Chatkovski
Chatkovski
About
- Username
- Chatkovski
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
I totally agree, it's one of the things that make me hate these (very often) useless chats.
When the game is obviously bad, for everyone (because of disconnections for example), or only one side (difference in skill / rank between survivors and killer for example): dropping a "GG" is just toxic.
And I see them, those streamers who gloat over the idea of saying "GG" at the end of the game because they destroyed the opponent. So unhealthy...
Personally, I usually don't say anything like that. Automatic speech, becoming ritual, often loses all conviction, sincerity, and meaning, and I believe this more harmful than polite.
-
It would be the minimum.
But Saboteur remains an overall not very interesting perk.
Like the flashlight, this will be mainly reserved for really experienced survivors, and/or SWF. And the toolboxes do the job just as well anyway, saving a perk slot that cannot be replaced by an item.
-
I have no problem with survivors losing their add-ons. But now I have a problem with the fact that they have to pay and can lose their items.
-
@Peasant said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1148455#Comment_1148455
Mainly because everyone and their mother kept yelling: "Every survivor within 16 meters of a hook has their aura revealed?! That's awesome! Good bye BBQ hello Hangman's!" etc. For reference, that's KINDRED'S killer reveal radius at tier 3.
For a single hook, not all.
But if you really want equal treatment, I gladly accept that Kindred reveals the killer's aura at 6 meters from all hooks.
-
Perfectly logical and normal change.
And that doesn't change the fact that the survivors will now have to move away from the hooks as soon as a killer picks up a survivor even if the killer doesn't have the perk. And obviously do something else to avoid BBQ too. It annoys me already.
-
Overall I accept his skills. But I believe that falling asleep is too easy, and getting out of it too limited or punitive, a balance is essential, because the more the survivors sleep, the more Freddy becomes unmanageable.
Personally, I think you have to think of ONE of these nerfs:
- increase the time before falling asleep automatically.
- survivors no longer fall asleep when they are hit.
- add an alarm clock, or have it be located at random and not systematically on the other side of the map.
- reduce the cooldown reduction of the Dream Projection by sleeping survivor.
-
There are no killer perks that influence chests.
Cursed chests with jumpscare upon opening, notification, temporary effects as exposed or exhausted, items of poorer quality, etc. There are many possibilities.
This is probably not intended to become meta, but if it does exist, a survivor will always hesitate or be a little afraid of opening a first chest. Just like leaving a locker (with Iron Maiden), or cleaning a totem (Thrill of the Hunt).
-
@Peanits said:
You know you just admitted to taking the game hostage, which is against the rules, right?
It is strictly impossible for this situation to be a hostage taking.
- If the EGC is activated, it makes no sense to name it "hostage taking". True ?
- Or he is not the last survivor, so the killer can look for the other survivors.
Now, if a killer can't find the survivor, is it the survivor's fault ? You regret that the survivors do not put their heads directly in the lion's mouth... This is precisely what camping involves. And this is why you consider that it is not a problem. Bias.
Because as a reminder: this was a reaction to the killer's camping. But camping is a strategy?
All right, so I also consider that a game where each survivor remains hidden, waiting to be the last alive to have the hatch and the doors open is an equally valid strategy. I don't see why we should allow killers to do nothing, not to play "normally", but not survivors.
-
Destroy the 5 totems to avoid NOED is just unreasonable.
Solo, survivors have no way of knowing whether another survivor destroyed a totem or not. Everyone must therefore seek and verify that all the totems are destroyed... Absurd.
The totems become just as absurd to find in the new maps. Even Small Game can keep you going in circles for several minutes.
I only ask NOED one thing, that destroying a totem is not useless. NOED should be linked to a totem from the start even if it is not activated. If NOED is the only Hex used, first totem destroyed: 1/5 that it is NOED, then 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, and 1.
Survivors receive no notification if NOED is destroyed in this way. And the killer sees NOED from the start and receives a notification if it is destroyed.
Search, find and destroy 4 totems in the game, be the only one interested, and finally have to undergo NOED because it activates even if there is only one totem, it is not what I name "fair".
-
I have already read suggestions to resolve this issue. Interesting, but causing too many changes to be consistent and truly effective. And finally, these solutions allowed the escape of others, it did not improve the case of the survivor camped.
