Dehitay
Dehitay
About
- Username
- Dehitay
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,872
- Last Active
Comments
-
I'd be more amused if the entity punished them by randomizing their perks, items, addons, and offerings for a certain amount of games per disconnect.
-
It's competitive by it's very nature of player vs player. I know Behavior wants to claim the goal is to be casual and nobody should want to try their best to win so there's no need to balance since fun is the only objective, but that's a dellusional goal that will never happen. Whether or not it's a more casual or competitive isn't actually up to the developers, it's up to the players.
-
@Frozenscum said:
You dont count cases when survivor especially awaits at hatch when gates are opened. This will deny them 3k points at least.
Yeah, but the only reason they even do this in the first place is because the hatch gives extra points. I agree that hatch escapes themselves should give less points, but I'm not above having the act of opening the hatch with a key to give more survival points to compensate for the loss since using the key is probly one of the most powerful moves a survivor can do.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
You are right, the sounds are terribly balanced in terms of volume. I agree all sounds should be noticable while playing, because in the game as DBD sound is very important, but the current state is just plain terrible. All the important sounds like music, environmental sounds, chainsaws, blinks, terror radius, music ques are basiclu gone. Survivors are way too loud because of how quiet everyting else in the game is.
I already see 13 downvotes on your post OP. It's cute seeing killer babs defending broken state of the game so they can compensate for their lack of skill. I hope devs will fix it soon.
I love how you claim you care about the important sounds but then immediately list 2 less important sounds first in your list, not to mention you listed one of them twice. If you can't tell when you get into a chase in the current iteration of the game, no amount of sounds are going to help you against a skilled killer.
I'll admit that chainsaws, blinks, and terror radius is important, but chainsaws are the only one on that list that I can't remember hearing recently, and the rest are definitely audible.
This is another clear cut case of a survivor wanting the music to be ridiculously loud and breathing/footsteps to be inaudible because of personal bias. Made completely obvious by the fact that music is both the first and last thing on your list.
-
I think I get where you're coming from. I hate it when people obviously hack just like you were obviously hacking in that last game. And before you deny that you were, why do I have to prove that I'm not lying?
-
The only real downside to PGTW is you need to know which generator has a lot of progress prior to the hook or luck out in running into one.
-
So being able to hear stuff ruins the immersion for you? Obvious bias much?
-
@ClogWench said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/554981#Comment_554981
Gonna break a few of these down real quick
1) we don't actually know the requirements for getting banned from DCing so that one is speculation on your part and I'm electing to ignore it
2) considering how bad queue times are for everyone, making someone's queue times worse would end up impacting everyone indirectly.
3) giving everyone else extra bloodpoints IS a good idea, but that wouldn't change how frequently people DC. If someone is pissed enough to DC it doesn't matter if they'd give extra BP or not, they're going to DC regardless
1) We do know that there is a requirement for getting banned for disconnecting and that it's related to the percentage of games you play that you disconnect from. And we know that percentage is on the lower side based on how the rate some streamers have been watched to intentionally disconnect and continue to be allowed to play. So elect to ignore it if you want. A smart move since it definitely doesn't help your case, but a horrible move for rational debate.
2) Assuming that survivors and killers disconnect at an equal ratio, that would have an insignificant effect on queue times. But the very fact that you recognize that high queue times are annoying is more validation for a deterrent that says you can't join a game for a certain amount of time after disconnecting.
3) I can't say for sure what percentage of intentional disconnects it would stop, but I can garuntee that it would be a significant enough number to validate increasing compensation to remaining players for disconnects. Watch any rage baby streamer or get into voice chat with enough random SWF pickups and it becomes rapidly clear that one of the biggest reasons to disconnect is to intentionally screw over other players. If intentionally disconnecting actually rewards other players, this major reason for disconnecting would vanish. The fact that a number of other intentional disconnecters would continue to disconnect is not a valid reason to eliminate the motivation for these particular problem players.
@Slayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/554988#Comment_554988
There are ones or you want what? One dc = perma ban?
What I would specifically want from the ban punishment for constant disconnects is a system that punishes for disconnects per period of time rather than percentage of games. We know for a fact that the current percentage is low enough that it doesn't discourage intentional disconnects even remotely close enough. But if you had a system that says you get started on the ban elevation system based on having X amount of disconnects over a certain time frame (ex: 5 disconnects within a 2 hour period), then people would actually be scared to intentionally disconnect all the time.
But the one system that I'm pretty sure the majority of the playerbase wants is for there to be an ever increasing delay before you can get into a new game every time you disconnect that slowly goes down after you go long enough without disconnecting. The vast majority of major games with matchmaking systems do this because it has been proven to help.
-
@Slayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/554981#Comment_554981
People dont want to play they will leave anyway
If people want to murder, they will murder anyways. Is that a good reason to not put laws in effect to curb the murder rate?
-
@ClogWench said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/554922#Comment_554922
They can't do much about the DC problem until dedicated servers which theyre hard at work on currently, they're not just sitting idly by
No, they definitely can. They can do even more to combat it with dedicated servers, but that doesn't mean there isn't plenty they can do already. They can change the ridiculously lax requirements for punishments to be rolled out in the first place so that it can actually serve as a deterrent. They can install increased queue wait times for disconnects to stop them from getting into games so quickly after rage quitting. They can significantly increase blooodpoint gains for disconnects for both survivors and killers to simultaneously make disconnects less annoying and take away one of the major reasons people intentionally disconnect in the first place. There's plenty they can do about it, they just don't care enough to do it.
-
@ReikoMori said:
Behaviour isn't some small time developer that only does this game. Partnering with those companies won't solve anything.
It would give them the kind of management that would allow a game with golden opportunity to live up to its godly potential. As of right now, they're played with management that looks at the massive DC problem and goes "Meh, we'll do something about it later". Management that thinks balance around optimal gameplay isn't important as long as thinks are ok at casual gameplay. Management that looks at game breaking bugs and goes "Meh, that can wait till the next schedule patch". Management that takes that very dc problem from earlier, makes stats that count DCs as non-escapes as well as survivors massively disadvantaged by being in games with DCs, and goes "Look, less than half the survivors are escaping so the game isn't strongly survivor sided".
-
@ClogWench said:
Pretty sure it resets when you down them, think it was like that to begin with.
Hmmmm, I guess that's possible. I never used the 99% strategy all that much. But I'm surprised I haven't run into this issue before now even if I haven't played must Ghostface.
-
I think Valve would be the obvious partner for Dead by Daylight. Might even be able to allow them to port Bill to consoles. And I've never had a problem with Valve unless DbD intends to try to make more than 1 sequel.
-
@Milordo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/72708/why-did-they-fix-play-with-your-food
I can say the same thing about Wake up. With Wake up no more hit wifi or bad hitboxes, it was paradise.
How the hell did Wake Up affect hitboxes? And how the hell does anything in this game affect your wifi?
-
Ruin in its current iteration is a band aid to the gen rush problem much in the way that DS is a band aid to the tunnelling problem. You can't really nerf either of them too much until you fix the problems that they solve to begin with.
-
The problem with Leatherface specifically is that camping is his most viable playstyle. If he had other reasonably viable playstyles, you would see much less of it when facing him. They've been meaning to rework him for a while, but I don't know when that will actually be coming. But hopefully, once it does, camping with LF will be less of a problem.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
not a bad change. but the part of giving notifications when a survivor starts cleansing a totem would make killers like nurse and billy way stronger.
to fix it. let the notification appear when the totem cleansing progress is 50%.
and some changes in KotH
1- gives a notification the second they start cleansing a totem.
