Condorloco_26
Condorloco_26
About
- Username
- Condorloco_26
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,557
- Last Active
Comments
-
Since I've experienced it quite a lot before, in any bodyblocking situation I always go look for another hook as a first option.
And as a second option I go full Shane if they swarm the hook, not caring about the carried guy. I'll most likely land 3 hits before being stunned. That's a win for me.
And unless they all ran away, I know someone is going to block that "stepback" position, so it's a no-win for me if I try to hook with someone still around.
-
If I knew as a noob what I know now,
I wouldn't have unlocked almost any teachables, except for 2 or 3.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/499100#Comment_499100
Yes, they changed the hooks since facecamping had no counter, bodyblocking has counters.
Bodyblocking is a strat and all, and it works great when a survivor manages to block the front of the hook and the killer either drops the survivor, or takes the stun due to wiggling out.
Still, there's one situation where, while carrying, killer hits 1 or 2 guys and manages to "win" the position in front of the hook. At that point I would consider bodyblocking failed, since the killer is in front of the hook already. And the killer should be allowed to hook, I mean, he's right there.
But Mr. 3rd guy crouches behind the killer in the exact spot where the little "stepback" for hooking is prevented. This is the only case where I would advocate for ignoring collision, since the killer succeeded in clearing the front of the hook. Why should he also care about his backside?
-
@thesuicidefox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/499041#Comment_499041
Whatever you say, but this thread got a "BHVR read" status so that means the devs have seen it and may take it into consideration.
Not to mention that I'm fairly positive their stats will show that closing the hatch results in a 4k almost all the time. I have seen too many games, from both sides, end with the last survivor dying after hatch is closed for them to NOT see a problem.
Good, let's see if a chain of successes on one side and failures from the other, is still worthy to be rewarded with "fair" chances.
-
Well, yes. Most of the times competent SWF teams will be the ones ranking all the way up. The chances of going to R1 as a solo have decreased considerably.
-
Ok, and there's no point to discuss it any further, since you've made up your mind already and I'm just wasting my time here.
You already know the devs won't do anything unless their stats show any significant tilt, or they actively want to promote any kind of result.
-
That's why Agitation is my friend on every killer. Just the amount of time saved carrying people around is worth the perk slot.
Besides, I can run heroes down while carrying, injuring 2 - 3 in the process, or I can go look for another hook if that's what I really want.
I know there are teams that know exactly where to crouch to prevent the hook prompt from even appearing, and MAYBE that would be an analogy to the facecamping situation. You still can hit them though.
But MAYBE that's something to look into, the ability to hook from any angle. Because survivors CAN unhook from any angle.
-
@T0xicTyler said:
Don't nerf Balanced Landing, it's one of the few good perks Survivors have anymore. Wait for the map reworks. I agree that Haddonfield is super broken!
Agree, Balanced is fine.
Haddonfield is the problem
-
@noneofyourbusiness said:
I think that Asylum is not better at all.
I think Asylum is not 100% wrong. Just forget about the gen in the middle building. Let them do it without interference, and don't go inside for any reason unless the basement spawns there. No reason to eat those 4 - 6 pallets, they will cost you the match every time.
You should be able to 3 gen them with the ones outside, and any time they go inside the building, they're just wasting their time.
-
@thesuicidefox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498966#Comment_498966
Do this.
When you have 2 survivors left, slug one and find hatch. Then take the hook, go over to hatch, wait for it to open, and close it. Then just patrol the gates until you either see the survivor or see a light on the gate. You should get the last guy almost 100% of the time. If you don't then you did something wrong, or the gates were as far apart as they could possibly be.
Like I said, 2 people have escaped my Spirit out the gate after I closed hatch. Out of 25 ish games. And both times were because I made a mistake, not because the survivor did anything special.
Even in that case, a smart survivor can light 1 or 2 bulbs in an exit gate and go look for the other one, hide and wait for the killer to leave and resume progress on the same one, etc. It opens the door for gate mindgames.
If a potato survivor runs straight to the closest gate and mindlessly tries it to open and waits for the last instant to try to run away from it if the killer is coming (exactly as they do when working on gens), it's an almost guaranteed kill, yes. Because he treated the gate as a gen/looping situation. Thus, a mistake.
