Archol123
Archol123
About
- Username
- Archol123
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,490
- Last Active
Comments
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3640489#Comment_3640489
Well, I don't jump thread to thread doing what you said I'm doing. I think I've made maybe less than 10 posts about Hillbilly lately if that? Giving my opinion on the killer in the spotlight at the moment isn't a bad thing. You just seemed worried I and others may influence them not to keep these changes. I don't post here nearly as much as I used to but maybe I should because after all it is the player/customer who matters most at the end of the day. If they make changes I deem unfair in a game I've spent the past 3 years playing I am going to talk about it regardless how you or anyone else feels. If that "appalls" you then thats not my problem. This is a feedback thread. I'm here to give my feedback so the people who make this game can know how I feel about it.
Hillbilly feels like a variation of leatherface now. Before his chainsaw gave him insane map traversal with the ability to down a survivor that got in his path. Now the chainsaw is everywhere. He gains too much reward from using it all the time now. If his chainsaw wasn't an instant down and instead applied other effects this wouldn't be a problem. Instant down powers offer an insane power advantage to killers and if you pair that with super fast map traversal well you may as well just be a speed hacking leatherface at that point.
The chainsaw being everywhere was always the whole part about Billy... What do you even mean?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3640235#Comment_3640235
I guarantee you this does not reflect the experience of most Hillbilly players. I remember when I decided to play Myers just so I could spook survivor players with gen grabs. I never put any BPs into him or used any perks. He's been level 1 since I bought him. After just a few hours of playing him I felt like I mastered the killer. Now imagine someone who actually plays killer mainly who uses all the best perks, addons and tries their best to win. Now imagine that killer gets a massive buff to their power and addons. You can see how that would be the best day ever for those killer mains right? But it becomes the worst day ever for the survivors who have to go up against them. This is a terrible example to justify the power level of this killer now.
You are completely overreacting... Billy is probably at the bottom of A tier now, around Huntress, he is nowhere near as overpowered as you make him out to be and the extra speed he gets in overdrive makes curving really hard, some tiles probably even not curveable anymore. Besides that the cooldown addons don't even work on overdrive.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3639564#Comment_3639564
My point is a killer's power shouldn't be so good that it becomes their basic attack the entire match.
That applies to basically every m2 killer in the game? People tend to use the m2 even when it does not give you an advantage just because it is more fun. Why would you m1 if you have an instant down? Unless the person is already injured? And like I said, some Billie's use their saw even on injured people because it is fun to use or because it is anti loop.
Half of the killers basically use their m2 ability only...
-
@psntsn89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3639490#Comment_3639490
I would probably increase his cooldown for chainsaw usage, and make his hitbox a tad bigger. Not as before, but in between so he doesn't get stuck as often but to make it so he doesn't cut corners just as well as a survivor. He should NOT be able to do a 90 degree turn while chainsaw sprinting
What do you even mean by that? The 90° turn is what enables you to curve? Or are you talking about maneuvering while traversing the map?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3638846#Comment_3638846
Shock therapy doesn't down you if it hits you. It doesn't even injure you. It also doesn't make the doctor run across the entire map in a few seconds. Hillbilly's chainsaw puts you into the dying state after 1 hit. When you're in chase and the only thing you're left to deal with is infinite chainsaw sprints it gets old very fast. Dodging Hillbilly before was meaningful and eventually led to him using his basic attack. Now its just endless chainsaws.
Obviously shock therapy does not have the same effect as the chainsaw, but you drew the connection between those two abilities so what is your point even?
I think Billy is one of the most fun killers to play against in the game, and the m2 abilities offer new forms of interaction, I'm glad he is not an m1 killer with the occasional chainsaw here and there... Because that would become really boring... There are so many m1 killers in the game and so few killers that can basically play by only using their m2 ability, so how exactly does m1 gameplay not get old but playing against a curve Billy does?
Besides that, even before the rework Billy's tried to almost exclusively m2 people, because that is what makes him unique, the curves... It just seems like you hate playing against Billy... But that does not change whether it is the old version or this one... It is just that the current version is quite the threat, whereas the old one was rather tame and weak.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3638758#Comment_3638758
Imagine if the doctor could use his power endlessly without a cool down. Hillbilly's chainsaw feels like it should work on charges instead of a cooldown. Have each charge cool down at maybe 15-20 seconds each and start him with 10. Something like that. It would feel less stressful if I could feel like I could be in chase with this killer without constantly having him sprint at me with an instant down power every single time he chases me.
Doctors shock does not have a cooldown though? Sure his second one does have one but not his primary... Overshocking is something to avoid on doctor, same with Billy's chainsaw, overusing it is something you need to learn to avoid, as it looses you time and distance. I think it is a good thing that the chainsaw gets used that much, because there are more than enough m1 killer where you can have that type of gameplay, but with m2 killers the counterplay to their power is the unique and fun mechanic that I want.
-
@Memestofel said:
Hey fellas. I think that im starting to main this fella, so im looking for advanced stuff for demo, like bounces spots, carteck etc. Would be really grateful if you share some knowledge with me.
Already saw a few vids on yt from monsterkill, so im aware of the few on farm, gideon and preschool.
Maybe the car in front of autoheaven main building, not sure if it still works.
-
@CammyChameleon said:
Recently I have been facing a lot of ex comp teams in full swf, and everything single time there is a map offering for Macmillan/Azarovs.
At first look this just means it's a survivor sided map, and they always spam it.
But It's hard to tell as it depends on which map/RNG of the tiles.
The one consistent feature it does have though, is A LOT of filler pallets that you can chain into Jungle Gyms forever, and I think this is the reasoning behind this.
For the meta of Pre dropping, filler pallets absolutely carry, as there is no counter play for most killers, especially m1 killers, and they can assuredly make it to the next pallet no worries.
I think overall though, pallets should span further apart, to make dropping them right away more detrimental to the team as it can become more of a dead zone.
The answer is fairly simple, those two realms offer the most balanced maps, which is why tournaments mostly use maps of those realms and most really good players don't want to play one sided maps.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615384#Comment_3615384
DbD has a few things going for it on sales numbers. It's always been a very cheap base game, is on a lot of platforms, world popularity, and has a 7 year run.
Cheap: Many players have more than one copy, this isn't just Epic (though that's part of it), there are a fair number of players who've bought it on console/switch and PC. It's a relatively cheap game compared to many other popular games.
7 Years: This separates it from a lot of games. Take the Witcher 3 from that list of games, it's highest concurrent player count ever was 100k (a little less than the highest ever count for DbD), but it only had two windows of popularity (release and the Netflix show). People who are getting into gaming now (i.e. kids) aren't really likely to pick up the Witcher 3, and a few years from now will be even less likely, but DbD keeps attracting new players because of its ongoing nature.
World: Not many games have had as much international appeal as DbD. It's heavily played in North America, Europe, and Asia.
So basically they want to say that this game is basically dunno top 5-6 of best selling video games? When we go after raw numbers?Player counts look comparable to Red Dead Redemption 2, both games are available on multiple platforms, and DbD has had a longer run, though given the differences in base price likely wildly different revenue returns.
