GravelordNito99
GravelordNito99
About
- Username
- GravelordNito99
- Joined
- Visits
- 605
- Last Active
Comments
-
Killer is horrendous at the moment. The gens will fly in just a few minutes, even with a full regression build. Every survivor will loop almost perfectly, and you'll lose every mindgame if you're an unlucky person. Your reward for your suffering is being made fun of and ganged up on by 4 people post-game.
Only option for killers is to bring S tier. Anything else and you're just getting genrushed.
They need to make the gens take roughly 1.5x the time they take at the moment for 90% of the killer roster to stand a chance against good survivors.
-
You, sir, win the award for worst idea in the history of this forum. The moment you bring old cakes back, they lose all their sentimental value, and just become numerically worse versions of the new cakes.
I can't believe you actually wasted time typing this.
-
@Coordi said:
What platform did this occur on? If it was PC and it happens again, please upload the logs to this thread.
It was on PC. I will be sure to grab a log if I encounter it again.
-
@Coordi said:
Is it possible you last leveled up those characters during the last event?
No. This was several levels deep and came from a Halloween mystery box.
-
@Marc_go_solo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776774#Comment_3776774
Yes, I did. My response was alluding to the fact that a comparison could be made, because it was illustrating how The Entity can bend the vast majority to its liking, and not saying Freddy and Dracula were on the same level.
In that respect, I don't think you read correctly what I said in my original post - it was all about stating how The Entity controls its Killers amd how it can effectively mold them. Where you got the idea that I was saying Freddy is as strong as Dracula is beyond me. I was just stating the Mark Of The Entity is put upon those who represent a real threat, and why would this Mark be put on Dracula, when he cannot control The Entity?
The Lich has the ability. He already kept The Entity at bay and only entered willingly in order to learn its secrets and one day harness that power. I do not believe The Entity could have taken The Lich otherwise. Dracula, Freddy, The Dredge and so on don't have that knowledge.
You directly compared the two. It isn't really a comparison that works due to the massively different scales. Dracula, Vecna and The Entity are all in a league of their own, and on similar power scales to each other. Freddy is less than an ant to them, so the comparison is strange. If it requires a mark to nerf Vecna, then Dracula should need it too. It would not work in the way it does for Freddy.
I think you're conflating control of the entity with threat to it. The mark is to nerf those who are a threat. Vecna and Dracula are on the same power level, and therefore Dracula would be just as much of a threat to the entity if he wanted to be as Vecna is. Dracula's current happiness in the realm is irrelevant to that, because time passes and people's state of mind changes. The entity would mark him anyway if it has even a basic human level intelligence, because Dracula COULD pose a threat in the way Vecna currently does. They both have the power to do so.
-
@Marc_go_solo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3775848#Comment_3775848
Nothing is obscene when the Entity is something so far beyond either of them it's unreal. Notice The Dark Lord doesn't even have the Seal of the Entity like The Lich does? That's the difference in power between The Lich and The Dark Lord. The Entity simply can manipulate at will. Dracula is no different, and I will say that - because of this - Dracula is just as helpless as Freddy is against The Entity.
Dracula has been moulded to what is required by The Entity fpr the trials. It's an inescapable fact.
Did… Did you actually read my original post…? The reason the mark exists is because the entity is NOT that far beyind them. And Dracula is on a very similar power level to Vecna. Therefore, both Vecna and Dracula should be marked.
-
@Marc_go_solo said:
It's possible BHVR may consider it, but for me Dracula would just have his powers manipulated in the same way Freddy has.
Vecna is a genuine threat to The Entity, with his intellect probably as much as an issue than his powers. However, within the realms The Entity has muted the magical side because it already found out it could not take Vecna by force, so it understands the danger of bringing Vecna in unhinged. Dracula is not a threat to The Entity.
The devs could use the Mark as a way to mute Dracula's power, but then that creates a lore issue for me, because surely someone like Freddy would have also needed this to mute his power too.
