Clowning
Clowning
About
- Username
- Clowning
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,922
- Last Active
Comments
-
@jesterkind said:
I assume by "competitive" you mean like, "tournament ready", since the game is already competitive.
I don't think it's that far fetched, honestly. Even this game isn't that far off, outside of some specific problem areas and certain map RNG components. Give the teams the same tile spawn variant of like, Coal Tower, and that's a tournament ready game right there. Granted, it's a tournament that's only going to see a handful of characters and builds, but that's the case in some other tournament games too to a certain degree.
Idk, dude. Most comp games I've watched looked like rank 20 gameplay for the most part, because it is more beneficial in DbD to play in a way that minimizes skill input from both sides, rather than focusing on ensuring you outskill the other party. Meaning you do end up with clearly skilled, dedicated and impressive players that are reduced to face camping, tunneling and holding M1 on gens 24/7, while predropping palllets like their life depended on it. There's absolutely nothing interesting about it. And yes, you could argue that anything can be made competitive, but the bigger question is whether it should.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
Whats terrible about the new sbmm is they were working on this for how long? I hope it doesnt take them 4 years to fix it.
I do wonder if that'll ever happen, given how content Patrick seemed with the ol': "Sometimes you escape and that's fun" mentality.
-
This is the reason why I can't really enjoy M1 Killers anymore. I rarely get frustrated, but there's just something absolutely infuriating about being matched with equally skilled Survivors and you both know that "Okay, now we will loop this object three times at which point the Survivor has to give me the pallet and then they'll move towards the more unsafe loop that they can run once before I can force a 50/50."
-
@Advorsus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2555948#Comment_2555948
The minimum is 800... With the starting point being 1100 according to behavior... Are.. are you... Are you clowning me right now? 👀 Lol
I would never 👀
On a serious note, assuming you are someone who's MMR was even slightly above average, this is an interesting find. How long did this take you? Did you notice any perk changes/tendencies at any point? Did you bother to check the hours played, if you did this on Steam? Did you read any good books while AFKing? Did you try to play any Killers you rarely frequent after this to see if the global MMR that may or may not be in place affected them in any way?
-
What if your MMR was already at zero though 👀
-
It's because you do enough complaining about Resident Evil for everyone here, so we wouldn't want to take your hobby away from you.
-
That's actually hilarious, I've not thought of that. But what can we do, as the Lead Dev said - There's just too much nuance to make an effective system!
-
@ezmindgames said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2555176#Comment_2555176
Iridescent players are most likely to have higher MMR than Lower grade players
No, no they're not. Not by such a large margin that it matters. It just means they play more. Matter of fact, you could even argue that some casual players will have a much easier time ranking up with the new system.
-
How is this still happening. HOW.
My dude, how do you make a thread complaining about MMR, but you end up blaming grades. Like, it's either the fault of Grades, which it isn't because it has been said 30 000 times they no longer matter, or MMR. How do you reach the conclusion that it's both. How is there like five of you every day.
-
The Devs consider a 2k to be a balanced outcome, meaning you're not supposed to be able to stand up to a high rank SWF.
-
No, you're absolutely right. But the Lead Game Designer considers it fun, because "sometimes you'll get out", so there's not much we can do.
-
I accept the fact that I am playing a game with a dysfunctional matchmaking, I realize that all the odds are stacked against me and that I simply wasn't meant to win this one which wraps up my ego in so many layers of protection that I then start having fun, because I'm being challenged and it's interesting to see how well I can perform regardless. In a way, it takes away all the pressure of an equally balanced match, because if there's nothing you can do about something, then there's nothing to worry about.
-
Anything goes, so long as you remember to humblebrag on the forums.
-
As of right now, nothing has been confirmed or denied, so there's nothing to be called facts. But those videos and articles just gotta roll to get those clicks.
-
To put it very simply, it is a non-fungible token, say you see a sick image on the internet, but you don't know how to copy and paste pictures and you have to be a special boy at all cost, so you get yourself a verified certificate that you own this piece of art that doesn't even really exist and it's yours and it belongs to you and only to you. I could even screenshot this thread right now, get it verified and claim that picture as my own.
You buy them with Cryptocurrency. Crypto requires "mining", which is basically algorithm solving that you let your PC do. Naturally, this consumes electricity. Some people will tell you that three seconds of mining can destroy the entire Amazon rainforest, some will tell you that it's literally harmless, but the main point everyone can agree on is that it's wasteful, pointless and Behaviour's involvement in this would be bad news as it also may or may not impose other various restrictions on content.
-
Heh.
