AngyKiller
AngyKiller
About
- Username
- AngyKiller
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@slunder said:
@The_Krapper yea, but there are tons of examples of survivors using it as a free escape card.
1) Dead harding over a trap.
2) Dead hard to save yourself if you get jumpscared.
3) The survivor goes in the open and plays poorly but thanks to dead hard, makes it to a loop.
@AngyKiller lol your comment is ironic, you say "whatever survivors invent next" but you can only defend killers lmao. Also if you cannot pressure gens and down survivors you do not deserve to have an easy down at the end.
Imagine thinking you can tell me how I can or can not earn downs, or what 'rights' I have based on perks.
I'm going to use NoED more, just to tick off angry Survivor mains who think they can tell me how to play. 😘 I hope they come onto these forums to cry harder over 'unfair NoED' and 'Unearned kills' and 'No right! WHAAAA!'
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739407#Comment_2739407
"Man, I plan to suck all game to get an Insta-Down and a Speedboost, because I cannot run Loops as Killer!"
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739268#Comment_2739268
You dont plan ahead for NOED. No Killer can tell me that they prefer to win after 5 Gens are done and not before. The first goal as Killer should always be to not lose all 5 Gens, followed by not letting the Survivors escape.
Regarding your DH-idea: Perk Number 1 would be the one which would be played, because it would just be "DH for distance", basically before they fixed it, DH had the same purpose and was complained about, because Survivors used it for Distance, which was the only way to use DH.
The second Perk you created would not be used, since iFrames without any distance dont do anything, unless you are directly at a Pallet.
You dont plan ahead for NOED. No Killer can tell me that they prefer to win after 5 Gens are done and not before. The first goal as Killer should always be to not lose all 5 Gens, followed by not letting the Survivors escape.
ANd I try to win before 5 gens pop, but I use NoED on the off-chance I don't. That's what's called 'planning ahead'. I'm using NoED to PLAN FOR the gens popping.
This is why all this inane dribble about 'NoED rewards failure' pisses me off; The Killer has not failed just because all 5 gens popped. 5 gens popping is an arbitrary limit Survivors invented to then claim was the 'flaw' of NoED.
Also; if I can't run loops: NoED won't magically make me better at loops so... 🤷♂️
The second Perk you created would not be used, since iFrames without any distance dont do anything, unless you are directly at a Pallet.
I left out a part; If the Killer hits a Survivor using #2; The Killer gets the attack cooldown animation, which would help the Survivor get away.
Hell, pair it with Sprint Burst, let the Killer hit you, and then Meep Meep away while he's wiping his weapon. Or pair it with Lithe and drop from a high area, or any other speed boost perk.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739268#Comment_2739268
What do you “plan” about NOeD? You don’t control anything about it. It could not even activate at all. It activates, or it doesn’t.
You plan needing the pressure in end game instead of using th at perk slot for early or mid game pressure, or gen regressing.
This bullshit about NoED 'rewarding bad play' or whatever inane drivel people will make up needs to stop, because it's wrong. Full stop.
You can't balance a perk around a false premise, and 'blah blah bad play' or 'rewards failure' or whatever buzzwords Survivors will invent next week are a false premise.
-
Rofl. No.
-
Rofl. 'Killer sided'. Riiiiight. That's why SWFs can bully Killers of equal skill; because the game is so Killer sided. 🙃
-
Implement a halt to the sacrificial process if the Killer lingers too close to the hooked Survivor
I will say this again: The devs tried a 'If the Killer is too close to the hook, do <x>' punishment. In their case, it was 'The struggle meter empties slower'.
Survivors abused it by forcing the Killer to either camp, or walk away for a free unhook.
So stop. Everyone. Stop with these camping punishments. They cannot work. Every single one has been abusable by Survivors. Let me explain:
- I hook a Survivor. Now 2 Survivors are North and South of the hook by...let's say 25 meters. Clearly in the open, opposite directions.
- If I go after North: He slowly backs away, preventing me from starting a Chase event. At the same time, South walks towards the Hook.
- I reset to the Hook. North and South reset to 25 meters away. The game still considers me 'Camping'.
- Repeat 2 and 3 if I go after South instead.
Now, what are my choices?
- I camp the hook. North and South camp ME. 4th Survivor now has infinite time to solo gens without their friend dying on hook.
- I commit to a chase. In doing so, the non-chased Survivor gets a free unhook.
