SamuraiPipotchi
SamuraiPipotchi
About
- Username
- SamuraiPipotchi
- Joined
- Visits
- 112
- Last Active
Comments
-
@immortalls96 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1167655#Comment_1167655
Not when the latter can get done before a killer is physically capable of crossing the map..your blatantly comparing character limitations to player decision making and I think you know that as well..anything else?
I mean, I've personally never had an issue patrolling gens and have never had any instances where I wasn't able to check the furthest gens within 80 seconds.
So as I see it, it's a player limitation, not a character limitation.
-
@ThisGuuy83 said:
Don't gens already go fast enough? I mean, a good team can knock them out in under 5 mins, and your complaining that you can't do them faster? That nerf was WELL needed, and some...
In no way did I complain about gens being too slow to complete nor did I suggest that I've ever had any issue with the gen completion time. I've even recommended slowing down the time to complete gens in the past and in this very thread said that I agreed the toolboxes needed a nerf.
This was very clearly a post asking about the toolbox change and what impact it has on the game. If you don't have anything valuable to add, please take your mindless toxicity elsewhere.
-
It depends what you consider a win.
You did win, but you technically failed to prove you were a better killer than they were survivors, so your rank didn't go up.
Which admittedly, is really difficult to do when the survivors refuse to play properly.
-
@immortalls96 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1167047#Comment_1167047
Because if that's true they were horrendous players
Doesn't that logic also apply to the killer though?
If the players die that fast, it's the survivors fault.
If the killer fails to identify the probable locations of 3 of the survivors and allows them to easily pop 3 gens that fast, that's the killers fault.
-
You're right. You are cringy. Bye!
-
@Raccoon said:
It definitely sucks being wrong all the time, I must admit.
*reads wall of text*
*ignores wall of topics and videos highlighting examples of DS "working as intended/anti-tunnel (that's sarcasm)" on this very forum*
The most popular discussion regarding the perk seems to be:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/84747/youre-mad-at-decisive-for-the-wrong-reason
Why not bring your points to a broader audience and see how they react instead of just 'arguing (verbally putting down)' someone that has that "special skill where [they] manage to be wrong several times in single sentences?"
I'm sure the results will surprise you.
I'm arguing your specific point. That's why I'm not presenting it to "a broader audience". Plus it's an open thread, so everyone can join in if they want. If you want to take your point to it's own thread, feel free to do so.
Arguing doesn't mean verbally putting someone down, for the record. It means countering one point with another. I'm ridiculing you, if that's what you meant.
I'm also ridiculing you specifically because you only responded in the interest of putting me down, while providing no evidence or logical reasoning in your attempt to do so. Your argument effectively boiled down to saying there are reasons that I'm wrong, but you're not willing to provide any. After me goading you, you then provided one poorly presented argument as evidence that there are infinite good ones. Sort of a bad tactic, if you ask me. But to sum it up, I'm ridiculing you because you pretend you know better, but haven't shown the tact or intelligence to back it up.
On the note of not providing logical evidence: 1. Grammar and sticking to perspective are important. You (pressumably) accidentally said that you ignored a wall of evidence. 2. You say the evidence is there, but haven't personally provided any of it. 3. Of all the people you could have quoted, you chose one that agrees with me. 4. After reading that whole thread, there is no solid evidence for your point. Every possible response that could serve to help you also has a strong counter-argument that serves to help me. 5. Many of the points that serve your argument are just as vague and without hypothesis or evidence as yours was. 6. Hey, you commented on this post! You counted how many people disagreed with you, then dismissed their opinion with no evidence or valid arguments. And here you are, 20 days later, still doing what you do... really poorly. "The person you are quoting is best ignored" just like everyone else you disagree with, I imagine?
You even said "The actual bottom line is that you're refuting the anecdotal evidence of other posters with your own anecdotal evidence" which is hilarious, because it completely invalidates the linked thread as anecdotal AND you can't even provide anecdotal evidence to properly support your point.
