Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014308#Comment_4014308
If we based everything off of loudness of feedback, we'd have a very different game.
I did not say minor changes, I said simple.
They are not the same thing.
By that logic, reverting the PTB was a simple change that fixed the system.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014292#Comment_4014292
Very untrue.
Simple number tweaks would have fixed the system.
Incorrect. Considering the massive amount of backlash and negative feedback it got, minor changes absolutely would not have fixed the system.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014247#Comment_4014247
They needed adjustments, which could've been tested on the PTB.
Instead, the screeching and crying won over, BHVR instantly pulled them, and I doubt we'll be seeing them for quite a long time.
They needed way more than minor adjustments that could be quickly figured out. They were so far out of control, that they need massive reworks.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014200#Comment_4014200
I wouldn't say the majority. At least not anymore since the changes. But I also don't think it's a rare thing either.
Those are two different arguments. Ragequitting is a symptom of what I already said is the biggest issue: a lack of fun. There are multiple ways you can express that. I'd say most of us here would know exactly what I'm talking about when I say, "play one trial, sit in the menus for an hour". There's also ways to give up in the trial without leaving, including sitting on a gen until you're ripped off of it, antagonizing the Killer for fun, sandbagging, refusing to touch gens and focusing on side objectives only, AFKing, etc.
As to why they stay, Survivors are historically resilient. Those first two weeks of 6.1.0 were BRUTAL and yet they still queued up. Even now with all of these anti-health health changes, they're still queueing up. A lot less for sure, but they're still here. However I think expecting them to stick around forever without throwing them a bone (or giving them something like the pallet update which we all know isn't gonna last for long) is unrealistic. The anti-tunnel/slug system was putting a good step forward toward solving that problem, but we saw how that turned out.
The phase 2 changes were completely out of control, and the people that thought they were fine as they were, are the real biased people.
I can’t even imagine being so survivor sided, to think the phase 2 changes would have been healthy for the game, if they went live as they were on the PTB.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014033#Comment_4014033
I won't pretend that people don't leave winnable games all of the time, but if you develop any game sense with DBD you learn when a match is over and when it's not with only a slight margin of error. I think that's something that's missing from the conversation a lot.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014058#Comment_4014058
The thing is any time those sorts of systems that are commonplace in other games have been implemented into DBD, it's a disaster. DBD has always seemed to do better with systems that don't really appear to be viable in most PVP games. Plus, beyond the problems presented with the genre alone, the game also isn't in a balanced enough state to handle systems like that.
If you want to try them anyway, you have to think of it like this: a Band-Aid can fix a boo-boo, but it can't fix a gash. You need to address the larger issues first before simpler fixes have any impact.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014069#Comment_4014069
I know I get a lot of heat for it, but there really is some psychological component to Killer mains that I don't fully understand. But it does manifest often times as looking like main character syndrome. And I think appealing to that as strongly as BHVR has for the last several years is really aging the game incredibly fast.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014078#Comment_4014078
I believe fun is lacking, so naturally I think most players don't have fun. They want to have fun, but that's not the same thing. As far as most players not quitting early, I have no idea how to answer that because it feels like the opposite argument you were making just a few posts ago.
You can't address behavior, only the tools used. We saw the evidence of that with anti-go next. Those tools can be addressed and they often have. With camping/tunneling/slugging, it's a little different. We did have the tools and now we don't. It's time to address that.
Do you personally think the majority of survivors or frequently ragequitting?
Because if you don’t personally think the majority of survivors are frequently ragequitting, even though some of their games are frustrating, then why is it they can’t manage to play through their games?
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014133#Comment_4014133
What are our thoughts?
My main question about this is what problems are we looking to fix?
I saw an awful lot of panic, and basically zero actual experiences with how it played out on the PTB. Probably because they pulled the plug instantly without actually testing much.
The main things I think need to change would be:
Base kit tenacity is not necessary (moving while recovering, specifically). It punishes legitimate slugging (short term) because they can both move and recover, and for excessive slugging it's going to be long enough that recovering and then moving isn't a problem. It's backwards and unnecessary, but removing that isn't a huge deal either.
Elusive should also include not attackable. It isn't enough to just lose collision, you need to basically be not attackable or it defeats the whole point.
Most other things I saw were on the level of "but plot twist and no mither counters corrupt intervention" where, yeah maybe, but no one actually does this. Specifically, the panic over "but survivors will die to give the others the buff", which is a huge net loss for the survivor team, and no one will actually play this way outside of testing to verify that, yes, this loses you the game.
Survivors would just weaponize that version of Elusive. If there is a survivor under an undropped pallet, the Elusive survivor could just stand next to it, and the killer would have zero counterplay because the killer isn’t allowed to hit the Elusive survivor, but the Elusive survivor is allowed to pallet save their teammate.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014121#Comment_4014121
Making a thread doesn’t work, because it will get derailed by people telling us the problems aren’t real.
How do you know it will get derailed if you never make a thread?
Because other people already made threads that got derailed and deleted.
