ArecBalrin
ArecBalrin
About
- Username
- ArecBalrin
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754429#Comment_754429
You said that their method to balancing this game is bad and that they are not willing to improve the game balance wise. That's what I was replying to. Why do you feel like the devs don't care?
I agree that they could still improve how they try and keep balancing the game, but in my opinion they aren't doing a terrible job at it either. We've seen many good balance changes in the past in my opinion.
Also I say feel, because it's just my opinion on this matter. Just like you have your opinion on this matter.
I've already talked about the double-dipping issue with Nurse now having to go through Blink recharge + fatigue, but it's clearly not enough though you won't tell me why it's insufficient.
The devs have also gone through several iterations of a ranking-up system, all of which conveniently favour survivors desires at that period in the game. The 'victory cube' system was introduced on the understanding that the survivors version was mere weeks away. It skewed the balance of the game by grotesquely mis-matching opponents(which seems to be the only purpose of the match-making; to make the game look more balanced than it is) whilst providing a disincentive for killers trying to be sportsmanlike and instead they had to min-max every decision and leverage every edge-advantage, thus used to justify nerfs to said options. Instead of cancelling the whole victory cube and rolling-back the changes to killer ranking, the devs kept what they had implemented for killers whilst allowing survivors the far more generous and open legacy system. Remember the devs only justification for this was that a new system was coming soon. That system, the emblem system, came years later.
Let's not forget the missing hook-auras for killers, which the devs first said was a bug they were working on fixing, before admitting it was an intended change, but then later when they removed it said they had 'fixed that bug'. We never got told which version of this nonsense was the truth.
These are not things you engage in if you are trying genuinely to balance the game.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754289#Comment_754289
What exactly do you mean though? I personally feel like the majority of balance changes they made were pretty good. I feel like the game has improved in many areas it needed improvement in.
This is vague, what am I supposed to understand from your post here?
When I explained the double-dipping in regards to Nurse requiring a feature that allows survivors to get away, I explained precisely what I meant. There's no confusion there, no room for interpretation or misunderstanding.
Feel whatever you like. The devs seem to make decisions based on feelings too though, rather than any facts.
-
@UlvenDagoth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754318#Comment_754318
Well you are making things up too! (even though i'm not making up a thing. You said "Survivor meme" so I figured you meant you thought I was a survivor. Logical leap there)
Honestly though, I can already tell you won't listen! It's okay though! We can disagree! Just don't be rude to people and remember. It's a game! Have fun in the fog.
I don't like vagueness. I don't like double-think. I don't like group-think.
It is not hard to understand my position if you are not desperately trying to invent opinions for me that you are more convenient for you.
-
@UlvenDagoth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754304#Comment_754304
Hi!! I'm a Legion main in red ranks! Wanna keep telling me that I am a Survivor? You know, Killers that blame everything on Survivors really give us bad names! So stop that!
You wanna look at 2016 footage and tell Me survivors are the same they were then? Sorry, but as much as I am a Killer main, I try to see the BIG PICTURE! Not just what is good for Killers. So, sorry friend, i'm not with your opinion!
(also, the "!" is just a habit on these forums of mine. Not really "yelling")
You do realise if you make up things I say, you're basically ignoring me(well actually worse). What reason do I have to not reciprocate that?
If you have to make stuff up about someone you disagree with, you've probably lost any argument you thought you were having.
-
@UlvenDagoth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754295#Comment_754295
Please remember the devs are on the GAME'S Side! Not Killer or Survivor! There is alot of whining from extremes of both sides here!
'Both sides are the same' is a survivor-meme. They are not the same or even similar.
The devs are on the side of themselves and their source of revenue, to phrase your point more correctly. The bit you miss out is that this means they are biased towards players who prefer to be survivors, because there are far more of them than there are killers, as is required for a 4v1 game.
Whatever platitudes you want to spout though, no matter how loudly; the record of the devs speaks louder. It's on that basis that I make the comments I post.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754205#Comment_754205
Well I personally think you are being way too harsh on the devs and I think this was a good way to nerf Nurse, but I guess we simply have to agree to disagree. You're not the only one unhappy with the game's momentarily balance.
But I do think it's not fair to say the devs don't think about killers. Just this patch we are getting nerfs to insta heals finally, and killers have recieved a nice number of buffs in the past.
It's not simply the state of the game's balance in the moment; it's the method by which the devs go about it that and their lack of any apparent willingness to improve on it, as well as their demonstrable lack of honesty whilst holding to a pretense of openness. It even goes as far as them removing videos from their Youtube archive of streams that contradict their latest narrative about controversial aspects of the game, such as SWF.
