Archol123
Archol123
About
- Username
- Archol123
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,490
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Neaxolotl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702854#Comment_3702854
I mean, isn't that a really big map problem to begin with
I honestly doubt killers can hold those 5 gens without all that eruption/CoB/overcharge nor SM drones anyway, even 3 gens are barely defendable for majority of times
Sanctum of Wrath, Azarovs resting place and suffocation pit all can spawn 4-5 gens on one side leading to a very hard to break situation for the survivors, especially without the 8 kick limit, at least in public matches.
-
@Neaxolotl said:
It's quite obvious this system severely hinders ridiculous amount of perks that isn't even strong, basically affecting "normal gameplay" so much
If the only problem is 3 gen endless kicking meta, we don't need anything until that happens, make it so it only happens at 3 gens remaining
In theory, but there can be certain maps where you get 4 or 5 gens that close together on one half of the map that you can almost hold them all.... So that would be terrible on those maps.
-
Obviously not, but it should be, which is why we need to close the gap between swf and solo.
-
I don't see a reason not to, you can't dodge in post game and more information is always welcome... If needed it could be a changeable option.
-
@Archael said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701971#Comment_3701971
I'm sorry I bothered you with my poor English. I thought everyone can reply on forum, not only native speakers :(
But for real.
I'm not saying Nurse is weak killer. But she have her downsides. I would love to give her few minor nerfs, but she has counter plays.
I remember two games where Nurse players hated me so much. One was on the game map, obviously I was on the first floor during chases. Another one was on McMillan. Good times
Nah man it didn't bother me, but I don't like sugar coat things and pretend it was 100% perfect. Like I said it was understandable and that is what matters.
Obviously everyone can speak on the forums, I didn't say anything about that either. I'm not native in English as well, it is my third language to be frank^^
I think Nurse is overall fine right now, however I for example think the burn mechanic could have stayed maybe even re add it as a killer specific item, because there was quite a nice interaction with that and a skill cap behind it. But other than that I don't really know what to change without making her miserable to play or a worse version of other killers.
The game is actually a fun thing here, because the game is Nurses strongest map xD Just a few days ago when watching Knightlight stream (a polish comp player and one of the best Nurses around) getting asked about why Midwich is not the strongest map for Nurse but the game. However I agree, most mediocre nurses hate indoor maps in general, me as well, but the really good nurse love those two because of the traversal between floors and so on.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Any opinion goes, Id just like to see how people feel about the current state of the game and/or the game's future, or the Forums.
Im not going to bother putting my likes/dislikes here, frankly most people wont even bother to read it, seems that long responses dont generally get engagement so Im just moving away from long posts. Also generally editing, correcting, and fixing is overall a pain with my ADHD and I just really need to transition away from long posts.
Of course I will read the responses to this post though, so there is something.
For the game it is somewhat the same as usual… changes are happening but way too slow, features that would expect any game from 2010 onwards to have are still missing. The variety of graphics settings for example is below the standard of a decade ago, somewhat forcing people into changing settings in the files directly. Changing keybinds is a struggle and has different actions on the same button leading to frustrating situations on both sides, especially bad on console. A chat filter that cannot be disabled for whatever reason, despite the age restriction of the game and that censors the weirdest things, making it so communication and working around it becomes a struggle. There are just so many things that should be optional and the players should be considered mature enough to decide for themselves whether they want a option or not.
As for the forums getting your posts changed without being able to see what got changed is really frustrating, because sure I can phrase things differently, but for that I would need to know what got changed in the first place... The rules are somewhat too strict, using figures of speeches or a little rougher language is a pretty common thing in debating culture, especially if you look at parliamentary debates in the UK or US, even in my home country the language is allowed to get rougher, even in debating tournaments, but the restrictions here are a bit too much. I mean sure personal attacks don't lead to anything but calling an opinion dumb is really not too far off if it is on the level of some flat earth nonsense or completely neglecting every logical or mathematical argument someone else brought forward, it is hard to argue against fixed values of for example movements peed and not really something you can agree to disagree on, if for example demogorgons ms while shredding is x then that's the case, there is no agree to disagree in that kind of cases.
I remember a post where someone compared the forum rules to some really rough stuff from the past when it comes to censoring, and while I do not agree with that on the level of severity or anything for that matter I do think as a figure of speech it was barely passable, maybe a bit off, have heard rougher stuff at the debating tournaments I have been on so. Other than that the guy was calling the censorship a violation of freedom of speech, which a mod corrected in telling him to research what that part means. Which I found kind of funny in the following sense. Disclaimer: I can only talk about the law in my home country. Some people think freedom of speech only works against the state, however that is not really true. There are exceptions to that where it also works in private, for example if Twitter or Facebook delete your posts you can sue them and your freedom of speech can be an argument why the post should not have gotten deleted, the state is however only involved as the judge deciding the case, that post that got deleted does not need to Adress the government the state or any other matter that would fit the "defensive right against the state" part in that case. The reason it works like that is that by deciding such a case the rights of those private persons need to be taken into account and can potentially be violated if the judge didn't take them into proper consideration. So a few years ago we had a case where a public figure got insulted on Twitter or so I think? And the question was what comes out on top freedom of speech of person A or "right to develop their personality" for person B, no state involved other than in the court room but freedom of speech still applies. So what I want to say by that is that while I don't agree with the comparison to the censorship of the past, having a too strict ruleset and being too quick in changing and deleting posts can potentially be a violation of freedom of speech, even among private people. And I don't think that the strict rule set is a good thing for those before mentioned reasons. (Also no, you cannot just write anything in your terms and services, there is limits to that as well)
Sorry for the long post, it is hard to sum this up even more. Also is not to be taken as legal advice, as that would involve a guarantee function for it being true.