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014121#Comment_4014121
Anything survivors do is “not a problem”
For the most part, survivors are pretty much cornered these days, and the only thing they can do is gens. Anything else isn't a problem for the killer side, because that would actually be more beneficial to the killer than it is for the survivors. A survivor not on a gen is not helping their team, unless they can save the poor sod that is being tunneled by the killer.
You’re still dismissing killer concerns as not a problem. It’s the whole mindset that killer problems “aren’t as important” as survivor problems. And if someone tries to talk about anything involving survivor nerfs, they get told the camping/slugging/tunneling update is more important T and should happen first.
@Skillfulstone said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014117#Comment_4014117
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014110#Comment_4014110
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014104#Comment_4014104
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014108#Comment_4014108
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014097#Comment_4014097
As sad as I am to say this, while the forum is meant for discussions, feedback and opinions, all of us are currently just feeding the fight (I gave up trying after seeing like a dozen thread get derailed like this and three get entirely closed).
When reasoning with the mentality that "not enough innocents are being punished to matter, so the punishement system is fine, also most people are lying about being innocents and getting false-flagged and are actually frequent ragequitters." There's really no point to continue trying after several threads.
This thread is about the anti-tunnel system (and how it can be properly implemented next time so it doesn't mess with normal gameplay and create lose-lose situations) and its consequences when it eventually comes back out of the metaphorical oven. What are our thoughts?
Considering what happened to the phase 1 changes, the phase 2 changes shouldn’t be punishing innocent killers. Which means anti-slugging shouldn’t happen if the killer is forced to slug. It also means that none of these changes should be allowed to be weaponized by survivors.
It also means acknowledging the fact that a lot of survivors are going to complain that the changes aren’t enough, and will still claim that survivors are ragequitting because the changes weren’t enough.
It also means acknowledging that the phase 2 incentives were absolute garbage, and nowhere near good enough. Killers got nerfed BBQ, that was completely unreliable, easily dodged, and often showed zero survivors. It was horrible.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014105#Comment_4014105
You responded to a comment literally listing various fixes to bully squads with "BHVR never does anything to fix bully squads!" while also proving AmpersandUnderscore's previous comment about derailing the thread about tunneling. I am truly flabbergasted here.
Also, if "most" Survivors play out their matches, that would imply that ragequitting isn't as big of an issue, meaning that the current penalties are doing their job just fine. So why are you advocating for harsher punishments?
Because we’ve had multiple people on these forums, admitting to frequently ragequitting, or admitting they have a friend that frequently ragequits.
@littlehoot said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014105#Comment_4014105
The point isn't "killer problems aren't real", the point is YOU on a thread about survivor issues trying to derail the entire discussion to talk about anything but survivor issues.
If you think that bully squads, or gen rushing are a problem, make a thread about those issues to discuss it. Don't repeatedly derail a different thread talking about problems that are impacting predominantly survivor players. I don't think anyone in this thread is saying that killer is a perfect role and that there aren't issues there that probably need to be addressed by the devs.
But this isn't the time or place for those conversations, especially when they're only brought up to draw attention away from issues other people are having.
Making a thread doesn’t work, because it will get derailed by people telling us the problems aren’t real.
And we’re even being told in this thread that ragequitting isn’t a real problem. And if people create threads to complain about ragequitters, they get derailed too.Notice the theme here? Anything survivors do is “not a problem”
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014095#Comment_4014095
I'm not going to feed the troll here, but just to also point out:
And why isn’t bully squads on the official roadmap?
It's not on the road map because it's been addressed directly every time.
Boil over buff reverted very quickly when it was a problem (2 weeks).
Base kit light born on locker grab to effectively delete double locker saves.
RPD library was reworked to have a hook, which was then immediately abused by killers, before they finally deleted the upper library entirely.
Infinite locker glitches got kill switched same day and fixed.
Hooks respawn to make sure there are no dead zones, even if a survivor died on hook.
Maps are smaller to mitigate hook dead zones. (Admittedly, current pallet spawns is messing with this, which is actually 2 issues once they fix pallets).
So yeah, there's no road map for "bully squads" because they actually fix it, and quickly if it's actually an issue.
And this is exactly what I’m talking about. If killers complain about bully squads, they get told it’s not a real problem.
And if killers complain about gen rushing, they get told it’s not a real problem.
The main theme is killer problems “aren’t real”, and BHVR shouldn’t spend time fixing them, and instead, all the time and effort should be spent on making the survivor experience better.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014078#Comment_4014078
Meanwhile, any conversation about ragequitting problems has to devolve into people massively over exaggerating how often Go Next makes false positives.
Where are the threads about ragequitting? Because it kinda feels like 'yes, I derailed the conversation, but now it'd be derailing to go back to the original topic'.
And why isn’t bully squads on the official roadmap?
Because, judging by community feedback, it's not a problem at all.
No one talks about this. It's only ever brought up in answer to survivor complaints. If you want it addressed, bring it up. Open threads about it. Don't keep sitting on it until you can use it as a 'gotcha'.