2- the game starts with 100% longer cleansing time for totems. and every minute. that penalty gets reduced by 10%. so cleansing the ruin from the start of the match would be a pain in the a*s for survivors.
If you're talking about Thrill of the Hunt, you can reduce the cleanse rate by cleansing dull totems. Cleansing dull totems against TotH doesn't give the killer a notification of where you are. Or was that second part added with the intention of making dull totems give a notification in part 1?
-
As recently stated the current chase music and many other audio cues are set to return what the audio was before 3.0.0 update.
Where did they state it's getting reverted? I read anything to that extent yet.
-
This would make Nurse, Spirit, and Hillbilly far more powerful than they already are. Notifying killer of hex cleansing is significantly more game changing than you might be thinking.
-
Using the perks themselves to get them to tiers 2 and 3 is probly the coolest suggestion to this problem that I've heard so far.
-
I hope this gets a response from BHVR
-
@Elk said:
I don't see Ormond at all.
God, I wish I had that issue. I hate the visual screwbaggery they did with that map.
-
She's one of the main reasons I wish there was a no mask cosmetic for Legion. Her face is more creepy than Legion's mask.
-
@Cymer said:
Thanks to everyone for the constructive input.
Instead of different queues, how would you like the game be adjusted?
I read a lot of gen or action speed reduction, but in general I strongly believe that nerfing isn't fun for anyone and if the pain becomes too great the SWFs either leave the game or just queue up simultaneously until they are together, like before SWFs were a thing.
A killer buff would be cool, but the issue are the other solo survivors.
A killer on steroid would be fun for the killer and a challenge for the SWFs (hopefully fun too) but for the solo it would be a nightmare.
Different queues with BP incentive is the only way I can see right now, that could be somewhat implemented in the game.
Yes we could go down the fantasy route and buff solos to the level of SWFs and by doing so truly overpower the survivors and every killer and most of the perks would need a rework to adjust to the new power level.
Maybe in a DBD2, where the game revolves around surviving as a team of 4 but not in the current game.
I really wish someone comes up with a better solution that would fit everyone better.
To all those comments about SWFs aren't op, you just need to git gud.
Survivors in red ranks are usually really good and strong and you need to bring your A game if you face a motivated pure red rank SWFs team.
That's maybe a flaw of the game balance but this is debatable.
The majority of players and SWFs aren't top rank players and I agree with you, a yellow or green rank killer facing SWFs teams with yellow and purple/red rank survivors often lose due to their inexperience, but there is a reason they are on low to mid rank. If you face a team of 2x2 team of SWFs you could face up to 2 red rank survivors, way above your skill level and if you are unlucky and run into them first you just get looped for ages, because a green rank killer usually don't know how to mindgame or run certain loops. This experience frustrates beyond belief and is the source of most anti-swf posts.
One solution we could test out is matching those SWFs against more experienced killers instead of the average.
I've always wanted to limit what SWF could bring into the match. In my opinion SWF groups of all size should be limited to a max of 1 of each item type per group so no full toolbox/flashligh/instaheal squads. Groups of 3 or more shouldn't be allowed to use killer aura reveal perks cause then essentially everybody gets use out of it and only one person needs to bring it meaning they could just combo them all into the game and almost always know where the killer is. Groups of 4 should probly be restricted from using ultra rare (or maybe even just rare) items and addons.
-
@Warlock_2020 said:
@Tsulan Yes, killer can only chase one at a time, but he can also be smart about it.
Example from last night
I ran Trapper and I hear a gen going near the killer shack but there is another gen around back in the open field. I see 1 on the nearby gen and I swoop by for a free hit. I then move to the next gen when the survivor predictably runs into the shack. 2 people are on that gen. 3 of the survivors are on gens near the shack. The 2 run opposite of each other. I chase Nea and hit her as she keeps a window to the jungle gym. I disengage because I'm sure the other 2 went back to their gens. Sure enough, Nea's partner returned and was shocked to see me so soon after hitting Nea.
