Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892994#Comment_3892994
BHVR has been working to try and prevent unhookable situation, in fact that have made many changes throughout the years focusing on addressing issues with Survivors holding Killer hostage via making themselves unhookable and unsluggable.
- Boil Over nerfed from 33% of Total Wiggle Progress to 33% of Current Wiggle Progress.
- Adding a hook to RPD's upstairs of the library, which unironically just inverted the situation by creating a hook location that Survivors could not rescue another Survivor from. RPD's upstairs of the library would eventually be removed altogether.
- Hooks added to many locations to prevent unhookable situations.
- Hooks respawn (seriously the best change they have made in my opinion).
- Nerfing perks that discouraged the Killer from picking up a Survivor (e.g. Background Player) so the Killer can get hooks easier.
- Introducing new or changing existing perks that promote engaging with hooked Survivors (e.g. Babysitter, Shoulder the Burden, etc.) with the intent of reducing Survivor-forced slugging and addressing other aspects of the game (tunneling) with it.
None of this is to say that BHVR is perfect, they still do ignore some issues, but you are acting like BHVR has not attempted to reduce slugging and encouraging hooking altogether.
I'm saying there's supposed to be this massive anti-slugging plan, that's so huge that it spans multiple phases of the year, and yet 100% of the changes so far are to benefit survivors, and there are 0 announced changes that will benefit killers.
Are any of the anti-slugging changes in this giant 2025 plan, going to help killers?
-
@upsideinsanity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892929#Comment_3892929
Again, if you are bringing in knockout, you are bringing that before you know that the survivors are bringing this. No I do not agree with survivors bringing builds like that or playing like that and yes you have to slug in that situation, but that you blame that rare occasions like that as an excuse for running a perk like knockout or slugging in every game.
You are grasping at straws and looking for the rare situations to justify a very unhealthy playstyle.
In the situations where slugging is necessary, it's necessary. Knockout is by no means a perk to bring when slugging is necessary, as I said previously, it is a perk to bring when you go into the match with the intention of slugging.
And if you want to talk about things being nerfed for used for griefing, then I guess the ability to move forwards and backwards needs to be nerfed on killer. Something tells me you make use of those frequently too.
I never said knock out should have remained the way it was.
What I am saying is that if slugging is a problem that needs to be fixed, it should be fixed on BOTH SIDES of the game. But when BHVR nerfs Knock Out, and allows survivors to surrender early when everyone is slugged, it's basically only fixing the problems that negatively affect survivors.
BHVR could have easily made or announced anti-slugging things that would benefit killers, that would help reduce the frustration that happens when killers are repeatedly forced to slug. But none of that happened. Badham + basement in shack, is still a super grief that survivors can do. Any all the other ways that killers can be forced to slug is still fully intact in the game.
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892871#Comment_3892871
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892891#Comment_3892891
My post wasn't really meant to be a big statement on balance, I was just stating what I consider to be a fact about the devs/BHVR and that's why they make these kind of changes. On top of addressing player complaints I mean.
Not saying it always makes sense, mind.
You should just say "on top of addressing survivor complaints", because that is what happened. Every single possible complaint that killers might have, about survivors forcing killers to slug, has been 100% ignored.
The only slugging changes that were made, were 100% for the benefit of survivors.
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892929#Comment_3892929
Just want to gently remind you this is a thread about a knock out nerf
This thread is about knock out being nerfed, because of a claim that killers are using it to grief survivors.
And if we're actually being fair to both sides of the game, it means that things survivors do, just to grief killers, should also be nerfed.
-
@upsideinsanity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892566#Comment_3892566
If youre bringing knock out - you are going into the game with the intention of slugging. That is not situational that is intentional and you cannot blame that on the way survivors play.
When survivor burn a Badham offering and a "basement in shack" offering, they are going into the game with the intention of purposely hanging out in the school basement, where it's literally impossible to get them to a hook.
But for whatever reason, that's not considered unhealthy even though it's literally 100% being done to grief the killer. However, if killers try to slug for the 4k, it's demonized and considered unhealthy for the game, even though they're literally doing it to raise their kill rate.
-
@Brokenbones said:
Knockout's being changed because it promotes unhealthy playstyles that heavily punish solo q survivors
BHVR want killers to hook people, not leave them to bleed out for several minutes. This is also why the slug surrender mechanic is being added, so instead of a 4 man having to wait to die they can just give up and move on fast.
