Blueberry
Blueberry
About
- Username
- Blueberry
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@MagicDragon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716228#Comment_3716228
Most games I lose as killer I don't think the outcome could have been changed.
No disrespect intended, but whenever I've seen someone do an objective breakdown of their losses as killer they almost always are able to point to discreet mistakes they made that led to their loss. Do you think it's possible you've simply never sat down and analyzed your mistakes in a game, or alternatively that you haven't developed the necessary skills to understand where you made mistakes?
You’re conflating two things as the same that aren’t. Me saying there’s nothing I could have done to change the outcome is not the same thing as me saying I didn’t make mistakes. Quite different. We’re not perfect, of course I make mistakes. It’s understanding how much of an impact those mistakes have on the game that matters. My point is that correcting those mistakes much of the time would not have changed the outcome.
Now I am not talking about common games, these are much rarer outliers. This also has many factors of how often this is based on killer and other choices pre match.
I had a match recently against a 4 man that had combined dbd hours of over 40,000. So like I said, not matches most people are seeing. Their occurrences rate does go up the higher mmr you are though. After almost 11k hours myself I can pretty well deduce the impact of decisions and how much of an impact different choices would make.
There are unwinnable games as killer, but I think most survivor games could be won by improving the skill of myself or my teammates. If both sides play perfectly, the survivors win every time. Most killers rely on survivor mistakes. This is not something that applies to most dbd games mind you, these are rare high mmr matches. Most killer matches their skill could change the outcome.
There are some exceptions to what I’m saying, but it is generally speaking the case.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716426#Comment_3716426
It still doesn't look good, be reasonable.
It does look quite good. Probably not for the average player who doesn't know how to loop and the broken is more punishing. However for any decent survivor, especially if they're a swf, this looks good.
It isn't just a math of time spent doing it vs gen progress since it's progress that can't be regressed and it's something that could be sniped early on before the killer has even started a chase so less valuable time lost early on. Now much worse later in the game. You would have to do it at the start.
I could see some argument to what degree of good it is, just okayish or great, but I think for anyone to call it as much as "bad" would just be wrong.
You absolutely will see this ran a decent amount on swf groups. That tells us there's at least something there.
-
At worst Weaving Spiders looks good now. At best it could be meta.
I think we're gonna see it a lot now.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716324#Comment_3716324
I agree. the latest chase perk is…. unbound. a perk that require to injure then you get 30 seconds of 5% haste after vaulting a window for 10 seconds. when you read perks like this, it is clear that your only suppose to use gen defence as killer.
Yeah the requirements on Unbound seems quite excessive. Like they could've just left it a flat 5% move speed buff duration on vault with a cooldown. That's it. The hit requirement just seems unnecessary.
Batteries Included - Range to gain the effect is too short. Needs to be larger to gain the effect more often and make the linger 10 seconds instead of 5.
Beast of Prey - Useless currently.
Dissolution - Too restricted by TR and 3 second buffer.
Brutal Strength and Enduring - I know people like these but honestly I think these are more feel good perks than anything. Their effect is too minor of an impact for the perk slot it's competing for. I think they need higher numbers or an additional effect.
Cruel Limits - Just bad.
Fire Up - Irrelevant numbers.
Game Afoot - Too niche when only on the Obsession.
Hex: Crowd Control - Not good enough for being a hex. Should also block fast vaults. Now that's scary enough to have an impact before it's cleansed.
Hubris - Duration way too short to get value from and once they know you have it they just pre drop the pallets and it never triggers again
I'm All Ears - Too long a cooldown. Cut it in half.
Machine Learning - Made terrible because it only lasts on one gen at a time. Also requires a preliminary kick just to activate.
Predator - Literal meme.
Yeah, so much bad.
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716228#Comment_3716228
Since I mainly solo'q, it indeed is a 1v1v1v1v1.
