Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@HolyDarky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865993#Comment_3865993
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3866260#Comment_3866260
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3866267#Comment_3866267
One thing that I don't really like about your suggestion is the fact that you rather want to punish the killer for doing good/keep pressure. In my opinion, the changes the developers did made slugging so much common. Two/nearly three years ago we had no big slugging problem but then the developers increased the hooktimer and introduced many strong hookperks for survivors while nerfing hookperks for killers. Don't get me wrong, I don't like mindless slugging and bleeding out either (for that we need a different solution) but instead of punishing the killer for slugging pressure, the killer should be rewarded for hooking since this will already solve the slugging problem - like I said before nothing has change that made slugging stronger, hooking got weaker and that made slugging better. Some killers like Dredge or Oni get rewarded for hooking survivors and - I think - other killers should get the same reward like Deathslinger automatically reloads for hooking a survivor. A general killer buff after hooking a survivor like 5% haste + Undetectable for 10 seconds could encourage the killer to hook the survivor and leave the area to gofer a different survivor (camping and tunnling gets also fixed). The developers should also introduce more perks that reward the killers for hooking like Firends Till The End is one of the healthiest perks in the game because it rewards hooking and denies camping and tunnling by default. We need more perks like this one. Some perks should also get a rework or tweak and reward the killer for hooking like Coup de Gras based on hooks instead of finished generators or buff Furity Chase and make it work for every hook. On the other hand, strong slugging perks and strategies should get a nerf like Knock Out or Third Seal because they give killers an unfair advantage against SoloQ.
Overall, I think buffing and rewarding hooking will solve the extremes of slugging. In the end, it will still be an option or a strategy but these situations will be okay because they are examples that Mandy gave us (slugging for pressure, slugging because someone else is there ect.)
The killer sided problem with slugging isn't that "hooks aren't valued enough". The killer sided problem is that the killer is sometimes forced to slug survivors for excessive amounts of time, and that isn't fun for either side of the game.
Teleporting slugged survivors to a 2v8 cage, fixes all the problems with excessively long slugging, because it removes it from the game. It's a good compromise for both sides of the game.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3866464#Comment_3866464
I understand what you’re saying, but I think we’re looking at different scenarios. If a killer is forced to slug a survivor because of any nearby teammates, that recovery speed does not activate. It only activates once the killer has left the slug entirely. The actual proximity range I am unsure about but using something like the anti camping feature is a possibility. If you are standing directly by the slug, this Is the equivalent of being away from the hook for anti-camp, which means It would never activate. If you are across the map, this is the equivalent of face camping, which, then it would activate. And again, it’s only for faster recovery, not a self pickup.
If you want to chase after the teammate, even if it means running across the map therefore leaving the slug unattended, there should be risk involved with that. And this still gives killer control, because they will decide if it is worth leaving the slug to try and slug someone else if they have ran far enough away to prompt the faster recovery. It gives a killer a choice if they would rather risk that slug getting up to try and get another down, or to walk back to the slug and secure the hook. Killer is still dominant in this scenario. You get to choose weather it is activated or not.
When it comes to your concerns as an M1 killer, slugging typically isn’t the best strategy regardless because of the lack of mobility. Certain killers do better with certain strategies and it’s the players choice to pick both the killer they use and the strategies they use for that killer. If you prefer to slug heavily then using a killer like Blight or Twins makes more sense. Trying to slug everyone as someone like Trapper is not going to be very effective, because that strategy doesn’t compliment his power and abilities. But that doesn’t mean that slugging itself should be made easier or that it is not deserving of some possible changes simply because some killers struggle with slugging more than others. The same reasons why certain perks or base kit suggestions that would greatly benefit Solo Q shouldn’t be added because of the power imbalance it could create in SWF.
I understand that you may have the opinion that slugging shouldn’t be touched at all, and that is a valid opinion to have as are everyone else’s. But clearly BHVR is looking into the possibility of making some changes in regards to slugging, so offering up ideas that don’t take away a killers ability to slug but making it more risky is a good place to start. My reply was directly a response to Mandy, who talked about the struggle to identify the distinction between slugging that is strategic vs. slugging for no reason. And I believe that using proximity is a valid way to make that distinction.In my scenario, the killer isn't trying to slug everyone. They are in a situation where they are forced to slug. The killer literally doesn't have the option to hook the survivor while the teammate is nearby. Killers shouldn't be punished when they literally don't have the option to hook a survivor.
And I have the opinion that if survivors are slugged for 60 seconds, they should automatically be teleported to a 2v8 cage, somewhere random on the map. That fixes the survivor-sided problem of survivors being slugged for excessive amounts of time, AND fixes the killer-sided problem of being forced to slug survivors for excessive amounts of time.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3866283#Comment_3866283
Could you explain your concern further? With proximity-based recovery, there’s no punishment for slugging and defending against a save. If you down a survivor and stay nearby to prevent a flashlight or sabo play, nothing changes. The idea only speeds up the slugs recovery if the killer leaves the area entirely.
