Blueberry
Blueberry
About
- Username
- Blueberry
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Neither of those perks needs a nerf.
-
No, both addons are fine. If anything Iri Head is actually pretty weak now.
-
I buy the premium every time regardless of if it’s good or not because if you finish it then it pays for itself. So you basically buy it once and you never have to buy future ones again. This of course only works if you play a lot though.
-
His "nerf" ideas would do absolutely nothing in terms of the perks power level and the perk would still be S tier as he didn't address any of the fundamental issues with the perk which are how powerful 3% haste is and the fact you can stack it with other Exhaustion perks still.
What the perk actually needs to be balanced is to lower the percent to like 2% and then make it cause Exhaustion itself so it can't be stacked. Now it's solid, but not over tuned.
Knowing they are running the perk and the Endurance feature are nearly irrelevant as far as what makes the perk good.
-
Her condemn is very good but it’s important it is because it makes up for the fact that she’s literally trash in every other possible aspect.
Overall I think she’s fine. I like how the condemn makes the match very different for both sides and it seems balanced by her being bad in everything else.
If they were to nerf her condemn she would need very significant buffs in other areas to compensate.
Typically the only time she blows out the survivors hard is if they are completely ignoring her TVs and not respecting her condemn. Which does happen a lot it’s true, but that’s not Sadako problems, that’s many players playing bad problems.
-
The majority of the maps are still very unfair for m1 killers and even 60% is being kind, I could see it being higher than that. If both sides are equally good, you lose. You rely on survivor mistakes to win as an m1. Map design always has been and still is very, very unbalanced in survivor favor. It’s much better than it used to be don’t get me wrong, but it’s still very bad.
-
Wish they’d remove the black dot entirely. It’s annoying and gets in the way.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3511458#Comment_3511458
And to make it even worse, no one can even agree on what "fair" is. Too subjective. And balancing any asymmetrical game is a nightmare to begin with.
On a side note, locking or removing the lobby would also get rid of that last second swapping bs survs can do. I'm willing to bet no killer would miss that. 😁
Lol yeah I agree it’s a whole mess that I don’t have a good solution for either. I feel like any solution would have a decent chunk of the population who hates it.
I wasn’t thinking about the locking on survivor too lol
-
Given that it’s a paragraph on the schedule released that to me says Springtrap.
If it was a full chapter I would say a couple other options as those better options would all come with maps.
That said I could also see Predator as being a very logical choice. So Springtrap or Predator make the most logical sense to me given what info we have.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3511244#Comment_3511244
I have no doubt many players will not like the idea of locking the lobbies or doing away with them altogether. Mostly veteran players I'd think.
There are legit reasons to want to ditch a lobby, and some bad reasons too, in both roles. But I firmly believe taking one of those two options will over time even out the matchmaking, so long as we have the current backfilling system in place.
As for balance and SWF that's another big ol pile of difficulties.
I've heard the notion floating around here and elsewhere that many of the posted complaints are "first-world high MMR problems" that do not really effect the average playerbase much. The devs themselves seem to agree, with what little stats we do get & their responses to us proding those stats.
The problem as I see it is the balance issues mainly crop up and are most strongly felt by those in that mythical high MMR area (not counting people just regurgitating content creators) where the efficient or "sweat" play is. Luckily I'm a lousy killer & ok-ish surv and aren't often swimming around in that area myself.
I see what you’re saying. I tend to find people vastly over exaggerate the mythical high mmr thing. In the sense that it’s not some .01% of the population only being effected. I would say even the top 20% is heavily effected by swf. I do think though that even low to average swf groups are getting a significant unfair advantage though and I believe their stats a while back showed a significant survival increase from swf even at those lower levels.
In the games current state I think locked lobbies would cause more problems than backfilling does. Assuming zero changes of course.
Instead of forcing lobbies they should work to fix the reason people dodge in the first place. Yes some reasons are silly or they just want an advantage, but I don’t believe that is the majority of the cases although some will disagree with this I understand. I believe the majority of dodges are people simply wanting a fair game and there are many unbalanced things in the game currently that prevent a fair game.
-
Unfair and unfun I agree. Unfortunately just currently necessary in many matches so while I don’t enjoy getting it on the receiving end I understand why they need to and I don’t blame them, I blame design, as you mentioned.
Also as you mentioned I agree we need incentives for hooks and reward killers for spreading their hooks around as it currently makes no logical sense to do.