-
@Raconteurminator said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702580#Comment_3702580
The more posts I read on this board, the more and more I am becoming convinced that 99% of people here have never played another videogame before.
I mean other games have pretty clear win conditions don't they? Starcraft counts a win when you destroy all enemy structures or the enemy leaves the game, Dota and LOL have the destruction of the Ancient. Counter Strike has bomb exploded, defuse or opposing team killed, all pretty clear and straight forward. Not so much here however.
You could go by condition that makes you gain rank or whatever, so you would have the old emblem system, or even by current pips or you can go by kills or escapes or even hook stages. But the game nevee objectively tells you what a win is.
So you are free to have your opinion but this does not change the fact that DBD does not have an official win condition stated by the game itself, so it is still whatever you make it out to be.
-
@Raconteurminator said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702455#Comment_3702455
The lore is meaningless apropos the gameplay.
Even if, but the kills = argument does not have a reason that is based on something else that lies within the gameplay, so no reasons vs bad reasons is still something.
-
@Raconteurminator said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702433#Comment_3702433
It hasn't been defined by the devs because for some very strange reason they refuse to do so, and even more strangely they forget that asymmetrical games have existed long before Dead By Daylight and have long since answered the question of how win conditions work in a 1 v Many scenario. The win condition is very, very clear.
The Killer is going against a group of four players that operate independently, can choose to work as a team, and that each have the individual win condition of escaping. If 3 Survivors escape and you do not, you have not won. If you escape and they do not, they do not win because of you. If the Killer sacrifices the majority of Survivors, they statistically, have completed their win condition by sacrificing more Survivors than have escaped. If they do not, they have statistically, not completed their win condition.
That is just what you subjectively made out to be the win condition. From a lore standpoint you as the killer win when the entity got to see an interesting match, that can just as well be done without sacrificing anyone.
Therefore I don't agree that the win condition is very clear.
-
@Raconteurminator said:
Telling people 9 hooks and 1 kill was a win would be just as fallacious as telling them 4 hooks and 4 kills was a loss. The win condition is already defined, the win condition has never been one of the game's many issues.
Technically it has never been defined what a win is... Before the introduction of mmr you could easily get pips from that and therefore "win"... I would not go that far to call that fallacious...
-
@GolbezGarlandGabrant said:
My suggestion was more about challenges than the actual Rift. Like an expansion on the daily rituals to elaborate.
Thats a better idea, should have elaborated a bit more on what you actually wanted ^^ Like I said something like weekly challenges would be Allright, but I don't see a reason to time limit it. Since it will be a bigger achievement to get they could earn you way more BP or shards or something. Building up on the daily challenges is a decent idea, might motivate players to commit until the challenge is done.
-
@GolbezGarlandGabrant said:
I never said anything about cosmetics said I don't know where that is coming from.
You asked for a rift... Not for a tome, but for a rift... So the thing you can level up and get either cosmetics or BP... Soooo that's why we assumed that.
-
I mean sure, I guess BHVR will be delighted to be able to sell more premium content with the same FOMO stuff that is up and coming nowadays. Can't really blame them, if I was a company I d also try to earn money.
Why not introduce weekly challenges? Aside from a rift that only feeds this FOMO stuff... Like sacrifice 100 survivors or get a 3 K with a random build, stuff like that would be nice without being tied to some time limited shananigans.
-
@Hermit said:
Some people still remember the times, when games were played just for playing the game. Not for some battle passes, events or FOMO cosmetics… oh dear, I'm old.
Same... Remember when you paid for actual content and not some ridiculous looking outfits? That was when gaming went the wrong way... When cosmetic dlcs got introduced, especially in single player games.
-
@GolbezGarlandGabrant said:
I hate this down time between rifts. It's like I want to play but there's nothing to accomplish.
No offense dude but that just sounds like you don't like the gameplay but just the feeling of completing something/doing work... Otherwise give yourself some challenges... For example Pebble recoil challenge.
