T2K
T2K
About
- Username
- T2K
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,584
- Last Active
Comments
-
My games were balanced. I put on the most sweaty shhh on my killers and had good games. I also got sweaty opponents, so it worked like intented. Got 4ks, 4 man escapes and everything inbetween. Thats totally what I hoped for regarding my playtime, rank, playstyle.
Ofc if I want to have chill ez games all of a sudden, I cant expect to not get crushed at high mmr.
So for me its perfectly fine atm.
-
@imakoolguy4 said:
For the lowest picked killers ex: nurse and trickster I only had around 2 matches with each so their data might be a little off
What are you talking about it could be off. You put big pictures of the killers into a graph. thats like the most inacurate thing to to do :D
Its nice for a personal overview and tracking of your matches. but thats it.
-
Didnt they link together a nea outfit that was never linked to beginwith?
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2284923#Comment_2284923
Because survivors want the game to be even easier for them.
I think most of the people dont understand that you can balance a game for high levels without destroying low levels
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2284932#Comment_2284932
The 1v1 should not be ignored tho.
But, other than that, going against Oracle also does not have any value either. You wont encounter those teams in Public Matches.
I do think it has a value. Ofc you barely encounter these kind of groups, but same goes for these kind of killer players. It all waters down from the highest skill level. You can clearly see just by watching different streamers how they dominate at high ranks. Doesnt matter if they play surv or killer. So I dont understand how the videos dont have any meaning for figuring out the problems at high levels of the game.
-
In my understanding of the current dbd version its sort of:
Survivor > Killer
If you guys always try to get skill involved it all gets messed up. In fundamentals, the survivor side has a lot higher possibility to escape the trial than the killer has to kill all survivors.
I would recommend to play a custom game without any perks, items and addons to see the core game. Then one by one add things to see how busted and unbalanced it can get :D
-
@Steah said:
I don't want it nerfed per say, i like what it does now but it just kinda invalidates stealth killers, GF especially.
I still want it to be good but, and if they do make it so it doesnt work vs stealth they should give it something in return, but it makes playing some killers feel kinda pointless. 1 perk countering my who ability seems dumb.
Any idea's on what could be done?
I have an idea. Dont walk to survivors at a gen while straight looking in that direction. Ez fix
Edit: if you mean it regarding the power to stalk, its still fine imo. Not everyone uses SC and although you may not have the advantage of being unspotted while stalking, you still can get your stalk off. Its not like they know exactly where you are.
-
If its only me who comes to your rescue or if you are close to dead and the other mates are unable to get you, I farm you in hope you have DS or unbrekable.
Oh and also if I feel like it. Its hiliarious :D
-
I think bubba is fine in core mechanic. What really stings me is his braindead playstyle. Equipping bamboozle and simply chase suvrs in straight line to a pallet, chainsaw pallet, rinse and repeat till down. Every greed is punished by insta down.
I think he would need some tweak to have a more fun playstyle.
-
@Jarol said:
Vera, I know it's fun to play as Spirit as a killer and maybe a headache as a survivor, but I've seen that a lot of people have talked about her, what changes they suggest and why, let's be honest, her power is broken, I've been testing it. with the most OP addons I have and certainly no one escaped from me. Does the spirit need a nerf to her power? My idea is that if it ever needed a nerf, it could change planes and at the end it will slow down when it reappears for about 3 seconds and within those 3 seconds it cannot attack. I do not see a need for a change but its addons.
Ever played other killers with their strongest addons?
Her power is broken? Definitly not. What is broken?
I do think her addons are very strong, but in all honesty, you do need them. I advice playing her without addons to get a idea of her power instead of equiping the strongest ones, getting some 4ks and then come here calling her broken. I could do exactly the same with any killer.
-
give her an indicator when she is phasing. Then she is fine I think.
I dont understand why people often use skill related arguments like "when you play against a DECENT spirit" or something similiar, when a majority of her power is build on potatoe survivors.
