Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Vrose29 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3970493#Comment_3970493
Hey, just letting you know your math is wrong. Each chance is 4%. Percentages don't stack in that way, and mathematically just because there's 3 chances does not mean there's a 12% chance. If that was the case even more people would have been able to unhook prior to the change. It's 3 attempts with a 4% successful chance. I was suggesting 2 without health bar going down as a compromise to unhelpful teammates/bad situations vs going next.
Actually, the math is 1 - (0.96 * 0.96 * 0.96) = 11.5264% chance.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971437#Comment_3971437
and there's zero evidence that the absolute best players in the world would want to join this group.But is there any evidence that the best players in the world wouldn't want to join that group? The nature of competition is not only in personal skill, but one's ability to adapt to opposing skill. The average caliber of player is going to be higher, therefore each player is generally getting the most experience against similarly high caliber players. You're kinda leaning way too hard into the possibly of some kind of DBD Will Hunting out there, which while possible, is less probable than the best player being among players who regularly experience curated high level play.
I'm not even saying I agree with either stance, since it's not really something thats quantifiable, just that claiming that the best player is more likely to be from a competitive scene is a more reasonable assessment than claiming they aren't.
Because it's a niche group, with a gigantic list of custom rules, and isn't anything like public DBD games.
And the custom rules themselves are controversial. Do you really think all the top players are going to agree the custom rules make the game "more balanced"? Obviously not. There are many players, of all skill levels, that think the comp DBD custom rules are ridiculous.
-
@squbax said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971385#Comment_3971385
I mean so far any very good pub team/killer that has faced comp players had been destroyed. Like a lot of players with 10k+ hours have played against comp player to try and prove your point and lost. Even then the pub player could use all they wanted to, and play killers like blight and nurse, still got wrecked.
Do I have a presedent of a comp player facing 1800 teams in pubs and only being stopped by 1 comp team as well as any person saying they are the best x killer or have the most stats in a particular killer getting dunked on by comp teams when they face the., yeah I will assume until proven otherwise comp players are vastly better than whatever you find in pubs because so far no proof has been offered of it being the opposite.
Your argument boils down to people saying olympic swimmers are not thr best swimmers because somehow out there there is one random person who is faster, we don't know they exist, no proof of how fast they swim but you just have to trust they are the best.
Are you for reals comparing comp DBD to the Olympics?
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971409#Comment_3971409
Thats the thing though, are you trying to compare the pinnacles, or the averages? Either way, the chances are higher of them putting the comp player(s) over the non-comp one(s.) There isn't an objective metric to try to factually state for or against the claim, the only objective measure would have to be based off of one of those two metrics, which can only be assumed. The claim is essentially a very reasonable assumption, even if not an objective fact.
Pinnacles.
And it's not a reasonable assumption, because it assumes the absolutely best players in the world, would obviously want to play in comp DBD. But it's still a fact that comp DBD is still a niche group of people, and there's zero evidence that the absolute best players in the world would want to join this group.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971385#Comment_3971385
I think he's more saying that a comp player is inherently going to be able to coordinate more than a non-comp player. When you're focused on a coordinated environment, you tend to get better at compensating for other non-coordinated players due to knowing what you're supposed to be doing (and when) without needing to be told. I don't agree with comp players always being better than non-comp players, just that they gain experience in coordination in a way that helps them deal with its absence if they properly utilize that skill. Non-comp SWFs obviously have this same potential, but generally not in an environment that focuses strictly on things like efficiency, unless they center around pubstomping.
That’s literally the argument though. The argument literally is “are comp players the BEST players in the game”?
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971372#Comment_3971372
Did you think the number 1 nurse in the world would be the same guy as the number 1 Twins? Comp killers are generally really good "jack of all trades". As for the SWFaspect... no, i dont think your 4 man non comp SWF players are doing the same stuff as their comp counterparts. Theyre looking at their friendslist and saw their buddy is online. You can get 4 good players together, but they generallydont have the same team cohesion.
Again, you keep comparing comp DBD to AVERAGE players.
