Awkweird
Awkweird
About
- Username
- Awkweird
- Joined
- Visits
- 51
- Last Active
Comments
-
@MaxFiGuy said:
I think SBMM reveals balance issues in DBD.
I completely agree. It exacerbates existing problems and polarizes the playerbase at best, and at worst it doesn't even work and gives unbalanced matches anyway.
-
I would say yes but also no. It could be a purple. The Sadako one doesn't make sense. Anyway the devs don't know what they're doing.
-
@OverratedFool said:
At the very least, I would love to see them change the system to work so that survivors are affected by the survival of all four survivors. That way, the Blendettes can find themselves back in the noob games where they belong. Survivors who just leave instead of making late unhooks will also be justly punished and sent back to the noob games where they too belong.
You get the picture, I have more of a problem with the idea that survivors are ranked purely on their own survival, than I do with MMR being a thing. Why would they create a system that actively encourages people to play selfishly? What a fun environment in which the game will thrive... That said, getting rid of MMR completely would be better still.
This is interesting. Care to elaborate?
-
@hegewaldd said:
@weirdkid5 said:
@hegewaldd said:
@weirdkid5 said:
@hegewaldd said:
@weirdkid5 said:
@hegewaldd said:
@weirdkid5 said:
@hegewaldd said:
I mean, it's legacy 1. Not much of a big deal tbhIt's 100% a big deal when a single legacy took around 100 hours or so to get with the old leveling system.
As someone that also lost Legacy, they need to fix this problem still.
it's 100 hours. that's my point lol.
Also, legacy can be restored if you have hard, solid evidence that you actually had legacy.
Whether or not you personally find 100 hours to be a big deal or not is irrelevant. This is a subjective case, and if someone is upset over this problem they have right to be so and you're just trying to dismiss feelings.
And you got proof of this? I've never heard of anyone having their Legacy restored aside from a particular streamer for the sole fact that he was a streamer.
My friend had his legacy restored after he lost his save file because he had screenshots and a twitch clip (very small streamer, only a few viewers at most). I can't guarantee you'll get yours back.
Also, why did you mention that it took 100 hours in the first place if it's irrelevant? I agree 100%.....people will have different opinions on the amount of time it took and effort. So if that is true, why mention it in the first place? Because i don't have the same opinion as you on the amount of time it took? Not everyone thinks the same way. You're contradicting yourself there bud.
You're acting like it isnt a big deal for 100 hours when that's completely subjective. Your initial reply is a pointless one that is simply dismissive. Telling the guy it isnt a big deal and not even giving him the information that it can be restored. You just dismiss and leave.
And cool, I'm glad they decided to give it back. That's something you should mention and be helpful, instead of being dismissive.
So why do you feel the need to mention that it even takes 100 hours with the old system per piece, if you know that i may not agree with your opinion? I think that it's nothing, you think that it's a lot (considering the fact that you mentioned it) but then you go on to say it's irrelevant how many hours he had, and that my opinion is irrelevant because they're upset. If they're upset and the 100 hours is irrelevant? WHY DO YOU MENTION IT? jesus this community sometimes....
I never said the 100 hours is irrelevant. I said your opinion on whether or not it is a big deal is irrelevant. Read my initial reply about that. I see you're going to be one of these people that are arguing just for arguments sake.
I'm out.
Have a nice day bud. I also mentioned the part where you said my opinion was irrelevant. So yours must be too. Everyones must be if its subjective. It doesn't matter because he's upset, right?
agreed
-
@mouse0270 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2893974#Comment_2893974
Guess we just look at the game differently. I don't expect anyone to really like MMR, for example, I don't think anyone was actually asking for it other than BHVR, as since its been introduced its just been a spiral of download average players. I don't give two craps about my MMR, its on of the reasons I am Pro let me DC if a survivor DC's cause my MMR means nothing to me, I really just want to move onto the next match once that happens, but I can't because DC'ing means I have to wait 5, 10, 15, 30+ minutes each time it happens. I think last night as killer I had like 4 DCs, if I DC'd each time I'd have to wait 30 minutes or more before I could queue again.
I don't care about MMR, I care about getting into the next match and PERSONALLY, I don't find 3v1 fun, so its either try and kill everyone or let them do gens and get out... both of which can take 5-10 minutes to do so. A DC would be instant and depending on the time of day, I'd be in a new match in less than 5 minutes.
I don't think DBD is a good game for competitive players and I see a lot people get frustrated because of that. Maybe it's the dev's or some content creator's fault for pushing the game in that direction but it will never satisfy the competitive drive inside you because it is fundamentally unfair.
-
Perfect gameplay destroys any game. Meta builds, unbeatable strategies etc. The more predictable a game is, the less fun it is. A solved game is a dead game.
This is why the devs should do a complete 180 and run away from the MMR and balancing ideology as fast as ######### possible.
-
@mouse0270 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2893950#Comment_2893950
Where are you getting this "fair matches", "exploitation" stuff from... The only thing in your reply that I said was "earn my win" which is something subjective to me and I didn't say everyone else had to play by. Reading back I did say
its not fair to the survivors that some asshat decided he didn't want to play anymore.