If BHVR wants killers to hook people, then why didn’t they address any of the reasons why killers are sometimes forced to slug?
Why is it that when bully SWFs literally go into a game to make fun of the killer, and sometimes do this publicly on a stream, it’s not considered unhealthy for the game? Why is griefing only important when it happens to survivors?
-
@Brokenbones said:
I think staggering the updates is probably for the best, just in case something gets broken or abused massively.
Though the thing with survivors hiding seems more like an edge-case thing than something that's quite rampant. I think giving both sides the means to exit a match without being penalised seems more important in the bigger picture
Forcing killers to wait an entire 10 minutes without generators being completed, but allowing survivors to instantly surrender the split second after all of them are slugged, doesn’t seem very equal to me.
Also, we’ve had a lot of people claim that survivors being able to surrender will encourage killers to slug more.
…So why aren’t these same people complaining that killers being able to surrender will encourage survivors to excessively hide more? If the killer surrenders, the survivors will win, because either the game will instantly end, or the killer will be replaced by one of the horribly bad killer bots.
-
@AssortedSorting said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892573#Comment_3892573
Increased TR can be a double-edged sword, on both sides.
Larger terror radius means the Killer can make use of Terror Radius perks more effectively like Coulrophobia.
Slap on Distressing and the Survivors now need to work under the Distant Terror Radius layer or constantly be running away, meaning you could possibly have in essence a smaller terror radius as they have to rely on the second layer of the Terror radius to indicate you're closer to them. Great on smaller/layered maps, but perhaps less so on larger spread out maps.
Smaller Terror radius lets you get closer, and benefit more from TR reducing perks like Monitor and Abuse, however once they hear your terror radius, Survivors will typically know you're very close and to start running with more certainty.
No, it’s really not a double edged sword. There aren’t a lot of people using Distressing or Coulrophobia on Wesker, even though he has a 40 meter terror radius, because it’s just not a good idea.
Also remember that map offerings are going to be changed to no longer be 100% guaranteed, which means that anything that relies on a specific map type, is just going to be unreliable.
My concern is with excessively hiding survivors, and if survivors use the increased terror radius to excessively hide even earlier, then it’s just frustrating for the killer.
-
Gamma settings aren’t going to change the fact that this game still doesn’t have good colorblind settings, and Reshade is sometimes being used to create colorblind settings.
-
So we’re going to increase the terror radius of some of the killers, to make it easier for survivors to hide from them, but not implement hiding prevention at the same time?
It feels like both of those things should have been implemented at the same time.
-
@Goblin_BHVR said:
We're stoked to hear that you're looking forward to these changes, and we're excited to see what kind of feedback the PTB will bring 💚
It sends the message that when slugging is the killer’s choice, it’s frustrating and should be fixed. But if survivors force the killer to slug, it’s not frustrating, and doesn’t need to be fixed.
Survivors are still dedicating builds to making themselves unable to be hooked, but that’s not frustrating, and doesn’t need to be fixed? When I play against SWFs that swarm the area with flashlights, flashbangs, and sabotage toolboxes, to force the killer to slug... that isn’t frustrating, and doesn’t need to be fixed?
Is slugging an issue on both sides of the game, or is it only an issue when it’s the killer’s choice to slug?
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3892452#Comment_3892452
Not in such an intense way, but you see sometimes Lightbulbs flickering. I dont know if they fixed it, but it can be really annoying in the House of Pain (I THINK the Badham-version) in the Room where the 4 Lockers are located. I have seen some examples in a video from Otz, but I cannot find it.
Nothing in current DBD is anywhere near as bad as flashlights used to be.
People were binding flashlight clicking to their mouse scroll wheel, and the flashing lights were so rapid that the flashlights made a non stop BBBRRRRRRRRRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRRRRRRRRBRBRBRBRRRRRRRBRRBBRRBRRRRRRRBRBRBRBRBRBRRRRRR noise.
-
@supersonic853 said:
With the more interesting changes I've seen in stuff like 2v8 (with 3 dash wesker at least) itd be interesting if we got a balance modifier to test minor changes and actually got everyone's feedback instead of locking it to a PTB. I think overwatch had this prior to OW2. And seems like simple number changes can be done in a modifier. We have the beta tab for testing other stuff to which I think the FoV slider is still stuck in. So it'd be interesting to see BHVR test a few balance changes in a modifier to get all sides feedback instead of locking that behind a PTB. Do we think that is possible and would people play it if it was? Also with them saying characters will be free when trying modifiers its kinda like the ptb where you can try freddy being buffed while not owning him (correct me if I'm wrong). Would people like this as a modifier?