If you slug one survivor and then cross the map to down another, you’re no longer defending the slug, which is where the increased recovery would come into play. This doesn’t give survivors a free pick-up like base Unbreakable; they still need a teammate to revive them. But it makes slugging multiple survivors more risky, unless they’re all grouped together in which it being proximity based would mean it wouldn’t affect the killer at all anyway.
If your concern is that this punishes slugging the entire team, then yes—that’s the point. The goal is to discourage full-team slugging without removing the option to slug for pressure or strategic reasons. As Mandy mentioned, there’s a difference between tactical slugging and unnecessary slugging. My idea I believe does help with this.
Defending against a save sometimes requires leaving the slugged survivor, especially if it is a low mobility M1 killer.
If a killer is forced to slug a survivor because a nearby teammate has a flashlight or toolbox, that teammate is obviously going to run away from the slugged survivor if the killer tries to chase them. You're basically saying killers should be punished if they chase after the teammate.
In this scenario, chasing after the teammate, even if it results in leaving the slugged survivor, is slugging for strategic reasons.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Even if the Healer needs to be asleep, I am not a fan of it. This means that I have to be unhooked by a Survivor who is awake in order for them to be able to safely heal me. So it is out of my control, once again, if the person unhooking me is actually smart or not and this results in me being tunneled or not.
If the person unhooking you is asleep, then you can just quickly wake them up. You will be awake because you were just unhooked. And if you're worried about being healed before you can wake up your teammate, then you can hold the shift button to prevent that.
-
@Crowman said:
Manually waking up a survivor becomes slower and slower each time you do it and nothing has stated this has been removed. Freddy has passive map pressure as survivors will have to spend time to keep themselves awake.
How many times would a survivor need to be woken up by a teammate, for it to be slower than the average time it would take to walk to an alarm clock and use the alarm clock?
Because even if it took 8 seconds for a survivor to manually wake up another survivor, that would still be faster (on average) than if the survivor woke themselves up with an alarm clock.
The alarm clocks have the potential to be Freddy's "slowdown" mechanic, but this won't work if survivors can wake each other up, or if failed skill checks can wake up survivors.
-
@VolantConch1719 said:
Survivors who go against Freddy aren't actually fully awake, they're in a state of drifting between microsleep (it's why Freddy can actually interact with them in the first place and what the timers on their portrait represent). It's not unlikely that Freddy's powers can hit them in this state, considering how he hunted Nancy in the aisles. It's actually got more validity than the popular suggestion of reverting him to manually putting people to sleep, which is something that Freddy has NEVER ONCE done in any of the movies.
I'd normally agree that any alarm clock waking you up is bad, but the fact that Freddy will be able to teleport to sleeping Survivors who are healing kind of necessitates being awake before you heal, which will probably start wearing on the clocks. It'll have to be a "wait and see" thing.
There is nothing that states how many tokens there are anywhere in the post. They do what you fear, or they may increase the number of tokens, or they may keep the tokens separate, or they may do both. We don't know until the PTB how this will work.
I don't think the snares will have tokens anymore. The dev update made it seem like they are going to move like a projectile, instead of being stationary?
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865993#Comment_3865993
What if proximity determined the type of slugging happening? When a survivor is downed and another waits nearby for a flashlight save, the killer typically stays close to defend the pick-up. You’ll check the surrounding area, hit the survivor with the flashlight who typically runs away injured, and then secure the down.
A possible solution is proximity-based recovery? If the killer stays within a certain range of the slug nothing changes—allowing them to defend the down as usual. But if the killer moves away, similar to the anti-camping mechanic, (but reverse because it’s not the closer you are it’s the farther you are) the slug’s recovery speeds up. The farther the killer is, the faster the survivor recovers, but only once the killer is outside a set distance.
This way, killers can still defend slugs against saves, but slugging the whole team now becomes harder and riskier, but still not impossible.
Killers are sometimes forced to slug survivors, and your idea would punish killers when they are forced to slug a survivor.
-
@Mandy said:
This is an interesting discussion, I think there has to be some distinction as well between slugging for pressure in a match, which most people don't seem to mind, and slugging for no reason - when you slug survivors at 5 gens or something. Also, you down someone, see someone hanging around with a flashlight, so you down them - one of them is naturally going to be slugged for some length of time…whatever "solution" there is to slugging has to take those factors into consideration (if there's even a solution for slugging).
@Yggleif I also remember those days, so you're not remembering incorrectly. It was either a straight up trade on the hook, or you needed a couple of survivors to be able to make a successful save.
