Beaburd
Beaburd
About
- Username
- Beaburd
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,496
- Last Active
Comments
-
See, I have a great system for handling salt in this game.
I just throw it over my shoulder, and get a lifetimes worth of luck.
-
Well whenever I'm at Father Campbell's Church, I like to pretend to open mouth kiss a horse in homage to one of my favorite films.
---
Oh, unless you meant favorite game-play related thing to DBD.
In that case I'd have to say just stalking around with 0 terror radius Ghostface or 10 terror radius Doctor. Nothing funner than jump scares and seeing people visibly panic with whacky movements.
-
My main is Ghostface, but I'd probably switch to Doctor if it was removed.
Double "Calm" add-ons with Monitor and Abuse is too fun with a fluctuating 10-38m terror radius on demand.
---
Though I do intend to main the beautiful Carmina soon, so maybe that's not relevant.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2658349#Comment_2658349
As someone else just said, these events are planned far in advance, and this one seems to be more about the upcoming chapter than trying to sabotage the VHS beta.
I mean...it's a beta. And VHS isn't the DbD killer people think it is. It's going to be fun, maybe force BHVR to think outside the box a little (competition is good!) but it'll probably find a happy little niche and do it's own thing. If it's good (right now it's...pretty janky).
Yeah, and if it is about supporting the chapter then that's awesome! But I'd love to know if these things are planned to happen more frequently or not. This blood hunt just took me so far off guard that I can't abuse the double BP as much I wanted due to scheduling issues.
That said, I agree VHS isn't really a dbd killer. Heck, I doubt I'll even play the game myself because it has more elements of Evolved and voice chat in my opinion, neither of which I'm too excited about. That said, I do love me some competition and do hope it fosters some more creativity, ingenuity, and just downright better business practices in general for all competitors.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2658340#Comment_2658340
You notice that there has never been a bloodhunt in November in 5yrs.
Yeah, and maybe it is just a planned marketing strategy in an effort to reduce competition. If so, can't blame them for that, I'd do the same.
But on the off-chance this was planned for months in advance like she said, and for other reasons, I'd love to know what just so I can better prepare for them. I have group projects out the whazoo for university and the timing of this blood hunt just is not the best for me.
-
@Mandy said:
I'm sorry that you're disatisfied with decisions that you do not agree with. However, just to reassure you on one point - our calendar is planned months in advance, as was the Bloodhunt.
I'm personally thankful for the bloodhunt, and regardless of the timing, I appreciate it.
That said, what factors do you consider when planning them?
I'm looking at the wiki (https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Blood_Hunt), and we literally haven't had a bloodhunt in two years until the 5th anniversary this year and now. I expected the anniversary one since it's a 5-year celebration and a huge milestone for this game, but was there anything that prompted this one in particular?
-
@Labrac said:
Whyyyyyyy couldn't they make it after the chapter releases? If the BP cap wasn't a thing I wouldn't be mad, but with 1 million you can barely get a half decent build.
Mclean (former dbd dev) actually stated in his stream yesterday that the cap was purposefully implemented and maintained specifically to prevent BP stockpiling and keep people playing/grinding when a patch releases instead of having them splurge their saved BP and getting all patch content on the first day.
So ending this double BP exactly when the new killer releases is 100% intentional to prevent you from reducing your grind on the new characters.
-
The only reason they'd get mad is if they didn't view it as a good game for whatever reason.
This is an asymmetrical game where, typically, the more fun and good a game is for one side, the more miserable it was for the other.
That's why I never say gg when I win unless the loser does first. Even if I had a good game, I don't know if they did, and if they didn't, it's kind of just rubbing it in.
-
Oh cool. I made a post recently about how bad the grind is, and how it takes about 4000 hours to get every perk on every survivor and killer using in-game BP gains only, so I'm really happy to see this.
My only problem is that I have around 4 group projects that need to be finished in this time frame, so I guess I can't enjoy it as much.
Well that sucks.
-
I've been wanting this forever...
Also gimme Miner 49er, just because his name is so darn fun to say.
-
This thread suddenly gave me an idea for a new survivor item: the whip.
Now this item doesn't have any practical purpose or use limit, but its range is about 4m and it will show a pretty lashing visual with a sound-cracking audio cue when used.
I think that would be very entertaining for all players worth considering involved.
-
@thebrentster911 said:
Man, this is depressing to read about and all the comments.
I'm still newish, and I keep thinking "when I put more hours in and learn and develop my skills as killer/survivor, the game will be more fun".
It seems like the more you play and higher your MMR goes, the less enjoyment you'll have.
