Archol123
Archol123
About
- Username
- Archol123
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,490
- Last Active
Comments
-
@kin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/397595/what-is-your-opinion-about-the-wraith
Weak, boring, forced to play stuffy for the sake of victory, a killer who is also terribly easy to play and without any special features...he ranks second in the top of my not favorite killers, right after the new sadako, about which I can say exactly the same
He has some specifics for example the increased lunge after uncloak and is a rather decent killer, there are some others that would come first for buffs in my mind and Wraith is one of my favorite killers.
-
@appleas said:
Rather than nerf numbers, I think informing the obsession that stbfl is in play makes more sense, what’s the point of increasing the stacks lost from hitting the Obsession when the Obsession in general will not know STBFL is in play because the Killer won’t be hitting them?
The change to STBFL could be giving the Obsession the status icon similar to dying light and dissolution on their screen. That way the Obsession knows that the Killer has STBFL and will most likely go after the other 3 players. So it is up to the obsession to make the altruistic plays like bodyblocking, rescuing from hook. More interactions with the Killer means a higher likelihood of reducing STBFL stacks.
Survivors are supposed to work as a team to escape, so give them sufficient information to do so. Since Survivors dont usually realize stbfl is in place until the Killer has 6-8 stacks, giving the Obsession this information would introduce the potential for counterplay.
If you don't take chase at some point in the game when everybody else is on death hook then it is your fault, you should eventually find out about STBFL if you play properly.
-
@Nos37 said:
STBFL nerf should just be reducing the max token count from 8 to 6.
Killers already got 2 tokens base kit. Plus, the killer will lose all tokens after 3 hits on the Obsession instead of 4, making it more punishing to hit the Obsession.
That's not exactly how it works and the math has been done before, so at least be a bit more specific... 6 stacks of 2.7 seconds are not the same as 8 stacks of 3.0 seconds...
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589654#Comment_3589654
That's fine. Survivors will be better than me, and they're allowed to be.
I SHOULD NOT BE MATCHED AGAINST THEM though
Fair, but that is a completely different topic... I don't think a perk should compensate for that in a way to make it just impossible to get outplayed in that sense.
Also agreed matchmaking is wild sometimes, but maybe it gets better with the changes they made, we will see.
-
@BlightedDolphin said:
Replaces Dream Projection with Dream Cloak
Press the Secondary Power button to activate Dream Cloak for 15 seconds.
While cloaked Freddy gains the following benefits:
- Freddy is completely invisible to all survivors when further than 16 metres
- Sleeping survivors do not hear the lullaby
- The aura of all sleeping survivors are revealed to Freddy
- While looking at a generator, press and hold the secondary ability button to perform Dream Projection (functions like it does now)
- Upon completing Dream Projection, all awake survivors within 16 metres of the generator are pulled into the Dream World
- After 15 seconds or after performing a basic attack or Dream Projection, Dream Cloak ends (the length can be modified with add ons)
Dream Cloak’s cool-down is the same as Dream Projection is currently and functions the same way with it being reduced the more survivors are asleep.
The idea of this is to give the Dream World a bit more of a threat. Not knowing whether Freddy is coming for you while he knows exactly where you are might encourage people to actually want to wake up.
The Dream Projection change making survivors fall asleep is to help Freddy have more control on when survivors go to sleep and give Dream Cloak some benefits if used while everyone is awake and maybe give him a bit more of a skill ceiling.
Of course his add ons would also need to be reworked to take this new power into account.
Swing all survivors auras for that long is kind of problematic when you use it mid chase to "mind game" because you see them exactly and can come from an unexpected angle, that's not too good in my mind...
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589486#Comment_3589486
Yes but are we suddenly playing comp demo? Also comp demos are not shredding people in open ground.
You don't need to play comp to use the killers power more effectively? That's a weird statement, also for the most part using the power is more fun than m1 so people might just try it every time because of that reason.
-
@appleas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3587886#Comment_3587886
Back then, I had a 3 man swf Claudette in dark cosmetics with No Mither who brought me to Dead Dawg, crouched in the grass and threw pebbles in the random spots of the map without doing gens. I went after the random who was doing gens and got him out of the game, but the 3 Claudettes refused to do gens and continued crouching in the grass. I eventually managed to find them after 20+ minutes because I was playing Nemesis and my zombies located them.
So tell me, if vanilla dbd was forced and Killers had to go up against builds like this, is this what DBD is supposed to be? No Chases, just crouching in grass and refusing to do the objective/interact with the Killer. Is this the type of game that would make DBD exciting and worth playing?
I beg to differ
I mean that is a reportable behavior ^^ I am against the vanilla thing, but this cannot be brought up as a reason for re shade and what not.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3587927#Comment_3587927
that is not what this post is about. The post is about Reshade and Filters. The main cheating going onto mainly on survivor mains is that If you go into your RGB settings, You can make your Red color have massive red opacity. Why is this big deal?
Well, you see, everything related to tracking is red. If you change opacity color of Red into be stronger on your Monitor, It makes killer red glow stronger. This is terrible for m1 killers because... m1 killers all have red glow. If you can see red glow clearly, you gain wall-hacks towards killer. normally red glow opacity for dbd is faded out. you can see red glow but red glow is faint. With max red glow, you can see bright red which removes lots of mindgames.