This is how these 'punishments' ALWAYS can play out. Every, single, one.
And this is not a hypothetical; this is, literally, how it played out when the devs tried this. Survivors showed they would abuse the HELL out of it for their own benefit.
People need to accept that camping has it's uses, and any 'punishment' they invent will be so massively abused that Killers would never stand for it.
As for the rest...Eh? The problem with making Ruin basekit is that Killers cannot kick already-regressing generators, which means perks based on kicking generators are now useless & all need a rework.
Also; how long with this part Survivors can find halt regression for? The entire match? A minute? Two minutes?
I do like the idea that regression would be based on Killer's proximity to a hook, but it should maybe be worked into Ruin itself.
-
Jesus. NoED does not 'save you when you get outplayed'.
It's an end game perk, that activates in the end game. It's called 'planning ahead'. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
As for Dead Hard...I honestly think DH should be 2 separate perks:
1 perk dives you distance, but you can be hit if you time it wrong.
1 perk gives you a moment of no hitbox, but you don't dash anywhere.
-
Silly fact for no reason: The Xbox One X is abbreviated as XBOX
X
Box
One
X
Whoever in marketing decided the name had better have gotten a raise.
-
@Coder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739155#Comment_2739155
The good thing is that you're actually proving my point. You agree the addon is powerful, and you think the only reason it should not be removed/reworked is because "survivors complain". Your argument is more like a strawman fallacy, instead of talking about the balance of the addon you divert the discussion towards attacking survivors for complaining.
Way to put words in my mouth to pretend you're right.
I don't think it's OP, and I think both sides cry and whine the second something beats them. Then they run onto the forums to scream for nerfs, and result to personal attacks whenever someone disagrees. 'It is powerful' does not mean 'It is OP'. So keep reaching.
-
@Coder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739150#Comment_2739150
Don't make this an "us vs them" post, it's not about that, I play 50/50 (based on your name only you feel like a killer main so probably your opinion is bias). It's not that it's strong, it's straight unbalanced and it removes all her counterplay. It's like having an addon for nurse that will help you blink exactly where the survivor is at all times. It would remove all juking and counterplay you could have against her.
Gotta love that 'I play both but your biased based off absolutely nothing but a name you made as a joke'.
Whatever, dude. Survivors gonna whine.
-
I repeat 'heaven forbid Killers have powerful add ons'.
The second they do; Survivors claim it's 'not fun' 'OP' 'a miserable experience' and whatever else they can think of to get it nerfed.
MD Ring, DCB, NoED, camping, slugging, tunneling, etc. etc. If a Killer kills; people gonna claim they did it wrong, or it ruined their fun.
-
Heaven forbid Killers have even 1 add on that's at all powerful. 🙄
No.
-
@Psyphren said:
There's literally no reason to remove a feature simply because a small handful of crybabies find it to be annoying. You have 0 valid points here. The fact that being a killer player is super easy in this game IS valid, because all of the "fix suggestions" pertain to needlessly nerfing something that doesn't need nerfing when there are a plethora of ways to go about the issue as already stated, via gameplay, via display options, and simply by being responsible for your own health. Some of you simply need to play survivor more to understand the game better and improve as a killer instead of crying the moment you get outplayed.
The fact that you think this is about nerfing flashlights, and you'd rather that not happen, even if it's dangerous to player's health, shows how horrible of a person you are.
This is not an attempted nerf in disguise. This us about the fact that they can be clicked so fat; they give me a headache. And I'm not photosensitive. So imagine what they can do to someone who is.
So take your 'Reeee! Don't nerf my flashlights!' and walk, because what you what means less than nothing in the face of people's health.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738596#Comment_2738596
HAHAHA.
Okay, I have to follow that up with one from tonight.
Queue into a 3man on Midwich as Scratched Mirror Myers.
Right off the bat - get several downs, just creeping in and going wild.
So they try to get smart, I come from the back and do it again.
Then they post one person as permanent lookout. I drop down from above and get them again.
Postgame:
'Dude, you gave me such a fright that I screamed, then my sister screamed, then my dog ran out of the room barking'.
You know you done good when you scare people not even playing as Scratched Mirror Myers! 😁
-
Playing Trapper. Or using Spies.