As for the estimates that would make the whole thing really sad, because with the game basically being this big there is no excuse for the slow changes to basically everything... I basically gave them an easier time thinking the game was rather niche and not as big as other titles, but hell no if this is true there is no excuse for that bad performance and slow changes to major issues.People do have this misconception about DbD as being a small time player. I got into DbD relatively late, about 18 months ago, and every other gamer I knew had already played DbD (quite a few only a couple of times and then never again).
Even when talking with non-gamers its not unusual to run into people who have heard about the game.
As for the pace of changes, that annoys me, especially the bugs. On the game change issue, I do from a financial standpoint understand their reason for slow rolling changes, given that they are currently doing amazingly well and it makes sense to not mess with that.
It's also unknown how many people actually buy cosmetics, so estimating their revenue would be incredibly difficult.
But there's a reason multiple other companies have tried to imitate DbD's model.
I don't know how steam counts players, but I basically assumed it to be total numbers and not as of this second?I don't know if they track every second, but you can see how the player count changes in the game hour by hour.
That is like saying we could make a better game but we don't want to because you won't stop playing it anyway... It is not even like some changes would diminish its popularity, like additional game modes or basic functionality, so it is either limitations of the engine or its design/code
I mean the Witcher books are also fairly successfull so I guess they will eventually attract players to the game or even new games may be created.
If DBD is basically that big the state of the game is quite embarassing... Imagine taking years for basic options and still missing some when you have a fairly big game that is out for that long and what not... I will never get how that is a thing. This game has options missing that games had in 2005...
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615282#Comment_3615282
The 65 million - https://www.polygon.com/23978649/dead-by-daylight-player-count-2023
Also, there's currently a bloodpoint code celebrating when they hit 60 million players from back in November.
The article says more than 60 million, the original commenter either has more info than me or rounded up.
From that article: the game had 12 million players by 2019, that's two years before it was free on Epic or ever on mobile.
For current player counts you aren't going to find any data that says it absolutely, because outside Steam no platform releases their data. https://activeplayer.io/dead-by-daylight/ lists it at half a million to seven hundred thousand per day excluding mobile, I don't know their methodology, but the site tries to estimate lots of games.
That number would make sense. Throughout the week the player count at any single time varies between 25k and 40k on just Steam. Those players are rotating over the course of day with many people logging in to just play one or two games.
As an example using very rough math: let's say every player on Steam plays DbD for 8 hours straight and they have an average active player count of 35k over the day. That would still mean a 105k unique players from Steam alone. And very few people are playing this game 8 hours a day, or even 2 hours day, so the number is a good deal higher than that.
Then you can factor in all of the other platforms. Even if you exclude the mobile count, lots of players on playstation, xbox, epic and switch.
I mean they gifted the game away for free, so I would guess everyone basically owns it twice who has it on pc anyway, me included.
It would however be nice to know how many of those accounts were basically for free... I guess they just count everyone in regardless of how long they have been inactive for, but even then, if consider this in comparison to the most sold games out there... This is just way too much, it would make it one of the most sold games ever if this is true.
So basically they want to say that this game is basically dunno top 5-6 of best selling video games? When we go after raw numbers?
These games have sold a few copies…I find that hardly believable...
As for the estimates that would make the whole thing really sad, because with the game basically being this big there is no excuse for the slow changes to basically everything... I basically gave them an easier time thinking the game was rather niche and not as big as other titles, but hell no if this is true there is no excuse for that bad performance and slow changes to major issues.
I don't know how steam counts players, but I basically assumed it to be total numbers and not as of this second?
Even then, the unique player count is not really the thing we need to look at but the currently active ones, so we can say whether or not there should be enough players in the game.
-
I think she is in an ok spot, flashlights not being usable against her is quite the buff, it got somewhat evened out by the swipe away thing. I would say though that it is quite time consuming as survivor to do that, as a trade off to being more safe than triggering the trap and running away instantly. You have to know where the trap is, crouch walk in and whipe it away, and basically only do that while the Hag is far enough away to not interrupt you, as this would basically give her a free hit. I think it was a good idea to have these two ways to get rid of traps: an easier, less risky way that takes a bit longer and a riskier less safe way that is rather fast. Depending on the situation you can decide which choice you want to make.
The only thing I would change about her is placing traps under hooks... Because that just should not be a thing.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614912#Comment_3614912
I think 65 million is the total number of new accounts that have ever played the game.
Talking about player count varies depending upon what you mean. It could be the peak number of players who play the game at a single time, but more likely it is the number of people who play the game at least once a month.
I'd say it is way over a 100k. There's 31k people on steam playing the game right now as I post this, Steam is only one of the ways to play the game on the computer, you have multiple console versions which I think have more players overall (I'm not really sure what the preferred method of playing DbD is within Asia, which has a substantial player base).
It also depends on whether you count mobile players as part of DbD or its own separate game.
I see sites that estimate a million different people play DbD per day, that seems like a reasonable number to me.
Where did you even get that number from my man? 65 million is massive, I don't think it is even close to that... Unless there have been 64 million bot accounts when the game was free on epic...
Mobile is a completely different game, so no that does not count.
There is no way this game has a million different players per day and matchmaking is this God awful... Dota 2 has like 6-7 different players a month, which is still massive and somehow the matchmaking works properly.
I'd really like a source because otherwise this is just random number guessing.
-
@Liruliniel said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615118#Comment_3615118
dodged "people he knew" would end his win streak
Well if you think so? I would like the source though, because I assumed he did only dodge those he knows, because as far as I know he generally does not want to play against people he knows, outside of streaks as well..
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614285#Comment_3614285
Of course those people are good. But good players will face other good players. Maybe not every match, but countless times in 1600 games.
Magnus Carlsen, the best chess player right now and often called one if not the best of all time has a personal record of 6 won competetive games in a row. Six.
Or starcraft, even the very best are still loosing games against players in the top 5% range. It is totally normal to loose even as the best player. Unless the game is wildly unballanced.
Starcraft is a semi good example considering there have been Seasons where Serral went like 120 : 2 ... And there is only a handfull of players in Europe (Serral, Clem, Reynor, Maxpax (maybe Showtime and Heromarine) that regularly win against Serral, Clem, Reynor or Maxpax... Out of those I think Clem and Serral are the most consistant ones. And even then he wins the vast majority of his games... The issue there is the same as in DBD, most ranked matches in starcraft those guys play are against people with way lower mmr than themselves, and they win the vast majority of them. And Starcraft has quite the big pro scene, especially compared to DBD, and if those guys go against way lower players many times a day, can you seriously expect matchmaking in DBD to be better? In starcraft at least most of the pros still ladder, whereas in DBD the comp players mostly scrim, which lowers the odds even more.
And I would assume if they play pubs they don't play solo, because matchmaking gives them teammates way worse than themselves, so they would need to swf, and at that point they can just scrim or what not ... I don't even know if the top comp survivors in DBD even play pubs (unless they stream?)... So they not only would need to play pubs regularly as survivors, they would also need to win quite a lot to be at a certain mmr to be matched with killers that only win for 500+ games in a row... Unless they are themselves going for a streak I just don't think the odds favor that matchup. All the effort they would need to put into it just to get matched this high, because sure as hell you don't get that high mmr by soloq only.
-
@Liruliniel said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/400736/killer-winstreaks
Fungoose would specifically dodge surv's he knew would break his streak.
I thought he only dodged those he knew, because he was aware that it is not really fun to play against and didn't want his buddies to endure that? Or something like that?