Judging by community feedback, bully squads aren’t a problem because it’s fun for survivors. It’s like how killers can’t complain about generator speeds, without people telling them that gen rushing is a hyper specific thing, and they weren’t “really” being gen rushed.
And remember that a lot of ragequitting threads get closed for breaking forum rules, and a lot of comments about ragequitting get closed for breaking forum rules.
And are you seriously saying you don’t see people over exaggerating the Go Next false positives? You don’t see people saying things like “I can’t believe people keep getting punished for getting tunneled out of the game”????
Go Next should be allowed to be more harsh, without people constantly complaining that it “already has too many false positives”.
-
@Shurix said:
Tonight I was thinking about anti-tunnel mechanics and what could help dissuade killers from tunneling, without punishing them the way the 9.2.0 PTB did. I think survivors are generally stronger than the killer, and the anti-tunnel changes certainly nerfed killers. I’m glad they didn’t implement the changes, but I still think creating some kind of anti-tunnel mechanic would be good. With that in mind, I tried to think of a mechanic that would prevent tunneling, without nerfing killers. This is what I thought:
When a survivor is unhooked, they enter the “Ethereal” state. While a survivor is in the Ethereal state, the survivor has no collision, and the killer cannot hit them with any attacks. The survivor exits the Ethereal state when they perform a conspicuous action, become healthy, another survivor is hooked, or after manually exiting it by pressing a button (like dead hard). The Ethereal state is also deactivated once the exit gates are powered. If a survivor comes off the hook while the exit gates are powered, they get the current endurance effect. The survivor’s model would look ethereal, so it’s clear that they are in the state, but it wouldn’t show up on the killer’s HUD.
I may be overlooking other ways this could be abused, but the idea is that the killer wouldn’t be able to touch them until either the survivor has progressed the game, or the killer has hooked another survivor. There’s a manual option it exit the ethereal state in case they want to take a hit for another survivor. Technically the killer could camp the survivor while they are in the ethereal state until the exit gates are powered, but they’d still have windows, pallets, and other survivors to help.Survivors can weaponize that, because they would be immune to damage, but could still choose to flashlight save, flashbang save, pallet save, or hook sabotage.
So, for example, if a different survivor is under an undropped pallet, the ethereal survivor could just stand next to that undropped pallet, and the killer wouldn’t be able to do anything about it, since they aren’t allowed to hit the ethereal survivor.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
I'm just going to jump in and point out something about the forums meta here.
This thread. Right here. It's exactly the problem with discussing anything about tunneling.
It applies to far, far more, but you can look at the history of posts on this forum, and every single time recently that there's been a thread gaining traction about survivor issues (which is usually tunneling) we get this:
A completely derailed thread from a small handful of extremely loud and insanely biased (to the point of being just rage bait) commenters who take a thread about "when are we getting the postponed changes" into "punish them harder".
Which wouldn't be so frustrating, except this is the exact kind of tactic that gets anti tunneling pulled (effectively cancelled for all we know at this point) on day 2, and also could get "go next" tuned up to punish even more innocent players with penalties.
You simply cannot have a discussion about this problem because a few people just have to do this:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/9UHBRD7C9SCN/1000010969.jpg
And they'll just keep doing it because it's worked for years.
Meanwhile, any conversation about ragequitting problems has to devolve into people massively over exaggerating how often Go Next makes false positives.
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013977#Comment_4013977
I would happily agree to longer queue times, if it means my games won't be ruined by frequent ragequitters.
Unfortunately, most people don't share that sentiment. When the devs first tested the SBMM system, testing out queue time priority vs. quality match priority, long queue times were a huge complaint about the latter.
And what was the biggest frustration for Killers in 2v8 again? Oh yeah, the insanely long queue times!
A ragequitter queue will never fly if it just leads to longer queue times for all players.
You don’t need to over-exaggerate this. Yes, the normal queue time would go up, but not by so much that the majority of players would care. I’m sure most players would be happy with maybe a few extra seconds added to their queue times, if it meant a severe reduction with ragequitters in their games.
Again, the majority of players are actually playing through their games, even if they are frustrating. It’s really just a small percentage of survivors that are ruining lots of games for other people.
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013998#Comment_4013998
Fair enough.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4014001#Comment_4014001
I'd elevate the fun argument. I think people DC/give up the most when they're not having fun and there's a laundry list of reasons behind that. Camping/tunneling/slugging is a major one, as are bully squads. So are endless trials or trials that end too quickly. Many times there are personal reasons, like DCing on first down. But at the end of the day, fun is a major component of any game and it doesn't feel like the highest priority most of the time. In my opinion.
But why is it that most people can manage to play through all their games? Do you really think most players don’t have games that feel frustrating? Do you really think most players don’t have games where they feel like something unfair is happening?
And why isn’t bully squads on the official roadmap? Bully squad survivors, whose main goal is to ruin the fun of their opponents, isn’t a game problem? But killers, they are using game strategies to try to win a game, are a game problem?
