Blueberry
Blueberry
About
- Username
- Blueberry
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
There's already a skin called Mud Medusa which is kinda what you're talking about.
-
Better, but 16 seconds still doesn't feel like enough.
-
2 seconds makes that addon actually pretty good
-
I like their style, but they're really hard to see compared to the old ones. Maybe just make them brighter and thicker?
-
Yeah it's quite a hard nerf on Knockout...which was already almost never ran anyway.
Making it only basic attacks is quite a hard nerf, whereas 15 seconds of slow crawl speed and Blindness is just completely irrelevant and might as well be deleted. That would only be relevant if it was like 60 seconds.
-
The tinkerer is a nice change but honestly doesn't feel like enough. 16 seconds of Undetectable is just not long enough, it needs to be 30 seconds.
-
@Splinterverse said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1481936#Comment_1481936
Thanks for posting my profile. You're lovely, aren't you?
Anyways, you don't have to play killer to have perspective on it. I've watched hours upon hours of killers streaming and their YouTube videos. And, yes, I have played killer.
.
-
@Dabihwow said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1481961#Comment_1481961
Now I agree to some extent to what your saying but you gotta realize it would take them forever to go over all of the cultures and such for each killer they add, through the skins it allows them to explore it, and allow those cultures to enter dbd, I like the Minotaur skin but the sword needs to be bigger, and I hope you get your own theme music and chase music while wearing it. BUt I understand but this them the time and effort and for the newer player expierence it is still gonna be rough even when they change it.
I guess I can see that point if they really do have that many endless ideas still that they're not even remotely worried about running out.
Rather than be excited when a new legendary skin comes out though, I'm just disappointed, because now I know I'll never get to see that killer come to the game.
-
They look awesome. Great job on the art team.
That said, I dislike the legendary skins idea because it is going to limit their future design options. For example, now that Oni has a minotaur legendary skin there will never be potential for a minotaur killer in the game. So as they keep adding legendary killer or even survivor skins, it's going to be eating away at future possible killer and survivor ideas.
Second issue is the new player experience. The newer players are going to be confused as to what killer it is. They're going to see a minotaur for example and be like, "wow I didn't know there was a minotaur killer, I wonder what he does". This is going to be repeated many times as we get more and more legendary skins. Not gonna be good for newer players that don't know the game well yet.
-
If you played killer more you would see where a lot of these people are coming from. You've only seen the game from one side so it isn't allowing for clear objectivity. They're just wanting you to experience both sides to understand their view points is all.
-
@Nos37 said:
Hope the duration for Knockout's new effects is increased. Killers have to slug for 60 seconds to bypass Decisive Strike, but Knockout only lasts 15 seconds?
Survivors shell out the money; Killers don't get nice things.
Don't forget it's also only basic attack now as well. Most people missed that, huge nerf.
Probably more of a nerf than a buff even given how useless 15 seconds is. Surprised no one else has pointed this out.
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1480325#Comment_1480325
Has this been stated?
It's a gruesome animation, that alone is reason enough that it has a long animation.
I like the idea of a secondary mori that is very quick.
Not stated, just my personal opinion as to why. Seems the main logical reason to me anyway.
A quick mori would be cool, but I don't think they would ever do it because of the above reason.
Who knows though, maybe I'm wrong.
-
As killer, 3k+ and pipping
As survivor, 2+ escapes
-
They made them long intentionally as a downside to using them.
-
Because they want to limit what killers they're good on. In other words they want the perks to benefit weaker killers but not make the better ones even better.
The problem is those better killers still wouldn't even be close to too strong or un fun if they were able to use them. So it turns into just another unnecessary negative on most the parks.
It's also an artificial way of trying to force perk diversity because a large majority of the perks aren't balanced well enough to have more diversity on their own.
It's a bandaid fix and misunderstanding of certain perks power levels in other words.
There are a few exception perks, but generally speaking. It also is simply for consistency.
-
Pretty much my thoughts as well.
Whether I slug or not has absolutely nothing to do with how many gens are left. I slug if the situation arises and the survivors put themselves in that position.
Whether that's at 5 gens or 1 gen is pretty irrelevant to me. I capitalize on the situation whenever it may be that it comes.
I feel like this hate for slugging at 5 gens comes from a lack of playing killer most the time. Killers don't just go into a game pre planning what time they want to slug or not slug at. We slug if the survivors misplay in a situation that makes it an advantageous choice to make.
Or simply because everybody has DS and they're forced to.
-
@Dead_by_Gadfly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1479392#Comment_1479392
I actually think it might be ok if they let you gain tokens off the obsession and let tge debuff apply to tge obsession, Id also change it so the obsession only has a buff of 18%.
