Krimbar
Krimbar
About
- Username
- Krimbar
- Joined
- Visits
- 80
- Last Active
Comments
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3015197#Comment_3015197
Generally yes, but it's not guaranteed everyone is going to do that. This is no different than for example not being able to use overcome if you get hit with bubba's chainsaw. Some exhaustion perks just don't work as well against certain killers.
I mean yeah sure, but I think its a drastic change that will likely only effect Deathslinger and maybe some other killer. I personally welcome this change as a Deathslinger main, but I was wondering if that's really thought through, you know?
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
You can still use it if he goes for an m1. I don't think it's a problem.
why would you go for M1 though? you hit them to injure and then follow with M2
-
@DarKStaR350z said:
Just asking to make sure before I prestige and lose all my addons; is the rework live right now?
Will I keep addons? Will I keep perks?
yes
-
@Tiufal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2823195#Comment_2823195
Which is pretty much a lie. There are several kilelrs viable in high mmr, cause its still casual and not competitive. Players are just too lazy to play as those cause theyre not too easy handle.
Wait what? You are saying people are just too lazy to make these killers viable?
-
@Marcavecunc said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2822557#Comment_2822557
Yeah, would be good if we could still dump points into her, rather than lock her up entirely.
As for the original post..
MMR is character based, so saying Nurse is the only killer viable in high MMR is ridiculous. If you reach high MMR with anyone, it means you're decent with that killer. If you're bad with a killer, you won't reach high MMR with that specific one. So while being a good nurse player would get you matched with good survivors, if you're bad at, say, Billy, you shouldn't get matched against those same survivors because your Billy MMR is lower than your Nurse MMR. And if your MMR is high with everyone, it means you're technically decent with everyone and that's it.
What? You can reach the soft cap for MMR pretty easily on every killer. The reason why you don't see anyone else than Nurse, Huntress, Blight and Bubba is, because all the other killers can't even make it far enough to be considered for matchmaking.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2820735#Comment_2820735
That's pretty much the only viable method in solo. That challenge was not well thought out.
I got quite lucky and got it after just 2-3 games, but I can definitely see this challenge being a pain.
-
What I did was: Wait for a survivor to get hooked and then wait until somebody comes for the unhook, then I ran to the hook and healed the unhooked survivor together with the person that did the unhook. Things like Kindred, Bond and Empathy also help.
It's not easy, but doable.
-
@AlbinoViera said:
I genuinely have no idea what brought this fad of wanting to nerf Hug Tech. It's another form of skill expression that changes the game from *Run to loop, run around loop, get hit and/or drop pallet, repeat.* Hell, it can be countered by rather simple means, but no-one wants to try and learn how to counter it.
It'd be like making it so you can't vault a pallet immediately after a stun/near a downed survivor to stop that CJ tech thing or whatever it's called. I'm sure that wasn't intentional design and it's just as easily countered, but I've only seen maybe one or two people complain about it so far.
I personally like the form of skill expression, it adds depth to the gameplay. But, I was probably the only person that liked old Spirit and having to mind-game her, so, take my opinion with a grain of salt.
Exactly. I think it's objectively a healthy layer of depth that seems to have happened on accident, but labeling it as just another bug that should get fixed is a really bad way of approaching mechanics like these. Unless it's something straight up unfair or broken, it just makes the game more interesting and complex, which is the best thing a game can do, in my opinion.
-
I'm glad you asked!
A Pirate collection would be nice.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
The devs spent months trying to fix his collision problems, and they failed miserably. Blight still has so many collision problems that if you want any of them fixed, then it’s more helpful to be asking for Blight to have a code rework (like they just did with Nurse).
TDLR the devs tried looking into Blight’s collision problems, but they couldn’t figure out how to fix them.
And look what happened to Nurse now.
-
@ObservantOfTime said:
So... Does someone actually have a video of this "bug" or "exploit"? I can't tell what part of regular gameplay mechanics people consider bugs or exploits these days. Example please.