I know it isn't supposed to be that way, but it is. And this isn't really something that can debated. Experiences differ person to person, but your view will only be a view of killers. Anyone who solo'qs enough will likely agree, but again, mileage will vary person to person.
I understand your position, I just don't think it's blanket.
I mainly solo queue as well, but I understand it's still a 1v4. The killer isn't playing against just me, I have 3 other teammates helping me complete my objective as well. Thinking of the game as a 1v1 is how we got the balance issues we do have currently in the first place.
It's annoying if you get selfish teammates but you are still working on the same objectives. It is objectively a 1v4.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716097#Comment_3716097
i am highly convinced that the dev do not want any diversification in meta especially on killer side where almost every single perk they nerfed is game-delay.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716040#Comment_3716040
current progression is intended. Pop goes weasel is the save gen perk and eruption is "i kick gens below 30%" perk. There is also cob and overcharge to suppress gens but the base regression of 400% makes those other two perks not worth investing into.
Yeah, plus them nerfing Sloppy and STBFL pushing us even more into just stacking gen slow down. Distortion also completely countering info perks makes those pretty unappealing. In general I find most their chase perks very lackluster in terms of value compared to gen perks. Rapid Brutality, Bamboozle and sometimes Coup are the only ones I really see much value in and each is still very situational and killer dependent.
-
This isn't a meta shake up at all. All the other options are still terrible so people are all going to still run the same perks, they'll just be worse. Idk how anyone would think this is going to change the meta.
-
@WolfyWood said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3715402#Comment_3715402
I'm intrigued. Do you have the source of this concept?
I've always thought Corrupt should be basekit and that the perk would just enhance it somehow.
First chase decides games for either side is really annoying.
They never actually gave us a concept, they had just talked about working on it but it was never talked about again.
I agree with your idea though. Current Corrupt base kit and then make the corrupt perk version be something like "Corrupt lasts until the first gen is completed".
Alternatively another route they could go is something like "repair speed is reduced by 30% until the first injure".
-
@Sava18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716059#Comment_3716059
Yeah it's def both sides but in regards to the human nature thing it's really bad in this game compared to others.
It is quite rampant here. It's why it's hard to have an honest conversation on balance.
If you're a survivor and complain about (x), oh it's just because you're bad and need to get better.
If you're a killer and complain about (x), oh it's just because you're bad and need to get better.
This would be alleviated a lot if we can see our MMR. Then we could at least see we are going against the higher level so my skill is there or oh I am low MMR I probably do have a lot to improve on. However when everything is hidden it's all just conjecture.
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716059#Comment_3716059
I'd say this is partially true. No matter what happens, I can't fix my teammate from bringing No Mither or Weaving Spiders or trolling to make me lose. I can't force the correct person to get off the gen, and the correct person to stay on the gen. I can't change anything that my supposed teammates do.
I can make a better decision in chase on both sides. I can chose to provide pressure on a side objective (heal/snuff boon) or main objective (pump specific gen/chase specific Surv) on both sides. There are nearly no cases as Killer where you can lose due to no fault of your own (outside of blatant cheaters). It is the (vast vast vast) majority of cases as Survivor where you can lose due to things outside of your control (IME).
If I could play a solo Survivor gamemode instead, then I could actually improve and have my wins and losses be in my control, but as long as I have to rely on trolling teammates, the majority of my losses are going to be out of my control and infinitely more frustrating.
"There are nearly no cases as Killer where you can lose due to no fault of your own"
I completely 100% disagree with this statement. There are many games you lose on killer outside of your control. I would argue killer has vastly less agency than survivor. You have to stop thinking of survivor as 4 different people, you are one team. The agency comparison is 1v4, not 1v1v1v1v1. The game is in the survivors hands to lose or win, that is agency. Almost all games I lose are because me or my team played bad. The team playing bad is still my agency, we are one. Most the killer games I lose I would replay them exactly the same, that isn't agency. You make the mind game and either the survivor falls for it or not. Making the mind game was still the right choice either way. If both sides play perfectly the killer loses every time. That shows who has the agency.