The biggest problem with this suggestion is that whenever BHVR tests things out, and they end up being rejected, it causes long term drama.
We still hear people complain about basekit unbreakable, which was tested in the basekit mori PTB, and was later rejected. The fact that is was tested in a PTB, caused more people to petition that it should be added to the game, which meant that PTB did more harm than good.
In fact, people are mass complaining there is a slugging problem in the game, even though BHVR confirmed it wasn't a problem before the basekit mori was added to the game, and we've gotten zero official stats since then. This means the basekit mori update made everything worse, because it is being used as an excuse to nerf killers, and we have zero official data to confirm if there currently is a slugging problem.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
Great question! The intention is to deliver bug fixes for long-standing issues across both of these phases. While we're not sharing specifics quite yet, continuing to push for meaningful bug fixes that the community cares about is an equally important part of "quality of life" to us.
I really really hope BHVR can finally fix aim dressing, because it currently steals hits from the killer.
What aim dressing currently does, is have proximity checks that are completely separate from the hit validation checks, and if a proximity check succeeds, it can yank the killer's camera and force a killer's lunge to turn into a short M1 attack….. and then the actual hit validation check can fail specifically because the game yanked the camera and forcibly changed the killer's attack.
Just to be clear, it would be perfect if the game made the hit validation check BEFORE forcibly yanking the camera and forcibly changing the killer's attack. That would allow aim dressing to still make hits look nicer, without stealing hits from the killer.
-
-
Remove all hatch interactions from keys and maps.
-
@caipt said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3891354#Comment_3891354
when the game detects your m1 will land it locks your camera ontot the survivor so the hit will look like its supposed to connect as well. This camera lock and occasionally make you miss hits around certain tiles, or even just out in the open.
This game makes proximity checks that are completely separate from hit validation checks.
If an attack succeeds the proximity check, then the game can yank the killer’s camera, and force the killer’s lunge to turn into a short M1 attack… and then the hit validation check can fail because the game forcibly changed the killer’s attack.It’s officially called Aim Dressing, but it is functionally an Auto Aim feature because it affects the game before hit validation. Because, just to be clear, Auto Aim affects the game BEFORE OR DURING hit validation, and Aim Dressing affects the game AFTER OR DURING hit validation.
-
Right before the finisher mori was released, BHVR gave us slugging stats that showed slugging wasn't a problem at the time.
After the finisher mori was released, nothing really was released that would affect slugging, except for shoulder the burden, that I honestly don't think is used much at average MMR, and therefore most of the players really aren't seeing it being used well.
So the actual questions, are "do we really think the finisher mori caused a slugging problem", or "do we think there still isn't a slugging problem, but since we don't have access to any current official stats, no one can actually prove anything"?
-
@TragicSolitude said:
I don't even think it helps new players out
Unless you mean this in some way I missed, aim dressing definitely doesn't help any killer player out, as explained by a dev:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ZD4KNDV7XTKA/aim-dressing.png
In summary: auto aim would give someone a hit they otherwise would not have gotten, helping them. Aim dressing will not give someone a hit if they didn't aim correctly, though aim dressing may cause a hit that should have connected to miss.
Aim dressing is to make hits "look like you'd expect": it sacrifices gameplay accuracy on the killer's side for visual accuracy. Most killers would prefer a hit to connect while sacrificing visuals, so I'd say it's more for the survivor's benefit than for killers. Killers won't get to turn off something that makes the game look better for survivors. Sucks for us.
(No offense meant if you already understood all this. I see this thread as an opportunity to gripe about how awful the controls feel, especially on console. Low frame rate + poor input response = I play less and less killer and hell, most days I'm playing a different game entirely. I'm tired of all these different problems that have me feeling like I'm versing the game itself more than the opponents. Aim dressing causing me to a hit a tree when I managed to aim correctly despite the performance issues is the icing on the cake.)
Aim Dressing doesn't need to sacrifice anywhere near as much accuracy as it currently does.
The game shouldn't be yanking the killer's camera, or forcing a lunge to turn into a short m1 attack, until AFTER the hit validation check happens. Or, if that is too complicated, then if a proximity check succeeds, but the hit validation check fails, then the game needs to rewind its forced actions upon the killer as much as possible, which means returning the camera to where it used to be, and changing the forced short m1 attack back to a lunge.