Maybe you're 95ing that situation with a Prayer Beads Spirit/Mother Daughter Ring Spirit or a Double engraving/M&A Billy, but any smart survivor will hear the TR and hide right away, trying to lure the killer into wondering if he left for the other gate? is he hiding around? is he inside a locker? etc
-
@thesuicidefox said:
@Condorloco_26 "Well, if the killer catches you on the gate before you can open it: it means you made the mistake of going to the nearest gate from the hatch, and the killer made the right choice of looking for that gate first"
No... dude you are not reading.
There is no opening the gate before the killer catches you. It doesn't matter which gate you choose, the killer will catch you on the gate if they are smart and know how to patrol. It is impossible to open the gate if the killer does this perfectly. You have 2 minutes to open the gate, and it takes 20 seconds to open. Even if you tap the gate and leave before the killer comes back, they know you were there because they can see the lights on the gate.
<There is no opening the gate before the killer catches you>
This. You're saying this as if it was a fact. Why not? Is there an Entity blocker on the switch?
You're saying 20 seconds are enough for a killer to kick the hatch and patrol 2 gates and prevent interaction in any of them, at all times?
Only Billy may be able to do that in certain maps if RNG favored him and a Pride Hill spawned in the middle of the map (and WITH the hatch there, too) with no LOS blockers so he can react immediately to any movement on either gate. I can only think of Blood Lodge, maybe Wreckers.
But even he can't do that in Yamaoka, Temple of purgation/mother's dwelling, Crotus/Chapel, Lery's, Game, Springwood, Haddonfield, Azarov, Ormond, etc.
-
Well, if the killer catches you on the gate before you can open it:
it means you made the mistake of going to the nearest gate from the hatch, and the killer made the right choice of looking for that gate first
If you know the killer is sitting in the hatch, waiting for the 3rd guy to bleed out so he can kick it, you should look for the farthest gate and sit by it. If the killer makes the wrong choice of gate, you win. If he makes the right chase, you'll still have enough time to make it/leave it 70-80%.
You can also choose to sit by the gate, hide, then wait until the killer comes, sees no progress is being made, and then leaves for the other gate. Just like you wait for starting a gen in the beginning of the match. There are 2 full minutes in which you can do that.
You would only be royally screwed if all three things spawned together, hatch, gate 1 and gate 2. Not much to do there.
I don't really know what else to say.
Only that there's a 50/50 on killer/surv chance to find hatch first and interact with it.
Your idea of 2 hatches still leaves you with the original 50% chance of jumping through it, since you can be unlucky and find the fake one.
-
I thought Lightborn made you immune to:
- being burnt out of cloak as Wraith
- drop survivors when flashlighted
Turns out it prevents none
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I thought Whisperers didn't work on hooked survivors.
Cue many games of me basically camping hooked survivors because I thought someone else was always nearby waiting for me to leave and go for the rescue.
This is a good topic.
Whispers procs for hooked and dying state survivors. That's a fact.
Does anyone know if whispers procs when someone is inside a locker?
And if slugs are treated as "survivors being around", why do killers get camping-penalized when there's one hooked guy and a crawling survivor is near?
-
@thesuicidefox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498379#Comment_498379
THIS IS NOT A TEAM GAME STOP TREATING AS SUCH.
While it is generally in your better interest to work with others and keep each other alive, as it increases your OWN chance of survival, you are not bound to each other like other team games. Similarly, as 1 survivor there is only so much you can do. If the other 3 don't do gens and don't make saves, you get punished for it. I could do 3 gens by myself and still die because no one else did anything. Explain to me how it is then fair that I should die with the rest when I did WAY more than my share of the work? Why should I not be given a fair chance to escape, especially if I outlived the other 3?
Failing to do gens just means that not EVERYONE gets to escape. If survivors do 5 gens, ALL of them have a chance to escape. Otherwise only 1 gets a chance to escape.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498375#Comment_498375
Except that's not really what's going on. Again I could play way better than the killer and other survivors but still die because I was the only one doing gens. You're saying that I played "bad" when I actually play exceedingly well and did more than what I should have had to do as an individual. On the flip side, if killer played well then there shouldn't be 4 survivors making it to the gates. To say that a killer played well in that situation is just asinine. That is like saying a survivor that did no gens and got caught in 10 seconds should escape. And if the killer killed 3, then they have the advantage on the 4th kill, not a guarantee on the 4th kill, which closing the hatch basically does at this point.
And I still don't see the problem. Say you watch for your own back only and don't give a damn about anyone, or even gens.
Still, you can have a headstart since you can go looking for that sweet hatch while the killer is busy as soon as the 3rd guy is being chased/dropped/hooked, depending on how many gens got done.