Hens talks about this. it is huge problem especially for survivors at top-level that abuse "subtle-cheats" to gain an unfair advantage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwd2LL63o64
Here's an example of what it looks like in the video.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/OT5O3Z7V6UVH/image.png
you see. the red glow does not look normal. It is so red that you can see people across walls. Normally red glow is faded out on very ends. This is what it is like for survivor.
===
This is also a problem for killer because when survivors are injured, you have blood marks. With this Reshade filter, you can see blood on the floor so clearly that you don't need bloodhound as a perk. you get free base-kit bloodhound. It also makes scratchmark's impossible miss because they're also brighter due to red color.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/WS5FE2GOKKDK/image.png
Stretch Res and Reshade red filters have been in the game for long time. both them were subtle cheats. they give you unfair advantage over your opponent. While the problem is bigger on survivor side, it does give unfair advantage for killer side in regards scratch mark tracking and bloodhound tracking which are suppose to be perks that you equip.
They are not subtle cheats though, because by definition cheats are against the rules, and re shade has been allowed/whitelisted by the rules and stretched res has been gotten rid of in the options when the devs decided they didnt want it anymore... Soooo? Also if both sides use re shade it is fine again isn't it? Is it also cheating by that definition to play on low graphics because you see less grass and trappers traps better by that?
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589655#Comment_3589655
Don't expect that ramdom solos can pull that off until it's too late. Doctor needs nerf in this he is in a way better facecamper than bubba and that should not be the case. What I mean that bubba at least takes skill to facecamp.
How does Bubba need skill to facecamp but doctor doesn't? ^^ One needs to time his shock the other has an ibsta down xD
Well then that I'd a skill issue on the survivor side isn't it?
-
@kit_mason said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589429#Comment_3589429
Killers are allowed to defend hooks and not every hook is going to be a free unhook for the survivor.
I know. I feel like i'm having to say this 20 thousand times because y'all are inferring that I'm advocating for something I'm not.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589439#Comment_3589439
That the issue of face camping was not just "oh no the killer is stood right next to me" it was "the killer has made unhooking genuinely impossible outside of a very coordinated SWF and against Bubba not even then", which it has not fixed. So why bother keeping the mechanic in the game? Who's only mad about the killer being stood 20cm from their face and no other aspect of face camping?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589461#Comment_3589461
This is quite literally my point. "just like before."
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589655#Comment_3589655
Step 1: Get two survivors that know they're both needed for the unhook.
Step 2: Get them to correctly, without comms, position themselves so they can get the unhook.
Get this consistently in SoloQ and I'll stop complaining about the difference between SoloQ and SWF.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589811#Comment_3589811
How people define face camping and proxy camping is entirely arbitrary. I'd consider a bubba stood just outside of the anti-camp radius but ready to shove forward and facecamp the second a survivor shows up to pause the timer still face camping. Wouldn't you?
Fundamentally, I think people have misunderstood my point by filling in my motives for why I want it to be changed. I care equally if the killer camps me at 20cm or 8m. It's camping either way. But the anti-facecamp mechanic just adds yet another layer of unexplained complexity to playing matches that new players *are not taught*, and if it's not even making getting face-camped easier to deal with then what's the point in keeping it in the game?
More broadly, I'd appreciate not being condascended to by a dozen people with the cookie cutter response whenever someone complains about anti face camp. I know it wasn't meant to fix a killer just checking in - referred to as proxy camping. My argument is that killers still undertake actions that I would regard as face camping (sitting unmoving just outside the radius until a survivor shows up and then moves in to blatantly face camp), so the mechanic achieves nothing and should be removed.
The mechanic is not supposed to bridge the gap between solo and swf though Sooooo... You re barking up the wrong tree here.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589273#Comment_3589273
Doctor can just shock threrap and prevent the unhook. You can still camp at least 11s from close and even longer if there is survivor trying to save. So anticamping barely does anything to those who adapted to it. I think the range is not enough and it should fill faster. Doctor facecamping power should be nerfed.
Just bring two survivors and approach in a way that the shock cannot hit both, when the first one gets interrupted by the shock you walk in and unhook. It is really not that hard man.
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589593#Comment_3589593
Okay, drop them and chase the other guy. When you down them? They do it again.
Drop them again, and chase the other guy again. When you down them too? They do it again.
You get no hooks. 3 people waste all your time. 1 person does gens. You lose. You wasted so much time in chase and got nothing! You're the poster-boy in their YouTube compilation now!
Only if they can take on overly long chases... If they take several hits so you don't get a hook and you still don't manage to get at least one guy down in a reasonable time then I cannot help you, they might just be better than you.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589521#Comment_3589521
Given the state soloQ is I think people want to play more swf then before and many soloQ players have quitted.
Perhaps, but that is just guessing..
-
@bobateo said:
Take aways -
- The game is less engaging for him when he has gotten over the initial rush for new content.
- He doesn't want to 'have to play sweaty'.
- He's able to play 'nicer' when going against weaker opponents. This allows them, according to him, to have 'more gameplay' while he gets 12 hooks (a 4K). "I can make the game more fun"
Counterpoints -
If the game is truly less engaging for him because he's been playing it so long, then pick up another game or be okay with losing when going against opponents who are as skilled as you but are playing to win instead of playing to chill with chat.