-
@Texy said:
I think that they should add a ranked mode and take sbmm out of the casual mode. If they show what rank we are and we get proper rank rewards like iri shards and limited cosmetics people will play ranked and the game will become alot more fun for both sides. (also bring back the emblem system it was much more precise and rewarded playing good)
Generally speaking to show the rank of players is a great idea, just because it would be an incentive for people to win. And streamers as well, the try hard ones would need to put their money where there mouth is. Ofc some goodies for reaching a rank would be nice as well, but I think that just showing rank or mmr of players (even mmr could take the emblem system into account when calculating and not just death or escape) would be good enough. It would not even be needed to show it off publicly or could be changed in options to not show publicly. I would like that ^^ And I would definitely try to reach the lowest mmr on survivor, die to EGC every game if needed just to figure out how low it gets :D:D That would be awesome. Finally not having to rely on data miners for that stuff is also a great argument for it... Transparency helps with these kind of things.
-
@StikMC said:
I do think that chases and hooks are more fun than simple kills. I think 12 fresh hooks is far more impressive than 4 kills on 4 fresh hooks.
I’d support a win con of 9 hooks (one kill). Or even 10 hooks. But I’m a survivor main. Would a true killer main be satisfied with a game where you get 9 fresh hooks but only get one kill? Even is you knew the game counted that as a win?
That’s a thought.
I think MMR should measure thing like average chase to hook time. Average time looping. Fresh hooks vs hook states.
But I just wonder about thoughts of others.
What about thinking about it another way:If you got 4 kills on 4 hooks, would you be angry if the game said you lost, or would you be satisfied you killed the survivors?
With these thoughts, I suggest MMR account for actual chase time and hook states. Looping time and other skill expression events.
But I ask the community and the devs to offer thoughts on hooks as a win con and state how many (fresh, not hook states) hooks should be a win.
Well I consider 8 hooks and above a win, 6-7 a draw and everything below a loss, no matter how many kills I got.
The issue with this system however is that to get 12 hooks, or 8 hook people without getting someone out early would need massive buffs for the weaker killers and also losses for you when someone dies on first hook because then you don't get enough hook actions (or are you voting for hook stages and not hook actions? Because in that case tunneling would just be the same as always and I don't see an improvement in any way by that?).
The issue with chase time and so on would be that it favors some killers over others, legion has a relatively long chase time because of how his frenzy works, whereas a killer like Hag or Wraith only quickly hit someone and chase basically ends immediately. Therefore I cannot really agree on that system either.
I think the best way would be an improved emblem system and to just get away from kills hook stages in total...
-
@shadowdrives said:
Instead of skill based matchmaking (sbmm), we have this (put this in a ptb if your not confident this would work):
Red rank killer vs red rank survivors
Gold rank killers gold rank survivors
Sliver killer vs silver survivors
Etc with some improvements.
It Will be better for the fun and mental health of killers and survivors.
Maybe describe how the system would work in defining who falls in which category? Because with that description the system would not necessarily change at all. It would just get a new name.
-
The issue is background player not necessarily flashbang. Usually you can just have a quick look around and when the survivors are a certain distance away you can pick up relatively safe, with background player however the distance just becomes ridiculous, they are able to cover so much ground and it is somewhat foolproof, because the speedboost only activates on pick up, so you cannot even trick them by pretending to pick up. Background player should get looked at for those reasons, the rest is fine though.
-
@Ranch_Jello said:
Survivor hides the entire time...no saves, no doing gens, just hidden. I felt bad because I'm Human and empathetic towards my fellow players so I hunted down the hidden player, hooked them, and let the other one go.
was I wrong?
Was working with the survivor wrong?
Was feeling empathetic because I know how they feel wrong?
Aside from game rules I think it is completely fine to go for the useless teammate, it is up to you how you play. The whole working with the killer ban reason is ridiculous anyway… by that you are technically working with survivors if you let them escape I just don't think they would report you for letting them go. The same goes for accepting their lunchbox as offering and what not. There should just be clearer rules to what is bannable, sometimes survivors just get mad because one teammate did not do anything, as they can see on the HUD and will rat that one survivor out, which I think is completely fine. Ofc the guy would be mad to basically play a 3v1 just because one guy decided to do nothing at all.
-
The amount of times aim dressing makes you hit objects or a hooked survivor over the target you actually wanted to hit is ridiculous. It really should not be much of an effort to make hits connect and make it look so instead of making you hit walls or other stuff.
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
Hold W Killer againts power, loop basic M1 Killer without power. Yes, she can make you exposed but good Survivors don't care.
Ezi to gen rush, ezi to loop without power.
Even in comp she does fairly well because of her corrupted fountain uses... I don't think she is overrated and probably in the top 10 or at least 15 of best killers in the game, Plague is really strong. Especially when you have 3 fountains from the start.
-
@AfraidMonsters said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701753#Comment_3701753
idk how that would work. Chase music is how the game lets you know youre being chased. I doubt they'd find a way to change that for players who don't want music
It should be fairly easy to get the default chase music instead. Which is what I proposed.
-
@dinarawr_TTV said:
Day 1 of asking Behaviour to open the gates (or at least 1 gate) after the hatch has been closed for the last survivor.