Think of playing DBD like climbing a mountain!
At first it can be intimidating, with exciting prospects for the views and wonders you'll experience as you get near the top!
Mid-way up you start to realize how tough the climb will be, but are still certain you can overcome it and be rewarded by whatever feelings of accomplishment accompany your triumph over conquering this mighty wonder.
Then as you finally approach the top, you feel pride in yourself for your dedication and hard work. Unfortunately you also begin to realize there's nothing up there but cold, snow, and an air so finely stripped of oxygen that you begin to feel suffocated. While the view can be nice, it's not a place you want to stay for long. At this point, you're desperate to climb back down before you wither away from the harsh conditions.
But hey if you like the journey enough to not mind the bittersweet ending, go for it still.
-
Trail of Torment, Dragon's Grip, Oppression, Play With Your Food just to name a few.
-
Definitely get the classic Ghostface mask for 200 Auric Cells.
It's like regular Ghostface, but classic.
-
@kaeru said:
MMR is invisible number. How do you all define your MMR as high or low?
Personally I go by the efficiency of my teammates or the enemy survivors paired with their in-game hours.
If I see excessive co-ordination like body blocking, well executed BT swarm plays, taking killer agro, saving death hook teammates, and especially if ~4 gens gone within 5 minutes on top of all of that, that's all usually a good indicator of high MMR.
Never hurts the theory when the survivors have 2-8k hours of game time either.
-
I see, I've read your suggestions but I have one glaring issue with them.
How do these improve the survivor experience?
The corn especially - what other food source will they have access to in the Entity's realm?
-
@Liam282 said:
No. Survivors are the main buyers of cosmetics and must be empowered as much as possible.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/2ADGNIIOCAFN/i-love-it-halloween-meme-2.jpg
Off-topic, but I've never seen that image before and it made me laugh harder than it should have.
Thank you.
-
If they make or have any plans for positive changes for high rank I'd be really surprised.
The entire time this game has been alive, it's just felt like an endless pattern of mediocrity where balance is geared towards attracting new players and through a combination of coddling the majority using biased data and preying on gambling addictions and grinding (bloodweb) rather than working to retain the more experienced players and improve game quality.
I 100% feel like if it were anyone on their dev team other than Mandy replying to this (if she even does), their response would be a vague "we hear you, but maybe just take a break and play something else."
I'm also at the point where it's really hard to motivate myself to play a single game of either killer or survivor. Although I've quit many times and played this game in multiple bursts, those bursts where I find passion to play get shorter and shorter every time.
---
That said, I've been holding hopes for the perk reworks they said were coming in the mid-chapter patch.
A part of me is paranoid that it's going to make high level play even worse, but a part of me is optimistic as well.
---
As a side note, does anyone else feel a portion of themselves withering away and die whenever they say they're optimistic for positive high-level change in this game?
It's like a leaf crinkling up and falling just before winter hits.
-
This is a terrible idea!
If the occasional double BP weekend on major holiday events was deemed enough to ruin the BP economy by the developers, imagine if everyone had it baseline?
You should be super thankful that it only takes around 3,500 hours worth of pure in-game grinding to max out your characters (excluding prestiging) and that only 300 hours more grinding is added per chapter.
---
But no, really, the grind is super stupid.
Please actually do get rid of perk tiers or double BP gains - this is ridiculous.
-
Way more than I like to admit, but nowhere near enough to have enough BP to have all the perks I want on all of my characters.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651250#Comment_2651250
Yes, I think the problem is likely assuming 20k average.
If you're playing killer only with BBQ, you're going to exceed that, once you get BBQ. If you only play on characters with BBQ. And always run BBQ.
Survivors don't seem to have that luxury.
Oh for sure, killers will likely double or even triple that with BBQ.
Even then though, they're still probably going to have to spend 1.3-2k hours dedicated solely to killer to cap out (excluding prestige), and 100-150 hours of grinding per patch with both a survivor and killer.
Those poor survivors though in this case, especially the ones that average 13-15k per game.
---
Whatever role you play though, it is legitimately disturbing how big the grind has been allowed to grow to in the last few years.
Even more disturbing is the lack of BP events when it's this bad. How stingy can BHVR be?
-
You know, I just realized, based off my first post here, that the grind really is nutty.
9.3 million BP to get all perks on a single survivor, and 6.3 million per killer (excluding prestige).
There's 30 survivors and 26 killers in this game, meaning you need 279 million to get all perks on all survivors and 164 million to get all perks on all killers. That's a total of 443 million to get all perks on everyone, excluding prestige.
