AmpersandUnderscore
AmpersandUnderscore
About
- Username
- AmpersandUnderscore
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859159#Comment_3859159
Wait.
Hang on a damn second there.
Where did I say 'the kill rate isn't real?'
Double inverted commas mean that's a direct quote. So again - where?
Statistics are accurate but also give an inaccurate view of the whole picture here. Which is why I posted that often misattributed Disraeli quote.
I mean what I said. The stats are what they are, but the stats can be deceptive in isolation.
I'm not sure if you didn't really read what I said or simply misunderstood
Also - the term 'win rate' is meaningless for killer. Because BHVR has never specified what the killer win state is.
You mentioned specifically "Yes, but this is a case of raw statistics being misleading" when specifically responding too someone talking about kill rates for swf.
The more specific confusion comes from your statement here:
Just blueskying, but I'd guess a 55% kill rate against high MMR SWFs translates to something very close to 50%, factoring in the prevalence of 25% kill rate even in losing games (1k).
That makes no sense. Either you meant to say "a 55% kill rate translates to a 50% win rate", which is the only reason I can think of that a 1k even comes into play at any point.
Because if not, you're just saying arbitrarily that a 55% kill rate should just be considered 50% kill rate instead for some reason.
And generally speaking, most people consider 3k-4k a killer win, 0k-1k a survivor win, and 2k a draw. I don't really care if the devs defined it or not since that's the colloquial use of the "win conditions".
-
@joel84 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859212#Comment_3859212
I have to agree with you. Who likes to lose? Nobody does. I'm just saying that anti-perks have a right to exist and deserve to be used.
These aren't strategies that require anything other than base kit to execute for the killer.
So when you say things like
I'm just saying that anti-perks have a right to exist and deserve to be used.
And
That's what those perks are for, so get out of your comfort zone.
Your basically saying that it's the survivors fault for not running OTR, DS, Unbreakable, and Reassurance every single game with no exceptions.
It's a design flaw in the game, which is precisely the reason they had to make BT base kit, because it wasn't a choice: it was a required perk that meant you only had at most 3 perk slots to actually choose.
You're basically just saying that the game is so poorly designed that survivors are to blame for the fact that the game gives them the illusion of perk choices, but they aren't picking the exact 4 perks to make the game function (some of those perks being real money dlc, which is the definition of pay to win).
Blame the devs that the game is designed this way, with perks to band aid the issue instead.
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859093#Comment_3859093
Sure, which is why the kill rate is a bit lower. Watching some top level streamers though, it definitely isn't uncommon, and altruism can also backfire hard.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859095#Comment_3859095
I don't think there has ever been a time in DbD's history when there were more useful perks on either side. There just aren't as many flat out broken ones like CoH and DH were.
I will say that SC should never have been nerfed as this was hugely punishing to solos, and I think most people seem to agree.
The kill rate is the kill rate. It's also official stats from the entire game by BHVR.
Sure, which is why the kill rate is a bit lower
Are you meaning that the win rate is different? Because what you've said twice now is that "well, the kill rate isn't real and it's actually much lower because reasons".
You may mean something different, but the words you're writing are just flat disregarding the stats, semmingly because you feel like it or just didn't like the result.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858949#Comment_3858949
3s was literally still very good against almost every killer, nobody is at fault for you not realizing it's skill floor and not knowing how to force a down at a beneficial tile instead of an open space/deadzone. Only way DS should've been buffed is to prevent killer from using their power for like ~3s after stun animation finishes.
So, two things here:
First, the killer stun was 3s, but the animation for the survivor was about 1.4s. So even successfully using this perk only have you about 1.6s of distance, since you were also animation locked (stunned) yourself after activation.
I'll also add that their first swing at extending the stun back to 5s also increased the animation time, so the survivor was animation locked for about 2.2s instead. They made the perk objectively worse for everyone involved, then settled on 4s, simply because they only wanted survivors to get about 2 seconds of distance off this perk.
Second, with the endless "maps are bad" complaints, maps have been nerfed, tiles nerfed, pallets nerfed, and dead zones are everywhere. "Just get to a good place to use it" is insanely tone deaf in 2024 DbD. That might've worked fine in 2020 or earlier when there were actual resources to use. The only resource that's gotten better over time is hooks now respawn, so it's even easier for killers to hook in a dead zone.
-
@thrkeybs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859052#Comment_3859052
The more we discuss this the more this feels like, at least to me, the biggest source of "unfun" in the game.
Since maps were redesigned, there's less emphasis on a survivor being able to outsmart a killer, or a killer being able to outsmart a killer, and it feels like you're just chum for shark bait. In fact, it feels like there's a straight line between map design and the other problems causing unfun things in the game for both sides:
Maps and tiles are redesigned to discourage looping
→ Survivors have few playable tiles & resources
→ Survivors only resource is then to focus on gens
→ Killers feel like Survivors are gen rushing
→ Killers avoid hooks to save time
→ Killers slug and tunnel more to become more efficient
= Everyone has less funMaps are one contributor for sure, but almost all of the changes in the past couple years boil down to:
Survivors only resource is then to focus on gens
Maps made smaller, pallets weakened, tile spawn logic nerfed, more dead zones, perk nerfs, oppressive killer metas... The only real answer is putting more pressure to just do gens (i.e. "gen rush").
Any time survivors voluntarily choose to do something else, it gets complained about and nerfed or removed, leaving gens as the only viable gameplay.
Whenever an oppressive killer meta emerges (gen kick, 3 gen, camping, tunneling, excessive slugging, giga thrill) there's no comeback mechanic for survivors, so the only answer is to rush gens or basically instantly lose the game in some cases. People spent most of a year where if you didn't break the 3 gen immediately you just lost in a slow, agonizing, PvE game.
And if none of these factors are currently in play, then the go-to complaint reverts to "gens are too fast, nerf something". Which only ends up putting even more pressure on survivors to rush gens as the only possible gameplay.
-
@GlamourousLeviathan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858969#Comment_3858969
Gen rushing is also a problem that is patched by perks. By getting rid of gen defence perks, killers also get hindered by a lot. Rotative modes such as 2v8 and Lights Out had no perks for both sides and no one complained about that. If you are still losing as a survivor because you don't have DS or OTR when the killer has no gen defense, that's on you.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858973#Comment_3858973
Each survivor chooses one perk to ban. Like, let's say Felix chooses Pain Resonance, David Dead Man's Switch, Jane Corrupt Intervention, and Cheryl Knock Out. They should also be able to talk in the chat and convince each other on which perks to ban. On the other sides, the killer ban OTR, Lithe, Hyperfocus, and Prove Thyself. That's 8 banned perks in total, 4 for each side.
Gen rushing is also a problem that is patched by perks
Is it? Cause the current discourse on the forums lately has been entirely around either:
- "slugging is the best current way to play the game. You can easily win by just slugging and never hooking" (which also means never activating most of the games gen defense perks)
- Or the recent thrill/hex meta which entirely revolves around totems and secondary objectives. The only time this touches on gens is if you run pentimento, which may not even be in play in a devour build.
Sounds like gen defense is largely unnecessary in the build at that point.
Most people also acknowledge the biggest problem with "gen rushing" is toolboxes, which aren't included your perk ban system either.