He doesn't have to sweaty..... Unless he cares about winning. I've seen a couple of people say that he doesn't, but I think his owns pretty clearly say that he does.
While there might be people out there who on the whole would rather play against a Killer who doesn't tunnel and camp, but still 4Ks than one who does, even that will get old after awhile. The feedback loop for survivors would be atrocious - no matter how much better they get, they will still lose most/all their games. It will never matter how hard they try unless they make it into the top 1% of players. Then maybe they'll get to escape sometimes. That's a good way to get people to quit playing with any consistency.
This may be harsh, but it sounds like he wants to put in minimal effort while still getting top tier results on a consistent basis and if that's the case, sounds like he needs to do custom games against bots or his audience.
He also said he is not going to play sweatier even if it means loosing... So unless you just don't believe him when he says he doesn't but then again he is pretty much known for most of the time not caring for the outcome of the match.
Why is everyone assuming just because the other side is slightly better than you means you will never get out... Like what is this?
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589562#Comment_3589562
I've been in situations where I could not ever get a single hook because of coordinated survivors.
Starts off with blinds. I adapt and counter with Lightborn.
Then it's bodyblocks. I adapt and counter with Mad Grit.
Then it's hook sabotages and horsey perks. I adapt and counter with Iron Grasp.
Then it's last second hook sabotages. I adapt and counter with
Hangman's TrickAwakened Awareness. (I preferred Hangmans, but they nerfed it by making it only affect four hooks instead of all hooks 😥)It's gotten to the point where I have all 4 of these perks in a loadout on EVERY SINGLE KILLER. Even that's not enough
Now it's purposefully going down under pallets...
The best I can do is play Trapper, trap 1 side of the pallet, pick up from the other side, and hope they don't coordinate holding the trap open for someone to run in for the drop.
This means to counter all this crap survivors on comms get away with, I have to play Trapper with ZERO chase/slowdown/endgame perks. Meawhile, they just need a flashlight and Iron Will (maybe Clam Spirit if they suspect the killer has Ultimate Weapon or Infectious Fright).
And survivors would call a "counter" to pallet saves overpowered?? 😂
Killer can secure the hook they spent time in chase earning, but that's 1 less perk slot doing other things. 😔
Against bodyblocks you can just drop and chase them like... The perk is really not worth taking even if they all take hits constantly, just because they will figure out you have and then just not doing it...
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589220#Comment_3589220
Sure, this works for the FIRST survivor you down, and ONLY IF you can down the survivor in the first 60-90 seconds of the match before Blood Favor's cleansed.
This "counter" is as effective as saying use H:NOED to counter gen rushing. The gens still get rushed...
Not every hex gets cleansed within 2 minutes... But sure it has the possibility to get cleansed.
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589384#Comment_3589384
They can't be left as is...
Be in a duo, trio, or squad on comms. Have Windows of Opportunity equipped. Run to pallet before getting downed. Never get hooked until there are no more pallets left on the map or every survivor is slugged*
*Assuming that there are no Unbreakables, Flip-Flops, Power Struggles, Plot Twists, or Boon: Exponentials
The killer has NO counter (beyond the first minute of the match, IF they brought Hex: Blood Favor)
You can just slug him and take chase to someone else, they need to be close to get the drop on you and this is probably not problematic in most games as there are not many players that play around this on purpose. You can try to bait the pick up, worst case you just run UW and use it before picking up to see if someone is close to you.
-
@please_explain said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589337#Comment_3589337
It's not a counter if it's not reliable.
That is not quite true my man... It stays a counter, just not a strong one...
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589298#Comment_3589298
Requirement for their matchmaking should be face to swf. 4 man swf probably make 20% of the playerbase so there is enough for those blight and nurses. Most of them can at least put a fight.
They make up around 5-10 % ... According to some data realeased some years back, I don't really see much of a reason why that number should have changed.
-
@HugTechLover said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589436#Comment_3589436
Yea that map was an absolute pain in the ass… but I do miss it. :,)
Nah I never miss terribly designed maps or design in general...
-
@kit_mason said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589391#Comment_3589391
Nothing. I'm just saying that anti facecamp hasnt meaningfully changed the way killers camp nor the way you resolve it.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589355#Comment_3589355
I know. It just doesn't punsih that because they stand slightly away from the hook instead whilst still achieving what a facecamp did.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589352#Comment_3589352
Sure, if you consider the problem of facecamping just that the killer was stood right next to you and consider no further implications with facecamping as a whole (which were not resolved).
Face camping is by definition the act of standing right in your face, like this close. Whereas camping as a whole from further distance is something else, either camping or proxy camping...
So the goal of anti face camping (standing like 20cm away from the hook) has been achieved. Sure there are still other problems but the one this thing was designed for was reached so.... where is the issue?
-
@HugTechLover said:
I miss old haddonfield.
I don't those fences gave me nightmares...
-
@Krazzik said:
It's the same uproar many streamers had when MMR was first introduced and it's such a bad take. Scott's video is just him complaining that he's going against people closer to his skill level and actually has to try instead of steamrolling much worse players like usual.
Yes, I'm sure you're able to have a more chill stream when you're constantly matched against worse players, but how do you think it feels for those teams of survivors who have no real chance of winning due to poor matchmaking? Oh, you're going easy on them and 12-hooking before getting your 3k/4k? Well most killers in that situation don't do that, especially streamers doing streaks. It also still doesn't change the fact that the survivors still had no real chance in chase anyhow.
