Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011408#Comment_4011408
personally as a killer main i prefer communications because it feels like thats what the game is balanced on, but at the same time i rarely if ever play killers like trapper or faceghost
Then enjoy your quick killer queue times, because a lot of killers aren’t going to want to put up with it every game, especially if it’s voice comms.
-
Giving survivors extra basekit communication is a guaranteed way to ensure that killers would avoid the ranked mode.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011219#Comment_4011219
The moment BHVR starts threatening killers with disconnect penalties and grade losses, I'm right there with you.
Until that happens, comparing these "punishments" is just absurd.
That means you would be completely fine if the AFK crows got super boosted, because the AFK crows don't threaten anyone with disconnect penalties and grades losses.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010894#Comment_4010894
it aint going to tell only ONE half of the playerbase to "get good" while lowering the skill requirements for the other, it's not how things work here.
That is absolutely how things work here. Every bit of killer powercreep has been met with survivors being told to 'get good'. Complaints about tunnelling get met with 'just loop for 5 gens, 4head'.
Every single killer buff gets forgotten by the end of the week they're released and then we're back to footstomping on the forums, demanding more killer buffs. This is absolutely how things have been working for the past couple of years.
if they remove killer's macroplay that is vital for equal skill performance
Tunnelling is the absolute lowest level of macroplay that any bot could figure out. This argument always tries to present some kind of grand strategic choice but ultimately always comes down to 'just tunnel 24/7 lol'.
you can already see it with ghoul/krasue fundamental design - unavoidable free hit + freest catch up / mobility in the game + scamper for ghoul or unmindgameable / uncounterable head/body form powers with slow burn free tag, scamper and catch up.
Ghoul got released before anti-tunnel's design was even on the table. You think they released a killer designed around anti-tunnel, months before their first attempt at anti-tunnel?
This is defeatism for argument's sake, where there's a hope that they're the way they are because of the anti-tunnel, because then you can claim that anti-tunnel is the cause. Sadly, though, both of these released without anti-tunnel, one of them long before anti-tunnel, so it's more likely that BHVR just keeps powercreeping killers, and anti-tunnel has nothing to do with it.
Also, we didn't get anti-tunnel, but we did get Ghoul and Krasue, so the threat of getting broken overpowered killers is kind of moot by now. The reversal of the anti-tunnel changes did not see these two get adjusted in any way, so the choice is basically 'get all the alleged drawbacks of the anti-tunnel without the anti-tunnel' or 'get all the alleged drawbacks of the anti-tunnel with the anti-tunnel', and that's a very easy choice to make.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4011098#Comment_4011098
The doom posts are a real concern though, and they aren’t there to derail conversations.
They are absolutely there to derail conversations. Just in the post quoted, they refer to an 'inevitable' compensation or killer design change that will make the game much less enjoyable.
Given we've had one (1) iteration of this system, this is just absolute doomposting without any constructive criticism or logical underpinning. It's got 'We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas' energy to it.
It's declaring the problem unsolvable, not because of a genuine belief that it is, but because it's a problem they don't want solved.
It’s absolutely terrible that the AFK crow update and the Go Next update was absolutely flooded with “survivors should NEVER EVER be punished if they don’t deserve it”…
….and these same people are like “killers should VERY OFTEN be punished if they don’t deserve it”. Because that is what the phase 2 changes did.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010773#Comment_4010773
I'd like to have actual balance discussions instead of this bullshit "the game will die" every single time.
Zero constructive feedback for how to actually improve on the problem, let alone fix it, while avoiding these self proclaimed "catastrophies".
We can't even have a meaningful discussion because of doom posts like this that just serve to derail useful conversation about it.
The doom posts are a real concern though, and they aren’t there to derail conversations.
The phase 2 changes were completely out of control, and would have caused massive issues if they reached live. There shouldn’t even be conversations of “what SMALL changes can we make to fix it”, because the PTB was so bad that they need lots of major changes in order to be acceptable.
-
@Munky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010949#Comment_4010949
There are plenty scenarios that happen aaalll the time, ppl are just not recording their gameplay 24/7. I can give you one of the reasons I got penalized, if you believe it was "deserved", then pls just stop cause you arent helping anything.
Going against Krasue, me as a solo, 3 other ppl, probably a SWF, all DC at the start, leaving me to rot with the bots… At this point the killer wants to go next, probably just as much as I do, for good reason. Well the krasue just insta tunneled me out, I dont blame them, its the anti-go-next im pointing to.
but hey … there is the system penalizing me for "suspicious behaviour"… Maybe its cause I didn't hit my skillchecks on deathhook? But why would I prolong the inevitable, just to attempt to circumvent the system? We don't even know for sure if that is a thing the system takes into account. And even if it is, its still complete bs and you know it :p
The only other option I had was hope the killer would DC, but that would penalize them instead. Its always a penalty, but according to you deserved? nobody with a reasonable amount of hours wants to waste time playing with or against bots.