I once played Trapper with Spies, while streaming to a friend:
Me: Yeah, Spies ain't too good but-
*Spies pops*
Me: *Downs Survivor, hooks in basement* That's the most use I've ever got-
*Spies Pops*
Me: *Hooks Survivor #2 in Basement* Ok, so I got some valu-
*Spies pops* *Survivor #3 in basement*
Me: If they would just stop-
*Spies pops* *Survivor #4 in Basement*
Me: ....I like Spies.
Friend: Did you even place ONE trap?
Me: Yes...No? Yes...? No. No, I did not.
-
@BenSanderson55 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2706710#Comment_2706710
You played since the beginning where gens could be done in a few seconds and you think its gen rushing now lmao
Man, you quote my almost 3 week old post to say...absolutely nothing of value?
Also; where did I say 'genrushing'? And when I DO mention 'genrushing', I'm just using the term people know. I've even said that 'genrushing' as a concept is as fake as 'camping'; both are either side doing what they feel is the best way to complete their goals. And both terms are just the other side trying to add a false stigma; an idea that winning 'too fast' is toxic.
-
@legrosporc69 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738451#Comment_2738451
Someone who can tp ounce every minute its not really a good power
Not to mention that he loses his ability to TP once the final gen pops. What a great power. 🙃
-
While I like the idea, there is a problem; The game would have to load the items in separately, since they would be different based on who is playing, and what Killer they are playing.
This would possibly bloat load times, which are already rather bad. Imagine how much worse it would be for console players.
I know you already kind of get this with the Hook keychains, but adding even more, and possibly items with a larger poly count? Oof.
-
@chargernick85 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738160#Comment_2738160
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738173#Comment_2738173
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738175#Comment_2738175
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738177#Comment_2738177
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738244#Comment_2738244
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738255#Comment_2738255
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738263#Comment_2738263
I want to thank you all for your prayers and being understanding of the situation......unlike others.
When i made this thread she was in the process of a 3rd code blue and up this point my families prayers werent being answered. I hoped more prayers would swing the odds but unfortunately it was her time....again thank those of you who tried and knew how to read.
I am sorry to hear that, and I'm sorry for your loss.
-
@ImBrakingBike said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/303889/imagine-a-perk-ban-system
The main problem I see there is that for a system like this to be implemented you'd need to show the killer to the survivors while in the lobby. And we all know it'd just make it near impossible for certain killers to find matches.
Or for certain Killers to win. There are a few off-meta perks that just hard counter certain Killers.
But it's still a funny idea to imagine.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738202#Comment_2738202
Always a pleasure talking to you 🙂
And to you! :)
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738200#Comment_2738200
I understand what you're saying and the lines definitely get blurry like in the situations you described.
If donating to an anti-LGBTQ+ lawmaker was the only way to raise minimum wage and improve quality of life for starving people then it absolutely wouldn't be homophobic to donate.
Although that isn't the situation Cawthon was in. I could forgive if maybe he inadvertendly donated to 1 or so politicians without knowing their stance but it's the fact that he donated to numerous, knowing that they were homophobic just because it was economically favourable for him. Essentially, his decision means that he's indifferent (at best) to LGBTQ+ people losing rights if it means that he's taxed less. It's a huge kick in the teeth for his LGBTQ+ fans, who he claims to "love" on his socials.
That's fair. I tend to not think about the money aspect, having been lower-middle-class (and even homeless twice) my whole life. 😁
@QwQw said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738202#Comment_2738202
Damn, is this massive argument actually gonna peacefully?
Oh no! Umm..quick! Uhh...
Grrr! Survivor mains! Argh! Killer mains! 😲
-
The Survivor Meta would cease to exist, and Survivors would get a large chunk (but not all of) of decent Killer perks. 😁
Be funny as heck to see.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738129#Comment_2738129
I usually agree with you, but I think you're a bit off the mark here. I mean, it was a fun example, but not really representative of anything.
Fact is, when you give money to a political candidate, you are doing so to support their platform. If that platform consists of some things you like, and others you don't, then you are saying that the stuff you don't like Is worth it to get what you do like.
In the real world example of Scott, he gave money to multiple anti-lgbtqtia politicians, people who are actively and openly involved in trying to roll back human rights for people who aren't cisgender and straight. Now, he says he did that because of their economic plans, but frankly, those plans are just giving people who have his amount of money a tax break, so he's really saying he donated to them to try and pay less money later.
Does this make him a homophobe? No. But I would argue it definitely shows he's fine with people who aren't him losing rights, just so long as he pays less money in taxes. This isn't like giving money to a charity only to find out the CEO had some bigoted ideas, these are public political platforms.