For me, the Mark is used to subdue a threat to The Entity itself, as it's already shown how it can boost or weaken an existing power. Pyramid Head and Freddy are perfect examples respectively.
Comparing Freddy to Dracula is obscene. They're in totally different macro scales. Dracula is multiversal+. Freddy is Planetary at a push. it's like comparing the strength of an atom to the big bang.
-
For me, I can't claim the Greenville banner. The "claim drop" button just circles for a second and then comes back. The DBD site also says I have not claimed it, even though I've pressed the button 50 times.
-
He's far too weak. He's just Huntress but needs permission to deal damage with his hatchets. Honestly probably needs a hotfix buff or to be disabled completely until he's playable.
-
Since the new MMR makes killer a ridiculous sweat-fest every game, the new trick snowmen were genuinely jumpscaring me to the point where I'm still physically jumping when they get me now. For me, I personally like it, since it reminds me of just how much I'm focused in on the game. They're making me jump because I'm hyper focused on what I'm doing to win. Without the jumpscares, the MMR sweating would be far more unbearable, so thanks for the much-needed surprises lol.
-
@Unequalmitten86 said:
The most important question is how did you obtain that kill rate? If you are not patrolling and just hanging around a hook focusing on one player while they run you of course your kill rate will go down. Assuming you are playing against SWFs. However I have played in some seal team 6 soloq where we had it very well organized with no coms we just knew what to do.
I do agree though the new MMR is way off though.
I obtained a ~80% kill rate by being great at the game. Survivors are stronger than killers and yet I got those numbers without playing Nurse or Blight. However new MMR means that survivors are always P100 swfs in top MMR if you get unlucky, and it just isn't pleasant to play against every game. Therefore my kill rate has plummeted in a very short span of time. MMR in a party game is nonsensical.
-
@Skitten56 said:
I strongly disagree with OP. I think the MMR changes have made playing killer much more fun. All the matches for me have been a lot better recently. The games have been much closer, more competitive and more enjoyable. The amount of games where I get paired against survivors clearly outside my level have gone down a lot which is great. There is nothing enjoyable about destroying a team in a pub match at 5 gens left.
it seems a lot of killers simply love to play sweaty as possible but hate to actually go against sweaty survivors in return. If you played to win and play well, then its only natural you should go against people at your skill level who aim to do the same. This is MMR working as intended.
It isn't a matter of discussion. Winning is more fun than losing, objectively. Having variety in your life is more exciting than repetition. Neither of these things are in contention, and you therefore have no way to "disagree" with me. Anything else you said was already forefeit.
-
@Venusa said:
"until recently won around 80-90% of my games, despite the fact the game (and devs) naturally favors survivors"
The game and the devs "favor survivors" yet you still win %90 of your games... It's as if the favorism isn't working or it doesn't exist... How interesting.
For real though I can't believe how you wrote that sentence and didn't stop to think how contradictory it is within itself.
Forums never disappoint me.
I direct your attention to the nature of asymmetry I already discussed earlier. I answered this exact response earlier on, so please read the thread before commenting.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613040#Comment_3613040
https://nightlight.gg/killers/viewer?sort=pick&shown=pick%7Ckill%7Cdist&start_days=28
You can add 5% to actually have the realistic number we are right now. It got already confirmed by the devs and people who can calcublate 2+2 that the winrate according to killrate matches. I am sure you can do the math aswell.
I mean it does not really matter if we go for personal escape streaks or not. The record of 3/4 man out is 200, done by one of the best teams in the world, while on the other hand, random non-comp players delete survivors on Ghostface or Pig 200+ times. You know, killer you probably have yourself on your personal tier list under the letter F.