-
Well, if the recent post is any example, apparently the killer can 4k with 5 gens still standing uncompleted, but still lose the game because the survivors cleansed one hex totem.
-
@Berienn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857974#Comment_3857974
and killer's job is to make sure survivors cant escape… if that require slugging one guy then i'll do it every single time.
The killers job is, very specifically, to kill survivors by sacrificing them to the entity on hooks.
There's even a built in BP penalty for bleeding people out by slugging.
I'm curious though, where do people buy these motorized goal posts on wheels? They move really fast and I see a lot of people using them here.
-
@SidneysBane1996 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858889#Comment_3858889
But the reason it failed is not, IS NOT because "enough Survivors quit".
It's because the experience was so wildly imbalanced, everyone on all sides quit. BHVR doesn't have that issue. If anything its been working on balancing BETTER over time.
No, this is just trying to make your point when you're objectively wrong. The hunter had abilities toward the game's end of life like instantly killing the survivors. The devs tuned the game more and more for the hunter to be more powerful, which both sound disturbingly familiar.
The survivors quit because of balance. The hunters had all the tools and power in that game and basically had no reason to quit unless it was out of boredom.
-
@SidneysBane1996 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858837#Comment_3858837
I promise you there will always be more than enough Survivors to keep the game going no matter what, because there's always four times as many Survivors as Killers. It's mathematically impossible for there to ever be so few Survivors the game dies, the entire and I mean ENTIRE Survivor playerbase would need to quit overnight and that's just not feasible. Therefore a bunch of Survivors quitting will not do anything meaningful whatsoever, unlike the time when a lot of Killers quit because Survivors were genuinely too powerful. They stayed during 3gen meta and nothing happened. They stayed during facecamping existing and nothing happened. They stayed when Killers were given stuff like TotH buffed too much, and nothing happened. Nothing changed. It never has, it never will.
The reason it worked for Killers quitting but never does when Survivors sabre-rattle about quitting en masse is because it's a 1v4. If the whole side of the game that only has one per four players is unhappy, the whole game suffers. If the whole side of the game with four times as many people in a queue has even 25% of people annoyed at the game enough to quit, that doesn't matter because there's always more people who come in later for events/modes, free weekends, etc. and there's always people who just don't care enough and will play anyway… there's four times as many. You can therefore afford to lose even half of the current Survivor playerbase and it will still not grind the game to such a halt it's an issue.
We saw this in action with 2v8, where everyone wanted to play Killer and it ruined queue times. It literally does not matter as much how many Survivors you have, Killer retention is much more important. You can replace a Surv with a bot. and functionally nothing changes, as proven by them trying to add bots in player lobbies to quicken queues (which thank god they did not do). You can't replace a Killer with a bot.
If Survivor sucks, the only issue is slightly longer queue times. If Killer sucks, you have no game because Killer simply determines game pacing more.
White I don't think the game is dying, and we get one of these posts every few months here, there is one thing to point out:
The rest of your post, specifically:
It's mathematically impossible for there to ever be so few Survivors the game dies
and the surrounding argument is simply false on just about every level.
Other asymmetric have have failed, many (almost all) in fact. It's why DbD has effectively zero competition most of the time, except for a few months when a new asymm game tries and then disappears again.
The best, and most relevant example being a different game by BHVR called death garden: where one "Hunter" (killer) went up against 4 scavengers (survivor) trying to escape.
That game died due to balance, specifically they made the killer role too powerful, and the game died because no one wanted to play "survivor". A complete counter example to most of your post.
Let's be honest, the main thing keeping DbD afloat is licensing. Flat out. And that's 100% supported by player counts.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857956#Comment_3857956
This has been a crazy talk, lol. I can show you why a the 70% is as it is... because of survivor hissy fits. I can show you clips of survivor behavior skewing stats and you acknowledged that THAT had 0 to do with the killer performance that match. So we can agree that it wasn't due to a balance issue rather than popularity. People were adding "I hate her lore and the way she walks" to reasons they hate her, lol.
You can look at this, look at a reduction of effectiveness of over 50% and then honestly tell me it was an attempt at balance rather than to appease people who hated her mere presence in the game and would often ask the character to be deleted entirely? Are you claiming the nerfs put her in a balanced state NOW? That the devs plans for future changes arnt needed? The only reason the complaints about her existing stopped is because her pickrate is abysmal.
Throughout this thread, you keep quoting statistics and then not seeming to understanding how the devs came by those numbers.
SM (before the recent nerfs) had a 71% official kill rate. That kill rate doesn't include any game with a disconnect already.
They even went the extra step before the nerfs to give us extra data that if you threw out games with a disconnect and any game where a survivor died on first hook (so, gave up, was left hanging, etc) she still had a 68% kill rate. Games where anyone died on their first hook only made up 3%.
That's insane, and also means that "giving up" isn't including her numbers enough to claim she was in a good place there.
SM had 3 major problems:
- Devs saying she is a statistical outlier for a high kill rate.
- Killers saying she felt weak.
- Survivors saying she sucked to go against.
While I still say the recent changes weren't handled well by the devs, the only reasonable answer to solve all of these problems is to rework her. Which is the stated goal of the devs as well.
I'm not entirely sure why the devs decided to use the "break glass" response per se, but no one was saying she was in a good place across the board either.
-
@SidneysBane1996 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857726#Comment_3857726
This is it.
If you truly "play chill" and "aren't sweaty", that means you CANNOT also hold the idea thta you deserve to always win/escape. Like, you can't be running a ton of Meta if you really are playing chill.
And a lot of people say they are a chill SWF or Killer, then don't actually play chill.
If you stack the odds in your favor, in any way, you are not chill, you are sweating.
I feel like many people on these forums say "I want to play chill" but mean "I want to win by expending little to no effort".
Those aren't the same thing, but it explains a lot about how people tend to talk about "balance" sometimes.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857289#Comment_3857289
Unfortunately I just had one of those, with the exact type of build you've mentioned:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/S8OY283FJJTB/image.png
Props to this Nea because her last chase was good, really gave Doc a run for his money, but with Knock Out in effect I don't think she was able to find anyone (and I have a strong suspicion someone was downed inside the tower).
But this is ridiculous.
Some players are pushing it too far, to the point where I am certain something will be done to address this situation. And if we get an anti-slug mechanic, I hope it is way stronger than the AFC. I don't think this specific playstyle should still be allowed to exist.
While I fully agree that this is excessive, shouldn't exist, and needs to be dealt with by the devs, I have little hope of that actually occurring.
So far I don't think we've even had acknowledgement from them that there is a problem, and any solution they provide will be at most as effective as AFC, since any mechanic will likely involve a base kit way for killers to work around the effect.
I think a rework and redesign of knock out is necessary, far easier in the short term, and less prone to unintended side effects. But I don't even see that happening any time soon, unfortunately.
-
@theonryo123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857772#Comment_3857772
so basically it would work like if it was more or devour you hit them since they tried taking a hit their already exposed and put into the dying state
So, basically this is just a free down for being back at the unhook. Since you're counted as being in chase with both survivors the instant their feet touch the ground off hook.
This is a terrible idea to giga buff camping. No.