I smack Jake and pursue him to the killer shack. I see Meg healing off to the side where the first gen encounter is and I ignore her so I can get Jake to loop around 1 more time. I then break off the chase of Jake and hit Meg, downing her. Jake takes off, but Nea is healed and back on that other gen. I run over to chase her off and get a hit. Kick the gen, back to Meg and Jake is healing her. Down Jake, kick gen and hook 2.
I was able to keep 3 survivors tied up by being unconventional. That may not always work, but it is how you can keep pressure on. You don't have to follow every chase through.
Considering your situation started with "I see 1 on the nearby gen and I swoop by for a free hit", I have to assume the survivors you were up against weren't really all that good. I might be able to pull that off with a stealth killer, but I have never been able to just get a free hit on a survivor working on a gen as Trapper unless they're unskilled. For some crazy reason, they always run when I get close.
-
I think the primary reason not to make it free to play at this point is just because of all that people that have already paid for it. BHVR would have to compensate them to validate this, and compensation would probly mean giving out auric cells which I'm sure they don't want to do.
-
Lmfao, the irony of him mentioning that it's unfair to have a perk's usability to be decided by the killer when the very powers of the last 2 killers have their usability decided by survivors.
-
@Warlock_2020 said:
@Dehitay As Peanits has pointed out, and statistics posted by BHVR have shown, SWF is a small grouping. Most SWF are not hit squads with meta perks. Most I run into get destroyed easily. Most are just friends having fun, and the killer still has the power mode. The less than 10% of players who are in the red ranks face those top tier groups. That's what the red ranks are for. Tough challenge, good players. Some hang, some don't.
I have zero problem with SWF, but I usually hang in the purple and green ranks. I don't care to play so hardcore that I push for red ranks. It's a casual game and I play it that way. Nerf SWF, and you punish the majority of SWF players that are not doing what you think they are.
I can't believe even after I preemptively gave the response to the "not all survivors do it" arguement, somebody still gave it to me but without a response to my counter to it. But since I apparently need to repeat myself repeating myself, I'll go ahead and repeat myself. A minority of players abused Legion's chase breaking cheese mechanics. It's utterly hypocritical to say that swf shouldn't be touched if you believe that Legion should have been.
-
I'm pretty sure it's due to there being more killer dailies in general. Unless I'm remembering wrong, all the killer rituals are killer specific so there's now 16 of each type of ritual (or less if you haven't unlocked all the killers). Meanwhile, I believe a number of survivor rituals can be done with any survivor so there won't be 17 types of those rituals, only 1.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
The point of Furtive is too trick survivors by having no Terror Radius at 4 stacks, but it's pointless on anyone except Freddy because survivors at high ranks look for the Red Stain, or for you by looking behind them. all in all, it's pretty pointless unless you're playing Freddy, since Freddy can see aura's of survivors outside of his Terror Radius.
EW1 or EW2 Myers without M&A is the only killer who would have no terror radius with max tokens Furtive Chase active. It reduces terror radius by a max of 16 meters at 4 stacks.
-
@LCGaster said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/550368#Comment_550368
Private matches with friends are made to mess around and have fun, not to gain bloodpoints
Private matches and in game currency shouldn't go together in any game
Funny, the same could be said about SWF
-
@LCGaster said:
Why should you be able to get BP in a private match?
Because not being able to get bloodpoints from KYF has made that game mode generally considered a waste of time. BHVR claims that being able to play with your friends is a fun play style that they encourage, but the ultimate play with your friends game mode is highly discouraged.
-
@Warlock_2020 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/549475#Comment_549475
Not sure what you are talking about here. Smash has huge tournaments with actual money prizes and regional championships. Not really the same thing. Just took my son to one in Detroit earlier this year. Over 100 contestants and the final 16 were insane good. The winner got over 5k in prizes. You'll never see that with DBD.