If the killer is like you and slugs the 3rd guy, depending on his actions you can either:
- heal the guy, if the killer leaves because he's looking for the hatch, thus resetting the game
- you go look for the hatch while the guy bleeds out and is being camped by the killer
In the unfortunate event of the guy going down exactly where the hatch spawned, go look for the exit gates. You have 2, and the killer is waiting to kick the hatch door, so you have a headstart already. If he kicks it, open the gate you're already on. If he doesn't kick it, EGC doesn't trigger and game hasn't ended yet.
I think egc is fine.
Maybe like it's already been suggested, just adjust the min-max spawn distance of exit gates .
-
@BoredByDaylight said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498657#Comment_498657
Fair enough, but I had 3 survivors blocking 1 hook. I swung and hit but they just swapped resulting in me dropping the survivor. Yet another case of SWF benefits. How is this fair?
If they did that, the upside for you is: you got 3 free chase-less hits in exchange of dropping a survivor. Now you have 4 injured people.
At high ranks, chases can last anywhere from 10 - 80 seconds just to land a single hit. So I'd say the net total is you saved a bunch of time hitting those 3 guys when they were sitting ducks.
Highly annoying, yes it is. But you can turn it upside down after that.
-
Well, any argument can be used in favor of any side finding the hatch first.
For example: a survivor can do absolutely nothing during a trial, not gens, not heal, not unhook, not totems, and still dedicate all his time exclusively to hide and look for the hatch when it spawns, while the killer must be running around chasing hitting hooking etc. which leaves him with little time to spare and go look for it.
The only way to know for sure who's finding the hatch first and interacting with it, would be asking Peanits about that particular stat.
But I think you're right about the min - max distance between gates and its RNG. It would be the right thing to do. Still, there will be exceptions like Lery's and the meat plant, where gates always spawn on opposite sides.
However, if that particular aspect about RNG is going to be looked into just because right now it's mostly affecting survivors, I'd say they should at the same time look into all RNG involved when it's affecting killers.
Namely: number of, and distance between pallets (I've broken 16 pallets in Plague's map and I've not even broken them all), jungle gyms in autohaven spawning with double pallets, etc. Number of, and distance of open windows in Haddonfield, etc.
-
@thesuicidefox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498361#Comment_498361
Doesn't matter because my hatch close overrides their use hatch. If I'm standing on the hatch just before it opens, survivor can't use it. Doesn't matter if they know where it is and are standing there waiting with me.
@Condorloco_26 "Well if you played perfectly until that point, why should the survivor still be highly able to beat you? He failed all his previous "tests", so?"
First, they aren't "highly able to beat me" it's 50/50 and I have control over whether or not the situation even happens in the first place. Second, if both players play perfectly killer still wins in this situation, because all things considered it's just impossible for the survivor no matter how well they play EGC. Their only chance is that I make a mistake, and mechanics that rely on a player making a mistake in order for the other side to have a fair opportunity are fundamentally broken. See old DS.
Failing to do gens, failing to help keeping your teammates alive, and failing to find the hatch first don't deserve any pampering. And still, you have 2 possible exit gates.
The thing is, survivors are so used to old hatch that they feel egc is so unfair, whereas in reality the game is still giving them 3 free chances to escape regardless of what happened during the trial.
Tell me how a killer gets 3 free chances when he failed at everything? Maybe NOED is 1, which can be 100% defused even before it activates. And EVERY SURVIVOR HATES. Because it's cheap AF.
-
@thesuicidefox said:
@Condorloco_26 "And if the killer closes it, the survivor still has 2 more chances of escaping. It won't be easy, though. But the exit gates spawn right from the beginning of the match and the survivor can spot them beforehand. Besides, it wasn't easy for the killer to lead into this scenario either."
"Won't be easy" no it won't, it will be near impossible. Literally no one would have been able to escape from me after I closed the hatch if I played perfectly. It's just not possible. And the times I escaped myself were times when the killer made a mistake. Escaping shouldn't be based entirely on whether or not that killer makes a mistake, because as survivor you are just screwed in this situation.
"And from personal experience: As a killer I very rarely spot the hatch before it comes into play, so looking for it becomes a race vs the remaining survivor, and I've seen plenty of them escaping. And dying."
Then you are a fool. Once I get down to 2 survivors and the hatch has spawned (remember this is the important part), I will slug one and go looking for the hatch. Once I find it, I come back and take the hook. Sometimes the survivor is revived before I come back, which then I just play out the game until I down one again and take the hook, then rush to hatch. It is IMPOSSIBLE to take hatch if killer does this, and near IMPOSSIBLE to escape through the doors after the killer closes hatch using any sort of skill.