Hatch should be removed all together because the survivors failed to do their objective and therefore should not get out at all. It is a useless mechanic that just makes it so killers slug for the 4k for achievements or whatever instead just getting it right away and everybody going next.
-
@Tyler3 said:
For killers and survivors. Honestly there's quite a few, say however many you want.
It would honestly be faster to name those that are fine... Basically 80% of the perks in this game are so terrible nobody ever runs them... Like quite literally you could play 1000 games and probably not even once encounter 30-40% of the perks that exist.
-
@Livion said:
Just curious since a while ago I heard a lot of people who where tired of the Wesker techs and know I started to play him (also any tips on how to use him?)
You can check out Crombs I think he is called? Did some nice guides on YouTube for wesker, otherwise for gameplay KNightlight quite often plays him.
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701651#Comment_3701651
Bruh, there's nothing with their English. Maybe your reflexes are slowing down as you become more experienced at the game.
It's not foolproof, but I try to visualize the Nurses Plaid Flannel addon. That add-on has helped me as a Survivor to understand her better
I mean it is understandable, but I would not go as far as to call it "nothing wrong", there are quite a lot of grammatical errors... But like I said, nothing that would hinder you from understanding what was meant.
-
Both in different aspects. The weakest killers should get buffed so they don't feel terrible to play as against survivors that know what they are doing, for example Freddy.
Survivors should get buffs/QoL changes that Adress the information gap between swf and soloq resulting in (but not limited to)(+some other things) :
- Information about the state of the self unhook feature by the anti face camp mechanic or deliverance
- Information about the perks your team is using, at least during the match itself when pressing escape, maybe even beforehand in the lobby
- A chat wheel, voice or text chat to communicate and plan things ahead to be clear how to do the unhook or whatever play needed, maybe in addition a ping feature
- Evening out the differences between survivor sounds so one is not super silent and another as loud as a fog horn
Aside from that both sides should have the majority of their perks changed, because the big majority of them are super situational or so useless you will basically never see them when you play 1000 games on both sides. Maybe even combine some perks together so the game does not feel so super loaded.
-
@AfraidMonsters said:
PLEASE make voicelines and sounds SERVERSIDED. Not playersided!
There have been times when I play with friends, and then I'm laughing cause the killer said a certain voiceline, or a survivor did a specific scream which was hilarious sounding, or something. And then my friend has no idea what I'm talking about.
Why are sounds playersided instead of serversided?
Any survivor screams should be the same scream everyone else hears. It should not be different for each player.
Same goes for any and all other sounds. PLEASE fix this. It's annoying and weird and makes the game out of sync, in a way. its really not a fun issue.
I'm not sure if when, as killer, if your character says a line if the survivor hears the same one or not. but from what I've seen I doubt that they do.
I have 2000 hours on DBD and this is something that has always bugged me, and I really don't understand why they would still have the game work this way.
Was even playing with a friend who was TTVing. I was hearing survivors screams on their end being completely different screams I was hearing on my end. It's just so backwards and doesn't make sense why DBD would have the game work this way.
Then I was playing with another friend, and I could hear the survivors screams be different through his computer speakers, and on my end I was hearing different screams. It's annoying and backwards.
What do you people think? I think that DBD should definitely make sounds and lines etc. all serversided instead, so its all the same.
Like, in L4D2, all the sounds heard by all the players are the same. Not different voicelines or infected warning sounds or attack sounds etc for each person… That'd be crazy. 8 people in versus hearing different sounds for each thing going on.
Yet, that's exactly what's happening on DBD for 5 people in matches.
On top of that maybe an option to disable them so you don't have to hear them if you don't want to? I like Wesker voice lines, but find Chucky quite annoying, would be nice to get an option to disable voice lines.
The same thing could be done for chase musics, some are just terrible and it would be nice to change them so you can hear them in default or what not. Ofc only for the player that changes the option and nobody else, so everyone can decide on their own.
-
@jamally093 said:
I can't beat/face her. The main problem being her power messes with hit validation and server. Basically she can teleport and hit on her screen but on my screen she hits milliseconds after coming out of her blink which gives me no reaction time. Yes I know people say well you just have to predict where she will blink to by her noise. Yeah but if I hear the full charge sound I know she's traveling far but here's the kicker I still won't know entirely because of the angle she's looking or if she'll even end up near a wall. So the problem I have with Nurse is she has no practicality or at least way to figure out how to counter her since her power messes up the server a lot.
Hens333 has a guide on what to do against Nurse, that might help you. In open field you are not supposed to avoid a hit by Nurse, only thing to try is running into her or spinning or whatever, but that is not supposed to work. You can use line of sight blockers and edge map tiles, to make her guess more where you currently are and so on. Also it help to play her a bit to get to know the structures that have weird hitboxes where you can make her get stuck. Other than that you can block her blink location which your hotbox, which can work in combination with pallets.
