AngyKiller
AngyKiller
About
- Username
- AngyKiller
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@SUGR0B said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2720124#Comment_2720124
Do you think adopting good experience is bad?
Yes, Because what's a 'good experience' in one game does not mean it will be good in a completely different game.
You can't just throw random stuff into a separate game just because you liked it in a different game; that's not how game design works.
I love the original Final Fantasy 7; does that mean Limit Breaks should be in DBD?
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2720100#Comment_2720100
I'm guessing make classes for survs, and bind certain perks to them? Maybe that's what they mean? Dunno...
I bloody dislike 'Game <x> does this, so why not THIS game?' suggestions.
A perfect example is this thread, where the suggestion makes absolutely 0 sense, and proves that you don't just do what 'other games' do. That's not how game design works.
Plus, if every game played follow the leader, we'd never have new stuff.
-
Survivors don't have classes. Perks are mix & match. And Killers are solo. So I don't see what your suggestion is?
-
@GoshJosh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2622499#Comment_2622499
A 6,000 or 7,000 BP item just to possibly use as the last person all the time is rather pitiful. Not to mention the expensive add-ons that go with it. No, it’s really not that powerful in that scenario. It just means killer went to patrol gates while you snuck back to hatch. Whoopie.
Posted prematurely. Yes, I am in the minority I’m sure but I do think it was. Killers don’t need to 4K every game.
Killers should be able to ATTEMPT to 4K, instead of Survivors be handed a free escape because they never want to die.
I love this Survivor entitlement of 'Killer should not 4K all the time'. I sure as hell should if I'm out-playing the Survivors. But Survivors have been coddled for so long that now they think Killer should just NOT win if Survivors don't want them too. 🙃
Hatch is fine as it now is.
-
Hexes for Killer: Weak trash. One and done.
Boons for Survivors: Broken OP power skills. Can be reused infinitely.
Boons just show how Survivor-sided this game is.
-
Welcome to DBD; where the Survivors have been favored for so long that they now think they have a say in how Killers play, and how Killers win. 🤡
-
@OldHunterLight said:
Short answer? No.
Normal answer, they should get punished by adding some kind of mechanic kinda like what Scott suggested with kindred, do 15% faster everything if killer is camping.
At this point with all the facecampers I'm down for it.
No. Then one Survivor will run the Killer around the hook, which will give 2 friends the ability to do healing/repairing 15% faster, each.
-
@KayTwoAyy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719405#Comment_2719405
The fact that they did not complete gens, showcases the fact that it is not the killer being rewarded, but the survivors messing up.
I don't care about the WHY? I'm not studying the reason why camping is so strong--just whether or not it pays out.
This study is trying to look at X and you're upset that we aren't concerning ourselves with Y.
I'm not playing competitive either (and neither are most of the community's players), so what works for them is largely irrelevant to this study.
I could be playing competitive, if you're really concerned about what MMR I'm playing at. I was asked to build a comp team with R I V E N and his friends, who play/played for the Golden Wolves. If you follow comp at all those names should be familiar to you.
Its so tedious arguing with people who tell me "that doesn't work at high MMR" when I play against DBD's "best" every single day.
There is some perverted fantasy that people have about "high MMR" DBD that is so far off from reality.
I include d/c's because they are a survivor saying "I give up--you win."
Hatches are null, period. They are a coin toss. A statistical anomaly.
They are a free pass to the last survivor standing, and say nothing about the match that happened leading up to its spawn.
Running the same build on every killer is not the proper way to analyze each killer's camping strength.
Perks that make one killer stronger might be useless or less effective on others.
I can see why you'd think that is the proper way to run the study, but if you want to really analyze the strength of camping you need to give each killer the strongest loadout for camping. It is for that reason that in my first study with Bubba I needed to acknowledge that I did not use the best perks because I did not have them--I could have seen better results with better perks.
I could see people making a case for "no perks & add-ons," but the counter-argument to that would be that no one ever does that. No Perks & Add-Ons is not "average DBD." Such a study would not be a representation of how strong camping is on average.
The statement of people is actually that if survivors respond properly that face camping does not pay out. Therefore the full scale of data and actually determining whether the tactic is rewarding or that survivors are simply being punished for playing poorly is relevant.
As I've said many times before, I'm not concerned about the WHY with this study.
You can say "good survivors won't get 4k'd by camping" all you want.
But if 10,000 games go by and I still have a 100% kill rate, either 'good survivors' don't exist, or you're just wrong. Regardless, I'd have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that camping pays out.