"Theyre looking at their friendslist and saw their buddy is online" is a statement about AVERAGE PLAYERS.
This entire argument is supposed to be "Are comp players the BEST players in the game"? As in literally better than everyone else.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971367#Comment_3971367
I wasn't even talking about the killer aspect. Was specifically talking about how comp survivors are generally better at working as a unit than their non-comp counterparts. Normally 4 man SWFs are just ppl screwing around with their friends and the voice chat is filled with banter.
When you get to the killer aspect of comp, you have to remember they dont get to just choose who they want to play as. They have to be equally ready to play as any killer. They'd obviously wouldn't be as good as ppl who 1 trick a specific killer at that killer.
If "They'd obviously wouldn't be as good as ppl who 1 trick a specific killer at that killer", then we've already admitted that comp players aren't necessarily the best players in the game.
And you keep trying to compare comp DBD to average players. When you say "Normally 4 man SWFs", you're literally talking about the average skill level. As I said before, claiming the comp players are better than average players, is fine.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971318#Comment_3971318
I feel like the mix up here is how they all are playing together. Even if you get 4 players who individually are better than each of the 4 comp players, I would still say those comp players are probably going to perform better due to they're constantly working as a whole unit. Other ppl might call out that they dropped shack pallet, but the comp guys are calling out that they dropped pallet at 7 o'clock.
Theres also the general endgame mindset that's different. I remember back in the day when the "de-pip squad" were doing their streaks with the goal of ensuring the killer lost. They had no problem not saving someone because a 3 man escape is still a win for survivors and a loss for killers. Alot of normal players will turn a winning game into a loss trying to get everybody out.
I still don't care.
There are plenty of SWFs in this game, that are using voice comms extremely well, and never play comp DBD. And it also doesn't give any proof that comp killers are the best killers.
-
Comp DBD should never be an argument for anything, because they have so many custom rules, that it isn't anything like public DBD games.
I really don't care how well certain killers do, when a gigantic list of custom rules is added to the game.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971215#Comment_3971215
In all fairness, comp players generally are the type of ppl to be constantly doing callouts and are able to understand those callouts. If you put a typical soloQ players on a comp team, they're probably not gonna be able to do the same. Comp players are not only the ppl who individually play well like you might see from non-comp players, but are generally hyper efficient due to being better at functioning as a team.
Again, I'll say it's completely fine to claim comp players are better than average players.
But calling them the BEST players in the game, is an over-exaggeration, considering how absolutely niche the DBD comp scene is in this game.
-
@squbax said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971215#Comment_3971215
You can put the worse comp team against any pub player and the pub players will be eaten alive.
Saying comp players are not better than pub players is insane, when its obvious who actually can win.
Example, the highest win streak in the game which was against pub players with NO restrictions nor rules, would not be beaten by almost 1800 teams of pub players, and the ones to end it were a comp team. If that doesnt tell you that even without restrictions comp players are vastly better than pub players idk in what world you live in.
Comp players are better than the AVERAGE public player. That is a 100% fair claim to make.
Claiming they are the best players in the game, is a massive exaggeration. There is way too high of a chance, that the best players in the world, just don't participate in comp DBD. It's far more likely the best players just don't want to participate in a comp format that has a massive custom ruleset.
-
@albertoplus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971102#Comment_3971102
Even if it's a fast heal, it is still your decision to finish it up or not, you can still cancel being healed by pressing the run button.
The same way as if you decide to start healing, the killer can still come after you before you finish, but it still deactivates at the moment you start with the healing action.
The only problem i see is with "instant" heals like syringe or any instant heal perk, but i suppose it can be coded differently for those cases.
However i think that one very safe thing they can do at the very least is to make the survivor collision as long as OTR/DS/Basekit BT is active to just dissapear. It will still protect you if the killer decides to tunnel but you will not be able to weaponize them.
That idea is amazing.
If a survivor has an endurance effect active, just get rid of their collision so they can't bodyblock the killer.
This would make the perks stronger at actually functioning as anti-tunnel, so it's a good change.