I wish more people cared about the scenarios where the killer is tactically supposed to have survivors bleed out on the ground, either because the survivors placed themselves in situations where the killer can't reliably get them to a hook, or the survivors placed themselves in situations where the killer shouldn't even attempt to pick them up. There are also scenarios where a survivor bleeds out on the ground because they purposely crawled away and hid in some random part of the map. Slugging has issues on both sides of the game, but we often only hear about how slugging negatively affects survivors.
I still think the only slugging solution that fixes the problems on both sides of the game, is for a survivor to get teleported to a 2v8 cage if they have been slugged for 60 seconds.
This is the only solution I've seen that fixes the slugging issues for survivors AND killers.
-
I think most of the ragequitting starts happening while all 4 survivors are still alive.
And if ragequitting happens when there are less than 4 survivors, the #1 reason is because another survivor already ragequit that game.
-
The only change I want is for a teleport cancel to have the full cooldown timer. Because I’m really not looking forward to a bunch of new Freddy players that spam 99% teleports every few seconds.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865209#Comment_3865209
That's a good point, and it's something I've thought needs to be addressed for a long time. I think there's often a pretty big disconnect with how the developers view the survivor role and how the community views the role. The community seems to view it as more of a team-based PVP game, whereas the developers seem to view it as a survival horror individual experience where you may or may not work with others. It leads to some seemingly bizarre design decisions.
Survivor MMR needs to be largely individual based instead of team based, so the entire hatch mechanic doesn't fall apart.
If survivor MMR was primarily team based, and a game was a 1k, it would basically say the last survivor lost the game, regardless of they were sacrificed, or if they escaped through the hatch, or if they escaped through a gate.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864957#Comment_3864957
I think you have to realize, that tunneling is making some people's games miserable. There are even people going out of their way to check profiles to tunnel the one with the least amount of hours. Does that help them win? More often than not it does.
Does it make it less, excuse my wording here, disgusting? No.
Again, you do what you do. But dont expect sympathy from people that you either tunneled or people here that try to tackle tunneling as a problem.
- Survivor A is hooked
- Survivor B uses the perk on Survivor A
- Survivor B is hooked
- Survivor B is unhooked
- Survivor B is hooked and sacrificed
In the above scenario, Survivor B was only hooked twice, AND that survivor willingly used STB to take a hook state from someone else. Are you really going to count that as "bad tunneling"?
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864957#Comment_3864957
My argument is the perk isn't anti-tunnel, because when SWFs bring multiple copies of this perk, tunneling and not tunneling needs to the same outcome (the hook states being spread out).There's a lot of problems with this.
1: All anti-tunnel perks can get value whether the killer tunnels or not. Just because a perk has a primary purpose doesn't mean that needs to be the only time it comes up. Babysitter can help a survivor get away from a tunneling killer, but it can also be generally helpful.
Another example would be how Unbreakable and We're Going to Live Forever can help out against a killer who is dedicated slugging, but they can also be situationally useful.
StB is best if you have a hard tunneling killer. You still might get value out of it against a non-hard tunneling killer, but that's basically true of all perks.
You brought up earlier the idea of a perk that stuns the killer for 60 seconds if they tunnel - hypothetically that's the level of power a perk would need if it could only truly be used in one instance, but it would also be a horribly designed guessing game perk.
2: StB carries a fair amount of risk for the use it gives. If the survivor brings it and they are tunneled, no use. If the killer wasn't tunneling but is spreading hooks and gets an exposed down the perk helped the killer. Even against a hard tunneling killer, the exposed might negate the ability to body block.
3: Same outcome tunnel or not. The daisy chain argument doesn't make sense in a non-tunnel scenario, like every time you've laid out a scenario multiple people have pointed out how it doesn't make sense and I'm really trying to understand it. If you tunnel the perk counters it, which is its purpose along with a lot of other perks, and if you don't tunnel you're spreading hooks around anyway. Like as killer are you just standing at the hook downing people after they come in for the rescue, hooking them, and then just standing there?
The best I can come up with for a non-tunnel situation where you have 2 hooks, 1 hook, 1 hook, and 0 hooks, and the final survivor is the one who saves the first person, but that's not daisy chaining, still falls on the perks intended purpose, other non-tunnel perks could still be used in this scenario, and we really need to know how the final survivor changed up their playstyle to accommodate the perk.
If this change was made, then a killer would actually be better off targeting a survivor that used this perk, instead of continuing to tunnel the same survivor over and over.But why shouldn't survivors be able to fight against killers desire to tunnel? This change would basically make the one survivor the target of 'please tunnel me' in this set up.
- Survivor A is hooked
- Survivor B uses the perk on Survivor A
- Survivor B is hooked
- Survivor C uses the perk on Survivor B
The above scenario is basically saying "don't chase survivor A, but don't chase survivor B either". If survivors want to protect one survivor from being tunneled, that that is ok, but we shouldn't have a "let's simultaneously protect 2 or 3 survivors from being tunneled" situation.