Most people won't ever play that many games of DBD.
'I can see why you'd think that is the proper way to run the study, but if you want to really analyze the strength of camping you need to give each killer the strongest loadout for camping.'
Wrong. If you want to look at the power of camping and ONLY camping across every Killer, you do proper scientific method; You remove or normalize all variables possible.
Survivors: Short of finding a crew to do all this in KYF; not possible to normalize.
Maps: Again, short of KYF; not possible to normalize.
Powers: Change per Killer.
Perks: You pick the same perks on the same Killers. In this way, you're removing the PERKS as a variable towards your study.
Since you're studying how well CAMPING works, and ONLY CAMPING; you use the same perks per Killer. Anything else is contaminating your study.
It stops being 'How strong is Camping?' and becomes 'How powerful is <Killer> at Camping with the best possible perks?'. Which is a different test all together.
-
None, because Killers should not be punished based on Survivor's hurt feelings. Or vice-versa.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719203#Comment_2719203
Saying "voice cheats" is quite misleading, as the mods here as well as the devs themselves have declared comms permissible.
How you or I or anyone else outside of BHVR feel about comms doesn't matter, it's their call.
They can declare them permissible all they want. Until they either add voice chat to the game & balance around it so SoloQ's and Killers stop being screwed by SWFs, or find a way to prevent to alltogether; I will consider voice comms cheating.
-
@GannTM said:
Billy’s always had a punishment for screwing up, which is the cooldown for missing his saw. Overheat just limits the mindgame potential. A killer shouldn’t be “punished” for using their power.
I agree, but Legion is punished for hitting Survivors. I think it's stupid.
Ghostface loses his stalk on Survivors if he melees them.
If a Survivor is wounded and Plague pukes on them; they get a free heal from cleansing.
What I'm trying to say is that allot of Killers are punished for using their powers. Even if it's crap.
-
@Firellius said:
The half-quote is done with the 'Greater than' symbol, though it doesn't work on mobile, IIRC.
In regards to the raised points...
I don't think this system should consider killer's proximity to the hooked survivor. In the interest of consistency, I'd say it should always fire when a survivor progresses to struggle stage from first hook. There could be some kind of visual indicator, like a ring closing in on the hooked survivor at 4 m/s to help survivors gauge whether they can make it under normal circumstances and save them the pain of running up to someone getting ported off, but I think it's a drawback survivors can afford to suffer.
I also think it's healthier for the teleport to happen in disregard of the killer's proximity, because if the killer isn't trying to camp it out, it won't make any difference to them, and if they are trying to camp it out, they can't abuse it by standing just outside proc range. If it's an unconditional effect, it cannot be exploited and everyone knows what they're getting into by default.
Fair enough on both points.
And thank you for the format info, too! :)
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719273#Comment_2719273
I do not share that opinion.
Do you think Solo Q is OP like SWF?
I don't. They need help just as much as Killers do. So whilst it may be fair to tell the 4 man SWF with meta perks to spend 70+ seconds cleansing totems because there might be NOED, I do not believe the same can be said for the Solo Q gamers.
Once again; you misunderstand. I said SWF was OP, and SoloQ and Killers suffer for it.
I actually said 'SWF makes NoED useless.' and 'They should just add voice comms and balance around it. Not ignore the fact that voice comms utterly break the entire premise of the game wide open, and turn Killers & SoloQ's into SWF punching bags'
So I don't get if either you're not understanding me, or ignoring what I'm saying, because I feel I'm being rather clear.
- SWF breaks the game.
- Voice comms are what cause such a huge gap between SWF and SoloQ's
- They should just add voice comms to the game, so SWF and SoloQ's can communicate together, then balance the entire game around this communication.
As it is; BHVR seems adamant to pretend voice comms are not what breaks the game. They also have a history of being very slow to admit their own screwups, and would rather pretend everything is fine before admitting, and fixing, mistakes. Just look at how damn long it took to fix Struggling on the hook. I remember one Q&A, someone asked 'I have disabilities, and the struggling PHYSICALLY HURTS; will it ever be changed?', and one of BHVR said something like 'No, because we are proud of the struggle system'. Because they thought mashing was an amazing thing they invented, admitting it was flawed was out of the question.
So they are doing the same thing with SWF and voice comms; they are stubbornly ignoring how badly voice comms break the game, to the utter suffering of Killers and SoloQ's. Because adding voice comms would be admitting that they did not think it through when they added SWF.