If you assume you get 20k BP per match on average overall, it takes 13,950 games to do that for survivor and 8,200 BP to do it for killer, or 22,150 games total for both. At ~10 min per game that's 220,150 minutes or 3,691 hours to max out (excluding prestige).
---
It gets worse too if you consider every new chapter.
Every time a new survivor is added, they come with 3 new perks with 3 tiers each (total 9 new perks in the web).
Each web gives 2 perks at 50+ and costs ~60k BP, meaning you'll need 270,000 more BP per survivor to get those remaining new perks. Since there would be 31 survivors in that scenario (30 + the new one), that new survivor is basically adding 9.3 million BP worth of grind for themselves, plus 8.37 million BP (31 * 270,000) to grind the new perks on every survivor including the new one, for a total of 17.67 million BP extra grind for a new survivor.
For killer, you're adding the same 270,000 cost from perks and spreading it across 27 killers (26 + the new one) for an extra grind of 7.29 million BP from the new perks alone. Add the new killer's cost to get all perks (6.3 million) and the total becomes 13.59 million BP extra grind if they add another killer.
A chapter with both a new killer and one new survivor would therefore be a total extra grind of 31.26 million BP.
To put that into perspective, if you make ~20k BP on average per match again, that's 884 games for each new survivor and 680 games for each new killer needed to get the required BP to get all perks again. That's basically 150 hours worth of grinding each if games last ~10 minutes each on average, for a total of 300 hours worth of grinding per DLC with both a killer and survivor.
And these grind numbers will keep increasing with more content, since new perks will have to be obtained on more and more characters.
---
TLDR:
Excluding prestige, offerings, x2 BP events (that no longer exist), tomes, and lobby/loading wait times, you need ~3,700 hours worth of dedicated gameplay if you average 20k BP per game to get all perks on all characters.
Each chapter with both a survivor and killer also adds ~300 hours worth of grinding.
This is kinda excessively gross, and I'm really hoping my math and/or assumptions are SIGNIFICANTLY wrong somewhere.
-
@lavars said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651145#Comment_2651145
idk how accurate the website is but https://dbd-stats.net/ says i spend around 30 mio points. and i only have 3 dlc killer (not even everything unlocked) and 3 survivor (stranger things and the mikaela).
And i "only" played around 230h
Ehh, I'm not too far off then.
230 hours = 13,800 minutes = 1,380 games (if ~10 min per game average) = 21,739 points per game (30,000,000 / 1,380)
That does include things like offerings though, which I wasn't intending to include but it conveniently works out I guess!
Handy stats, thanks.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651139#Comment_2651139
Probably a lot? It's less about the number of builds affected and more about the number of people affected.
I am of the belief that it is far too late too do anything to differentiate Survivors from each other mechanically by even a little. It is something that should have been built into the foundation of the game from the start (or close to it).
That's fair.
I won't stop dreaming though!
-
@lavars said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651063#Comment_2651063
I like you put time into account.
The average bp gain is probably more around 10-15k. It is rare that I see games where everyone does 20k, yeah i'm not good, but a good average view, haha. 10 Minutes is fine as an estimated average, but only if we count games where you also get caught early. And you can spend WAY more on just unlocking all perks(even if you don't have all characters). And we only talk about one side. If you want to have 2-3 killers ready up (even if not all perks) it's probably even more (i sometimes play killer and only could be arsed to unlock perks and then every perk on my main)
You can spend 1mio points sometimes just to get one perk to level 3.
From what i could figure out (it's only a rough estimation) i spend 25mio. blood points.
And here's the extra thing: Imagine you want to have an item-build, and you need to spend even more blood points just to unlock certain stuff xD.
The Bloodweb is really in need of an overhaul.
Yeah, a lot of my estimates were based on personal experience and the real averages could differ. I could totally see games being shorter for some, and BP gains being 10-15k on average for survivors as well. In that case, I wouldn't be surprised if the grind was slightly more than I stated, but I wanted to be a bit conservative. It actually is scary to think about in that light.
Overall though, I agree. Bloodweb does need an overhaul, it's honestly ridiculous at this point.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651104#Comment_2651104
Buffing is not an acceptable mitigation IMO. It's not just about making sure your character has meta perks. It's about making sure that your character has the build you actually want. This solution would still very much result in A LOT of time spent personalizing the character's build being flushed down the toilet.
Maybe, but how many personalized builds would actually be affected by this?
