Rikashi
Rikashi
About
- Username
- Rikashi
- Joined
- Visits
- 1
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
I swear, I have NEVER seen a gaming community that whiny like the DBD Community. Maybe the Devs should remove the Rift and Archives alltogether, because apparently DBD players just want to have their standard games all the time without any variation what you can do or achieve.
First of all, you dont need to do ANY of the Archive Challenges. If you think they are unfun - ignore them. Then you also dont need to cry about them.
Second, they are not meant to be done in one game (or in the first game you play with this challenges active). I mean, what do you expect how many games you will need to get 20 Gold Emblems? With 4 Emblems per game? 20:4=5. This is the minimum, you got the MInimum. Cool.
15 Unhooks will come eventually. You can ######### over games to get those done, but you have time. If they would be done so fast, it would be like the Level 1-Challenges: You finish them in a few hours and then you are left with 12 days of waiting. The Level 2-Challenges are all reasonable and not really difficult.
So, just play, ffs. Dont care that much about the challenges, two weeks until the next Level opens, around 50 days until the Rift closes. More than enough time to make it enjoyable instead of sweating and thinking this has to be done ASAP.
And yet they make challenges that require them to be done in one game they make challenges that for the sake of speed promote bad gameplay doesn't matter if it's optional they know the entire player base is going to at least try to do them as it gives free stuff making challenges that are insanely rng is only there to increase play time as well as promoted playing in a way that can ruin matches which there's already plenty of people that play like that
-
The game supports face camping as a valid tactic which you can punish via doing gens borrowed time (unless vs leatherbutt or sweaterboy) other reasons fall to the survivor being toxic or the killer just felt like it plenty of killers don't fc if u get camped waste their time and move on it's a game if you DC on hook from that you give the killer a freebie and you deserve a ban hammer for dcing at all but this ge rarely DC bans so w/e
-
@jakesotto said:
I had this random idea and I wanted to just hear the communities opinion and to be open minded to each others points of view on it.
What if we limited SWF to 2 players per group and left SWFs with 4 players to a kill your friends. It seems to me that a lot of balance problems with the game revolve around 4 top tier survivors going against a single killer because survivors have such a high skill cap, aswell as the amount of communication survivors have with one another.
For example, if in a 4 man survive with friends one person is using object of obsession and communicates where the killer is at all times then its 4 people constantly knowing where they are while the killer can only see one of them. This level of communication gives a big edge.
In my own personal experience as queueing in a SWF with just me and one of my friends who are decent players at the game I've felt like the games were more fun and balanced. (We also don't communicate with mics). We are both red ranks. I could tell the killers had more fun playing against a balanced team and we all got an equal amount of points.
To conclude I also think if this change were made it would make sense to balance other aspects aswell to adapt to this dynamic, considering it essentially puts a skill cap on a survivor team.
I dont feel insanely biased about this being implemented I was just curious how other people feel and wanted to put my personal experience out there.
Wow the same thing that's in several threads won't happen the game would die