Daisy chaining this perk, is basically saying that unless the killer is literally using their first 4 hooks on 4 different survivors, then they are tunneling. That is way too overboard for a definition of tunneling.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864876#Comment_3864876
If you like to do it, do it. You bought the game, you can do what you want (if you dont cheat or hack).
We here stand for improving the overall gameplay experience. Tunneling, camping, slugging, gen rushing and stacking stuff that is way too strong leads to a negative experience for most people. Therefore you will not convince us that tunneling is good or that Shoulder the burden needs to be nerfed. I personally see tunneling as a necessarey evil in SOME situations and i think most people can agree to that. If the survivors have a huge advantage in terms of objective, it is only logical for the killer to try to create some pressure. If people go into a match to tunnel, that is not the killer being in a bad spot though. They dont know if tunneling is necessary at all. They just do it regardless.Please consider this: You dont have to make sure the others have fun. However, you dont have to make their experience miserable either.
If I'm purposely doing strategies for the intention of winning the game, that is 100% acceptable. I tunnel because it helps me win, and that is acceptable.
What is not fine, is when people do things with the intention of making other players miserable. Yes, there is a big difference here.
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864875#Comment_3864875
At the moment I'm just trying to follow what your argument is. You started off in this thread talking about killers not intentionally tunneling, and now you seem to be throwing away your own example to focus on the hard tunnel.
StB is an anti-tunnel perk. It's one of many in the game. Compared to the tools that already exist, it seems pretty weak. Reassurance could just keep a survivor on the hook, babysitter allows the survivor to get away, etc. And those perks don't require the user to stay under death hook, give an exposed, or require more than one survivor to run them.
The one time StB seems to shine is a killer who absolutely commits to the hard tunnel, which is exactly what the perk is designed to counter, so I don't see the problem.
My argument is the perk isn't anti-tunnel, because when SWFs bring multiple copies of this perk, tunneling and not tunneling leads to the same outcome (the hook states being spread out). The killer isn't better off if they avoid tunneling, with the only exception of quickly throwing someone else on a hook and then immediately going right back to the tunnel.
My argument is the perk shouldn't be allowed to daisy chain, which means that if a survivor uses the perk on someone else, then they should be ineligible on having someone use the perk on them. If this change was made, then a killer would actually be better off targeting a survivor that used this perk, instead of continuing to tunnel the same survivor over and over.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864831#Comment_3864831
That is subjective. Id enjoy getting tunneled if I get 6 tries at it.
How about just not tunneling? If the result is the same, but not tunneling leads to a more fun experience, then go for it!"Not tunneling" doesn't lead to a more fun experience for me. This is a PvP game, and it's acceptable to try to win in a PvP game.
Just an FYI, none of you will ever convince me that it's more fun to not tunnel, or that I shouldn't tunnel. Let's just make that 100% clear. Saying "just don't tunnel" is an unacceptable solution for me.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864809#Comment_3864809
Others have covered issues here, but I want to lay out the details
If StB didn't exist, you'd have three hooks states spread between survivors, A, B, and C
With StB you'd have three hook states, spread between survivors B, C, and D.
Your scenario here doesn't make sense, the survivors have three wasted perk sluts to move a a hook state from A to D. Presuming you got even a single down due to the exposed, you as killer have benefited substantially.
If StB didn't exist, I would be trying to hook the same survivor 3 times in a row. This scenario is showing that the perk doesn't really discourage tunneling, because tunneling and not tunneling leads to the same outcome.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864838#Comment_3864838
Isn't that just the same as very aggressive players without Shoulder The Burden, and wouldn't you counter it the same way as normal?
IE, you just ignore them and force them to waste time running around behind you and trying to get your attention.
I don't deny that they're kinda annoying to face and I don't deny that they'd probably bring StB as one of their perk choices here, but I don't see StB actually changing anything about this situation or its counterplay.
It also still doesn't mean the perk itself is overpowered or capable of harming killers that don't tunnel.
How exactly is "If the killer hooks the same survivor twice in a row, then stun the killer for 60 seconds" weaponizable by survivors?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864834#Comment_3864834
I wouldn't, because there's a genuine detriment there if survivors are capable of weaponising it, which they probably could the way you're describing it.
In this scenario, there's no detriment. You just get a normal game. It's not just that you don't need to tunnel, it's also that the situation you're describing isn't actually negative for the killer.
Some SWFs are weaponizing shoulder the burden. They'll have 1 survivor with chase perks and anti-tunnel perks, and that person will repeatedly be baiting the killer, or standing nearby with a flashlight/flashbang/toolbox if the killer tries to chase someone else, or aggressively bodyblocking if the killer tries to chase someone else.