-
@squbax said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971116#Comment_3971116
While they have many rules they are also the players that know how to best play the game. I will 100% trust more the opinion of a comp player on how good doctor is rather than someone who says he is either a hidden gem of a killer and no one really knows it or he is somehow op and impossible to loop.
This game doesn't have an official leaderboard, so there is zero evidence that that comp players are the best players.
Comp players are comp players because they joined a comp team.
-
The game needs to add "intentional bodyblocking" to the list of conspicuous actions.
Yes, it would take a lot of coding to figure this out, but if a survivor is intentionally bodyblocking, then they aren't being tunneled. The biggest problem with anti-tunnel perks, are survivors weaponizing them against killers that are trying to chase someone else.
-
@squbax said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971074#Comment_3971074
I mean for that we should actually take into account good players opinions. Timmy who believes dredge is not weak because he cannot loop on nightfall is not a good source compared to an actually good player/a comp player who actually can play effectively against strong killers and also have to know how to play weak killers to their max potential when they are chosen for sets.
Comp DBD should never be an argument for anything, because they have so many custom rules, that it isn't anything like public DBD games.
I really don't care how well certain killers do, when a gigantic list of custom rules is added to the game.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3971059#Comment_3971059
I'm not new in the least, I just disagree with the commonly cited use of the term. I don't think it's helpful and I think we'd be on much firmer ground discussing the game if this term weren't used this way.
The fact of the matter is, people consistently use "M1 killer" as a stand-in for "weak killer", often either ignoring killers that are equally M1 focused but very good or citing killers that have a damaging M2 attack.
My point is this: If the term is going to be "M1 killer", it should be used to define something about the killer's power. If the meaning is going to be "weak killer", the term used should reflect that more accurately.Or, TL;DR, if what you mean is "weak killer" just say that. Why bother with the misleading term?
Defining the term to mean "weak killer" wouldn't help, because people would still disagree with most on which killers should be considered "weak killers".
-
@Nathan13 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3970952#Comment_3970952
I really don’t understand why they only sold the first 4 tomes in a bundle and not other older ones???
It's because the tome bundles were completely out of control.
BHVR refused to add certain cosmetics to the shop, and then locked them behind massively expensive bundles. This means that when someone is literally only wanting one outfit in the entire tome, they still need to pay for the ENTIRE bundle, just to get the one outfit they want.
-
I want BHVR to fix the search command before considering a 3rd command.
Because the search command is AWFUL when it's trying to target something on a different floor. And it's also awful at targeting the ground, at far distances, when there are line of sight breakers between the killer at the target location.
-
@HeroLives said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3970312#Comment_3970312
I just don’t think it’s that black and white when it comes to balancing because if the answer is join a 4man to be able or you have to run these perks and it might work still depends on teammates, to get any real interaction otherwise it’s just landslides then it’s probably a bad philosophy given that there are players who have no interest in doing that. Again it’s not always as easy as heal your teammate and get them up. I can do that until we’re all bleed out from being repeatedly slugged since everyone isn’t on comms coming up with a game plan collectively to be able to compete. Which is my entire point, because the game is centered around balancing high mmr 4 mans. This creates a gap between the two, mmr is shot for a variety of reasons.
That’s not true, you had to build for it, you had to be on comms, and then you had to break the hooks and get in there before they could hooks the person and get out of there without causing a snowball.If you wanted to go totally brain dead though with little to no risk have just one guy run the killer while everyone breaks hooks. Depends on which way you did it. It was super engaging and interactive for survivors, probably not for killer. Sabotaging similar to slugging made sense in certain situations and required skill and risk, and then there was taking the least engaging route and farming the killer, and they just had to play along, unless survivors were playing the risky way which left room for counters.It still got reigned in all the same same though because of certain ways it could be used to put killers in unwinnable situations.
Survivor has a similar issue where even though there is a counter its join a 4 man or everyone should be running these perks, I’m sure these knocking it out of the park situations for killer feels very interactive for survivors not on 4mans not bringing slug perks.
Distortion got nerfed because killers couldn’t swap 1 single perk to a different notification alert, and there was a plethora of counters to it. Doesn’t mean it didn’t need to be changed for other reasons.