-
@ill_Boston_lli said:
I am curious to see what the majority of the community thinks of the new Wraith. I have seen a couple posts here and there but I want honest opinions. Lets objectively look at this and have a civil discussion. I think he was def a bit over tuned. I think all he needed was a movement speed boos in cloak. Giving him the lunge he now has coming out of cloak is overkill. The mere fact that he can lunge around ENTIRE loops is crazy. This turns most tiles into 50/50s which is kinda boring imo. Again this is simply my opinion on this and I in no way want him nerfed. So please lets try to keep this Civil.
Yeah well, I would argue its a 50/50 at loops. depends on how you play it. If you stay at the pallet while he is uncloaking, then yes. You usually should make distance when he uncloaks.
I dont think hes overtuned. Its more like that he is valuable now after the buffs and you got more space for using other addons. Before the buffs he was just a gg ez for most of his matches.
-
You need to burn her while charging the blink. Problem is, it takes as long as to burn a wraith. So if you are in radius for the flashlight to burn her, you usually dont have enough time (she needs less time to charge up and blink to you, than you need to hold your flash at her) . So usually it only works if she goes for another survivor, and charges up for full distance.
-
@TheBus4K said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259687#Comment_2259687
1. Yes, there may be players who like stress, but I am sure it is much less than those who prefer to play without, at least, being ALL the games under stress. This is demonstrated by looking at the number of Killers at night (a very low number, which makes queues very long at night). Just because you feel stressed doesn't mean that you have lost the game. Feeling stressed and getting 4K is very different. And that's the problem, if I play a couple of fairly easy matches, a match with stress, honestly, it feels great, but 5 matches in a row of pure stress would be incredibly bad, at least in my case. Even doing 4K, all the stress I've felt in the match makes me lose the desire to play another one. Where I want to go is that, as much as I feel stress, I can continue to win matches, and therefore my MMR will remain or even increase, making my matches still stressful. There is no way to remove that stress unless it is by losing games and, therefore, reducing your MMR.
Your balancing concept will only make many Killers play far fewer matches in a row, since as I said before, one or two stress matches aren't bad after an "easy" or "moderately easy", but not 5 in a row without any "easy" match.
2. As I have told you, if you constantly face players with 10k hours, no matter how much stress you feel, you can continue to win matches, so your MMR will remain, you will continue to have stressful matches and you will get tired much sooner. Feeling stress isn't the same as losing matches, I think it's something that you haven't understood.
3. You haven't understood my point but absolutely nothing. What I'm referring to by that part is that, even if you aren't constantly facing SWF, if you face 4 survivors with 5k hours, it will not be exactly the same, but very similar to a SWF. What the MMR is going to do is make me face SWF and survivors with many hours, that is, I will never have a match against really bad survivors, so I will always have matches with stress, even if I win them.
1. I wont go into discussion the number of killer players, because there are way more aspects to it than just matchmaking.
Ah ok got u. Yes if you feel stressed by playing against teams or killers of your own level, then yes, mmr will be your nightmare.
That would assume that you would go against the sweatiest of all, all the time, what is only the case at high mmr. And Ill tell you, there wont be that many players in general. To say that some may drop playing killer because of the constant stresslevel of high mmr may be right. But let me ask you this about the current matchmaking: What about the players at low ranks who face high rank players? Are there not killer players who hit first time rank 15+ and get matched with red rank swf? They quit without even get to know the game to its full extend. What about red ranks who drop killer because of slaying potatoes all the time? what about those who dont want to go against sweat squads anymore as killer? Those also already exist in the current system.
2. I understand now. Dont worry. Yes you can have stress although you are winning. Let me ask you this.
Why are you playing killer when you feel stressed out by it?
And explain to me, why should you not have constantly matches where you feel stressed and give it all you got, tryhard/sweatfest, at the highest level of the game?