If you are telling me these type of scenarios are "deserved penalties", then I will just mute you, cause there is no point trying to have a rational conversation with you. Obviously similar scenarios happen enough, especially with the latest chapter, to have it happen multiple matches in a row like in my case. Having up to 15 min penalty before I decided to call it for the day. (ps: I havent played since, I just dont have the energy to deal with this nonsense anymore)
Any game with 2+ early survivor ragequits, is a completely ruined game, and everyone remaining should get an abandon button. I don’t think we should pretend that survivor bots are a valid replacement for people, and in the entire time I’ve played this game, I don’t think I’ve ever lost a game as killer when 2+ survivors ragequit early.
In fact, I think BHVR should acknowledge that even 1 early survivor ragequit is pretty much a ruined game for the other survivors, and that early survivor bots aren’t good enough to fix the ragequitting problem.
BHVR should acknowledge that any game with an early survivor ragequit, is a ruined game that feels bad for all the remaining survivors.
-
I would like to see BHVR live stream solo q games, and show us what we’re supposed to do as survivor when a teammate ragequits early.
Because the answer feels like “you’re probably going to lose the game”. We still have a major ragequitting problem, and it’s the biggest solo q problem in the game.
-
I would like to see BHVR live stream solo q games, and show us what we’re supposed to do as survivor when a teammate ragequits early.
Because the answer feels like “you’re probably going to lose the game”.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010903#Comment_4010903
I anxiously await the system that can clearly and accurately detect everyone's intentions and reasonings. Why not just fix the reasons that people go next instead of trying to relentlessly trap them in matches that leave them feeling hopeless?
If we're comparing phase 2 to go-next then I guess they can just shut it down until they fix it then, can't they?
Because a lot of those reasons are selfish and petty, and based on entitlement, and a lack of respect for their teammates.
We should NEVER feel sorry for frequent ragequitters. The deserve to be punished.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010878#Comment_4010878
I already said people regularly try to suicide out in my killer matches. I don't play as any of the top most disliked killers yet I'm not exaggerating when I say it's daily. But those people are probably not being punished because I simply don't let them die fast enough, yet they basically sandbag until I let them fly free.
What your advocating for isn't even all that helpful to the problem. If someone gets two-hooked and, instead of trying to die, rats in a corner, they're just as useless to their team as they would have been if they'd died. There's no punishment for that. To some people, that sort of ratting is a strategy. You're just as trapped with that rat as you would have been without them. You'll never know what anyone's perspective was just by judging in-game actions.
So the system is useless against much of the genuine problems, yet it's punishing at least some people who did nothing wrong. That's a crazy thing to root for.
And the solution is Go Next should be improved to try to detect people intentionally sandbagging. And the AFK crows should be improved to try to detect survivors that are excessively hiding way too early.
How would you like it if BHVR said "well, we didn't get the phase 2 changes right on the first try, and it's really difficult to figure out, so we should just give up now and never try to do better"?
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010867#Comment_4010867
I would think you of all people, the champion of believing everyone has a sleazy ulterior motive, would embrace the idea that people are going onto something as potentially important and performative as the ptb with the express intent of shifting the narrative in the direction they want it to go. And again, the devs could have 1) let it go on for more than two days and then 2) modified it based on what they'd learned. All people asked for in regards to Krasue was less clunky head control and they buffed her into braindead invincibility, probably because not enough streamers were getting their easy 4Ks with her. And now we have another despised, overturned killler. Tell me how these two things make sense.
If they can properly revise it, why wouldn't I want that? It doesn't benefit me having my teammates suicide out, nor do I enjoy hopeless opponents running up to me to die. I'm also pretty tired of giving the remaining players hatch/gates because they had a deranged teammate and now I feel bad. But I don't see how you can make it identify genuine go-next behavior. People should never be punished for doing poorly, and they never, ever should be punished for someone else's behavior. If that's what you want, then the killer can get the same penalty for tunneling them out in two minutes. That's a choice they made, unlike an unfairly punished player.
The anti-killer phase 2 changes were so terrible that they needed a lot more than a few minor changes to fix them. I have zero sympathy for the phase 2 changes being reverted, because survivors got the phase 1 changed nerfed into the ground.
People should never be punished by being in a game where someone ragequits early. That's the part you keep ignoring. We aren't comparing a survivor getting punished with a survivor not getting punished. We're comparing survivors getting punished because another survivor ragequit early, with survivors being punished with a false positive from Go Next. The number of overall survivors being punished is much less with Go Next intact.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010838#Comment_4010838
There wasn't a single false positive on the PTB - a false positive would be if generators were blocked from regression if a killer killed a survivor at 9 hooks or if it mistakenly gave endurance to someone other than the person just unhooked. No, it did what the patch notes said it was going to do. If you're going to complain about what the change was called then AFK crows would like to have a word with you.