Anyways bridging the gap and balancing around that and still pushing up lower tier killers to be more competitive is probably the best route since they have face these 4stacks too. Otherwise you’re alienating an entire portion of the player base all for the pursuit of balancing killers around 4swf even though not every lobby is 4swf and trying to pretend there’s not huge differences in performance vs 4swf and mixed lobbies, while simultaneously undermining it as “git gud” moments. When comms gives real time feedback that adds up for counterplay.
What do you think? Since we feel differently im interested in you expressing your perspective on this and this take.
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3970334#Comment_3970334
How is "just break all the hooks that never come back" skillful? The only part of that to offer resistance is skillchecks. As for slugging, I never said anything about perks or special teamwork. The thing to counter a slugged teammate is the exact same thing as countering hooked teammates... 1 guy rescue them to bring them to the injured state.
Generally the "strategies" that survivors have had through the years that were discarded are a repeat of "if I do this, im 100% safe and at most all the killer can do is mildly annoy me". The double locker flashlight "strategy" being a good example of this. Y
This post is trying to gather answers to: What counts as "extreme slugging situations", for the upcoming anti-slug?
Do you two have opinions on what should count as extreme slugging?
-
What does this mean? Does it mean killers will get more hits now, or less hits now?
-
@jedimaster505 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3969288#Comment_3969288
This is an appeal to authority fallacy. Just because the devs think the game should be easier for killers, doesn't mean this actually makes for the most engaging gameplay. To the contrary, a 50% kill/escape rate is the perfect ratio of challenge to reward, which induces the flow state, which is what makes games fun to play in the first place. Players play games to have fun, so making the game braindead easy for one side just leads to unengaging and boring gameplay for killers, and frustrating gameplay for survivors, as well as a rage quit epidemic that has only received band-aid fixes.
So, instead of listening to the people that literally create the game, I should listen to someone that uses words like “brain dead easy” in their arguments? And I’m supposed to pretend that statement isn’t over-exaggerating at all?
-
@jedimaster505 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3969193#Comment_3969193
Well, yes, survivors can post the average escape rate when complaining too. But anybody in the loop already knows this ranges from 48% (high MMR 4 stack SWF) to around 40% (solo Q + 2-3 stack SWF). So the survivor role as a whole warrants a huge buff, namely for solo Q, which should be addressed with anti-tunneling/slugging/camping and MMR measures in Stage 2 quality of life update. If any killer's average player-base wide kill rate falls below 50% kill rate as a result of Stage 2 update, then they deserve a buff to bring them in line with the other killers.
Whereas every killer character has a unique average kill rate, survivors only have a single average escape rate. Now, I am not asking for killer mains' personal kill rates. That is irrelevant when it comes to balancing because that specific killer player might just be better or worse than average. I am saying they should post the average kill rate for that character across the entire player base, which gives an objective overview of how deadly that killer is independent of player skill. This will reduce the noisy complaints from below average killer players that don't want to actually learn how to play killer, but just want easy mode at the expense of fair matches for the opponent.
Nurse at high MMR was recently shown to have nearly a 70% kill rate, which is extremely high. Of course, given that she requires a few more hours practice to get decent results with compared to other killers, her kill rate is lower across all MMR, since most killer mains want easy 4Ks out of the box with as little effort as possible. The last time I saw an official breakdown of per-killer kill rates in 2024, her kill rate across all MMR was 55%, which is well above the 50% fair balance target. Now, Nurse is a case of a killer like Ghoul, that is completely broken and needs a serious rework to give her more viable counter play than just running behind a wall and praying she both sucks and doesn't have wall hack perks, but also to have her kill rate be closer to 50% at both low and high MMR. Well-designed killers should be accessible to new players but difficult to master, just like survivor role. It is time to make Dead by Daylight great again.
BHVR said multiple times that the game is balanced around a 60% kill rate and 40% escape rate.
Therefore, survivors having a 40% escape rate, means survivors DON’T need major buffs, because they are literally at the target escape rate.
-
@jedimaster505 said:
I love looping a killer the whole match and escaping after he humps me on ground for simply being the better player.