Killers get buffs and survivors get nerfs; this is a superficial and selective reading though that ignores the context in which they happen. Killers get buffs long after such buffs would have been of help. Survivors get nerfs long after such nerfs would have been effective, often they are nerfs to things which already have replacements. The devs think no one notices this just because the vast majority of players(who are mainly survivors) do not.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/746461#Comment_746461
Ok so the problem you have is that the game thinks you lost the chase which in change has negative effects on the chaser emblem? That's understandable, but couldn't they just improve the chase detection mechanic in that case? Because the reason they want to give Nurse's blinks a recharge time, as they have explained, is to allow survivors a few more seconds to reach an area in a map where they can break line of sight in order to gain counterplay against her blinks.
I do think now that her movement speed should be increased to 100% so survivors can't gain distance to her by just running in a straight line.
Again you're defending the devs with wishful thinking. The fact is the devs have expressed no desire to re-work the chase-detection mechanic, yet continue to introduce other mechanics which have dependencies on it.
I've said the devs explanations for the changes are vague, they are humbug. I have explained why and will not repeat. If the claim is that the Blinks must independently recharge in order to give survivors more time to get away, either by breaking line-of-sight or do something else, then Nurse already has that built-in and always has: it's what her fatigue state exists for. If they think fatigue is insufficient, then they should replace it, not double-dip. The fact that they think this is even remotely acceptable means they are still far-off doing evidence-based design or joined-up thinking.
The devs do not listen to killers though. These are changes which are purely survivor-oreintated, like almost all meaningful changes to the game are. We can argue however much about what the devs ought to do; the fact is their record speaks louder and it's appalling.
-
@Mochan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/745506#Comment_745506
Right, so self-healing going from like 12 seconds to 30 seconds is a "paper-nerf"
Window vaults getting auto-blocked is a "paper-nerf"
Utterly gutting MoM is a "paper-nerf."
The entire Endgame Collapse mechanic is a "paper-nerf."
Get over yourself. These are huge, game-changing nerfs and are not "diluted" any more than Killer nerfs.
Is there any point me answering this if you've already made it clear you aren't going to listen?
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/745465#Comment_745465
I was but whatever. I was just talking about the distance, if a killer breaks a pallet a survivor can only gain so much distance.
Sure, but there are no actual facts as of now. You can't say for a fact that Nurse is now underpowered either.
It's enough distance for the game to detect a chase has ended with the survivor declared the 'winner' according to the emblem system. That's if they just run in a straight line in any direction away from the killer. That is what happens when a killer breaks the pallet now: the default decision according to the devs, expressed by the chase-detect mechanic, is that the killer lost and the survivor must be awarded all due credit.
It has been the case also since the emblem system was introduced that Trapper 'loses' any chase where the person he was chasing steps in a trap. These Nurse chases are nakedly an attempt to have the same result occur in any event where the Nurse chain-blinks but does not hit anyone whether they attempt to or not.
These are the raw conclusions from looking at the numbers and if the numbers have not changed, nor will the conclusions.
Whether the Nurse is overpowered or not is an entirely different discusison. What we have cause for anger about is the devs have once again nerfed killers and are not owning up to it nor explaining their reasoning with any clarity.
-
Context: insta-heals have recieved a 'paper-nerf' only after they have been made irrelevant by several other game changes and meaningful survivor-buffs. These are the only forms of nerfs survivors ever get, done purely so they can make their lol-lists of 'extensive nerfs' they've recieved and pretend they are somehow on-par with the hundreds of undiluted nerfs killers have got.
-
@HawkAyeTheNoo said:
People seem to be forgetting its a PTB, im sure the devs will take feedback before it goes live. People need to chill a bit. Test her and then give your feedback.
Do you just not remember how all the previous PTBs mostly went?
-
@SaltySwag said:
Then show the Devs how displeased you are.
Not by disrupting gameplay, not by spamming the forums.
Name yourself "Nurse Nerf Protestor" and play as normal, to show them just how many people think its a horrible idea to nerf her base kit.
Being vague and supericial is what got us into this mess. No thank you.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742713#Comment_742713
I mean I'm not sure what you are on about. If killers break a pallet survivors can't gain that much distance on a killer. If the chase ends, then there's no chase music, but survivors shouldn't be able to get too much distance on you when you break a pallet. At least Nurse should be able to catch up to that survivor easily with her two blinks.
I just don't feel like survivors will be able to gain that much distance on Nurse after she double blinks. We'll see how it is on the ptb.
And I'm not defending them with wishful thinking, I'm defending them because I believe these changes are good. Recharge time could maybe be decreased to 2.5 seconds, but otherwise, I'm very glad to see these changes to Nurse.
I don't believe you are genuinely confused and do not actually require it explaining any more than I already have done.
It doesn't matter what you feel: lateral move-speed on characters is a transparent fact. The distance and LoS rules on chase-detection is also a stable game mechanic, even if it is poorly-designed and the devs have made no indication ever that they are going to change it despite making several crucial game-features dependent on it.
You have every right to your opinions, but they are not very useful for anyone else unless they start with an acknowledgement of facts.
-
@Victory said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742375#Comment_742375
Can you please read the developer statement that they posted? I feel like you just heard abunch of rumors, they gave you enough reasoning in their developer statement.