Still waiting on your video evidence that there's a go next epidemic right now. Or does that not matter when it comes to your assertions?
There were lots of false positive on the PTB. Killers were constantly being punished even when they weren't doing problematic behavior.
And you still haven't said if you think BHVR should improve the auto-penalty mechanic, or completely get rid of the auto-penalty mechanic.
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010838#Comment_4010838
Streamers and sweats go on the very limited ptb to test the limits, hence all that video evidence. Average players aren't doing any of this. They could have just adjusted the numbers and sent it live to see how it works with regular players, then hotfixed it again. There was certainly no issue sending the untested Krasue buffs that are making everyone miserable to live.
It has been OVER TWO FULL MONTHS, and we still haven't seen recent video evidence for Go Next punishing people incorrectly. At some point, people really should admit it's not really happening often at all.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010750#Comment_4010750
And we could just as easily say that the benefits of the tunneling reduction far outweigh the downsides of it. But it got pulled because it was deemed unfair for the Killers who weren't tunneling, so it's (supposedly) being worked on. Why should go-next prevention not receive the same treatment? Yes, we know they did it once, but they need to do it again, if they absolutely insist on having this system in place.
Because the tunneling reduction PTB had a very large amount of video evidence of people getting punished unfairly, because the PTB changes actually were giving an extreme amount of false positives.
See how that works? People were super easily able to get video evidence of the tunneling reduction problems, because it was happening often enough to be a problem.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010771#Comment_4010771
You do realize how ridiculously ironic your entire response here is, yes?
You say 'I certainly don't appreciate you trying to get an entire part of Go Next to be fully reverted … '. I challenge you to show me a single place I said that.
In fact, I've been pointing out things that I've experienced that might be responsible for false positives and yet you've done nothing but argue with me.
Shall we turn this evidence table around now? You say people going next is some sort of epidemic despite hook changes. Prove it. None of this 'well everyone knows' or 'watch any streamer' tomfoolery - nope, I'm going to need some actual proof. Proof of people going next. Not DCing. Going next.
If Go Next has false positives with the auto-penalty mechanic, do you think BHVR should improve the auto-penalty mechanic, or completely get rid of the auto-penalty mechanic?
Because it really looks like you're asking for the entire auto-penalty mechanic to be removed. But if you instead want BHVR to improve Go Next so that it's giving less false positives, then please tell me I'm wrong.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010742#Comment_4010742
Actually I'm a software engineer, I'm not ignorant about QA testing (nice assumption about my experience there btw). This isn't a court of law. This isn't a meeting of the QA or prod support teams. The amount of proof you seem to need in order to stop telling other people to ignore their own experience is unrealistic for a discussion forum.
Just because it's remotely possible that some mystery variable is at play doesn't mean I should shut my brain off and figure it's just unknowable. It shouldn't have given me that message. Period. Full stop. I didn't go next that match. I didn't go next the match before that. I didn't go next the match before the previous match. I DON'T GO NEXT. The only possible thing that could have happened there is that it misidentified me as going next - because I wasn't.
The fact that I did part of a gen, unhooked someone, and it still gave me the message tells me it ignored those events. The only alternative is that it didn't ignore them in which case I ask - how the hell is that evidence of me going next? Yet you argue I can't possibly posit that it just ignored them.
You haven't gotten it before? Great - good for you. Those of us that have when it wasn't warranted don't really care and certainly don't appreciate you coming in here an telling us how we should think and feel about it.
I certainly don't appreciate you trying to get an entire part of Go Next to be fully reverted, even though Go Next helps the game way more often than it has false positives.
Survivor ragequitting is a major game problem, and it deserves Go Next to be fully functional. If Go Next is having false positives, the proper solution is to try to identify why the false positives occurred, to try to reduce the number of false positives in the future. It doesn't make sense to say "oh, I personally saw 1 false positive, so let's just scrap the entire auto-penalty feature instead of trying to improve it".
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010729#Comment_4010729
It's funny that you don't want to believe that innocent players are being punished by the go-next prevention without video evidence, but you're willing to believe that people are ragequitting frequently without video evidence. At this point I'm convinced this is just you saying whatever you think will convince the devs to keep the go-next prevention as is.
Of course, you don't have any evidence that these people are ragequitting frequently, so following your logic of "if there's no video, it didn't happen," then they're not actually ragequitting that frequently. Everyone has their ragequitting moments; it happens to the best of us sometimes, where we reach that boiling point of frustration.
I find it odd that it's acceptable to keep the go-next prevention system as is when it's punishing the wrong people, but they pulled the tunneling reduction system before it even went live for the same exact reason, because it was punishing the wrong people. Make that make sense.
Because if the issue was happening frequently enough to be a problem, we would have a lot of video evidence of it already. Just like how we had video evidence of Go Next being overtuned before the nerfs.