-
@Raccoon said:
*Squadette 3 gets unhooked*
*chase and hook another Squadette*
*walk across map and grab healthy Squadette from generator*
*eat DS for tunneling*
Sorry I'm unable to provide you with the infinite scenarios that can occur leading to a killer eating DS with its gargantuan 60s timer :(
You seem to have this special skill where you manage to be wrong several times in single sentences.
Considering you said infinite possibilities, more than one would be expected. And clarifying that you expect the killer to screw up multiple times instead of just once didn't change that the killer screwing up is out of your control.
Let's give the best chances for your optimal use case. 4 players, swf, all look the same. Killer initiates a chase, one of them unhooks you.
For your optimal use case, the killer has to not tunnel you. If he does, your case fails and the optimal use becomes as an anti-tunneling perk (Hey! That's what I said earlier!)
If he ends the chase too late, he won't make it to you within the 60 seconds, and your case fails.
But if he ends the chase too soon, you won't have time to safely heal and reach an objective, meaning your case fails.
He then has to precisely target the same objective you have gone to. If he doesn't, your case fails.
He also can't get distracted by your team, can't run into any obstacles and can't be too far away from your objective, or the timer will run out and your case will fail.
And finally, if he somehow manages to do all of that but doesn't pull you, your case fails.
It should also be noted that if you pick a high priority objective, a killer would be unlikely to pull you on purpose. And if you pick a low priority objective, a killer would be unlikely to target you before the 60 second timer runs out. Meaning that you have no way to increase your odds of executing this terrible play that you've concocted.
An optimal use case requires you to be able to execute that use case reliably. If you can't, then it's not optimisation, it's luck. A more optimal play than your plan to get caught after a perfect series of luck would be to just not get caught, which as it turns out, Decisive doesn't help with that.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/701024#Comment_701024
You can work on a gen/totem/gate for the next 60s for free without fear, DS'ing the killer if they grab you (literally the same as "the locker issue"). After the killer gets hit with DS, the survivor can opt to escape/make distance or put an additional 5s into whatever objective you pulled them off.
The killer can just hit you and leave you on the ground instead of pulling you. Then you're back at square one, hoping the killer screws up. Putting yourself in a vulnerable position without healing first just because the killer might make a mistake is usually a terrible idea and far from an optimal use case.
One example of playing poorly isn't what I was expecting when you described it as achieving "infinitely more".
-
@Raccoon said:
"Decisive only counters tunneling. "
Current Decisive does INFINITELY more than that if used optimally.
I like how vague you were with your lack of examples. You can use it to stall killers or take a protection hit I guess. But that could easily get you hooked, killed or used as bait, which is hardly optimal and far from an infinite range of possibilities.
Actually, your suggestion had a subtext of being able to control how you use Decisive, so tell me - how do you use Decisive optimally? Cause as I remember it, the survivor doesn't even get to decide whether or not it activates.
I see Decisive Strike used by about half the players I come across. But on that same note, I see Decisive actually activate less than once every 5 games. Decisive is a perk that relies entirely on the killers choices, so how does a survivor find a more optimal use case than "I hope the killer screws up"?
-
@Toxicboii said:
No.
Mettle change is essentially Borrowed time in every aspect with deep wounds removed.
Ds change is essentially a weaker revert to the old ds.
So no. What we actually need is for ds to instantly deactivate in lockers, and for Mettle to return to previous state, but with more hits required to activate, or have it's stacks given through all altruism acts (healing, safe unhooks, protection hits).
I'm not too bothered about the current state of decisive. It would only NEED changing if another perk became too alike to it again (like my new concept for mettle).
Adding more tokens to the old Mettle wouldn't be for the best because it means it would activate later in the match. It wouldn't make a difference overall, it would just be more aggravating to deal with it late game.
Changing it to all altruistic actions might work, but I have a few concerns with that. Ideally with second-chance perks you only want it to trigger in order to counter specific scenarios. For instance, Decisive only counters tunneling. For Mettle, it was to give inexperienced players a chance against stronger killers. My concern with using altruistic actions for the tokens is that it would be far too easy for experienced survivors to use against inexperienced killers and would be useless for inexperienced survivors. If it was an experienced survivor against an experienced killer, it would be balanced, but rank reset happens too often for that to be the primary case.