Take a look at my list of proposed linked-perks for each survivor:
- Dwight - Bond
- Meg - Adrenaline
- Claudette - Self Care
- Jake - Saboteur
- Nea - Streetwise
- Laurie - Decisive Strike
- Ace - Ace in the Hole
- Bill - Unbreakable
- Min - Alert
- David - Dead Hard
- Quentin - Vigil
- David - Stakeout
- Kate - Boil Over
- Adam - Autodidact
- Jeff - Distortion
- Jane - Solidarity
- Ash - Mettle of Man
- Nancy - None (license expired, perks are general pool)
- Steve - None (see above)
- Yui - Breakout
- Zarina - Off the Record
- Cheryl - Repressed Alliance
- Felix - Built to Last
- Elodie - Power Struggle
- Yun-Jin - Self Preservation
- Jill - Blast Mine
- Leon - Rookie Spirit
- Mikaela - Boon: Circle of Healing
- Jonah - Boon: Exponential
Now a lot of these perks are weaker than some others currently for sure, but that's not the point. I just wanted to briefly remind anyone reading this that we'd theoretically buff them all to be relatively equal in worth and appeal before going further (which is a great excuse to make a pass on some of the weaker perks anyway).
The main point I wanted to make is:
How many of these perks actually have synergy with each other to the point that more than one is likely to be put into a single build at a time? Aside from the meta perks (Decisive Strike and Dead Hard), which are used together not for personalization or synergy, but because they're just independently strong. In that way, I don't think this change would affect many people.
That said, I don't want to entirely ignore those who run unique builds such as Self Preservation + Breakout + Rookie Spirit + Mettle of Man because they like to, regardless of how rare they are.
In these cases perhaps weaker versions of the linked perk could be transferable, but at a significant penalty. For example you could still use Dead Hard on Laurie under this system to maintain the DS + DH + BT combo, but DH is weaker than if David used it. If Dead Hard were linked to David as it is now, Laurie using it would incur a double cooldown penalty (120s, reset entirely on hook still) to discourage multiple strong perks from being used together.
Diversity is encouraged, builds are preserved to a degree, and the grind is still reduced by half individually and yet still made optional through the encouragement of leveling multiple characters for their unique empowered core perks.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2651063#Comment_2651063
"Instead, I'd rather meta teachable perks be linked to their respective survivor and unable to be transferred."
This idea could have worked in theory if it were implemented a long time ago, but by this point, it's WAAAAAY too late to do something like this without pissing off so many people who wasted a large amount of time grinding on a character who can no longer use the build you had in mind.
Yeah, I tried suggesting it way back in 2016 and even a few years inbetween then and now.
The argument back then was primarily "everyone would just use Claudette for her stealth and Self Care" or "Everyone would just use Meg for Sprint Burst" and so on, before they were nerfed.
---
That said, even though we're definitely at a point where if this was introduced there would be backlash because no one can pile on all their favorite meta perks anymore, I still want to see an innovative solution like this. I think the backlash could also be mitigated somewhat though by fact that not all survivors have amazing meta-level perks and require buffs.
Like, what perk from Ace or Dwight can compete with Laurie's DS or David's DH? None of them really.
So the only solution to these key meta perks being restricted would be buffing Ace and Dwights linked perk (whatever it is) to be pretty dang powerful to make up for the fact they won't have access to DS or DH. Maybe a Bond with infinite range that can pierce blindness? Ace in the Hole that can get rare and stupidly good add-ons, like a key that reveals the hatch once x gens are done regardless of how many survivors are left?
Maybe these examples are too strong, but the idea is that these survivor-specific restrictions could enable the implementation of some really nifty and strong perks. And that is something I think even people irritated with this change might come around to.
Not to mention all of a sudden this opens doors to make otherwise lacking perks have value. Plunderer's Instinct on Ace for example might start looking real tempting.
-
I do think meta perks need to be restricted (if not nerfed) to increase build variety. I would take different a route for this instead though.
Currently it costs about 1 mil BP to get to lvl 37, then another 1 mil to get to 50 or so.
Then it's ~60k per bloodweb at lvl 50+, and you get two perks per web with 303 possible perks for survivors and 270 for killers in the game at the moment. It probably literally costs around 9.3 million BP to get all perks on a single survivor without prestiging once, and 6.3 million BP per killer.
If you're making ~20k BP as a survivor on average per game, that would take you 465 games. If you play a game for ~10 minutes on average, that would 4650 minutes or 77.5 hours of game time to get all perks on - one - survivor.
If you made prestiging mandatory to get all of the perks, that would increase the BP required to get all perks on a single survivor up to ~13.3 million BP. Effectively you'd be increasing the grind in this game by 43%.
I don't know about anyone else, but the thought of that scares me hard.