-
I mean, you're not wrong.
But you're also talking about company that needed years to deal with keys, only to opt for the simplest solution that could've been done over the weekend.
-
Then I guess we all ought to go play something that's fun instead.
-
Because Survivors that hide and don't actively bring attention to themselves have a higher chance of escaping than all the loopers and altruistic players combined, meaning bad/selfish players are actively rewarded.
-
@OldHunterLight said:
He was exaggerating, as someone who has been taken hostage vs a cheater, matches only last 2 hours max, the match ends.
And yes, I'm a very stubborn person, so yes, I didn't dc and stay in the match until the script kiddy left.
So yes, for anyone wondering how long you can stay in a match.
2 hours is the max, the server/match/ whatever you want to call it ends.
Lmao, I'll be sure to make the time when I'm about to play a game.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2551277#Comment_2551277
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2551279#Comment_2551279
gonna be real i thought it was 2.5 (2.498069154...) but im also awful at maths.
I'm tempted to give you the answer because it's you, but that would make the next 30 times I post this question in future AMA threads even less funny than it already is.
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2551277#Comment_2551277
If I remember my math correctly wouldn't it be 1.25? I could be wrong lmaoo
Damn, I'm never gonna graduate.
-
In triangle ABC, the measure of ∠B is 90°, BC=16, and AC=20. Triangle DEF is similar to triangle ABC, where vertices D, E, and F correspond to vertices A, B, and C, respectively, and each side of triangle DEF is one third the length of the corresponding side of triangle ABC. What is the value of sinF?
-
Truly a unique design.
-
Y-you too.
-
Congrats?
-
With a system that attempts to enforce a 50% escape rate, there's no motivation to do anything.
-
In triangle ABC, the measure of ∠B is 90°, BC=16, and AC=20. Triangle DEF is similar to triangle ABC, where vertices D, E, and F correspond to vertices A, B, and C, respectively, and each side of triangle DEF is one third the length of the corresponding side of triangle ABC. What is the value of sinF?
-
How about it just uninstalls the Killer's game and removes one random DLC from their account while at it.
-
A lot of people are having the same issue at the moment. Matter of fact I assume it's everyone on Steam, myself included.
-
@Hex_Llama said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549558#Comment_2549558
I don't consider this a blatant lie, though (and I don't know why it would matter if it were, but that's a separate issue). They slightly overstated how involved the calculation is, but it's true that they don't just use kills and escapes to determine the rating, and it takes several factors into account (we know death order and hatch are two of those factors), the goal is to have you win half of your matches, and, from some points of view, the calculation is complex (we don't know exactly how it calculates the killer MMR, for example, because it has to factor in four 1v1s).
If you're disappointed by what the system turned out to be, or if you imagined something different when you read that statement, that's fair. But I don't think it's a lie.
If you view this entire situation as them "slightly overstating how involved the calculation is", then there really isn't much to talk about. The way I see this, is yet another Corporation playing the "how do you do fellow gamers" shtick left and right, while aiming for as little transparency as possible, because that makes them impervious to any negative feedback. And the tone in which this was explained on the stream really pushed my buttons.
Don't get me wrong, it would be incredibly naive to even assume that Behaviour would be any different, but I suppose it's the fact that it's never been made more obvious. Am I a little bit salty about the entire situation? Yes, yes I am.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
well ######### me i guess
BadBoyKaru won this time.
-
@Hex_Llama said:
The new system seems better than the old system, which is a plus to me. I do remember them saying they wanted it to be more complicated, but, just because the version they ended up with is simple doesn't mean it's wrong. Sometimes you try something complicated and it doesn't work.
I also think there was an element of struggling to define what would constitute a good match, and it seems like the definition they settled on is that you have roughly a 50/50 change of surviving as survivor and roughly a 50/50 chance to kill each individual survivor as killer. That's a really clear outcome to build a system around, and I bet it took a while to define it and then to run tests to determine, for example, that you had to remove hatch from the calculations and account for changing probabilities as the number of survivors goes down.
I also remember them doing a survey where they asked people what a win was, and I'm willing to bet that the results validated this system -- I'm pretty sure most people said "win" means you escape or get a certain number of kills.
TL;DR it's simpler than what they initially proposed, but I still think it's okay.
Look, I get it if you like the current system, that really isn't something we can or should argue about. But don't defend the blatant lies we've been told. SBMMR was made out to be this complex system that would do its best to calculate your skill, it isn't, it never was and we've been fed nonsense for months and months.
-
No.
And I'm incredibly displeased with how the Devs spoke of the issue.