I have read it, before I posted anything. My opinion of it is that it's vague nonsense which uses several different narratives that have been expressed by players including myself, but then seems to want to emulsify them together in support of their decisions when they are in fact mutually exclusive. They've been enabled to do this because very few people posting here are interested in good-faith discussions about game design and balance.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742669#Comment_742669
Yes but it's only 4.75% lower than the running speed of survivors. That will not allow survivors to gain a lot of additional distance once her fatigue is gone, not at all.
Pretty sure if Nurse seems a bit too weak, they will indeed decrease recharge time to 2.5 seconds. Their track record is fine in the recent past, just look at Freddy who is now a very strong killer.
A chase can end when a killer stops to break a pallet.
If you think it's fine to defend the devs with wishful thinking, then I am more than fair in criticising them based on their actual past actions, as a basis for judging their probable future ones.
They are double-dipping on design intent for giving survivors a chance to get away. Fatigue already exists for this reason, so slapping yet another cooldown on blink charges themselves means they are either confused or are trying to mask how severe these this particular change actually is.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742627#Comment_742627
But she's only really slowed down when she is fautigued. Survivors don't gain much distance when she can move normally again. Her blink will then easily cover the range she needs to cover, of course depending on how close she got to survivors.
If it really does turn out to be a problem, the devs will probably reduce the recharge time. 2.5 seconds would probably be the sweet spot in that case, reducing the time to you have to wait after double blinking to 2.5 seconds if your math is correct. I wouldn't mind that. I'm just happy she has a recharge time so survivors can have some fair counterplay.
She's slowed down whenever she isn't blinking; she moves slower than survivors do since her original unjustified uber-nerfing. Having made it necessary to blink in order to chase rather than just bypass loops, the devs inadvertently pushed Nurse towards the playstyle that has been standard ever since.
Speculate all you want on what the devs will do; I will go by their record, not wishful thinking.
-
@ad19970 said:
Seeing all the outcries of killer mains because Nurse did get a nerf to her base power that allows survivors to have a bit more counterplay against Nurse, I just want to remind you of the survivor mains outcry when the exhaustion nerf happened. You still implemented it into the live version.
I do believe that especially within the first few days many people will say that Nurse is almost useless now and has been destroyed. Of course, seeing a more significant change to some side will always make many mains of that one side upset. Nevertheless, I hope you test Nurse long enough to see if she really was overnerfed or if she now simply is in a fair spot that gives survivors at least a chance to win against even optimal Nurses, which I personally believe is the case. People like to bring up the Freddy nerf from the ptb that was rushed and unjustified, and want to apply that same logic to Nurse. It will take a bit of time to get used to the new Nurse.
The way I see it, allowing survivors a bit more counterplay by giving them a bit more time to break LOS is not going to overnerf the most powerful killer in the game, not by a long shot. It's good to see that you do try and make the game fun for both sides, balancing the game with both killers and survivors in mind. Survivors also need to be able to enjoy the game and have a fair chance at winning matches against any killer.
The current issues survivors are having with Nurse originated precisely from changes to her blinking that were intended to 'give survivors more counterplay' against her. The devs didn't understand that survivors never adapt because from very early on they almost never had to. They didn't adapt to the changes of patch 1.9.0 either and that's been their issue. They've been blaming the addons ever since, despite the consensus before universally being that they ruined muscle-memory.
The devs have utterly missed the point with these proposed(yet almost garaunteed to go live) Nurse changes, seemingly intentionally.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742600#Comment_742600
Have to disagree. I just don't believe that giving survivors a bit more time to break line of sight will ruin her in any way. It just allows for actual fair counterplay for survivors in my opinion.
If a Nurse uses chain-blinks to travel around the map and happens upon a survivor, they only need to run in a straight line away from her and they 'win' the chase that just started. That is the result of 3.50 extra seconds of waiting to get 2 blink charges. They do the same thing to skewer it for Trapper and screw killers over in regards to penalising 'hook-camping' when there is no camping.
The devs of course not listened to a damn thing killers have had to say except to twist things as usual.
-
@Peanits said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/742303#Comment_742303
By all means, please do. But feedback without even trying it first helps nothing. That's just speculation.
No, it's maths. It's not someone's opinion; it's a fact, which is the basis for the feedback now being generated.
Now Nurse has to generate blinks over time, why is fatigue still in? The purpose of fatigue is to delay the time until the Nurse can resume a chase(I'll come back to this in a second), giving the survivor a chance to get away. This is also the stated purpose of Nurse having to wait for additional blink charges to return. Why is there a double-dipping on design intent here? It's like paying tax twice on the same bit of income.
Currently my boi Trapper has this funny thing going on since the emblem system came out; whenever a survivor steps in a trap during a chase, they win the chase and Trapper is penalised for it by the Chaser emblem. This has been a long-standing and as far as I'm aware, still unaddressed issue. It gets to a point there I have to wonder if it's incompetence or deliberate. Now I am guessing it's deliberate because of this change to blinking: the Nurse will basically lose a chase virtually every single time she chain-blinks during one but doesn't attack. The survivor only has to run in a straight line, not even lose LoS with these numbers and they 'win' the chase. Just like with Trapper, the Nurse is going to auto-lose for playing well; the whole point of chain-blinks is to apply map-pressure but now when a Nurse lands close to someone, a chase starts and ends almost immediately because they're gone.