And BHVR never makes mistakes. 🙄
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719250#Comment_2719250
So I'm a Survivor main because I think NOED is unhealthy?
Oh, the MMR aside was meant to demonstrate how it is not fair to the Killer. Since he was obviously outclassed during the trial (ie, less than 5 hooks or 2 kills I would say is being outclassed) then it is certainly not fair to put them up against even more difficult opponents.
Likewise, how well, in your opinion, does NOED work against SWF? In my experience, it doesn't...at all. Because they can and will cleanse those totems. However, Solo players do NOT have that kind of time or coordination. NOED will almost never take out serious SWF players, but it almost always unfairly hits Solo Q players who, let's be real, have it rough already.
I am in favor of changing NOED because of that. I feel it is completely invalidated by having comms, but that it is simultaneously far too strong against Solo Q players. Also, please note how I said change, not nerf.
Where did I say you were a survivor main? I said 'Survivors have chosen an arbitrary cutoff point; 5 gens, and decided this is a loss for the Killer'. So thanks for putting words in my mouth.
And you are right; SWF makes NoED useless.
But SWF makes 99% of anything Killer useless; the game, at base, is not designed for voice communication. It never was. Survivors are supposed to feel alone, even in a group. They are supposed to have no one to rely on but themselves, and even saving someone else is supposed to be a risk.
The developers flat-out ignore this fact, which part of what causes the gulf between SWF and SoloQ's. And is a large reason why most Killers are Z-Tier.
They should just add voice comms and balance around it. Not ignore the fact that voice comms utterly break the entire premise of the game wide open, and turn Killers & SoloQ's into SWF punching bags.
But back on the topic of NoED; balance HOW?
See, to me, NoED and Dead Hard fill the same role the game is MEANT to have; Information Blackout. Players on both sides have to play around the assumption these perks exist at any given time. Schrodinger's Perks; they both exist & don't exist in a match until observed. Then they collapse into a stable binary of 'Yes they do' or 'No they don't'.
Killers have to assume DH exists & bait it out/refrain from attacking, which buys Survivors precious seconds to get to another pallet. Or they can assume it does not exist, and either be rewarded or punished.
Survivors have to assume NoED exists and spend precious time doing totems, or decide it does not exist, and be either rewarded or punished.
You can't really change either without changing this stable equilibrium. Hell, I wish more perks worked this way; mind games that reward or punish taking risks.
But the devs threw 'Information Blackout' into the garbage disposal with SWFs, since with SWFs came Discord use.
-
@KayTwoAyy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718415#Comment_2718415
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718494#Comment_2718494
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718538#Comment_2718538
You've all brought up some great points, but you're turning a blind-eye to what is going on here.
---
@RainehDaze i'm sorry mate, but your take is just wrong. Would footage validate my study? Yes, absolutely. And I'd be more than happy to stream this to someone on Twitch or Discord, but I'm not wasting my storage space on footage I know no one is going to watch. You're just calling for more requirements because you want to play the antagonist.
Perks, Grades, and even a guess at my MMR will not answer the question OP initially set out to answer. That information might answer "what is the best way to counter camping?", but it doesn't say anything about an average player signing on for the night and deciding to camp in every single game they play that day. Because as I said before, if I were to do this for 10,000 games my data would likely reflect every possible scenario a camping killer can run into. If my kill rate is still 100% on Nemesis after all those games (or close to it), then there is no debate as to how viable camping is in DBD.
That data might speak more to my ability to play the game than camping in general, but no one said this has to be a one-man gig. You (and everyone else who has read this thread) are more than welcome to contribute your own data points and participate in the study. But if you don't want to, that is on you. Don't waltz in here and act like we're villains for "withholding information" as we showcase our kill counts after 10 games each night.
Bottom line: I'm not your lab rat. I'm not going to give you "proper numbers" when they're wholely irrelevant from the task at hand. Get up off your ass and contribute to the study or watch the numbers pour in and see if I'm really being punished for camping after 100 games.
---
@Kalinikta yes and no. Confirmation bias is the "interpretation of evidence as confirmation of one's existing belief." Depending on which way the numbers go, I think you could make a case that this is confirmation bias, but as it stands this is not confirmation bias. The data is objective, and it is very relevant to the topic at hand (with some additional irrelevant information such as map & trial time).