Most games I lose as survivor I could have changed the outcome if me or my team played better, that's agency. The outcome could be changed through skill.
Most games I lose as killer I don't think the outcome could have been changed.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716090#Comment_3716090
Quantifying how much of an advantage it brings to the table is important, so you need a Control Group and limited Variables to compare between, otherwise it creates room for misinformation, bias, or results that are altered by Variables not accounted for.
The entire foundation of experiments is reducing outside influences and trying to pull the most accurate results. Saying "we dont need to reduce other variables because there is no reason to" is fundamentally stupid and ignores potential nuance that could exist.
Who are we to say that filters provided a player a given advantage in a scenario when the Killers in Group A was worse than the Killer in Group B. Likewise, what if the Survivor was worse than the Killer in Group A, the Survivor in Group B would suddenly look better regardless if filters are being used. Tru3 did most of his testing in public matches against random players on random maps where no such Control Groups existed, meaning a LOT of variables could have affects the results.
Likewise, it creates great probability for error to exist. In science, things are not determined by if they are right or wrong, but moreso for the margin of error. To put it bluntly, science and experiments do not deal with "absolutes" but moreso "the least amount of error possible." If experiments in DBD are not held to such scrutiny, it can easily lead to misinformation being spread around, which is something we, as a community, should not stand for.
"Quantifying how much of an advantage it brings to the table is
important, so you need a Control Group and limited Variables to compare
between, otherwise it creates room for misinformation, bias, or results
that are altered by Variables not accounted for. "No one's disagreeing with this as a concept. It just doesn't apply to this scenario.
"Who are we to say that filters provided a player a given advantage in a
scenario when the Killers in Group A was worse than the Killer in Group
B. Likewise, what if the Survivor was worse than the Killer in Group A,
the Survivor in Group B would suddenly look better regardless if filters
are being used."Because their skill is irrelevent for what is being tested. What is being tested is not how well you can use the advantage based on your skill, it's for measuring "does the red stain reach 2 meters further".
"Likewise, it creates great probability for error to exist. In science,
things are not determined by if they are right or wrong, but moreso for
the margin of error. To put it bluntly, science and experiments do not
deal with "absolutes" but moreso "the least amount of error possible."
If experiments in DBD are not held to such scrutiny, it can easily lead
to misinformation being spread around, which is something we, as a
community, should not stand for."Yes, we all know this, but this has nothing to do with my point. I think you are conflating two things as similar when they're not. Those two things being the objective value it provides and the subjective value it provides based on skill.
We can see this illustrated by the fact that when I asked for examples you gave none. You just listed off why control groups are important, which is obvious. The question is not why control groups are important and matter, the question is for you to provide an example of why in this specific scenario a control group is needed. Provide me a perk, a survivors skill, or a map that would hypothetically mess up his experiment with them being different.
As I already mentioned, when he's measuring how far the red stain shows between filter and no filter, the map, skill, or perks being ran provide zero difference on the objective advantage provided. This is my example as to why this is an exception to where your control group is not needed. Please provide a hypothetical example as to why I'm wrong.
I think that you are wanting a control group to control for factors that don't actually need to be controlled because those factors actually have zero influence over what is being measured.
-
There's way too much focus on nerfing instead of buffing. All this nerfing just replaces one meta for another instead of what we really need which is a more diversified and large meta. If they just kept buffing all the bad perks instead of nerfing all the good ones we'd have way more options to choose from.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Sidenote, but I really do not like Tru3's experiment.
If Tru3 was really trying to test the difference it makes, ideally they would need a Control Group. The same Killer/Survivors, on the same map, with the same perks and everything, since it reduces variables that could affect the result. The issue is that Tru3 wants to do experiments that I do think are interesting to watch but ultimately fail to apply any form of scientific process or method to reduce outside influences from affecting the results.