Having a fake hatch would make killers more carefully consider killing the third survivor, and/or give survivors a more fair chance to actually hatch.
Well if you played perfectly until that point, why should the survivor still be highly able to beat you? He failed all his previous "tests", so?
And sorry if I don't share your vision of being a fool. I never slug the 3rd guy because it highly sucks for him, chances are he will DC anyway to grant hatch if 4th guy finds it, and generally I don't get high on being a jerk. If 4k comes naturally, without dragging someone else's game, so be it.
If not, let's all move on quickly to the next match. I won 3-1 anyway.
And as a survivor, same rules apply.
-
I don't think this is necessary. Killers and survivors have the same % of chance of finding the hatch.
The hatch is already an *extra* option of escaping, even when survivors fail to do any, partially, or all their 5 objectives.
And if the killer closes it, the survivor still has 2 more chances of escaping. It won't be easy, though. But the exit gates spawn right from the beginning of the match and the survivor can spot them beforehand. Besides, it wasn't easy for the killer to lead into this scenario either.
And from personal experience: As a killer I very rarely spot the hatch before it comes into play, so looking for it becomes a race vs the remaining survivor, and I've seen plenty of them escaping. And dying.
And playing as a survivor, I've died mostly before, and seldom after it spawns, and I've escaped both from jumping into the hatch or opening the gate, the same. It's fine IMO.
-
:)
-
Nerf Beast of Prey!
-
-
@Blueberry said:
"Outside of ethnicities (which already have been taken into consideration, lowering the number to 8%) colorblindness has no ties to age, social or economic status, hobby predilection, or videogame genre preference. Meaning, the 8% will most likely translate unchanged."
You're missing my point entirely.
You can't consider 8% in terms of the potential DBD players that would want to play because of this change. The vast majority of that 8% would not be interested in DBD regardless of the change, that is my point.
"you'll still find approx 8% of those 14,000 living their lives affected by colorblindness."
You can't parallel those two things. 8% of the population would not mean 8% of the steam player base.
"That amounts to 1,120 guys only on Steam"
That isn't an accurate number because of the stipulations I mentioned above.
"I'm sure it's a considerable amount."
Based on the things I've stated above you are coming to an inaccurate assumption. It is much, much lower than you are presuming.
@Blueberry
I have a degree in Science (Biology) and work with statistics everyday. I'm not trying to sound pretentious or anything, what I'm saying is you're making incorrect assumptions. I'll try to make myself as clear as possible.
The *8* is the percentage of males affected globally.
If you take a sample of 1000 random males in the world, you'll find more or less 80 colorblind guys. As you repeat your samples over and over, the 8% will consolidate even further.
i.e. If you pick 1000 random carpenters, you'll find roughly 80 colorblind guys. If you pick 1000 random kindergarten kids, you'll find roughly 80 colorblind boys. If you pick 1000 random truck drivers, you'll find roughly 80 colorblind guys.
Unless the activity we talk about involves any *weeding out* where colorblind people have already been filtered (airplane pilots, electricians, air traffic controllers, etc), any activity where you take your sample from will include roughly the same 8% of colorblind males.
As far as I know, videogames don't require passing any colorblind tests. So we can infer 8% of all *male* gamers are colorblind, regardless of what game they choose to play.
So ---> Out of the total 14,000 estimated male DbD players, we will find roughly 1,120 colorblind males.
If you're talking about how much of the 8% global colorblind males would actually be drawn into videogames ---> DbD, then you should consider your base number is
320,000,000 or 320 millions
because that's the global number of colorblind males living today.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498181#Comment_498181
The data I'm using is world wide and not limited to strictly one population.
DBD is mostly males. For strictly males we are looking at a blanket worldwide amount of 8%. Now cut that 8% down for the ages that typically would be playing games. Now cut it again for the small percentage of those aged males that play games that also happen to like Dead By Daylight by chance. You're realistically looking at probably a 1% or around there. It is a very, very minute amount.
Ok, so 8% global male then.
No need to cut any more out of that.
Outside of ethnicities (which already have been taken into consideration, lowering the number to 8%) colorblindness has no ties to age, social or economic status, hobby predilection, or videogame genre preference. Meaning, the 8% will most likely translate unchanged.
What I'm trying to say is, out of roughly - let's say - 14,000 *male* Steam players (we have no data for consoles, unfortunately), you'll still find approx 8% of those 14,000 living their lives affected by colorblindness.