This isn't even remotely surprising, as you've forgotten a very important point I made in the post. Survivor is a far lower skill role than killer, and so it naturally attracts people who don't want to be challenged, and even if they are god survivors, they're babies in comparison to a god killer in terms of skill. Therefore, even though in theory they should be capable of infinite escape streaks, their natural complacency that comes with the ease of the role will screw them over every once in a while. Or, as should be obvious, they just run into a great Nurse or Blight, which are OP killers that are exceptions to the generalisation of my post.
-
@xEa said:
To funny, Otz has just released a video about those "dishonest numbers".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5PKg4HPjnE
The game is so unfair, Survivors are so powerful.
lol
Pointing to Nurse or Blight as examples to try and prove that killer in general is not too difficult with new MMR is like pointing to a lottery winner as evidence that everyone has a good chance of winning the lottery.
You misunderstand the difference between generalisations and exceptions. You just forefeit your right to any kind of intelligent discussion. Try again.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3612959#Comment_3612959
A killer should not automatically win the majority of his games because he is the killer. This is a game played by 5 people each round, so not only one person is entiteled to have fun. The better player / the better side should win.
As many have mentioned, when you loose now 70% of your games and draw 20%, then you a) might not be good enough or b) you have a loosing streak.
Lets hope MMR brings you to the level you belong, which i doubt because the system is not the greatest tbh.
After all criticizing MMR would be the only valid point you could make.
No, they should not "automatically win", but they should be able to when of equal or greater skill than their opponents.
Criticising MMR is EXACTLY what I've been doing the entire time. Please for the love of everything actually read the post with more than just your eyes.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3612959#Comment_3612959
yes, it means you were facing opponent far weaker then yourself when your win-rate was 80%. Now your playing against survivors within your skill-level. as result, you need get better to have the same win-rate as before. I do not see anything wrong with this.
If you see nothing wrong with this, then you clearly didn't read my post.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/400650/new-mmr-makes-playing-killer-unbearable
The reasons this is not fair are obvious. For one, the game is extremely survivor sided. Nobody would dare argue against something as obvious as that.
I dare, and instead of you, i back it up with facts.
- Survivors loose in 60% of their games, while killer win 60% of their games. Its a fact and undenyable tho to sheer numbers and simple math.
- Survivor win streaks are super low compared to killer. We are talking here about 38 escapes in a row on survivor vs 1000+ wins on certaint killers. Dont even try to deny it, i swear i won't shy away posting the pig winstreak video again 😘
- Even in comp, killer come out on top with a higher average on killrates. I know i know, this is a very hot topic and this is debateable since both sides have restrictions, but nevertheless it is true.
Your numbers are extremely dishonest. You seem to have forgotten that survivors are a team of 4. Winning on survivor means having 3+ members of your team escape, because you are a TEAM. If you run the Killer for 5 gens and get facecamped, you didn't lose. You played like a beast and got your 3 mates out. You won.
Your own personal escape is irrelevant. Therefore, you're comparing apples to oranges when comparing escape streaks with killer winstreaks. This one crux makes everything you just said completely redundant. Try again.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/400650/new-mmr-makes-playing-killer-unbearable
something doesn't add-up. If your winning 80-90% of the matches, your among best killer players. Your suppose to be playing against the best players because your one of the best killer players.
Just let it be a party game and put me vs every kind of player. I want to mess around with newbies sometimes; I want to have some tough battles sometimes; I want to get stomped by perfect survivors sometimes. I don't want to get stomped 70% of the time, and struggle to barely draw the match the other 30%.
This whole aspect makes 0 sense with the rest of your post. your entire post is complaining about so called perfect survivors stomping you. Your 80-90% win-rate does not correlate with you losing 70% of the time and drawing 30% of the time. These two numbers don't add up. your clearly a competitive player that wants to win every game but you lack skills to do so. there is no reason for BVHR to change the MMR system for your lack of inability to play the game.
No. You missed the point. This game is asymmetrical. Unbalanced. It's a party game. If you win often on Killer, that's how it should be, because losing feels 4x worse. Please for the love of everything actually read my post before responding.