He only went back on this… like a week or so after starting this whole thing? After being called out for his experiment not really removing outside influences and not using a Control Group, and only after going on an entire rant on Twitter about how they were being unfairly cancelled when nobody was cancelling them. I think Tru3 DOES have some good points but he does not do a good job to really support them or put people in a position where they feel inclined to support him.
And dont get me wrong, I do think filters provide an advantage, I use them to help with my colorblindness so they gotta be doing something, but overall it relies on if BHVR thinks they should/shouldnt be used, and we have basically heard little to nothing from their end.
While a control group would normally and for many things make sense, it does not for this. There's no reason to. The test is for visuals, perks or survivors specifically is on the verge of entirely irrelevant. This isn't testing skill or power level, it's literally just how the screen looks. The closest you're gonna get to any difference would be map and even then the result is very similar. If you still disagree, please provide examples of perks or how different survivors could in any way affect this result. I feel like this is all reaching very hard to find an issue with it. He also has all his vods as well as our own visual experience of those same maps already to compare them to.
-
This is a people thing, not a killer thing.
"Too many killers complain that the game is unfair but they don't work to
improve their game by watching tutorials or run the perks needed to
balance their weaknesses. Sometimes you are the main cause of your own
demise during a match."You could just as easily take this entire statement and replace "killers" with "survivors".
It's just human nature to be this way, not specifically one side.
-
I don’t really like this change. 5 sec stun on a killer tunneling is totally fine. The real issue is getting hit by DS when you’re not tunneling, which happens very, very often. Making it 4 seconds causes it to be worse against the tunnelers and solve nothing for the people incorrectly getting hit by it.
Keep it 5 seconds but make it turn off if another survivor is hooked.
-
I like the direction they're going with it but overall a nerf.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3715300#Comment_3715300
And good day to you Onryoberry 👋😏
G'day Mr Singularity! How's your evening?
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3715402#Comment_3715402
That's what i'm hoping, but if so why haven't they mentioned it yet? Maybe save it for the live stream? If that were the case they should have said: "we are making some changes that will be revealed later and as such are tweaking these gen defense perks" Some way to give us a hint that something like that is taking place.
Yeah that would make sense.
-
I'm hoping that this is actually in anticipation of some big change to be announced at the anniversary that will slow gens down some. Like the early game collapse they talked about long ago. That would at least make some of this make sense.
-
Unfortunately this doesn't change the meta at all. The rest the perks are still terrible. All this is gonna do is make people tunnel and camp more. Wrong direction for changes to go.
The game needs more built in slow down and then we can gut all the gen regression perks. Make base kicks 10% and base regression 200% and then nerf everything heavily.
-
Yeah basically. The correct changes would be as you said, completely gut regression perks and build some into the base kit. Your idea is a good one.
-
At 20% the perk is dead. That’s worse than surge which is generally the weakest regression right now. A better change would be if it only activated when you hook a different survivor.
-
Yeah these perk changes are a buff, when it was supposed to be a nerf. 200 to 150 is pretty minor in changing what you can do with it but halving the cooldown is huge.
-
I want to see SWF in post game lobbies and actually be able to see our MMR. MMR should be attached to a "silver/gold/plat/diam" type ranking system that we can see. This whole trend of "hiding everything from the player base because if they can't see it, they can't point out the problems" thing needs to be done. It's unhealthy for the game and feels like it's trying to hide problems so they don't have to be fixed.
People want to have have their visual MMR since it motivates them to want to play and climb their ranking. Along with this, rank/MMR season rewards.
I personally think we should be able to see everyones in lobbies like literally every single other game does, but at bare minimum see our own. It irritates people not being able to have any idea where they stand in their skill level.
-
As others have pointed out, this is simply not understanding the mechanics of Onryo.
