Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
I personally use the information of breakable walls. There are some maps where there are dead ends of the breakable walls are intact, and I want to make sure I don’t accidentally run into those dead ends. Also, there are some loops that are much more powerful for the survivor if the breakable wall is still intact, so that is useful information too.
It also stops trolling attempts, like on Midwich, when killers break one wall on the back staircase, but doesn’t break the other wall, so survivors get trolled by a dead end after walking up or down the staircase.
I would much rather the walls just be a different aura color, so they aren’t as confusing, but it is very important for me to see the breakable walls.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435855#Comment_3435855
Except that I had a hit like that. And didn't move mouse. So you are saying to me that thing that happened to me DID NOT happen... IDK what to tell you about that one
Yes. I’m telling you the thing you think happened……didn’t happen. I don’t care what you personally think happened. You’re wrong. Aim dressing is not an auto aim system, and it never ever helps a killer get a hit.
But BHVR admitted aim dressing can steal hits, and I can personally confirm the short m1 attack bug absolutely can steal hits.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435930#Comment_3435930
As we state in the patch notes, this is a temp measure - short term, whilst we look at longer term options
We had a PTB that included an anti-slugging mechanic, there are plans for an anti-camping mechanic, and BHVR is looking into an anti-3 gem mechanic.
Is there absolutely anything on the survivor side that is problematic, and needs a mechanic?
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435641#Comment_3435641
Not possible, but then you can try to play nurse and see you blink over survivor (see nothing in front of you) and you still get that down... Well. That doesn't sound like "there is no auto-aim". It sounds more like "killer can lock his target even before he can attack" (which more broadly can be called auto-aim).
No, that can't be called auto-aim. It's called "Nurse manually moved their camera and aimed for the survivor".
There's no target lock on with Nurse either. You shouldn't just make stuff up that is objectively wrong.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435494#Comment_3435494
Then how could you get a hit with nurse by your back? Also how can it steal hits and not give hits you were not supposed to get? You just take 50% you like and ignore the rest
Aim dressing, and the short m1 attack bug, both have a double validating system, that can steal hits, but can't give hits.
In the case of aim dressing, the first validation is to see if the killer is making an attack, and is aimed properly. If this check passes, then the game might yank the camera away from the killer, to have to "look better" for the survivor. This camera yank can steal hits, if the camera yanks improperly, or if the camera yank disorients the killer so much that they overcompensate their camera turns and miss the survivor.
However, aim dressing will never just say "hey, the killer wants to make an attack, let's yank the camera so the killer is aiming towards the survivor, to help the killer".
And yes killers can attack survivors, but the aim dressing system itself will never give the killer a hit they weren't supposed to get. It's not an auto-aim system.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
He is probably BHVR's fav killer. If he is not, i don't know what is the reason he is not getting any nerf.
+ 2nd best killer in game.
+ Very strong chase power.
+ Very strong map mobility.
+ His mains loves to abuse hug-tech (bug)
+ Broken level add-ons.
+ Whenever Nurse miss with her blinks, she gets punishment by it but Blight? No Sir! Thanks to 4.6 movement speed.
Now imagine this killer people. S-tier killer. Very busted with some add-ons but BHVR nerfed average killers like Slinger and Freddy before Blight. End of story.
1st best killer in the game. Ever since Nurse’s big triple nerf, she’s no longer the #1 killer for 99.999% of the games.
Does everyone remember how much complaints Nurse used to get, and how very little complaints she gets now in comparison? That’s because many people really just don’t see her as super OP anymore.
Meanwhile, Blight has a much higher pick rate, and a better overall kill rate, and is much easier to start playing. And people are constantly complaining about how OP some of Blight’s addons are. Does everyone remember how many complaints Nurse used to get about her addons before all her good addons got nerfed into the ground? And now I haven’t seen any Nurse addon complaints in months?
At some point, people should admit that it doesn’t matter if a killer can teleport through walls, because there is a point where a killer can get so many nerfs that they aren’t #1 anymore.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435116#Comment_3435116
Reread what I wrote. Yes. It is a bug. No it shouldn't work like that. Yes it robs killers of good hits too
We did reread what you said. BHVR admitted that aim dressing can steal hits from the killer. However, they also said that aim dressing will never give killers hits they weren't supposed to get, because it's not an auto-aim.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3434582#Comment_3434582
Questions:
- Isn't incentive based upon queue? If not, what is it based upon?