-
I warned everyone that addons were a wedge issue: by saying 'the only problem was her addons' you're affirming something that demonstrably isn't true whilst given credence to the incredible. Now the base-kit is being changed and the justifications given for it are ambigious.
The standards of discussion used when talking about the Nurse and her addons have been rock-bottom and are the basis for what the devs are about to do. As usual, the DbD community will not respond by choosing better standards.
The devs approach is of course no better. They are not addressing this in the context of Nurse already having been given the single largest set of nerfs in the history of the game only shortly after she was released and purely based on low-quality feedback. We know this was knee-jerk because her addons were ignored in that patch, so some acknowledgement on their part for their mistakes might have been helpful for reassuring players that they weren't simply repeating the same mistake. Instead it looks like yet another under-hand and unjustified/unjustifiable blanket nerf.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/723549#Comment_723549
Oh come on. You dont need to act dumb. Healing (mainly Self Care) and Exhaustion Nerf were requested by Killers for a long time.
PGTW not that much, but there were Threads about it. Really, if you want prove, use the Search Function of this Forum.
I could also ask you to not act dumb. Those things have been the subject of discussion among killers, with no consensus on anything that should be submitted to the devs as requests. You did not specify which changes you are even talking about, which is what I asked for so we are not talking past each other or misunderstanding anything.
It is extremely easy to make a list of changes you don't like and assign them to having an origin among killer-mains posting about them. This ignores the broader context of what other changes happened that coincided with them and can affect what they actually mean for the whole game. Case in point; killers got hatch-closing only after the purpose of our having requested it had been made pointless by EGC.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/722779#Comment_722779
Exhaustion Nerf
Healing Nerf
PGTW Buff
3 things that come to my mind in 2 seconds.
Don't just try winging it, as the fact you admit it took you '2 seconds' shows: what were the changes, when and what conversations were killer-mains having that correlated with that?
Anyone can pull examples of changes out of their rectum and claim they're because of what killers said. Takes '2 seconds'. The game is in the state it is in because there's too few people that care that discussion about it should be informed by facts and specifics.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/720239#Comment_720239
"The devs do not listen to killers."
Maybe take a look at the Patch Notes from now to 12 months ago.
...Only killers read the patch-notes, going by the conversations I've had. From your cited source of the patch notes of the last 12 months, find me one single example of something introduced which was notably and expressly requested by killers. You can't, because I've already tried and have been more interested in it than anyone else has so far expressed for almost three years now.
The closest you will get is killers being able to close the hatch; one thing which was notably and expressly requested, repeatedly, by clear-thinking and actually genuine killer-mains. It had a PTB and was a success, so of course we couldn't have that; the devs had to find a way to screw it up and defeat the whole purpose of us having asked for it. So they did and now it triggers EGC, which powers the gates, leaving killers still with a catch-22 on whether to close the hatch when guarding both gates isn't possible. It means survivors can still hold the game hostage.
Killers getting unrequested and unwanted 'paper-buffs' does not mean the devs are listening. Survivors getting 'paper-nerfs' does not mean the devs are hearing anything killers have to say.
-
@Kagrenac said:
- Killers are inherently faster than survivors; it's impossible for them to escape in any open space
- 360s don't work due to how inflated killer/survivor hitboxes are, any half-brained killer easily negates a 360
- So many add-ons give the exhausted effect, disabling our main tools of escape or survival
- Being stealthy isn't as easy an option as it once was due to how many different perks and abilities there are designed to snuff out survivors
Looping is all we really have to avoid getting killed. I see it complained about a lot by a few killer mains on here. Why? There is literally nothing else we can do to evade killers. Looping only stalls for time, it's inevitable we'll get caught unless the killer decides to go away and work on someone else.
We complain about it because many of us were opposed to the suggestions that created this state of affairs and were ridiculed for doing so. The devs do not listen to killers.
-
@BlueFang said:
I've been a fan of DBD since i started playing a year ago during Hollowed Blight. What drew me to the game was it's horror theme, what has kept me playing the game is it's insane amount of content, characters, maps, perks, items, offerings, and unique gameplay. DBD at it's best is one of the best MP games I've ever played and it's genuinely exciting, fun, and rewarding to have great hard earned games
However at it's worst it is one of the most frustrating and un-fun games I have ever played and that is due to player mentality. With the current state of the game you almost never see fun builds anymore, you almost never see anyone really being ambitious or anything, and partially this is due to the game's design, but still. The game has over 100 perks for each side and maybe 10-15 are used per both sides and the reason for this is due to the sheer fear both sides have of losing
No one wants to run fun, silly, or niche situational builds because everyone fears the specter of a curbstomp match. Killers always play seriously because they don't want to be bm'd, depip, and insulted at the end of the game so they use the same perks and killers over and over again too afraid to do anything different. Likewise Solo survivors are too afraid to be silly because they don't want to let the team down, 1-hooked or run into a toxic killer. Everyone's so afraid of running into toxic players that we ultimately end up creating toxic players, with everyone playing seriously, never going easy, or playing for fun purposes, Toxicity is always just one bad match away for every player.