This scenario means you had a TV right next to you, which is now highlighted for you so you don't even have to find it, and sat there on a gen completely ignoring it while you watched her rack up stacks on you. Heavy misplay.
All you had to do was pick up the tape and get back on the gen and this entire scenario was countered.
-
@kosaba11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3714477#Comment_3714477
I respectively disagree with a lot of your takes, but that's okay. What I will ask, however, is this - Are you a killer main? Cause, a lot of your takes feel like they come from someone who either doesn't, or never has played survivor. Like, most of your takes would make it extremely unfair or unfun to be survivor, and make killer even easier. So, I'm just curious - is this coming from the bias of a killer main, or from someone who plays both?
I play both sides pretty equally with nearly 11,000 hours in the game. They may seem to skew one way more than the other because I think there are more issues on one side than the other, it's not a bias, it's just high mmr reality. Bias would be if I just wanted buffs to one side because I played it more. I just want objective balance. I also think the game would be a healthier balance if it was top down balancing rather than what we have now which is bottom up, so that's going to sway my balance opinions differently than say someone who wanted it bottom up.
-
Yeah I disagree on all those takes lol.
Compared to most perks Exhaustion ones are way overtuned.
Indoor maps are generally healthier design for the game than outdoor ones.
Being able to remove yourself on hook should be removed
Theres nothing wrong with slugging at all and we should even get more perks for it.
There’s way less tunneling than people think. The majority of things people call tunneling isn’t actually tunneling, it’s just easier to make excuses than admit you or your team played bad.
Kills are an awful metric for measuring game balance and hooks would be significantly more accurate.
Balancing top down instead of bottom up would be healthier for the games balance.99ing gates shouldn’t be a thing. They should passively regress if not finished.
Distortion is unhealthy for the game as it just further encourages stacking of all slow down perks.
Base kick regression should be higher. Unless you’re running gen perks kicking a gen is very rarely ever worth it.
The 3 gen mechanic shouldn’t be active till it’s at the last 3 gens. Having it active before this just destroys gen kick perks overall.
Hex perks should be active but not light onto a totem to be cleansed until 1 gen is completed.
Solo queue doesn’t need buffs, it’s just a skill and matchmaking issue.
NOED is unhealthy design and artificially boosts bad killers.
STBFL, Thana, Ruin and Sloppy didn’t need nerfs.
Tunneling and swf boosts players to higher mmr’s than they should be based on their skill.
We still need an early game collapse to slow the start of the game down.
Male survivors should be quieter than females to compensate for the advantage of smaller female size for hiding.
Endurance off the hook should give zero collision to prevent body blocking with anti tunnel features.
Anti tunnel perks and features are used more often aggressively than they are for actual tunneling.
-
@bernkastel0990 said:
Is there insight into whether this issue is being worked on, or not?
Not sure if there’s a way of knowing. All I can tell is they’re reviewing it. I don’t think they typically post on the bug listings to tell people they’re working on it.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3714307#Comment_3714307
As a billy player. I hate you. As a wraith and myers player. Agreed.
Yeah there’s of course some killers that indoor maps are bad for but I’d say the majority are fine on them. Also those outdoor maps that’s are great for killers like Billy are awful for all the stealth killers so it’s only fair we’ve got an even spread. I also simply just think indoor maps are healthier design.
-
I think it’s probably Vecna. However I’d really prefer an original spider killer for the “8” legs. More indoor maps please, we’ve got a disproportionate amount of outdoors now.
-
Yeah I would say the majority of my reports all resulted in action so they seem to do a good job of checking them out.
-
@Ohyakno said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3713574#Comment_3713574
That's like 70% of the design space for the game. There will always be perks that interact with them and even with this fast track wouldn't be meta or anything.
I don't believe it’s that much of the design space.
-
I’m actually currently collecting SM game data to see if the DC/give up rate is as bad as people say, as well as to get a better idea of how much the SM kill rate is being influenced by this.