Killer mains disingenuously pretending there are "weak", low tier killers in DBD when every single killer has an average kill rate well above 50%. They have moved the goal posts so far that the S tier killer of 2016 is basically the "weakest" killer of today. There should be a new rule where you have to post the average kill rate of your killer character (official stats, Nightlight doesn't count!) before asking for a buff or nerf to survivor to help that killer. That way everyone will see that you just want easy, free wins handed to you by BHVR instead of a fair match.
Can we also demand for survivors to post the average kill rate of their Nurse character (official stats), when they say Nurse is super easy to play, and needs to be nerfed???
And in general, if someone says a certain killer has “zero counter play”, they should post their official stats for that killer?
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968139#Comment_3968139
I agree. Ideally no one would go next, but avoiding the problems that make the game unfun for so long and trying to force people not to give up when it comes so naturally is just going to exacerbate fatigue. The players that like the system as is would rather punish their peers and harm the game further than play with bots that actually will fill a slot in the trial without complaint.
People that ragequit are breaking game rules, and deserve to be punished.
Seriously, if someone frequently ragequits, then their feelings do not matter at all. Give them huge DC penalties. It doesn't matter if that gives them fatigue or whatever. They deserve to be punished.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
Hey there folks! I'm happy to share that Phase 2 of the Quality of Life updates is already underway, with pieces of the roadmap having been tested as part of the recent 9.1.0 PTB. This included the Map and Key item balancing and Custom Game improvements. On top of these, improved keyboard and mouse support on consoles is also coming alongside our upcoming update.
Of course, this is just the start of Phase 2! We'll have more to share about other aspects on this phase soon, so stay tuned.
Does that mean Phase 1 is done, or is the Hiding Prevention and "Go Next" Prevention, still being worked on?
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967825#Comment_3967825
Someone isnt quite telling the truth then.
Either the epidemic isn't that bad or it is. Pick one.
Either a significant portion of your games are being affected or there's not actually that many people quitting.
The percentage of players, that frequently ragequit, and is 100% determined to ragequit, is very small.
There is a much higher percentage of players, that are only ragequitting because there is an easy way to bypass the DC penalties, or because they feel the DC penalties aren’t harsh enough to care about.
Before the 20-game Go Next change, the DC penalties absolutely were not harsh enough for many people to care about them, because the penalties decayed with time, so players could easily just ragequit a large percentage of their games, and wait out the DC penalties.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967764#Comment_3967764
Having some punishment is fine, but that is not what I foresee happening.
People will continue to soft-quit. Other people will start calling for other avenues of quitting to be policed as well. We cannot police everything. We already saw that when given the chance, BHVR will start grabbing innocent players and banning them.
Changing attitudes of players isn't easy, but it can be done. Forcing them into matches that they don't want to be in may hide the issue for a while, but it won't fix the underlying causes.
Like we discussed, if you truly think that most players will DC or suicide at the drop of a hat, for no other reason than ego; well then there isn't really anything to be done, and the game is doomed no matter what course we pursue. If, instead, you believe that this "epidemic" is in fact, a culmination of different issues plaguing the game for some time, well, that would lend itself to my theory, which is that we can alleviate common areas of frustration.
That logic doesn't work.
The percentage of players that are frequently ragequitting, is low enough, that if BHVR found a way to magically ban them all, then the game would still be fine.
As in, I can simultaneously believe the majority of players that frequently ragequit, are doing so purely because of selfish and unacceptable reasons, and still believe the game isn't "doomed".
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967609#Comment_3967609
Either way, we've already been down that road, and it failed in such a spectacular way that it would be insane to even consider trying it again or fixing the issues. There are way too many "what if" scenarios to make it work properly.
And other PvP games eventually figured it out, so this game could too.
And yes, other games have a lot of “what if” situations too. -
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967585#Comment_3967585
And what if it's a Scratched Mirror Myers hiding behind the corner and you have no idea he's there? Do you think the game would detect that?