@Dehitay Legion was broken and even the developers admitted he was not being used the way they intended. The chase mechanic was exploited due to poor development. Apples and oranges. I'll never accuse BHVR's developers of being good, or competent for that matter. They are very short-sighted and are unable to adapt to exploits in their design. They are fantastic at conceptualizing great ideas, but horrible at putting them to the application stage.
SWF is also broken and not being used the way it was intended. You don't believe built in psuedo forms of Bond, Kindred, Object of Obsession, Empathy, and maps were intended, do you? SWF naturally comes with a significant portion of all those things. And that's not including the quick time high efficiency shot calling and multi-survivor perk combinations.
And yes, before somebody gives me the same staple line of "not all survivors do it", I repeat not all Legions did the chase breaking cheese mechanics. Yet it was broken as hell and ruined the fun for survivors just like high efficiency swf is broken and ruins the fun for killers.
-
I believe that all bloodpoint gain offerings are already disabled in KYF so that wouldn't be any extra work. However, I don't think a hard cap on bloodpoints earnable through KYF is the right way to go. That completely invalidates the whole point of making bloodpoints obtainable through the that game mode after X number of games depending on the cap. I believe they should just make it to where you get bloodpoints at a significantly reduced rate from KYF so that if you truly want to farm bloodpoints, you're sure to get them faster in matchmade gameplay.
-
@Warlock_2020 said:
@Dehitay I would suggest knowing your genre before suggesting their balance philosophy is off. This is a casual party game. It is not a hardcore competitive game. This game is meant to be played by friends and people who love the horror genre. You don't balance such a game around the small group of hardcore competitive players.
You do if you're intelligent. Good developers always balance around optimal gameplay. The killer equivalent of swf is pre-rework Legion. He was fun as hell for some killers. He was also weak as ######### if you didn't use his chase breaking cheese. But when played optimally he was massively unfun for survivors. Should we have refused to balance him because the minority of Legion players played him optimally and most were just casually playing Legion to have fun? Or should we have balanced around optimal gameplay like good developers do?
-
@Mister_xD said:
the problem is, that there will pe players that will not play the actual game, but just farm in KYF matches with their friends until they maxed everything out.
even at a reduced rate, 5 bloody party streamers and they will make a LOT of points.
to prevent such farming games, this mode does not reward you with points.
Unless they changed it since I last played, no form of bloodpoint offerings are available in Kill Your Friends. The best you could get for bloodpoint farming is BBQ and WGLF.
And so what if people aren't playing the actual game until they max things out. If this game is supposed to be casual, then there's no problem with that. And even if it's supposed to be competitive, giving newer players an advanced starting ground to deal with the other players that are already gonna have more perks, offerings, and addons sounds more balanced. The only difference is that they're having more fun as they grind for bloodpoints to play in matchmade games (at a slower rate than if they were grinding in matchmade).
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/548406#Comment_548406
Actually it is something you guys "can" fix but the question is will you? THE PROBLEM IS SIMPLE Bloodpoint Gains Survivors get nothing but Killers get a ton of bloodpoints you want this problem to stop FIX THE BLOODPOINT GAINS even if its a tiny buff to them you would see this issue fix itself.
Its Lame that ive got to wait 15 minutes for one killer game all because the devs are scared of fixing the bloodpoint gains.
This would actually just end up completely reversing the problem. As of right now, there's a reason to choose both survivor and killer. Killer's get more bloodpoints, but survivors have more of an advantage once you get into the higher ranks and they can play with friends. If you made the bloodpoint distribution even, then all the encouragement would be to play survivor and you'd have very few killers.
-
@Peanits said:
It's way more complicated than it seems. Not all groups are super coordinated and trying to win as fast as possible, most are just a couple friends hanging out and chatting while they play a game. How would you suggest doing so in a way that would unnecessarily punish the casual groups that are not trying as hard as possible to win? And how could that not be avoided by queuing solo at the same time as your friends?