- The difference on PS5 is significant, as in seconds vs. 3-5 minutes or more. Does that count?
Incentives are not based upon queue times. I've had 10 second killer queues, non stop all the time since the Survivor HUD was released, and I still sometimes see +100% survivor BPs. Meanwhile, my survivor queues are always much slower, and can easily take over a minute, and that also started when the Survivor HUD released.
If the incentives were working correctly, they would be giving each player incentives to play whichever of their queues (killer or survivor) is shorter, because each player's shorter queue needs more help.
-
@Mushmallow said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3434263#Comment_3434263
10-16m away is not directly next to by any definition.
Correct. BHVR was really just trying say "directly next to, in all the 360 degrees that the killer could be relative to the survivor", but that sounds awkward to read, so they said "otherwise in the immediate vicinity".
This "maybe 16 yards counts as face camping" is such a fake made up argument some people are making. There was zero confusion to what face camping meant before the anti-face camping announcement was made, and "directly next to" was always the definition of face camping.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3434124#Comment_3434124
"or otherwise in the immediate vicinity"
How are we defining 'immediate vicinity' here? It's clearly referring to a condition other than directly facing the survivor, "or otherwise"
"allows them to easily interrupt grabs and prevent rescues"
This is possible within around 10m, depending on immediate obstacles, which is why they designed it to be the range it is.
immediate still means directly next to. There are other immediate directions, like directly to the left of the survivor, or directly to the right of the survivor, and all the other 360 degrees the killer could be, and still be directly next to the survivor.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3434024#Comment_3434024
Don't you think the range would need to be a little larger than the typical facecamping range, to ensure that facecamping killers don't just take two steps back and return to business as usual?
How is 16 yards "a little larger" than melee range?
-
@MrPeanutbutter said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3433574#Comment_3433574
I hope they reconsider the range. 16 meters is a long way away and is absolutely not facecamping. Facecamping is being within range to grab somebody if they go for a save. I’m willing to see how this plays out, but I worry that it’s penalizing a very legitimate and sometimes required way for killers to play.
I don't have high hopes. Did you see how terrible the mori PTB was? BHVR didn't even try to balance the PTB, they just released it in the most awful way for both sides. Survivors were abusing troll builds to prevent killers from hooking them, and killers were making 20+ minute long games where they "challenged themselves" to see if they could trigger the new mori when all 4 survivors were still alive.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3433800#Comment_3433800
In no universe is 5 yards proxy camping. That's the range of Prove Thyself, that's lunge distance.
In what universe is 16 yards "right next to the survivor's face"?
-
Remember that BHVR claims they want to have better transparency...... unless it involves topics that can benefit killers, at which point it's just a bunch of silence. Why is it so difficult to get just one comment from BHVR on an FoV slider?
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3433587#Comment_3433587
My question still stands, what is the threshold between face camping and proxy camping? Is there a vague middle range that's just camping but not either face/proxy? And if so, then this is a mechanic to address that form of camping as well.
Getting hung up on "it's not akshully face camping in the technical sense" is just missing the point, camping is camping, whether you're staring the hooked survivor down or you a couple of meters away, it serves the same purpose.
Technically speaking, facecamping hasn't been an issue since they solved the problem of the killer literally bodyblocking hooks, camping is just camping now, the face part is immaterial.
Facecamping is when the killer's face is directly next to the survivor, or when the killer is next to the survivors face, depending on whose "face" you want "face camping" to be based off of. Proxy camping is anything farther away than that. For most killers, it's close enough for the killer to attempt a hook grab. For Bubba, it's close enough to wreck everyone with his chainsaw.
This isn't some deep philosophical problem. Facecamping would be 0-4 yards max, using the definitions people have been using for years. And going anything farther than 8 yards is absolutely ridiculous.
-
@Seraphor said:
What is the line between Face Camping and Proxy Camping?
16m might seem like a long way, but it definitely feels too close to consider Proxy camping. It's close enough to be able to reach the unhooker before they make it to the hook, and it's within Kindred range.
It doesn't matter if it's within Kindred range. Face camping is when the killer is right up next to the survivors face, or when the killer's face is right up next to the hooked survivor, depending on whose "face" you want "face camping" to be based off of.