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614977#Comment_3614977
Tension: Call it horror, call it tension - or maybe a mix between both. A god nurse is according to your argument supposed to be high tension then? Much higher then Trapper for example? Somehow its the opposite. Your argument, powerful killer create tension is not valid at all. But they cause a lot of frustration, thats for sure. If frustration is important for the game might actually be a decent topic tho.
Steam chart: Please dont twist my words for the sake of your argument. You said i may mark your words, that ballanced gameplay is overall bad for the game. I disagree because we had a time where it was more ballanced and at that time the playerbase was at an all time high. So clearly no, people would not run away or get bored by the game if it would be more ballanced, the opposite is the case.
I mean... When you get chased by a killer that A. knows what he is doing and B. is able to get hits at the current tile if you are not super carefull that for sure creates tension, but if you are playing against the most basic m1 killer where both of this points don't really exist, why would there be tension? There is nothing this guy can do to you unless you mess up big time? (If you are experienced in the game.)
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613178#Comment_3613178
Doubt it. 🤣 people will play regardless. They have over 65 million players. The devs will do what they feel is best
Where did you get this ridiculouly high player count for DBD? xD I cannot immagine more than 100k players for DBD on all platforms combined.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614801#Comment_3614801
The explanation is that every time BHVR has shown stats and then separated out the higher MMR regions (Be it Iri rank or just 'high MMR'), the killrates at higher MMR have been higher. Which logically means that at lower MMR, killers get fewer kills and are performing less adequately than they are in higher MMR.
I can't give you a reason because there's not that many stats to go off. I can speculate as to the reason, as I think killer has a higher skill floor but also a higher skill ceiling leading to low MMR killers underperforming but high MMR killers doing comparatively much better.
But all I can tell you is that killers are statistically stronger in high MMR.
The problem with that argument is that you cannot really differ between the different stages of skill/mmr... My point was specifically among new players killer performs better. All we however have is all MMR and top 5% MMR. And the difference in killrates is only 2.2 % (59.1 % all mmr and 61.3% top 5% mmr). My statement could still easily be true, if we assume that on mid mmr killer underperforms, like around average or what not, but overperforms at the bottom and the top, because of mmr working the way it does.
That is the problem with the whole thing, you cannot just state that I am wrong based on such an unspecific statistic. However I agree that the lower 95% of mmr must underperform compared to the top 5% but by like really not much...
Assuming the top 5% means 5% of players then the 2 % difference gets easily evened out, since we have way more players in the rest of the group.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614824#Comment_3614824
There was a series of matches they had with that format. Unfortunatly, all i found was a "best of"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Z8lP_gBJE
There are also PoVs from killer and survivor side.
My math is done by myself. Simply counting kills and deviding by player during a period of time. Time peroid was ~1,5 seasons.
Yeah right, I remember that one, I watched V1's game on Lerys, and I think the map made him struggle more than the survivors, if I remember correctly. I agree that the results of this are basically similar to what would have happened with restrictions, however I don't think 5 matches on different killers are really a representative amount to decide whether or not one side gets restricted more than the other side. Besides the point where we even lifted map restrictions.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614760#Comment_3614760
They actually tried out (hens if i am not mistaken) no restriction on several killers. Killer performed very well with positive results. On some killer even crushing.
It is not really true that besides a handful of killer they all perform bad. In fact watch DBD league, you might be in for a suprise. I did some simple math, and on average, killers had ~2.4 kills. But it is debateable of course, because of restrictions for both sides.
From a statistic standpoint, high MMR killers have same or higher killrate then on mid or low. They win on every skilllevel. On average of course.
I only every heard of a tournament years back where they did that, and the results were not much different than with restrictions, because both sides had super busted stuff, but that was with omega-blink-nurse and what not.
What you might be reffering to is a showcase Otz and Hens did a while back, but I think that was a comp Nurse against non comp but really good players?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wemWwE-0TLIAre you referring to this? Because I think the surivors were streamer with many many hours, but no comp player. If it is not that I would appreciate a source.
5-12 killers is more than a handfull ^^ But still only like 1/3 of the killer roster...
What statistic are you reffering to here? Because BHVR didn't really give us one for complete beginners or something like that?
It is hard to have an argument when I cannot check the data you are reffering to ^^
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614760#Comment_3614760
I think the lower you go the stronger killer becomes in comparison
And you would be incorrect, see point 3.
Give reason then? Because at the lowest level killer tends to win usually. And I gave you an explanation as to why I think that... All you gave is a statement without explanation.
-
@NightThingexe said:
In its current state, Breakdown's usefulness is quite limited. It can only be triggered a maximum of twice per trial. So, I would suggest that its effect can also be triggered when unhooking other survivors instead of just when you get unhooked. If that's too strong, maybe throw in a cooldown or something. Thanks for reading this.
Breakdown is problematic just by design because it creates dead zones for hooks where you are basically forced to slug if someone ever goes there. I once had a match against 4 guys running breakdown and no mither... I couldn't hook them because no hook was in reach and I could not slug them because they could just pick themselves up again, was just a terribly annoying match.
I don't think the perk needs a buff like this, maybe a rework however.
-
@Firellius said:
It's quite amazing that, statistically:
1) Killers average an above 50% killrate
2) Killers win more than they lose, on average
3) Killers perform better in high MMR than low MMR
4) Killers are able to string up wins in streaks in the hundreds
And not only do people still complain that killer is not strong enough, but there's even people saying the game is 'very survivor-sided'.
The question is in what skill range is the game killer or survivor sided? I think if for example in comp there were no perk or item regulations the game would most likely be rather survivor sided (maybe unless going against Blight with his most busted addons), besides like 5-10 killers in comp the rest is not really able to perform somewhat well against the survivor side and is basically expected to get like 3-6 hooks or something like that... I think you could call it rather survivor sided in this setting because 2/3 of the killers are not viable in this setting.
I think the lower you go the stronger killer becomes in comparison, because it becomes easier to tunnel and camp as the survivor don't necessarily know what to do against it... And if they do know and are beyond a certain point in skill, give you are of equal skill, less and less killers become viable from that point onwards... But in matchmaking, since it is what it is all killers are somewhat viable.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614380#Comment_3614380
I mean, ofc 3 gens that are specifically put in close proximity, it will be good for 3 genning regardless of map size. My point is large maps afford more space to make that tougher to do, so generally, it should be less common on larger maps than smaller ones.
I get that Coal Tower is a smaller map, so your point is aligning the distance between gens. I guess there is no real consensus between map size/LoS blockers and alike, even the number of string main buildings isn't consistent to map size. It's more trends between realms I guess.
I suppose to my mind gens on the edge of the maps precursors adding appropriate tiles at those edges of the maps. If the gens are just in big dead zones the obviously there's a problem. This ties into the LoS argument. If you've got gens sat in the corners you need survivors to have LoS to know to head to their tiles, or you deny LoS, and killers can't see them either.
In either case, the mobile killers still come out on top. Moving gens out still doesn't square up the differences between lower tier and higher tier characters. Mobile characters will get more out of this change than less mobile killers will because they actually have the speed to be able to cut survivors off before they even get to the safety of their tiles, and can check those locations easier if they don't have LoS.
Like if it can be done, fair enough, but to my mind, I don't see how you push the gens out, without just making fast killers even better than they already are vs. slower killers.
