Sixnno
Sixnno
About
- Username
- Sixnno
- Joined
- Visits
- 71
- Last Active
Comments
-
@YaiPa said:
Despite maps are the biggest problem atm in DbD, you shouldn't take care of the statistics, those numbers they threw at us are completely worthless, lacking and also badly acquired. Those numbers caused more damage than other.
I mean, even without the statistics I seen everyone grown as the indoor maps being extremely killer favored. The stats just backed that up now.
-
I had an addiction to urban. Now I have an addition to fixated.
Gotta move fast.
-
@goat10em said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/118429/they-balance-for-a-50-50-kill-survive-ratio
Wait....so the 50/50 balance thing actually came from bhvr? I just assumed it was something people who've never played killer said.
Yes, it actually came from BHVR during their streams a few years ago. Their goal is 2 kills / 2 escapes on average. So some games might be 4k, most might be 2/2, others 0k. If it averages to 2/2 then they are happy.
@MegHasCuteFeet said:
What does "2 kills" even mean? How many hooks should that be?
Do I sacrifice one and camp the other to death?
Do I hook 10 times and let the other survivors barely get away?
Do I hook 5 times and get two kills?
They don't adress how much effort the killer has to make.
Kills means kills. It means at the end of the game, you see 2 skulls and 2 doors.
What it takes to get to that average is up for debate.
-
@DeadArsenal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/983009#Comment_983009
You're obviously not even listening to what I'm telling you. It's a failure by degrees. If you fail to kill half of the survivors then you've half failed. Since you immediately restructure my argument for me to suit your own preconceptions it sounds like you see and hear whatever you want to hear in order to confirm your own intrinsic bias. If SWF have a fair chance to all escape then Killer should have a fair chance to kill them all. Fair's fair. Half's half.
You're not understanding the actual goal of the game.
You say that if two people escape, you half failed. That's not true. You are exactly the type of person I made this thread about.
The goal of the game is not to kill the survivors. That is not the win state of the killer. The killer's win state in to pip. Which at minimum requires 2 kills in red ranks if you do well everywhere else. You pip and thus succeed, or you don't.
Edit: okay yeah you can tie / draw if you safety. It isn't a fail, but not a success.
-
@AntiJelly said:
Killers don't want 3-4 kills a match, they want a fair match. When you lose, it doesn't feel deserved. Even winning sometimes it doesn't feel deserved. There's too many broken and unfair mechanics.
(Also dev stats are completely meaningless. They use a tiny test-group and skew the data.)
Devs don't use tiny test groups for the stats we ask. Usually they use data from the last 3 months of games with no disconnects.
-
That means your other emblems were lacking as well.
It's possible to pip at red ranks with a gold-silver-iridesent-iridesent set of emblems.
Or with a gold-gold-gold-iridesent combo. It's possible to get a gold devote if you hook every survivor once, kill 2, and get 9 hook events.
@DeadArsenal said:
Sorry I really can't even take the idea of a 50/50 ratio as the target seriously at all. Not when I've seen survivors declare "GG EZ" when I killed three of four and the last escaped by hatch. Half of the survivors fail and the killer gets half a failure. Yay, fun. We're having fun! Right? Probably not.
See, you're viewing not killing as a fail. It isn't. I mean you can play like that but it isn't a fail. You are also letting survivors get under your skin despite getting 3 of them.
It sounds like you are the type of person I made this thread about. That there needs to be better communication to the killer side that 2k is not a failing state. It is possible to fail with 2k but if you do, you would most like be lacking in other areas as well.
-
@Hopesfall said:
you mean they balance for a killer depip, in other words
Since the rank update that made ranks harder to get?
Yep, for red ranks. Which is also a flaw they need to fix along with communicating it is okay to let 1-2 survivors go.
Actually it is possible. You can get gold - silver - iridescent - iridescent and pip (13 point to pip).
It's just extremely unlikely.
-
@oxygen said:
That's unfortunate for them, just like survivors that for whatever reason expect to escape before they've actually left the match. This is more of a multiplayer action game with a horror theme than an actual horror game.
One thing's for sure though, if they really want to go for the 50% goal of theirs killer emblems in high ranks need to change to actually work with that goal, even if emblem-cucking elements like instadowns or ... Plague in general are involved.
I 100% agree. One reason why I want an update to see if this is still their goal.
