Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@CompetitifDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048778#Comment_4048778
If anything this just shows how garbage most survivor players are. All of these killers other than Twins are terrible and should be getting minamum 3 outed almost always.
The reality is Kaneki is pretty much the most played killer still, which means with so many people playing him, the chances of some of those killer players being bad are alot more likely, impacting his global collective killrate to be alot worse than it actually should be if they only cou ted matches where he would be performing at his best and more like his true strength as a high A tier. Like with Nurse, good ones will 4k all the time, but people who don't know how to play her well get outed often.
Though, aren't these the Asian server stats specifically?
Potential isn't relevant for the vast majority of players in the game.
The vast majority of players aren't playing at the top potential of the killer. The vast majority of players are playing at average level. And at average level for the entire world, killers like Pig and Dredge really do outperform Nurse, Blight, and Ghoul.
…For the stat question, the left side is Japan only, and the right side is the world.
-
@Balrog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048973#Comment_4048973
This is great feedback and a very helpful perspective! Really appreciate you taking the time to clarify so I can better share your thoughts with the team.
Can killers get something on their HUD, like maybe an indicator that changes color or intensity, depending on how far away from the hooked survivor they are, and depending on how long they've been in the anti-camp range?
It doesn't have to literally be the resolve bar. Just something that helps visualize what would happen if zero other survivors are nearby.
Because this mechanic is still massively confusing for newer killer players, and telling them to "leave the hook" doesn't help, because it's too vague, and some players might honestly think they left the hook, when in reality they are still close enough to progress the resolve bar.
-
@Elan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4049026#Comment_4049026
Give killer option to see anticamp meter, it's nothing crazy.
I don't think BHVR wants to do that, because killers would be able to monitor the gain rate of the meter, to determine if another survivor is within the anti-camp radius, and also get an estimation of how close they are to the hooked survivor.
Honestly, killers should be able to see the meter. A better idea would be is that killers should be able to see how many generators are currently being repaired (at least when at least one survivor is currently hooked).
Because we currently have a ridiculous expectation that killers should ALWAYS leave a hooked survivor to patrol generators, even if zero survivors are repairing generators, even if zero survivors are anywhere near an unfinished generator, and even if all the healthy/injured survivors are nearby a hooked survivor.
You know what is a real motivator for a killer to leave a hooked survivor? Knowing there actually are other survivors repairing generators. And knowing that if a killer actually leaves a hooked survivor to patrol generators, that they might actually find someone there.
Because we currently have a problem where it's way too easy for survivors to pre-leave generators whenever the resolve bar pauses, because they know the killer isn't staying nearby the hooked survivor, and therefore might be patrolling generators. And therefore, killers really should proxy camp instead of patrolling generators, because it's too easy for survivors to pre-leave generators if the killer is patrolling generators.
-
@Balrog said:
I wonder if this is moreso a mechanic some Survivor players aren't aware of. Do you feel like it's intentional that players are hiding in the anti-camp area?
I still think anti facecamp is confusing for newer players on both sides. Even with a meter shown to all survivors, I really don't think newer survivors are all aware they can slow down the meter.
And anti facecamp is an absolute nightmare for new killers that don't play survivor. I honestly don't understand how they are supposed to have any clue of how their actions affect the anti facecamp meter. Are newer killers really supposed to be able to visualize circles around the hook of various sizes, and what the gain rate is for each circle, and how each circle is affected by other survivors depending on which circle additional survivors are in?
I think there needs to be an in game tutorial that is always available, that annotates and explains the different scenarios, so all players can actually understand what is happening.
-
@FerrousFacade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048798#Comment_4048798
You are conveniently ignoring Ghoul sitting right below this at number 8. You are the one bringing them up not being in the top 5, no one else did. You are being intentionally manipulative.
The official stats are saying that Freddy, Dredge, Sadako, and Pig have a higher kill rate than Ghoul, in the majority of games.
For most players in the game, Dredge and Pig have a higher kill rate than Ghoul, and are therefore more imbalanced at the average skill level.
-
@Valuetown said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048778#Comment_4048778
These stats are from August 15th 2025 to September 25th 2025. Hardly anything to prove your point. It's been about 3 months since then, and there is a ton of nuance with perk and other killer balancing where these stats are essentially meaningless. You are also forgetting that 80% of matches are in average to below average MMR, where killers like Onryo and Freddy dominate.
Where is the proof that Ghoul is in the top 5?