Everyone rushes the objective as fast as they can because they "Have to deny the toxic player from insulting, beating us, and reveling in his own pretentiousness" with everyone so high strung in this game and so afraid of the boogeyman, ultimately
They become the Boogeyman
I think you're right but this is only part of the picture.
Another game to bring in as an example is the near-miss that was Evolve, another 4v1 multiplayer which in 2015 was tipped to be something very special, then it wasn't. I've seen the issue identified with that game(among many problems it had) is that the game is fun when people are role-playing; acting like hunters or acting like monsters. It stops being fun when people instead act like players and try to optimise to win.
This narrows down the range of behaviours they express, what tolerances they have for those they are playing with and the play-style choices that are considered to be viable. Once they realised as monsters that unlocking every possible ability was better than investing the mid-match evolution points into specialising an ability, now every fight with them was the same. That meant picking certain hunters was mandatory too.
I love sub-optimal and interesting builds in DbD, one of the few pleasures I get out of the game now. It does mean though that when I go up against a SWF premade determined to guard against any possibility of losing, most of it is going to be spent with them holding the match hostage as the actual meat of it left me unable to do anything much to change the outcome. Likewise for survivors who are randoms against a Nurse or Billy with Ruin and Dying Light.
I have my own thoughts for how we got to this state, but I've expressed them enough times already.
-
@joan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/718498#Comment_718498
EGC heavily favour survivors? A timer to escape? 2 doors close each other? The killer closing the hatch?
Confirmation bias much?
Killers had been asking to be able to close the hatch for over two years and it worked well when it finally reached a PTB; the first time an explicitly killer-originating suggestion had ever done so. EGC was a way of not giving us it without a catch alongside it that defeats the entire point of what was being requested.
The nominal reason given for EGC was to 'put an end to games being held hostage' which it was warned immediately it would not do; it simply changes how those stand-offs happening. Anyone could have guessed(and did) that survivors would make 99%-ing gates into a standard play rather than something specific to use against Blood Warden. The devs ignored this.
There are two scenarios which trigger EGC and both favour survivors, what a surprise. When 3 survivors are gone from the match and the hatch opens, killer has to decide whether to close it or not and on most maps the gates are impossible for most killers to guard and the survivor will always get out through them. Making it so closing the hatch automatically powers the gates was a scummy-move by the devs that hands the game to the last survivor most of the time. Survivors still aren't happy though and manage to frame this utter gift to them as being grossly unfair that there are circumstances where the killer is able to get to both gates before they can open one.
In the second scenario where survivors have the advantage, is the killer offered the same rubber-banding assistance the lone survivor gets in the other scenario? No, it entirely favours survivors. The timer for EGC is not only excessive(with a token nerf after the PTB from the enormous 3 minutes to the merely excessively-generous 2) but will slow to a crawl the moment survivors by their own errors lose their advantage, because they can only ever be gifted help for failure whilst killers always get a kick in the balls for success. Because they can 99% the gate-switches and still effectively hold the game hostage, the killer is forced to make a decision designed purely to be humiliating: they have to choose whether to open a door for the survivors to start the EGC timer or hope they can catch and keep someone hooked. They're punished for doing anything.
-
@Mochan said:
It's to help anyone who's on hook so there's no time pressure. Also it's also done to mindgame the killer and lull them into a false sense of security. The guy on the hook knows you opened the gates already because he can see you opening them.
Personally I don't because there's enough time to do rescue usually. But it's a valid technique.
'Mindgame the killer', but the killer knows exactly what you're doing?
In reality, EGC should have never been introduced and was always going to heavily favour survivors who would always be allowed work-arounds that won't be addressed until long after other changes have made them irrelevant, as usual.
Killers meanwhile keep having our options perpetually narrowed.
-
@Nicholas said:
The same can be said about a number of things, decisive strike and borrow time are so popular because many killers tunnel and camp!
This is a survivor-meme though. Both are countered by camping harder and closer. They are used because they are broken and over-synergise; it has nothing to do with what killers do. Meanwhile MoM as it now functions is made more effective by the killer camping, yet it isn't used simply because it now demands survivors put some effort in, it's not another automatic get-out-of-jail-free card.
-
Oh also once again: if a survivor gets caught in a trap during a chase, Trapper actually gets penalised and the game registers this as Trapper having lost the chase and the survivor winning it.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
"Then the entitled survivor crew complained (was only a matter of time)"
How to get people to disregard the rest of your post 101
By accurately referencing the history of the game?