It seems you're incapable of basic reading skills, which makes discussion with you very difficult. I said I won 80-80% of my games "until recently", however NOW, I lose 70% of the time due to the new MMR making it much more likely to match vs comp survivors every single game if you're unlucky. I'm at MMR cap, so I get P100 swfs in most of my games, and it simply isn't fun in what's supposed to be a casual party asym game.
They're ridiculously skilled at the game, and I'm thrown in with them after I come home from a 12 hour work shift and just want to play some lucky dip games. But dbd is no longer a lucky dip due to MMR. It's exciting not knowing when you'll be put against a god squad or some absolute cutie pie newbie survivors. Having the god squads every once in a while makes it less frustrating and more impressive and inspiring. But having the god squad every single game? Soul-destroying. It really isn't complicated.
I implore you to go back and read my post more carefully this time.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3612415#Comment_3612415
I did read your post and it just comes off as being upset you can't win 90% of your games anymore. Which is fair, because if you were able to maintain a 90% win rate then you were more than likely facing opponents under your skill level too often.
The way something "comes off" is completely irrelevant to the content it actually contains.
-
@lifestylee said:
Pretty strange post.
I havent played killer much in the last few weeks, but the mmr wasnt very bad and meta wise the game is a decent state, all tho you often have to camp/tunnel/slug to win. I think the games balanced around that.
You dont like playing vs sweats and having a low or 50% winrate but noobier survivors also dont like playing vs sweats and never or very rarely escape.
People dont like losing in general.
Survivor at high lvl takes skill just like killer all tho i think killer is overall more skillful.
The game is survivor sided (not extremely) but thats only really a noticeable problem at the highest levels of play.
You shouldnt encounter those players in your normal matches frequently.
The part where you said you run the killer ungodly amount of time with ease every chase and escape whenever you want seems unlikely to me.
You also ignored half my post. I direct your attention to the fact that losing feels worse on killer than it does on survivor. Escaping on survivor is like a nice bonus, but anyone with sense goes in with the goal of interacting with the killer as much as possible.
-
@Crowman said:
What's not fair about being put against higher skilled opponents? You claim to have an 80-90% winrate, so you should be facing these teams.
I think you just need to accept that you're going to lose some games.
You clearly didn't read my post. I quote: "I want to get stomped by perfect survivors sometimes." Just not most of the time.
-
The revised chase music is far superior. What are you talking about?
Sure, it still isn't good. But at least it isn't awful.
-
@mizark3 said:
It is working as intended, the problem is the intent wasn't properly communicated to you, or the majority of the playerbase for that matter. The intent is if you only win by sweating, you will lose if you don't sweat. If you stop sweating long enough, you will lose enough to get you to the point you will win more often than lose again. The problem is people don't like to lose, so they fall back on sweating consciously or subconsciously. If you try to win without sweating, and refuse to cross that line into sweat, you will (eventually) get enjoyable matches again. Again the problem is you have to be willing to lose (enough times) to get you back in what you consider a 'fun MMR'.
If the intent is for decay and lower mmr for new killers to be in place, as they have claimed, then the system is not working as intended by my experience, as I am pointing out.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3453792#Comment_3453792
despite survivors being bad at the game
wouldn't that mean they don't escape often -> their MMR is low?
So that would mean you are playing against correct (low) MMR.
It may suprise you, but hours played does not equal skill.
"wouldn't that mean they don't escape often -> their MMR is low?" - No. If you think this is the case, then you're misunderstanding MMR. MMR is just a rating as you compare to other players within the game. ALL survivors are bad at the game, since the role itself involves no skill, which therefore means that even top MMR survivors are bad at the game. Use your brain.
Hours played does not necessitate skill, but usually indicates it comparatively, especially when its presence is so consistent. You aren't going to consistently see 15,000 hour teams at low mmr. if you consistently see 15,000 hour teams every game, then you're undoubtedly at high mmr. Use your brain.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3452714#Comment_3452714
Nah, it shouldn't decay.