---
Instead, I'd rather meta teachable perks be linked to their respective survivor and unable to be transferred. Then drop the perk tier system to reduce the individual grind per survivor. Now the grind is lessened for specific builds and play-styles you want, but still substantial if you want to max out every character to build around their survivor-specific perk.
This would reduce the grind to 4.46 million BP per survivor while simultaneously increasing build diversity.
---
If anyone's curious about the numbers I'm pulling up, here's what I did.
BP to reach to 50 is estimated based on experience, as well as the 60k BP per bloodweb at 50+ and could vary slightly.
The 9.3 million BP cost to get all perks on a single survivor however, was determined with the following steps:
- 101 unique survivor perks in the game currently with three tiers each, meaning 303 perks you can get in the bloodweb.
- You get 1 perk per lvl from lvl 1-40, then 2 perks from lvls 40-50 and onward
- You therefore get 60 (40 + 2 * 10) perks by lvl 50
- There's 243 perks left to get by lvl 50 (303 - 60)
- You get two perks per bloodweb, so you need to finish 122 bloodwebs (243 / 2)
- Each blood web costs ~60k BP, meaning you need 7,320,000 BP to get all remaining perks after reaching lvl 50 (122 * 60,000)
- You spent ~2 million BP getting to lvl 50, so the total BP needed to get all perks is 9,320,000 or 9.3 mil (2 + 7.3)
- Add 2 mil per prestige (the cost to get to lvl 50 each time) to get to 13.3 mil for all perks under your idea
A similar process was used to determine an estimate number of BP needed per killer and to get all perks if tier systems were eliminated.
-
This was taken on the final night before Hawkins was removed.
It started as a serious game, but then we all had fun with it and ended with a consensual selfie.
-
No one wants you to play fair or be nice.
They just want to win, shove it in your face, and have an excuse if they can't do that to make themselves feel better and rob you of you feeling of victory.
Play however you want, but don't be afraid to tunnel, camp, user certain perks, or do other things within the games rules that some consider 'dirty' or 'cheap.'
-
I'd actually make the argument that Circle of Healing is destroying heal-based perks like Deathbound.
The main reason people would heal each other isn't because it's efficient, but because they couldn't heal themselves without a proper build. Now that Circle of Healing motivates people to heal on their own, no one will proc it and why should they? Healing others under CoH takes 8 seconds of both your time (16s total) and 16 seconds if you heal yourself. There's literally no difference in time between the two other than who gets the heal points, you or the other guy?
The only time you'd wanna heal someone else, especially if you know the killer has Deathbound, is if the killer is nearby and forcing you to heal someone before he gets there. But in that case Deathbound won't proc because the killer is too close.
---
As for Forced Penance, does anyone actually body block nowadays outside of end-game collapse?
I rarely see it, unless a SWF is protecting someone I'm tunneling. Even then, I think the sight would be even rarer once they knew I had the perk after the first body block. At that point, I don't see this perk getting much use.
---
Then as a random rant:
You have perks similar to Deathbound like Nurse's Calling, Blood Echo, Blood Hound, Coulrophobia, Dying Light, Hysteria, Scourge Hook: Gift of Pain, Sloppy Butcher, Thanatophobia. Not many of those listed perks were good in the first place, but Circle of Healing indirectly nerfs all of them by reducing the likelihood that anyone stays injured enough for these perks to work well at all anymore.
In the case of things like Dying Light and Sloppy Butcher, who reduce heal speed rather than give effects based on people being injured, they're also negatively affected because their heal speed modifiers have become insignificant.
Just look at Sloppy Butcher:
Sloppy Butcher used increase heal time by 4 seconds (16/0.8), which affected both you and the healer for a total maximum time wasted of 8 seconds per injury on the survivors side. If you tried to Self Care, your heal time increased to 40 seconds (16 / [0.5 * 0.8]) which was also 8 seconds of time wasted for the survivor side.
Sloppy Butcher under the effect of CoH now reduces self heal time to 20 seconds (16/0.8) for an extra 4 seconds of time wasted for the self healer alone. If someone else heals you in CoH it will only take 10 seconds total (16 / [2 * 0.8]), or an extra 2 seconds to heal for both you for a total of 4 extra seconds wasted on the survivor side.
Notice how Sloppy Butcher's mangled status effect literally got halved thanks to CoH.
I wouldn't be surprised if the other perks on that list whose effects are harder to calculate (Thanatophobia) are being hurt to an equal degree.
This one perk, from one survivor, which is infinite in use, and has so many other practical applications and time-saving benefits, is literally hard countering over 10% of killer perks for the entire survivor team.