Survivors did their usual thing of raining complaints during the PTB for the emblem system, even had it made so killers could scarcely do anything to avoid being penalised for being near the hook(due to it relying on the ever-unreliable chase-detection system) and they themselves got rewarded for harassing the killer for the whole match rather than for specific tasks as it was originally intended. Funny how the devs do these U-turns on their intended design decisions only for the benefit of survivors. Every single iteration of the ranking system has been a nakedly unfair mess for killers.
-
@AliXnm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/708900#Comment_708900
Ok???? What does this have to do with camping?
What does the context of how the game actually plays out have to do with killers making decisions like whether to camp or not?
Oh, I dunno.
-
Reminder that when a survivor steps in a trap during a chase; it still counts as the survivor having won the chase according to the emblem system.
-
@Mochan said:
Yes, imagine punishing killers for playing the game.
Look, I get you're a killer main, but there is a vast difference between survivors and killers. You know what that is? It's called POWER. Killers are the POWER ROLE. No matter how many killers are bad at the game don't have power, it is a fact that killers are the power role.
What this means is killers can end a survivor's night just like that. Utterly deny him from even playing. That is called tunneling and camping.
The mechanics are terrible and need some kind of fix. BHVR obviously intends for killers not to camp and tunnel. It's clear as day from their (badly-designed) emblem system. But as we all know the emblem system is junk, so killers don't have any incentive not to tunnel camp.
It's been a long time coming that a real mechanical change is put in place to prevent tunnel camping, but BHVR is half-hearted about it. Likely they don't want to take agency away from players. I get that.
But nobody can complain if the survivor population is so low that killers can't reliably find fast games, because tunnel-camping is the number one that drives survivors away from playing this game.
So YES, killers need to be punished, if that's what it takes to stop this silly epidemic.
The badly-designed emblem system which is in the state it is because of massive survivor lobbying during it's PTB to give perverse incentives rather than reward good-play.
Like all things which are influenced by survivors, it's terrible. They demand stuff, they get it, then they complain about it. They do this because they don't know what they want and it's why the devs must stop listening to them and actually listen to killers for a change.
-
Survivors lobbied for and recieved changes to the Emblem system in PTB such that it would reward them for stalling the killer in a chase all-game and allow them to pip. Let me know when that was changed since.
-
@alienschmalien said:
I can also say that about how many times you can go on reddit or here and you see a killer also saying something about how a game went and how they didn't get any kills.
Both sides whine and complain. Neither side is innocent of ''expecting" things.
That's the nature of a game. People expect to win no matter what side they are on.
The variable is depending on what the player themselves consider a win. Some survivors might consider getting their teammates out a win, some survivor might consider getting a decent amount of bloodpoints a win, some probably and a lot probably consider it getting out through the gate the hatch.
And some killers might consider a win 2 kills, or at least a kill, or getting a lot of bloodpoints and hooking every survivor at least twice, and a lot might consider it ''I got a 4k and no one left through the gate or hatch."
It still doesn't negate the fact both sides will go on forums and complain though. As many stupid forum survivor quotes there are? There's an equal amount for the other side of the game too.
All based in truth.
Well who needs to listen when you already know the truth?
-
When one unintended consequence of collision-boxes is fine but another unintended consequence of collision-boxes is an exploit, with the only difference being one is for survivors the the other is killers.
-
@alienschmalien said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/700883#Comment_700883
Ehh. The emblem system kind of rewards you for going out of your way to get the 4k.
That and the number of people in game you will see when playing survivor who will straight up leave another survivor on the ground to bleed out and chase the last survivor who is juking that killer for days on end?
Kinda of lends into this meme.
There's a lot of killers out there okay with 2ks and 3ks sure or just getting everyone hooked twice, etc.
But for most memes or things in this community? There's some truth behind it.
The emblem system is not reflective of player opinion, especially not killers who have had the most to complain about for every version of the ranking system that has been used.
Nor does the killer in-game making a straightforward logical choice mean they are judging the match based on how many kills they got. Killers have disagreed about how their performance has been measured since release and this is one of many aspects where it seems patently obvious killers are not listened to, by the devs of by survivors.
In fact one of the ways of pro-actively not-listening has been to keep asserting that killers say or think things which we actually don't. Often it's the total opposite of what we think. No matter how many times we say we don't judge how the match went based on kills/escapes, it never seems to sink in because it conflicts with the group-think that 'killers just want 4k all the time'.
When it comes to killers laughing at survivor-memes though: every single one of them is based on a direct-quote of a survivor which can be traced usually on the Steam forum.
-
@Frosty said:
This game is labeled as a "asymmetrical horror" one could argue that it really is neither, at least for experienced/good players.
The fact that after a while the game gets figured out and you either conform to few proven paths, or go your own and accept that the game probably won't be in your favor.
I think this comes in part partially for the fact that survivor's are pretty much guaranteed to escape when the game is trying to be balanced around two escaping. This can only lead to certian builds, intended to take advantage of the key conditions in order to win, and will rule the game.