And before this announcement, I've never seen anyone ever use Kindred's range as the facecamping range. And I've never seen BHVR mention that kindred's range was made on purpose to represent facecamping's range. And when BHVR did talk about facecamping, they referred to things like "facecamping with the chainsaw revved", and when it's not a basement hook, that requires the killer to be extremely close to the hooked survivor.. way closer than 16 yards.
-
@Crowman said:
If the system works to tackle solely facecamping, then you can still proxy camp with killers like Huntress. You should still be able to go in to force the next hook state since it's a build up. You can still defend a hook against survivors rushing to unhook. Basement is still deadly due to the 1 way out and you can still watch the single entrance.
The only thing, assuming it the values are right, is that you can't just down a survivor, put them on a hook, and stand in front of them until they die unless the gens are all done. Which is fine, because even as someone who plays killer, there's little value in facecamping and having it being practically removed from the game is fine.
Of course this all depends on the exact numbers as it's possible the system is too weak or too strong against normal gameplay.
A killer that is 16 yards away from a hooked survivor isn't facecamping them. This isn't a definition of facecamping that I've ever seen anyone use before. If BHVR wants to make an anti facecamping mechanic, it should be limited to facecamping range.
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3433313#Comment_3433313
Isn’t that just from the basement hook to like the top of the stairs?
You mean "Far away enough, that you can't even see the survivor's face anymore"?
-
Why is the term "face camping" being used, if the system goes out 16 meters? How on earth is that face camping?
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3432427#Comment_3432427
So you think Cowshed will be worse?
It doesn't matter what cowshed turns into. BHVR said they want to balance maps for both sides, so this isn't a killer-only gameplay improvement.
Besides, the map rebalances might end up being an overall nerf for killers, depending on how the full set of rebalances go.
-
@BlightedDolphin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431707#Comment_3431707
To be fair, we don't actually know if this will be a good change yet, especially given their latest reworks. They somehow made Mother's Dwelling and Gas Heaven more unbalanced so I wouldn't put it past them to make Cowshed worse...
Not saying I agree with the OP, because every change they listed is an amazing change, but I don't have much faith in these map reworks...
Also BHVR said this, so the map reworks will also make some maps more survivor-sided, so the map rebalancing is not a killer-only gameplay improvement.
"What map is played on can have a substantial difference in the outcome of the game, and most maps are very polarizing as either killer sided or survivor sided, with very few if any commonly seen as balanced towards both sides equally, and the team would like to change that."
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3432404#Comment_3432404
In this particular debate, that wasn't the contention. The contention was that they clearly don't care about Killers because they didn't mention any Killer-sided changes.
My point was that they specifically pointed out two maps that were Survivor-sided and said they were changing them to be more fair.
Again, map improvements don't count as a killer-only gameplay improvement, because the map improvements could also make some maps more survivor-sided.
In order for map balancing to be a killer-only gameplay improvement, DBD would need to vow to never use it to make maps more survivor sided. Otherwise, it's a change that will eventually benefit both sides, depending on the reworked maps.
-
@Star99er said:
I mean you aren’t going to get anything without giving some constructive criticism. All the survivors changes you mentioned are features that players have been vocal about for awhile.
Personally I feel like killer balance changes have been slow lately. I wouldn’t mind at least 1 killer per chapter or during each mid chapter patch. There’s few killers that I rarely see in my games and when I do they’re a pushover.
1) We have a short m1 attack bug that can steal hits from the killer, but BHVR won't even comment on this issue. BHVR also admitted that aim dressing can steal hits from killers... is that still happening? Are the "aim dressing problems" really just the short m1 attack bug, and people are mislabeling it? If aim dressing can still steal hits from the killer, that should be fixed too. Both these issues fall under the killer gameplay issue of reliable attacks, which this game doesn't have sometimes, because the double validation of the short m1 attack bug, and the double validation of aim dressing, can be disorienting, and possibly can steal hits from the killer.
2) FoV slider has been mentioned multiple times on these forums, but zero feedback from BHVR. Not a "we don't want to do this". Not a "maybe in the future, but not anytime soon".... Just zero feedback from BHVR.
-
@lifestylee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431707#Comment_3431707
Those reworks are most likely gonna be like red forest reworks tho, they'll just update it visually, add some more random stuff to the map, add some more safe pallets and loops and call it a day.
Yeah, we don't even know if the changes will be killer sided. I know for a fact that the new red forest maps are a lot less fun for Huntress, because they added a million line of sight blockers that make it so much more difficult to try for long ranged hatchets. And let's remember that the new skull merchant shack is so much more annoying than anything from the old red forest maps.