The fact is that the best killers should be going against the best survivors; killer players like Scott and Otz should be constantly playing against organised 4-mans with the best items and perks because they're the kind of players that can actually play against them.
But that's the whole point, he is not steamrolling them, they still get chases he tries to 12 hook them, steamrolling would be playing nurse and 4 man slugging everyone or something ridiculous... They would not have less of a chance if he plays sweatier, if he did tunnel, proxy camp and what not. But that's not his point, his point is that he likes to play nice so everyone can play the game, so this change kind of hinders him from doing so if he wants to still win, which he accepts by continuing to play nice instead of changing his playstyle.
Otz continuesly plays nice and sometimes even loses the streak over doing so, sure maybe others don't but many players and streamers don't want to just sweat every game because it is neither fun to watch nor fun to play.
At least the survivors got chased, they still could have outplayed him or at least learned something out of it, but if they don't get chased at all because they just get proxy camped at 5 gens and so on there is not even that chase despite you thinking t is worthless because they are going to lose anyway, which I don't agree with... Sure if they were much worse, but as far as I know he only wanted them slightly worse, so they can still do it, just because you are slightly worse does not mean you will go down in like 10 seconds in chase, only if you are complete garbage.
The last part kind of goes back to the problem that there are not enough full 4 mens to supply killer players of that level, as they are quite rare, especially on that level of play.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589398#Comment_3589398
I feel like we're just going in circles here. What is being addressed is his preference that matchmaking pair killers with less experienced survivors. He states that he usually wins his games while being able to chill and chat but that recently that hasn't been the case, which prompted this very video. Him saying that he may have to "play sweatier," or "be a dick to survivors" as he succinctly put it, suggests that yes, he does in fact care about his win rate because he is willing to change his gameplay in order to maintain it. He *can* still play chill with stricter matchmaking, literally nothing is stopping him except he knows he will cop more losses doing so.
It's all well and good that playing against weaker survivors allows him to play nicer, but that doesn't mean much to the 99.99999% of the people who are not playing against Mr Jund.
He said he could do that as he watched the replays and what not, so no he does not care about his winrate... But he does not want to play differently, as he does not care about winning so much.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589395#Comment_3589395
I am just glad BHVR devs did not lose their mind yet to make matchmaking like that. Unless they wanna kill their game.
You need 4 survivors and one killer for one match. For every killer player, you will need 4 survivor players. So majority of players need to be survivors if you want to make game survive.
If matchmaking like that happen, kill-rates will rise because killer player will always get some survivor who has less skills. Right now, if you win your mmr will go to up. And after some wins, you will face someone who has equal skills with you. And this is where you will lose some matches.
If they make something like Scott's matchmaking, you will never get equal skilled players with you. This means you will keep win but you will never get good teams. And i highly doubt people will play survivor when it's only lose for them. Queues will be insanely long for killers because who would play survivor when you know it's auto-lose. I would not.
So system like that never gonna happen and should never happen anyway.
Are you one of those guys that think everyone always only plays one side?
You already go for the weak link in any game if you seriously want to win, so nothing changes in that regard...
That is the problem right now, you won't face someone like that necessarily because matchmaking can still be all over the place if there are not enough players.
Why exactly would never get equal matches with Scotts system? Loosing still means you will get worse players to go against, what I described above is what would happen and eventually you would have the same results, of balanced matches, in theory at least.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589370#Comment_3589370
Great! Then playing with people on his own skill level will be no big deal surely
Did you even watch the video mate? That's literally what he said xD He doesn't change his ways of playing despite him not winning because he does not care about it that much, he only misses the chat interaction ^^ In the end he will probably just end up playing survivor more often and play a bit sweatier when playing killer.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589323#Comment_3589323
I don't think anyone wants it restricted to that extent. I'm sure BHVR received the feedback on that loud and clear.
Anyway, I've just seen that Mandy confirmed in another thread that they raised the soft cap a few weeks back. Which is what Otz theorised happened. I don't agree with Otz on alot, but I agree with him that raising the soft cap primarily impacts those in high MMR (those who are competitive and want to win) while the impact on the casual (majority) player base will probably be negligible. You may feel it'll make for boring streams, but not everyone watches streams or cares about the experience of content creators. They just want to play and have a chance at a win once in awhile.
Would you mind linking that post if you could find it? Would be very nice of you.
About the impact, I don't even know about that, because before they apparently raised it was basically a given that everyone could reach the mmr soft cap rather fast and without many problems, so I would say matchmaking was so garbage because basically everyone was at the soft cap, therefore getting everyone that was queueing at the time.
According to some data miners way back the soft cap was 1600, base mmr was like 1200 and the highest even cheater bots could get was around 3k, going higher was basically not possible because they got no points anymore because matches were so unbalanced. However streamers who were playing really good as well as some good squads were apparently between 2000 and 2400 mmr, which means that even if we raise the soft cap (unless by a lot) I don't really think it will have that much of an impact. Even when the soft cap was 1700 matches were kind of similar to later, you still got some random comp players with 12000 hours every once in a while.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589339#Comment_3589339
No it is not.