Unless it's specific killer like Blight, Nurse etc. you won't really get that worse with M1 killers.
Why should starting MMR be lower? So you stomp bad survivors? How that makes sense?
You are winning means you are not higher than you should be.
It really should decay. In fact, they have claimed that it DOES, so they therefore seem to agree. However, my experience suggests that it is not true. It isn't about "getting worse", it's about recent experience and being "warmed up". Those skills remain, but are somewhat dormant after a break, much like muscles when you don't go to the gym for a while. They remember where they once were and thus will grow back to that point quickly, but will have set themselves to reduced dormant state in the meantime.
The issue is that the system is not doing its job. MMR is supposed to decay, yet I'm at top mmr even after a break on an entirely new killer. That is a problem, despite survivors being bad at the game.
-
@erggie said:
That's the most entitled post i've seen in a while. Get over yourself, dude
Congratulations for addressing none of the points presented and doing nothing but attacking my character. Please don't act a stereotype.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3452709#Comment_3452709
Kills = higher MMR.
because you keep killing them, your MMR will increase even more.
That's how it works, nothing to fix.
Starting MMR is probably average. Either you will kill everyone and it will increase or you get destroyed for few games before you get on your MMR.
When you get stressed during your game it's on you, not MMR.
Well done, you described the MMR system I am speaking out against. Gold star.
The mmr should decay over time and be lowered when you are playing a new killer. Please actually read the post.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3452424#Comment_3452424
Poor me, have to play tryhard, killing everyone anyway, but poor me.
Soo relevant...
Of course - the point is that regardless of my skill, the numbers simply aren't adding up. Survivors play survivor because the roie places very little pressure on them and is not skill-intensive at all. It's an easy role for casual players, meaning that they aren't accustomed to having to get better at the game since it's so easy for them. Therefore, when they run into an actually competent killer, they lose due to their complacency and lack of skill. That's simply an explanation for how I win 80+% of my games even at top MMR as killer. The point is that despite all of this, I simply should not be placed against them in the first place due to the numbers, time and circumstance involved. It isn't a fun way to set up a non-ranked game system. Make it more random who you go up against. It would be much more fun and avoid frustrations like this with new killers.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
You really should learn when to stop talking.
Playing new killer after break and going against experienced survivors.
That's it.
But you just had to keep going...
No, everything said was relevant.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/378739/please-fix-the-mmr-system
Do I get it right?
I win all the games, but I still want even weaker opponents. MMR is not working correctly, because even though I still win, I don't want to even have to put an effort.
Talk about self-entitlement.
You are right though. MMR is not working correctly. If it was, you would be either the very best player, or you would have equal chance of winning or loosing the game (and quite frankly, I don't care if we are talking from killer's or survivor's perspective).
Yeah, I win most games, but only through sweating. It ends up meaning that the game is always stressful, or always ends with a 3k due to high level survivors knowing hatch spawns, making it a 5050. I always lose anything involving chance. This means the adept is almost impossible, and learning the new killer even moreso. I win with my m1 knowledge gameplay. I hardly get to use the new power.
-
@Dipper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3373050#Comment_3373050
Well that just means that the chances are twice as high to make it spawn at the shack. Not that it spawns 100% at the shack
A 100% additive modifier. Please read the thread before you continue to comment.
-
@Dipper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/367467/pc-hatch-offering-didnt-work
Afaik it states that it increases the chances heavily. Maybe you just got unlucky and hit that percent where it didn't spawn there
As mentioned throughout the thread, it is a 100% modifier.
-
@Alionis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3371231#Comment_3371231
I agree with your observations regarding hatch spawns, they could be additive.
However, I stick to what I said with realm offerings, those are most definitely multiplicative, which was literally the only thing I addressed in the comment you quoted, which you apparently didn't pick up on.