-
@Philscooper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048757#Comment_4048757
With deadbydaylights stats ruling in place and even with the moderators even stating.
If those implementations were going to be so devistating as some people have said for low tiers, which would have easily shown on the stats.
They could have emergency buffed these killers, revert and take away these changes in a hot-patch and see the data comparasion or nerf survivor as a compensation, maybe exhaustion perks, genrush or other meta alternatives, to breed out a fresh era this game desprately needed.
BHVR WANTS, all killers to have a consistent pickrate and 60% killrate, that has never changed and it never will.
So giving dbd the chance to evolve more than just a tunnel/floor/camp simulator and experiment would've been fine in the long run.
There is no ruling to protect survivors though,
If any killer has a high killrate, above the avarage, they usually wait months or years to even act accordingly, if at all.
Kaneki alone is proof of that. Hes the most conplained killer, for 9 months and yet, He's still on top of the roaster.
The latest official stats don't even have Ghoul in the top 5.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048757#Comment_4048757
Can we not derail the topic?
Nobody is talking about Phase 2 changes that never happened.
The topic includes "you dont NEED to nerf survivor over and over for absolutely no reason"
Do you honestly think BHVR nerfed survivor over and over for absolutely no reason?
-
…Meanwhile, the phase 2 changes would have nerfed the low tier killers, and lots of people were ok with that…
-
@SoGo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048155#Comment_4048155
Honestly, the hiding update and antitunnel update both turned out the same, shot down by the community, with only fragments left in the game.
BHVR tried to make the game fun for both sides, but this community decided that they don't want that.
I still think that what happened in the phase 2 QoL, was the fault of what happened in the phase 1 QoL.
There were SO MANY people that demanded the phase 1 survivor nerfs by as light as possible, and demanded phase 1 never punish survivors unless it was 100% certain the survivor was purposely doing the bad behavior.
We even had survivors sharing video footage of themselves not doing anything useful for long periods of time, getting AFK crows, and yelling "you're punishing me for THIS? I'm just trying to SURVIVE".
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048211#Comment_4048211
And none of it ever makes its way here onto the forums, which is what we're talking about.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048207#Comment_4048207
Some people said it was proof the game was killer sided
It IS proof the game is killer-sided, the devs literally rig it to be.
But declaring that it is killer-sided isn't the same as complaining about it being killer-sided. People mention that the game is killer-sided when killers demand further direct killer buffs. Buffs that, coincidentally, also never have anything to do with the issues you complain about not being allowed to complain about.
Do you think there is something fundamentally different from killer players and survivor players, where survivor players care about fairness but not about winning, and killer players care about winning but not about fairness?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048096#Comment_4048096
People complain about the game on both sides because they lose more often than they think they should.
If survivors cared about winrates, you'd see them throw a tantrum over the fact that BHVR officially balances for a 40% escape rate, which means they are intentionally getting disadvantaged in balancing.
Survivors really don't care much about losing, it's about the way they're made to lose.
I did see people on these forums loudly complain when BHVR announced the kill rates are supposed to be 60%.
Some people said it was proof the game was killer sided, and some people demanded it be moved to 50%. Some people threatened to leave the game because they didn't like a 60% kill rate.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4048096#Comment_4048096
People complain about the game on both sides because they lose more often than they think they should.
I think you're over generalizing this.
Sure, everyone has different motivations, and there are people driven by "winning" on both sides here. I won't deny that.
But, in general from what I've seen, people who play mostly killer are obsessed with winning and people who play largely survivor are looking for good gameplay regardless of the outcome.
And that good gameplay has mostly taken a back seat, or been outright sacrificed, for the sake of this kill rate stat.
The kill rate itself is proof of that. Survivors are dying 60% of the time on average, escaping 40%.
So, even by those numbers you're far more likely to die (lose) than escape (win) on survivor. Your thesis here doesn't hold water for many people. If survivors only cared about winning this game would've died simply with this one metric goal.
Arguably, the game is strained already, and things like disconnects, giving up, and "go next" meta all point to major issues, but that's not just because of losing constantly.
The gameplay sucks, sometimes even when you win. Sometimes doing what it takes to win sucks more.
But we can't talk about making the gameplay fun, apparently, because we might have to actually fix some things, and that might impact the Almighty kill rate for a month or so. We can't have that.
The problem is when we try to talk about making the gameplay fun for killers, the conversation gets an overwhelming amount of pushback.