In part because it's a good goal to have. Even with their flaw that they need to communicate it more effectively in game.
That and red rank emblems like you said completely counter act those goals. Well the emblems didn't untill they made it harder and harder to rank up.
-
@JKastle said:
Also perception and reality are two different things. It may feel like DS, DH and BT are used in 85% +- 5% of games but it may feels that way but the reality is it may not be.
Because DS or borrow time is in around 85% of games...
Not not 85% of use. Remember there are 4 survivors. You might see a perk I nearly every game on a survivor, but it won't equal 85% use unless 3 survivors have it every game.
Vs 1 killer so it's easier to get to that high of use.
-
@VincentRedfield said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/118429/they-balance-for-a-50-50-kill-survive-ratio
The flip side is 80% of the players have to play survivor for balance. Why would they keep playing just to die every round, which feels worse than seeing people escape? They're players too.
I mean a 2 live/2 die ratio has worked out for them so far. A 45-60% win ratio also helps other games like league and DotA retain players. It also depends on how long a game is as well.
You died in a 10 minute match? It sucks bit you'll just move on.
You died in a tough as nails 30 minute match? Well that really blows.
-
@FriendlyGuerl said:
It would be really good to balance for six hooks instead of two kills.
Would be a good but the issue still exists that they need some way to communicate that to the players in game. Atm it's failing.
@gantes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/976783#Comment_976783
This game is not a bully simulator LUL. It has never been less survivor sided, objectively speaking. You're probably just not that good as killer.
I mean, rights after release the game was heavily survivor sided. Up until sabo got nerfed really. Man clearing the maps of hooks was nice.
-
@Synfralidro said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/976753#Comment_976753
That's literally why i bought the game. To do what i could in game before the inevitable death came raining down on me in the form of the killer and then the entity claiming my soul. I didn't buy the game for the bullying simulator that it has been transformed into.
It was from the live streaming they used to do like almost every month.
And it isn't a 50% survive ratio. Ratios could be screwed. It's just they said they generally want 2 survivors to escape, and 2 survivors to die.
I wish a Dev would actually chime in so we have more information if they are still aiming towards that then 2-3 year old information.
-
@ruler33 said:
heres the thing though they balance for two kills but lets be realistic your never going to pip if you get two kills per game you have to get at least three to pip as killer
I think you can pip in all but red ranks with a 50/50 ratio.
Which is something I agree with. They shouldn't balance around something, and then comment they work towards something when said thing is impossible to do in their own game (pip at red ranks at a 50/50 ratio).
@Ryuhi said:
If you facecamp and turbo tunnel one survivor at a time, you will likely get a 1 or 2 kill game as killer. You will not likely get more, but you will similarly not likely get less. so.... best way to attain balance is to pick two people and just ruin their game?
I can't stand that 50/50 target. Like most stat collecting with this game, it completely ignores a multitude of very important variables.
Agreed
-
@Blight said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/973415#Comment_973415
You do realize this is a multiplayer game right? Both sides have to have the ability to do their jobs, both sides have to have the ability to win not just killers. There is not a single killer below a 55% kill rate on average, going all the way up to 75% average. No multiplayer game on the planet is balanced for one side to dominate every game, no game is balanced to one side winning all the time. If you truly take actual balance into consideration not entitled I have to absolutely dominate every game to feel good, killers are over tuned in the perspective of actual balance not survivors. 50% kill rate is balance, not 100%. If killer could never kill anyone no matter how good they are then killers wouldn't play the game, same goes for survivors. Balance. I'd love to dominate every game of OW or Apex I play but BALANCE makes that impossible. Stop only looking at killer and consider both sides of the equation equally and you too can look at actual balance in a game.
I play red rank survivor and 90% of the time I finish the first gen even with ruin before the killer gets a single down. Why is this? Because of the go to answer killers give for anything a survivor complains about. Do gens, git gud at gens, learn to hit great skill checks forehead, and so on. The state of gens is because survivors listened to the direct advice of killers, no more no less.
If you want a single player experience where you can't lose go play a single player game and leave the multiplayer games to people who understand balance.
I mean, the developers want a 2 die/2 live kill rate. The data they showed were matches with no disconnects, and 4 survivors. So a 50% kill rate is what they are aiming for.
It's also what killers need to understand. They are not developing the game for killers to get a 4k every time. They are shooting for 2 kills.