I’m waiting to post my data until I get a larger sample size but so far at 40 games the DC/give up rate is 80% of the matches..like wow that’s high. About 90% of those give ups and dc’s are within the first 30-60 seconds of the match too. So it has nothing to do with perks or play style, literally it’s mostly giving up as soon as they see me.
So far this leads me to think her kill rates are significantly inflated beyond what they realistically are.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
20s cooldown and either extend it to 5s or make it hide blood as well.
I really want to see this perk be decent by itself, it's only really useful with Lithe atm.
Yeah I’d say this as well.
-
I'm down for buffing a ton of survivor perks that are really bad, but gen speed perks are unhealthy for the game.
-
Lots of issues with something like this.
-People would swf queue and just spam surrender to fast mode derank their mmr. Even aside from how bad letting people derank that fast and easy is, it would also be extremely annoying to all the killers they queue against and ruining their matches.
-You would basically never see almost any games actually to their conclusion. As soon as it looks really bad, NEXT. Talk about anticlimactic.
-You would have groups all just auto surrender against any killer or map they didn't like basically rendering any strong or unpopular killer nearly unplayable.
In no fathomable way would this ever be a good idea for DBD. What we should be doing is going in the opposite direction and take away the ability to remove yourself on hook. It ruins matches for everyone else.
Catering a games play through around the criteria that it only plays out when everyone's subjective and completely different interpretations of "fun" are upheld is a disastrous design choice and flawed in just basic conception. What if my groups interpretation of fun is only when we play against weak killers? Next, next, next, and so on. Obviously this has to be fair for both sides so killers vote would have to count for multiple survivors. So killer sees a SWF? Next, next, next, and so on.
Nothing good would come from this.
-
We've been saying this for years, it's ignored. This is what makes hexes so bad.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3713314#Comment_3713314
Was not with me...
Technically it wouldn't... Because you don't gain an advantage over your opponent... Nobody keeps your opponent from being in a voice chat... That it gives you an advantage compared to a different group of survivors does not really matter because you don't compare them, but the two groups actually playing against each other.
And going back to the requirement of a rule violation to have an unfair advantage I would say you don't have that here either.
"Because you don't gain an advantage over your opponent... Nobody keeps your opponent from being in a voice chat..."
It is in fact an "unfair advantage" since the game is not balanced around survivors having that extra information through voice coms or the guarantee of high quality teammates and skirting around matchmaking RNG. The game is balanced around a solo queue group of randoms not on coms. That would in fact make it cheating by the definition of cheating.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712777#Comment_3712777
The patch notes says removed twin's ability to recall. so they essentially changed nothing about twins and didn't fix any of their issues after 2 years. the main two was victor hostage taking and the extremely slow-win condition of slugging. in all that time, there could so many changes to other killers. what a great excuse for laziness. Hopefully their next killer changes are actually changing the killer and not just pretending that they're changing the game.
It’s quite unfortunate. Their number one core issue and why no one played them was Victor getting taken hostage and now not only is it not fixed but the time he’s held hostage is even longer lol. They’re going to remain completely unplayed and these changes accomplished nothing. Very sad.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3713210#Comment_3713210
What has swf to do with anything here?
Sorry I couldn’t remember if it was our conversation or someone else’s talking to me here about this topic. I was saying by definition it would make swf cheating.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3713118#Comment_3713118
Not really... It increases better vision for both... And it does not really change the definition because of the specifics of the game, it just does not mean that the advantage is the same for both sides. However when it comes to filters, as we for example know from the colorblind filters it is still basically the same.
And even if it was you would still need to reason why the advantage for both sides is not the same or similar...
I can see your rational here for the color filters not being cheating since both sides can use it equally, even though I would say it’s slightly different in value for each side. But at least close enough I can see your argument for that. That’s a reasonable point. However I don’t think that argument works for swf not being technically cheating per the definition since it is only for one side.