And if the proximity check is done on the killer side, but the hit validation check is done on the server side…. then why is that happening? Are we safe to assume this is what is actually happening, because if everything really was done on the server side, then there wouldn't need to be separate proximity and hit validation checks?
Is the proximity check really necessary? Why can't we just have a hit validation check, and if that succeeds, then yank the camera or force the lunge to turn into a short m1 attack? Why has this bug report been under review for over a year with zero feedback from BHVR?
-
@TerraEsram said:
Don't think touching the perk from survivor in function of the killer is a good idea
But, what the game can do is giving only smaller map for killer who don't have good mobility, and larger map for the other
All the good killer, or the killer who are high in a lot of tier list, are killer who have a pretty good mobility… Wesker, Blight, Spirit, Billy, Nurse…
Give them more large map because they don't have any problem to go in any point, and space more the gen (Survivor have to go far to find a new gen) and smaller map for the killer like Trapper, trikster, nemy, …Those tier lists aren’t relevant at all for this scenario. Those tier lists are based on the top 0.0001% of the players, which isn’t relevant at all to public games.
If we’re discussing an average MMR game, then we need a tier list based on how the killers perform at average MMR. If we’re discussing a lower MMR game, then we need a tier list based on how the killers perform at lower MMR.
And because public games have a soft cap, at the very top, we would use a tier list based on how killers perform at the soft cap. Which, by the way, is still very far off from the top 0.0001% of the players, that most the tier lists are based off of.
-
@jasonq500 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889280#Comment_3889280
I've seen lots of trickster players that hate current trickster on YouTube comments
As for reddit I do see that they want him to be at 115 instead of 110, but it was mostly divisive whether or not people like the idea they he'll be reverted
But from a few comments that I've seen it was mostly their mains that prefer to revert the changes
So you admit there wasn’t an “almost everyone” consensus? Because “mostly divisive” certainly sounds like many people weren’t in agreement.
-
@jasonq500 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889129#Comment_3889129
Why though? Almost everyone (including trickster mains) despise the rework he's gotten currently
That’s not true. BHVR had a Reddit post to discuss the possible rework, and it turns out that many people liked the rework, including some of the Trickster mains. And the majority of the players thought Trickster was more fun to play as with his current movement speed.
There was never an “almost everyone” consensus.
-
The best solution would be to rework slippery meat and luck offerings (or rework luck so it doesn’t affect self-unhooks).
Because if BHVR doesn’t rework these things, then people absolutely would equip one of these things, ragequit, and say they were “just trying to get value from their perk or offering”
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889153#Comment_3889153
But if the killer tunnels survivor A, there's no reason for B to give up their StB early, before the killer can do so. And if the killer switches targets, and A StB's B, then there's now two StBs down without the killer having done any tunnelling yet, and as @AmpersandUnderscore said, you'd have gotten two hookstates out of two hooks, identical to normal play. Just with two expose effects firing.
I think you're too deep into the theoretical here, because none of what you're describing is of any value. The ONLY value StB has is if one survivor has two hook states and the StB user has none. Any other situation is just shuffling hook states around for the fun of it.
I’m describing stuff that happens in my games.
Regardless of what the actual thought process is, coordinated SWFs are actually using STB on first hook states, and they are succeeding in spreading out the first 3 to 4 hooks.
Maybe Survivor A is the best in chase, so the originally plan was to use all the STBs on them, but after the killer hooked Survivor B, Survivor A used STB to encourage the killer to tunnel them instead.
Because that absolutely is a thing too. Some teams clearly have 1 or 2 survivors with chase builds, that are always trying to aggressively bodyblock, or otherwise get the killer to chase them, so the other survivors can use their generator perks. -
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889140#Comment_3889140
So the killer hooks two survivors, and the end result is that two survivors each have one hook state.
Sounds like if the survivors are also wasting two perk slots to literally not change the end result, and are making themselves exposed for the killer, that sounds like a pretty big win for the killer tbh.
No. The idea is that multiple STBs work as a flowchart, to force the first 4 hooks to be on 4 different survivors.
The survivors don't know beforehand if the killer will tunnel survivor A or chase after survivor B. So they use STB on first hook states, to make the flowchart easier. There's also a possibility that the killer didn't tunnel survivor A in this scenario, specifically because they were using STB.