The game could make an exception for survivors being surprised by undetectable killers, if the killer wasn’t ever in line of sight.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967540#Comment_3967540
I can honestly say I've never seen anyone banned for feeding.
Your statement doesn't mean anything.
I can honestly say I've never seen anyone banned in Marvel Rivals, for any reason at all.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967512#Comment_3967512
If feeding got you banned in OW, the world would be a better place.
But also OW would have no players, we all feed a little bit lmao
Feeding is literally in Blizzard's Code of Conduct, as a reportable offense that can have penalties.
And feeding is the equivalent of inting in DBD, where DBD survivors do things like purposely run to the killer with the intent of getting hooked quickly.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967490#Comment_3967490
Ragequitters should be handled the same way as hackers, because both groups of people are breaking game rules.That's like saying parking violations and arson should be handled the same because they are both against the law.
Different situations require different levels of priority and different levels of punishment.
In both scenarios, there is no perfect solution. But the correct plan of action, is to keep trying, and keep improving on the detection algorithms.Algorithms aren't great at detecting intent. Hackers are using external programs and/or manipulating code, ragequitters you are trying to decipher why a person played the way they did. How much time is it worth for BHVR, instead of fixing bugs, balance issues, new gameplay additions, etc. to try and solve a potentially unsolvable issue that risks false positive and catching innocent players?
They already have different levels of punishment. Hacking is a permanent ban, while ragequitting is only the DC penalty.
And it should be one of BHVR’s highest priorities, to try to fix the ragequitting detection issue. These people are breaking game rules.
Other PvP games manage to have ragequitting penalties for inting, so it’s a very possible goal. (Inting in this game, would be things like purposely running up to the killer, or purposely not trying when the killer is chasing them)
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967490#Comment_3967490
We seem to have gone really quickly from 'remove 4% so people will have to cop a DC penalty if they wanna leave' to 'the DC penalty isnt enough, they need to be banned'. It's only been like a month..
I just want the ragequitters to get the DC penalties they are supposed to get.
If someone ragequits, they are SUPPOSED TO get a DC penalty. We have multiple people on these forums, admitting the ragequitters are finding other ways to bypass the DC penalties; and that shouldn’t be allowed.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967508#Comment_3967508
Yeah except giving up isn't breaking any rules.
You can't possibly force people to try.
Ragequitting is breaking the rules.
It’s the reason why it has a punishment associated with it, and it’s the reason why people aren’t allowed to admit or encourage it.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967490#Comment_3967490
No where did I say that they shouldn't be punished.
I merely said that people have already found alternatives, and that it would appear that the system isn't really accomplishing much except changing the method by which people give up.
It will take more than punishments to change attitudes.
It’s the exact same issue as hackers. When BHVR patches one exploit, hackers will find alternatives. And hackers are changing the method by which they hack the game.
-
@Pulsar said:
Not super surprising. People are going to turn to anything else that lets them quit. Most probably aren't DC'ing, they'll just be soft quitting. No way to police that.
Perhaps we should start fixing pain points.
Ragequitters should be handled the same way as hackers, because both groups of people are breaking game rules.
In both scenarios, there is no perfect solution. But the correct plan of action, is to keep trying, and keep improving on the detection algorithms.
According to your attitude, BHVR shouldn't try to punish hackers, because hackers are going to turn to anything else that lets them hack.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967295#Comment_3967295
it adds temporary penalties (fatigue) when the system detects that a killer is serial tunneling.
So, if there's one take away we should have from the recently attempted go next and crows systems it's that any automatic system trying to "detect gameplay" is going to be highly flawed, subject to false positives, and is basically just defining "what is gameplay".
How does this system even work? It seems abusable if the survivor throws themselves at you for a DS play or even just to force the system to activate. We saw the same thing happen where tunneling someone out forced the game to consider the survivor to "not be trying" and hit with a dc penalty.
What they should do:
Hook donation system. Survivors can choose to donate their first hook stage to a shared pool that is pulled from before individual stages. Shuts off at end game
Doesn't touch player agency, doesn't affect end game. Killers can still choose to camp and tunnel, but early game will have to camp through 6 hook stages to get someone out. It becomes inefficient, and people will lose games trying, so they will do something else.