As an example. Obsession starts with 18% buff, at 1 token thats reduced to 15%, 2 tokens 12%, at 6 tokens they are normal. After that theyre debuffed too.
That would be another way of fixing the perk I agree.
-
@Nurgling7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1479392#Comment_1479392
I'd rather they made the Obsession effected by the slowdown. You already buff the Obsession, dont progress the slowdown by hooking the obsession, and the perk DEACTIVATES if the Obsession dies. No reason for the perk to not work on everyone.
That would work as well.
-
@The_Krapper said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1479341#Comment_1479341
Discordance is good on killers with mobility that can get there in time to do something about it but not so much other killers
I agree.
-
Doesn't seem good enough to warrant the downside to me. Generally why it's not worth running.
If they removed the buff to the obsession part it would be decent.
-
@johnmwarner said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1479286#Comment_1479286
I’m with you, when I first started I used Discordance all the time and then I bought into the Corrupt hype. Don’t get me wrong it’s a solid perk but I prefer discordance as 9/10 games it gets me into a chase earlier than Corrupt does.
Yeah I don't actually find many killers that run Discordance. I think it's a quite underrated perk.
Not only is it a locating perk which is essentially what Corrupt is, but it is also a pressure perk because anytime it activates, going there lets you pressure 2+ survivors, not just 1. That is very significant.
The less gens left, the stronger it is as well.
-
Overall quite overrated imo.
I only think it turns into an "alright" perk on setup killers that have a slow early game like Hag, Trapper, Demo, Myers etc.
As someone else pointed out, I find Discordance does its job more effectively in most cases and you actually get more value out of it as the game goes on unlike Corrupt.
-
Imo bump it to 6 or 7% per injured survivor but it no longer effects healing.
This makes it less annoying to counter but punishes harder if you just ignore it and try to "gen rush" as fast as possible.
-
Those are near synonymous so that's kind of a weird question to answer.
Part of how you get map pressure is through knowing when to end chases early.
The entire reason you want to know when to end chases is because you need to keep map pressure.
-
Legion, Ghostface and Demo players seem the nicest overall to me. You get a good bit of them goofing around or giving you hatches. That or just nice in after chat.
-
@NoShinyPony said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1477170#Comment_1477170
No, "you just have to learn how to shut down loops and apply gen pressure properly."
There, now that I did write that nonsense, nobody else has to.
Applying gen pressure, aka slugging. Like I said.
-
"It seems impractical to 2H everyone before you kill them."
Because it is impractical.
Against good survivors you literally do not have the time to play that way.
When you are playing against good survivors, unless you are playing one of the few top tier killers you will have to do some variation of slugging, camping, or tunneling to an extent if you want to win. Those are just facts.
If you won without doing any of that whatsoever they played very poorly.
-
@PrettyFaceKate said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1476159#Comment_1476159
That's beside the point. Winning or losing are not the issues. The issue is that the killer bled them out to death and bm'd for no reason other than trying to be as annoying as possible. Once they had a 4-man slug, they could've easily hooked and even camped the kobe if they wanted to. The 4-man bleed out was totally unnecessary. If sides were switched and it was the survivors who had been toxic, this forum would already break out the pitchforks and go on a witchhunt.
The only things that are irrelevant in the OP posts are the mentions of noed and deerstalker.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1476234#Comment_1476234
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1476374#Comment_1476374
You guys seem to be talking about Tombstone+Fragrant, which is not the case here. The killer didn't have tombstone. Fragrant alone increases the required stalking, but not as much when run without tombstone. It's actually fairly easy to get it when combined with Myers memorial.
Even fragment alone, that is a lot of misplaying.
-
And it requires a green key ;)
Now they have a purpose.
-
They've been getting worked on for years ironically. Yet they're still absolutely terrible.
They should be hidden well enough that you only find them when you're actually looking for them. What we have currently is you just randomly run into all of them during your loops by accident...or just look across the field.
-
If he even made it to T3 with those addons before the gens were done y'all messed up a lot, especially on a map like that.
-
I had an idea similar to something from your first picture. Seems like a cool idea. Creepy gothic castle map please.
-
It's a pretty busted map. One of the worst ones you can get as killer. If you're playing against good survivors your chance of winning is quite low.
For most killers you basically have to just give up half the map and pick your 3 gen from the start. The map is just way too large and with way too many chained loops to even have a chance of pressuring it properly.
-
@Pryzm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473675#Comment_1473675
Having a flashlight means nothing. It is a tool in the game. I agree that the person may have been toxic to the killer all game and perhaps warranted some form of "justice". That said, the reason I play killer is because I got tired of constant toxic killers. They are not rare. They are nearly the norm now days. I would rather farm BP off of 4 toxic survivors and at least get a good 20-30k BP reward for my efforts than get hook farmed out of a match with 4k by a toxic killer.