I will not react to the blackmail of opposing camping and genrush. Likewise for the second suggestion, not believing in the incentive effectiveness of losing BPs, even very strong.
I really like this idea of stun and/or blindness when a killer stays close to a hooked survivor for a long time. It is truly punitive, and it gives survivors an opportunity to save in safety.
Some fear abuse by survivors. This is clearly not inevitable. A few simple activation rules can greatly resolve this:
- the effect is only activated after a determined time. Obviously giving time to the killer to leave the radius of effect, and also to break a generator, a pallet, etc.
- the effect turns off as soon as the survivor is off the hook, of course.
- more important: the effect is inactive when the killer has activated a chase, even if it is within the radius of effect. This allows stealthy survivors to take advantage of the effect on the killer, but no longer impacts the killer if he has found another survivor.
The idea being: the killer is camping, a survivor discreetly approaches,
- if the survivor is not seen and chased by the killer: he waits for the moment when the killer will be stunned and/or blinded by the effect before going to save.
- if the survivor is seen and chased by the killer: he must leave, or will save by assuming the risks.
In addition, this also allows survivors to attempt to unhook themselves safely when all seems lost. For example when there are only two survivors left in play, one is downed and ignored, the other is hooked. The killer will usually camp, waiting for the survivor to struggle.
With this, the killer will be forced to walk away, or suffer the effect. This leaves the distance or an opportunity for the survivor to try his 4% with a real chance, or to use Deliverance.
-
Yes, this update and what it announces is essentially for the benefit of the killers.
In addition to the killer buffs, including the Doctor who does not need it at the moment:
- a new killer, therefore a new power against which the survivors must know how to adapt.
- a new map, probably in the logic of the latest and reworks: impossible to orient yourself quickly, useless pallets, totems better hidden than money in tax havens...
- walls will become breakable by the killer - without the survivors being able to rebuild it - including for the famous Killer Shack, of course.
- the add-ons of the survivors are now consumed... and they continue to be able to lose their items if they do not escape, items which they must buy again too.
- any killer will be able to take full advantage of Hangman’s Trick which reveals all the survivors close to a hook on the whole map as soon as it picks up a survivor. While Sabotage remains very specific, unattractive and limited compared to the power and versatility of a toolbox...
- from what I could see from the PTB, the window tech does not seem to work anymore? Soon the end of the 360, in order to destroy any difference between the good and the bad survivors and to balance everything from below?
And I do not develop the new perks which I find essentially disappointing, which in no way compete with those which already exist.
Yes, this update makes me very pessimistic.
-
It is a perk with a cost, much higher than the profit, and it is not even the one who owns the perk who benefits... Personally, I will never use it. This will be used in SWF mainly, again.
Even BT does not apply a disadvantage to the survivor with the perk.
-
Yes. Very nice progression from the Doctor. The Legion and the Wraith have regained some stamina. The Nurse and the Oni doubt themselves. The Demogorgon seems to be shunned. The Clown and the Cannibal always shame the rest of the killer gang. The Hillbilly, the Spirit, the Ghostface and the Nightmare eternally keep their position of merciless killers.
-
I rather think we should push this logic, and standardize the functioning of powers / items and add-ons between killers and survivors.
- each item only exists in one version (rarity). Each item is always available to survivors in the lobby. A toolbox, a med-kit, a flashlight, a map, and a key. Each survivor simply chooses the item with which they will play the next game. This change would surely simplify their balancing. (yes, the key requires a big change)
- the bloodweb no longer offers any item, but only add-ons.
-
Since the survivors will now systematically lose their add-ons (who will use Ace in the Hole, seriously ?), and since the killers don't lose their power after a defeat, I also suggest that this is the same for the survivors:
- each item is unique. There is now only one version of each, still available to survivors in the lobby. Survivors choose to play either the flashlight or the toolbox, etc.
- The bloodweb only contains add-ons.
This standardizes and simplifies the functioning of powers/items and add-ons between killers and survivors.
-
The Plague is such an underrated killer.
1. Survivors refuse to purge themselves to avoid giving the killer too powerful and punitive power.
2. The killers complain that the survivors are only forced to play the whole game injured, under Broken status, coughing and vomiting, etc. It was clearly a very easy situation for the survivors, of course.