There's also a possibility the killer will just try to tunnel out survivor B, now that they know the survivor team has STB, at which point, the last 1 or 2 STBs will be used on survivor B, to further spread out the hook states.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889120#Comment_3889120
Yes, but there's no point to that. It does not confer any value. It's just shuffling hookstates around without accomplishing anything but an exposed state.
Being able to delay the 1st kill, from 3 hooks to 6 hooks, is huge value.
- Survivor A has 1 hook state
- Survivor B uses STB on Survivor A
- The killer hooks Survivor B.
- Survivor A now has 0 hook states, and Survivor B now has 2 hook states.
- Survivor A uses STB on Survivor B.
- Survivor A and Survivor B now each have 1 hook state.
And the reason why Survivor B used STB on Survivor A, is in case the killer wanted to tunnel Survivor A, because this gives more margin of error than waiting for survivor A to have 2 hook states.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889094#Comment_3889094
The thing you are talking about though, using StB in order to remove someone else's first hook for the purpose of letting them use -their- StB has no value at all.
Some coordinated SWFs are using STB on people with one hook state. They aren't doing this specifically so the 1st person can use STB. But if the killer chases after the 2nd person instead, or otherwise doesn't tunnel the 1st person, then the 1st person can use STB on someone else.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889006#Comment_3889006
Jamming more perk slots in order to make it less niche but also weaker still does not a popular perk make.
Edit: Actually, come to think of it, this tactic adds literally zero value. It just creates an additional exposed effect.
Coordinated SWFs forcing the first 4 hooks to be on 4 different survivors, isn't zero value.
The exposed effect isn't very meaningful against some killers, especially if the killer isn't heavily proxy camping.
-
@Firellius said:
It's another band-aid perk, but this one can't be used on yourself and can't be used once you've been hooked once. It's very situational, and jamming a perk slot for every match when the opportunity to actually use it may be rare does not a popular perk make.
It can be used after you're hooked once, if another survivor uses the perk on you to take away your hook state.
And that is what the coordinated SWFs are doing, when multiple people bring the perk.
-
I voted yes, if they keep the 400% BP bonus.
Instant survivor queue times, at 400% BP bonus, is a lot of BPs, even if the survivors lose the game.
-
Shoulder the Burden is only really overpowered when multiple survivors are bringing it, to ensure the first 3-4 hooks are spread out on 3-4 different survivors.
-
@wikarski98 said:
Am I lost or is 2v8 really not about killing survivors?
By the time I finish breaking the 14 pallets in the 3-4 chases half the gens are done. Ok maybe I’ll hit and run and push them off gens nope pressuring gens doesn’t work because they only have to 8 which is 1 each so they blitz it still and some how heal super quick. I’m FT killer player and have pretty balanced matches but this is something else.The survivors have the below:
Rebuild/ reset pallets, some form of proximity insta heal, gen speed boost, built in windows in one class, sprint burst in another and made for this in another, have to complete 8 gens not 10 like it would make sense, 3 hatches, 3 exit gates, flash light saves, pallet saves and now herbs that remove hook states or inta kill.
Killers have:
Their powers they always have that have some buffs, some crappy class system that really is total garbage, kick gens and they just regress after taking some measly amount off, break pallets at the same slow speed, vault at the same slow speed and wow the herbs make you faster.
I don’t know when you lay it all out it doesn’t seem all that balanced especially after waiting 10-20 minutes for a match to load in find one survivor and 2 gens pop and it’s over in 3-5 minutes.
Where is the build in pop or deadlock or some sort of incentive and why is not actually double the amount of gens there is in 1v4?
idk if I’ll play this game mode again if there isn’t some serious balance updates.Killers being able to work together as a team, is considered such an exciting thing by itself, that the survivor side needed to be given a whole bunch of unbalanced stuff that could never exist in 1v4. And it STILL doesn’t make the killer queue times actually good.
As in, survivors really should have been given even MORE overpowered stuff to help balance the queue times. And Legion should have been nerfed so they aren’t chaining so many hits. BHVR should have gone overboard and made it twice as survivor sided as it is now.Because really, if 2v8 was twice as survivor sided as it is now, then maybe the killer queue times would be 5 minutes or 4 minutes. 2v8 is definitely not at risk of having a killer shortage, if the survivor side is boosted further.
-
@Mandy said:
I'll jump in here right away to try to reassure you, if any feature that's implemented changes kill rates drastically and in a negative manner (as you know we aim for approx 60% kill rate), we will make adjustments as necessary. These are QoL features, so focusing on game health and enjoyment, these are not balancing changes as such.