Your mileage may vary based on your experience, but I've found the frequency of toxic survivors is about he same per match as toxic killers.
I can't argue with the experience you'd had but mine has been completely the opposite.
I typically find that the reason so many people think so many killers are toxic is because a vast majority think things are toxic that simply aren't.
-
Deathslinger is one of my least favorites. There's just zero interactivity between the killer and survivor. A good Deathslinger can no scope instantly so there's nothing you are reading to react to. You just randomly wiggle while looping in case he shoots. Not saying he's too strong, I'd even personally buff him, just boring chases.
-
Tbf most killers ultra rares are garbage these days.
They add so many completely unnecessary negatives on them for just an average effect that they end up hurting you more than they help or they're just weak effects in general.
-
It can be very difficult for people to step back from the high pressure moment and recognize that your outcomes happened because of a misplay you did. I think we all do this a lot. In the heat of the moment I can make excuses but if we don't have more self agency and take responsibility for what happened we can never improve.
(Not speaking in regards to the bad behavior in afterchat you linked, that's something else entirely)
I think this especially happens in my experience in regards to tunneling/camping. In the moment you'll think you got camped but in reality it was your team circling the hook or someone sprinted across the whole map leaving a scratch mark trail back to the hook. That was your teammate(s) screwing you over in that scenario with bad saves, not the killer.
-
@SweetTerror said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1474012#Comment_1474012
Hopefully we do see a change. It's funny, I loaded up the game tonight and I was close to starting up another killer match, but my last two matches were back to back red rank swf teams. I have no problem playing killer, but I'm a casual DBD player at best, and until the game ranks matches accordingly, I may have to hold out until the new MMR is up and running because I'm just too damn nervous to try.
I think the change will be barely noticeable for mid and low ranks, but it's going to be a nightmare for high ranks. The poor matchmaking and boosted survivors covered up the games balance issues at high ranks. Once this goes through it's gonna be sweat fests and swf every game at the high mmr's. Gonna make a lot of killers not want to play because of that and a lot of survivors not want to be play because then every high mmr game is gonna be nothing but nurses and spirits since the mmr on those killers will just always be higher than say something like Clown.
-
@NepalibyDaylight said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473675#Comment_1473675
Ah yes blame the victim.
Nothing I said blamed the victim.
-
The funny thing is, you'll have no idea if it's fixed or not because the MMR will be hidden.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473951#Comment_1473951
I didn't say it was a massive bias. Usually you land on the killer side of things. That's why I say I feel you have a bias. But you never present absolutely outlandish things. Which is why I say you are generally fair.
I think this just comes to a disagreement on the definition of bias then.
I appreciate that you think I'm generally fair though.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473859#Comment_1473859
Playing both sides does not prevent a person from forming a bias. As I said before, I feel your views are generally fair. But once people come to conclusions about something, they rarely have their minds changed. From what I've noticed you're more open to having your mind changed. But will probably always see things with a killer slant.
If you view my opinions as generally fair then that already doesn't make them bias by definition. Bias by definition would include an "unfair" treatment.
"But once people come to conclusions about something, they rarely have their minds changed."
If I was presented with data and evidence to suggest otherwise I would gladly change my opinion.
"But will probably always see things with a killer slant."
From a killer slant implies unfair preference to one side, of which I do not think I have. Killer slant the way you are saying it would mean that irregardless of data, evidence or anything I would give preferential treatment to one side which is not the case.
Whatever the data, evidence and experience shows needs buffs or nerfs is what I want, I could care less which side it is. All I care about is objective information. I do not view that stance as bias or as a killer slant. It just so happens that in this one case, killers need some help.
I also happen to think a lot of survivor perks need buffs. That isn't because of a bias, it's because there are a lot of survivor perks that are objectively weak.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473714#Comment_1473714
You can have a bias while still playing both sides. In my observations of your posts I would say you definitely have a killer bias. Or at least a killer leaning to your views. Which is not to say your positions are unfair. I actually feel they're usually pretty reasonable. But your views are definitely seen from a killer colored lens.
Not that I'm really any better about it. I play both sides. But I certainly see things more from a survivors view point. As much as I try my own bias will always creep in.
Playing both sides and analyzing the games balance to determine that one side is skewed in the balance so you want to better balance the game does not make you biased. By that reasoning no matter how much experience, data, information or anything you collected, if you think one side needs a buff and the other does not you are biased. That would not be accurate. "Unfair" is one of the key words in having an opinion that is biased, of which is not the case in my scenario.
"But your views are definitely seen from a killer colored lens."
If I play both sides equally at max rank with thousands of hours, how are my viewpoints through killer colored lens? I seek to have the game balanced for both sides and having played both sides for many hours I have determined my opinions to fixing the issues for both sides through that experience.