---
CoH is just in a state of being entirely broken and desperately needs to be nerfed in some or multiple ways.
It just has no counters currently.
It's like old DS on the Halloween chapter all over again, but whose impact is more subtle than flat-out denying killers a down.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2649208#Comment_2649208
For me this sounds terrible.
Survivors just being skins means you can level up one survivor and keep thr others at lvl 40 and have acces to all the builds
If you like build variaty then with your suggestion you would need to level up every single survivor.
No thanks. Grind is bad enough as it is
Yeah, that's one of the typical argument against the idea.
But personally, I'd much rather have this system be a replacement grind system for the current perk-tier system. This way the phenomenal grind of dbd still exists, but is lessened by lowering the individual grind of each survivor and instead dispersing it across each of them. Players could then pick and choose what/who they exactly want to grind for and in what order, and therefore lower the short-term grind further that way without actually reducing the overall grind too considerably and potentially robbing players of long-term of grind objectives (leveling other characters).
And since the grind has to be reduced eventually, this would be one way to tackle that issue + the meta issue without straight numbers-nerfing or power creeping everything.
---
The other argument against this idea is that everyone will just play x-survivor for their specific unique perk.
But at that rate all you have to do is make each super unique perk powerful and interesting enough to warrant building around by tweaking their dedicated perks effects or numbers.
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2649208#Comment_2649208
Well, now we are two: I like this a lot. Thats basically what my second idea build upon, but I penned it way more clumsier then you. This would help to establish the survivors as characters with a givin identity, and not just skins, once their perks are freed in the blood web, sorta like the different killers, and give each of them a core gameplay. But the normal way is already too established instead for them to change something profund like this.
Oh heck, you did - I completely glossed over that.
I'm so happy I'm not alone now. Have an upvote!
---
Sadly, I've been wanting this since 2016 and proposed it multiple times in the past. I doubt it will ever come true at this rate.
We can dream though.
-
Circle of Healing.
It's just such a terribly balanced perk, but I can't help but love it.
-
Finally a thread I can get behind.
I personally think the reintroduction of infinites is necessary to make the game bearable for solo survivors again. Some would argue that the old infinites are not fair, but to be honest?
"It takes so much skill to pull off anything even remotely resembling an infinite."
-
@Rizzo said:
Let's keep the thread on topic, ok?
Again, if you have issues with other users, keep it out of this platform.
To go back on track, my favorite survivor is probably Nea, mostly because of the staff shirt to be completely honest.
Wait, Nea of all survivors has a staff shirt?
Please tell me that's based on the old joke that BHVR is the real entity, and that this is a subtle admittance that Nea is also the entity since she represents the staff.
-
I'm gonna suggest what I've been suggesting for years in different variations but will never be implemented because apparently I'm the only person in the world who likes these types of restrictions and differentiation among survivors.
Permanently assign one insanely good perk to each survivor, and restrict it to that survivor.
Every other non-assigned perk has to have less impact than linked ones and be balanced around each other in terms of strength.
---
Example:
- Bond becomes a Dwight-only perk and is global
- Self-Care becomes a Claudette-only perk and takes 20 seconds to heal at base
- Adrenaline becomes a Meg-only perk and activates on the third and last generator popped (no exhaustion applied)
- Saboteur becomes a Jake-only perk and disables a hook for one or two minutes
- Decisive Strike becomes a Laurie-only perk and can be used after both unhooks regardless if used before
- Unbreakable becomes a Bill-only perk and has unlimited uses
- Dead Hard becomes a David-only perk and has a 30s cooldown
- Boon: Circle of Healing becomes a Mikaela-only perk and... hell, it's already broken enough
- Power Struggle becomes an Elodie-only perk and you wiggle out 40% faster
- Built to Last becomes a Felix-only perk and has infinite uses
---
This would allow you to create new meta perks since they'd all be distributed and linked to their respective survivor. You could also then buff otherwise uninteresting survivor perks to insane levels by restricting them, encouraging new ways to play and build diversity.
I also just want character differentiation for survivors really badly.
-
@HaunterofShadows said:
Probably NFT's (to no surprise)
This is my reason.
I really want his perks too, how sad.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646888#Comment_2646888
That's a misunderstanding of how this thing works. Dead Hard giving a false positive to survivors is still possible, it's just that it's hardly ever going to happen because survivors were never -that- greedy with their DH.
I will say though that the false positives are a critical issue that needs to be addressed immediately, since it is a server issue that can fully impact the game in unfair ways, like a Nemesis tentacle not shattering a pallet that it would've hit if it didn't hit the survivor.