As another person also pointed out correctly, while killers tunneling survivors isn’t fun, it’s also not fun with survivors tunneling gens. Hopefully a solution for both these would be nice.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3511179#Comment_3511179
you are aware that I'm not a programmer or designer etc and that the Community Team does not make decisions for those other departments? My idea is one idea and yes it would actually work in solving the issue that is lobby dodging in general - players have always dodged lobbies it's been something that's happened since the game began, maybe it's time that lobbies were locked when you join them - I don't really see anything bad about that.
Could we have some middle ground solutions for swf then if we were going to lock lobbies? There are of course multiple reasons people dodge but one of the main ones is swf and the majority of the community dodges because they feel it isn’t currently balanced for it and is an unfair advantage. Just bringing this up because I think a lot of players would feel upset over this change since it would feel like it’s forcing them into unfair matches.
-
Yeah I disagree, I see no issue with it as survivor. If the last guy is looking for the hatch then the killer earned a 4k since you wouldn't be in that situation in the first place if he hadn't.
Ya'll don't want your time wasted? Then tell your friend to walk up to the killer instead. Ya'll are literally wasting his time exactly how you think he's wasting yours. You think it's bad he feels entitled to that 4k while ya'll are wasting his time since you feel entitled to the hatch escape.
On that topic, why should the hatch exist in the first place? It's a pity free escape chance that wasn't earned.
It is a choice ya'll are making to have your games dragged out like that. If the real issue was wasting your time from him slugging ya'll have it in your power to not have your time wasted. Does it sound silly for me to expect you or your friend in that slug scenario to just give yourself to the killer? That's exactly how silly it would be to tell the killer to just give the 4th guy a free escape.
To expect a killer to give a free escape but not expect a survivor to give a free kill would be a double standard.
-
Stealth + Mobility + built in slow down (something with the eggs/facehuggers)
I'd prefer they stay away from zone control and anti-loop. High skill ceiling please.
And please not another handful of way undertuned/useless perks that we'll never see again after release.
-
@Thund3rstruck57 said:
@Pavel_Ch Ya they're not just going to remove and refund a huge license like that. And if they were going to do that for any killer, it would be for Twins or Cringe Merchant.
@Blueberry I doubt they'd make those changes for balance reasons. I'm guessing she'd sneak up on survivors way too easily with no lullaby. And now that she can't be stunned while demanifested (and during the manifestation process), if she weren't slowed down, survivors would be in a lose-lose situation at pallets. Either they insantly throw every pallet or are guaranteed to get hit if they try risking another loop. That being said, my suggestion for the stack 1 effect would cause the survivors to get spooked more with fake creepy lullaby sounds and she could walk through dropped pallets while demanifested, which could lead to some interesting mindgames.
Her no stun on demanifested is largely irrelevant and more a placebo than anything. It is absolutely not even close to a lose/lose scenario. No lullaby makes her just the same as the rest of the stealth killers, you make it sound op or something lol
-
I completely disagree. There are plenty of totem finding perks, more than we need actually. You’ll typically find they’re a wasted perk slot later as well. The killer also isn’t the power role as your eluding to. Fighting back items/perks would be terrible for the games health.
-
Sounds reasonable.
-
@DaddyMyers_Mori said:
Too much work at this moment. People should really learn to be realistic.
Just make survivors see active TVs aura on 32 m.
Could we also have her lullaby and the slow down on manifest/demanifest removed in exchange for this?
-
Yeah it happens a lot. As well as getting accused of stream sniping if they happen to be streaming.
-
MFT for sure. Maybe Resilience.
-
I used to see it pretty 50/50 depending on the time of day but these days it's 100% bonus on killer like 90% of the time.
-
@Kaitsja said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3506527#Comment_3506527
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/AUYCE4T71ZWT/screenshot-20230807-043719-chrome.jpg
Slightly different wording, but the context is the same. Principles of Equality and Justice are the foundations for the legal system.
You're trying to define SWF as being unfair because the game isn't balanced around it. The game isn't balanced around tunneling, camping or slugging either, does that mean those are unfair? While we're at it, the game isn't balanced around looping either. Guess that's unfair too. The maps aren't balanced either, so I guess at this point the entire game should just be deleted because it just isn't fair.
Under the broadest definition, everything could be defined as unfair. The reality is that not everything is fair, equitable and just. We do not live in a perfect world, and videogames are not perfect products either. You're twisting the contextual definition of words to suit your narrative because you don't like SWF.