The benefits of the Go Next system existing, far outweighs the EXTREMELY rare complaints of false positives. And most of the time it didn’t even end in a penalty because Go Next requires multiple flagged games for a penalty to happen.
-
@Alicia_Tried6041 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010635#Comment_4010635
You didn't answer my question though? Why can't survivors use the tools they have like bodyblocking but killers can camp tunnel and slug?
The perk is intended to be anti-tunnel. But there were too many survivors that would run at the killer to offensively use the endurance to bodyblock, which encourages the killer to tunnel them, which is the exact opposite of what the perk is intended to do.
OTR should get a buff that’s 100% defensive, and doesn’t involve endurance at all.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010729#Comment_4010729
No, you don't know for a fact that everything else was ignored.
So your suggestion here is what - it didn't ignore it and considers doing part of a gen and unhooking a survivor as something someone does when they're going next? Remember - it gave me that stupid warning at the end of that match. It either considered those actions or it didn't. If it did consider them then it must have considered my doing part of a gen and unhooking someone to be evidence of me going next. It's one or the other here - either it ignored it or considered it. Arguing that it considered it makes zero sense therefore I feel absolutely confident in saying it ignored it.
You don't even have examples of other times you lost that quickly
Probably because this is the fastest time in my memory that I've lost this quickly. There are no other examples. That being the case and the fact that this is the only match that has given me this message tells me that the one aberrant thing about this match is probably what triggered the message. Otherwise what the hell else would have triggered it - the numerous other things that I've done in numerous other matches that didn't leave me with a 'suspicious behavior' message at the end screen? I don't need to review the code or pour over hundreds of videos to make educated inferences about what it's doing or triggering off of.
I guarantee you the sky isn't on fire right now but I'm not looking outside. Do you want to argue with me about that?
I’m claiming you don’t know enough about QA testing to draw solid conclusions out of your one example.
Just because you personally can’t think of other variables that might be involved, doesn’t mean there were zero other variables involved. It might be the short game time AND one or more other variables combined, that causes the warning. With this logic, the “one of more variables” would not cause a warning by themselves, but would only cause a warning in combination to the short game time variable.
We’re not even sure if each game is being evaluated separately, or if Go Next builds a profile on a player based upon previous games.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010710#Comment_4010710
The thing is, the one time I've seen the 'suspicious behavior' message is in a match where I was at least momentarily on a gen and the down that ended up being my death was in a hook trade. I know for a fact that the system has to ignore the things I did because if it didn't then I wouldn't have gotten the message. It's also the fastest I think I've ever died so that tells me it's likely just going off speed to death since it clearly ignored the actions I did take in the match.
I don't have infinite storage space. I don't stream. I don't want to wear out my SSDs by constantly writing and deleting video files I don't want in the first place just in the off chance I might capture evidence to use in a stupid forum argument.
I did say I've seen DCs. Those are a measured and handled by a completely different system - not what we're discussing here.
No, you don't know for a fact that everything else was ignored. You have one example, and that's it. You don't even have examples of other times you lost that quickly, which means you're not even sure if the warning would happen again if you lost that quickly.
And DCs are a big part of Go Next, because if the penalties themselves are too light, then people won't take them seriously. From the screenshots people have shared, I'm assuming they need to get flagged multiple times before there is even a penalty, and even then, the first few penalties are so light that a lot of people aren't taking them seriously.
-
@Senaxu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010652#Comment_4010652
Agree. I’ve never hit a DC penalty either… I only DC for hostage cheaters or when the game crashes.
My hunch is the live system is softer than advertised (same as AFK, which was relaxed after the backlash).
BHVR should publish the exact thresholds so players actually know where the line is.If BHVR punishes the exact details, than ragequitters would know exactly what they could get away with, before the penalties are so high that it affects whether or not they'll actually care if they get another penalty.
-
@MDRSan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010688#Comment_4010688
Who are you arguing with here? Who is saying rage quitting is fine?
Do you think the only solution to going next is to disregard all actions taken in a match and just go off how quickly you die? Doesn't matter if you were on a gen? Doesn't matter if you unhooked someone? You died quick so you must be throwing? You think that's a good system?
Do you not think the hook changes already fixed the problem? I don't know about you but I'm not seeing anyone going next in my matches. I'm seeing DCs but that doesn't have anything to do with this - DCs are a different system.
I don't think anyone said the only solution is to disregard all actions taken in a match and just go off how quickly you die. We don't have any video evidence, saying that is even occurring. People learned "correlation does not imply causation" in high school, and it still applies here. You don't actually know what caused the warnings or penalties.
And no, I don't think the hook changes fixed the problem. And I have absolutely idea idea how you aren't seeing any ragequitting, because when I watch streamers, I'm seeing A LOT of it happening, where the survivors either DC, or they purposely throw themselves at the killer to ragequit without DCing.
-
@MDRSan said:
The penalties for DCing and dying too fast are 2 different things. DC too frequently and it can result in a time out before joining another lobby. Die too fast, too frequently and it gives you a grade reduction.