I think it would make killers without much mobility a bit better because the overall effective map size would be reduced, but ofc mobility will still be a benefit, why would it not? It is part of the killers kit..
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614381#Comment_3614381
You have alot of perks that really shine either when comboed or in a SWF. Head on for example is gonna see alot more value when you can talk to the person being chased. Buckle up isn't NEARLY as good when used alone vs with FTP.
I mean that is kind of the whole point ^^ Finding synergies for perks and using them.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614360#Comment_3614360
For sure. The really advanced ppl can pull off meta. Newbies... not so much. Unless something is both OP AND brain dead easy, it's not gonna be universally used and thus the pick rates won't be the highest. 4 ppl will DEFINITELY escape if I play Nurse, lol.
It is not necessarily easy, but more like easy to understand why it is good? Because beginner survivor probably won't realise why adrenaline or unbreakable are great perks...
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614276#Comment_3614276
Sorry dude, we have some big misunderstanding/miscommunication... so please explain it to me like I'm an idiot, because I'm not understanding you.
Low mobility killers don't like large maps, because they're hard to patrol. Larger maps are inherently harder to 3 gen, because they are bigger... so the space between gens is larger... but that by the same token, makes them harder to patrol, because you've got to commit more time to doing it.
Smaller maps exist, so that less mobile killers can still patrol. Smaller maps tend to have more clutter and LOS blockers and places for survivors to hide, and that's the trade off, however ofc naturally smaller maps also make 3 genning easier... If you push the gens out to the very corners and edges of the map, you're back to a large map set up. Yes you can't 3 gen anymore, but also patrolling is harder for a less mobile killer...
You keep saying that map traversal would decrease... but how can it if you're increasing distance between gens? I can't patrol the 4 corners of Coal Tower on Pig; I can barely patrol 2 before a gen pops. Lets take an asinine example of map as a proof by contradiction like this:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/YSVESEAW5FGJ/image.png
Though it is stupid, this is an absolutely impossible to 3-gen set up. However how the hell do you patrol this as a less mobile killer? I've solved 3 genning sure, but I've made it harder for less mobile killers to patrol.
Now even if you take a more reasoned approach, I still ahve the issue as these low mobile kilelrs it's not worth my time to patrol the gens on the outer edge. Something like this, I'd focus my attempts on the green square, and maybe 1 other gen, and just forfeit the rest:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/0K3DU2TJ7WWZ/image.png
What something like would do for my Pig, or my Trapper, or whoever, would be to find someone, down them, then camp the hell out of them. Force survivors to come through me to get pressure, which coincidently is what 3-genning should do as a strategy when not used to just hostage the game.
How do you push gens to edges, without making less mobile killers less effective? You haven't answered that.
The difference between gens being on the edges of the map and for example Ormond is that the distance between those gens will still be lower than the travel distance on Ormond, just because the map is that big. Let's say it is about that sweet spot of the map being not too big overall but the gens being far enough apart from each other so you cannot 3 gen.
I don't think larger maps are harder to 3 gen, it all depends on how the gens spawn... Think about old Mothers Dwelling, it was possible to basically have a 3 gen around the main building where gens were like 15 m apart from each other, sure you needed to walk up the main building to protect that one, but if you just stand up there you can look at all 3 of them and reach them within seconds. And that was the biggest map in the game... If the gen spread is terrible the 3 gen is quite easy, otherwise not.
I would not say smaller maps exist for that reason, nor did I notice the amount of clutter and LOS blocker being bigger on these maps? Once again, all about the distance between gens and not the map size, necessarily... Sure if you make a map the size of one floor of midwich not getting a 3 gen will be tough, but even smaller maps like coal tower are big enough.
I don't think patrolling is that much harder, because you don't necessarily need to go really close to them, but can more or less just stand in the middle and look left and right to see if someone is sitting on the generator, or maybe go close enough to hear the gen, in case the gen is behind a line of sight blocker. As long as there are no haddonfield fences or too many line of sight blockers the pre running will be rather hard, because they are already at the edge of the map.. Which would be another benefit, you cannot really run towards the opposite direction the killer is coming from, this also helps the more imobile killers, because if you prerun you don't get as much distance and the killer can possibly cut you off way easier.
Map traversal would decrease compared to bigger maps, as stated before I think the travel distance would be less between coal tower edge map gens and Ormond normal gens.
Coal tower is a rather small map, usually you can traverse the map entirely until even the first gen pops.
To answer the last question in short, despite me probably already answering it in this big text...
- Coal tower edge map gens will probably still have a shorter patrolling distance than bigger maps do right now.
- Pushing them to the edges makes pre-running less effective, since you cannot run in the opposite direction, making it easier for the killer to cut you off, because you can only run along the wall, if the killer is properly approaching you.
That means less traversing than on big maps, hopefully less pre running.
I don't know if campings you that far, since you cannot camp inside a 3 gen anymore, so you will probably just a 2k? technically it is still more efficient to just juggle two survivors and hook them until they die at 6 hook stages total. But I don't think this is still part of the 3 genning issue ^^
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614340#Comment_3614340
Even perk selection has things skewing them. Self care for example would PROBABLY have a significantly lower pickrate if it was on a DLC character like Quinton than Claudette, a free character.
Perhaps, but I think it is mostly because people that start playing don't know how bad the perk is and therefore use it. Because there are some nice perks on the starting survivors, no need to run self care.
-
@zarr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614261#Comment_3614261
Basekit would be more arguable indeed. Blight without anything probably is A tier, the lack of speed particularly would be notable. Nurse without add-ons is still S tier though.
The baseline balance is 4 solos, of course still with the assumption that they are all equally as skilled, experienced and "sweaty" as the killer. That is just the base game design perspective for balance, I do think that build coordination and voice communication does break that balance for many killers. But in the actual game mode, solos make for around 50% of all players, 90+% of lobbies will be some mix of solos and duos, and that again of course does not mean there are voice communications in play either.
I agree on your point about Freddy vs. Elysium. While my prior point still stands that the difference between one Freddy getting 5 stages vs. the other one only getting 4 can still be what there is to play for and this still being engaging and dependent on skill, more powerful killers that actually can more reliably turn the tides of the entire match are more impressive and engaging to watch.
I think killers like Blight and Nurse are simply so egregiously powerful that they can be considered a game design flaw. In any other game, winstreaks of thousands of matches would be pretty scandalous. But I personally don't meet the best of players using these killers often either (although I have played against KL's Nurse multiple times, it's still just a handful in thousands of matches), I don't think more S tier killers like this would kill the game (for me or in general), particularly if they're difficult to master, like Blight. Even many of the good Blights I meet I can handle fairly well, as long as they are not using some of the oppressively broken add-ons (mostly Vial or C33), because there is still quite a big difference between a good Blight and the best Blights. But with a stricter matchmaking - which is desirable for many more reasons - of course I would be likely to meet them much more often.