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013977#Comment_4013977
Well, like @CrypticGirl said, if it's so common, then the ragequitter queue is going to move much faster to the point that ragequitting would make the most sense to do. If it's not that common, then it means that even the non-ragequitting queue would still have a fair amount of ragequits. And like anti-go next, the system used to determine ragequits would possibly open the door to punishing players who aren't doing it, further impacting the queue.
In that case, what would prevent Survivors from deciding to purposely ragequit to enter a queue that is less likely to punish them anyway than staying in one that doesn't and walking on eggshells?
Nope. I’m not going to entertain this garbage false positive theory, that’s so rare that it literally takes over two months to get one single video evidence of it happening. The false positives aren’t happening often enough for me to care.
There’s nothing preventing people from purposely trying to enter the ragequitting queue. As long as they are banned from being in my games, I don’t care what they are doing in the ragequitting queue.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013795#Comment_4013795
That was around the time brand new parts flat out completed a generator when used. Want to go back to that too?
So you aren't going to comment on the fact that I was replying to someone that said…
"Enough with the survivor item nerfs already.
Remember when BNP's used to instantly pop a gen?"
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013950#Comment_4013950
If ragequitting is so common, surely these people have already experienced what it's like to have others quit on them as well. It's not like a separate queue for ragequitters will be a new experience for them.
A separate ragequitter queue will lead to longer queue times for everyone. Perhaps even more so for the non-ragequitters if ragequitting is as common as people are making it out to be.
I would happily agree to longer queue times, if it means my games won't be ruined by frequent ragequitters.
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013968#Comment_4013968
And that benefits the queue how? It's removing more players that aren't being replaced.
It benefits the quality of matchmaking, because the rule-abiding survivors that actually play out their games, won't have their games ruined by frequent ragequitters anymore.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013958#Comment_4013958
I was going to say something like that for the other response. That the queue tends to be a high priority for BHVR. It's why we don't have true blocks or power/perk bans or perks with BP incentives. Asking for a separate one for ragequitters is unrealistic.
The only exception is how damaging to the game anti-go next was and current DC penalties, but to be totally honest that might be explained away via Play While You Wait being tested.
The queue time doesn't need to be a priority for frequent ragequitters. They are already supposed to get time penalties, so BHVR can just shift the time penalties into having a longer queue time for their ragequitter's queue.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013739#Comment_4013739
Rage quitting isn't my peak issue with solo Q, it still happens even when go next was just introduced and the new dc penalty.
It's tunneling and slugging stuff which should have been tackled first. Not punishing survivors even more, people rage quit for a reason in most games, regardless if it's justified. If it's happening often, something is wrong with the core game, shocking news (sarcasm): It's not fun in a lot instances where you're slugged/tunneled proxy camped. Queueing up into multiple matches like this is awful.
So no, I want these changes ASAP, I was looking forward to the incentives for hooking different survivors as killer and finally being rid of the awful gen regression meta. I do agree the downside was harsh, but the gen regression changes should have stayed for the perks, it makes no sense, but better gut tenacity…Placing frequent ragequitters with each other shouldn't be considered punishment. It should be considered placing like-minded people with each other. It's greatly improving the matchmaking.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013931#Comment_4013931
Fair enough, but I really don't think it's the problem with solo q. More punishments and othering them won't solve the problem, as we've seen with anti-go next. At some point we should try to strike a balance.
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013942#Comment_4013942
You keep saying this yet you have zero evidence, only assumptions, as to why people quit.
Most survivors play through their games without frequently ragequitting. They are playing games that are sometimes frustrating, but they still play through the games. These survivors deserve to be in games with other survivors that will actually play through games, even if they might be frustrating.
And again, the frequent ragequitters being placed together, is the perfect Go Next solution. Anyone that thinks it's fine to ragequit, should be happy to be with other people that also think it's fine to ragequit. They can ruin each other's games, and the rule-abiding survivors that want to play out their games, won't need to suffer the awfulness people that selfishly ragequit.
-
@Gh0st2317 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013931#Comment_4013931
I'm sorry, I gotta disagree with that. Rage quitting isn't the main issue of Solo Queuing. As @THE_Crazy_Hyena said, people would mainly DC for a reason.
Hence, tunneling has gotten so frequent, people would DC as there isn't any point to continue playing. It makes matches boring as someone is always being targeted and the killer isn't going for anyone else. No one should be forced to play a match that is 'depressing'. The main issue for solo queue is lack of comms. I can't tell my allies if I'm being camped or need healing or whatever.
No one is being forced to play a match they don't want to play. No one is physically restrained to their computer or console, with a mouse or controller physically glued to their hands. But people absolutely deserve punishments if they ragequit.
And people mainly DC for a selfish reason. Sometimes it's "this map is boring" or "I got chased first" or "I don't like the killer" or "I don't like one of the killer's perks" or "I don't like my teammates" or "I only want to play games where I'm clearly winning". Selfish selfish selfish.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013739#Comment_4013739
You are missing the point here. People don't ragequit or DC regularly without a reason.
The point is that excessive tunneling being the problem, which is almost happening every single match.I have a friend who never DC's but today I am pretty sure he was close to considering it, because of excessive tunneling.