Excessive hiding is unfun for killers, and we we SUPPOSED TO have a phase 1 update to address this problem, but survivors complained they are "just trying to survive", and got the entire thing nerfed so badly that BHVR might as well just revert the AFK crows to what they were before phase 1.
Bully SWFs are unfun for killers, but if people try to talk about that, we get told it's not really a problem, or "at least they aren't doing gens"
Gen rushing is unfun for killers, but if people try to talk about that, we get told "it's not real" or "that's not what gen rushing is"
Being forced to slug isn't fun for killers, but if people try to talk about that, we get told "slugging is worse for survivors" or "it's not really a problem"
Voice comms and SWFs aren't fun for killers, but if people try to talk about that, we get told "you can't punish people for playing with friends"
So really, when people say "making the gameplay fun", the vast majority of the time it's really "making the gameplay fun FOR SURVIVORS ONLY"
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4047754#Comment_4047754
We're talking about how casual lobbies are effected, you don't even know if you are a "High mmr gamer" are you talking from experience?
And using nurse as an arguement when it comes to overall data is hit or miss as is Blight, coz there is a lot of people who can't play them who try them casually too, As for the 4-mans in high MMR, we don't know how many of the community they are we've been told they are a very small portion of it multiple times.
Survivors go against the entire roster, not just those higher power killers too, another thing you havn't considered, what if the data is against super low tier killers who need help rn?
We don't have data specifically against the best killers, there is also games with cheaters too and the whole abandons affecting stats too.
Anyways I'm done here as its off topic, nothing you say changes how people feel, we can't get meaningful balance changes until the powerful killers are dealt with.Casual (average MMR) lobbies are affected by casual (average MMR) killers. And Nurse is not "S-tier" at average MMR, which is why her kill rate was never really that great at average MMR.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4047752#Comment_4047752
It's not disproportionally higher, you're making that up, it's a small percentage of at most 6ish percent which is probably heightened that there is less 4 mans in "high MMR", overall its still the same as the others. Co-ordination will always be king in team games. it doesn't matter how you "nerf it" in this case. This is also year-old pre ghoul data also.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/X0ACLZQDB0IA/image.png
And it does help it, a lot of what people complain about is stacked second chances etc syringe was widely hated for that reason.
Nurse/Blight and even ghoul are literally solo characters who are just better choices in every regard compared to most of the cast and I just don't think its anywhere near the same comparison, solo Q arguably has a higher overall, does that make them more overpowered Coffee? LMAOThat picture just showed S-tier survivors as being 8.2% above the target escape rate of 40%. That is a big percentage.
Nurse at high MMR was only 7% higher than the target kill rate of 60%, which means that S-tier survivors are a bigger problem than Nurse is.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4047743#Comment_4047743
S-tier is a buzz word as it's an effective way to summarise the issue.
Skully wasn't an S-tier she was just boring and really badly designed. S-tier of stalling and making boring matches perhaps at the time.
Legion is arguably an S-tier in 2v8 because of how broken it was when paired with another killer, DBD players don't usually play other games to be aware of group toolkit synergy. Legion 2v8 is a great example of that lmao, they were right to change them, it wasnt fun to play against.
Ghoul is considered S-tier, it's a matter of opinion and they are really effective in casual lobbies, scaring most casual players away at that. even if we took it your way, they are still widely and unanimously hated across the board by the casual community.
S-tier survivor options are being dealt with like syringe and styptic if you wanna argue that, which btw isn't that much higher lol.
It's just a summarisation, you being able to identify what I was talking about just proves its effective in communicating that. So thank youS-tier survivors aren't really being dealt with, since they still have a disproportionally high escape rate when compared to solo q. Nerfing a few survivor addons isn't really going to move that escape rate to where it should be.
That's like saying Blight and Nurse were "dealt with" because they had multiple nerfs already.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4047640#Comment_4047640
Then hopefully the team can at least see the huge thread about the Ghoul among other large problems. It would be nice to have them addressed, it's been months at this point nearly a year of them as soon as blood moon hits:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/462379/so-still-no-ghoul-changes-huh#latest
The last set of nerfs were nothing but a slap on the wrist. We really need to be doing something about the S-tiers so we can start working on level playing field so we can actually balance the game to a fun consistent state.The major problem is the whole "S-tier" thing is just a buzzword.