I do think there are enough players, particularly because it isn't just these 10k hour tournament killers that are winning most of their matches, it's most of any decently experienced and skilled killer. Even those that are really rather mediocrely skilled and lament how painfully overpowered survivors are win decidedly more often than not. I guarantee those people could get paired with players that actually make them average out to a 50-60% killrate, instead of the 80-90% they have now. At the very least, BHVR could try to make things more strict, see how it pans out. They have already made things a little more strict recently, which I for one appreciate. But anyway, it has long been clear that they make decisions based on whatever internal processes and opinions they have, based in turn on whatever indicators, motivations, intentions, convictions... Maybe they have simply come to the conclusion that people actually need to be able to win 90+% of their matches to keep playing past a thousand hours or two, and that the people losing out on the receiving end of this aren't actually quitting over it. Personally I just find it extremely boring that good killers (and good 4-SWFs) barely ever get challenged in pubs, can win hundreds of matches in a row. I had to stop watching most of any killer streamer that only plays pubs, it's just mindless.
I don't think the baseline should be 4 solos, because swf and comms are obviously a thing and the game should adapt to that by bridging this gap in information between those groups, otherwise you cannot really balance around a group of players because you will always have a second more powerfull one that does not get value of half the perks, because they only benefit solo players. And in that scenario I don't think Nurse or Blight are brokenly overpowered but can be beaten.
Like I said many times before, I don't think winstreaks that high exist because the killers are broken, I think it only exists because the matchmaking does not work properly and the killer is strong enough to stand against players that are way worse in pretty oppressing way.
Yeah sure, those addons are busted and need to get reworked.
I don't think there are enough players for that, but we can only guess, unless BHVR gives us some stats.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614277#Comment_3614277
It CAN be, but... you'll have a hard time convincing anyone that a blank perk slot is more meta than NOED or Ultimate weapon. You'd also have a hard time proving Legion more meta than Nurse.
More like for used perks than for played Killers ^^ Especially if the perk is not character dependant... Besides that obvious exception aside.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614236#Comment_3614236
You told someone to look at pickrates to prove what's meta. I was pointing out that ppl use the term "meta" incorrectly.
Ok then, I mean usally meta and overall most used stuff goes kind of hand in hand in this game... In the sense of Pain Rez being the most used perk and being meta and so on.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614208#Comment_3614208
Indeed, that's why I have concerns in the first place. Though I think a lot of peple are looking at the 3-gen changes the same way a lot of people keep thinking the AFC is an Anti-Camping mechanism.... it isn't, it's there to deal with the most extreme cases, and 99.9% of the time won't come up.
I don't think it would be done if a gen is broken too many times within a certain time frame, as ofc a survivor could keep tapping on Hex: Ruin and activate the 3 -gen countermeasure. My instinct is too many instances of the same gen being kicked and/or instant regressed within a particular time scale would be the trigger, the intent being, instead of just kicking gens repeatedly, you should be committing to a chase at somepoint. I'd imagine it's goal is to target something like Chess Merchant level 3-genning to hold a game as long as possible, not 3-genning as a general strategy.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614223#Comment_3614223
My above point ties into my response here. I'm not convinced the anti 3-gen announcement is meant to stop 3-genning. I think it's meant to stop people just holding a 3-gen and never trying to actually stop survivors.
With this in mind, moving the generators apart to the edges of the map doens't benefit the game... what sense does it make to explore the map as a survivor and potentially get caught by the killer, when you can just walk around the edges of the map like a crouching bambi Nea and guarantee finding 4 of the 7 gens? It sounds massively dumbed down and boring to me.
You say it's better to use the outside of the map more... but why is it? Players already use the outside of the map to run to and take the killer as far away from hooks and gens as they possibly can before going down. If the killer refuses to chase and insists on just holding the 3 gen, this is when the aforementioned break limit starts to come in.
Maybe its 10 breaks? Maybe it's 20? Who knows the right number? But that's what a PTB is for.
The point is that moving gens to the edge of the map, is not a good solution, and creates far more problems than it solves... the further widening the divide between immobile and mobile killers being the strongest one. Mobility is a very valuable tool in a kilelrs power, consistently one of the best in the game. I for one, am not willing to sacrifice half the killer roster based on mobility, to stop a few boring nerds from playing chess, especially when other options are available.
Finding the gens on outdoor maps is never an issue? You can see them from very far away usually... And you run around in the open because you usually do not care if the killer sees you, because experienced players mostly wanna get chased anyway...
I think it is better to use the outsideof the map more in the sense of having tiles there and the map also being somewhat equal to the effective map size, so there is not really deadzones around the edges or what not that serves no use but to make the map bigger.
No clue how they will form this in the end...
If the maps are smaller, but the gen spread wider, there is no 3 gen anymore, because the distance between them is too big... And certain killers don't need to 3 gen regardless because they can just end the game beforehand? I don't really see your point here... The distance the killer has to travel is still smaller than on current big maps if you just put the gens on coal tower further to the outskirts, the same with the tiles...So the reliance on map traversal would decrease overall...
-
@zarr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614163#Comment_3614163
It's debatable, the strongest killers (i. e. those that should be compared to the strongest loadouts survivors can bring) have a plethora of restrictions. And again, I hold that survivors actually gain a world more from the competitive setting, because the killer is just that same one player they are in any setting, whereas the survivors get to be a 4-player team that practices together constantly, has communication and coordination.
From the base balance perspective, Nurse and Blight are pretty abhorrently OP, which is the perspective of a group of survivors that don't know each other, and therefore have no coordination (of loadouts, strategies, tactics), nor communication. Again, this is the base assumption of the game, and it is infinitely more often the case in the game's actual game mode than the scenario of a seasoned 4-player SWF on comms. I think A tier killers are barely balanced under that base assumption, and a fair few B tier killers also get to be A tier with certain add-ons.
As for whether there should be more killers that can consistently win in a tournament environment against actual survivor teams... Well, while I do think a couple more S-tier killers would be neat to have for that environment, it has to be noted that first of all, killer vs. survivor balance does not really matter in competitive formats because both teams play both sides, there is an inherent competitive balance established in that format, a team can win even if their killer only gets 5 stages, simply because the other team's killer may have only gotten 4. Secondly, in these competitive environments, balance rules can make the lesser half of the killers more viable, with map picks, perk and item limitations. Thirdly, and it may surprise you, but most killers perform well in the comp setting. Sure, not many of them consistently 4k like Blight and Nurse can, but many of them are perfectly competitive, 3/4ks not being uncommon, averaging around 2.X, skill still making a huge difference in how well the respective killer players perform. And finally, this of course does not matter at all for the game mode that 99.9% of players are actually playing, which is just public matches, in which those consisting of highly skilled 4-player SWFs on comms facing off against highly skilled killers constitute 0.X% of all matches, if that.
I don't think the queue times would get very bad unless they go for extreme streaks like that. I mean, one simple change would be to just extend the period within which the matchmaker searches for an accurate MMR match by 1 minute for every, say, 300MMR beyond the soft cap. So say the soft cap is 2000, and at that cap the matchmaker will look for other players around the 2000 mark for 2 minutes before it widens the range. Now at 2300MMR it would take 3 minutes before it widens the range, 4 at 2600, and so on. At the upper end of MMR queue times would still just be around 5 minutes, and only of course if it doesn't actually find other players of that rating in that time. And again, these players not being matchmaked away after one minute with 500-hour Megs that happen to be at the soft cap also increases the possibility of even matching them with others at their MMR range that may be in queue wait time. It also has to be noted that with a stricter matchmaking, the MMR of these players would never even reach too ridiculous heights, they wouldn't be expected to have as high winrates anymore or let alone go on winstreaks of hundreds of matches. The reason Dowsey for instance had hours-long queues is simply that BHVR had had the MMR rating system active in the background for weeks or months prior to actually basing the matchmaking on it, meaning he racked up wins without actually facing higher-rated players that themselves are also winning. He would have simply lost his streak earlier and his MMR would not have been inflated astronomically. And also, the amount of players at these extreme upper MMR ranges also is and will be fairly low, so the increased queue times won't affect many players. And I really doubt most of the really popular streamers and content creators will be up there, they just don't play hard enough, and often also aren't as good as those tournament players.