@Munqaxus made an observation, created a hypotehesis, and is now testing that hypothesis. The only data that is relevant to this study is kills, because all other data is variable and uncontrollable to the killer (save for perks and add-ons). Therefore, if we were to carry this study out over 10,000 games--preferably with others helping reach that number--the average kill rate across all games will answer OP's question.
Look at my data on Nemesis, and you'll see I out-performed Bubba by a large margin. I'm going to play another M1 killer tonight, and I'm confident I'll do just as well.
---
@AngyKiller we're not really concerning ourself with the WHY right now. We're only looking to answer the question of "is it?"
I'd argue that a killer great in chase is better than Bubba at camping, because they can down the first survivor faster and therefore outpace the speed at which gens can be completed.
So while you may want to concern yourself with the reasons that camping is so effective, this study is simply aiming to acknowledge whether or not killers who camp are performing worse or better than the community believes they do.
But you're not PROVING that by using a strong camper to prove camping is too strong.
It's like me saying 'I'm going to prove lima beans suck!' and then polling only people who hate lima beans: I'm making my experiment match my already-decided result. I've skewed it towards the result I want.
Proving camping is strong with a strong camper is fixing the test to give you your decided result. It's not a valid test.
If you take the WORST camping Killer and show they can get 3-4 kills on average, and then you've proven camping is strong.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719216#Comment_2719216
I meant anyone in the trial. Apologies, I should have been more specific.
The Killer gets their MMR to go up. Which gives them (in theory) sweatier opponents. This will mean they continue to have a miserable experience.
Oh? Does NOED often work against SWF?
I don't get the question about MMR and SWFs?
You said 'So you think if a Killer gets 0 hooks in the trial prior to 5 gens being done but gets a 2K because of NOED it's fair?'
And I'm saying that yes, it is fair. 5 gens being done is not some sort of magical cut-off point for the Killer to get kills. No rule in the game states 'If the Killer has 0 kills before 5 gens pop; Survivors get to leave for free'.
As long as Survivors are in the trial; the Killer can kill them. This means that individual Survivor is not safe, and has not won, until they, personally leave. Which means they, personally, can be killed.
Which means NoED is doing what it's designed to do; kill at the end-game.
All this BS about 'not fair' is just whining, man. Survivors have invented a cut-off points for kills; 5 gens popping. And now they point at their own, made up rule, and scream 'This proves NoED is unfair! By Survivor decree, the Killer has LOST by now!'
I'll say it again: Until each, and every, Survivor is off that map; those that remain are potential kills.
What does it matter if they die mid-match or at the end? Other than some made-up cutoff point Survivors invented?
-
@GuyFawx said:
What if they could shapeshift into objects such as a locker or a generator?
That could work, but it would require new map tiles. Everyone knows what is where; a single locker, or a gen in a tile that does not normally have a gen, would be a giant red flag.
It just would not trick anyone who's put more than 20 hours into the game.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719192#Comment_2719192
So you think if a Killer gets 0 hooks in the trial prior to 5 gens being done but gets a 2K because of NOED it's fair?
Because that doesn't seem fair to anyone.
I think you meant to say 'That does not seem fair to me', because you are not everyone.
And yes, it's fair, because Survivors can do this amazing thing called 'Cleansing totems'. WOW! Such bones! Much cleansing!
It's simple: the Killer brought a perk that only works in the end game. If Survivors are bad enough to not cleanse it before it procs, or after it procs, or to JUST LEAVE; the Killer earned his kills. Amazing how that works!
You claiming 'Blah, blah. Not fair' does not change that yes; it is fair. The Killer used a perk. A perk that can be removed before it triggers. A perk that only works in the end game. And he used it to GOOD EFFECT and got those 2 kills. Since he GOT the two kills, and he did not cheat or exploit glitches; he EARNED the 2 kills.
It's that simple.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719192#Comment_2719192
Anyone that thinks the game is over at 5 gens in the current meta is simply not adapting.
NOED aside, NWO and BW are both making huge plays in my games on both sides.
A few years ago (and as I still get yelled at in-game); this was the go-to argument to 'nerf NoED': That it 'rewarded failure' and 'The Killer has basically already lost'.
-
Morphing into a Survivor is useless with SWFs on Voice Cheats.
Bill: I'm over by the Killer Shack
Ash: Oh, so the Bill at the Barn is the Killer in disguise.
-
@dictep said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717998#Comment_2717998
Agree if they make keys basekit also
How? Just let all Survivors open the lock no matter what?
Oh boy! Now Survivors can reopen the hatch while bringing a healing kit! Pass. 🙄
-
NoED is just a Killer planning for the end game.