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3856524#Comment_3856524
I'm actually glad you brought up BBQ because that was one of the best perks that incentivizes going for hooks. At first, I wanted to suggest making BBQ base kit, but I'm of the firm belief that built in aura reading should not be a thing for killers, at least in the base kit. But I still think a base kit BBQ does have some merit, or at least the concept of it. I just couldn't figure out a way to make it work properly. And then, Scourge Hook: Jagged Compass was introduced. A perk that shows the gen with the most progress. This isn't what i had in mind for the base kit addition to killers to incentivize going for a new survivor once an old one was hooked, but its a step in the right direction.
What I'm suggesting is a base kit mechanic for killers that rewards them for hooking a survivor; the reward being information of some kind valuable information regarding the rest of the map. Now, what that information should be, i cant really say. I think giving the specific location of the other survivors is a bit much, and Jagged Compass already shows the gen with the most progress, but by giving the killer something valuable, in a way that could be minor or major depending on balancing, you incentivize picking up that survivor and hooking right away rather then simply leaving them on the ground.Now, You're still going to have some specific situation where leaving a survivor on the ground may be a smarter choice, but they'll be far less frequent. And frankly, the only way to really eliminate slugging would be to have the Entity itself hook survivors as soon as they're down and immediately move that survivor to a far away hook that the killer can't see the aura of, and thats just a bit too much.
You're still going to have some specific situation where leaving a survivor on the ground may be a smarter choice,
I completely agree. I think of strategies like camping, tunneling, and slugging as "situational". Which generally means they should be available for the killer to use, but shouldn't generally be the "plan going into the match" or "the only way someone plays". It's also why I'm generally opposed to base kit unbreakable.
What I'm suggesting is a base kit mechanic for killers that rewards them for hooking a survivor; the reward being information of some kind valuable information regarding the rest of the map
This is kinda why I pushed back on the inital post. Information, especially "valuable information" that isn't currently available, but is added as a result of gameplay is a buff to killers, specifically a base kit buff. And I'm not sure that you could give extra information that would be valuable enough to deter slugging, since both slugging and camping are generally (over)used to bring survivors to the hook/slug so the killer doesn't have to go searching at all.
It's also why I think something like the BBQ BP bonus is about the only way to go with this, because it's an extrinsic reward and incentive. It doesn't do anything to affect the match or the balance of the game, but is still useful to the player. And might still be enough to encourage some players to play differently to obtain that reward. Player agency isn't touched at all, and neither is balance, but you might be able to sway someone to a mindset to spread hooks and maximize their reward.
Anything that intrinsically rewards gameplay, or affects the gameplay directly, is a direct balance change (buff to killer or nerf to survivors in this case).
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3856504#Comment_3856504
Agree to disagree, I suppose. However, there is one specific line in your post that gave me pause, and i'd like to push back against…
"your insistence that this is "a focus on the core problem" is, simply put, just another plea for the devs to buff killers and/or nerf survivors"
First off, thats just putting words into the mouths of others. But second, how is making changes that incentivizing hooking "buffing killers and nerfing survivors?" I'm quite curious about that.
If you truly want slugging to be one hundred percent impossible or at least detrimental to killer gameplay (if you do, thats a completely different conversation, so lets put a pin in that for a later day), then there are two ways to go about it: Incentivizing hooks, or outright punishing slugging. I'd avoid the later choice personally, because there are sadly occasionals where leaving a survivor on the ground is simply the smarter move, whether it be because of nearby flashlighters, potential pallet saves, spoting a nearby survivor who is terribly out of position, needing to rush back to a gen to keep it from getting finished, and other such things. There are times when immediately picking up a survivor right after you down them simply isnt the smart play. But if you punish players by forcing them to choose a less then smart option, well, thats just not going to turn out well
But the former option, incentivizing hooks more, thats different. Its the concept of rewarding good gameplay, rather then punishing what may be the smarter choice, specific situations withstandingFirst off, thats just putting words into the mouths of others.
No it's not. You specifically state:
The comment you are replying to did bring up a valid point. "Slugging is a thing because they have added so many perks, add ons and items to counter hooks. There’s a plethora of survivor perks that give second chances, get more health stages, trade hooks etc. They feel the need to nerf every chase perk and killers good in chase till they become trash." While I wouldn't have worded in such a way, this comment is factually accurate.
And then:
The core problem isn't that killers slug. The core problem is why killers feel they need to slug.
So, to put it simply, you're directly saying that the main problem is that killers feel that they need to slug, and that slugging is prevalent because of the perks, items, and add-ons to "counter hooks" (otherwise this isn't a "valid" argument, in your words). So when you go on to say that
Lets come up with ways to address the core problem
You're implicitly saying that those "perks, add-ons, and items" need to be adjusted. And since buffing those would only make the problem worse, then the only solution from your perspective is to "undo the damage" by removing those "core issues" as you put it.
how is making changes that incentivizing hooking "buffing killers and nerfing survivors?" I'm quite curious about that.
It doesn't necessarily have to be, but that's what you're directly saying in your post, for the reasons I explained above. And just about any changes to balance will be perceived that way regardless.
However, instead of nerfs or buffs: You could, for example, make the "old" BBQ BP bonus for hooking each individual survivor a base kit effect. You can even add an on-screen UI element for the killer to see their bonus amount, and even further, disable additional bonuses after the first survivor dies. It's a non-controversial way to incentivize spreading hooks that has basically no balance impact, but would have a minor impact to player mentality and gameplay. I've wanted that, or something like it, since they removed the BP bonus from the perk itself.
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3856341#Comment_3856341
The comment you are replying to did bring up a valid point. "Slugging is a thing because they have added so many perks, add ons and items to counter hooks. There’s a plethora of survivor perks that give second chances, get more health stages, trade hooks etc. They feel the need to nerf every chase perk and killers good in chase till they become trash." While I wouldn't have worded in such a way, this comment is factually accurate.
The point you were trying to make was, by your own words "killers are asking for unbreakable base kit with this playstyle". However, if you make that comment without addressing the previous comment via gameplay changes, all you're really saying is "Yes, survivors do in fact have plenty of ways to deal with hook states, but killers still shouldn't slug." And honestly, thats just not a convincing argument, because it doesn't even attempt to tackle the core problem.
The core problem isn't that killers slug. The core problem is why killers feel they need to slug. And spoilers, its rarely to be mean and toxic. WHile I'm sure that has happened to a lot of us in the past, please lets stop pretending that it happens often. That dilutes the argument when it just isn't factual.
Lets come up with ways to address the core problem, rather then focus solely on the side effect of the core problemSlugging is a thing because they have added so many perks, add ons and items to counter hooks.
This is simply not correct. The only things they've added have been to deter camping and tunneling, and do nothing if you leave the hook. And while there are a disturbing number of killer players who see that as synonymous to "hooking" and can't literally think of any other way to play the game, that's entirely and completely wrong.
Anyone who says or thinks this is because of perks or mechanics is being disingenuous to everyone, possibly including themselves.
The core problem isn't that killers slug. The core problem is why killers feel they need to slug.