People demanded so many nerfs for Skull Merchant even though she wasn't considered S-tier. People demanded nerfs for Legion in 2v8, even though he wasn't considered S-tier. When BHVR tried to buff Clown, nerfs were demanded even though he wasn't considered S-tier even with the buffs. And Ghoul generally isn't considered S-tier anyway.
And if we really cared about S-tier, we should also care about S-tier survivors (4-SWFs), that were shown to have a disproportionally high escape rate when compared to solo q. And since it's the S-tier survivors that are disproportionally higher than the target 40% escape rate, there should be nerfs that target the S-tier survivors.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4046909#Comment_4046909
Why are you comparing high MMR nurse players with low MMR newer survivors?
I can tell you didn't read a thing I wrote, because my examples of this are to show why you shouldn't be basing balance decisions based on potential on the character alone.
Nowhere do I compare killers to survivors. I compare killers to killers. I didn't even mention survivors except to wonder why you're jumping on "SWF", and clearly your just trying to curve the conversation that direction since you haven't responded to any of the points I've made debunking your claims and being up things I never even said.
I also use nurse as an example of how you could use add-ons to target a particular group (new nurse players) without significantly impacting other groups (veteran nurse players who don't need the indicator).
That is exactly the same thing as comparing high 4-SWF 6,000+ hour voice comm teams with low MMR newer killers.
It's not though. Especially since
A) the data we do have is that SWF is not significantly out performing anymore, so I'm not sure why this even comes up. People don't suddenly become better at the game when grouped with friends. And that's what the data says.
B) I'm not comparing survivors to killers at all. I'm comparing nurse players with thousands of hours to nurse players with 4 hours. This is just you trying to turn this into an us vs them, when it isn't.
C) no one has ever put forth a single idea that would "nerf SWF but leave solo completely the same". This is just a dog whistle phrase for "need survivors entirely" but that sounds far more entitled.
Why would Nurse's potential at the highest MMR, be relevant for newer players that are at low MMR?
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4046901#Comment_4046901
I'm not saying balance around potential at all.
The "tier" ranking system that this community is obsessed with is entirely and purely subjective. It's only vaguely a measure of power scale, and honestly more a measure of how strong people think something is than how strong it actually is.
What you actually use to balance anything is objective data and stats.
Which is why you can separate the data for something like nurse and say that, at high MMR nurse can be nearly unstoppable on a small, open map, and at low MMR newer players struggle to perform. That's what the data says, why her (all MMR) kill rates seem low, despite her still being considered "one of the best killer in the game".
And there are sometimes ways to make changes that target particular skill levels. Nurse specifically has the Flannel add-on designed to help newer players, who can use it until they no longer need it. Alternately, changing something like hug tech affects the top end of players and largely doesn't impact her players at all. Though this isn't always possible to "target" and changes usually impact more than one group or all players.
Not surprising that you jump on SWF, given your history, but even there the data says that groups aren't performing significantly better than BHVR wants them to. In fact, the most recent data sites that there was a weak correlation to doing slightly worse than solo in a group.
Which is why we should use data and not subjective anything.
Why are you comparing high MMR nurse players with low MMR newer survivors? That is exactly the same thing as comparing high 4-SWF 6,000+ hour voice comm teams with low MMR newer killers.
Average MMR killers should be compared to average MMR survivors. And average MMR Nurse players generally don't have a really good kill rate (which is shown in official stats).
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4046866#Comment_4046866
If someone complains about playing against "S-tier" Nurse killers, but the game reveals they were playing against average MMR Nurse players, then the survivor didn't play against S-tier Nurses, and instead just played against average Nurses, which usually don't have a really great kill rate.
This is now the second thread you've posted in where your argument is essentially "ignore any feedback unless the player is the best in the game".
Personally, I don't think that ignoring the average player (or really any level of player) based on skill level is warranted. Something can be more or less difficult to deal with base on player ability, yet it may or may not be easy or feasible to adjust for every skill level. For example, new player experience is important too.
You're also using "s tier" in two different ways. Almost always this is a measure of potential. The killer kit is s tier, regardless of the player's ability to use it. But you are also arguing here that new nurses are not "s tier".
Don't confuse ability for potential, because otherwise you could argue that nothing in the game is "s tier" or "good" simply because new players exist. (Which., for the record, would include broken things like old dead hard for distance, for example).
how much complaints Nurse got every week, before her giant list of nerfs happened
I'm going to need you to write out this "giant list".