-
Yeah most the swf send me there or ormond, it’s like every third game.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712973#Comment_3712973
That does not really apply in video games though, that is more the definition when it comes to fraud or when you are trying to decepr someone... But when it comes to games, be it board games or video games there has to be some form of violation of the rules. Because if something is allowed and available for both sides it cannot be unfair, as both sides can use it, allowing for an equalibrium again.
Your last statement falls apart in an asymmetrical game .
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712753#Comment_3712753
Usually cheating involves breaking the rules, if the devs white-list something how can it be cheating? How would you even define cheating if not as doing something that is not allowed within the rules of the game?
I don't define cheating myself at all. I'm just reading the textbook definition. It's an "unfair advantage". Cheating has nothing to do with breaking rules. People tend to use it that way yes, but it actually has nothing to do with that.
-
@KayTwoAyy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712918#Comment_3712918
Guess I just imagined it then…
Yeah I actually think tunneling/camping has gone down progressively year after year. Tunneling/camping actually isn't that common these days. Most people call things tunneling that aren't actually tunneling.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712905#Comment_3712905
Maybe, it seems to be worse for some. Scottjund made a video about how out of 14 matches he had a leaver in 10 of those matches, or something along those numbers.
Yeah I watched that one. I don't disagree that the amount of DC's or giving up is ridiculously high right now. I just think it was like that before this patch as well. I've been tracking my stats lately and mine are pretty similar to his. Although I do play a lot of killers that are generally very disliked by survivors and I have no qualms about slugging. That said, I do zero tunneling and only run 1 slow down perk that's not even a meta one. Plus I mostly main m1 killers, so not exactly top tiers they're dc'ing or quitting against.
Since I feel it was like this even before this patch I attribute it more to entitlement but also people these days have extreme lack of accountability. Nothing is ever their fault and they try to make excuses for everything or blame someone else. So if someone's having a bad game and it's "hypothetically" something out of their control, that leads them to DC since being punished for things that people perceive as out of their control is very frustrating.
Relating to rage quitting and DC's I'm actually going to be posting some stats soon specifically on my highest DC/rage quit killer which is Skull Merchant. Some pretty wild results so far. I want a larger sample size though.
-
@KayTwoAyy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712915#Comment_3712915
Care to explain why camping and tunneling is so much more prevalent today when Survivors were exponentially more powerful 5 years ago?
I actually don't think I agree with your premise. There was significantly high amounts of camping and tunneling back then, honestly probably even more than today.
-
People playing at different skill brackets have different experiences.
You're also ignoring many, many buffs to survivors and nerfs to killer over those same years as well as the fact that so many years ago survivor was wildly over powered. Something that overpowered can get nerfed and still be simply over powered, even if it's no longer as extreme an amount of overpowered.
Don't get me wrong, I want tunneling/camping removed as well, I just think you're not seeing the games true balance as well.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712889#Comment_3712889
Clearly, they are intrinsically linked, even to you.
You wouldn't, I hope, drop chase times to 20 seconds without addressing tunneling. We also wouldn't want to totally kill off tunneling without addressing chase times, in some manner.
Because I think tunneling would drop off drastically if we were balanced that way to be much less of an issue. Of course I know you disagree with this. Regardless this is arguing semantics. If average chases were that short I'd make tunneling extremely difficult if not nearly impossible, which is the main point.
Idealistically though I'd rather have chases on the longer side as they are mostly now since this is significantly more fun for survivors. The problem is that length of chases isn't viable for the killer. So I'd prefer slowing the game down at base to allow survivors to have their long chases without it costing the killer the entire game. Then we could also very heavily nerf all gen perks and heavily nerf the ability to tunnel/make it nearly impossible. This is the perfect scenario at least to me.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3712858#Comment_3712858
I would argue it also has something to do with the bad state the game has been in since the latest patch.
So you think the issue is significantly worse post latest patch?