For all we know, they might be reducing the size of the giant deadzones (cornfields), and replacing them with safe tiles, because it is "too easy for m1 killers to hit a survivor that runs into a cornfield"
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431940#Comment_3431940
Sure, they could've, but them not saying that isn't somehow an insult or a slight. There's a thousand things, even great things that the game desperately needs, they could have said. It's also worth mentioning that they tend to get given flak for saying "soon(tm)" so I don't blame them for only sharing when they have something concrete to talk about.
The visual terror radius is the one accessibility change they made, the other stuff is just... gameplay improvements, and it's not like killers have been lacking in that. 6.1 had a ton of killer gameplay improvements, and specific killers have gotten noticeable improvements too since then. Add in perk balance changes and map changes, and killers are far from left in the dust.
How many years need to go by, before we can consider it a slight? This isn't the first year this has happened. We knew about the survivor HUD plans a very long time ago, and back then people said "oh, well, just because survivors get something doesn't mean killers need to get something"..... but that was over a year ago, and we now have a roadmap for the next few months, which means about a 2 year timeframe without announcements for killers?
-
@jesterkind said:
Bare minimum, survivor bots should be counted as a bonus for both sides, not purely a survivor advantage. A survivor DCing robs you of another player to proc perks on, a kill to count for challenges, and any pressure you could get from downing and hooking them; it is better for the killer overall to get a bot to replace DCs, even if a 3v1 is technically the better outcome from a raw strength perspective.
Anyway, to the wider issue, I want to say this as gently as possible but I think you've kind of made this into a pet issue and interpret its absence as an active slight when it's really just that they haven't gotten far enough in it to announce it yet. It's not as though killer players have been neglected when it comes to overall changes, they've just done one accessibility change for survivors recently.
Gotten far enough into it? Sometimes we are given months, or a year advance notice for survivor changes. Why didn’t BHVR say something like “Hey, we’re also working on killer gameplay improvements, so stay tuned for more info in the future”?
Even if you want to argue survivor bots, we still have the survivor HUD, visual terror radius, and anti face-camping announcements, and nothing for killers.
-
@PowZapBamWoofMeow said:
They didn’t mention ANYTHING about killers.
Survivors whining about getting face camped: fixed!
Killers with legit issues, such as older killers needing reworks, addons needing reworks, etc: ignored!
BHVR won’t even comment on the short M1 tap bug, that can steal hits from the killer. Is this an intended mechanic?
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431727#Comment_3431727
POV: You completely missed them saying they're messing with Coldwind maps.
Again, that doesn’t count as a killer only gameplay improvement, when we all know killer-sided maps will also get targeted in the future.
-
@Lord_Antonius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431700#Comment_3431700
bots genrush and are dead perfect with skill checks.
Also bots are insanely OP with flashlights.
It’s still an improvement specifically targeted for survivors.
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431700#Comment_3431700
And plus they announced 2 survivor-sided maps will be re-balanced. But they ignored that fact as well.
How is the world is that comparable to features like survivor HUD, especially when everyone knows killer-sided maps will also get targeted in the future?
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430556#Comment_3430556
No one asked you to be nice, you are getting triggered out of a hypothetical situation. Just bring the mori and the putrid offering. There's nothing nice about either of those. You have more control over your gameplay than survivors have unless SWF. I don't understand what's so difficult about accepting that solo survivor has issues. You don't see me saying stuff like "If a killer hits me on hook 3 times I should be automatically unhooked" or something like that. Come one now. Is it the toxicity that bothers you about that? Or is it the small buff survivors will get. You confuse me with what is really bothering you.
If you think it happens a lot more often than killers being toxic, then it's on you to bring statistics.
This isn’t a hypothetical situation. It literally happens a lot in my games. And there isn’t any “getting triggered”, I’m just telling you what I do in my games. If survivors don’t want to be hooked, then they can bleed out on the ground. It’s not really a big deal. But survivors should give up their right to complain about getting bled out, if they are purposely placing themselves in situations where the killer can’t reliably hook them.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430691#Comment_3430691
This is true, but a pin-point notification would be too much. It would have to be quite vague. Because even while you hear a Survivor on the other side of the wall, you wont know their exact location. However, with sounds being directional in this case, a visual indicator would point to them.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430771#Comment_3430771
The thing is, if it would be like the visual terror radius, it would be an improvement to having nothing, but it would not be compareable in usefulness to the survivor equivalent.