I’m just worried that the QoL changes will make one side feel better, and as a consequence it will make the other side feel 1,000 times worse.
The vast majority of the anti-slugging suggestions on these forums want to punish killers for slugging, even if the survivors are forcing the killer to slug. And we know survivors would do this, because during the base kit unbreakable PTB, survivors were weaponing slugging, by bringing entire builds dedicated to forcing the killer to slug, and then laughing as the killers got punished for slugging.
And the same thing applies to anti-tunneling. How is that supposed to work, but also prevent survivors from weaponizing it, just like how survivors currently weaponize DS by having the recently unhooked survivor aggressively bodyblock and harass the killer?
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3887116#Comment_3887116
You mean when all 4 survivors are down? Ever since hooks can respawn, are there really places where survivors can place themselves that make hook sunreachable?
- Hooks don't respawn instantly.
- Even when hooks respawn, if all the survivors purposely get knocked down in the same spot, they aren't all in range of separate hooks. And at least one of them will bleed out by the time you can hook 1 of them, wait for them to die, then wait for the hook to respawn, so you can hook the next survivor.
- We still have people burning "basement in shack" offerings with badham offerings, then purposely standing in the basement where they literally can't be hooked.
- We still have survivors sabotaging hooks, which forces the killer to drop the survivor, and by the time the hook respawns the survivor has moved far away enough from it, and has enough wiggle progress, that the killer literally can't hook them.
- We still have slugged survivors purposely crawling away to hide, so the killer can't find them.
- We still have games where a killer is forced to slug the 1st survivor because the 2nd survivor is trying for a pallet/flashlight/flashbang save. Then the killer is forced to slug the 2nd survivor because the 3rd survivor is trying for a pallet/flashlight/flashbang save. Then the killer is forced to slug the 3rd survivor because the 4th survivor is trying for a pallet/flashlight/flashbang save. Yes, there are games where survivors force the killer to slug over and over and over.
- We still have games where a killer is forced to slug a survivor that has boil over and flip flop, and by the time the killer can actually pick up the survivor, they've crawled away for a hook far enough, and has enough flip flop progress, that the killer can't get them to a hook
- We still have games where a killer is forced to slug a survivor that has power struggle and flip flop, and by the time the killer can actually pick up the survivor, they've crawled under a pallet, and has enough flip flop progress, that the killer can't get them to a hook
- When all the survivors are slugged, there is often more than one of them that has never been hooked, and it's not safe to hook them, because they might self-unhook and then pick up their teammates. As in, there's a legitimate reason to keep those survivors slugged.
- We still have games where 1 survivor can't be picked up, but the other 3 survivors can be hooked, but all 4 survivors purposely crawl on top of each other so the killer can't reliably pick up the 3 survivors that can be hooked.
-
@CautionaryMary said:
@bazarama , more us v. them yawn - people play how they play, it doesn't matter. I see the same gen regression perks people begroan are ruined. If they were as weak as they were, they wouldn't be seen predominantly in most games.
@Coffeecrashing , why do you feel like a slugged survivor should come crawling to you when you've already wasted their time by four minute bleeding them out?
If the survivors are intentionally not using the surrender option, why is it on the onus for them to simply give up when the playstyle itself is problematic to the majority? Solo-queue.
I hope that in the future, many survivors will learn to counter the specific playstyle and learn to not simply give up as the killer has chosen to simply utilize tactics that only affect the side without comms. 😊
I'm not expecting for survivors to do anything.
I'm expecting the game not to punish me, when survivors purposely place themselves in situations where I'm forced to slug them. The giant double standard is when people say "slugging is a problem and needs to be fixed", they only want it fixed for survivors. And if the killer is forced to slug, they still want the killer punished for it.
If slugging is fixed, it should be fixed for both sides of the game. Slugging is frustrating for the killer, when the survivors force them to slug.
-
I completely stopped playing this killer because they recently heavily nerfed her by changing her chase music.
It was a completely unnecessary nerf, and purposely changing her music to make it way harder to hear survivors, is anti-QoL, and it's completely awful.
-
I’m hoping the changes to maps and keys make it so they don’t actually interact with hatch at all.
Keys being able to unlock hatch, just encourages survivors to bring them in selfish lone wolf builds, where they wait for their teammates to die, so they can escape as the last survivor.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
I believe they're very intent on keeping that 4% chance mechanic, and will try pretty much everything else first and only as a lost resort will finally ditch it.