3. Yeah I didnt quite understand what you meant here. Now I got it. Yeah 100%. With mmr you will face high mmr when you are high mmr yourself. You wont have really bad players then.
And what you are saying is, that the games where you dont feel stressed are the games against really bad survivors. And this is the problem. You cant have a stomp anymore and therefore you cant have fun and mmr is bad. Thats 1:1 what you said. Let me tell you this: Its disgusting that this game allows stomps! It should never be the case. If you want easy games as killer, make a smurf account, play KYF or play bad till you reach low rank or mmr. I dont care. But a matchmaking that allows stomps is awful. And there is no logic in saying: mmr is bad, because then I cant have fun anymore at high elo, because I cant beat up baby players.
I now understand where you coming from. :) have a nice day
-
@TheBus4K said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259281#Comment_2259281
It's not difficult to understand. If you are always playing games where you have maximum tension and are constantly under stress, there will come a point that you cannot follow, and therefore, you will get tired of Killer much faster, which will reduce the number of Killers and increase queue time. With Ranks matchmaking sometimes you have very stressful games, other times easy games, "balanced", but it's true that sometimes there are many easy games.
I don't speak for everyone, but I don't understand how you could be able to play the same way you do now, having to play from now only against SWF and / or people with more than 3k hours, games that would be completely pure stress .
People complain about Solo Queue, but 4 survivors who don't know each other but have more than 2k-3k hours aren't the same, but very similar to a SWF, their rapport even without communication is very high. I say this from pure experience, I have played Solo Queue games in which I have had monkey survivors and others in which it seemed like I was in SWF.
Im going to put numbers on your text boxes to adress it easier.
1. I understand that its more stressful to have difficult games if you give it your all. (Lets not forget that there are players who like this stress and they find enjoyment in it.) If you get stressed out by the difficulty of your matches in the top % and get tired of playing killer, then either you play killer too much or you are not fit to play in the top %. This is at least how it should be. The current matchmaking tells you: "its ok if you not that got at high rank, we got you with the matchmaking". The mmr would tell you: "we push you down till a comfortable level".
Im very confused about your understanding of balance. For me, balance is not the one extreme and then the other extreme. Balanced means for me that you get matches with people who are on the same level as you, throughout all the games.
2. Its easy because this wont happen. If I get sweaty 10k hour survs in x games and I like it, then theres no problem. If I get 10k hour survs in x matches and I cant and wont deal with it, I go down in mmr and get easier matchups.
3. I dont understand your point here. Top solo players will get high mmr and bad swf players will get low mmr. To be specific here I would need the stats how mmr exactly works in dbd. But I cant see a problem here.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259271#Comment_2259271
Mechanical skill is separate from playstyle intent. For my Nurse for example, I can 4k at 5 gens with a full meta build or literally run only BBQ no add ons, have a decent chill game, and still 4k with everyone having decent BP. Without MMR, a player like myself can queue up and get a decent variety.
With MMR on a killer like Nurse for me, I have only been matched with 3k+ hr squads. The chill has been completely removed from the game on Nurse for me. That's simply not fun all the time.
Yeah but still makes no sense. If you have to sweat against those 10k hours survivor teams, mmr works as intented. If you get a good game out of it, you earned your mmr and matchmaking. If its not fun because you dont like to sweat and you play chill, they crush you. Your mmr drops and you will get more relaxing games. Where is that bad?
So btw, if you can have decent chill games while get 4ks, literally without loadout, its not called decent variety, its called bad matchmaking.
-
I like the crack version of Kate
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2258773#Comment_2258773
Yeah the amount of people I've seen complaining they're going to have eternal queue times and nothing but sweat squads and nurse and spirit...I guess 95% of the community is in the top 5% of players
Yeah I would argue that. I dont have the exact percentage but, there is a trophy when you hit rank 5 the first time. 10% of players earned this trophy in Steam. 6% of players earned the rank 1 trophy. I think this gives you a good idea about the playerbase.
edit: wait did you mean it as joke? lol then Im sry
-
@TheBus4K said:
I think the MMR system is going to affect the game in a very negative way.