3. The developers' solution is: give the Plague the possibility of using an absurd power from the start of the game.
No, this is not good at all. Yes, the Plague deserves a rework.
-
As already said, the ideal is not to use it.
However I also read some suggest Iron Will, but in the description of No Mither it is written: Grunts of Pain caused by injuries are reduced by 0/25/50% AT ANY TIME.
I always thought that this "at any time" meant that it couldn't be changed by another perk like Iron Will, so isn't it? What does "at any time" really mean?
-
@MegaWaffle said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/984088#Comment_984088
So to quote your last sencence about "practice" why then could they not practice with Ruin up? Hell even if you feel you cannot get better through practice you had the ability to outright break the perk through cleansing.
I struggled to do ruin skillchekcs (PS4) back in the day and would always hunt the totem. By doing this I learned many of the totem spawn locations and became quit proficiant at locating it. After deciding I wanted to get better at skillchekcs I stoped going after Ruin and instead focused my attention on it. I now regularly do gens through Ruin as if it weren't even up.
Now that I am a veteran player (PS4 day 1 release) this new Ruin will be as easy to ignore as the screams of the new players I've been putting on hooks.
I then try to be more radical. Skillchecks have never been interesting. There are much nicer rhythm games if you want to practice this skill. For me, we must limit their presence in DBD as much as possible.
Sometimes I'm aiming for the perfect skillcheck, but sometimes - often - I'm lazy to focus so much on it. Ruin (its systematic presence and its random effect) absolutely didn't allow me to do that, on the main goal of the survivors.
So rather than training, I was more like those who went to look for the Ruin immediately with Small Game. And the killers also complain about it.
Killers should consider skillchecks to be the equivalent of pallet loops in terms of boredom and frustration.
Yes, this change of Ruin does not please the killers. But keep in mind that its power in terms of slowdown (effective or desired) is not questioned.
If the result was (more or less) good, the way involved a lot of bad things. A word of advice: accept the conditions of this change: forget the current skillchecks for Ruin, the issue is here, and the developers will probably not change their mind on it. But for everything else, including its effective power, the developers are surely very attentive.
-
Thank you for your concern for the new survivors.
There is what the survivors choose, and what they suffer.
DS is chosen and is limited to... 2 uses ideally and at most, with difficult skillchecks.
Ruin - because it's your real concern - is something sudden. Skillchecks are more difficult than DS, and Overcharge, the perfect being equivalent to Overcharge + Unnerving Presence... completely random, and countless if you don't destroy the totem, and even perfect, they are punitive.
Overcharge is every time the killer destroys a generator. The skillcheck is predictable after the first time, but is quite difficult and very punitive if it fails.
Difficult skillchecks must be rare if we want them to remain difficult. For me, the interest of the surviving game is not the absolute mastery of skillchecks.
With Ruin, it was very difficult, systematic, almost every game. Yes, it was logical that the survivors would end up completely mastering all of the skillchecks and that others would rather seek out the Ruin and destroy it as soon as possible. But all this was undesirable, both for the survivors and for the killers.
Yes, new players will probably be less able to master these difficult AND rare skillchecks. Which seems healthy to me. And they can always practice - by choice and not by obligation - on the generators.
-
@KillermainBTWm8 said:
The majority of survivors don't care about ruin, that is the truth. They find it easy to get rid of the only survivors that have been asking for a ruin nerf are rank 15-20s. Honestly ruin is like playing killer with 3 perks in some cases anyways. Don't blame the survivors for this.
And it is of course because Ruin is so useless that statistics show that it is used massively by killers, even at high level.
In the same way, the killers complain that the Ruin is destroyed too quickly precisely because the survivors do not care about this.
There are actually lots of good reasons for a change of Ruin, and developers already enunciate many.
Personally, the change is justified. I never appreciated this mechanism which annoyed me deeply. Becoming a master of skillchecks is not what I'm looking for in this game. Difficult skillchecks should stay that way, so they should be rare.
It is one thing that we do not like this change, but the status quo is no longer possible.
-
Yes. This combo works and is very powerful, and the survivors can only suspect the use of Surveillance.