Because there was exactly and only one nerf to nurse, about 2(?) years ago now, where her blink attack went from being a basic attack to a special attack. The end result was that she went from being s-tier, best killer in the game, to still s-tier and either #1 or #2 depending on how you subjectively place blight. The horror.
The only other change to the character since 6.1.0 was removing lightburn, which was a buff.
Any other changes to the nurse are from like 7-8 years ago when she had 6 blinks. Or things like "she gets base 5% regression on kick and anti gen tap" that applies to all killers.
If killers should be balanced around potential, then survivors should be also balanced around potential, which means balancing survivors as if they were all 4-SWFs that use voice comms for competitive callouts.
And if the new player experience should be balanced around potential, then when new killer players complain about survivors being too strong, then we should automatically focus on the 6,000+ hour 4-SWF survivors that use voice comms for competitive callouts.
-
@Philscooper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4046837#Comment_4046837
Wouldnt that same arguement hold with mmr not wanting to be shown?.
Yes. If someone complains about playing against "S-tier" Nurse killers, but the game reveals they were playing against average MMR Nurse players, then the survivor didn't play against S-tier Nurses, and instead just played against average Nurses, which usually don't have a really great kill rate.
Does everyone remember how much complaints Nurse got every week, before her giant list of nerfs happened? The reason why the complaints went down so much, is because the reality is that her performance usually isn't very great in the majority of the public games.
I would be bold enough to say that the majority of players would do better playing as Myers than Nurse. This game desperately needs to have a separate tier list for average MMR, so the majority of players can actually have a tier list that is relevant to them.
-
@Philscooper said:
Bhvr said once that they hate people showing off stats and invalidating eachother.
But then doing stuff like dbd stats and revealing info anyway
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/I9Z7RYDQ0VZI/rdt-20251220-210326131533930785019770.jpg
Wierdly enough, no one has come out to show their stats (atleast from what i have seen).
So either everyone is scared to be invalidated,
Its pointless to show them,
Or no one cares for that one thing...somehow....
A lot of people don't want to share their stats, because it would invalidate their arguments. Imagine someone telling us that "Nurse is S-tier", and "is broken for anyone that spends a few hours with them"…. but that person's stats reveal their performance with Nurse isn't very good, and in fact they have multiple "not S-tier" killers with better stats.
Imagine someone telling us that "solo q is impossible", but their stats reveal their escape rates aren't really that much better in a SWF.
-
For over 95% of the players, a lot of killers are better than Nurse.
Tier lists based on the top 0.001% of players, aren’t relevant to over 95% of players. Average MMR players are likely to get better kill rates off of some other killer, and they’re also highly unlikely to be matched against a Nurse player that’s high enough MMR to be overperforming.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4046246#Comment_4046246
Then doesn't that make your point moot?
No.
You're the person that thinks the game shouldn't "operate like pretty pretty princess" and that "sometimes you're going to be disadvantaged". Therefore, you should be the person that wants cursed survivor addons, so that survivors can have a chance at being disadvantaged by random survivor addons.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
Why should DBD operate like Pretty Pretty Princess? The random nature means it's random. Sometimes you're going to be disadvantaged.
Then you should really like the idea of cursed survivor addons. Because right now, randomized survivor addons, operate like Pretty Pretty Princess.
-
@SoGo said:
Or BHVR could just disable all meme addons instead of just random ones.
BHVR should exclude all the meme addons AND all the addons that massively transforms the killer's power.
Addons like Plague's Prayer Tablet Fragment, Hag's Waterlogged Shoe, and Doctor's Scrapped Tape, massively changes the killer's power, but some people don't consider them to be meme addons.
-
Hag is unplayable in Chaos Shuffle, because she is unplayable if she doesn't have Rusty Shackles.
She's been broken for a super long time, because survivors can purposely bypass the camera spin penalty by running at traps with the camera facing the other way.
-
@Adameia said:
i also am not even sure that list someone posted is legit as i would think BHVR would have said something themselves if any addons were excluded
BHVR said some of the killer addons were excluded in that Twitter post.
-
I'm not sure if we are allowed to discuss anything that person created, because that person creates leaks, and even though the event is out, it still might be considered a leak. I don't even know if I can comment on whether or not I think it's real or fake, because that involves discussing something that might have been a leak.