Because as Survivor, if you are in the Terror Radius, you will start looking around. And with the visual TR players get the information to start looking around. However, this would not really be useful as Killer. If I get a notification that a survivor sound (obviously there are other sounds like Generators as well, but lets not include those) was done nearby, looking around would not give me any more information and probably just be a waste of time.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3431017#Comment_3431017
Yeah, this would work. But it would be more vague than the information people without hearing issues would be getting, but I think this is the best that can be done without the feature being OP.
Obviously sounds like Generators can be more clear with the indicator (because the Killer can see Gens anyway), but having such a vague indicator that the Killer knows the general direction of the Survivor but not their exact location could work.
I was thinking quadrants (left, forward, right, behind).
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430662#Comment_3430662
The problem is that you cannot just compare those two because they are not even compareable in the game without any hearing issues.
Terror Radius is not directional while Survivor sounds are directional (which is logical, since they are emitted by the Survivor itself). So if you would get directional queues where a Survivor is, it would be a huge buff and every Killer player would just turn it on instantly, because they get a clear indicator of the exact position of the Survivor.
Sadly I dont think that it is really possible to give Killers such a accessibility feature, except it is either really useless or OP.
It would be just like the visual terror radius, where you only get visual survivor noise indicator if those noises should be audible. The current way sounds work is unhealthy, because they encourage killers to blast their headphones at dangerous noise levels, just so they can hear more. This game should not be encouraging potential hearing loss, and should instead implement visual survivor noises, so killers can play the game at safe noise levels.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430485#Comment_3430485
Bro, just hook him. Most of the time you can hook them. If you're so worried just bring the offering to make hooks spawn closer or bring a Mori. As it is now, it's not fair atm that killer can slug a survivor for an indefinite amount of time (4 mins is a lot of time in DBD) so he can get the last guy. Killers freak out when a chase takes a bit too long, 4min of chill time for the killer to look for the other survivor is a lot of time.
A killer who wants to get a 4k hardly cares about wasting time (see 3 gen killers at their peak slowing games immensely), please don't make any more excuses. You just don't want 4k denied if you get too greedy. The thing is that killers who wanna try hard can bring anything busted. Putrid Oak tree is an offering to counter the thing you're worried about, the Mori is even better because you don't even have to carry the survivor to a hook anyway if he already has 2 hooks.
Survivors unless in a SWF cannot co-ordinate to bring the stuff that counter killer strategies. Killers have more control that survivors (again SWF is the exception).
Killer wasting too much time chasing a survivor is a mistake, I don't understand why it should not be a non-factor when 2 are left. It's also a big reward for the killer to have 4 mins to do whatever he wants to find the other survivor. But you're used to it, that's why it does not look like a huge deal to you. The thing is that atm the freedom the killer has when 2 are left is not fair and it should involve more risk for such a strategy. Strategies that are low risk high reward are broken (and slugging for the 4k is high reward and low risk since it's very hard for both of them to escape). It should be a high risk higher reward strategy for someone who is really intend on winng. 3k is a win already.
If I’m not in range of a hook, and the survivor starts wiggling, then they can get dropped and bled out. I refuse to be nice, when survivors are purposely placing themselves in situations where they can’t be hooked. Survivors know exactly what they are doing, and they’re being spiteful.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430460#Comment_3430460
I prefer basekit UB to be honest when 2 are left than your idea. Your idea still favors the killer and gives him ample time to look for the 4th survivor. Should not be like that. Being greedy should come with a risk. Killer just saves time by not hooking the survivor, now imagine killer defending his slug when survivors are trying to get up a teammate who's recovered. No thanks. LOL, remove survivors ability to self unhook, are you serious? (what if they have Deliverance). Are you actually asking for a killer buff here? I thought you were more concerned about toxicity.
I just rather argue for slugging for the 4k not being such a big thing anymore. If DS and Off the Record get de-activated at end game because it's a guaranteed escape (I know, I'm repeating myself here), slugging when 2 are left should also be less of a guaranteed 4k-3k. Take your 3k or settle at 2k if you play too greedy. End of story.
Basekit UB would be a giant nerf to killers, because if the 3rd survivor purposely places themselves in a situation where the killer can’t hook them, they get rewarded by being able to self pickup.