This possibility will justify destroying Ruin as soon as possible, systematically. Finally, nothing really changes. Ruin, even when used alone, will be greatly feared.
-
You forgot camping.
These threats, which can be read regularly, just prove that these things are also problematic, and that they are mainly used by griefers.
I would add that you never read the equivalent on the survivor side despite the nerfs. "I'm so sad, pissed off, and at odds, so I'll only be playing with keys!"
Yes, continue like that, please. You only prove that, on the contrary, the game is very tolerant, too much, with killers.
-
Unexpected change, but welcomed. For me.
Developer comments are correct, and the change to Ruin was predictable. For me it was not a priority, but it was a problem.
Despite the ritual cries, this new effect is also interesting, and is surely easier to balance.
If the totem of the Ruin is destroyed very quickly today, it is precisely because it is unbearable and it has become the priority objective for many. Personally, the almost systematic presence of Ruin justified playing with Small Game. Particularly with the new maps...
Now, we can bet that Ruin will generally last longer but will become an important mid-game objective.
However, I have some concerns.
It will be even faster for survivors to determine if Ruin is in play, since there will be no need to wait for a skillcheck. We repair a generator for a second, and we look. This inevitable habit can prompt you to get rid of the Ruin as soon as possible. While the goal for developers, I believe, would be to make it a mid-game goal.
It may be time to consider some sort of temporary immunity for Hex totems, resolving other concerns about them as well. Whether they are active but not inflamed for a period of time, or before a condition, may be a solution. Survivors will have to destroy the totems blindly and may lose time, or may prefer to suffer the effect of the totem until it ignites.
-
Oh, I thought that the killers complained about the disconnections of the survivors. But now it's a goal, a challenge? I really don't understand anything anymore.
-
It doesn't matter. I am not asking the opinion of the executioners. I listen to the victims.
And the camped survivor sees everything, he sees if another survivor is near, if he runs, and if the killer does not move without any explanation. He knows.
Besides, if the killer sees scratchmarks or a survivor directly, this justifies even more that the killer searches or hunts. Not that he does not go away
-
Again, a strange concordance between the nickname, the title, and the content. The last time was to promote camping.
Who does not feel unhealthy jubilation under these words? All this is pure provocation. An attempt to justify what is not necessarily so. Most of what is quoted is highly debated. This is not because disconnections are not desirable that anything that can cause you to disconnect is.
The debate and the fight continue. But it was a good attempt.
This forum tires me, especially when moderation approves this.
-
Kindred is not an anti-camping perk, it has never prevented a survivor from being camped. It is a perk of information gathering and group cohesion.
A camping killer doesn't care if the other survivors see him or not. He stays there, in front of the hook, does nothing, waiting for Godot. Between griefing and AFK.
Regarding Kindred and Indetectable status... I understand, but the problem is not really Kindred, it is still and always camping.
However, in the absence of a real developer fight against camping, I agree. Kindred's effect should be stronger than Indetectable status and reveal the aura (only). Otherwise, this status may encourage camping. If the killer does not camp and stays close to the hook for a valid reason, it is probably that he does not need his stealth: he must chase the other survivor. This stealth killer will regain all his abilities a little further. :)
-
I think it is often good to standardize some mechanics rather than having specific mechanics. It may also help with balancing. So, yes.
And I do not see how this uniformity of the penalty would make the powers of the killers identical.
-
They do this because it is griefing.
Yes, there is nothing we can do... It's a shame to have no developers on this game to solve this. Either way, they won't even try.
I personally delete the "Game Health" line from the year 4 roadmap. It was a joke.
I am sincerely sorry for the inconvenience.
-
I am currently ranked 50/70, and there are two level 3 challenges left.
Steam indicates 4 hours of play (so less in practice) per day during my last two weeks.
I regularly calculate how far I will get if I finish the whole Archive, and for now I will probably have to play more or pay. Knowing that the Christmas holidays and the family are coming...
It's totally possible to finish it so far. But you have to play a lot.
Knowing also that the difficulty of the challenges increases, it might be preferable for the first levels to come out faster. Go from 20 days between each level to 8/16/24/32, for example.
-
When I read the description of MoM, I can only support the rework.