If we're talking about keeping Mettle as it is, then what I'd personally do is make it so that you only need to take one protection hit to activate it but it deactivates when you heal and permanently deactivates if you get hit while it's active. It would work as a second chance perk, but very specifically only if you were still injured as a result of putting yourself in the firing line - could be a great anti-camping/tunneling perk and would be more viable at higher ranks than lower ones. Only issue is I don't know how the level 1/2/3 perks would vary without complicating the perk.
-
@TAG said:
In your effort to make MoM not like DS, you made it an even stronger Borrowed Time, which is already a strong perk.
Plus, with your Decisive Strike change, you're enabling SWF to almost guarantee flashlight saves.
Not good ideas IMO.
But Decisive is already a stronger version of Borrowed time - that stacks with borrowed time.
Mettle can only trigger once and only for yourself. My concept means it would be completely wasted if played alongside borrowed time. Considering Desicive is basically the exact same thing with 2 uses, a timer that's twice as long and a 10 second delay after pickup and stun is involved AND stackable with borrowed time, I don't see how my version of Mettle could possibly be stronger than what we already have, especially since Mettle doesn't work in lockers.
Plus Decisive is already a guaranteed stun and save - twice - which can be triggered while your team is doing a gen on the opposite side of the map. My concept means a survivor would have to anticipate you going down and position themselves ahead of the killer thus wasting time not doing gens. But survivors already do that for a guaranteed flashlight save, so using Decisive in that scenario could be wasteful. Also if you were carrying a survivor and saw another survivor running up to you with a flashlight, you could quite easily just anticipate Decisive and look down to counter the flash light. Forcing players to coordinate or plan ahead in order to gain the best value out of a perk isn't always a bad thing.
My concepts mean Mettle would become worth using and Decisive would become less reliable, but still worth using.
-
@michaelrandom27 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/697435#Comment_697435
This. Autodidact is a very weak perk and it doesn't need a nerf and a buff, just a buff.
If you buff it, it will need a nerf. Or more accurately, it probably needs a rework.
I've seen it when it's actually in action, and it's insanely strong.
The key issue isn't strength, it's the use case. Most people use self care or a med kit and you typically only get 1 skill check if you fully heal a person. That means that getting the necessary skill checks to make it work is unlikely.
It's alike to Mettle in that it's a really strong perk, but doesn't fit in with how the game is played.
-
@Mochan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/697532#Comment_697532
"I teabagged him" "I played well."
I love it. :)
I really want to believe they're joking, because that would be an amazing sarcastic response.
But the last few sentences make me worry that they genuinely think they're good at the game.
-
@avilmask said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/697484#Comment_697484
Wait, you jumped to my post not even getting familiar with the topic? You can't down survivor in a locker, you have to "pick him up".
Yes, I'm aware. It was a response, but I screwed up the quote.
-
I don't get why people still think DS is strong.
Once you're out of the low ranks, it's useless 19/20 games.
If you're still in the low ranks, it solves the tunneling issue for new players. It makes the game more reasonable for newer survivors and punishes killers for being #########
-
@avilmask said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/694384#Comment_694384
Responding to all those guys that think the choice is just that simple:
- killer goes away by 16 meters, somebody unhooks a person, but FOV is blocked by a wall. Killer comes here and sees two tracks, leading different directions. He chooses one, but 10 seconds later he realizes that it's an unhooked guy, so it's wasted time, and he just have to let him go, right?
- killer immediately sees two guys, but they both have identical skins. They run different directions. Killer chooses one, and this guy hides in a locker. So, is it unhooked guy or not?
- killer can't immediately see anybody, and after short search finds only unhooked person. He just should let him go because he hid in a locker right in front of him, right?
Only right play here in any case is get survivor out of the locker and let him use DS, because he may use it next time closer to the end of the game. It's a lose-lose, but removing DS is better than just letting survivor go AND keep DS.
That's where subject comes in, where a simple action turns situation into a triple lose one for a killer (let him go, eat DS, wait).
If you accidentally chase the guy who was on the hook, down him and leave him as bait for the next minute.
It'll either attract other survivors or force them to burn unbreakable.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/430671#Comment_430671
The same argument has been made many times, yet business is booming.