I don't agree with the assumption, I think basekit Blight is a pretty balanced killer, basically same for Nurse without addons. I don't think the baseline of players should be 4 Solos without coordination... Like sure not everyone is a 4 men, but you can still do pretty well if everyone is a good player.
Sure both teams play both sides, but a game becomes more interesting if the outcome is not guaranteed... And if I watch Freddy vs Team Elysium I might fall asleep faster than the survivors in this match... Jokes aside I think comp is interesting because games that are not guaranteed to end one way or the other, therefore such killers would greatfly benefit it.
Sure it does not necessarily matter for public matches, but a well designed killer is one that is strong across the board and offers enough to learn and master to make a difference between beginner, intermediate and comp players when using the power. And with the more basic killers we don't really have this distinction from a certain level onwards.
Even if you increase the queue times that way in the end you will still mostly put together fairly inexperienced players against those hundreds of wins-streak players... All you do is give them less matches in the time, because the amount of good players does not suddenly increase. And on the side note, I do think that certain players should get that many wins in a row, just because the opposing side is that much worse... Sure in a perfect world they would only match against other comp players and what not... But that is just not what is happening. And I simply don't believe that there are enough different groups of players that are as skilled as those 10 k hours players... I think there are really few players with that amount of hours and skill.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614219#Comment_3614219
The argument presented here wasn't about meta, but rather most used. META is most effective tactic available. Obviously having an empty perk slot is not Meta, even though a surprising amount of ppl on nightlight are doing it (8.92% for killers).
What people are basing their judgment here off of is personal experience, which isn't the same as guessing. It IS though still flawed in that I'd say most ppl don't stick around to look at the killer's load out after they die unless the game is almost over anyway.
You also have stuff in the game that is more obvious when playing against. You might not notice a Wraith's movement speed is slightly faster when cloaked after he hooks you or that he's noticing auras better, but you'll notice that he keeps cloaking to break stuff while he's chasing you.
It actually was about meta though ^^ He literally phrased it that way several times... Sure you could say it meant something else when using the word meta, but after all he still used it.
I think when we talk about meta and addons it is oftentimes rather hard what is better... Is faster uncloak better or more movementspeed? You could argue for both, I find it hard to say which one is "objectively" better, therefore all we do is guessing... However if it is about something being most used, you can still only say what is most used against you and not in general, because the second one would be guessing again... Which is basically my entire point.
So to sum it up, I think he didn't keep it coherent if he meant by meta the best addon or just the most used one (against him).
-
@UndeddJester said:
Although I am a little concerned about the 3-gen changes coming, I have a reasonable amount of faith it's going to be like the AFC. Restrained and something that doesn't affect normal play.
I watched Scott's take on 3-genning and how he would fix it, and to summarise, the idea is map design is the issue, and the solution is to push gens to the far reaches of the map, and use LOS blockers so a 3-gen can't exist.
https://youtu.be/6j4iswtqVVc?si=Mp6eBWn21KMTrE81
A lot of people seem to mirror this stance, and cite maps as the root of problem, and this argument to my mind has been best represented by Scott, whose opinion I ofc respect.
The big issue I have though using map design as the means of solving 3 genning, is you hit none 3 genning killers as well, and it widens the gap between top tier and mid/low tier killers even more... By spreading out the gens to the map limits, you undo the whole point of making maps smaller, which was to make less mobile killers more viable. (You also kill any need for survivors to search for gens cause they're always at the map limits across all maps, which is dull imo).
Regardless this proposed solution slams straight into the obvious issue that Nurse, Blight, Wesker, Spirit, and Xeno are gonna be better than everyone else because they can traverse maps quickly, and aren't hit by the longer map traversal as hard as the other killers are... sure some more balanced killers get to also thrive like Wraith, Chucky, Hillbilly, and Demogorgon... and even Sadako and Nightmare will get by... but your killers who will struggle will be characters like Trapper, Pig, Shape, Pinhead, Huntress, Cannibal, Nemesis, Doctor and Clown, who already have trouble already pressuring the map globally.
Nurse especially doesn't care about your line of sight blockers, so she retains the ability to 3 gen, whereas the other killers that in some cases only remain viable thanks to 3 gens fall even further behind.
I don't know what BHVR have in mind, but just moving the gens to the map limits to handle 3 gens doesn't seem like a good solution to me.
It is still better to have smaller maps but wider gen spread, because it also makes the edges of the map more usable, which is generally speaking a good thing. Sure killers with good map traversal will still have a benefit, which is the whole point of that part of their kit, however it won't be that big anymore... Think about how little it time it takes to traverse coal tower compared to Ormond or what not... As for Nurse, she would still need to blink behind to wall to check on the gen every single time, which is still quite the time investment.
I think the idea is not to bad. However I would have liked it more if it was just reactivating an already done gen or whatever? I do think though that spreading gens further out is also kind of necessary, because this way the effective map size will get a bit bigger, while the total map size will get smaller, what I mean by that is the area where loopable tiles are will be bigger, but hiding in corners won't give you that much more of the map.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614212#Comment_3614212
I was checking it out and... nope. I DID find it funny that it tracks empty perk slots though.
Well guess than it has to e some other source, otherwise this talk about "meta" is basically just guessing...
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614200#Comment_3614200
I don't tend to use nightlight, so maybe that's why but... I'm failing to see ANYTHING about it tracking addon usage.
I thought it did, I'm also not really on that side, but when someone claims something to be meta I expect either good argumentation or at least some form of data as to why it would be. And since nightlight is basically the dbd stats tracking site I just expected he would have the data from there.
-
@egg_ said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614167#Comment_3614167
??? XD
Meta addons on wraith are purple breaking speed and uncloaking speed, all other addons are worthless, not sure what kind of scottjund meta ur talking about here xd
As for worthless I would say that Wraith has quite a lot of decent addons, his iri ones are not bad, his aura reading one is decent uncloaking speed and movements peed are great...
As for meta, sure his best playstyle is hit and run, which tends to work even better with a stealthier approach, or with faster movementspeed/uncloak.
Out of curiosity did you check Nightlight or why are you so sure that those are the meta addons? We can argue about good or bad but meta requires more than good or bad and personal experience.
-
@egg_ said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614167#Comment_3614167
??? XD
Meta addons on wraith are purple breaking speed and uncloaking speed, all other addons are worthless, not sure what kind of scottjund meta ur talking about here xd
If the player knows what they are doing you will never get value out of breaking speed, as they will just vault the pallet to prevent you from breaking it while cloaked...