Survivor's expect to escape - so they must do gens, and asap because the killers are expect two get to kills (let's be honest they expect 4). They are in a race to do so before the survivors who are rushing to not get killed power the gates.
The perks and character that allow each side to do the best will set the tone of the game because most play to win.
This game is shallow and all of us were OK with that because it wasn't trying to be more then it was, which is a glorified version of freeze tag. Now it is trying to deepen its self, and allow people develop certian play styles but with pre-set stats, and this doesn't seem to be sitting well with many of the gamer demographics. Too intense for casual gamers and an on the rails for rpg/character development folks for example.
I don't think gens need to be increased or that a second objective is required or nefring noed or removing moris ect....... is going to fix this. Surviving and killing needs to be harder and or more based on skill. Stealth players should be able to play and win differently then in your face aggressive players.
Essentially this game needs to be left alone soon, and they need to start working on larger, or more in depth version of their dream. The current product doesn't seem to please many.
Who says 'killers expect 4 kills'?
Literally, this meme is spouted only by survivors.
-
@Lost_in_the_Fog said:
So a little background. DBD is actually the first online vs game I've ever gotten into. I've mainly avoided it because of the stories I've heard about how terrible people are. Since voice chat isn't a default feature of the game I thought it would be better. Sure people can say nasty stuff in end game chat but that is easily remedied by leaving the lobby.
To my surprise, I learned that specific actions in the game are considered toxic such as teabagging, pointing, and killer hitting survivors on hook. After learning this I started getting offended by these things. Then I realized, this is stupid. I'm only being triggered because I read somewhere that I'm SUPPOSED to be triggered by this.
So my question is. . . why do people let a silly action in a game get to them so much. Is there a rich history of this in online gaming? I'm assuming yes. I get it that the anonymity of the internet brings out the worst in humanity but it also seems like there is some sort of mob mentality going on and people have been convinced they must be offended by fairly innocuous acts in a video game.
Well to be offended by an action or mere words is silly, of course it is. That isn't the issue. You may have realised you were only upset because you read something telling you that you should be, but in my experience people are upset for a different reason to that, a reason that is core to relations between people.
People get upset at something if that said thing is intended to make them upset. Now people can say this doesn't upset them at all and my honest opinion is: they are either liars and/or sociopaths who don't feel anything about it because they don't care about people at all. Most people do care about what others think, say and do. They can't care about everything and everybody; there has to be a limit or there will be emotional burn-out, but when it comes to how others are directly interacting with them, there tends to be a focus on that which is necessary for blocking out things said and done by people who you have no relations with.
In the specific context of Dead By Daylight, I regard at the basic level anything a player may use in order to win is fair, even trying to put opponents in a state of mind that hinders them. I don't stay at that basic level though because whilst the onus is on the developers to make sure the game is fair and fun for everybody, many players are not by-standers. Having influenced the development of the game since release, they make use of features which emerged from that influence, some which can legitimately be argued were originally exploits turned into supported gameplay features. To me, those features and the over-reliant use of them is toxic.
-
Survivors dropped it immediately after it was changed. No one has a clue what other potential use it has because no one is trying to find out.
Imagine now if Nurse-mains had done the same in 2016, causing Nurse to actually get ridiculous buffs since then. Instead they stuck with her as-is and found a new playstyle that worked.
I would change MoM by making it mandatory for four months, see how quickly a meta develops when people are forced to find one.
-
@Peanits said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/628807#Comment_628807
Each of those seconds healing is a second that could be spent on a generator. Even if we're talking about a generator with no progress at all, that's only 80 charges. If you work with just one other guy, it only takes 12 seconds longer to fix the last generator and get adrenaline, healing all four of you, over sitting there with self care. Working with two people, it's about the same amount of time as self caring.
None of which matters because survivors are not paying in that currency.
The killer's currency is time; a killer pays for everything with time. Their time is valuable and it's aways uncertain.
A survivor pays with resources, which are collectively known to the survivors, divided by the remaining objectives.
There is a clear difference in the utility of these: a killer can only ever get back a part of what they have lost, but survivors have some resources which are infinitely renewable, health-states being one.
This is why survivors getting nerfs in terms of changes to timings have often been 'on-paper' nerfs only. Meanwhile their buffs tend to be full-blown mechanical changes that affect the purpose and end-utility directly.
-
"I main survivor" = Survivor-main
"Killer-main here" = Survivor-main
"I play both sides" = Survivor-main
"T-bagging is the Hegalian Dialectic in play, as is hitting someone on the hook" = Killer-main
-
Ok, an adjustment I would make to the above is that helping someone in a Frenzy struggle wouldn't garauntee the helping survivor gets injured; unless they withdraw from the interaction, they fail one of their own skill-checks or the struggle is won by the Legion.
The principle of replacing Frenzy as a debuff-application with a QTE struggle is that the killer's ability to do it is being directly tested against the survivors. The Legion are closer to survivors than any other killers are; an ability that reflects survivor mechanics fits the theme and provides a skill-based ability with a decent reward from it.
