DeadBobDaylight
DeadBobDaylight
About
- Username
- DeadBobDaylight
- Joined
- Visits
- 79
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Yords said:
Please read first.
I have made a post about this before, but I feel that it is more relevant especially right now with moris being nerfed and I feel that this should definitely be implemented as it is not crazy big of a change.
The current yellow mori: Allows you to kill a survivor if they are the last one remaining in the trial regardless if they have been hooked or not.
This is not used often and most of the time, you probably aren't even going to get to use it if you do run it.
The could-be base kit mori: Allows you to kill the last remaining survivor in the trial only if all other survivors have been sacrificed. Grants you as many points as you would have gotten if they were hooked and sacrificed.
It makes sense with the lore of the game "You worked well, the last one is yours.", gives moris more of a use just in general gameplay, is not OP, and gives you the rest of the points you would have gotten sacrificing them.
What are your thoughts? Do you agree with me, or do you think something else could work? Just keep it professional.
I get the idea and the sentiment, but I think we shouldn't look at the Mori adjustment as a nerf. This is a legit rebalancing. (I know they're usually synonyms, but the distinction helps here.)
Moris were rebalanced because their effect was too strong and it hampered enjoyment of the game. With this and whatever comes from keys ( assuming that it is acceptable ( I know it's in the future and people WILL complain, but let's assume good faith and acceptable compromise)) we should see it as something unhealthy being removed that doesn't need something to be added to compensate.
In this instance, that's the better move for game health. Otherwise we end up in a recursive loop of diminishing returns, lol.
Tldr- No. I get it and appreciate the perspective. But no.
-
@JoeyBob said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1781052#Comment_1781052
Hypocrital from someone using ad hominems.
Not how that works, boss.
-
@JoeyBob said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1780689#Comment_1780689
Idk you say "impolite" when I was being perfectly civil, but nice ad hominem sophist.
Didn't invalidate your argument, just said you were rude.
Needs to be called out here more often.
-
@JoeyBob said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1780362#Comment_1780362
It's not an opinion, it's a fact that disabling crossplay fixed survivor queue for PC players.
Not everyone likes broken matchmaking like you do. I'd rather be paired with players of a similar skill level than a noob killer that will just get rolled.
Go take a time out if you can't be polite.
This is a game for adults.
-
And, of course, by all means if you're not happy with a product don't buy it.
But let's not crucify people just trying to do their job because they fudge up. It's literally a luxury service.
It'll get sorted.
-
@SweetTerror said:
The PTB revealed some very glaring issues with the twins. Survivors could take Victor hostage, Victor couldn't interact with lockers, and charging Victor's attack slowed him down too much. These are all things that BHVR addressed that are being fixed in a future update, yet the chapter is still being pushed out come December 1st.
Why???
The chapter is incomplete. The whole reason why you have a PTB is so that gamers can test out the mechanics and bring to light any possible issues, bugs, or glitches. Kudos for listening to the community and acknowledging these issues and fixing them, but what point is there in rushing something out that you yourself acknowledged needs to be fixed?
It just all reeks of greed. There's zero incentive in rushing out a broken product unless all you care about is the money. Vote with your wallets fellow DBD players, and hold off on purchasing the twins until BHVR rightly fixes what they said they were going to fix. There's so much changing with the twins that it almost resembles a full-on rework, so there's no reason in purchasing this chapter on day one.
BHVR has a track record of releasing content and fixing known issues on the back end. As gamers we rightly call out AAA developers when they pull this kind of shady business practice, and we should be doing the same for indie developers too.
Don't be so quick to assign malice. Games of dbd's size and platform base require very hard deadlines from big publishers.
Likely, they're unable to delay because they're locked into timelines with Sony or Microsoft, etc, that would require a very long reset time.
It's the reason we get Day 1 patches on basically every game now, they get the ready-to-publish game approved by the big platform holders weeks or months ahead of time and often a giant like Sony doesn't care about individual companies, they want all partners to hold to guidelines. Which sometimes means no changes X amount of time before launch date.
So, I wouldn't be so quick to call the devs greedy. After all, if they want to play in the big boys' sandbox they have to play by their rules.