Remember: The Killer has not 'lost' just because all 5 gens pop. So NoED is not 'rewarding losing', because the Killer has not lost until the match ends.
Survivors are not safe until they leave the trial.
Survivors have not won until they are out of the trial.
Until the last Survivor leave the trial; the Killer can still kill them. Ergo: NoED is not 'rewarding losing' like I've had some idiots in-game scream at me.
-
@RakimSockem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/301954/dear-devs-if-you-alter-camping
Yeah, if you HAVE to camp to get kills, that's just a lack of skill. It's simply untrue that you have to camp at ANY point in time during a match, INCLUDING EGC. You literally never HAVE to camp. If they escape, they escape. The fun of the game (on both sides) is the chase.
If you aren't chasing, you're making the game boring just to get a kill.
Don't you tell me how I have fun. And don't you try to shame me if I want to try killing them instead of giving them lollipops when they twerk out the exit gates.
The chase is fun FOR YOU. You have no damn right to tell me what's fun for me, or what I should or should not do.
-
Why? Why are you trying to shove anti-loop into Killer kits? We have anti-loop Killers already, so why nerf other Killers into the dirt for more anti-loops?
-
@kaskader said:
@AngyKiller This changes would actually make snares a worth anti loop and this is what Freddy needs.
Teleporting power is the main issue people have with Freddy so making a weak part of his power better and very strong part of his power weaker would be reasonable.
Except his snares were changed to having slowdown explicitly to prevent them from being used in a chase. Their intended use was always traps, not anti-loop mid-chase.
And you want to nerf his teleport because Survivors don't like his teleport? That's not a good reason to nerf it. Plus, it becomes 100% useless once all gens are done, so it does not need further nerfing.
-
We need a Killer who insta-kills anyone using stretched res. Just one-hit-dead. 😁
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2719023#Comment_2719023
I'm leaning to having them not teleport. At the very least to start with. If it's not doing enough, the state of the game can be re-evaluated, but having it activate on second hook by default would swing the game way harder than only having it activate when going into struggle from first hook, so it's safer to just start off with 'If a survivor goes into struggle phase from first hook, they get whisked off to a safe hook'.
Fair.
Heck, if BHVR wanted to shake up the meta; they could make 'Teleport on second hooking' a Survivor perk. Maybe make it reduce the time to die by <x> amount? So they're preventing being camped, but have to be saved sooner.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718896#Comment_2718896
I think this will benefit survivors a little too much though. But I think there's a possible adjustment to make that makes it work much more fairly...
If a survivor progresses to the struggle phase from first hook, they are teleported to a random hook, away from the killer. You get facecamped on first hook? Halfway through, you are transported across the map for a safe and easy pick-up.
Abusable by survivors? Nope. Because it still costs a hook state to use. It just makes facecamping to death a near impossibility.
Loop around the hook? Still costs a hook state.
Stand-off? Still costs a hook state.
Facecamping? You're not getting more than one hook state, and at what cost?
EDIT: Detail I'm on the fence about: Maybe the killer shouldn't get aura reading on the hooked survivor once they get teleported.
This, I like. Even for a 3-gen scenario; the Killer is not getting more than a hookstate out of it.
Question: What if the hook is putting the Survivor in State #2? IE: They were already hooked once before. Do they teleport? Or do they stay, since it's not moving INTO a new hookstate?
I can see arguments for both:
- They Don't Teleport: They are already in a hookstate, just from being hooked. No Different from 1st hook; the state is just different. The Survivors should not get an easy unhook just because it's the Struggle Phase on hook.
- They Should Teleport. The Survivor is most likely dead, if the Killer camps. Or has a 3-gen. No different from camping for the kill. Survivors should have the chance to save them.
-
@dictep said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718970#Comment_2718970
Yes, because killers don’t abuse it
The Killer confirming his kills (IE: His objective to win) is not 'abuse'. 🤡
-
@BenihimeWrath said:
How come these two perks are treated so differently despite the fact they are basically the same perk? Both are straight line dashes for extra distance. However killers are only allowed a measly 5 per game, and those 5 tokens are at the complete mercy of the survivors to give you? Imagine if survivors had to be in chase with a killer for 60 seconds in order to get their exhaustion back, there would be a complete meltdown of society on the forums.
Honestly that bug where you would get 5 stacks per gen pop seems a lot closer to what coup de grace SHOULD be. Personally I would just switch its activation to hooks, at least you'd possibly get 11 uses out of it.