When your MMR is high, you will only face against good survivors, so you will never have an easy game, you will always play with immense stress until your MMR is reduced, this will cause many Killers to stop playing, and therefore, the queue times are even longer.
The same for survivors, with MMR they will probably face even more Spirit / Nurse, which will make survivors tire much faster from playing.
But why exactly should you have easy games when you play at the highest level? this is beyond me. pls explain
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259247#Comment_2259247
But I think that's what people are getting at: it doesn't *have* to be that way. MMR isn't going to take care of one of the biggest core frustrations among the playerbase. Player A wants to try hard and player B wants to mess around. DbD is literally the only multiplayer game I can think of with only ranked competitive matchmaking and nothing else.
But if you tryhard you most likely go up in mmr and get matches with other tryhards. And if you want to mess around your mmr will go down and you get matches with other players who mess around or are not that good. How does mmr not take care of it?
If you mean player a and b in one swf together, that would be another topic.
If you mean a as killer and b as survivor, mmr helps here too.
-
@CLAUDETTEINABUSH said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259189#Comment_2259189
Or you can add another mode that is a casual mode, where people don't necessarily take the game seriously, but that is something the devs don't want. If they add bp in a custom match everyone would abuse that.
So we can't have bp and exp granded in custom games, and we can't have two modes in dbd. So what's left?
Either we will completely destroy the fun that one side of the dbd community has so we can leave more place for sweaty players, or
The matchmaking should not be perfect so it can create fun games sometimes and sweaty games other times
Am I incorrect?
I do think you can abuse it, although I would argue it doesnt matter when you look at the absurd amount of grind in this game :D
I also agree that most likely we are left with only one mode to earn bps, pips and shards for all eternity.
And here I disagree. And I think this is the point what its all about. You say, you can only have fun games because of the unbalanced matchmaking. I say you can have fungames with a balanced matchmaking.
I know those kind of games where you fool around, equip wglf, a flashlight and hope for a bad killer. I got plenty of them and they were crazy fun for me. And I can have those kind of games in a high working mmr too. But I dont expect to escape in the end then or that I can troll the killer for the majority of the match.
And I can use silly meme builds as killer as well in high rank or mmr. I can have fun times, but I dont expect to get a 4k out of it.
So how are you not abe to have fun when going against your caliber of player? pls explain to me.
A working mmr system would only provide the playerbase with less stomps, but not less fun. And dont forget, sweatlords have fun in competetive matches, so they play sweaty. Chill gamers in casual games, so they play chill. In mmr you are less like to be paired in a sense of sweaty with casual.
-
@CLAUDETTEINABUSH said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259156#Comment_2259156
In most multiplayer games you have the option to progress whilst having the option to either sweat or play casually, and it works. I can think only a few games where you can choose either the one or the other.
But I can think a ton where you can choose both. Examples: in rainbow six siege you can get points by playing a casual mode, an unranked mode and a ranked mode. The only difference is that you get a bit more points on the ranked than the unranked and casual. And it works for them (same with exp)
In league it's the exact same thing, you get more exp and a bigger boner when you win a ranked game rather than a normal game.
I would mention ow but I don't remember if the same thing applies there, even tho I'm sure it does.
Go through your games that have a multiplayer system and see if any of these have the same features I mentioned.
Yeah there are some that give you progress. Not denying it.
But then it would be the question about why kyf doesnt give you any bps, wouldnt it?
Also you spoke of maximizing your bps while playing casual. And even in your examples you said you get a lot more in ranked in those games. If you want to apply this logic to dbd it means you have to sweat for it in online mode.
So you are left with
-sweating for a lot of bps
-casual for a few bps
And the fact you can find games where you chill and get a lot of bps put of it, is the prime example of bad matchmaking.