It really looks like a perk that you don't know how to balance.
Multiple conditions, activation for a single precise state, a backlash (whose activation time is not clear), a conditioned deactivation (definitive or not?), increases the chances of being the Obsession... I can't even understand precisely how it works.
Honestly, I prefer to start the game with a med-kit and the Styptic Agent.
-
There is probably also an effect of imitation, of conformism.
Kindred was not immediately used as massively when it was changed, but last night I saw that two or even the other three survivors were using it... so I did the same. Maybe we'll see it less and less used in the future. Or not.
I had not thought of Open Handed, it is actually very interesting in addition, especially that it benefits the entire team (and is cumulative?).
However, I continue to disagree with all of this.
Just like Ruin and BBQ for killers, the game deserves that all the perks are balanced, so that we use them by affinity, and not only because they are much better than others. It's a shame to have so many perks, but to use so few.
Kindred adds a problem: it is useless for the SWF, but becomes unavoidable for solo players. It does not seem healthy to me.
I still think that Kindred should be basekit, and that matchmaking should not have special and arbitrary rules for the SWF.
-
Just read his nickname and the title of his topic. For me, it's provocation. Most of his arguments are dishonest and misleading. We all know very well what we are talking about, but some killers and developers are the only ones who do not understand... Playing on words and mixing situations...
We must learn to ignore them, and not be too disgusted by this forum and its foul atmosphere.
Camping is uninteresting. Camping does not require any skill. Camping is like doing nothing. Camping is greifing.
-
@Polychrome_Baku said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/897466#Comment_897466
Your suggestion had been attempted in the past and it was abused. Survivors looped near the hooked victim to artificially extend the timer. Sometimes I wonder if some of the people in this community have played any other versus games. You're not always meant to have agency and sometimes you lose. Happens in fighting games when you get juggled, and it happens in shooters when you get spawn camped. Sometimes you draw the short straw. Get over it. I just got camped in my last trial and guess what I did? I queued again. It was that easy.
And if new players quit due to this, I would have hated to see them join back in the dark ages. Before NOED was a hex. Or when you could get moried without being hooked first. 20 second cooldown on sprint burst. This is objectively the best balance state the game has ever been in and I'm tired of this constant whining about camping. Its an overblown problem that people won't stop circlejerking about.
My suggestion (which is not mine, but that of another) is not to prevent the Entity's progress on the hook when the killer is close to the hooked survivor. Ideas evolve!
The suggestion is: to prevent the Entity's progression on the hook when the killer is close to the hooked survivor AND if there is no survivor in that same proximity to the hook.
Yes, it's very simple, it seems obvious, but you had to think about it...
Technically, this also implies other changes, but these are complicated details. If the killer still sees, yes or no, the progress of the Entity on the hooked survivor for example...
Abuses described are not possible since progression only stops if the killer is alone. This requires some adaptation of the survivors (that they understand that they must move away from the hook first) to force the killer to move away too.
This solution seems to me to be a fair immunity.
-
And the developers answer, globally, that it's impossible...
They invite to experiments, like the one Vanilla in which I participated. And I did not even know for what purpose.
Here, the goal is clear, and this system seems to me perfectly adequate to this proposal. People are volunteers because they are happy to help in the development of the game, and they know they will be compensated.
And then they propose that we do it alone, without analyzing any data, using the perk Kindred... It's a joke? That Kindred is no longer a perk is exactly the point.
I am really clueless. I do not think we understand each other.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/897451#Comment_897451
I play the game. I watch streams of the game. I see the usual complaints around. That's how I would know. How about you?
So in this scenario the killer already killed 1 or 2 survivors and only 1 gen fot done? You're already in a losing scenario here, if the killer goes to the corner of the map after hooking someone it would still be hard to escape, why bother with this scenario?
80 seconds base. Person stays on hook for 120 seconds. With toolboxes you can be out of the gates in less than 4 minutes.
But hey, you apparently think camping is this unbeatable strategy, so go ahead and reach rank 1 with it. I'll wait.
"You seem to be defending the game very hard"...what? Just...what?
It's a common complaint because it happens a lot on low ranks. Doesn't mean it's an issue, people haven't learned how to counter it yet.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/897466#Comment_897466
Creating pressure so the killer leaves the hook doesn't help the hooked survivor? Ok.