Granted, challenging camping could earn them the equivalent of loose change - you're not wrong. But on the other hand, it could be what nets them thousands over time.
I have two groups I typically play with. One the groups is about 8 people - One of them recommended the game to us. The other of which is about 6 people, who I recommended the game to. Between us, we've spent over £800 on the game so far.
If that one initial person didn't like the game because he got camped, they would have lost at least £800 in sales.
-
I don't know what you mean by boosting my opinion's value level, but camping is more common and problematic at lower ranks.
People who are invested in the game typically don't have much issue with camping, but the reason camping is an issue is actually related to new survivors or people who simply don't have as much time to play the game. Businesses require those players to want to keep playing, but when those survivors constantly de-pip or struggle to even play because of the killers camping (especially with long lobby times), it quickly encourages them to give up and invest their time elsewhere. Those people also aren't typically invested enough in the game to make a forum account.
Camping isn't just annoying - it's bad for business.
-
@nursewithbamboozle said:
grow up. simple.
Ironically, one of the least mature ways to respond.
Also ironically, I'm an adult that's studied games design.
-
Ultimately, people view camping as an action that should be discouraged. Having said that, the "legitimate approach" reason is why I suggested this approach instesd of a more drastic one. You can still easily get a hit in or a grab on anyone that's unhooking, but it gives the survivors a decent chance to actually get away or initiate a new chase - effectively if you don't feel you can deal with the chase, you're going to have to chase regardless. It doesn't entirely invalidate camping as an approach, but it does discourage abusing camping as an approach.
As for the survivor being behind you thing - my idea is that camping is the actually a logical choice when you're aware of someone's presence nearby, so we should avoid punishment in those scenarios. If a survivor is outside of 20m, they're not nearby. If the killer is consistently not looking in their approximate direction (which is a pretty large radius), they're probably not aware of the survivors' presence. A good killer would have to identify that a SWF player is trying to bait them away from the hook and respond by searching for the hidden survivor.
-
@tt_ivi_99 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/426319#Comment_426319
I cant belive I have to reply to this...
You serious? You are seriously comparing the objective of the game with how you are meant to acomplish that objective? You are the naive...
Yes, killers have to kill, that doesnt mean you can make them play however you want to acomplish their objective.
Do you see any CoD that punishes campers? No, because they cant make people play in a way that they dont like, this is the same.
Also, forcing someone to play in a way that they dont like just because you dont like the way that they play is a very, very fascist ideology, just saying...
Actually, what you're describing is a written fundamental of good games design. The emblem system and even the end game collapse that's just been unveiled are examples of this.
It's on the devs to design the game in such a way that it conforms with the playstyles that they want to see. They can do this either by rewarding good play and encouraging it to happen more often or by punishing and disabling bad play, encouraging people to avoid bad play in future. It can be tricky, because you don't want to strip too much freedom from players, but when a negative opinion is as unanimous as "Camping is bad", steps should be taken to combat the cause of that issue. If that seems unfair, replace the word "camping" for "murder". Not everyone should be given the freedom to do as they please.
Btw, in CoD you can kill the campers.
-
@lewfairbrother said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/424594#Comment_424594
Excellent, clearly that shows this is a good idea and is something the community is tired of.
Thousands of people agreed that slavery, the holocaust, war, etc. were a good idea. Based on your logic, that means they were right?
I'm not against your opinion - camping is a problem.
But stating that people agree with you doesn't mean that you're right or that the idea is good.
-
@Saint_Ukraine said:
If you had read the Q&A post that accompanies the Endgame Collapse post, you would see that most of your questions have already been answered.
The devs posted the Q&A section of the endgame thread a little over 2 hours after this discussion thread was created. Even if the OP read the whole post, they still wouldn't have seen that information.
-
@GraviteaUK said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/414732#Comment_414732
Could you kindly point to which guideline i broke?
Also you ignored the part i wrote about you setting your own precedence but have fun with your white knighting sir!
"This is a thread about the pipping system and the recent patch that altered that system."