Behavior's philosophy of trying to balance against low skill gameplay instead of optimal gameplay really isn't the best of ideas. It's one of very few companies that believes competitive balance shouldn't be done around skill.
Honestly, if they're truly playing casually, then should winning even matter for them? And if winning does matter that much, are they actually playing casually? Why should somebody who's not really trying have an equal chance of winning against somebody who is?
-
@SlickSal said:
God legion is sooo boring to play now. I completely dropped him after a few games. He’s literally M1 killer who has “get your first hit free then get a 4 second stun” the ability.
No, that would actually be a good killer. There's too many ways to avoid that FF hit as it is. Are you next to 2 vaults in close proximity? Avoided. Have an exhaustion perk charged and ready? Avoided. Next to what's ironically supposed to be an unsafe pallet? Avoided. Got a firecracker? Avoided. Next to a up pallet near a wall that can hide you from vision? Avoided.
-
If you have a problem with exit gates spawning too close together, then it's hypocritical to not have a problem with exit gates spawning too far away.
Now, how many maps have exit gates pre-determined to spawn at opposite ends of the map? And how many have exit gates pre-determined to spawn close to each other? Even with RNG, guess which you're going to see more of as a result?
-
Groans of pain and breathing to a lesser extent are SUPPOSED to be audible within short ranges like 8 meters. The fact that sounds have been broken for so long have made survivors entitled.
That would be like bhvr fixing the bug that makes some hair shadows appear in front of generator auras, and then having killers complain about how hard it is to find survivors working on generators after that.
-
Not to mention if there are two vaults in close proximity to each other, the one thing that's supposed to be so special about him becomes completely worthless. Why they nerfed his vaulting speed is beyond me.
-
@knell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546645#Comment_546645
If all of Rank 1's sacrifices/kills/disconnected were counted as Rank 2's, then why is Rank 2's Survival Rate still high as being around 60%? If the answer is 'Rank 2's sacrifices/kills/disconnects were counted as Rank 3, then why is Rank 3's Survival Rate still high as being around 60%? And so on. The problem is, there's no other huge discrepancy in that graph as the Rank 1 and Rank 2 difference of ~20%, including at Rank 20, where all of Rank 19's sacrifices/kills/disconnects should have been dumped at.
So overall, this graph itself is very questionable to me. Why didn't they just take the players' Rank at the beginning of the match instead of after the match? After all, isn't the point of the graph to find out the survival rate of each individual match in THAT rank, and not the survival rate of the rank where they END UP in?
In addition, it is still unbelievable to me that they included matches with disconnects in the first place. @Peanits had at one point mentioned that exclusion of matches with disconnects would skew the results, but in reality, if you are attempting to balance the game around these numbers, it is absolutely essential to have excluded matches with disconnects, because those are not the kind of matches the game balance should be striving towards.
Let's say, for example, the 2-Killer exploit was rampant throughout the game, and plagued many of the matches people are playing in. Should such matches be included as part of the data? Should such matches be included in the statistics in which the developers decide whether to buff or nerf a particular group? Should all the killers be nerfed because the 2-Killer exploit's effect on the statistics significantly showed the killers to be too strong? Of course not, because the game isn't meant to be played with 2 killers in a match.
Then why should matches with disconnected games be included as part of the data? Is this game meant to be played with constant disconnects? Are disconnects due to deranking part of this game? Are involuntary disconnects part of this game? Is the chain of disconnects by SWF groups part of this game? Is prevention of BBQ by disconnects part of this game? Is rage quitting part of this game? If they are not supposed to be part of this game, why are they balancing around them?
Why is Behaviour giving the power to balance the game to people who are constantly disconnecting?
@knell Woah, wait a minute! Did they actually admit at some point that they included games with disconnects in their statistics? I've been trying to get clarification for the longest time if they were ignoring games with disconnects or not! By any chance do you have a link to the statement where they said whether or not disconnects are taken into consideration?