How much more abuse do we survivor players need to endure before we get proper anti-tunnel, and discouragement for the killers to practice that kind of "strategy"?And the reason is a complete lack of respect for teammates, and a complete lack of respect for the rules.
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013739#Comment_4013739
I honestly wonder what creates this mentality of "Everyone has to be miserable and they're going to like it, or else they can leave and they won't be missed".
The game is better off without frequent ragequitters. They are the #1 problem with solo q,. They should not be bargained with, since they act out of entitlement, and you can't fix that. They should be forced to play with other people that frequently ragequit, so they can ruin each other's games.
Really, just do that. Place the frequent ragequitters with each other. It's completely fair, because if someone thinks it's acceptable to ragequit, they should be 100% fine being in groups with other people that think the same way.
-
I want more QA on whether or not a cosmetic is realistically allowed to be in the game as advertised.
For example, if BHVR can’t easily make the Dredge cosmetic work, it should never have been a finalist. Yeah, that sounds sad, but it’s better to admit the design is too difficult to implement, than to give us an awful looking Dredge skin, whose arms and weapon covers half the killer’s screen.
If fact, if BHVR can’t figure out how to move Dredge’s arms and weapon so it’s not covering so much of the killer’s screen, then they shouldn’t ever be making any Dredge cosmetics that have bulky arms or bulky weapons.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013559#Comment_4013559
Enough with the survivor item nerfs already.
Remember when BNP's used to instantly pop a gen?
Also, self-healing got trashed in the 6.7.2 update. It's only recently where it has become semi-decent again, when Botany got buffedThen enough with the killer nerfs already.
Remember when mori offerings used to work when survivors at 0 hook states?
And self-healing with a medkit still saves way too much time, considered that the healing time for altruistic healing needs to be doubled if it involves two people. And the altruistic healing cost also includes the extra time players take to travel to each other (if it's not being healed after being unhooked), that doesn't exist in self-healing.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011416#Comment_4011416
I have some friends I was playing with every night for hours, for months. They've also been playing for years, almost the length of the games existence. I see them on less and less, for shorter periods. One of them gets mad about the tunneling and ragequits regualrly. Then he's just gone for the night. I have some others who have trickled away recently too. I'm playing killer more and more. It's getting gloomy. If I run out of friends I guess I'm a killer-only player again.
If someone ragequits regularly, that means Go Next isn't being harsh enough. People that ragequit regularly, really need to have harsher punishments. They are the #1 problem with solo q.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013526#Comment_4013526
No, I think the actual problem is that Fog Vials suck.
Making everything suck isn't really a solution lol
When people say S-tier killers should be nerfed, do you say "oh, we should keep S-tier killers the same, and bump everything else up to S-tier level"?
Because this is the same thing. If something is overperforming, the solution isn't to make everything else overperform too.
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013573#Comment_4013573
Sounds good. So if we're nerfing everything down to the level of the worst survivor item, im sure you'll be fine with current skull merchant being the standard for killer balance?
I never said to nerf them to the lowest survivor item. I said to nerf them so they aren't overwhelmingly better than some of the other items. We don't need to slippery slope this. There is a balance point where toolboxes and medkits are useful, but aren't massively better than some of the other items.
Keys and Maps shouldn't have to compete with overpowered addons like syringes.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013559#Comment_4013559
Lmao all survivor items need to be as useless as current fog vials. Balance achieved!
Think of it as nerfing S-tier survivor items.
People seem super fine with asking for S-tier killers to be nerfed, so asking for S-tier survivor items to be nerfed should be ok too.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013526#Comment_4013526
I usually run a common camping aid kit with common butterfly tape and common bandages as addons. They're more useful than post-nerf fog vials and I'm far more likely to encounter a situation where I'm guaranteed to get more value out of it.
It doesn't take a syringe or a styptic to out compete what fog vials were nerfed into. The only time I've used them post-nerf is when I've had literally nothing else in my hands and I found one in a chest.
Then that needs to be nerfed to, so other items feel more useful. Maybe the self-healing speed can be nerfed.
But whatever it is, the problem are the medkits and tookboxes. Because buffing fog vials won't change the fact that the maps and keys are also underused because they aren't considered as useful as a medkit.
-
Fog vials should never have been introduced before medkit and toolbox reworks, because it's not fair for items to compete with overpowered addons like syringes.
The actual problem are the medkits and toolboxes, which needs major reworks like the maps and keys did, so that the medkits and toolboxes are closer in power to the other items.
-
@runningguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013051#Comment_4013051
right or wrong stats graphics aside, i think the point is that the screenshots don't show a date or anything like that so could be interpreted in whatever way. im not saying the info is inaccurate or you deliberately tried to create a narrative using cropped screenshots or any thing like that but its understandable to question screenshots that show no date. which i believe i did mention before when i said "assuming the screenshots was around the same time period" or something to that effect. thats why i make a conscious effort to make sure my screenshots are dated whenever possible.