These SWFs absolutely want the killer to tunnel the 1 survivor with all chase/anti-tunnel perks, and are actively trying to make that happen.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864831#Comment_3864831
Good?
That sounds fine to me. Tunnelling and not tunnelling lead to the same outcome, which is that survivors aren't taken out of the game early. That sounds like it's working.
If individual players get annoyed, that's on them, it's not a flaw with the perk.
As an aside, you "might as well" just focus on spreading your pressure instead, since you can't get the benefit of tunnelling. If you can't take the shortcut, honing your fundamentals is a good idea. There's no real incentive to keep tunnelling, it's just what you personally prefer doing.
Honestly, if there was a survivor perk that said "If the killer hooks the same survivor twice in a row, then stun the killer for 60 seconds", I believe you would think that's fine, because the killer could have "just not tunneled" to avoid it.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864809#Comment_3864809
I think @Firellius and @jesterkind already said what I was about to type.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864827#Comment_3864827
+1
If you didnt tunnel, and they used the perk spreading hooks, which also lead to no tunnel, then you lost nothing and they gained nothing. The perk worked, yes, but in the long run it did nothing. If where able to get an insta down, it was even detrimental.
Overall, the perk punishes tunneling. Tunneling is strong but awful to play against. A game is supposed to be fun. The perk is a win in my book.
When SWFs stack this perk, tunneling and not tunneling leads to the same outcome.
Therefore, I might as well tunnel, because tunneling doesn't punish me more than not tunneling. This perk fails to actually discourage tunneling. It just results in a survivor getting hooked 5 or 6 times in the same game, which causes the survivors to get way more frustrated than if they were tunneled out at 3 hooks.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864822#Comment_3864822
Obviously, yes, but that isn't what we're discussing here.
Therefore, it is harmful to killers, when a perk can require 5 or 6 hooks before a survivor is eliminated from the game, because the killer would have been better off if they could have eliminated a survivor in 3 or 4 hooks.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864809#Comment_3864809
Isn't this just like, fine, though? Isn't this still just progressing your objective the same way as if you'd been spreading hooks from the start and this perk wasn't in play? You still have three hook states, you've still used up resources, you've still dragged people off generators to come save…
I don't see how this is a bad outcome for killers at all, that's the part I'm confused about. Can't speak to anyone else responding to you, but that's where I'm struggling to understand your argument.
Honest question. Do you believe that tunneling a survivor out of the game in 3 hooks, is beneficial for killers?
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864618#Comment_3864618
Don't tunnel in the first place???
- I hook survivor A
- Survivor B uses the perk on survivor A
- I hook survivor B
- Survivor C uses the perk on survivor B
- I hook survivor C
- Survivor D uses the perk on survivor C
In the above scenario, I haven't tunneled at all, and the survivors still used the perk 3 times to spread the hook states. This means the perk doesn't actually discourage tunneling, because tunneling and not tunneling leads to the same result.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864424#Comment_3864424
If tunneling hasn't happened, how does this perk effect you in a negative way?
I understand, that not all tunneling is intentional and that sometimes obe just find the same survivor by chance.
If you don't tunnel, then you shouldn't have a problem with going for many hook stages. Therefore this perk, that allows the survivors to make the killer go for many hook stages, should not be much of a problem to you.
Am I missing something?
You're missing the part that when a SWF stacks this perk, it just ends up making everyone unhappy. Do you know how much complaining survivors do when I throw someone on a hook 5 or 6 times in the same game?
Because when a coordinated SWF uses this perk, they will stack the perk if I hook the same person multiple times, and they will daisy chain the perk if I instead hook the person that used this perk. This means that it doesn't matter which people I hook, because the hook states will get spread out regardless of what I do, so I might as well just continue tunneling.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864576#Comment_3864576
Counter play to what?
I've seen you talk about this a few times in different threads and to my recollection you've never actually outlined what's supposed to be bad for the killer about this situation. What exactly is harming killers here?
I'm genuinely curious, I have no idea what you're referring to here.
Increasing the number of hooks it takes for the killer to eliminate one of the survivors, is bad for the killer.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864527#Comment_3864527
You've mentioned people "daisy chaining" the perk twice now, but does that actually like… do anything?
If you're not trying to tunnel whoever it was used on, surely that just kinda shuffles around the hook states without it changing anything about how close you are to winning or how much time you're investing, right?
-
To the wider point, I think Shoulder The Burden is an interesting example for demonstrating the difference between saying a perk is going to be very strong, and saying a perk is going to shake up the meta.
StB's effect is, unambiguously, exceptionally strong anti-tunnel. It even does a little in some scenarios where the killer isn't tunnelling, though considerably less. It being very strong doesn't mean people are actually going to run it, though- the need for a little coordination and the lengthy Exposed make it unpopular even though it is very good.