Hug techs are when Blight starts his rush while looking down at an object or a wall, allowing him to glide along the object/ wall. There are many different applications for it, here is one at the cow tree on rotten fields:
https://youtu.be/kAt_VvoHGAcSome people are considering these techniques, exploits or are saying it's a bug and needs to get fixed.
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819939#Comment_2819939
Maybe it just takes more complaints for them to look into it? Sorta like how that worked when boil over got complained about and COH. There’s many people who think the hug tech is broken or should not be in the game you just don’t see the complaints that often around the forums because these forums are known to be a killers only hub.
What exactly is your complaint though?
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819950#Comment_2819950
that's true, i just don't think it's that vital of a blight mechanic to justify it staying in the game, he'll do fine without it
From my own experience, learning how and when to slide around all different kinds of objects and terrain has been the hardest aspect of learning blight for me. It's the most fun part about blight and it also gives him a competitive edge against difficult survivors, which makes me think it's very vital to his kit.
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819921#Comment_2819921
you're pushing yourself against a wall and pressing a button, not exactly a hard tech to learn
If you think that's all there is to hug techs, then you don't really understand what you're talking about.
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819925#Comment_2819925
unintentional, a bug, an exploit, whatever you want to call it, it’s still a feature that shouldn’t be in the game and hopefully gets some fixing soon.
I can't change your mind about this, but all I can say is, getting rid of one of the most complex and interesting mechanics dead by daylight has to offer, which in my opinion is also actually well balanced, is a terrible idea. At the end of the day, it's up to the devs if they like it or not.
-
@SuzuKR said:
Spear tech...? You mean a 90 flick? Also McLean still made sliding intentionally, just not avoiding collision by pre-emptively being against the object.
Well, a 90 flick hitting a survivor behind another survivor, you know, like as if he had a spear instead of a walking stick
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819914#Comment_2819914
Which is confirmed to be a bug by the blight’s creator.
Calling it a bug only says it's unintentional, which doesn't mean it's not well accepted by the developers.
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819902#Comment_2819902
it's only a drastic nerf to bad blights who rely on it too much
How can you call people bad when they are perfecting the highest potential of a Killer? That's the opposite of what a bad player would do.
-
@ShinobuSK said:
If they gonna be messing with collision again, they will 100% ######### it up somehow and may as well killswitch him for 6 months until they fix it
Scary possibility
-
@Rivyn said:
I always thought 'hug tech' was survivors gliding across walls while looping so they could see behind them while moving. . .
No, hug techs are when Blight starts his rush while looking down at an object or a wall to glide along the object/ wall.
-
@Tiufal said:
Yeah, dont fix bugs if its not in favor of killers.
No, it's "don't fix bugs, if they are actually good for a character"
-
@Shroompy said:
Fixing hug tech wouldn't turn him into a boring M1 killer lmao what
Getting rid of hug techs would drastically nerf his M2, which in return makes him more boring and more M1.
-
@GeneralV said:
Gotta say I liked your pirate impression :)
Thank you, I tried very hard on this one.
-
@dugman said:
Personally I’d be happy if they just removed map offerings altogether. They cause more problems than any minor benefit they give. In particular they exacerbate map imbalances and exploits by allowing people who want to abuse them to just keep pulling those maps up over and over. The recent Boil Over issue on RPD for instance was bad and was made even worse because people who wanted to really drill into that exploit could just keep going to that map repeatedly. If there were no map offerings then when a serious exploit or imbalance pops up in a map it at least keeps the number of matches where that becomes a problem to a minimum.
That's true yeah. I wouldn't mind either if they removed them, but that wouldn't fix these maps, that's a different problem.
-
@Dramzar_Myers said:
Just no)
Ok
-
I think about 10 mins is a decent amount of time. The issue is when you have those games that only last 5-6 mins and both sides barely interacted with each other. Those matches feel pretty bad, in my opinion. Or when you happen to down all 4 survivors in the first 2 mins of the game, that just doesn't feel like a good match.