The date doesn't actually help, since it could be easily Photoshopped or otherwise manipulated. For example the in-game screenshot doesn't actually have a date in it, so I could have either Photoshopped a fake time, or manually have set my system clock to a different date before taking a screenshot with it below the screenshot.
Which means people will either believe the screenshots or not believe them. It's also 2025, and it's so easy to digitally alter images that someone could have easily just have done that instead. People could also post their friend's stats, and none of it is verifiable.
Regardless, the in-game screenshot clearly shows a 66 game time period. It doesn't matter if that took 4 days or 4 weeks, it's still 66 games with a 51% escape rate. And that is still a lot higher than the average solo q survivor.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013011#Comment_4013011
You've posted these same chopped up, out-of-context screeshots multiple times. How old are these now? Months? I could post these two:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/JS9G9OJQ89XX/screenshot-20251009-210426.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/BFBFPHER0TIS/screenshot-20251005-142433.jpg
What does this tell you? Absolutely nothing.
I keep track of my survivor stats on paper. The numbers match fine. The data just doesn't sync up all at the same time. The recent matches are instant but the percentages come days or weeka later. It's easy to try to make it look wrong if you don't wait for everything to load in properly.
So your conspiracy theories now include BHVR padding stats to appease survivors? That's easily disproved considering how many people stream/record their matches. Many, many people would have noticed by now.
Except that you used the wrong dbd stats graphic. The one with the survivor/door icon is the overall escape rate. You posted an individual survivor escape rate.
And I didn't think there was a conspiracy theory, but considering how many bad takes are on these forums, I thought at least one person would have gone overboard about it.
And actually, the inflated stats had nothing to do with not waiting long enough. It has to do with the fact that a lot of people don't understand how QA testing works, and don't understand how to check if a system is working properly.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4013030#Comment_4013030
Because phase 1 focused on problematic survivor behavior and phase 2 focused on problematic killer behavior.Maybe because they saw the survivor issues as needing larger changes than the killer changes because there was larger need on the survivor side, thus necessitating more time.
The whole point is that problematic survivor and killer behaviors should be treated equally.But its a point you're making that you want to be true without any reasoning on why it should be true. It's an asym with radically different sides who have had differing levels of QoL treatment over the years. There's no reason to presume that both sides are in a position of equal need.
But the phase 2 changes actually got super reverted, which implies the killer changes need to be way larger than the phase 1 survivor changes.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012691#Comment_4012691
Nope. We're comparing phase 1 with phase 2.Why?
You're just making up rules without a logical explanation for why it would lead to the best possible game.
It would make as much sense for me to say that because the killer issues came first, survivors are owed interest on our delayed boosts and thus must be considerably stronger, for the sake of consistency.
It doesn't even get into the idea that the survivor QoL is coming with compensation for the killers. I think it would be silly to give survivors compensation for the AFK mechanics or all the survivors starting together, but being that's your argument you should be saying that first we need to give them compensation for those changes on top of the anti-tunnel.
Because phase 1 focused on problematic survivor behavior and phase 2 focused on problematic killer behavior.
The whole point is that problematic survivor and killer behaviors should be treated equally. They are either both supposed to be handled extremely gently, or both handled extremely aggressively.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012968#Comment_4012968
I've never complained about go next nor have I ever been affected by the system. There are many thing I want changed that don't touch me. All I've said is that there's no way to implement a system that can accurately read intent, nor is the current minor system that does so working properly. If BHVR somehow cares about the opinions of the 6 people bickering in the forums then they can look at my account and see that I have maybe one DC in my whole history on this game.
But what does that have to do with you ignoring everyone's counterpoint? If context is important, what does your gameplay look like? How much do you play?
I've already talked about myself in multiple threads. I tracked my stats for a month, and my overall escape rates were pretty much higher than everyone else, and that is with 100% solo q games.
In one month, my actual stats were 66 survivor games at a 51% escape rate. But because the official stat tracker was still overinflating the escape rates, it placed me at 68.75% escape rate for the month.
And no one seemed to care that I did the whole thing as an experiment to see if the official stat tracker was broken, and that the official stat tracker was actually inflating my escape rate by 17%, and that might mean that other people have inflated escape rates on the official tracker. I thought for reals that someone would have been like "my awful solo q escape rate might be even lower than I thought it was, and this must be a conspiracy to trick survivors into thinking they are better off than they are", but no one cared.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012949#Comment_4012949
Why would I continue to engage with you at this point? You completely ignored all the points by multiple people being thrown at you in the previous thread about this and just reverted to your zero-nuance mantra of RAGEQUIT BAD MUST PUNISH. You talk about this game as though it's a conceptual theory you've never put into practice and you only say something when you think you have a gotcha.
Because context is important. If you are the type of person that thinks people should be able to ragequit if the game isn’t going well, then BHVR needs to know that, so that when you complain about Go Next, they know it’s because you want the ability to ragequit without penalty.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012872#Comment_4012872
Do you even play this game?
Seriously, what does “make an appeal” mean? Because it sure sounds like you ran up to the killer and just stood there.