That "something else" is chase. We go back to "gens aren't worth kicking" and killers are driven to get into chase as fast as possible to get through hook stages. This is also slowdown since, instead of standing around a hook with their mouth full of teeth, they're pressuring survivors off gens. Ideally, getting more than one person on hook at a time becomes the most efficient play, while slowing down the game.
No penalties, no "detecting gameplay", not abusable by either side in any way. You're just making tunneling and camping early game less efficient, and allowing people to choose to pay more efficiently. Coincidentally, this also creates map pressure to slow down the game naturally, and allows better killer skill expression, since more hooks is at least one measure of killer skill.
That's all you have to do to change this meta. And if it impacts kill rates, we can finally talk about buffing trapper and other killers individually. Although I suspect that there will be killers at the top tier that can still perform perfectly fine with this system also.
Actually, that would mean the killer should just tunnel the same survivor through 6 health states instead of 3.
Do you want to know what would be more frustrating for solo q survivors? Being tunneled through 6 health states.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
The controls have always been a problem for both sides and I'd love to see a fix. It gets in the way of just about everything.
A good solution without changing the controls themselves would be to implement better priority stacking. Make it so that Killer will always prioritize grabbing/mori-ing a Survivor over all other actions.
If a survivor with Head On is in the locker directly next to the slugged survivor, then the killer needs a way to open that locker, even though a slugged survivor is directly in front of it.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966994#Comment_3966994
Everyone would be better off if the Go Next mechanic would properly detect anyone that ragequits, and gives them a DC penalty.In a perfect world, sure. But actually trying to implement a system like that is almost impossible. Make it to loose and you'll get false positives (see AFK crows), make it too stringent and it will be easily avoidable and just cause unnecessary worry in the community. Designing a system to detect intent is probably impossible.
Properly punishing people that break game rules, should be an extremely high priority, and should be handled similarly to punishing hackers.
In both scenarios, there is no perfect solution. But the correct plan of action, is to keep trying, and keep improving on the detection algorithms.
-
This survey wasn't survivor sided. But I remember multiple surveys talking specifically about survivor-only frustrations, but I've never seen a survey ask me about killer-only frustrations.
The survey should have talked about how we feel about the phase 1 changes, and if we feel they are just right, or if they should be increased or decreased.
It's like anything that might involve talking about the survivor role in a negative way, is super off limits for the surveys.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966994#Comment_3966994
Well all I can say is good luck with that one, I would think the reason people are going next is more important but hey… let's just continue down this path and hope it works out better than hit has so far.
People are breaking game rules for unacceptable reasons. They deserve to be punished.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966428#Comment_3966428
But that isn't reality, they do want out of matches and if you make DC penalties higher they will just be even more determined to not DC and instead waste everyone's time by constructively throwing the match without overtly doing so.
Not advocating it but the fact is everyone would actually be better off with a bot over a person who is throwing the match.
Everyone would be better off if the Go Next mechanic would properly detect anyone that ragequits, and gives them a DC penalty.
If someone is throwing the match, they are clearly breaking game rules, and should be punished with a DC penalty. The solution should be "the Go Next system needs to do better".
-
@Mandy said:
This was removed from the game when the system changed (the ability to not get crows by picking up and dropping the item), what was kill switched was the messaging and subsequent penalties for "going next" until we adjusted the system.
Adjusted, as in past tense? Did the “going next” stuff get added back into the game?
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966872#Comment_3966872
That would be nice, but I guess you could write this at the end of a survey. It does ask "Is there anything else you would like to give feedback to us on about?"
That's your chance to let your frustrations out. (In a nice constructive way lol)
That's what I do. :D
Writing things at the end of the survey doesn't really seem like it ever does anything, because we still don't have a survey talking specifically about killer-only frustrations.
We don't even get to have a survey talking about how we feel about the phase 1 changes, and if we feel they are just right, or if they should be increased or decreased.
It's like anything that might involve talking about the survivor role in a negative way, is super off limits for the surveys.