-
@Hannacia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2808718#Comment_2808718
I didnt say it was ok. I said if Bubba wants to camp..Bubba will camp no matter what. Should they fix it. Absolutely. I think the library is useless room in that map and it should just be a room where you cannot go. Whole map has too many useless rooms and dead ends that needs fixing.
Most survivors know where the library is though and avoiding it is your best bet FOR NOW. If you get killed there you know not to go there next time. Until this map gets fixed or wiped from the game completely (which is my hope)
Alright. This is not the same as a camping bubba though. I just want this map killswitched, because of some personal reason like the absolutely horrible design and layout, but also now since there are actual exploits on that map.
-
@Sybarite said:
It use to be a somewhat rare thing to see, I would get one in maybe twenty matches if that. In my last 20 games, I have had 12 most of them are oddly steam accounts with previous vac bans. Just wondering I am just unlucky? Or is it something other people have noticed in their matchs?
I have seen a couple lately, seems to be related to the time of day. Early in the morning (EU CET) is when I get cheaters more commonly.
-
@Hannacia said:
As a killer i understand the survivors frustration as you could probably understand ours when boil over was abused in the library. I think if a killer really wants to abuse camping or blocking in certain place the killer doesnt need RPD for it. Certain perks and certain killer will make sure you get camped or bodyblocked no matter where you go.
Its up to you if you go close to that place.
Now this being said i hate RPD let's get rid of it! As a killer i just want to afk the whole match when im sent there
I don' really understand the argument "just don't go near it". so it's okay for people that don't know about it to just die due to horrible map design that allows ANY killer to bodyblock the stairs, making these 2 hooks unreachable for their teammates?
-
The game has sadly opted into and embraced some of the most unfun gameplay mechanics you could think of.
-
@throwaway79465468797 said:
Doesnt the library have two entry/exit points? If you're 2v1 against the killer then I'd say the game is already lost. With 3 people it shouldn't be an issue because there are 2 paths into the library
No I don't think so, I tested it myself. It's not about the doors leading into the library it's about the upstairs area. There is only one staircase going up and the killer can bodyblock it completely. If the killer knows about it and exploits it, you're just dead if he catchtes you anywhere near the library, which can be very common.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
I'm not saying this isn't a problem and RPD doesn't need fixed in so many ways. Because it does.
I however DO find it by hilarious that people had NO problems abusing boil over in this spot. But now that something can be abused against survivors at this spot, and how unfair it is. It's a problem 😂
I just want to say, that I made this post as a Killer player. I think both the boil over issue and now the blockable staircase issue are both ridiculous. The current staircase issue just seems a bit worse, since it doesn't require a specific build or setup to work and also isn't intended in any way.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2807775#Comment_2807775
It's not like this can take the game hostage though. I don't think it's worse than survivors living forever.
Could get a fix in next chapter or something, but I doubt it gonna be killswtiched.
Yes, but until they fix it, it's 100% exploitable and can ruin peoples matches. That's why they should just killswitch the map, to prevent any of that until it's all fixed.
-
@fulltonon said:
I mean if it is killswitch worthy why didn't they killswitched boil over.
likely not happen.
Well, that's not really the same thing. In an attempt to fix the issue with boil over they made it arguably worse, making the killer able to force a kill if they bodyblock the stairs similarly like they used to be able on some of the other maps basement entrances. On top of that, there are also some uncleansable totem spots on that map, all in all disabling the map would be the best choice.
-
I always wondered why it seems way more common for survivors to cheat than killers. I mean killers are considered weaker than survivors at the high end, so wouldn't it be more logical for them to cheat? Anyway, I think it's most likely a smaller percentage than how many survivors are cheating, be it subtle or blatant.
-
@Rivyn said:
They didn't kill switch it with Boil Over exploit, they won't kill switch it with their ill thought out band aid patch.
But one can still hope.
-
@Nathan13 said:
I wish RPD would get deleted period.