If there is any other way to interpret this, please tell us what you meant.
-
(Edit) Why did the forums double post me??????
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011491#Comment_4011491
In a similar scenario, I had three teammates all get slugged in shack in early game. Like your case, none moved, and they all stayed around the basement. I finished our one and only gen and walked over to the killler to make an appeal. It failed. Should I get a suicide penalty for that?
I've also had several recent killer matches where the survivor team failed to read my perks properly and all were downed a minute or so into the match. If people are already accruing hidden penalities for dying too fast because they screwed up, I don't want to cause that. And I definitely don't want it to get worse.
Does ”Make an appeal” mean you purposely ran towards the killer, and just stood there? Because that sounds like ragequitting to me.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012598#Comment_4012598
Do you honestly think the phase 2 changes had the equivalent impact to the game as anti gen tap?If your issue is fair treatment/consistency, you can't just ignore times in the past when BHVR made changes that focused on killer. You don't get to have your way and then when BHVR finally says its time to pay attention to survivor demand that things be 50/50 from here on out.
Nope. We're comparing phase 1 with phase 2.
The phase 1 anti-hiding mechanic is very easily bypassed by survivors, and excessive hiding is still very much in the game. There are also still a lot of survivors that Go Next, and the system punishes innocent survivors so rarely that it takes over two months just to get one video of it occurring.
That is how the phase 2 changes should go. Killers should be able to easily camp/tunnel/slug, while bypassing the phase 2 mechanics. And camp/tunnel/slug should very much still be in the game, with the phase 2 changes punishing innocent killers so rarely that it takes over two months just to get one video of it occurring.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012483#Comment_4012483
Maybe you're not seeing them because the survivors are progressing the game? In the first iteration, people were getting them just trying to find and remove hex totems. That's not AFK.
TD;LR: Survivors are just crouch walking in a small area, and using things like chests, dull totems, or killer interactions like disarming a Trapper trap, to hide for 10+ minutes.
Problem 1: AFK point gain is 25% if the survivor is moving at all, which includes crouch walking back and forth in a small area. It takes 8.5 minutes of being AFK, for a survivor to get their first crow, if they are just crouch walking in a small area.
Problem 2: Opening a chest, or cleansing/blessing a dull totem, aren't important enough to fully reset AFK points (and they currently fully reset AFK points). Cleansing/blessing a hex totem, absolutely should be worth a full AFK point reset, because there is an actual need for survivors to remove hexes.
Problem 3: Some killer interactions aren't high-priority enough to be worth a full reset of AFK points (and they currently fully reset AFK points). It's ok if high-priority killer interactions fully reset AFK points, like searching a Pig box, or solving a Pinhead puzzle. But disarming a Trapper trap, or looking through Springtrap's cameras, really isn't important enough to be worth a full AFK point reset. All the killer interactions should be reviewed, to determine how many AFK points each interaction should remove.
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012573#Comment_4012573
Why not as impactful as, say, anti gen tap?
You know, one mechanic that decisively and completely eliminates what it's targeting and makes it impossible to circumvent in one fell swoop.
Seems like you're cherry picking here.
Do you honestly think the phase 2 changes had the equivalent impact to the game as anti gen tap?
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012439#Comment_4012439
First of all, that's BHVR's MO. Changes made to the game are usually extreme and very black and white. Secondly, I would like some consistency. I do believe delaying the system was most likely the right call. But you have to admit the way they handled the entire thing was not good.
There should be consistency. The phase 2 changes should be just as impactful as the AFK crows.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
Much agreed.
What they did with the skin sucks. They looked at the submission and used it as inspiration rather than a guide, which is not what anyone wanted. We want that skin, not BHVR's re-interpretation of it. They destroyed all of its personality. They didn't do the sheets properly, they didn't even try to do the fabric scissors. The original design was a cohesive aesthetic and BHVR said, "Nah."
Have they fixed the Singularity submission skin where they purposefully chose to mess up his screen face, yet?
No. the face is still completely not what anyone voted for. Everyone wanted the goofy emote faces.
Zero people wanted the weird creepy orange distorted skull flicker thing.
Like, why can’t we just get what we voted for? Who decided to put extra effort into making the cosmetic worse?
-
@Duncan_Ellis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012439#Comment_4012439
I've gotten them while doing the "last two survivors hide and seek" several times, also seen them as a killer. (Although I didn't know what the heck was going on the first time, I just thought the player was being a schmuck)
So yes, they do work, just not as fast as "you" want.
The AFK crows are so easily delayed and bypassed that I’ve literally not seen a survivor with 3 crows in literal months of playing the game.
How on earth can you twist that to “not as fast as I want”? So you would be ok if the anti-tunneling changes were nerfed so badly that you never ever saw them activate? And if you complain, I could say “they do work, just not as fast as “”you”” want”???