"The 2.6.4 patch did not directly alter matchmaking. Even in the topic encompassing everything about the patch, matchmaking would still not be encompassed within the topic/patch. The bug fixes I referred to however, ARE encompassed in the patch."
I did address your comment about setting a precedence. You simply overlooked multiple paragraphs of text. The bug fixes are a part of the 2.6.4 patch and this is a thread about the 2.6.4 patch as a whole, not just the pipping aspect. Matchmaking however, was not a part of the 2.6.4 patch and thus is not relevant to this discussion.
As for the guidelines, they state:
- Please follow the topic of discussion you are participating in. Derailing the discussion will result in closing and offenders might be warned.
It's quite clear that you are more interested in arguing than you are in following the intended topic of discussion.
-
@HazeHound said:
Honest opinion? I would not use any of those perks as survivor. No scratchmarks after unhook... you stiil leave blood pools, making perk basically useless unless paired with adrenaline or your second proposition. The thing is, you can use 2 perk slots much better. Also perk doesnt do its job really. If that was legitemate, safe rescue its not needed. If killer was there, he can just see where you went.
Heal on unhook and broken on hit, this could actually be interesting and have some uses... But its very situational. Keep in mind that m1 killers are less likely to camp, while instadown killers and Plague counter it completely. Also broken is basically death sentence against competent killer unless its Legion or paired with iron will. It is also very hard to explain why perk works like this 'lorewise'.
It has its uses and idea is interesting! But i preffer to not use hook based perks (when i can just not beeing found), kindred beeing exception, because of how good it is.
Edit: I also don't like the consequences this perk would have. Just like with distortion, which is amazing concept and design but... When killer sees noone with bbq and chilli (lockers, distortion) he assumes that survivors are near hook, making poor dude got camped for one sacrifice stage.
Survivors assumimg that hooked guy has this perk will swarm the last hook resulting in killer who failed having more hooks, even 4k instead of 1k with no points. I see this way to often.
That's pretty much what I was thinking with the second perk idea. My whole premise for the perk was basically that it could be amusing or maybe used for challenges. It would probably only actually be useful as a tunneling/camping counter-measure. I did forget to consider the lore though.
As for the serious idea, I don't think the blood pools would be a huge issue. A lot of brown - purple ranked killers tend to overlook blood far too often and the blood would be quite spread out while sprinting. Having said that, Bloodhound and Sloppy Butcher would be obvious counters.
The perk idea does clearly have a lower value at the higher ranks and against certain playstyles, but I don't think it's ok for some perks to be a bit niche or situational. Alternatively though, it could be made so that blood pools are significantly less visible (or invisible) while the perk is active as well as maybe extending the time that the perk is active for. I also considered suggesting a sprint burst effect, but I figured that you could just use the sprint burst perk to achieve that.
-
@GraviteaUK said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/413414#Comment_413414
Im sorry but where in the title did you put Patch 2.6.4 pipping is awesome? you didn't.
You simply stated THE PATCH IS AWESOME which is fine but that also encompass everything.
You even set your own precedence by talking about bug fixes not related to the pipping system.
So next time instead of trying to be clever by white kniting BVHR and going "This thread has no negativity reeee safe space please"
Try adding context.
The "context" you are looking for, regarding pipping, is literally in the first sentence of the thread.
The 2.6.4 patch did not directly alter matchmaking. Even in the topic encompassing everything about the patch, matchmaking would still not be encompassed within the topic/patch. The bug fixes I referred to however, ARE encompassed in the patch.
As for your "white knight" claim, I dislike safe spaces. I think negativity is necessary in logical discussion. However your unwarranted pessimism had no relevancy to the topic of the discussion, which is illogical, unappreciated and against community guidelines.
Addition: Whether 2.6.4 is a sub patch or a major patch is a moot point as it is the focus of this thread regardless of its size. If you wish to talk about the 2.6.0 patch or the 2.6 series of patches in general, please feel free to start your own thread.
-
@Maximus7 said:
Why are survivors allowed to choose a map via map offering anyways? Isn't the point of the game to be dropped in a KILLER's realm and try to escape THEIR realm?
Also, instead of a map ban feature can we please just rework maps to not be complete garbage balance-wise? The only decent map left for killers in general is Father Campbell's, and even then one BL can change that.