Do you really think a 3v1 at 4+ gens is fun for either side? That comment wasn't about the game being balance, it was saying the survivors stand no chance in that scenario and I PERSONALLY find that unfun for both sides.
My point is, do you really have fun playing against 3 survivors at 5 gens who aren't really trying cause they just gave up because the game was a lose? Do you find that fun? If so, then you don't have to DC. I simply said, I don't find that fun and would like the option for me to be allowed to DC without suffering a penalty.
Most players like the game because they can exploit unfair things, whether it's perks, offerings, addons, game mechanics etc. BOTH killers and survivors like to bully the other side. That is what made the game popular in the first place. Competitive players are a VAST minority.
If you don't believe me, then a simple experiment will prove it. Make separate casual and strict MMR ques and you will see that the MMR que will be dead within a week.
-
@mouse0270 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2893934#Comment_2893934
How do bots or just letting the killer leave with a 0 gain 0 loss not count as a fair system?
For example, if bots replaced the DC'd player, the match goes on like normal. So really it would be like the person Didn't DC.
As for my example that DC'ing is free after the first one always the killer to just step out. Or the other survivors for that matter. To be clear, there probably needs to be some more specific rules in place. But I am talking about an early on DC. For me as killer, when someone DC's at 4+ gens, I just want to leave the match. I usually do one of two things... I either hook everyone and let the last guy get hatch, or let them do all the gens, cause honestly, its not fair to the survivors that some asshat decided he didn't want to play anymore.
But if I could... I'd rather just DC and go to the next match. If someone DC's at 4+ gens, the game is over, the survivors stand little to zero chance of winning. I don't want to play that, I like the stress of the killer role and want to have a challenge, I dont care about BP or MMR, I just want to play the game and earn my win... So if someone DC's I'd love the option to just DC and go into the next match then spending the next 5-10 minutes killing/letting go of the survivors
Now you're getting into subjective territory. You want fair matches as a killer, you don't like exploitation, earn your win etc etc. Go play chess. This game isn't perfectly fair and that's why it's popular. It's closer to poker, where the cards are sometimes against you, sometimes in your favor. But guess what, it's more fun that way.
-
@Wendygo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2893900#Comment_2893900
There Actually is a reward for some to have higher MMR. You play against tougher opponents. It's the challenge and satisfaction if you had a hard game. Not everyone likes easy matches.
I agree, but if you are good, you're going to get a high MMR regardless. It is inevitable, it's not a reward. A few DC matches don't matter either.
-
@mouse0270 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2893900#Comment_2893900
Well thats not entirely true... They could allow players to do multiple things. For example they could implement AI, which it appears they are tyring to do so, at least from what I've seen on youtube. Or they could make it so that when someone DC's the rest can just DC.
Cause honestly, as a killer, if someone DC's at 4+ gens, I'd much rather just have the option to DC and go to the next match. I don't want to play a 3v1 at 4+ gens.
Basically the first person eats the punishment but no one else does... Now you might say SWF can abuse that but really only a little, they get up to 4 DCs? It most likely wont be on the same killer every time, so it shouldnt be that annoying and DCing is still way less than it was a few years ago.
So AI or only the first person DCing gets punished everyone after that can DC freely.
The problem is that most of survivor DCs (from my experience) is when they are severely outplayed at the start. They get found in a locker or a quick down at a safe loop.
To then 'reset' the game as if it never happened isn't fair to the killer. If others don't want a 3v1 they can just let go when hooked and get out of the game quickly. Which is what happens now.
There is already a reset if someone fails to load in. This game isn't competitive enough and the matches aren't long enough for team rebalancing or other solutions you've listed. Just take the loss and move on to the next. . There is no real punishment. MMR doesn't matter, ranks don't matter.
-
It does ruin the game. 90% of the game is hitting someone with a melee attack. This perk makes it frustrating and takes all the satisfaction out of it.
Turn it into what other exhaustion perks do, which is giving the survivor distance in chase when some condition is met.
-
First of all you shouldn't care if your MMR goes down. There is absolutely no reward for having a higher MMR, you only get tougher opponents. Also it's a magical value that no one sees.
Why do teams suffer because of the actions of a member of the team? That's a fact of life that BHVR can't change. If someone gives up, yeah you're gonna have a ######### time.
-
You HAVE to use gen slow perks. You can't jjust ignore that part of the game. That's why the gens are flying and your games are 10 mins long.
And before you say "ruin gets found in 15 secs" "pop is a waste of time"- Some games they are useless but more often they turn it in your favour like the totem giving you downs from patrolling it or ruin just staying up the whole giving massive regression.
My favorite right now is the pain resonance with ruin. Pain tells you which gen they're working on better than tinker.
-
@BenihimeWrath said:
It would take 2.5% in order to make survivors go even in the time investment it takes for a killer to damage a generator baseline. (Without brutal/addons)
It would be nice if they could buff base regression or add an instant damage so that damaging a gen without a perk wouldn't ALWAYS be the wrong choice to make.