And I'm not being purposely obtuse. I really don't know what the forum rules are for this situation.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4045570#Comment_4045570
As others have mentioned, the point of the mode is to be mostly disarmed. Survivors could get perks with horrible synergy, so at most they might get value out of one perk instead of four. Maybe two, if they're lucky. Same for Killers.
The important thing is to compare this Chaos Shuffle to the past versions of Chaos Shuffle.
The major new feature of this Chaos Shuffle, is that killer addons and survivor addons are randomized…
- Random survivor addons never force the game to be worse for that survivor
- Random killer addons absolutely can force the game to be worse for that killer
…Because if the whole point of Chaos Shuffle is "to be mostly disarmed", then every survivor item should have a chance to roll a "cursed addon", which forces the game to be worse for that survivor, and prevents that item from being dropped by any means.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
How do you define "safe to play?"
Killers get terrible perks and add-ons, Survivors get terrible perks and add-ons. Everyone wins.
- Zero of the survivor add-ons force the game worse for survivors. If a survivor really doesn't like their random add-ons, they could just choose to drop the item.
- Most of the bad survivor perks don't force the game to be worse for survivors. For example, Invocation perks don't force the game to be worse, because the survivor can choose not to use it.
- The only survivor perk that really forces the game to be much worse is No Mither. And if people really wanted to be picky, OoO and Scene Partner could be added to the list. That is going to be 3 perks out of 167 perks. There is an extremely low chance of a survivor randomly getting at least one of those perks.
- The number of addons each killer has is sometimes 20, so if 2 of those addons forces the game to be worse for the killer, there is a MUCH MUCH HIGHER chance of a killer being stuck with an addon that forces their game to be worse.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4045479#Comment_4045479
Only because it affects you?
It wouldn't affect me, because I would just refuse to choose any killer that might randomly get miserable addons.
That's how this works. If Chaos Shuffle has a random chance of being completely miserable for some killers, then I will refuse to play as them.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
Is it that different? The whole point of the mode is that it's disarming.
Yes
-
@The_Count said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4043079#Comment_4043079
We just got to this point.
What's the point of playing with a friend as killer if it's gonna be miserable?
There's a limit on how much is tolerable about survs mocking you thinking they won by skill instead of the truth that is the mode being extremely surv sided.Do we really know if it's going to be so miserable that it will break the survivor queue times?
The last few times survivors got broken 2v8 stuff, the killer queues were still 20+ minutes. I think we just need to wait and see what actually happens to the queue times.
-
The killer queues for last 2v8 were absolutely horrible, and were always over 20+ minutes. "play while you wait" didn't change the fact that killers were still in 20+ minute queues.
Survivors should be getting more and more broken stuff in 2v8, until the killer queues are actually decent. So I'd say just pile the survivor-sided stuff onto 2v8, and only fix it if the survivor queues get super long.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4042527#Comment_4042527
Or, in the case of totems, only make them give you progress on your stack when you complete the action.
Which I seem to recall is already the case for AFK detection?
Unless the rules changed, its still…
8) Repairing a generator for 12/13/15 seconds = removes 1/2/3 crows
9) Repairing a generator when it reaches 100%, regardless of seconds spent repairing = removes all crows
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4042328#Comment_4042328
The thing I'm interested in exploring is whether this synergy would be problematic, though.
The current issue is unambiguously that generators get completed too quickly when toolboxes are used, especially in conjunction with other repair speed options.
If what you get is the exact same amount of protection but slightly quicker… is that a problem on the same level? Synergies existing isn't an issue, after all, it's only when you get too much value from them that it's a problem.
Again, this isn't a suggestion, I'm interested in exploring this topic. I have no strong opinions yet.
The problem isn't synergy. The problem is there is way too much of a performance difference between a toolbox being used by itself, and a toolbox being used in with addons and perks.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4042323#Comment_4042323
Sure, in order:
1: Completely separately to this set of suggestions, I think Hyperfocus shouldn't work with toolboxes. It was outside the scope of this post to mention that, though.
2: Would they? If it's charge-based and not time-based then you'd get the exact same amount of gen shield, you'd just apply it faster. That's not even stacking at that point, it's just synergy.
3: I made this post to poll survivor opinions alongside killer opinions, so if that's the case I'm hoping to hear about it.
4: Ditto the above for this.
2) Then I'll rephrase my comment to say that "the problem with toolboxes is they synergize way too much with addons and perks"
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4042307#Comment_4042307
I mean, wouldn't that be the first one?
You can't stack toolbox speed with other speeds if toolboxes don't have repair speed on them.