Grab validation also doesn't work that way, because the killer is always last-to-act. And if you act fast enough to where the server receives your grab before it receives the survivor's interruption of said grab, it won't look like a validation on your end, it'll just look like a clean grab.
Good points, I clearly wasn't thinking about this topic well enough. Though I do want to partially blame my frustration with false positives for my clouded judgement here too.
I'm sure the survivor could still have a scenario where they input Dead Hard in time on their screen, but the server retcons it with its own decision against it. I wonder how that looks now actually. I doubt they'd have exhaustion on the floor since the server would deem they didn't use Dead Hard if they got hit beforehand.
Similar on the grab, you're right there too. What I'm experiencing is probably false positive grabs I've been canceled out of which are similar to Dead Hard validation hit reversals due latency. If I got what I was aiming for here (no false positive grabs), it would either be from the overall fixing of this issue or making these action decisions based on the killer's client again - which is not what I'd want.
Here's hoping a fix to these false positives comes sooner rather than later.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646869#Comment_2646869
In regards to Dead Hard validation: it didn't 'move the issue to the killer side', it just stripped the killer of preferential treatment.
The server is now the solitary arbiter, as opposed to the killer's client. The killer no longer gets a benefit off their own latency.
The Dead Hard validation gives killers false positives for hits, similar to how pre-validation Dead Hard gave survivors false positives through exhaustion.
It's fine and dandy to say "it was just fixed, no preferential treatment was given." But while it was fixed in the sense of having the server make the call, it did shift the burden of false positives to the killer side.
On the subject of fixing issues, one could also mention that killers have been waiting for grab validation to be a thing since pallet hit validation. They've also been waiting years for the sound bug on downed survivors to get fixed.
So to be fair, it's understandable to have some thought of preferential treatment towards survivors overall and even in this case in some regard, even though the change itself was justifiable.
-
@anarchy753 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646868#Comment_2646868
So much that's incorrect to unpack in such a short paragraph.
- Time is not the punishment. As any second the survivor uses is only 1/4 as valuable as the killers, if it takes you 14 seconds to set up a boon totem, the killer has to find, get to and snuff the totem in 3.5 seconds before it's a net gain for survivors. Every time you boon a totem, you either win time for your team when the killer snuffs it, or you win a super powerful perk. You essentially cannot lose time by putting up a boon unless you're also dumb enough to get downed directly on top of it.
- "The more boons they have, the less gen perks they have. You can't carry DH, BT, 3 boons plus DS." That is literally the entire design of boons, perks that only one person has to bring for the entire team to have them. EVERY SINGLE SWF these days has one player with boons. That gives you 3 players with DH, BT, DS, their choice of another meta perk, COH and Shadow Step. It doesn't take 3 boon perks to have a major impact. Either of COH or SS alone have a significant impact on the game, and fit in with three other meta perks easily. Even when you aren't in a 4 man SWF, they're popular enough that you can bring a full meta perk build and assume at least some of the randoms will have the boons and you still benefit from them fully.
Great points.
Something else I'll add to the "Time is not the punishment [of boons]" statement is this:
Healing yourself with Self-Care takes 32 seconds for yourself to heal. Healing a teammate takes both you and the injured person 16 seconds each to heal (32 seconds total).
Healing yourself with a boon takes 16 seconds for yourself to heal. Healing a teammate in a boon takes both you and the injured person 8 seconds each to heal (16 seconds total).
Every heal you get off in a single boon saves your team, collectively, up to 16 seconds of effort. This varies based on travel time, but as long as you run less than 88m (16 * 4 + 24) then you're always running a profit in time.
This can lead to insane numbers of saved survivor time, gaining as much 80 seconds of saved time (an entire generator worth of time) for performing 5 heals within a single boon. This is very possible against attrition killers and even just in general.
-
@MrsMaliciousX said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646835#Comment_2646835
I think that they are doing it
- Because as you stated people like to goof of and 2. because if you take this game serious, you will hate it. Theres to much I HAVE TO WIN, NO I HAVE TO WIN going around. If the killer doesn't get a 4k by 2 gens left they tunnel and slug, all means go for it, but then killers wonder why people just throw themselves at them. No one wants to play this game THAT serious. I get on to have fun, and let loose. Hard to do when you're tunneled and camped out of every single match.
Yeah, exactly.
It took me a few years to accept this direction in terms of balancing, but I do think fun is important for the reasons you stated and eventually just agreed with it.
---
Though, ironically, I would argue that tunneling and camping are becoming more common because of this balance direction and is counteracting their efforts in making games more fun and carefree.