Other than those tips and the nurse guide mentioned before you could ask good Nurse players like SupaAlf or KNightlight, they probably have some more tips for you. Or watch comp games against Nurse and look what those players are doing.
I think Nurse is really fun to go against, because it plays different than any other killer, and otherwise weak structures are decent against her e.g. The edge map tiles.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701448#Comment_3701448
First of all, Nurse is not the hardest Killer to play. lol. Maybe the hardest to learn, but not the hardest to play.
To the rest:
Killers have individual MMR, however, this does not mean that you start at the lowest MMR when playing a new Killer. This would be absurd and would not make any sense at all.
In OPs case - even if there is 0 experience with Nemesis, the general M1-gameplay he provides is the same as Billy. It would be unfair to let OP go with Nemesis against Newbie-Survivors since they would be far weaker, simply because someone skilled at M1-gameplay would be enough to win every game with ease at the lowest MMR.
Let alone - what would happen if a new Killer releases? Everyone on lowest MMR? Sounds like a nightmare for queue times and for completely new Survivors.
According to Knightlight Nurse is the hardest killer to play against comp survivors.
Outside of that setting I would say Blight or Billy. But the statement is not completely wrong, especially considering what you need to know to play her on indoor maps.
-
@Archael said:
Removing certain perks from being used if someone is sfw also has that perk is one way. Another is reduced number of perks for sfw squad.
But there is another way - buff soloq, give them all information that swf already have - killer position as long as one survs have direct line of sight. Info about what the killer is as soon as first surv spots the killer or its power. Pings for certain actions, info about spotted perks.
And then buff killers accordingly
Seems the most reasonable idea.
-
@_Onyx_ said:
Tru3 had a great idea about Killers having a small window, when performing an action, to cancel it. I'm gonna flesh it out and paraphrase it.
So, imagine locker searching, pick-ups, pallet breaks, and wall breaks have a similar progress bar as damaging a generator. After about 0.5 - 0.75 seconds of the animation beginning you can no longer cancel the action and you commit to it.
(Note: if this were to be implemented, I think it's only fair that damaging a generator has this same affect applied. Once you're a certain % into the damage action, you're locked into it.)
(Second Note: Vaulting cannot be baited or faked out)
This essentially gives Killers a chance to bait and fake out Survivors in loops, going for light and pallet saves etc. What with the way the game currently is when it comes to light saves, pallet saves etc the Killer only has three choices:
- Look at a wall (though that doesn't counter Flashbangs).
- Lightborn (though that doesn't work against pallet saves).
- Slug them and try to find and chase a new Survivor and hope you down them quickly to maintain your potential pressure.
None of this is really good for a Killer player to choose from. No one wants to dedicate a valuable perk slot to a potential scenario (hence why Ultimate Weapon crybabies got their way, even though Calm Spirit exists). No one wants to feel like they are helpless to the other roles reactions. It'd just add more depth to the gameplay too. Especially when perks exist that can further be utilised to put the other role in an uncounertable scenario (OTR looping near a Survivor with Flip Flop+Power Struggle to guarantee the Killer loses all pressure) other example (Doctor with STBFL who defends against a hook rescue; guaranteeing that the Survivor cannot get the rescue at all and if they try to, they'll go down.)
Adding things to ensure there is more of a mini-game aspect to things is a good thing for the game.
Before the people against this idea rise up with pitchforks, know that this is highly unlikely to ever happen. Mainly because we're to expect all 'mini-game' style events to be phased out completely. Unhook Grabs are long gone, and now Survivors no longer being able to cancel an unhook is probable evidence for this conclusion.
How would this interact with background player? Does it only activate after the fake window is over? I don't think flashlights themselves are problematic, but perks in combination with them that allow you to make 30 m of distance and still get the save. The issue is as killer you can check the close by surroundings for a flashlight player, but when the guy can be across the map it becomes kind of problematic.
-
@BlightedSugarcane said:
He has problems such as his performance being highly dependent on the map and the lack of benefits of counter play.
In addition, I think that HugTech or "Sliding Rush", which is scheduled to be deleted, is a very interesting element that would be a waste to lose.
So I have an idea to make some big changes to his basic abilities.- Set the basic movement speed to 4.4m/s(or later)
- Gain 5% acceleration with each Rush(Same as previous BlightedCrow)
- Increases the cooldown when a rush attack fails, and conversely reduces the cooldown when ending a rush without attacking.
- By pressing the action button during "Normal Rush" (The first Rush that cannot be attacked), the collision detection will be disabled while you are pressing it, allowing you to intentionally slide. If you release the button, you can collide again.
- Even if you are touching an obstacle, you can start "Normal Rush" by holding down the action button.
Same as current HugTech, but even on the second rush, "Normal Rush" is started instead of "Lethal Rush". - Pressing the action button during "Lethal Rush" will transition to "Normal Rush".
- Sets turn rate and maximum look angle during “Lethal Rush” to the same values as when using an Adrenaline Vial
The goal of these changes is not just to buff or debuff him, but to make him less map-dependent and more fun for both sides.