-
@CLAUDETTEINABUSH said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259094#Comment_2259094
Interesting that you didn't contest my points there. So you basically say that I don't want to have a game where it's casual and I can progress whilst having fun? I could be mistaken, can you please rephrase your sentence if I am? I'd appreciate it
I have to say, I see it like @Moundshroud.
This goes for every game, not just dbd. If you want casual games centered around fun, you play offline, casual mode (like kyf), or you play online/ranked/competetive and get stomped for playing around. Theres no reason you should be provided with anything but fun when you playing around and want fun.
If you say you want to maximize your bps and at the same time have a casual game, its just a stomp game. And I can guarantee you most of the time at least one player has a miserable time.
I dont think its good matchmaking if one side gets stomped.
You just want two things that dont go well together in view of a healthy matchmaking.
-
@gibblywibblywoo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259095#Comment_2259095
I left her for the same reason. I loved the sense of velocity when phasing, but after the misguided Billy nerf a lot of players jumped ship to Spirit. So I started VSing her more as survivor, and I realised how unenjoyable she is to play against. So I stopped playing her as I felt bad about it. I try to give a fun match when I can.
I dropped Deathslinger and Freddy (until just recently) for similar reasons.
Yeah I feel you man. Dropped spirit, nurse, deathslinger and dont pick up freddy because I literally hate playing against him.
Im glued to huntress and wraith since their release. Most balanced ones imo. I have a good balanced kill ratio with them without slug/tunnel/camp and going for hook. Although getting 3-4 man escapes a lot, I also get 3/4k a lot.
-
I would love perfect mmr! And I do believe DbD needs it!
Im a player who likes the mix of casual and competetive games. Till now I get awful matchmaking with players all over the place in ranks, skill and whatsoever.
With a perfect mmr I could be paired up with players at my level. If I feel competetive, I would work on raising my mmr and get matched with also higher mmr players. If I feel casual, after some games my mmr will adjust. And problem solved for me Compared to right now its just a mess. But since the mmr testing is live I experienced actually good matchmaking. Sorry for the ones who had not similiar luck.
-
@gibblywibblywoo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2259077#Comment_2259077
Oh God. Remember when she first released and you had to mute your menu in the lobby or while searching? She was so incredibly loud.
Love her visual design with the disembodied limbs and chunks and her animations are incredibly creepy but I really don't like how her power functions right now.
I remember xD. I also remember the funtimes with gengrapping build on her :D
I used to play her a lot right after release, before all her changes. I dropped her after like to month because she really felt unfair to play (ez 4k with no trying involved). Like 2 months ago I picked her up again and dropped her after a few days. This time I dropped her like you did, out of boredom. It was different tho. it was boring not because she is too strong, but because most of the survivors cant handle her. I would say she is fine. Just give her an indicator when she is phasing, done. Main problem for me are players who just complain without trying.
And hell yeah I love her design :D. and how she hops over windows XD
-
@gibblywibblywoo said:
It's sad that we have to give evidence that we actually play killer to say "I think Spirits lack of interaction is somewhat boring and unhealthy", isn't it?
I haven't played her on close to a year, maybe more. I just got bored. Even against good players unless they pure genrushed and pre dropped every safe pallet instantly they had no chace at winning.
How can you get bored of waaaaaaaaaaah?
-
You can argue about the cheating part but it definitly gives you an advantage compared to not using it. If you think you can get the same consisten/fast shots with experience or lining up you are horribly mistaken. You just perform better with a crosshair
-
As survivor always 100%. You just need that to flick fast enough to not lose sight of the killer in chase.
As killer it depends. Usually 100%. But for demo or huntress I use around 80, to be more precise.
-
Why you have an alt account?
Obviously most of the people playing in the morning till afternoon are kids.
-
@latinfla4 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2026396#Comment_2026396
You ever win those type of matches?
Ofc. The question is not if I could win those. Its more about if I want so play such a match
-
@Angelicus23 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2026325#Comment_2026325
where is it stated that the game is competitive in the store page.