Replaces whatever you want. Use the perks you wanna use.
...ok boomer.
Did I say anything about the equivalent of camping being gen rushing? Why would you even bother bringing it up?
No, camping is insensitive to any pressure, because the goal is neither victory nor performance, the goal is to annoy the survivors.
So Kindred is not a nicely offered advantage to solo players to be at the same level as the SWF. That's all.
"ok boomer" it has absolutely no relation... So why ?
It's exactly because you do not talk about it that I said "And I want to add" because it's something I've often read to justify camping.
And bonus, example of pressure on a killer who camps :
https://www.twitch.tv/mahyars/clip/CourteousDignifiedAniseNerfRedBlaster -
@Alice_pbg said:
You go to the hook, notice the killer is camping, go back to a gen.
You have enough time to pop 1.5 gens by yourself, 3 gens popping would be better, but even getting 1 pop will help. It puts pressure on the killer to leave, if he doesn't, rince and repeat.
If you play solo a bunch, try equiping kindred. It will help a lot.
Neither of these two suggestions helps the hooked survivor.
Many welcome the Kindred buff, but its impact is neutral, since it is still a perk. What does Kindred replace? BT? DS? DH? SB? Adrenaline? Lithe? Self-care? Inner Strength?
Camping must be annihilated, intrinsically. This must not have any positive impact for the killer: the camped survivor must not be able to die on the hook. And the survivors do not have to be forced to use any perk for that.
And I want to add that the equivalent of camping is not the genrushing. The equivalent would be that a killer is unable to break a generator or attack the survivor who repairs it. And if the killer tries something, he would take the risk that another generator repairs itself. It does not exist.
-
Maybe.
Above all, we need a system that retroactively balances the game if a survivor disconnects. The disconnection penalties come, so it becomes deeply necessary, otherwise it will be just a hypocritical and unfair system.
It is not so complicated, and like solving the problem of camping: we are still waiting...
-
If the survivors do not purge, it is not because the Broken status is comfortable, but because the Corrupt Purge is far too punitive.
This is obviously frustrating for the Plague who is reduced to a M1 killer a little boosted, but who never or rarely uses his ultimate power. That's the trouble, because its theoretical power is good.
- Activating Corrupt Purge could clean all Pools of Devotion. This may perhaps encourage the survivors to purge themselves, in return for the accessibility of the Pools of Devotion for the Plague.
- We can imagine too that the duration of Corrupt Purge is proportional (linear or not, but clearly not exponential) to the number of Pools of Devotion soiled (if cleaned at once, of course).
It is not easy to solve without changing everything.
But the Plague does not lack power, it lacks the means to express it, which makes it boring.
-
Always longer and boring, and inciting bad behavior, but at equal reward.
-
@Resurrect said:
When I Am Camped . . .
The only thing I hate . . .
- watching all 3 survivors running towards me
- they notice the killer is not leaving
- they don't leave either
I will gladly mash that struggle button to waste as much of the killers time as possible.
- camping killer DO GENS
Conclusion . . .
I don't get mad at the killer for camping. I get mad at the survivors camping the killer who's camping me.
Whether the survivors come or repair the generators does not change anything in your situation.
The problem is the killer who does not move while he must chases the other survivors. Why he does not do it? This has a name: griefing. And according to my interpretation, we must report it. I do it and will continue to do it until it changes.
It's exactly the same when killers denounce survivors do not repair the generators and block the game. Except that the killers, unlike the survivors, ensure a kill while camping. They can even do this to prevent a survivor from trying his miserable 4%... It's dirty.
This practice must be made impossible by blocking the progress of the Entity when the killer is alone close to the hooked survivor, the killer no longer seeing this progression. It's very simple, and it will not bother killers who play normally.
Yes. Camping needs to stop.
-
@Boss said:
They don't aim for 50%, that would be a ridiculously small window.
They aim for 2 dead, 2 escaped.
2/2 means anywhere between 75% & 49%...
- 0-24% = 0 dead.
- 25-49% = 1 dead.
- 50-74% = 2 dead.
- 75-99% = 3 dead.