Even if you get better, you will always go to against someone who is better than you. That's what is Scott suggesting.
And my question was that, how you will make people play survivor when they lose and lose.
If you don't have actual answer , please don't mention me again.
First of all, yes it is. Just because it does not contain a reason for everyone to play but only for a small portion it is a reason nontheless. Second if you loose your mmr should become lower, therefore getting a slightly worse opposing player, at some point you will get balanced matches, just because the number the other guy has is higher than your and you still get matched does not necessarily mean the game is unbalanced... Let me explain... So lets say killer has 2800 mmr and you have 2500 mmr going into the match, you are actually playing at that given number of 2500 in the sense of you are that good ok. So if you loose some games because the better guys were to good you will maybe end up at a lower mmr after some time your mmr will be 2200, the killer now will be 2500 mmr, and now you are at the point where despite the mmr difference the killer is actually at your skill level. All this thing would do is inflate mmr for some people.
Many people lose most of their soloq games and still keep playing and most people don't really care about winning or losing because it is mostly about fun, sure if you get stomped every match it might get annoying, but as long as the chases are good who cares.
Also as for the part of them losing and losing, eventually they will win, either because they get a busted map or because their mmr is low enough so that they go against someone of equal skill. Overall I don't know if in the long run the whole concept would even work, because what it would do is just make matchmaking become more inaccurate for some time until you have a somewhat equal standing again.
-
@Annso_x said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589345#Comment_3589345
Killer is more stressful by design because it's an asymmetrical game. Giving people free wins because they want to chill but still 4k is ridiculous. Don't pick the outnumbered role if you want to relax, or just don't expect to win.
Ultimately the suggestion is:
Problem: If I want to chill I'm going to lose because my opponents are playing to win and if I want to win I have to put more effort in because my opponents have the same skill level.
Solution: Make me face weaker opponents so I can chill and win at the same time, but I promise I'll play nice :)
Consequence: The other side has to put the most effort in every single game. They're fighting an uphill battle so they can't ever play chill (especially not survivors who have a team dependent on them) and even if they play to win it's unlikely they will.
I genuinely don't understand how you can consider this being a good idea when it's clearly coming from someone who forgot the other side weren't bots and would also enjoy playing chill and/or winning for a hot second.
I don't think you will get a free win just because one side is slightly stronger than the other side.
I never said I consider this a good thing or a bad thing... I just gave reasons for one or the other side. In the end I don't care about this at all, I mostly play solo q and the games are miserable anyways, be it because of teammates that have no clue what they are doing or because of the killer playing like it is a tournament, so all I care about is chases, if they get better, because the other side actually knows what they are doing instead of just proxy camping all game long I consider this a win, even if there is only the slight chance that some people will play nicer, because they can, most people don't play nice regardless of how easy or hard the game is.
-
@please_explain said:
I think Iron Grasp should be buffed so pallet and flashlight saves don't make the killer drop the survivor.
Big no my man, sure the perk could become more usefull, but this is way too much of an effect, removing pallet saves is just not a good idea.
-
@kit_mason said:
Before anyone says that I just want to be toxic, that's not why I want it removed.
It's become very clear that this addition has achieved nothing. Killers who want to camp still camp, killers who didn't before still don't. The only difference is that they either
- Stand ever so slightly further away than they used to.
- Face-camp with tombstone to entirely bypass endurance.
A near-useless feature that adds yet-another bar new survivors have to ascertain the meaning of (and new killers have to learn the existence of) is the definiton of bloat. So remove it.
The feature got rid of facecamping, so it did what it was supposed to do... What exactly is the problem here?
-
@Annso_x said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589339#Comment_3589339
People aren't going to play survivor to get better at the game knowing they'll always be matched against killers stronger than them anyways.
Survivors would have to sweat every game just to have a chance at winning so killers can have chill games without impacting their win rate. This idea is just not good at all.
Some would for sure, that's like the whole reason why some people start scrimming and doing 1v1 because they wanna get better, I'm not saying it will fix it all, but it is at least some motivation, so it was the question you asked beforehand.
I never thought of looping the killer as sweating in any form, sure the macro play will be a bit more stressfull, but isn't it normally so that killer is more stressfull than survivor regardless? So I don't think it is too rough.
-
@PotatoPotahto said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589295#Comment_3589295
Then MMR window should've been widening faster. Literally any other game with MMR manages to deal with super good players, if BHVR doesn't do that it means they don't want to.
Does it though? Dota 2 for example has probably 50-60x the amount of players DBD has... And it still cannot manage to put people together accordingly, look at players like Wagamama or others when they try ot play with friends and look at the absurd duration the queues take and the massive amount of unbalanced games they get... It is not like other games can manage such things properly. Sure if those guys play ranked or solo then it works, but as soon as you get groups of players bigger than 2 the system basically fails.
If you widen the mmr window faster you will get more unbalanced games, basically leading to similar stuff like we had before, it just depends on how many people are online and playing whether or not it is needed.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589329#Comment_3589329
That's not the question i asked.
You asked how to make people play survivor... And I gave you a reason what might motivate people to play survivor... So it is kind of the question you asked.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
So as survivor i will go to killer who is much better than me. Most likely i will lose. Then i will go to against another killer who is better than me. I will lose again. This will repeat.
So can Scott explain to us, if matchmaking was like that how he would make people play survivor?