This may be a silly opinion, but I believe this killer will be better.
I'd like to hear your opinions.
I mean sure it would make him more consistent, but then again a big part of his skill ceiling is to learn how to collide or slide and by putting this on a button you are somewhat dumbing him down for more casual players to play decent, without putting time into him.
-
@sinkra said:
I'm wondering do these perks require all 5 gens to be complete, or do they also activate when the gens aren't done but killer closes hatch as the last survivor?
Sole survivor requires you to be the last survivor standing, it is not bound to generators. And Hope should activate just like Adrenaline does when the hatch gets closed and EGC gets started.
-
@Neaxolotl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701438#Comment_3701438
Why not? also "more than A tier" here includes A tier, too, S tier stealth would be super funny disaster but that could be too much
Because stealth killers overall perform better against solo players than swf, while it might be fine against coordinated players solos would lose a lot more often. Which would end up being really frustrating.
If the information gap between solo and swf is closed it would be much less of an issue. But even then the question that many asked stays: should s tier killers exist in the first place?
-
@Neaxolotl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701191#Comment_3701191
Whatever, if that's the case just do something else, it's not like I'm so inclined in specific ideas or anything
As long as they become more than A tier without relying on indoor maps, it'll work
More than a tier? You want an s tier stealth killer? Why even? Going against stealth killers tends to be quite miserable if they play it correctly, why would you want them to be that far up? XD
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701188#Comment_3701188
The MMR gain is capped at +20 per trial, and as @Xernoton explained the amount you gain or lose is affected by the MMR of the opponent, but gaining or losing it depends only in winning (in case of the killer, +3K) or losing (0-1K):
The strength of the MMR of one's opponents also influences the final amount of points Players gain or lose towards their MMR:
- If the opponent team has a higher MMR, but they lose, their losses towards their MMR are increased and the Player's gains towards their MMR are also increased.
- If the opponent team has a lower MMR, and they lose, their losses towards their MMR are reduced and the Player's gains towards their MMR are also reduced.
- If the opponent team has a higher MMR, and they win, their gains towards their MMR are reduced and the Player's losses towards their MMR are also reduced.
- If the opponent team has a lower MMR, but they win, their gains towards their MMR are increased and the Player's losses towards their MMR are also increased.
By the way, the max MMR is 2100.
https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Skill-Based_Matchmaking_Rating#Opponent_MMR
I have to say that is indeed a bit weird to just ignore each individual survivors mmrs and just average it out, despite calculating it for each of them seperatly. Like if you caught the top survivor in that game but had to let go the weaker ones that should count for more in my mind, but whatever the system is already quite bad, so this does not change much.
I d really like to know the wikis sources though, given that they are obviously not official, because the last time I got information on that the data miners gave the numbers I mentioned earlier... So that's quite interesting. I guess that is one of the few times where you cannot fully rely on the wiki... That and the old distance you got by deadharding.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701209#Comment_3701209
Just that maps are somewhat balanced and don't have an inherent advantage/disadvantage for a specific killer.
That can never be achieved though. An outdoor map will always be better for a Huntress than an indoor map because it allows her to use her power in more ways. I agree of course that no map should be absolutely terrible or a free win for any killer but that is not the case currently. We'll see how Blight turns out on Lery's. I hope it won't be too bad.
I don't think consistency is perfection. The more consistent a game, the more predictable it is as well. This is already a problem for DBD. And while I think that all killers should be fully functional on all maps, I don't want them to rework every map to be the same. I don't play Singularity enough to know, if it absolutely doesn't work on indoor maps or if it's only a skill issue on my part but I know of a way to fix it without redesigning maps. Allow biopods to slipstream survivors that are partially visible. That would definitely help me.
I think we're really on the same page here. A match should not be pre-decided by the map, no matter the killer but it is fine that some killers are better on some maps than they are on others simply because their powers interact differently. Every killer has their strenths and weaknesses (sometimes more of one than the other) and every killer can use some things to their advantage that others might struggle with, which is good as long as the ones that struggle are still fully functional, which seems to be the case currently (again, I cannot speak for Singularity).
Like I said the question is how much better or worse the killer is on a specific map, and I can for tolerance a bit, but some things are just ridiculous. As for Blight just look at old videos of him on PTB, he bumped against everything, people put him in B tier because it was that bad...
I dislike indoor maps for a big variety of reasons and I think they don't fit well, because they disable some mechanics that are quite good and well implemented for no reason, for example tracking via crows and scratch marks in the distance. You just don't get rewarded the same way for looking for those small things, and I think that among other reasons is why indoor maps are just not good in general.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701202#Comment_3701202
I mean, the game should not be balanced. If it should be balanced, they would not aim for a 60% Killrate. If it should be a perfectly balanced game (in theory), both sides should have the same odds to win, which is not the case by design.
And yes, I dont see any issue with Maps being survivor- or killersided for example. Same I dont see an issue if a Hillbilly is bad on Lerys, but amazing on Rotten Fields. As long as it is not too extreme (which mainly applies for survivor- and killersided), it is alright.