I've never had a grade reduction but I have seen that obnoxious 'suspicious behavior' warning one time. I know for a fact I wasn't going next nor had I died that fast in any recent matches. If it can erroneously trigger the warning to occur I don't find it unbelievable that it could erroneously trigger the grade reduction. Less likely, sure - you'd have to experience the same level of bad match multiple times in close proximity, but not impossible.
If someone is having that terrible of luck the last thing they need is to have salt rubbed in their wounds. I know getting that message once annoyed the hell out of me and that wasn't even a grade reduction.
Getting the message isn't anywhere near as annoying as having a teammate ragequit early.
Survivors ragequitting early is far more annoying, and far more damaging to the game as a whole.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010629#Comment_4010629
The only thing we want is the removal of the automatic bans for dying too fast. That is all. The removal of self-unhooks and dying after two missed skill checks on the second phase can stay as is. That solves the go-next problem effectively and fairly without punishing anyone.
That is a horrible idea, because survivors would just purposely run at the killer if they want to Go Next, to bypass penalties. That is what the ragequitters want. They want to be able to quickly and easily ragequit a game with getting penalties.
Go Next, punishing real ragequitters, is more important than this extremely low volume of false positives, that is so low that we STILL can't get video evidence of it even though it's 2025 and recording games really isn't that hard.
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010629#Comment_4010629
I'm not pro rage quitting but I hate the "go next" system they introduced.
There are certainly ways to mitigate people disconnecting, but this is absolutely a bad solution and it's also demonstrably not working either. (Imo, it solves none of the reasons that people disconnect, and attempts to determine intent from gameplay automatically).
My point, and what others are trying to tell you, is that this system will falsely flag players for actions their opponents are taking (tunneling is the killers decision).
So if the opponent decides if someone gets a dc penalty, it's abusable. That should never be possible, ever, when we're taking about bans in any form.
It's also a time out, which is an insanely harsh penalty.
So the real question for me is:
Make up your mind BHVR: if it's "abusable and overly punishing" are we forcing it down people's throats and not even putting it in patch notes, or are we pulling it indefinitely? Because there's a pretty massive disconnect there.
We still don't have any video evidence that it's actually doing what you claim. It's 2025, it's not that hard to record video games. If this really was a problem, there should be lots of people recording it, just like how there were lots of people recording Go Next before the nerfs.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010626#Comment_4010626
Skill expression applies to both sides. For instance, with Nurse, the killer has skill expression but the survivors have none. With Clown, neither side had skill expression from "lol throw bottle go fast".
I love that you think 12% perma-haste is fine for Clown but 3% MFT was OP. The problem was absolutely how easy it was to activate, not stacking. In that way it actually was similar to the MFT complaints.
I never claimed haste stacking was skill expression. I said his yellow bottle spam state lacked any skill expression, which is true. Clown's meaningful skill expression comes from correctly predicting survivor pathing and placing his purple bottles to outplay tiles. This is good, but is already very strong, which is why I suggested adding something to his kit other than even more oppressive chase tools.
If killer haste isn't skill expression, then how is Clown haste stacking with perks considered skill expression?
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010600#Comment_4010600
If someone got a penalty, then how did they get flagged in their other games?
That's the part no one will ever know. But we certainly won't explain it by calling people liars.
We have pro-ragequitters on these forums, that are trying to use the Go Next stories as proof that Go Next should be reverted.
Calling people truthtellers, because of an ulterior motive of wanting to get rid of Go Next by any means necessary, is the biggest problem.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010512#Comment_4010512
So you'd effectively nerf him by removing haste stacking and return him to a state with absolutely zero skill expression whatsoever that his mains didn't ask for and actively campaigned against. How does that help Clown exactly? The yellow bottles are a lazy gimmick that should never have been added to begin with. He deserved a better rework than them.
It helps Clown out because he really needed the buffs he used to have, but the buffs were way too much when the extra haste was stacked with perks.
And haste stacking isn't meaningful "skill expression". Because honestly, if "skill expression" meant that something was automatically good, then we should revert the Nurse nerfs, since her blinks are way more "skill expression" than a killer that barely need to aim anything with any sort of precision, because his M2 is an AoE.
-
Just because two killers have a dash, doesn’t mean their abilities need to be balanced the same.
Pig doesn’t have any collision at all on her dash, and she was released before Krasue, and therefore Krasue shouldn’t have collision at all on her dash? Because that is balancing the powers the same too
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010507#Comment_4010507
Once again, that shouldn't be happening at all, not even to the frequent ragequitters. Because getting tunneled is out of their control, unlike the actual ragequitting.
Also, if it's such a rare occurrence, that also means that people aren't ragequitting as frequently as you would believe.
Or it means that most of the people it’s happening to, know exactly why they got penalties, so they don’t complain about it.