If a politician says "I support low taxes for the rich, keeping children from learning about gay people, and kicking transgender people out of the military" over and over, in public, on camera, and even puts it in writing on their website, then it is reasonable to assume that someone who then donates to that politician is doing so because they, at the very least, support those repeatedly stated platform ideals.
Also very fair. See above post as well. :) (This did not alert me that you had replied until after I replied to ImmersedNurse).
Perfectly respectable points.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738170#Comment_2738170
I wasn't accusing you specifically of using the gay friend card. As I said in my post, I was speaking generally and saying that having gay friends does not automatically mean someone isn't homophobic.
Eh I don't agree. As a gay person I could NEVER donate to an anti-LGBTQ+ politician, even if I agreed with literally ALL of their other ideals. It just isn't right to me and would be a huge betrayal of myself. It's just not something I could bring myself to do. It's hard to put into words but it literally goes against everything I am to do so.
As for your example, why donate at all? It's not like they particularly need the money. If they're commited to raising minimum wage then they'll do it with or without your contribution. Do I think voting for them if there's no better option is inherently homophobic? No.
But going out of your way to donate or show more support than is necessary is questionable at best.
Fair enough. I respect that stance. I even said I can kind of understand that in my original post; How LGBTQ+ people could feel betrayed, and feel like their money went to an anti-LGBTQ+ politician when they bought FNAF, since the developer supported said politicians. :)
I just wanted to understand the stance even better, and talking about something can help both sides realize things they may not have known before talking it out. It's...easy to get set in stone, when one can think 'This is how <x> works', and not realize there's nuance, know what I mean?
As an autistic; I run into that line of thinking ALLOT in myself, so I try to think up scenarios in discussions that force people (myself included) to think outside our, personal, set ideas.
-
🙏🙏
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738129#Comment_2738129
Yeah. There's plenty of other charities you could donate to. Why would you pick one who is also homophobic? Also I thought we as a society were over the gay friend card. You (I'm speaking generally here, not to you specifically) can be homophobic and have gay friends. Being nice to some queer people doesn't mean you can't be homophobic to others.
It's not because I "say so". It's because by donating to homophobic lawmakers, you're inadvertently supporting their homophobic views. Public support, donations, votes allows these people to get into positions of power and influence - where they can do significant harm to queer people. It doesn't matter if you donate to them for their charity work if they go on and use that money to run a hate campaign against queer people.
Also if you don't actually donate to homophobic "rich schmuck[s]", to use your own words, then why are you even getting involved? You're making up hypothetical scenarios in which you support homophobic rich people and then are getting defensive when told that that would be wrong? Like what?
I was not pull the 'gay friend' card, but as you cannot read my mind, you can't actually see how little I care about someone's gender, race, or orientation. Folks just need to be happy and, as Betty White put it 'I don't know how people can get so anti-something. Mind your own business, take care of your affairs, and don't worry about other people so much'
And I gave a hypothetical to understand your stance better. Because I could not use myself as an actual example, as I did not fit the question I wanted to ask. That's kind of how discussions work.
You're right in that there are better charities to donate too. But all I'm saying is that you don't need to promptly throw someone into the 'enemy camp' because they donated to someone based on ONE aspect of that person.
Let me try to make it clearer. Apologies; I am bad at communicating:
If there was some form of...what's the word? Something only a politician could do...some form of SOMETHING (but I can't remember the damn word!)
Let's say...Mr. Schmuck was FOR raising minimum wage by $3. And I agreed with that. Should I NOT donate to him because he's anti-LGBTQ+? yes; him being anti-gay is horrible. No, I would NEVER donate to him in any other capacity. But if donating to him to help him campaign to raise minimum wage was the only way to raise minimum wage...What should I do?
Because the options are now 'People can't feed themselves' or 'He's anti-LGBTQ+'. Both are damn good reasons to donate/not to donate. And would wanting him to raise minimum wage make me anti-LGBTQ+? THAT is what I mean by 'you can't attack someone based on ONE aspect'
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738094#Comment_2738094
You can't look at it like that. Survivor perks help individual survivors. Killer perks affects the entire match.