People will always feel the "need to slug". In general, there are (unfortunately many) killers who put ego into everything, especially on these forums. Losing a game, or even not "winning completely" is not even a thought that crosses their minds. They can "play normally" or "play how they want" and stay in their own/appropriate MMR bracket, but many of these players aren't satisfied with that because it means they will only get about 60% kills, and eventually will not be winning all the time.
When that happens, they start using strategies that are "easy to execute, and hard for survivors to counter". They will tunnel until that inevitably stops working for them, and currently the meta is to simply slug until even that stops working for them. Usually, once they hit the absolute limit of their ability, they post on the forums for "devs to do something, because they insist they have to tunnel and slug every game".
But you don't have to. You can kill about 60% of the time in easy games, or you can sweat incessantly and have really frustrating games and still kill about 60% of the time. And your insistence that this is "a focus on the core problem" is, simply put, just another plea for the devs to buff killers and/or nerf survivors. At which point the cycle will still be identical, just with a few more easy wins in between before again hitting your skill cap.
The mindset for killers is the core problem. And somehow this is the only PvP game I've ever seen where players seem to expect to win every game, and when that doesn't happen, scream at the devs to fix it. That is the core problem, and no amount of balance will change the fact that people will seemingly always feel entitled to win all the time. The only thing that changes is what "flavor of the month" perk/mechanic/item is being blamed for it this time.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3856252#Comment_3856252
This comes up all the time. But you can even compare those - Killers have an option to end the teabagging at the Exit Gate faster. Survivors dont have an option to speed up the Bleedout.
But in general, those two should not be compared, for the reasons already mentioned.
@Topic:
There will be either something which helps Survivors to pick themselves up when slugged for too long or a faster Bleedout. Something like this is bound to happen, because some people are just overdoing it currently. Nobody wants to spend 4 minutes on the ground without any possibility to do anything, this is just not good gamedesign. And it is also not the intended way to play the game, if someone is bleeding someone out, they are playing the game wrong, indicated by the fact that a Bleedout gives almost no points.
But we all know that if something happens, it is because of those survivor-sided Devs and not those Killers, who think it is their job to make the Survivor Side as miserable as possible.
Pretty much agree on all points.
I've been pushing for the "faster bleed out" option for years now. Unbreakable has too many issues base kit, mainly that it just perpetuates the "already lost game" scenario. There's also the issue that the "unbreakable base kit" they tried on the ptb had no conditions and was generally a bad idea for that reason. It also does nothing if the killer is camping a slug, you just go right back on the floor again.
Just make it so that once a survivor hits "find help" they can do something further to speed up the bleed out timer. Or, if all survivors are hooked, dead, or slugged (or even all but one), then they can just give up entirely and go next once they hit that point. I think giving the killer at least 30 seconds to pick up is more than generous in those extreme slugging cases.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3856237#Comment_3856237
To be fair killers have to endure t bagging at the gates forcing the killer to traverse the map to both exit gates to literally force survivors out or wait until egc ends. Why does the killer have to forcibly push people through the gate which when all are healed can take a fair amount of time to hit them all out. Some t bag after every pallet drop knowing the killer can't touch them. Survivors are ok doing it to killers repeatedly throughout the match so I don't see why killers can't do it back. In an ideal world survivors at the gate would just leave and go next and killers would just hook, get the kill and go next.
Why did this come up every time being slugged until bleed out comes up?
Teabagging at the exit gate has several things base kit the killer can do. At worst, it's only 2 minutes, not 4. You can, base kit, force them out and possibly even mind game an extra kill or two. You can just ignore them and earn BP for two minutes around the map.
None of that is available to slugs. You can't earn BP, you can't ignore the killer if they're following your slug around throwing hatchet at you, or humping you. You can't turn the game around, and you have no measures available to speed up or shortcut the full 4 minutes of bleed out.
Not to mention that the teabagging scenario you describe requires all the survivors on the team to be coordinated in being toxic (a very small percentage of the player base). It only takes the one killer deciding to be a jerk to pull this off, which is far easier and also more common.
This kind of response is simply "bUt SoMeOnE ThInK oF tHe PoOr KiLlEr".
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855668#Comment_3855668
I've never understood the argument that her counterplay isn't possible in chase. Surely, if you're close enough to the killer that tapping crouch for half a second gets you hit, you were gonna get hit either way?
Not even mentioning that there's more to leverage than just crouching, too.
To be clear in context here, I'm mainly talking about her dropping her drone at a loop (which is the other obvious place to put them besides gens).
This depends a bit on the area. At a jungle gym, or high walled tile, you're literally running into a blind spot and will need to take the corner slower to double check before looping. The smarter, and better option is to leave the loop.
If you're at a low walled tile, or pallet, you might be able to crouch for just a second and let it pass over you... If you're traveling counter to the drone sweep direction. Best case, this is a second or two of a massive move speed reduction because you only crouch walk at about 1.13. So you're taking about a 70% move speed reduction doing it this way and hindering yourself.
It gets worse, and longer, if you're traveling in the same direction as the drone sweep. And, unfortunately for the survivor, the killer determines the loop direction.
In basically every case, if SM drops a drone, the best play is always leave the loop. All of those other options lose you a ton of distance, which will make you get hit sooner, which was my point.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855209#Comment_3855209
I'm certain, that at their level of play, they don't see blinding as a form of bullying anymore. Genuinely confused.
Bullying is something like old boil over in rpd library or when 4 people used flashlight saves at double lockers.
Chain blinding and pallet blinding are definitely not bullying in my book at least.
This is extremely confusing to me too. I want survivors to try and blind me.
Looking up, following survivors by audio, and being aware of my surroundings before a pickup are not hard things to do. And for that minimal effort, I get a survivor off gens? For free? Voluntarily? Yes please.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855346#Comment_3855346
And the worst thing is… survivors can avoid the injure. Rather easily in fact, if the killer is across the map.
It really shows you people never bothered to learn how to play against her.
The huge problem though here is that the killer is incentivized to almost never be "far across the map" from the drones.
She's an area denial killer, with a pretty large area. When she first released, people pretty much instantly realized that camping a 3 gen was the go-to way to play her. That's a big part of why it took several perk nerfs, her first rework, and a new base kit mechanic to finally kill off the 3 gen meta.
She also wants to call back her drone (instantly, "deactivated" or not, mind you) and place it again in the same spot.
And while you can go through the effort to avoid her drone beams by crouch walking or by timing, she's usually nearby and can just interrupt your little DDR session.
And, this is the kicker, none of the "counter play" is possible in chase. Crouch walk gives up a hit, you lose a health state. Max out your bar staying in an active drone, you lose a health state. The only answer to "she drops a drone in chase" is to hold w and leave... And she can just pick up the drone by looking at it from anywhere, nearly instantly, and do it again.
And that doesn't even touch on the laundry list of buffs and debuffs that happened during this process.
She has needed a rework for a long time.
-
Congrats on earning one of the game's more difficult achievements!
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3854049#Comment_3854049
I hear what you're saying dude, and I'm not denying your experience, all I'm saying is that defending totems with this configuration is very easy, and that is the key word... easy. It doesn't take any real skill on the killer's part to defend their totems other than patrol them every 40s.