-
I still want one of the surveys to actually care about frustrations for people playing the killer role.
The most frustrating thing for me is how absolutely awful the audio experience is for killers. But instead of choices like "it's too difficult to hear survivors during chase music" or "it's too difficult to hear survivors that aren't in line of sight", I get a whole bunch of options that don't help at all.
As in, I remember multiple surveys talking specifically about survivor-only frustrations, but I've never seen a survey ask me about killer-only frustrations.
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966667#Comment_3966667
What makes you think that this is supposed to be a anti slugging ONLY perk? Not every perk is designed to be insanely limited to one playstile.
Because otherwise it's a bully perk, that survivors would use to place killers in lose/lose situations. Conviction can be weaponized against the killer, which really shouldn't be the intention of the perk.
Conviction really could be a "triggers in the recovery bar is at 95%", to make it sort of like an unbreakable that can be used multiple times per game.
Also, it sets a bad message to the game, that the natural counterplay of conviction, is you should hard tunnel survivors 1 by 1, so they can't activate the conviction perk. This perk basically punishes killers for not tunneling.
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966164#Comment_3966164
op
conviction
in any case, I for one do not think things should be uncounterable just because they are so-called "legitimate strategies."
for example, I don't think that they should remove the broken effect from Plague's infection, or the insta-down from Bubba and Billy's chainsaws, or the exposed status effect from Myers and Ghost Face and the various perks that grant exposed, just because it counters the legitimate strategy of healing in order to have two health states. even though using time to stay healthy is a legitimate strategy for survivors, that doesn't mean there should be zero ways for killers to deal with survivors choosing to stay healthy.
each side having tools to deal with the strategies the other side might use is good game design, and a perk that only activates if you get slugged and still requires someone else to pick you off the ground is IMO an extremely tame way of giving survivors a tool to deal with a particular killer strategy
The problem is Conviction can trigger even when the killer isn't trying to slug. Having the perk trigger at 25%, means that if the survivor gets knocked to the groud under an undropped pallet, if the killer searches the area for a teammate, the survivor with Conviction can pick themselves off the ground. 25% isn't enough time for the killer to search the area for teammates.
The "slugging problem" is supposed to involve excessive slugging where the survivor is slugged for excessive amounts of time. 25% the recovery bar isn't excessive, meaning this perk isn't even trying to punish excessive slugging, and instead is just punishing the killer if they aren't immediately picking up every survivor off of the ground.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
As I am sure others have mentioned, DC is the best case scenario for the team as at least you get a bot that does gens and has wall hacks and cannot be mind gamed, so while not amazing they can still take up killers time.
However personally I have not really seen any noticeable increase in DC's, I just see people giving up but wasting everyone's time pretending they aren't trying to go next so the killer will hook them. Sure it keeps them in the match longer but if they aren't actually doing much to anything of use, is this really a win for anyone?
The best case scenario is if no one ragequits. And if there are people that are 100% determined to frequently ragequit, the best case scenario is to give them a super high DC penalty. -
@DBD2025MakesMeSad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966148#Comment_3966148
But only survivor downsides shouldn't be bypassed, right? Killer should always have a way around a downside.
It matters if that is intended or not. For example, it's not intended for Clown to bypass the number of carried bottles if he equips Pinkie Finger, so Clown should not be able to bypass that.
-
The killer has an above average pick rate, with a below average kill rate, and has way way less complaints than Ghoul had. This is pretty much the jackpot of game balance.
And the killer’s stealth mechanic is so fake, that a lot of people are running the guitar addon without the +stealth duration addon, meaning they are content with going entire games without the stealth mechanic.
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966167#Comment_3966167
Nope. Not what I said in the slightest. Let's break down what the effect says shall we
While using the Key, the following effects apply:
- The Aura of the Killer is revealed to you.
- Your Aura is revealed to the Killer.
Notice how they are two SEPERATE effects? Which means one or both can be countered by both sides. Distortion, Undetectable and so on. Absolutely nothing buggy about it.
That logic implies BHVR never accidentally words perks incorrectly.
I’m literally asking for BHVR to make a rules clarification.