"Principles of Equality and Justice are the foundations for the legal system."
Them being foundations of the legal system does not negate my point.
"You're trying to define SWF as being unfair because the game isn't balanced around it. The game isn't balanced around tunneling, camping or slugging either, does that mean those are unfair? While we're at it, the game isn't balanced around looping either. Guess that's unfair too. The maps aren't balanced either, so I guess at this point the entire game should just be deleted because it just isn't fair."
I never said it was a "good" definition. It's actually extremely vague and broad, just as you've pointed out here and I agree. So yes, while the definition can seem a bit silly since it would potentially include all those examples you provided, per definition, you could technically include those things.
Like I said, I'm not arguing that it makes sense or that it's good, I'm just saying that it is what it is. I agree calling those situations cheating sounds ridiculous, but I'm not the one making the definitions.
"Under the broadest definition, everything could be defined as unfair."
I wouldn't go quite that far, but yes, you could make an argument that many things could be deemed unfair or cheating based on how vague the definition is. The official definition if we were trying to make it more accurate should be less vague or broad, but unfortunately we don't get to decide that.
"The reality is that not everything is fair, equitable and just."
Correct. That's life.
"You're twisting the contextual definition of words to suit your narrative because you don't like SWF."
No, that's not correct. You are "assuming" my opinions. I like swf and have no issue with it actually.
I've said it multiple times already on this post that I have not been giving any opinions of swf at all. All I have stated is that swf is by definition (however vague or broad that may be) cheating and that people tend to misuse the words definition. That is all I have said OR implied.
I have no hidden motive behind my statements here as you are feeling I do.
-
@Kaitsja said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3506465#Comment_3506465
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QOKY4QYJN78V/screenshot-20230807-041042-chrome.jpg
Yes it is. Also, once again, neither the player base nor google defines the rules of the game. It is not a matter of whether or not it is "allowed", but a matter of definition. By definition, playing with friends and communicating with them is not only not cheating, nor unfair, but is officially endorsed by BHVR and falls within the confines of the rules of the game.
If something doesn't break the established rules of the game, it isn't cheating. The definition of cheating requires context, and cannot be used in the broadest sense of the word. To cheat is to break an established set of rules. Rules which you agreed to abide by.
You literally googled it in a law definition to reference, that is not the same thing. Just because it can be used in law does not make it solely for law.
"Yes it is. Also, once again, neither the player base nor google defines the rules of the game."
That does not negate my aforementioned point. BHVR defines their rules, that does not change the definition of cheating though.
"By definition, playing with friends and communicating with them is not only not cheating, nor unfair"
Incorrect. The game is not balanced for swf, that makes it unfair.
"If something doesn't break the established rules of the game, it isn't cheating."
Incorrect. "Breaking the Rules" is not the sole establisher for "cheating". That is misunderstanding its definition.
"To cheat is to break an established set of rules."
Wrong. It can be used in that sense, but is not the sole decider.
You are not using the word "cheating" by its correct definition.
-
@not_requested49 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3504212#Comment_3504212
Who's to say everyone would follow the win condition anyway?
"Everyone" would never follow anything. However with rank incentives and rewards I think most would.
-
@Kaitsja said:
It isn't cheating. That's the official stance from bhvr. Buffs against groups wouldn't work, as those buffs would have to be limited to informational perks only.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505856#Comment_3505856
The game not being balanced around SWF does not make playing and communicating with friends cheating, nor does it make it an unfair advantage.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505598#Comment_3505598
BHVR makes and decides the rules, not the player base. The game was developed with SWF in mind, and it is expected that those players will use external applications to communicate with each other. Thus it is not cheating.
Whether the devs allow it or not in the rules is irrelevant to the definition of cheating. Whether devs allow it or not simply determines whether an action is punishable or not. I've already said this to the last 5 people. I understand that many people tend to use the word "cheating" incorrectly on average but that does not change its definition.
And no, that definition is not solely contextual in the case of law.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505856#Comment_3505856
So anyone who runs Alc Ring is cheating.
Anyone who runs Nurse is cheating.
Anyone who runs meta addons is cheating.
Anyone who plays against Solos is cheating.
Anyone who plays against inexperienced players is cheating.
That definition doesn't do anyone any favors.
"That definition doesn't do anyone any favors."