Because Survivors must control all aspects of the game.
Look at a majority of Killer powers after a certain point; They all have something Survivors can control or counter built in. Some perks are the same way. I mean, just look at Hex perks; Survivors can counter then, and a majority are garbage; not worth the fact that Survivors control them.
And then look at Boon Perks; Grossly OP, and Survivors can re-ignite them no matter how often a Killer snuffs them. Once again; Survivors have the control.
-
@RainehDaze said:
And also, what even becomes the point of the basement in such a scenario?
Also, also: What about Killers like Trapper and Hag, who's powers can be used as a warning against Survivors brainlessly sprinting in? No more guarding the hook, because it teleported away!
But I'm sure BHVR thought of all this, given how long PH's cages have been in the game. Heck, PH's cages may have been a trial run for the idea as a whole. ANd they never set it for normal hooks.
-
Once again; your changes do nothing but completely destroy a Killer's power, and you give no reasoning as to why you're making these changes in the first place.
Why are you nerfing his projection power? Why are you giving Survivors more immunity to sleep? Why in all hells are you giving them a speed boost? Why for 15 freaking seconds?
This looks like nothing except suggestions to make Freddy worse.
-
So basically, her attack becomes faster but traps become useless? What's the point of these changes?
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718856#Comment_2718856
I have seen this posted before and dismissed it at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. The idea is already in use and there isn't issues with it, so I would say push it out.
Maybe just have the survivor teleported to random hook on the opposite side of the map when they are hooked. It's already been used with Pyramidhead cages without issues, why not just add it to hooks also. The developers already have the code in the game, just make a random hook appear, then disappear after an unhook just like a Pyramidhead cage.
Killers aren't punished and survivors can't be effectively facecamped.
As I said in your suggestion thread:
Except for a few things:
- What if it's EGC? The Killer has nothing to do but camp, at that point. His objective is to kill, and his hook teleporting away basically means the Survivor will be freed. Basically; this idea screws Killers in the end game by handing free unhooks to Survivors.
- What if it teleports in front of an open door? Or a 99% door? Once again; the Survivors are given a gift-wrapped unhook when the Killer literally has 0 goals other than 'secure kills'. Once again; the Killer is screwed by free unhooks being given to Survivors.
And as @RainehDaze said; if you teleport it away from the Killer's position, you will most likely teleport it next to a Survivor. They now got a free unhook within 5 seconds of the Killer hooking. It basically gives Survivors free unhooks without even causing them to lose time on gens.
Not as flawless an idea as you've claimed.
-
Except for a few things:
- What if it's EGC? The Killer has nothing to do but camp, at that point. His objective is to kill, and his hook teleporting away basically means the Survivor will be freed. Basically; this idea screws Killers in the end game by handing free unhooks to Survivors.
- What if it teleports in front of an open door? Or a 99% door? Once again; the Survivors are given a gift-wrapped unhook when the Killer literally has 0 goals other than 'secure kills'. Once again; the Killer is screwed by free unhooks being given to Survivors.
Not as flawless an idea because it misses that one check box for a facecamping fix: Not screwing Killers out of legit kills.
-
@HectorBrando said:
My guess she will be a mix of Pinhead box and Demogorgon portals, she will have a secondary objective around the VHS tape and teleport around screens/reflectant surfaces.
For perks I suppose she will have a scourge hook one and at least one Hex, the whole Ring franchise being about a curse it makes sense for her to have at least one curse perk.
And because Killers can never be powerful: Survivors can smash TVs, thereby preventing her from teleporting to them for the rest of the match. The smash action will start at 8 seconds but quickly be reduced to 1.5 seconds.
And her hex perk, like all hex perks, will be weak as heck. And, of course, over-written by the OP Survivor Boons. 🙃
-
I just hope she has no hexes, given how useless Hex perks are for Killers now that OPTotems exist for Survivors.
Trust DBD to take a Killer mechanic that barely had anything useful for Killers, and make it something completely broken for Survivors. 🙄
-
If she's not anti-loop, she will be garbage.
Give the number of safe loops, pallets that have to be respected, and chances for Survivors to extend chases from one loop to another, to another, to another, almost caught...DH for distance, and another loop!
Every killer needs to be anti-loop or they're no good. And given Survivors act like utter scum if you get anything less than a 4K (and scum if you get a 4K); getting that 4K at least means you can deflect the whining with 'At least I won'. So there's little incentive to play weak Killers.
-
Maybe make the skillcheck 10% bigger, for newer players.