Which is, literally, how it should be.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737871#Comment_2737871
Yeah, if you actively donate to a homophobe in a position of authority (such as politicians and lawmakers) then you're homophobic. You might donate because you like their soup kitchens, but your money isn't guaranteed to go towards those soup kitchens. It'll likely be used in a number of different things, including anti-LGBTQ+ campaigns.
Whether you like it or not, supporting homophobic politicians and organisations is enabling them to continue to harm the queer community. Just because they might build houses for the homeless doesn't excuse the massive damage they do to LGBTQ+ people.
And no. You clearly don't get it. Otherwise you wouldn't be spending your time writing paragraphs defending BLATANT disregard for the LGBTQ+ community, which Cawthon himself claims to "love". It's not just betrayal, it's active support of those who seek to harm us. He may not intend for that, but that is the impact of supporting politicians with homophobic views.
So you're saying that, even though I've supported gay friends, and I'm supporting and helping a trans friend, and I literally give 0 craps about someone's gender, will always used preferred pronouns (unless I forget; I have memory problems from a rough childhood), and don't care who kisses who, as long as it's consensual; If I donate to someone for their charity work, but they have anti-LGBTQ+ views; I'm phobic. Because you say so.
You're trying to attack people you don't need to attack because you want to vilify people. You want to reduce them to 'You did <x>, and nothing else matters, because I said so'.
(For the record; Everything I listed I do is true, other than the 'supporting politicians' part. I can barely feed myself; why would I give any money to a rich schmuck with 3 houses?)
-
@Advorsus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738088#Comment_2738088
Oh I don't mind you disagreeing with me, like at all. I do however think it's hilarious that you comment anytime somebody mentions changing anything killer related, even if it's a slight Nerf, and then proceed to ######### and complain how it's unfair and it wouldn't be right, while still bitching that everyone else is whining. While you're sitting there whining about an idea, something that isn't even happening currently. Oh the irony. You're like the killer version of sluzzy 😂😂 like ######### sluzz, and that shits funny to me.
Everyone always says I 'always' say something, when I don't.
It's like you guys really just have to attack anyone who disagrees with you, even if you say you don't. 😂
I've admitted, repeatedly, that Killers and Survivors whine.
I don't just attack 'every post about Killer nerfs'. Only the idiots who keep trying to change NoED. Because NoED is fine, if you're not a whiny scrub.
People love putting words in my mouth and pretending I'm some rabid attack dog, because they're upset I did not bow down to the Survivor Overlords demanding massive nerfs, so clearly I'm against ANYTHING balancing Killers.
What morons.
-
'Hillbilly' ain't a race, so how can it be racist?
-
No. If Survivors get 16 perks in a match; Killers get up to 4 Slowdown perks. Limiting them would just increase the 'genrush meta' and We don't needs matches to drop below 4 damn minutes.
-
@Advorsus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738032#Comment_2738032
So having insta downs at end game is completely useless? You're only getting value out of the perk because of a 4% speed boost? Lol how bad are you at playing this game 😂 maybe practice on bots some more? Idk.
But seriously you crack my ######### up kid. I swear, when they do change it, and it's 1000x worse than anything I could've concocted, I'm making an entire post just for you. It's gonna be nothing but laughing gifs lol
And there's the personal attacks this player base is known for, when someone disagrees with you.
The ista-downs are useless if I only get 1 or 2. The speedboost is useless if I still have to hit someone twice & the exit gates are open.
I swear, people on this forum lose their minds if someone disagrees with them. it's like everyone has the mental maturity of 6 year olds. Grow TF up.
NoED ain't being changed because it's not OP, or unfair, or 'rewarding failure' or whatever brain-damaged drivel people invent as new buzzwords to whine and cry next week. Get better ideas and stop being a snide prick if people disagree with you.
-
NoED is fine and it does not need tokens. Survivors just need to do bones. Stop trying to change a perk that does not need changing.
It would not even be in the META if gens did not pop in under 5 minutes. And it would be useless if I got only 1 token, used it to down someone, & Survivors decided to swarm the hook during endgame.
Tired of everyone trying to change a perk that, literally, needs 0 changes.
-
It's not even a cheat. #########.
People will literally call anything a cheat these days, huh?
-
@Entinaty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737953#Comment_2737953
I honestly don't think why they cannot at least add that or at least have a PTB about it in future to see. Is it really that hard to implement if other PVP and PVE games do it?
There's a few problems:
- BHVR rarely admits mistakes for a long time. Look at the old hook struggle mechanic, and how long it took for them to change it in the face of people saying 'This literally hurts'.