I'm not implying or saying it's a good definition as it's obviously quite broad nor am I putting any animosity towards swf or think it should be punished/nerfed. I'm not speaking towards any of OP's points. All I have said is that by definition it would be considered cheating and that most people misuse the word. I don't think the official definition is a very good one either, as you have mentioned, just pointing out that it is what it is.
-
NWTH is the golden standard of how good aura perks should be, it does not need nerfs. Other aura perks need to be brought up to its level.
If NWTH was like other aura perks it would have a 60 second cooldown on it, thank goodness it isn't like that since it would be trash.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505917#Comment_3505917
Unfair: not following the rules of a game or sport. This is the definition by Google.
I rest my case.
Unfair: not based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice
Google definition. I guess the case is still open.
-
Either put it back to 200% or make it a non hex perk. Either way the deactivate on 1 survivor death already hurts it a good bit.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505856#Comment_3505856
It is. That is what "unfair" means in this context. You do not get to decide what is fair and unfair. That is BHVR's responsibility and not ours. If it's not against the rules, then it's not unfair. And considering that BHVR do openly support playing in a SWF and use it as a marketing strategy, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume they allow it.
Defining cheating by using the term dishonest is not appropriate for DBD. Even mindgames and hiding certain perks and addons are technically dishonest.
"It is. That is what "unfair" means in this context. You do not get to decide what is fair and unfair."
No, I am not determining the definition of unfair either. I am using unfair per its actual definition.
"If it's not against the rules, then it's not unfair."
Wrong. That's not the definition of unfair.
"Defining cheating by using the term dishonest is not appropriate for DBD."
And I wasn't using dishonest in my definition. I was using unfair.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505856#Comment_3505856
So when a dev comes by here and once again says THEY do not consider comms cheating, would that be enough for ya? It is only their definition that really matters for their game.
I've literally repeated an answer to this kind of statement like 5 times on this post already.
Whether they allow it or not is irrelevant to the definition of cheating. The only issue of them allowing it or not is whether or not someone gets punished for said "cheating", but it is in fact by definition, cheating.
The way you are using the word cheating is not following its objective definition and using your own.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505652#Comment_3505652
Cheating: To deal fraudulently, practice deceit. https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=cheating
Also: Cheating generally describes various actions designed to subvert rules in order to obtain unfair advantages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating
There is no rule against SWF and there is no rule against the use of third party softwares for communication purposes as long as it doesn't affect the game's files. Which is not the case for Discord and other platforms.
Meaning, when BHVR allow something, then it is not cheating. They make the rules. If they decided that it was allowed for people to use third party software to gain the ability to fly, then even that, by definition, would not be cheating. Fortunately, they wouldn't do something like that but you get the point.
Cheating: act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination.
The game is not balanced around SWF, so it is in fact an unfair advantage.
You can keep repeating how they allow SWF but that is irrelevant. Whether or not something is allowed is not part of the definition.
-
Because there's a massive chasum of balance between bad solos and a 4 man sweat squad on coms.
There can be ridiculous levels of imbalance one match to the next with the amount of variables that exist. Like is the killer streak going for 12 hooks or camping and tunneling hard? Are they playing Myers or Nurse? Grey addons or ultra rares? 4 medkits/toolboxes or no items? Coal Tower or Garden of Pain? Completely different levels of results here.
-
@Moonras2 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505672#Comment_3505672
I would love the game to be balanced around hooks. That's the main reason I don't gain much MMR as killer. I don't really like the killing part and often let people go. I also play for 2 hooks nearly every game I play. The chasing is the fun part for me. I started playing when blood points gained rank, just before the victory cube. I hated the victory cube because it was also based on kills and was another time that camping was awful. It wasn't the greatest but I enjoyed ranking with the emblems over MMR.
However, no one is forced to camp or tunnel. As long as it can bring in wins I will not simply discard it just because I don't want it balanced that way. It currently is a part of the game and until it's either dealt with or people stop using it to win, then the game has to have some balance around it.
How is using the top killers as an example irrelevant? I never said it was fine that those were the only killers able to compete. It's just that as long as they can, and players aren't forced to pick any other killer, then that makes it kind of balanced around it. If you want to compete with high tier SWF then choose high tier killers. It's kind of the equivalent of solo queue players, who have a hard time, wanting to compete with high tier killers. They could just band together in 4 mans, practice together, and then be able to compete on a higher level as well.