But as for the rest, no; you miss it, that's it. You don't get to try again later. Are we now asking for check chances built into second chance perks just so Survivors never have to worry about failing ever again?
And nothing should affect the skillcheck? Again; no. Why should Survivor perks override everything the Killer does? I mean, other than Survivor entitlement. Perks already don't affect DS, and powers SHOULD affect DS, because the Killer's power should be, you know, powerful?
-
Considering you're afking in a match, and thus screwing over your team repeatedly; I sure as hell hope you can, and do, get banned.
-
Some people just want Killers to never win.
Look at the thread where someone is running an 'experiment' on how strong camping is...Using Bubba; the Killer with the strongest camp game. If that's not 'I want my evidence to fit my bias' than I don't know what is.
They should be using the WEAKEST Killer, to prove that camping elevate even the worst to the best.
-
And then everyone clapped.
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2718494#Comment_2718494
I agree this is in no way a scientific study, I'm not going to cure cancer with this data, lol. However, I think this data is important because currently, the commonly held belief is that facecamping does not reward the killer and we can see from this data that it actually greatly rewards the killer. I did choose a killer who is famous for facecamping but if you look at @KayTwoAyy data a couple of posts above this one, you will see he was able to produce the same results with a Killer not-known for camping, with a 100% kill rate in the 10 games he played.
However, there is a reason I'm sticking with the same killer. It's because to get more accurate data, I have to get a lot of data points using the same setup. And for that, I have to play the same killer. I don't want to screw up my MMR on the killers I like to play, so I picked a Killer I'm not really fond of playing and haven't played in a long time.
I guess I should mention that I always play with 2 brown add ons, Vegetable Oil and Spark Plug. I also only use bloodpoint offerings.
I think the take-away here is that there is absolutely no data on facecamping up until now. Now players can see actual data on facecamping. I would be more than happy if other players tried the same thing with other killers, like @KayTwoAyy is doing, because there's just no way I can do 50ish games with each killer, facecamping the entire time. It's just too much for anyone to do.
I think @KayTwoAyy data with Nemesis is actually more telling than mine with Leatherface, since he's able to pull out a 100% win rate, facecamping with basically a M1 Killer and no way to stop unsafe saves.
You are ignoring that facecamping itself does not reward the Killer, the skill of the Survivors does.
Seriously. I don't get this BS narrative that facecamping somehow magically gives the Killer more kills, as if it forces Survivors onto hooks. The numbers don't lie:
Facecamping for 2 hook states takes 120 seconds. Add onto that around 50 seconds for a chase (Not counting insta-down Killers), probably more, but this gives us a round number. That's 3 minutes.
In 3 minutes; 3 Survivors soloing gens can pop all 3, with 100 seconds left over. IE: 1 minute, 40 Seconds left over. That means the Survivor on the hook is not even dead yet.
That's also enough time to find and complete THREE MORE GENS solo, each. But since you only need 2 more; you will have Survivors group up on one, lowering it from 80 seconds to 47 seconds. Meaning that, unless it took you 60 seconds to FIND the gen, you are completing it before the Survivor dies.
That's, at minimum, without skillchecks or toolkits, 4 gens done in 1 chase.
But sure 'Facecamping rewards (magically) the Killer'.
And you're going to stick with a Killer that ignores the chases and is great at facecamping in order to prove that facecamping is OP?
That just shows your method is flawed and your data is useless. 'I'm going to prove <thing we don't like> is broken by using one of two Killers made to do <thing we don't like> and ignore literally the other 90% of the roster that can't do it as well!'
Great science there.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717909#Comment_2717909
If you're struggling to get even a single hook, the problem is either matchmaking or you.
My point was that it's not a 'free' anything. The Killer still has to put in work.
But Survivors seem to think they can label anything as 'free' in an attempt to make it sound OP.
NoED? 'Free Kills!' Ignoring, you know, going the whole match with 3 perks, plus totems maybe being destroyed before end-game.
Camping? 'Free hooks!' ignoring the base gameplay loop of Find, Chase, hit, chase, hit. Plus perks like DH extending a loop.
The mantra seems to be 'Pretend it takes 0 skill, then scream it should be nerfed'.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717873#Comment_2717873
Yes, I do realise that. That's why I said -15% per -other- survivor, not per survivor.
Yes, I want to change it to a flat +15% boost, after increasing base gen time from 80 seconds to 110, which you missed. And there is no flat boost to two survivors working on the same gen. Both survivors operate at 85% efficiency, they don't both work at 170%, if that was what you were thinking.