They're providing offerings to the entity to sway it's decisions in their favour. It fits with the lore, it's a good gameplay mechanic and the survivors are still dropped into one of the killers realms regardless. Plus most of the realms have multiple maps, so it's not like it's a fine tuned choice.
Besides, killers have just as much influence over maps. If you want a certain map, use an offering.
-
@Mr_Myers said:
I got worried that this would be another "You start healthy" post. Thank you for a unique idea
I actually like that idea (No where near as good as the exhaustion one, admittedly)
Having said that, Mettle of Man is in the game now, so the idea of starting healthy may be less balanced than it was previously. Would be interesting to see it tested though.
-
Slowly replenishing exhaustion would actually be a pretty sweet idea. It would provide the ability to prolong or escape chases and avoid being hit, which is necessary with No Mither.
But because you can only take one hit per chase it doesn't upset the balance of the game.
-
@GraviteaUK said:
Matchmaking is still broken as #########.
Getting a campy rank 2 Nurse main at rank 10 is not exactly fun.
This is a thread about the pipping system and the recent patch that altered that system. This thread has nothing to do with the matchmaking and I personally have no issues with the matchmaking.
Not all feedback has to involve negativity. If you want to complain about matchmaking, go find a more relevant thread.
-
I figure you already tried it and found your answer :P
But if anyone else is wondering, someone did a rough test using multiple 7.1 surround headphones, a few simulated surround sound applications and regular stereo. They found that it doesn't really affect performance, but some people had clear preferences for which they liked the most.
Basically, try it out, see how you feel and then use whichever you prefer using.
-
For those trying to invalidate the posters opinion with "your rank isn't high enough":
Rank doesn't define skill and it doesn't define the validity of an opinion.
Green ranks make up the majority of the player base.
Balance in the red ranks is a somewhat moot point. The monstrously large skill difference between the worlds best Rank 1 and the worlds worst Rank 1 isn't represented in any way. Most of the R1 survivors I go up against seem weak, but some of them insanely outmatch me. If it feels unbalanced, the enemy is probably just on a different skill level to you.
And if none of that is good enough for you, I - a person who has achieved Rank 1 - 100% agree with the poster. His opinion should now be treated as a Rank 1 player's opinion.
-
They'll probably involve the exhaustion status effect.
It's not likely, but maybe switch out the aura reading for the broken status effect.
-
It's suuuuuuper easy to pip as killer. Every match is Double Pip. Why am I even writing here? Oh right, because pipping is also bloody stupidly hard.
How can pipping be super easy and stupidly hard?
-
@Blueberry said:
The perk needs a small nerf, not a buff. The perk in its current state is still S tier and extremely strong.
All it needs now is to actually only affect tunnelers, of which it currently does not. If a different survivor gets downed DS should deactivate. The 60 second timer is also too forgiving, it should be 45.
A lot of survivors will for some reason unhook you while they're obviously about to go down, turning you an easy and vulnerable target. That's where the core value of Desicive Strike comes into play.
But if they go down immedietly after unhooking you and it causes DS to deactivate, the killer is then free to tunnel you and the perk becomes useless.
What your suggesting isn't a small nerf, it's a near neutralisation of the perk.
-
I've actually seen the new DS gain quite a bit of value, even against me as the killer (I actively avoid tunneling, for context).
The only buff I can see being fair/worthwhile is if the killer was to be blinded as well as stunned OR if the survivors scratch marks disappeared for the duration of the stun.
-
I don't play legion, so I can't speak much for balance and fun, but I can see a core issue with number 2.
The terror radius part would make it easy to detect where players are. If someones wounded status is depleting and then suddenly it stops, you know that an injured survivor is definitely within the distance of your terror radius. You even know the approximate direction of the survivor.
The 5 second thing would probably be smart though. Could probably do with being added to borrowed time too.
-
Making the perk persist through chases so that it works more like borrowed time would be interesting (20 second timer starts when hit, but the timer freezes during a chase).
That change would make sense, because when the killer is chasing the obsession they're usually too close for the perk to be useful.