I'm not saying we shouldn't camp or tunnel if we have to in order to win. What I am saying is we shouldn't be balancing around that. That would actually allow us to fix camping and tunneling.
"How is using the top killers as an example irrelevant?"
Because it would be silly to say the balancing is fine because 2 killers can compete. So if they want to compete they have to ignore 90% of the killers as options? This isn't rational.
I don't think comparing that to solos and telling them to do swf if they don't want to lose is apples to apples. You can very easily win without resorting to swf, whereas most the killer roster relies on survivor mistakes to win. Survivors are also just skins, killers are actually different game modes essentially, so you'd be telling them to ignore a large amount of the features of a game.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505652#Comment_3505652
"Wrong. That is not a part of the definition of cheating. Whether they allow it or not or build it into the system is completely irrelevant for the definition of cheating. They may be how people tend to use the word cheating, but most people are using the word incorrectly."
I define cheating what is clearly agains't the rules usually players using hacks. Now dbd could have built in chat definetely and maybe they consider doing that at some point like they did the hud change.
"No, the game is not balanced around a casual 4 man swf. It's balanced around a bad solo queue group. Most people could debate on what kind of solo queue group the game is balanced around, but it's pretty unanimously agreed on that the game is not balanced around swf at all."
If you think balance is getting 4K every game then yes game is balanced around bad soloQ group. But if the game is balanced around casual swf then that means sometimes you lose and sometimes you win. The devs I think have stated they try to balance between 4 man swf and soloQ. So that means the game is most balanced for 2-3 man swf:s and even casual 4 man not every swf is super competive.
"I define cheating what is clearly agains't the rules usually players using hacks."
Lol we don't make up our own definitions of words. That's not how life works.
"The devs I think have stated they try to balance between 4 man swf and soloQ."
They have not said this.
In order to have a rational conversation we have to operate in objective reality, not our own truths.
-
@Moonras2 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505632#Comment_3505632
Oh I agree with you on the stats. I don't draw any conclusions from the stats because I know they don't show the whole picture. I've got enough hours to know that the game also isn't balanced around newer players or just solo queue. I tend to hover at lower/mid MMR and I can promise you if the game was strictly balanced around solo queue players at that level then killers would never get a kill at any other level.
Higher MMR solo queue may be a bit different it's been a while since I climbed that ladder but judging by the threads I read on here, higher MMR seems to be only high level swf groups anyway. That apparently can still be beaten.
As long as there are higher tier killers, like nurse and blight, that can compete with higher tier swfs then it's hard for me to say it isn't balanced around that.
"Higher MMR solo queue may be a bit different it's been a while since I climbed that ladder but judging by the threads I read on here, higher MMR seems to be only high level swf groups anyway. That apparently can still be beaten."
Higher MMR is mostly swf, however high mmr solo queue does quite well. Based on threads on here where people say they survive an average of 20-30% of the time would lead me to believe most people on these forums play at low mmr. My solo queue high mmr survival is at least 50% and that's being generous as I tend to throw games to save other people and could be more greedy. Also the context of how people die is relevant. We don't want the game balanced around camping and tunneling, we want it balanced around aiming for 12 hook games as that's healthier and more fun for everyone all around. So saying that killers are handling high mmr swf is a bit disingenuous as they arent, they get their "wins" through camping and tunneling a lot so that is not a representing of actual objective balance. This is to say if they didn't camp or tunnel at all they'd be getting smashed on average.
"As long as there are higher tier killers, like nurse and blight, that can compete with higher tier swfs then it's hard for me to say it isn't balanced around that."
This is a completely irrelevant point. You pick the small percentage of the entire killer roster that can actually compete so that makes it totally fine? 90% of the roster cannot.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505598#Comment_3505598
If it was cheating game would not have option to play with friends on party and it would never be released on xbox where you have built in comms on consoles. Game is balanced beating casual swf:s but only good 4 man is problem but then soloQ wiuld suffer too much if game was balanced around that and it would suck all the fun away as well. Too competive games are not fun. Dbd was more fun before when it was not as balanced as it is now.
"If it was cheating game would not have option to play with friends on party and it would never be released on xbox where you have built in comms on consoles."
Wrong. That is not a part of the definition of cheating. Whether they allow it or not or build it into the system is completely irrelevant for the definition of cheating. That may be how people tend to use the word cheating, but most people are using the word incorrectly.