That being said, since it is specifically an anti-tunnel perk, I would like to see it be a little easier to use. Changing the Exposed to an aura read would be a good way of still taking aggro from a tunnelling killer but giving lesser-skilled and solo queue players a significantly easier time actually lasting with that aggro on them.
“The killer could just make their first 4 hooks on 4 different survivors” is unacceptable counter play. It’s an unacceptable expectation.
-
The perk is overtuned in coordinated SWFs, where more than one survivor is equipping the perk.
Killers at the MMR soft cap, should be seeing a decent amount of games where the survivors are stacking and daisy chaining the perk.
Killers at low or average MMR, or solo q survivors, probably won’t see a lot of games with the perk being stacked.
-
I'm still having games where multiple survivors bring this perk, and they are purposely stacking or daisy chaining the perk. And they will use the perk even if tunneling hasn't happened in that game.
And yes, this also happens when I’m playing the event mode.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863939#Comment_3863939
Mate, the deviation is literally not that much. Unless you're going for cross map pelting, we can hit with 80ish accuracy from the top of rpd stairs to the doorway (with vecna, don't know if each killer is actually different). And these are semi moving targets.
Sooooooo, that might be what's happening.
Snowballs might be based off of a survivor's height, so the different killer heights are actually offsetting the snowballs, because a killer's height affects their camera height, which means it's more difficult to use snowballs with tall killers than with average height killers.
-
@notyarbllewe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863947#Comment_3863947
Been fine for me! It's just harder to hit when you are running around, as well as balancing the height. But when standing still or following straight behind, they've been perfectly straight for me the entire event so far.
I don't think it's realistic to expect killers to throw snowballs when it's that much harder to hit. I shouldn't have a thrown snowball drop straight to the ground, and then when I move my camera a tiny bit, the next snowball flies way over a survivor's head.
-
@notyarbllewe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863939#Comment_3863939
I mean, I play killer a lot and the snowballs are fine for me!
Do you honestly think that snowballs are equally accurate for survivors and killers?
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863880#Comment_3863880
I'm not most people. I'm exactly and only me. If I notice the killer looking around for a hook I will crawl under one. Sometimes I did this when being bledout, too, but to no effect. A lot of suggested solutions I see boil down to instant sacrifice as soon as it is a 2v1. Well, not really, but might as well. Furthermore, I'm not advocating for any specific solution but merely trying to establish the problem. Being unable to do much of anything and thus nothing happening for >6min (worst case) with an average gametime of 10min is absurd.
Having empathy on the slugging issue, would mean caring about how slugging has problems on both sides of the game. If you are going to ask other people to have empathy, then you should be showing empathy for both sides of the game.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863847#Comment_3863847
...idk what to tell you except maybe aim better?
Please play a game as killer, and throw 5 snowballs without moving your camera at all, and notice that the snowballs literally fly in multiple different directions, because BHVR purposely made them super inaccurate.
I know how to aim. When I'm playing survivor, I can easily hit a moving snowman, while I'm running, at a decent range… because the survivor snowballs are very accurate.
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863864#Comment_3863864
Yes, I know. Like 5k BP and apparently a massive ego boost. My point is you can earn a lot more BP in that time. I can't offer you a replacement for the boost though.
If you are still waiting for an argument against 4k-slugging I suggest you read up on empathy. The way it plays out is stupid. Which you troll already know, too.
The empathy argument isn't valid, because both sides of the game aren't being considered. Slugging has issues on BOTH sides of the game, but instead of addressing both sides, most people want to focus 100% on the slugging issues that affect survivors, and 0% on the slugging issues that affect killers.
Survivors will sometimes be in situations were the killer can't reliably hook them, especially when the survivors are purposely bringing specific perks or items to place themselves in situations where they can't be hooked. But most of the "solutions" to slugging will punish killers if they are in a situation where they can't reliably hook a sruvivor.
And this is why I keep suggesting for survivors to get teleported to a 2v8 cage if they have been slugged for a minute. It fixes the slugging issues on BOTH sides of the game.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863811#Comment_3863811
There's literally snowballs to throw at each other for nothing more than point and hi five snowmen that body block better than zombies…if it isn't realistic to expect a little more casual play in here we give no hope for anyone
Have you tried hitting something with a snowball, as killer? Did you know killer snowballs fly in random directions, so it’s near impossible to hit something with a killer snowball unless the killer is like super close? The game literally forbids the killer from having any fun snowball fights.
-
The event was never marketed as a casual mode, and that is not a realistic expectation.
Also, this event mode often has a higher incentive than the normal mode, so it’s perfectly acceptable for anyone to join this event mode.