Seems unlikely, but we can try to keep finding reasons to killswitch this map again and again.
-
@CrashMADDS13 said:
No. Just don't go near the library.
And if a killer brings agitation iron grasp and a badge, then their intent to camp could have been done in the basement too in any map with bubba.
Get over it
The library is in the center of the map. You can't bodyblock basement entrances, the devs have had their history in making sure that things like that are not possible. I don't think it's a matter of "getting over it"
-
@jesterkind said:
Interesting read! I have... a lot of notes. I'll tackle them in the order you laid out your points, for consistency...
1: I agree in broad strokes that facecamping and hard tunnelling off hook are not particularly fun and should be addressed- luckily, the devs seem to be wanting to address both of these, so there is light at the end of the tunnel (pun not intended) there. My notes are that the story you used as evidence of the tunnelling problem didn't... seem to contain any tunnelling, since the killer actively left you alone and went off to presumably go do other things between chasing/downing you, and that I think your suggestion regarding hooks would be better suited in a competitor for Dead By Daylight rather than a change to the game itself.
All games have flaws and limitations that they won't ever overcome, and that's just the reality of it. Maybe that idea would make for a better game than DBD is! But, at least in my opinion, making dramatic fundamental changes to your game like that is something to be done very lightly, and not just because there is a flaw that exists. It could work, with very careful tweaking, but it's extremely far away from necessary and I'd rather see what we have honed a little further - even if it's just doing that first before considering dramatic changes to hooks.
2: Harkening back to #1, it is at least a good sign that the developers seem to agree both that perks like BT are too necessary not to be basekit, and that a lot of solo perks can be replaced with SWF communication. I do think you're a little too liberal in what perks you consider to be necessary (DS is nice but not necessary, also both DS and BT are anti-tunnel perks, not anti-camping perks? Minor point though), and there is always going to be room for solo information perks because not everyone can play with friends on comms, but in the broad strokes you're right that the current meta is as entrenched as it is because some perks just alter the game far too much.
I do think a better fix is to make those perks less necessary by altering base gameplay rather than just removing them, or even rather than just nerfing them, but I'm not quite sure if you agree with that or not- bit unclear.
3: So, literally and not as a gotcha- how on earth would they benefit from maliciously making cheating worse? What possible motive could they have to even want to? I don't want to be mean, but this is an extremely silly thing to say.
4: I have a lot to say about this one, so I'm gonna break it up into a couple of subcategories here...
4a: An MMR system is not inherently competitive, and the fact that DBD's system takes a pretty broad and loose view of skill brackets would hint to me that it's not trying to be a competitive one. I suspect that, to use Overwatch as an example arbitrarily, people hear "MMR" and they think of the ranked mode, without realising that Quick Play uses MMR too. It's just a tool to sort players in a matchmaking queue, there's nothing inherently competitive about it- even party games don't want to match people of wildly different skill levels together.
4b: I'm not sure why you think it's some arbitrary executive decision- people complained incessantly about how bad the emblem system was for matchmaking, and rightly so- it was genuinely unfit for purpose. What would you assume the devs would replace it with other than a standard, normal matchmaking system?
4c: If all you see is "working as intended" or "more fair matches", then as gently as I can, that's kind of on you? In the most recent QnA stream, the devs very publicly admitted the part of the MMR system that doesn't work and have said that they're working on a fix to it. You're right that the implementation of the MMR system has been very flawed, and that it currently doesn't work- but that's because of the matchmaking portion prioritising speed over accuracy, not because a system like this never could work. The part that I really want to hone in on here though is that it's not been radio silent and there has been indication that it's being improved. Whether you believe that or not is up to you, but the one thing you can't claim is that they haven't said anything about it.
4d: If "fair" matches (though based on what I've explained I'd call it more "equal skill matches", something like that) are unfun and undesirable, that's not a point against the MMR system- that problem doesn't go away simply because you get to stomp on some newbies every other match. It's a problem with the core balance of the game, and it is a problem, but it's not fixed by changing the matchmaking system.