"Game is balanced beating casual swf:s but only good 4 man is problem"
No, the game is not balanced around a casual 4 man swf. It's balanced around a bad solo queue group. Most people could debate on what kind of solo queue group the game is balanced around, but it's pretty unanimously agreed on that the game is not balanced around swf at all.
"but then soloQ wiuld suffer too much if game was balanced around that and it would suck all the fun away as well."
This would be a completely different conversation. I'm not referencing how the game should be balanced here, I'm simply clarifying the definition of cheating.
-
@Moonras2 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505598#Comment_3505598
I will agree with this if we can get an official statement from a dev/community manager on what the game is balanced around and what they consider to be an unfair advantage. I've seen nothing to state what the game is balanced around, other than stats. The only official stats I've seen seem to show that the game is fairly balanced between all MMR and the top 5% MMR. Which doesn't indicate that voice chat is or isn't causing an unfair advantage.
If it isn't considered an unfair advantage and is allowed by the game rules then it isn't really cheating. Just because someone playing considers it an unfair advantage doesn't mean the developers do.
"I will agree with this if we can get an official statement from a dev/community manager on what the game is balanced around and what they consider to be an unfair advantage. I've seen nothing to state what the game is balanced around, other than stats. The only official stats I've seen seem to show that the game is fairly balanced between all MMR and the top 5% MMR. Which doesn't indicate that voice chat is or isn't causing an unfair advantage."
Anyone with an even remotely decent amount of hours in the game knows the game is not balanced around SWF, that's just common knowledge and is generally a pretty unanimously agreed upon statement by killers and survivors alike. I wouldn't put too much thought into kill stats either as they are extremely flawed for a multitude of reasons, which is also why even the devs specifically state not to draw any conclusions from them, as you're doing here.
-
Most people will not call it cheating because the devs allow it, however, whether they allow it or not has zero to do with what the actual definition of cheating is.
Cheating is defined as simply an unfair advantage.
So, is the game balanced around swf? The answer is no.
So if it is an advantage that the game is not balanced around, then it is in fact an unfair advantage.
IE, it would be considered cheating by definition. It's just "cheating" that you won't be banned or anything for since it's allowed.
I'm not arguing that we should do away with SWF or anything, just simply pointing out that by definition it would be considered cheating.
-
I feel like people tend to conflate leaving another survivor or two on the ground while they look for the last one as “bleeding them out”. That is not being bleed out. That is a strategic play to get the last person and does not need fixing. It’s also not toxic. Bleeding out is where every single last survivor is on the ground and the killer is just standing there wasting all of y’all’s time. Of which this scenario is so ridiculously rare that it realistically isn’t a problem worth fixing. Base kit unbreakable was also terrible for the game and should never happen.
-
Make it 100%, but make it actually apply Exhaustion itself so that you literally couldn't stack it with another Exhaustion. Giving up an Exhaustion perk for 100% seems fair.
-
Absolutely not, it was completely busted.
-
As much of a joke as this sounds I do actually think it could work lol. Just the fin traveling around threw the ground and comes up to attack. There are realistically ways you could make this work.
-
CI, Deadlock, NOED, NWO
-
Still here. We come and go.
-
@thisislastyearsmodel said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3504539#Comment_3504539
At this point, I wouldn't be against trying any or all of these. He needs something.
Yeah their last buff to Trapper was so minor it barely qualified as a QoL change and he needs massive buffs.
-
I don’t think I could get across properly in words how utterly broken this design sounds. Way, way, way overtuned and would be abused out the wazoo. Very unhealthy for the game.
-
I hope they’re bugged because the blood points currently are ridiculously bad.
-
We can start by making both his ultra rares base kit as they each fix core problems with his design which are terrible time efficiency and a survivor just following you around disarming everything.
Next either start with all his traps on him, have them spawn much more central on the map, or have them spawn at pallets and windows so even if they’re far they’re in useful spots.
Traps darkened at base as well.
As a general note I also feel like they should be putting way more grass on maps than they currently are.
If he was to get all this however, I would increase the distance that he is unable to place a trap near a hook. Since these are large buffs to fix a lot of his really bad design flaws we need to weaken his hook camping simultaneously so he’s not just piling traps at a hook.
These buffs may sound really extreme but I feel like that should really get across how complete trash he is and how much help he really needs to be competitive. Small buffs or tweaks are not fixing how bad he is.