I think I have an idea for the Plague, making her power more skill-based.
-
The way survivor 'nerfs' tend to work, my guess is:
Survivors can no longer heal each other. This will come 5-6 months after survivors are given regeneration as a basic feature, killer has an increased chance to miss with all attacks and Exhaustion is split into two versions to allow more of the perks to be stacked.
-
This puts the cart before the horse.
If not-healing can be characterised as a 'permanent Exposed effect', then every single instance where a 2nd-chance perk is in play can be characterised as 'healing done before the fact', which makes general healing surplus to requirements.
-
I'll flesh this out later.
Proposal:
Legion's Feral Frenzy is no longer about applying Deep Wounds to as many survivors are possible, in order that they spend time mending it; because it wastes Legion's time more than the survivors and a killer's time is more valuable. It's conceptually flawed.
Instead Feral Frenzy allows Legion to perform a grab rather than melee at any time during it's duration. Because the Legion is just a normal human, they will struggle with the survivor. Both players will have to make alternate skill-checks rapidly that get progressively more difficult and can not be affected by perks. The first to make a mistake, loses.
If the Legion loses, they are fatigued and Frenzy goes on cooldown. If the survivor loses, the Legion finishes grabbing them as normal and can take them to a hook.
The Legion is human: other survivors can interact to help. If the tackled survivor fails a skill-check while another survivor is helping them, the helper can make a more difficult skill-check but only if they are uninjured. Successfully helping someone will make the helper injured.
-
I keep trying to make a post about the Legion. Each time I write a few hundred words and the post is terrible.
Just like the Legion.
-
Because the survivor intends that to happen.
It's like insults that are just words; there is no inherent reason why anyone should be insulted, except for the fact that an insult is what is intended. The only people who are honest when they say they aren't bothered are people who can't tell someone is intending to insult them. People manage their responses in different ways, but anyone denying they have a response is dishonest or lacks self-awareness.
-
@Raven014 said:
Legion, Wraith, and Plague need some attention.
Legion: Self evident, but this is probably the weakest killer in the game. That's a shame, because I'd love to play them more. If their frenzy could down people if played well, then that might make them more enjoyable. Like you have to hit them 4 times in frenzy to down, but you have to time your swings, and getting pulled out of frenzy or losing the survivor mid chase would stop you. Something to make going in Frenzy worth it. Frenzy should last until you down a survivor or cancel it. It should be able to swing multiple times, since it's a frenzy.
Deep Wounds needs to be removed from Legion. The Devs balance their kit around it, making the other parts of the kit weaker in kind. Replace it with a marker, like the DBD logo so that survivors and the killer can tell how many more times legion has to stab them in Frenzy before they go down.
Wraith: This guy is so weak... it's laughable. Invis that survivors can see coming from a mile away. Changes I'd make:
- Make his invis worth it. Make it so survivors can't see the shimmer outside his normal TR distance.
- Give him an attack from invis, something that's meant to be a surprise. It would have a way longer cooldown, but it would give survivors a reason to look for the shimmer instead of waiting for the warning bell.
Those are the only things I'd think of at the moment.
Plague: Being broken just isn't enough. They have to have an amount of time before it makes things even worse. Make it so they have to cleanse in 2 minutes after being broken, otherwise risk suffering from Dying status. This timer resets when healed back to injured by another survivor. This would give Plague corrupt purge eventually, allowing her to use half of her kit that's usually denied at higher rank play (people don't cleanse at high ranks).
Legion and Plague suffer from a similar root cause of their problems: they have been designed with survivors in mind, rather than how they play for the killer. They are part of something I touched on at the start: the devs trying to solve problems with options like perks and new characters rather than core game tweaks.
The Pig is the same, along with Legion and Plague; a main-power meant to slow down matches and give survivors something else to do other than gens, rather than actually present a threat. So Pig's RBTs are rarely lethal, Legion's Deep Wound is removed quickly and Plague's affliction doesn't even need removing.
Compare and contrast Billy, with an insta-down skill-shot ability that can take him across the map in seconds. Beautifully simple. By comparison the other killers mentioned here have convoluted powers with unintuitive rules.
I'm not aiming for a list of buffs we think are necessary in this thread though; but debate on what currently limits killers unnecessarily and which can be restricted instead by higher skill-requirements. I for one am full of bad ideas and don't want a single one making it into the game, but alone I'm not able to determine what is a bad idea.
-
@Ark_the_Bonsai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/625271#Comment_625271
The worst part is that it isn't clear. When I was new I thought they were only lost when I lost (in line with how survs lost theirs by dying). This was the time of the Cube so that made sense to me.
My own suggestion has been that killer should be allowed to open the hatch after it appears while carrying a survivor, then SLAM-DUNKIN them into it should reward killer with their addons back at the end. Oh and it should also trigger EGC without powering the gates if there is anyone else left.