- A number of Survivors claiming voice comms is 'not that powerful'. To which I call BS. It's literally the only difference between SWF and SoloQ.
- Survivors claiming they 'don't want people screaming on mic'. But, you know; mute options exist?
- Survivors claiming it's impossible because of language differences. Ignoring TF2, and Overwatch, and CS:GO, and literally every single team-based game.
So it won't happen. It SHOULD, but it won't.
-
@Entinaty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737943#Comment_2737943
You do make a fair point and while I wish that both were currently at full power maybe it is a subject best revisited when they try to implement their new system for solos to be able to see what their teammates are doing.
Their system for boosting SoloQ should be
- Add voice communication. Because everyone knows this is what makes SWFs strong. A freaking up-to-the-second report on the Killer gives Survivors so much to react on.
- Balance around the new power-level of Survivors.
This 'We don't think voice comms does much. Have another perk or Killer power that relies on Survivors not being in voice comms' development process needs to stop.
Until they admit it; Killers will beat SoloQs, and SWFs will beat Killers. And the game will be a mess.
-
@Entinaty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737911#Comment_2737911
I found that odd as well that they created a perk like that soon after the boon mechanic. Maybe a rework of Hex Totems from the ground up should be in order?
We could wish, but it won't happen.
I hate to join the meme, but it frequently looks like Killers get massive nerfs and slight buffs, while Survivors get massive buffs and slight nerfs. I mean, look how long Legion has been absolutely worthless to play as anything more than a meme.
Or, better example:
When Killers had an audio bug where Survivors could not hear the TR music; fixed in a day. Top priority.
Survivors get a bug where they make no noise in the Dying State, which makes it easier to hide? Been in the game for over a year.
And you can't tell me they can't just put a Killer & a Survivor in a match while checking the code, and smack the Survivor until the bug procs, then check the code and see why it failed to call 'DwightDyingSound . mp3' or whatever.
-
Nerf CoH. Remove the ability to overwrite Hex totems.
Seriously; Killers get a new Hex that literally relies on Cleansing, and then the devs basically remove Survivors need to ever freaking Cleanse. How baffling.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737732#Comment_2737732
I didn't say people can't enjoy the games or be a fan of his work. I'm just saying that donating to homophobic people makes him, himself homophobic.
Not really, because people are not one-dimensional.
If I wanted to donate to someone because they, for example, built homes for the homeless and funded soup kitchens to feed the homeless. And that person is also a homophobe; does that make me homophobic? And why?
That's what pisses me off; Scott came out and said soemthing to the effect of 'I did not donate BECAUSE of their bigoted views, but because of other policies they had'. But everyone just frotched at the mouth and declared him unclean.
And I do get it, in some ways; LGBTQ+ people felt betrayed. They paid money for a game that, due to some of Scott's donations, SUPPORTED LGBTQ+ rights (which people seem to forget to demonize him). So they feel their money went to him, and from him, to politicians openly lobbying to dehumanize LGBTQ+ people. So they felt betrayed.
But people tend to forget that, aside from the defeated former president Dump; most human beings are not 1-dimensional cartoons. It's entirely possible to support one or two things someone does, while decrying something else they do.
But everyone wanted to jump on the SCOTT IS ANTI-RIGHTS train ASAP and demonize him, completely ignoring donations he has made to pro-LGBTQ+ groups before all this came out.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737714#Comment_2737714
For what it’s worth, with DbD being the “hall of fame of horror”, it’s uniquely welcoming for franchises like FNaF. Maybe Monsters and Mortals as well, but that’s not nearly as big as DbD is.
I guess, but it's exhausting to see. Even in Phasmophobia 'You should cross-over with FNAF! Add a pizzaria and make the ghost an animatronic instead! 🤪'
-
Why is it I can't play a single horror-themed game without someone wanting to shoehorn FNAF into it?
Please, no. The DBD player base is already a toxic cesspit without dragging over the 12 year old FNAF youtube fanbase that likes the game because their fave youtuber screamed allot. 🤮
-
I think, my problem with Boons, is that Survivors set the speed of the match, not Killers. So now Killers need:
Anti-Genrush builds AND Anti-Boon builds AND Anti-Loop Builds AND Anti-Altruism builds.
All at the same time, in order to combat Survivors.