The point is the hexes are made generally more dangerous with this change at high level, but because of the more intricate interactions at those levels, it's managable. However because it is so easy and skillless to get value, it is absolutely devastating at low level. The relative value in low to mid MMR is absolutely massive... and just like you're arguing to not ignore the high level players perspective, you in turn can't ignore the low players perspective.
There are many ways that Hexes could get buffed that are far more healthy for all levels of play... this raw time increase is not a healthy buff at majority of levels of play.
Here are the options for survivors: -
- Can't cleanse totems against a highly lethal/mobile killers or killwrs with nasty scream/interrupt strategies without giving downs/burning resources.
- Can't take perks or items to counter it, cause every perk to counter it is also hindered by 70%.
- Can't take out blank totems, cause most people also take undying, so that's permanent aura reveal for an easy interrupt.
- Have to gen rush before 5 hooks because of Devour hope... players so inclined already gen rus and are balancing their wins against a potential 7-8 hooks before pmayers start dropping... players who don't take perks/items to gen rush get punished extremely hard.
- Have to play in a coordinated SWF to have a chance...
This is a crap deal for most of the survivor player base. Either gen rush, play SWF, or die repeatedly to this really easy hex bulld that a brain dead chimp can use to beat majority of the players who are quite a lot better than him.
This build is NOED on steroids... NOED isn't used by most killers unless they're bad, and want free kills... but NOED drops off hard even in the mid tiers. This build is the new NOED, but it only balances out at high level? That seems very unhealthy does it not friend?
You've got a lot of DBD experience man, I'm sure you can come with a far more clever and interesting buff for hexes that takes some level of skill or knowledge from the killer over this boring time buff that demolishes the casual playerbase.
Have to gen rush before 5 hooks because of Devour hope
This is the part that I think people overlook hard. We had the same problem with the gen kick and 3 gen metas: easy killer strategy that was nearly impossible to counter to the normal player base.
But, since there is literally zero in the game for comeback mechanics for the survivor team, if you don't gen rush it's auto loss.
For all of the complaining about "gens go too fast", some people are really, really stuck on strategies that the only answer survivors have is to push gens as hard as possible to even have a chance.
So survivors get conditioned to gen rush, and when the new, broken killer-toy-of-the-month is finally taken away, well... Survivors are still gonna gen rush after that too.
-
@SidneysBane1996 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853785#Comment_3853785
Because Survivors shiuldn't be able to control ALL the things Killers use to pressure. What if there were a perk that did this for Killers and randomly added hookstages to someone with the most stages? Still fair?
It wasn't a good perk idea and shouldn't have come live.
How do people still not understand how the perk works?
StB doesn't add, remove, or otherwise alter the total number of hook stages in the game, it just moves it to another survivor. That's it.
The perk even tells you when it activates, tells you which survivor did it, and makes the unhooker an insta down for you for 40s. At this point, do you need an aura or a neon sign?
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853610#Comment_3853610
I did earn it. A long time ago. With survivors DCing to deny it. It was a horribly designed achievement then and it's still a horribly designed achievement now.
If I name my character "going for adept" an I suddenly entitled to an escape? That the
killeris somehow in the wrong for me not getting it?If the killer disconnects to deny you the achievement, then that is wrong, yes. Killers who disconnect to deny survivors the RPD escape achievement are in the wrong as well. The killer lost, but they see something they can deny their opposition, and they do it even to their own detriment.
Again, no one's talking about free kills or free escapes. The comparison is wrong.
I've seen killers open an RPD gate and then go and stand in front of the other to deny any survivor opening it. I consider that bad sportsmanship as well. Again, not "unsportsmanlike" as in breaking the rules, just bad sportsmanship in that they're being a jerk in the way they're conceding. "I lost, but you don't get what you want. Ha ha."
The hiding in a locker nonsense to force a mori instead of being Tombstoned shouldn't be possible, it's poor game design. If the final remaining survivor could be Tombstoned in the dying state, or if the final survivor mori counted as a Tombstone, then this wouldn't even be a conversation. Instead, the devs designed an achievement that can be completely denied by the existence of lockers.
Like I said, back before bots, survivors disconnected to deny the achievement. They did it as they were about to be Tombstoned, they did it when I kept dragging them out looking for a dead zone, and they did it when I stared at the locker to see if they'd get so bored they'd just step out. The only reason they sit in lockers now instead of disconnecting is because they get replaced by a bot.
Edit: The reason I mention disconnects to deny the achievement is about mindset. It's two different ways of players getting the same outcome. I wasn't entitled when I was frustrated at being denied the achievement because survivors kept disconnecting. It's not entitlement to be frustrated that this achievement is so poorly designed and lockers can deny it even when the killer has otherwise won, either.
The hiding in a locker nonsense to force a mori instead of being Tombstoned shouldn't be possible, it's poor game design
At this point, you're just literally saying there should be no counter to this combo. Survivors should just die, and more importantly, that it's now somehow on the devs to give out the achievement for free. Or at least make it uncounterably easy. That's just an indefensible position, and blames literally anyone except the killer for their own actions (or refusal to do their literal job).
back before bots, survivors disconnected to deny the achievement.
Lockers weren't and aren't that hard to find and use for this purpose. You're trying to be outraged by the fact that survivors aren't somehow allowing the "power role" whatever the killer wants.
I don't deny that some people can be petty, but extending that to the entire player base is way off. Again, the killer in this scenario is refusing to end the game because the survivor isn't just giving them the achievement that they've only partially earned. Why should the survivor be stuck in a locker for an hour because the killer can't accept that 75% of an achievement isn't 100%?
I don't really care how much the killer wants it, or feels they deserve it. Be a good sport and put me on hook so we can both move on gracefully. Since that's what this thread was initially about.
I can accept that, as the survivor, I've lost the game, but the killer didn't earn their achievement. Those are two very different things. And that's the part that causes the conflict and dragging out the game: the killer can't accept that they got close, but not quite. Which is now why you're saying that "counter play should not exist". Yikes.
The biggest indicator for me that this is killer pettiness is the posts. This is the only achievement in the entire game that people regularly post about, usually because they didn't get it themselves, and are actively angry and blaming their opponent for not giving it to them.
If you're defending that, you're simply wrong. I've illustrated why that's the case in at least 3 different ways, so if it isn't sticking at this point it never will with you.
It's ego, it's entitlement, flat out. And this is literally the definition of special pleading fallacy of you are saying this is the only achievement in the game that isn't up to the player to earn, no, it's somehow on the opponent to gift it to them.
So I'm out of this discussion with you. But, since I can easily prove this is an ego thing too: you won't help yourself but have the last word in this conversation, but I also leave you with one final word of my own: ratio.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853454#Comment_3853454
I can't say this enough: in this exact situation, the survivor is doing the only thing they can to
survive, and the killer is refusing tokill.The survivor's objective is not to remain on the map indefinitely, it's to escape. If the survivor is not working to escape, all they're doing is wasting time. If a survivor hugs a gen and refuses to let go as a counterplay to Tombstone, I respect that. Working on gens is part of their objective and they're earning points doing it. Sitting in a locker doesn't earn points, it doesn't get them closer to their objective. In fact, sitting in the locker doing nothing gets the survivor closer and closer to death, they're just dong it via the ridiculously long route.