Also, guys...this is a business. They don't make dbd for fun. If there is no financial incentive the devs who make the game we all play for hours a week, they stop. They have to eat. They have to live.
They're people, think about that before youre so vitriolic. It's unbecoming of the whole community.
Edit: forgot an important sentence, lol.
-
@TheButcher said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1763341#Comment_1763341
I still play Survivor 😂, it's stress free and easy. Also friends with certain people that I stick around in the game for, but for confidentiality sake - I'm not naming them.
@Orion Another prime example of the dismissive comments. "Dont' bother playing" - the whole "Take a break", "Play something else", "No one's making you play". Instead of fixing the issues with Killer. They are expected to just leave the game and come back fresh to work again later.
It's not dismissive, actionable advice. If you don't like to do a thing...don't do it.
It's very clear the changes you personally want aren't in the cards atm, so stepping away is rational and healthy.
Getting defensive, claiming any disagreement is dismissive, is just unproductive and, frankly, immature.
The only reason these threads get so much traction is because we all wanna take the bait and tell you to got take a break in the corner, honey.
-
How often do you really get bloodlust though?
I don't know that I've ever even gotten bloodlust III...
-
Regardless of the results, I feel like experiments like this are super healthy for the game. Change one thing at a time, test, change it back, retest.
This is good.
-
@White_Owl said:
Wouldn't they be basically pallets which can't be vaulted?
That's what the walls are now, basically. But that's a good way to describe their mechanics if you ere in a pinch.
-
@Chinanumawaaan said:
I like it, then if the survivor closes it with bad timing the killer can kick the door open on them and stun them for a second
I wouldn't go so far as to stun at basekit, maybe with a perk. Like, "Here's Johnny", lol. "Kicking a closed door within 3 seconds of a rushed bolting slows survivors within 12m by 20% and causes the hindered status effect for 4 seconds."
-
@bm33 said:
I think make doors able to open/close by both survivor and killers. Killers can break a closed door to remove it from play.
Ideally, they'd start open and be able to be closed once. Essentially identical to pallets, just in walls.
-
@NomiNomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1758081#Comment_1758081
I'd rather just have Jack Torrance. Imagine how cool his animations would be. Sadly, he's more or less just a guy. A guy that went insane due to a haunted hotel or isolation, but just a guy.
:(
Hmm, if you think about it in terms of the book...its entirely possible the entity or something very like it could have been the occupying evil of the overlook... 🧐
-
@chieften333 said:
I've seen the bug before. I was playing against a wraith with that cosmetic and I could see the fire effects on his back normally, even when he was cloaked.
Inconvenient? Yes. Metal AF? Also yes.
-
@NomiNomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1758027#Comment_1758027
I think it'd be a good change. Far better than the "here's a god loop, break this peasant killer"
It just occurs to me that they'd have to make it so that the killer's "Chase Camera" (or whatever little bubble of proximity and attention triggers a chase) could see the survivor through the door. (But not actually see them, lol)
Because say dwight just slams the door in your face..he just broke LOS...he just broke chase....SPEED BREAK THAT DOOOOOR!
(Also Huntress could get a Jack Torrance mask...or a Dog Costume mask...To go with the doors.)
-
@Mikeasaurus said:
Isn't this literally just the same door system that Friday the 13th used?
Is it? I never got to play it even though I wanted to. :(
-
@NomiNomad said:
Jeez dude, these are way too complicated. I could barely understand them.
On a serious note, I feel like this is a step in the right direction but killers need to be able to shut them too - for the very few that shut down loops and don't create infinites. Maybe have a surv spend a good amount of time to break it themselves. Along with that, they should be one time use - killer (or survivor) breaks them, the wall is gone.
Yeah, once they'd break theyd be done. The idea was just to make a blocker that the survivors have to commit to, but also encourages them to take the risk to commit to them. Hence the screwy break times. Good for S if K has to break in chase, good for K if they find it out of chase.
Edited because my own joke went over my head.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
One side will complain about the aura reading of the stick, while the other side complains about the cooldown of the stick.
Both will argue if the devs ever intended the stick.
I wasn't impressed until the end when I almost spit my drink. Thank you.