In conclusion... I don't think I do agree that the game's on weak legs and that it's been getting worse. The game's actually been improving over the past year or so, even if it stumbles a little here and there.
"In conclusion... I don't think I do agree that the game's on weak legs and that it's been getting worse. The game's actually been improving over the past year or so, even if it stumbles a little here and there."
One comment on your conclusion here:
I agree with you, that the game has improved a lot since it's release, but lately not so much. In other words you could say, the game has had it's peak, and find it hard to disagree with that. The direction the game is moving in is very bad, in my opinion.
-
@jesterkind said:
Interesting read! I have... a lot of notes. I'll tackle them in the order you laid out your points, for consistency...
1: I agree in broad strokes that facecamping and hard tunnelling off hook are not particularly fun and should be addressed- luckily, the devs seem to be wanting to address both of these, so there is light at the end of the tunnel (pun not intended) there. My notes are that the story you used as evidence of the tunnelling problem didn't... seem to contain any tunnelling, since the killer actively left you alone and went off to presumably go do other things between chasing/downing you, and that I think your suggestion regarding hooks would be better suited in a competitor for Dead By Daylight rather than a change to the game itself.
All games have flaws and limitations that they won't ever overcome, and that's just the reality of it. Maybe that idea would make for a better game than DBD is! But, at least in my opinion, making dramatic fundamental changes to your game like that is something to be done very lightly, and not just because there is a flaw that exists. It could work, with very careful tweaking, but it's extremely far away from necessary and I'd rather see what we have honed a little further - even if it's just doing that first before considering dramatic changes to hooks.
2: Harkening back to #1, it is at least a good sign that the developers seem to agree both that perks like BT are too necessary not to be basekit, and that a lot of solo perks can be replaced with SWF communication. I do think you're a little too liberal in what perks you consider to be necessary (DS is nice but not necessary, also both DS and BT are anti-tunnel perks, not anti-camping perks? Minor point though), and there is always going to be room for solo information perks because not everyone can play with friends on comms, but in the broad strokes you're right that the current meta is as entrenched as it is because some perks just alter the game far too much.
I do think a better fix is to make those perks less necessary by altering base gameplay rather than just removing them, or even rather than just nerfing them, but I'm not quite sure if you agree with that or not- bit unclear.
3: So, literally and not as a gotcha- how on earth would they benefit from maliciously making cheating worse? What possible motive could they have to even want to? I don't want to be mean, but this is an extremely silly thing to say.
4: I have a lot to say about this one, so I'm gonna break it up into a couple of subcategories here...
4a: An MMR system is not inherently competitive, and the fact that DBD's system takes a pretty broad and loose view of skill brackets would hint to me that it's not trying to be a competitive one. I suspect that, to use Overwatch as an example arbitrarily, people hear "MMR" and they think of the ranked mode, without realising that Quick Play uses MMR too. It's just a tool to sort players in a matchmaking queue, there's nothing inherently competitive about it- even party games don't want to match people of wildly different skill levels together.
4b: I'm not sure why you think it's some arbitrary executive decision- people complained incessantly about how bad the emblem system was for matchmaking, and rightly so- it was genuinely unfit for purpose. What would you assume the devs would replace it with other than a standard, normal matchmaking system?
4c: If all you see is "working as intended" or "more fair matches", then as gently as I can, that's kind of on you? In the most recent QnA stream, the devs very publicly admitted the part of the MMR system that doesn't work and have said that they're working on a fix to it. You're right that the implementation of the MMR system has been very flawed, and that it currently doesn't work- but that's because of the matchmaking portion prioritising speed over accuracy, not because a system like this never could work. The part that I really want to hone in on here though is that it's not been radio silent and there has been indication that it's being improved. Whether you believe that or not is up to you, but the one thing you can't claim is that they haven't said anything about it.