I didn't even introduce him, he found the game himself and when I catched him streaming I surprised him with a little gift. My bad I guess. I don't smurf and I can't know people do this ######### in rank 20
its nowhere stated. Its like common sense. You play against other players in order to win, to be better. If it is not competitive, then why your friend quit after 3 games? I dont know him but Im pretty sure he would keep playing dbd if he would have 4kd in those games.
Bad things happen but your intention was very nice and I think he appreciates it.
I know many players who smurf. They just do it for fun, thats it. And if they enjoy the game like this, hey why not. No one in online games care for other peoples fun if they dont know them. Thats just a sad truth you need to understand.
-
I can only speak for myself and I rather do the one-hook-suicide than dc. I do it in games where I dont have fun or I dont enjoy playing. At the end of the day DbD is still a game and games should be fun for me. So if I face 3 times Freddy in a row with a lot of gen stalling in his build Im just go for the next game instead of play the fantastic match ahead of me till the end and waste my time with suffering and salt.
-
@Angelicus23 said:
TL;DR: You're pathetic.
My friend has just started as new game for streams and I gifted him the Bubba DLC to get started, now he never wants to play anymore as killer.
His literal first 3 games were against bully squads everyone looping like actual red ranks, tbagging, and made my friend's first experience such some bullshit.
Hope you're proud of having to create an alt account because you suck and need to ruin other players' experience since yours is sad already.
Im not trying to be offensive here, but maybe your friend shouldnt play competitive games. You always have smurfs, and if you can tbag in a game, players will tbag. Also buying additional content for a game you play for the first time is kind of a bad financial decision.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1955083#Comment_1955083
Disliked is subjective. A lot of my favorite maps are maps a lot of people don't like. With your change I'd never see these maps.
"balancing by the data provided this way"
This is under the assumption they would actually do this and do it correctly. Not to mention how long it would take them or if they even agreed it was an issue map. Based on their track record I would not put any faith in this.
"Its even not so far away imo from the current system. Because one surv drops coldwind and the killer drops lerys you end up the same."
Most games aren't throwing map offerings. Also, being forced onto a map because of a limited offering is fine. Your change would be getting forced every time.
Never is definitly not right. Lets say you like coldwind. With the idea you would have at least a 12,5% chance depending on the other players. If you use now the coldwind offering it also depends if others use offerings.
I dont have faith anymore in anything they do :D but hey, we still can hope
Your last point is really good. Maybe the question is about the trade off between beeing forced on maps at least one player wants to play on and semi random map rng.
Gotta think about that. Nice input
-
@JPA said:
I'd like to remove map offerings.
Not sure on the voting idea. As usual SWF would ruin it, SWFs could all vote for one map, Killer would vote for other map, so it would just be a tie and end in a random map.
In Solo Queue, the solo's will either all vote for the survivor sided map, in which case it's same as the above, or the solo's would vote for different things, and the Killer's vote would basically always win, being worth 4 votes.
Random is the way to go IMO.
Thats not exactly what I meant.
Imagine 4 votes from survs and 4 from the killer. So If the survs all vote for the same map it would be 50/50 for either map.
If the 4 survs vote for different ones it would be 12,5% chance for every map voted for. But ofc the killers choice would be more likely to win because he got 12,5% times 4 the chance for his map
-
Yeah, i guess it would turn out like that. But compared to the current system we wouldnt play on disliked maps and devs could focus on balancing by the data provided this way. Its even not so far away imo from the current system. Because one surv drops coldwind and the killer drops lerys you end up the same. Personally I already feel like playing only the same 3 maps all over again.
-
@TheeclumsyNinja said:
I get that at low ranks its strong, but ranks 1-3 its simply a way to help you get some trackion.
I as a killer do not wanna sweat 2/3 matches against good swf with all their op perks completely untouched for years when the killer finally gets something to help early game at red ranks and its nerfed within 3 months.