To quote Patrick, Lead Game Designer, using mostly a rather condescending tone: "There's sort of, a question I get asked a lot, I see from the community, I've even had people on the team talk to me about. They talk about the Survivor perspective of: I was playing a game of Survivor and I looped the Killer for seven consecutive hours and I unhooked, y'know, eighteen other Survivors and I healed for ninety-three health states, I fixed ten generators, it was such an amazing game, I truly am a god amongst men when I play Dead by Daylight. But then, right at the end, I got thrown on a hook and I died and I don't like that counts as a loss. And the idea here is, wouldn't it be nice if you could do all of that and sometimes you get out alive? Right? Wouldn't that be nice? That's the idea, that's all that MMR is trying to do. It goes, I know you've died, it's ignoring how you got there, because there's too much nuance to be able to make a real, effective system."
Like, on what planet is this an okay thing? How is this a mindset the Devs should have? I'm actually blown away that this is just the thought process that goes down and nobody's questioning it. Yes, there's too much for MMR to calculate, so maybe instead of trying to make DBD a competitive game, maybe instead of trying to force MMR, they could find a better system. And ######### me if the tone and delivery of that statement didn't answer any and all questions I could ever have about how Behaviour views their game.
-
How is there several posts like this every day, the Devs have made it crystal clear. Grades are not ranks, they are not used for matchmaking. How are you complaining about being matched based on MMR, yet you're directing your annoyance at Grades?
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2547690#Comment_2547690
No no, I'm smarter than Felix. I didn't get kidnapped by a malevolent Entity :p
Plus Felix didn't make a thread that brought attention to the Entity's poor performance.
All in all, if your hair game's on point as well I'll have to surrender.
-
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 👀
-
Ritual of the Meta
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2547625#Comment_2547625
I was more going for the prodigious engineer who was crippled by debilitating and dangerous health issues and forced to drop out of school to help his family.
However, I will accept yours as well, it is more relevant here.
Tesco Value Felix.
-
The official answer is that we genuinely don't know and saying otherwise is just a speculation.
My personal answer, given certain choices made by Behaviour in the past, is: "Probably, lmao."
-
You really did it. You got out of bed today and you thought to yourself: "Damn, today I'll do it. Today I'll go on those forums and tell them, I'll pave the way, I'll set the record straight, I'll put an end to the debate on what's toxic and what isn't. It has to be me, SlothGirly that does this. From this day forward, they will all know."
And just so nobody can accuse me of not contributing to the discussion at hand, I'll admit that this community loves the word toxic far too much, but if you genuinely think it's okay to be that one guy who's letting Survivors bleed out on the ground, or that it's completely normal for Survivors to ignore objectives just so they can point and laugh at the Killer, then there really isn't much anyone can tell you.
-
They know what you have done in @GoodBoyKaru's PTB post.
-
Add hackers on the pile of reasons.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2543590#Comment_2543590
Literally the opposite of what you said lol
Have you ever played Nemesis my guy
Yes?
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2543571#Comment_2543571
It actually does the opposite. I do not need a hook counter to go after the one guy I am tunneling. Rofl. Trust me, most killer mains can count to 3.
Where you really get us is counting to 3 multiple times on survivors that are wearing the same cosmetic. As if I can keep track of that much information. Ha ha ha.
And some Killers can even count to 12 after an unhook, or so the rumors say!
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2543598#Comment_2543598
Remember when they gave Victor a 5 second CD for successfully downing a survivor to "nerf" slugging with Victor and gave no other compensation buffs besides that you can now move victor very slowly for 2 of those 3 seconds.
It didn't stop the issue at all and in fact made playing the twins and not slugging the worse option.
BHVR doesn't seem to understand how to fix these "killer problems", because they will sacrifice any fun a player might have with that killer to create a situation where the best way to play the killer is in a way that survivors still aren't going to enjoy playing against.
Oh, yeah. It made me give up on Twins, despite quite enjoying them, as I simply don't like slugging and I don't see why I would play a Killer that gets punished for using their power correctly, it's such a strange design choice.
-
@DelsKibara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2543590#Comment_2543590
Inb4 they nerf Trickster.
The way they handled Trickster is the funniest thing ever to me. They made his general chase weaker, but made him even more oppressive at camping and downing Survivors in dead zones. I genuinely struggle to understand the thought process behind some of the changes that have happened in the past.
-
Behaviour seems too concerned with making Killers fun to play against, less so to play as.
-
@Elena said:
Anything you do as killer is illegal
I mean, technically speaking, you're not wrong.