That amounts to 1,120 guys only on Steam. Now add console players. Now multiply all those by the $$$/per capita. I'm sure it's a considerable amount.
8% is more than threefold Freddy's pick rate LOL, and they're reworking him for the sake of those poor souls.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498147#Comment_498147
Well firstly, you aren't really disagreeing with me. You're just simply saying that you think most the colorblind features already exist and that's something I was skeptical of. As I said before, if this is true and they are indeed already made then I agree it's a great idea.
Secondly, 12-14% isn't an accurate number in the least. I've got the statistics here in front of me and it is much, much lower than that.
Maybe you're taking into account numbers from a mostly white population. I come from a different ethnicity though. I also mentioned a percentage of a male population, as females are very rarely affected by it.
Maybe I'm out of the park wrong, but I assumed DbD is played *mostly* by males. Maybe 70% at least??. I don't have any numbers about that, though, so it is a rough guess only.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498158#Comment_498158
Tbh I don’t even care about scratch marks. I wouldn’t care if they got removed.
😄 LOL I appreciate your solidarity.
But yeah, sound is way more important.
-
@GrootDude said:
@Condorloco_26 I think he is talking about scratch marks, still a poor excuse.
Yeah, well. Honestly I wouldn't ask for a change in scratchmarks.
-
@GrootDude said:
@Condorloco_26 that sounds pretty rough. I do believe they fixed the Ormond problem recently though.
I've only played there 2 o 3 times since the rework, and unfortunately I couldn't tell the difference because I was playing as a survivor. I had a rough time spotting hooked and dying state people as always, though.
-
@thesuicidefox said:
Probably because it's not an easy thing to fix. You have to make sure whatever you do only explicitly helps people that need it and can't be abuse by normal sighted people to see better.
Blue hook auras give you an advantage, as a normal vision player?
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/498137#Comment_498137
If they do already have it done then that's one thing. I don't know what all goes into making a game colorblind friendly. Maybe they feel there would be a lot more to do and not just those few color changes you mentioned.
I think a full reskin of the game is out of the question, and is not what I'm asking for. Claudettes are invisible to normal guys, anyway.
Aura colors would mean a lot, though. And I say that as an average colorblind guy that experiences a tremendous increase in kill rate during events.
-
@Blueberry said:
While I agree it would be nice. Look at it from a financial standpoint only. How much will it cost them to do and how many extra players would that get them? You're looking at probably less than 4% of the population. Now what small percentage of that would actually be interested in games, much less DBD? That explains why it hasn't been done yet. It costs more than it would return to them.
I disagree with you this time.
They always change hooks and gens for events. They even switch colors mid-game, when the gen or hook has been used, so they've already coded the stuff. No extra work for them.
And, roughly 12 - 14 % of the male population suffers from some degree of colorblindness. That percentage equals some real coin there, in my opinion.
There are a lot of people from the thread I started almost a year ago that I have not seen post again after expressing their inconformity. My guess is they stopped playing.
-
I go curl up in a corner.
They're not completely invisible though, just really hard to see on some maps. Some more than others. It may cost you a wiggle out, a misdirection on a chainsaw sprint, stepping over your own traps or just failing to spot them to pick up, etc. Stuff like that. That's why sound is so important for me. Totems are a no-no, they're just way too hard to spot and defend, so I never play with Hexes.
And there are some maps that are just a waste of time for colorblind people. Ormond for example, it's broken even for normal vision guys. Whenever I get that map I just run around like a headless chicken until I spot/hear someone, and hope I stumble into a hook when carrying someone. I only don't DC because I'm not a chump.
-
PS4 Round numbers:
$15 for the game on sale
$8 x 5 from full price DLCs (Michael, Freddy, Pig, Clown, Spirit)
$5-ish for the Leatherface DLC
No extra clothes, Legion or Plague
Around $60
-
@brokedownpalace said:
What's the definition of viable? 4k at rank 1 against SWF team of 4?
I think only the most skilled and experienced players would consistently do that, even with addons.
I would say viable is the golden 2 - 2 at Rank 1 against a strong team.
-
At Rank 1??
Maybe just 2 or 3 without addons, but you should have a solid perk build. And even then, only in experienced hands.
Nurse, Billy, Spirit
Huntress (maybe, in some maps)
I don't know if Hag would do well without her BS-teleport-from-anywhere stuff
-
Meh. I've never even seen them in any of the maps, except for Lery's and the Meat plant.
It never was a problem until they also broke the sounds recently, though.