If you want to learn how to loop it is more beneficial to play against people betterr than yourself. Also just because the other side is slightly more skilled does not mean you will automatically loose..
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589295#Comment_3589295
What you're ignoring is that BHVR did those tests over the course of a week and only on *one* of those days did some streamers have long wait times, such as Dowsey's two hour wait. That was obviously excessively restricted matchmaking. I watched Otz's stream last night to hear his concerns on the matter, and he did not have extended wait times.
Obviously it was for stricter matchmaking, however the point is if you want it accurate to that amount you will get this result, that statement stays true, it is probably still not really equal in that sense, people will just have to play sweatier, but do you really want to see Otz play comp level sweaty for 50 matches in a row? That does not sound too interesting if I am being honest, there are only so many killers that are interesting to look at at this level, and I don't think a single m1 killer is one of them, so half the killers would already be boring to watch...
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589251#Comment_3589251
This too. It's so normal for expert streamers to have closer to 50% win rates in other games at the GM/top rank/whatever level. In DbD that's seen as a crime by content creators.
KnightLight still draws good viewership streaming lots of tournament content and scrims. He's just genuinely top level at DbD, so people watch him for that. People will still watch for top level play if content creators are afraid of that. But they'd have to actually put in the work.
Content creators already put in the work by coming up with funny ideas or comical characters and what not, but the problem is that you cannot really try those things unless you are really good, I find it kind of sad, since some of those goofy content creators did really fun stuff, but it just does not work anymore, since the games go faster in both ways and what used to be good plays back then just does not work anymore, it just seems to be all about skill these days, which isn't a bad thing in general but those guys just don't get the attention anymore, despite being funny and entertaining...
-
@Beatricks said:
Absolutely not.
And it's hilarious to me to see that all those content creators who spent the last years on their high horse calling us bad at the game for not being able to easily 4k against a killsquad on Garden of Pain with no slowdown perks on Pig/Legion/Wraith etc are now facing competent survivor teams.
So tell me sunshine, who were these people playing against when they weren't playing against you hm? Because these people didn't just spawn from the Fog out of nowhere. If you and your 10k hour on C-D tier killers need to sweat hard to have a chance at winning then imagine the regular Joes who don't have that amount of experience under your belt and were constantly getting these folks since we don't have preferential matchmaking to make the game look good to our audience.
Glad the hypocrisy is now dragged into the light and I pray that BHVR enables strict matchmaking so the high MMR monsters stop sealclubbing casual soloq gamers.
I never understood BHVR's insistence on not making every game sweaty for the top 1%. If you are on a 100+ killstreak with Blight and Nurse, you should be strictly banned from going up against SoloQ. I'd much rather a few good players have long que times than hundreds of people feeling miserable match after match because they never even stood a chance at winning.
If all those good players that make content about the game are unable to play, because they have hourlong queue times, what do you think how long it takes until they revert it because this free advertisement does not work anymore?
People that have such huge streaks on Blight and Nurse won't care about that, those guys are that good that unless they go against a full one 4 men comp squad they still are more likely to win than to loose. But sure if you try the same on a lower tier killer you will really struggle.
Also I have no clue how the matchmaking is apparently suddenly able to find better matches... Would also be glad to know, or to get word from BHVR what changed.
-
@PotatoPotahto said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589262#Comment_3589262
Then let them sit in queue for 15 minutes, that was normal for top-of-the-top players in StarCraft 2, why give DbD streamers special privileges of making MMR worse for everyone so they can pubstomp for content
15 min would be fine, Dowsey queued for 2 h and didn't find a match, that is not fine... You do realise the difference. But yeah sure I would find that amound of queue time fine, however in the survey they BHVR did basically nobody wanted to wait longer than 8 minutes for a match... sooooo We're in the minority here.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589269#Comment_3589269
The streaks would push the mmr more, than having an occasional loss.
Which means, that the players with ridiculous streaks, should get matched against SWF teams with ridiculous streaks. Instead of stomping normal players. I really don´t see the issue here. The system is meant to give out opponents to achive a 50% win/loss. Not a 100% win for ages.
If i have to choose between streamers getting fair (hard) matches and new players getting easier matches instead of being stomped. Then the choice is really easy for me.
New players should ideally get matched against new players and not serve as cannon fooder for 5k+ hour players. Especially since the new players are more likely to just uninstall the game after some horrible matches.
That is more about mentality and playstyle than about being a streak, players that go for streaks like the challenge or wanna be comptetive or whatever, that does not change just because they are not counting the wins in a row, and even if the win loose once every 10 or so games, so what? Do you really think they will loose more mmr than they gain by winning 9? Also those guys play so many matches anyway, so sure it would go up slower, but I don't think it matters overall...
There are not too many top tier players doing 4 men escape streaks the same as there are not many top tier killers doing killer streaks, so if we take into account when they play and the server and what not, do you really think you can expect those guys to get matched with each other? I don't think that is reasonable, sure in a perfect world you would get such matches all the time, but the issue is the amount of players, you just don't have enough players on that level for this to happen frequently.