That's what I mean. 90% of the time it's pointless. The only situation would be a gen in the corner of the map that had 1 survivor on it. But even then it's better to not lose distance on the survivor.
Like I said, it would make it more attractive to protect gens rather than just tunnel survivors. Or at least it would be a decision. Do I chase or kick the gen?
-
There is ZERO punishment. Pips don't matter anymore. Ranks don't matter. MMR doesn't matter. You can play however you want.
-
Sunk-cost
-
This game never stops being frustrating. You just hope you get enough satisfaction to balance out the frustration.
-
All that needs to be changed is snuffing out a boon breaks the totem. Then Pentimento would be a fair counter. I say fair because the survivors will still know exactly where it is.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
The implementation is so anti-fun. It's not intended to consistently match players with teammates and opponents of equal skill. It's meant to ensure that you lose 50% of your games by any means necessary.
If that means putting you with brand spanking new 10 hour teammates, it will do that. If it means putting you against hacker survivors with statistically impossible personal metrics, it will do that.
It reeks of a mandate and power through by higher ups who have no understanding of the game itself.
Without fail, if my SWF duo friend and I escape two games in a row or so, we get matched with default cosmetic teammates who can barely function. This has been consistent for weeks and it makes us not want to play. Our MMR is likely pretty high. We go against very well known fog whisperers, 6k+ hr killers. It feels like we're having our win rate manipulated by the matchmaking system.
Well said. The devs don't understand the gold mine they're sitting on. Fairness and competitiveness aren't what made DBD popular. What people love is messing around and exploiting horribly unfair things. MMR has absolutely no place in this picture, and neither does any kind of ranking system.
-
I'm still dumbfounded by his nerf; 2 chains down from 3.
The chain is significantly harder to hit at loops than Clown's bottles. And as you pointed out, the random aspect destroys all the benefits.
In a straight line it's better to just walk towards them.
And I know this from playing against him. It doesn't matter if I get hit.
Chain Hunt is admittedly strong but it can be countered and what about all the times when it's not up?
-
Yet another evening of silent bell wraiths, nurses and SWFs.
I can't get out of red ranks and I get absolutely no joy out of playing in red ranks.
The devs have hit gold but don't seem to realize what draws players in and why they stay. I never gave a damn about ranks and optimal builds. I still don't. There's tons of competitive games where you repeat the same thing over and over. If I wanted that, then I'd be playing those games.
I'm finished with this game for good. I'm done supporting it.
-
@CremelloJoJo said:
As much as I like the idea, what happens when you take away the ranks and new killer players go up against a previously red rank sweat squad SWF who still play as if they're holding onto their rank 1 badges, because they can't just turn off the need to play well...even knowing they're against someone who doesn't know a thing about the game, the killer would get bullied even then.
And the same goes for the other way around. A bunch of new solo players or even a casual friend group going up against some sweaty old red rank killer who still has it built into their brain that they need to play optimally and win no matter what...you can't switch off the need/want to mindgame even the worst of players.
This game needs some kind of matchmaking and MMR is on its way, not saying it'll be fantastic...but an unranked DBD would not be a happy one. You can't mix casual and competitive players in one pool.
This kind of stuff still happens when players come back after a long break and are pushed back down ranks. Or when the matchmaking system fails. Yet the result of the rank system is eventually 80% of your games become sweatfests.
@[Deleted User] said:
Playing outside of red ranks is severely unenjoyable to me because players make lots of rookie mistakes that either nullify my effort or I feel bad for beating them with 1k more hours of experience. And I do play both sides.
- Running 2-3 gen regression perks is a necessity and it makes the game possible for killers at top rank.
- 4 minute games are NOT common.
- A drawn out end game with camping and hook trading is kinda fun to me - but to each their own :) I like to open the gate to spice it up a bit.
- You can make up for using sub-optimal perks by playing well. Playing perkless is a great challenge!
- Being punished for every single mistake is right because you are at top rank. This point is mostly true for killers though. Survivors get so many chances to make a comeback at any rank.
And to be perfectly honest, even red ranks feel pretty casual usually because ranking up is not that difficult. I could get behind making ranking up a bit more difficult or finally implementing some kind of MMR. But quite frankly I enjoy the way it is now. It would get boring if everything was always perfectly optimal.
I agree that being punished for mistakes IS the price of being at the top. However, I don't want to be at the top. I get pushed into red ranks very quickly. But then I have no joy in the highly competitive games. Especially when I want to play one of my weaker killers. As I said, the choices and gameplay variation gets narrower and less interesting. I would say the majority of the player base feels the same.
Of course there is the competitive community of players like Otz, etc. I want to point out that Otz is also a speedrunner who doesn't mind doing the same thing 100 times. However, me and most players don't find that fun. It's simply not good use of limited leisure time.
This is exactly why so many people go through phases - quitting and coming back months later, or never coming back at all. Overall it hurts the game.