And again, according to the screenshots people have posted, 1 bad game doesn’t give a penalty. There’s definitely part of the story that people aren’t mentioning. If someone got a penalty, then how did they get flagged in their other games?
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010487#Comment_4010487
The Clown disaster was the last time survivor and killer mains agreed on something. Don't try and frame it like it was about him being too strong. Imo it didn't even move him upward in tier very much because the purple bottles got nerfed in that update. Maybe it was a slight buff but in an extremely unhealthy way at the cost of nuking whatever skill expression he had in favor of the most brainless playstyle imaginable.
I'm not sure how to buff him without making his chase even more oppressive. I think it would be interesting to have gradual lasting debilitating effects from the tonic exposure. Things like slower exhaustion recovery, visual/audio hallucinations, blur/double vision, etc., similar to doctor. The problem is BHVR boxes themselves into a corner where any time they try to add an immersive effect on screen, someone somewhere complains they got a headache, and the devs bend over backwards until the effect might as well not exist. So we're left with speed buffs, teleport, ranged attacks, and dashes. I don't think any of those really fits Clown's design.
How would you buff him (without permanent 20% haste for doing nothing)?
I've already said BHVR needs to just re-enable the haste stacking patch, that made it so haste from perks can't stack with anything.
Because the problem with Clown wasn't someone equipping 4 aura reading perks or 4 slowdown perks. The problem with Clown is when they stacked a bunch of haste perks, and that stacked with his yellow bottle haste. Most of the complaint videos were showing Clown players that were stacking haste perks.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010484#Comment_4010484
Who was even talking about encouraging ragequits? This is about penalties for dying too fast.
I have no problem recognizing the difference. There's just more to discussions and stutations then bannable and not bannable. But if all you care about is the black and white of law and order, then you should be outraged about people being penalized for things that aren't just nonbannable but completely out of their control, yet all you're doing is accusing them of lying.
Before the AFK crows got nerfed, there was LOTS of video evidence of people feeling like the AFK crows were treating them unfairly.
Before the Go Next mechanic was nerfed, there was LOTS of video evidence of people feeling like Go Next was treating them unfairly.
So don't you think it's super suspicious that we just can't find any video evidence of the current Go Next treating people unfairly? What happened to all these people that were super happy to give us video evidence? Did they all jump on a giant spaceship and fly to the moon?
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010391#Comment_4010391
What evidence do you have that these people are frequently ragequitting? None? Then why should anyone believe you?
Because there's got to be something suspicious going on, because if Go Next was literally "get punished the first time a killer tunnels you out of the game quickly", then there would be A LOT of people getting punished.
With the screenshots we have actually been shown, it looks like Go Next needs to flag someone multiple times before they actually get a penalty. And the most likely scenario for that, is someone that ragequits often enough to get flagged by Go Next as a frequent ragequitter, so that Go Next assumes that they are ragequitting (yet again) if they get tunneled out super quickly.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010469#Comment_4010469
You left out the part where I said killers below A-B tiers should be brought up as well. My point is the variability between killer power levels is too much to balance the rest of the game around fairly. Since survivors and maps don't change much other than the occasional pallet RNG screwing one side (you could possibly make an argument about mmr here too), the killer power levels at the extremes need to be brought in line with the bulk of the roster.
That’s not allowed to happen though. Look at what happened with Clown. He was actually decent for a while, and it got so many complaints that he’s back to being useless.
Like, people can say “oh, let’s buff the weaker killers”, but it’s not actually allowed to happen in any meaningful way because it just gets complaints.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010439#Comment_4010439
Okay, not a definition. This is in the section that lists what can get you banned. You sure do like extremes without nuance. Sportsmanship isn't usually a set of rules, it's an attitude. And one that is, again, lacking in this game.
So are the people chiming in with their experiences on this post lying?
I’m using sportsmanship as the official definition in the game rules.
And if you don’t like that, then we can just speak about ragequitting being literally against the game rules, and how it’s literally so bad that people can get banned from the forums if they keep encouraging other people to ragequit.
And you should be able to realize the difference between stuff that can get you banned, and stuff that can’t get you banned. And killer behavior like randomly tunneling random people, isn’t bannable.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010438#Comment_4010438
You brought up sportsmanship. So define it.
Here's the official list from the official DBD game rules! It's the official list!!!!!!!
Disconnects refers to ragequitting. We also have Botting and Lag Switching. And there's your list, directly from the official game rules.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010391#Comment_4010391
You know people might ragequit, or DC when they are feeling targetted too. Like if you are having a bad day, and ending up getting tunneled non stop.
That is still an unacceptable reason to ragequit. If someone needs a break from the game, they should take a break from the game. But they shouldn't break game rules, and show a total lack of respect for the other people in the game, by ragequitting.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010391#Comment_4010391
This statement is extreme. "Jaywalking is illegal, so people that like to frequently jaywalk are criminals." Just a tad black and white.