- 100% = All dead.
Once in that zone, it doesn't matter who's better, they reached the average and the devs will then say that "some Killers will perform better than others", which is only natural.
So anyone going over or below that line, they will probably face some big changes at some point, while anyone within the zone will...well, they'll see changes too probably, cause of new content and stuff, but they'll try to keep them there.
I obviously do not agree.
- 50% = 2 dead.
- 74% = 2,96 dead.
These are averages. It is wrong to say that the averages must necessarily conform to the quantification of a game taken individually.
So yes, on average, overall, these meager statistics indicate that all killers are overperforming.
Otherwise, it means that the developers are not targeting for something specific (2) but a range between 2 and 3, and ignore imbalances existing inside.
I totally accept the fact that it is impossible to balance perfectly everything. But there is a difference between target 2, with a small range (between 1,8 and 2,2 for exemple), and consider that 2 = 2,999999.
Currently, in all ranks, we observe all killers, with the exception of the Nurse, on average between 2,2 and 2,8. And in red ranks, all killers between 2,4 and 3,2.
Unless there is a bias explaining why these values are all clearly above the desired average... That's the reality.
I also want to add that the red ranks do not justify higher average values. Why would only killers become better in red ranks, but not survivors?
Perhaps, the red ranks should instead show a distribution of values less focused on the target average, alleged 2. So more values to 0, but as much 4... but the average should remain the same.
Yes, survivors have been right, and Freddy must be the next. He does not need much to get back into the mass of other killers, like the Spirit.
-
This unwanted behavior does not need to be balanced, it must be totally ineffective, both solo and SWF.
"just do then gens" is indeed not a good argument. That means: it's ok that a killer stays ALONE around a hooked survivor, involving 2 inactive players, and letting others fix generators without any pressure. No, it's not ok.
- Uninteresting for 3 survivors.
- Frustrating for 1 survivor.
- Only the killer played by a troll seems to have fun without needing any skill.
Of course, if the killer chases another survivor who gets closer and revolves around a hooked survivor, it's the survivor's mistake, it's not camping.
-
It is very bad if you look at all the ranks because it is undoubtedly the most difficult killer to handle and master, and it is in the basegame. The same reasoning explains why the Trapper would be the most popular killer (all ranks), and by far...
However, the Nurse keeps a reasonable level if you look at the red ranks.
For me, she needs QoL (which will also increase its popularity), and maybe a slight buff, but nothing more.
-
Whether survivor or killer, I never use map offerings. I do not see the point, even the worst BP bonus offering seems more interesting.
Although I have preferences and I really hate some, I like the idea of playing on a random map, it also allows to play on all. It does not seem fair to me to bet his victory on a map. This should be an absolutely random strain, and everyone must adapt.
It would not bother me to go so far as to delete them, I'll save a little BP.
-
Killers should agree to give up a survivor when the chase drags on. Or when you quickly feel that you are going turn around for 5 minutes, hit 8 windows, and 3 pallets will fall on you..
He is better? Yes, probably, but there are also 3 bad ones with him, why ignore them and focus the player against whom you have the most difficulty?
It is better to lose a few tens of seconds to look for another survivor, than to lose long minutes and generators because you absolutely want to kill this survivor.
Ignore the survivor against whom you have difficulties, he will make a generator, you will put the rest of the group in trouble, he will be also in trouble, and you will have better opportunities to kill him.
-
When I see a streamer, I use my legitimate strategy once hooked. :]
-
Yes, it's very kind for coordinating solo players. Thank you for that.
But camping is still a problem.
-
Survivors actually have enough perks offering this speed bonus.
Yes. It would have been more interesting to remove this bonus, and to make Balance Landing a fall stagger reduction perk only. And obviously correct the maps if necessary.
The old Balance Landing would continue to exist... but at the cost of two slots.
-
Kindred becomes really interesting for solo players.
The founding principle of this perk is to counter camping. Legitimate camping is obviously not a problem.
However illegitimate camping remains a plague, always achievable by the most boring killers. Illegitimate camping must be made completely absurd for the killer, without the survivors needing a perk.
I refuse this blackmail. If this buff will allow solo players to coordinate better in normal games, this buff will not change anything to the problem of camping.