-
@Lucama said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/974514#Comment_974514
I genuinely think you're overestimating it. Base regression is 1/4 of the rate that a vanilla survivor repairs at, with Ruin that becomes 1/2. And yes, it does potentially affect all the gens on the map, but a killer can really only force 1 survivor off a gen for an extended period of time, 2 if they're unhooking someone. This will only affect bad players who are scared of doing gens and non-coordinated teams who end up with 3 people going for unhooks.
I think you miss understood how a generator regresses.
A regressing generator loses .25 charges a second. This means a 100% gen takes 320 seconds to fully regress to 0%.
Ruin makes it so generators regress at .5 charges a second. This means it will take a full generator 160 seconds to fully regress.
However, if you scare some one off a generator at say... 50%, it won't take 320/160 seconds for it to hit 0. It loses the .25/.5 charges a second. So a 50% generator will take 160/80 seconds to fully regress. You also save time by not having to kick it to start the regressing.
There are two things I can think of that could make this ruin powerful. Since it affects generators and not survivors in anyway, it will remain hidden. Meaning you need to actually look at a gen to see if it is regressing or not. Won't help in red ranks but will punish people in lower ranks.
The second is slug builds. GG indirect buff to Oni. Basically more survivors you have busy not doing gens, the better.
-
Didn't they just nerf balance landing?
A survivor perk loved by many due to the stagger reduction and wasn't as over used as ruin.
-
@arslaN said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/848835#Comment_848835
Then why did you guys buff this perk in the 2.0.0 patch if the reduced stagger was meant to be used once per chase? It wasn't a popular perk before the buff and it's going to be seldom used once again. Seperate cooldown for the passive effect (like 30 seconds) would fix the issues without making the perk a lot worse than before.
The only problematic thing was haddonfield and it seems like you decided to nerf BL instead of actually fixing the map.
If I remember right, they stated the reason they buffed it when they changed everything during a QA was due to it being the least used exhaustion perk. Since you know, it is a highly situational perk based off RNG on top of RNG.
Did you get a map with out a set piece that allows it? Okay... if you didn't, did you get lucky with mounds?
It is 100% possible to get a map like Azarov's Resting place with zero mounds.
-
@Peanits said:
It's the exact same as it was before, only you can't use the stagger reduction multiple times in a chase. If you were using it multiple times in a chase, I'm willing to bet you were taking advantage of setups that were way too strong (e.g. Haddonfield).
In any case, the killer is meant to be stronger than one survivor in a chase, so they won't be getting a stagger.
I mean I was using balance landing for the stagger reduction multiple times in a chase on maps that are NOT Haddonfield.
Such as how the game is nearly unplayable with out Balance landing since it has few pallets, and the only way to really loose the killer is with Balance landing.
I find it funny how the original point of the perk is now basically gone. Before 1.1.0, survivors had no stagger. 1.1.0 added stagger to survivors and then added balanced landing to counter the stagger. Balance was even a weaker sprint than sprint burst at 2 seconds speed boost vs 3.
Heck, please give us a stagger reduction perk then, if balance landing will no longer full-fill it's original role.
-
@EnderloganYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/813356#Comment_813356
you make a good point, but I see it as the cinematics are Vigo and the journal is after all that. if I'm being dumb, i'm sorry but that's just how I perceive it.
That is also incorrect, thanks to the second animation from last year as well as the animation from this year.
Last year we learn that the Alchemist captures a killer and injects serum into them. The animation shows a captured killer who gets the serum.
We also learn that he injected his arm with the serum. This year we learn that he is addicted to the serum and through the journal, the pain throbs through his arm.
In the animation for this year, we see the cloak man grabbing his arm and searching for the flowers.
The cloaked man is the Alchemist. Most likely a future killer. The cloak man is not Vigo.
-
@December_1863 said:
This alchemist is vigo, you could see it in last years' animatics.
That's incorrect.
Read the Journal of the person's last years animatics.
" discovered a hidden laboratory while running away from a monster. Its stocks are uncommonly plentiful. I observed shelves of alkaloids, crates of silver syringes, piles of protective clothes and a journal signed “Vigo”. Its pages are filled with notes on an ancient force that controls the nature of this place—that shapes it. I also noted a few drawings of the growing cankers I've seen on trees."
"Based on Vigo's calculations, tonight is my last chance. I filled a syringe with the last drops of serum and injected it into my arm."
