences. We'll forget the 9 good matches we had, but that 10th match that sucked? Oh, we'll remember that one. That's why we can't use personal experiences in balancing things. The only thing that can be used to create balance is data sets.
The devs have the data sets. They're working on it. Obviously it's not as important as some of you want to make it out to be, or they would rush out major changes.
They're not rushing things out, and looking at the actual statistics, instead of the fake one that has been going around for a year, we can now see why. Because it's not nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.
So, yes, I admit it's not perfect and it definitely has some issues. But, not enough to cry about it, and certainly not enough to remove it.
-
@Master said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@Master said:
245_Trioxin said:@Mycroft said:
@245_Trioxin said:
@Giche said:
@245_Trioxin said:
But it's fine when a team of sweat lords team up in Cheat With Friends and stack offerings and coordinate. Yeah, sure.
This is an incredibly small percentage of SWF players. You can stop now, your arguments have lost all merit.
Said who ?
Everyone who played killer more than 30 hours know that you're lying, or ignorant.
Or both.
And your wall of text isn't really telling anything, it's like you want the reader to be confused.
InB4 : "Lul that's because youre too stupid to understand it :DDD"
Says actual data. If it was that big of a problem, it would absolutely be on the devs radar, and they would do something about it. If it was actually ruining that may matches and destroying killers across the globe, they would have to fix it.
What of my "wall of text" is confusing? Please elaborate.
By the way, that's not a wall of text. Paragraphs are separated and punctuation is used. It's actually a pretty easy read.
I don't stoop to your level of insults. I encourage debate, and I will listen if you can bring me proper arguments. That's where @Mycroft failed. He didn't bring valid arguments.
Here's a valid argument. A killer has the right to secure a kill in a game where securing a kill is an objective or part of the objective.
Period, point blank. Full stop. Not my concern if the opposition doesn't like it. If they don't like it they play Civ 5.
I agree with you. I'm not arguing against camping. I found your initial comparison to be weak, so I replied.
All I am saying is that people have the right to question it, because it's not a good strategy. Then you went into "all survivors" talk, and that's a strawman, so I called it out.
Generalizations don't work, ever. They just make arguments weak.
I call it a good strategy if it can deliver 4k because of stupid survivors.
All you gotta do Iß to estimate the stupidity and act accordingly.
The ability to adjust your tactics on the fly is what makes you a good killerThere are moments when it's the killer's best option, and I won't try to take that from anyone. But, I also believe in open dialogue and can understand why people will complain about it or question it's viability.
Of course I can understand why entitled survivors complain about camping. I dislike being camped too
Of course camping is not viable against competitive survivors, but luckily most of the survivors have not (will never) reached that level yet, otherwise the game would be unplayableI wouldn't use the term entitled, that's being facetious. Most of the complaints tend to be made by new survivors who don't have a full understanding of the game from both perspectives. In some cases you'll see pure survivor mains complain about it, but again, they don't fully understand the game, so they're just willfully ignorant.
In my opinion, camping is a highly situational tactic that is going to usually end in a loss for the killer. It's a good way to secure a kill in a bad match, but it's not going to help much towards score or pips.
Every once in awhile you get that one team of survivors that are like lemmings and keep throwing themselves at the killer before he even has a chance to step away from the hook. In that moment, what else do you do? I don't even consider that camping, and any survivor who does is lying to themselves.