Anti-slugging mechanics are only good if survivors can’t abuse them by purposely placing themselves in situations where they can’t be hooked.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430446#Comment_3430446
Ok, what about killers who slug you out of spite then? How should that be handled?
if a survivor is slugged for too long, teleport them to a hook, and remove that survivor’s ability to attempt self unhooks.
That way, you can fix the slugging problem without nerfing killers in the process.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430436#Comment_3430436
I agree with you that 3k should allow for adepts, I have no disagreement there.
The first point seems an issue with SWF. I find it hard to believe when survivors are random they'd do something like that (imo there's no point). They usually just wanna escape. I mean you could just also make another change and if Killer knocks the same survivor 3 times when only 2 are left he just bleeds out instantly. Or simply limit it to 2 times.
Solo survivors sometimes do this too, out of spite. Even if the survivors know they are going to lose, some of them will purposely place themselves in situations where they can’t be hooked, so the killer doesn’t get the full sacrifice bonus. And sometimes if you try to carry them to a hook anyway, they’ll wiggle off, then immediately run right back to the spot where they can’t be hooked, again, out of spite.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3428859#Comment_3428859
No kill/escape should be guaranteed . Isn't that why DS and Off the Record are de-activated in end game? SO as not to be a guaranteed escape? Why should the killer be able to guarantee 4k by slugging indefinitely one survivor?
Basekit UB should come for the last survivors. Maybe killers won't play as greedy if there's a timer. Get your guaranteed 3k and if you're lucky you get 4k. Don't force it.
Slugging throughout the rest of the game will still be a strategy.
You don't need a guaranteed 4k.
Bring basekit UB for 2 last survivors, there I said it.
If that is implemented, then the last two survivors might try as hard as possible to get knocked down in a place where the killer can’t hook them.
It would be better if the game officially considered 3k and 4k to be the same thing. The game should consider a 3k and 4k to both be be merciless, allow 3k to be good enough for adepts, allow 3k to be good enough for iri emblems, award the same BPs for 3k and 4k, and award the same MMR increases for 3k and 4k.
But the game can’t constantly advertise a 4k as “winning more” than a 3k, then expect killlers to be content with 3ks
-
@Z0mbiv0r said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430334#Comment_3430334
So it's official it's just him as a character? It seems wierd, but I'd have to wait to see what they do with him before judging.
We still don’t know if it’s Nicolas Cage as a movie character, for a role that hasn’t been announced yet. Maybe he’s in the new DBD movie, and it wouldn’t make sense to introduce him as his character name, since the character names haven’t been announced yet.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430142#Comment_3430142
This is a non argument. You're using the rare occasion of toxic swf teams who are blatantly griefing a killer and refusing objectives to say nothing should be done about it. You're also ignoring the fact that I never once said remove the bleedout so even if a team did do this, they would still eventually bleed out. I'm not asking for infinite recovery without consequence here. Survivors would still have to fully recover and escape the situation before a full bleed out. So no, your excuse is not a justifiable reason to ignore this.
It’s not a rare occasion. I very often encounter survivors that will do this out of spite. It doesn’t even require any special perks or items sometimes. It just requires survivors to run to certain spots, where there aren’t any hooks in range.
If you want killers to be punished if they don’t hook survivors, then there needs to be more reliable ways for killers to hook survivors. We shouldn’t have these situations where the best play is letting someone bleed out, just because a survivor is trying to avoid getting hooked out of spite.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430133#Comment_3430133
That didn't happen in my case, did it? Which is why if you've been reading my replies here I have continuously asked for a CONDITIONAL way for survivors to get out of a needless slugging situation. The main condition would have to be the whole team is downed. If the killer refuses to hook a single survivor in that situation then they deserved to be punished for it. As you can see from the screenshot I provided above in response to you the killer had every opportunity to hook me and refused to do so. They should be punished for that.
And what happens if all the survivors left in the game, have purposely placed themselves in situations where the killer can't hook them? Because that is what kept happening in the mori PTB.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3430105#Comment_3430105
Killers are supposed to be sacrificing survivors to the entity. Any kill that isn't that should not be rewarded in the same was as a sacrifice both in mmr and points. You are still using the same argument which is basically "well survivor died therefore I win" even if it means a 4 minute bleedout. No, you don't win like that. That is the very kind of player that no survivor player wants to play against. Excessive slugging needs to be disincentivized.