Is all unsportsmanlike behavior unacceptable then? Definitions of sportmanship involve terms like fairness, generosity, and respect—all things rather lacking in many matches from both roles.
The official rules say that ragequitting is against the rules, and therefore it is against the rules. Go Next exists because ragequitting is against the rules. It's also against the forum rules to encourage people to ragequit.
"Fairness" is not in the game rules. It is not the same thing.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010384#Comment_4010384
Because thinking every single person who's saying a thing has a shifty ulterior motive is paranoid. I also don't see what good it would do. If it's a hidden metric like MMR, only the devs know how it works, and they'll adjust it based on numbers more than a small outcry. Because this outcry is pretty small. People complain about tunneling a lot, but this occurrence is much less frequent. So we can assume the issue isn't huge and the occasiaonl complaint will do little.
That being said, if the system does catch innocent people, it needs revision. Your desired evidence won't tell you much though. What if I make a new account and DC a ton and then finally get a match where I get genuinely tunneled, post the footage, and say, "Look, I was tunneled and lost a Grade." The match footage won't give you the full picture.
People that often ragequit are already rule-breaking people
This is a massive assumption about people's characters based on very little.
Ragequitting is breaking the rules, so people that like to frequently ragequit are rule-breaking people. It's unsportsmanlike conduct, and it's not acceptable.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010375#Comment_4010375
I was wondering when this post would summon you.
That one I posted from Reddit is only a month old. And no, I don't think people across the whole spectrum of social media are lying about this relativity minor thing that either exists or it doesn't. I think they may just not be telling the whole truth about why it's happening. That, or they dont realize their history of DCing is also causing the game to think they're going next when they aren't.
For the people that really want to be able to ragequit whenever they want without any penalties, Go Next can be a huge deal to them, because the previous system allowed them to very quickly and easily ragequit without penalties.
And when there are people that want to throw themselves at the killer to ragequit, they might "do whatever it takes" to try to get Go Next reverted.
People that often ragequit are already rule-breaking people, why is it so difficult to image them lying on top of their unsportsmanlike behavior?
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010360#Comment_4010360
So I did find a Facebook post from 4 days ago where someone said this happened to them with a screenshot. I don't really have any reason to believe people would lie about this so I'm inclined to believe it.
Reading a bit more about it, it does seem to happen to people who have a history of DCing or going next. So I guess the question for OP is:
Do you have a history that could make this happen? Four times in a day seems quite drastic.
I think I've intentionally DCed once as killer, one internet-loss DC as survivor and some "dedicated server not responding" issues (which hopefully don't count) and that's it, so I basically have no history of DCing, which is probably why I've never seen this message. I'm guessing there's some hidden system of strikes against people who make a habit of DCing/going next. I would also guess that's why there's a lack of footage, because who wants to show that and get roasted for it?
I guess if someone wanted to test this, they coumd make a new account and DC and go-next a whole bunch and see what happens.
Really? You don't think people would lie on the internet to get what they want?
You don't think it's really strange that we still can't get recent video evidence of this happening? After all the complaints we see about tunneling, and all the complaints we get about unfair S-tier killers stomping all over survivors, there still isn't anyone that can record video evidence of this happening?
-
I still haven't seen any recent or semi-recent video evidence of this happening
And people that complain about this, very often sound like the type of person that ragequits often. So it begs the question if these people ragequit so often that Go Next thinks that whenever they die fast it's another ragequit.
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010208#Comment_4010208
Actions speak louder than words. By not addressing the hiding they say….
They addressed everything they could about go next. There isn‘t much more they can do and that they have to do.
The Go Next penalties can be increased.
The Go Next detection can be improved.BHVR absolutely did not address everything they could. The current implementation was a good start, but it obviously needs to be better due to the fact that so many people don’t take it seriously. And that is mostly because the penalties aren’t harsh enough .
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010150#Comment_4010150
They declared hiding as not a problem by keeping it the way it is. It was also not called anti ragequitting it was called anti go next, which refers to the action of survivors killing themselves on hook.
We were never told the anti-hiding mechanic has been finalized, and it still might be a work in progress.
Also, Go Next involves a lot more than survivors just manipulating button presses while on hook. It’s also a rework of how the penalties functioned.
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010117#Comment_4010117
Who officially called hiding a problem? Just search for them or equip perks if you have such a problem with it. As for ragequitting, you can‘t solve that people will quit when they don’t want to play. The go next reduction tried to solve people killing themself on hook, which it did archive.
The phase 1 changes including anti-hiding and anti-ragequitting, declared them both as problems.
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4010106#Comment_4010106
The go next stuff did work and the afk crow stuff was never needed in the first place.
Neither of those is actually true.
There are still way too many people ragequitting, and people have claimed it's because the penalties are way too light.
And excessive hiding is officially considered to be problematic survivor behavior, and should be taken with the same seriousness as things like camping, tunneling, and slugging.