Part of the reason no doubt is all the connected game elements that would have to be messed with in doing so. The time and resources that would be needed to do that is not negligible, and then there's the problem of related challenges and in particular Achievements and Trophy's.
I really wish BHVR would make a public announcement that achievements and trophies will never ever take priority over game balance decisions.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3887025#Comment_3887025
How could they spite the killer that way when the killer simply has the option to hook the slugged survivors? The survivors not surrendering wouldn't really be spiting in that case.
The killer doesn’t always have the option the hook the survivor. That’s the biggest problem with these anti-slugging conversations. Too many people assume that killers always 100% of the time can hook survivors.
Survivors can purposely place themselves in situations where the killer can’t hook them, and the killer shouldn’t be punished when this happens.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3887010#Comment_3887010
Imagine being so biased and twisted that you think that the Survivor who gets slugged by the Killer (an action the Killer is actively doing) is doing something out of spite.
- Some slugged survivors purposely crawl away and hide, to spite the killer.
- Some survivors purposely wait at exit gates, or on top of hatches, to spite the killer.
- When the surrender option is added to the game, some survivors will purposely not use the option, to spite the killer.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3886921#Comment_3886921
I don't know how they could hard lock turn rates like that effectively, but they'd get a huge backlash for trying to.
They've already done this with Blight. He has a large angle turn nerf, which still works even if a mouse is at something ridiculous like 24,000 DPI. And yes, it did cause backlash. And if I remember correctly, it took 4 separate nerf patches before BHVR figured out how to nerf the turn rate correctly.
The only killer that is arguably still broken is Oni, because he can still 180 M2, even though he looks like he's supposed to have an M2 turn rate limit.
-
@Ghostofsnow said:
Okay, i know stuff will probably be addressed with the phase 2 stuff, but with the addition of the give up option, which is linked to 4 man slugging… whats stopping a killer from hyper fixating and camping a body? Like you're forced to go to them and try picking them up so a killer gets easy snowball potential
_____
Like I'm not saying its going to be efficient but i can very easily see this honestly increasing slug heavy playstyles due to the fact you can make the other side instantly quit, granting a win.The killer can't make anyone instantly quit, and there will still be plenty of survivors that will stay in the game the entire bleed out, just to spite the killer.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
I admit, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed so I know this could be a terrible idea, but what would be the downside if:
- The Entity would teleport a slugged Survivor to a hook after 60 seconds of being slugged.
- None of the Killers hook perks would activate when this happens and Entity teleports won’t count as a Kill but more as a bleed out currently does.
- Killer loses out on blood points and hook objectives for challenges.
- Unbreakable can be buffed by reducing the activation from 60 seconds to 45 seconds.
Survivors aren’t rewarded (by giving them base-kit Unbreakable) for losing the chase and not splitting apart to prevent slugging and Killers are pressured more to pick up and not bleed everyone out since they’ll lose out on points and objectives if they take too long.Please don’t be snarky and try to have a legitimate and constructive discussion.
It should be a 2v8 cage instead of a hook, so the survivor doesn't have the option to self-unhook.
- The Entity would teleport a slugged Survivor to a hook after 60 seconds of being slugged.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
I honestly think there won't be that many console players switching to MnK. It'll just be nice for the few that'd put in the effort to do so.
I'd imagine they also already have kill rates per-platform so they can see if there's a large discrepancy that'd indicate that a killer needs improvements on controller.
I also wondering if there could be QoL to make controllers less awful. For example, button combinations for…
- instant 90 degree turn clockwise
- instant 90 degree turn counterclockwise
- instant 180 degree turn
I honestly don't know how anyone is supposed to play a teleporting killer like Nurse or Unknown, when it takes SO LONG for a controller to make a 180 degree turn. And trying to use a controller to follow a survivor that wants to "360" around the killer, is SO AWFUL, because we aren't allowed to quickly turn with a controller.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3886560#Comment_3886560
Oh, by standing inside the killer, that makes a bit more sense. My mistake.
That's pretty easy to safeguard against, though. Just make them go invisible when overlapping with the killer or something, I feel like systems in that vein exist for a few games with intangible models.
You're still allowing survivors to bully the killer by allowing them to repeatedly run in front of the killer, shining a flashlight in the killer's face, to prevent the killer from chasing a teammate. Flashlights still force the killer to look away or take a flashlight blind, even if it's not a flashlight save.