The reason this (50 50 win loss) does not work here is the same reason why for example pro players in starcraft don't get 50 50 win loss in public matches, because they are just usually that much better than the guys they play against. Even there it happens very often that pro players go against Grandmaster players that are not pro players and those guys loose in 9/10 cases at least, probably even way more. And that is for the ordinary pro player someone with around 6k + mmr, if you look at the top players, like Serral, Reynor, Clem Maxpax, on the european server, those guys barely loose to other pro players, except for those before mentioned guys. So let's say the normal pro players is basically our streamer does winstreaks, he knows what he is doing, he is a really good player, and our comp players are basically those 4 top pros... And now think about it, those guys already don't really match each other too often because of different times they play, you are expecting a full on 4 men swf, which are a small minority of players, that is also reeeeeally good at the game, good enough to stand their ground against guys with 6-8k + hours, another reeeeeally small minority of players, and those guys are supposed to match the other really small minority of players constantly? This is so rare my man, for the sake of finding matches most matches are severely one sided.
Sure if that is the choice you have to make I agree it would be fair, but can it be expected? In a perfect world this is what it would be like...
Once again, same as before, new players are a really small group, would take ages to find games against other new players... So basically the same as I said for the other side of the spectrum.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589264#Comment_3589264
Oh i´m not missing that point. After a certain queue time, the mmr search range should continue to widen. Just like its supposed to do.
The problem of not finding any suitable opponents is kinda self inflicted by the 50+ win streak streamers. Of course the system stuggles to find any opponents that have an equal high amount of win streaks for a fair match. Adjusting the mmr takes time. In which the streamers will have to take the pill and just wait.
I don' think it has anything to do with winstreaks... They would not necessarily lose more just because they are not going for a winstreak... Most winstreaks even have restrictions, so they could probably go even higher. If you for exampel look at those ridiculosly high win streaks like 500+ on Nurse Blight Spirit and what not... do you really think there is something to adjust there? They should be at max mmr for like 400 + games at least... I don't think there can be better oponennts, at least not more likely now than before, unless there are more better players now.
-
@Tsulan said:
Oh no, Streamers complaining that they can´t do their win streaks anymore. The Horror!
Like seriously. MMR is supposed to match them with players of their skill level. Not absolute noobs that "should be grateful to get a 12 hook match".
MMR should be stricter. Thats a good thing. Streamers shouldn´t be able to have 50+ win streaks. Thats simply not realistic and draws a wrong picture of the current state of balance.
Yeah obviously, but you seem to miss that the matchmaking did not match people acurrate because it could not find accurate matches... The problem was that people waited ages to find a game and even then didn't find one, Otz mentioned something about Dowsey looking for a match for 2 hours on Twins when it was stricter once and did not find a match. So unless for some reason there are more better players now than compared to when mmr got introduced the problem will somewhat stay, there will still be a gap between the skill of the players.
-
@PotatoPotahto said:
Oh no, streamers can't go for 10000 win streaks anymore, wait a minute, I need a microscope to find my violin to play for them
BTW, welcome to the world of common gamers, where you don't get ez wins against people with ten times less hours. I'm wondering how many streamers will change the perspective on the game now, when they have the same experience as everyone else.
You do realise that there are still not enough people to get constantly match with players with 10k hours and above or comp players? The same thing will still happen, maybe not for every streamer doing win streaks, but I have no doubts that for example Knightlights Nurse streak will still not be broken, just because there are not many 4 men squads that can win against a comp nurse.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3589240#Comment_3589240
If MMR is stricter - ie more accurate - then he should presumably settle in a bracket where he can continue to play chill and not worry about whether he wins or loses. The only difference would be that he'd be playing with people closer to his own skill level which he seemingly doesn't want. And his argument rests on the idea that killers play nice with less experienced players, but who is gonna tell these killers that they need to play nice?
Ok? Doesn't change the point that he does not care that much about winning to change the way he plays right?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
This discussion is inspired by Scott Junds latest video. Specifically the point he starts to make at around 6 minutes in:
https://youtu.be/ccYLse6kWnI?si=Zuz6lHpWxnfs_ANr
Before commenting I want to reiterate that flaming content creators or attacking them personally is not allowed so please don’t do this. You may not like what Scott says here, but I think he raises an interesting point about matchmaking in the game that I would like to hear genuine opinions on.
So the point of Scott’s video is that recently he has been finding his matches harder. At the start of the video he states that usually he wins all the time but in recent sessions this is no longer the case, causing him to speculate (as other content creators have been doing) that something has happened to MMR. He then makes a point later in the video that he believes that him playing regularly against survivors who are less experienced than him results in good matches because his playstyle paired with less experienced survivors= a better time for everyone involved. He doesn’t have to “use strats”, he can go for chases, he can 12 hook and everyone gets to play the game. So is this vision of DBD truly what ideal DBD looks like? Is this DBD at its most fun?
Here are my problems with his take:
- I cannot get on board with wanting to face lower skilled players. I understand his point but it just doesn’t sit right
- Is this game really fun for everyone if no survivor escapes? 12 hook 4K’s are obviously better than 4 Hook 4K’s but survivors not escaping due to always being outmatched by the killer player doesn’t seem fair
- He may play his version of “fair” but how many killer players will follow his personal DBD code? It seems very naive.
- The point he makes about winning all his matches seems odd when he then admits later on he prefers facing lower skilled players. It’s a weird combination of a flex and an insult. If you’re winning ALL the time, you should be facing harder opponents. If he doesn’t want to sweat in those games then stick with your usual playstyle take the L, and go next. Refusing to match your opponents sweat levels is a you problem.