-
@jamally093 said:
Originality. I get there's a meta for every killer but after a while it gets really boring to face as a survivor every Blight uses Shadowborn and speed add-ons and every Wraith uses speed breaking add-ons. I won't as much as I dislike Wraith because of how his counter works or the fact slamming a pallet down doesn't seem to work even though I pressed my button first before he swung its more annoying that every Wraith just brings add-ons to break stuff faster since I won't lie he does have other good add-ons its also because I'm tired of hearing that bell for the tenth time in a single chase.
Are you complaining about shadowborn on Blight? Eeeehm why even?
As for Wraith the breaking/vaulting speed addons are not even meta, movements peed or uncloak speed much more likely... Also it is fairly easy to outplay those addons, he wants to stay cloaked to benefit from the faster breaking speed so you just spam vault the pallet so he cannot break it but has to uncloak, wasting quite a lot of time...
-
@zarr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613986#Comment_3613986
I'm not sure asking the community what an acceptable wait time for a match is is the way to go, but regardless, the more extreme wait times expected under a stricter matchmaking would mostly only apply at the extreme ranges, and affect relatively few players as a result. And like I said, they could even stricten the matchmaking only at the upper brackets, with it getting more and more strict the higher the MMR is. Certainly people that have won hundreds of matches in a row are few and far between, and deserve to have a matchmaker that first searches for strict matches for 10 or so minutes before it decides to feed them their next victims that will end up just another number on their streak counter.
Nurse and Blight absolutely are OP, they win consistently even in the tournament setting where you have teams of survivors that practice together constantly, have call-out systems and coordinated strategies and so on. Survivors have restrictions, but as do killers, comparable in severity. Blight has a whole arsenal of busted add-ons that he doesn't have access to, and yet for good tournament Blights the expectation is still a 4k, the deciding factor of who wins usually being how many gens are left standing at that point. And the base balance that we measure these killers by (and that is also the infinitely more common scenario in the game's actual mode) is one where survivors don't even have communication, let alone being a coordinated team. It's actually insane that these killers can beat the best players unified within the best teams, with years of competitive experience and honed coordination and communication. No wonder they then go beat up hundreds and thousands of random groups in a row without it often even being a challenge.
It is true that they can go on long streaks or have ridiculously high winrates with just about any killer. And although I expect they would struggle to get 1600+ with any killer but Blight or 500+ perk/add-onless with any but Nurse - because these killers are still far and away above the rest, apart from maybe Spirit -, that is precisely why the other major issue is matchmaking. Any sufficiently competent killer player in this game (so not only some of the best that compete in tournaments like Knightlight or V1, but really any experienced killer player that is at least decently skilled) can get winrates that even some of the best players in a game like Starcraft can only dream of (on the game's own matchmaking), and those players are worlds better at SC than even the best DbD players are at DbD.
Like I said, the crossplay off scene when it was active had enough players for fast queues and matches filled with skill and experience. Maybe you overestimate how many players it takes at this level to match them among one another. And if they don't get matchmaked away to the next random 500-hour Meg in the first minute of their queue, they will also find each other more quickly. Plus, the streamers that actually go for ridiculous streaks like that aren't all too common, and they aren't all too popular or integral to the game's popularity either, at all. The game could absolutely survive (on twitch and otherwise) if someone that sets out to win hundreds of times in a row had to wait a relatively long time in matchmaking after a certain number of wins. And it's not like they couldn't alternate matchmaking specifics either, such as loosening things for players if they have had strict matches for the last 5 queues, or whatever. There's absolutely room and possibility to stricten matchmaking to a point where streaks like this aren't as feasible, without affecting things too much outside of the relatively small pools of high MMR players (talking about players well above the "soft" cap of course - that cap is precisely one of the major issues with the matchmaking).
Considering the perk item and addon restrictions on survivor side I would say killer gets less restricted in a tournament setting, if we don't count the addons that should not exist like c33 and alc ring.
The issue is not winstreaks, those players win the vast majority of their game regardless, as it is their job to play dbd and stream it they are very experienced... So all of those players would have way too long queue times to be still worth the wait for quite a lot of players.
I don't think Nurse or Blight are op, just some addons on Blight are busted... However I would say that there are just too few killers that enable the player to win in a comp setting... Because most of them are just not good or consistent enough, at the same time many killers also don't have the depth or skill ceiling to enable plays that can catch comp survivors off guard... I would want more killers that enable the player to win if he is good enough or lose if the other side is better... But as it one half of the killers is worthless against comp survivors a handful can win rather consistently and maybe like 4-5 are in that parameter of strength were it can go both ways... However the major issue will always be matchmaking... On an average level you can totally run a nurse long enough to get gens done, but you cannot do that against players much better than yourself.
-
@zarr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613481#Comment_3613481
While it is true that finding a group queueing that could compete with things such as Knightlight's Nurse and V1's Blight is nigh impossible as it takes actual tournament 4-SWF teams on voice comms trying their all to win to do so (and those teams still regularly lose in tournaments against this too), the matchmaking absolutely isn't strict enough. The type of opponents these players often get even hundreds of matches into their streaks is guaranteed to be far from the best players queueing at those times in those regions. Blight and Nurse are OP outliers, but to for instance get a 4k-at-3-gens-standing streak with Wraith, the matchmaking has to be lax. There used to be a crossplay off scene in central EU, where good players collectively decided to queue in the crossplay off pool, and it consistently led to much more competitive matches. These players are out there, they are just very rarely meeting each other in the cesspool that is general matchmaking.
We have seen what an actual strict MMR looks like when BHVR was first experimenting with it, and it took a streamer by the name of Dowsey hours to get into a lobby with his Twins, who he had been on a winstreak approaching 200 matches with. A tournament team decided to get together and queue to end his suffering, and they got him (and they ended his streak, bringing him to old Cowshed, using old instaheals and whatnot). Of course the matchmaking shouldn't be strict enough for it to take hours, but a few more minutes for people that are constantly winning is more than reasonable. Particularly for people that are on ridiculous streaks like this. If anything, 10-minute queues or whatever would discourage people from even doing these things, which are really not good for the game as they come at the cost of thousands of players being on the receiving end of something they would never be able to compete against. The "soft" cap of the matchmaking is too low, and the matchmaker prioritizes faster queues over more accurate matches. At least for the upper extremes of the MMR range, things could be made much more strict, because there you have players that are almost (or actually) never losing in the current system. These players could also preferentially be paired against SWFs.
As a more general point, it is far from only these players or winstreaks that go to show how lenient matchmaking is. Any even just competent killer wins most of their matches, go watch any sufficiently experienced killer streamer and they rarely lose. You don't have to literally win 100% of your matches for things to be one-sided, of course. A winstreak being broken is still a 99.X% winrate, and they could just go on winning for hundreds more matches afterwards. The game in its main game mode (public matches, matchmaking) is killer-sided. There are various reasons for this, although the major ones (apart from some killers being OP) is that the game actually fundamentally favours killers if the survivors are randoms that have no communication or coordination, and that the matchmaking leads to disparities in the levels of skill, experience and "tryhardiness" among the survivor groups, which is awfully detrimental to their chances of succeeding, whereas on the killer side there can be no such disparity of course. And you could take the best team in the world and replace 1 of their players with a random weak link and I guarantee a good killer would win most of every time against them, by capitalizing on that weak link.
I mean BHVR basically asked the community what would be an acceptable time to wait for a match and apparently they just went with the results, so we really cannot blame them much for, if that is what the community wanted.