The devs say they want something to help with early game... well you had it but all the bad survivors complained so you nerfed it into the ground immediately.
If they complain about something as simple as doing totems what the hekk are you ever gonna be able to do to help early game lol
Devs need to get a back bone, stop babying bad survivors and force them to learn how to loop in a chase.
A quick reminder that ruin is still there and that there were times where undying didnt exist. Ofc we need something for the early game, but I think we need a change in the core game and not just bandaid perks. Also I never felt undying+ruin was for the early game. For my case, I never used gen stalling perks and have fun games at rank 1. I think a lot is about the reason why you playing the game. If you want chill games at red ranks and still "win" , maybe you should consider playing other killers or play chill and depip till you ranked where you have those kind of games.
-
I used to miss those too. I did two hings that helped me. First I equiped shadowborn. Although you need to get used to it and its just a FOV thing it worked for me pretty good. Second and I can only recommend this, is to practice flickshots. Thats all I do close range and I rarely miss one. But you have to invest a lot of time into it.
-
I think it needed the nerf. And here is why:
I think undying was the devs solution for the scenario where you totem got cleansed after 30 seconds in the game. Overall undying did too much and relied heavy on rng. In personal experience, I had a sh.. amount of games where survs searched the whole game for all totems and only the 3rd to 5th was the other hex or undying or the hex stayed up all game. It became a very onesided game in those cases. On the other hand, even if the hexes were gone soon, my games were kinda balanced.
The main reason Im in favor for the nerf is because I think perks shouldnt solve core issues. E.g. gen speed - ruin, hex too fast cleansed - undying, and so on. They should adress gen speed and other problems not with bandaid.
-
@dbd_noob said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1542661#Comment_1542661
You would be surprised how lazy a lot of people are. But still. It should be changed as well, I agree
I think you see it only negatively. Its good to see if they play on another platform too. For example, if your opinion is somewhat bad about console players and you see one performing quite good, its a positive thing.
-
Lmao. Dude if you remove the icon you can just figure out that they are from another platform by trying to open their profile xD One click m8.
-
Lmao. Dude if you remove the icon you can just figure out that they are from another platform by trying to open their profile xD One click m8.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1467029#Comment_1467029
Rizzo literally posted if survivors do nothing for a prolonged period of time they get punished because the game is held hostage. Its no different then me blocking 2 people in a corner. The others can still do gens and theyll die of egc so im not holding the game hostage am i? The game can still end cant it? These are just 2 acceptions.
Well I tried to look up what you posted, but couldnt find it as it is a closed thread. So I can only believe what you tell me.
By fact and logic it is different. As I quoted, a hostage szenario is when there is no possibility to end the game or progress to the end. And regarding your match you had always the possibility to end the game (sooner or as in your case later) by finding them. So by definition it was not a hostage situation. There was always the possibility it progresses, and the fact that your game ended is further evidence. If you body block a survivor in a corner, there is no possibility the survivor can do anything but to stand there. You literally can do nothing in this case.
I dont want to say you are wrong entirely, I just say by game rules and what is considered taking the game hostage as far as we know, its not the case here. The only thing that can help us out is a word from the devs or you reporting them and show us the result from your report, so that we have clarification in this matter.
As for now we cant solve this problem. So no bad blood m8
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466938#Comment_1466938
It is holding the game hostage.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/8J1ZB9VRN7CO/screenshot-20200722-082152-chrome.jpg
Which i can prove with my video as obviously i kill one and the other escapes through hatch after the hour long game. Done with your bias they've stated it right there. Have a nice day :)
Thank you for posting me Idk what. lol
It is not holding the game hostage. and I will quote @Peanits from may 2019 : "... . We only consider it to be holding the game hostage when there is no possible way for the game to end."
And that is clearly not the case.
Also thank you for showing me your bias by pointing Fingers at me for being neutral and stay with facts.