Now here’s where I do sort of see his point:
- Optimal, sweaty DBD absolutely sucks
- The game prioritising kills over how the killer achieves those kills will always be an issue. If killers were rewarded more for playing the way Scott says he plays then the game would be much more enjoyable. And you wouldn’t need to stomp babies to do it.
- It’s a repeat of a previous point but it is true- generally 12 hook games are more fun than 4 hook games. I just think it would be nice if high hook counts could be achieved playing against skill matched opponents. However Scott seems to think that’s impossible, and that the survivors need to be slightly worse than the killer. Is this true?
I’m curious to know what you guys think about the argument he made here.
I think it is somewhat fair, when playing survivor it is basically better to get a killer that is slightly stronger but plays nice, first of all you get chases more which means you can try to get better and maybe even try out some new stuff whereas as killer if the survivors are slightly weaker you get the option to go for tricks more often instead of having to play it safe all the time, the problem is that by not playing efficient you decrease the time the game lasts and the amount chases/possibilities to try something out, do something skillfully gets less. Sure most people want to win, but for me it is more about chases, could I have a good chase pull off some neat trick than that's a win in my book. The problem together with matchmaking is just the maps don't play along very well sometimes... I don't get to try something because sometimes everyone just predrops and runs to the next pallet, not really much to do besides kicking the pallet... Because of the ability to chain them.
-
@Nazzzak said:
He's used to winning and is now upset that he's taking some losses... I can't with this community sometimes.
Nope not at all, he even said that if he tunneled or played sweatier he would still win, but he doesn't care about winning therefore he doesn't so no, he is not upset about his losses...
-
@Avo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3588832#Comment_3588832
I think you misunderstood me. Why do you think I'm instulting you? I'm basically saying that at the low MMR of the game killers are not using meta perks/builds, so the chance of getting the killer that abusing those perks is %10 at the low MMR, I assumed you that you are playing on the Low MMR, didn't insulted you. STBFL is broken, you are also know this either, I already told you the reason, and I think I'm saying it for the fourth time. "Ridiciliously fast M1 hits and easily collectable stacks." Don't be a drama queen, I'm not looking for a fight on this forum. Insulting someone based on their gameplay skills/rank is a thing of 2017 and 2018, and it's a childish behavior.
"Playing from the worst mmr possible" seems like a fairly obvious insult my man. First of all, there is not really a low mmr, or high mmr or a functioning matchmaking system most of the time. Second you don't know what mmr I play at, neither are you able to ever know that. But apparently you didn't take into account that stbfl is not really meta on a whole lot of killers that get most commonly played: Wesker, Nemesis, Legion, Nurse, Blight, Spirit, Huntress and some more usually don't really run it, but apparently it is closer for you to assume I play so bad I never encounter people with proper builds? Besides that why would you even assume I don't ecounter people running Stbfl? The perk has been in the game for years and there has not been much of an issue with it ever, the change to base attack time of killers didn't make it much stronger and since you can loose the stacks again I don't see an issue with the perks, also how is it easy to collect? You need to be lucky to not encounter the obsession, for the obsession not to take hits and if you are playing something else than a basic m1 killer you need to be able to get hits constantly without using your power, which already puts you at a disadvantage, because you take longer to get the m1 than getting the hit with your power.
On the other hand if you play it on basic m1 killer you are playing a character out of the weaker half of killers, so why exactly do you want to nerf the perk in that case? Stbfl is a good example for helping weak killers and not giving full values for strong ones.
-
@Avo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3588787#Comment_3588787
Yes, playing survivor from the worst MMR possible, since you are aware of most of things. A reason? So spamming m1 with easily collectable stacks isn't a reason?
Well not that you would know how good or bad I play, but sure if you want to keep going with those childish insults, go for it Kiddo, only makes you look more ridiculous.
Sooo you have a condition in the ability, a way to lose the stacks again... You didn't even go into detail if or why the effect it grants is too much, your Argumentation ability is even weaker than your insults. I will help you out a bit... Soooo if you want to give a reason for a perk being too strong then you need to either state why it's effect is too strong regardless of any condition given, why it is too strong compared to how easy it is too aquire currently or maybe explain why it might be neither but still unhealthy for the game... Nonetheless you need to express why the perks effect is too strong, just saying it would be easy to aquire is not enough. Wanna try again?
-
@stunningpallet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3588623#Comment_3588623
None of that changes the fact that killer streaks are nowhere near the numbers survivor streak make. Unless there's a "but but" for this too?
You see the actual issue about all those streaks is they are only possible because the players are good and the matchmaking does not put them together accordingly... If we had proper matchmaking those streaks would not be possible to such a high number.
The only time streaks like this from Hens, Alf or Knightlight end is when they actually go against equally skilled players, they don't necessarily loose it on the first occasion, but eventually they would. Doesn't need to be 4 comp players, but 4 really good players might be enough. For those reasons all this shows is that matchmaking is not working properly.
-
@Avo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3588740#Comment_3588740
"Perk is fine" I would also enjoy the m1 spams if I was a killer main too.
Then give me a reason against... I m up for a debate, but give me something to work with, also nice try dude but I play more survivor these days...