- You still want the increased skill check chance to exist, which is what scales too much with Hyperfocus
- Replacing the gen speed with gen shields would just mean the gen shields would scale too much when stacked, which doesn't solve the "things can stack too much" problem
- A lot of survivors will just hate the shield idea, because if they stack shield stuff, and the killer ends up having 0 slowdown perks, they might feel like their build is "wasted".
- If gen shield stuff gets more popular, it might just encourage killers to bring gen blocking perks instead of gen regression perks, which is also going to feel bad for the survivors that stack gen shield stuff.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4042302#Comment_4042302
Of the two suggested, though, which would you prefer?
It's those two I'm gauging interest in, rather than other options.
Neither, because neither addresses the issue where toolboxes scale too much with stacking.
-
Toolboxes need to be reworked to bridge the gap between a toolbox by itself, and a toolbox stacked with perks and addons.
Because a regular toolbox by itself is fine. But a Commodious Toolbox, stacked with extra charges and Hyperfocus, is not fine.
- All toolboxes should be 16 or 18 charges, because 32 charge toolboxes stack too well with perks.
- Toolboxes should not give extra skill check percentages if the survivor has a perk like Hyperfocus that scales off skill checks.
- The +charge addons should be nerfed.
We've had reworks for medkits, maps, and keys… so the game is long overdue for reworks to toolboxes.
-
@ImWinston said:
- I'll tell you the most controversial thing in the history of this forum... but originally the hatch was used precisely to "limit" and discourage tunneling. The old Hatch appeared based on a calculation of completed generators/players remaining in the game. If I remember correctly, if there were 3 players remaining, all it took was 4 completed generators and then the Hatch would appear. The Hatch remained open for 10 seconds after 1 survivor had used it, after which it automatically closed and the remaining players had to escape through the doors. This is why tunneling (even though it has always existed) is so powerful and effective today... it simply wasn't an automatic win for killers with the old mechanics.
The old hatch rules often encouraged killers to slug the last 3 survivors instead of the last 2 survivors, because there were many games where hatch would spawn if only 2 survivors were left.
-
The "survivors spawn together" feature never properly worked. And sometimes the killer spawns in the middle of the map, and the killer just doesn't know which direction the survivors are in. And sometimes the killer spawn on the edge of the map, but the survivors spawn along the same edge of the map, instead of being all the way across the map.
The result is that if the killer guesses wrong, and all 4 survivors are on the same generator, and the killer is low mobility, then the 1st gen might be completely repaired before the killer finds any survivors.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4041340#Comment_4041340
If a lunge detects it's in a Survivor's hurtbox, then it ends the lunge with an automatic swing, since it's going to result in a hit.
What does aim assist have to do with it? Damage on collision is a different thing entirely. The aim assist OP is talking about is when your camera rotates on its own somewhere you did not mean to.
Aim Dressing makes proximity checks, and sometimes thinks the survivor is in range of a short M1 attack, even though there is an environmental object in the way. This usually happens because the killer's screen can partially see the survivor behind an irregularly-shaped environmental object.
This has been happening more often since the map reworks. Remember that the older map designs were mostly flat vertical surfaces at 90 degree angles. But now we have so many "debris loops" that are purposely shaped irregularly to make it more difficult for killers like Blight to get an M2 hit, that it's confusing aim dressing. Sometimes it's the (newer to the map reworks) "low to the ground" objects that get in the way, because the killer's screen shows a lot of the survivor, but the low objects can still prevent the killer from reaching the survivor with a short M1 attack.
My other theory is this game used to validate hits on the killer side, which meant it wasn't really a big deal for the proximity checks to be done on the killer side. But now that we have server hit validation, the proximity checks can get desynchronized from the hit validations.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4041337#Comment_4041337
That's just how hitbox detection works though?
If a lunge detects it's in a Survivor's hurtbox, then it ends the lunge with an automatic swing, since it's going to result in a hit. It only becomes an issue if you encounter an environmental hitbox during the small movements during the swing, which can be the case with tight corners and the like.
People act like the mechanic exists just to spite them or something, which doesn't make sense. It's just one of those things that isn't noticed when it's going right, and stands out when it's going wrong.
During some of the laggy PTBs, I've had lunge attacks forcibly turned into short M1 attacks, even with zero environmental objects nearby, and the attacks didn't hit the survivor. I assumed that was also because of aim dressing, because I don't know what other game mechanic/bug could forcibly end my lunge attacks early.