Well that's where we disagree, I think it should be balanced and the teams should win or lose as one, including the removal of hatch with also taking a look at all the rng that stands in the way of balance.
The problem with the 60% killrate is, among other reasons that hatch sometimes turns 4ks into 3ks and killers being able to usually secure at least 1k in endgame. And I think both of those things should be looked at for the sake of balance.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701200#Comment_3701200
In most competitive games that I know of, there are things that work really well with some other mechanics and not very well with others. That is part of it. Not everything should be 100% consistent.
No map should be so horrible or so good, that a killer can basically never win / lose on it but if we take Billy for example you can still play on Lery's and do reasonably well even though this is one of the most extreme cases. Don't get me wrong, I do think Lery's could use a few changes to make it more interesting to play on for both sides but it's not a guaranteed loss just because you played the wrong killer. Quite the opposite, if you play stealth Billy.
Which is why I said the maps should not be terrible for the killer. Indoor maps for Singularity for example, new Blight on Lerys (where you will probably bump on everything and so on). However I did not say I want only 50 50 win loss rate maps. Just that map are all somewhat balanced and don't have an inherent advantage/disadvantage for a specific killer.
100 % consistancy cannot be achieved anyway. But it is still somewhat of a goal to aim for isn't it? Just because perfection cannot be reached does not mean we shouldn't try to do it anyway.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701198#Comment_3701198
There is nothing wrong with ending on a bad map as Killer. Giving Killers basically built-in Map Offerings by only sending them to Maps where they are good on is really just wrong.
The only thing I will give you on that is that it is debatable how much of an imbalance is still acceptable, because making a map that is perfectly balanced would be pretty hard. Give the goal of a 60% kill rate maps should probably be slightly killer sided overall? If we decide the balance of a map only by its escape rate ofc, otherwise I would prefer a balanced map with like 3-5% leaning towards either side.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701198#Comment_3701198
There is nothing wrong with ending on a bad map as Killer. Giving Killers basically built-in Map Offerings by only sending them to Maps where they are good on is really just wrong.
I did not say good for them, I just said not terrible.
"there is nothing wrong by having an uneven match just by getting a specific map" is a really weird statement when trying to get a balanced game design isn't it?
-
@Xernoton said:
Probably because it's too much work to maintain for 35 killers and 40+ maps. This is just not realistic.
Also, there is nothing inherently bad about some killers being worse on some maps and better on others. It adds a bit variety to the game. I'd rather they only look at the most extreme cases where a killer absoutely doesn't work on a map or another becomes pretty much unbeatable.
Take The Game for example. It's a pretty terrible map for both sides but a killer with designated build for it becomes almost undefeatable. That map desperately needs a rework.
I mean getting an advantage/disadvantage just by a specific map which is random or decided by offerings and unable to blacklist is an inherently bad thing if you want to have a balanced game.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
This is a really unreasonable idea because this would mean they would need to create multiple versions of each map AND balance every new map with that in mind. This is tons of extra work which can just be avoided by accepting that not every Killer is great on every Map.
(As an example - they got rid of the Moonlight-Offerings because it was too much work and balancing work to create multiple lightnings. And this would be far less work than creating multiple versions of the same map for each map in the game)
I don't think it would be too much work, especially the clutter stuff, since you can just include that in an algorithm or make like 3-4 versions of the map. It is not like the have to change the entire map or balance too much.
Just accept bad stuff is not a good argument. The other option that is way less time consuming is just to make it so a killer gets specific maps only, like they do it in comp, so the killer is not hindered too much by the map. That would no be much effort and result in the same result, the killer does not get hindered my unfortunate map design.
-
@Neaxolotl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3700865#Comment_3700865
Anything that makes stealth killers work in outdoor maps
At least try to make them invisible past whatever distance? I don't really care how, just that it feels stupid to have killers that only works in specific maps
I think the whole fun thing about playing stealth killers is planing your route ahead and use the Los blockers to not be seen by the target you are approaching, on indoor maps you don't even have to think, because there are walls everywhere anyway.
I don't see a reason to make a killer invisible beyond a certain range.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701169#Comment_3701169
That cannot happen as far as I am aware. If you gain or lose MMR is decided purely by how many survivors you killed. The actual numbers are calucalted base of the survivor MMR however.
I mean imagine if you have a 4 men swf... 3 guys have 700 mmr, one guy is a cheater bot with max mmr, let's say 3k for the sake of it. The mmr you gain or lose is based on the difference between you and the survivor. You should get a lot more from someone who is higher than you or lose less, and the other way around. If you yourself have like 1k mmr you should lose not too much from those 3 guys escaping but gain quite a lot by killing the 3k cheater bot. (It is a bot for that example because no human can reach that mmr)
If those are given why should it not be possible to gain mmr with a 1k? It would make no sense at all if it didn't work like that,and it the whole system already makes very little sense.