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546666#Comment_546666
it ain't that deep dude, lmao.
Why design a whole new graph for a joke question?
You guys take this stuff far too seriously, like lives are involved or something.
It's ridiculous.
You're right, it's not deep. It's incredibly simple. When somebody can't correctly accomplish a very simple task, I don't put my full faith in them for more complex tasks.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546615#Comment_546615
I'm just going to chime in, that graph that you posted was posted after the original stats, it was added in after the devs did a survey with a question about opera.
The reason the stats are "bs" is because people think it's funny to lie about a question which has no relevance on the survey.
You can't dismiss all the other graphs because the devs made a funny question and then pulled stats from it.
While I admit there's a very real possibility that people were just screwing around when they said they attended the opera daily, anybody who would answer that survey question in a joking matter would probly just choose daily. The fact that weekly and monthly also have a serious influx means they didn't actually take the data from the survey. They just threw in random numbers. If you do the math, you'll also realize they some how managed to get feedback from around 150% of the people who took the survey.
That particular graph was just a joke, but it was also the only graph where we knew exactly how they would have gotten their statistics, and it was the ideal opportunity to show us how they could grab statistics and make a graph.
It also happens to show that they'll recycle stuff from other graphs and not put much effort into a new one. The fact that that particular graph also says percentage of all players when it's clearly only the players that took the survey is proof that they may have just not been paying attention when they labelled it percentage of all players on the graph that shows percentage of swf groups. The y-axis for that graph could very well have been something else but they just labelled it wrong.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546523#Comment_546523
I'll just elaborate what you said:
Basically, whenever a rank 1 survivor was sacrificed, killed, or disconnected, it would be counted as a rank 2 sacrifice, kill, or disconnect because rank 1 survivors tend to de-pip when they don't escape.
Therefore, we got a 80% survival rate at rank 1 because everything was skewed towards rank 2. If I remember correctly, the actual survival rate at rank 1 is 43%. Correct me if I'm wrong.
That's correct in that's what's Peanits was communicating to us, but if you stop to think about it, it's kind of extremely suspicious that the survival rate for rank 2 survivors is between 50 and 60% when the survival rate for rank 1 survivors is 43%. I really wouldn't put too much faith in the numbers they throw at us unless they give you enough information on how those numbers were obtained.
-
I wouldn't trust that chart 100% if I was you. There is a possibility that it's accurate, but I can't get anybody from the development team to verify how the statistics were acquired. If you pay attention, the y-axis is actually marked "percentage of all players" which means the disparity is actually even larger than it appears since it takes 2 of those 2-swf players to make a 2 man swf group and so on meaning the ratio of 4 man swf groups to solo groups is actually only 1/4 of the 4-swf bar. While that in itself is believable, it's unlikely that 2 and 3 man swf groups are that much more popular than 4 man swf groups considering 4 man swf groups would be what most people are actively trying to get when playing swf.
Also, keep in mind that chart was released along side this one which is clearly BS:
The chances that they fudged something up is rather significant. Especially since I've never been able to get any of them to tell me the details on how their data was acquired.
-
Buckle up is definitely powerful enough to be a perk. Anything that reveals killer aura is very strong. I can understand the killer's aura being visible within 8 meters of hooked survivor being based cause it would discourage camping, but I don't think any other killer aura reveal should be base.
-
@prof_teabagger said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545403#Comment_545403
Smart guy u r lol. U are aware that you could switch it on or off right?
You can switch cross platform gameplay off and on if Behavior codes the game to throw together players from all platforms for matches? I didn't know that. I always assumed that the developer controlled how their servers worked with the clients. Didn't realize clients somehow had authority over the servers.
-
Killer:
- disconnects
- game length too short against gen rushes
- some ridiculous looping setups
Survivor:
- disconnects
- tunneling
- camping