Because I would expect that when I'm in a laggy PTB, that if the survivor is too far away to hit (even though the survivor looks close on my screen), that the game would just allow the lunge to fully complete.
-
@Steakdabait said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4041299#Comment_4041299
Aim dressing doesn't make u miss when ppl 360 lol. You are just missing. When a swing would hit aim dressing centers your cam onto them. Aim dressing only cucks u in 2 situations; When the game detects you have "hit" a survivor but there's an object blocking the center of their hitbox and when it makes you let go of your lunge early against a survivor with high movespeed like sprint burst
If a survivor is doing a 360, the split second they are in front of the killer and in range, aim dressing should be auto-locking onto them, yanking the camera in the correct direction, and forcing the hit to happen.
And if the killer is purposely swinging their camera side-to-side, in a 180 degree arc, while the survivor is doing a 360, that absolutely should guarantee a hit… because the killer (with a decent DPI) can swing their camera way faster than a survivor can 360, which means that should guarantee a point in time where the survivor is in front of the killer and in range.
There also isn't a reason for a killer to "let go of the lunge early", because aim dressing is supposed to take care of that. Yes, aim dressing is supposed to auto-cancel a lunge and turn it into a short M1 attack.
-
@Steakdabait said:
erm it's aim dressing not auto aim 😎
and devs have said that it has no impact on gameplay bro why would they lieThat is incorrect. The actual BHVR quote was something purposely obscure, like "we're not saying it can't ever steal hits".
@Junylar said:
If they could, they would've done it long ago. Most likely it's soaked somewhere in their spaghetti code and no one in their team was successful in finding and fixing the source of the issue, just like with the server validation and omnipotence of the cheaters. Now it's just part of the passive killer nerfs: "the entity has a slight chance to steal your hit, to give survivors hope".
My current theory is the hit-stealing bug is still in the game, to give survivors "exciting moments" where they think they outplayed the killer with a 360, but in reality the game bugged out and stole the hit from the killer.
Because if aim dressing worked properly, then 360s shouldn't work. Because if a killer lunges, and the survivor is ever in front of them while in close range, then aim dressing is supposed to yank the killer's camera and make the hit happen.
-
The "survivors spawn together" feature never properly worked. And sometimes the killer spawns in the middle of the map, and the killer just doesn't know which direction the survivors are in. And sometimes the killer spawn on the edge of the map, but the survivors spawn along the same edge of the map, instead of being all the way across the map.
The result is that if the killer guesses wrong, and all 4 survivors are on the same generator, and the killer is low mobility, then the 1st gen might be completely repaired before the killer finds any survivors.
-
Being able to freeze a pallet, so I can safely pick up a survivor off the ground, is by far the most exciting part of the Winter Event. And I really wish there was something in the regular game mode, that would allow me to safely pick up survivors that are under un-dropped pallets.
The most obnoxious part of playing killer is the amount of hook denial I have to deal with. I'm often getting games where the survivors are purposely trying to pallet save, flashlight save, flashbang save, aggressively bodyblock, or hook sabotage… to prevent me from hooking a survivor. And it happens over and over and over in the same game.
I'm at the point where I just won't play a lot of the killers, because dealing with hook denial is super unfun for the weaker killers. Being forced to slug survivors, is really unfun for killers.
-
@kit_mason said:
I don't really get why you can be aim dressed into a miss at all. The game is admitting you're deserving of the hit, that's why its dressing the aim to make it appear more legitimate than it was.
Surely the game should recognize that it's giving you a hit and then give you the hit, no?
Aim dressing makes proximity checks, to see if a hit is "likely" to happen, and a successful proximity check can forcibly yank the killer's camera, and forcibly change a killer's lunge into a short M1 attack.
The game afterwards makes a completely separate hit validation check, which can fail because the proximity check forcibly changed the killer's camera and attack.
Ideally, aim dressing should only forcibly change the killer's camera and attack AFTER a successful hit validation check.
My current theory is still that the proximity checks are done on the killer side, and the hit validation checks are done on the server side. Because if the proximity checks were done on the server side, then there really isn't a good reason for them to happen before the the hit validation checks.
And it should be noted that killers don't want the entire aim dressing mechanic to be removed, because if it was removed, then killers would need to manually let go of the M2 button during a lunge attack, if they wanted to swing their weapon before the entire lunge duration has happened.