And Survivors, being 4 people & 16 perks in the same match, can literally bring all 3 threats. Survivor 1 can have Boons. #2 can be for genrushing. #3 can be a looper. And #4 can be the unhooker.
And a Killer has to counter those 16 perks with...4 perks, plus a Killer power that has built-in perk-free counter-play.
I swear; Survivors have so much control over how a match flows, that you could reskin DBD as 'Tucker & Dale Vs Evil', and It'd almost no changes:
The Killer are now just normal rednecks trying to enjoy their cabin in the woods, and Survivors are psycho college students who THINK they (the rednecks) are killers, and keep killing themselves trying to kill the 'Killers'.
(BTW: If you have not seen Tucker & Dale Vs Evil; go watch it. It's gory, but it's a dark comedy. It's great!)
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737118#Comment_2737118
If you disagree with me you're low mmr.
Ah yes, the preemptive way to dismiss opposing viewpoints.
Usually done by people so terrified that they have 0 actual arguments, so they have to try ending discussions while they think they are 'winning'.
-
@Thompson3582 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737292#Comment_2737292
What are the odds? Even that these odds EXIST is an error of Design. I admit, it will forever stay a small chance, and I don't want the pig to be nerfed, just adjusted in a way that this is impossible to happen.
The killer even stated in the lobby after the game; "I expected one of you to die, but not all of you!"
Still... this shouldn't happen in a properly programmed game
This game as RNG. The Killer got insanely lucky. It happens.
To claim the game is not 'properly programmed' because you lost to RNG - in an RNG-heavy game - is not a real argument for changing it.
It's not an error of design just because it worked against you. And I imagine, if every Survivor had gotten every trap OFF at the same box; you would not be saying 'Oh, that was so unfair for the Killer!'
-
Survivors using Dead Hard 100% Of the time: That's because it's META!
Killers use NoED 60% of the time:
Survivors: It's being used too much! This means it needs a nerf!
-
Umm..That is not error of design because:
- How often will everyone need the same box?
- The Killer cannot see which boxes are the solutions to her traps.
Either you're blowing this out of proportion to nerf Pig, or the Killer was hacking. Because what are the odds of every trap being the same box? And how would the Killer have known?
-
This is the only game where I've seen one side claim the other side is responsible for their fun.
It's also the only game where I've seen that side not only demand, but actually expect, the other side to stop trying to win because it ruins their 'fun'. IE: Calling people tryhards and sweaty.
It's, frankly, baffling how much vitriol gets flung around because one side or the other demands their opponent ensure they have fun instead of trying to win.
As long as one is not cheating, or abusing exploits (Like hiding under a hook with Unbreakable to avoid being picked up); one can try to win, and they're not responsible for their opponents 'fun'.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
No, I like to click. I do not want that removed as well just because some clowns use macros.
I don't care what you like. With a macro, players could give other players seizures. That's a literal health hazard.
Then read my post again? The reasoning behind removing it is because, if it can give non-photosensitive players headaches; it could possibly cause seizures in sensitive players.
-
@TeabaggingGhostface said:
Petition to change almost all hex effects into scourge hook effects
Oh gods yes! Hexes are trash; 99% have effects too weak to be hexes, and now they can be over-written by Boons.
And the newest one needs Survivors to Cleanse, when they can just...not cleanse & apply a Boon. 🤪
There is almost no point to using hexes anymore, and Boons are 100 times more powerful.
-
@Irisora said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2735118#Comment_2735118
There isn't even a 1% of racism in bubba face mask. Its all about how people interpret the use, wich can't be deal with even if the devs apply tougher rules. People will do whatever they want.. Therefore removing the mask does not solve any problem and its totally pointless.
Citation needed on your 1%. What data do you have that others don't? Or is it just based off your own, personal time in the game?
I'm sorry but if something can be used for racism; it needs to be changed or removed. We don't allow hate to spread and then go 'Oh, well, it's only 1% of people! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ '.
I think one thing that has pissed me off about a few replies is this tone of 'Well I never saw it, so it can't be that bad!'. Those are the replies of people unable to comprehend anything outside their own, personal universe. They never saw it, so everyone who suffered must be making a stink over nothing.
And at the other end is people screaming 'All censorship is bad!' and babbling slippery slope fallacies and excuses as to why hate speech is okay because 'It's just words, bruh! It's your fault if you get offended!' (Side note: I want to slap everyone who says it's the target's fault when someone uses hate speech to offend them.)