-
@CursedPerson said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863244#Comment_3863244
This is a bad idea it completely gets rid of the uniqueness of the perk the whole point of it was to get stronger by taking hits. making it endurance based completely changes the identity of the perk making it a weak anti tunnel perk that forces you to jump in front of a survivor multiple times which would probably only end up benefiting swfs. MoM is a weak perk with or without a going down from full health or injured but youre trying to say all perks should do the same thing.
I'm saying the perk should either stay exactly the same as it is, or it should be changed to an endurance perk. I'm also saying the perk should never ever have a more powerful custom effect, like "endurance but with zero downsides".
-
@BorisDDAA said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863417#Comment_3863417
Yawn
Finding excuses even for snowballs. I aim when I'm close
Does that sound like a fun snowball fight? The killer just mashing the snowball button in melee range?
The game literally forbids the killer from having any fun snowball fights.
-
@BorisDDAA said:
I legit have only seen a handful of killers/survivors in the whole event interacting with the event stuff and that's when they're both doing it. Everyone else just plays normally or super sweaty. At certain hours games become so miserable, especially in solo queue.
Have you tried hitting something with a snowball, as killer? Did you know killer snowballs fly in random directions, so it’s near impossible to hit something with a killer snowball unless the killer is like super close?
How are killers expected to have fun with snowballs, when the killer snowballs are purposely made horrible?
Meanwhile, survivor snowballs are so accurate that I can hit a moving snowman, while I’m running, from a very decent range.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863244#Comment_3863244
it's designed to stack with other endurance perks. nobody is running the perk. it is just there to be there. if they made the perk gain stacks by unhooking like original iteration in the ptb and did the change in my previous post, it would be in a stronger position but i think bvhr does not want to buff the perk due it's release iteration. i imagine that a lot of player in new player of dbd have no idea what this perk used to be.
I think BHVR's logic is that it's currently a niche perk, that has some very enthusiastic fans, and killers aren't complaining about it, so it should just stay as it is.
And if BHVR really wanted another "shield a survivor from a hit" perk, they could just make a new one instead.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863234#Comment_3863234
endurence was in the game long ago before mettle of man was added to the game. the perk was specific designed to counter any and all hits in its first iteration. it got shadow nerfed. it's only counter is suppose to be machine gun and nothing else. still it's pretty bad perk.
it would likely be better if it triggered on 3rd hit even if that hit would down you. for example if you have 1 stack and you take 2 protection hits. the second protection gives stack & allows you to tank that hit. that would likely make the perk stronger.
BHVR literally tried to update this perk to modern standards, by turning it into an endurance perk, and completely removing the custom status effect. If the perk were ever to be changed again, it absolutely should be to changed back to endurance, so that it doesn't stack with other endurance perks, and so it deactivates on a conspicuous action.
And it doesn't matter what the previous version was designed to do, because many other perks have been nerfed even though they did exactly what they were designed to do.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863168#Comment_3863168
But that's the thing, it's not "endurance with zero downsides", it has to be earned by taking multiple protection hits and staying alive long enough to do that too. Most games with Mettle of Man do not result in even getting 3 protection hits and I genuinely cannot remember the last time I got hit by it as killer.
"Endurance with zero downsides" would've been a better description for the old Buckle Up + FTP. That was genuinely unfair and it had to be nerfed. Mettle of Man comes nowhere close to that and still wouldn't even if this change was made.
The effect is "endurance with zero downsides". The trigger condition is "earned by taking multiple protection hits". Effects and trigger conditions are two very separate things.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863149#Comment_3863149
And why exactly is that a bad thing? If there really is some other similar issue with another perk that needs fixing then why is it bad to make an exception? And I'm not only saying this about survivor perks, this includes killer perks too. As long as perk descriptions are clear about how they work I don't see an issue with it if there's a good reason for it.
Also, Mettle's protection effect already is unique as it is in that it doesn't cause deep wound, there's no other perk that can do that.
Mettle's effect, that was create a way long time ago, and isn't anything like other perk effects, is unique. But that doesn't mean the perk has a free pass to be anything else that is unique.
If the Mettle perk was originally created today, it would have had the endurance effect, for the sake of consistency. Mettle is only allowed to keep the inconsistent wording because like zero people complained that the inconsistent effect was unfair for killers. But there absolutely 100% would be lots of complaining if BHVR created "endurance but with zero downsides" as an effect.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863125#Comment_3863125
Needing 3 protection hits is enough of an activation requirement to justify that effect. Most of the time it doesn't even happen at all. The change OP is asking for barely changes the perk's strength and would not matter at all in probably 99% of games, it simply removes one frustrating element of the perk and that's it. It's not like it would be any easier to activate the perk in the first place.
And if a special exception is made for the Mettle perk, then a bunch of people would complain that the special exception they want for a different perk "barely changes the perk's strength", and their favorite perk should get an exception just like Mettle did.