Have a nice day, too :)
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466889#Comment_1466889
Did you not read my note earlier? I left the gens for 3 minutes to look around the map and came back and there was still no progress on any of them. (With it being a 2 man swf it only takes 1 person 80 seconds to do a gen so 2 would take under a minute) they were stalling the game dude. Not me.
Yes you are right. They are stalling the game. I never said anything different. Still, it is not a hostage situation.
-
@Vibe_plant said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466744#Comment_1466744
As i stated, it is just how i saw it happen when i played in the early days, slugging wasn't too common unless you did all the sabo strat. Maybe i was unlucky but i would always face the 4 jakes and like i said, i'm not saying it has gotten popular and stayed just because of this sabo meta, it had died out long before they 'fixed' it however i do believe the strenght of slugging was discovered as a response to it.
As for what i meant for why it balancing seems to favor survivors because of it, they gave survivors allot of their get up yourselves as the response to it. I know there was the agitation/iron grasp combo that was also popular but in my own experience from back in the day, slugging was more popular until the release of Bill and eventually David.
They never touched the sabo meta until it was completely dead and nothing more than a fun/meme build as you said yourself, while slugging was constantly being discouraged with new perks every other survivor. I understand why and i assume they were trying to find a middle ground however they then also promoted slugging with other perks or redesigns of perks [although og ds was more bullshit] over the longer time. As i said, maybe i was just being nostalgic and am seeing things from a different window in an attempt to pin point where my frustrations with the game lie and where they started but i do believe their bias isn't because they prefer survivor over killer but because all survivors are the same, so if they just fix it from the survivor side they only need to look at it once however by doing so many changes on one side they've left behind the other who's internal issues only grew until they were too urgent to ignore.
I just think the reason everyone feels like survivors have so many 'second chance' perks and killers are being 'punished' [two ideas i'm not agreeing with although i personally think survivors hold too much control over the killer. Mainly fault of matchmaking so i'll hold my tongue until the MMR system is out.] is because they go into survivors to fix killer and survivor problems.
And again, this is just how i feel about it, i'm probably wrong but mhe, i didn't come here to be the know all and bastion of fact.
Thats a really good point here, I think that would make an awesome discussion on its own:
Are Devs trying to fix the game by going into survivors to fix problems on both sides?
Thanks btw for clarification. Got u
-
@SaltedSnow said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466868#Comment_1466868
While it may be an uncommon bug, the speedy nurse one was just as uncommon. They're both game-ruining bugs, and surely "it's patched because it affects 4/5 players" is admitting that they favour survivors.
I think you could read that into it. But dbd is so intransparent that you cant use it as a fact. "If something affects the majority, its more urgent" is not showing any bias. Im sorry but if it is that game breaking Im sure the forum would be filled with it or I would have at least heard of it.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466843#Comment_1466843
The survivors jobs to do gens and they are refusing to and hiding forcing me to look and prolonge the match so They are
So its ok that you want survivors to come straight up to you to do gens but its not ok for you to have to go searching for them?
I mean you are literally forcing them to walk up to you, and they are forcing you to come searching for them. So where is that unfair? Both sides are stalling the game dude.
-
@SaltedSnow said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1466744#Comment_1466744
If I were the OP, I'd use the bug fixes as examples of survivor bias; nurse gets a hard-to-pull-off bug that lets her move super fast? Instantly patched. Nurse has a bug that causes her to permanently lose a bunk charge? Been in the game since her rework.
Im not a dev but I think there are different kind of bugs with different urgencies and difficulties. I dont know about that charge bug on nurse.
Further more I dont think a list of bug fixes will prove any bias. How would it?
Maybe to dive a little bit deeper here, which bug is more important? A bug that affects 4 of 5 people, or a bug that affects 1 out of five and can be avoided for the time being by picking another playable character. Im not saying its ok for any bug to be not fixed, but I think there are maybe more urgent problems and certain fixes that would take a lot of time should be delayed for that.