Again, the survivor's objective is to survive by escaping. That's survival. That's very different from sitting on the map doing nothing prolonging death.
in an ideal world the killer would actually try to counter the locker counter play and grab, drag the survivor to a dead zone, and still have
earnedthe achievement.Some maps have nowhere to drag the survivor that's far enough away from a locker. Getting a map where that's not the case isn't "earning", it's getting lucky. Back before I had the achievement, one of the maps the game put me on was Red Forest. That sucked. I tried over and over again, but there was nowhere far enough. It was in the days before bots, and once the survivor realized I was persistent, they disconnected to deny the Tombstone.
This has always been about spite rather than surviving or countering. Now that there are bots, the survivors can't disconnect to deny the achievement anymore, but back when they could they would. Constantly.
the killer is wasting the survivors time by not ending the match gracefully with a hook.
Or the survivor could end the match gracefully by letting the killer have the Tombstone. The killer isn't obligated to kill the survivor a certain way as much as the survivor isn't obligated to let the killer kill them a certain way. The survivor is wasting their own time if they keep running back to a locker. And if the survivor is so determined to refuse to be Tombstoned, then the killer can also refuse to drop them and mori them, and the two can let the entity handle it, in which case the survivor dies when time runs out. Both players are being stubborn but neither are breaking the rules. In my opinion, the survivor is the one being more ridiculous, because dying quickly by Tombstone seems a lot better than waiting for 50 minutes to die by the server closing. It's not like the survivor gets an achievement or more points or anything for dying by mori or the server closing instead of being Tombstoned.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853545#Comment_3853545
The sportsmanlike reaction to this should be "well, darn. I was close but looks like this isn't in the cards this match. I'm going to hook you and try again next, gg!"
So why isn't the killer doing that?
There's nothing "ggwp" about lockers existing. The survivor outwitting the killer in a chase and getting the hatch or using stealth to get the door, actively doing something, that's "ggwp." Prolonging the game while not actively doing anything just in the hopes they'll force the killer to mori them instead of Tombstone, that's not good gameplay, that's petty.
And it's unlikely to be a choice between getting hooked or getting Tombstoned. Mori'ing the final survivor is base kit. With Myers, the only difference is that the survivor is choosing to go lying down (mori) instead of standing up (Tombstone).
What is the killer waiting for in your world?
Simply by standing outside the locker, the killer is already asking "would you like to gift me the achievement?" And by staying in the locker, the survivors answer is "no".
At that point the conversation is done, and that should take, at most a couple minutes. The killer, by not pulling from the locker, is saying "fine, I'm not going to do my job of killing you at all, you can stay in that locker until you change your mind or the server shuts down".
That's it, that's the entire conversation.
The mental gymnastics here are insane. You're going out of your way to try and say things like "the survivor should only survive so long", or the "survivor should just give up" when the answer is "the killer should just kill the survivor and accept that their achievement isn't possible that match".
This conversation never happens for literally any other achievement in the entire game. If I name my character "going for adept" an I suddenly entitled to an escape? That the killer is somehow in the wrong for me not getting it?
Absolutely not. That's completely unreasonable, and it's not up to the other team to grant our gift that to me under any circumstance.
No one ever says, no matter how entitled, that is somehow on the killer to make sure their adept achievement gets done. Yet here we are, an entire thread of people so backwards that it's somehow the survivors fault for not giving up the achievement.
Get over yourselves, it's a hard achievement, go earn it.
-
@AlexXHunter44 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853532#Comment_3853532
In the situation you are describing the game is already over. If the survivor can actually still survive, it's not bad sportsmanship by the killer its a bad play by the killer.
Now if you want to actually talk about the subject and not a made up fantasy scenario, as I said both sides have the ability to end the match at any point they want to. It's not on either side to end it the way the other wants, both are allowed to play for their goals as long as they aren't holding thr match hostage. Which in this scenario the killer isn't doing.
I'm not sure what "fantasy scenario" you're taking about, since I very specifically describe the situation that is generally considered "the tombstone achievement dilemma".
The killer has opportunity and ability to kill a survivor and isn't doing it (specifically in hopes of being gifted the achievement). That's where the problem is.
The sportsmanlike reaction to this should be "well, darn. I was close but looks like this isn't in the cards this match. I'm going to hook you and try again next, gg!"
So why isn't the killer doing that?
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853454#Comment_3853454
Speaking of insights, how did you feel about hatch standoffs? They were generally considered the survivor's fault for refusing to take the chance on getting grabbed, and we basically forgot about this scenario when addressing them. Now the killer is apparently expected to continuously grab and carry the survivor in the hopes of landing in enough of a deadzone (no other lockers nearby, of course) as many times as it takes to secure their win they already got. The match is over in this stalemate, the survivor's outcome is nearly always death. You're stretching the hell out of that <1% chance of them surviving somehow when they're firmly placed between the killer taking a single action to finish them vs dying to the server shutdown anyway.
The only way that anyone can ever survive that is if the killer lets them. And thats kinda the point many people have regarding the situation, the killer is expected to give them more free chances to escape the stalemate. Yet it's the killer showing bad sportsmanship for wanting the achievement, while the survivor afking and watching youtube videos is the victim? Prolonging the match (which they will not survive) until the 1 hour shutoff is not a "counter" any more than people DCing before bots to deny it was. It is just refusing to accept defeat and being spiteful about it. The irony is, as has been mentioned, preventing their achievement just subjects other survivors to the same playstyle, so the cycle continues until it ends with a non-spiteful survivor who happens to lose last
how did you feel about hatch standoffs?
Hatch standoff was already gone before I started playing the game. But I don't feel like that's comparable here since that was a poor design choice by the devs. Interactions or locker use are the intended counter play to tombstone.
Now the killer is apparently expected to continuously grab and carry the survivor
Not continuously. There's a finite amount of space on a map, and it should be pretty clear after a short time that it is or isn't possible to give a dead zone. The survivor is likely going to go to the same locker they know is safe in a small number of turns.
Looking for a dead zone and trying to catch the survivor is literally player vs player interaction. It's literally gameplay. And if the killer manages to be successful, they've earned the achievement.
Every single response is completely backwards in this thinking. This has nothing to do with a win, if it did then why not hook? Be done with it! You even admit the game is over, so the killer needs to do their job and kill the survivor!
The survivor isn't prolonging anything, the game is over when the killer decides or realizes he can't get his achievement. That's it, that's the secret reality that no one wants to admit.
The killer isn't doing his job of killing the survivor, when they have the opportunity and ability to do so. In any other context it's an open and shut case that that's where the problem lies.
The only reason for this conversation is that people want a difficult achievement to be made easier and are blaming the survivor for not gifting it to them. That's entitlement.
-
@AlexXHunter44 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853454#Comment_3853454
Why is the killer wasting the survivors time in that case 😂 the survivor is also choosing the same gameplay loop with the ability to end it at any point. It's both sides being equally stubborn. Neither side is trapped in the game, they are both choosing it equally.
It's the killer's move. He has the opportunity and ability to kill the survivor at any time and is choosing not to. He can end the game at any moment by completing his primary objective, and the only reason he isn't killing this survivor is to hope the survivor either makes a mistake or gifts the achievement to them.