I don't think extending how long the timer lasts is a good idea though. Anything that lasts longer than 30 seconds wouldn't provide much additional value because the survivors would adapt their playstyle to ignore the terror radius altogether and just rely on their eyes. It would become less useful and more obtrusive.
-
@wisdom said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/410090#Comment_410090
The aura reading part happens while it is active and you heal to full, regardless of if you have ignored a hit or not. the perk just has to be active
No it doesn't.
Once Mettle of Man is charged, you gain the endurance effect and the perk becomes active. If you're hit while injured the endurance effect vanishes.
If the endurance effect is still present (Mettle hasn't triggered and is still active) when you heal, the perk remains active but your aura isn't revealed.
If the endurance effect has been used (Mettle has been triggered but is still active) healing will cause your aura to be revealed to the killer until it deactivates.
-
@Tru3Lemon said:
the only thing that they need to do its making second objective finding parts for gens etc thats it and thats a balanced
My concern with something like this is players who don't read the patch notes, the possibility of games becoming significantly longer and people who simply don't like the idea, though it would be nice to have a little more variety in the matches.
It also entirely depends on HOW the devs would implement a second objective, and it would definitely need testing beforehand.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I don't think I ever played durring that time but wouldn't competitve people just play stealth until the timer is up?
They could, but it would be a very high risk-reward scenario. They could use the 3 minutes to break totems and identify the killer and their perks, but they would have to worry about things like crows revealing their location and that fact that 0% gen progress would get done during those first 3 minutes. Not doing gens could give the killer a massive advantage and plenty of time to prepare any traps. Plus if one of the 4 players mess up, the killer still gets the momentum that he needs from hooking a player and the gen rush nerf has still done its job.
It would be interesting to see if players did alter their playstyle at all, especially if they started prioritising perk identification at the start. Although I feel like competitive players would mostly do the same things they do now, just a bit slower.
-
@wisdom said:
Yea so I can tell you are probably not trying to say that it triggers multiple times, but it sounded like you were.
thinking about it, you were just referring to the situation in which the survivor takes their 3rd hit while MOM is active but doesn’t trigger MOM (take a 4th hit)
but yea, simply not healing you still have 2 health stages with no drawbacks. Healing would make 3 health stages with massive drawbacks... and you have already gotten your 3 health stages, you just happened to use one of them already.
Ok, you completely lost me for a while, but I'm assuming you're confused because you're talking about AFTER MoM triggers and I'm talking about while it's active, but has not yet triggered.
So we were applying different logic because we were applying it to different cases entirely.
-
It's not a bad idea, but unfortunately people would only use it for the sake of being toxic. Even if being toxic isn't the survivor's intention, I can assure you that that's how most killers would perceive it.
-
Typically, no. But if you're the only survivor alive and they're heavily spamming mori or refusing to hook you while everybody is downed (assuming they clearly know where you are), I'd say that that could be considered a form of griefing.
Basically, it depends on the circumstances.
-
@wisdom said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/409745#Comment_409745
The option to delete the quote isn’t a thing so I guess I’ll just have to edit in a comment.
the argument for the video, which honestly I am not going to watch the entire video, is probably “billy counters it”. Close to right? It didn’t proc off billy?
when would an Individual heal to full health (aside from an adrenaline proc) with mettle of man active?
Oh, boy. You should have watched the (less than a minute long) video. That was the exact opposite of what happened.
Billy dropped the survivor he was carrying because a HEALTHY Meg had Mettle waiting and was able to block him twice. They then both got away. If the Meg was injured and had chosen to not heal, one of them would have felt a sharp pain through their left shoulder.
Besides, why would you choose to not heal? If you heal, you get 3 hits on your next chase. If you don't, you only get 2. If you're exposed, fair enough, but that's the exception, not the rule.