-
I'm still waiting for the phase 1 stuff to be fixed. The AFK crows got nerfed into uselessness, and Go Next was nerfed so badly that a lot of people are still ragequitting for selfish petty reasons.
-
@Rudjohns said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4009958#Comment_4009958
I still wonder who asked for that rework?
Things that people actually complained about:
- Some of his addons felt extremely awful as survivor
- It felt unfair being able to do things like have a 4m terror radius in T2, holding onto a 99% stalk, sneaking up to a survivor… and then instantly tapping to T3 to either one-shot or mori the survivor before the survivor can properly react.
Things that people absolutely did not complain about:
- Myers having an M1 lunge attack
The new dash just doesn't make sense. It's worse than having the super lunge , because the dash has too much counterplay. But BHVR made the "give me the super lunge instead" addon have such a low rarity, that killers can bypass the new dash in every game.
If we aren't allowed to have a reliable dash ability, then get rid of it. Unreliable killer powers are not fun. And if the dash needs to be unreliable in order to exist… then it shouldn't exist.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4008732#Comment_4008732
Thanks for going into more depth. I think this comes back to definitions, because it seems like we’re working with different understandings of what “difficulty” means. I think if we’re both on the same page with that, it will help us figure out how to move forward. From your points in our discussion, it feels like you’re defining difficulty almost entirely in terms of mechanical complexity, like how many buttons are pressed, how often you move, how much action per second is required.
If that’s your definition, then yes, I can agree that the core of survivor mechanics are simple. But then doesn’t that apply to many killers as well? And even so, do you feel that mechanically simple is all that dictates skill or difficulty? Some killers like Nurse are less mechanically complex than others. Blinking and swinging involves fewer “button presses” than, say, Vecna managing spell rotation, yet Nurse is widely considered the strongest and one of the hardest to play well. Why? Because her difficulty doesn’t come from the physical act of pressing buttons, but from knowledge, precision, and timing of when to press those buttons. Just like looping. Nurse doesn’t even have to worry about walls to move around, or crossing pallets, or windows, but just because she requires less mechanical input does not mean she is not difficult to learn, or difficult to be good at.
That’s why I don’t agree that mechanical inputs alone can define difficulty. Otherwise we’d be saying Nurse is easy because she has fewer buttons to press, or that carpentry is easy because hammering a nail is mechanically simple, or that chess is easy because moving a pawn is mechanically simple. In all those cases, the real difficulty comes from what surrounds those simple mechanics, knowledge, judgment, and application. And I feel it’s disingenuous to disregard those things in regards to survivor gameplay and the impact it has in difficulty.
So I guess the question I’d bring back to you is: if mechanical inputs alone define difficulty, then why isn’t Nurse considered one of the easiest killers in the game? And if you agree she isn’t, then doesn’t that show that mechanical simplicity doesn’t necessarily equal low difficulty? What do you define difficulty as?
Nurse ranks highly on tier lists, becuse the tier lists are assuming the killers are magically playing 100% perfectly. And if someone magically plays Nurse 100% perfectly, and perfectly predicts, aims, and times all her blinks, then all her chases will end super fast. The actual issue is reality doesn’t work like that, and there are so many opportunities to mess up while playing Nurse, that she very often doesn’t actually perform that well in reality.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4009721#Comment_4009721
"That point is meaningless" is just a way of saying "I don't have any counter point."
"The Killer could have stopped the Survivors from doing the gens with various perks or strategies, but they didn't" is just a way of saying "I don't have a real argument"
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4009711#Comment_4009711
Too vague.
Okay, I can be more specific. If I'm doing a generator and you're chasing a teammate, it's up to you to decide whether to keep chasing, or come over here to stop me from doing the gen. That is how you control whether or not I complete the gen.
We could just say survivors are in complete control if they escape, because they could use various perks and strategies. And if the survivors fail, it's because "they just didn't"
Actually, we can't say that. If Survivors escape, then the Killer failed to control the generators. Even if you just made the bad decision to commit to chasing that one Survivor while the other three rushed the last gen, that was still a decision entirely within your control.
If Survivors fail, then the Killer successfully controlled the gens and prevented them from being completed.
That point is meaningless. A killer could literally stand next to 1 generator, and chase everyone off that 1 generator, and still lose the game. Being able to chase people off of a generator, doesn't mean the killer is in complete control of whether or not survivors complete generators.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4009666#Comment_4009666
But it is. The Killer could have stopped the Survivors from doing the gens with various perks or strategies, but they didn't.
Too vague. We could just say survivors are in complete control if they escape, because they could use various perks and strategies. And if the survivors fail, it's because "they just didn't"
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4009615#Comment_4009615
It sure feels that way sometimes. But whenever Survivors do win, it's because the Killer failed to stop the gens from being done.
That certainly sounds like proof that survivors doing generators isn't completely within the killer's control.