Making a special exception, that "would not matter at all in probably 99% of games", is not worth doing… especially if the special exception would cause a lot of complaints about other perks.
-
@CursedPerson said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863091#Comment_3863091
MoM shields you from going to down, its a different effect, and they could easily change it to also shield you from going down from healthy
Perks shouldn't ever have special custom effects like that, especially when it's literally "I want endurance but with 0% downsides".
Mettle only has the current effect because it was created a very long time ago, and people aren't complaining that it's too powerful. But giving the perk "endurance but with 0% downsides", would just open the floodgates for people to ask for special exceptions for other perks.
-
@CursedPerson said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3862885#Comment_3862885
Ok thank you I was trying to remember why the 2 hit version was so bad(the wiki did not mention that). I cant believe they made it disable on conspicuous action, another reason why it being bad on endurance 2 hits is because the killer could immediately get rid of hit by hitting you off hook.
MoM should protect you from healthy not just from injured to anyone else that was unclear
"Protect you from healthy" would mean endurance, and endurance would mean it deactivates on a conspicuous action.
-
@radicalboons said:
didnt we have MoM nerfed cause it was too strong? i feel like this could get too strong. i agree something should be done about it cause its weak but endurance perks are already pretty strong as a whole.
There was a version that granted endurance, but so many survivors complained that it was a nerf, that it got reverted.
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3862172#Comment_3862172
I'm not interested in the technical aspects behind those things tbh.
A bunch of killer mains on these forums who aren't you love making the comparison between teabagging and slugging for the 4k, and that note was made for them.
You're wrong about which of the two is worse for the game overall, but at least you understand that they're different, so that note wasn't for you.
Those things really shouldn’t be compared to each other, because one of them helps the killer raise their kill rate, it the other doesn’t really help the survivor lower the kill rate.
For reals, slugging for the 4k should be compared to survivors using voice comms for extra game advantages, or flashlight saves, or hook sabotages, or anything else that is unfun for killers AND helps survivors lower the kill rate.
-
@TheSubstitute said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861770#Comment_3861770
But that's simply not true for the majority of people. If it were true then gankers and twinks would be the majority in MMORPGs and they're not. And you still haven't directly answered my question; do you enjoy it when you get stomped by Survivors? Or is it you only enjoy it if you get to stomp?
Your question isn't worded correctly. This isn't a "people only have fun if they win 100% of their games" situation.
This is a "DBD needs to be allow lopsided games to occur, so that everyone has their turn at having memorable games that were lopsided in their favor". I'm putting a lot of stress on the EVERYONE GETS TO HAVE THEIR TURN part.
It's the same concept as Roguelite games, where some of the most memorable games, was when all the RNG stars aligned, and the game offered a player everything they wanted, and that player just stomped through that entire game. Of course, these games are purposely designed so that every game isn't a stomp-fest, because that would be too boring. The games are carefully designed so that JUST ENOUGH of the games are stomp-fests, that they become memorable experiences.
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861947#Comment_3861947
Can you please stop constantly replying "Being stunned is not fun" as if I was suggesting to stun killers just because I love being evil or whatever. I have literally only been playing killer for the past 2 years, thanks for reminding me 3 times in a row that a killer does not like losing control of their character for 5 sec, but I actually know. The part I would like you to notice is, that there's a distinction between an unavoidable 5 sec stun that can trigger reliably without the other side being able to prevent it, which is absolutely NOT what I suggest, and a stun that happens as reward for preparing a setup and outplaying your opponent.
If you're getting stunned by Blast Mine, the survivor HAS outplayed you, it means either you constantly kick the same gen and failed to find the survivor who is sneaking to repair it, or it means the survivor has purposefully left the gen at 90% as bait (hence soft thrown the game) just to see your reaction when getting blast mined. If you think that's not a "fun" interaction, then don't complain when survs only end up doing gens and leave, because that's ultimately what the game will come down to as both sides never want to recognize any sort of outplay from the other.
It's a valid take to not like Blast Mine, fun is subjective, but saying it is not a fun perk just because "it's not fun to get stunned", would be like a killer running into every pallet on the map then complain that pallets are not fun. Yes the stun itself is not fun but you're totally ignoring the whole interaction that precedes the stun and that is the reason for the object to exist.
A killer getting hit with Blast Mine is not an outplay.
Kicking a generator, while being fully aware that it might have a Blast Mine, is sometimes the correct and best decision. “Don’t kick generators” is not a valid counter play, especially when the benefit of a generator regressing is more important than the penalty of Blast Mine.
There isn’t any skillful decision making happening here for the killer. If a killer gets hit by a Blast Mine, it doesn’t mean they made the wrong game choice. The killer was still supposed to have kicked that generator regardless.