-
@wisdom said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/408738#Comment_408738
Yea it sucks when people don’t bother reading the post before they comment
and you are correct, it is exactly like adrenaline.
except it can be used earlier in the game
except it can be stacked with adrenaline
it by itself isn’t a problem. The fact it can be stacked over multiple similar perks and used in tangent with them is the problem. The cost to the perk that is built inside of it cannot (will not) ever come up because why would anyone ever heal while the perk is active?
so I do appreciate you comparing it to adrenaline, which is often regarded as one of the strongest perks in the game (but you are right not overpowered), and yes the problem isn’t actually with mom itself. It is with the sheer number of second chances and effects like this in the game. There are so many that stack with each other that means winning becomes far more difficult than it needs to be because survivors correct their mistakes for free 3-4 times a game per survivor.
I didn't compare it to Adrenaline and don't think it's similar to Adrenaline. Please don't attribute arguments to me that I didn't make.
Adrenaline is considered strong because of it's possible value, but the truth is that it's often useless (Literally doesn't get used) because of how situational it is. With that in mind, how is stacking a near enough useless perk with Mettle even a remotely overpowered option?
Speaking of Mettle stacking with other perks, the only complaint I've seen with any validity so far is dead hard and very few people have brought that up. Know what would help resolve that though? Removing the speed boost from Mettle. Oh wait, according to you that would make the perk useless.
By the way, stop saying healing with Mettle is pointless. The fourth comment (the video) in this thread literally proves you wrong and you're just invalidating your own opinion. Being able to heal while keeping Mettle active is what makes this a toxic perk. (Having said that, maybe making players broken when Mettle triggers would be an appropriate change).
-
@Frozenscum said:
So much BS about camping.
Wanna know how to stop it? Do the damned gens while killer is hanging around hook. You have 2 minutes of time till survivor dies on hook if it was his first. I can tell you for sure that when killer will see 3 gens popped while he was standing there doing nothing - he will be at different side of map in no time. Facecamping is 100% loss for killer if survivors dont feed him with new bodies trying to rescue camped teammate.
Yes, you can probably lose your second hook, but killer will lose the game and rank.
And if killer is moronic enough to keep camping after 3 gens pops - do rest 2 and get out of there. It gonna force killer not to camp in next games and make it more healthy. Yes, its probably not fun to be camped after 1 chase and hook, but as much as you let killers get new bodies from that strategy - they will continue to do it.
Actually, because of how survivor ranking works, if you did that all survivors would also risk losing a pip.
Gens wouldn't get regressed, so without blowing them constantly you can't get much lightbringer score (unless your teammates aren't doing anything).
And you would lose your benevolent emblem entirely because you lose score when people don't get unhooked.
You also wouldn't get many chaser points, because the killer wouldn't be chasing you or anywhere near you for the majority of the match.
Pressuming you survive, you would likely end the match with just enough points to maintain your rank at most.
-
@Peanits said:
This was actually tested quite a while ago. The issue is that it could be abused by people who rush the hook or by people who intentionally sprint over to the hook when they get chased. If the killer tries to prevent them from unhooking each other right in front of them, the timer stops. While it does punish someone for camping, it also punishes people who don't camp.
One thing I'd be interested in seeing tested would be the killer getting a speed nerf if he's too close to the hooked survivor for too long.
The speed nerf would dissipate over 3 - 5 seconds after a chase started or if they left the radius of the hook.
-
@Bongbingbing said:
It's a Passive insta heal with a speed boost that happens automatically when you should be going down, It's incredibly OP.
I don't understand how anyone could think otherwise unless they are not familiar with the game.
Read the original post before commenting please. I said removing the speed boost would improve the balance.
Also I think otherwise because I've been intricately studying games design for >10 years and playing DBD for... I think 2½ years. I think otherwise because I'm basing my opinion on rational thought and multiple perspectives as opposed to personal frustration.
The perk is poorly designed because it annoys people. Not because its overpowered. It's literally just Adrenaline by your description.
-
Honestly, I don't think the old Desicive Strike was overpowered either. I much prefer the new DS and if the old DS was paired with Mettle... yikes.
People may ask "Why does everyone think it's overpowered then?" to which I say: most people are bad at games design. They see something they don't like and become the boy who cried "Overpowered" because they don't understand the intricacies of games design.
The reason killers don't like these perks isn't because of their strength, it's because they're annoying and poor games design. It's frustrating to win a chase and then feel like your reward was snatched from you. Mettle isn't overpowered. It's just annoying.