And honestly, even I would see the problem in changing the color for scratchmarks. What if I'm not colorblind and I turn them neon pink?
But on the other hand, gens, hooks, totems are THE objective.
-
Yes.
And also let killers break them before being used.
-
I literally started an account in this forum to ask for it, a year ago. Thread has been going on and on.
It's as easy as letting people choose the aura colors of their preference. Say, from the 3 or 4 options they already have coded into the game.
Gens and BBQ auras should always be the same color, so survivors can hide behind them. But nothing prevents them from letting us choose blue, for example. They already have blueish/whiteish gens during events, so, at this point I just understand it as a negative.
-
@Mat_Sella said:
After the changes to DS, you'd think the detractors of the perk would be done hating on it. apparently, they'd rather it be thrown into the old Deja Vu tier rather than be a viable perk to disrupt tunneling behaviour.
Of course, because that's exactly what I suggested. Nerf it to oblivion.
/s
If hooking 2 other guys still qualifies as tunneling in your book, and a killer should be punished for it, I got nothing more to say to you.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/65333/ds-needs-another-condition
DS is fine. If you've hooked 2 players after a survivor is unhooked and they still have time left on DS then you are winning hard enough that eating one stun isn't going to lose the game for you.
Or I'm facing late game against a coordinated team stacked with second chances, most probably.
And if a killer is trying to gain the upper hand, he deserves to be stunned, right? Just like gens start regressing when survivors are progressing too fast...
But anyway, playing as a killer I know I'm expected to eat whatever comes my way.
-
@artist said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/497852#Comment_497852
right. I said that when? my problem is a perk that is supposed to be "anti-tunnel" doesn't actually do that well. putting words in other people's mouths makes you look bad
Well I don't know what are we arguing about then, since that's exactly my point.
An antitunnel perk that punishes non-tunnelers.
And I understood from your post that DS sometimes goes unused, and that it sucked in those cases.
If I misunderstood your message, I apologize. But that's why I drew the comparison with an unused adrenaline.
-
@artist said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/497660#Comment_497660
how is that comparable to the trial ending? the game goes no further for u once u escape, the game is still going after getting chased off hook lol
According to your own words, an unused perk is a wasted perk slot.
There you are, that's the comparison I made.
-
@Arroz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/497684#Comment_497684
Do you think I care about people taking me seriously?
Just a question, how can you down 2 people in 60 seconds?
And you just can slug that guy and ds is gone, easy, no?
Firstly, it's not my problem anyway.
Answering your question, Billy or Leatherface are pretty capable of doing that. I've done it with Huntress and Spirit too.
About your 2nd question, yes it would be easy, if I knew the guy had DS. The thing is, you don't know. Most of the times MoM is also in the picture, so the obsession thing has its own ways to work.
And when there's no MoM, the DS guy is NOT the obsession.
-
@Arroz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/497652#Comment_497652
Is the truth.
DS already got nerfed and some people still cry about it
I'm amazed at how your posts always lack of any reasoning. It's always fingerpointing and namecalling.
Just try to give a valid reason as to why DS procs after hooking 2 other people, and maybe more people will take you seriously.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/65333/ds-needs-another-condition
Lol I have not been struck by DS from the nerf. Do not tunnel like a madman - you have only yourself to blame.
Obviously you can't down and hook 2 other guys, then come back for the 1st guy and down him again, in 60 secs.
That's why you haven't been hit by DS since the rework.
-
@Mister_xD said:
2 hooked 1 slugged
chase and down the 4th, then hook the one with DS.
shouldnt be a problem imo...
but yeah, it does feel cheap. especially if they unhook them right in your face with BT then and you just literally lost all possible momentum.
That's what I'm talking about, but anyway. I already know it'll stay the same.
-
If they can't be hit, at least their hitbox should disappear for the same time. A lot of times I'm trying to hit the unhooker only to have the unhooked tank the swing.
-
@artist said:
you have situations like the one you described where, yes, you weren't tunneling but still got hit by ds. then you have other games where you're immediately getting chased again off hook but you have a setup strong enough to last you more than 60s, or the killer doesn't run loops well. you were tunneled in this scenario, but you were good enough to last more than 60s, so you dont get a chance to use ds without intentionally going down. it can suck for both sides
That would be like saying Adrenaline sucks some times because you took the hatch without having used it.
-
@Arroz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/65333/ds-needs-another-condition
So now we cry about DS
Thanks for bringing the most unbiased presence to this thread. I feel honored.