No killer wants to play with survivors that purposely place themselves in situations where the killer can't hook them, and this happens a lot. The mori PTB failed, because as soon as survivors realized they could pick themselves up, they played things like unbreakable/flip flop/tenacity/breakdown, and purposely tried as hard as possible to place themselves in situations where the killer couldn't hook them.
You have to fix both sides of the problem at the same time.
-
Does anyone think killer accessibility issues will be mentioned at all, or are we going to go through yet another full year, with zero feedback on whether or not killers can ever get things like an FoV slider?
Will anything be announced at all, that killers would find exciting?
-
@drsoontm said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3429356#Comment_3429356
By opposition to what? Unhealthy ones?
There is no point grabbing when a survivor can go down in one simple hit.
Yeah. I don’t understand the logic with this entire post. What is the point of a grab mechanic if it can only work on injured survivors? Why would a killer want to waste all those extra animation and recovery frames for a grab, if they only work on injured survivors, at which point a quick m1 attack would be more efficient?
-
This doesn’t necessarily need to be Nicolas Cage as Nicolas Cage. It could be Nicolas Cage from a movie, but it’s makes more sense to advertise it as Nicolas Cage, then to give us the character name Nicolas Cage is playing.
It might even be an announcement that Nicolas Cage will be in the upcoming DBD movie, and we aren’t given a character name because that would be a spoiler.
-
@KateMain86 said:
Its one thing to leave a survivor on the ground for a moment while you engage another one you saw nearby, but when you leave the last 2 survivors on the ground for an entire bleedout knowing there is absolutely nothing they can do about it then that is when slugging becomes a problem. This pic below was taken after me (Kate) and Mikaela crawled across the map hoping they'd hook us so the match would end. Mikaela eventually made it to me and the killer decided to stand there and wait for us both to bleed out. This is why we need basekit abilities to deal with these situations. If nothing exists to deter and discourage killer players from doing this, they will keep doing it. The killer has no strategic advantage at this point. They already won, so the intent is clear. They only do this to be toxic.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/041HUABCPK6G/20230512222243-1.jpg
If you really did “crawl across the map hoping the killer would hook you”, then why isn’t there a hook visible in your screenshot?
-
1) FoV slider for killers.
2) Fix the short M1 tap bug so it can't steal hits.
3) Fix aim dressing so it can't steal hits.
4) Fix the survivor turn rate, so survivors can't go over the intended turn rate.
-
@1ettuce said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3428688#Comment_3428688
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/XD9SBYQZU8U3/image.png
this u?
try again, and read the post this time
I read your post. It's still a double standard. Survivors want killers to be punished or forbidden, but don't want survivors to be nerfed to allow this to happen. They want killers to take the full burden of this game change.
Because if you want tunneling to be removed from the game, then it needs to be much easier to find someone else to chase. If you want to punish tunneling, then the game should also punish survivors that try to excessively hide from the killer. The game should force both sides to interact with each other, instead of just forcing killers to change, and allowing survivors to be as non-interactive as possible.
-
It's the same issue I wrote in https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/375033/killers-are-forbidden-to-lunge-if-they-are-too-close-to-a-survivor-which-can-steal-hits#latest
If you try to lunge, the game makes a validation to see if you're allowed to lunge. And if the game thinks you are too close to lunge, it will forbid you from lunging, and will force a short m1 tap attack instead, which can steal hits from the killer.
And it can steal hits from the killer, because it validates hits twice. You get one validation to see if you're allowed to lunge, then a second validation to see if the attack hits.
The game should only make one validation per attack. The game shouldn't try to change a lunge into a short M1 tap attack, unless it has already validated the attack. Similarly, the game shouldn't try to yank the killer's camera, unless it has already validated the attack.... because aim dressing is also a double validation that can steal hits.
-
@1ettuce said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3428456#Comment_3428456
You're proving the entire point I was making w the post XD
Yes. The entire point is a huge double standard. Survivors want killers to make bad game decisions, so that survivors can have more fun..... but also think survivors don't need to make any bad game decisions so that killers can have more fun.
-
@1ettuce said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3428432#Comment_3428432
you're joking right?
I'm serious. Why should killers purposely make bad game decisions, so that games are more fun for survivors..... if survivors aren't expected to make any bad game decisions so games are more fun for killers?
Where is the list of things survivors should avoid doing, because they are unfun for killers?