If a survivor uses a flashlight at all, it should be considered a conspicuous action.
…Because in current DBD, if a recently unhooked survivor tries to bully a killer with a flashlight, the killer can just hit them. But you want the survivor to be immune to being hit, but still able to repeatedly shine a flashlight at the killer.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3886543#Comment_3886543
To the first: … No it doesn't. Survivors aren't big enough to actually obstruct your view like that.
To the second: Sure, but survivors can also currently do that, so we're still overall improving things considerably from the current situation by downgrading them just to that and nothing else.
- Correction… survivors can't normally obstruct almost the entire killer view, UNLESS they are intangible and can freely overlap with the killer. Intangible survivors absolutely can purposely have their survivor model overlap with the killer model, to block large portions of the camera.
-
@Bloodartist said:
Immediately after hearing about this I rushed to the forums to give my thanks to the devs… only to find the initiative quite lacking.
Can you please please please also add a surrender option to the killer? Please?
Condition is simple: There is at least one gate open and all of the survivors are in the vicinity of the open gate(s).
It was really nice that you added the original timer, but the timer is still too long in my opinion.
I utterly hate when survivors linger the maximum amount of time next to the open gate instead of exiting it, simply because they are greedy for more blood points. And as a killer I have zero incentive to go to the gate since I have zero chance of catching said survivors. The game expects me to humiliate myself even more in front of the survivors teabagging just to push them out, after an entirely humiliating match that led to this. The end result is that in such games the timer will run its full course with me waiting it out in a corner of the map since I dont want to indulge the greedy BP-grabbing of these survivors. Let me surrender in such a case to save couple minutes of everyones time. Please?That won't work, because survivors could just hide somewhere else, and run through the open exit gate near the end of the EGC.
-
@jesterkind said:
We know there's some form of anti-tunnel change/update coming in BHVR's big Quality Of Life Initiative sometime in the back half of the year, and there are two things I'm personally hoping to see there:
- Basekit Endurance changed to basekit loss of collision off hook.
Keep the Haste, that part works perfectly fine, but change the Endurance to simply being entirely intangible for the duration. This would synergise better with existing anti tunnel tools - no clearing OTR immediately if you can't hit that survivor immediately - and would be impossible to weaponise for bodyblocking, which in turn allows certain tools to be properly potent with zero risk of backfiring.
- Conspicuous Actions including any form of save.
If you get a pallet save or a flashlight save, that should count as a Conspicuous Action, just to make very sure anti tunnel can't be weaponised. I'd like to specify that I don't mean starting to use a flashlight or dropping a pallet, those are both things you could (and probably will in the latter case) do while you're being tunnelled, I mean when you successfully get someone off the killer's shoulder.
Those two changes alone would go a long way towards addressing tunnelling, and I'm sure there's plenty more that can be done on top of that too.
Being intangible means a survivor can use their post-unhook haste to repeatedly run directly in front of the killer, to completely block the killer's view of everything else.
It also means the survivor could run in front of the killer, and repeatedly try to flashlight blind the killer, to help prevent the killer from chasing a teammate.
-
@HolyDarky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3886323#Comment_3886323
@Coffeecrashing made a good point: survivors can still have more control than killers: dropping Eyrie + Badham or Autohaven + McMillen gives them a 40% chance to get their preferred maps that gives them an advantage while killers will have a 20% chance no matter what.
I can only say it again: I agree and wish the map offerings would decrease the chances for this realm instead of increasing it. For me, map offerings are the most annoying part in this game. I can understand that some players don't wanna play on specific maps but not that some need to send the other side to the most miserable one or with the best advantage.
But once the PTB with this change goes live, I hope our feedback will convince the devs to make additional changes to map offerings
Yeah. I wish map offerings made the maps less likely to happen.
Or the game should scale the 20% amongst all the survivors that brought map offerings. If only 1 survivor brings a map offering, then there could be a +20% chance that offering will be used. But if all 4 survivors bring map offerings, there should only be a +5% chance that each of those offerings will be used, so that the survivor side still collectively only has a +20% bonus.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3886176#Comment_3886176
20% for each of the four, I assume the rest of the maps have the normal weight.
Does that mean 1 - (0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8) = 59% that one of the four maps is chosen?
Because the survivor choice going from 100% to 59% doesn't sound very fair to me, when the killer choice is just flat out going from 100% to 20%.