-
@Xernoton said:
- On a new account you get a starting value for killer and survivor MMR that is above the very lowest MMR regions.
- From there on, MMR gains are decided by kills / escapes for killers with the MMR of survivors taken into account respectively, so that beating a team with a higher MMR, gains you more MMR and escapes / deaths + suvival time (although I think the latter only applies a positive multiplyer to MMR gain, that would either increase or decrease it further) for survivors with the killer MMR taken into account.
- All survivor characters share the same MMR value. Among killers each MMR value scales in some kind with your highest or average MMR value (I reckon it's probably highest because otherwise it would scale differently depending on how many killers you own / actually play, which kind of defeats the purpose of this mechanic). I also believe that all killer characters have an MMR value in the same bracket. Meaning, you can't be low MMR on 1 killer and high / mid MMR on another.
- For survivors, the MMR gain is calulated individually and not as a team. Meaning 1 survivor could raise their MMR by escaping while the other 3 lose MMR. For the killer, 0-1 kills is considered a loss, 2 kills a draw and 3-4 kills a win.
- There are 3 MMR brackets (high, mid, low). As long as no backfilling is involved, you will only compete with players in the same bracket. As queue times rise however, it is possible for the range eligible players to increase as well. So if you were at the absolute highest end of mid MMR, you could potentially go against players that have a much lower MMR than you but not higher.
- Hatch counts as a draw for survivors.
- Given the number of DBD players in each region, we can assume that the MMR distribution looks almost continuous. Meaning, there should not be a huge difficulty spike in matches even when you enter a new MMR bracket. However, because the 1:4 ratio between killers and survivors is almost never given perfectly, it is possible that after reaching a new MMR bracket, your opponents will be a lot better than usual.
- As stated by the developers, most players are in mid MMR and only very few at the very extremes. Meaning most of us probably aren't "high MMR".
- It is very hard to derank in the sense that only a large amount of continuous losses would allow you to sink to a lower MMR bracket. Even if you were to have the absolute lowest MMR value possible in one such bracket.
The main issue with SBMM in DBD is the arbitrary idea, that kills and escapes indicate skill. On a developer live stream one former dev the game to hockey. Their reasoning was, that good chases and many hooks give you more of a chance to "win" like in hockey more shots on the goal give you a higher chance to actually land one.
This however does not consider the very nature of DBD. Tunneling a survivor out immediately can give you a kill at 3 hooks, the same goes for camping. So a killer with 3 hook stages (possibly only 1 hook) and 1 kill is considered better than a killer with 8 hook stages (possibly all individual hooks) and no kills. It also doesn't account for the unbalanced nature of a video such as DBD in regards to loadouts and maps. What is more impressive; beating a good killer / survivor team on a favorable map with the best loadout or beating the same opponent on an unfavorable map with a bad loadout?
In a survivor team there are different ways to increase the chance of survival. One of them being to play careful and hide while the rest of your team tries to escape. At worst you have a chance at the hatch and at best your team mates will carry your load and you escape. Even if you did almost nothing. That means, that it is possible for survivors to get to a MMR where they are hopelessly outmatched against any killer they face, if they choose to play this way. Likewise, this impacts the killer's MMR gain.
I would disagree about the win definition for killer based on kills... As technically the 1 guy you kill couls potentially give you so much mmr that the other 3 that lived were unable to give you enough minus points so you would still "win" with 1k and 3 hooks... The whole system is quite useless for our purposes and a reworked emblem system or something completely different would be nice.
-
@rad1sh said:
I just got this killer and, correct me if I'm wrong, but do you actually have to press M2 each time you want to use another token? Not only it means you lose out on duration of your sweep (to be safe), but if you press to use another token too late the animation cancels- it's very frustrating.
Surely you should be able to hold M2 to keep using tokens automatically, one after the other, when available??
It kind of is part of his skill ceiling to use the charges to its maximum consistently.
-
@joel84 said:
hi,
i don't know exactly how this system calculates the MMR. Nobody actually knows. I imagine it's similar to chess and Elo numbers.
I would just like to know how the system is supposed to know which offers I use (e.g. a diffr maps), which items I bring into play (e.g. strong items like red AHS with medkit etc.) and which perks I use.
I would like to remind you that there are strong and weak perks. (hi Meta)
Is all this included in the MMR calculation? I certainly can't imagine that.
Then why is it called skill-based matchmaking? This name just doesn't fit. There are simply too many things that can influence a game. It's not just about time, but also about certain cards, items, perks, offerings, etc.
The name would fit if it were only about pure skill. How is the MMR system supposed to know whether I'm a camper, tunneler, good survivor or good looper? I just don't think it can do that. That's why I've come to the conclusion that it's inaccurate. Pls let me know if I'm wrong…
Does anyone know anything more about this?
Data miners have figured it out pretty well, if you still need an in depth explanation let me know, but roughly it only counts kills or escapes, but nothing else and is viewed as 4 different 1v1s, the killer against each survivor.