I don't think that what you're referring to is using the word bias correctly.
-
@Khakuate said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473714#Comment_1473714
That's your experience, you're not even 1% of the playerbase.
You can't claim killers are most of the time angels, when that's just not true, both sides have the same level of toxicity, you can't claim survivors/killer are more toxic, cause that's a flat out lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias
And I dont know ######### you're talking about, "Bias is disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing, usually in a way that is closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair."
You can play both sides, but I know a lot of streamers/gamers that play both sides, yet they still favor they're favorite side cause they're
B I A S E D.
Btw when you have any proof that you play both sides, we can discuss that.
"I think you are misconstruing what I am saying. I am not saying he was toxic. All I said was that we saw none of the rest of the match and that they could have been toxic towards him, we have no idea. That is a true statement. I also never said his behavior was fine, I said it was indeed toxic."
I can agree with you on that, OP should post the entire game, but saying most killers are angels is just a biased statement.
Firstly man, you need to relax. You are getting way too argumentative over a simple conversation. We can talk or disagree without being combative.
"That's your experience, you're not even 1% of the playerbase."
I quite literally said that was my experience, yes. I also never said I was more than 1% of the player base, you completely interpreted me as saying more than I did my statement.
"You can't claim killers are most of the time angels, when that's just not true, both sides have the same level of toxicity, you can't claim survivors/killer are more toxic, cause that's a flat out lie."
I can claim that as my experience as it is literally just that, my experience. You are interpreting me as saying all killers are non toxic which is not what I said even remotely. All I have said is that in my experience that is generally the case, that's it. Those things are not synonymous
"And I dont know ######### you're talking about, "Bias is disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing, usually in a way that is closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair."
You can play both sides, but I know a lot of streamers/gamers that play both sides, yet they still favor they're favorite side cause they're
B I A S E D."
You literally posted the definition and didn't read it carefully for what it said. "Closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair" That implies a one sided view point with a lack of objectivity and literally treating one side unfairly. None of which are accurate to what I have said thus far.
As I said, not what bias actually means in the way you are using it. You are misinterpreting the definition you posted.
"Btw when you have any proof that you play both sides, we can discuss that."
here you go.
Twitch.TV/blueberrycollectiveI can also stream it if you'd like.
"I can agree with you on that, OP should post the entire game, but saying most killers are angels is just a biased statement."
Because "but saying most killers are angels is just a biased statement" Is not actually what I said at all, it is what you interpreted me as saying.
-
@Khakuate said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473675#Comment_1473675
So you're saying killers are most of times not toxic?
Dude, just leave bias aside for once, BOTH sides have the same level of toxicity.
And you can clearly see he had ######### addons on the flashlight, and didn't even USE IT
Nope, very rarely are killers toxic in my games. Most people just think a lot of things are toxic that aren't like slugging, or say the killers camping/tunneling when they're not.
I don't think you understand what the word bias means. Bias would be if I only played one side so I had a skewed perspective towards one side. I have played both sides at rank 1 for thousands of hours.
"And you can clearly see he had [BAD WORD] addons on the flashlight, and didn't even USE IT"
I think you are misconstruing what I am saying. I am not saying he was toxic. All I said was that we saw none of the rest of the match and that they could have been toxic towards him, we have no idea. That is a true statement. I also never said the killers behavior was fine, I said it was indeed toxic.
-
@LqF said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1473592#Comment_1473592
just like i said however: if they fixed gen speed etc. would all killers need to be that powerful? Not really a way to know, but i personally don´t think so.
I see what you're saying, but that isn't a question that can be answered because it's extremely broad and completely vague.
It's like saying if we made Deja Vu better would it be OP? That's the kind of vague I'm talking about.
Fix gen speeds could mean adding 5 seconds or 100 seconds to each gen. You see what I'm saying?
My answer would be completely different depending on your specifics.
-
That would seem toxic. That said, we see none of the game that happened before that and you have a purple flashlight. For all we know you were in a toxic swf tbagging and flashlight flicking him all game, we have no idea.
The amount of times I see a killer do something like that when no one was toxic on our team is extremely, extremely rare.
Just saying it seems odd for a person to randomly do that for no reason.
-
Freddy strength is what the other killers needs to be brought up to.
Also, I don't think doctor would even make my A tier, much less a nerf.
-
I think the issue is OoO, not Midwitch. OoO in its current design will limit all future map design. This is the same issue old balanced landing had and why it was changed, it limited their future map creation.
I actually love the unique map design of Midwitch as both survivor and killer. I hope they experiment more like this in future maps.
-
Midwitch is one of the best maps they've designed in a while.