Yeah I agree with you - must have been a misunderstanding. I only ever quoted hatch numbers because I wasn't interested in realm offerings. I didn't even know the realm numbers, but upon seeing it's 9,999%, it has to be multiplicative.
-
@Alionis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3370545#Comment_3370545
I don't remember anyone claiming those are additive and their in-game behavior suggests that their interaction is actually multiplicative. While sure realm offerings increase the odds, they do so by absolutely ridiculous values (check the wiki), so obviously they are nearly always a guarantee for their given realm.
But they actually aren't, there have been cases, and there still are, when the game picks a different realm despite the presence of an offering.
So based on that, and you not understanding that maps and realms aren't the same thing and offerings actually go for realms, and also that you seemingly don't understand percentages properly, I'm not going to agree with what you said.
The way you describe this stuff just does not add up with what we can observe in-game, and since the behavior of neither the realm offerings nor the hatch offerings has changed since they were introduced, I seriously doubt that anything is bugged or not working as intended. I'm quite sure that if something were wrong, it would have been addressed by now.
No, their behavior in-game CONFIRMS that they are additive, at least in the case of hatch spawns. I explained it all in my comment. If it were multiplicative, the offerings would not be so consistent. It really isn't any more complicated than that. The only case in which it isn't practically a guarantee is when there is a conflicting offering. For maps in particular, the 9,999% modifier definitely suggests it's multiplicative, but I was focused on hatch offerings.
Who said I don't understand the difference between maps and realms? Of course I do. In the context of a conversation, people say "map offering" not "realm offering". You are therefore choosing your map with an offering despite the offerings being for realms. People are simply switching the terms since we consider realms to be their own category of maps. Your pedantism over word usage and your failure to understand common usage meanings within context makes absolutely no difference to relevant meaning within the context of the discussion. Of course, due to the difference in number values, it may well be that map offerings are multiplicative while hatch spawns aren't - reasoning for this I will mention at the end. Regardless, my discussion was and remains focused on hatch spawns, hence why I specifically mentioned the 100% modifier for hatch spawns, and did not mention the map numbers.
It is you who doesn't understand percentages properly if you are insistent with hatch offerings. Behavior in-game simply doesn't add up. It's safe to assume the difference in percentage between the hatch and map offerings is on account of differing modifiers between the two, as without conflicting offerings they are almost always consistent. If hatch spawns were multiplicative, a 100% modifier would not at all result in the consistency we see with the offering, even despite the lower number of possible spawns compared to map options.
-
@Alionis said:
BY 100% is not the same thing as TO 100%.
Increasing something by 100% just means you double its initial value.
For example: if you have a 25% initial chance of something happening, increasing it by 100% of that would result in a 50% overall chance.
You are incorrect. It's additive, not multiplicative. That is to say, it's +100% chance as opposed to x2 chance. That is why map offerings are always guaranteed when no conflicting offerings are used. If your multiplicative approach were true, then map offerings would almost never work on account of the sheer number of maps meaning a doubled chance would still be a very small one. The same applies to hatch offerings.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I thought it states “increases The odds”.
According to the wiki, it "increases the odds by 100%". Therefore, with no other conflicting offerings it should be a guaranteed spawn.
-
@not_requested49 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3367329#Comment_3367329
Did someone else play a conflicting offering like the other hatch offering?
Nobody else used one.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
Hatch spawns inside the shack on that map (not outside on the edge), did you check inside?
I did indeed check inside. It was nowhere.
-
The way to beat any killer with any addons is to play survivor and not be bad at the game. Survivors are unbelievably op, so it's quite literally impossible to lose.
-
I also agree with this. I'm amazed we don't have it yet. I'd love to see my overall stats somewhere.
-
It's old news that the game itself is massively survivor-sided at its core, with new gen speeds still being unwinnable for killer. Of course, the maps also being awful for killer is just extra insult to injury.