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4012276#Comment_4012276
That's what kills me the most about it. I'm genuinely not trying to remain stuck in the past here, but 6.1.0 wasn't pulled despite how drastic the changes were or how strong the feedback was. More recently, they let the anti-go next and the AFK crows "buff" stay live for an entire patch even though players were unfairly copping bans left and right. It got to the point that you wouldn't be wrong to assume they have some personal vendetta against The Walking Dead. 😵
And yet anti-tunnel/anti-slug was so strong that it couldn't even survive the entire PTB cycle without being cancelled. Genuinely what are we as a community supposed to take away from that? Even the pallet update feels like they're switching goal posts and giving players something they didn't even want (better, thoughtful pallet placement =/= spamming them to try to distract from the other changes to maps).
Ideally we wouldn't have to barter in extremes like this, but it's all we seem to have. And more often than not, the ball lands in the court of what's least beneficial to the game.
Ultimately, this sad attempt at Operation Health has only proven that BHVR should not be the ones to decide the direction of their own IP, in my (very fair and justified) opinion. And that's not even getting into the fiasco regarding the Rift, which has left many of us wondering what can they manage successfully? Not trying to be a d*ck either, but we're all sick of it.
Would you rather BHVR treat phase 2 exactly like the AFK crows, where the buffed AFK crows went live for a while, then got completely nerfed into uselessness, and months later they are still completely useless?
Seriously, would that make you happier? Because I’ve literally never seen a survivor with 3 AFK crows since the nerfs happened months ago.
-
@UndeddJester said:
With how ready and willing so many people were to throw at least 60% of the killer roster in the dumpster with the original proposed changes and simultabeously be completely unwilling to give any time of day to the myriad of very obvious problems it entailed... I'm extremely worried about the return of these changes.
I don't disgree with reducing the power/effectiveness of tunneling/slugging... but shooting m1 killers in the knees and at the same time giving killer side a bunch of effects that only benefitted the A and S tier killers, instead of taking the obvious route of taking a nerf hammer to those A and S tier killers and then buffing killers across the board was madness to me.
The way discussions were going around the issue, I genuinely feel like DBD is on borrowed time if anything even remotely resembling that PTB ever comes back...
The problem with balancing killers like Trapper has nothing to do with S-tiers or tunneling.
The problem is that trying to balance him around high MMR would make him broken at average MMR, because of the way his character is designed.
Trapper doesn’t have a dash or a projectile that can be accidentally aimed incorrectly. BHVR even told us that Trapper can’t easily be buffed, because we have to look at his performance across all skill levels.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011698#Comment_4011698
Any other nerfs you want to stack on, like maybe a permanent 30% repair speed penalty, or having it only work on the second hook?
The endurance nerf happened because survivors were weaponizing the perk. That’s the official statement, regardless of your constant insistence that the perk can’t be weaponized.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011698#Comment_4011698
Any other nerfs you want to stack on, like maybe a permanent 30% repair speed penalty, or having it only work on the second hook?
The endurance nerf happened because survivors were weaponizing the perk. That’s the official statement, regardless of your constant insistence that the perk can’t be weaponized.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011617#Comment_4011617
They can't tell you're being sarcastic, so you might want to clarify that.
Serious question. Because, you know, multiple people wanted the perk to be reverted, so we should revert the scratchmark change too, right?
The scratchmark change happened because of the anti-tunnel PTB, and the endurance change happened independently of the anti-tunnel PTB, so the scratchmark change should be reverted.
-
@Mandy said:
Off the Record was always on our list for changes, even without the tunneling solutions tested, we were aware on how the perk was able to be weaponised and felt that 80s Endurance was a pretty long length of time, it's part of why when adding it back, we've halved the duration so it is still strong in a situation where a player is being tunneled but it will be in a healthier position which won't allow it to be weaponised in the same way.
Is Decisive Strike also on the list for changes, since a lot of survivors weaponize that perk too?
-
@ThatRyanB said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011558#Comment_4011558
Thanks for catching this. This was a mistake on our end. It's the entire perk duration (including aura reading and suppression) that's been reduced to 30/35/40 seconds. We're updating the patch notes now to fix this.
Is the scratchmark removal still going to be a part of the perk?
I thought the scratchmark removal was supposed to be compensation for the endurance removal? Because if endurance is back, then the scratchmark removal can be reverted.
-
40 seconds is way more than enough for anti-tunneling. If a killer is tunneling a survivor off the hook, they aren’t going to passively follow the survivor for 40 seconds, just to avoid the endurance hit.
I still think the duration should be lower, but I’m curious if this is enough to greatly reduce the number of survivors that weaponize the perk against me.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011407#Comment_4011407
Exactly! We all say if people get frustrated with the game enough to DC, they should stop playing. But the current penalty system forces people to keep playing anyway, by queueing up to tick down the timer, and then playing more matches to remove the penalty points. Which makes no sense.
Hopefully now people can understand how flawed this penalty system is. I'm baffled at how anyone can support it, no matter how frustrated they get by the DC's.
The time-decayed penalty system was terrible, because a survivor could literally ragequit in 90% of their games, and the penalty system wouldn’t care.
The current penalty system cares about the percentage of ragequits, which makes way more sense.