Can you really call Nurse and Blight op if in a tournament setting where those guys play who mastered those killers they can get beaten?
I don't really think the streaks really change much... Whether people do a streak or not does not really change how they play, people that do streaks tend to try to win when they play, whether or not they are on a streak and do you seriously believe people would have a higher chance to win against knightlight or V1 if they played other stuff? Knightlight literally plays without perks or addons, he still wins 99% of his games on every other killer despite ridiculous meme builds being requested. It does not matter if he does a streak or not he willstill win most games with ease so the players at which cost it comes still suffer the same result streak or no streak.
You just overestimate how many people are playing this game with the amount of hours and experience those streamers have... There are just not that many players and people cannot be asked to wait for 30 min... The streamers are free advertisement for BHVR and if they could never find games that would be almost a death sentence for the game, because how many people sit around in a stream where nothing happens for half an hour?
-
@BaroneMaximus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613562#Comment_3613562
I played videogames of all kinds in my life. I'm 31 and i play since i was 5 and i NEVER EVER EVER encountered something most unbalanced and broken as SWF. Don't call it "play with friends" because it's not. I played with my friends and we had fun, we didn't go around like dogs with flashlights and bodyblocks, we were just doing gens and having fun WITH the killer not OF the killer. You LITERALLY CANNOT WIN vs SWF and this is BROKEN. Name a single game were there is a feature that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to win and i'll agree with you that SWF is not the most broken feature ever, but i bet my A** you can't find any because I KNOW there is none.
Play a stronger killer and master it I guess? Sure playing against 4 well coordinated survivors can be tough, but then you just need to put in more effort... It is totally possible to win against a well coordinated SWF, as people in comp do it constantly... As harsh as it sounds, this is basically just a skill issue... This bullying strat basically only works because of the skill difference... I've yet to see players like Knightlight or LilithOmen to get bullied by those squads...
On a side note... SWF literally means survive with friends... So why would I not call it play with friends :D:D Chill my man...
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613224#Comment_3613224
This was years ago. Do you know of something recent? Like within the past 8-12 months? Just something analogous to the killer winstreaks that are current.
You need to keep in mind that survivor win streaks take a lot longer than killer win streaks, because for one you need to have all 4 players available and the gameplay is way more boring because for the most part you are only holding m1 on a generator and matchmaking being how it is the majority of killers those guys face are still way below their own skill making those games quite boring for them... So if they play like once a week for like 3-4 hours with like 4-5 games an hour at most they get max 20 games a week, therefore they take like 10 weeks to reach 200 wins in a row, I think this is basically what Hens and his friends are doing... Knightlight basically did 10 nurse games a day for his streak, which alone shows you why his streak went way faster... And you are expecting a streak with that high of a number to be this new? Come on man, those guys would have been doing this for many months to go up to like 1600 wins in a row or what not... Besides the point where they limit themselves when it comes to perks and items...
Hens and his friends are currently doing a win streak again, I think they are around 170 wins in a row? But like I said before they are only doing this like once a week at most, maybe once every two weeks? I don't know exactly... So for their streak to go this far up will just take time...
-
@ays12151 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613555#Comment_3613555
If a comp Players brings the strongest stuff on the strongest Killer in Public Matches he shouldn't be able to lose matches, right? I'm pretty sure if he would meet strong SWF with items he would struggle very hard to win this.
I don't think he would... A strong swf of pub players would lose this without much effort... I'm sure in some of the 500 matches Knightlight played were some strong SWFs in there... But the gap between good swf and a comp swf is way bigger than you seem to assume... Think about it, in those 500 matches not once have they finished all 5 gens... And Knightlight himself said that the only way for him to lose the streak is against 4 comp players...
-
@BaroneMaximus said:
As survivor you get MMR by escaping so if you play as solo your escape rate will be lower so it goes like this: You die - you lose mmr - you get worse survs - you die again because survs don't do gens and do worse chases - you can't complete all the gens so you end up dying or drawing (AT BEST) by escaping through hatch so you are not still getting MMR and the cicle here begins anew.
To get MMR easily you play SWF (THE MOST UNBALANCED THING EVER MADE IN VIDEOGAMES) So your escape rate increase - you keep playing with goodish players so gens are completed, chases last longer cause you help eachother - you escape more often - you get lods of MMR for free. You start getting sweatier killer who will ONLY play Nurse and Blight slugging and camping and tunneling and NOBODY WILL HAVE FUN.
As killer you have an easier life vs solos and bad swf so you will play chill and start winning - your MMR will increase easier - you will eventually stop gettin solos and bad swf because they CANNOT get any high MMR as solos or bad swf - you start getting ONLY SWF ABUSERS who JUST play to ONLINE BULLY PPL and have fun of THEM and NOT trying to enjoy the game so you start playing by camping and tunneling more - you start losing and/or drawing more - you WILL NOT have fun anymore neither the ppl you go against since it won't be anymore focused on enjoying the game but ONLY on WINNING and KILLING and even if you try to have fun YOU CAN'T because you will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS get t-baggers and clickers and SWF ABUSERS who will RUIN your games and make everything horrible JUST BEACAUSE THEY HAVE FUN BY BULLYING PPL ONLINE THIS IS CYBER BULLISM.
So you get rid of MMR and then you can do what you want with SWF OR you start balancing the game for SOLOS AND SWF PROPERLY by NERFING SWF and BUFFING SOLOS in a way that will make killer NOT FORCED TO PLAY EVERY GAME SWEATY BUT ALSO FUN.
I mean I agree that MMR is not able to detect a skill full player because you can get a 5 Gen chase and still die and the hame will count that as a loss, despite you clearly being better than the killer... However I find it weird to call "playing with friends" the most unbalanced thing ever made in video games...
-
@SMitchell8 said:
A lot of Knight loving on these pages tonight. I thought he was hated? Or is that just survivors who don't like him?
I think the majority of people on Twitter were really happy about it, just because most people despise playing against him...
-
@TheSyndromeOfClowns said:
Like a much better hemorrhage effect? They'll bleed profusely and leave a ton of trails of blood behind? There are some items that won't work when you have this effect like syringes.
I don't think so, and even if, why just Bubba? Why not Billy as well?
-
@qNorax said:
I dont use it, but I want to know if is bannable or can cause crashes.
As far as I am aware BHVR stated that they won't ban people for using filters and it is indeed whitelisted by easy anti cheat so there should be problems with using it from that point of view.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
My question is does distortion cause you to inadvertently tunnel? I generally consider myself a pretty fair playing killer. I don't camp or tunnel very much and I sometimes let the last survivor go after I have finished getting to red rank 1 every month. But I run a fair amount of aura reads and with distortion entering the meta that has changed. I still run a couple aura reads most of the time and I find myself tunneling 1 or 2 survivors out almost every game that distortion is in because I can't see the other survivors and I take what BBQ or floods or rage give me. My wins and losses are about the same ratio as always but when i 4k the distortion survivors are often dying on first hook after the non distortions go early. Not trying to complain about distortion just asking other killers is this your experience too?
I kind of have the same issue, I used to run BBQ on all killers, but barely got value out of it anymore due to distortion, and now I just chase who I can find... I cannot be asked to check all the bushes for those super stealthy players... It didn't really get harder, just more annoying because I don't like to tunnel guys but I'm also not checking every hiding spot until all gens are done.