If that goes on for longer than a few minutes, then either the killer doesn't realize the achievement isn't going to happen (unlikely), or feels entitled to the achievement.
The optimal, "good sport" move is to do their job, hook the survivor, and say "ggwp" and try again next game.
Survivors should never be expected to stop "surviving" and throw themselves on the killer's blade. You're expecting the survivor to throw away their primary objective (surviving) to end the game. That is completely unreasonable when the killer just has to do their job.
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853160#Comment_3853160
What you're implying is that it's ok to sit in a locker for 60 minutes until server closes because....the killer isn't entitled to an achievement?
You sure showed those Myers they should have tried switching out that chainsaw for a Dredge kit
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853160#Comment_3853160
The topic isn't asking for survivors to give free kills to help the killer. The topic is asking if it's bad sportsmanship to sit in a locker for an hour when you're the last survivor and Mikey's right there so you're dead either way. OP was pretty specific on that point. Staying in the locker until the server ends the match is still a death, the survivor is wasting their own time to be petty, and it means they're damning other survivors to more future matches as that Mikey who was denied the achievement continues to play with those add-ons. To hurt one killer player, the survivor is hurting at least four times as many other survivor players.
So, these responses always give an insight into how people think. Let me explain what I feel should happen in the "classic tombstone achievement standoff".
So, in this scenario, we have a double iri tombstone Myers, three survivors are already dead to the add-on and the last survivor is in a locker. Myers is standing outside and knows the last survivor is in the locker.
In this situation, the killer has said "I know where you are and would like to kill you by my own hand and get my achievement". The survivor said "yes, but I know the counter play to this". And now we get to the very important part that people seem to not understand:
The next move in this situation is the killer's.
Now, in an ideal world the killer would actually try to counter the locker counter play and grab, drag the survivor to a dead zone, and still have earned the achievement.
Maybe the survivor can still make it to a locker instead. This is called PVP.
So let's say this has happened, the killer has tried all of this and can't get the survivor to a dead zone. Or maybe they haven't tried anything other than standing there, menacingly. It doesn't change that that next move is the killer's.
With mature players, the killer will understand that the survivor is effectively playing to counter, and they won't get the achievement. So the only real course is to hook the survivor and go next.
I can't say this loudly enough, but if the match lasts for longer than a few minutes in this state, it's the killer who is showing poor sportsmanship.
Maybe the killer will hope that the survivor will gift them the achievement. But if it's been more than a couple minutes, that's obviously not going to happen. Once it gets beyond a couple minutes, the only options are that the killer has a sunk cost fallacy and doesn't realize he should cut his losses and try again, or (most likely) the killer feels entitled to the kill… and the killer is wasting the survivors time by not ending the match gracefully with a hook.
I can't say this enough: in this exact situation, the survivor is doing the only thing they can to survive, and the killer is refusing to kill. Anyone saying the survivor is in the wrong is way, way off base.
-
I have no responsibility or obligation for your achievement. That's basically the only healthy option.
Otherwise, people would just run these add-ons and expect people to give them a free kill or two.
Would we expect this of survivors? If I play Ada and name myself outbreakbreakout should I expect to be given a free escape? That sounds ridiculous.
-
I'm personally of the opinion that lightborn is fine and doesn't need changing.
However, if we're going to nerf distortion because "one perk shouldn't counter everything in one category", then the devs have to decide if they're going to be consistent with their design philosophy.
-
@GeneralV said:
it wasn’t like this
That is a good point. It wasn't like this.
Sometimes, people seem to forget that the sheer amount of tunneling / slugging killers just wasn't a thing back in the day. Those strategies existed and some players used them, of course, but generally speaking you could expect killers to go for 12 hooks.
And it was fine, it was good and healthy for the game. In current DBD things have gotten out of hand, especially slugging these past few months.
And it was fine, it was good and healthy for the game
You defend the old system of ranks a lot, and while the MMR system we currently use isn't perfect, it's still better.
When they did MMR system testing and feedback a couple years ago, they did blind testing without telling the players what they changed, asked for feedback on how it felt, and changed it again for a week or two.
When they gave us the results, the old ranking system was one of the tests, and if was wildly unpopular. The only thing people really want from ranks is to see their MMR on screen, which was one of the major problems with ranks.
Ranks had the ongoing problem of the players being able to manipulate their rank at will. Deranking was a huge problem on both sides for players who simply wanted easier games and pub stomping.
The current system obfuscates the numbers, and people can't really do that any more (at least, not without spending days deranking with boring losses, and even then you can't be sure it's working).
That's what I hear when people think fondly of the old system, since one if the make complaints is always "games are too sweaty", which is identical to "I want easier opponents".
My only real criticism of the MMR system currently is that I didn't think they're iterating on it to fix the issues that do exist. But revealing the number isn't one of those issues.
-
People complain about the Thana nerf, but this is exactly the same thing that happened then too.
They overdid the changes, and every. Single. Killer. Ran Thana, pentimento, and some combination of two other slowdowns for two weeks until they nerfed it.
I still vividly remember a huntress match on the chapel map. She lit exactly one pentimento totem every time once of my solo q teammates cleansed anything to keep the gen debuff running. I did the last gen injured by myself and it took nearly 3 minutes. Screw that.
-
@Yggleif said:
No and hexes will go back to being irrelevant because survivors don't actually want other objectives no matter how much they claim otherwise.
This is more a matter of poor phrasing.
Survivors say they want "other objectives" and mean something other than gens and staring at a progress bar. Collect parts to repair the gate, a scavenger hunt, something new.
Killers want "other objectives" and tend to mean they want extra things for survivors to do, which are also mandatory to escaping and give survivors no benefit for having done them. This interpretation is indistinguishable from just "more gens".
You're responding that the survivors want the second one, and I don't think anyone has ever meant that except killers.
-
@iloveandhatethisgame said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3852397#Comment_3852397
thing is that it was a doctor. It makes sense if it was a killer with an alternate attack but with doctor it makes no sense
Can still technically be done with grabs off a locker, vault, or a gen. I've also had it where my fourth survivor is being carried before the third is off hook, so that can mess with the stack counting on the survivor end.
So unusual, but not impossible.
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3847622#Comment_3847622
I do? When I get tired of going there. Thanks for the not so helpful advice.
I'm not sure why you think this was unhelpful advice, since it's not only the answer to this issue, but was also recently buffed to be a much more common offering to obtain.
What exactly are you looking for if not this? Do you want the devs to remove map offerings?
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3850962#Comment_3850962
This is not a "magical hypothetical scenario" at all? It will literally work in every scenario that doesn't go 1-1-1-1, I just gave one example across hundreds of possible ones. In particular, it can also happen in 2-1-0-0, and now you have 2x more chance that one of the unhookers has the perk. It won't happen every game sure, but empirically I'd say the perk already gets used ~1/10 of the time against me right now and I don't tunnel, and it has a game-changing effect when it happens. (To be fair though, it was counter-productive for the survivor team half of the time, so right now it's not frustrating to play against, but it could be in the future)
What do you mean by:
there's a much much greater chance the one person who brought STB is already hooked in this case
Given a 2-1-1-0 scenario, the chance that the person who brought STB has not been already hooked, is simply 25%. 1 out of 4. That's quite common.