The way I always saw it was kind of like this (And I suck with numbers. I think I actually have number dyscalculia):
1 Survivor: 100%
2 Survivors: 200% (100% for each Survivor) - 15%
Etc.
IE: It took the speed of 2 Survivors, and removed 15% from that. Am I reading your idea right in that you instead want:
1 Survivor: 100%
2: Survivors: +15%
3 Survivors: +15% AFTER the first boost (So it's not a flat +30%)?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717859#Comment_2717859
Because unless the incentives royally break the game, they're not going to compare to a free 2K.
Ah yes, that 'free' 2K, where the Killer never had to find, chase, hit, chase, hit, pick up (being aware of attempted pallet or flashlight saves), and carry to a hook that may or may not be sabo'd.
Is that the 'free 2k' the one you are talking about? Because to anyone not biased; that does not look 'free'.
The way biased Survivors scream about it; a Killer just has to say 'I wanna camp' into his microphone and, magically, 2 Survivors teleport onto hooks.
'Free 2K' rofl. What tripe.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717866#Comment_2717866
But the developers haven't even mentioned having to be forced to hook someone 12 times in order to get a 4k. So I am not sure where that idea originated from.
The problem with Camping is not everyone is using it as a 'tactic'. Many of the players who use it just want to use it as a form of BM. So for me, that is one element that needs to change.
Ok, let me try again.
The theory is that, if camping were altered/punished/fixed, so it cannot happen, then Survivors get more unhooks.
Which means Killers are forced to 4 hook each Survivor, in theory. Because they can't camp to confirm kills. This does not take into account Survivors not unhooking. Or Survivors killing themselves on 1st or 2nd hook.
So if Survivors can unhook more, it's not a far reach to think that a 4K will require 12 hooks more often.
And if and if 3 hooks per Survivor is the new norm after a 'fix' to camping; then Gen speeds will need to be looked at at the same time. Or the game becomes unwinnable for all but Otz-level Killers.
It's all theorycrafting and a warning to not just look at 'camping' in a vacuum, like some Survivors want to do.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717857#Comment_2717857
I think there's a similar problem shared between survivors and killers in that the most effective strategy is the one with the least interaction possible.
For killers, this is in tunnelling and camping. But an under-recognised problem with generators is the co-op penalty. -15% repair speed per other survivor on the same gen accomplishes something it really shouldn't: It makes the safest way to do gens the fastest one.
A killer can only pressure one gen at a time, so having all survivors split up on separate gens makes their job significantly harder. But that is just flat-out the best way because it rewards the most progress per second for survivors.
The co-op penalty needs to be changed from -15% per survivor to +15% if there's more than one survivor on a gen, in addition to changing base gen time from 80 to 110. That way, a pair working on a gen is, IIRC, .3 seconds slower than under the current circumstances. This creates a dynamic choice for survivors: Do we spread out and take it slow, but safe, or do we bundle up and risk the killer disrupting us really badly if they find us?
This'd make pressuring gens much more manageable and would make downing and hooking a survivor put a bigger dent in survivor progress. There would need to be some other adjustments, of course, notably Prove Thyself and Discordance, but I think it's an overall workable solution to give killers more breathing room.
You do realize that -15% is AFTER the second player's gen-speed buff is added?
IE: It's not 1 Survivor -15% for another Survivor. it's 1 Survivor + 1 Survivor - 15%. Or Survivors would never group up.
And you want to, what? Change it to a +15% boost? On top of the flat boost 2 Survivors working gets? Did I read that right?
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717842#Comment_2717842
Not according to those of us who do not camp and get at least 9 hooks.
You aren't meant to hook 12 times every single match. At some point you will meet your match.
I'm not saying I expect to 12 hook every match.
I'm going off the idea that 'camping' needs to be fixed/removed, which will probably FORCE Killers to 12 hook if they want a 4K.
-
@ShamelessPigMain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2717838#Comment_2717838
Slugging is not guaranteed, especially at the ranks I'm playing at. Even if the entire game was a slugfest, there's always the off-chance that there's a door nearby, you have unbreakable, and even soul guard if you're not like the other girls.
So you think every match should be dragged out on the off chance that some people are running a build specific to getting off the hook AND picking themselves up, AND an open door or hatch is nearby AND the Killer has not closed said hatch?
The devs have said this is almost a non-event, which is why Survivors die if they're the last hook.