-
Actually, if anything, Wesker needs buffs. His counterplay is extremely effective and competent survivors make easy work of him. All you need to do is put any kind of object between you and him and he becomes an m1 killer with some mediocre map traversal. He needs quite a few buffs to be in A/S tier. At current, he's mid-low B-tier at high mmr, and solid A-tier at low-mid mmr.
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/345535/post-bugfix-wesker-feedback
30 cm is definitely the perfect spot. Me personally, I didn't think 20 cm was as bad as people said. Just like with every projectile in this game, I just got used to how it works. 30 cm definitely feels fine, let's have some form of skill lmao. I don't think he needs anything else. Obviously fix the bugs and iron out some problems but he works fine for me.
Couldn't disagree more.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3176413#Comment_3176413
Blight is ofcourse stronger. Blight is stronger then anything but nurse in this game. We don't need more blights either. But he needs to bounce at least once and slides on things. This can be (rarely) abused to make blight run to nowhere. Weskers don't suffer from this.
Also for a tree... All he needs is position himself in front of where survivor needs to run for very easy M1. And even if he had CD after using his ability, he does not have such a strong movement slowdown as blight. So he more often then not make that next hit... It's just 5s later then blight.
But I agree with OP's point 4. That feels like a bug.
Overall I don't think those buffs are good idea. Wesker is already stronger then e.g. Nemesis. It makes more sense to talk about buffing onrio/pig/ghostface at this point rather then making Wesker compete with blight or nurse.
Blight having one small instance of potential (and extremely rare) counterplay does not outweigh Wesker's extremely basic, constant and powerful counterplay, especially considering how much stronger Blight is at base. We absolutely do need more Blights - he's one of the best things to ever happen to the game, unlike Nurse. Blight gets his hits through skill and ability (with the exception of his disgusting addons), while Nurse gets them through luck and guesswork.
You don't seem to understand how line of sight works - it doesn't matter how close the survivor is to the tree - all they need to do it be on the opposite side of it to Wesker. or usually not even, since he can't grab them from other angles accounting for travel time. Load up a custom game with a friend and try it - I guarantee that if the survivor plays it right, Wesker will never, ever, ever, ever, ever hit his bound with a tree there. Plus, the trees aren't even the strongest counterplay objects against him, yet they're that powerful. It's ridiculous.
You mention m1, and that's exactly the issue. Wesker can work around the counterplay to an extent to get an m1, but that's just the thing - it's an m1. He isn't getting to have fun with his power if survivors play it properly. He will simply be an m1 killer all game with some map mobility. 5s is an eternity in DBD. A competent survivor is already at 3 more windows and pallets.
Nemesis is definitely stronger than Wesker, no question.
The reason to make Wesker stronger is because he's new, he's popular, he's hype, and he has a very fun base concept. Wesker is an opportunity for BHVR to make a killer that will pull people to their game again, like Blight. That is why he should be buffed. No amount of buffs are going to make Pig as fun as Wesker could be without her having her very core gameplay foundation overhauled, which just isn't going to happen.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3176353#Comment_3176353
Good weskers already use V-shaped attacka very well. I presume you still don't play him that much, because what you wrote works only on weskers that "hug" obstackles (same way as M1 killers chase). For quite a few situations/tiles he is better then blight when played correctly - which is unique to him (and worse in others).
No. This killer already has quite huge potential. I see 0 reasons to buff him any more.
I play him quite a lot. That kind of attack is not viable against good survivors. It does not only work on hugging Weskers, it works anywhere. Even a simple tree completely shuts down his power, ad survivors can just rotate around it and force him to m1. In no way does he even come close to Blight's level on any tile whatsoever.
-
@Crowman said:
I think if there's anything Wesker really needs, it's for his cooldown after vault (more specifically the pallet vault) to be reduced. The fact that survivors can step away to avoid getting hit after your vault and still have enough time to go around you to vault over the pallet before you can do anything about it is really dumb.