I say that because I myself used to actively avoid tunneling and camping even when infinites were a thing in 2016, but now I advocate them as a killer to be as efficient as possible because of the time handicaps I feel subjected to lately.
Which is funny because you'd think I'd have been under more pressure when infinites were a thing and generators technically went faster. Maybe the skill level in players has just increased that much, or maybe I've just finally cracked under the pressure.
It's even more comical when you consider that when I get tunneled as a killer I still can't help but think to myself "oh a crappy tunnel killer" even though I do the same and understand very well why some would do it.
Thinking on it I'm actually really curious what, if anything, they'll do about camping and tunneling in the future. They'd have to throw killers a bone somehow to relieve the in-game pressure that's on them that motivates them to do it in the first place.
Or maybe they'll just leave it alone and hope everyone gets used to it.
-
While I can't deny War's mention of power creep, I do have to acknowledge how disorienting killer can be.
Sometimes I don't even have the stomach to play Twins because survivors running around me when I'm Viktor is so nauseating. Loops less so for me, but I could see it.
-
For a serious response to this post by the way:
I think it is pretty clear that survivors are coddled quite a bit, and killers tend to get the short end of the stick in terms of balance. I can't think of a time in this game's existence where this hasn't been true honestly.
I don't think this favoritism is done out of malice for killers or ignorance to their treatment of them though.
I tend to believe that the developers think of their game as a party game primarily more than a serious competitive one. They want to ensure the largest side has the largest opportunity to goof around and have fun, and give them ample room to do so. They're probably well aware that killer can feel miserable a lot of the time, but because it's such a relatively small role they don't like catering to it as much.
I found this theory supported in their last live stream Q&A when their Lead Game Designer, Patrick, emphasized that he knows people like to goof around and have fun in games and implicitly supported it through his behaviour. Then again when he shook his head furiously about the idea of increasing generator times, and said nothing else about the pace of the game.
Pair that with how long stretch res has pervaded the competitive scene and been in the game, and that's another bout of evidence that they don't want to pursue a real balanced or competitive aspect to this game.
All I think they care about is enabling survivors to play as half-heartedly as they are now, and coddling that play-style by balancing around it to ensure that no matter how badly they play, they'll still be rewarded half the time. This is especially true with MMR as it is currently implemented.
As long as they can ensure that kill rates are relatively stable while allowing the survivors to goof off and have tons of fun, I think they're content with whatever balance scheme they end up with using the noncompetitive statistics they have.
I can't blame them for it either, because I do have a feeling that if this game were balanced and treated more competitively that a lot more people would leave and it would be less forgiving to newcomers.
They could maybe balance around MMR to separate the competitive players from the casual ones, but I wouldn't be surprised if they just think the expenses don't justify it.
---
In short, that does highlight some of the frustrations that come with playing killer and the inequality of their treatment. Sadly, I think they know already and actively don't want to act on anything.
And a side note, this is why I like joking around a lot on these forums.
-
@Drag0n100 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646790#Comment_2646790
Oh I'm in no way "heated" or "angry" this was just an analysis based on an observation me and some friends made. But hey, I'll still definitely play some Civ!
Yeah sorry, my bad. I already edited that out because it did make it sound like you were frustrated when your post doesn't imply it. I hoped you wouldn't notice before I could edit, but oh well.
I found a funnier quote anyway to go with either way.
-
Relax guy.
https://youtu.be/jnpKUOAgWAU?t=30You may have noticed some changes to your game.
Don't worry about that, the changes will continue.
-
Staaarrrs
are looking pretty tonight, so I guess I'm doing well. Thanks!
Hope you're doin' peachy yourself.
-
I like the concept of main event, but hate it's execution.
Change his main event from its current iteration to a simple buff that empowers his regular knives by giving them free bounces and maybe other effects based on his add-ons.
Tada!
Now he's an ACTUAL trickster with his base kit knife plays, you can add cool new add-ons for him to change what his event does (aura on bounce hit? mangled on injure with main?) and the power is less oppressive so you can use it whenever you want.
-
I really like Dwight because he's a cowardly dork, but I also really like Mikaela just because she has a pointy witch hat and red hair.
It's a tough call.
-
There actually is a counter to boons to make it so a survivor can't bless a totem no matter how hard they try.
The secret is to use "The Twins," find two totems kind of nearby to each other, then body block one with Viktor and the other with Charlotte.
Now you might ask "what about the other three totems though?"
That's the beauty of it, there's only three left. If all four survivors take a boon perk, only three can use them. This means you've effectively denied one survivor the use of their boon perk for the entire match!
All it cost you was the game, your sanity, and a bit of luck.