4d: If "fair" matches (though based on what I've explained I'd call it more "equal skill matches", something like that) are unfun and undesirable, that's not a point against the MMR system- that problem doesn't go away simply because you get to stomp on some newbies every other match. It's a problem with the core balance of the game, and it is a problem, but it's not fixed by changing the matchmaking system.
In conclusion... I don't think I do agree that the game's on weak legs and that it's been getting worse. The game's actually been improving over the past year or so, even if it stumbles a little here and there.
Hey, thanks for reading my post and writing such an extensive reply! That made my day.
I think you seem to understand what I'm trying to say here generally, but my choice of words and specific examples might have made my points a little unclear.
#1. First of all I wouldn't say getting facecamped "is not particular fun", it's not fun at all, it's borderline not even gameplay. As I said at the very beginning of my post, I don't think that any of my suggestion would ever be considered by the devs. They are just meant as a way of sharing how I feel the game is lacking in these aspects and how I think this game can be improved on. My hook state suggestion is something I came up with on the spot as I was writing the post, not even remotely fleshed out, but one way I think could solve those issues. You're totally right, such dramatic changes should only ever be introduced lightly and very carefully, but I think such dramatic changes are necessary for the health of the game.
Also the story I was telling was more about the concept of having death be part of the survivor experience, more than an example of Tunneling.
#2. I'm pretty much aligned with what you have said here, so nothing much to add there.
#3. Here I was just basically saying, cheaters are something that I shouldn't even have to mention. It's a huge problem in my opinion, and that one example of giving the game out for free on the EGS is just a hilariously funny mistake to me. I don't think there was malicious intent here, but it's just strangely counterproductive.
#4. About the SBMM, I did acknowledge how it doesn't only make a game potentially more competitive, but can also be used to improve matchmaking in general, just like you said they do in overwatch. SBMM =/= ranked mode, but it definitely didn't improve on the matchmaking experience. Also when I was saying how I feel the SBMM system must have been some decision from higher up, I just can't imagine why they implemented it so poorly and against all feedback, if it wasn't some kind of forced-on project. I do remember that it was requested by a lot of people, but they could have just said:"No, that's not gonna work well with our game." I mean, I really don't want to start a conspiracy theory about this, it's not that big of a deal.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
I mean hooking survivors is the main way to kill them??
Shouldn't it be "Killing Survivors is the primary goal" then?
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2798304#Comment_2798304
It is trustworthy, hooks are among the highest scoring bloodpoint events. But that’s not the only way to kill survivors as I’m sure you already know.
that's not what this tooltip is referring to though, it clearly states that HOOKING is the primary goal of the killer, not killing them or stopping them from escaping necessarily. Hooking is the killer's goal, but the SBMM system doesn't care about the killers goal, but instead makes up it's own rules.
-
@jesterkind said:
Yeah, that tooltip is referring to the primary way that you have to complete your goal, which is to kill survivors. I believe the tutorial clarifies this a lot more clearly, though it's been a little while since I went and did it.
Not the most clearly worded loading tip ever, but the killer's primary goal is and always has been to kill the survivors, and hooking is being used as shorthand here since it's the primary method of doing it.
Yes exactly.
-
Real and true
-
@dugman said:
You’re reading too much into a loading screen blurb. The goal is to kill the survivors. Usually hooks are how it’s done but that’s not the only method obviously.
Alright, I thought in-game advice created by the devs would be a trustworthy source...
-
don't tell em...
-
If you look at how DS was originally working, you could say they pulled a 180 on that perk, from literally attacking the killer and denying a regular hook, to making it only intended to be used as a defense against tunneling with a seemingly unintentional byproduct of being still powerful when used offensively.
-
@Alionis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2788449#Comment_2788449
Does that make them fair though? Because I keep hearing that argument, that they are fair, because they have counters. Obviously, in a scenario like mine, they do not, because there's always yet another second chance perk that will negate an unsuccessful use of the previous one.
I think they create more unfair scenarios than fair ones, but they seem necessary since without them there would be equally unfair scenarios.
-
It's called "second chance" for a reason, you're not supposed to "counter" these perks