There are a bunch of factors not included in your assessment here that play a big factor.
A huge one being: just because people bring the perk doesn't mean they're going to get value from it. They may get to second stage first (tunneling), they may not get the unhook, and most importantly, it may not be a smart idea to activate the perk of the killer is camping and you'll be insta downed for no gain.
You also have the problem that even just moving hook stages around isn't always going to be a net benefit for the survivor team. If your "weak" player, or someone with a meme build, makes themselves the target it will net lose time for the team over someone who can loop better or has a chase oriented build.
I think you misread what I wrote because you responded to the wrong thing. In the 2-1-1-0 scenario, there's a 75% chance the one STB player is already hooked meaning they're either already on death hook, or putting themselves on death hook to use the perk. Which is much much greater than the 25% to use it completely safely.
And all of that is contingent on the other factors I mentioned above as well.
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3850826#Comment_3850826
It actually affects even non-tunneling killers.
For example, if the killer gets hook states 1-1-1-0, then 2-1-1-0, then they are clearly not tunneling. Yet someone uses the burden and now it's 1-1-1-1. The killer played nice and yet the perk still works against them.
This perk is not particularly anti-tunnel, it basically affects every killer who doesn't go for 1-1-1-1.
Meanwhile, BHVR will think they addressed tunneling, even though this perk does nothing for solos.
I mean, in this magical hypothetical scenario you also have to have 4 survivors all running the perk for this to even be guaranteed (along with some pretty tight coordination). Otherwise random chance dictates that there's a much, much greater chance the one person who brought STB is already hooked in that case.
And if you have 4 copies of one perk on the survivor team and only one of those 4 even gets value, that sounds like a gigantic win for the killer already.
-
They already announced that balance fixes are coming for this character. And Mandy just confirmed it again in this thread for you.
-
In the next hot fix? Revert. 100%
Any change, buff, or rework should be tested internally, then ptb, then go live. Like basically everything else.
The fact that this wasn't in the patch notes, road maps, or in the ptb test tells me this was entirely an error that this went live at all.
-
@tyantlmumagjiaonuha said:
This is a very powerful perk for survivor teams because it gives them more time to kick the first one out of the game. It is also useful in the sense that it makes a strong perk even stronger, as it is even stronger if you have Off-Record, DH, etc.
It doesn't though, at least not if the killer has more awareness than a brick.
The perk announces itself when used, so the killer can just switch targets and get someone out of the game early.
It also just switches the "strategy" from tunneling to hard camping, since the survivor who just took the hook state is literally a free kill and hook. I honestly don't think it's suddenly "too hard" for killers to figure this out, since camping and tunneling are literally the go-to (only) strategies some people understand in any capacity.
-
These are part of the devs continuing efforts to increase kill rates that don't usually make it into the patch notes except for footnotes.
Maps getting reworked to be smaller is usually a patch highlight, but they've also reworked many tiles, reweighted existing tiles (so that mind gameable tiles spawn less often), and even hard coded some anti-tile-chaining logic in place so that you're all but guaranteed to get useless hills or something to break up the map between tiles.
All these are barely mentioned, if at all, but it leads to gigantic dead zones in lots of places, one-way vaults that can't be used to loop, just hold w (harvester, for example), and completely unsafe pallets that just water down the map spawns yet provide nothing.
And the devs have, admittedly, done a poor job of communicating that this is occurring, so people who don't ever touch survivor still think "just mind game lul" is a valid response.
-
@Reinami said:
I just wonder why when its a killer perk, why do they hotfix it, but when its a survivor perk, we have to wait 6+months for it?
The nearly equivalent change was a couple years ago to boil over.
They overdid it (can't honestly remember if it got ptb tested or not) but it was reverted within 2 weeks.
People complained (on both sides) that the perk was overtuned and they fixed it quickly. The only difference I can see here is that there are a handful of *extremely* biased killer players who think this is ok or balanced in its buffed state.
-
Since this comes up often right now, saying "counterforce is the answer/counter to thrill" is basically just disingenuous. It barely makes a dent. And by the time you have enough stacks to notice any difference, you've cleansed probably 4 totems and thrill has gotten a gens worth of time out of you.
It doesn't "counter" as much as "barely mitigates the tremendous impact that thrill has currently".
Thank the entity they're addressing this soon though.
-
@biggybiggybiggens said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3848757#Comment_3848757
You have to remember that MFT is a Survivor perk. This is a Killer perk getting whined about. I have no doubt Thrill will be touched before Xmas break. When Killer stuff is whined about, it doesn't last as long as Survivor stuff does ever since Ruin/Undying. There's only 1 person complaining when it's Survivor OP, vs 4 whiners against Killers OP..
Killers burned down the forums and complained about the "extra gen popping when a survivor dies" bug. That was fixed within 6 days. Fixed
The identical thing happened to survivors where merciless storm was bugged and deleted the entire gen, even if you hit the skill checks, and that went on without being kill switched or fixed for over two months.
It's now day 7 since the patch, and they haven't even acknowledged that thrill is an issue, let alone anything beyond that.
You can try to spin that fixes are biased all you want, but if you're going that route you won't like where the facts and patch history take you.
-
@CrossTheSholf said:
Is this the new thing survivors are complaining about? Really? Hexes?????
The change to a single perk, with no testing on the ptb, or even mention in patch notes, until it was going live is being complained about yes.
Especially since that one change results in cleansing totems taking 46.666 seconds now instead of 14 without that one perk.
It's over the top, broken, and feels like it was an afterthought. And the devs have said nothing on the issue either, so it feels kind of like a big middle finger to survivors with the new meta that everyone seems to understand why it exists, yet the forums is just incessantly gaslighting into thinking that complaining about it is somehow not justified. Like your post, for example.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
What are people doing on killer? No, the survivors cannot safely ignore hexes and also get gens done. Unless you're completely AFK. Unless you're somehow getting 3 staged and Devour isn't going off. And again, unless you're completely AFK, you're going to win if survivors spend 2 minutes on a totem quest. Counterforce will not change this.
What are people doing on killer?
The answer appears to be:
Enjoying yet another 45 second of slowdown on one perk that relies entirely on defending a PvE objective, while gaslighting the devs and the forum that this is somehow an ok change. Calling it "skill" to equip the newest overpowered thing and winning without much effort while boosting their MMR to be heights so they can complain for more buffs against the evils of SWF.
Apparently.
The only thing I'm seeing is that being polite and requesting change or asking "is this intended?" seems to get ignored.
There's not even been a response from the devs on this surprise change, yet if people burned the forums down like they did with other patches (like the bug that gave free gen completion when killing a survivor early)... Now *that* was already fixed by this point in the patch cycle.
Looking forward to another "8 months of Eruption meta", or even "2 months to bugfix merciless storm" wait time to resolve this.
-
@Crowman said:
Let killers pick 3 perks they never want to play against.
You mean, in addition to being able to already avoid lobbies with flashlights, toolboxes, or nea?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should put in a system like this at all. But at the same time, why is it suddenly an instant "give me a compensation buff" literally any time someone recommends any change at all. That's the definition of entitlement.