Yes, that was point 6.
-
@Gandor said:
No. Right now he is good.
He is able to chase, he is able to hit, but if he doesn't, he gets punished for it.
He has quite a substantial slowdown after unhook - your first priority is quick heal and cleanse. The problem is, that if he decides to tunnel, he will get survivor latest in about 40s after infection fully develops and there is nothing you can do to counter it (the slowdown is way too strong).
He counters all sprint-based exhaustions with his power, so there is also no loosing him.
The way he is now is actually Ok. He is definitelly stronger killer from all of them. All the other buffs would make him new nurse
There is so much you can do about it. To beat Wesker, put any object between yourself and him, and he is reduced to an m1 killer. He's like Blight with only 2 rushes that can't be drifted and bumps into things more easily. If he tunnels, just do the gens and you're guaranteed to win because times are so broken. He does not counter those exhaustions if the survivor uses literally any terrain to their advantage. His slow cooldowns and how hard he is punished for not landing a bound is so severe that it's unlosable for a competent group of survivors at high mmr.
If you think Wesker is good right now then you either don't play him, or you're a low-mid mmr survivor.
The counterplay of putting terrain of any kind between you and him is so ridiculously powerful that as soon as a team starts doing it, he will kill nobody. He isn't even comparable to the top tier killers.
-
@SirCracken said:
- Survivor throws and wallsplats after a bound are extremely inconsistent. Certain surfaces cause survivors to slide across them, rather than splatting onto them, which doesn't damage them.
- His bound randomly doesn't deal damage to survivors.
- His bound will never deal damage to survivors if Wesker falls off a ledge, allowing survivors to deliberately avoid taking damage if they position themselves near a ledge.
- Some objects cannot be bounded off of. Whereas some can. (E.G the generic hill tile can usually be bounded off. Whereas the top of the saloon in Dead Dawg Saloon cannot)
- Sometimes he is unable to vault a window or dropped pallet by bounding into it. The angle of the bound doesn't prevent this from happening.
- Bounding into a dropped pallet or window while a survivor is over half-way done vaulting it will neither damage the survivor nor let Wesker vault it.
- His bound hit-box is absurdly small and unnecessarily punishing to learn.
- Sometimes his bound will pass through survivors.
- The logic that determines if a bound will stop or slide off an object is highly inconsistent.
- His 1st person animations frequently bug out. Especially after throwing a survivor.
- Bounding into a survivor the moment they drop a pallet is extremely buggy, and can sometimes result in the survivor dropping the pallet, not stunning Wesker, and then being carried by Wesker despite being on the opposite side of the pallet. Sometimes comedically long distances without stopping.
- Charging up and releasing a bound whilst regenerating a bound token will completely reset the token cooldown. Unlike Nurse, whose token charge remains even after blinking.
- His power description doesn't include info on how his power cooldown is decreased per infected survivor.
- Bounding into a pallet as a survivor drops it will not allow Wesker to vault it, instead he will stop at the pallet and waste the bound token.
- Bounding into a healthy survivor at the exit gates will block them. But the block is completely useless. As downing the survivor will simply knock them into the escape boundary. And the gate block doesn't last long enough to down the survivor with either a basic attack or a bound before they can escape.
- Vaulting a dropped pallet with a bound will sometimes not damage a survivor even if they are very close to the pallet.
- Hitting a survivor with a bound while they are close to a pallet or window will sometimes grab them but not slam or throw them. Causing them to take no damage.
- Bounding over a dropped pallet that is next to a downed survivor will sometimes cause Wesker to hit the downed survivor.
EDIT : Added 16,17,18
Did I miss anything?
Great post, though you missed a couple. Sometimes Wesker simply lets survivors go if they are at corners, or against chests up on walls. Or sometimes just randomly. His charge time is also too long for the power to feel smooth and powerful.
-
These seem decent, although I'd personally argue the survivor hitbox would be best at 35cm.