"I looked for Vigo. I shouted his name with no concern for the monsters lurking about. I need to find him… I picture the scene, etching a canvas of wild lines in my mind, focusing on the moon and I know—something is off. I fed the dead rodent under my pillow."
Why would the cloaked guy (the Alchemist) Look for Virgo if he was Virgo, or follow Virgo's instructions.
-
@thesuicidefox said:
@Sixnno said:
It's not my view.
It's the view of many. Especially since killers used to be judge on just kills and still have killing apart of the current pip system.The argument "everyone believes it therefore it is true" is a logical fallacy called ad populum. It's like saying because most of the world believes in some form of God, that it means God must exist.
@Freudentrauma said:
No, that's how it was defined over the time. But the core game system actually defines Kill or Escape as the win/lose conditions for survivors. For killers it's more complicated, because technically you win/lose against individual survivors, but I would say each kill is a win and the core design is about how many you can earn each match.No, the win condition is a pip. PERIOD. Playing for kills or escapes as a win condition is the reason there are so many toxic players in this game that get salty when they "lose".
Killing and escape contributes to a win, but is not the sole definition of a win. You can pip without killing or escaping. Is that a loss? No.
I like how you completely ignore the part were I state that: that was how the game used to be scored. a Killer needed to get kills to pip and due to that a lot of players (even after the change the emblem system) still go off that method for win or lose.
You also ignore the part were I state** how people play a killer in this game to KILL.**
Legion might win, but he doesn't win by killing. Thus for a lot of people he is a bad killer since he doesn't actually KILL HIS TARGETS.
@thesuicidefox said:
@Freudentrauma said:
I'm talking to the core game mechanics of the game. If you would prototype DbD and strip it down to it's base mechanics, there wouldn't be any point system. The core game defines the win and lose condition. The pip system is technically just another monthly grind which might be part of the entire game, but not to it's core and it's general feel.If we go by that logic, then you only win at Chess by taking out more pieces than your opponent. You win at football (American) by gaining more yards than your opponent. You win at baseball by hitting the ball more than your opponent.
Game mechanics do not define a win. They are contributory to but not mandatory for a win. Escaping was never a victory condition. Killing was only a victory condition during victory cube. TODAY RIGHT NOW, pips are the victory conditions. That's all that matters.
Now that's a lie.
Game mechanics do define a win in chess and american football.
The core game mechanics of chess is to move pieces to the other side and to take their King. All other mechanics support this in that.
In foot ball the rules are all built around the main win mechanic as well: to get to the scoring zone.
Dbdl's win mechanics are not built around the main mechanics of the game. Due to the point were people complained so much that they have had to re-write the "win" condition 3 separate times for killers and twice for survivors. Dbdl's win is not a zero-sum game. Unlike those examples you gave above, 3 every one can 'win' in dbdl currently.
Before DBDL had a win system that supported it's core mechanics. the core mechanics of the game, as a killer is to kill the survivors. The survivor's core mechanics is to hide and do the gens and then escape. The current win system does not support the core mechanics, but does support a lot of secondary mechanics which is what a lot of the players wanted.
Finally I'll leave off with this:
If people were happy with winning with Legion, there would be no complaints right now since it's fairly easy to actually win as Legion. Instead we have a large number of complaint threads both here, reddit, and steam about how weak he is as a KILLER.
-
It's not my view.thesuicidefox said:@Sixnno said:
Some people view killing as the killers objective. Legion gets low kills and thus doesn't win for a majority of people that hold that view.Your "view" of winning is irrelevant. Otherwise anything could be a "win".
Pips are the only way the game defines a win.
It's the view of many. Especially since killers used to be judge on just kills and still have killing apart of the current pip system.
People play killer to KILL.
Legion might pip, but he is very infective at KILLING.
It doesn't matter if pip means win of the player FEELS like they lost even in the case of winning.
It doesn't matter if players can easily win as legion by the current game standards if a lot of players FEEL it's a lost and un-fun. -
I mean kind of.thesuicidefox said:@Sixnno said:
Great killer at pipping and ranking up.If you count ranking up as winning, then legion is one of the best killers.
Ranking up is literally the only metric of a "win" in this game. SMH
Some people view killing as the killers objective. Legion gets low kills and thus doesn't win for a majority of people that hold that view.
-
Great killer at pipping and ranking up.
If you count ranking up as winning, then legion is one of the best killers.